Why do some people deify AJ Foyt

[Fish_Flake]

Plus, the sides of the Foyt-Luyendyk incident were reversed from what the original poster described. Billy Boat (A.J.'s driver) was declared the winner at the 1997 Texas race. Arie Luyendyk thought that he should have been awarded the victory, and proceeded to crash the post-race ceremonies in protest. A.J. didn't appreciate Arie ruining his team's big moment in this way, and put him on the sidewalk. Subsequent investigation ultimately proved that Arie was right, but in A.J.'s eyes the tussle wasn't about who won the race; Arie's gesture was a blatant show of disrespect toward him and his team, and he wasn't going to stand for it.

People admired A.J. for that no-nonsense, take-charge kind of attitude he had. Sure, it often led to confrontation, or moments that would cast him in a less-than-flattering light. Over the course of fifty years, though, those incidents become anecdotes to his legend, and well short of defining him. There are all sorts of characters like him in the history of motorsports. Denny Hulme was known as "the Bear" because of his gruff attitude towards his adversaries, but any of his contemporaries will now not hesitate to hold him in the highest esteem. Tony Stewart is vitriolic beyond a fault, yet he's the most popular figure in American motorsports today. People love rebels who shun the decorum of the establishment and aren't afraid to speak their mind. To several generations of racing fans, A.J. is the archetype.

[kingfloopy]

I don't think he's being deified, like its been said before its 50 anniversary at Indy and he's being given the respect he deserves as the only 4 time winner and as someone who has accomplished a lot in lifetime, things that no one else may ever accomplish.

I like and respect A.J. Foyt because he seems to be the antithesis to the current crop of drivers. He's someone who actually has an opinion and isn't afraid to show it even if it isn't politically correct or even if he might be wrong. He reminds me a lot of Smokey Yunick who is someone else that faults and all I admire greatly. He's not perfect, but no one is.

J.D.

[Bluewolf]

Originally Posted by Fish_Flake

Plus, the sides of the Foyt-Luyendyk incident were reversed from what the original poster described. Billy Boat (A.J.'s driver) was declared the winner at the 1997 Texas race. Arie Luyendyk thought that he should have been awarded the victory, and proceeded to crash the post-race ceremonies in protest. A.J. didn't appreciate Arie ruining his team's big moment in this way, and put him on the sidewalk. Subsequent investigation ultimately proved that Arie was right, but in A.J.'s eyes the tussle wasn't about who won the race; Arie's gesture was a blatant show of disrespect toward him and his team, and he wasn't going to stand for it.

You left out on bit of info Fish - Arie was told to go to the winners circle by the chief Steward!!!!!!!!

[Bluewolf]

Originally Posted by JohnSSC

I am curious. Why the sudden need to portray AJ as a bad person based on (apparently) an incident with Hall?

I will put it this way - and I am no AJ apologist - besides being a great driver he was one heck of a wrench. He was probably as good a mechanic as there was at the time. His accusation was likely based on informed observation. It may have turned out to be wrong, but in those days AJ knew what went on under the hood better than many a driver.

John he was beginning to lose his touch rapidly as a mechanic in the 80's. After the '82 500 he raced 11 times and could only crack the top 10 twice in those years -- Every major area became an area for a specialist and AJ couldn't hold a candle to educated specialists with degrees who were starting to pull in very big salaries from the big teams.

[Bluewolf]

Originally Posted by JohnSSC

I wonder what you think of the Yarboroughs, who at times resorted to fisticuffs to resolve on-track disagreements...

Just because the Yarboroughs were jerks, when they had a disagreement post race doesn't make it right. The cowboy types are dead and gone and that's a good thing. I like well defined parameters and going through the proper channels when there's a disagreement after a race - There's nothing wrong with that --- it's called, being civilized.

[Fish_Flake]

Originally Posted by Bluewolf

You left out on bit of info Fish - Arie was told to go to the winners circle by the chief Steward!!!!!!!!...

...Just because the Yarboroughs were jerks, when they had a disagreement post race doesn't make it right. The cowboy types are dead and gone and that's a good thing. I like well defined parameters and going through the proper channels when there's a disagreement after a race - There's nothing wrong with that --- it's called, being civilized.

