What next for Federer after the #20?

Roger Federer became the first male tennis player to reach 20 major titles by defeating Marin Čilić for a record-equaling sixth Australian Open championship. Following Federer's straight-sets win over Čilić in last year's Wimbledon final, the Australian final must have exceeded the expectation.

Following the lopsided first set, Čilić did well to regroup himself in the second set. He did exactly what he needed to do, being able to hold his serve and use the opportunities presented by Federer in the tiebreak. After Federer took the third set and led the fourth with a break, it looked like all Federer would need was cruising through his service games. Yet Čilić was finally able to break Federer's serve to level the set and with another break he could take the match into the fifth set.

The momentum was on Čilić's side after the fourth set and he had break points again in the opening game of the fifth set. Federer save those break points and immediately broke the Croat's serve. As the set progressed, the momentum got back to Federer's side and he took the final set 6-1 equal Roy Emerson and Novak Djokovic at six Australian Open men's singles titles with his 20th major title overall.

With the 20th major now in Federer's bag, the question is, what next? The hot questions for the upcoming months are if he claims the No. 1 ranking and if he plays on clay?

Will Federer claim the No. 1 ranking?

Following the Australian Open, Roger Federer trails the World No. 1 Rafael Nadal by mere 155 points. Neither player has points to defend before the last week of February. Nadal is defending 300 points from the Acapulco final and he's scheduled to return to courts again in Acapulco. Federer is defending only 45 points from Dubai's round of 16. Federer has not signed to play in Dubai this year, although he may still enter with a wild card.

If Nadal, injured at the Australian Open, didn't play Acapulco or didn't reach the semifinals there, Federer would automatically become the No. 1. If Nadal played Acapulco and won the 500 title, Federer could become the No. 1 by winning the Dubai 500 title, assuming he'd take the wild card.

Rankings weren't Federer's priority last year as he skipped the entire clay season and skipped the Paris Masters, very much handing the year-end No. 1 ranking to Nadal. But now that he's so close to the No. 1 ranking, at the age of 36, it might be too attractive an opportunity to pass.

Federer could become the oldest player to reach the No. 1 ranking, a record currently held by Andre Agassi who was the No. 1 at the age of 33. I think that is a record worth chasing for Federer now that he's so close to it. There is still a month to Dubai; he should have recovered from the Australian Open by then. Dubai has been a happy hunting ground for Federer; although he lost on the round of 16 last year, he's a seven-time champion there.

Should Federer play on clay?

Last year after winning the Indian Wells-Miami double, Federer took a break from the tour and later announced he will not play at the French Open, starting to prepare for the grass season. That appears to have been a smart decision as he won Wimbledon without dropping a set. As that worked last year, the question is if it makes sense for Federer to play on clay this year either.

Now that he's achieved the 20th major title, Federer should have less pressure to succeed at Wimbledon, especially as he won the record-breaking eighth title last year. If he wants to have one last good run at Roland Garros, there will be no better time for it, he's not getting any younger.

Federer has not made it past the quarterfinals at Roland Garros since 2012. Then again, he's playing better now than in those years. With question marks over Wawrinka's, Djokovic's and even Nadal's fitness, the draw could be open for Federer although he's at his most vulnerable on that surface.

I think this year could be Federer's last chance for a good run at Roland Garros and he should play clay tournaments. Even if he could play great tennis beyond this year, this year could present the most open draw given the current state of the tour.

I'd like to see Federer skipping Miami, especially if he plays Dubai, and measuring his clay performance at Monte Carlo. If he's good enough on clay, he should continue on clay and play either Madrid or Rome before Roland Garros. And if his chances for Roland Garros don't look good, then he could skip it and start preparing for the grass season. But I'd like to see Federer giving clay a try this year, just to see how well he could do on that surface with his current game.

That being said, I'm rather expecting Federer to follow a successful formula from last year, skipping clay to prepare well for grass. At the age of 36, he must be careful with scheduling. Winning Roland Garros is a long shot whereas he's the favorite at Wimbledon, and the physical demands of clay tennis may compromise his preparation for the grass season.

How long can Federer keep on winning slams?

Federer has won three of the last five majors and there are not many players who can beat him when he's on top of his game, despite his age. If he stays healthy and in form, he's the favorite to win at Wimbledon next July. The US Open is possible for him, although it will be ten years since his last title in New York this year. Last year the US Open was the slower of the two hardcourt majors, making it the more difficult one for Federer.

