[LEADERS EDGE]

Getting rid of testing is not as easy as it sounds. The pavement tracks want testing as part of their revenue stream. If you ban testing then the track may not want your race.

Tire companies sell tires. They are going to work any advantage they have to sell those tires at maximum profit.

This is where it has gotten so murkey as the sanctiong bodies and the tracks and tire manufactures have gotten too cozy.

USAC should have kept their main focus on what was best for their series and their teams and the tracks should focus on butts in the seats and ad sales and the tire companies should of been left to compete amongst themselves.

Duke: There are already many, many pavement cars sitting in garages. Guys won't run them because of the $1,500-$2,500 tire bill per show. Not including the percieved disadvantage because you didn't spend a total of another $3,000-$5,000 to test for that one race. It's a shame that a great pavement racer like Clauson doesn't do the pavement because it costs too much for the tires and testing. I don't blame them for that "business decision" either.

The same car dirt and pavement doesn't fly unless all of those pavement cars were already racing and counts were still off. Besides; it isn't only the pavement cars that have become specialized. The dirt cars are just as specialized.

As far as the banks go: Huge car counts have never been the norm, but I would like to see 24-30.

What sucks is the wing guys couldn't even start and park because their tire is different than the non wing tire compound wise. They had to at least get some used tires from someone to do that.

Originally Posted by snoopy 1. Time Winchester 11:00 pit gate Fort Wayne 1:00 Plymouth 2:00 These are for night races, dirt you show up around 4:30/5:00. 2. Would Eldora be as popular if you had to empty your trailer? 3. Why not qualify and hot lap together. Like Kokomo. Saves 2 heat cycles on the tires and saves two hours. 4. Support classess. Good for the promoter, but. Not much fan interaction at 1:00 A.M. after 4 support features. Especially if you then get to load your trailer. 5. That new RR tire that has a pop rivet in it

Snoopy --

1) Good point on showing up so early. In these hard times, it's difficult to get so much time off from work. A later time might help.

2) VERY interesting! Hhhmmm...

3) Group qualifying has been used during hot laps. Most people I talk to seem to like it.

4) IMO - The only way to reduce excessive support classes is to promote your own series more or better. But, in the end, it's the track's choice & they need to make money, too, right?

Have a good day everyone,
Jimmy B.

---------- Post added at 11:28 AM ---------- Previous post was at 11:09 AM ----------

Originally Posted by LEADERS EDGE USAC should have kept their main focus on what was best for their series and their teams and the tracks should focus on butts in the seats and ad sales and the tire companies should of been left to compete amongst themselves.

THIS statement is really the crux of it all - isn't it? And, it's NOT just USAC who have let their focus stray.
The question then becomes --

---> Why does the complete burden of "butts in the seats and ad sales" fall to the tracks ESPECIALLY w/so many choices of racing series(es?) out there?

---> Shouldn't a strong focus be on creating and maintaining a fan base and sponsorship using the tracks as "conduits" to do this as partners?

Maybe I'm missing something...
Just some food for thought on a hump-day!
Jimmy B.

[kbesecker]

I think the BIG problem is a lack of scheduled races (USAC). It is hard to justify sinking that much money into a car to that races MAYBE 7 times a year (if it doesn't rain). You can ban testing, enforce a tire rule, limit anything exotic, adjustable, or expensive, but until they actually have more than a handful of races, the car counts will not go up.
The little 500 is a totally different animal. Great purse, pit stops, 33 cars. This race is an "event" not just a race(kind of like the chili bowl for midgets). It is easy to justify racing this one race a year for owners who already have a car. Anderson is one of the few tracks that the "wing" guys can be competitive. This is not a slam on the wing drivers or teams, but most have cars built for winged racing.

[LEADERS EDGE]

Kevin has a great point as well, but then it is almost a case of chicken and the egg. Can't get races because of car counts and can't get cars because of lack of races.

I agree they all involved should be marketing partners to an extent.

