[spankytoo]

Originally Posted by Seadog Were does this info come from? Heresay? Do you have a link to these "facts"? You could be correct, but maybe not. If you are right, please accept my apology for doubting what you said.

Heresay at this point. I heard it from a reliable source. One of the USAC pavement regulars.

[thebus79h]

To me this is real simple. Yeah, it's a "regional" series, and it's expensive to run if the rules don't change. It's definitely a good thing, and hopefully it grows, but the rules need to change.

There isn't a need to test for 4 hours before a race, and there isn't a need for more than one right rear a night. Why not run the Spartan Speedway (and hopefully South Bend now that they are running bi-weekly non wing sprints) rules, and integrate them into HOSS, AVSS, MSR, so that they can run. Just make it to where the tire you qualify on is the tire you run the rest of the night on. You can change left rears for stagger obviously. Take away testing, and practice time at the beginning of the night and you take away a LOT of the cost. Throw in this tire rule (and make the darn thing a brick (M55)) and go race.

[Charles Nungester]

Originally Posted by Seadog Where did USAC say $1,200.00 to win? I didn't read this. Do you have a link to it? Is this a fact or a rumor? Heresay? Whatcha say Chuck?

I guess its hearsay but I'll just say its a Pretty good source that has no reason to lie about it and I'll leave it at that.

[BrentTFunk]

The way it looks to me when a promoter runs sprints that race for less they get more cars. Isn't a big selling point of the Must See series that it is cheaper than USAC? They seem to draw more cars. I didn't say I understand it, just the way it looks to me.

[short track scott]

Originally Posted by BrentTFunk The way it looks to me when a promoter runs sprints that race for less they get more cars. Isn't a big selling point of the Must See series that it is cheaper than USAC? They seem to draw more cars. I didn't say I understand it, just the way it looks to me.

Yes,Must See Racing is most likely cheaper than the USAC National series, unless one takes the purse and starts to "minus off" for a less than agreed upon full field number.

One thing about USAC was that every National pavement car was a 10/10ths car. They were very well financed teams fielding cars for well financed drivers who were either chasing National points and/or looking to be noticed down South (in my opinion). There weren't many Brian Gerster type guys racing to support the shows. Guys couldn't even come close to being competitive with the top teams anymore. So they either quit, or put a wing on and raced with guys of similar budgets. Dave Durnwald, Jeff Bloom, Denny England, Mike Blake, Marv Carman, and I'm sure there could be more added to the list. Must See Racing is simply taking this racing and providing more exposure, a better purse and giving it credibility. Not every last car in Must See is a 10/10ths car, but they are on the track and supporting the show, even if it is the B main.

My number argument with Nascab fans, and I still can't get even one to follow is this:

What makes fast cars fast?

It's slow cars.

25 cars that can run three wide but cannot separate from each other can be accomplished by mini stocks. For almost nothing! The slower cars in the Must See series, which are still freaking fast by the way, make the fast guys look even faster and add the lapped car dynamic to an event.

Must See had a 6,8,10 inversion this year. The 10 came up a lot and it pinned the fast qualifier behind nine very fast cars. The fast qualifier made it up once or twice at the most this year, some of which were 50 and 60 lap races.

THE WING IS THE ONLY MAJOR POINT OF DISTINCTION BETWEEN THE SERIES!

The value of the Must See show comes from bringing a good field of cars and delivering good action to tv. That is where the sponsors want to be and be seen.

I hope that I helped answer your question. I know it isn't exactly keeping with the title of the thread but you asked, and I tried to answer.
Posted via Mobile Device

[BrentTFunk]

I can not disagree with any thing you said Scott. I sure hope I did not seem negative against the Must See series. In fact the point I was trying to prove is maybe they are on to something. I have seen this in dirt racing also. Paying more money dosen't always mean higher car counts

[Pavement Dave]

I have one question? Of the teams chasing National points, how many will still run pavement? Because now that the pavement insnt part of the National championship teams can cut a huge expense out of their 2011 budget. Because if we loose 10 cars for example, how will we replace them to make this pavement thing work? The wing guys just dont support USAC shows.

[short track scott]

Absolutely no offense taken.

Must See is running a lean, efficient program that for whatever reason race teams are willing to get behind and support.
Posted via Mobile Device

[1121]

This whole thread (and others before it) reminds me of something that happened last year (2009). I was standing in line to get a pit pass at a Baer Field HOSS race late in the year.
The gentleman in front of me gets a phone call. He talks a little bit and I could tell he was excited. He hangs up and turns to me and says. "A buddy of mine just talked to a "reliable source" with USAC and there's not going to be any pavement races next year!"
Remember, this was in 2009 and there was certainly pavement USAC racing in 2010.
But let's say for argument's sake that the USAC pavement series will be a regional series with a reduced purse. USAC tried this a couple of years ago and had races scheduled at Illiana and Plymouth as well as a couple more. They paid a greatly reduced purse ($200 to start, I can't remember what to win) and at the first race at Illiana, they only had something like six or eight cars. They ended up cancelling the rest of the races. Hopefully, USAC learned from that.
So if USAC reduces the purse much, all they will get is a bunch (a relative term) of kids spending their father's money hoping to get to "the next level." And if you look at the schedule, you'll see that it is full of big fast scary places. No short bull rings. You want experienced drivers at Winchester, Salem, etc. Even slow cars go 120-130 mph in the straights at those places. That's zipping right along in a non-winged car.
Scott is right. It takes slow cars to make the fast cars fast. And one thing some series' seem to forget, they need the slow cars as much as they need the fast cars. If you have a guy that is a feature winner at track "Y" and he goes and runs with series "X". And he is consistently running 10-12 with series "X" rather than running in the top five at track "Y" and sometimes winning, he not going to hang out just so he can see his car on TV for five seconds. And I don't care where you run; winning almost always pays more than 12th.
One of the reasons that USAC car counts suffer is that us poor guys can't show up and come even close to break even. But if I go to a HOSS race, as long as I can make the feature, I come close to breaking even. When the day comes that I can't make that feature, it's time to do something else.

Tom Paterson

[Honest-Sam]

I think that the biggest thing about the 2011 USAC Sprint Pavement is the TV deal. TV races are a different animal. Don't be surprised if you see more cars and new faces, regardless of the purse.
Posted via Mobile Device