Smart scheduling allowed Federer to start the 2018 season fresh after the successful 2017. The same can't be said about Nadal who played a heavier schedule and has a more physical playing style. That being said, I'm not sure how much longer Federer can continue this great run he's been having since the start of last year.

Since his injury comeback last year, Federer has shown so much love for tennis that I believe it overcomes any desire to walk away after a great season, like 2018 may be. I believe Federer will keep on playing as long as he can contend for major titles. I believe Federer will still have few more years of great chances at Wimbledon. But the physical demands make it more difficult for the ageing Federer to win more slams outside grass, although the Australian Open showed it's still possible. And given his age, any injury can end Federer's flight on top of the game.

I think one or two more majors is still possible for Federer, even three if he won two more this season. He can still outplay anybody but he must stay healthy and fit. Though if some dominant player or players emerge from those in their mid-to-late 20s' physical peak, like Djokovic in the first half of this decade, then the days of Federer winning slams may be over.

Does alpine combined have a future?

The future of alpine combined has been questioned several times this decade. With skiers specializing more and more in speed or technical disciplines, a discipline requiring all-round skills makes them less sense.

In theory, alpine combined is a great discipline, measuring the skiers' all-round skills. Speed and technical skills are well-balanced in the format of one downhill and one slalom run.

However, alpine combined is not in a good health. The risks of downhill are keeping some of the best technical skiers away from the discipline. The need to complete the downhill training runs before the combined races further discourages technical specialists to participate in combined when the schedule is already taxing. There have been combined races of super-G and slalom that don't require training runs, though that format is also less neutral, favoring technical specialists.

Alexis Pinturault gave up his hopes of winning the World Cup discipline title in combined in order to get time for training. Marcel Hirscher, world gold and silver medalist in the discipline, has competed only rarely in the discipline in the World Cup, mostly only when it's been a combined of super-G and slalom, requiring no training runs.

For speed specialists the barrier to enter combined races is lower. They need to participate in the training anyway for the downhill races. Combined gives them one more run to train for the downhill race and the risks are low in slalom. Still, despite speed specialists making up most of the field in combined races, those races often end up being won by a technical specialist.

The last two World Championship combined races have been won by Marcel Hirscher and Luca Aerni, both finishing 30th in the downhill leg and getting to start the slalom leg in conditions where the course deteriorated rapidly. The reversed starting order for the top 30 gives an advantage for those slalom specialists who finish the speed leg barely inside the top 30. Not only they are better slalom skiers than the speed specialists but they also get to have their run in the best conditions.

The combined race in Bormio in December was combined at its best. Alexis Pinturault, probably the best all-round skier in men's side, made big progress in slalom to win, though the conditions allowed also the best downhill skiers to challenge him. The second combined race of the winter in Wengen was more like combined at its worst. The winner Victor Muffat-Jeandet was 27th and the second-place Pavel Trikhichev 29th in the downhill leg, yet the best downhill skiers couldn't challenge them on the deteriorating slalom course.

The starting order wouldn't be such a big issue if there were well-capable slalom skiers in the top 10 of the downhill. If that was the case, winning from outside the top 20 would be almost impossible. The conditions wouldn't anymore change that much during the top ten and they would decide the victory. However, there are hardly any skiers on the men's tour who can score points in both downhill and slalom, let alone be top-10 contenders in both disciplines.

All-round talent in women's side justifies combined

While the men's tour lacks all-round skiers, the women's tour has more all-round talent. The likes of Lindsey Vonn and Tina Maze are recent examples of skiers winning races in all disciplines. This season Mikaela Shiffrin became the latest skier to have won World Cup races in both slalom and downhill, as well as in giant slalom and combined. Michelle Gisin is another young skier who has shown skills both in speed and technical disciplines, making her a strong combined skier.

If men's combined comes down to who is least bad in his worse discipline, women's combined is more about who is the best in two disciplines like it should be. If you barely make the top 30 in the downhill leg, you probably can't win a women's combined, there's enough slalom talent in the downhill top 10. With hardly any all-round skiers on the men's tour, it's justifiable to question the existence of alpine combined. Yet the all-round talent on the women's tour justifies its existence.

Should combined stay in the schedule?

The future of alpine combined has often been questioned this decade. I think it belongs to the World Championships and the Olympics, just like decathlon and heptathlon in athletics. The Worlds and the Olympics have no overall winner, the combined winner is closest to that.

