track congestion the small tracks cause. I am in no way saying get rid of> the short tracks, I happen to love short tracks but its gotten to where

just congestion, the leader catches the rear of the field in 4 or 5 laps> then soembody wrecks due to congestion and the announcers marvel at how 30> cars can stay on the lead lap at a short track. Cut it down to 30 cars

see what happens...>

"Computer Guru" <newage@joink.com> wrote in message > news:1112889563.490­37e403a5ee6a8c90b790­811cb78ca@teranews..­.>> They start too many cars on these smaller tracks (Bristol, Martinsville,>> etc.) In the good ole days back in the late 80's they started 30 cars,>> plenty for a short track. Now they try to cram 43 cars on it is no >> wonder>> it becomes a 50% yellow flag race. I know Nascar could never make >> sponsers>> happy only starting 30 cars these days but that is the only way to solve >> the>> track congestion the small tracks cause.>

You can't compare the 80's. There were only 4 or 5 good cars back then. > 25% of the cars didn't finish the race and usually only 3 or 4 on the lead > lap. 1 year I think it was earnhardt and rudd the only ones on the lead > lap, there were a few a couple of laps down and everyone else was just > riding around. I think DW lapped the whole field one year and there might > have been 1 guy 1 lap down, everyone else, done. Today there are 25-30 > cars that can win any week. Parts are more reliable, unless you have a DEI > motor and a 15 on the door =). So, you don't see people dropping out. I > know everyone seems to recall it being better... I bet the average lead > lap cars for the 80's at Bristol was under 3. In the 00's it's probably > closer to 13-15.>