The Future of Sportsman Racing?

[BobOrme]

Originally Posted by drooze

I have no doubt they will try but if the Geniuses who limited TF to 4 "test" runs keep that up, they will cross a line that is called "Unfair Competition" it is quite obvious to anyone that rule is intended to limit TF cars and drivers to the NHRA events and venues. THAT can cross a line of attempt to structure a monopoly, and unchecked they will.

All that needs to happen is for them to keep "squezing" and imposing rules like that and a line will be crossed they will wish (IF someone has enough stones to contest in a court of law)

The AHRA if they want TF cars, just got Nuked by that rule, IF they want established "Big Names"

Unlike the 70's and 80's where they would cross compete and match race.

The NHRA learned how to avoid this this time. (I believe)

There may be another reason the NHRA did this, but Im not aware, if it looks like a rat, smells like a rat, well......

Whats next a rule saying if you want to run Sportsman at a National event you cannot have run at any non-sanctioned tracks in the last year ? Yeah right, Glendora would have to hire armed guards.

Im not saying a Big National org, I would be VERY curious at IHRA and NHRA turnouts both cars and spectators over the last 2 years, Im sure both are down because of the economy but which is down further in terms of establised market share percentage ?

The reported reason for limiting the fuel teams to 4 "test" days was to lessen the advantage the high dollar teams have over the lessor funded teams who couldn't afford the extra test days. It does have an affect on TF teams that run both sanctioning bodies, but it doesn't prevent anyone from racing in both series. It does penalize the ability to earn points toward a season championship or top 10 finish and the subsequent prize monies involved. I don't happen to think that is fair, but it also doesn't affect any of the top teams - those most likely to finish in the top 10 anyway. Very few (if any) of those teams were racing in both series before the testing rule went into effect. That said, the rule does hinder the ability of the top teams to earn extra revenue by appearing at special shows like match races. Not that there has been very much match racing over the last ten or more years, but I think the ability to do that kind of thing should still be available without penalty.

The AHRA got "nuked" from conducting events at NHRA sanctioned tracks because the AHRA decided to go into the sanctioning body business instead of just conducting events like the ADRL does. I can't see the NHRA or IHRA allowing events on their competitors' sanctioned tracks, but they both allow other promoters like the ADRL and Pinks to conduct their events because they aren't in direct competition for track sanctioning rights and privileges. If they didn't allow those types of events, then I believe they'd be guilty of restraint of trade, and that would be illegal.

[Bunkster]

Originally Posted by drooze

...
The racer commitment is an "honest" commitment, one of love, and passion not of $ , a corporate bottom line...

What's the problem with a corporate bottom line? What's dishonest about a corporate bottom line?

[Chris "drooze" Wertman]

Originally Posted by Bunkster

What's the problem with a corporate bottom line? What's dishonest about a corporate bottom line?

2 different reasons to do something in this case

1)Because you love the sport
2)To make a buck

Its not that its "dishonest" , rather that #1 is for a pure reason.

Who do you think would think of the sport first the bottom line 2nd ?