April-19 Results-2023 Brownstown
Results - 2023 Speedway
Brownstown Speedway Results: April 19, 2023
Kyle Larson hustled on the Indiana bullring on Wednesday night
This evening, it;s night two of FloRacing Night In America in Brownstown, Indiana. The 1/4-mile track of Brownstown Speedway is set to have very soil late models.
View Brownstown Speedway results underneath.
Devin Moran and Ricky Thornton Jr set the first line. 50 laps of soil late model hustling are up straightaway…
Headliner
Report
Green banner, they run even into turn one. Thornton Jr wins the fight off turn two through the external path.
Lap 3, Mike Marlar works by Moran to take second away.
Lap 10, Marlar has shut to the guard of Thornton Jr in the fight for the lead. Marlar moves to the base as Thornton Jr is stuck to the top.
Lap 15, Thornton Je has gotten the tail of the field. He rapidly takes them three wide through the center and opens the hole to Marlar.
Lap 20, the track has taken elastic. The whole field has moved to the center path.
Lap 34, vehicle off course and the wariness is out.
Green, Thornton Jr leads Marlar and Moran on the single document restart.
Ricky Thornton Jr takes the success at Brownstown Speedway.
Brownstown Speedway Results
April 19, 2023
View results from the Brownstown, Indiana soil track underneath:
Late Model
Race Results
Coming up next are the outcomes for the late model division:
Late Models
Qualifying
Qualifying - Gathering A (2 Laps) : 1. 99M-Devin Moran, 00:13.604[2]; 2. 6-Kyle Larson, 00:13.675[26]; 3. 1-Hudson O'Neal, 00:13.695[20]; 4. 12-Jason Jameson, 00:13.786[24]; 5. 1T-Tyler Erb, 00:13.800[9]; 6. 11H-Spencer Hughes, 00:13.800[12]; 7. 46-Duke Pearson Jr, 00:13.833[6]; 8. 49-Jonathan Davenport, 00:13.935[10]; 9. 39-Tim McCreadie, 00:13.958[23]; 10. 18-Shannon Babb, 00:13.963[13];
11. 76-Brandon Overton, 00:13.979[19]; 12. 7T-Drake Troutman, 00:14.002[18]; 13. 7W-Ricky Weiss, 00:14.043[1]; 14. 96V-Leather treater English, 00:14.097[15]; 15. 32S-Chad Stapleton, 00:14.182[22]; 16. 58-Garrett Alberson, 00:14.232[8]; 17. 10-Garrett Smith, 00:14.281[5]; 18. 22-Daniel Hilsabeck, 00:14.382[21]; 19. 6JR-Parker Martin, 00:14.460[16]; 20. 93X-Zak Blackwood, 00:14.501[7];
21. 20TC-Tristan Chamberlain, 00:14.509[17]; 22. 36-Logan Martin, 00:14.602[28]; 23. 11-Tyler Collins, 00:14.623[14]; 24. 4-Travis Stemler, 00:14.669[11]; 25. 80-Mat Bex, 00:14.770[3]; 26. 30-Todd Cooney, 00:14.867[27]; 27. S21-Seth Daniels, 00:15.197[4]; 28. 11R-Josh Rice, 00:47.730[25]
