Do you think the divisional doubles are a good idea?
 

We attended the double this past weekend at Norwalk and listened to a number of racers express their option as to whether doubles are a good idea. One of the things I heard was that the doubles cost working racers three vacation days to get two grading points. If divisionals were Friday, Saturday and Sunday as they were in the past you could go to five divisionals and use five vacation days. I would guess that about 50% of the Stock and SS racers are retired so this issue would affect them less. What is your view of this?

Re: Do you think the divisional doubles are a good idea?
 

Doubles are awesome!
The only thing better is when the weekend before or after is a national.
Doubles cut travel time, stacking/set up time, and fuel cost in half.
At Vegas you get all that with adult entertainment and an international airport 30 min away.

Re: Do you think the divisional doubles are a good idea?
 

I attended a double in Vegas a few years ago and enjoyed it very much. Doubles work great for divisions that don't have high car counts. I have also attended the St. Louis double a few times and most recently the Norwalk double. Not good. Too many cars. We always get our allocation of qualifying runs cut short, like only one versus three at a regular 3 day points meet. Several times we had to race first round in the dark at 10 PM because they are afraid to use the Sunday rain day. However the Norwalk race had so many rain delays that they had no choice but to use Sunday. Please....NO DOUBLES for Division 3.

Re: Do you think the divisional doubles are a good idea?
 

No. They are a FANTASTIC idea.

Re: Do you think the divisional doubles are a good idea?
 

We love Doubles, they save us a lot of travel
expenses and time!

Re: Do you think the divisional doubles are a good idea?
 

I love them!
If we lose anymore tracks in D4..we might have a triple.

Re: Do you think the divisional doubles are a good idea?
 

Not a Fan of the doubles. Bigger car count divisions should not be having doubles. Especially Wednesday to Saturday.

Also it makes zero sense to run Alcohol Car at doubles. Norwalk usually draws a crowd at Divisonal races. There couldn't have been 100 paid non crew/family spectators for the whole week and weekend at Norwalk. After extensive rain delays they still gave Alcohol cars three qualifiers on Friday and completed their eliminations on Saturday. While SST, STK, SC,SS,& SG only got one qualifier for second race.

Many people bring up an aging participant base, however if you cater to retirees you can't expect younger racers to join the divisional races.

Re: Do you think the divisional doubles are a good idea?
 

We are blessed with out west weather. Very few weather delays. We have class run offs in Vegas and Bakersfield. Life is good!

Paul

Re: Do you think the divisional doubles are a good idea?
 

I like them, but I can certainly sympathize with arguments against them. Vacation days being one, but especially one qualifier for the second event for classes that have non-qualifiers going home without racing.

Re: Do you think the divisional doubles are a good idea?
 

Other than Brainerd my closest divisional is 550 miles one way, doubles are the best option for me cost wise.

Re: Do you think the divisional doubles are a good idea?
 

Wonderful idea.
When considering my travel distances from central Wyoming, closest divisional is Acton Montana. Any others at least 450 to 900 miles away.
Weather and days off are always a problem regardless of location or event.
But the two grade points in two races without additional travel expense is a plus.
Steve

Re: Do you think the divisional doubles are a good idea?
 

We have so few tracks out here in the west, doubles are pretty much mandatory. Our travel costs are already high in D7, the doubles give us more bang for the buck.

Re: Do you think the divisional doubles are a good idea?
 

I'm with Julie. I live in Canada, and with the dollar exchange, fuel, lodgings
once in a while, it costs me 3500.00 to 4000.00 to go to a race. Example:
Winnipeg to St. Louis-1050 miles x 2 = 2100 miles. Winnipeg to Earlville Iowa, 725 x 2 =1450 x 2 =2900 miles. Earlville is twice a year, no double.
Brainerd is a cake walk 350 miles x 2 = 700 miles. Now that only gets me
6 grade points, you need 8 to get into the Brainerd National Event, and I consider that my home track. And if your doing good in points, you have
to find 2 more LODRS races. Give us four doubles every year, and a lot of people would be very happy.

J.R.

Re: Do you think the divisional doubles are a good idea?
 

With the ever dwindling number of available race tracks, doubles have become essential to the viability of division schedules. Until we see an influx of viable facilities, they must continue regardless of whether they are liked or not.

If the car counts are small to moderate and the weather cooperates, they are great. If the car counts are large and/or the weather is a factor, they pretty much suck.

At this point they are necessary.

Re: Do you think the divisional doubles are a good idea?
 

