Super class survey

[roseracing]

Originally Posted by Terry Edwards

Hi guys and gals. For those who don't know me, I am the D5 super class rep. I would like to give my input on a few things.
First of all, the email that was sent out to the super class racers stated that the Sportsman Advisory Council felt there is a need to lower the indexes. That is not actually true. The council agreed that a vote should be conducted to include all racers' input on if the indexes should be lowered, and we unanimously said yes to an online poll.

I took an unofficial poll at the Topeka division race in August in which I handed out ballots in the staging lanes. Racers returned their vote on some of the same issues you are voting on now. The overall results just to let you know were:

• Index change?.. 75 voted no (leave it be) and 8 voted yes (lower it)
• Super Street racers able to run 2 classes?.. 58 voted yes (change the rule) and 25 voted no (leave it alone)

As you can see, only about one third of the super class racers in attendence responded. I hope there are more that speak their mind to the online poll. Also, all my fellow D5 racers need to vote again on the online poll. I don't want them to think they have already voted from the unofficial survey I took.

I am not going to give my opinion on here. There are pros and cons to both sides. I will just vote on what I think will be best for the sport on the online poll. Thanks, Terry

We had all 3 of our D5 Super class cars in Topeka and we all 3 voted. Terry does a GREAT job as our D5 Super Class representative. Thank you Terry for taking the time to hand out all those ballots. We appreciate you and your time. I was lucky enough to meet Rock at the Chicago all-star race and after reading all of his posts, he's obviously very good at it too. So, thank you to our Super Class reps for, at least, getting this out to let every racer vote on it.

There are some great ideas being passed around on here and some insane ideas. Just so you know, our S/G car could probably run 8.90 and our S/C car could run the 7.90. But, my S/ST car can only run 10.57 flat out. Here are some things to remember.

1. No matter what you do, you will not get more people in the stands for Super Class racing. (Unless you run a free beer special for those sitting in the stands while the Super Classes run).

2. If NHRA does make an index change, some racers will have to change some things and spend more money (me included). So be it. It happens. If some choose to step back and quit, that stinks. But again, so be it. It happens. As Steve Cohen said, this is a step in the right direction (unlike Stock & S/Stock).

3. What will changing the names of the classes accomplish?

4. Banning electronics from Super Classes? That seems like a step in the wrong direction (even though Jason Oldfield may disagree). If it's available and affordable - then why not allow it? It makes for closer racing. Just my opinion. (And yes Jason, our closest race is 4.5 hours away. No local tracks close to us either. Check it out, my zip code is 68776).

5. Capping the MPH is an easy idea "on paper" (and not a bad idea), but almost unrealistic (per Chris Williams post). That will never happen.

6. Splitting the 9.90 class into 2 classes (one for door cars and one for roadsters) is a different idea. Let me take that idea one step further and simply allow the Super Gas "roadsters" to race in Top Sportsman.

So here's what I voted. Leave everything alone (including the Scotty Rule). And here's why.

Super Comp - No need to speed up that class. If they want to go faster, go race Top Dragster. If they do anything, put all the dragsters in one class and dial your own index (No slower than 8.90) and race on whatever tree you want.

Super Gas - If there is any class that would warrant a change in index, it would be Super Gas. Do I think it needs one? No. But, this is the class that's the most out of hand. What's the correct remedy? IDK, I guess look at #6 above. Allow the "roadsters" to run in Top Sportsman. BUT, the only way to make that work is to significantly raise the Top Sportsman payout. Otherwise, why would the "roadsters" want to change classes?

Super Street - Since I can only run a 10.57 flat out, I say leave it. I'm probably being selfish with this one, but I guess that's my right.

Here's to hoping every Super Class racer gets what they want - a safe and healthy 2011 racing season full of many wins. I hope you all have a Merry Christmas and Happy New Year.

Thanks,
Brad Rose

[BKSG1198]

Leave the indexes the way they are....it doesn't matter if you go 190mph or 120mph the only thing that matters is who can light that little light bulb at the end of the race track....correct? You can run 180-190 mph all day long but if you can't put the car on a .90 then there is only place you will be....in the trailer on the way home. If your worried about putting fans in the stands....come on now who are we kidding! We can do away with timers and stops but there still will be nobody in the stands to watch the .90 classes. 90% of the people come to National Events to watch the John Force Circus and if they are in the stands during .90 racing it's because they don't want to lose their seats.

[kenny v]

Well said Rob, I think they should just give us a real 4.00 and 5.00 tree.

[SG1809]

Originally Posted by BKSG1198

Leave the indexes the way they are....it doesn't matter if you go 190mph or 120mph the only thing that matters is who can light that little light bulb at the end of the race track....correct? You can run 180-190 mph all day long but if you can't put the car on a .90 then there is only place you will be....in the trailer on the way home. If your worried about putting fans in the stands....come on now who are we kidding! We can do away with timers and stops but there still will be nobody in the stands to watch the .90 classes. 90% of the people come to National Events to watch the John Force Circus and if they are in the stands during .90 racing it's because they don't want to lose their seats.

Very well said!
Pat I.

