Robin Miller's Mailbag for November 27, presented by Honda Racing / HPD

Your questions for Robin should 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.

Q: Did not see the news of Sebastien Bourdais' split with Dale Coyne Racing coming. Bourdais must have had some warning, though, since the IMSA ride was announced the same day? Assuming the Honda engine support might have been Seb’s main funding contribution to Coyne, does this provide an opportunity for Hinch at Coyne? I am assuming he likely has more Honda support than Bourdais had, as well as some potential other support. Or would Hinch need to basically provide full funding to DCR which puts him in the same predicament as he is with Rahal? A lot has happened since what was thought to be the main silly season story when Rossi signed with Andretti.

Don Weidig, Canton, OH

RM: I doubt Seb had much warning, It didn’t sound like he saw it coming and why would he? I don’t know the details of Coyne’s engine deal but I can’t imagine that would have been enough to bounce Bourdais. There has to be more to this story. DCR obviously needs money and I don’t know that Hinch has any. Honda went all in to keep Rossi, though, so unless Honda of Canada steps up, it may be Indy only for the Mayor of Hinchtown.

Q: I am really concerned that IndyCar is again losing its way by jettisoning drivers that fans have developed a desire to see on a weekly basis. The loss of Hinch and Sebastian this year should not be taken lightly. I feel IndyCar's strength in the early '90s was attributable to name recognition as well as competition. The new crop of drivers may be capable of putting on a great show but we need to keep people who put on a good show and talk to the TV camera well. Who would have thought Paul Tracy and Sebastian Bourdais would become lovable faces of the sport?

John Sedlak, Venice, FL

RM: It’s a shock to see someone of Bourdais’ stature moved aside, especially on a team he helped elevate, because it seldom happens. But, unfortunately, it’s the reality of the economics in IndyCar. And Hinch simply wasn’t wanted by McLaren or Arrow, it would appear. I’m sure IndyCar is concerned (especially in Toronto) at losing two of its biggest names, but other than raising the purses and lowering the costs across the board, what can it do? It’s not going to buy a ride for either driver.

It's tough to see drivers as popular as Bourdais, Hinchcliffe and Pigot pushed aside. Image by Cantrell/LAT

Q: I just read the disappointing news that Seabass has been dismissed by Coyne. Might that open up a seat for Hinch or do you expect Coyne to go with a kid whose father has deep pockets?

Rick, Lisle, IL

RM: I expect Dale has already heard from somebody with money, but I doubt it’s Hinch.

Q: This is becoming a disease that IndyCar does not need if it is to have continued support by race fans: This evening I read on RACER that Bourdais is unemployed? What gives with this "off-season disease," with the IndyCar driver unemployment line becoming longer with each passing month?

Bruce from Sheffield, MA

RM: Since 2015, Helio Castroneves, Juan Montoya, Sage Karam, Carlos Munoz, Gabby Chavez, James Jakes, Jack Hawksworth, Luca Fillippi, Mikhail Aleshin, J.R. Hildebrand, Jordan King and, soon, Mattheus Leist have gone from full-time IndyCar rides to sports cars to spectators. And that doesn’t count part-timers like Rene Binder, Kyle Kaiser, Pietro Fittipaldi, Pippa Mann, James Davison, Stefan Wilson or Oriol Servia. My point is that IndyCar is always a revolving door because of the economics, but this is big news because Seb and Hinch are two of the biggest names in our sport and that hasn’t happened since JPM was farmed out to IMSA.

Q: Hinch is to be paid for his final year via his contract, yet Bourdais is dumped despite having a contract. How does that work? Are there clauses in contracts regarding availability of sponsorship dollars? Yeah, that may sound like a dumb question, but it sounds even more stupid to me that contracts between teams and drivers would be signed without having sponsorship nailed down for their entire term.

