Elimination of Buy Backs?

[Mike Bradley]

Many of you know I'm not a big fan of buy backs or re-entry into the main eliminations. Would the Saturday night bracket racer support a program that didn't have some sort of re-entry, buy back, format to the main eliminations? I realize this is a HUGE step from the way it's typically been done, especially in this part of the country. I welcome your thoughts and ideas.

Re-entry for or against?

Mike

[BHicks9411]

Most people don't like buybacks until they need them. I support ONE ROUND of buybacks. I DESPISE TWO ROUNDS of buybacks. Might as well start racing 3rd rd.

[Joe McCoy]

I don't support buy backs and only a few people have ever seen me Buy Back in my whole life. Many racers use the buy back every time they need to and can which is fine but I don't support it. They just pay for more practice......LOL. I would like to see BBs gone or held to first round only plus BBs could be run together and not just put back into the regular program. Last BB car goes into the regular race again. I know some tracks do that and you guys may also, I don't remember since I don't use it.......LOL. RM. Merry Christmas everyone.

[Rick Rafferty]

As Brian said, I don't like buy backs either till I need one.
No one likes doing all that it takes to get to the track and get put
on the trailer after 1st round without a chance to redeem yourself.

I, too, agree with only one round of bb and pairing bb's together with
final car going in with the rest of the field.
It's always frustrating to put out a tough racer first round then have to
possibly face him in round two.

I doubt that the majority would ever agree to NO BUY BACKS, but a
modification similar to the one described thus far may garner support.
My vote would be for something like this.

[Joe McCoy]

I better add this to clarify a little. A track has to make a profit to grow and prosper. If the track has a low car count then allowing a couple rounds of BB starts to make perfect sense to me. I still want them to run in a BB class til there is only one left. Not bad mouthing any tracks but it fries me when there is 200 cars and they do BBs for a regular purse and it takes all night to get the race run. That is just not in the racers best interest while the track does very well. RM

[Mike Bradley]

Very good points made by everyone. Rick touched on one of the things that has always made me question typical reentry programs. If someone puts out a heavy hitter first round and then has to possibly face that person again chances are they'll not be so fortunate the second time around. It would seem to me that it would a great motivational tool if a less experienced racer was to put a veteran on the trailer 1st round knowing he/she wouldn't be possibly lining up beside them for the next round.

I've thought as well about pairing all the reentry cars 2nd round then at least all the racers in the 3rd round would have won a round. Buy backs really aren't a great revenue booster for the track if extended beyond 1st round. I've crunched the numbers and seen times when it actually cost us money to extend buy backs into the later rounds not to mention adding time to the overall event.

I would love to be able to eliminate reentry into the main event for each class. Then after 1st round have a second chance race, with a nominal entry fee and purse, where all classes, box/no box, are run together. This is done in other areas of the country but is hard to do here in the south due to an over saturation of tracks in a given market.

It was enlightening to talk with other track owners at the track operators meeting in Greensboro Saturday and see the sheer look of horror on their faces when they look at this area. In THEIR opinion and IHRA', there's way to many tracks chasing to same finite number of participants in this area.

In order for something like this to work it would require a open minded racing community. Quiet frankly I don't think I can be this much of a trend setter right now. Change can be unsettling for most people so I think we'll need to go slow for the time being and see what the general theme is before the season kicks off. If reentry is a must, I like the 1st round only, reentry cars run each other 2nd round and good luck to each competitor.

I know I get long winded and ramble at times but I appreciate your willingness to read these post and respond accordingly. That's why the forum is here for everyone to bounce ideas back and forth in a constructive manner.

Mike

Mike

[BHicks9411]

You're on the right track. I would agree with buybacks running each other second round. Then 3rd round have everyone together. You won't have big enough car counts to run them separate from each other until there's one buyback car left. I think there would be some confusion 3rd and 4th rounds. Are you a buyback car or not? sort of thing. But like I said, you're on the right track.

[Joe McCoy]

Well here's a couple thoughts to ponder on as well. Track X does a few neat things and they don't have over whelming car counts. First is they run a 5 sec class as well as a Pro Class. They pay a few hundred bucks to win the 5 sec class. then the winner moves into the Pro barcket with a chance to win that. The neat part of that is it gets all the long cars and fast door cars away from the slower cars. If handled right it speeds the event up by better pairings of ETs. They also run the BBs together til only one survives and they too move into the Pro class. FB and FB buy backs don't run a 5 sec bracket since most FB cars aren't that fast. Just something to think about. RM

[Rick Rafferty]

1st Round BB only and pairing BB's in second round or second-chance race would be a great start to resolving some the issues discussed. Many of the regular racers read these posts but do not reply or offer their views - please take a moment and let everyone know how you feel. Hopefully, we can propose something new at the 2007 Drivers Meeting, take a vote and implement a new standard.

[BHicks9411]

You may already do this but for those who don't you should really check out dragraceresults.com. They have a message forum much like this called Bracket Talk. When the page comes up it is located on the left of the screen, titled Bracket Talk. Click this and on the next screen click the Bracket Talk section again. Then click the title General Discussion. You will find many a useful topic to LEARN about. A topic you'll find much like this one on the JPD site is titled Mooresville Dragway 2007. This topic is talking about all the Carolina tracks and the Carolina Coalition. Its talking about entry fees, buybacks, round money, payouts, car counts, and spectator attendence. My point is everyone is having the same problem in some sort of way. No one has the real answer. You know why? Cause there isn't one. There's better ways and worse ways but you'll never please everyone or every track. That's life though right:smile: .

[Rick Rafferty]

Great suggestion Brian! DRR is a great source of info - check it out!:smile:

[staginglt]

>>If the track has a low car count then allowing a couple rounds of BB starts to make perfect sense to me.

As Mike pointed out, a second round of buybacks can actually cost a track money due to paying out additional round money. (depends on actual number of cars in a particular round how this works out)

If they raised the entry fee $5 and went to No Buybacks, they could DOUBLE the round money. The "Win" figure would have to be lowered (which racers do themselves already by splitting), but they could keep the RU money the same (or perhaps even raise a little), and the semi-final money would then be just round money (which would be a higher total than what semis currently pays!) The bonus is that it would take one less round to win the event. People make more money, *and* get to the finals quicker. The net income for the track would be roughly equal to its current setup even with a 90% buyback rate! From the track's perspective, that's a lot of extra work to come out the same.

The track can also generate income by having an All-Run Gambler's race with an 80% payback, as Mike mentioned earlier.

If you "have" to do a re-entry program, what we did up north was call Re-Entries to the lanes right at the end of 1st round. They paid in the lanes, and an "R" was added to the end of their number. That way, you knew who was who, and the computer would skip them in points, since the number was different. Winners of that round advanced to 2nd round of the 'regular' race.

Y'all are lucky to have Mike at the helm. He genuinely cares about the track and its racers, and is working hard to make things better for everyone.

[Rick Rafferty]

Hello Michael Beard! You provide some of the most thoughtful discussion and creative ideas I have seen in the drag racing community. I enjoy your articles and appreciate your perspective on this great sport. This is a crucial issue that you have expressed some intriguing thoughts on and have reported on
recently. Please share more of your thoughts with us on this subject.
Thanks in advance for contributing to our discussion.

