|| *Comments on the 1973 American 500:* View the most recent comment <#63> | Post a comment <#post> Tweet 1. Matthew Sullivan posted: 01.18.2007 - 11:37 pm Rate this comment: (5) (0) This was the only time the season ended in Rockingham. It was a memorable race for 73 champion Benny Parsons. He was caught up in an early accident which severely damaged his race car. However, with some hard work and determination by the crew, Benny was able to get back out on the track to earn more points and win the championship. 2. Anonymous posted: 05.24.2007 - 9:20 pm Rate this comment: (4) (0) R.I.P. Benny. 3. RaceFanX posted: 11.28.2007 - 1:01 pm Rate this comment: (1) (0) This was the last race for NASCAR journeyman John Sears 4. Anonymous posted: 01.01.2008 - 3:37 am Rate this comment: (5) (0) David Pearson ends his astonishing 1973 season fittingly with a win. In my opinion, it's the best season of all time. 18 starts, 11 wins, every time he was running at the end of a race he finished either 1st, 2nd, or 3rd. He led 2,658 of 5,338 laps he completed. Just amazing. 5. rob posted: 09.16.2009 - 10:14 pm Rate this comment: (2) (0) pearson finished the race on seven cylinders, running the final laps on the track apron. 6. Jim posted: 09.22.2009 - 11:17 am Rate this comment: (1) (0) This was the next race for owner Don Bierschwale after his driver Clarence Lovell was killed in a highway accident earlier in the year. Good finish for Rutherford. 7. Walleyewhacker posted: 07.04.2011 - 12:43 pm Rate this comment: (0) (0) Pearson would have been 12 out of 19 had there been an August race at MIS! 8. Mr X posted: 09.23.2011 - 11:55 pm Rate this comment: (1) (0) Pearson led 887 laps of a possible 984 at the Rock in 1973. 9. David posted: 08.19.2012 - 10:32 pm Rate this comment: (1) (0) For all the 43-car fields in the present-day, they were pretty scarce in this era. 10. spinpsychle posted: 12.21.2013 - 12:33 am Rate this comment: (0) (0) They gave points for each lap in 1972 and 1973, in addition to points for position. A mile track was a half point per lap. Parsons completed 308 laps and won by 67.15. 11. DozierTheGreat posted: 01.28.2014 - 5:24 pm Rate this comment: (0) (0) Some sponsors: #72-Russell Bennett Chev #32-Northside Auto Parts #40-Noels' Auto Sales #25-Star City Body Shop #49-Camcraft Inc #48-Bob Stott Chevrolet #79-Hinson Construction #04-Honda of Danville 12. Mike Daly posted: 06.02.2015 - 5:23 pm Rate this comment: (1) (0) Prerace inspections were noticeably tougher after the Charlotte controversy; Cale Yarborough had to requalify on the second day and actually ran faster. 13. Ivan Balakhonov posted: 02.17.2017 - 12:01 pm Rate this comment: (2) (0) Reasons for cautions according to Southern Motorsports Journal: 13-28 (#28, #40, #49, #72, #89, #98 accident T2) 40-43 (debris) 109-116 (#10, #19, #30, #67 accident T3) 198-201 (#28 spin) 256-259 (#67 spin) The biggest story of the race is definitely Benny Parsons getting back to the track after the crash which destroyed the whole right side of his car. Travis Carter, his crew and volunteers, including Ralph Moody (all in all around 20 people) managed to complete the repairs in 1 hour and 8 minutes. They had to replace a rear axle, rear suspension, side bars, braking system and roll bar cage. The cage was taken from Bobby Mausgrover's car. 14. kup posted: 11.14.2017 - 12:37 pm Rate this comment: (0) (0) UPS: universal points system. Driver's UPoints = Miles / Aver.Finish 1973 UPS _ Driver = Miles / AF 996 _ Benny Parsons 10060 / 10.1 975 _ Cale Yarborough 9751 / 10.0 923 _ David Pearson 7197 / 7.8 885 _ Cecil Gordon 10001 / 11.3 852 _ Richard Petty 9291 / 10.9 803 _ Buddy Baker 8917 / 11.1 762 _ James Hylton 10057 / 13.2 660 _ Bobby Allison 8652 / 13.1 476 _ Elmo Langley 8384 / 17.6 468 _ J.D. McDuffie 8136 / 17.4 & TOTAL: UPS! 25 years 1949-1973: Lee Petty 5 in: 1950, 1952, 1954, 1958, 1959. Richard Petty 5 in: 1963, 1964, 1967, 1971, 1972. David Pearson 3 in: 1966, 1968, 1969. Buck Baker 2 in: 1956, 1957. Rex White 2 in: 1960, 1961. Bill Blair 1 in: 1949. Fonty Flock 1 in: 1951. Herb Thomas 1 in: 1953. Tim Flock 1 in: 1955. Joe Weatherly 1 in: 1962. Ned Jarrett 1 in: 1965. Bobby Isaac 1 in: 1970. Benny Parsons 1 in: 1973. 