I like usac old format where the fastest 28 after quals made the heats and everybody else went home.

I like any format that dosent involve a dash!!!

I agree with Brent. I would tweek it a bit and go back to inverting 8. Let's face it, as much as I love both forms of sprint car racing, winged heats usually suck. The outlaws have to take care of the guys who travel with them so if those guys are OK with it, I'll accept it too. But the usac format is the best going cause you got to race, that's why it's produced the best racers of all time

Agree if winged groups did king of the hill like the Smackdown, instead of a dash I would go to more of their races for sure.

I agree with the exception of make it fastest 32 advance to four 8 car heat races completely inverted. Top 4 advance to Feature; remaining 16 to Semi starting straight up from qualifying times. Top 8 advance to Feature from Semi (and get their qualifying time back), for a 24 car Feature Event with NO PROVISIONALS.
To spice things up, a pill draw by the event's fastest qualifier determines the Feature invert. A 2,4,6,8,10 pill in the bag.

Used to be top 32 inverted heats then had non qualifer or last chance top 4 tag tail of each heat no provisonals terry pletch won terre haute comming from non qualifer only down fall to this format was track prep sometimes track change a full second to second & half from 1 st to last car but did make for better racing

So its not good to have a car count big enough to be its own show with up to 9 races in it. Vs maybe less than four races total? Three heats and a feature?

I used to hate the hooligan. You had a bad mag or whatever and couldn't' qualify, You got put 20th in a 8 lap race for four positions just to make the heats. The heats haven't even started yet and 16 cars are on the trailer or leaving.

My point was, For bigger shows like sprint week where you can have 40-50+car count, why not have more racing and a fair shot at getting in the show. Not ahead of the top qualifiers or heat transfers, but just a fair shot at getting in the show on ability.

IMO, Chuck, no it is not.
I believe that at a "sanctioned" race event, such as a USAC event, people come (pay) to see the best, not the most.
If I'm the promoter, I want 32 quality cars, no more, no less. The tracks really can't sustain larger fields anymore, but more importantly, neither can the average attention span of a race fan.
More of anything isn't always better.
Keep in mind, not all paying fans are as die-hard, addicted to this sport we admire as much as, say, you and I are.
And, as you well remember, USAC used to be the epitome of traditional sprint car racing. Nowadays, you get essentially the same product every Sunday night at Kokomo (as an example).

You talking before my time too (epitome). USAC of the 80s and 90s was lucky to have 8 full time followers.

I just really liked going to the track and seeing ONE class and a lot of that class. While you can still run a support class without really interfering or extending a show. The nine races of Sprints vs. five or six races of sprints and another five or six of another class was better for me.

I already mentioned in my Atomic post last week, That a large field of sprints was great. 6 other classes, 4 of them large just made for a marathon of racing, half of which I didn't care for.

We all have our own views, I respect yours. I was just thinking at some of the known bigger shows (Like Sprint Week) we could have a little better format. I don't just think it but have been told by others. USAC's the same show, over and over and sometimes not as good as your local show. While I don't think the later is necessarily true, Mainly instead of four or five of the best being at your local. Your getting into B mains of top talent in USAC.
Not looking for advantage, Just looking for a way to let those not necessaraly great qualifiers to have a fair shot at making the show.

Charles, Vern Lefevers? Now that's a name from the past. What year was that "World 100"