[interpreter66]

Originally Posted by kbesecker I think the BIG problem is a lack of scheduled races (USAC). It is hard to justify sinking that much money into a car to that races MAYBE 7 times a year (if it doesn't rain). You can ban testing, enforce a tire rule, limit anything exotic, adjustable, or expensive, but until they actually have more than a handful of races, the car counts will not go up. The little 500 is a totally different animal. Great purse, pit stops, 33 cars. This race is an "event" not just a race(kind of like the chili bowl for midgets). It is easy to justify racing this one race a year for owners who already have a car. Anderson is one of the few tracks that the "wing" guys can be competitive. This is not a slam on the wing drivers or teams, but most have cars built for winged racing.

the car doesn't know it has a wing on ,only the driver's do

Originally Posted by kbesecker I think the BIG problem is a lack of scheduled races (USAC). It is hard to justify sinking that much money into a car to that races MAYBE 7 times a year (if it doesn't rain). You can ban testing, enforce a tire rule, limit anything exotic, adjustable, or expensive, but until they actually have more than a handful of races, the car counts will not go up. The little 500 is a totally different animal. Great purse, pit stops, 33 cars. This race is an "event" not just a race(kind of like the chili bowl for midgets). It is easy to justify racing this one race a year for owners who already have a car. Anderson is one of the few tracks that the "wing" guys can be competitive. This is not a slam on the wing drivers or teams, but most have cars built for winged racing.

Hey Kev, how goes?

You're right about the lack of races. I've heard many times from car owners staying home because there really aren't as many places to run anymore - let alone the expenses involved.

You may be on to something with the event vs. races concept. If you really think about it, "events" are more successful long-term. You mentioned Little 500 & the Chili Bowl as examples. Others could be:

Four Crown
Night Before the 500 (IRP)
Turkey Night
Indiana Sprint Week
AVSS/IMCA Friday show at Toledo (NASCAR weekend at Mich)
Ft Wayne Indoor

There certainly are many others. So, what's next? HHmmm...
It would be fun to be involved with these types of events.

Say Hi to Lauren. Miss you guys.
Later,
Jimmy B.

[wbr]

Kev,
We have a lot invested for 7-10 races per year, but we love the 500. You got that right. 15 races on pavement, 15 races on dirt. or 20 / 20 would make it more viable for all owners. Have a dirt champion, a pavement champion and an overall champion.

Traction control- I don't know of anyone using in the pavement sprints. (We sure could have used it at winchester.)


Speaking about events; a good friend of ours wanted to see a true national sprint car championship.

His idea was to have the Triple Crown of Sprint Cars.
Race#1 would be the Florida 400 in December. (like the one they had at DeSoto for 2 years)
Race#2 would be Southern California in February (Irwindale?) 400 Lapper
Race#3 would be The Little 500.
These races being held in all 3 sprint car strongholds of the country would eventually have a large enough following to have qualifying races leading up to each main event. Being in Florida and SoCal. in the winter would be nice and there is plenty of time between races for the teams to travel and work on their equipment.
I hope to see this happen somehow before my days are done on earth. Lottery tickets maybe?

[Lucky161]

Originally Posted by JBX2 Hey Kev, how goes? You're right about the lack of races. I've heard many times from car owners staying home because there really aren't as many places to run anymore - let alone the expenses involved. You may be on to something with the event vs. races concept. If you really think about it, "events" are more successful long-term. You mentioned Little 500 & the Chili Bowl as examples. Others could be: Four Crown Night Before the 500 (IRP) Turkey Night Indiana Sprint Week AVSS/IMCA Friday show at Toledo (NASCAR weekend at Mich) Ft Wayne Indoor There certainly are many others. So, what's next? HHmmm... It would be fun to be involved with these types of events. Say Hi to Lauren. Miss you guys. Later, Jimmy B.

Maybe it's because our trip to Winchester was probably a once in a lifetime deal, we considered it an event. It was sprints, supers and midgets all in the same weekend and since we rarely get to see pavement anything race, we thought it was awesome. I don't remember the car count, but I think it was in the mid 20s for all 3 classes.

