[Jeff Lee]

Let me see if I can wrap this up as I haven't looked here in almost 24 hours...I'll do my best!

Mark Faul said:
With the current points system it's fair for everyone! If any racer competes at 6 national events, they have the same number of races to claim as a "touring pro". Because ONCE AGAIN, you claim your best 3 out of 6. No races after your FIRST 6 count towards national points. Same with divisionals. Best 5 out of FIRST 8. So anyone that does well at their points claiming races could be national champion. There is no benefit in points to going to more than the 14 points claiming races. Touring pro or whoever.

Yes, fine. But in your scenario you, the traveler, are rewarded with a "bigger bucket" in which the top races are chosen. It really doesn't matter if you, the racer, or NHRA chooses the top points earning races; you'll benefit. Neither the racer or NHRA will pick anything but the best. Right?
As you have pointed out, the system is geared to favor those that can attend (6) national events and (8) divisional events.


Mike Carr said:
Jeff, I am guessing you are referring to the old "waiver" system, where racers had x-amount of races they could waive, pre-event and post-event? I'm not sure how many waivers a racer had back then (I think the current points structure has been in place since the early 1990's). I think a racer had two pre-event and two post-event waivers. Maybe three. Someone else will have to help me out here.

What we need here is somebody that can accurately explain the evolution of the NHRA Championships. As Mark Faul said, he didn't start class racing until 1996 and I didn't start until 1998. A lot can be learned by the history and I believe it will demonstrate how it has grown to favor or actually encourage attending as many events as possible.
At one point in time a racer received more points for attending intra- divisional events than out of divisional events. Why? The racer was encouraged to stay "local". I guess that was when NHRA was concerned about the Sportsman racer and new there was a line separating the Sportsman from the Pro.
At one time the Championship was decided when all divisional champions competed against each other at the World Finals (much like Jegs All-Stars). Originally held in Oklahoma (or Kansas?) as a "central" location then moved to California. Somewhere along the way it was determined that the TRAVELING DISTANCE of the World Finals was a HARDSHIP for the division champions. That thought has been lost and now NHRA encourages, no mandates, the Sportsman to travel through the current points system if a championship is a goal. Again, NHRA new there was a line separating the Sportsman from the Pro. Not today though.

442OLDS said:
What defines a "full-time professional drag racer" versus AMATEUR racer?

Who knows. But if it walks like a duck, quacks like a duck, it's probably a duck! I understand from a bowler friend that if his average over a season is 195+, he is not allowed to participate at amateur events. Golfers that participate in amateur series once obtaining a 3 handicap or less are placed in the pro category (pretty sure that's the correct numbers as I'm not a golfer).
The absence of a full-time job other than drag racer, full sponsorship deals that pay the racer to attend races (note: not limited to winning races), IRS declarations...those would be strong indicators to me.

Evan Smith said:
My question is: should the national champions be simply the best bracket racers or the best overall racers, based on building and tuning your car as well? Award points for the top 32 qualified spots at national and divisional events and award points for rounds won during class eliminations and for records set. This also will entice racers to run hard and the AHFS system will be more effective.

I've said here more than once, points to #1 qualifier and record runs. Evan has expanded on this and he has my agreement.

Paul Merolla said:
Evan, that's the FIRST rule change discussed on this thread that made any sense to me. Don and Jeff's ramblings sound like recess in 2nd grade..."I can't win so change the game to suit me!!" How many times do they have to explain it? The best 3 of the FIRST 6. Anyone who can attend 6 nationals has the same playing field as the guy that attends all 24.

Paul, I'd bet I posted that before Evan but who cares. Like I said above, I've repeated this more than once on this site. Don and Jeff are not trying to change the rules because we can't win, Don & Jeff are supporting ideas that would be more favorable to the average Sportsman racer. Don't forget Paul, you can't attend AA of those national events without attending ALL of those divisional events if you want a championship. Anybody out there operating under the current points system ever win a championship without attending the maximum allowable events? I don't think so...

Under the current system, it would be foolish to chase a championship unless you have the commitment of time and money to attend all 14 races.
The old system, as I understand it, was more favorable to a true Sportsman racer. The new system favors the pro racer. So who "changed the rules"?

West Coast said:
The only disadvantage to the current points system would be were you live and how many races are close to you. So that solution would to be move.

Yea, move. That's the argument presented by IHRA racers as well. Sell your home on the west coast lately? Have enough left over for the move?
The old system as pointed out gave points for intra-divisional races. Now you get the same points if you live in California and race there or New Jersey. Yes, I call that a disadvantage.

Ed O'Brien said:
If they ran off records my bet is Bob Shaw 2010 world champ . Have a nice day Ed

And maybe he deserves it. I have a client that set 28 records one year and won his divisional. I say he deserved it. To the next comment by Ed to Evan Smith about "bogus" engines qualifying at #32 or better, all NHRA participants are subject to tear down. Even the last qualifier.

Toby Lang said:
Same thing with divisionals except it's your best 5 of 8. Bottom line: nobody gets to pick and choose which races they claim. Do you understand this point?

About the old system. I heard that Jim Waldo lost out on a championship one time because he didn't claim a 4th rounder thinking he could do better and didn't. If he would have claimed that race he would have been champ. This is just what somebody told me. Please correct me if I'm wrong.

Don't you think the current system gives the person who doesn't travel across the country the same chance to win a championship as a Touring Pro Sportsman®?

1st paragraph. Yes I understand. As I said before, you or NHRA pick the top 5/8 divisional. Either way it will be the top 5/8 so it doesn't matter who does the picking.
Jim Waldo's issue - yea, he took a gamble and lost. He didn't have the opportunity to "stuff the ballot box" as can allowed today. Another analogy is today the racer that can attend the maximum number of races is in a "buy back" situation and Jim Waldo did not have that luxury. Again, this shows that the person who can attend the maximum allowable of 14 races has an advantage.
Last paragraph - I would hope by now you see my point that no, it requires full use of all allowable races to chase a championship. Like I said before, I don't think it has been done under the current system with anything less than 100% attendance.

Ed Fernandez said:
Originally Posted by Jeff Lee
How about this. Since NHRA has a limited quota on entries to national events, once the touring pro's have met their allowance on races claimed, they can not enter races if it bumps out a potential participant. If the quota is not met, then entry is open.
You can't be serious can you comrade Jeff

Not on that one. But I have heard this from more than one source so maybe it has some merit. Nothing pisses off a racer more than to not get into a race in your own backyard because your shy one point. And when 40 out of 60 in attendance get in from other states....oooh, they git a little miffed.

By the way, I just found out today Mexico manufactured AMC's (VAM - Vehicle American Motors) had a 302 CID 4bbl equipped straight six! You have any info on that? There's an intake on ebay right now, factory 4bbl. I asked around and found out about the 302 six. That's all I know about it but that would be worth looking into. Maybe a SS/GT engine for you? If I were into sixes I would look for some SAE papers for NHRA!

Ed O'Brien said:
I forgot Merry Xmas everybody !! Is that better ? Have a nice day


Yea, great post! That's the longest response I've ever made and I'll bet 1/2 or more gave up on the second paragraph. Kudos to those that stuck with me. Now I have work to do that pays the bills...good night all and I've enjoyed your opinions; hopefully as much as you've been entertained by mine...