Robin Miller's Mailbag for May 23, presented by Honda Racing / HPD

Your questions for Robin should continue to be sent to millersmailbag@racer.com We cannot guarantee we’ll publish all your questions and answers, but Robin will reply to you. And if you have a question about the technology side of racing, Robin will pass these on to Marshall Pruett and he will also answer here.

A quick note before we start...

One of the best things about the Mailbag are the passionate letters you folks send 12 months a year, and this week was one of the largest and most vocal responses I’ve seen since I started doing this back in the early ’90s. I even heard from former Indy driver Scott Harrington. And it’s mostly about qualifying and bumping, which returned to IMS last weekend after a long hiatus.

And don’t compare what NASCAR does to 25/8 – that was a political ploy to divide and conquer. It had nothing to do with protecting big names, investments and sponsors. I’ve covered Indy for 50 years, and I know what real bumping is: it’s when 15 drivers are going for three spots in the final hour and jumping in and out of strange cars with no regard for the consequences, not one person making four attempts. I get that many were excited by the first drama we’ve seen in a while, but spare me the comparisons to the good old days.

Anyway, like we always do, we try to give everyone a chance to state their opinion so this is my blanket answer to the first half of your letters. Thanks for caring enough to write, and for reading RACER.com.

Q: I read your article “Time for a qualifying re-think at Indy?” While I appreciate the thought/debate provoking nature of the piece, surely you – Robin Miller – can’t think that it is time for a change.  This is what Indy is all about. The Penskes missing the show in ’95.  Rahal missing in ’93. Hundreds of drivers over the years risking it all to make the race. That’s why the 25/8 rule was so disrespectful! I know it’s only two cars that got bumped this year, but IndyCar is on an upswing and things are improving throughout the sport. It is entirely possible that we see more cars attempting in the near future. I love Hinch. He is the reason my 14-year-old son is a huge IndyCar fan. My son was gutted when Hinch got bumped. But that is what is magical about Indianapolis. It doesn’t matter who you are – if you’re not fast enough, you don’t make the race – no playing favorites.  This is the drama this sport needs, even at the expense of the most recognizable driver in the race. Please – do not change that rule!!!

Mark, Littleton, CO

Q: "Re-think" this... No, Miller. No, no, no, dammit! The value of qualifying for the 500 just went up, as well as the value of attending qualifying. Don't muck it up by rethinking.

Lew

Q: So however it happened, a large contingent of drivers will start next Sunday's Indy 500, and once again disappear for 365 days into racing (forget sports) media obscurity. Meanwhile, one of the biggest names in the series, the man who has been starring in Honda commercials, is not appearing. Let that sink in, and just think how plain embarrassing this is. You want to know where this wouldn't happen? It's spelled N-A-S-C-A-R, and you wonder why it's five times as popular? Listen, if Hinch were that that slow, fine. He wasn't. He had the bad luck of having to run on a green track, and was given little time to make that up thanks to Mother Nature, and what is clearly a ridiculous format.

To have cars requalifying to make the Fast 9 clearly is not drama anybody cares about. The entire affair looked silly, and quite frankly, like it was drawn up by Brian France. I don't want more than 33 to start, but my gosh, what are we doing? How can we have cars trying to bump into a phony Top 9, and others dying on the pitlane, unable to make it into the race? I haven't been this embarrassed to be an IndyCar fan since TGBB restarted 'em in the wet at Loudon.

Greg in Belleville, NJ

Q: I am as shocked and saddened as anyone that James Hinchcliffe was bumped from this year’s 500. But I don’t agree that we should rethink qualifying because one of the best, most popular drivers was not among the 33 fastest. Reserving places for the full-timers is akin to the old IRL 25/8 rule. I think that would discourage one-off efforts at Indianapolis.  How many Indy-only efforts would there be if they were only competing for eight or nine slots on the starting grid?  This way, they know they have an equal shot at making the race.

Also, everyone wanted bumping, like the old days. Now we have it. Sometimes there are surprises, and drivers we never thought would have been bumped are bumped. I’ve been attending the 500 since 1962. I remember 1965 when Rodger Ward, who in the previous six 500s, finished first twice, second twice, third and fourth, was bumped. No-one suggested altering the qualifying procedures. The same in 1993 when Bobby Rahal, defending CART champion, was bumped, and 1995, when Penske couldn’t get either of his cars into the top 33. The price of bumping is that some drivers, good drivers, fan favorites, recognizable drivers, may not make the race. Manipulating the starting line-up to guarantee certain drivers are in the race is a NASCAR tactic. Let it stay there. I feel sorry for Hinchcliffe and all of SPM. I also feel sorry for Pippa Mann and her team. But as Hinch said, Indy can be a cruel mistress; and like any cruel mistress, is full of surprises.

Peter, Gainesville, Va.

Q: Hinch. One of only five drivers in the field with national media exposure outside of IndyCar. Great sponsor. Full-season entrant. Bumped. NASCAR would have never let this happen. I'm still baffled by the decision not to start all 35 cars.

Clint, Chicago, IL

Q: Okay, so now “Mr. Tradition” thinks the Speedway and IndyCar needs to revisit their qualifying rules because one of the big names didn’t make it. Here’s a wild idea: how about we keep the 33 spots intact, but, say we reserve a certain number of positions, maybe 25, for full-time series participants. We can call it the 25/8 rule. What do you think??

Scott C, Bargersville, IN

Q: It’s so funny everyone (including you) has been saying for how many years, “I miss Bump Day, we need Bump Day, we need larger crowds for qualifying”. We finally get Bump Day back and everyone is crying it’s different than NASCAR. Thank God! That’s what makes Indy, Indy.  If Davison got bumped, this would be a non-story. It could have been worse – Danica could have been bumped! Then what? Let’s make Danica win because that would be a great story, or let’s give a trophy to everyone in field because we don’t want any losers, waaa waaah. Just put Hinchcliffe in the booth instead of Cheever. What’s worse: not qualifying for the Indy 500, or crashing on the on the pace lap from pole? There have been plenty of people that have qualified but never finished the first lap. It’s no different. Be thankful we had more than 33 cars, and hope we will again next year.

Tony, Mamaroneck, New York

Q: I can't help but feel that after the struggles to field 33 cars the past several years, that Bump Day is just stupid now. And I don't buy the "Tradition" argument. The Tradition ship sailed years ago when two weekends of qualifying changed, among many other things. Here's my solution: any car qualifying slower than 33rd must start from the pit lane. They go with the field for the parade laps, but coming to the green flag must pull into the pit lane at the pit lane speed limit, and rejoin the track on the backstretch. Also, there should be a minimum speed rule, since you don't want a car qualifying for the race that's 20mph slower than everyone else.

