Montoya has more bad luck at Richmond but sees some positives
By The Associated Press| Sunday, April 28, 2013, 6:30 p.m.
RICHMOND, Va. — It's been a season of bad breaks for Juan Pablo Montoya, so it was only fitting when things again didn't go his way.
Montoya was sailing toward his first victory since 2010 — on an oval no less — when an ill-timed caution ruined everything. He had led 67 laps Saturday night at Richmond International Raceway and needed to complete just four more when Brian Vickers hit the wall.
Montoya screamed into his radio, pounded his fist against the steering wheel then quickly collected himself to consider the big picture: He'd come into Richmond ranked 27th in the Sprint Cup standings with absolutely nothing to show for the improvement Chip Ganassi Racing has made this season.
In his seventh season with Ganassi since leaving Formula One for NASCAR, Montoya has no more time left on his contract unless Ganassi picks up the option the team owner holds. But keeping his seat in the No. 42 Chevrolet could depend on performance in an organization desperately trying to turn a corner.
Montoya has just two road course victories and a lone appearance, in 2009, in the Chase for the Sprint Cup championship. But the team struggled mightily, Ganassi has made numerous personnel changes, and no amount of talent could get Montoya out of the rut.
He recommitted himself to his fitness, focused on his racing and opened the year driving the final stint in Ganassi's victory in the Rolex 24 Hours of Daytona. The momentum from that win never materialized, even though the Ganassi organization appears to be the most improved group in the garage.
“We had a great car. Same as last week, we had a great car,” Montoya said. “The pit crew redeemed themselves. They did a great job all day, no mistakes. That is what we needed. We needed to come out of here and be smart.”
You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.
We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.
While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.
We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments â either by the same reader or different readers.
We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.
We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.
We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.
We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.