As you said Michael, all of the JPD Racers should be thankful for having a guy like Mike Bradley at the helm of our track. Many track owners don't give a rip.
Thanks Mike, Tim, Jeff and all of the JPD Staff.

[staginglt]

"Brake's on the left" :biggrin2:

Different tracks need different things. A place like Rockingham is a totally different animal, with ridiculous overhead. JPD, on the other hand, is in a very similar situation to my old home track, Beaver Springs Dragway, in central Pennsylvania. They're kind of out of the way, and don't have a very large population base to draw from. Well? If what you're doing isn't working, try something new. I commend Mike for thinking outside the box. And chances are, if you make the change, you'll hear complaints for a few weeks. When BSD instituted a Re-Entry program for the first time, in the early 90's, everybody complained (spend more money to race again, unfair for points, longer race). Then when they went back to No Buybacks a several years ago, people complained! LOL BSD went through some tough times, getting down to 80 cars, total. That's when they ditched buybacks... figured they didn't have anything to lose. Since then, car counts have doubled... 160 on a regular basis, and topping 300 cars on Memorial and Labor Day weekends every year. The track is a really tight knit family, and people have FUN racing there. Even though I haven't lived in that area for 6 years now, I check their website every week during the regular season to see pics and results. It'll always be home. www.beaversprings.com

If Mike follows through with his ideas, you may see me several times, in and around my IHRA Stock eliminator race schedule. I'd drive an extra half hour to run No Buyback races! If I beat you, stay beat! LOL If I get beat, I'll either get in the Gambler's race, or pack up and try again next time.

I checked out the photo gallery... the place looks really nice! Looking forward to racing with you some next year.

One thing that y'all can do to help, as racers, is participate on DRR, BracketNews, and other forums. Talk about Jefferson-Pageland, and what's going on there. Get the name out there, so people are thinking about it.

If you market to the same people, you're going to draw the same people. I'm constantly learning myself... I still work closely with Beaver Bob on BSD's program. Last year, my big question was: Why do we assume that everybody in the area knows about the track? How do we reach the new batch of college kids that come into the area universities every year?

We had a great program at Quaker City Raceway (I worked there for a year before getting the bug to go racing even more, and then started my own business). We worked a deal with Pizza Hut, and got our track schedule brochures in over 50 stores all over northeast Ohio! Like Bader taught me, "Everybody eats." Restaurants are great places to try to tie into to reach the masses.

'nuff for now...

-Michael

[furr980]

i aggree with michael and everybody else in favor of eliminating buy backs. you dont do it in any other form of drag racing other than local bracket racing. i think its the fact of either beating the same guy twice (normally the second time is in the later rounds) or paying that lil extra to stay alive. also you find out whos on their game every pass they make. its kinda like simulating the bracket finals all year long. if you happen to keep buy backs emliminate points from there on out. mooresville did that in '02 and i thought it was great because you found out ur true champion that year not who could buy back the most. anyways mostly people who buy back are goin for the money after that anyways. just my $.02

allen furr
62 chevy II FB

[DCInc]

The no buyback idea has a lot of merit. Even a 2nd chance race starting after maybe the 3rd round would be nice.

One of the things that some tracks around here did was call all BB cars to the lanes after 1st round, they ran each other and only the winners advanced to the 2nd round of the regular race. That way all 2nd round cars had won one round. I had no problem with this policy and would even support it.


Tom Drake

[Rick Rafferty]

I have not been around bracket racing very long, but it appears that "Buy Backs" have been around for so long that many think they can not do without them. The few that have responded to this subject feel they can do without buy backs. Most racing sports don't have them but some offer 2nd chance races or some type of consolation race. We should, too.

IMO, Once everyone gets a taste of more round money, more semi-money and not having to beat the guy you just beat or someone who has not won a round, they may like the idea of "No Buy Backs" and "More Money".

90% of the racers are paying for the winnings of the other 10%,
incuding the "Buy Backs".
When the odds become better for everyone to win something back, then the sport will begin to grow and thrive again.

Again, just my opinion - everyone is free to express theirs, as well.
That is what this forum is for.

[Mike Bradley]

To say the least I've been surprised at the far reaching discussion regarding reentry/buy-back's, or the handling of buy-back entries for the second round. Like Brian and others have stated earlier there are no simple right or wrong way to approach reentry's. I think if you allow reentry then they should run each other second round.

I like the no reentry format with a second chance gamblers race after 1st round. Have the box and no box cars run together but keep them separate as long as possible.

I want to welcome Michael Beard to the forum. I know he's worked with many track owners including Bill Bader, Beaver Bob and others as well as IHRA. I enjoy reading his columns in DRM. Maybe he'll pay us a visit in 2007 and show us Team Mopar. He would be right at home here with the strong fleet of Mopar racers we have each week.

Keep the thoughts and ideas flowing. J-P Dragway might just be a trend setter in 2007.

Mike Bradley

[MTODD358]

Mike, I Think Youe Idea Of Eliminating Buybacks ......is Awesome.....i Think It Should Be Done The Way U Suggested .....and That Is To Have A Constilation Race.....with Everyone Together....box And No Box........lets Go Back To The Way It Was!!!! It Was Much More Interesting That Way...........

[moparwife]

I have been reading all the posts concerning bb's and payouts, etc., but being a racers wife, I have a different list of concerns. SAFETY should be a top priority. What about teching cars? I certainly don't want Marty to run beside or behind a car leaking fluid. If Marty is leaking and I don't catch it, I hope someone else is there to stop him! All cars racing should be held to some kind of standard to ensure safety for themselves and the racers beside them on the track.
Track payout is not a top priority for me either because racing is not a JOB! We work all week and race day is our day to spend together with our extended (racing) family. Win or lose it's the fellowship with other racers that I enjoy. I haven't met a bracker racer yet that makes money at racing.
(Except for maybe Alonzo!)
Last year I thought a few times that we were at Lancaster Speedway instead of jpd. (You go there to see a fight and maybe a race will break out! )
Instead of fun it was fussing, arguing and poor sportsmanship. I realize that cars tear up and things go wrong but remember the future generation of racers are watching and learning from you.
Sorry to unload, but I'm not having fun anymore!
Mikala Steele

[CFH1250]

AMEN!!!!!!!!! I agree with you 100%!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[Mike Bradley]

Mikala you are 100% correct in saying safety should be the #1 priority in any motorsport competition. Do I feel like we have room for improvement regarding pre-race inspection? Absolutely! Now as far as once the race is underway I'll have to say we do a pretty good job of keeping the cars inspected while on the racing surface. Tim, Jeff or myself are always trying to be somewhere from the head of stagging to the starting line just to add another set of eyes to help with this.

Drag racing is a hobby for most just like playing golf, fishing, hunting, camping, you name it. You participate or don't participate because you enjoy it or don't enjoy it. Many people today loose sight of the importance of good sportsmanship. I attended a youth league baseball game a while back and was appalled at the outward display of unsportsmanlike like conduct between the parents, coaches and umpires. I thought to myself just what kind of example are they setting and what message are they sending these children. As was stated earlier, mechanical failure occurs. Chalk that up to "That's Racin'", fix the problem and be ready for the next event. If you red light, hit the guardrail, breakout whatever the case may be remember next week is a brand new race with a fresh start.

