USAC 2010 Dual championships
 

According to this article, USAC is considering dual sprint car championships, pavement and dirt for 2010. thoughts?

http://www.theheraldbulletin.com/spo...ml?start:int=0

Re: USAC 2010 Dual championships
 

About mid season this year I was talking to Jesse Hocketts crew chief about how proud I was of his non wing results. At the time Hockett was a close 3rd in USAC points in spite of 2 recent showings on asphalt that left a lot to be desired.

I said "It's a shame USAC doesn't crown a dirt champ, an asphalt champ, and an overall champ anymore."

Hocketts guy said that if they did that that it would probably kill the pavement car count even more. At the time I thought he was probably right but after reading the thread about pavement car counts I am now starting to think it may help them a bit.

You may see more asphalt specialists and NASCAR hopefulls coming to race because they can stay off the dirt and still contend for a championship. Especially if there is a little bit of point fund money to entice some of the cars that are getting "Garage Rot" to come out and play again.

Now if they would just come up with a way to keep people from using 12 tires per show.....

I hope they do it and i hope it works!!!!

Re: USAC 2010 Dual championships
 

Originally Posted by :
Now if they would just come up with a way to keep people from using 12 tires per show

Limit the number of tires per team as suggested by Jeff Bloom in the article..........

Re: USAC 2010 Dual championships
 

And how to they expect to pay two separate point funds? Not that their races actually have decent payouts to begin with...:14:

Re: USAC 2010 Dual championships
 

Originally Posted by CTtoPA:
And how to they expect to pay two separate point funds? Not that their races actually have decent payouts to begin with...:14:

Allow each team to buy 2 tires per event at regular price...then every tire after that costs 2 thousand bucks of which 1800 goes into the point fund....ha ha ha ha ha ha

then dock each team 100 points for every tire they buy at 2 grand...that should work shouldn't it?!?!?!?

Seriously, I realize paying 3 point funds would be tough if 1 point fund is already hard to do. I just want my buddy Hockett to add "USAC CHAMP" to his resume someday.

Re: USAC 2010 Dual championships
 

Originally Posted by Kevracer58:
Limit the number of tires per team as suggested by Jeff Bloom in the article..........

Good article. It's also good that communication lines are open.

Clearly, dual championships won't necessarily increase car counts or people in the stands. It might just dilute the product being offered. Didn't the Focus series start out with separate dirt & pavement divisions?

From the article, a two tire rule seems like a no-brainer. And, as mentioned on another thread, I think that non-qualifiers from heat races shouldn't get their spot back in the B-Main either.

In short, I think it starts with lower car operating costs; increasing sponsorship value for both teams and tracks; and, increasing fan's entertainment value. Most of us already know this. Or do we?

In the business world, a popular operational platform is called lean manufacturing. For the most part, it looks at ALL aspects of the business in a workflow & productivity sense. The overriding theme is:

"If a process doesn't benefit the customer - it's WASTE."

Sooooo, the question is do WE - and, I do mean, WE - know who the customer is?
The answer to that question explains a lot of where motivations lie.

Just my 2-cents...OK, 3-cents :2:
Have a great night, all!

Jimmy Baumgartner

Re: USAC 2010 Dual championships
 

:11: I honestly have no idea if it is the right thing for the Sprint Car division, or not???? :11:
It sure would be a GREAT THING for the Silver Crown division though!!!! :6:

Re: USAC 2010 Dual championships
 

I think they should just co-sanction pavement races with HOSS. Wings aren't as cool, but maybe what is needed to get through this time? I'm NOT saying anything about the airfoils on dirt...just for the pavement races. They ran wings on both dirt and pavement in the late 80s and grew back to be very healthy in the mid 90s, so maybe this would just be another chapter in the book. Oh, but at least the Little 500 should be non-wing...car count was good there this year...Hopefully other clubs will follow this tire rule!