Obviously it's possible for a sponsor to have sudden financial issues which, despite a contract, could make recouping money from them problematic for the team and/or driver since the sponsor's well could be dry, thus making lawsuit expenses wasteful and useless. But, if a sponsor just decides to walk away, then I'd think that the team, the driver, or both would pursue legal avenues. However, since Bourdais has a contract for 2020 but was dumped, it would seem that his reps could pursue legal action against the team.

From reading the articles, it comes across that Coyne figured out pretty late that he either needed or wanted more money from somewhere. While that's literally a problem for Bourdais, in another sense it's not Bourdais' problem that the team owner took so long to figure things out (if you get my drift). I'd think that any contract should stipulate fiduciary responsibilities, timely communications -- whatever necessary to keep all parties in the contract informed. If Coyne was having issues, then it would seem that he had a responsibility to inform everyone involved immediately. Or did Coyne's issues (assuming it's that and not just a desire) occur literally overnight?

Ron from Northern CA

RM: Nobody knows exactly what those two contracts say -- whether there’s a buyout clause in either or both are entitled to their full retainer -- and neither driver has made any public comments and probably can’t if they want to get paid. Seb was also in the final year of his deal. My suggestion to both teams would be to let fans know if the drivers are being compensated because that would be the first good publicity they received.

Q: After a wave of positive news, the loss of both James Hinchcliffe and Sebastien Bourdais has been a real letdown. The Bourdais/Coyne story was a great one. I always rooted for them but now I cannot. The only thing that can turn this into any kind of positive news would be if Hinch moves to Coyne via Honda.

I’m really disappointed in the way Coyne dumped Bourdais and left him hanging -- two popular drivers dumped in the same way. Add that ugly aeroscreen we have to look at starting next year and my enthusiasm for the start of next year has waned. We need some positive news.

Bob Rundgren, Villa Park, IL

RM: I kinda thought Roger Penske buying IMS and IndyCar was positive...

Q: Please tell us that Seabass is being picked up by another team. The fan base really enjoys the periodic "cameo" interviews he has given, via RACER’s Marshall Pruett. Similar wishes for keeping "The Mayor" on-track as well!

Bill in CA

RM: Don’t know where Seb would go at this point. Ditto for Hinch. But the Hamburger and French Fry videos were quite entertaining, and I guess we’ll only get to see them at the IMSA races now.

Q: Well, Robin, that didn't take very long. Here's the answer to the mysterious parting of ways at Coyne Racing: IndyCar's loss is IMSA's gain. Seabass has raced in sports cars before, most recently for Ganassi Racing in the Ford GTs, so fans will be familiar with him and he can still go like stink! Hate to see him leave IndyCar, but I'm also a big IMSA fan, so glad to see him move over.

This will help boost the JDC-Miller team's Caddy DPi program -- they should become real contenders with the top teams now, likely make podiums and a few wins. I'm also wondering if just maybe Seabass feels its a good time to move over and drive a car with a roof on it? He's already gotten banged up on the ovals pretty good; made that remarkable recovery to get back behind the wheel. But maybe he feels it's time; his kids are getting older now. Now we have to see who Coyne ends up with as his lead driver. Ferruci might be brave on the ovals, but I don't think he's experienced enough to be the No. 1 on the team yet. I could be wrong....

Tony Mezzacca, Madison, NJ

RM: No doubt Seb enjoys sports cars, but I think he would have preferred to leave IndyCar under his own terms. And Santino drove like a team leader much of 2019, so he’ll be fine in that role as long as Craig Hampson is there for him.

Q: Hello, Robin, long-time fan and reader of the Mailbag but first time sending in a question: In previous Mailbags I have seen many criticisms levied against James Hinchcliffe's results while with the now-AMSP team. I feel like the blame does not fall just at his feet but the team as well. I may not be remembering correctly, but it seems like I remember him having more lead engineers than seasons. Am I wrong? I always wondered, 'Was it due to him being difficult to work with or was there another reason'? He is not my favorite driver out there, but I feel like he has been and continues to be a good ambassador for IndyCar. Love reading the Mailbag and thank you for everything you have done for the sport. Hopefully I will run into you at the race in Richmond next year.