I still feel like we need to address format and payout structure for the long term health of drag racing. Reentry format and round money paid will allow more people, i.e. average weekly bracket racer, to keep returning to the track to race and feel good about the format and payout. Maybe one day if and when this deal implodes and the dust settles we'll go back to racing for trophies and keep the money out of it. But wait, there isn't a purse in little league so maybe we need a more inward change. That'll be a topic for another thread.LOL

Mike

[Tom 396]

Hello. My name is Tom Worthington. This is my first post on the JP messageboard. I think it may well be worth the effort of registering, though.

Let me first admit that I will not be running at Jefferson Pageland. I live in Rocky Mount, NC. Mapquest tells me that you are well over 200 miles away from me. The only bracket race I would consider going that far to run in would be the Team Bracket Finals. But I wouldn't do that anymore either, solely because they had (believe it or not) b*ybacks at the 2005 IHRA Division Team Bracket Finals. I qualified to go again in 2006, but didn't, because of the chance of b*ybacks being there again.

I know of Jefferson Pageland only because of my many past chats with Joe McCoy in the hotrodder.com chatroom, and because Michael Beard told me that you were considering dropping b*ybacks in 2007. That was when I started my Mapquest search. If you were 100 miles closer to me, I'd be at your doorway every weekend, provided there were no b*ybacks. Michael also told me that Piedmont was considering dropping all their b*ybacks. If so, I am definitely considering them in 2007.

I'll tell what I already do, because of my hatred of b*ybacks. I run for points at Northeast Dragway. Northeast is 110 miles from my front door. In Rocky Mount, there are about 7 other tracks that are closer. However, Northeast is the only one of that bunch that doesn't award points after a b*yback. I also run weekly at an unsanctioned track called Wayne County Speedway Dragstrip. They have no points system at WCS, but they also have NO b*ybacks.

I have never and will never use a b*yback. I've been bracket racing since the late 1970's. My "problem" with b*ybacks is quite simple. I think they are wrong. Dead wrong. The concept of purchasing a round win is wrong and cannot be made "right". Awarding points after a b*yback just makes it that much worse. I never much cared for the arguments about who made more money from b*ybacks, because that didn't change the fact that they are fundamentally wrong.

I never quit, in spite of b*ybacks, but I feel certain that many have. Try as you might, you aren't going to get folks who have quit bracket racing to post their opinions about anything bracket race related, on a bracket race messageboard. They obviously have no further interest. I plan to stick it out, even if there are b*ybacks available every round of the race. Of course, it really isn't a "race" with b*ybacks, but it's better than test and tune.

If a more "conventional" argument is needed, then there is the fact that a single round of b*ybacks nearly doubles the length of a bracket race. What? You don't agree? Think about it. The single round that is added is FIRST round. If you had to run the final round twice, it wouldn't add much time. Add first round, twice, and you have to run ALL the cars down the track again.

Also, b*ybacks favor the best racers. Of course, most good racers would argue that point, but it's obviously true. :smile: The only time poor racer A beats good racer B is on a lucky run. Those don't happen twice in one night (or they happen very infrequently in one night). The best customers are the poor racers. Think about that one too. 80% of your customers will lose more than they win, in a season, merely comparing entry fees to winnings. When you start hearing an argument that includes how the "other" expenses of bracket racing need to be offset somehow, you are obviously listening to somebody in that 20% category. Remember, the other 80% continue to run, even though their winnings don't even equal their entry fees.

The drop in bracket race popularity coincides with the advent of b*ybacks. That could just be a coincidence, or it might not be.

I will admit this, also. Dropping b*ybacks now will not suddenly increase the popularity of your bracket program. It MIGHT save it in the longer run, though. I certainly wish you much fortune, if you go that direction. I'll sure be watching. :smile: Take care. Tom Worthington.

http://www.hotrodder.com/Tom396

[Joe McCoy]

Mike , it makes me happy that you guys at least talk about things like this in a forum everyone can use to express opinions and thoughts. Ole Tom Worthington and I have talked about this very topic many times for many hours as far back as 5 or 6 yrs ago. The more people talk about and discuss things the more they ponder the consequences and rewards of what is happening to racing. Thanks for the site, a nice track, and good conversation. Happy New Year to all. JM

[Mike Bradley]

Happy New Year to you Joe. I've stated from the very beginning that my personal hands-on experience with the Motorsports Industry hasn't been decidedly drag racing. Tim and Jeff brought to the table a more rooted drag racing background but it wasn't bracket racing. The last two seasons I've tried to sit back and analyze exactly what bracket racing is all about here in the 21st century. I've come to the conclusion that there isn't a "one size fits all" change that's needed much less where to lay the blame for the decline in the overall motorsports picture.

Can we honestly say that top heavy purses, buybacks, reentries, dragsters, super fast footbrake cars, the list could go on and on, are the reason for the decline? I don't profess to have the answers. Do I feel like changes are needed? Absolutely! For the average weekly bracket race the purse should be structured where more racers are getting more round money earlier to possibly aid in their return each week. If a racer wants to chase a big money bracket race knowing on the front end that the chances of them at least wining their entry fee back requires a 5th round loss or better and can except those challenges then by all means chase the "Big Money". My focus here is the loyal weekly racer that's supporting the local tracks. Please understand what I'm conveying. They're isn't one thing wrong with chasing a Carolina Coalition, National Events, Pro-Am's etc. In terms of buybacks, I feel like this preys on the novice-average and helps the better funded racer more often than not. If you eliminate buybacks and say racer "A" is really pumped up and puts heavy hitter "B" on the trailer 1st round then not only is racer "A" stoked up now but ALL the lesser experienced racers have dodged that bullet for the entire main event. Many very smart people have shared with me that eliminating buybacks would in fact help the more experienced racer disproportionately. I'll confess, I can't embrace that thought process 100%. It will refocus a racers attention on the 1st round win. I've heard racers say that the 1st or 2nd rounds to them weren't as big a deal so long as they still had a buyback they could use if needed so they approached them like practice rounds. With the current class structures we seem to be missing a transitional class for people to start out in and then progress to the next level then the next level and so on. With the level of competition in footbrake today no wonder new want-to-be-drag-racers get frustrated after entering a hand full of races, loosing 1st round, buying back, and then loose 2nd or 3rd round. The track has to come up with classes and formats to allow more novice racers to compete and feel good about their chances.

In a perfect world there wouldn't have to be any buybacks. You could set a realistic purse for the main event and then have a 2nd chance gamblers race for all 1st round losers while keeping the box/no box cars separate as long as possible. Some programs use buybacks to add funding to the top without paying round money. There again more often the less experienced racer funding the minority money winners.

The message forum is just one tool to help us make our program the best it can be for our racers. Not all racers have a computer or feel comfortable posting on a forum. That doesn't diminish their valued input as a weekly racer.

Mike

[Tom 396]

"...My focus here is the loyal weekly racer that's supporting the local tracks..."

