my opinion

[Jeff Lee]

Michael Beard said:
Instead of injecting my opinion here, let me just ask you: How many races should a racer have to attend to "earn" the National Championship?

Different sanction, but for what it's worth Bertozzi and I finished 1-2 in IHRA Stock a couple years ago with only 5/6 Nationals.

Good question. Don't know. But I do know I would want a system that gave maximum benefit to staying within your division. And I suppose I would be highly in favor of the old way (as I understand it). Win the divisional championship then run for the gold at the world finals.
It is not a waste of time and money to travel to races. Travel all you can handle. But just about everybody I know that races S/SS would never pursue a national championship under the current system; even if they were to win a divisional or two along with a national or two in any given year.
Taking the amount of time from work, much less family, to pursue this dream is daunting at any time, much less with the current economic times (and believe me, the economy ain't going to right itself anytime soon). However, myself and others I know, if we did well in our division, we would travel to any location in the USA for a chance at a national championship. That's one big trip and a lot of little trips that can lead to a championship as opposed to a LOT of BIG trips criss-crossing the country.
How different is this from the Jeg's Allstars series?

[Toby Lang]

Jeff,

It doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out that to have a better chance at winning a championship you need to go to the maximum allowable races. I'm sure it was that way under the old waiver system also. Why don't you ask Al Corda how many events he had to go to back in the old days to win a championship? He lives by you, right? Or maybe Don could ask his good friend Al for you.

If somebody is seriously in the championship hunt they usually find a way to get to all the races allowed. I (and many others) think the system is just fine the way it is. I think the champion should be determined over a period of many races not just one.


-Toby

[Billy Nees]

Jeff, what is your issue with "Pro Sportsmen? I don't get it. Is it jealousy or ego or what? Over the years I've had a couple of chances to win the World but I couldn't take them. Just too many other comittments. I got over it. I'll never forget one year in particular I was kissing close to closing up my business and taking a shot when a chance conversation with an old friend (Joe Scott 1980 SS World Champ) changed my mind. He told me,"Billy if you need the ego massage then go for it 'cause you're not going to be doing it for the money". With that being said I didn't close my business for two months and go on the road. I can live with it. Why can't you?

[Michael Beard]

It's difficult to read emotion in typed words... take this post as inquisitive, not accusatory.

Originally Posted by Jeff Lee

Good question. Don't know.

Tough when you have to make a decision that will make everybody happy, isn't it?

However, myself and others I know, if we did well in our division, we would travel to any location in the USA for a chance at a national championship. That's one big trip and a lot of little trips that can lead to a championship as opposed to a LOT of BIG trips criss-crossing the country.

This is basically what IHRA has now with its Tournament of Champions. There are people who love the new system who hated the old system, and people who loved the old system and hate the new system. There's certainly been plenty of discussion about it.

How different is this from the Jeg's Allstars series?

Are you ready to declare the Allstars winner the National Champion? If you did so, would more or less people chase points, and would it get the people that do chase to attend more events? Really, that format isn't so different from the Bracket Finals, where you have to qualify at your home track, and then a single event determines the champions.

Just my opinion, but I don't think that it's *supposed* to be easy to win the World Championship. Is it really unreasonable to expect your Champ to attend 14 races? The shorter the season, the more luck involved. Would you rather not have any dropped events? While many will choose to max out their claims, they don't *have* to. As soon as you start eliminating dropped races, racers start losing their options, and if you "fix" that by reducing the number of races a racer can claim, then you probably hurt attendance at events. Catch 22. I think everyone would agree that National events put more of a time & travel strain on people -- would it be beneficial to reduce National claims to 3/5 instead of 3/6? ...and would it really make a difference?

I do agree that they should give the extra "little points" for In-Division claims, and not for Outs.

Short version: "What Toby said."

[Jeff Lee]

Originally Posted by Billy Nees

Jeff, what is your issue with "Pro Sportsmen? I don't get it. Is it jealousy or ego or what? Over the years I've had a couple of chances to win the World but I couldn't take them. Just too many other comittments. I got over it. I'll never forget one year in particular I was kissing close to closing up my business and taking a shot when a chance conversation with an old friend (Joe Scott 1980 SS World Champ) changed my mind. He told me,"Billy if you need the ego massage then go for it 'cause you're not going to be doing it for the money". With that being said I didn't close my business for two months and go on the road. I can live with it. Why can't you?

