Stock and Super Stock qualiying

[Fred Elsass]

What is the purpose????????????????????


I did an analyses of the top ten qualifiers several years ago and very seldom are they in the semi's


If you doubt this have NITRO JOE do it.



The only possible positive is you might get a bye run.



If you can run the index you are competitive.


I guess it is all EGO,. You know the mine is bigger than yours thing.


Oh well, have a go at me, will check back on your responses in a couple of weeks. It is ok to call me an A#$ H&**.


Just asking


Sarge

[MR DERBY CITY]

Only one purpose Sarge, to set the ladder. Someone has to be number one.

It’s the way we have been run since the inception of our class I believe. Not having a predetermined ladder based off qualification, competition could pick their first round opponent’s by just waiting and following them in. In a normal bracket race that’s fine because everyone is equal. We are not because of the possibility of heads up races during eliminations. Obviously cars are at a different performance level and advantage than others. Just my take. I take it you’re not a fan?

[JeremyDuncan]

Random Pairing sucks.

Would you have it laddered for 2nd rd on or random through out eliminations?

If laddered for 2nd round would you base the ladder of indexes, closest to dial in or reaction time?

[Bench Racer]

Originally Posted by Fred Elsass

What is the purpose????????????????????


I did an analyses of the top ten qualifiers several years ago and very seldom are they in the semi's


If you doubt this have NITRO JOE do it.



The only possible positive is you might get a bye run.



If you can run the index you are competitive.


I guess it is all EGO,. You know the mine is bigger than yours thing.


Oh well, have a go at me, will check back on your responses in a couple of weeks. It is ok to call me an A#$ H&**.


Just asking


Sarge

Sarge, I kinda got to agree with you. My late brother (David Jackson) had some fast Super Stockers over the over the last 40 years. We talked a lot about the racers that were always top qualifiers vs the finalist, Biondo and Bertozzi were always the first two that came up when talking about the finals. David said for the last 12 or so years "I can't drive a lick anymore but if I get em heads up I'll catch em at 1000foot mark and ride with them lol" Donald Jackson

[BRETV]

That's what makes Stock and Superstock such a great class. It's 2 types of racing, it has performance based heads up racing and bracket racing all wrapped in one. Some guys love the heads up stuff (mine is bigger than yours thing) that's where the qualifying comes into the picture. They're happy to qualify high and that makes them feel good and if they do well in the eliminator that's icing on the cake. Other guys like the bracket part better and play the qualifying game to set up the eliminator. It's been run this way from the beginning and IMHO it's WAY COOL!!!



Bret Velde
2003 ??/SA

[Randall Klein]

Qualifying is a known benchmark in a performance based class. Trying to extract maximum performance within fairly restrictive rules is the challenge. If you approach the line on "kill" you are acknowledging you may not take it home in one piece...stupid?, Yes but some thrive on the edge...there is great satisfaction in qualifying position even though
there is no real benefit

As Garth Brooks sings, you can stand outside the fire, life is not tried, it is merely survived, if you stand outside the fire

[B Parker]

Originally Posted by Randall Klein

Qualifying is a known benchmark in a performance based class. Trying to extract maximum performance within fairly restrictive rules is the challenge. If you approach the line on "kill" you are acknowledging you may not take it home in one piece...stupid?, Yes but some thrive on the edge...there is great satisfaction in qualifying position even though
there is no real benefit

As Garth Brooks sings, you can stand outside the fire, life is not tried, it is merely survived, if you stand outside the fire

Randall Whoever changed the AHFS this year to what we have now really has no idea about what makes some of us tic. Or maybe they have stock in racing oil companies. It used to be how many quarts you could get away with running without hurting your motor. Now it's how many can you run without making whip cream out of it and hurting parts. BP

[Mark Yacavone]

Some of you might remember (I'm sure Sarge will) when you had to wait 2-3 weeks to see who made the top 16.
First thing some would look at...Then the record page.
Maybe it's not such a big deal today, with store bought engines, transmissions, and complete cars,..plus, up to 128 cars that all run under the index.
I wouldn't want to see it changed though.
Maybe just give 10 pts. for no.1, and down to 1 pt. for 10th.

Look out...Incoming !

[james schaechter]

Originally Posted by Fred Elsass

What is the purpose????????????????????


I did an analyses of the top ten qualifiers several years ago and very seldom are they in the semi's


If you doubt this have NITRO JOE do it.



The only possible positive is you might get a bye run.



If you can run the index you are competitive.


I guess it is all EGO,. You know the mine is bigger than yours thing.


Oh well, have a go at me, will check back on your responses in a couple of weeks. It is ok to call me an A#$ H&**.


Just asking


Sarge

Some play the ladder, but most that do don’t have the car and hp to be number one.

I will say that because NHRA execs are no longer racers they don’t really understand how to support performance classes.

there are not as many incentives for racers to try and make their combos the best they can be.

On top of that, there are some combos that are so soft,the car can be really set up poorly and still look good on paper.

When you have cars that run well for what they are, they are efficient and well tuned, that is a satisfying moment even if not a number one qualifier.

My opinion is that everyone can have their own opinion. There is nothing wrong with having a goal to be number 1. That is not a bad thing in my view.

I do think the analysis would be interesting to see if there are any qualifying spots or ranges that equal more wins

. I would expect that if you analyze those racers that won the most races. Look to see where they qualified.

it might be that they qualify where they think it is best for them at thst race when they can.

Because very few can actually capture number one, it is naturally not going to produce the most wins.

I think if NHRA actually made qualifying meaningful instead of a participation award, the statistics would be different.

If a racer had to actually qualify to “make” the field, they would not be sandbagging or bring a car that was not prepared to have a shot to get in.

Maybe then , AHFS would work better for cars that are just ridiculous in terms if their low hp factors.