Follow Slashdot stories on Twitter

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Science

Game Theory at 190mph 351

Posted by michael from the bump-and-run dept.
cameronm writes "A recent article in Slate discusses the value of NASCAR racing as a tool to study Game Theory. You can view the original study at FirstMonday."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Game Theory at 190mph More

Game Theory at 190mph

Comments Filter:

  • NASCAR (Score:4, Interesting)

    by erlee ( 91852 ) on Monday February 24, 2003 @01:28AM (#5368600)
    I am not a big fan of NASCAR, but I would think that the mechanics and those who design the cars have a more difficult job than the driver's themselves....

    • Winner's Circle (Score:3, Interesting)

      by Adam9 ( 93947 )
      Usually at the Winner's Circle or whenever the driver gets some time to talk to the camera, they thank their pit crew first. If you've ever seen them change tires, or whatever it's incredibly fast. Not to mention all of the other repairs they have to do at lightning speed.

      • Re:Winner's Circle (Score:2, Informative)

        by Slack3r78 ( 596506 )
        Not to mention the fact that the pressure on them during a pit stop is immense. Competition is so tight that a second or less in the pits could make the difference in winning the race.

    • This study only concerns drafting tracks. (Score:5, Interesting)

      by Blaede ( 266638 ) on Monday February 24, 2003 @02:13AM (#5368783)
      A quick primer in ultra basic physics: Assuming all equipment is equal, two or more cars running nose to tail (starting at about 130 MPH+) can move faster than a single car with the same amount of horsepower, due to the drafting effect.

      At two tracks on the NASCAR schedule (Daytona and Talladega), restrictor plates are used (I won't get into the religious war as to why the plates are used). The effect is that due to the cars being "underpowered" as (compared to the circuit's grip and traction potential), the cars do not maximize the track, they are able to negotiate the entire course without having to lift or brake. Due to the artificially enhanced draft effect, no car is able to pull away from the pack. Hence there is a continual chess game using this effect to work your way to the front, for gaining points for leading, and to be at the right spot for the last lap. Part of the chess game is teaming up to create temporary alliances to maximize the draft.

      While the draft effect is a crucial part at other high speed tracks on the circuit (Michigan, Charlotte, etc), the effect is the most important aspect at Talladega and Daytona.

      • Re:This study only concerns drafting tracks. (Score:5, Interesting)

        by Anonymous Coward on Monday February 24, 2003 @02:39AM (#5368863)
        >Assuming all equipment is equal, two or more
        >cars running nose to tail (starting at about 130
        >MPH+)

        I don't think you really need the speed to see this effect. Truckers see more efficiency with a trailer than a cab, and do better with tandem trailers. They like to draft each other, saves fuel.

        • You are correct.... (Score:5, Interesting)

          by Blaede ( 266638 ) on Monday February 24, 2003 @02:53AM (#5368904)
          ...but being ultra nitpicky. The draft effect can definitely be measured at those speeds, but for meaningful use during NASCAR races you only can truly utilize it at the speeds I mentioned. When truckers utilize the effect, they have the luxury of long stretches of road. NASCAR drivers have at the most, 1 mile to make use of it (at tracks other than Dega/Daytona) before having to brake. Daytona and Talladega repesent the extreme use of this effect. At the other tracks, there is more emphasis of driver skill and equipment construction. At short tracks like Bristol and Martinsville (1/2 mile total), the draft effect (however tiny and measurable it is) is never something a driver even subconciously thinks to try to utilize.
          • At the other tracks, there is more emphasis of driver skill and equipment construction.

            Yes, I see. Restrictor plates snd rednecks who can only turn left.

            Banked turns! I forgot the banked turns!

        • Re:This study only concerns drafting tracks. (Score:5, Funny)

          by delstar dotstar ( 593915 ) on Monday February 24, 2003 @06:59AM (#5369380)
          Truckers see more efficiency with a trailer than a cab, and do better with tandem trailers. They like to draft each other, saves fuel.

          Not just truckers, but regular cars as well. When I'm on the freeway, I get right behind another car so we both can save a little gas. To let them know I'm there, I beep my horn and flash my high beams.

          For some reason, though, everyone I do this to gives me the finger. Some people, I swear.

    • Re:NASCAR (Score:2, Insightful)

      by Anonymous Coward
      Different work, different risks, different rewards.

      The crew and the mechanics have amazing skillsets.

      The drivers are athletes. It's hot in those cars, especially wearing an asbestos suit. The suspension is built for handling, not for comfort, so it's a bone-jarring teeth-loosening experience.

  • NASCAR? (Score:2, Funny)

    by HungWeiLo ( 250320 )
    What's next? Studying Wal-Mart shoppers' habits for the cultural development of the Western world???

    • Re:NASCAR? (Score:2, Funny)

      by Whitecloud ( 649593 )
      What's next? Studying Wal-Mart shoppers' habits for the cultural development of the Western world???

      No, studying online Sims-Mart shoppers' habits for cultural development of a virtual world.

    • Re:NASCAR? (Score:5, Funny)

      by stinky wizzleteats ( 552063 ) on Monday February 24, 2003 @02:57AM (#5368918) Homepage Journal

      What's next? Studying Wal-Mart shoppers' habits for the cultural development of the Western world???

