Comp 10 years ago.

Discussion in 'The Comp Buzz' started by David Eatom, Mar 13, 2017.

  1. Bob Book

    Bob Book Member

    Joined:
    Jan 20, 2006
    Messages:
    193
    Likes Received:
    17
    Another issue I see is all the self serving rule changes which only benefit those on top. .60 under use to be the fastest car at any race and now if you can't run .65-.70 under there's no use in even showing up. Doesn't anyone ever notice that if there's 17 cars at a race 15 of them are .60+ under and the bottom 2 likely just didn't make a good run. No class can survive if you formulate all the rules solely to benefit the " Haves" and leave the "Have Not's" with nothing but crumbs. When I first started you lost .05 if you went .610 under and guess what?? #1 was .598 under and #32 was .500 under. It wasn't until my 3rd national event that I qualified yet I ran almost .50 under at the first 2 I DNQ'd at. Now all we do is worry about mineshaft rules and everything to do with protecting those on top. If I had any say in it one of the first things I'd do is any run .71 under (And I don't care if it's a .980 correction) the racer would lose .001 for every .001 past .70 under - qualifying or eliminations. Why would anyone want to get involved in a class where the game is so rigged in favor of those on top?? It's exactly like NHRA Pro Stock the same small group always dominating leaving outsiders to wonder why anyone else even bothers to show up. I realize there are other issues at work here (As I stated in my previous post) but this surely doesn't help our cause...
     
  2. David Eatom

    David Eatom New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 13, 2017
    Messages:
    7
    Likes Received:
    11
    Ditto Bob. the system has became a self-serving mess to the comp purest.. the so-called good Air Races do not give index hits when they deserve it and it takes away index at altitude races for classes that at times do not deserve it. Fair and just index hits in the past were the great equalizer in comp making all classes competitive when the system was allowed to work.
     
  3. Charlie Yannetti

    Charlie Yannetti Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 25, 2006
    Messages:
    1,551
    Likes Received:
    57
    Excellent posts, and ideas, Mr Book...
     
  4. gkamp

    gkamp New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 20, 2010
    Messages:
    28
    Likes Received:
    22
    Bob, We are good friends but I am afraid I have to disagree with you. The last two major changes in comp were definatly not for the faster cars. No one that was running around .60 under wanted personal indexes or the .1 back. These rules were put in place to make the .40 - .50 under cars .50 to .60 under with the stroke of a pen to try and get them to come racing. The reason 15 out of 17 are .60 + under is because the same people that have been racing are still racing and doing their best not to use up the tenth that they didn't want to begin with.

    Greg
     
    #64 gkamp, Apr 3, 2017
    Last edited: Apr 3, 2017
    Backyard Bandit likes this.
  5. Raymond Martin

    Raymond Martin Active Member

    Joined:
    Nov 8, 2007
    Messages:
    377
    Likes Received:
    97
    429 K/AA Old Dude
    Greg:
    You are exactly right... It takes 3 to 4 years to get indexes in line and with the stroke of a pen they screw it up. Go to work and quit whining I say..
     
  6. Bob Book

    Bob Book Member

    Joined:
    Jan 20, 2006
    Messages:
    193
    Likes Received:
    17
    I probably worded it a little wrong as I know all the SRAC's are doing the best they can and I don't mean to be a back seat driver. My basic point is how far under the index everyone seems to think is necessary anymore to compete and how that impacts those on the outside looking in. I feel no index should ever have been given back - at any point in comps history and if we ever would have allowed things to run there course maybe it wouldn't be this way now. I've always supported the individual index - even realizing it allows those who don't work as hard - or spend the money and or the time - to compete with those who do but that's where not wanting to die a martyr comes in. Would we all rather be the baddest car on the planet - with nowhere to race - or open up the class rules to make it easier to compete?? I'd gladly give a little to have a place to race so my point is we should be looking for ways to make the .85 under cars have a more realistic index instead of worrying about mineshaft rules. The mineshaft rule is 1 example of the haves being taken care of when we need the have not's situation looked at. In a perfect world we could fill the class with cars of the quality similar to Greg Kamplain, Brian Browell, Frank Aragona etc., but it's not looking like that's possible in today's world. I'd like to see Steve Johnson, Bob & Fred Gillings, and the like back out racing. 1 of 2 things is going to have to happen for comp to have a sustainable future and it's either more cars or we're going to have to pony up the $$ to support the class without NHRA's help. A little of both is likely what it'll take to secure the classes future. Don't forget to keep in mind no one has more at stake in this situation than I do - my whole business model revolves around comps well being so I'm 100% behind doing about anything in my power to try and help.
     
