2-Headed Monster: Did Kyle Larson, No. 5 Team Engage In Race Manipulation?

The closing laps at Talladega are always some of the most exciting moments in all of motorsport. Some of the most iconic images in the history of NASCAR have occurred with the field storming towards the start-finish line — which, if you didn’t know after this weekend, is actually down closer to turn 1 than the tri-oval.

In-car audio from Kyle Larson had him receiving repeated instruction from spotter Tyler Monn to not draft so close to Brad Keselowski to avoid “pushing him to a win”. With the Ford of Keselowski squaring off against the Chevrolets of Ricky Stenhouse, Jr. and teammate William Byron, Larson was in position to make a move — but never attempted one.

Did Larson and the No. 5 team violate the spirit of the 100% rule and engage in race manipulation? These kinds of things are open to conjecture, and this week Amy Henderson and Trenton Worsham break it down in 2-Headed Monster.

It Goes Deeper than Just Kyle Larson

Kyle Larson’s spotter telling him (a Chevrolet driver) not to push Brad Keselowski (in a Ford) to the win in Sunday’s YellaWood 500 at Talladega Superspeedway was a single symptom of a larger disease in the sport.

While the SMT data appears to exonerate Larson (depending on who you ask or interpret the data), his spotter’s orders are a problem. If Larson had made a concerted effort to slow the inside line just enough for the outside lane, led by Ricky Stenhouse Jr. in a Chevy, it would violate NASCAR’s rules, which require to give 100% effort in pursuing a race win.

Not only that, but it violates the spirit of the sport itself.

By not pushing Keselowski past Stenhouse if he was capable of the pass, Larson would have denied himself a shot at the win. Had he pushed the No. 6 clear, he’d have had at least a chance to make a move.

The situation is a little different than a teammate pushing another to the win if he doesn’t feel he has a viable move of his own. That happens frequently, and it’s the nature of superspeedway racing. It’s not even the same as pushing the driver in front to the lead but having to settle for finishing behind him because there’s not room or time for a pass. Sometimes there is no move to be made.

But Larson’s spotter was telling Larson to deliberately sabotage his own race in order to also sabotage a competitor’s.

That’s not racing.

Manufacturers put a great deal of money and resources into racing, and of course they want a return on investment. That’s absolutely reasonable. They wouldn’t be in the sport if it wasn’t profitable in the end.

But calling a driver to the carpet for working with a driver representing a different manufacturer when it’s to his own advantage to do so. To tell a driver to settle for a lesser finish himself if it means pushing another make across the line?

That crosses a line all right, but it’s not the finish line.

Drivers from various teams under a manufacturer’s umbrella pitting together so they have a drafting group after stops? Totally fine. Dropping to the rear in the early stages to avoid trouble? Part of solid race strategy if it works.

Even holding up the leader to help a teammate isn’t a terrible thing if the driver isn’t capable of winning himself. But going to the lengths of actively hurting his own chances is going too far.

NASCAR should look at SMT data for the final lap of superspeedway races, especially if there is radio chatter that suggests a driver is deliberately holding himself up to stop a competitor’s run.

If there is an abundance of evidence that he did back out without trying to make a run, he should be heavily penalized. Anyone telling a driver on the radio to give up position to slow a competing make should absolutely draw a penalty.

And the penalties shouldn’t be light. If dipping his tires below the yellow line to gain a spot relegates a driver to the back, this attempt to throw a race and to manipulate the finish should be worth at least that.

Backing out for the sole reason of keeping another driver from winning just seems … sleazy. It might not be as blatant as intentionally wrecking another driver, but it changes the sport in an unsavory, unhealthy way. It robs race fans of moments, like one driver choosing to push his best friend instead of one in the same model of car to victory in the Great American Race.

That’s happened. And that’s the kind of finish fans want to see and the kind of story they want to hear. Not the one where the driver backs out and lets someone else win because of the emblem on his car.

That’s not racing. – Amy Henderson

Blue Ovals and Red Bow Ties Never Mix

There has been a rise in debate about drivers and the 100% rule, which basically means you have to be racing 100% the entire race, as well as drivers doing things that go against the standards of race manipulation. The big focus of that post-Talladega was Kyle Larson’s radio communications coming from spotter Tyler Monn. Approaching the finish line, Larson was behind Brad Keselowski on the bottom lane, drag-racing with eventual winner Ricky Stenhouse Jr. and William Byron behind him.

Monn told Larson over the radio to not push the No. 6 to the win and it seemed like Larson backed off; SMT data has been inconclusive to say for sure.

Generally speaking, is this a bad thing? Does the action of not pushing a driver go against race manipulation and racing 100%? I would argue that it doesn’t.

There is nowhere that states a driver MUST always be pushing another driver at drafting tracks. Some have even gotten in trouble with their team by doing this, such as when Parker Retzlaff had a Richard Childress Racing-prepared car pushing Harrison Burton to the lead in the second Daytona race this year, causing Kyle Busch to lose out. While the outcome Retzlaff was hoping for didn’t happen — an outcome where he cleared himself of Burton and took the lead — he finished seventh and yet was still looked down on by the organization.  

OEMs are essentially teammates in these types of races. They all have meetings during the week together, they all pit together, they all try to work together. To say a Chevrolet driver, which Larson is, supposedly not pushing a Ford driver to the lead to win the race is wrong is just unfair.

If we want to play the game of “100%” or “race manipulation,” then throw out every recent drafting race we have had because they have all turned into running at 80-85% to save fuel. That is not racing 100%, that is manipulating the race in a non-organic way — not running all-out, straight-up the whole time.

One could also argue that pushing a driver based on OEM is manipulating the race because of a bias to help one driver over the other. The waters get murky when one starts to argue that it is wrong to not push anyone. Is it Larson’s obligation to subject him and his car to undue risk? After all, the No. 6 had been involved in the last two big wrecks at Talladega, and Larson’s teammate was in the outside row as well.

Self-preservation is also still a legitimate strategy.

Prior to the communications, we did see the Hendrick Motorsports driver push Keselowski to the front, and he did not move up to block the top lane. He had a shot and did not take it. The topic regarding this situation should be about how the RFK Racing driver lost the race when he was in control of his own destiny. – Trenton Worsham

Amy Henderson

Amy is an 20-year veteran NASCAR writer and a six-time National Motorsports Press Association (NMPA) writing award winner, including first place awards for both columns and race coverage. As well as serving as Photo Editor, Amy writes The Big 6 (Mondays) after every NASCAR Cup Series race. She can also be found working on her bi-weekly columns Holding A Pretty Wheel (Tuesdays) and Only Yesterday (Wednesdays). A New Hampshire native whose heart is in North Carolina, Amy’s work credits have extended everywhere from driver Kenny Wallace’s website to Athlon Sports. She can also be heard weekly as a panelist on the Hard Left Turn podcast that can be found on AccessWDUN.com's Around the Track page.

Trenton Worsham