Changes to National Records? (2 Viewers)

[Rat]

This is I have to say the worst single decision the NHRA has ever made since I have been a fan when I was 14 in 1998. I agree 1000% I could care less about "the little points." My main point is if they are gonna take away the 1%, it really means nothing as the only way most teams cannot back up a record is if the conditions are never there again in a weekend for a following run. I DO fully feel that if they take the 1% away fine, award the 20 to the team that does and that's it.

Another excellent point that I have to agree with is that I do not care how advanced the timing systems are, hiccups occur and are they gonna award a faux 338 to a possible 332 hypothetically speaking? Courtney's run was an exact 6 MPH error. I also feel this inhibits any team to ever have a desire to ever push for a National Record. What for now? For what? Who cares?

 

[Reese]

Thanks Paul. But if they want it to be more about winning and making it simpler, are they keeping the "little points"?

If its about winning the countdown should be next to be removed.

 

[Gordon]

Just a thought, but is it possible that they're doing this in an attempt to reduce oil downs? I'm not suggesting I believe it will accomplish that, I'm just asking the question.

If teams aren't going to be rewarded with points for re-setting a national record, nor are they required to back up a new national record ET within 1%, doesn't it lend itself to slightly less "pushing the envelope" and more work towards consistency? If my "thought" is even marginally close to accurate, then I'm guessing the Friday night testosterone session will be the next to go. But again, it's just a thought... and I'll go on the record as saying I'm against the new rules altogether.

It's appears to just be another attempt to align NHRA with NASCAR - they don't get points for setting a new qualifying speed or anything like that, do they?

 

[SoCal Racer]

I couldn't care less about the 1% rule but to take the points away...I can't wrap my head around that. I guess we'll never see an epic moment like "The Run" again.

I suspect the reasoning behind this is to keep teams from gunning for the record. No points? What's the point! My son and I were there for The Run and it was one of the most exciting moments in my decades of racing. The tension mounted throughout eliminations to a fever pitch for that final round. When Tony pulled out the win and set the record that team had done what seemed almost impossible. EPIC!

I asked Terry Blount earlier today why and this was his response. " A couple of reasons why we eliminated the bonus points. First, we want it to be uniform with speed. We stopped awarding points for speed several years ago. Second, we want the championship to be about winning and losing, not records, but we wanted to make it easier for drivers to set records, along with making it easier for fans and reporters to understand it."

The reason for stopping speed records was to dis-incentivize teams from deliberately running big speeds as a means to gain points; and especially in the wake of some top-end incidents. There was nothing difficult about setting records - you just had to back it up to ensure it was legit. Easier for fans? I'm sure everyone in the stands has a cell phone with a calculator, in case you can't calculate 1% in your head. This is just a dumbing down that detracts from the legitimacy of the sport.

And if they truly want to the championship to be about winning and losing... lose the Countdown! We don't need a contrived championship!

I still see absolutely no sense in doing this at all. Drag Racing has always been about numbers, and being as fast/quick as possbile. Now, setting a National ET Record means nothing in the big scheme of things, beyond bragging rights.

I agree 100% drag racing is all about numbers. But records (for fuel cars) haven't really mattered since the 1,000 foot era. That move disrespected every racer for the 60 years prior. And when they shorten the race to 660' (it's coming if they don't slow from the current 330 mph speeds) it will disrespect this crop of racers. "I'm the quickest ever!" will require a disclaimer as to what length track, and that just confuses fans.

 

[FABMAN]

I still see absolutely no sense in doing this at all. Drag Racing has always been about numbers, and being as fast/quick as possbile. Now, setting a National ET Record means nothing in the big scheme of things, beyond bragging rights.

It's call self fulfilling, racers take pride In seeing their names next to the record and as a fan now i like the resources being available to read. In my opinion they need to leave this alone.

 

[JRX]

Here's what some of the racers are saying....
http://motorracingpress.com/?p=5296
Some of NHRA’s Fastest Racers React to New Rule Concerning E.T. Record

http://motorracingpress.com/?p=5296

 

[Rat]

And they are not happy....I can't imagine it being it well liked and on twitter I only find 2 drivers stating they wish they kept the points.

 

[TSK]

Both fuel classes are spec categories. Why don't they just run against an index?
NHRA has killed off the need for innovation.
Personally, I would love to see a bunch of AA/GS cars instead of short fields in TF and FC.

 

[yoda]

When was the last time you saw a team that had the capabilities to set a national record oil the track?