[Jason Oldfield]

Originally Posted by roseracing

4. Banning electronics from Super Classes? That seems like a step in the wrong direction (even though Jason Oldfield may disagree). If it's available and affordable - then why not allow it? It makes for closer racing. Just my opinion. (And yes Jason, our closest race is 4.5 hours away. No local tracks close to us either. Check it out, my zip code is 68776).

5. Capping the MPH is an easy idea "on paper" (and not a bad idea), but almost unrealistic (per Chris Williams post). That will never happen.

6. Splitting the 9.90 class into 2 classes (one for door cars and one for roadsters) is a different idea. Let me take that idea one step further and simply allow the Super Gas "roadsters" to race in Top Sportsman.

Brad Rose

Brad,

4. I believe you. My issue is not that the electronics are available and affordable, because for the most part they are (for about $1,000, you can have all the electronics you need to be competitive). My issue is that by allowing everybody to run the $1,000 in electronics, people are then required to spend another $10,000+ in engine upgrades to keep themselves competitive. And please nobody tell me that there isn't an advantage to being the faster car that is chasing. There is, and if the vast majority of the people didn't feel this way, the speeds would not have crept up in the Super classes like they have. Does being the faster car guarantee you a win? Obviously not, but it certainly makes it easier (just like the faster car has the advantage in the classes with handicapped head starts).

My other issue with the electronics is that it takes more of the driver aspect out of the classes. Again, not to say that better drivers won't win more races than not-so-good drivers, but let's take the electronics out of it and put it more back into the hands of the drivers.

5. Agreed. Again, this is easy to implement (it's a software change, big deal - we all upgrade our computers ourselves, so I'm sure the track operators can certainly accomplish this on their own), though I don't believe this is a realistic change (and if you get rid of the electronics, it is completely unnecessary).

6. I LOVE the idea of letting left-hand steer roadsters compete in T/S. I have NEVER understood why they aren't allowed. This doesn't completely solve the current issue in S/G, but it's a good start (plus it gives racers more options).

Well written and thought out response Brad...

[Chris Williams]

Originally Posted by Jason Oldfield

5. Agreed. Again, this is easy to implement (it's a software change, big deal - we all upgrade our computers ourselves, so I'm sure the track operators can certainly accomplish this on their own)

This is a naive response. I have 25+ years in the software business, and get pulled aside at every track I go to answering software questions. Track operators are among the worst. I've seen computers that are 15 years old, and software that hasn't been upgraded since the Clinton administration. They all work on the "if it ain't broke, don't fix it" mentality.

And, more importantly, such a change would almost certainly come at a cost from the vendor (read: Compulink). They'd only put the change into the latest version, I'm sure. So there would be cost to upgrade, and maybe even a need newer computers. Most track operators I know are exceptionally reluctant to spend money on this kind of thing.

Finally, as I said above, the rules would be just silly and complex.

In short, this would never happen. You need to find another way to solve the perceived problem of people going "too fast" (this is racing, right?).

[Jason Oldfield]

Originally Posted by Chris Williams

This is a naive response. I have 25+ years in the software business, and get pulled aside at every track I go to answering software questions. Track operators are among the worst. I've seen computers that are 15 years old, and software that hasn't been upgraded since the Clinton administration. They all work on the "if it ain't broke, don't fix it" mentality.

OK, fine.

Originally Posted by Chris Williams

And, more importantly, such a change would almost certainly come at a cost from the vendor (read: Compulink). They'd only put the change into the latest version, I'm sure. So there would be cost to upgrade, and maybe even a need newer computers. Most track operators I know are exceptionally reluctant to spend money on this kind of thing.

Please. The addition of this feature would not tax these old computers so much that they would need to be replaced. If they can run the existing software with the existing timing features, this would most certainly not push them over the edge. I'm not saying that they shouldn't be replaced, but the addition of this sole feature would not mandate it.

That said, if there was a cost to implement the change, and NHRA pushed the upgrade cost on to the track owners, then they would either need to upgrade their systems or not host a national or LODRS event. I'm not saying the track owners wouldn't complain about it, but those are the facts of life. I've seen tracks all over the country upgrading to LED bulbs and crosstalk systems, and haven't heard of a single instance of a national or LODRS event being pulled because of a track operator's unwillingness to upgrade.

Originally Posted by Chris Williams

Finally, as I said above, the rules would be just silly and complex.

In short, this would never happen. You need to find another way to solve the perceived problem of people going "too fast" (this is racing, right?).

I don't disagree about the implementation of speed limits. But, we currently get disqualified for going too quick, so using your logic I guess we currently aren't racing (which, quite frankly, could be argued since we aren't "racing" as per the definition of the word). Anyway, my ideal solution is the elimination of electronics, not the implementation of speed limits, as speed limits would just be a band-aid to the underlying problem. So there's no sense us arguing the semantics of the implementation of speed limits, particularly since neither you nor I want to see them put into place.

[63corvette]

[QUOTE=Jason Oldfield;226959]Brad,

6. I LOVE the idea of letting left-hand steer roadsters compete in T/S. I have NEVER understood why they aren't allowed. This doesn't completely solve the current issue in S/G, but it's a good start (plus it gives racers more options).

Jason, the issue with roadsters in TS is most of them have frames which will certify only down to 8.50 seconds. A complete rebuild will be in order to meet the TS guidelines for them and be too costly for most racers.
Just My 2 Cents
Rick Cates