Jason Dull
815 494 6002
jdull99@hotmail.com
jasondull.com (For all the Racing News)

I can ALMOST guarantee if HOSS and USAC raced doubleheader weekends, like Winchester, there would be a worthwhile number of guys switching cars around to run the USAC end. I wouldn't get my hopes up for HOSS/USAC at Newton, or Richmond. Even IRP is tough on engines pulling that wing around. The tire issues expressed earlier in this thread are the most glaring issue holding this from happening. Bodies can be reworked, or changed overnight. Another major holdup is that HOSS cars are much less funded than USAC cars. It was no mystery when Tracy Hines goes into the 13s and Bloom can only do a 14.205. Conditions weren't great for Jeff, but still the disparity behind him was immense compared to USACs group. Don't hope for "full" fields, then be let down when twenty six cars aren't all within a half second of the pole. Even though they are lesser funded, it's true HOSS has pulled a better car count all season.

I've probably forgot something but my breakfast is here. Waffle House yo!
Posted via Mobile Device

Re: USAC 2010 Dual championships
 

Originally Posted by short track scott:
i can almost guarantee if hoss and usac raced doubleheader weekends, like winchester, there would be a worthwhile number of guys switching cars around to run the usac end. I wouldn't get my hopes up for hoss/usac at newton, or richmond. Even irp is tough on engines pulling that wing around. The tire issues expressed earlier in this thread are the most glaring issue holding this from happening. Bodies can be reworked, or changed overnight. Another major holdup is that hoss cars are much less funded than usac cars. It was no mystery when tracy hines goes into the 13s and bloom can only do a 14.205. Conditions weren't great for jeff, but still the disparity behind him was immense compared to usacs group. Don't hope for "full" fields, then be let down when twenty six cars aren't all within a half second of the pole. Even though they are lesser funded, it's true hoss has pulled a better car count all season.

I've probably forgot something but my breakfast is here. Waffle house yo!
posted via mobile device

they don't want to race with out a wing!!!!!!!!!!!!!! And they would not keep up with the top 6 in usac!!!!!!!!!!!:14::15:

Originally Posted by SUPERDUKE:
they don't want to race with out a wing!!!!!!!!!!!!!! And they would not keep up with the top 6 in usac!!!!!!!!!!!:14::15:

Maybe not. But the way things are going, they'll be in the top 10 when they sign in.

Go ahead. Stand on the sideline and throw crap at the players. HOSS averaged 21.4 cars on a 15 race schedule. USAC averaged 15 on 7? If that?

To borrow a term that you may not understand, "Don't hate the player, hate the game".
Posted via Mobile Device

Re: USAC 2010 Dual championships
 

I guess Duke started great.

Without going USAC when do you learn non-wing pavement. Non-wing dirt everywhere in Indiana.

A lot of the HOSS guys would unbolt the wing if the track or series asked them to. Most promoters want the sunshades.

Many low buck guys do not like Eldora, Terre Haute, Hartford or any big engine eater track any more that they like Salem, Winchester, Berlin or Mansfield. It is all about $$$$.

JB2X, you know the problem WWOMS had with tires. Guys would not buy one set for a group and another for another group.

Unification of rules seems to have saved dirt taxis.

Re: USAC 2010 Dual championships
 

I am just an idiot fan, who knows nothing, but what I'd like to see for tires in USAC pavement racing...

Run any brand or combination of brands, any compound, any stagger you want. Tire companies make deals with the racers and/or owners (not the sanctioning body) and offer incentives to them for winning with that tire company rubber. They get 50% of the incentive for winning with the RR, 75% for both rear tires and 100% for all fours. Or maybe owners get a price discount for using their tire and winning. I think this creates competition among companies and could be billed as "Sprint car tire wars" to make it maybe more interesting for fans.

Make the RR NARROWER. Maybe the same width as the LR. I don't know what this does as far as wear, heat cycles, blistering, etc., but I would like to see the driver finesse that throttle even more to keep those tires from spinning up off the turns.

Just my uneducated opinion. Somebody who is in the know can feel free to correct what I said.