Don't know about that. Regardless of the peripheral details, the Foyt-Luyendyk incident boils down two this: two parties both thought they had won, tempers flared, and some pushing and shoving went down. Luyendyk had a disagreement after the race, and the way he approached it (cursing his way to the winner's circle, even if he was provoked by the Chief Steward) was far from civilized. Foyt's reaction wasn't civilized, either, but I wouldn't chide either of them for how things played out. For all of your advocating of "being civilized," the same scenario plays out every Saturday night somewhere after a short track feature race. The people who have witnessed or even participated in the post-race brawls that are commonplace at the grassroots level are not going to look at that moment and say, "That A.J.'s making a real fool out of himself." They're going to say "That A.J., after all these years, is still like one of us."

[jhansen]

Originally Posted by Bluewolf

Just because the Yarboroughs were jerks, when they had a disagreement post race doesn't make it right. The cowboy types are dead and gone and that's a good thing. I like well defined parameters and going through the proper channels when there's a disagreement after a race - There's nothing wrong with that --- it's called, being civilized.

The ironic thought is, without those cowboy types, where would racing be today?

In my opinion, you have not provided proof for your original premise. It isn't that some people deify AJ Foyt. Some people like him, and some people don't. I don't think it's fair to say that AJ's fans are deifying him. If you don't like him then that's obviously fine. But I am failing to see the evidence that everyone else is giving him a free pass.

Is this just a "civilized" way of bashing someone?

[Bob Riebe]

Originally Posted by Bluewolf

John he was beginning to lose his touch rapidly as a mechanic in the 80's. After the '82 500 he raced 11 times and could only crack the top 10 twice in those years -- Every major area became an area for a specialist and AJ couldn't hold a candle to educated specialists with degrees who were starting to pull in very big salaries from the big teams.

It had nothing to do with this BS, it had everything to do with the death of his father; by his own admission, it took him years to be able to accept it, even half-way.
He makes no defense and says it ruined good years of racing for him.

[Bluewolf]

Originally Posted by Bob Riebe

It had nothing to do with this BS, it had everything to do with the death of his father; by his own admission, it took him years to be able to accept it, even half-way.
He makes no defense and says it ruined good years of racing for him.

AJ saying it ruined good years of racing for him could just as easily be an excuse for why he wasn't winning -- just because AJ said it, doesn't mean it's the truth. Besides there are a lot of drivers who have lost their fathers while racing, but they don't use it as an excuse as to why they're not winning. And what I stated is not BS - Foyt's operation grew smaller compared to the monied teams as the years went on - you saying it's BS shows you know nothing of growth of the major teams in the eighties.

[ensign14]

Quote from Johnny Boyd in Vintage Motorsport this month. Something like "Walt Faulkner came up to me, poked me in the ribs, and said, 'son, you have the makings of a great racing driver...but when someone hits you like that you hit them back in the next corner...let 'em know you ain't scared.'"

[JohnSSC]

Bluewolf, with all due respect, you obviously have an axe to grind about AJ. Many of us here have discussed, thoroughly, the shortfalls of his racing operation recently. I would say most of us agree that when times changed, AJ did not.

That can be both good and bad depending if the "changes" one needs to make are personal or in the business sense. AJ, like Tony Stewart or Hulme is a competive guy who wants to win bad in whatever he is driving. Your supposition is that there is something fundamentally wrong with AJ as a result. We could sit here all day picking nits about the Unsers, Rutherford, Sneva, Johncock, Ruby, Penske, Andretti etc. At the end of it, we really have nothing more than opinions as very few of us here actually "know" these people. Likely we would have a big old pile of crap for each one of them being as how they are all human beings and not exactly perfect.

You don't like AJ. Fair enough. But to me, this is going beyond the tipping point into "bashing" territory...

Sorry if this comes off as "personal" but it is difficult to separate the incidents, which have been made personal as far as how the poster feels, from the very personal assignment of "lack of integrity" to AJ for the purposes of the discussion.

[fazzaz]

Well, John; Foyt, many NASCAR drivers, perhaps those of us who live down here are less civilized; moving further up on that scale might indeed improve racing. I might be much like when I started in SCCA in 1964; "After you, please, that corner is yours." "Can we meet for a spot of tea after the race?" I think I still have the stingback driving gloves -- not to race in, to drive to and from the track. Very, very civilized.

