Where you qualify is very important

[treessavoy]

I've bracket raced and class raced with the AHRA and raced with the NSS and in most of those they drew a car number for the bye runs thereby making it a random choice rather than rewarding the top fast cars who could go the most under.

Just sayin'

JimR

[Mark Yacavone]

Originally Posted by treessavoy

I've bracket raced and class raced with the AHRA and raced with the NSS and in most of those they drew a car number for the bye runs thereby making it a random choice rather than rewarding the top fast cars who could go the most under.

Just sayin'

JimR

Jim, so what did AHRA do for the remaining rounds?
I really don't see AHRA as a good example to use for a business model.
My recollection in NSS was that a ladder was generated by qualifying by closest to one's own particular index.
Even the .90 classes "qualify' closest to, after a random first round.
You need some kind of system...hence odd number bye runs.

[Michael Beard]

Another example, if you have a 41-car field (one of the "magic ladders" as is being discussed here), there's a total of 4 bye runs throughout eliminations.

Utilizing Tom's ladder, it's actually more complicated than what I'd originally thought. In order to get 41 cars to 32 in round 2, you would have to pair 18 cars (sending 9 into rnd 2) and give 23 cars bye runs. (18+23=41 rnd 1 cars. 9+23=32 rnd 2 cars).

I don't see how awarding 23 bye runs is an improvement over 4. Additionally, this procedure would cost an additional $650 in round money (Based on NHRA Div. 1 payouts), as there would be 16 cars left in Rnd 3 as opposed to 11, and more cars in each successive round. Running all the singles would take more time as well, unless you ran them side-by-side. Multiply the time and money by the number of classes that would use this system.

I do enjoy the mental gymnastics of working through ideas, though.

[Brad Zaskowski]

Another way would be to just have 8, 16, 32, 64 and 128 car fields based on car count rounding down from the actual car count....

Bring some performance back to our classes and there would only broke opponent bye runs most likely after first round

27 cars in the class make it a 16 car field, no bye runs, 11 cars dnq and 11 cars available for alternates.

33 cars in the class make it a 32 car field, no bye runs, 1 car dnq and available as alternate.

73 cars in the class make it a 64 car field, no bye runs, 9 cars dnq and 9 cars available for alternates.

This one would suck- got 127 cars round down to the 64 car field, no bye runs, 63 cars dnq and 63 cars available as alternates.

[Billy Nees]

Originally Posted by Brad Zaskowski

Another way would be to just have 8, 16, 32, 64 and 128 car fields based on car count rounding down from the actual car count....

Bring some performance back to our classes and there would only broke opponent bye runs most likely after first round

27 cars in the class make it a 16 car field, no bye runs, 11 cars dnq and 11 cars available for alternates.

33 cars in the class make it a 32 car field, no bye runs, 1 car dnq and available as alternate.

73 cars in the class make it a 64 car field, no bye runs, 9 cars dnq and 9 cars available for alternates.

This one would suck- got 127 cars round down to the 64 car field, no bye runs, 63 cars dnq and 63 cars available as alternates.

I'm sure THAT would work wonders for car-counts!

[GUMP]

Why not just leave it alone?

[Billy Nees]

Originally Posted by Kevin Zaskowski

I don't think Brad was suggesting a new theory to increase car counts.

I don't think that he was either, he was just making a point.
The point I am trying to make is that the average 5 tenths under Racer isn't going to show up to try and qualify for a 7 tenths under field.

[Charley Downing]

I think its time we remove our selfs from the 60's and 70's.

iam all for 64 car fields at all pts races and nationals events. I think INDY should stay a 128 car field. The car counts are bad now so whats the difference. All you cry baby old time racers already have 20 reasons why you don't race. So whats one more?

[thomas sheehan]

Originally Posted by Michael Beard

Another example, if you have a 41-car field (one of the "magic ladders" as is being discussed here), there's a total of 4 bye runs throughout eliminations.

Utilizing Tom's ladder, it's actually more complicated than what I'd originally thought. In order to get 41 cars to 32 in round 2, you would have to pair 18 cars (sending 9 into rnd 2) and give 23 cars bye runs. (18+23=41 rnd 1 cars. 9+23=32 rnd 2 cars).

I don't see how awarding 23 bye runs is an improvement over 4. Additionally, this procedure would cost an additional $650 in round money (Based on NHRA Div. 1 payouts), as there would be 16 cars left in Rnd 3 as opposed to 11, and more cars in each successive round. Running all the singles would take more time as well, unless you ran them side-by-side. Multiply the time and money by the number of classes that would use this system.

I do enjoy the mental gymnastics of working through ideas, though.

Michael.... I'm actually half-agreeing with Brad Z.
Let's end up with 16, 32, or 64 car fields.

(but I would give everyone a chance to get in, instead of sending the low qualifiers home)

Let's look at the 41 car field you mentioned. (instead of sending 9 cars home, we have the bottom 18 run to get in the 32 car field)

You do have the bottom 18 cars running a "Get-in or Play-in round" (just like the NCAA uses for the march madness). Those 9 winners are not credited with a rd win, but they now qualified for the final 32 along with the other faster 23 cars that did not have to run. (this will also force 23 cars to chase after the top qualifying spots to avoid the "get-in round).
No one said you had to pay rd money for those that are still trying to qualify for the final 32 cars.
Issue #2 - 23 singles - no need to run them (just like class eliminations, some guys run more rounds than others- no extra advantage)

Myself, I wouldn't mind this method, and it's not very complicated.

If you think this is complicated, go stand by a qualification sheet at the races, and 50% of the racers couldn't figure out who they had to run if there was an odd number of cars if they tried. 95% couldn't tell if they were on the short side of the ladder unless they had the ladder book or Bobby Fazio's program (plug!).

ps... and honestly... I won't mind if they leave it alone... because I understand it.

[Brad Zaskowski]

How about best losing package in the previous round gets back in the spot of the bye run? Only laddered bye run would be first round for the #1 qualifier who would deserve the bye if there were a odd number if cars. After that best losing package racers would be put in the spot where bye a bye would normally be. Wouldn't hurt car counts, not complicated, only would cost the tracks or nhra a few bucks extra for paying a loser one round later and would give a racer who just came out in the wrong end of a good race another shot. More of a earn back than a buy back......