Matthew Bush, Fredericksburg, VA

RM: Hinch has had a few engineers in recent years. Allen McDonald left the team at the end of 2017 when he and then-new general manager Piers Phillips did not mesh. McDonald was replaced by Leena Gade, who was a whiz on road and street courses but, with her lack of oval experience, struggled in testing at IMS and again during the month of May. SPM technical director Todd Malloy stepped in to try and help, but it was too late and Hinch missed the show. Gade was replaced by SPM's Will Anderson, a team veteran on the assistant engineering side, who was promoted to race engineer with Meyer Shank Racing's team under the SPM-MSR technical alliance. Since MSR was only doing six races, Anderson was often free to engineer Hinch when he wasn't looking after Jack Harvey's MSR entry; and he put Hinch in Victory Lane at Iowa. When he was on MSR duty, Malloy filled in. For 2019, Anderson went full-time with Hinch and SPM's Mike Colliver was assigned to Harvey.

Is there a connection between Bourdais' ouster and Honda (plus most IndyCar fans) wanting a full-time ride for Hinch? Uhh...no. Image by LePage/LAT

Q: Just when I thought I had most of the seats for next year figured out I hear two strong rumors. 1) Bourdais was out at Coyne because some “performance objectives” dictated by Honda were not met. Can you confirm? Is this Honda’s way of providing a seat for Hinch? 2) I heard MSR is now adding a second car. Is this a Honda seat for Hinch? Any more word on who gets the second seat at Foyt or if Conor Daly winds up at Carlin? Have a great Thanksgiving!

John, Del Rio, TN

RM: Have not heard that at all. Honda spent to keep Rossi in the fold but I don’t think an engine lease alone would be enough to make Coyne jettison Bourdais. Second car for Mike Shank? News to me. I’ll ask him. No idea about A.J. and we’re hoping Daly gets the second seat at ECR.

Q: Nice to see Seb landed at JDM-Miller in the Cadillac DPi. Any other veterans getting canned before we get back to St. Pete?

Jeff, FL

RM: Well, you wouldn’t think so, but I didn’t think there would be much movement past Rossi and Herta so maybe nobody is safe except Dixie and the Team Penske trio.

Q: I read RACER's report of Michael Andretti advocating for some sort of franchise system in IndyCar racing to help set values for teams. In other words, the Formula 1 model, which Andretti has first-hand experience with thanks to his Formula E team. I was quite frankly disappointed. To paraphrase Andretti, "Any Tom, Dick or Harry with enough money can put a team together and go racing, and that's bad." Really? I don't think a closed shop is the answer if IndyCar wants to grow.

The recent experiences of Mike Harding and Ricardo Juncos would indicated that there are already enough barriers to entry. I also suspect that any new owner coming in today would find it difficult, if not impossible, to secure an engine lease. Formula 1 has devolved into an engineering exercise that travels the world putting on chess matches in tire management with an occasional auto race breaking out. That's the result of a closed shop with no new blood. That's not the direction that I'd like to see IndyCar go. Your thoughts?

Bill Carsey, North Olmsted, OH

RM: I think it was a poor choice of words by Michael, but all he’s saying is there needs to be some kind of a franchise system for full-timers that have invested their lives. Baseball, basketball and football couldn’t survive without the financial gift basket from television (same for F1 and NASCAR), and since IndyCar doesn’t have that option, what’s wrong with some kind of franchise program? The Leader’s Circle gutted the purses so that’s not the answer, and I truly don’t think people understand how expensive IndyCar is and how small the return on investment.

Q: Guessing I will be in the minority on this one but Michael Andretti is correct in saying that a franchise system is critical to the owners having something of value in their team outside of a few assets. Provided they were willing to pay for a franchise (at this point the fee would have to be quite reasonable), I see no reason why Mr. Penske would not explore such an arrangement. In the end, strong owners and teams are critical to the success of IndyCar in which he now has an even-more-vested interest. It seems a reasonable proposal.