15. Brandon posted: 03.31.2018 - 2:31 am Rate this comment: (1) (0) A total of 7 manufacturers raced in the 28 races in 1973, here is how many races each showed up to. AMC: 11 Chevrolet: 28 Dodge: 28 Ford: 28 Mercury: 28 Plymouth: 17 Pontiac: 3 16. rateus posted: 05.30.2020 - 3:21 pm Rate this comment: (0) (0) 3 of the top 4 in the 1973 points had precisely 1 lead-lap finish between them all season (Parsons 1, Gordon and Hylton 0). Imagine the fuss if this happened today... 17. rateus posted: 05.31.2020 - 8:26 pm Rate this comment: (1) (0) Also of note, this is the earliest in the year a Cup season has finished since the inaugural season in 1949, and the last time there have been no races in November. 18. Mile501 posted: 11.23.2020 - 12:08 pm Rate this comment: (0) (0) I have attempted to go back and recalculate how the points looked going into this race. Because a complex point system was used in 1973, I hope this is correct but it is possible that I made a mistake. Point standings headed into this race: 6973.80 Benny Parsons 6765.15 Cale Yarborough (-208.65) 6728.80 Cecil Gordon (-245.00) Points scored in this race: 200.00 Benny Parsons 341.50 Cale Yarborough 318.00 Cecil Gordon If Parsons had completed fewer than ~200 laps, and all other things remained the same, he would not have won this championship. His crew not only repairing his car but doing it quickly was key, because laps completed was a big factor in this point system. 19. ScottB posted: 11.23.2020 - 5:03 pm Rate this comment: (0) (1) The points standings for this season should serve as a cautionary tale for people who say the system should reward consistency. 20. possum posted: 11.23.2020 - 7:28 pm Rate this comment: (1) (0) @19 - how so? The points system was designed to reward the guy who ran best in all the races. Parsons had 21 top 10 finishes in 28 races, most of any driver, and given the mechanical reliability of cars back then that was a pretty remarkable achievment (all of Parson's finishes worse than 10th were mechanical DNFs). If anything, this season should be a cautionary tale to those who want wins to count for everything. If that were the case, Pearson would have been champion, even tho he ran barely more than half the races (in 18 races Pearson had 4 mechanical DNF, a third, two 2nds, and won the rest. Of course, with 11 wins you could argue Pearson should have been champion). 21. ScottB posted: 11.24.2020 - 12:21 pm Rate this comment: (0) (0) I would defend Pearson winning the championship that year based on his 11 wins. I don't care that he skipped races, he was absolutely dominant in the ones he did run. Beyond Pearson, though, you have Richard Petty with 6 wins placing 5th in points and Cale Yarborough with 4 wins, both competing in all 28 races. Cale finished runner up to Parsons though he led 3,167 laps to Benny's 374. How is that not a better season, even if you want to keep part-timers out of the championship discussion? Farther down the standings, you have Buddy Baker and Bobby Allison in 6th and 7th, respectively, each with 2 wins in 27 starts. They are behind Cecil Gordon (3rd) and James Hylton (4th), both winless in full seasons. Gordon led 5 laps all season, Hylton a single one. In my opinion, NASCAR pretty much turned the championship into a participation award under this system. It's not by coincidence. They had a title sponsor to please in Winston. Manufacturers were cutting back on support. NASCAR needed independent drivers to show up and keep the car count up, and they wanted them to do more than show up and park after a few laps. So, they work things like laps completed into the points formula. It serves their business purposes, it does not accurately reflect which drivers and teams had the most success. (PS: Nothing personal against Benny Parsons intended, I just think this system was wonky) 22. Anonymous posted: 11.24.2020 - 2:49 pm Rate this comment: (0) (0) @ScottB So you're saying the championship system should be based only on wins? Smh. 23. ScottB posted: 11.24.2020 - 3:03 pm Rate this comment: (0) (0) Heavily skewed toward wins. A driver with 11 wins had a better season than a driver with one win, that win being his only lead lap finish in that season, where a relief driver ran a good portion of that race. Yeah, debate that. 24. TTaylor944 posted: 11.24.2020 - 3:15 pm Rate this comment: (0) (0) Maybe Pearson could have run the other 10 races? 