Dear SRAC Members

[Jeff Lee]

So NHRA has gone full circle over the years. Starting with, you must win class to even race the eliminator to, winning class doesn't necessarily mean anything.
The fact Jim Wahl is not or may never be entered into Indy is irrelevant. The point is this is a grevious error on the part of NHRA against 40+ years of tradition brought about by those with their own agenda.
And the fact SRAC menbers are volunteers has no merit about what has or will be said for or against them. You step into such a role, you should expect no less. As our elected representatives, they owe it to us to report the minutes of the meeting so it can be publicly seen as to what transpired.
As I have said before, personal agenda's have should have no weight in any issue. Reading these post's filled with personal slam's makes it apparent this is not the case.

[Bill Koski]

Asking for an explanation is slamming somebody? I've seen one derogatory statement about a committee member.
How times change, in the mid 90's when I was looking at running a stocker I was advised to run the body I have now rather then what I had in mind by an NHRA official because my choice would not be very competitive and the other class had noone in it then.
At the time you did not even have to run the index to win class though you did not get on the ladder. Since then singles not only have to run the index but are required to run .50 under to win class. DISCRIMINATION???????
Trying to discriminate against a certain segment generally has unintended consequences!

[Alan Roehrich]

If you HAVEN'T seen a derogatory comment directed towards the representatives, you haven't been reading the threads. Woodro Josey and Jeff Teuton were called out BY NAME on this board, and that is ONE example. There have been multiple derogatory comments directed towards the entire committee.

Unless you are a member of the committee, or privy to the rules that apply to the committee, you do not even know if anyone records the minutes, or, more importantly, if NHRA even allows them to be published, if they are recorded.

From what Jim Waldo wrote, the committee voted to no longer allow people who single for a class win to get a pass into the final eliminations. It should be obvious to anyone paying attention at that point that NHRA made the other change, that is not allowing ANY class winners who did not qualify by ET into the final eliminator.

IF you've been listening, and asking the right people, you've heard by now that this latest rule was only PART of what was proposed and voted on. I've been told by multiple sources that there was also a proposal to lower the indexes 2 tenths. As to the class win rule, well, that is quoted in another post, and above in this post.

It's called an ADVISORY committee. Meaning these people advise NHRA, and NOT that NHRA does what the committee tells them.

By the way, so far there are two polls, and I have voted in neither, and both show that by at least some margin, at least a slim majority would prefer that the 128 fastest cars qualify. Of course, these are not scientific polls, and only reflect the opinions of a few who come to these forums and vote.

I'm not a fan of the 0.90 Super classes. However, if you are so deluded as to think that NHRA is going to kick them out, and let more Stock and Super Stock racers in, you are just that, deluded. They require only a cursory safety tech, and a heads up Pro tree. They are 20% the trouble we class racers are. I used to crew multiple cars in the 0.90 Super classes, I never cared much for them then, and do not now, although I have some VERY good friends who race those very classes. But I sure do find it amusing that people who say no one has the right to tell THEM they shouldn't have a place to race are very quick to tell someone else the exact same thing.

[Torque addict]

Originally Posted by Alan Roehrich

If you HAVEN'T seen a derogatory comment directed towards the representatives, you haven't been reading the threads. Woodro Josey and Jeff Teuton were called out BY NAME on this board, and that is ONE example. There have been multiple derogatory comments directed towards the entire committee.

Unless you are a member of the committee, or privy to the rules that apply to the committee, you do not even know if anyone records the minutes, or, more importantly, if NHRA even allows them to be published, if they are recorded.

From what Jim Waldo wrote, the committee voted to no longer allow people who single for a class win to get a pass into the final eliminations. It should be obvious to anyone paying attention at that point that NHRA made the other change, that is not allowing ANY class winners who did not qualify by ET into the final eliminator.

IF you've been listening, and asking the right people, you've heard by now that this latest rule was only PART of what was proposed and voted on. I've been told by multiple sources that there was also a proposal to lower the indexes 2 tenths. As to the class win rule, well, that is quoted in another post, and above in this post.

It's called an ADVISORY committee. Meaning these people advise NHRA, and NOT that NHRA does what the committee tells them.

By the way, so far there are two polls, and I have voted in neither, and both show that by at least some margin, at least a slim majority would prefer that the 128 fastest cars qualify. Of course, these are not scientific polls, and only reflect the opinions of a few who come to these forums and vote.

I'm not a fan of the 0.90 Super classes. However, if you are so deluded as to think that NHRA is going to kick them out, and let more Stock and Super Stock racers in, you are just that, deluded. They require only a cursory safety tech, and a heads up Pro tree. They are 20% the trouble we class racers are. I used to crew multiple cars in the 0.90 Super classes, I never cared much for them then, and do not now, although I have some VERY good friends who race those very classes. But I sure do find it amusing that people who say no one has the right to tell THEM they shouldn't have a place to race are very quick to tell someone else the exact same thing.

WOW!!

For someone who takes exception in your posting to "derogatory remarks" that you percieve, you sure quick to dole them out!
No one is deluded sir!

If you wish to trade insults, I do not and you are in fact VERY derogatory and insulting.
You can prove that you have class with an apology ..or not.

I KNOW NHRA will not elminate the So-Called "Super" Clases from Natiaon Events.

They are a CASH COW and although boring as hell, with a lot of nice guys running them, they will remain for the reasons you state.

I have to give NHRA credit for being " inclusive" in rtecent years and responding to trends.
Examples are: Sport Compacts, Pro Stock Truck (knee jerk reaction to NASCAR Truck Clasees) , Pro Stock Bike...that class still has me wondering why BIKES are at the drags, No cars run at the bike events do they??

I am stubborn in accepting the fact that NHRA has been slow in changing it's logo and name to reflect that it is really now the NHRC...the National Hot Rod CORPORATION . dedicated to PROFIT!
It is all about the Bottom line, balance sheets and profits.
The fan and the racer are an afterthought that get lost in the shuffle, as long as there is SOME source of revenue they keep proving that they really care very little for those who supported them.

You must know PT Barnum's old line. NHRA has it as it's credo....


Now please do not take my opinion as DEROGATORY, I would not want to ellicit more insutls from you beacuse my OPINION Upset you...after all according to you I am deluded.

Cheers;
Derek

[Alan Roehrich]

Derek, I said "IF you are so deluded". No where did I say "Derek, you ARE deluded". See, the word IF is the operative word. I owe you no apology, and you'll get none. I can be insulting, but I choose not to.

As to derogatory comments, Jeff Teuton and Woodro Josey were called out here on this site by name, and it was done BEFORE anyone knew what happened. I have only met Jeff Teuton once, briefly, in passing, in the staging lanes. However, Jeff has been helping to support sportsman racing and class racing for years. I know Woodro Josey pretty well. Woodro has been doing this about as long as just about anyone here, and I'd say Woodro has about as good a grasp on what is good for class racing as anyone even remotely likely to be willing to give their time to represent us. The remarks made about Woodro and Jeff were entirely uncalled for. I did not "perceive" them, they were posted plainly. The ink on the paper the rule was written on was not dry before people began their tirades, and the tirades haven't stopped yet.

[Dick Butler]

Derek, I know Alan and I am sure in his defense at this point he has been pushed to respond as you see his wording. His values and position I feel you would find very close to the thoughts you have offered. Reading the written word is tough . Thanks

[Alan Roehrich]

Ed, (note, I have the courtesy and respect to spell your name correctly) I have no problem whatsoever with anyone requesting information from their representative. I do have a problem with someone insulting a personal friend of mine for no valid reason. There was no reason, and no excuse for it. But the same people who do things like that will wonder why no one wants to represent them, and no one wants to answer their questions or address their concerns.