In my humble opinion, that is the only way that a bracket program makes any real sense. Once brackets have become the sole realm of traveling mercenaries, bracket racing will cease to make any sense at all. Well done. Take care. Tom Worthington.

http://www.hotrodder.com/Tom396

[Mike Bradley]

Tom I want to welcome you to the forum. I wish we were a little closer to you as we'd love to have you race with us whenever possible. I appreciate your insight into drag racing.

I honestly don't know if a change on the surface as radical as the elimination of buybacks would work in our market place. It would probably take several tracks working together to make the transition more appealing. We'll see what the majority of our races thing along these lines.

Mike

[Mike Bradley]

I think with the possible format change in the Summit Super Series it'll do what it was intended to in the very beginning. That is to give the local track a very strong program that encourages and rewards the weekly racer that supports his/her "home" track. A racer that supports his/her "home" track should be rewarded some way and the SSS might be the answer.

Mike

[Jamey Abercrombie]

I have been away from my computer for a couple of weeks and just saw the post about buy backs. As a married man with two children and a limited income, I like the idea of no buy backs or limited buy backs. Nothing is worse than entering third or forth round and pulling up beside the car that you put out in the first round. If the track needs buy backs in order to make money then I think that we need to keep them in order to keep our tracks running every week. If the track owners don't make any money with buy backs then lets get rid of buy backs.

Thanks,
Jamey Abercrombie

[staginglt]

>> I honestly don't know if a change on the surface as radical as the elimination of buybacks would work in our market place. It would probably take several tracks working together to make the transition more appealing.

Not necessarily, Mike! By being one of the few progressive tracks in the region, you allow racers to make a decision. If they like your program, they come race with you. If they prefer another, they go race there. Given the response we've seen on this board and elsewhere, you may end up having 'THE' place to go, because no one else offers exactly what you do.

[staginglt]

Right now you've got a whole bunch of tracks all doing the same thing. When the top-heavy purses began, a bidding war came with it. Now, we basically have 'big money' races everywhere, every week. Car counts stagnated for the most part, until Mooresville came under new leadership. They became 'the' track in North Carolina virtually overnight because their program was different than everyone else's (paying 2nd rnd win). You had a similar program in 2006, and if things come together, you'll have 'the next step' in the re-evolution of bracket racing... getting back to the roots.

The only real trick is just getting the word out to let people know who you are and where you are. I think you've seen that on DRR already... Pageland was something of a secret, but you've put yourself on the radar simply by participating in the forum.

[player]

I like the idea of just one round of buy backs because if you can't win one out of two rounds then you need to be on the trailer. As for running buy back cars together(what's the big deal) just run the second round and keep the race going. Trying to seperate winners from losers will just cause a big cluster. I personally don't care if I have to run the same man two or three times just as long as I go to the next round. Oh, I'm not that good if I lose then so what I'll be back next week to try again. To many people worry about who they have to run, why. Just run who you pull up beside and be done with it. If you get beat by someone who bought back then you just lost, plain and simple. I race just for fun and something to do not for a living. I work during the week to make money. If your bracket racing for money then your in the wrong class, you might want to go to grude racing or something. JP doesn't have a big enough crowd to run a 2nd chance race.

Well in all, cutting out buy backs is not gonna help JP grow. Yes, I would like to see just one round of buy backs. Maybe some $3,000 races(if the entry fee and all is right)will bring in some new racers. Well that's all see yaaaa!!!

[staginglt]

>> If your bracket racing for money then your in the wrong class
>> ...
>> Maybe some $3,000 races(if the entry fee and all is right)will bring in some new racers.

If money's the answer, then why is money not the answer? (or vice versa)

There are only so many racers available that are willing to support big money bracket racing. Even the Carolina Coalition isn't doing as well as it once did. Why? There's a certain group of racers that are always going to attend those events, regardless. They've lost the little guy. Little guys contribute to car count, and car count contributes to the purse and the track's bottom line.

>> Trying to seperate winners from losers will just cause a big cluster.

No, it doesn't. I've run in that type of event for years. It's not an issue. Running a re-entry race takes almost exactly the same amount of time as a race with one round of buybacks, and it's shorter than a race with two rounds of buybacks. The track also makes more money while being able to spread the money around better. It's a win-win.

$.02,

[Joe McCoy]

Greer for one runs a buy back class. First round losers can buy back but they all run each other in a BB round after first round is over. They stay in the BB class til only one car is left and that car goes back into the main program running for the main purse. It works well and nobody I know has had any issues with it. Greer also has a 5 second class. All the fast cars can run the 5 second class and the winner of the 5 sec class gets 300 bucks then advances to the regular program with the chance to win the purse of $1000. That gets most of the really fast cars grouped together and that really speeds the program up. They also pay 15 a round starting first round. The track is old and not the best, they have a curfew of 10 so they start early which sucks in the summer plus the pits suck and you have to run mufflers but they usually have a good turnout of cars. I always split and I can't think of one race I ever won where we didn't split so big purses usually mean 3 or 4 way splits which leads me to think most racers want a little something when the purse allows it and the big money purse isn't as important as some think. JMO, JM

[Mike Bradley]

Me personally, I can't see trying to "market" Pageland Dragway as a big money bracket racing facility. I think our primary focus needs to be on a healthy weekly racing series that rewards round winners in a way that psychologically and logically puts money in circulation to allow them to feel good about coming back each and every week there's a bracket race. With many other Carolina tracks chasing that "Big Money" racer I can't see where it would behoove us to follow suit. Many of our weekly racers are just like myself, average working class, that's looking for somewhere to participate in "their" hobby, drag racing.

I like the idea of having some format to ensure the round winners are rewarded. I would think as a racer it would be frustrating to be paired with a racer you had eliminated in a earlier round and then get beat by them. True you got beat fair and square but basically they bought a round to have another shot at YOU. If you run a reentry format at least all the reentry cars are racing each other with the winners transferring into the 2nd round. There's many ways to structure the format. I'm not saying one is absolutely right or wrong. In the traditional since buybacks basically help fund a program for the top money winners. Racing is racing and like most have stated, you do it for fun and bragging rights.:biggrin2:

Mike

[furr980]

player...why dont you care about buybacks. if you beat a guy in the first round then you face him in the 3rd or 4th round how is it fair to you that you go home and he moves on to the next round. i dont like that and thats not the way drag racing ought to be but thats the way it is because enough guys complained about running one run and going home, so they implemented this buyback rule. id bet most of those guys who complained are the ones who were trying to make a living out of it. the ones who had it to spend. im sorry, if you or I cant get it done first round then we have no business racing that night, and besides all a buyback is is a crutch for those who have money or those who cant get it done first but maybe more in the rest of the race. it doesnt make you a better racer. and id think that the novice would be more apt to coming out because the same rules are for everybody like a no buyback format or re-entry format. because he/she knows that if they win first round then in the second round they will be facing someone who also has a round win. how does this sound, two drivers win one round in a given race. driver A wins first round and goes to the second round. driver B loses first round, buys back, meets up with driver A in the second round and beats him. driver A loads up and goes home and driver B moves on. both won one round. ask yourself hows that fair? how is it that one guys bad luck is more timely than anothers? in my opinoin have no buy backs, that a way nobody gets jipped in the race with who buys back when. have a gamblers race for those who desire. design where one top car and footbrake car meet in the final. just my $.02

allen furr
62 chevy II FB:propeller:

[onebad camaro]

I think getting rid of buy backs would be the best thing that could happen to bracket racing at JPD.If you on your game then you win if not load it up and try again next week thats just part of racing at least the way it should be.I haven't raced there lately but if this format of no buy backs happens. I think a late of racer's would come from other tracks to get away from the buy the race game.Real racers race to win with passion not money.Good luck to everyone this coming year at JPD.Had a lot of good times there and one day hope to have some more so lets make this happen.

