Kevin Harvick has never been a man who lets bad takes slide quietly. The former NASCAR Cup Series champion, who now co-hosts the SPEED with Harvick and Buxton podcast, came out swinging on April 28, 2026, after ESPN's Stephen A. Smith declared that NASCAR drivers and golfers simply do not qualify as athletes. Harvick's response wasn't just a hot take in return — he came loaded with physiological data, real-world measurements, and a story about a Polar smartwatch that nearly broke a company's confidence in its own product.
The exchange has ignited a full-blown culture war between NASCAR's passionate fanbase and the sports media establishment, and it raises a genuinely important question: what does it mean to be an athlete, and who gets to decide?
What Stephen A. Smith Actually Said
The controversy began when Smith, responding to a fan who cited NASCAR legend Richard Petty as an example of a great athlete, dismissed the premise entirely. His position was blunt: NASCAR drivers and golfers "don't count" as athletes. The reasoning, delivered with his trademark confidence: "You're driving a car!"
It's a take that resonates with a particular kind of casual sports fan — one who conflates athleticism with the visible physical exertion of running, jumping, or throwing. But it fundamentally misunderstands what happens inside a stock car traveling at 200 miles per hour for four or five hours in extreme heat, under crushing G-forces, with zero margin for error.
Smith later doubled down when critics pushed back, dismissing the backlash with characteristic self-assurance: "Do I look like somebody that needs to be relevant? I am relevant." It was a response that pleased nobody who wanted an actual engagement with the argument.
Harvick's Rebuttal: Data Over Debate
Rather than simply trading insults, Harvick did something more effective — he produced numbers. On his podcast, Harvick called Smith 'clueless' and backed that assessment with a story that is genuinely striking for anyone unfamiliar with the physical demands of racing.
Harvick had Polar — the Finnish sports technology company known for its precision heart rate monitoring — build him a custom smartwatch capable of surviving the heat and vibration inside a race car. He wore it during a 500-mile race. The results were so extreme that Polar's own team thought the watch had malfunctioned.
In that first race, Harvick burned 3,200 calories. Polar called him after the event, convinced the device had produced erroneous readings. A replacement watch was sent. In the next race, it recorded approximately 2,500 calories burned — still a figure that would be considered extraordinary in almost any other athletic context.
For context: Harvick's data places NASCAR drivers in the same physiological territory as marathon runners, a comparison that reframes the entire conversation. NBA players, by contrast, burn roughly 900 to 1,500 calories during a full game — a figure that Harvick's numbers dwarf. The general range for NASCAR drivers across a full race runs from 2,500 to 5,000 calories, depending on race length, temperature, and conditions.
Harvick's message to Smith was equally direct: "Keep your opinion to yourself" if you don't have the foundational knowledge to support it. He accused Smith of "looking for clicks on something he knows absolutely nothing about" — a charge that lands harder given the data Harvick provided.
Why Racing Is Physically Brutal
To understand why Harvick's numbers aren't surprising to anyone who has studied racing physiology, you need to understand what a NASCAR driver actually endures during a race.
Cockpit temperatures routinely exceed 120–140°F (49–60°C). Drivers wear multi-layer fire-resistant suits that trap heat. They cannot stop for water. They cannot stretch. For three to five hours, they sit in a fixed position while managing a 3,300-pound machine producing 750+ horsepower, experiencing lateral G-forces through corners that stress their neck, shoulders, and core continuously.
The cardiovascular demand is constant and high. Studies of racing drivers have recorded sustained heart rates of 160–180 BPM for extended periods — comparable to a distance runner maintaining race pace. The combination of heat stress, sustained isometric muscle engagement (particularly in the neck, arms, and core), dehydration management, and cognitive load creates a physiological environment that would exhaust most trained athletes within the first hour.
NASCAR teams invest heavily in driver fitness programs. Modern Cup Series drivers work with dedicated strength and conditioning coaches, follow strict nutrition protocols, and train specifically for the demands of racing — including heat acclimatization and high-intensity cardiovascular conditioning. The idea that they simply "sit in a car" is a misconception that died decades ago inside the sport; it just took longer to reach the general public.
The NASCAR Community Responds
Harvick was far from alone in pushing back. The reaction across the NASCAR world was swift and unified:
- Joey Logano, the 2018 NASCAR Cup Series champion, publicly criticized Smith's take.
- Denny Hamlin, one of the sport's most outspoken personalities, weighed in against Smith's characterization.
- Ryan Preece, a veteran Cup Series driver, added his voice to the chorus of critics.
- Mike Joy, the long-time Fox Sports NASCAR play-by-play voice and one of the most respected figures in racing media, also pushed back.
- Front Row Motorsports, an organization with multiple Cup Series entries, made an institutional statement opposing Smith's claim.
The breadth of response — spanning active drivers, retired champions, broadcasters, and team organizations — reflects how personally the NASCAR community takes the "not athletes" characterization. It's a slight they've heard before, and one that touches on a deeper frustration: the consistent undervaluing of the sport by mainstream sports media despite NASCAR's massive fanbase and the evident physical demands on its competitors.
The Broader "Who Is an Athlete" Debate
Smith's take isn't new. The "are NASCAR drivers athletes?" debate has existed for as long as stock car racing has competed for mainstream sports legitimacy. It intersects with similar arguments about golfers, esports competitors, equestrians, and motorsport drivers of all kinds.
The debate often hinges on what criteria you apply. If athleticism requires visible running or jumping, NASCAR drivers and golfers fail the test by definition — but so would competitive shooters, archers, and weightlifters in some formulations. A more defensible definition of athleticism focuses on physical fitness requirements, training demands, competitive performance under physical stress, and the role of the body in executing the sport. By those measures, the case for NASCAR drivers is overwhelming.