Justin, Park City, UT

RM: Of course it's reasonable, logical and very necessary if IndyCar is ever going to sustain anything resembling a successful business model.

Q: When Michael speaks about "revenue sharing" and other ideas, he would be wise to remember that, according to what I heard at the Speedway over the years, this was one of the major reasons for the Split. Please don't go down that road again...

Jim Mulcare, Westbury, NY

RM: Not true. There was a rumor CART teams were going to boycott Indy and that was pure B.S. fabricated by an IMS PR man. Of course, when CART went public in the late '90s, then the full-timers cashed in their stock, but that’s the only revenue sharing that ever existed in my memory.

Q: I will totally admit that, with the amount of money in my bank account, I am pretty naive to the kind of business challenges that an owner like Michael Andretti faces. However, as someone who has scraped and sacrificed to be a "part of the show" in other forms of motorsports, as well as a long-time USAC/CART/IndyCar fan, it is pretty disheartening to read, “Now, any Joe Blow can buy a car and a truck and show up at the racetrack, and it’s too easy." To me, the fact that Joe Blow can do that in any form of racing is what makes it so appealing. It always has been. I guess I'm just old.

Brad in Seattle

RM: Correct. It’s the Joe Blows like Roger Rager, Phil Krueger, Jim Guthrie, Bob Harkey, Eldon Rasmussen and John Martin that always made qualifying at Indianapolis so compelling back when there were 50 cars going for 33 spots. I’m sure Michael wishes he’d have used a different term.

The 'Joe Blows' like Eldon Rasmussen (shown here at Pocono in 1975) that once made Indy 500 qualifying so compelling ...

Q: Robin, with respect to securing a title sponsor for Indy in order to bulk up the purse, you wrote: "'The Menards 500 at Indianapolis' doesn’t bother me in the least if it gets the teams a well-deserved raise." Well, it bothers me, greatly. I have no objection to title sponsorship and along with you have questioned why it has not yet happened. But the event is the "Indianapolis 500" and has been for over 100 years, so any title sponsorship has to be "The Indianapolis 500 presented by [sponsor]," not the "[Sponsor] 500."

Aside from preserving the immensely marketable name of the event, it also makes it unnecessary to change the event name when the title sponsor changes. It would remain "The Indianapolis 500," with only the "presented by" portion getting an update. Lest you argue that "[Sponsor] 500" has greater value to the sponsor and therefore can bring in more money, I ask only this: Is the sport really that desperate? The only true household name in racing is "Indianapolis 500."

Bob Marlow, NJ

RM: Hell yes, the sport is that desperate. Sebastien Bourdais just got kicked to the curb. Indy’s purse is a joke, just like IndyCar’s purses, and who cares what the race is called as long as Indy 500 is in the title? The current presenting sponsor (Gainbridge) doesn’t put in enough money to make a ripple, so whatever R.P. can work out would likely be predicated on major exposure -- hence the Menards Indy 500. And the 'household name' draws six million fewer viewers than the Daytona 500, so let’s not get too melancholy.

Q: It was one of the few times you didn’t answer one of my questions: Do you really think they need to tear down the IMS Museum? My mother took a picture of that museum when I was in Germany in 1976! Why can’t they just build onto it? This whole thing about putting a label on the 500 is ridiculous, too. The Indianapolis 500 stands on its own merit! No petroleum/tire/electro whoever sponsored Indianapolis 500! It’s the Indianapolis 500. Maybe '...sponsored by?' Just quit pushing that! Penske will dive into that and ruin the whole Indianapolis 500. It can never be the Whoever 500. After that it dies.

Tim B.