Brad Hinsley

Q: I think I can count on one hand the number of times I've read one of your articles and found myself shaking my head, but I find some of what you say regarding Indy lately a little hypocritical. You ran an article about including NASCAR and Formula 1 drivers to the IMS Hall of Fame, titled "Spitting in the Face of Tradition." Then you champion the effort to have all 35 drivers who showed up be allowed entrance to the race, eschewing decades of tradition at Indy and reminding us all of the debacle that was the 1997 installment.

Now, after bumping finally returns and –  in my personal opinion – two consecutive days of some of the best qualifying crowds in recent memory despite the weather, you are calling for IndyCar to adopt NASCAR's horrendous charter system. NASCAR has made one bad move after another, leading to artificial racing, declining crowds, and withering TV audiences. IndyCar should be running from anything NASCAR-related. You're still the best, you're just wrong on these accounts.

Alex, Ohio

Q: I'm shocked such a champion of tradition like you even suggested changes to the qualifying format. Hinch being bumped has actually put more emotion into this year's 500 than any other in recent history. Want to change the format? Consider this: two-day format like now. Pole day Saturday, Bump Day Sunday. Everyone must make at least one attempt on Saturday, but are allowed unlimited runs. Only top nine are locked in on Saturday. Everyone else comes back on Sunday and tries again as many times as they want. This gives those slow cars from Saturday a second chance to qualify. In case of Sunday washout. Saturday times stand.

Having Hinch out is gut-wrenching, but this is what Indy means. Just ask Al Jr. There must be another way to accommodate sponsors and teams without resorting to provisionals or expanding the field. I'd rather see selling the naming rights first. Let's face it, a past champion’s provisional or promoter’s option isn't going to infuse the cash needed, and failure to make the show isn't going to hurt the series or race significantly. If anything, a major driver bump has attracted more attention to this year's race than lack of bumping has.

Shawn Starkey

Image by IndyCar

Q: I'm sure that the bumping issue will dominate your Mailbag questions this week. I've attended almost as many 500s as you have (this year will be the 45th), and I have a healthy respect and appreciation for the traditions. Unfortunately, in today's racing business climate, I don't see how allowing Hinch to be eliminated from the race makes sense. I made a comment on your initial article suggesting that maybe they should have essentially guaranteed a spot for the series regulars. Hinch would have started 34th (the old promoter's option) and Pippa would have gone home. I got crucified for that suggestion. Another, less foolproof approach, would be to guarantee a run to anyone sitting in the Fast Lane when the session ends. That certainly would have resolved Hinchcliff's problem this time.

Alan, St. Petersburg, FL

Q: Hinchcliffe misses Indy, and out come the calls for all-inclusion? Bernie Sanders-style qualifying! What made Indy Pole Day so compelling to the masses was the possibility of teams not making the race. Even having just two cars bumped offered drama sorely lacking in the recent past. If Hinchcliffe misses Indy, is the race worse? If Hinch races, is the 500 better? Please. Fastest cars in. Let's get it on! Thanks for the opportunity to opine, Robin.

Bradley R. Van Swol, Sussex, Wisconsin

Q: I am sure your Mailbag is going to be lit up this week.  I hope you have some help sorting through all the comments. I just read your article "Time for a qualifying re-think at Indy?" and although not having James Hinchcliffe in the Indy 500 is a great loss on the surface, I highly doubt it will effect the fan base like NASCAR feared losing its most popular drivers would. And let's be honest, the issue here should be less about the qualifying format, the timing of the final gun, or even other drivers attempting to qualify or improve their times, which prevented Hinchcliffe for getting in the field. It was poor qualifying strategies by SPM that should be the main focus. It’s my opinion that the No. 5 car could have slotted in the 21-26th range, and its first attempt was hampered by a green track and changed conditions following the rain. But all cars made their first attempts – SPM could have, and should have, made an earlier attempt to ensure its spot rather than sitting in Lane 2, three or four cars deep, while Servia and Daly were finding their own speed. SPM had too good a car to rest on 32nd-best, and then wait until it had less than 20 minutes to go to make a 'single' attempt. I think we should be question the strategy of SPM more than the format.

Also, we would not be talking about this if it were James Davison on the outside looking in because he is a non-regular? What does any notion towards protecting full-season drivers say to the sponsors who come in and support the one-off driver and teams? Any potential sponsor might then be more inclined to overlook the one-offs and focus more on the regulars to guarantee its name is on a car in the field.  If anything, I would rather see the Indy 500 be a non-points event. That protects the season for all the full-time drivers, while promoting the Indy 500 as an iconic event for all challengers.

Jamie Doellinger

Q: Definitely not time to rethink qualifying. Tony George did that for 1996 and 1997, and it was the pivotal wedge between CART and the new IRL. No gimmies. You can't rest on your laurels, or get a provisional, or come to the Speedway with anything less than 100 percent preparation. I understand how important Hinch is for Honda and IndyCar, but his team came up short. Regroup, and come back strong in Belle Isle.  And please find Tony this week and implore to him the importance of saying, "(Lady and) gentlemen, start your engines!" But weakening his grandfather's legacy is nothing new to TG.

Steve from Redding, CA

Q: I could not disagree with your story and the opinions of Bobby Rahal more! While NASCAR has fully detoured down the road of entertainment with WWE and Monster Trucks, the highlight of the racing weekend was Indy qualifying. The drama was not fabricated. There are a lot of fans that are excited about what IndyCar is offering and are disenfranchised with what NASCAR has become. There is a great opportunity for IndyCar to take back some of the national spotlight with these awesome cars that obviously reward the best drivers and teams. Teams that put it on the line and performed when needed made the field. Those who did not, missed the cut. The same opportunity was available to everyone.

I agree that it sucks that Hinch missed the 500, but talking about enforcing the "Good ol' Boys Club" rule sounds a hell of a lot like the 25-8 rule. Why the hell would we take bumping, something that we have all been clamoring for, and soften it? That is what we want to see. Rewarding drivers or teams who do not perform just because they show up every week is along the same lines of some of the garbage memories I have of '97. Starting 32nd in the 33 car field with the 36th-fastest time because they are popular/come every week/we feel bad for them/life is difficult/we have to protect the "Good ol' Boys" & their investment... Many of us believe the correct American way is to give everyone the same opportunity and let the dust settle where it does. Hey Conor, I know you and your team did your job, but we are going to let the slower guy start because that is the new American way we are trying to sustain. Matter of fact, let's start everyone who showed up, because tradition doesn't matter if people get their feelings hurt or want to be in the race.

People want to eliminate the possibility that those who are fighting for a career and trying to make something happen (Conor Daly) can make the race? Underdogs who beat the Goliaths with an equal starting opportunity makes for great sport! Stop the madness of rewarding and/or breaking traditions for the "Good ol' Boys Club." Please do not start thinking or acting this way, IndyCar!