 

[Nunz]

You can't totally blame NHRA for curbing innovation. We've reached a point where cars in every class are flying. This isn't the '60s where you could change a few things around and lose 2-3 tenths (just making an example). Any new development nowadays costs huge dollars. And, what are we trying to develop, fuel cars that run 350mph in 1000 ft? Because if you uncuffed the CCs, I bet that could happen. AA/GS cars were cool, still are, but I still really enjoy the spectacle of modern fuel cars. And 270+ mph alky cars. And pretty much everything else. We can't complain about having barely full fields and then in the same breath, complain that there's no innovation. Not enough teams that can afford the status quo let alone an R&D budget. Just a tough deal, the sport has matured, and it's really tricky to balance all the moving parts to make everyone happy. JMO

 

[Gordon]

You can't totally blame NHRA for curbing innovation. We've reached a point where cars in every class are flying. This isn't the '60s where you could change a few things around and lose 2-3 tenths (just making an example). Any new development nowadays costs huge dollars. And, what are we trying to develop, fuel cars that run 350mph in 1000 ft? Because if you uncuffed the CCs, I bet that could happen. AA/GS cars were cool, still are, but I still really enjoy the spectacle of modern fuel cars. And 270+ mph alky cars. And pretty much everything else. We can't complain about having barely full fields and then in the same breath, complain that there's no innovation. Not enough teams that can afford the status quo let alone an R&D budget. Just a tough deal, the sport has matured, and it's really tricky to balance all the moving parts to make everyone happy. JMO

Outstanding point. I think sometimes this simple, plain truth gets lost in the commotion.

On one hand we read posts where folks are up in arms about smaller car counts and fuel (or even PS) fields that aren't even full. As a paying customer, of course I wanna see as many professionals as possible... though personally, I enjoy the other classes just as much. Heck, some days I barely leave my seat because I'm so interested in what's happening on the drag strip. One can only watch teams disassemble and rebuild a fuel motor so many times before it becomes a little mundane.

Then on the other hand we read posts by folks who are upset about the lack of true innovation and the lack of performance gains. Those innovations and gains usually cost money - a LOT of money, especially today. The header pipes in Funny Car last season notwithstanding, most of the time performance costs more money than many of the bottom half teams can afford. So they wait around until the technology is available in the form of used parts. In the meantime, something new has come along and then they have to wait for that. It's a vicious cycle.

Still more, we read about the demise of the sport because of the multi-car teams. Sure, it probably has led to a situation where the smaller budget teams have a difficult, if not impossible time trying to compete, but you can't blame the folks who had the foresight to build these teams - that was an innovative move in it's day, and it was done with the intent of winning. That is still the name of the game at the end of the day.

And then we wanna complain when NHRA makes decisions with the intent of leveling the playing field so the aforementioned low-budget teams may actually have a chance. Is NHRA always right? No, of course not. But I've never walked a mile in their shoes, so I don't pretend to know what pressure they're dealing with from every conceivable direction (sponsors, track owners/operators, owners/teams, etc.). It's a delicate balance, no doubt, but as Gen. Colin Powell once said: "Sometimes being responsible means pissing people off."

I stand by what I said in an earlier post - I disagree with the decision to do away with both the 1% back-up and the points for a national record. That said, it will not prevent me from attending races in the future because I still love the smell of CH3NO2, I still love the thrill of the speed & sound, I still love being able to wander through the pits and chatting with the racers, crew chiefs, fans, etc., and I just generally enjoy the racing, regardless of class.

 

[Nunz]

Right on Gordon. To this day, I have a blast going to the races. Of course, having grown up in the sport, the needle is in too deep to ever come out. Running the NHRA or any race organization in this day and age is not an easy task. Hopefully, the new management will be successful in meeting today's challenges. Promoting race events today is nothing like it was in the '60s-'80s. Back to the thread, I don't really get why NHRA needed to change the national record situation. Have they addressed why they thought getting rid of the points was a good move? No matter what, points or no points, setting a national record will always be an accomplishment, especially today when it's really hard to do in any class. My dad was fortunate enough to set the NHRA speed record in A/A back in '70, and it still means a lot to him.

 

[Nunz]

Asher's take:

http://competitionplus.com/drag-rac...-with-jon-asher-no-points-for-records-why-not

 

[Bullard Anderson]

This has probably been said already, but I believe the NHRA took notice last year of the FC record setting runs. In their mind they want th guy who wins head to head to win the Championship. Not a guy who accumulated 40 points 2 races before Pomona by setting the record. Maybe allowing the +20 could have been kept in play until the Countdown.

 

[Reese]

If NHRA thinks that eliminating record points will slow the cars down, they are crazy. It is and always will be about out running the car in the other lane by any means necessary. I guess Jimmy Prock is sitting down right now saying "I just need to go A to B and hope the other car don't out run ours". I guess VHR and the rest of the PSM are giving up on trying to run 200mph. Why they just don't turn off the clocks like at those no prep races. If winning the championship is fake because of someone setting the record a couple of times to get the points, then what the countdown is?

 

[JB3]

Just a thought, but is it possible that they're doing this in an attempt to reduce oil downs? I'm not suggesting I believe it will accomplish that, I'm just asking the question.

