The New IHRA ???

[Alex Denysenko]

Just because there are new owners what makes anyone think that anything will change since the same 2 decision makers are still in charge

[Tracy Robbins]

Originally Posted by Alex Denysenko

Just because there are new owners what makes anyone think that anything will change since the same 2 decision makers are still in charge

There you have it...I believe that's what most people that raced w/ IHRA in the Bader days are thinking. Just like you Alex!

[Michael Beard]

change the payout structure. Top heavy payouts are sending over half of racers home without anything. Lets bring back incentivaes to racers that love the competition and fellowship enough to invest lots of $$$ with a small chance of return. Rising prices vs looking at having to win 2 rounds or more to get $$$??? Well just my $.02

What's your suggestion for entry fee and the complete payout structure?




http://etdragracing.com/magazine/jan...of-racing-math

[dug283]

Originally Posted by Michael Beard

What's your suggestion for entry fee and the complete payout structure?




http://etdragracing.com/magazine/jan...of-racing-math

My suggestion is to look at the Bader days. The issue is not that the tracks have to make a profit, or the cost to compete has risen. But the reality that it is very difficult to go one or more rounds at the level of competition we have. A weekend warrior can win one or two rounds and not win anything, only the top 8 or 16. So are more racers more likely to compete in events that have large payouts for the top 4, 8 or 16 finishers, which is usually about 25% of the total car count. As appose to round $$ and more moderate top $$ payout? Could that have been a factor in the low car counts of the 5k S/SS events of the recent?


PS: Bobby, I like the ideal of index qualifying too.

[Michael Beard]

My suggestion is to look at the Bader days. The issue is not that the tracks have to make a profit, or the cost to compete has risen.

Those absolutely are issues, and that's why changes were made in the first place.

But the reality that it is very difficult to go one or more rounds at the level of competition we have.

Yes, it is. It is challenging. It takes a good car, skill, and a little luck. If it were not challenging, we would just go to test n' tune and car shows. You can help the driver aspect of the equation at www.thisisbracketracing.com

A weekend warrior can win one or two rounds and not win anything, only the top 8 or 16.

No. 2nd round winners do in fact get paid already.

So are more racers more likely to compete in events that have large payouts for the top 4, 8 or 16 finishers, which is usually about 25% of the total car count. As appose to round $$ and more moderate top $$ payout?

Please detail the entry fee, complete purse structure, track and promoter expenses, what the necessary level of profit is in order to remain viable, and the car counts required in each class to achieve that.

[dug283]

Originally Posted by Michael Beard

Those absolutely are issues, and that's why changes were made in the first place.

You say half empty I say half full??? Your reply was not in line with my post. Tracks have to make a profit, the cost has risen to race, is a given NOT my point.


Yes, it is. It is challenging. It takes a good car, skill, and a little luck. If it were not challenging, we would just go to test n' tune and car shows. You can help the driver aspect of the equation at www.thisisbracketracing.com

Again, this is not my point?????? There are lots of quality cars and great drivers but there is a minority of racers that is always in the money rounds. And that's fine because they have paid the price to become the great racers that they are. I grew up with some of the best and I'm honored to have them as friends. But, along with many other factors, and No return on investment, no matter the size, is shrinking the number of class racers?

No. 2nd round winners do in fact get paid already.



Please detail the entry fee, complete purse structure, track and promoter expenses, what the necessary level of profit is in order to remain viable, and the car counts required in each class to achieve that.

This is my point, HOW did the Bader's do it????? Why not look and see what is being done different? Even now Norwalk pays for a 1st round win: http://summitmotorsportspark.com/ind.../mr-gasget-pro

Understanding it is bracket racing that they have posted, but it is still a business they have been successful at. Contact them to plug in your details to see if it would be beneficial or enlightening.

At the end of the day I'm not debating cost, profits, cars or drivers. I'm looking at ways to encourage growth to our shrinking class. I still remember the days at Empire Dragway and other local tracks with more stock and super stocker's weekly than we see at some major events now.

Just my .02

[442OLDS]

Originally Posted by dug283

This is my point, HOW did the Bader's do it????? Why not look and see what is being done different? Even now Norwalk pays for a 1st round win: http://summitmotorsportspark.com/ind.../mr-gasget-pro

$5 for a first round win will buy 5 pounds of ice cream at Norwalk!

[novassdude]

Originally Posted by dug283

My suggestion is to look at the Bader days. The issue is not that the tracks have to make a profit, or the cost to compete has risen. But the reality that it is very difficult to go one or more rounds at the level of competition we have. A weekend warrior can win one or two rounds and not win anything, only the top 8 or 16. So are more racers more likely to compete in events that have large payouts for the top 4, 8 or 16 finishers, which is usually about 25% of the total car count. As appose to round $$ and more moderate top $$ payout? Could that have been a factor in the low car counts of the 5k S/SS events of the recent?


PS: Bobby, I like the ideal of index qualifying too.

Please tell me I am reading this wrong. The way I read it tracks do not need to make a profit and you should win something for going one round. Well with that system the track is definitely not going to make any money. I don't like real top heavy payouts but it should require a couple of round wins to get paid in my opinion. And if tracks do not make a profit there will be no place to race.

[HR9121]

Why don't we give out trophies to first round losers also like todays youth athletic events.

[dug283]

Originally Posted by novassdude

Please tell me I am reading this wrong. The way I read it tracks do not need to make a profit and you should win something for going one round. Well with that system the track is definitely not going to make any money. I don't like real top heavy payouts but it should require a couple of round wins to get paid in my opinion. And if tracks do not make a profit there will be no place to race.

I'm not debating cost or profits, without the tracks all is lost. But I do disagree with you about having to win a couple of rounds for any pay.