.Advisory committee
 

I would like to know if the advisory committee was told about the change with 128 fastest cars getting in without any class bump-ins. And also would they please tell us how they voted and why.
Patsy

Re: .Advisory committee
 

The commitee voted this new rule in, we need to give them a big THANK YOU for voting this new rule in. We could call it The Dick Bulter Country Club rule. Just think of all the money you will save by not having to go to all the points meet to get enough grade points to be able to attend these races. Your car is pretty fast so you most likely won't be hurt, but us 7-8/10 under guys might as well forget it. J. Gower stock 3058

Re: .Advisory committee
 

It sure would be interesting to hear the rationale for making a 180 from the way the classes began?
You'd think by now at least one of the division reps would have chimed in on the subject?

Re: .Advisory committee
 

Any of you in div. 3 who want to know how I voted on any issue please e-mail me and I will let you know.

gph.hill@insightbb.com

Greg

Re: .Advisory committee
 

Why don't ALL of you Committee members make it public, right here how you voted and why?Jim

Re: .Advisory committee
 

This is "interesting".
So a proposal like this gets mentioned to a committee member by a racer with a self-serving interest.. The Rep then brings it up to the next level (?)where it's voted on , without any input from the racers in general?

Maybe Greg Hill will tell us if this is the case.

Re: .Advisory committee
 

Ed, I thought you were running for "President of Technical Affairs"? I hope someone on the committee can explain how something such as this can possibly happen! Jim

Re: .Advisory committee
 

When we voted in the reps, we left the decisions in their hands.....not for the change to come back for a general vote of the racers......Your future is in the hands of your Rep.

Re: .Advisory committee
 

Rich, Not asking for a general vote. Just like to know what's coming up and who brought it up.
We have not heard from anyone who knew about the Indy thing beforehand.

Re: .Advisory committee
 

Mark -- I'm with you -- seems like coast to coast no one knows where this came from .............

Re: .Advisory committee
 

Mark
I agree we need to see an agendas and how the votes are cast. The meeting transcripts should be made available to active NHRA members.

Does anyone know if there are term limits or how long the appointment to the committee is?

Re: .Advisory committee
 

Did you guys really think you were going to agree with everthing the elected Advisory committee would put in place? Did you think Advisory committee was needing your okay on every topic? It seemed they were elected to "represent" the racers of their divisions and make the "best Decisions" they felt were possible. Maybe the options available were a LOT worse.
J Gower, I am not sure how I would be named for the rule change. I have no position on the advisory committee. I feel CLASS racing needs to be rewarded in every class regardless the et of the winners. Class Racing IS NHRA Sportsman racing.

Re: .Advisory committee
 

No, but I thought that they were being elected as a representitive committee not a rules making committee. No one ever contacted me about the latest vote on Indy. Nor did I realize that it was even on the table for consideration. That said, it is fine with me to make it all class winners only in elims at every event and run them off the records or index. Dosen't matter.

I don't think it is good business to have winners of a popularity contest making rules and trying to hide where it came from.

Re: .Advisory committee
 

SS Engine guy. good point but one thing no one has stated anywhere is whether the Advisory committee had any discussion or input on this change....will it help AHFS?

Re: .Advisory committee
 

This is just another change that will not make any difference in the quality of racing. It won't make the cost of racing any cheeper. It wont raise the pay out or the contingincy money. It wont help attract any sponsorship opportunities to our form of racing. I dont see where any of the recent changes have made any real difference to the competition. The spec button hasn't done anything for super stock and comp. Just cost us money to replace a perfectly good button. The stocker guys had to relocate there 2 step button to the brake pedal. What did that change. Nothing. It seems that any time you put new people in a position to change things they will make change for change sake. Thats what seems to be happening here. Unless its a rule that will make racing safer I think we should leave well enough alone. Its worked for over 40 years lets leave it alone and race.

Re: .Advisory committee
 

The way I see it is the racers that elect to race in a class where it takes 1.20 under, or faster, to win class got their way in this case. Next on their agenda is undoubtedly eliminating all heads up runs in eliminations.
Class racing will then be basically the same as Top Sportsman except that all cars won't have the same minimum ET. That folks, is true bracket racing!!!!!!!!!!
The puzzling thing is why not a single soul will step forward and confess to initiating or even supporting this change?