  7. gkamp

    gkamp New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 20, 2010
    Messages:
    28
    Likes Received:
    22
    I have been trying to think of a good example to help us understand and or remember why the mineshaft rule was implemented. Lets say we have two people from the Midwest that have identical cars and just to take it to the extreme they both have small motors with single 750 carbs. They both run .60 under in div 3. one goes to Gainesville because he likes to get away from the cold and do a little early racing. For what ever the reason the other doesn't go. In Gainesville he can easily go .65-.70 under. He wants to win (because that's why he went) so he takes an .05 hit to do it. He goes back home and can only go .55 under in the Midwest air. So he works and spends some money to catch back up. So next year he is either going to stay home or go and shut off early to avoid the hit. With the mineshaft rule he has the .05 protection that keeps him going racing and taking it to the stripe.
    If this isn't a good enough reason to keep the rule we can see what we can do to get it changed but this is the reason it was implemented.

    Greg Kamplain
     
    Stephen Rosen likes this.
  8. 377 D/A

    377 D/A Member

    Joined:
    Mar 13, 2008
    Messages:
    278
    Likes Received:
    6
    problem being greg they have given index back 2 times since that rule was created, now it doesnt protect anyone because as you can attest to how many races were we at last year where the da was 3000 or worse and it was a "mineshaft". i was having a conversation with a guy the other day and it was kind of focused on a chassis that is for sale somewhere. the real topic of it was how many classes could he run with that car, now if he got that car it would add no new cars to comp just a different car with the same guy, all he was looking at was how to get around the personal index rule, that was it. is that the intended effect of all this?

    ian
     
  9. gkamp

    gkamp New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 20, 2010
    Messages:
    28
    Likes Received:
    22
    I believe the mineshaft rule was implemented in 2014. And for that year and 2015, for the most part, it only came into effect at true mineshaft races. in 2016 with the introduction of the personal index and every class getting a tenth back I would have to agree with you. It isn't doing what it was intended to do anymore. The protection is still there but its at races that shouldn't be considered mineshaft races. Like I said if it is something that needs looked at we can because as long as we qualify off of class index we are going to continue to have mineshaft where we really shouldn't. I know a lot of people are against qualifying off personal index but if we did it would start eliminating some of the mineshaft races.
    I believe anytime a new rule is introduced the first thing a person that runs comp thinks is how can I make this work to my advantage. The Personal Index and tenth back was brought about to entice lower budget teams to run comp. We still all hope that is the end result. Sounds to me like the guy you were talking to is a true comp racer.

    Greg
     
  10. Charlie Yannetti

    Charlie Yannetti Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 25, 2006
    Messages:
    1,551
    Likes Received:
    57

    The part of the story about "the same guy, different classes" to get around the PI rule, is actually pretty accurate.. just going by some discussions that I have recently had.. weight changes, induction changes, trans changes, etc, etc..

    I happen to be a fan of the PI system as a tool for leveling the playing field.. I believe it can be effective, as it does affect your Personal Index, regardless of what class you jump to.. at least that's the way I see it.. you can move to a new class clean, but as soon as you take PI hits, you own them in that class also.. there, hopefully, is something in the rule, as in when you take class index hits, that states how many classes you can jump to.. I believe that you can only take class index hits in two classes, and then you are stuck in those two classes..

    I do feel bad for those racers who have built a specific combination that doesn't allow them much movement.. you have a weight to cubic inch issue to worry about, and either you can't get light enough, or you have to carry too much weight.. so these are the guys that stay on the shelf, because to change classes may mean another engine.. many can't afford that these days..

    NOW, the "mineshaft rule" was a good thought when implemented, but with the index give backs, it's now on the side of ridiculous.. like Ian states, many races have fallen under that rule, and no indexes get adjusted.. we have seen fit to make 60 under cars, 80 under cars, not with power, and for what purpose, bragging rights??.. if this index saving act does not bring people back to the track, it serves no other purpose.. kinda reminds me of that stupid "altitude adjustment" crap.. might just be time to consider throwing both of these rules into the circular file.. might just work...

    And NHRA considering the National Event entry fees might also help... $330.00 for car and driver is starting get also be ridiculous... JUST SAYIN'...
     
    #70 Charlie Yannetti, Apr 7, 2017
    Last edited: Apr 7, 2017

Share This Page