[kdobson]

Leading into last nights races at Jacksonville Speedway, knowing that there was a chance we could have the dreaded mid-race downpour - I started thinking about a new way of handling mid-race rainouts that just seems more fair to everyone. Maybe it's done other places. Maybe there's a good reason for doing it the current way. But one thing I know is that the opinionated souls of IOW will give me their 2 cents...

Traditional rule is that we have this line in the sand that occurs when all preliminary races are complete and only features remain. If it rains during heat races/B-Mains, no matter how long people have sat and watched, the fans get a raincheck for the full amount of their ticket price (meaning they watched everything up to that point for free) and the racers go home empty handed with a rain check on their arm (meaning they aren't compensated for expenses of getting there and running heat races etc). Teams and fans that realistically can't make it back due to geography are probably refunded by contacting the track at most places.

When it rains after all of the heat races are complete, but prior to the main event being run it seems like the fans get the short end of the stick because we are keeping their money (no raincheck) and paying out the racers either by splitting the payout up somehow for a feature that hasn't run yet - or coming back to run double features on some night. BTW - Double features are a thing of the past until the tire shortage is resolved. No longer an option.

The opposite is true as well. When it rains after a bunch of entertaining heat races and B-Mains but before the feature the fans got the long end of the stick at the expense of the racers.

What if the policy was more reflective of the value received (by fans) and money spent (by teams) in getting to the point of the cancellation? I'm considering a new rainout policy that takes an equitable impartial look at the situation at the time of the rainout. Say in the scenario where fans have watched 2 great hours of racing of preliminary events but prior to the big event feature. Let's say the ticket price for this special was $20 and pit passes $30. I think it would be much more fair to take half of the purse and pay it out to the racers to compensate them for their time and expense, and then make the rainchecks worth half their paid value. So your rain check is now worth $10 toward a future event and your pit pass worth $15.

You sat there and watched 2 hours of entertainment. The racers spent money and fuel to get here and to provide that entertainment. What if we step across that line in the sand and split the difference between these two. The racers get paid a fair amount - and the fans paid a fair amount for what they saw.

And like any promoter I know... after we determine the fair split of how much to pay the racers and how much of your admission to use up (with 99% of the quiet fans probably agreeing with us) and you individually think you were ripped off in the process - I'll probably let you get your way and make you happy with a call that doesn't involve a butt chewing on social media.

The difference is that doing it the new way involves a judgement call not everyone will agree with - depending on what they were actually there to see. It's no longer a bright line. But to me it seems like both the racers and fans leave holding their appropriate amount of the stick.

Opinions?

[racefan20]

So are you saying and this is hypothetical, lets say if it rains at the end of the heats the fans get 50% back and the drivers get 50% of the posted purse, after B's fans get 25% back(of the ticket price) and drivers get 75%(of the posted purse) etc.? I'm not sure that you wouldnt be creating your own problem without some kind of line(s) in the sand so the fans understand what to expect. If for some reason it rained after the first of the B mains in 3 classes and you deemed that the program was 80% complete there might be some pushback. But in reality drawing multiple lines in the sand seems like a good idea from both a fan and driver point of view. If you want to get real technical about it you could divide the number of laps run by the number of laps scheduled to be run and give the drivers that percentage and give the fans the number of laps rained out divided by the total scheduled laps. Have I got anyone confused yet?

[Charles Nungester]

Unfortunately we are in a rainy season. Of course we had five straight days of sun and 80 here leading up to Saturday (Rainy season)

[ThrowbackRacingTeam]

I agree with your policy. I’m all for it. I always thought the old way wasn’t right.

[dirtnonwingfan]

Originally Posted by racefan20 So are you saying and this is hypothetical, lets say if it rains at the end of the heats the fans get 50% back and the drivers get 50% of the posted purse, after B's fans get 25% back(of the ticket price) and drivers get 75%(of the posted purse) etc.? I'm not sure that you wouldnt be creating your own problem without some kind of line(s) in the sand so the fans understand what to expect. If for some reason it rained after the first of the B mains in 3 classes and you deemed that the program was 80% complete there might be some pushback. But in reality drawing multiple lines in the sand seems like a good idea from both a fan and driver point of view. If you want to get real technical about it you could divide the number of laps run by the number of laps scheduled to be run and give the drivers that percentage and give the fans the number of laps rained out divided by the total scheduled laps. Have I got anyone confused yet?

Yes (to the confused part). Seriously, that sounds like it might be a bit more fair, but I would lean toward something which is simpler and more easily understood by fans and teams. The last thing a promoter wants is to be entangled in multiple arguments from people who think they got the short end of the stick because they don't fully understand the process. I really compliment you on the thought you put in to this!!!

[dirtnonwingfan]

Once again you have demonstrated why you stand out among promoters. I really congratulate you for even trying to make this a fairer deal for everyone. I have a dog in both fights (fan and team) and think your proposed solution works for both. There might be a little tweaking possible, but I favor something that is simple and easy to understand. You can pursue perfection 'till the cows come home and still not satisfy everyone. Thank you for even attempting to make things a little better for us all!!

[mc/rider]

Manys a time after 4 heat races Ive thought to myself Ive all ready got my moneys worth but stayed for the rest of the show anyway. I left a number of rainouts a little disappointed like everyone else, have quite a few unredeemed ticketstubs misplaced around the house and Im still coming back for more. With a few tweeks as mentioned earlier it sounds like a fair deal and Im willing to do my part. Mr Dobson Thank you for your clear thinking and leadership

[Rpracing1]

Best of luck with your new innovative Rain Out policy.

[sw1911]

Try it. I frequently find the heats to be the best part of the evening anyway.

[Jonr]

I guess I am old school, but I am not sure I would change the rain out policy. We all know that tracks run better when they are in hurry up mode because they have incentives to try to get the show in. I am not sure if your new policy will still incentivize the track to go into hurry up mode.

I also think that "most" of the people going to the races understands the rain out policy. I think the new policy will cause a lot of confusion and opinions on what is or is not a rain out.

Finally, I understand your point about double features with the supply chain issues, but traditionally, I have loved double feature nights. In fact, I would actively look for a track running double features as a track that I wanted to visit.