Re: USAC 2010 Dual championships
 

It is all about the purse.

They were paying $5000 to win 20 years ago. In this day and age the purse should be at least $10,000 to $15,000 to win if not more.

I am sure I would pay more for a ticket to see 30 Sprinters, vs 18 at Winchester (well maybe not Wincester). Look at Salem and the crowds they used to draw, granted the ticket price has not gone up, but the car count as gone down. Is there a relationship here, I believe so.

Up the purse so a team can at least break even and car counts would go up. Let's drop all the support series that most people do not want to see and put that money towards the main event.

It is all about the money and I believe that if you put on a good show with a good pay out, both fan and cars would show upl

Re: USAC 2010 Dual championships
 

Originally Posted by Dyno Don:
It is all about the purse.

They were paying $5000 to win 20 years ago. In this day and age the purse should be at least $10,000 to $15,000 to win if not more.

I am sure I would pay more for a ticket to see 30 Sprinters, vs 18 at Winchester (well maybe not Wincester). Look at Salem and the crowds they used to draw, granted the ticket price has not gone up, but the car count as gone down. Is there a relationship here, I believe so.

Up the purse so a team can at least break even and car counts would go up. Let's drop all the support series that most people do not want to see and put that money towards the main event.

It is all about the money and I believe that if you put on a good show with a good pay out, both fan and cars would show upl

$5000 to win 20 years ago? For a regular show? I'm thinking not, but your memory may be better than mine on that.

Re: USAC 2010 Dual championships
 

It always amazes me that the ones that dont go to many races would like to pay more money for admission, while the fans like me that try to hit 100 races a year dont want an increase in admission.

Re: USAC 2010 Dual championships
 

when i was 17 i followed the hell tour (i know fenders) but a couple of my friends were runnin it... I was workin for my dad during the morning/ days and he'd let me leave early every day now i dont know if any of you have been to a summer nationals date but admission is almost always higher, and me at 17 was still able 13 races in 4 states in just over 2 weeks... if you want to go to the race your gonna go to a race, i had an apartment and all kinda stuff to pay for but still made it work... like stated before il pay a little more to see more cars with higher quality racing.....

Re: USAC 2010 Dual championships
 

Originally Posted by Dyno Don:
It is all about the purse.

Let's drop all the support series that most people do not want to see and put that money towards the main event.

l

As much as I hate to say it Don, the money the track makes off of the pit passes for the support classes is usually more than the purse for those classes and the rest goes to help pay the main event purse.

Re: USAC 2010 Dual championships
 

Originally Posted by Andrew S. Quinn:
... would like to pay more money...

Personally I would not like to pay more money for anything, anywhere, at any time.:2:

Re: USAC 2010 Dual championships
 

Originally Posted by Seadog:
I am just an idiot fan, who knows nothing, but what I'd like to see for tires in USAC pavement racing...

Run any brand or combination of brands, any compound, any stagger you want. Tire companies make deals with the racers and/or owners (not the sanctioning body) and offer incentives to them for winning with that tire company rubber. They get 50% of the incentive for winning with the RR, 75% for both rear tires and 100% for all fours. Or maybe owners get a price discount for using their tire and winning. I think this creates competition among companies and could be billed as "Sprint car tire wars" to make it maybe more interesting for fans.

Make the RR NARROWER. Maybe the same width as the LR. I don't know what this does as far as wear, heat cycles, blistering, etc., but I would like to see the driver finesse that throttle even more to keep those tires from spinning up off the turns.

Just my uneducated opinion. Somebody who is in the know can feel free to correct what I said.