Re: .Advisory committee
 

If you have EVER been @ Indy and ran better than a -1.00 second under and been knock out of the field because of a class winner. Then you know how it feels. A few years ago a 69 F/S camaro won class,no he did not get a class win because he could not run .5 tenths under but was placed in the field. Best I can remeber is he was maybe 1 or 2 hundred's under index. But he was in the field. I was 7th alternate @ -1.07 under. That leaves a bad taste all the way home [900miles].
Like me or hate me but but "I" love the new ruling.

4705 A/SA
4705SS/IA

Re: .Advisory committee
 

Maybe (but I doubt it) this would bring about some parity in the HP factors by using the qualifying numbers and IF they would have a MAJOR tear down (all of the qualifyers) and the powers in Calif. would allow the GOOD tech people such as Travis Miller and a couple of others to do thier job WITHOUT interference from them to weed out the bogus cars. Naaaaaaa, wont happen. To many "IF's" and to much work involved not to mention the $$$$ required to have a competent tech crew on hand to handle the work load. Besides... it would probably embarass to many "HEROS". Just my opinion and that dosent count anyway.

Re: .Advisory committee
 

If a car didn't run .50 under and because of that didn't get the class win there was a huge mistake made if he was on the ladder?
Must have been a class with at least 2 cars and he won class, or before the .50 under rule!
Again, why won't somebody man up and admit to participating in this change???????

Re: .Advisory committee
 

Cause they know they made a huge mistake thats why no one has the balls to step up and say "hey guys this was my idea!" If i woulda known about this rule oooo lets say last wed when i enter the us nats. i woulda just saved my money! NHRA PLEASE QUIT screwing this up, its worked for a long time!

Re: .Advisory committee
 

Anyone can look at the archives of Drag Race Central from 1998-2008 and find just how many class winners actually bump out qualifiers. This includes the before and after .5 under was put into effect.

Re: .Advisory committee
 

I don't know how these ideas were prepared and explained, but here is an interesting picture of reps voting.

Our local government pushed something thru that the majority of the residents did not want. When one resident raised the question of them doing what the community wanted at a board meeting, the elected official replied "you elected me to vote however I want, not what you want."

Re: .Advisory committee
 

128 248H F/S Casey Miles, Boca Raton FL, '69 Camaro 11.723 12.10 -0.377


2004 Indy

Re: .Advisory committee
 

Is it me or is everyone missing the agenda, didn't they try before to get rid of some classes...This is another way of tighting up the field and getting rid of the slowest cars... I think racers should stop complaining and get to work on their cars.... Maybe they are trying to help out IHRA, maybe now guys will crossover , nah I don't think so..

What did everyone think that the Reps were going to check with the racers before they did anything ???? They would never get anything DONE, because racers also have their own agendas.. we can't agree on anything.... So now maybe we should stay in touch with our Reps alittle more and stop bashing them for doing their job... Were was everyone when the voting was going on ??? thank you.. Trying to hang these guys is not the way to get something done... I am sure there's alot more to this story than we are being told, so lets give them a break and see what happens... In the mean time, get to work on your cars and lets race......This has been coming for quite awhile, why is everyone so upset now.....As Jack Maytas said it may just take care of it's
self in time, just look at INDY......Next will be autos & sticks combined, get ready !!!!!!

Its Dragracing.... Dave,

Re: .Advisory committee
 

Bobby Brannon: That was me who towed 1200 miles to attend the 50th U.S. Nats, I technically won class because my opponent broke. I was as surprised to see that I was on the Qualifing sheet as anyone else.
I took the car there because I attended the 25 U.S. Nats with the same car and the same configuration as a F/S car. By the way, I don't understand that NHRA doesn't allow you to win class except if you run .5 under the index. NHRA set the indexes for a performance level, if you go under that performance level, you should be given any awards that you deserve. When I went to the 25th, you had to win class or go home!
Casey Miles
248H E/S (because of 4 HP)

Re: .Advisory committee
 

Mr. Brannon.........You did not win your class at the 2004 Indy Nationals.....Mr. Miles did.......You ALSO did not go fast enough to get in via the fast qualifier clause........These were the rules at the time you entered........It is called CLASS racing......or WAS. !!! So the resentment that you have harbored for almost four years has no basis.....I hope your happy now, enjoy your nostalgia bracket racing from here on out.....