RM: Go visit the Barber Museum in Birmingham or Speedy Bill’s in Nebraska or Penske’s in Phoenix and you’ll see why IMS needs a new one. Upping the purse and calling more attention to a race that falls woefully short of Daytona in terms of eyeballs is ridiculous? I don’t think so. If the Menards Indy 500 paid $5 million to win and $500,000 to start like it should, then we might have 40-45 cars again. If the Split didn’t kill Indianapolis, a title sponsor certainly is no threat.

Q: I know it would get a little slippery if the Powers That Be got their hands into driver line-ups, and I am not sure where Roger Penske would fall on this. But do you see any initiatives on getting American drivers opportunities? I am not one of the fans that disapproves of the foreign influence, but I know there are fans that want to see Americans get more chances and I do think it could help from that side. 

I know there are a lot of young American drivers that would love the opportunity if they had the funds, and it would be nice to see them get a chance. I am for little interference and it does get dicey when leadership “favors” some drivers even though it would help the bottom line. I guess the same could be said for Hinch or Conor in that it would help the series to get them rides. For The Captain, where do you see the business line and competition line meeting? Will he be totally hands off? Or will he see growth opportunities from initiatives to get some young Americans a chance?

John G.

RM: I think he sees that the Road to Indy is working just fine for Americans since Colton, Oliver, Spencer and Josef have all scored full-time rides and none of them had to bring any money. I don’t think R.P. sees the need to do anything different right now, in terms of American drivers, and Dan Andersen’s commitment is working just fine.

Q: Now that Roger Penske has ownership of IMS and the IndyCar Series, do you think he could find someone other than Stephen Starks to renegotiate IndyCar's international TV deals? I know the topic has been covered to death but there really is something wrong when Australia and Latin America only get a one-hour highlight reel. Canada is stuck with inadequate coverage on a streaming service or it's $25 a month on a pay TV channel that only shows rugby the rest of the time.

While you cannot force a product on a network that doesn't want it, I would think Penske would have the resources and desire to see the series on conventional television in these countries. In Canada, we don't have the ability to access NBCSN and only get NBC affiliates. We can't get Gold either. The closest we get for IndyCar is a $27-a-month SportsNet Now streaming service. It's been better than the SportsNet World pay channel because you can get all the games and everything else they carry for that price without cable. This service tends to show practice and the race but not always qualifying. I'm not sure what else Gold in the U.S. gives you for coverage.

Geoff Roberts, Unionville, Ontario, Canada

RM: Why would you assume Starks is the reason for the lack of coverage? Maybe that’s all that was available. I realize it’s far from satisfactory in many places and I have no idea why Canada got the short straw, but I will ask Stephen to do a podcast with Marshall and myself and we’ll ask some of your questions.

Simon Pagenaud leads at the start in Toronto last summer. Is it time for a second race north of the border? Image by Abbott/LAT

Q: Now that the temperature has dropped and we're expecting snow soon, it’s a good time to reflect on 2019 from the Canadian perspective and what needs to change for 2020. In order of priority: 1) We need a better TV deal up here! 2) Move the Toronto race to Mosport. Anyone who's been to a race at Mosport in the last five years knows it's second to none in North America. Why waste all that money setting up a track in the middle of the city when you can just show up at Mosport and race? Plus, three times the number of fans would show up -- half of them would camp. It's just so simple. 3) Hinch needs a ride! 4) We need a second Canadian race, maybe Montreal as it's only used once a year now for F1. Mt. Tremblant is good but not as good for spectators. People can disagree with me but they are wrong.

Doug L.

RM: We’ve kicked around Mosport -- sorry, Canadian Tire Motorsport Park -- since Ron Fellows gave it a major upgrade. But, as long as Savoree-Green is promoting Toronto, I doubt if IndyCar would race at both. I do think Montreal could be in the cards by 2021 but Mt. Tremblant isn’t likely. Start a GoFundMe page for Hinch or win the lottery.