We're both fans, but I think that is a recipe for disaster. The exact opposite of what is needed, in my opinion. Tire wars are expensive and dangerous. Company H makes a deal with racers 1,2, and 3. They run off with show due to their unlimited tire supply. Company G comes in and makes a better deal with racer 2 and also makes deals with racer 4. Company G gives them better tires than anyone else has and they win the next race. Company H comes back with a better tire (better being faster, not really better) for racer 1 and 3 and they win. During this time racer 13, 14, 15 and 16 realize they don't have a chance and stay home. Company G comes back with a faster tire and their tire leads the most laps but racer 4 wears out his soft G tire and slaps the wall hard. He is uninjured, but the car is badly damaged. Next race company H comes back with an even softer/faster tire. Racer 1 appears headed to an easy win until his right front gives up and he hits the wall. His injuries are not too serious, but he's out for a couple of races. Meanwhile racer 4 makes the race in his back up car but is uncompetitive even with free tires. Racers 9,10 and 11 decide to stay home from the next race. Racers 15 and 16 are switching their cars over to dirt. You get the picture?

Oh, I forgot this part. Company G decides they are spending too much money supporting this series and quits furnishing tires to any competitor, especially free ones. Company H having won the war stops giving away tires and raises prices to pay for the free tires they gave away during the war.

Re: USAC 2010 Dual championships
 

I think Pavement could be hugely popular, However IMHO it's not going to work on weekends against 7 dirt tracks running within 150 miles of INDY.

My Solutions and many if all could be wrong from a owners perspective.
1. Control Cost. Tire limit. Testing. Practice's.
2. Wed or thurs nights. Possibly Sprint and Midget doubleheaders.
3. Pay for a three to five race TV package, Thats whats needed to bring both owners and SPONSORS into this sport. Add new fans and help existing fans to keep track.
4. Totally separate from dirt
5. NO MATTER WHAT, DON'T Schedule against yourself!

Chuck

Re: USAC 2010 Dual championships
 

Originally Posted by snoopy:
i guess duke started great.

Without going usac when do you learn non-wing pavement. Non-wing dirt everywhere in indiana.

A lot of the hoss guys would unbolt the wing if the track or series asked them to. Most promoters want the sunshades.

Many low buck guys do not like eldora, terre haute, hartford or any big engine eater track any more that they like salem, winchester, berlin or mansfield. It is all about $$$$.

Jb2x, you know the problem wwoms had with tires. Guys would not buy one set for a group and another for another group.

Unification of rules seems to have saved dirt taxis.

my first sprint car race was imca at winchester 1964 then the little 500 in may! How much is the hoss purse? What does it pay to win? Many low buck guys should not be racing in usac! I dont know anything about wwoms? I stated usac racing in 1965 a few starts started racing nascar csra cora midgets in 1963! Raced mostly b class cars & series in 63 64 to learn! Nobody holds a gun to there head to race anywhere! I dont think most promoters want wings!!!!!!!!!!! :14::15:

Originally Posted by SUPERDUKE:
my first sprint car race was imca at winchester 1964 then the little 500 in may! How much is the hoss purse? What does it pay to win? Many low buck guys should not be racing in usac! I dont know anything about wwoms? I stated usac racing in 1965 a few starts started racing nascar csra cora midgets in 1963! Raced mostly b class cars & series in 63 64 to learn! Nobody holds a gun to there head to race anywhere! I dont think most promoters want wings!!!!!!!!!!! :14::15:

Gee Snoop. I guess maybe he did start great. In 1964. Before that almost doesn't count as written above. We've never raced where we weren't wanted-and we've never claimed to be USAC. Duke said low buck guys shouldn't be racing USAC. Apparently there aren't a lot of high buck guys racing USAC pavement, but they will for the dirt. When the USAC/NASCAB pipeline was flowing, it was the pavement that put Jeff, Tony and Ryan through to the next level.

HOSS purses to the promoter are under $14,000. I believe the Winchester race was $1,600 to win, $500 to start.

HOSS has NEVER been asked to take off the wings. Instead, the wings have been the selling point. Winged sprinters on pavement are a freak show. When a stock car track has one open wheel race every year, and it's HOSS, it brings out new people. I HAVE STOOD WITH PROMOTERS watching the front gate. They know their regulars and who isn't. The guy in the Wolfgang shirt, the King's Royal kid, the USAC hat, they all chose to see the show. The point is HOSS racing exposes fans to sprint car racing. If USAC wants the HOSS date at New Paris, or Angola, come and get it. These tracks can't afford a USAC purse, and maybe (picture this) they don't want to.