Qualifying - Gathering B (2 Laps) : 1. 18D-Daulton Wilson, 00:14.182[2]; 2. 157-Mike Marlar, 00:14.188[5]; 3. 9-Scratch Hoffman, 00:14.220[8]; 4. 20RT-Ricky Thornton Jr, 00:14.283[25]; 5. 21-Billy Moyer Sr, 00:14.283[26]; 6. 24-Jared Bailey, 00:14.303[7]; 7. 32-Bobby Penetrate, 00:14.385[27]; 8. B5-Brandon Sheppard, 00:14.394[15]; 9. 28-Dennis Erb Jr, 00:14.399[10]; 10. 7-Ross Robinson, 00:14.421[1];
11. 49T-Jake Timm, 00:14.434[14]; 12. 40B-Kyle Bronson, 00:14.463[24]; 13. 68-Adam Stricker, 00:14.481[17]; 14. 2S-Turbulent Scott, 00:14.501[18]; 15. 81JR-Jack Riggs, 00:14.573[20]; 16. 1G-Devin Gilpin, 00:14.606[16]; 17. D8-Dustin Linville, 00:14.622[4]; 18. 39H-Mike Hildebrand, 00:14.627[3]; 19. 86-Kyle Facial hair, 00:14.634[11]; 20. 7R-Kent Robinson, 00:14.643[28];
21. 93-Cory Lawler, 00:14.687[6]; 22. 23-Keegan Cox, 00:14.710[22]; 23. 29J-Jordan Wever, 00:14.732[13]; 24. 56-BJ Gregory, 00:14.751[12]; 25. 81-Jason Riggs, 00:14.809[23]; 26. 11K-Austin Kirkpatrick, 00:14.980[21]; 27. 22L-Skyller Lewis, 00:15.375[19]; 28. 28S-Jeffrey Shackelford, 00:15.375[9]
Late Models
Heat Races
Heat 1 (8 Laps - Top 3 Development) : 1. 99M-Devin Moran[1]; 2. 12-Jason Jameson[2]; 3. 46-Duke Pearson Jr[3]; 4. 58-Garrett Alberson[6]; 5. 18-Shannon Babb[4]; 6. 7W-Ricky Weiss[5]; 7. 6JR-Parker Martin[7]; 8. 36-Logan Martin[8]; 9. 80-Mat Bex[9]; 10. (DNS) 11R-Josh Rice
Heat 2 (8 Laps - Top 3 Development) : 1. 6-Kyle Larson[1]; 2. 1T-Tyler Erb[2]; 3. 76-Brandon Overton[4]; 4. 49-Jonathan Davenport[3]; 5. 96V-Leather treater English[5]; 6. 93X-Zak Blackwood[7]; 7. 10-Garrett Smith[6]; 8. 11-Tyler Collins[8]; 9. (DNS) 30-Todd Cooney
Heat 3 (8 Laps - Top 3 Development) : 1. 1-Hudson O'Neal[1]; 2. 39-Tim McCreadie[3]; 3. 11H-Spencer Hughes[2]; 4. 7T-Drake Troutman[4]; 5. 32S-Chad Stapleton[5]; 6. 20TC-Tristan Chamberlain[7]; 7. 22-Daniel Hilsabeck[6]; 8. 4-Travis Stemler[8]; 9. S21-Seth Daniels[9]
Heat 4 (8 Laps - Top 3 Development) : 1. 20RT-Ricky Thornton Jr[2]; 2. 32-Bobby Pierce[3]; 3. 18D-Daulton Wilson[1]; 4. 68-Adam Stricker[5]; 5. 81-Jason Riggs[9]; 6. 86-Kyle Beard[7]; 7. 1G-Devin Gilpin[6]; 8. 7-Ross Robinson[4]; 9. 23-Keegan Cox[8]; 10. 28S-Jeffrey Shackelford[10]
Heat 5 (8 Laps - Top 3 Development) : 1. 157-Mike Marlar[1]; 2. B5-Brandon Sheppard[3]; 3. 2S-Blustery Scott[5]; 4. 29J-Jordan Wever[8]; 5. 11K-Austin Kirkpatrick[9]; 6. 21-Billy Moyer Sr[2]; 7. 7R-Kent Robinson[7]; 8. D8-Dustin Linville[6]; 9. 49T-Jake Timm[4]
About the Creator
Keep reading
More stories from Ahmed Y Shaikh and writers in Earth and other communities.