[onebad camaro]

I think getting rid of buy backs would be the best thing that could happen to bracket racing at JPD.If you are on your game then you win if not load it up and try again next week thats just part of racing at least the way it should be.I haven't raced there lately but if this format of no buy backs happens. I think a lot of racer's would come from other tracks to get away from the buy the race game.Real racers race to win with passion not with money.Good luck to everyone this coming year at JPD.Had a lot of good times there and one day hope to have some more so lets make this happen.

[player]

I'm sure everyone's opinion in the matter has it good and bad points. But I've been around JP going on 9 years and raced there for 6 years. I'm just stating a fact, cut out buybacks and its gonna run of regular racers, point blank. And to me keeping regular racers keeps the track running, not a bunch of racers saying they'll race here if they cut out buybacks. It doesn't matter to me if you buyback or not, I'll race at JP unless I fill like trying my luck at another track one weekend. But 9 out of 10 times I'll be at JP because I like my fellow racers and its 8 minutes from the house. We run hard all year and go to the Bracket Finals. I would like to see some of you show up at JP this year and race with us. It would be fun to have some new competition!!

[Mike Bradley]

I feel like there should be some sort of second chance race for 1st round losers. Most guys/gals race for fun. It would be nice to have as many passes down the track as possible while competing for something. It might be counter productive to have someone fairly new to the sport come in and get 2 time runs, then get handed a 1st round loss and have to go home. At least with a reentry race or gamblers race you get to practice your starting line and top end driving techniques at least one more round.

I see a lot of "chatter" regarding the elimination of buybacks and the idea that this format change would increase car counts. I hate to be skeptical but I can't get my arms around this notion. If that was the case then why not restructure the Coalition races if the car count is really flat. I don't know that the Coalition is down on cars. I just read what other people post pertaining to this topic.

Mike

[Tom 396]

"...I see a lot of "chatter" regarding the elimination of buybacks and the idea that this format change would increase car counts. I hate to be skeptical but I can't get my arms around this notion. If that was the case then why not restructure the Coalition races if the car count is really flat. I don't know that the Coalition is down on cars. I just read what other people post pertaining to this topic..."

Mike, you've got to do what you think is the best fit for your own situation. But remember that if you are going to compare your own situation to an existing one, be sure you are comparing apples to apples.

Big buck bracket races will continue to draw entries after all the other bracket racing has finished dying out. Remember class legal racing on a weekly basis at local tracks? Class legal isn't gone. It just isn't at the local tracks on a weekly basis anymore. Now a class legal competitor has to do a lot of traveling and cannot possibly run at only one or two tracks all year long. Big buck series races, especially ones that run for more than one day of the weekend, are going to appeal to the traveling mercenaries and/or those that have so much money they can't figure out how to spend it all. You looking to attract the motorhome crowd? Then stick with b*ybacks...lots of them. I don't think that crowd would care if you charged $200 a day to drive through the gate and then charged them another $100 for each round win (b*yback). And they'll be real "loyal" to you too. Right up until the day you have to cut a purse just to break even. Then watch how quick they turn on you.

I hate having to argue against b*ybacks on the basis of whether or not it will benefit this person or that person, though. The things are just dead wrong. I'll hear somebody say that they lost the first round, but went on to "win the race". I congratulate them, but I'm still thinking that they didn't "win" anything. They just bought and paid for it. I couldn't do that and feel good about it. Take care. Tom Worthington.

http://www.hotrodder.com/Tom396

[BHicks9411]

No Buybacks is risky. One Buyback is safe. Let's talk about something else. Sometimes you have to take a risk......and sometimes the grass looks greener on the other side. There isn't a eazy dry concrete answer. If there was then all tracks would be doing it and there would be no questions. I think we've covered the basis on this one:biggrin2: . Can we talk about something else?

What about purse?? What's the buyback matter if you don't know what you're racing for people??? You wanna take money off the top to distribute more round money right? Were's that money gonna come from. Current payout in PRO is 1200/250/75/75 or 1200/250/75, depending on 4 or 3 car semi. Not sure about footbrake but it is on the front page. What's some ideas here?? 600/500/250/250???? That's how I like splitting 4 ways in the semis. Some would go 400/400/400/400. But whatever. What cha think? Oh and that's not taking any off the top for round money so we're does that come from??

Thanks ahead of time for your answers:cool:

[BHicks9411]

I guess this is for Mike to answer as I know we all wonder. When we start the race we're thinking $1600 in the pot to split.......then we get to semi's and there's only 3 cars. Then we're told there's $1525 in the pot because there's only one semi. We the racer have always opposed this but people aren't gonna push the subject at that time with only $75 going away. BUT if you change the pot to for example my idea of 600/500/250/250, then the pot goes from $1600 to $1350:frown: . The 3rd place man would get his $250 but what about the other $250. The track wins that???:smile: . If so then I would suggest leaving the purse alone. Let us splitt it ourselves like we been a doing. Thanks.

[staginglt]

>> If that was the case then why not restructure the Coalition races if the car count is really flat.

CC races are doing "good enough", but there not what they once were, from what I understand. Unless they cut the purse in half, the same guys (the guys with money that expect to win anyway) are going to show up at them regardless. Right now, with two rounds of buybacks, you have to go 7-8 rounds to 'get in the split'. With only a tiny percentage of the racers winning the biggest percentage of the races, they lost some of the low buck guys that aren't willing to take a chance anymore. I have recommended changes to them. I heard through the grapevine about concerns that the CC promoters have... things I've been trying to tell them for a year! We'll find out after their banquet this weekend....

With the purse structure that I've suggest to Mike: Raise entry $5, make it 1 round of re-entry instead of buybacks (I never asked, do you guys do 1 or 2 rounds of buybacks there?) DOUBLE the round money, you'd have $20-$50 less in an even split, but you *will* make more money by end of the year. I've run the round by round numbers for track champs and average drivers alike to see how much each driver would spend and make with each purse structure (even took splits into account) and it works, hands down. With your current car count in Footbrake, going to re-entry also makes it a 6-round race, making it easier to get to the split. Top would be close on whether it'd go 6 or 7 rounds. (Need 46 cars and 80% re-entry to go 7 rounds) Only have to go 5 rounds in Footbrake to get in the split? Piece o' cake, right?

Since the track also makes more money with this, they could conceivably take $1-$2 per car and put it in a Bracket Finals fund. (I didn't run that idea past Mike yet! Hope he don't kill me!)