Jordan Glenn, Binghamton, NY

Q: I have been a long time fan of yours, but I can't believe what I just read!  Bumping is finally back, and you and some others are talking about Nascrap-style provisionals to keep big names from missing the 500. Hinch is great, but he isn't bigger than the 500. Nobody talked about changing the rules when Rahal, as the defending series champ, got bumped in ‘93. I still get emotional thinking about watching Little Al and Emmo, two of my biggest racing heroes ever, not getting it done in ‘95. Nobody was crying when Paul Tracy came back only to get bumped in 2010. Indy is where many of us fell in love with the sport, and one of the things that made it great is the fastest 33, and the fact that nobody is bigger than the 500! I would rather see one of my favorites miss the field than to relive the IRL B.S. from 1997!

Josh Wagar

Q: Finally, bumping with drama and excitement! Fastest 33 drivers should mean something again. This isn't “NAPCAR" with wonky gimmick rules. Learn the lesson Penske and Rahal teams had to learn. They had popular drivers at the time, too. Poor execution and planning has consequences. Coyne was laughable when he suggested just run 35. Of course that gets Pippa in his car in, also. Don't be hypocritical. Tradition is what makes the Indy 500 what it is. Let's capitalize on the new cars, new engine rules coming and a better TV network soon. Like you say, ovals are also tradition and all must be built towards rebooting IndyCar. Try some real promotion, too.

Craig Bailey

Q: You can put me in the not, side of the qualifying re-think question.  Here's why: Let's say next year or the year after that or the year after that, there are 40, 45, 50 cars which show up to qualify. What's the cut-off number then? How do you justify cutting cars without saying we're just being arbitrary? And what do you say to Pippa Mann this year, "We want Hinch, you're a throw-in to justify our indecisiveness about holding true to rules we claim to value." See the stupidity of that? If IMS or IndyCar takes a page out of the NASCAR playbook and "guarantees" spots to teams and drivers, it'll hurt the sport more than help it.

And IndyCar would be wise to think about that, especially considering that IndyCar is on the rise now and NASCAR is on the decline in many areas. Is that really what IndyCar wants to do? Set the series back just as it is gaining fans and has a new TV contract in place? I think not. Besides, Bump Day might've been the best thing to happen to IndyCar in a long time. People are talking about IndyCar racing again, and that's a very good thing. Next year and the years to follow, Indy will have fans watching qualifying again, all because of bumping. Hell, there might even be new entries into the series and at Indy, especially if IndyCar opens up the rulebook to allow more independent car owners to build or develop their own engines and chassis, but still using the Dallara tub. Anyway, those are my thoughts. Your mileage may vary.

Jake, Pasadena, CA

Q: Seriously? After all the grief George took for guaranteed spots, you think IndyCar should guarantee spots like NASCAR? Come on. People wanted bumping, they got bumping. You can't have it both ways.

DJ Odom, Anderson, IN

Q: Why even have qualifying? Let everyone who enters a car make the race. That way, no one has their feelings hurt if they don't do enough to get in according to... gasp... a qualifying procedure that everyone agrees to before any official attempts are made. Let everyone run the race, but don't declare an official winner. Declaring a winner as the first entrant crossing the yard of bricks after 500 miles might make those who finish behind him/her have their feelings hurt. Also, don't let anyone pass any other car during the race, as this might be considered "mean and unfair." Give all race entrants a participation Baby Borg trophy, and commission a new giant Borg Warner trophy to have every race entrant's face rendered on it. These new updated qualifying and race procedures should make everyone happy and prevent any hurt feelings. How about it? Can I count on your vote?

Brad, LaPorte, IN

Q: Hey Robin, good to see you back and in good health. Just had to weigh in on the Hinch being bumped deal. I came to Indy in 1989, when we had 70+ entries. I went home with my tail between my legs, but I learned a lot. Did my first IndyCar race with Coyne that year. I came back a short 10 years later to win Rookie of the Year with my own team. I woke up in the MRI tube in Methodist in 1997 after trying to bump my way into the 24/7 rule. I wake up every morning to pain from my multiple broken legs from Texas. It’s Indy – these guys have had it way too easy for too long. If it had been show up and race in my day, I’d be a 20-time 500 vet. Hate it for Hinch, he’s a great ambassador for our sport. It’s Indy, it shouldn’t be easy. I’ve lived the highs and lows of, are you gonna make it or not. Proud that I did, sad I didn’t at times. That’s the lot in life I was dealt – do your best. If you’re in you’re in, if not, work hard and come back next year. Bumping is the best thing to happen in years.  It’s Indy, never meant to be easy. I’ve loved the Speedway since I was a little kid. It’s Indy, the cruel mistress. It’s Indy, it should be hard.

Scott Harrington

Image by IndyCar

Q: With all due respect, have you lost your mind? I read your article on a potential re-think of qualifying and nearly fell off my chair. For years you have represented clear thinking on the direction of IndyCar with respect to its traditions and what has made the Indianapolis 500 so great. It now appears that you are advocating going back to something similar to the infamous IRL 25-8 rule to accommodate a situation like Hinchcliffe not making the race.

I find this thinking flawed for the following reasons: It flies against tradition when all Indy traditions seem to be under assault. SPM made a mistake with Hinch. He should have been in the priority line far earlier than they moved him over. It was pretty clear at least 30 minutes before they moved him that his time was not going to hold up, or at the very least, was in grave danger. Had they moved him earlier, he would likely have made the race even with the tire issue. Bottom line, the team made an error in judgement, and was punished. This was not a flaw of the qualifying system.

This qualifying weekend was the first weekend in a long time that was actually interesting due to the bumping. The bumping made great TV! Why take that away by assuring that at least 22- 24 entrants have a spot? Any type of program where regular entrants are guaranteed spots would almost certainly damage the chances of Indy-only entrants taking the chance, hence taking us back to the days of no bumping. The story of Hinch not making the race is also a publicity-generating storyline. I am bummed about Hinch not making the race too, but the bottom line is SPM made an error in judgment and that, combined with some bad luck, led to their demise.

We have finally had an interesting weekend due to bumping. Don’t screw this up over one team’s bad luck and lack of foresight. Whatever you and Mark Miles are cooking up, don’t break the thing that was nearly fixed. Hinch took the high road, so should IndyCar.

Justin, Park City, UT

Q: For all those fans that were happy there would be bumping this year at Indy, congratulations, you got what you wanted. It was great TV. You had Bourdais coming back from a crash that reminded us of Gordon Smiley, saving Honda from Chevy’s chokehold on the fast nine; A.J. Foyt racing being relevant at Indy; local boy Conor Daly getting bumped and then going back out and hanging it out to make the field; local hero Ed Carpenter laying down a great lap in conditions that was not as favorable as those who qualified earlier in the day that gave us a taste of what was to come on Sunday; Pippa Mann struggling all week and the emotion that goes with it, holding back the tears while taking her official 500 photo; and finally with memories of Bobby Rahal and Team Penske not making the field, you have fan favorite and Honda commercial spokesman, (it will be interesting if those commercials run during the race) running out of time and getting bumped.