      Hey, this is big stuff. Game theory applies to the fans, too. The tension of a decision such as "Do I throw a beer at the guy in the next row?" have important game theory connotations. If you throw your beer at him, you don't have a beer anymore. Complex stuff.

      • If you throw your beer at him, you don't have a beer anymore.

        A highly complex game theory analysis yeilds the following optimum strategy:
        Always wait to finish your beer then throw the empty at him.

        -
        • Only if it's an empty can. Usually at sporting events you get the proverbial plastic cup of lukewarm beer. If you were to throw an empty plastic cup at someone they'd probably think the wind just blew it in their direction or something.

          A can, on the other hand, sends a real message.

      • WalMart (Score:2, Interesting)

        by MisterMook ( 634297 )
        I don't see how you could do worse than use Walmart as a study basis for sociality theories. Just like Sears made some pretty profound implications for social change with their mail order business, the fact that Walmart has been basically transforming many rural areas they're part of by a flood of mass produced mid-quality goods has got to have some implications as well. Before Walmart many rural areas had to depend on untrustowrthy local distributors and access to urban centers, now they too can get cheaply made crap from around the world exactly like everyone else. In many ways they're like homogenized corporate flea markets.

        I'm not saying that Walmart is good or bad. The way they use controls over their distribution and those implications of control are pretty nasty, but on the other hand I can't see how many places in rural America would be better off if there hadn't been a Walmart. It simply gives rural America better access to consumer goods than main street type small businesses could possibly afford to, covering goods that might not otherwise make it into smaller markets.

      • To ensure you always have a beer at hand, hang a six-pack of cans from your belt using the plastic retaining loops - Porta-Beer(tm)!
  • it is simply a daytime soap played out on a race track.

    p.s If you don't get it then you didn't read the article
    • it is simply a daytime soap played out on a race track

      While I agree with you, generally, keep in mind soaps have been and continue to be popular. It's certainly a key part of Pro-Wrestling, which has outlasted my predictions. I've always figured the key attraction of NASCAR was 2+ hours to get roaring drunk, a few exciting crashes, then scream your fool head off during the last lap. Seems a perfect way to spend an afternoon, when you think about it.

      • "I've always figured the key attraction of NASCAR was 2+ hours to get roaring drunk, a few exciting crashes, then scream your fool head off during the last lap."

        In my experience...

        Fans at stock car races tend to behave better than fans at baseball, football, hockey and soccer games. Fights and arrests are very rare. It's a good place to bring the kids.

        Many tracks allow you to bring your own cooler of beer into the stands. Cookouts in the parking areas are the norm. You'll never meet friendlier people.

        Sure, crashes can be exciting, but real race fans hate to see drivers getting hurt. They would rather see clean wheel-to-wheel racing.

        Winston Cup is actually far from the best racing Nascar has to offer. Watch the Modifieds at Loudon if you ever get the chance and you'll see what I mean.
      • There's a difference between "popular" and "popular with a marginal segment of the population".

        Marketers know how to use that difference to their benefit, but it leaves most of us wondering why our media are being used for insane purposes when we're not watching them.
    • ---p.s If you don't get it then you didn't read the article

      WTF are you talking about? Nobody, I mean NOBODY in their right minds reads the articles on slashdot.

  • Why fans like NASCAR (Score:3, Interesting)

    by fozzy(pro) ( 267441 ) on Monday February 24, 2003 @01:32AM (#5368620)
    It's no the complexity or simplicity of the track, that is unimportant. The point is the challenge and the danger involved in NASCAR. Another reasons fans like NASCAR is because everyone drives and everyone can try to make their car faster. The final reason is that the drivers are friendly unlike other sports and aren't paid many millions of dollars for the most part.
    • While my interest in motorsports lies more with rally and road course racing, I believe you're misled if you believe that NASCAR drivers aren't very well compensated. Albeit, earnings are based more upon performance than most american sports, but they are the best paid drivers of any motorsport in the US. Cart and IRL are the only other American racing divisions with anywhere near the financial fortitude of NASCAR, but with nowhere near the popularity. (or number of events, with # of events == greater opportunity to earn more winnings). Internationally, I'd venture a guess that only F1 and maybe WRC drivers make more.

    • Re:Why fans like NASCAR (Score:5, Informative)

      by Chanc_Gorkon ( 94133 ) <<moc.liamg> <ta> <nokrog>> on Monday February 24, 2003 @01:58AM (#5368734)
      Well, if you don't win, you don't get paid. As it should be. Most drivers, say Dale Jr, Michael Waltrip, Dale Jarett, Tony Stewart and Jeff Gordon win a few times a season and barring winning, finish in the top ten. Plus if you get high in the points race you get paid money too. So saying that they don't get paid millions is not showing much insite there.

      On the other hand, most teams and drivers will bend over backwards to do things for the fans. They have appearances, they sign autograph after autograph at special sessions and right in their locker room, the garage area. This has slowed down a bit. It had gotten so bad that they had to issue Hot and Cold passes because asshole fans got in the way (last year, Tony allegedly pushed a fan out of his way on the way to his trailer. Ends up they were just trying to egg him on.). The new rule was made to protect fans from flying tools, cars, and to give the racers some time to get away. Now they can walk from their RV to their trailer without a crowd behind them when it's close to practice times and race time. Imagine if football or baseball was this way even a little. It would never happen.