Another thing is if combined should be featured in the World Cup and if it should have a crystal globe.

The World Cup already has an award for all-round skills, it's the overall crystal globe. However, the overall standings rather favor specializing and succeeding in two disciplines rather than consistent scoring in three or four. Alexis Pinturault is probably the best all-round skier on the men's tour, having finished on top of the combined standings four times in the five previous seasons. Yet he has never finished higher than third in the overall standings.

If there were more combined races in the schedule, it might encourage skiers to improve their all-round skills. With more combined races, there would be more races awarding points towards the overall title. Then again, there was an increase in the number of combined races when the current super combined format was introduced, yet most skiers concentrated on speed or technical disciplines with little focus on combined. And without true all-round skiers, combined isn't very attractive.

As for the discipline title in combined, I think it could make sense if there were more combined races, like at least five. It would reward all-round skills more than the overall title does. But right now with two races it doesn't make sense, as shown by Pinturault prioritizing training over racing for the title.

I wouldn't like combined to disappear completely. It can still provide some great races, more commonly on women's side. Though I'm afraid the sport is going into that direction. The FIS is pushing for more parallel races and you can't expand the schedule endlessly. I wouldn't be surprised to see alpine combined replaced by a parallel race at the Worlds and the Olympics in the future.

Is it Hirscher vs. Kristoffersen for the Ski World Cup overall title?

11 races into the 2017-18 Alpine Skiing World Cup season, the Austrian Marcel Hirscher has returned from an ankle injury to lead the overall standings. The six-time World Cup overall champion broke his left ankle in a training accident in mid-August and he wasn't initially expected to return before December, putting his title defense in jeopardy. However, he returned already in early November at Levi, and thanks to the cancellation of the opening GS in Sölden, he didn't miss a race.

After a short preparation, Hirscher was only 17th in the slalom at Levi, though his four starts since then, he has achieved three wins and a third place. Norway's Aksel Lund Svindal, another skier returning from an injury, shares the overall lead with Hirscher. However, the rest of the season is more favorable for the technical specialist Hirscher with eight slalom and five giant slalom races remaining as opposed to six downhill and three super-G races remaining in the speed disciplines. Besides there will be three parallel races and two combined races.

The remaining schedule makes it difficult for Svindal to match Hirscher. It seems like the Norwegian Henrik Kristoffersen, currently nine points behind the leaders, will be Hirscher's biggest rival. The table below shows the projected final points based on the average points scores in each discipline so far this season.

Parallel and combined races not included.

The table excludes the parallel races because of their unpredictable nature. Combined is excluded because no races in the discipline have taken place so far this season. Also, that is the projected points for the current top 10; skiers from outside might be inside the top 10 in the projected points, though hardly contend for the top positions.

History on Hirscher's side vs. Kristoffersen

The projected points show an advantage for Kristoffersen in the overall title race against Hirscher. However, there are many factors making Hirscher the favorite. Hirscher's 14th place at Levi brings down his average score in slalom; last season his worst result was a sixth place as he finished all other races in the top four.

That doesn't mean Kristoffersen can't outscore him in slalom. Kristoffersen won the 2015-16 slalom title ahead of Hirscher and won five slalom races last season as opposed to Hirscher winning only two. Though Hirscher is ahead of Kristoffersen in consistency. Besides, Hirscher is the better parallel racer, which may be decisive in this rivalry.

Although a win is missing so far this season, Kristoffersen is probably having his best season in GS. It's not easy to beat Hirscher in GS, though Kristoffersen can beat anybody else in GS. So far Kristoffersen has two second places and a fifth place. He needs to keep up his GS form to stay within a striking distance from Hirscher.

Kristoffersen needs to continue his good performances in GS and produce a season similar to 2015-16 in slalom to contend for the big crystal globe against Hirscher. That being said, Hirscher's consistently great performances are hard to match over the full season. Hirscher also has the benefit of being able to score points in super-G and combined, although he hasn't raced in super-G so far this season, probably as a precaution after the injury break. I'd expect to see him in some super-G races later this season if the title race requires it. On the other hand, Hirscher has never raced on the Bormio and Wengen downhill courses so he may not start in any combined race in this winter's World Cup.

If Hirscher stays fit, he's the favorite to win his seventh consecutive World Cup overall title. But I don't completely rule out Kristoffersen beating him if Kristoffersen can produce the best season of his career.