It was what everybody was hoping for. Its what everybody was talking about Saturday night and Sunday. So why are people crying foul? What if Hinch did not have the vibration and bumped James Davison – would that make it all better? On another note, if ABC had any brains (which I question), they need to get Hinch in the booth on race day.

Joe Mullins

Q: That is a horrible idea to protect the regular series drivers from being bumped. The fans and everyone have been bitching and moaning about no bumping for 20 years now, and we finally have some drama back at 16th and Georgetown and you and IndyCar want to take that away from us. SPM ought to be ashamed of themselves for not being able to qualify. That is their own damn fault, just like Bobby Rahal in ‘93 and Penske in ‘95. Tough %$#@ if you’re not fast enough. I’d rather see Milka Duno make the race on speed rather than buy a ride or push another qualified driver out just because you’re a regular.

Don Mathews

Q: I’m totally bummed out (should that be bumped out?) that Hinch got bumped. But everyone knew the rules going into qualifying. Too bad. So sad. Should have done a better job. I always thought that if they had more than 33 entries and all the cars were able to post times that were race-worthy, then they should all be allowed to race. It’s no different to what should happen at any other race. As long as there is enough room on the track for the cars, and they can all run a proper race pace, then they should all be allowed to run. If you think about it, the two Lotus-powered cars from a few years ago, never should have been allowed to start. They were way off the pace. How is that situation any better than allowing 35 cars to start? It just isn’t. Hinch and the boys need to get back to work for Detroit.

Doug Mayer, Revelstoke, BC, Canada

Q: Robin, I've been e-mailing you since your days at The Star and I've defended you at great personal peril on many occasions, but you're making it hard this time. What is your stance on bumping? Bumping? No bumping? Bumping but only certain people can be bumped? Guaranteed starting spots for some people, with open spots for qualifying for the rest? Oh wait, we tried that and you didn't like it. Does 25/8 ring a bell? You're beginning to sound like a politician with your waffling on the subject. Do you want tradition or not? You're all over the map on that subject, too.

Come on Robin, step up to the plate and take a stance, it can only help you out. And shame on Bobby Rahal for mentioning NASCAR in his comments regarding qualifying. We don't need anything NASCAR has to offer. I know Arrow is not happy it won't have Hinch in the race, but it's not the Speedway's obligation to make sure their car is in the race, that responsibility falls on SPM. The only person that seems willing to accept what happened is Hinch. A class act in the face of crushing disappointment.

John Fulton, Akron, Ohio

Q: Implementing a rule to protect full-timers now would be no different than the much-despised 25/8 rule, and much the same as rationalizing "33 is just a number," just from the opposite side of the fence. That doesn't mean IndyCar wouldn't be wise to re-examine the qualifying format and procedures, but not with the aim to create special exemptions or expand the field. I like Hinch and understand what he means to the series, but that's the way the chips fall sometimes, as Rahal and Penske can attest. I suppose Honda could help by cutting a big check to get its spokesman into the race in another car, but I'm not so keen on that idea either, even though it's allowed. Somewhere, Bruno Junquiera must be feeling a sense of déja vu. Indy is the 33 fastest drivers, with everyone playing by the same rules. That's what maintains the integrity of the event, and helps give it its stature.

John Q.

Q: I have to say that prior to Saturday I was a fan who leaned to the "let them all run" side of things. I didn't want to see IndyCar lose any momentum it had with new sponsors and money coming into the series. As of Sunday morning, I think I was wrong. Being a newer fan to IndyCar and a younger guy, I haven't seen the drama of the huge field days and all the bumping. I think I forgot what it was all about. Watching on TV Saturday it instantly took me back 2011. I remember Marco sitting on the outside late on bump day and the drama of not having an Andretti in the field for that race.  Saturday was the most engaged in Indy qualifying I have been since that year, and the first time I had those butterflies in my stomach for guys like Hinch and Daly. I felt terrible for Hinch, but relieved for Conor all at the same time. In the end, aren't those feelings the reason we are fans?

Kyle in PA

Q: I watched my first Bump Day on TV this weekend and I enjoyed it immensely – so much so that I will buy tickets for Indy 500 the first time since 2016, as well as tickets for qualifying because I will want to see, in person, drivers make attempts for the field as well as see the unsuccessful ones turn their final laps of the month. I read your piece about whether a change is needed and I think it would be a severe mistake. I want the series and Arrow to know that having risk back in qualifying is gaining them paying fans.

Victor, New Haven, CT

Q: You are suggesting giving automatic spots for IndyCar regulars at the Indianapolis 500 starting grid. I seriously can't believe that. Are you dropping tradition for reason now? Is your mental health improving? Are you becoming... sensible? Jokes aside, there are good reasons for qualifying provisionals. It could help to attract full-season entries to IndyCar – at least for the first quarter of the schedule, which is better than nothing. And it could prevent recognized drivers from missing the show. Did Penske paid a heavy price for missing 1995? Yes. But missing today is even more costly, given the fragile status of IndyCar. The Split is long gone. A 25/8 rule would not be meant to kick out drivers who deserve it, but to protect those that deserve it.

Ignacio, Uruguay

Ryan Hunter-Reay, Carb Day, 2011 Indy 500

Q: As I write this, James Hinchcliffe has not bought his way back into the field. If he does, what is the point of having 33 cars? Bumping? Two days of qualifying? I am a Hinch fan and it breaks my heart that he struggled. But if you can just buy a spot, what is the point of the entire exercise? Just have provisional spots like NASCAR.

Jeff Loveland

RM: Bobby Rahal and Roger Penske opted not to buy their way back in but Ryan Hunter-Reay [above] and Tim Richmond did, for example, and sponsorship would seem to dictate that decision. Miller extended its contract with Rahal AFTER he was bumped, and Marlboro never waivered in its support for The Captain. But if there’s a provision that a certain percentage of sponsorship in contingent on running Indy, then that changes everything.

Q: Can you explain the reasoning behind this ridiculous qualifying format? I’m a long-time fan and this stupid crap is maddening. A team used to get four days to claw their way in using extraordinary measures to do it! This year they had six hours and 50 minutes minus the rain delays, [and] the last hour was a dud with I think three cars trying to get into the Fast 9? I guess we did get to see one of the most popular drivers fail to qualify, and all to do what on Sunday? Watch 24 cars re-qualify, and a hour for the Fast 9? It’s not that hard. Qualifying should start at the same time as the race, so everyone has similar track conditions, and set the pole on Saturday. Sunday, do the same thing to fill the field, then bumping if it’s needed. If they just have to have the Fast 9 shootout, do it Saturday from 5:30 to 6:30 or 7:00. I love Indy, but seven hours of mostly one car on the track? Just ridiculous.

