[Kirk Spridgeon]

Originally Posted by cecil98 ...adding a fifth heat dilutes the talent......Kirk Come on, Kirk, that's ridiculous!!!!

Adding another heat throws things off. If you run five heats, do you still invert 8? That puts eight more cars into the invert of the heats, and those 8 are slower than the 32 we already have, which lowers the level of talent racing for transfer positions.

Would you transfer four from those five heats? That puts 20 into the feature, and then how many would you take from a B Main stacked with the fastest qualifiers? If you only transfer three, do you still make the fastest guy start eighth?

All you've done by adding another heat is let some slower guys have a chance to start on the pole and "not get passed by three or four guys" to make the feature, all while screwing up a format that only has very, very minor flaws.

Pushtruck, you had it figured out in the beginning. Guys are not taking it easy. They know how quickly one can go from first to fifth in a heat race. Especially in Sprintweek, there is no time to ride around and "just transfer." If you're not going forward, you're going backward.

[openwheelKT]

I personally think if you are going to qualify, this is the right format.

1. Qualifing has to mean something or don't do it. If they invert the heat, you should get your time back in the end after the B. Quals have to mean something or don't do it.

2. Inverting the heats gives somebody that "missed it" or drew a bad pill a chance to make the feature by starting up front. If you aren't good enough to stay up front, you fall back, miss the transfer, and then start back in the B. You obviously weren't that fast to begin with if you can't finish 4th.

3. Pill draw is a pill draw. You draw for heats or quals, it's still a draw. Sometimes going out early is good, sometimes it's bad. I don't really see how you make ANY kind of draw fair. Just can't happen. You can't make track conditions equal on a dirt track for everybody.

4. If you can't qualify in the top 32, you should have to work a little harder. I realize a bad draw can cause that, but Hines made the A WITHOUT even needing the B at Lawrenceburg. I know he has good equipment, but not every driver out there could do that. He then had to start the A in the back because of quals so that still meant something.

I think USAC should do things differently because that's the top of line. I like that the other series draw and race, but I like that USAC quals and it means something.

Stanbrough or Ballou would have made it to the front if they had started mid-pack at Kokomo. They were that fast and the cream rises. They weren't up front based on just a good qual run.

Originally Posted by robert gatten This is just a place to air your thoughts, and i like your ideas posted earlier. However the fastest qualifiers start in the back and i have no problem with that. My problems comes from a guy making it out of the non qualifier,starting in the back of the heat (thats ok too ) but then passing good USAC cars to run up to 5th only to be put to the tail of the B again too start all over. The USAC cars that run 8th in the heats get to go right up front in the B even though they were out raced in the heat. Just kind of sticks in my crawl a little. Maybe its too much trouble for USAC to figure out all those heat races and line up a B main based on racing .

This is exactly why you have to QUALIFY well....so you don't end up in the rear of a heat and race one spot out of the transfer then go to the tail of the b and have to start over....running with USAC is not made to be easy......these guys are the best of the best and they all know how important those 2 laps are....if you are an underfunded team and a poor qualifier....then things are gonna be extremely difficult for you.....but maybe....just maybe you cut two nice laps of hanging it all out....and you make the invert or higher...thats what the entire format is about and that is why i love the qualifying.

I am as much for the underdog as anyone as i have multiple friends who race here in indiana locally every weekend....they are not racing sprintweek because despite them being quite formidable on some really tough local race tracks....they know better than to try to race against these odds because they don't qualify well...plain and simple...they know how much it is to qualify well.

i agree with spridge....i don't think these fast cars are sandbagging as much as some of you think...the first couple heat races at gas city last week were raced on a really fast track...despite some of these drivers driving for the big teams...they couldn't catch the guys starting in front of them...yes...maybe by feeding a wheel and crashing themselves or others they MIGHT have made it....but why take that risk if your running 6thor 7th with 2 to go...and despite not wanting to run a b you know your gonna get your time back and have a shot at transfer...a reward for QUALIFYING well....i was standing outside of turn 3 where i could see that the cars were creating major groundspeed on a fast track...so putting the fast qualifier or some of the cars around him where they finsih the heat race...after they cut 2 great laps and the guy on the pole...maybe the 24th fastest qualifier takes off and never gets passed because of a fast track...doesn't make much sense.

i like the format now....however rob's idea about the featch invert is something to ponder.

[Racerrob]

i like the format now....however rob's idea about the featch invert is something to ponder.

Not my idea. USAC/CRA out west has been doing it for years. It does provide extra incentive for those top 6 cars to try to make it through the heat.

I never want to see my car in the B even if I am going to start on the pole. There are too many things that can happen during a B to cause you not to transfer...a tire gets cut, you tangle with another car and spin/flip, challenge the cushion one too many times, etc. If we can make it through the heat that is the way to go.