      Very rarely do you hear racers bad mouthing each other and 2 years ago when Dale Earnhardt Sr. Died, there was an outpouring from fans AND drivers.

      NASCAR drivers are usually clean cut. OH they may toss back some clydesdales, but that's about it. You don't hear much about this driver is doign this and this driver is doing that. Noone to my knowledge has ever been caught doing drugs and you usually don't hear of them beating their wives either. They are generally alot better then the majority of the public, but human all the same.

      NASCAR is more then just getting in your car and going fast. You got to MAKE SURE your car is fast. Tweak the camber hear, round of track bar there...a few tenths of a pound of air in a tire, patching your car so it's still aerodynamic. NASCAR racing can be incredibly geeky and usually is. Races like Daytona and Talledega are like chess matches instead of races. Get the help of the draft to get ya up front. Block the others to stay up front. No when to pit and when to stay out. When to two tire and when to get 4 new tires.....on and on. Crew Chiefs not only have to know alot about cars, they have to be able to interpret the driver and tell the pit crew what to do on a pitstop. They calculate fuel mileage so they know to the lap when they can stop to get tires and gas. They also do quick thinking on the spot when a driver has some damage to his car. NASCAR is one of the most complex sports of all since it's really more then just the driver and the car. Recently, they added crew names to the pit crews uniforms. Without men like Chocolate Meyers and Slugger Labbe, these guys would be driving Go Karts. NASCAR IS A COMPLEX sport as well as a honerable one. One I am proud to show my son and say go ahead and give it a try Not like other sports where you don't need people of high intelligence.

      • Have you tried F1? (Score:5, Insightful)

        by lpret ( 570480 ) <lpret42@NOspAm.hotmail.com> on Monday February 24, 2003 @03:52AM (#5369025) Homepage Journal
        All the qualities of NASCAR that you mentioned, importance of crews, technical detail, gas/air consumption, etc. are even more important in Formula One. If you want to look simply at the cars, F1 has allowed greater flexibility to the design and power of the car, allowing the drivers to have different advantages.

        The BMW engine is much better in the straightaway, however the McLaren is better at the corners, and Ferrari are the best at tight spaces. It really makes it multi-dimensional compared to the Ford, Chevy, and Dodge cars that are the only allowed types on the field. NASCAR emphasises the driver, while F1 (any formula racing for that matter) focuses on the car. The nerd will go for F1 any day, while the Sociologist will watch NASCAR.

        • One reason that I prefer stock cars over their many open-wheeled cousins is that you get the door-bangin'. They can bounce off each other, plant a couple donuts, and still be okay. Which makes for more entertainment, IMO. Also, with NASCAR rules the way they are, the makes have to be manufactured in the US. Which lends the sport a bit of patriotic 100% American-ness. Ok, so that could be good or bad, depending on how you look at it.
      • "Most drivers, say Dale Jr, Michael Waltrip, Dale Jarett, Tony Stewart and Jeff Gordon win a few times a season"
        Actually, most drivers are lucky if they win a few races in their entire career. see for yourself [nascar.com]

    • It's no the complexity or simplicity of the track, that is unimportant.

      Yes, those ovals can certainly be tricky, what with all the turning left and going straight...

      *boggle*

  • hmm, they missed an important part (Score:5, Interesting)

    by lingqi ( 577227 ) on Monday February 24, 2003 @01:36AM (#5368642) Journal
    once you are in "line" you need to stick your head out once a while otherwise your engines overheat.

    I am sure that contributes to a WHOLE other dimension of it - how do you know if the guy's going out for "fresh breath" or passing?
    • Actually, that part is mentioned to some degree in the extraordinarily verbose firstmonday article. It goes (and goes and goes) into detail about drafting, and other aerodynamic tactics (fanning, slingshots, etc).

      As for how to tell if somebody is passing, the firstmonday article notes that for a pass, the trailing car will drop about 1 1/2 to 2 car lengths back, then run up for a slingshot, whereas they get air on their radiators by merely dropping back about 1/2 of a car length.

      Spotters around the track tell the drivers what's going on around them, so it's not so much a game of mirrors as it is a game of spotters giving radio contact.

  • Hard to explain to CS people... (Score:5, Insightful)

    by caferace ( 442 ) on Monday February 24, 2003 @01:45AM (#5368682) Homepage
    There aren't a lot of people that are hardcore techs and also like NASCAR. There are even fewer that are hardcore techs, like NASCAR and also race themselves (like myself).

    Racing is a weird dance between tech and mental, especially on an amateur scale where you are the mechanic, crew chief, transport driver, racer and the lunch chef.

    It is indeed a HUGE mental game, but in my case (motorcycle roadracing) it is mostly played with yourself. The organization I race with (AFM) [afmracing.org] is stricly road courses, and not a lot of drafting is required but the technical challenges are many and varied during a race weekend.

    Give it a shot sometimes before you knock it. Racing requires hugely varied skills and a whole boatload of maturity and perserverance.

    -jim

    • It isn't without reason they call it "Chess at 200 mph."

      Now that's a *real* game of speed chess.

      You do realize that part of your post really set you up for some zingers in this forum, but I'm not going near it with somebody else's ten foot pole.

