Quote:
Originally Posted by pwd72s
Uh...ALMS has terrible color guys...they break for ads often, and the casual viewer doesn't have a clue what's going on with the various classes...only true car junkies understand what's being televised. That's the ALMS problem, IMHO...
|
I agree it's hard to follow the races. But to me that's a marketing issue not a fundamental series problem. Some marketing a-hole should be able to figure out how to make it more viewer friendly. Look at Starbucks using a bunch of bull****e and they well come... "May I have a 'tall', (small), 'mocha', (chocolate), 'cafe', (coffee), vente el-grande steamed cream latee el-porko" What the hell, all I want is a friggin' cup of joe!!!!!! oops excuse my rant.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Noah930
To add to the ALMS/Grand Am debate: why are the Daytona Prototypes so hideously ugly? Yes, I realize that there are mandatory cockpit dimensions around which the car must be packaged. I understand that NASCAR (and it's love for aerodynamic, yet still brickish racing cars and pickup trucks) is running the show. And I realize that a racing purist would judge the racing purely on that point--the on-track racing--versus how pretty the cars look.
But, man, those DP cars just don't excite me in any form or fashion. They're just not sexy. At all. ALMS prototypes are exotic, sleek supermodels, in comparison. They look fast even standing still, and that's a major part of the attraction for most sportscar fans (as well as non-blind people, I'd think). If you're going to the effort of writing the rules for a racing series (that you're trying to market and sell), at least write the rules so that the cars aren't mandatorily butt ugly.
|
Yes the Rolex DP cars are hideous.
As I stated in another post, the GT2 class of ALMS is the best on the planet. 6, soon to be 7 manufacturers and beautiful cars that you can actually tell what they are. The series has it's problems but again nothing that can't be fixed.