Slashdot Mirror
Game Theory at 190mph
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."
← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)
← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)
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....
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?
My life in the land of the rising sun.
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) 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
Game Theory (GT) is a mathematical field all about choices: given a set of knowledge, build a set of choices that will lead to the greatest expected outcome.
GT can be applied to games, since games generally consist of a set of choices. But the term is more often heard in economic circles: stock market, insurance calculations, portfolio planning... But don't limit it to that either. GT can be applied to most any sort of competition, such as competition for food sources between predator species, or trying to find the shortest/quickest way through the lines at a supermarket.
A number of different factors influence your choices. How much information do I know? How much information does my opponent(s) know? Do they know I know what they know? Can I influence my opponent's choices such that we both get a better outcome? All these things will change my strategy.
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.
--- I do not moderate.
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.
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.
Gorkman
Shhhhhhh! You're giving away my secret to +5 insightful comments!
Have you seen my stapler?
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.
I am not a big racing fan and have never really understood the allure, but the section Basic Dynamics of Drafting is a fantastic read. It gives great insight into tactics used by these highly skilled drivers.
No, I think the article has a good point. It's challenging to come up with another popular sport where cooperation with the opponents is necessary to win. (Emphasis "popular"; yes, I too can reel off video games and odd-ball sports where that's true too, but they don't preempt Futurama to death on Fox.)
Using as a guide what the networks, including ESPN will run (even late at night): Basketball, baseball, soccer, football, tennis, golf, hockey, billiards, chess, various "slam-dunk" style contests, strongman/American Gladiator-type competitions, convention human/bicycle/boat racing, every Olympic event I can think of (though one or two may fit the bill, it's hard to remember them all), the list goes on. None of these things involve cooperation with oppenents. About the only thing I've ever seen on ESPN that might fit the bill is some wierd moves in Poker that might be based on unspoken alliances, but I'm just speculating and that's not as obvious as it is in NASCAR.
In fact I'm not a NASCAR fan but this does give me a new respect for the sport.... interestingly, based on this article I now mentally classify NASCAR as next to Poker, requiring psychological manuevering, "social capital", and some luck (in the form of good pit crews, along with traditional luck) to win. I guess only a game theorist could stick car racing and poker "closer together" then car racing and bike racing and consider it perfectly logical...
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.
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.
NASCAR racing, along with 'professional' 'wrestling,' country 'music,' and insipid reality shows like "American Idol," "Joe Millionaire," and "Survivor," are the three greatest contributors to the horrific plummeting of the average American's IQ.
I'm not a fan of any of those entertainments, but really they do not strike me as any more insipid or stupid than past popular entertainments. Time tends to filter the stuff we see from past decades - only the (relatively) good stuff survives. If you think back to earlier decades (or visit a museum if you are not old enough to remember more than one or two past decades) then you will see that most entertainment has always been moronic.
...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.
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.
The most common complaint from NASCAR drivers:
Just once, can't we turn right?
I suppose they can relate to derek zoolander.
to email me: take my
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, 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.
RTFM; please, I beg you.
Well, why aren't there more White basketball players? Or, early in the 20th century you might have asked "why are so many basketball players Jewish?". That's right. Jewish.
It's because basketball started in Springfield, MA and took hold first in Northeastern cities that were populated by Jewish immigrants at the time. When that demographic became successful, the inner city became more Black, but the basketball infrastructure (hoops, gyms, cold winters, confined spaces) remained. The Blacks took to it.
Same deal with NASCAR, except that it sprang out of moonshiners outrunning the revenuers. Moonshiners were mostly white, so NASCAR drivers were mostly white. Originally, racism certainly played a part in it too, but probably not as much as we might imagine.
Asking this question is a bit like asking why there are so many Asian guys who like to do martial arts, while so few of them are to be found at quilting bees. It's just part of the culture.
For all intensive purposes, "whom" is no longer a word. That begs the question, "who cares"?
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.
This is my digital signature. 10011011001
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.
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
Want to learn about race cars? Read my Book