      ( By the way, I once did original research on two wheeled vehicle dynamics back in the mid 70's. A much more fascinating field than cars)

      KFG
      • "It isn't without reason they call it "Chess at 200 mph.""


        Probably because nascar is just as boring and slow as chess to watch. ;-)


        Seriously, I'm not just trying to make take a cheap shot, I do have a line of thought here.

        I always find that games and sports, that are fun to participate in are the least fun to watch.

        Soccer is incredebly fun to play, but I gladly admit that the game is slow to watch. (Unless you *really* care about the end score)

        Hockey is the exact opposite, fun to watch, but just a crowded mess to play.


        Me, I'd love to get behind the wheel of a racing car on the oval track and apply some of that game theory. But watching others is (IMHO) just plain dull.

    • in my case (motorcycle roadracing) it is mostly played with yourself

      Hmm, I'm surprised this isn't something that appeals to more slashdot readers, considering how proficient most are at playing with themselves :-)

  • An Economics Professor.. (Score:3, Insightful)

    by ackthpt ( 218170 ) on Monday February 24, 2003 @01:47AM (#5368690) Homepage Journal
    An economics professor goes to the track... Well, that's what sports and video games are all about, isn't it? As my econ prof put it, "economics is the study of scarcity".

    Perfect. There's one one winner, so that's unique. There's 3 that place, so that's scarce. There's a handful that get points in the series, so that's common.

    Video games stack up about the same, leaving physics and other sciences out of it for a moment. Feed the ego with wins or temorary need for sense of accomplishements with little tokens, like collecting rings in Sonic or a kick that sends a little blood splashing in some fighter game. Yeah, I lose games quite often, but I still try to limit the availibility of pluses to winners, even acting as a spoiler if that's all I can do (which I did very nicely today, thank you very much :-) Nice to see all the dymanics, which I already knew from other racing sports. (even engaged in a little drafting today on the end of my ride, yeah, buddy you didn't lose me, I'm right behind you going just as fast as you and you're starting to huff and puff and I'm fresh, guess what comes next...) I was considering the whole economic model of a couple games a few days ago, considering why some work and some don't. Games have economies, even single player, so a good economic model, besides just how many win, place or show, helps.

  • Apparently a decent amount of people actually play Nascar games. I am surprised these aren't the 10$ Deer Hunter type games at Wal-mart. But apparently they actually have decent graphics and gameplay. The reviews [gametab.com] are decent as well.

    Still, doesn't mean I am ever going to pick one up.

    GameTab [gametab.com] - Game Reviews Database

  • Former hater. (Score:5, Interesting)

    by juuri ( 7678 ) on Monday February 24, 2003 @01:54AM (#5368716) Homepage
    I used to absolutely abhor NASCAR. The only thing I'd ever watch were the wrecks. Now I'm the type of guy to leave some sort of sports on the teevee while tooling around online or playing games in MAME. But starting last year during a really bad cold I began to watch NASCAR. At first I was like okay this is at least as exciting as soccer. Then I watched some more and the wrecks were fricken awesome. Okay, one more race. More awesome wrecks. Then again. Next thing I knew I actually began to pay real attention (well in the same way I'd watch a BBall game) and suddenly it struck me. NASCAR is a hell of a lot smarter than I was giving it credit for.

    Races play out a lot like a chess game, there is an immense amount of strategy involved. Hell there is a concerted effort going on with everyone at very high rates of reaction times... one fuckup and bam they all go down. NASCAR really gets a bum rap because of the stupid commercials, southern drawls and history. But for techies and people willing to look past it's somewhat boring motif there is a somewhat rewarding experience there.

    Then again I also like any kind of car racing. Perhaps one too many hours of Gran Tourismo broked my brain.

    • Re:Former hater. (Score:4, Informative)

      by OneFix ( 18661 ) on Monday February 24, 2003 @07:19AM (#5369414)
      You should check out The History of NASCAR [nascar-info.net]...very interesting read...many ppl know about the moonshine thing, but how many know about the real history of the sport???

      There's a lot of science and engineering involved with NASCAR...which is why the modern drivers are more engineers than mechanics...

      This is also one reason why I think the current drivers and crews are much better role models than most of our athletes in traditional sports (football, baseball, boxing, etc)...

  • Changing Times (Score:4, Insightful)

    by lpret ( 570480 ) <lpret42@NOspAm.hotmail.com> on Monday February 24, 2003 @01:55AM (#5368720) Homepage Journal
    I think the most interesting thing noted in the firstmonday article was the reason for NASCAR's growth:

    Baseball - a slow, serene game played with a wooden bat, a cloth ball, and cowhide mitts on a broad, grassy field - surged in popularity just when the industrial revolution was taking hold, leaving masses of urban workers and shopkeepers yearning for the pastoral peace and quiet of the fabled agricultural age. They could relive this for a day by attending a baseball game. By extension, no wonder stock-car racing - a fast, furious sport contended on a paved roadway with snarling, smelly machines operated by hand - is surging in popularity at the very time the computerized information revolution is transforming our society from top to bottom. Stock-car racing expresses the industrial age more than does any big sport in America.


    I think this is interesting, because perhaps these are reasons why people are having a hard time adjusting to the "new" era.

