new indexes

[Michael Beard]

Great post, Myron.

Buff Daddy writes: >> It helps bring back some performance to two eliminators that were founded as "performance based".

How's that? So a -1.20 under car is a -1.00 under car, and a .60 under car is a .40 under car. It's all relative, like a barometer. The net effect is nothing except telling a scant few to spend more money or go home. True, there's not many, but it's some, and some of those go on to become the future of our sport. Hopefully you have not forgotten where you came from.

I got started in Stock with what I could afford, and was fairly competitive with the Turismo. Sometimes it was an index runner. I spent money on it, and eventually ran -.45 under. So... now it would be a -.25 under car. It's exactly as much "performance" as it was before. I say again, what has been accomplished? I've got a $20,000 Stocker like everybody else now. Yippee. It's not because of indexes, it's because I wanted to have something that I liked, and felt competitive in. They took .20 or .25 off the CM indexes a few years ago. It didn't make the categories any more "performance". All it did was make one guy change to another combination.

If I take my girlfriend's Cobalt out to a points race, and run under the index, will they lower the indexes another .20 because someone didn't spend enough money to satisfy the country club members? (Then again, it's an $18,000 car, too, right?) LOL

The only way to truly bring "performance" into the equation is to lower the indexes to where half the field or more can't run the indexes, make them so nobody can run them so you end up with Comp-style racing, or do something to raise the likelihood of heads-up runs. But no, people clam right up. They only want to set the indexes and AHFS triggers just outside of what *they* run.

Just my opinion,