Also if you are running for USAC points the heats pay way better than the B. A heat win is worth 8 points and a B win is worth 4. While that doesn't sound like much, we missed 2nd in the car owners chase by 2 points last year.

I can't speak for all the teams and drivers but I would think that the vast majority have the same thought process and conduct themselves accordingly.

Now let's go racing!!! :Steer

Rob Hoffman

[767]

no sandbagging, get real, I've seen it way to much this year in the heat races. I guess the biggest problem is the car count. The adverage 24-30 car usac show, the format does not really matter. For the large shows, the current format really hurts. Somebody talked about a stacked b-main if there were 2 b-mains, its not stacked if it goes by qualifying time. It is stacked because you are going by names.

I like D.O.'s idea. I went to Tri-State a couple weeks ago to an MSCS race, no qualifying thus a later start for practice (saving the track on both counts a big plus on hot days with us on eastern time for the last couple of years). NO lcq race, yeh! Passing points and everyone gets a chance to race twice. If you haven't got the hint I hate the non-qualifier and qualifying. On hot days a bad draw means head home terribly discoureaging to someone thinking of hauling a long way.Let's practice and RACE!!!

I also like D.O.'s idea. I went to an MSCS race at Tri-State a couple of weeks ago and practice started a little later and there was no qualifying. Both of these measures were huge as far as saving the track especially since we have been on eastern time the last couple of years. No non-qualifiers race as there was a draw and everyone car placed in heats. This gave everyone a chance to race twice. As it stands now a bad draw for qualifying with 50 cars on hand on a hot day, you might as well load up and head home! I didn't hear any complaints with the structure of the racing programe at Tri-State. I'm there for the RACING!!!

[Kirk Spridgeon]

The MSCS format is perfect for their niche in sprint car racing. It is simple and gives every car a chance of starting on the pole of a heat, which is good for smaller teams or slower cars, honestly.

There are no passing points with MSCS, though.

Here's the negative - if you start on the pole and win your heat, you have a very good possibility of starting on the front row. In an MSCS event, you can start on the front row for every race and win without passing a car, all by drawing two good pills.

Also, if you start at the back of a stacked heat, you have an uphill battle all night. If you go from ninth to seventh (let's say you couldn't pass Stanbrough, Clayton, Schuerenberg, Short, Levi, or Bland in your heat race), then you're likely starting in the C MAIN!! The only reason that it usually works out fairly well in MSCS events is that the fields are not that deep, so moving forward in a heat race and/or C/B Mains is possible...

767 - There is some sandbagging at pavement races during the heats. I would say it is very rare at any dirt USAC race. The lowest car count all year on dirt has been 26, which came at Hagerstown. In that race, Jesse Hockett crashed while racing hard in his heat race, and had to take a provisional for the feature. Brady Short got caught up in a lapped car's spin during the B Main and barely made it back to a transfer spot. Josh Spencer missed the show after tangling with another car while battling for the transfer spot on the last lap. Believe me, no one wants to run the semi!!

But even with that, I would still love to see the CRA format employed...

[Kirk Spridgeon]

The only night of the four so far that had such a thing as a "bad draw" was the second night at Lawrenceburg.

Night one, Levi Jones set fast time early, but Chris Windom came out at the end and went tenth-quick.

At Gas City, Scotty Weir set fast time at the end of the line, but Kenny Biro came out fifth and was fifth-quick.

At Kokomo, Brad Sweet came out late to set fast time, but Jerry Coons, Jr. came out third and ended up fifth-quick.

In that qualifying session at Lawrenceburg on Thursday, Dave Darland's quick-time came late in qualifying when the track had worked in a little. An early number was not good, and it seemed to hurt Chad Boespflug, Jesse Hockett, Tracy Hines, and even Jon Stanbrough, among others. But before all those guys came out, Jeff Bland, Jr. qualified himself solidly in the heats. And right after those "good guys" went out, Bret Mellenberndt qualified 14th.

The thing is, no matter when you go out to qualify, you have to hit a good lap. I can't even count how many guys go out and don't even hit the right line. There's a reason, other than really good luck, that some guys seem to always stay out of the non-qualifier's race...

[767]

maybe you reward the top 12 qualifiers by letting them keep there qualifing time. If you qualify for the a main thru your heat race the worse you can start is 12th if you go thru the b-main the best you can start is 17th. top 4 from the heat go to the feature invert either 4 or 6 cars in each heat, no more. Fastest qualifier to make it thru their heat drawls a pill for the invert of the 12 fast guys. if only 10 of the 12 fastest make it thru the heat race, then he drawls out of 1-10. It rewards guys for good qualifing, and rewards guys for raceing there way to the front. if you qualify in the top 12 and do not make the a-main thru your heat race, then you start up front in the b-main. no matter what happens your never going to get rid of ruff driveing, unless the sanctioning body starts calling balls and strikes.