25. Sector posted: 11.24.2020 - 3:52 pm Rate this comment: (0) (0) This debate feels like a lazy attempt at determining Kyle Busch being the 2015 champion without the Playoffs. 26. Anonymous posted: 11.24.2020 - 3:52 pm Rate this comment: (2) (0) @23 First of all, Pearson wasn't even full time. Of course he wasn't going to finish ahead of Glotzbach in pojnts. As he shouldn't. Furthermore, wins don't tell the entire story. Ryan Newman won more races than Matt Kenseth in 2003z but Matt was more consistent and thus better overall. A championship based on consistency rewards overall performance and should be the main basis for a points format. Wins should be an added bonus. 27. Corey posted: 11.24.2020 - 4:22 pm Rate this comment: (1) (0) If you're going to complain about the point systems for 1973, then the argument should be about how Cecil Gordon and James Hylton finished ahead of Richard Petty, Buddy Baker and Bobby Allison. 28. ScottB posted: 11.24.2020 - 5:09 pm Rate this comment: (0) (0) Corey, See comment #21, I did mention the situation with Gordon and Hylton. Even without debating the number of race attempts, this formula was trash. 29. ScottB posted: 11.24.2020 - 5:10 pm Rate this comment: (0) (0) Sector, No, not everything is about Kyle Busch. At least not for me. I'm talking about the 1973 season only here, on the page for the last race of the 1973 season. Are there other seasons where the points standings seem funky to me in relation to how the drivers actually performed? Yes, many, but not looking at it in a way to glorify or discredit any specific driver. I truly like BP, and he understood and used the system in place to his advantage... but it was a lousy system. 30. Anonymous posted: 11.24.2020 - 5:48 pm Rate this comment: (0) (0) Nothing lousy about a system that rewards consistency. Parsons had the most top 10s that year. Anyway, Pearson not winning is his own fault for not running the full schedule. 31. possum posted: 11.24.2020 - 6:40 pm Rate this comment: (0) (1) @22 - I'd be OK with deciding it strictly on wins. After all, that is the point of running the race. As Scott has pointed out, NASCAR had a specific goal in mind with the points system back then: get drivers to run all the races, and get them to race for positions all thru the field. They wanted it to make a difference if a driver finished 20th or 21st, so they didn't just stroke around when they were laps down. And Parsons did the best job of running every race and racing to the highest position he could in each race. NASCAR is different now. The charter system forces teams to run every race, and NASCAR doesn't really seem to care if cars outside the top 3 or 4 positions try to improve their position. So a point system based on just wins, or just top 3 finishes, would work well in today's NASCAR. @24 - no, he had other important things to do, like fishing. (actually, he probably would have run the others if the Woods had been interested, but they didn't care to run the whole season and didn't need to financially). 32. JSPorts posted: 11.24.2020 - 6:53 pm Rate this comment: (0) (0) So the driver who has 1 fluke plate win as his only top 10 has a better season than the driver who doesn't win but has 5 runner-up finishes & 20 top 10s? The logic works both ways. Also, the argument used by several posters (arguing against a consistency-based championship) doesn't recognize that 1973 wasn't really a consistency-based championship format. Sure, there were points for finishing position, but that was only half the equation. NASCAR also awarded points for laps completed that year, which skewed in favor of performing well in longer-distance races (for example, a win at Bristol was worth 250 points, while a win at Daytona was worth 375). You got way more points for 20th place if you finished the race than if there was a lot of attrition & you didn't complete many laps. 33. guac_is_extra_ posted: 11.26.2020 - 5:38 pm Rate this comment: (0) (0) It's not just about the title. For 3/4 of the field it matters if they finish 9th, 16th, or 25th. Not really because points