Q: First off, I love reading the Mailbag every week. So many people have some good topics that wouldn’t be brought up without it. With Penske at the helm, do you think IndyCar will branch out and try to engage the youth market? As a young person, I can’t see why F1 and NASCAR have successful social media outlets and video games. Now, I can’t speak for my entire generation but I know personally the impact of video games on impressionable young people and I can guarantee you that I wouldn’t follow NASCAR or Formula 1 if I didn’t play the games first. I understand that motorsport doesn’t have the mainstream appeal that it once did, but an IndyCar game could definitely get some exclusively NASCAR or F1 people interested -- especially the youth market that IndyCar has overlooked in the past few years.

Nate Burck

RM: Roger has a lot of smart people working for him in business, racing, marketing and promotion, so if they think there is an outlet to capture younger fans then I’m sure they’ll pursue it. It does seem like there is a huge audience for video games, and maybe IndyCar has yet to tap into it. Thanks for reading.

Q: First, in my opinion Hinch got screwed and I wonder why? Second, (in last week's) Mailbag you brought up a driver's name that I haven’t heard in a while: Cristiano da Matta. He was a great racer and I was wondering if he ever recovered from his accident with the animal (I think it was a deer)?

Stan Frame, B.C., Canada

RM: My theory is that Arrow McLaren SP wanted a couple of young studs to build the team around and Hinch was expendable. And Arrow was obviously upset with his ESPN The Magazine spread, but he didn’t deserve to be treated like some throwaway. Cristiano is happily married with a couple children and made a tremendous recovery.

Q: Just a short question here Robin: While reading about the upcoming KERS system, they seemed concerned that little or no braking on ovals would not supply enough energy for the push-to-pass. They currently don’t use it on the ovals, right? So what’s the issue?

Dan Moore, Placerville, CA

RM: P-T-P is never used on ovals, so who was concerned?

Q: Robin, I was lucky enough to befriend John Martin about a year and a half ago. He was a truly remarkable person. With the recent release of Ford vs. Ferrari and the focus on Ken Miles, I can't help but think we will never see the likes of Ken or John again -- amazing engineers and drivers. Is it possible to put into words the importance of people like John Martin to Indy and what Indy used to mean to all these upstarts? Juncos seems the closest thing nowadays.

Michael from Dallas, TX

RM: It was a different time back in the early 1970s when John first showed up at Indianapolis. Indy cars were still towed behind station wagons; crews consisted of four or five guys; and a jack of all trades like Martin could carve out his place at IMS. The John Martins, Bill Finleys, A.J. Watsons, Grant Kings and Eldon Rasmussens were as much a part of Gasoline Alley as A.J., Mario, the Unsers, Bignotti and R.P. Just making the show in those days was a major accomplishment because there were so many cars. Nobody today compares to those guys.

Q: It seems like every year they are always trying to figure out how to make Indy cars better for passing or make the competition good for TV while keeping it pure. It’s always a big concern, comparing one year to the next, hoping they keep attendance up and racing “exciting.” It got me thinking: Was this a topic of concern back in the '80s and early '90s? That’s considered the golden era and attendance was crazy for 500 qualifying and almost every event -- and not just the 500. I’m a 26-year-old fan, so I wasn’t born yet and am too young to remember those years. But judging by what I’ve seen, there were both close finishes and runaway wins, a lot like today. Was the series as concerned with making passing and competition better to please fans, and did the fans complain and criticize number of passes and how close the finish was like they do now? And did they constantly search for things to keep things close? Or was it more about hero drivers and innovation?

Taylor, South Bend, IN

RM: Damn good questions. Back in the 1960s, '70s and '80s, we never seemed to care if A.J. lapped the field at the Hoosier Hundred or Mario massacred everyone at Long Beach or Rick Mears won Indy by two laps. It was more about the drivers and cars back then. If we got a great Indy finish like '82 or '92, then it was more of an anomaly than SOP.