  • in the first 37 comments... (Score:5, Interesting)

    by thunderbird46 ( 315436 ) on Monday February 24, 2003 @01:58AM (#5368731) Homepage Journal
    Pretty much all I'm seeing in this thread so far is a bunch of insults of the intelligence of NASCAR fans. (Of course, this is slashdot, and this is the first few posts...)

    However, I think one thing that people overlook is the level of creativity the teams have to have to make their car superior to the next team's. This year, all the makes have to fit the same set of templates -- that is, the cars have to be practically the same shape, whether a Chevy, Ford, Pontiac, or Dodge. Meaning no make has a particular aerodynamic advantage over another, and teams can't tweak the shape of their car for more speed. NASCAR has strict rules on engine specifications and suspension setup. There's a lot of engineering work in these cars that, while not necessarily directly applicable to street cars the way, say, World Rally Championship technology is, still helps the automakers develop more efficient, better performing, safer cars. Teamwork matters in NASCAR -- many a race has been won or lost just because of how well the pit crew did their job.
    • the cars have to be practically the same shape, whether a Chevy, Ford, Pontiac, or Dodge

      is there a set of rules or conventions or sponsorships that conspire against import cars? im surprised there arent any japanese or german models out there. just curious.
      • IIRC, and this was from some radio news.
        For NASCAR the vechicle needs to be manufactered in north america (North America Stock Car???). This year the daytona 500 had the first Toyota vechicle because it was made in some US plant.
    • NASCAR is becoming more and more like the IROC series every year. For those not familiar with it, IROC is a set of 8 races for "champions" basically to show off driving against one another. Short races, no real point, but the main thing is the cars are all identical.

      I'm sure the cars are all the same shape now because Ford & Chevy got upset about last year. Last year Dodge started to pull ahead of the pack (while staying within the rules) and the Chevy teams got NASCAR to change a few rules to make their cars, and only their cars, a little faster. Same thing happened in the early 70s - Dodge was kicking Ford & Chevy's ass, so Ford & Chevy got the rules rewritten to the point where Dodge would have to develop a whole new engine just to stay in the game. So they bailed instead.

      The whole thing is rigged. Not as blatant as F1, but it is. The cars quit being "stock" years ago and at the same time innovation, creativity and technology has been stifled.

  • Great Description of Drafting Tactics (Score:5, Informative)

    by soundsop ( 228890 ) on Monday February 24, 2003 @02:13AM (#5368784) Homepage

    I am not a big racing fan and have never really understood the allure, but the section Basic Dynamics of Drafting [firstmonday.dk] is a fantastic read. It gives great insight into tactics used by these highly skilled drivers.

  • Tit for Tat (Score:3, Informative)

    by QEDog ( 610238 ) on Monday February 24, 2003 @02:19AM (#5368798)

    Cooperation in competition to win and GT? Check out Tit-for-Tat [brembs.net], as well as a bunch of other things [abc.net.au] for more examples.

    My favorite part was: "It takes two to pass one."

  • So it's a science of it's own. (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Bender Unit 22 ( 216955 ) on Monday February 24, 2003 @02:21AM (#5368805) Journal
    How often haven't we looked at things we know nothing about, thinking that it can't be that hard, or there isn't much to it.

    When videocameras became a household item, we all thought that it would be easy to make quality vacation movies only to discover that watching hours of TV and movies does not give you the skills. As they say in France "pouvez vous avoir la grande honte pour traduire ceci", he who thinks he knows everything, knows nothing.

    In the case of Nascar there's is also added a lot of "padding/filling" to make the broadcasts more interesting. This is done in many programs so that people who don't know about the "rules/mechanics/physics" about the actual driving, can be entertained too.
    • >pouvez vous avoir la grande honte pour traduire
      >ceci

      Errr, I only got as far as second year French in college, but, what you said is more like:

      "Shame on you for translating this?"

      >he who thinks he knows everything, knows nothing.

      Celui qui pense il sait tout, ne sait pas rien?

  • Pro cycling is similar (Score:5, Insightful)

    by kma ( 2898 ) on Monday February 24, 2003 @02:24AM (#5368814) Homepage Journal
    Most North American sports fans I know assume cycling is just a test of physical fitness, comparable to competitive marathon or track and field. Not so. Drafting in cycling is crucial; at the speeds the pros race, sitting on another rider's wheel saves about 40% in power compared to riding into the wind. Team strategy and tactics more often determine winners than raw fitness.

    It's funny that NASCAR and pro cycling occupy almost opposite public images in the North American gestalt: hirsute, homegrown, working class sport vs. effete, Euro, vaguely yuppie-ish sport. But the sports' underlying structures (strategy, tactics, etc.) are surjective.
    • In my opinion, cycling is much more intricate than NASCAR. Since theorists like simple things.

      Let me give some examples of how cyclng is more intricate than NASCAR:
      - The person in front of a group is putting in more effort than the rest of the group. Therefore everybody takes turns at the front of the group and the group is constantly rotating ("cycling").
      - Although the wind-effect is levelling the field, there are still people who are better (are fitter) than others. As said in the article, the differences between nascars are minimal. Also there are specialists in every team: Sprinters, Climbers, Loners, Rain-people, Coblle, etc.
      - In a burst effort, you can get clear of your group. But you can only do that a few times, therefore you have to play your cards right.
      - Not to mention team tactics. Cyclist who are designated as a "helper" (in Dutch "knecht") is obliged to put effort into getting his teammate into a good position, an action which removes all chances of him winning. Sometimes that means thaking the front position in a group. This often escalates to an entire team (about 7 persons) at the front of the pack; racing like mad.
      But positioning is also vital. When the pack makes a sprint the positioning and timing in the pack is vital. Since the pack is constanly rotating (usually the ouside goes faster than the inside, followed by the outside becoming the inside) it's a question of timeing. Also if the pack makes a turn, the cyclist on the outside has to make a lot more distance than the inside. Being on the wrong side of the curve will cost you 10 places, at least!

