I’d like to make a few more points if I may.
Without meaning to upset anyone, Wayne Dirks, please remember that when you’re getting your “news” from an NHRA web site or publication you are reading propaganda. There is nothing whatsoever wrong with that as long as you bear in mind that it’s NHRA’s responsibility to paint themselves in the best light possible, so the odds are that you’re not getting the complete, unvarnished truth from them.
Let’s face it, it’s not in their best interests to completely report whatever took place regarding the decision to give four-wide racing another chance. To do so might open them to ridicule or question.
Karl, I remember how the latest incarnation of the PRO came about, which was about 20 years AFTER the two PRO/PRA races in Tulsa. I’m going to have to look into this, but as I recall it the first Tulsa race precluded running Indy at the same time due to the scheduling, but the second time around it was possible to run both, and some drivers did. I know as a journalist we flew back and forth between Indy and Tulsa to work both races.
This is the short version (consider it the Cliff Notes version), but it came about the year that the competitors still had electric clutch timers. Had to be around ’89. Gary Ormsby was still racing with Lee Beard as his tuner. NHRA had asked for a competitor vote on whether or not they wanted to allow electric clutch timers. The vote took place early in the spring of that year, when only Ormsby, Amato and Bernstein had the expensive timers. The vote was overwhelmingly against the continued use of them.
Unfortunately for the racers, in between the time the vote was taken and the end of the season two things happened. First, everyone, even the so-called “little guys,” had electric clutch timers by the time the Finals rolled around. Second, Graham Light had ascended to a position of power.
In the pits at the Finals the racers began discussing how they were all going to have to throw their electric timers away, or peddle them for pennies on the dollar to racers from Australia or Europe. Someone – and it may have been Frank Bradley – was tabbed to go to Graham to tell him everyone wanted to continue using the timers. Graham said no, probably in fear of knuckling under to the racers the first time they questioned something.
The racers retreated to Bradley’s rig back in the pits, and when they emerged the newest version of the PRO had been established.
Like, a lot of good it’s done them!
I’ll leave the FUCM story to someone else.
Bob, the nitro situation has potentially devastating results, but to my knowledge nitro’s been on the known carcinogen list for a long time.
In your next post you say you love drag racing but decry the way in which changes are introduced. You may have a point, but at the same time how would you suggest major changes be implemented? I’m asking because if we’re honest with ourselves we’ll admit that at the mere mention of a possible change many people will immediately be negative. It’s more the idea of a change than the change itself that concerns them.
John Waters, if you’re that disappointed by what you see in today’s drag racing then by all means do something else. You’ve admitted you don’t like much about it any more, and many of us empathize with you, BUT the drag racing the young people see today is the ONLY drag racing they know. To them it’s exciting, loud and exhilarating – and you are wrong in suggesting there’s no young people to replace you. They’re out there and drag racing needs them to survive. Those young people don’t have your history in the sport, so therefore have no negative comparisons to make. They never saw the Old Man run in his prime, they never saw Jungle, they never saw Sox & Martin, Jenkins and everyone else. To them Tony Schumacher and Ashley Force are superstars, and we shouldn’t begrudge them that.
Jon Asher
Senior Editor
Competitionplus.com