Those tire bill numbers are scary. I don't see how anyone could justify those kind of tire bills on a regular basis. I don't know the answer and I guess I am too far away not just in miles. But it seems to me that you approach the tire companies and ask for a tire that is reasonable in cost and more importantly will last. Surely they can make a tire that will last. They might not like selling a lot of people a few tires as much as a few people a lot of tires, but I'll bet they would like that better than selling no tires to nobody. To quote Racesavers again:
Tired of being run out of racing by the ultra wealthy? Fight Back!

RaceSaver® rules prevent money from buying a significant advantage.

The RaceSaver® concept allows working men and women the opportunity to compete on a level playing field.

Here is the proven RaceSaver® plan:

Stable and Enforceable Rules, Consistent Rules Application, Fair Purse Distribution

Did you know that the average sprint car purse pays the winner 10 to 20 times the amount earned by the 24th place car? Races run under RaceSaver® plan pay the 24th starter at least 1/2 of the winner's purse. A typical RaceSaver® purse would pay the winner between $250 to $500 and the 24th starter $125 to $250. No, that isn't a lot of money but that is exactly the plan. Big money brings big problems. You can be competitive for under $150 per night. Now you can race, pay the mortgage, and send the kids to school

[Texan]

Originally Posted by Lucky161 Maybe it's because our trip to Winchester was probably a once in a lifetime deal, we considered it an event. It was sprints, supers and midgets all in the same weekend and since we rarely get to see pavement anything race, we thought it was awesome. I don't remember the car count, but I think it was in the mid 20s for all 3 classes. Those tire bill numbers are scary. I don't see how anyone could justify those kind of tire bills on a regular basis. I don't know the answer and I guess I am too far away not just in miles. But it seems to me that you approach the tire companies and ask for a tire that is reasonable in cost and more importantly will last. Surely they can make a tire that will last. They might not like selling a lot of people a few tires as much as a few people a lot of tires, but I'll bet they would like that better than selling no tires to nobody. To quote Racesavers again: Tired of being run out of racing by the ultra wealthy? Fight Back! RaceSaver® rules prevent money from buying a significant advantage. The RaceSaver® concept allows working men and women the opportunity to compete on a level playing field. Here is the proven RaceSaver® plan: Stable and Enforceable Rules, Consistent Rules Application, Fair Purse Distribution Did you know that the average sprint car purse pays the winner 10 to 20 times the amount earned by the 24th place car? Races run under RaceSaver® plan pay the 24th starter at least 1/2 of the winner's purse. A typical RaceSaver® purse would pay the winner between $250 to $500 and the 24th starter $125 to $250. No, that isn't a lot of money but that is exactly the plan. Big money brings big problems. You can be competitive for under $150 per night. Now you can race, pay the mortgage, and send the kids to school

This is probably derailing this thread, well not probably it is, but I am just curious if the RaceSaver plan has a limit on the top side of the purse? In other words, the statement above says the 24th starter gets half the winner's purse but is there any limit on the top payout?

[Lucky161]

Just so you'll know. I am new to the site. I am not new to internet racing sites. I have a well earned reputation as someone that likes to cut costs wherever needed. And of course where it's needed is in my opinion. Not everyone agrees with me. In fact it irritates the hell out of some people. What constitutes where it's needed in my opinion is anywhere the car counts are notoriously and chronically low. That includes indycar racing, F1 and most road racing series. Although I would love for indycar racing to have good car counts, I can live without the others for the most part. But those are supposedly top level professional series. But short tracks which are my favorite have low car counts in some areas. I am a lifelong fan and am pretty hard core. I've attended races where there were only 3 supers/sprints and other races that had 4 cars for 2 classes. I am pickier than that now though. I am fortunate in that within reasonable driving distances I can see lots of sprint, modified and stock car races on dirt. And for the most part they all have good car counts, some with great car counts.
Now Indiana is not within reasonable driving distance for me, so even if pavement sprint car racing in Indiana was revived, I probably wouldn't see any of it. But I might catch some of it on TV. And if it revived in Indiana, it might catch on in other places.