This is a very valid question, but i think there area a few factors that need to be considered:

1. What division?

I know there are several with lower car counts and a dwindling amount of tracks to even race at. They completely make sense out in Div 6/7, but here in Div. 3, we are blessed with plenty of racers, and good tracks, despite losing NTR (& the Sportsnats) this year.

2. Time of year.

Summer is hot, fall is nice. We can't control the weather, but the season changes are not a secret.

3. Other NHRA races.

I think the double at Norwalk followed by the national event a few days later is insane. It was brutal on the racers, the track staff and the Div. 3 crew. Not everybody can just take off 2 weeks from their job to attend or work at these races. Ahh to be retired someday...

4. Fuel/Travel Costs:

A double obviously saves money.

My opinion is that Division 3 can stick with the fall double at St. Louis and that's all. It is a great race with a 128 car field in Stock every year.

*Also, much to my surprise and many others, there was no VP fuel truck for the Norwalk divisional!! I went there with 0 gallons of fuel, and was pretty disappointed to hear that the truck would not be there. Really?? Thanks to the Running's for having plenty.

Re: Do you think the divisional doubles are a good idea?
 

I understand both sides on this, truly. But in my case, I am not a fan. In particular, the Wednesday to Saturday version. Showing up on a Tuesday afternoon/evening has become the norm for National Events, and we have learned to swallow that (If we can even get in, thanks to preposterously low quotas..)

Having to do so for a divisional race, (granted, a double) is hard to swallow. So lets say you simply cant make your work schedule (yes, many of us still do) jive with a double, now you lost 2 races/2 grade points, as opposed to 1, had they been scheduled over different weekends.

And if you have an issue with your junk, which otherwise could have been repaired in a week or so at home, you are now losing 2 races, and at least 1 grade point, when you could have only got hurt on 1.

Also, this obsession with compressing and completing races on Saturday is really getting old. I understand weather causes issues, and so far this year, yes Maple Grove div and Norwalk div have been a trainwreck in that regard, and that's not NHRA nor the track owner's fault. But I'd much rather see Monday as a rain date. Holding Sunday as the rain date is the reason for starting the race so early and folks not getting many qual runs. At least if Monday was the rain date, then chances are well over half if not many more of us would already be out from earlier round losses, so way less people have to take a Monday off, than all of us needing to take a Tuesday and Wednesday off.

For those who have to travel very far to race, like out west, I do entirely understand that doubles are certainly great for yinz.

For Div 1 and 3, I'm most certainly not in love, and that's and understatement.

Kp

Re: Do you think the divisional doubles are a good idea?
 

I like doubles, but I want more racing in general. To me, the past few years in D2 have been excellent. We have had few double divisional, but most divisionals were paired with a Sunday National open. You still get two races but only one counts for Div points.

Right now, there are no doubles in D2 with a national open, only divisionals, meaning we only get to race 4 weekends a year not including nationals if you want to go to them. We get Orlando, Bby Gators, Double at SGMP, and a double at Rockingham (the sportsnats being moved to SGMP and being a double did add another weekend which is nice, but not typical). Anyway, that's only 4 weekends a year. To me, class racing is not a chore, it's a privilege and something I enjoy doing. I would certainly appreciate more than 4 events all year.

If I had it my way, All the divisionals would be separate on their own weekend paired with a national open, preferably all at different tracks so I can go new/different places. That'd give me two more weekends to hang out with my buddies, 12 grade points, and takes no more than one vacation day per weekend.

Re: Do you think the divisional doubles are a good idea?
 

I feel this is a very real situation that should be discussed. I totally see both sides of it. I do not believe it is a one size fits all dilemma and prior points have been made regarding each division specifically. Division 5 now only has 2 tracks that can host a Divisional. Thankfully for us they are both close.

For us, taking multiple weeks off for doubles and nationals just won't work. It was "OK" to have one double and couple 4 day nationals but now we pretty much have to leave Monday night for these Tuesday-Saturday doubles. We have three doubles that are close to us and two 4 day nationals. I don't quite understand why Chicago was a 4 day national but not the point here. I also agree with the Thursday-Sunday and save Monday as a rain day. If you start on Wednesday, it affects everyone. Usually if it has to go into Monday at least half the people are gone and unaffected.

In my business, if I'm not at work I don't make money. If I want to afford to go to these races, I have to work. Especially now since you can't even make your money back at a race unless you literally win the race. Missing 4-5 weeks of work and then if you end up doing good and chasing points you are missing even more traveling at the end of the year. For me, I will gladly travel a few more weekends and not have doubles that I have to miss a week of work for.