I ran the pit board for Lloyd Ruby at Trenton once and only four or five cars finished, but nobody complained; it was just racing. I’m trying to recall the first time people started talking about close competition and passing as part of the allure, and I imagine it was CART’s heydays in the '90s (the Hanford Device certainly made us aware on the superspeedways). But, with spec cars and engines, today is about tight fields, tenths of a second, and as much overtaking as can be dictated through push-to-pass and the race-ability of the Dallara. People are severe critics if we don’t have finishes like Indy, Mid-Ohio or Gateway last year; and even though Rossi mopped the field at Road America, it was a helluva race behind him all day. Different times, different perspective. Thanks for your interest.

Q: Are there any more John Martins out there? Any Smokeys? Anyone using a school bus motor? Anyone similar? In any series? Who comes closest?

Wally, Eden Prairie, MN

RM: Ricardo Juncos and Clauson/Marshall are the closest things because they had very little money (and no experience for the latter) but managed to qualify last May. Their reaction to making the show was reminiscent of the little teams in the '70s accomplishing the same thing.

Pippa Mann qualifying the Clauson-Marshall Racing Chevrolet for last year's Indy 500 was one for the much-missed "little guys". Image by LePage/LAT

Q: I just re-watched your series on the toughest people in IndyCar racing over the years. I loved the behind-the-scenes stories that you brought. I truly appreciate the passion you put into keeping the history of the sport alive. You may not realize but it may well be key to getting new fans interested. That said, I would like to see a “where are they now” to tie up the Split years using a similar format. What is Tomas Scheckter doing these days? Where is Cristiano da Matta? How about Josele Garza or maybe even Eliseo Salazar? Could be good fun and maybe even educational. Thanks for all you do for IndyCar racing!

Troy Strong, Kansas City, MO

RM: It’s a good idea but let me get a few more Tough Guys knocked out this winter and then we’ll concentrate on “Where Are They Now?” Thanks for your passion.

Q: With O'Ward running full-time, will that give IndyCar a foot in the door at Mexico City? And what about Australia? Two venues outside of the USA -- IMO, the series needs them. Somehow the schedule needs to grow to 20 races. We keep adding new venues every year, but end up dropping a venue to replace, gaining nothing. Formula 1 has come to the USA and has been pushing its way into the USA market. A street race in Florida, a return to Mexico City. I know how much it costs to fund a F1 event; hopefully Roger and his staff can take IndyCar to the next level.

Arnold Edgar, Danville, IN

RM: If Carlos Slim gets behind Pato and the idea of bringing IndyCar back, then Mexico City could certainly be in play, and I know IndyCar had some talks with Ron Dickson about Australia a few months ago so it could be alive as well. But you’re only going to go where promoters want you and it’s an expensive proposition. Twenty good races remains a lofty number.

Q: I like your answer to whomever should give the command for the next Indy 500, but I feel it’s incomplete. I think Mr. Penske should give the command along with the Hulman siblings. A passing of the torch if you will. It would be a very symbolic, significant gesture, and I bet there won’t be a dry eye in the house when the engines are fired.

P.S. I’ve already bought my tickets to St. Pete.

Stitch Turner, Gainesville, FL

RM: Not a bad suggestion but not sure R.P. would choose to be in the limelight for that moment; it’s more a family thing for T.G. and his sisters.

Q: Back in the 1960s, didn't the drivers have to run certain races to be eligible to race the Indy 500?

C. Beckman

RM: Drivers had to run some combination of Phoenix, Milwaukee and/or Trenton before they were allowed to take their Rookie Test at Indianapolis. That ended in the '70s when Roger McCluskey introduced the Rookie Orientation Program at IMS.

Q: I did what every red-blooded American male should have done last Friday: ditch work early and go see "Ford vs. Ferrari." Lloyd Ruby was supposed to be Ken Miles' co-driver at Le Mans in 1966, but, from what I've read, he was injured in a plane crash and was replaced by Denny Hulme. Had Miles not lost the race to a technicality and Ruby not been injured, they would have won endurance racing's triple crown. That would have been a monumental accomplishment for that time. You knew Lloyd. Did he ever express to you that the '66 Le Mans was the one that got away? Maybe even more than the Indy 500?

Jonathan and Cleide Morris, Ventura, CA

RM: Never talked to Lloyd about Le Mans but Mario tells the best story: He, Roger McCluskey and 'ol Rube were in Las Vegas prior to a test of the GT40 at Ford’s test track in Kingman, Ariz. Well, the boys stayed out most of the evening and were not in very good shape on the drive to Arizona the next morning. But before they got to the track, Ruby ordered the car to stop so he could get a chili cheese dog and a big soft drink. When they got to the track, our hero insisted he take the first stint, and Mario recalls with awe in his voice that “'ol Lloyd was at speed on his first lap by and Roger and I were still bleary-eyed.” The fact remains that Ruby was a helluva road racer and Le Mans would have been a nice feather in his cap had he not broken his back in that ’66 plane crash.

Because of a broken back, Ruby wasn't at Le Mans in 1966 (subject of the new feature film). But he was a gifted road racer, shown here at Le Mans '67 in the GT40 Mk4 he shared with Denny Hulme. Image by LAT

Q: Sir, I have been a fan of yours for quite some time. Why are most races on special TV broadcasts that you have pay for? IndyCar, I think, would get better audience results without all the limitations. All of these special networks just keep increasing the price and adding channels. They are nickel and diming everyone to death.

TG

RM: Eight races were on “free” NBC network television last year, while the rest were on NBCSN here in the USA, and, yes, it takes a cable package to get NBCSN. Ditto for ESPN, home of F1 over here. But it’s the way of the world and paying for cable seems like part of the culture, although I understand the concerns of some of our Canadian fans for getting gouged. Yes, the ideal scenario for more eyeballs is every race on network television, but that’s simply not feasible anymore. Appreciate you being a fan.

Q: You might want to pass this on to your many readers: I have received a Black Friday e-mail from the St. Pete GP offering two weekend general admission tickets for just $60. Limited quantities available and a bargain.

Andrew Hodgson in the UK

RM: Good to know. Thanks for sharing Andrew.

Q: I watched the F1 series on Netflix. I was not a big fan of Formula 1, but the series really made an impact, and I find myself binge watching. IndyCar should do the same. It was well done and really gives a look at the drivers and teams -- and, honestly, there needs to be more rivalries between teams.

Jay, Bradenton, FL

RM: I think Liberty Media credits Netflix with raising F1’s TV ratings this past season and I understand it was an excellent show. I’m sure IndyCar would be all for it if somebody like Amazon would want to film a documentary.

Q: I have been reading that the Haas F1 program is going through some changes and Gene Haas is having second thoughts on remaining in the series. I was wondering, given the amount of money it takes to even be a backmarker in F1, would it be an option for Haas to join IndyCar? He would still be represented in a premium series. Given Haas' affiliation with Ferrari and Fiat, is it possible FCA-Peugeot may be interested in being an engine supplier?

Bob Peck, Raleigh, NC

RM: I think I answered this last week but not knowing Haas, I have no idea what winds his watch and just being part of the F1 grid might appeal to him more than being competitive in IndyCar. Haven’t heard Peugeot mentioned by IndyCar.

Q: Seems to me with the F1 teams getting a budget cap for performance in 2021 there still will be a temptation to get a competitive advantage by outspending the rival teams. Some teams are already front-loading cost on things like new wind tunnels. It seems logical to me that money could easily find its way to an IndyCar team to get around the cost cap. F1 and IndyCar are totally different, but I would think there are still things that could be learned. Is Zak Brown ahead of the curve or is this totally off base -- or is it a subject no one will talk about for obvious reasons? Thanks for your time with the Mailbag. It’s great!

David Floyd, Signal Mountain, TN

RM: I imagine there are some basic things that could be shared, but the cars are so different, not sure how beneficial it could be. But maybe Zak will figure out a way to make a data exchange work?