If teams aren't going to be rewarded with points for re-setting a national record, nor are they required to back up a new national record ET within 1%, doesn't it lend itself to slightly less "pushing the envelope" and more work towards consistency? If my "thought" is even marginally close to accurate, then I'm guessing the Friday night testosterone session will be the next to go. But again, it's just a thought... and I'll go on the record as saying I'm against the new rules altogether.

It's appears to just be another attempt to align NHRA with NASCAR - they don't get points for setting a new qualifying speed or anything like that, do they?

I disagree with your NASCAR analogy. Its true about their records, but can anyone name me another sport (motorsport or otherwise) where there is anything but a paper acknowledgement given to anyone breaking a record in the sport? I don't believe it is done. Yes some Pro athletes may have a clause in their contract about $$ rewards for establishing a new milestone, but I bet those are few and far between.

In the context of 1% backups ...

• Did Roger Maris have to hit an extra 1% more homeruns to be sure he really broke Babe Ruth's HR record?
• Did Emmitt Smith have to rush for 1% more yards than Walter Peyton?

To me, sports records are (and always have been) nothing more than a chest puffing activity. Some lead to immortality, others don't. But regardless, no one gets rewarded with points or incentives toward the end of year.

 

[Gordon]

In the context of 1% backups ...

• Did Roger Maris have to hit an extra 1% more homeruns to be sure he really broke Babe Ruth's HR record?
• Did Emmitt Smith have to rush for 1% more yards than Walter Peyton?

To me, sports records are (and always have been) nothing more than a chest puffing activity. Some lead to immortality, others don't. But regardless, no one gets rewarded with points or incentives toward the end of year.

Okay, fair enough - the NASCAR analogy may have been weak.

But Roger Maris' homeruns and Emmitt Smith's rushing record didn't rely on electronic timers that were subject to malfunction or outside interference. Those records were tangible - everyone could see what happened with their own eyes. As a guy who has held the starter switch in my hand, I can say there are times when something happens with the timing system and everyone (tower, starter, etc.) scratches their head. It's rare, sure, but it does happen. Leaves, wrappers or some other items blowing across the beams are the most common cause, but bugs can trip a beam too. And unlike Maris' homeruns and Emmitt's rushing yards, people cannot "see" thousandths, hundredth's, or tenths of a second with their own eyes. The 1% backup was in place to show that the run wasn't a fluke - it was meant to prove that the team could match the performance again, or very nearly so. Maybe onboard computer data reduces the need for a 1% backup because the data should match what the timing systems shows, but that's a separate argument.

As for rewards or incentives at the end of the year, if you're including all sports than you haven't been paying attention because the age of the salary cap has led to many skill players having incentive laden contracts, particularly in football.

 

[mick]

how much faster is this sport going to go in pursuit of records?....with the given distance and tire/gear/engine/fuel specs. as written?
if we want 1000' racing to remain, maybe we should wrap our heads around the idea that eventually it isn't going to get any faster?
and it mite get slower? this sport enjoyed endless performance growth thru 2008, and continues now @ 1000'.....arguably the benchmark of the sport; but in the last 8 years we've watched the mph creep rite back to where it was in 2008 in 320 less feet.
how fast are we going to accelerate two human beings down a dragstrip to entertain fans and maybe set a new record?
i love new performance marks don't get me wrong, but when is fast too fast?....i think nhra is faced with this dilemma rite now.

 

[Gordon]

I don't disagree, Mike, but I think we all agree that no matter the changes, Crew Chiefs will still find new and innovative ways to outperform their competition, so why not reward them when they succeed?

I do agree that NHRA certainly faces a dilemma with respect to keeping the Professional Classes ahead of everyone else while also considering the safety of the drivers. If the professional categories are to remain at the top of the heap in terms of ET & speed, then they must continue to be the quickest and fastest cars on the grounds. NHRA can't limit Top Fuel or Funny Car to the point where Top Alcohol (or A/FD) and TAFC are just as quick... or worse, quicker. Yes, it's a fine line they must walk... no doubt.

 

[mick]

crew chiefs will always find a way to go faster, but if someday soon really fast is 320 then so be it......it's only a matter of time
till we see rules come into play that will slow these monsters, IMO it is only inevitable.

alcohol cars vs. nitro.....old argument.....busch vs. winston cup (i don't know what the new names are).....the pros are the pros
and on tv and featured as the exclusive, top bill, top tier nhra classes.....the alcohol cars are sportsman and are also on tv, but to a lesser degree. it matters not if their performance is similar......a drag racing junkie should be excited and sit on his/her hard bleacher seat all day long soaking up all the performance they can from multiple classes......the majority come for the show to see the names,
when they are between rounds it's hotdog, beer, bathroom, souvenir and pit time; and on sundays anymore there isn't much time anymore when the pros are not on the track.