Speed specialists lack good giant slalom results

The two-time World Cup overall champion Aksel Lund Svindal shares the lead with Hirscher, though it seems like this season will follow the familiar storyline. The early season has had one speed race more than technical races and he's leading the overall standings, though he can't keep up with Hirscher as the remainder of the season will have four more technical races plus the three parallel races.

Svindal has had a great start for his campaign in downhill with a third place followed by two wins. His super-G hasn't been up there yet; despite top-10 finishes in all three races so far, he's yet to make the podium in super-G.

Two-time overall runner-up Kjetil Jansrud has usually had the same storyline in his seasons as the countryman Svindal. Once the season gets more tech-favoring, Jansrud's overall title challenge has dried up.

Jansrud is leading the super-G standings with a win and a second place from the North American races, though he also missed the points with his 35th-place finish in Val Gardena. Downhill has been less successful for the last season's downhill runner-up Jansrud, though his first podium with the second place in Val Gardena promoted him into third place in the discipline standings.

What Svindal and Jansrud need to keep their overall title campaign alive is strong results in both speed disciplines. And even then, the lack of good giant slalom results keeps them out of the title contention in the tech-favoring remainder of the season. Speed specialists who won the overall title traditionally had success also in GS, for example Svindal won the GS title on his way to the 2007 overall title. However, Svindal hasn't started in GS this season following his knee injuries while the 2010 Olympic silver medalist Jansrud has not qualified for the second run in his two GS starts this season.

The 2016 World Cup super-G champion Aleksander Aamodt Kilde might be the best candidate to end Ivica Kostelić and Marcel Hirscher's streak of seven overall titles for technical specialists since he's shown most promise of speed specialists in giant slalom in last seasons. He was able to score some points with the 26th place in the Beaver Creek GS, though didn't make the second run in Alta Badia. The new GS skis, closer to the pre-2012-spec skis, have not boosted speed specialists' GS performances as much as one might have hoped. That being said, sixth in the super-G and 15th in the downhill standings this season is not good enough for Kilde to contend for the overall title.

Pinturault needs consistency and another strong discipline

The Frenchman Alexis Pinturault may be the best all-round skier in the World Cup at the moment, as shown by wins in all disciplines but downhill and by finishing on top of the combined standings four times in the last five seasons. However, giant slalom is the only discipline where he's an absolute top contender and he's lacked the kind of consistency the likes of Hirscher, Svindal, and Jansrud have showed.

Although Pinturault has shown skills to match Hirscher's performances in giant slalom in last two seasons, inconsistency over the season has kept him from contending for the GS title. That seems to be the case also this season. He achieved an impressive victory in Val-d'Isère, though ninth and 12th places from the other races aren't enough to contend for the discipline title and also cost him in the overall title battle.

Pinturault can be a winner on a good day also in slalom and super-G, however he is very inconsistent in those disciplines. He finished as high as fifth in the Beaver Creek super-G, though he was only 27th in his other super-G start in Val Gardena. Pinturault started his slalom season with a promising eighth place at Levi and he was ninth after the first run in Val-d'Isère but didn't finish the second run.

Pinturault may be the best all-round skier in the World Cup, though the points system rewards finishing high in races. Pinturault needs another discipline where he's a frontrunner. Slalom offers better chances for him to score points. It's still a better discipline than super-G for him. Besides, slalom races outnumber super-G races by ten to six.

142 points may not be a totally impossible gap at this point of the season. Pinturault can score good points in the combined and parallel races, though he'd need to start beating Hirscher and Kristoffersen in slalom and giant slalom, which is a big task. To contend for the overall title in the future, he needs more consistency, and he needs to reach his maximum in slalom consistently to score high points.

Does tennis fanbase have an age problem?

SportsBusiness Daily has reported earlier this year about the demographics of major sports' fanbases in the United States. Tennis has one of the oldest fanbases of all sports with an average age of 61 for the ATP's TV viewers and an average age of 55 for the WTA. The only major sport with older TV viewers than the ATP is the PGA Tour with an average of 64 years. The ATP's average has increased by five percent since 2006. The WTA is at least showing a positive trend by being the only major sport where the average age has decreased, by eight percent since 2006.

Of course, those are only American numbers but I'm still a bit surprised by how old the fanbase of tennis is in the USA. Tennis has traditionally been a game of young players, dominated by players in their 20s, although 2017 saw players like Roger Federer, Rafael Nadal, and the Williams sisters having great success still in their 30s.