      I could go on and on and on...

      • Re: Pro cycling is similar (Score:5, Insightful)

        by Patoski ( 121455 ) on Monday February 24, 2003 @10:44AM (#5370106) Homepage Journal
        Now I wouldn't say that one sport is more difficult or intricate than the other but everythign you've mentioned here has a parallel in NASCAR.

        Let me give some examples of how cyclng is more intricate than NASCAR:
        - The person in front of a group is putting in more effort than the rest of the group. Therefore everybody takes turns at the front of the group and the group is constantly rotating ("cycling").

        This is also often done in NASCAR although its not planned. If you run at the front of the pack all day long unless you have an absolutely peerless car you're going to ruin your car for the end of the race. You won't have anything left for the end of the race and you'll likely end up further back in the pack. Often times drivers will wave other drivers by and let them pass so they'll have something for the mad scamble at the end of the race.

        - Although the wind-effect is levelling the field, there are still people who are better (are fitter) than others. As said in the article, the differences between nascars are minimal. Also there are specialists in every team: Sprinters, Climbers, Loners, Rain-people, Coblle, etc.

        To say that there aren't many differences between cars ignores the tens of thousands of man hours (not to mention the billions of dollars spent yearly on a single car) setting up, experimenting with and tuning these cars. There are also specialists who only drive road courses and other drivers who do well at superspeedways etc. Everyone has their strengths.

        - In a burst effort, you can get clear of your group. But you can only do that a few times, therefore you have to play your cards right.

        If you burst free from the pack at a superspeedway the other cars behind you begin drafting. The "train" of cars will gain momentum and blow by you. After that no one will let you back in the draft and you're left there wondering how you've suddenly gone from 1st to 20th place in the space of a few laps.

        - Not to mention team tactics. Cyclist who are designated as a "helper" (in Dutch "knecht") is obliged to put effort into getting his teammate into a good position, an action which removes all chances of him winning. Sometimes that means thaking the front position in a group. This often escalates to an entire team (about 7 persons) at the front of the pack; racing like mad.

        These types of things happen all the time in NASCAR with people on the same team. Also, many times drivers will make temporary alliances with each other to help one another advance their position. This makes for interesting pit road politics at times.

        Again, neither sport is better or harder than the other but... That said there are lots of things a NASCAR driver has to endure that a cyclist will never see. Strapped to a 200mph rocket for two hours at Talladega (Florida) in the summer when the temperature outside can touch 100deg F and engine temperatures run about 300-350deg F and you begin to know the meaning of the word heat inside the car. Drivers have to wear fire suits, helmets and other saftey equiment in this heat. A driver's foot is seperated from the engine only by inches and at the end of the day he/she can have 2nd and 3rd degree burns on their feet when the heat of the engine eventually burns through their fire retardant boots. Thay my friend is hot.

        Anyone who's played enough of the game NASCAR 200x will know that there is more to the sport than throwing back Buds and "hollerin'." A winning NASCAR team is a dance of technology, skill, hard work and just plain luck at times. I could go on and on about the many facets of NASCAR but all most /.ers will ever do or know is make redneck jokes. Isn't it a tad ironic that most /.ers are just as close minded in their own way as the rednecks they poke fun of?

  • Imagine this in the office (Score:5, Funny)

    by LongJohnStewartMill ( 645597 ) on Monday February 24, 2003 @02:27AM (#5368822)
    Heh, imagine all the applications of this in Corporate America:

    Joe: What the hell is Bill doing ducked behind Milton over there? He's been right up his ass all day.

    Ted: He's drafting. It's a new way to climb the corporate ladder. He was yelling "It takes two to pass one!" over the whole lunch break. I can't blame him, though. He's gotten five promotions this week.

    Joe: That sounds like a pretty good idea. Maybe I'll try that with the new girl in accounting.

    • Milton: What ever happened to Joe?

      Ted: You know that new girl in accounting?

      Milton: Yep.

      Ted: Well Joe tried drafting too close and bumped her spoiler. She defected and Joe dropped all the way back to the end of the unemployment line.

      Milton: Ouch.

      -

  • Game Theory + Nascar = ... (Score:4, Funny)

    by CowardNeal ( 627678 ) on Monday February 24, 2003 @02:33AM (#5368840)
    Game Theory + Nascar = NASHCAR

  • I suspect NASCAR is not an ideal example (Score:4, Informative)

    by The OPTiCIAN ( 8190 ) on Monday February 24, 2003 @03:08AM (#5368946)
    I suspect NASCAR is not an ideal (ie: boundary pushing) example of the sorts of game theory this article talks about.

    Most of all: cycling. There's more flexibility for overtaking - a limitation in track racing. Other than that, the nature of the competition is similar - slipstreaming and darfting.