Formula 1 has done more than almost any other motorsport to publicize driver fitness. The FIA's medical standards for F1 competitors are rigorous. Drivers like Lewis Hamilton and Max Verstappen are widely recognized as elite athletes. NASCAR operates under different physical demands — more sustained heat stress, less aerodynamic downforce to manage — but the underlying athleticism required is comparable.
The irony is that Smith's framing — "You're driving a car!" — could be applied to demolish his own position on many sports he does consider legitimate. Basketball players are "running on a flat floor." Baseball players are "swinging a stick at a ball." The physical complexity of any sport disappears when you reduce it to its most dismissive description.
Analysis: What This Moment Reveals
Harvick's response to Smith is effective precisely because it doesn't rely on outrage alone. The calorie-burn data is the weapon, and it's a good one — concrete, measurable, and independently verifiable. When Polar's own engineers thought their watch had malfunctioned because the readings seemed impossibly high, that's a more powerful argument than any amount of indignation.
But the episode also reveals something about how NASCAR is perceived in the broader American sports media landscape. Smith's dismissal wasn't calculated trolling of NASCAR fans specifically — it was genuine ignorance from someone who covers the sports he prioritizes (basketball, football, boxing) and has limited engagement with motorsport. That ignorance is itself a symptom of how underrepresented NASCAR is in mainstream sports conversation despite its enormous fanbase.
Harvick, now in a media role himself, is well-positioned to fight this battle. His credibility comes from having lived the physical demands of racing through a Hall of Fame career. His willingness to produce actual data rather than emotional appeals puts the argument on the strongest possible footing. And his call for Smith to "keep your opinion to yourself" if uninformed — while blunt — articulates a reasonable standard: if you're going to make definitive claims about a sport's athletes, you should have some basis for those claims.
Smith's response — essentially, "I don't need to defend my relevance" — is a deflection, not a counter-argument. It sidesteps the data entirely. For NASCAR fans already frustrated with how the sport is covered nationally, that response will only deepen the perception that mainstream sports media simply doesn't take their sport seriously.
The episode also fits into a broader pattern of sports culture clashes in 2026, as traditional sports media figures grapple with increasingly vocal, digitally organized fanbases who can fact-check in real time and amplify responses across social platforms. Harvick didn't need ESPN to make his case — he made it on his own podcast, and it spread organically because the argument was substantive.
Frequently Asked Questions
How many calories do NASCAR drivers burn per race?
Based on data Harvick shared from his custom Polar smartwatch, NASCAR drivers can burn between 2,500 and 5,000 calories in a single race, depending on race length, track conditions, and temperature. Harvick's first measurement came in at 3,200 calories for a 500-mile race — a figure so high that Polar's team initially thought the device had malfunctioned.
What did Stephen A. Smith say about NASCAR drivers?
Smith stated that NASCAR drivers and golfers "don't count" as athletes, saying "You're driving a car!" The comment came in response to a fan who cited NASCAR legend Richard Petty as a great athlete. Smith later defended his position against critics, saying: "Do I look like somebody that needs to be relevant? I am relevant."
Who is Kevin Harvick and why does his opinion matter here?
Kevin Harvick is a NASCAR Hall of Famer and the 2014 NASCAR Cup Series champion, with 58 Cup Series victories across a career spanning more than two decades. He now co-hosts the SPEED with Harvick and Buxton podcast and works as a NASCAR analyst. His firsthand experience of the physical demands of racing gives him direct authority on the subject — he didn't just argue theoretically, he produced measured calorie-burn data from his own races.
Are NASCAR drivers considered athletes by sports scientists?
Yes. Research into motorsport physiology consistently classifies professional racing drivers as athletes. Studies have recorded sustained heart rates of 160–180 BPM during races — comparable to endurance running — along with significant caloric expenditure, dehydration rates, and demands on isometric strength (particularly neck, shoulder, and core). Modern NASCAR teams employ dedicated strength and conditioning coaches and follow structured athletic training programs.
Which other NASCAR figures criticized Stephen A. Smith?
The response was broad and came from across the sport. Joey Logano, Denny Hamlin, and Ryan Preece pushed back as active or recent drivers. Veteran broadcaster Mike Joy also criticized Smith's take. Front Row Motorsports, a Cup Series team, made an institutional statement opposing Smith's characterization. Kevin Harvick's rebuttal on April 28, 2026, was the most detailed and data-driven of the responses.
Conclusion
Kevin Harvick didn't just win a podcast argument — he made a substantive case that changes how the debate should be framed going forward. The calorie-burn data from his Polar smartwatch isn't anecdotal; it's measurable, independently verified (by Polar's own skepticism), and consistent with what sports scientists have documented about racing physiology. Comparing NASCAR drivers to marathon runners rather than couch-sitters is not hyperbole — it's what the data shows.
Stephen A. Smith is a skilled provocateur who has built a career on confident takes, and his dismissal of NASCAR drivers probably played well to an audience that shares his reference points. But confidence without knowledge isn't analysis — it's noise. Harvick called it "looking for clicks on something he knows absolutely nothing about," and based on Smith's failure to engage with the physiological evidence, that charge is difficult to refute.
The larger takeaway is that NASCAR's athletic credibility is no longer just a matter of insider opinion. The data exists. The science supports it. And now, thanks to a former champion who thought to strap a Polar smartwatch to his wrist on race day, that case can be made with numbers that speak for themselves — regardless of what the loudest voice in sports media thinks about it.