I love discussing this. And I don't want to confuse the fact that HOSS, or AVSS in Michigan, neither group has ambitions of going topless. I have for several years tried to get the HOSS owner to schedule a non wing race. Just to get guys ready for the Little 500. No luck.

I feel the tire costs/lack of rules are the lynch pin to at least getting car counts to a reasonable level. Geoff Kaiser is the 2008 HOSS champ. He wants the MSA two tire rule. Tom Paterson is a low buck guy who probably wouldn't buy two tires a week if he didn't have to. A tire rule isn't going to put him in the winners circle. In fact it could bring more cars to the track and he will have a tougher time making races. Maybe Tom didn't think of that...

One thing is certain. As long as one car is on the track, there will be a winner. This is about filling, or keeping the rest of the field. If USAC can do it without help, well then that's just fine. HOSS has cars. And drivers that would support USAC if they could afford to.
Posted via Mobile Device

Re: USAC 2010 Dual championships
 

Yeah Scott, I thought of the consquences of the two tire rule, but I don't know how much longer I'm going to do this and ultimately, I'm a fan first and a driver second. I would much rather see a 25 guys like Tim Cox, Geoff Kaiser, Jason Blonde, Sam Davis and yes, even guys like me rather then 6 millionaires spending twice as much as their making.
And my appoligies to Duke if I'm not good enough in his mind to run a USAC race. But I bet if I would show up, they would great me with open arms. And by the way, in looking at the top ten in HOSS points, nine of the ten have non-winged expierence in either a sprint or midget. And the tenth was our rookie of the year. So don't say we won't take the wing off.
I love watching a USAC race either on dirt or pavement. And I equally like a winged race on either surface also. Like I said, I'm a fan first. I work a fifty hour week as an engineer and I do race on a budget. And unlike others on this board that blow their accomplishments way out of proportion (YOU KNOW WHO YOU ARE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!), I am a mediorce driver at best. But I love this sport and I'll be going to races long after I've quit a driver. I just don't want to see it die because of a stupid thing like tires.

Tom Paterson

Re: USAC 2010 Dual championships
 

The idea of a tire limit would be a great start. Limit every car to 1 set of tires per night and you would see a few more cars come out of the garage. Another way to get more cars is to find a track willing to run a weekly show. The cost to build a car to run less than 15 nights a year is not worth the effort. I struggle with this in the SilverCrown Div because I fear we are going to lose more pavement dates for 2010. If you own a car you want to run it if a team could find a place to run and limit the tires you would see 20 plus cars show up.

Re: USAC 2010 Dual championships
 

Here's the problem. Ready for it...

BEAST!

That's the problem with pavement racing. A specialized car that costs a bloody fortune because of everything so damned specific on it, with roll bars, and this and that. Get rid of all that stuff and run a straight up sprint car. I'm cool if you want to have a pavment chassis to keep the chassis lower, but all the other stuff is not needed. That's why none of the HOSS guys would come and run a USAC show other than the Little 500 is because they usually don't have a prayer in the world.

If I'm a "lower buck" guy that can really only afford to run dirt, that's great because I can run my car weekly pretty much anywhere, and then when USAC comes to town, then I can run with them if I choose to do so. But I can't afford to run a pavement car at 7 races. It's not feasable or economical to own one. Then plus, you have to change over the motor to be competitive.

The pavement series is a good idea, but it would take quite a while for it to get off the ground, becasue until the rules on sway bars, roll bars, and all the other BS that's on those damned cars, you're never going to get a car count. I personally liked it back 15 or 20 years ago when the cars were doing nothing but sliding around the track, and it was all about balls and throttle control. But the more you lock these cars down, the less we know about a driver, and the more we know about how good the car is.

Just like the midgets, everyone has let it gone way to far, and something drastic has to happen.