    Another comparison I thought of is the board game Diplomacy, because there's more time to think, and betrayal is all but inevitable: in order to win, you will have to screw your allies if you are on the path to success. This is not necesarily the case in nascar where you may be happy to lose now because it's meaningless whether you come fourteenth or fifteenth. In diplomacy, there is a status attached to mere survival. I admit, there is a path to stalemate whereby you honour your agreements. However, it is rare.

    However, I found the point of the article - regarding where accidents happen - to be very interesting.
    • I suspect NASCAR is not an ideal (ie: boundary pushing) example of the sorts of game theory this article talks about...

      Another comparison I thought of is the board game Diplomacy

      But would a story about using board games to study game theory make slashdot? Where's the gimmick?

  • First Monday a bunk journal? (Score:3, Funny)

    by GMOL ( 122258 ) on Monday February 24, 2003 @03:12AM (#5368957)
    Can someone else confirm or deny this?
    I've read about 3 papers from that 'peer reviewed' journal and they just seem like little soapboxes for the authors; I could read through the linked paper, it was reading like an editorial....

    I thought it was just the author of the papers I was reading but I am begining to think its' encouraged by the journal..

    A quick scan of the paper doesn't really show any data..I see words like 'agents' and 'complexity' but not much data...unless someone can give a convincing arguments otherwise I stand by my assertion that it's just a load of bunk.

  • most common complaint (Score:4, Funny)

    by brarrr ( 99867 ) on Monday February 24, 2003 @03:17AM (#5368968) Journal
    The most common complaint from NASCAR drivers:

    Just once, can't we turn right?

    I suppose they can relate to derek zoolander.

  • A Parallel With Real Life? (Score:5, Interesting)

    by beaverfever ( 584714 ) on Monday February 24, 2003 @03:18AM (#5368969) Homepage
    "...it offers an opportunity to study a complexity rarely seen in other sports but much evident in the real world: the tension between cooperation and competition that is necessary for modern victory.

    The real world must be a lot simpler than I have always believed, or perhaps they should be studying a sport like european bicycle road racing [cyclingnews.com], which shares the cooperation/competition thing, but has nine or ten guys per team in scenarios where, because of terrain or the type of race, certain teams/riders can excel and have a real chance to win one day, but not the next, and everyone knows what everyone else's strengths and weaknesses are. Also, things like national loyalty, even between riders on different teams, often plays into things, as well as riders "thanking" other teams for giving them a nice contract for the upcoming season, and blowing off their current team.

    It's a heartless sport really, much like life.

  • Please god no (Score:2, Funny)

    by Razzy ( 175090 )
    As someone studying political science with a strong interest in game theory, complexity theory, and computational modeling, I have only one thing to say: please don't make me watch--much less analyze--NASCAR!

  • John Nash (Score:3, Insightful)

    by BitwizeGHC ( 145393 ) on Monday February 24, 2003 @04:09AM (#5369056) Homepage
    That thing about cooperation sometimes being necessary in competition... isn't that one of John Nash's discoveries? I forgot.

  • restrictor plate 'racing' (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Army Eye ( 651245 ) on Monday February 24, 2003 @05:09AM (#5369190)
    It is kind of frustrating to read articles like this because the action seen in the Daytona 500 is not indicative of NASCAR racing in general. Since the Daytona 500 is by far the biggest race and thus picks up the most casual viewers, there are many people getting to see true NASCAR action, but the very ugly restrictor place bastardization instead.

    There are 36 races in the NASCAR season. Four of them, including the Daytona 500, are run with restrictor plates on the carburetors (which limits the horsepower). The effects that these plates have on the cars and the race are many, but the net effect is that they equalize the cars to a ridiculous degree. What this means is that the draft becomes the only away to get an advantage on another car and so you absolutely need a 'buddy' to run with you if you want to make a pass. This is the phenomenon that is explored in the Slate article.

    Now, there are some interesting things that go on during a NASCAR restrictor plate race: the cooperation with opponents, the constant need of strategy, the frequent teamwork, etc. And hey, the game theory applications in the referenced articles are pretty neat. It is indeed a high-speed chess game. But as someone else already said here, one thing is it NOT, is racing.

    Rest assured that most of the races in the NASCAR season still boil down to a good old fashioned "run the car as fast as you can, the best man wins". For sure, drafting strategy still comes into play in some of the other races on the larger tracks, but it's not the one and only thing that determines every position on the track. In this poster's opinion, it's a shame that the great Daytona 500 is sullied by restrictor plates.

    Note: Restrictor plates were mandated by NASCAR as a safety measure, but the way they equalize everybody's speed causes extremely congested groups of cars, and that has led to some really huge crashes. One could argue that Dale Earnhardt's death is partly attributable to the restrictor plate rule. It's a very controversial issue.

    • Restrictor Plate Safety (Score:5, Insightful)

      by DG ( 989 ) on Monday February 24, 2003 @11:48AM (#5370472) Homepage Journal
      Before you go getting all bent out of shape over restrictor plates and safety, consider the following:

      1) Daytona and Talledega are LONG

      2) Daytona and Talledega are HIGHLY BANKED

      That combination of the length of the track and especially the high banking (which provides gobs of extra cornering force) means that the cars can sustain astronomical top speeds without needing major revolutions in tire technology or wing-and-undertray levels of downforce. It's the banking that lets 'em run flat out.