but because that's the way the field is. 34. ScottB posted: 11.26.2020 - 8:22 pm Rate this comment: (0) (1) Since NASCAR began, less than 200 drivers have wins in what is now the Cup series. It's a very exclusive clu How many drivers have had seasons with 20 or more top 10's? I don't know, and don't care enough to do the research. It's not what the sport is about. Those stats are useful for judging if a driver is improving, or if they should be replaced, but ultimately they are indicators of who might be close to winning. Actual wins are the goal. With that in mind, if I had a chance to run just one year in Cup, you can be sure I'd take that one win over any amount of top-10's. 35. ScottB posted: 11.26.2020 - 8:52 pm Rate this comment: (0) (0) 33, Right. Every position should matter, and does as long as a better finish equals a bigger check. I'd even favor shifting more money into weekly payouts and away from then end of the season points payouts to ensure that weekly motivation is strong. 36. Anonymous posted: 11.26.2020 - 9:12 pm Rate this comment: (1) (0) ScottB, wins alone don't measure an overall season or career. The primary goal should be the championship, and in any legitimate form of motorsport, the key to the championship is consistency. 37. possum posted: 11.26.2020 - 10:05 pm Rate this comment: (0) (0) @35 - for years (at least going back to the turn of the century, if not before) people actually involved in racing, as opposed to entertainment, have agitated for that. That was part of the initial goals of the charter system, altho it kind of fell by the wayside. @36 - it's very debatable if the championship should be the primary goal, and for many series it's not. When you think of the great races, the 500, or Le Mans, or even the Knoxville Nationals or the Chili Bowl, the championship is irrelevant. You are correct tho, that if the championship is the goal, consistancy should be the main factor. In that case the question becomes consistantly doing what? Finishing on the podium? The top 10? Best average finish over the year, which might go to a guy who consistantly finishes 11th or 12th? 38. ScottB posted: 11.27.2020 - 7:36 am Rate this comment: (0) (0) Take the emphasis off consistency, and you'll see more teams trying alternative pit strategies. Two tire stops, stretching fuel mileage, more aggressive chassis set ups. More than ever with some of the aero package effects, everything is about not giving up track position. Lessen the negative effects of trying something different and guessing wrong. 39. Steve posted: 11.27.2020 - 7:37 am Rate this comment: (0) (0) @35 Used to be that way. It was called purse money. Big races like Daytona, Talladega, and Charlotte had the biggest purses; therefore, more cars showed up. 40. Mile501 posted: 11.27.2020 - 7:37 am Rate this comment: (0) (0) @37 - A good point system should reward strong finishes (wins and top 5s). A guy who's running in the top 5 regularly should be a championship contender. A guy who runs 12th every week shouldn't be. All NASCAR needs to do is adopt a point system similar to F1 or IndyCar. Most years, the championship battle will be exciting. Occasionally, it won't be, but that's okay as well. 41. JSPorts posted: 11.27.2020 - 8:29 am Rate this comment: (0) (0) NASCAR could even use their current system if they did away with stage points & instead added them to finishing points. What I mean is, give the winner the amount of points for a win (40) + 2 stage wins (10 + 10) regardless if they finish 1st in each stage. Using that system, the top 15 points-earners in a race would get 60-53-50-47-44-41-38-35-32-29-26-25-24-23-22. 1st gets ~12% more points than 2nd, and more than double the points of 10th. 42. JSPorts posted: 11.27.2020 - 8:38 am Rate this comment: (0) (0) 2 things that I think are important for a championship system: 2 positions should not earn the same amount of points for their finish (as NASCAR currently does with positions 36-40 (1 point) & IndyCar does with positions 25-33 (5 points)) and no driver should earn 0 points for starting a race (as F1 does with every position below 10th.) One idea I had for a points system was that every position would be worth the amount of points of the previous position plus an increasing number of points. 