Joe from Indy

RM: The qualifying format needs a major overhaul, it’s way too convoluted and way too expensive for the teams, and nowhere near the reward vs. risk for the drivers as they seed themselves on Saturday.

Q: Respect your work, [you're the] only guy with a mic old enough to know how it used to be. Hang in there, the kids will fall in the dust. Bumping back? Fine by me, wasn't that long ago when there were so few entries, thanks to TG, that bumping wasn't even mentioned. We were lucky to fill half the seats at the Speedway. Don't remember too many people crying about it when Penske's group had to go home early. I've spent years in the system, luckily only had to go home early once. As has been said by many people before, you pay your money, you take your chances.

Gary B. (No, not that one)

RM: As I said in the opening paragraph, last Saturday can’t compare to what happened in 1995 because of the volume of cars trying to make the race. And Team Penske missing the show remains the most dramatic and shocking day in IMS qualifying history. But bumping one or two cars doesn’t compare.

Q: Seriously, IndyCar needs to give its collective heads a shake on two items. Just make it a big 36-car race. Include all the tenured IndyCar contracted drivers, and fill it out to 36 seats with one-off star applicants. NASCAR runs what, 43 entries? Seriously, there is absolutely no reason to ruin the entire points season for guys like Hinchcliffe in favor of a one-off driver. What kind of tobacco was IndyCar smoking when they made the Indy 500 a double-points race? This is a very high-speed oval race with probably higher then usual odds of nailing the wall. An innocent driver can easily get caught up in a mess of a crash and have their entire season ruined because they’re missing out on the equivalent of two races worth of points. If IndyCar doesn’t think it has enough races and has to score double-points on a single race, then just get another damn race on the calendar somewhere, but stop even thinking about double-points scoring just because it’s a big race.

Jim Hawkins

RM: I have more of a problem with Sonoma being double-points than Indy, but to hear people scream about tradition being upheld… really? Take a look at the last 20-plus years and tell me about tradition.

Q: IndyCar wanted bumping drama... and got it! Probably not what it were hoping for in Mayor Hinch not making the field.  I really applaud Hinch for how he handled this in the media. As a fan, I'm upset that Andretti sent Rossi back out to try for the Fast 9. I could be upset at Coyne for Pippa Mann, but the truth is, SPM should have gotten Hinch out sooner. SPM should have made sure the car was perfect mechanically. Yes, SPM and Hinch got the bad end of fate with the way the rain fell, and the wheel sensor failing causing the vibration. But that is why when it's going to be close, you have to step up as a team and make it happen. Mayor Hinch, I applaud how you have handled the heartbreak and not thrown the blame on anyone else but your team.

On to ABC... ABC was handed a major qualifying drama on a golden platter. Drama that calls for pit reporters scrambling for interviews and to gain information to report back to the viewing audience. ABC... went to commercial. Only a few minutes left and tensions are high... ABC again goes to commercial. ABC, that is why we, the fans, applaud you losing the TV contract. What do you think IndyCar will do in the future to ensure a major team and driver does not miss the field? Will anything be done? Will this hurt SPM's relationship with Arrow and Honda?

John B, Milwaukee, WI

RM: Hinch was all class afterwards, and made it a point for people not to blame anyone but himself and SPM for not making the show. I think NBC would salivate at the thought of having that kind of TV opportunity that ABC had last Saturday. Not sure IndyCar will do anything, but Miles said they will discuss it after May. Arrow seems to be taking the high ground, and Honda loves Hinch.

Q: I’m sure this is what everyone is saying to you, but wow. Bumping. I’ll be honest, I thought from the beginning that this was going to be a potentially good idea but with serious risks, and was tentatively for it. I thought that we’d have two one-offs not make the show, and that everyone would be sad for them but people would be happy at the manufactured drama and would be happy to pretend we’d recaptured some of the old drama, and IndyCar would be content with having added a little bit of excitement to their show.

But we actually did recapture some of the old drama, and it led to a grandstand of people flipping off the cars in line in front of Hinch that stopped him from getting a final run. Hinch getting bumped was not their fault, but they had to face the anger from all the fans. I usually think that IndyCar makes pretty good decisions about how to run its races, but with the benefit of hindsight, I think it’s clear that IndyCar shot itself in the foot this May. Obviously no one could have predicted this would happen, but now it is in a bind. It can either change the rules and let Hinch start (I don’t see it happening) and prove it’s hypocritical and only cares about the drama if it doesn’t affect anyone it deems to be “important.” Or they can let one of the most popular drivers not start and face the wrath of all the angry fans (myself included).

Furthermore, what if we’d had the other female driver get bumped instead of Pippa (who I’m absolutely gutted for after all the work she does to get sponsors and to promote women in racing)? If Danica didn’t make the field, I guarantee that rule would be changed, and she would be taking the green flag. I asked you a few weeks back in the April 25 Mailbag about what would happen if Danica or someone like that didn’t make the field, and you said something about a special Sunday morning session for people who ran into trouble on Saturday. I think you absolutely called it by saying we don’t need bumping from Day 1, and now IndyCar has to pay the price.

I think that it failed to think of what would happen in a situation like this, and now it has a tough decision to make. What do you think of this crap? I get that no-one, no matter how popular, should just get to start the race because they showed up, and that the rules apply to everyone the same (as they should), but IndyCar has a real mess of angry fans on its hands now.

Max Camposano, Los Altos, CA

RM: As many fans that are upset about Hinch being bumped, even more seem happy to have bumping back and I don’t think IndyCar is paying the price – I think it got more publicity about Hinch missing the show than Ed Carpenter got for winning the pole. And the special session was for anyone crashing or blowing up Saturday before getting an opportunity to qualify, and that scenario didn’t happen.

Image by IndyCar

Q: Kudos to Marshall Pruett, the RACER staff and you for all the great coverage this month. For years I’ve been reading your column, and for years you’ve waxing nostalgic about the good old days of Indy 500 qualifying and Bump Day drama. I’m scratching my head at your column on Sunday – why would you advocate adopting the NASCAR practice of promoter’s options after the amazing and heartbreaking show put on by James Hinchcliffe and Pippa Mann?

It was everything the old bump days were and more – gut-wrenching, compelling and incredibly watchable. Indy has always been about the Fastest 33, and you’ve always passionately supported that construct. I get Hinch’s popularity. He is an awesome race driver, and props to him for accepting his fate. But he’ll be back next year with a vengeance.  Why screw with a format that is now working well again after you’ve beaten the drum so long for its return?