Perhaps anyone should easily get past the death of his father, but when I was visiting your city in September and October of 1991 Sports Illustrated did a major story on AJ. His relationship with his father, and his father's death were covered in detail. If anyone (perhaps not the original poster) can still find that issue it paints a very well drawn portrait of A.J. as a man as well as racer. One of the best written pieces I recall from SI

[Leighton Irwin]

I also raced sports cars in the 60's and was not above bumping. Neither were a heck of a lot other sports car racers. Stringback gloves yes, after you nope. Capt. Nice (Mark Donahue) was as hard nosed as anyone and his boss one Roger Penske was no sweetheart as a driver either.
AJ came out of short track racing and it is no different today than it was then. See the "Dude", Danny Lasoski, and his family at the Knoxville Nationals last year and this was family!
As I said I don't like AJ but I sure as heck respect him. I understand where he is coming from and his attitude. When the technology of racing passed him by it was, I feel, almost too much for him. Heck he had a hard time accepting rear engined Indy cars but sure adapted to driving them.
Tempers flare in racing. PT and Tags, Seabass and PT and several cases in F1 over the years.
I feel AJ has as much integerty as anyone else in this business and there many cases of lack of integrety in all phases of the sport. Look at NAPCAR every week with their fines and suspensions.
Bending the rules or imaginitive interpretation of the rules has always been around. The more rules the easier it is to find loopholes. Been there, done that.
The only case of lack of integrity I can remember with AJ and I don't know the full story, is when he promised Herta his ride back after his crash in Toronto and then renigged.

[nycuk]

Originally Posted by JohnSSC

In my opinion, the only thing (and this is no knock on Mario) that Mario Andretti has over him is the F1 portion of the CV.

I agree. I'm not knocking Indycars (you won't find many bigger Indy fans than me) but during AJ's time as a frontrunner, the championship was effectively a domestic series that (the 500 excepted) made few waves outside of the US.

When people discuss the all time greats it's names like Fangio, Moss, Clark, Andretti, Senna, Prost, Schumacher that will always come up. Foyts name may have been a part of that illustrious list too had he raced in F1, which is and always has been, let's face it, the worldwide motorsport pinnacle.

I was lucky enough to attend the Indy 500 last week, and whilst in the States I read an interview with Foyt in USA Today. When asked why he'd never raced in F1, AJ alluded to a lack of enthusiasm for foreigners and a dislike of our 'funny food'... So maybe that's why?!

So the F1 experience may be the only thing Mario has over AJ - but it's a pretty big thing.

[mmciau]

Was very fortunate, together with about 150 other Australians, to see AJ Foyt win both races in a USAC Sprintcar on the Friday night before the Indy 500 at the Indianapolis State Fairgrounds in 1974.

His Chevy powered sprintcar won both 25-lap races on the night. It sounded like a 'McCullough Chainsaw Engine" as it lapped on the mile track at about 110mph average.

I remember he started about 8th in the first race and was lying about 2nd or 3rd after the first corner!.

And watching him and Rutherford duel for the first 25 laps at the Indy 500. He was 'black-flagged' when an oil leak in his gearbox started to annoy Rutherford who was slip-streaming him.

Mike

[deeks6]

There are 3 American motor racing legends - Mario, Dan Gurney and AJ - you can keep the rest. They have provided true race fans with countless hours of enjoyment, their achievements are monumental and all 3 certainly rank in any list of All-Time Greats in my opinion.

As for the "integrity" argument, I never heard of AJ being in court or not paying a debt or reneging on a deal ... did you?

As for temper, I could name plenty of F1 people renowned for a bit of temper - Senna, Piquet, Irvine, Surtees spring to mind instantly - and nobody accuses them of having no integrity.

[Bob Riebe]

Originally Posted by deeks6

There are 3 American motor racing legends - Mario, Dan Gurney and AJ - you can keep the rest. They have provided true race fans with countless hours of enjoyment, their achievements are monumental and all 3 certainly rank in any list of All-Time Greats in my opinion.

As for the "integrity" argument, I never heard of AJ being in court or not paying a debt or reneging on a deal ... did you?

As for temper, I could name plenty of F1 people renowned for a bit of temper - Senna, Piquet, Irvine, Surtees spring to mind instantly - and nobody accuses them of having no integrity.

You cannot take Parnelli Jones out of the elite of US racing drivers, as far as that goes, you cannot denigrate any driver, unless the drivers themselves have done so.
Bob