In the American market, global sports tend to have a younger audience than North American sports, soccer and Formula One being examples of that. That makes it somewhat surprising how old the tennis fanbase in the USA is. On the other hand, the USA has greater traditions in tennis than in many other global sports, explaining the older fanbase.

There is a trend in many sports that younger fans tune in only for something big. Those young adults with work and kids don't want to spend all their spare time watching sports. As an example from tennis, the Wednesday night session featuring the Keys-Kanepi and Federer-Del Potro quarterfinals was the most-viewed US Open telecast both overall and in the 18-49 age group, though the women's semifinals and the final had more viewers in the non-18-49 demographics. Young adults wanted to see the much-anticipated Federer-Del Potro match; for comparison, the Nadal-Anderson final had only half of the 18-49 audience of the Federer-Del Potro quarterfinal.

Lack of American stars may explain why the WTA's fanbase in the USA is younger. Ever since Andy Roddick won the 2003 US Open, no American man has won a Grand Slam tournament whereas American women have achieved a total of 21 Grand Slam titles since 2004. The WTA provides more must-see matches for American people than the ATP does. The Stephens-Keys US Open final had 25 percent more viewers than the Nadal-Anderson men's final, in the 18-49 age group it had 58 percent more viewers.

Young adults are likely able to spend less time watching TV than retired old people. That may be the reason for the increased cord cutting, especially among young adults. Why pay for cable channels you don't have time to watch? Streaming services will be a big part of the future of sports broadcasting. People want to be able to watch from their mobile devices wherever they are and they don't want to pay for content they aren't watching.

All the numbers above are from the USA but it's easy to assume there are some global trends there. Streaming services are replacing traditional subscription channels around the world. Young, working adults with small children don't have as much time to watch sports as retired people have. Yet still, young adults are fascinated by major sports events and want to watch them.

Tennis needs young stars

With the average age of the fans increasing, the sanctioning bodies of tennis are trying to make the sport more appealing to younger generations. The ATP experimented some rule changes at the Next Gen Finals, including no-ad scoring, a best-of-five format with sets played to four games, and on-court coaching.

I'm not sure tennis needs those rule changes. A match played as best of five sets to four games will be 12 to 35 games, with the current rules of best of three sets to six games it's 12 to 39 games. No big difference there. No-ad scoring would shorten the matches, though it would come at the expense of thrilling extended games. Hardly an improvement.

What I think tennis needs to attract younger generations is young stars. After all the years they have spent on the top of the game, Federer, Nadal, Djokovic, and Murray don't appear as young and exciting.

Tennis needs young stars whom young adults and teenagers can identify with. But how can the sanctioning bodies get them when the old guard is still too strong?

It's almost crazy how fit some players in their 30s are. Federer, Wawrinka, and Nadal would be retired at their age if they were 1990s players, yet they can beat younger players with their stamina. Today's tennis is very physical and players in their late teens or early 20s aren't ready to win major titles. Stan Wawrinka won his first slam at the age of 28; that's the age when players had usually reached their peak and started to decline. Grigor Dimitrov won his first Masters 1000 title at the age of 26 after years of big expectations.

Tennis needs to become less physical to help young players to break through (among many other reasons). Speeding up the courts would help in that. A young player who has the skills but not the stamina would be more capable of beating seasoned veterans if the game was less grueling.

Neutral Russian hockey team is not truly neutral

The International Olympic Committee has decided to suspend the Russian Olympic Committee because of the systemic manipulation of the anti-doping system in Russia. Individual Russian athletes may still participate in the Winter Olympics in February as IOC-invited "Olympic Athletes from Russia" in both individual and team competitions, yet without Russia's national symbols.

I think the IOC's decision is the right one. Sports were used as a political tool in Russia, and worse still, to achieve the aims Russian sports organizations resorted on cheating with the help of the government. Russia's doping problem is not just an issue of sports organizations, it's a political issue. The only way to penalize Russia was to ban the Russian team and the national symbols at the Olympics.

The IOC's decision still leaves the door open for a neutral Russian team in hockey. Whether or not there will be a Russian hockey team under the Olympic flag is likely a highly political decision. Will Vladimir Putin's government decide to boycott the Games after the humiliating ban on national symbols, or do they want to show that nothing will stop Russia and will send the hockey players to PyeongChang?

Given the nature of Olympic hockey, a neutral team from a banned country isn't really a neutral team. Russian players would still represent Russia, even if they didn't have the national symbols. Clean individual athletes deserve to be at the Olympics but no Russian national teams should be invited to PyeongChang.