40th would be worth 1. 39th would be worth 3 (1+2). 38th would be worth 6 (1+2+3), etc. That way, every pass on-track would be worth more points & would be incentivized, but also, finishing well would give you a big boost. Using that format, the points would be: 1st: 820 2nd: 780 3rd: 741 4th: 703 5th: 666 6th: 630 7th: 595 8th: 561 9th: 528 10th: 496 11th: 465 12th: 435 13th: 406 14th: 378 15th: 351 16th: 325 17th: 300 18th: 276 19th: 253 20th: 231 21st: 210 22nd: 190 23rd: 171 24th: 153 25th: 136 26th: 120 27th: 105 28th: 91 29th: 78 30th: 66 31st: 55 32nd: 45 33rd: 36 34th: 28 35th: 21 36th: 15 37th: 10 38th: 6 39th: 3 40th: 1 The points could be adjusted for any number of positions, where the 40th-place points are always last. So for a 36-car Xfinity field, the winner would get 666 points, and for a 32-truck field, the winner would get 528 points. 43. Anonymous posted: 11.27.2020 - 8:42 am Rate this comment: (0) (2) @40 Absolutely not. There's too much foreign influence in NASCAR as it is. Just go back to the old points system from 2003. 44. Anonymous posted: 11.27.2020 - 8:42 am Rate this comment: (0) (0) @38 No. That would eliminate the strategic element of racing. 45. Anonymous posted: 11.27.2020 - 8:42 am Rate this comment: (0) (2) @40 NASCAR should not be similar to boring series like IndyCar and F1 in any way. 46. Mile501 posted: 11.27.2020 - 10:20 am Rate this comment: (1) (0) @43, 45: Who said anything about foreign influence in NASCAR? What a bizarre response. I just said NASCAR needs a point system more like those two series, where wins and strong finishes are more highly rewarded than with NASCAR's current 1-point-per-position system. Something like this: 100-90-85-80-75-70-65-60-55-50 47-44-41-38-35-33-31-29-27-25 23-21-19-17-15-14-13-12-11-10 9-8-7-6-5-4-3-2-1-1 Plus bonus points for laps led, pole, etc. 47. JSPorts posted: 11.27.2020 - 10:46 am Rate this comment: (1) (0) Ah yes, IndyCar, my favorite foreign racing series. 48. possum posted: 11.27.2020 - 6:32 pm Rate this comment: (1) (0) @42 - I assume you'd be OK with two positions scoring the same points if it's 0? I think points should stop being scored around 30th, to avoid any incentive for rambling wrecks to stay on track for points. (not scoring the lower finishing positions would also allow doing away with the crash clock and it's inherent unfairness - why is it OK to go to the garage and replace the oil pump if it just spontaneously falls apart, but not if it falls apart due to hitting another car?) @45 - since the start of the aero-push era in NASCAR, Indycar has usually had the less boring races (now F1 you're correct about - they need to do a major rethink of their rules so that one car is not dominant for season after season). 49. ScottB posted: 11.27.2020 - 10:30 pm Rate this comment: (0) (0) 44: How so? The only strategies it would cut down on are team order garbage late in the season, and I'd be very happy to see that gone. 50. ScottB posted: 11.27.2020 - 10:50 pm Rate this comment: (0) (0) 36 & 37: The emphasis on the Championship in large part is a product of having all the races televised live. Back in the day when all you got was cut-ins on ABC Wide World of Sports (mixed in with arm wrestling and figure skating) there was less focus on giving viewers a reason to tune in next week, because the next wouldn't be televised. 51. ScottB posted: 11.27.2020 - 10:50 pm Rate this comment: (0) (0) The other influence toward emphasis on the season long championship was Winston coming on as title sponsor, for obvious reasons. 52. Anonymous posted: 11.28.2020 - 11:11 am Rate this comment: (0) (1) @48 Every finishing position should at least get a point. NASCAR should never, EVER adopt any of F1's terrible policies. 53. GoRC10 posted: 11.28.2020 - 1:22 pm Rate this comment: (0) (0) @52 Participation points don't belong in the upper levels of racing. 54. Anonymous posted: 11.28.2020 - 3:07 pm Rate this comment: (1) (0) @53 The point of stock car racing is that it's an everyman's sport. Adopting an F1 style system would go against its blue-collar nature. Besides, it's always been that way in stock car racing. Every position has always gotten at least a point. There's no need to change that now. Even the smaller teams need incentive to compete. The elitist attitude is exactly why I cannot stand F1 and its fanbase. 