Re: Do you think the divisional doubles are a good idea?
 

Wonderful idea.
When considering my travel distances from central Wyoming, closest divisional is Acton Montana. Any others at least 450 to 900 miles away.
Weather and days off are always a problem regardless of location or event.
But the two grade points in two races without additional travel expense is a plus.
Steve

Re: Do you think the divisional doubles are a good idea?
 

We have so few tracks out here in the west, doubles are pretty much mandatory. Our travel costs are already high in D7, the doubles give us more bang for the buck.

Re: Do you think the divisional doubles are a good idea?
 

I'm with Julie. I live in Canada, and with the dollar exchange, fuel, lodgings
once in a while, it costs me 3500.00 to 4000.00 to go to a race. Example:
Winnipeg to St. Louis-1050 miles x 2 = 2100 miles. Winnipeg to Earlville Iowa, 725 x 2 =1450 x 2 =2900 miles. Earlville is twice a year, no double.
Brainerd is a cake walk 350 miles x 2 = 700 miles. Now that only gets me
6 grade points, you need 8 to get into the Brainerd National Event, and I consider that my home track. And if your doing good in points, you have
to find 2 more LODRS races. Give us four doubles every year, and a lot of people would be very happy.

J.R.

Re: Do you think the divisional doubles are a good idea?
 

With the ever dwindling number of available race tracks, doubles have become essential to the viability of division schedules. Until we see an influx of viable facilities, they must continue regardless of whether they are liked or not.

If the car counts are small to moderate and the weather cooperates, they are great. If the car counts are large and/or the weather is a factor, they pretty much suck.

At this point they are necessary.

Re: Do you think the divisional doubles are a good idea?
 

This is a very valid question, but i think there area a few factors that need to be considered:

1. What division?

I know there are several with lower car counts and a dwindling amount of tracks to even race at. They completely make sense out in Div 6/7, but here in Div. 3, we are blessed with plenty of racers, and good tracks, despite losing NTR (& the Sportsnats) this year.

2. Time of year.

Summer is hot, fall is nice. We can't control the weather, but the season changes are not a secret.

3. Other NHRA races.

I think the double at Norwalk followed by the national event a few days later is insane. It was brutal on the racers, the track staff and the Div. 3 crew. Not everybody can just take off 2 weeks from their job to attend or work at these races. Ahh to be retired someday...

4. Fuel/Travel Costs:

A double obviously saves money.

My opinion is that Division 3 can stick with the fall double at St. Louis and that's all. It is a great race with a 128 car field in Stock every year.

*Also, much to my surprise and many others, there was no VP fuel truck for the Norwalk divisional!! I went there with 0 gallons of fuel, and was pretty disappointed to hear that the truck would not be there. Really?? Thanks to the Running's for having plenty.

Re: Do you think the divisional doubles are a good idea?
 

I understand both sides on this, truly. But in my case, I am not a fan. In particular, the Wednesday to Saturday version. Showing up on a Tuesday afternoon/evening has become the norm for National Events, and we have learned to swallow that (If we can even get in, thanks to preposterously low quotas..)

Having to do so for a divisional race, (granted, a double) is hard to swallow. So lets say you simply cant make your work schedule (yes, many of us still do) jive with a double, now you lost 2 races/2 grade points, as opposed to 1, had they been scheduled over different weekends.

And if you have an issue with your junk, which otherwise could have been repaired in a week or so at home, you are now losing 2 races, and at least 1 grade point, when you could have only got hurt on 1.

Also, this obsession with compressing and completing races on Saturday is really getting old. I understand weather causes issues, and so far this year, yes Maple Grove div and Norwalk div have been a trainwreck in that regard, and that's not NHRA nor the track owner's fault. But I'd much rather see Monday as a rain date. Holding Sunday as the rain date is the reason for starting the race so early and folks not getting many qual runs. At least if Monday was the rain date, then chances are well over half if not many more of us would already be out from earlier round losses, so way less people have to take a Monday off, than all of us needing to take a Tuesday and Wednesday off.

For those who have to travel very far to race, like out west, I do entirely understand that doubles are certainly great for yinz.

For Div 1 and 3, I'm most certainly not in love, and that's and understatement.

Kp

Re: Do you think the divisional doubles are a good idea?
 

I like doubles, but I want more racing in general. To me, the past few years in D2 have been excellent. We have had few double divisional, but most divisionals were paired with a Sunday National open. You still get two races but only one counts for Div points.

Right now, there are no doubles in D2 with a national open, only divisionals, meaning we only get to race 4 weekends a year not including nationals if you want to go to them. We get Orlando, Bby Gators, Double at SGMP, and a double at Rockingham (the sportsnats being moved to SGMP and being a double did add another weekend which is nice, but not typical). Anyway, that's only 4 weekends a year. To me, class racing is not a chore, it's a privilege and something I enjoy doing. I would certainly appreciate more than 4 events all year.

If I had it my way, All the divisionals would be separate on their own weekend paired with a national open, preferably all at different tracks so I can go new/different places. That'd give me two more weekends to hang out with my buddies, 12 grade points, and takes no more than one vacation day per weekend.

Re: Do you think the divisional doubles are a good idea?
 

I feel this is a very real situation that should be discussed. I totally see both sides of it. I do not believe it is a one size fits all dilemma and prior points have been made regarding each division specifically. Division 5 now only has 2 tracks that can host a Divisional. Thankfully for us they are both close.

For us, taking multiple weeks off for doubles and nationals just won't work. It was "OK" to have one double and couple 4 day nationals but now we pretty much have to leave Monday night for these Tuesday-Saturday doubles. We have three doubles that are close to us and two 4 day nationals. I don't quite understand why Chicago was a 4 day national but not the point here. I also agree with the Thursday-Sunday and save Monday as a rain day. If you start on Wednesday, it affects everyone. Usually if it has to go into Monday at least half the people are gone and unaffected.

In my business, if I'm not at work I don't make money. If I want to afford to go to these races, I have to work. Especially now since you can't even make your money back at a race unless you literally win the race. Missing 4-5 weeks of work and then if you end up doing good and chasing points you are missing even more traveling at the end of the year. For me, I will gladly travel a few more weekends and not have doubles that I have to miss a week of work for.

The schedule over the past couple years definitely caters to the retired and people who's business revolves around racing. It absolutely amazes me how many people show up to some of the doubles. But I really don't know how 20-40 year olds are making these schedules happen while trying to work and raise families. These past few years attempting to go to as many races we can has taken a toll on our family. Last year ended great and had an awesome time out in Vegas but physically, mentally and financially we were wore out!!

I really don't see doubles as a way to sustain and grow for the upcoming generation. For sure not Wednesday-Saturday. But like I said, it amazes me every time we go to a double how well attended they are so I think I'm in the minority here.

Re: Do you think the divisional doubles are a good idea?
 

Double divisonals are great have more!

Re: Do you think the divisional doubles are a good idea?
 

I agree with Jeremy and Brett Speer, they eat up to much vacation time. If I was retired I would love them.