[AveryMcLawhorn]

I debated very long about if I was going to respond to this thread or others. I will state as a "young blood" in the sport, I have been racing for 3-4 years and 30 years old. I have my own opinions about this situation and as such decided to share with the group my email response to our Div rep I sent.

As a Super Stock racer, I feel my opinion and analysis are most relevant to that category. Therefore, I will leave the discussion of Stock to my fellow racers.

Regarding Super Stock, this is a very tough question and decision for the NHRA officials to determine. I must personally say I see both sides of the coin regarding the rationale to lower the indexes to serve the few who have spent countless dollars and hours working on their combination and would enjoy being able to run flat out. However, I also appreciate the other side of the coin where certain combinations or people are not far enough under the index to warrant any form of restrictions on their passes. I also respect and appreciate that this is a performance-based class, which should carry a large discussion in terms of input. With all that said, I am not in favor of lowering the indexes at this time based on the following points:


Lack of Tech by NHRA: This lack of tech has allowed some, but not all, the ability to change their performance in an unfavorable way compared to others. As such, lowering the indexes will likely only further encourage the lack of honesty and integrity within our sport among racers who do not desire to be the #1 qualifier at Indy, where the only real teardowns occur. As such, people will be more tempted to gain additional performance enhancements to meet the new lower index requirements.

Flaws in the AFHS System: The system only evaluates runs between a certain range and does not fully account for outliers (weather conditions, individuals that are higher than 10% variability of the same combinations, or the lower qualifying personnel that are running said engines outright). In today?s data analytics world and with the conjunction of AI, simpler regression models could be easily established to account for said variables to build a more robust system.

Performance Data Analysis: Looking at the average under-index runs for 2024 in Super Stock, granted I am missing a few events and run logs, but out of my 8,224 runs established in 2024 for NHRA Super Stock, I have removed outliers of cars outside of 2 seconds under the index for reporting issues and any run that is over the index for a total count of 7,120 runs counting towards the data analytics. The average for all the runs was -0.635, which is well below the NHRA golden standard of -0.85. Therefore, a vast majority of the runs are below the established threshold for the AFHS system and NHRA?s long-standing standard. In fact, there were 1,284 total runs that were -0.850 or more under the index, or 18% of all the runs completed in NHRA Super Stock logged. Of these 7,120 runs logged, there were 592 unique individual NHRA racers that competed to complete this list. 212 racers completed at least a single pass that was -0.850 or further under the index, and only 81 racers completed at least a single pass that was -1.00 or more under the index. This correlates to 15% of the racing community having completed at least a -1.00 second or under pass. Based on this data, I would say the bell curve is appropriate for a performance chart in terms of a smaller percentage of personnel being in the ?elite? under the index performance. The challenge I would have for NHRA is to evaluate the AFHS system in terms of revamping to properly address certain engine combinations and the evaluation of individual personnel against the standard margins for said engine combinations. Simple outlier tests and statistical analysis of 3 standard deviations or nelson rules could be utilized to determine if an individual is well outperforming the average for said combination. This would be a great starting point in reimplementing the teardown and tech of NHRA as opposed to who is the #1 qualifier at Indy. Reference the histogram chart attached for the detailed breakdown of runs within x range of under the index.

Impact on Sport and Revenue: The final point is related to the status of our sport and competition. It should never be confused or twisted that NHRA is a business first, and therefore one of the most important points is related to revenue. In this specific case, NHRA would be eliminating some of the racers that are not able to qualify with the adjustment of indexes. Out of the 7,120 runs, there were 167 unique racers that qualified at -0.200 to 0.000 under the index during some form of qualifying and eliminations. I do note that some of these runs could easily be outliers for people?s individual averages but do show a higher number of unique racers have passes below the threshold than that of the 1-second club, which this rule change is really tailored towards. Eliminating racers from a class hurts revenue that is already established with the divisional and national events that are already scheduled. The economy has been tough on a lot of individuals, and with the lower lack of additional fun money funds for the average NHRA sportsman racer, I believe it is important for the survival of our sport to continue to encourage and find alternative ways to grow with the difficulties of today. One area of growth within the sportsman ranks is to continue to allow budget building of racer cars that are obtainable for all individuals. COPO, Drag Paks, and Cobra Jets are not obtainable for the average weekend warrior NHRA sportsman racer, but I do understand the corporate engagement they drive. This continued engagement will help grow or at least maintain the numbers of current events, which have seen a decline over the last few years, as opposed to booting people out the door. Every dollar counts from all racers, regardless of the class or way they got to the event.