Conversely, your article on Saturday about Danica was prescient and timely. She has been very  impressive on her return, and hasn’t put a wheel wrong all month.  For her to qualify seventh after being away for seven years is truly a credit to her and to ECR.  I’ll be rooting for her on Sunday.  It would be one of the greatest sports stories of this century if she stays out of trouble and wins the 500 in her last race.  As you’ve stated, Indy suits her skills, and she is smooth enough and savvy enough to win it all on Sunday. Who besides Marco has the best chance to win it this year?

Bob

RM: I think Team Penske’s four drivers are going to be very tough to beat, and I hope Ed Carpenter can contend to the end, but Scott Dixon can never be counted out. It appeared Chevy had the advantage in qualifying, but drivers seem to think it might even out in the race.

Q: Call me a traditionalist. I like the pole on the first day and bumping on the last. I made it home just in time to see Hinch sitting in his car after missing the show. And I have seen a lot of comparisons between Hinch and Rahal/Penske in the '90s. Fair enough, high-profile driver missing out. However one big difference. Hinch was fast enough to get in. Rahal and Penske in their day were not. I went to Day 1 qualifying every year from 1986-1993 before moving to Texas. Amazing crowd and atmosphere. Guess what IndyCar, you are never going to get that back. So the one weekend thing is very understandable.

I have read quite a bit about your opinion, but what about the opinions overall around the paddock? Keep trying gimmicks like the Fast 9 in hopes to find that miracle to entice more fan attendance? Or go back to tradition with the simple formula – pole first day and bumping last day? On a side note, one thing I always thought was cool was that the final day could be faster than the rest, so you could have a third of the field going to bed last night not knowing if they had a safe time. That's drama!

Doug Sohn, North Richland Hills, TX

RM: Actually Emerson was fast enough to get in on Saturday, but his run was waived off and he wasn’t able to get back to that speed. I think the paddock is weary of all the running just to get in position to qualify. It doesn’t pay anything, and it’s expensive. But I agree the qualifying format needs an overhaul.

Q: I like having a process to find the 33 fastest cars, whether 34 or 44 show up. Also, aligning the grid on Sunday should be interesting. I were an owner, I don't know how thrilled I'd be about the "risk/reward" factor, but these are now the rules. Fast 9 is fun, a "race for the pole" but again, what a risk for the owners and drivers. As you've said, pony up the big bucks and make it worth it. How about a big payout if you win, pole at the Indy GP and win, followed by pole and win the 500! Perhaps someone could buy an insurance policy and offer it up, make it a staggering number. The actuaries will figure out the odds.

For the race, why not make a staggering payout for a last-place starter to win the race? How about, the further back you start, the higher your payday if you are drinking the milk? You may have teams sandbagging to start last, but if you're bumping and there happens to be a rainstorm, it could ruin someone’s strategy and they might not even qualify! I think there is a means to facilitate a huge payout that won't empty the Hulman bank account – oh wait, didn't Tony already do that?

Oh, and ABC is the worst. Awful, pathetic... the adjectives go on an on. Why not scroll adverts on the screen when qualifying. "These laps brought to you by....." and have something on the screen while a driver is trying to make the field? The breakaways were so untimely and ridiculous it ruined the viewing.

Chip, Earleville, MD

RM: I’d love to see a title sponsor for qualifying and $1 million to win the pole and $100,000 to make the Fast 9. But what Indy really needs is a title sponsor for the race to put several million into the purse, which is a joke right now.

Q: I can remember who won the 1987, 2000, and 2011 500 quicker than other years because they were memorable one-offs. I also think such a [provisionals] rule can discourage NASCAR, USAC and F1 drivers from running. I don't get that excited compared to others when these drivers enter, but I can't discount it entertains others. I think such a rule can make it harder to get one-off sponsors into the series. Sometimes these sponsors fall in love with the series once they get their toes wet at the 500, i.e. NAPA. I would rather see the field expanded in the future, as 33 is just a number. Anyone who disagrees should put an asterisk on Harroun's win, as it didn't follow "tradition." Also, I know you will get mail bringing up Bobby Rahal and Penske missing in the past. That's kind of apples and oranges, as both of these teams were compensated well to run lemons in those years, although Penske is a murky story, as I think – and you will correct me if I am wrong – CART outlawed Roger's 1994 engine.

Robert Sergott

RM: USAC outlawed RP’s engine after he took its rulebook and beat them over the head with it, but Indy has started 35 a couple of times and 43 once, so as long as it’s at least 33 I’m happy. But I don’t think provisionals would have much affect on drivers from other series, because there are so few that can or want to run Indy.

Q: We got the bumping that we longed to see again. It sucked Hinch didn't make it, but man was it exciting to watch. It's the nature of the beast at Indy. What I would like to see happen is Saturday be the day where you only fill the top nine positions for the shootout. Everyone gets a chance, or multiple if time was available, to get in the fast nine until 6:00. Not 5:50. Then on Sunday, the cars that didn't make the Fast 9 go for 10-33 with bumping from 10 a.m. until 5 p.m. Then save the last hour for the Fast 9 shootout for the pole. I was at the track Sunday, and it was pretty boring until the end for the pole. The whole re-run for 10-33 is not needed.

Eric, London, OH

RM: The current format is geared to give ABC two days to cover qualifying, and finally it got some dramatics on a Saturday. But flipping the pole and bumping would be fine with most.

Q: Well, that was strange. I understand using the Fast 9 to drum up excitement, especially in the bump-free times of the recent past, but only being able to get the pole on Day 1 of qualifying used to be a reward for having your car ready to go early, and if that didn't work out you still had a chance to qualify. Not only did the current process screw that up, but it also meant you had people in line trying for their second or third nowhere-near-fast-enough attempt to get into the Fast 9, preventing other people from just having a chance to put their car in the show before the clock runs out. What crap!

Fine, keep the Fast 9. Everyone runs on day one to get into the Fast 9. But why toss out all the 10-33 times from day one? Keep 'em, and let everyone hammer at the bubble through 5pm on day two! Then there's two days for teams to get a good run, and people trying to get into the Fast 9 aren't in the way. Also, you want drama for the Sunday telecast? How about two hours of nerve-wracking bumping followed by an hour of the Fast 9!  Or go back to the old way. Anything but this!

Matt, Philadelphia, PA

RM: I think most agree the qualifying format needs to be simplified or returned to the old days, when the pole was Saturday and bumping was Sunday. Maybe NBC will push for a change.

Image by IndyCar

Q: First off, I would like to thank you and Marshall for your outstanding work covering all things IndyCar – you guys and RACER are simply the best. Hope to see you both at The Brickyard later this week! What happened to Hinch was tragic, but it seems to me that Honda could have and should have prevented it.