Top Business Leaders Issue Expletive-Laced Message on Green Backlash
In a move that has captured global attention, a coalition of top business leaders recently issued a sharp and expletive-laden statement responding to what they describe as growing “green backlash” against corporate sustainability initiatives. The statement, which circulated widely on social media and news outlets, reflects increasing tension between business interests and environmental advocacy. Executives from some of the world’s largest corporations—including energy, manufacturing, and technology sectors—warned that the backlash threatens progress on climate goals and risks undermining long-term economic and environmental stability. What the Statement Said While the exact wording contained strong language, the core message was clear: business leaders are frustrated with public criticism that, in their view, unfairly targets companies striving to reduce emissions, invest in renewable energy, and implement sustainable practices. According to excerpts released by major media outlets, the executives argued that: Sustainability efforts are essential for long-term business survival. Criticism from political groups, activists, and some consumers is often misinformed or oversimplified. Corporations cannot be held responsible for systemic environmental challenges alone. The expletive-laced tone surprised observers and sparked debates about corporate communication strategies and the limits of public discourse in environmental debates. Why Business Leaders Are Pushing Back Many companies have invested billions in green technologies, energy-efficient processes, and corporate social responsibility initiatives. Yet, they argue that despite these investments, they face increasing public scrutiny and sometimes hostile criticism: Activist campaigns often portray corporations as greenwashing, exaggerating sustainability claims. Politicians in some regions have launched legal or regulatory challenges against certain environmental strategies. Social media amplifies criticism rapidly, sometimes disproportionately. Business leaders warn that this backlash not only demoralizes corporate teams but can also slow down innovation in areas like renewable energy, sustainable packaging, and carbon-neutral logistics. The Green Backlash: What It Is The term “green backlash” refers to growing opposition to environmental initiatives, particularly when such initiatives are perceived as expensive, disruptive, or politically motivated. Analysts suggest the backlash stems from several sources: Economic concerns: Some voters fear green policies raise costs for consumers or hurt industries reliant on traditional energy. Political polarization: Environmental issues have become entangled with partisan debates in multiple countries. Misinformation: Social media often spreads misleading narratives about corporate green practices. Executives argue that a lack of understanding among the public contributes to misdirected criticism. Examples of Corporate Sustainability Initiatives The companies represented in the statement have launched a range of initiatives over the past decade: Transitioning to 100% renewable energy in certain operations. Developing electric vehicle fleets for logistics. Investing in carbon capture technologies. Promoting sustainable supply chains and sourcing practices. While these measures have tangible environmental benefits, some critics argue that companies could do more or that efforts are motivated primarily by public relations rather than genuine ecological concern. Public and Media Reaction The expletive-laden nature of the statement drew immediate attention. Responses have ranged from support to criticism: Supporters argue the message is a wake-up call, highlighting that corporations are actively addressing climate challenges despite unfair scrutiny. Critics say that the tone reflects arrogance and defensiveness, suggesting that executives may be out of touch with public concerns. Media outlets noted the unusual directness and language, emphasizing how rare it is for top executives to express frustration so bluntly. The controversy highlights the fine line companies must walk in communicating sustainability efforts while maintaining credibility and public trust. Implications for Corporate Environmental Policy Analysts suggest this incident could have lasting impacts on corporate environmental policy: Stronger Communication Strategies: Companies may invest more in explaining their initiatives clearly to the public. Policy Advocacy: Corporations could increase lobbying efforts to protect sustainability investments from backlash. Collaboration With Stakeholders: Building alliances with NGOs, governments, and communities may help mitigate criticism. Transparency and Reporting: Enhanced sustainability reporting could counter claims of greenwashing. Overall, the backlash may push companies to balance assertiveness with accountability, ensuring their green efforts are both visible and credible. Broader Context: Climate Action and Corporate Responsibility This statement comes amid a period of heightened focus on climate change and corporate responsibility. Governments around the world are implementing stricter emissions targets, and investors are increasingly prioritizing environmental, social, and governance (ESG) metrics. At the same time, some sectors are experiencing pushback from consumers, employees, or regulators who feel that certain sustainability measures are too costly or disruptive. The tension between progressive climate goals and short-term economic or political pressures is likely to persist for years. Lessons From the Backlash Several takeaways emerge from this high-profile corporate statement: Companies must communicate proactively, not just implement policies. Strong language can grab attention, but it may also polarize stakeholders. Engagement with critics, rather than public confrontation, could yield better long-term results. The green backlash reflects a broader societal debate about the pace, cost, and responsibility of environmental action. The incident illustrates how corporate leadership and public opinion intersect in the era of climate change. Conclusion: Navigating the Green Debate The expletive-laden message from top business leaders underscores the frustration felt by corporations navigating environmental challenges in a polarized climate. While the tone may have raised eyebrows, the underlying message is clear: companies are committed to sustainability but are seeking understanding and support from the public. As environmental policies, corporate initiatives, and public expectations continue to evolve, the dialogue between business and society will remain critical. This episode may serve as a reminder that communication strategy is as important as action in achieving meaningful progress on climate change.
By Muhammad Hassana day ago in Earth
USA Weather Forecast, Next 3 Days cold
Day 1 — Friday: Winter Storm Impact Begins Across much of the nation from the southern plains to the Northeast, storm conditions will rapidly intensify: Snow and Ice Spread — Snow and freezing rain will expand eastward, leading to slick roads and hazardous travel. Ice accumulations could be significant in certain corridors, particularly across parts of Texas, the Mississippi Valley, and the Southeast.
By Hamd Ullah2 days ago in Earth
Comments
There are no comments for this story
Be the first to respond and start the conversation.