[staginglt]

>> at that time with only $75 going away

FYI, 6th round semifinal in Top under my proposal is $120, not $75... :-)

[staginglt]

Hey, Mike, are you still going to offer $100 to the guy who wins without splittin'? :eyeroll:

[furr980]

i dont know if elimination of buybacks would increase the car count but it will increase the importance of 1st and second rounds and also increase racing morale.

[Mike Bradley]

Sorry guys real busy today so here is a short post. Michael I hope once we establish a bottom-up purse it'll discourage people from feeling like they need to split on the back end. Better round money with good distribution may be the answer.

LOL You weren't supposed to share that with the masses. I'm not proud of it but yea I've stood at the head of staging and offered a $100 bill to the winner if they wouldn't split but race for it. This may be sending the wrong message somehow.

Let me catch my breath today and I'll post "real" thoughts later.

Mike

[BHicks9411]

I agree about the CC. I think though some people expect to much from the CC races. It will never be like it was in 02(the first year). Man it was like a bracket final back when they were still at Darlington. Cars everywhere. But as Michael said, the people that couldn't cut it for whatever reason quit going. Big thing with the CC for the average racer since the CC started is gas for their tow vehcile. Its almost, if not sometimes, doubled since then. While the payout has stayed the same or decreased. But whatever the reason's the CC is a good deal to me. Only problem I see is there needs to be someone over it. Not a track owner. When you have each track making their own rules like they do then it gets aggravating. The CC started out as a stand alone thing like Tony Brown's deal, TOP 8 Doorslammers and so on, with the tracks working together. Now the CC doesn't even have its own website. Its under Rockingham's now. Hmmnn. But the CC doesn't mean a hill of beans to JPD so I'm done:biggrin: .

[BHicks9411]

Michael, last year it was mostly 1st OR 2nd rd. buybacks if the car count was met or it was a IHRA points night. If not then it was 1st AND 2nd. a few times.

[Rick Rafferty]

Car counts have been steadily going down in the CC for the same reason they
have been going down at many tracks - Top Heavy Purses, Too Many Buy-Backs that lead to races taking forever to finish or not finished and 90+% of
the racers not taking home anything for their effort.

I'm still farily new to this sport, but I am passionate about it and it allows my dad & I an opportunity to spend some quality time together. We do it for the
sheer enjoyment of racing but we do enjoy winning and improving against all the tough racers out there. We are the type of racers that the CC has lost because you can win 3-5 rounds then come up against a hitter and go home with nothing.

I raced the CC for two years because I wanted to learn against the best in the Carolina's, which I did, but got discouraged because of the things I mentioned above. A lot racers have decided to run a local points series, as I have at JPD, rather than chasing the $ in the CC which is extremely difficult to get a piece of.

As Mike Bradley, Michael Beard and several others have expressed, there are a lot of ways we can make it better for everyone. I'm glad we are all willing to consider alternatives. I look forward to racing with everyone in 2007.

[Mike Bradley]

The previous format was 1st or 2nd round buybacks for IHRA point's races and 1st & 2nd round buybacks for non-point's races. We keep the format consistent for the point's races so ever thing was consistent. Buybacks cost us, the track, money last season. This has been the motivation for me to evaluate the true "value" in buybacks as it's done today not only for the track but for the racers as well.

The purse structure Michael and I have been modeling looks to be very rewarding for the racer's and the track. With a clear message being sent the last two seasons with purse splits on the back end the real focus now isn't a top heavy winner's purse. Nobody is ever going to race for the win without splitting so we should remove that layer of "negotiations" between racers toward the final rounds that can slow race pace. If we go ahead and set a final 4 car payout that is level then there won't be that temptation.

Mike

[furr980]

mike,
could the track pay both semis money if there is only 3 cars. because the 3 is better than four and too that would also deter spliting at that point as well...just a thought.

allen furr

[staginglt]

Heck, all this time I've been running numbers off of 1 round of buybacks! Even if you didn't change a THING, going to re-entry shortens your program and turns a loss into a tiny profit.

>> Nobody is ever going to race for the win without splitting

I'd never even HEARD of splitting until the late 90's. If the purse isn't all screwed up, I wouldn't split. You earn your keep. But if it *is* all topsy-turvy, sure I would. When I made it to the finals at the last CC race, and you're looking at $2,500/win, $500/ru, that's just STUPID. :banghead: I threw $100 back to my semi opponent. I wanted to run for $1,800 and $1,000 in the finals, but they whittled me down to $1,600/$1,200. Sad thing is, with two rounds of buybacks, towing, and race fuel, people *have* to split those kind of purses. If you get to the semis, you should at least be able to break even.

I'll be honest, I don't understand 'even' splits or 'race for $100' at all... that just shows how upside-down we've let things become. Guys shouldn't have to feel desperate just to get back what they just spent. By limiting eliminations to 1 round of re-entry, a lot of people don't spend as much as they used to, you put more round money into more people's hands (who are going to be able to give the track that money the next week!), and you still keep a solid payday up top. And the track makes out.

If you want to do a semi-big money race once or twice a year, I've got ideas for that, too. :cool:

[Mike Bradley]

I'll rest my case.

Michael you'll have to sharpen your salesmanship skills to get me to schedule and promote a "semi-big money" ET bracket race.LOL

Mike

[BHicks9411]

Mike, can we expect the 2007 schedule soon? And when the driver's meeting will be. There's already some schedule's out with some races coming up. Just trying to see what to do in February. Thanks.

[Mike Bradley]

Mike, can we expect the 2007 schedule soon?
Brian I'm having a little trouble nailing down our exact Division for 2007. It appears we may have been moved to Division-1 after all. I've tried unsuccessfully this week to confirm with IHRA whether we have or have not been moved. This potentially alterers our time frame a little. With the Division-2 Bracket Finals being earlier than Division-1 then we'd probably start our 2007 point's season in early March if we remain in Division-2. If we've indeed been moved over into Division-1 we could start a little later with our point's races.
And when the driver's meeting will be.
I'll try and have the drivers meeting date posted by Monday. We'll reopen next month but I don't foresee having any IHRA Summit Super Series point's races until March.

Mike

[furr980]

why are we being moved to division 1. that division has way too many tracks and cars :frown:. i, for one, dont wanna go to rockingham. that was one of the small factors for switching to JPD. division 2 dont have as many tracks as division 1. and i dont see why they cant put MIR and other northern division 1 tracks into division 3? that would make better since with the bracket finals being in rockingham. im still gonna run at JPD but that stinks being put BACK into division 1. know what i mean..

allen furr
62 chevy II FB:propeller:

[Mike Bradley]

The last count I had there was, counting us, 18 tracks in Division-1 and 13 in Division-2. I'm no rocket scientist but 18x42=756 by my calculation. Granted, that's assuming all 18 tracks bring a full field plus 2 alternates but still that's a ton of participants any way you dress it up.

Michael how about YOU calling Aaron or Skooter at home and confirming exactly what Division we'll be in for 2007. J/K

Mike

[CFH1250]

Could someone please!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! explain to me why anyone would rather drive 6 or 7 hours instead of 45 min or an hour:banghead: .....