Re: .Advisory committee
 

I've never heard so much crying, boo hoo, waa waa. Now stock/superstock will be based on performance. The way it should be.

Re: .Advisory committee
 

This thread should move to the registered racer section to eliminate all the yahoos who only race their mouths.

Ed F.

Re: .Advisory committee
 

When Casey Miles won Class that year there were two cars in the class and Dan Bowers broke a rear BEFORE class eliminations. Thats how Casey got into the eliminator without a class win.

Sam

Re: .Advisory committee
 

The fantasy that these changes will lead to more races based on performance is a real laugher!
The same racers that instigated this change from the way the classes have always been are undoubtedly hard at work on the next item on their agenda, ELIMINATE ALL HEADS UP RACES IN ELIMINATIONS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Re: .Advisory committee
 

I know, how about a poll on here for this subject? Granted, ya not gonna get every single racer in the country voting, but it seems a little 'lop-sided' at this point, as in the racers that are posting hate it!!!!!!!!!
I'm not always convinced that a democracy is the way to go with a 'SANCTIONING BODY' but it is, what it is, right now. ( I think they're just flat out lazy and not allowed to make discisions cause it'll cost too much)

I'm not smart enough to do it so could somebody post the pertinant question in a poll.

SHOULD CLASS WINNERS BUMP IN?

YES or NO

Re: .Advisory committee
 

Bernie , First of all you would have to accept the premise that class winners bump in .
See Capt Jack's post.
If we were going to revert to a previous rule, there are 3 or 4 ways you could do it.
Those choices would have to be included in the poll.

Re: .Advisory committee
 

Yak,
Class winners aren't the ones who bump in at Indy or any other National event that runs class, they ARE the field! The rest of the qualifiers up to 128 cars are the ones who bump in. Jim

Re: .Advisory committee
 

Jim , I think that the terminology came about because of this: For two days at Indy, you have a Q sheet only and then .....after class ,the last sheet reflects the class winner's final position .

In reality , they were there all along. The last ten or so on the sheet (118 -128) were not really in .
I guess you could call them Bump -outs.

I think that some of the newer / younger generation of racers never really grasped this concept.
Looks like a moot point now, anyway.

Re: .Advisory committee
 

I would probably be considered one of the younger generation, and honestly I never would have thought of it that way. I always thought of the class winners as the ones bumping themselves in.

Now, I don't have a dog in this fight, but it would seem to me that even if I had a fast car that I would want class winners to automatically get a spot. Only the first round of class eliminations counts towards qualifying, right? So, if I had a fast car but made a bunch of crappy runs before class eliminations (say, I was fighting a problem), class eliminations would actually give me an opportunity to still get in the show!

Now the question I have is, why have class eliminations at all if they don't really count for anything but a $500 check and a trophy? Not that I'm trying to get you guys screwed out of your money and trophy, but it seems that the whole reasoning for class eliminations just went right out the window.

I'm also curious to know how many racers actually got "screwed" by the old setup over the last 10 years. I could be wrong, but I wouldn't think it was more than a handful, and certainly not enough to change the rule for the hundreds of competitors in Stock and Super Stock...

Re: .Advisory committee
 

Thinking out loud here
Currently you have to run .5 under to get a wally. How about class winners being put in the show if they run.xx under index also? .5 the same as a wally or .7-.8 under to get in. I don't know what would be the proper under index should be. Being a single car in your class is nobodies fault and should not be penalized but you should have to prove your ability be running fast enough.

Re: .Advisory committee
 

now there is a voice of reason

Re: .Advisory committee
 

[QUOTE=Jason Oldfield;75910]

Now the question I have is, why have class eliminations at all if they don't really count for anything but a $500 check and a trophy? Not that I'm trying to get you guys screwed out of your money and trophy, but it seems that the whole reasoning for class eliminations just went right out the window.

My point exactly. When they call for class runs to the staging lanes just don't show.