There’s no team (Constructor’s) championship.

There is - it's just not hyped up to be the most important aspect in Indycar. The teams aren't constructors, of course - but they do receive a prize for the most points accumulated throughout the season.

There’s practically no difference between Chevy and Honda

There's practically no difference between Honda, Ferrari, Mercedes and Renault engines in F1 anymore either, thanks to the ever-tightening technical regs and the political games that influence them.

If Indycar were to suddenly have a team championship where all 10 full time teams have same amount of cars, the series would have tremendously more talking points and bring more value to the series by proping up the teams that otherwise don’t get any limelight.

Personally, I think taking the emphasis away from the athletes and putting it on the teams in Indycar would undermine the series' biggest strength and key differentiator from F1 - that it is, almost exclusively, a pure driver's championship.
The 'best' drivers tend to be the most successful ones - not just the ones with political priority in the fastest car, as is the case in F1.

Right now Indycar is, in effect, blocking viewers from other countries.

They are doing exactly what F1 does, @murasamara300. Actually, most series do exactly this.

Removing geoblocking would simply deprive Indycar of a lot of money that Sky is willing pay in exchange for exclusive broadcast rights.
Indycar aren't desperately short of viewers, by the way - they don't need to pimp it out for free.

Right now Indycar is, in effect, blocking viewers from other countries.
"Unavailable in your region" is being shouted from the "Ways To Watch" page on indycar-dot-com.

I wonder why there aren't enough viewers. Hmm, tricky question…

I'm in the UK and the only available option to watch Indycar would be to buy an overpriced package from Sky Television (paying for a lot more than just Indycar).
I'm more than happy to pay directly to Indycar on a pay-per-view basis but I am not willing to pay to Sky (I have my reasons but I'm not going to list them here).

Removing the geolocation blocks would be a good start if Indycar really wants some non-US viewers. Make it easy to pay per view and watch the races regardless of where in the world you might be.

Until that happens, I shall simply continue to read the race reports and watch the odd highlights on Youtube long after the races are run. Their choice, not mine.

The problem with Indycar is that it's entirely a driver's series. There's no team (Constructor's) championship. Which is the cause of lack of tribalism. There's practically no difference between Chevy and Honda, it's not hotly debated subject anymore because there's heavy regulations to ensure fairness. However there's a difference between Ganassi and Andretti or Penske and McLaren. But those differences are unfortunately not showcased or made into talking points, simply because there's no team championship.

If Indycar were to suddenly have a team championship where all 10 full time teams have same amount of cars, the series would have tremendously more talking points and bring more value to the series by proping up the teams that otherwise don't get any limelight.

Only other thing Indycar needs is more international races. But I think regulating a team championship would be the fastest and most cost effective means of boosting Indycar's value and popularity.

1. The commentators say very stupid things and it makes me feel embarrassed for them. This is the same reason I can't enjoy watching other American sports unless the audio is muted.
2. It's too difficult to sort out the liveries and understand which car is which driver for which team. In F1 this is very easy. In F2 this is very easy. in FE this is very easy. In Super Formula this is very easy. in Indycar this requires a field guide.
3. The points system requires an accountant to understand. I'm not asking you to explain it to me (please don't).
4. Spec series is boring on a technical basis. I like F1 more than any other series because it the top engineering sport in the world. I guess yacht racing is a distant second.
5. Rolling starts are boring. An F1 race is exciting from the start.
6. Race control decisions make every race feel like it could finish like Abu Dhabi 2021. I'll add stupid pit lane closed under yellow flag rule here too.
7. Watching adult humans drink milk is disgusting.
8. Indycar drivers don't make it into F1. If I'm going to watch a second series I find a series more interesting if I could be watching a potential future F1 champion in action. F2 gives this. I feel like Super Formula or even the NZ Toyota Racing Series have a better chance of this than Indycar. Who was the last driver who moved from Indy to F1 and had any measurable success? Jacques Villeneuve nearly 30 years ago?? I blame the FIA most for this, but it's still a factor in why I care less about Indycar.

The reasons I sometimes follow indycar:
1. Excellent tracks. Laguna Seca, Road America, etc. I have been to more US indycar races than US F1 races and I don't even follow the sport other than checking the points tables on Wikipedia, watching the occasional race, or reading articles here.
2. Occasionally great racing. Usually good racing.
3. Indianapolis 500.
4. Oval racing is actually fun to watch. The mix is actually interesting and requires skill in two quite different disciplines for championship success.

I appreciate the Youtube recaps though, at least gives me a chance to follow it a bit.

Though in general, I think the market for circuit racing is a limited in the US, especially for a series where the racing is in the focus.

Forgot to add when I said indycar has far better racing, that drs really wasn't a good implementation of an overtaking aid. The fact also that F1 is so keen to play around with other race formats yet has never even entertained the idea of trying out different implementations of drs or indeed an entirely different system altogether, is absurd!

I'll add I'm for reverse grid sprints, the way F1 currently sits competition wise at least that way you'd get to see the top cars and drivers forced to race each other a little.

So long as there's enough incentive I think it's at least worth a try.

I said in a previous comment on the hybrid era article that f1s best possible scenario for a real racing fan, is competition from an equal series. It would force better racing and what I believe is the answer. "Spec" cars. Broadly similar but with scope for teams to develope their own parts, which is how indy car is. In indy car the top teams generally stay at the top so it wouldn't change much in F1 other than closer competition between teams

As a non American it doesn't bother me. Essentially a lifelong F1 fan but I've enjoyed indycar overall more these last three seasons since I began watching it. It feel like a purer Motorsport than F1 currently is and reminds me of when I began watching F1 again as a preteen in 2007. The things many F1 fans feel and gone from F1 since liberty took over, indycar still has, and the fact that there's solid competition and far better racing is a reason to argue it's a better series for a motorsports fan. Fan always had hype but that's just went to another level under liberty. To the point that it seems they've structured the sport in a way that doesn't depend on the track action to do well. Drive to survive and they new younger fan base are I think mostly the reason for this. I think most F1 fans don't know what they are missing out on F1 potentially being capable of if it was more competitive like indycar and if you're a real fan of Motorsport (not just F1 and it's hype) then it's hard to follow indycar races and then not feel less excited watching F1 *racing*

Honda’s bad start made their success sweeter and more profound int he end.

In the meantime, it trashed their reputation and cost them billions.
Nobody wants their corporation to repeat that. F1 is simply not worth it.

To me that sounds all very reasonable. Which motor sports series has grown over the last 10 years, what did that series do to get that increase popularity, can Indy do something similar?

In my view Indycar cannot strive for an F1 type worldwide popularity. But given the size of North America they could be a lot more popular than they are. Indeed as someone above commented, it was disappointing how empty Laguna Seca was for the 2022 Champions race. I was there.

As a Dutch person living in the USA I do follow Indycar and F1. Many years since 1994 when I moved here, including the Champcar years. Last several years with both series having a Dutch driver (VeeKay and Max) making it even more fun.
Why do I watch every practice, every qualification and every race from F1, via the F1TV app, go to one, two or all three USA F1 races the last five years, but Indycar on TV only when convenient, and only the race in Laguna Seca? Racing in Indycar is more often more close than in F1 (although also Indycar has boring races with a winner many seconds ahead).

Somehow F1 has more intrigue, more drama, more spectacle. Indycar is close racing, but sometimes very amateuristic, confusing due to all pitsstops, too many cars, some very bad drivers. It just “feels” different. Fun to watch, but not special enough to stay at home for, or travel great distances.

Not sure what Indycar can learn from my “feels”, or even if what I “feel” is shared by enough others to be relevant.

MichaelN, but weren't you arguing earlier about the importance of heritage in helping to establish a sense of narrative for a series that can be used to build it's image?

This is the error people make in motorsport marketing. People might not care about the intricacies of technical changes in detail, but they care holistically. (worth noting there is a huge audience for technical detail stuff)

Your cared about McLaren because McLaren build their cars to compete as a team. That's the 'Technical Aspect'. Does your dad care as much about McLaren in Indy as he does in F1?

That's a future direction F1 is taking which I do not agree with. Honda's bad start made their success sweeter and more profound int he end. Often lessons aren't learnt. I am not an F1 evangelical. I think they are making errors.

I just recognise that there are clear elements to IndyCar that will limit its growth and why trying to emulate F1 on the periphery marketing techniques won't do much for them.

I agree with that. The teams are definately competeing to show their prowess on a world stage.
I'm talking more about perception from fans.

People here can talk forever about the evolving technical, financial, and political undercurrents of F1.
But for a lot of viewers, its more a surface-level following. Be it for a team, or driver.

We may nerd out over a new wishbone assemble. But the broad audience doesn't.
My dad got me into F1. But he didn't care about what technical changes were happening in the cars. Only if McLaren were winning.

Audi, Ford and GM only joined F1 when it took away that possibility, because they were all afraid of looking as incompetent as Honda did in 2015.

Similar to how in DPi in IMSA or now in LMH/LMDh, manufacturers are flocking to a series where they can put their name on something when they know it'll be made competitive behind the scenes via a BoP scheme. To them it's just marketing. Not a single one of them wanted to participate in the much more open LMP1 series when they could make pretty much whichever car they wanted… at the risk of failing, like Aston Martin did to an almost comical extent with the disastrous AMR-One.

The myth and interest is largely driven by the enormous weight of F1's history, and more specifically, the excellent TV product Ecclestone and his associates created. As is mentioned elsewhere as a con for Indycar; Ecclestone knew that it's much better to have only championship-races, to have the same teams in each race, and the same drivers. That's how you build a narrative throughout the season that everyone can follow, and create cast of characters that's not too large (as in sportscars) or too changeable (as in many other series). That wasn't always how F1 was, but that's what it became by about 1980. In many countries, F1 successfully monopolized high level single seater racing. To this day there are many 'F1 fans' who watch not a single bit of other motorsport. F1 still has a lot of that momentum.

The MGU-H (rather than MGU-K) is probably the only real technological innovation F1 has seen since the mid 2000s when it backtracked on a lot of the reintroduced 'driving aids', or maybe even since the early 1990s when it banned the active suspension. And the MGU-H really is impressive, but… who cares? Even with their 1.3 million subscribers, the Mercedes team couldn't attract more than 70k viewers to their (well done) 2022 video about said component. And it's one of the very few uncapped pieces of the power unit so its at the very forefront of the development race! But despite all that, people just don't get excited about turbines, turbos, thermal efficiencies or charging-strategies for the on-board batteries.

The Tech Talk videos F1 itself puts out every race weekend constantly struggle for attention relative the other videos; in most cases they're stuck around 300k views in between the pre-race chit chat and the Thursday walk around the paddock. People might want to know if some team will do better at the race than they did previously, but the technical details of that are largely or even entirely irrelevant. They just want to know if Norris can win, not how many millimeters the latest McLaren front wing has added to the endplate - or something arcane like that.

Indycar can still learn a lot from F1, but it doesn't have to become a super-expensive version of itself to do so. Streamlining the calendar and straightening out the teams can go a long way; it's just a bit of a mess with 30+ drivers in 17 different teams, which aren't really different teams at all, some of which have two cars, or three, or four, or even five if you include the single-race entries for the Indy 500. And those that do race in every event change their entire colour scheme a few times. That might all be part of Indycar history, but that history brought them here - to a near deserted Laguna Seca for the 2022 title decider. O'Ward is right that everything needs to be open for discussion - even if there's definitely a lot worth keeping.

They don't 'care' but it does fuel their interest. These components coalesce to create a compelling sport. People might say they don#t care, but their actions speaks otherwise. It's a pluralistic ignorance of sorts. This aspect it a huge driver of narratives. Look at Mercs last two seasons. These are huge factors. The Soap Opera of F1 is predicated on the Technical Aspect. You don't get one without the other. It's just that this is often stated out loud enough.

Those names aren't in F1 without the possibility of technical differences. You don't get one without the other. It's the sporting technical structure that feeds everything else which then snowballs.