[Mike Bradley]

Chad I can't answer that one for you. From a logistical standpoint Rockingham is a no brainier. Now if they have 700 or 800 participants at Rockingham I don't know what we'll do.LOL

[Mike Bradley]

Bracket Racer and former track operator Jok Nicholson brought up some payout structure questions in his recent article on Drag Racing Online:

http://www.dragracingonline.com/columns/deadon/ix_1-1.html

Copied and pasted from Michael Beard' forum.

Mike

[staginglt]

>> i dont see why they cant put MIR and other northern division 1 tracks into division 3?

I suggested that some time ago. Div. 3 is now down to 10 tracks, with Tri-State switching, and Quaker City going up for auction. Div.'s 4 and 5 are each at 9 tracks now.

Travel comparisons for VA tracks, Rockingham vs Pittsburgh
MIR - 2 hrs closer to Pitt
Sumerduck - 45 min closer to Pitt
Richmond - 25 min further to Pitt
Natural Bridge - 1 hr further to Pitt
Motor Mile - a bunch further to Pitt...

Then again, most of the southeastern tracks are closer to Rockingham than Alabama, so I guess that's a moot point. They should probably take 3-4 VA tracks up north to Div. 3, and still otherwise leave Div. 1 alone. (Still send SC to Alabama). That'd make each of them big enough to support payouts, but still manageable, logistically.

I had some ideas for the SSS that would actually make you WANT to drive to Alabama! Don't hold your breath, but we'll see how that goes.

>> Michael how about YOU calling Aaron or Skooter at home and confirming exactly what Division we'll be in for 2007

PPFFFF! Yah. If you asked the question point blank, I don't know how I could gather a better answer...

>> I'm no rocket scientist but 18x42=756 by my calculation

I've been told that the number of cars per track in Div. 1 has been reduced. Nobody's told me how many, though.

>> Now if they have 700 or 800 participants at Rockingham I don't know what we'll do.LOL

Race. A lot. Er, well, WAIT. A lot. I was working the gate at Darlington's marathon Bracket Finals gambler's race several years ago. They let Tom Kreager and I go back to the hotel at 3 a.m. Few hours of sleep, then back at it. They were just calling the finals to the lanes as people started coming in the next morning. Sam Kearns worked the starting line for 40 hrs straight. It was *over* 800 cars that year, and I think about 5 didn't buy back. That was just another one of these... :banghead:

I'm good with that... hopefully can try to qualify at both Rockingham and Pageland, on a limited schedule... go to both Bracket Finals.

VMP was never able to finish the Gambler's due to weather and curfew. Rockingham couldn't finish them because of weather. 43 deg., the place gets slick at night.

At Steele, AL, the Gambler's went until 1-2am area, if I recall. I announced the whole weekend. Lived off of "Hall's Defense" lozenges. Still sounded like Wolfman Jack by Sunday morning. Had a BLAST though!

>> Bracket Racer and former track operator Jok Nicholson brought up some payout structure questions

At least somebody's paying attention to all this. :eyeroll: Jok's a pretty smart cookie. Payout structures are *wildly* different up in the midwest, but I'm sure there's some good food for thought in it all.

[BHicks9411]

I was going to try and qualify for both bracket finals last year but IHRA told me I couldn't. They said I could only run for one division for the bracket finals. I didn't push it any further. I was gonna run ROCK and JP too.
I'm gonna do it this year though in case JP has to go to Alabama. The more cars the merrier to me. If its 3 in the morning and I'm still IN, I won't care what time it is or what time I gotta get started the next day. I'll just be happy to be there:biggrin2: .

[onebaddss]

from what i heard they have also moved rockinghams finals also but i dont know where. and also brian darlington has also got two cc races this year.

[staginglt]

If not at Rockingham, where? Fayetteville? I don't think any of the 1/8th mile tracks can physically handle the cars. Unless they use Darlington as a 'neutral' host track. But, that's the first I've heard anything about it being moved. I've been asking them to post something about the Bracket Finals, but they've dutifully ignored my question every time, even though the dates and locations for at least two of them are already set.

I *was* told that there are no big changes in the Summit Super Series this year.

[Mike Bradley]

I spoke with Joel Thompson with IHRA today. I had spoken with him last week to reconfirm that indeed we were still in Division-2 and would be going to Steele, Alabama. Apparently IHRA.com has always had us listed a being in Division-1 but I don't see how I missed seeing it on their website until now. Joel was going to have a conference call with Skooter tomorrow and try and nail down a few answers for us. The main thing for me is just knowing what, when, and where. We'll take care of the rest. I do agree with Chad, Rockingham is a great deal closer than Steele, Alabama. I'll post any information as it becomes available.

Mike

[furr980]

mike, if you were to do a gamblers race with 1st round losers would you consider letting some of the fans into it as well for say $10. do you think that could get more fan participation with the races or not. just a thought i had this morning with trying to make it more fan interactive because thats where we have to go with it. we need to make more appealing to them by interacting with them with our program. looking forward to the driver's meeting on feb. 10

allen furr
62 chevy II FB :propeller:

[Mike Bradley]

Allen I appreciate your thoughts on ways to bring more continuity to the bracket program.

Honestly I don't think there would be any fans/spectators willing to enter a gamblers race with the seasoned racer even if they were 1st round losers even with a free entry. In my opinion the level of competition would be decidedly against the novice entry.

I sincerely hope the reintroduction of "Hot Rod Trophy" class will spark some interest for new bracket racers. Maybe we need to look at a
"Fan Participation" night, say the 1st Saturday of each month that there's a bracket race. Allow anyone not entered in the bracket program have *free* entry to the "Fan Participation" race. The winner would receive a trophy and free entry to the very next race that has a "Hot Rod Trophy" class race. From the initial interest in the ATV drag race maybe we need to add an ATV class to our bracket program.:eek:

We need some sort of transitional class for the beginner. How many times is a new participant going to enter Footbrake, get hammered first round, buyback, then get nailed second round, will have spent $50 or more on entry fee's and made 4 passes down the track.

Maybe we need to structure the trophy class where all participants race 5 rounds then average their overall package for the event or average their E.T. for the 5 passes. This way they will have had a hit at the track for 5 rounds instead of possibly 1 or 2 rounds. If I was racing I would rather have 5 trips down the track instead of 1 or 2. Just thinking out loud as usual.

[furr980]

better thinking of course. im just thinking of different, "outside the box", ways of getting more people to the track. i would consider that thought of an ATV race on a saturday night with the bracket racers and not allow the bracket racers to enter that race. just trying to throw out more ideas to make the JPD experience better and thanks for listening to the racers. you dont know what that means to them

allen furr
62 chevy II FB :propeller:

[staginglt]

I think you'd just confuse a newbie with a best package average competition. Keep it simple, and make their experience something that they'll be able to apply to the next level, when they get there. While you have re-entry for the other categories, I would suggest giving Trophy cars can extra time trial.

One of the reasons guys love the Friday Night Street Racing program at Beaver Springs is that they get a lot of time trials. People are more likely to enter a Trophy race if they get more practice. We always ran 3 time trials. Some quickie seminars or at least make some 'beginner's guide' material available.