I posted the name and email address of every person on the committee. I also posted the link to the page that detailed all of it. It's sort of like knowing who your congressman or representative is and how to reach them.

However, I agree, more could be done to make the process better, and more transparent. For example, NHRA could put up a page on the Lucas Oil part of the site that gives the addresses, it is actually there, but there needs to be a link on the main page. NHRA could post the agenda and the minutes. But the committee can only do what NHRA allows them to do, using the tools NHRA gives them.

[Bruce Noland]

I can feel the pain of the Bump-in guys on this issue. I have been unable to obtain information from nhra on several occaisions and it is no fun.

But this issue is finished. Someone comes up with a copy of an email message from a person who admits that he is at least a little fuzzy on the details of the SRAC vote. This information is no smoking gun.

From what I have been told the vote went 6 - 0 to eliminate class winner bump in. One person was not able to attend the conference call. And now the poll shows that the racing public believes the class winner bump in should be eliminated. nhra looks at this stuff.

The small group of bump in advocates on this site can come out and create the appearance of support for bumping faster cars from the sheet. But, in the end, they fail to persuade the majority of the racers and nhra.

[Torque addict]

Originally Posted by Dick Butler

Derek, I know Alan and I am sure in his defense at this point he has been pushed to respond as you see his wording. His values and position I feel you would find very close to the thoughts you have offered. Reading the written word is tough . Thanks

Dick;

Thank you for you insight as to the style of response that Alan has doled out to me, Jack, Jim and others here.
I atke you at your word that he is a quality person and racer and needs to comprehend that his words can be taken as an insult when he makes flip remarks as he did such as " I owe you no apology".
Somehow I was never expecting one and eluded to that in my post, given his style and position that someone dared to "Call Out " one of his friends.We now see that was NOT the intention of the original poster at all.
His reaction to someone spelling his name wrong was special too, glad it was not me... lol!

By the way, it was not me nor my post that had to do with his friends, it was intened for Jeff.
Alan chose to comment.
Oh well, I can still extend him my respect and best wishes.
In the end, we are all passionate about the same thing here.

I think what we really want are assurances that in the forseeable future that Stock and SuperStock are Viable classes that will continue to be supported by NHRA and not pahsed out or gutted as they have done with many different classees in the past. When rules are changed, it is done BEFORE the year begins and not mid stream unless it is a safety related issue. I fail to see the urgency of this change. If they need more room my point was they need to review some other classes that take up time space at Indy in conjunction with these changes.

Come on guys! Let's support the commitee, NHRA could do a LOT MORE to get input from racers and fans, this has been a problem of late.
I do not think anyone could disagree on that (I am sure I will be corrected on that point though...lol), stong communication builds a stong organization!


Cheers;

Derek

[Alan Roehrich]

Derek, I think I pointed out pretty clearly that I never said you were deluded. If you cannot grasp that, I can't help you.

Most everything can be seen as an insult, if you're looking for it. Evidently you are.

Spelling a persons name correctly is a sign of courtesy and respect. You'll notice I make an effort to do so in every case. In your case as well. The point I was making there is that there are a few who will show no one the courtesy and respect if they are not in lock step agreement. Regardless of how much I disagree with Jim, Art, Jack, or even Ed, I at least show them the respect of spelling their name correctly.

Oh, and I already took responsibility for not understanding Jack.

I got your point about other classes, too. It is still very obvious that you think that it is okay to tell them not to show up. And there's a distinct difference between what you are proposing and the new rule. You are talking about reviewing someone else's class, and cutting someone else's quota (review other classes has no other implication). The new rule for Stock and Super Stock actually says that now more than ever, if you're coming to Indy, bring your A game and be fast. It does NOT cut the quota of either class, the quota for Stock and Super Stock remain the same.

I do actually agree with you that the rule change wasn't really a priority, and could have, probably should have, waited until 2009 to go into effect. I do think it is a little too close to Indy for this rule change to have been implemented.