I have no ego involved in this "conversation". I will never be a world champion in S/SS because I do not have the desire. That is my prerogative just as it is your prerogative to quit work and take the family on the road. Since I have no desire, I am also not jealous. It seems really difficult for some people on this board to understand some people, like I, see a bigger picture than themselves. I've said it repeatedly here, if you want to go to all 24 races, go for it. Why would I care?
All I am saying is the rules, as written, not only encourage but demand attendance to all 14 points earning races if one wishes to pursue a national championship. As you said, it is called "Pro Sportsman"; which is it, "Pro" or Sportsman"?
It would seem this type of "Pro-Sportsman" racer could be defined as a "professional". As I demonstrated earlier, some "individual" sports (golf, bowling, maybe even fishing) have standards that separate the "sportsman" (or amateur), from the "professional" ranks. NHRA does not seem to separate the two. In fact, it is part of your language.
In fact, NHRA allows "professional" racers (think Pro-Stock multi-time national champion Jeg Caughlin and others) to compete against "Sportsman" racers. Does that practice seem equitable to you? Should Tiger Woods be allowed to compete on the same level playing grounds in the amateur tournaments? Kind of like shooting fish in a rain barrel in my opinion.

[Michael Beard]

Originally Posted by Jeff Lee

All I am saying is the rules, as written, not only encourage but demand attendance to all 14 points earning races if one wishes to pursue a national championship.

Encourage? Most definitely. That's the promoter's job!

In fact, NHRA allows "professional" racers (think Pro-Stock multi-time national champion Jeg Caughlin and others) to compete against "Sportsman" racers. Does that practice seem equitable to you? Should Tiger Woods be allowed to compete on the same level playing grounds in the amateur tournaments?

What does Pro Stock have to do with Stock or Super Stock? They are different disciplines. This is like allowing Tiger Wood to compete in a croquet tournament.

I'm one that does look at the bigger picture, but I'm not sure I'm seeing the same one as you. What exactly are you defining as problems and solutions?

[Toby Lang]

Originally Posted by Jeff Lee

All I am saying is the rules, as written, not only encourage but demand attendance to all 14 points earning races if one wishes to pursue a national championship. As you said, it is called "Pro Sportsman"; which is it, "Pro" or Sportsman"?
It would seem this type of "Pro-Sportsman" racer could be defined as a "professional". As I demonstrated earlier, some "individual" sports (golf, bowling, maybe even fishing) have standards that separate the "sportsman" (or amateur), from the "professional" ranks. NHRA does not seem to separate the two. In fact, it is part of your language.
In fact, NHRA allows "professional" racers (think Pro-Stock multi-time national champion Jeg Caughlin and others) to compete against "Sportsman" racers. Does that practice seem equitable to you? Should Tiger Woods be allowed to compete on the same level playing grounds in the amateur tournaments? Kind of like shooting fish in a rain barrel in my opinion.

I see you're bringing up the pro versus amateur angle from other sports.

As far as I know, amateurs don't receive any prize money. Do you receive prize money when you win an NHRA event? Well, yes you do. Therefore, everybody that races in NHRA events is a pro.


-Toby

[Ed Fernandez]

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.

There you go again with the "communist manifesto".Where has it ever been stated that
home town racers should be allowed entry to any race?
You and Don are just disgrunted racers looking for handouts to make you more competitive.Brutal but factual.
Based on the frequent posts you make about our type of racing why do you continue to
pour massive doses of cash,as you sometimes remind us about,into this type of racing.
Maybe the show car circuit would suit you better.I've heard there's some real fierce infighting among that fraternity also.

[Jeff Lee]

Originally Posted by Toby Lang

I see you're bringing up the pro versus amateur angle from other sports.

As far as I know, amateurs don't receive any prize money. Do you receive prize money when you win an NHRA event? Well, yes you do. Therefore, everybody that races in NHRA events is a pro.


-Toby

So whats a "Sportsman". NHRA has a "Pro" category and a "Sportsman" category. You tell me, what's the difference?

[Jeff Lee]

Originally Posted by Ed Fernandez

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.

There you go again with the "communist manifesto".Where has it ever been stated that
home town racers should be allowed entry to any race?
You and Don are just disgrunted racers looking for handouts to make you more competitive.Brutal but factual.
Based on the frequent posts you make about our type of racing why do you continue to
pour massive doses of cash,as you sometimes remind us about,into this type of racing.
Maybe the show car circuit would suit you better.I've heard there's some real fierce infighting among that fraternity also.

The bold print would be a lie. The rest of your story is slanted to your view on Don and I. I can tell you that you are wrong. But go with it if it makes you happy.