55. JSPorts posted: 11.28.2020 - 3:08 pm Rate this comment: (0) (0) Yes, points should matter. That gives teams that run outside the top 10 an actual incentive to keep racing. They can effect their season-ending result by beating certain teams every week. In F1, you can finish 10th once and last every other race & finish ahead of a driver who finished 11th every week. That doesn't make any sense. 56. Corey posted: 11.28.2020 - 4:16 pm Rate this comment: (1) (0) @55 A good example to use is the 2005 US GP. It was the only race the Minardi's and Jordan's had scored points in. It killed the season long battle for 9th between the two teams. 57. JSPorts posted: 11.28.2020 - 4:58 pm Rate this comment: (0) (0) If there were high attrition & a Williams somehow finished 5th in one of the final races this year (or the 2 cars finished 7th & 8th) they would suddenly jump up 2 spots in the constructor standings despite clearly being slowest this year and deserving of last place. 58. possum posted: 11.28.2020 - 5:23 pm Rate this comment: (0) (0) @54 - the only reason NASCAR awarded points all thru the field was because points used to be used to determine provisional starters. Now that we don't have provisionals there's no particular reason to award points to the tail end of the field. Really you could stop at 20th and not have any effect on how the races are run. (incidently, "stock car racing" and NASCAR aren't the same thing, and haven't been for years. You want everyman's racing you need to watch late models, or sprint cars, or perhaps modifieds. They're all a lot closer to "stock car" than NASCAR is now). 59. Spen posted: 11.28.2020 - 6:42 pm Rate this comment: (0) (0) Possum: Awarding everyone points started in 1968, while provisionals weren't a thing until 1976. Me, I like giving everyone points just because it's easier to remember that someone raced in a particular season if they finished 35th in points than if they got no points at all. It's one of the reasons why I can name driver point finishes from the '90's and 2000's far easier than I can for this past decade, where some drivers run full-time without points. (The fact that sub-30th place teams could occasionally run well outside of plate tracks back then helps as well.) 60. Corey posted: 11.28.2020 - 7:51 pm Rate this comment: (0) (0) @57 Williams is really not that much slower then HAAS, Russell's qualifying average is actually .7 places higher then both Grosjean and Magnussen's. Latifi has a better average finish then Magnussen and has 3 11th's compared to a combined 0 for HAAS. Even Russell has an 11th. If either driver should finish 5th based on high attrition and other factors there would be no complaints about the points system. Most people in the F1 realm would just look at the team and say "job well done, mate". I only brought up the 2005 USGP as that result came about from outside politics, which did kill the battle for 9th between Minardi and Jordan. 61. Mouse posted: 12.04.2020 - 2:11 pm Rate this comment: (1) (1) Sorry, not sorry, but there's no way you can argue someone should be champion based purely on their wins when they were tooling around in the middle or the garage the other 50-90% of the time. 62. JSPorts posted: 12.04.2020 - 2:15 pm Rate this comment: (1) (1) There's got to be a good balance between consistency & winning. I think IndyCar's points system does the best job at achieving that. In F1, The winner gets 25x the points of 10th place. In IndyCar, the winner gets 2.5x the points of 10th place. In NASCAR, the winner gets 1.5x the points of 10th place. IndyCar awards points to every driver who starts, but also has bigger points spreads at the top of the field. I still don't think their system is perfect, but it's the best of the major racing series. 63. rateus posted: 02.20.2021 - 4:21 pm Rate this comment: (0) (0) Roy Mayne qualified for Jabe Thomas, yet again... ------------------------------------------------------------------------ *Post a comment:* Your comment may not appear immediately - all comments must be approved by the moderator. Name: Comment: