[Dean]

First, I am not trying to start an argument, just trying to understand what you are saying...

I don't think the level of technology changes the fact that there is strategy is involved or that one team can have an advantage over another in that area. In many respects, carburetor choices made before the race are a strategy in themselves, as are how many stops in a F-1 race, wing angle for speed vs. downforce, etc...

In this case, it was also the way Vickers drove vs. the other drivers. I would think that would be true in F1 as well. Changing from a 2 stop to 3 stop strategy due to race conditions or vice-versa must involve the driver and how he conserves or expends fuel and is not just a matter of turning a knob/switch. I swear I have heard conserve fuel and drive like hell, fuel is fine type comments on F-1 radios...

Martin who was saving fuel to an even higher extreme still ran out in his Chevy, so there was definitely a significant difference between the teams.

I think both series have quite complicated fuel strategies regardless of technology.

Fuel Strategy might play more of a role in NASCAR than F-1 and both are subject to "luck" factors, but NASCAR sees more "luck" factors due to the length of their races, the number of cars on track and the older technology.