NHRA LODRS Divisional payout info?

[Toby Lang]

So, I guess the lower the car count the better and since the Jeg's All-Star race is only three rounds, that should be a breeze compared to a normal six or seven round race.

There's a flaw in the D2 payout schedule (there is no 7th round loser, 7th round loser is called R/U in S/SS.) So, your chart should look like this, IMO:

NHRA Div. 2
3rd round loss = $125 (-$35 less than entry)
4th round loss = $150 (-$10 less than entry)
5th round loss = $200 (+$40 more than entry)


-Toby

[Michael Beard]

Originally Posted by Toby Lang

So, I guess the lower the car count the better and since the Jeg's All-Star race is only three rounds, that should be a breeze compared to a normal six or seven round race.

-=sigh=- You know what I was getting at. I'm sorry for not getting into every single permutation and combination of likely participants qualifying orders and head-to-head matchups AND I specifically said that the shorter field did not indicate a cakewalk. It still stands to reason in most circumstances that it's easier to win a 4 round race than a 6 round race.

There's a flaw in the D2 payout schedule

Has that been verified? (or should the Rnd 7 line simply be dropped?) At first glance the numbers looked the same as Div. 4.

Okay Mr. Beard since you have done this what is the solution? Can't classes get their own sponsors? Would that help the payouts with out hurting the tracks cut.

- We're not going to solve the world's (class racing) problems in an afternoon on a forum. I have a large list of things that could potentially help the sport, which have been done in the past, continue to implemented, or are advocated for the future. In many cases, the necessary parties are unwilling or unmotivated to make the short term sacrifices or long term commitments to see things through for the big picture. Some of the solutions are right under our nose.

- Yes classes could get sponsors, and obviously this could help all concerned. We have a pretty fair number of marketing partners for our Fall Footbrake Frenzy and American Doorslammer Nationals events, and you see S/SS Combo associations retain sponsors. I believe the biggest issues here are:
1) It's possible that there is an exclusivity issue with Lucas Oil / Summit Racing Equipment being the title sponsors that would preclude a naming rights sponsor on an individual class. But even barring that, you have a lot of companies already involved in contingency programs. What is their return on investment for additional sponsorship?
2) What extra value is the sanctioning body/track/promoter/event providing to these sponsors (existing and potential?)

[Bret Kepner]

Originally Posted by Michael Beard

My chances of winning just 3 consecutive rounds is nearly double that of winning 5 rounds to R/U. Every round more that you have to go, you have to add a factor of your round-win percentage. The more rounds in a race, the less chance you have of winning it.

Beard is one of only a handful of racers who accurately understand this point. It is THE definition of what we do and how we do it.

[Toby Lang]

Michael,

I understand what you mean, I was just being a smart ***.

So, you like the low car counts, right? Is that part of the reason you don't run more NHRA races?

About the D2 payouts, that is just my guess of how it should be. Mary Meints posted a thread about it earlier:

http://classracer.com/classforum/showthread.php?t=38780

Maybe she will update that thread when she finds out.


-Toby

[Michael Beard]

So, you like the low car counts, right? Is that part of the reason you don't run more NHRA races?

Do they provide a higher likilihood of return on investment, yes. Do I LIKE low car count races? NO. It's not sustainable and not good for the long term of our sport. Although it stands to reason that if everybody went to low car count races... they wouldn't BE low car count races in the first place! If I can improve my chances and add support races that need it at the same time, all the better.

And as I've already explained innumerable times over the years, and as recently as two posts ago in this thread, the reason I don't run more NHRA races is "the travel expenses and days off work make NHRA racing significantly more expensive," which I detailed last year with specific comparisons of chasing a Div'l and/or World Championship. And as I have also stated over the years, I don't agree with some of NHRA's policy decisions, and my choice has been to express my opinions about issues, and then if I am still dissatisfied and have other viable options, I will vote with my feet and run elsewhere. Until recently, I have had no need to run NHRA, as my schedule has had more than enough options for me to race 37+ weekends a year, usually multiple times per weekend. Due to the current climate of contingency postings and event exposure, I now need to start working in NHRA events in order to maintain or improve value for my sponsors.

I *had* planned on going to Orlando and Gainesville, but the first quarter of the year is always my busiest of the year, and like last year, I can't afford anymore 3-day work weeks. When I get moved to Ohio, maybe the longer winters will make my racing and work schedule mesh better.

[M&M Motorsports]

FYI -- Apparently the Div 2 payout is not "based on a 128 car field" because this response from Rich indicates that the 7th round loser line should simply be deleted. Again, it appears from this response that the payouts listed are "correct". Here is his response:

If we have a 128+ cars in a class this weekend I think Carl will be very happy. I'll find out why it's listed that way and get it clarified as soon as we can over the coming weeks. But I don't see it as an immediate problem. If we have a 128+ cars in a class, no track on our series is going to welch on paying 7th round loser money. The tracks see the same payout forms so they know if there's 8 rounds there will be 7th round money to be factored in.

See 'ya in Orlando.

Rich

[442OLDS]

Originally Posted by M&M Motorsports

FYI -- Apparently the Div 2 payout is not "based on a 128 car field" because this response from Rich indicates that the 7th round loser line should simply be deleted. Again, it appears from this response that the payouts listed are "correct". Here is his response:

If we have a 128+ cars in a class this weekend I think Carl will be very happy. I'll find out why it's listed that way and get it clarified as soon as we can over the coming weeks. But I don't see it as an immediate problem. If we have a 128+ cars in a class, no track on our series is going to welch on paying 7th round loser money. The tracks see the same payout forms so they know if there's 8 rounds there will be 7th round money to be factored in.

See 'ya in Orlando.

Rich

Its a pretty safe bet that there will NOT be more than 128 cars in Stock or Super Stock.

IF there was,then there would be some DNQ's that would not even get to race.

But IF there were 128 cars,they are saying that a SEMI-FINALIST who lost in the sixth round would get $200 after paying a $160 entry fee?

[Adger Smith]

I can go for the fewer rounds being a better race to make money at. Look at the round expense of running your car. That should be a factor, too. Don't just look at the expenses of entry fees,hotel and tow fuel. Most race cars I have eat, expensive valve springs, drink expensive fuel and wear out costly tires. As well as wear out Hi dollar converters and transmission parts and shocks. (If care is not taken Shocks can wear or get hurt riding long distances in your trailer)
Some cars operate round by round cheaper than others, but most real fast cars are costly per round. Do you have any idea what a round of racing really costs you?
With all of today's added travel expenses I'm of the opinion that if you have a bracket type car that operates cheaper per round than most expensive class cars you stand a better chance of paying for your chosen fun at local index or bracket races.
All of what I just posted has been a topic of discussion at my shop with many of my customers, even Circle Burners. You might be surprised at how each individual justifies how they race.