While I think it made sense for Rossi to make a last-ditch effort get into the Fast 9, did anybody at Honda (or anyone else for that matter) really think Rahal could jump high enough to make it in? Don’t get me wrong -- I would like to see Rahal follow in his father’s footsteps with an Indy 500 victory (which I witnessed at my first 500), but exactly what was Rahal hoping to do with his late rerun? Rossi was faster than Rahal all week, plus it’s not as if Rahal was at risk of getting bumped out of the field. Shouldn’t Honda have politely asked Rahal to give up his place in line so that Hinch would be less likely to run out of time?

Bill, Appleton, WI

RM: I can’t imagine Honda or Chevy ever telling its teams what to do or not to do in that situation. And Hinch said those drivers weren’t responsible for him missing the show. I’m not even sure he was ready when Rahal or Rossi went back out.

Q: Re-running positions 10-33 on Sunday doesn't really seem to generate much excitement. How many times did we hear Sunday it doesn't make that much difference where you start as long as you’re in the field? So if we get more than 33 cars next year, how about this qualifying format? Saturday determines the Fast 9. Positions 10-thru 27 are locked in. Positions 28-33 are not locked. Sunday: Open the track for practice and bumping 28-33, with the last hour reserved for the Fast 9. Or, one hour of bumping and one hour for the Fast 9. This would give bubble teams more opportunity to bump their way in. If you can't find enough speed after two days, then you don't deserve a spot. If the track is slower on Sunday, then the teams that hit their setup on Saturday keep their advantage.

Ken, Wisconsin

RM: There is virtually nothing exciting about watching 10-33 on Sunday. Having everyone post a time and then deciding things on Sunday would be my preference.

Q: I know hindsight is 20/20 and all that, but I was practically screaming at my TV for Schmidt to put Hinch in line right behind Servia when second runs opened. It was obvious to me that he was in jeopardy, and it was equally obvious that barring technical issues, he could equal or better Wickens's time on a much-improved track. Had they put him back in line at the earliest opportunity they could have fixed the vibration problems (wheel/tire issue?) in time and he would have made the race. IndyCar may look at restructuring qualifying yet again, but I hope it does not guarantee slots – that would stink of the IRL. What it should do is take a look at extending qualifying either by delaying the closing gun, or by moving bumping to day two (like it used to be) if there are rain delays on day one.

Mike Grove, Copley, Ohio

RM: You and half the paddock were wondering why Hinch wasn’t sent out right behind Jack Harvey with an hour to go.

Q: Have you heard or seen anything that would indicate that teams did not understand the qualification procedures on Saturday? I've read that Hinchcliffe said he thought qualifying ended at 6:00 on Saturday, instead of at 5:50. Evidently he also mentioned, but didn't elaborate on, several other points of confusion. I've also heard that Mann's team seemed unsure of which line to use late on Saturday. On a related note, is there anything SPM could have done differently after Hinchcliffe waved off his attempt due to the vibration? I was a little surprised that they didn't have a backup set of tires ready to go, although they may not have realized the vibration was a tire/wheel issue. To be fair, it's easy to be a Monday morning quarterback.

Kyle in Raleigh

RM: It’s been 5:50 for three years so I doubt if anybody was in the dark about that, and I haven’t heard anything about SPM not understanding the rules. It just looked like they panicked.

Q: I’ve always been curious, but why do they measure everything by speed instead on time at the Indy 500? I realize that high speeds and broken track records used to be a part of the history, but what started the tradition of speeds over times and why do they still do that? Also, my wife and I are going to the race this year, and we are curious if you have ideas of what to do after the race while the rest of the crowd tries to get out? Is the museum still open at that time? Should we just sit tight? Thanks!

Erik Steinbrecher, Oswego, IL

RM: Speed sells, not times. The headlines in the old days at The Star, The News and Indy Times were always blurting out new track records or big speeds. I imagine the museum is open, so that would be a good way to kill an hour or so.

Q: With the financial climate of racing these days, do you think that IndyCar might entertain to run a commercial during the race broadcast thanking every sponsor on the two non-qualifying entries for this year? My thought would be along the lines of “We, Indycar, would like to thank these following sponsors for supporting the spirit of competition”, then just scrolling all the sponsors on those two cars? This might help encourage more sponsors to support more entries?

Dave Carvin Lumberton, New Jersey

RM: That’s a nice thought, but IndyCar doesn’t even run national commercials about its drivers or races, so I can’t see that ever happening.

Q: I don’t know why 500 qualifying has to be so complicated now. Tell me why this wouldn’t be simpler and easier to understand. Same idea as what we have now without all the BS and unnecessary risk. Day 1 (Saturday) – 11:00 a.m.-6:00 p.m. All entered cars get attempt to qualify. Cars can take multiple attempts, but must withdraw previous time. Fast 9 set at 6:00pm gun. Day 2 (Sunday) – 11:00 a.m.-5:00 p.m. Cars bumped on Day 1, or unable to qualify on Day 1, may attempt to bump back into the field. Qualified cars from Day 1 or Day 2 can be withdrawn if they fear they are too slow and want to re-qualify. Any person qualifying on a Day 2 time must start behind all Day 1 qualifiers. 5:00-6:00 p.m. Fast 9 qualifying.

Mark Schneider, Columbus, IN

RM: I like three chances per car, pole set on Saturday and any bumping takes place on Sunday, but to answer your question: hell yes it’s too complicated.

Q: Although I hated that Hinch and Pippa didn't make the field, I sure don't think it would be necessary to change qualification procedure because of it. If anything, it should make James more popular. I don't think I've seen any greater class in a racer in such depressing circumstances. As he said, "This place has done worse to me." Talk about getting real! I was as shocked as I guess he was; told that they stopped at 5:50 PM for fricking ABC? I guess it's not the first time, but why would they change tradition like that? Marco says he was the one to let Hinch know while he was sitting in the car.

What they should do is give bumped drivers first priority in the line, rather than drivers who are safely in to try and improve their position. I noticed A.J. wasn't out on the stand in the pits this week, or at least I didn't see him. I saw him in the garage signing autographs once, saw today he watched quals from his motorhome. Is that because he is having a hard time getting around? I'm used to seeing him on the pit box.

Tim B.

RM: I think it’s possible that Hinch has become even more popular with his high-road stance and honesty since last weekend. Saturday qualifying has ended at 5:50 the past three years, so I don’t buy it. A.J. looks good and gets around fine, he just wanted to watch his cars without signing autographs and talking to fans. And he was pretty happy after TK and Matt qualified 10th and 11th.

Image by IndyCar

Q: After reading your article about Danica and watching her during this weekend’s qualifying, I have to agree with you and let go of any animosity I have towards her and her decision to move to NASCAR. At the end of the day, how many other drivers would not have chased that pot of gold? You also have to remember she is from somewhat modest means and I’m sure her family has made many financial sacrifices over the years, so why not try to get some security? Watching her this weekend, I remembered why we liked her to begin with.  She’s a no-nonsense racer who as she proved can go fast. I was impressed with her talking about the car, as well as the feedback she gave over the radio. So, I’ll be rooting for her to have a good race, and if she is there at the end, it will be a great show.