There are other team sports like curling or bobsled that are more comparable to individual sports than hockey. For example, in curling there are multiple teams in a country competing for the Olympic spot. On the other hand, in hockey players from multiple teams are aiming to make it into the Olympic team. Curling and bobsled teams are more individual and less of national teams than the hockey team is. Curling and bobsled teams can be neutral, a hockey team can't truly be.

Relay teams aren't truly neutral either

It will be interesting to see if the Olympic Athletes from Russia can compete in relays and other team competitions of individual sports. In my opinion, the Russian athletes stop being neutral if they are competing in relays against other countries.

What makes relays different from the likes of curling and bobsled is that relay teams are more of national teams. Sports like cross-country skiing are individual sports by definition, relays are just a way to enable team competitions.

The IOC's decision allows neutral Russian athletes to get invited to both individual and team competitions, though the invitations are at the IOC's absolute discretion. Even if Russia wanted to send a neutral hockey team, it's still up to the IOC to approve.

I hope the IOC will not invite Russian athletes in sports where that would lead into having a de facto national team, just without national symbols. Clean individual athletes deserve to be invited, disguised national teams not.

New motorsports blog

As motorsports make up most of my blog texts, I have started a separate blog for them. From now on, my new motorsports texts are in the FINdyCar blog (findycar.blogspot.com). Old motorsports texts can still be found here but they are also imported into the new blog.

I will continue blogging about other sports here.

The Glen's departure opens possibilities for INDYCAR in Pacific Northwest

The 2018 Verizon IndyCar Series schedule has been released. There is only one change, though a very significant one. Portland International Raceway will replace Watkins Glen International which was not satisfied with the Labor Day weekend date.

It is very unfortunate that INDYCAR's latest return to Watkins Glen lasted only for two races and ended one year before the contract was set to expire. The Glen is one of the greatest road courses in North America and in the entire world. It was the iconic host of the United States Grand Prix in the 1960s and '70s.

However, the Glen never became a permanent fixture for Indy car racing like other former F1 venues Long Beach and Detroit did. Indy car races at the Glen have always been short-lived and the latest incarnation was not an exception. If anything, the Glen has become a NASCAR venue in the last decades.

I am not sure the Labor Day weekend date explains the poor attendance. Maybe Watkins Glen just isn't the right kind of a venue for INDYCAR. The location of the Glen is distant from major cities and NASCAR is the big draw there.

While it's unfortunate to see Watkins Glen not in the 2018 schedule, I'm excited to see INDYCAR returning to Portland. Portland hosted American open-wheel racing for over 20 years before it was left out of the schedule following the re-unification in 2008. It may not be as iconic of a track as the Glen, yet Portland has more Indy car history.

I think there are factors that can make Portland a better event than what the Glen would ever have become. Firstly, the location in a city of the size of Portland is better than Watkins Glen's hours away from major cities. Secondly, INDYCAR will be the only major series at Portland International Raceway or even in the entire Pacific Northwest. While the Glen has become a NASCAR venue, Portland used to be an Indy car venue.

Portland kind of reminds of Gateway Motorsports Park as an INDYCAR venue. Both are just outside a major city, both have some previous Indy car history, and INDYCAR is the biggest series at both venues. Gateway had a great attendance for the return of INDYCAR last season, hopefully Portland will be able to replicate that. However, it will require also great marketing like Gateway had.

Maybe that should be INDYCAR's strategy; instead of fighting a losing battle in NASCAR's territory, INDYCAR should look for growth in new markets. That growth would help to make the series more mainstream, making it easier to break through also in NASCAR-dominated areas.

As much as I liked seeing INDYCAR at Watkins Glen, I am fine with Portland replacing it. After two years, the event wasn't working at the Glen and something had to change. I think it's the right move to go to Portland where there is more hope of getting a good crowd. It would be great to have a track like the Glen in the schedule, though most important is having good events.

As for a potential return to Watkins Glen in the future, I'd like it but I am not overly positive. There may not be better calendar slots opening for the Glen in the near future, and even if there was, the crowd might still not be there. The Glen is a great track for Indy cars, yet the series doesn't necessarily need it; CART was great even without the Glen.

Hopefully INDYCAR will get a good crowd next September and Portland will become a successful event in the schedule. With previous racing history but no other major series there, Portland looks like a venue with potential for INDYCAR.