The schedule over the past couple years definitely caters to the retired and people who's business revolves around racing. It absolutely amazes me how many people show up to some of the doubles. But I really don't know how 20-40 year olds are making these schedules happen while trying to work and raise families. These past few years attempting to go to as many races we can has taken a toll on our family. Last year ended great and had an awesome time out in Vegas but physically, mentally and financially we were wore out!!

I really don't see doubles as a way to sustain and grow for the upcoming generation. For sure not Wednesday-Saturday. But like I said, it amazes me every time we go to a double how well attended they are so I think I'm in the minority here.

Re: Do you think the divisional doubles are a good idea?
 

Double divisonals are great have more!

Re: Do you think the divisional doubles are a good idea?
 

I agree with Jeremy and Brett Speer, they eat up to much vacation time. If I was retired I would love them.

Re: Do you think the divisional doubles are a good idea?
 

I like doubles. In D7 were are putting in some major miles to get to tracks. For me to run a full LODRS schedule to chase world points, I'd need to take 45 days off work...

Re: Do you think the divisional doubles are a good idea?
 

If there is a double points meet available. a racer can still choose to just go to the second race. Like what was stated earlier, there are only two tracks in Div 5 that are hosting races. It's better to have the option to have the doubles available than none at all.

Re: Do you think the divisional doubles are a good idea?
 

I all for the doubles especially here in Div 5. But I think the Thurs-Fri and Sat Sun makes sense and use Mon if needed to finish what cars are left. That way most people would only have to take 3 days off and not 4. Also the track owners are hoping the car count is higher with the doubles$

Re: Do you think the divisional doubles are a good idea?
 

Doubles are hard on our family to be gone that long away from the business, but we manage with technology to minimize our absence. As with anything, finding something that will be a perfect fit for everyone just does not exist. The money it saves all of us racers in travel expenses (should you choose to attend both races) is substantial. We are all for them. That said, you won't catch us at a D3 double. When you combine high car counts and bad weather conditions (that seem to plague those races more often than not), makes for a miserable time. Enjoying our time at the races still means something.

-Emmons Bros.

Re: Do you think the divisional doubles are a good idea?
 

I think no matter what you're going to not make everyone happy; we have to face it the tracks that want to host a divisional event are becoming few and far between and they have to make money also, so big car counts like the 600+ at Norwalk last weekend help and would have been more if VMP wasn't going on. You also have to look at the fact of we basically need 7 / 8 grade points to enter a national event, and I can see the quotas probably going down even more in the near future, it's all about cost factors, I can see each NE going to 3 days (except Indy) because less days to pay employees and these tracks somewhat taking a stand to say we aren't making money on these events. When I sat down and did my 2025 schedule I said no Leb Valley or Epping but double Norwalk, Numidia, VMP and that gets me 6 GP and add Cecil and MG to the mix to get me 8 at only 5 weekends of traveling compared to 8 weekends of traveling. Yes, the Wed / Thursday & Fri/Sat kind of stink for the working man but if they get weather like we had in Norwalk we have Sunday to fall back on to complete the event. I know in D1 we are looking at Thursday to Sunday and at the rate we're going in the NE with weather, no doubt I see one of those events going to Monday unfortunately but I love the doubles personally.

Re: Do you think the divisional doubles are a good idea?
 

Due to insane quota numbers we are being held hostage to attend divisionals, it makes no difference if your division has singles doubles or triples you must attend. Just another way to push the low buck entry level racer into local tire classes. Yea the rich guys can take as many days away from home as they wish

I don?t are I?m just about done with the circus 😎

Re: Do you think the divisional doubles are a good idea?
 

There are pros and cons and variables. All good discussion material for Tuesday. See you there.

Re: Do you think the divisional doubles are a good idea?
 

Grade point concept was to attend division races for single point to attend national events. To get enough grade points to attend a national event, you'll probably need 8 for big nationals to 5 for smaller nationals. In some divisions you're going to be traveling long distances both to and from to get points. $$$
Time off to go to an event has to be calculated in. Having more than 1 event definitely helps. But time is still time off.
Divisional entry $160 or so. Payout $1,700 +- (local track $65 to enter, payout $2,000)
Contingencies, that's for a whole new thread.
Grade point concept would be great if you had 96+ car count at nationals, but instead they lowered the counts to ridiculous low figures. It's a mad house playing the waiting by the phone game for entry into a national. Makes no sense. It is almost like they don't want us there.
I'm for double divisional because it's two races. The grade point thing is a joke.

Re: Do you think the divisional doubles are a good idea?
 