Jim Doyle, Hoboken, NJ

RM: Being an also-ran in NASCAR fueled her critics, but if they check her IndyCar career stats, they can’t deny she’s had a lot of good races. And she’s always been focused.

Q: Your article on Danica Patrick smells of hero worship. Lyn St. James (in her day), Simona, and Katherine Legge are much better drivers than Danica. I consider Danica the Hillary Clinton of motor racing -- always blaming everyone else for her problems.

Jerry Wilt, Houston

RM: Simona is the best female IndyCar road racer and Legge has done a good job in sports cars, but never had much of an IndyCar ride. Sarah Fisher was the first woman I ever saw be aggressive in an IndyCar on an oval (Desire Wilson had her moments road racing), and she chased Sam Hornish all day at Homestead one memorable day. But just check Danica’s record before making a statement about not being as good as Lyn St. James. You are sadly mistaken. And my last hero was Jim Hurtubise.

Q: Just read your piece on Danica, and you sure hit it on the nail. As a longtime fan of the series, its history, and the greats who have entertained and awed me through the years most certainly Danica did bring that spark and immediate interest to the sport when it really needed something. She proved herself to be able to run with the boys, as well as give them a run for the money on occasions. She will be missed perhaps, but not forgotten.

Peter Carey, San Bruno, Calif.

RM: Thanks Peter, it just makes me shake my head when experts say she wasn’t a racer. And look what she’s done so far this month after being gone seven years.

Q: What kind of training do they give a pace car driver? I know he only will drive it for the start, but I imagine Oladipo will have a steeper learning curve than, say, Roger Penske, Jeff Gordon or Dario Franchitti. How much time does he get on track at the Speedway, and when does that happen? Do they take him to another track to get more seat time?

Tom Hinshaw

RM: Victor will spend a couple days at IMS with Sarah Fisher and be just fine.

Q: What is the deal with Eddie Cheever? I want no mistake to be made about what I'm saying next, because I am a confirmed Cheever-hater. I couldn't stand him during his "Andretti feud" (PS: What was the whole deal with that?), him bragging about his IRL 500 win all the time when he wasn't good enough for CART, but more than all that is his attitude in the booth. For several years, he acts like he will lower himself to call these road race thingys for a paycheck. Last year, something really changed. For last year's Indy 500, he was pretty good. He added to the telecast. He got excited. He got lost in the chaos for the race like a fan. For the first time, he sounded like he wanted to be there. He did such a good job, and I heard that exact same Eddie Cheever again during the Fast 9.

What's caused that Jekyll and Hyde change? Is it the fact he's about to be out of a job?  Did he finally choose now to loosen up?  What's your take on this, because if he could've done this more often in the past, then Always Bad Coverage wouldn't be such a chore to slog through. He's still not "Uncle Bobby and Sam" good, but he'd be far better than what we got.

Dan in Kansas City

RM: Eddie is an intelligent guy with a sarcastic sense of humor who did a marvelous job on F1 with ESPN, and could probably have flourished at ABC with the right team. He’s a great debater, and he and Uncle Bobby would have been a great match.

Q: Why aren't the most practice laps run from noon until 4 p.m. to simulate actual race day time and conditions? Happy Hour is always busy, but the race isn't run at that time.

Mike Oates, Los Angeles

RM: The smart guys try to run in the heat of the day.

Q: I heard Bob Jenkins say during a 500 practice telecast that the rule of thumb was “if you could see a car ahead of you, it was affecting your speed.” Was wondering just how much distance are we talking about there, and also if that effect was always a positive tow or if you get so far back (or so close) it becomes a dirty air negative?

David Spear

RM: That’s the best explanation I can offer – TK said he was coming out of Turn 4 and somebody else was going into Turn 1 (still on the straightaway) and that gave him a tow.

Q: Now that the Supreme Court has cleared the way for states to legalize sports betting, what are the odds we’ll see it in Indiana in time for next year’s 500?

I could imagine IMS doing a deal with Hoosier Park to set up betting windows around the Speedway (instead of creating its own system) and offering odds on qualifying weekend and race day for various drivers, teams (i.e., Team Penske’s drivers vs. the field, etc.) over/under on lead changes during the race, and various Super Bowl-like prop bets – such as how long Jim Cornelison holds the high note at the end of “Back Home Again in Indiana.”

Mark Gillespie

RM: Probably won’t happen very quick because we’re pretty conservative in Indiana, but it would be the best thing ever for IndyCar races – not just the Indy 500. Randy Bernard suggested it to the Hulman/George family and got rejected, but it’s the best way to create instant interest. And better TV ratings.

Q: Not one word in Sunday's edition of the Washington Post about Bump Day. Granted, most of that paper is a joke, but Jeff didn't invest for nothing. Doesn't IndyCar's media relations work with national outlets to ensure coverage? Especially for the Indy 500? If not, why not? No way Hinch's story shouldn't have been at least second page (of the Sports section) news.

Derek, Arcola, VA

RM: IndyCar doesn’t have enough people in PR to monitor newspapers and their interest. If Hinch was from DC maybe they’d make a call.

Q: Just thinking already about what NBC can do to bring a big-event feel to the Indy 500 next year. Can you please start the hints to your network bosses that Bob Costas has to host the pre-race show? He brings gravitas to any event he is involved in, and nobody would doubt NBC'S commitment if he's the one kicking it off.

Rob Joseph, Chandler, AZ

RM: I doubt my bosses need any input from me. NBC relishes big events and excels at covering them, so I imagine Mr. Costas will have a nice role. And I’d suggest Little E drives the pace car now that’s an NBC analyst.

Q: Someone recently suggested the 500 race non-qualifiers have a couple of laps at the start of the parade laps just ahead of the pace lap to at least give the non-qualifying car sponsors some air time. Place them just behind the pace car. And let the complete field keep a separation between themselves and the non-qualifiers. Also, have the TGV and radio media talk about who the drivers are and who the sponsors off those cars are. Especially hype the sponsors. Not my original idea; that of another of your readers from just a few weeks back. A great idea. Would work well until the car count gets to where there are more than six non-qualifiers, then stop the program. That isn’t this year.

Ft. Worth Dan

RM: Naw, that’s a slippery slope that IMS isn’t about to go down.

Q: If Hinch and Pippa are unable to purchase a qualified ride for the race, would IndyCar be open to adding two additional two-seaters decked out in Hinch's and Pippa's intended 500 liveries and let them run around the track during the parade laps with Mario? Or would that add insult to injury?

Brian, Spring Grove, IL

RM: I imagine if Arrow wanted to paint up a car and pay for it, then it could be possible, but not sure the two-seater gets any airtime on ABC.