Speaking of which, if I hadn't mentioned it before, it might do some good to put a link on your website to my Guide to Bracket Racing. http://www.staginglight.com/guide/

[Mike Bradley]

I think you'd just confuse a newbie with a best package average competition. Keep it simple, and make their experience something that they'll be able to apply to the next level, when they get there. While you have re-entry for the other categories, I would suggest giving Trophy cars can extra time trial.
Absolutely! With all the bracket lingo, reaction time, breakout, double breakout, margin of victory and so on at times it might be a little intimidating to the beginner. Simplicity is the best recipe for any night at the race track.

Speaking of which, if I hadn't mentioned it before, it might do some good to put a link on your website to my Guide to Bracket Racing. http://www.staginglight.com/guide/

Great idea Michael. I've skimmed the "Guide to Bracket Racing" and it has a wealth of information geared toward the beginner racer and fan as well. I'll add a link from our site to the "Guide to Bracket Racing".

Mike

[BHicks9411]

I'm all for getting more people to the track however JPD can and I'll do what I can to help. But be prepared if/when you have TROPHY or ATV classes on the same night as a bracket race for: Street tires and knobby tires pulling water up to the starting line and then a bracket racer kindly:eek: pointing this out to the track"officials". You can have them go around the water but most don't know better and couldn't if they wanted to as most of the time the water box is as wide as the whole track. Just something to think about. I see it on Friday night test n tune all the time. One reason the track isn't as good on Friday's(sand,water) as it is on Saturday's.

[staginglt]

Here again, a little education goes a long way, as well as a good starting line crew! The burnout box personnel is equally important. There's a lot more to it than spraying water and brooming rubber. (Ask Justin Amelung on DRR... aka Waterbox Technician! LOL He was one of the best, used to work at QCR before he joined the military)

The burnout box configuration and the amount of water used can have a lot to do with it. Although it'll take a couple extra footsteps, if you broom the rubber toward the center of the track instead of to the sides, you'll make it easier for people to go around the water that need to, keeping them from tracking up much junk. If there's a safe place for people to do a dry hop before entering the burnout box, that would be good, and always remind people over the PA about checking their wheel wells for sand, pebbles, etc. When I worked for IHRA, I saw plenty of photos of cars leaving the line, with debris coming out of the rocker panel, falling right in front of a guy's slicks. Always made me wonder if that guy was saying "The track sucks!" ;)

There are places that I will drive around the water and back into the box, even with my race cars, if they use too much water. You don't need an excess on the front tires either!

The burnout box guy can control the pace of the race by what he does, so it's important for this to be a knowledgeable person. Not all tracks control *where* a car does their burnout. It's ok for a car to pull out of the water, but it doesn't have to be 3 feet in front of the water. I've seen the burnout box get out of control even at a National event before when they weren't taking charge there.

The starter needs to do much more than flick a switch, too. (Not saying your guy doesn't, as I've never been there - I'm speaking generally) If you bust your butt to *keep* the starting line clean, it'll stay better all day. I ran 500 cars down Quaker City before needing even a touchup on the line. Taking care of every little drop or pebble between every pair of cars is work, but rather than letting it build up, it really keeps the hook in the track. Might be tougher on an 1/8th mile track... not as much time between pairs. Gotta hustle. I guess I like doing a little bit of everything.... I just want to race more than any of the other things!

A lot of this stuff is really simple, common sense stuff, but it all adds up to a more efficient program that everyone will appreciate at the end of the day.

I do agree with not running ATV's on a regular bracket day. I'd run them on a street-legal bracket night, though.

Oh, not sure if I agree with it, but I've seen some tracks that put out cones on the starting line to move the 'groove' over for the trophy cars. Maybe one reason we never had a problem at Beaver is that even in Trophy, we allow a set of slicks. It's one of the easiest upgrades for newbie racers. Most of the faster trophy cars run slicks, and the slower ones usually don't even need more than a dry hop, so they don't have any detrimental effect on the starting line.

[Mike Bradley]

Our regular racers know the ATV reference was tongue and cheek. Our bracket program would be best left as a stand alone program. A Trophy Class might not stir quiet as much animosity as sport compact or other types of vehicles. Simplicity is the best policy.

Mike

[furr980]

WHY NOT HAVE THEM ON A BRACKET NIGHT? IF YOUR TRYING TO ATTRACT MORE PEOPLE INTO DRAG RACING WHY NOT HAVE THE ATV'S WITH THEM. IT COULD SPARK AND INTEREST, MAYBE NOT THE ATV RACERS, BUT IN THE PEOPLE THAT COME WITH THEM. ALSO IT CAN HELP EDUCATE THE NOVICE ATV OR TROPHY DRIVERS ON BRACKET RACING. ON A T-N-T NIGHT, THEY WONT GET THE AMPLE INFO ON BRACKET RACING. AND BESIDES THE MORE YOU KEEP THEM SEPERATE THE HARDER IT WILL TO GET THEM TO COME ON A SATURDAY NIGHT VERSUS A THURSDAY OR FRIDAY NIGHTS. JUST MY $.02

ALLEN FURR
62 CHEVY II FB :propeller:

[Mike Bradley]

Allen I commend you efforts and open mindedness. I think for Pageland Dragway the better approach would be to have a E.T. Bracket gamblers race as a side bonus along with a King Quad Event. Let the King Quad race be the main event and have the gamblers race as an added bonus for the bike racers. Then bracket racers wouldn't feel any pressure to come race if they felt uncomfortable for any reason. Yet we could expose the ATV fans to IHRA bracket racing at the same time.

Another concern would be safety. I wouldn't want to have 200 ATV', with half of them kids, and a full field of race cars. Our racers are very careful in the pits but I would hate for someone to get hurt.

It's all good. Variety is the spice of life.

Mike

[furr980]

I HEAR YA. I AGGREE WITH THE SAFETY ISSUE. I JUST WANT THE TRACKS TO REALIZE THE MORE YOU KEEP THE TNT CROWD FROM THE SATURDAY NITE CROWD THE MORE DIFFICULT ITS GONNA BE TO GET THE TNT CROWD TO COME ON A SATRUDAY NIGHT. FIND A NITCH THAT THE TNT CROWD WOULD WANNA SHOW UP ON A SATURDAY NIGHT BECAUSE THE TNT CROWD ARE MADE UP OF THE YOUNGER GENERATION LIKE MYSELF AND THEY ARE THE FUTURE OF OUR SPORT WETHER THE BABY BOOMERS WANNA ADMIT IT OR NOT. JUST MY $.02

ALLEN FURR
62 CHEVY II FB :propeller:

[staginglt]

I don't know where Mike stands on it, but somewhere else on this board, I recommended being open three days a week: 1 for test n' tune/heads-up type racing, 1 for street-legal bracket racing, and 1 for IHRA Bracket Racing. Can't make money if the gates aren't open! :cool:

[furr980]

I KNOW OF A LOCAL TRACK DOING THAT AND HAS DONE IT THROUGH 3 DIFFERENT OWNERS.

ALLEN FURR
62 CHEVY II FB :propeller: