Skip to Content

Change Language

Listen Live in your browser

Travel Club

Travel to the world's biggest sportscar races with the RadioLeMans.com Travel Club!

Rolex 24, the aftermath

In the post-race press conference, Max Angelelli was outspoken about what he saw as an unfair performance advantage the Ganassi cars had over the rest of the field. Quotes:

"It's so obvious, so unfair. We were hoping to make it to the end and beat them with the fuel; so we didn't change tyres. I had many many laps on my tyres. We were hoping to make it like that, with this strategy, and get the win. But the 01 car is in another league. It is A-class. We are B-class."

Why does he think they had their engines restricted? - "I wanted to ask you that. I need an answer. Because there is no explanation, there is no point. Everybody could see it yesterday, the day before yesterday, today - I don't understand. This makes no sense, this is not competition. I am competing agfainst myself."

"It's like driving with your hands cuffed. You can't do it."

Is he a sore loser? Does he have a point?

Re: Rolex 24, the aftermath

This dares someone to ask the question "You Mad, Max?" Sorry, couldn't help it... ^^;;;

2 more questions - one of them of a possibly more lighthearted nature.

-If Audi were to take the next step in the racing at the Rolex 24 next year, would they give a team the opportunity to power one of their DP cars with a Audi engine?

-Any chance we get a new Twitter trend going by tweeting the Twitter handles of Target Chip Ganassi Racing and the winning drivers and add to the end the hashtag of #stoleallanswatch? :D

Re: Rolex 24, the aftermath

got to say if been ALMS with just local yellows chip ganassi car would have won by 5 or 6 laps
BOP did not work for then 2 car

Re: Rolex 24, the aftermath

"Is he a sore loser? Does he have a point?"

Cannot answer to that unless someone can provide a clear Grand-Am BoP sheet with actual numbers, not chit chat. It's true Ganassi didn't lose any RPM or restrictors after the Roar (unlike the competitors), but I don't know about the rest of the specs or any details.

I'm not blaming him for moaning about straight line speeds etc. In LMP1 you don't really expect all of the cars to be on equal footing (as that is by no means the intention, the idea is to have competition between makes), but in Grand-Am the competitors expect BoP to take care of all the differences between cars - which are already in pretty spec form. Therefore when there is a slight difference you don't understand why it exists. As Shank said on one interview too, NASCAR will now probably slow BMW Rileys down for the next race... just as they did them last year. But the problem is that D24 is their season's highlight, which makes pre-season adjusting lottery extremely important. And when that's not done "properly", the moaning begins.

But in any case this is what always happens when your series relies on extensive performance balancing and the organizers closely looks over your shoulder. Next year should provide even more shouting and accusations.

Re: Rolex 24, the aftermath

Chiana wrote:

"Cannot answer to that unless someone can provide a clear Grand-Am BoP sheet with actual numbers....

Hahahaha. Maybe the Easter Bunny can get you a copy.

Max clearly has a point. If you adjust the BoP on the morning of the race for Corvettes and Fords, then you can adjust it for the BMW......if you want to. I've got my doubts they wanted to. I believe Chiana agrees.

Typically, the series will buckle to pressure from other competitors after the fact. Porsche GT teams boycotted a race 2 seasons ago because of the pace of the RX-8s. As a result, the rotaries had 300 rpm's taken off and Porsche has dominated the category every since. Public critique like this from Max, as well as the tweets from Jon Forgarty and pretty much everyone on the Starworks team about relative performance levels would seem to be a means to that same end. Of course, Peter Baron has done a lot of public bashing of Grand Am and in particular, the double standard for Ganassi teams with no effect.

Welcome to the #TheFuture.

Re: Rolex 24, the aftermath

At this point everyone has got so bored of mr Baron's continuous moanings and outbursts (whether justified or not) so I doubt anyone pays attention about his opinions anymore. Well as long as he keeps supplying cars to the series, that's the primary concern of NASCAR.

But yes, in my eyes it is quite apparent as well that the love for Ganassi prevented Grand-Am from issuing BoP penalties.

I wish we could stay in #ThePresent. Or even better, go back to the #ThePast.

Re: Rolex 24, the aftermath

Btw I thought it was a fine event, generally speaking. Bit manufactured yes but I allow myself a few of these sort of races per year

Re: Rolex 24, the aftermath

I share Peter Baron's POV, so it's hard for me to say I'm tired of someone standing up and saying what everyone is thinking.