Dawson, I remember the old days with IHRA when if you wanted to run for points, no divisionals and you had to run 16 races to max out all the points. I ran from Cayuga ON to Jackson SC. I think your dad participated in that sillyness!! The Furrs,Doug and Tina Wood and list goes on!!

Re: Do you think the divisional doubles are a good idea?
 

Doubles... yess please! Especially as mentioned when the Natty is the next weekend. We were just at VMP and will return for the Divisional races in the fall. Would love to hit them both back to back.

SGMP with Bristol the next weekend worked out pretty well and we always love 10 days in Gainesville every March. Especially with the DRAW golf tourney in between.

Re: Do you think the divisional doubles are a good idea?
 

The idea of a double years ago looked good on paper especially when getting your out of Div races after going through several Topeka,Dallas , Columbus , St Louis, Atlanta and Norwalk one thing stands out at all of them it?s nearly impossible to run a 3 day race in two days in Divisions that draw large car counts without sacrificing quantity for quality . Here in d3 we need all three days of a normal points race to finish and that?s if all goes well. In the mid west from April to September it?s hard to go anywhere for 4 days and not get rain during one of them. I see both sides of starting Wednesday vs Sunday it was always hard to call the dealership and tell them your not going to be there Monday when you already took off Thur Fri on the other side not everyone is their own boss and may only have 2 weeks vacation a year and being of 3 days for 2 races doesn?t work. The doubles face a lot of challenges the biggest is time management. I was at Bristol the list of classes they had there was insane. TF FC PS PSM Mountain Motor PS Pro Mod FSS Top Sportsman and Top Dragster one session of those classes burn at least 4.5 hours . We have the same problem at the Div level both alcohol classes comp TD. TG that?s a 3 hour session in d3 somehow nhra has to figure out how to speed these classes up and shorten their session time up geez now profession fuel drivers can?t get of the track with a 4 wheels pushing them off it?s terrible for the fans and worse for the sportsman racers. Like them or not they work nor NHRA so they are here to stay. My two cents is none of them should have alcohol there.

Re: Do you think the divisional doubles are a good idea?
 

I do think they serve a purpose and a good one. That being said, car count vs schedule vs weather delay risks are all factors.

Planning and execution of the races given all of this should be adjusted as needed and not the same for every race. The historical data is there.

Some adjustments would make it a better experience for the racers and the many weekend warrior NHRA employees that often have the same problem getting back to their days jobs as racers.

I like the points meet and a national open combination. The opens can be done in a day most of the time and adds another quick race. Usually one qualifier and go race so an extra grade point is there for one tow.

I realize that D5 for example is in a bad spot so they need to do doubles just to have a points series at all.

Re: Do you think the divisional doubles are a good idea?
 

……WHOA , Hold on now , you are just a few weeks into your Superstock build ….

Re: Do you think the divisional doubles are a good idea?
 

Bingo...best of both worlds. Just show up for one race. I always like two races for the cost of one road trip. And you get an extra weekend home is how I looked at it.

If it helps make it worthwhile for the tracks, that's great. Low car count on a single weekend and they be thinking about doing a small tire/no prep/radial event on that weekend next year.

Re: Do you think the divisional doubles are a good idea?
 

At least in D3 racers only get 1 hit in qualifying in the second race. Sure makes it tough to compete with racers that have had multiple hits at the track for data. ( Min of 4 passes. Maximum of 10 passes)

Re: Do you think the divisional doubles are a good idea?
 

Well I need to make as many hits as possible. Besides win or lose I love going down the track in my car.
So I am not a fan of only having one hit for the second race.

Re: Do you think the divisional doubles are a good idea?
 

I just did the Norwalk double and there are clearly pros and cons to double divisionals with large car counts.

That being said,there is no way I would go to Norwalk twice or maybe even for just one race.It is truly incredible how much the tolls alone cost nowadays.I agree with an earlier post that the Alcohol cars made three qualifying runs (one run for each fan) and wasted a lot of time.

From a business standpoint,if there were two Divisionals at Norwalk on different dates,I don't think the track would be profitable. Lots of cars were there simply because it was a double.

Re: Do you think the divisional doubles are a good idea?
 

It is quite obvious that when you retire from the airport you should consider doing stand up comedy.

Re: Do you think the divisional doubles are a good idea?
 

i do not like the doubles. Last too long, and have half the prestigious accomplishment.

Re: Do you think the divisional doubles are a good idea?
 

I absolutely love doubles. I would prefer the schedule be nothing but doubles. Saves time and money