      NASCAR was running over 200 MPH at Daytona in the 60's, back when the cars really were production based and had stones for tires. With modern (for NASCAR) tires and suspensions, that banking could probably support speeds in excess of 260 MPH before the cars got cornering-force limited and had to slow down on corner entry.

      Now with the frontal area that they have, no NASCAR car is going to be turning 260 with even unrestricted engines. The power consumed by aero drag is a function of the square of the speed, so it takes more power for the same delta v the faster you go. There's a limit to how much power you can squeeze out of even an unrestricted motor, so the real top speed would probably be somewhere in the 235 area.

      But note that the guy who makes 5 HP more than his neighbor is only going to make a small fraction of a MPH more in terminal velocity.

      So guess what pulling the restrictor plates off did? You get the EXACT SAME scenario as you had with the plates on, except now the speeds are 30-50 MPH faster. And kinetic energy (that must be dissipated in a crash) is a function of the square of velocity squared as well....

      As bad as a Big Wreck at a buck ninety is, that pales in comparision to the same wreck at 230. And these aren't 1500lb Champ cars, these are 3600lb locomotives.

      The problem with restrictor plates isn't that they cause the tight grouping of cars and the inability to pass unassisted - that's the fault of the banking. The big issue with the restrictor plate is that it takes a tremendous amount of engineering to try and coax extra air through that plate, and to get the engine to run in the odd environment the plate creates in the intake manifold. R&D costs for a 'plate engine run easily 10 times higher than a short track motor.

      What NASCAR should do is make the actual engine displacement for the superspeedways smaller. Make 'em run a 3 litre V6. That'd bring costs way down while still preserving the safety.

      DG

  • Linux or NASCAR (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Sturm ( 914 ) on Monday February 24, 2003 @10:48AM (#5370138) Journal
    Hmm, let's see:

    Fat, beer drinking, rabid fans.

    Might be a NASCAR race...

    Might be a Linux convention.

    Seriously, being a devoted NASCAR fan AND a Systems Engineer, I obviously fall into a small demographic. But as several posters have noted earlier, NASCAR is SO much more than hicks in fast cars doing silly beer commercials. The crew chiefs, mechanics and fabricators that work on these cars are "hackers" in the true sense of the word, much more than most of us will ever be. Team work, dedication, commitment, attention to detail, creativity... I image any of these terms will be familiar to coding teams or engineering teams no matter whether you live in the southeastern US, or southeastern India. F1 and Rally Racing are technically challenging and exciting to watch, but if nothing else, NASCAR racing is just plain fun. Envite some friends over, fire up the grill, open up a cold one, put on that Harvick t-shirt and spend 4 hours watching a Bristol or Richmond night race. If nothing else, maybe it will get your mind off coding for a few hours and help improve your social skills all at the same time :)
    Then again, maybe I'm just weird. I'm from Kentucky and I'm a "rabid" NHL fan, also :)

  • As one of the few geeks... (Score:3, Informative)

    by foxtrot ( 14140 ) on Monday February 24, 2003 @10:54AM (#5370158)
    who enjoys a good stock car race (or, more accurately, I like watching darned near anything race...) I'd like to add in a few notes:

    1) Stock car racing isn't always like this; this is the norm at Daytona or Talladega, but smaller tracks have different dynamics. Also, simply saying this is "NASCAR" is also misleading; the "NASCAR Craftsman Truck Series" is just as much NASCAR as the "NASCAR Winston Cup Series" they're talking about here, and the trucks run differently, even at Daytona. (The trucks have unrestricted motors, and instead rely on the fact that they have to punch a bigger hole in the air to keep them at "safe" speeds. This leaves sufficient power to bring back one-on-one moves like a slingshot)

    2) NASCAR drivers aren't all "he". Shawna Robinson, Deborah Renshaw, and Tina Gordon would probably argue that point.

    3) The comment that racers get more aggressive when they're worried about losing more so than winning is questionable-- it seems more to me that the agressiveness level is a function of how many laps are left, and not position on the track. The reason backmarkers tend to wreck more often is their car isn't handling as well, which is why they're back there in the first place...

    On the other hand, the game theory aspect is pretty spot-on, and it gets even better than what the article noted: Many race teams field more than one car. So there are some cars out there that a driver can trust more so than the others, since they're teammates. Finishing second to your teammate isn't nearly as painful as finishing second to somebody else-- pays the same, but if you didn't win, it's much better to have not won by helping your teammate do so. The game mechanics are notably more complex than the article notes, and may even be as complex as the auto mechanics...

  • Interesting, But... (Score:3, Informative)

    by superdan2k ( 135614 ) on Monday February 24, 2003 @11:45AM (#5370454) Homepage Journal
    ...I was reading about this exact same subject, as it related to bicycle racing at least 5 years ago, if not more. And it's for the same reasons -- two competitors will need to take turns drafting off one another to get to the finish line before the peleton.

    To make matters more complex, those two racers have to have enough guile to draft longer than they pull...so that they have more energy for the sprint against each other for the win.

    Still...that racing where drafting is involved (motorsports, cycling, whatever) is extremely complex from a game theory perspective is nothing new...

Slashdot Top Deals

A morsel of genuine history is a thing so rare as to be always valuable. -- Thomas Jefferson

Close