Re: Fontana divisional rumor
Quote:
if the entry fees bother you look at other venues the weekend after the divisional theirs a big dollar bracket race 3 races that pay 3k 4.5k 4.5k for 325$ 3 races that pay more then the divisional that cost only 108$ per race sounds like a lot more fun with a lot more opportunity's to win |
Re: Fontana divisional rumor
In response to the two day divisional our division has had that inhacement some people are at the gate camping out complaining they can't get in on wendsday others are trying to expalne to there boss how they need 7 fridays off make it kinda hard to race with no qualifying on Saturday tell that to the truck driver carpet layer collage kid wife can't figure out we're all the participation and car counts are going!,,,...?.....?...?. MAYBE ASK THE PEOLE THAT PAY MEMBERSHIPS. .?.....?..?..
|
Re: Fontana divisional rumor
Quote:
|
Re: Fontana divisional rumor
Quote:
|
Re: Fontana divisional rumor
I think 2 days on Saturday and Sunday is fine if they have a test and tune Friday it is pretty much like a 3 day race. I do disagree with having Friday Saturday 2 day races. That hurts the working guy trying to make the races.
|
Re: Fontana divisional rumor
Quote:
|
Re: Fontana divisional rumor
Wow, there's a lot of different takes on this.
I'm retired myself but if I can arrive Friday and get the same number of qualifying runs as I would have in a 3 day event, I like that. It does save me the extra day in a hotel and some food expense as well. But I can see for others it adds up differently. Can't please everyone. For my money I'm fine with either 2 or 3 day events. What I won't do is still show up on Thursday and spend a lot of money for a couple of test & tune runs. Of course it doesn't matter for me this year as I have a schedule conflict. I'll be racing the Summit Series race at Wild Horse Saturday night. |
Re: Fontana divisional rumor
Quote:
Jim Caughlin SS 6019 |
Re: Fontana divisional rumor
At almost all D7 LODRS events, racers in each category get three qualifying/time trial runs. This event's expected car count (based on previous years) is such that we can accomplish this in a single day and allow for all eliminations on Sunday (no Saturday first rounds for fields over 64). This WAS done to help racers with saving time off and lowering the overall cost of competing in this event/series. I spoke with a number of racers about this last year explaining that I wanted to try and do a couple more events in this format to help everyone and hopefully increase participation a bit. Nobody I spoke with was against this idea.
Will the track make a little more $$? I certainly hope so as they are saving a day of insurance, wages, track prep materials, etc. Will it make NHRA more money? Not really, as the amount saved by not having a few tech personnel on Thursday, plus the associated costs (wages, hotel, etc.) will most likely be offset by running an extra three hours with a full crew on Saturday, and possibly make Sunday a little longer as well. For those that haven't noticed, we've also made some changes at the previous two events to try and grow participation in the SST and SMC categories by only having one run on Friday and two Saturday. While I didn't expect an overnight increase, I'm still positive that this format will increase those classes going forward. The events at Phoenix and Las Vegas have car counts large enough that this format would not work. For those events that this would work, I can't see any negative it. I appreciate all comments as to why you would be for/against, just want to make sure that facts are laid out as Kyle did. Mike |
Re: Fontana divisional rumor
At our three day points races, several guys just show up Sat morning, that could not get off work for Friday. Why should the guys that can be there Friday be penalized?
|
All times are GMT -4. The time now is 11:06 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Copyright Class Racer.com. All Rights Reserved. Designated trademarks and brands are the property of their respective owners.