Agreed that it wasn't enough to ruin this event for me. Audi bucked the odds and got the best of the Porsche teams who clearly had an advantage of their own through qualifying. If something isn't done though, Ganassi is walk away with sprint events uncontested........again.

Re: Rolex 24, the aftermath

Must say I enjoyed the end of the race, especially the GT battle. That being said, a minimum 20 minute long yellow flag procedure, and a race in which the BoP greatly failed does not have me excited for #TheFuture, in fact I am dreading it. If you want to use BoP to the point grand-am does at least get it right (i.e. Dubai 24 hrs). I stopped watching NASCAR due to all the yellow flags and the fact that there is a 20 minute yellow flag to remove a tire carcass from the track is just flat out disappointing to me. I usually try to stay up and watch the full 24 hours of any 24 hour race I watch but here I found myself losing interest at every yellow flag.

Re: Rolex 24, the aftermath

The min. 20min yellow flag does really break the flow of the race. It also gives a break to the race in a way that a 24h race shouldn't be broken up in different parts. At least the code 60 added another strategy-factor to the game that to me was pretty interesting.

Re: Rolex 24, the aftermath

Shawn88 wrote:

If you want to use BoP to the point grand-am does at least get it right (i.e. Dubai 24 hrs).

Re: Rolex 24, the aftermath

Hahaha +1

Re: Rolex 24, the aftermath

Ps Nate I personally agree with mr Baron on MOST matters as well, but he does have a small annoyance factor... I never understood his Montoya hate either, of course non-championship drivers behave differently

Re: Rolex 24, the aftermath

One could argue that Montoya cost Dalziel the DP drivers championship last year with what transpired at Indy. You be the judge.....

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=foChFtE653Y

Re: Rolex 24, the aftermath

Montoya was not the first driver ever to make a quest starring role in a sportscar race, with the aim to win... as much as I hate Ganassi, I don't think it was that big of a mess

You never really see mr Baron complaining about LMP2. Funny, I'd imagine he felt different if his car wasn't running with bigger restrictor break than anyone else in the champiobship!

Re: Rolex 24, the aftermath

That's not the point. Mark Raffauf consistently called that "avoidable contact" with a minimum penalty of a drive through. It's his rule, not mine.

I'm not sure what you're trying to say about the Honda LMP2 engine. Obviously, the only 6 cylinder in the class is going to have a larger restrictor than the V8's. Nissan power still won (5) of the (8) WEC races including the last (3). It has the most horsepower, the most torque and the longest fuel range. R&D and data acquisition is supported by a dozen entries in the championship. Who has the advantage here?

Re: Rolex 24, the aftermath

as I said on the facebook collective

watching...either the 01 or 02 car blow around the 2 car....could we make that more confusing...please...on the outside shows something was up. more power, more revs, less drag. this should make a good topic for MWM. The telmex cars had a few more chips in their corner then the rest of the field. I'm not saying that the 01 car shouldn't have won or that I'm not happy that they did, the only driver i wanted to win more then Mr. Pruett was Mr. McNish. But to look at how easily they drove around the 2 car made it clear that they had another tic in a box. Didn't they lead 90% of the race? Think I read that somewhere

Re: Rolex 24, the aftermath

I have a feeling we're going to see an additional announcement about class structure for 2014.

When you try and "balance" the cars to such a tight degree, any misstep is going to result in a perceived lack of "balance". Now, look at the cars they've intended to allow to race one another for the overall lead in 2014. Is the series going to be able to accurately control all the independent factors that lead to the overall performance of a car when they exponentially increase those factors by allowing 3 very different philosophies of car to be in the same class?

Hypothetically, what would the series do if the Deltawing proved as fast as the P2 and DPs, but got 4 more laps in their fuel range and only used half the tires? How are they going to handicap them to get everything back in line?

My bet is that you're going to see an announcement saying that due to competitor input, the top class will be DP but they'll open up the engine ranges to allow P2 powerplants in as well and then lessen the restrictions and let the teams race it out.

Re: Rolex 24, the aftermath

Jmgraham wrote:

My bet is that you're going to see an announcement saying that due to competitor input, the top class will be DP but they'll open up the engine ranges to allow P2 powerplants in as well and then lessen the restrictions and let the teams race it out.

Doesn't sound too unrealistic, but "lessen the restrictions and let the teams race it out" won't happen as long as NASCAR is in control and promoting "close racing is the only way" -philosophy.



D | forum