|
|
|
|
|
Topic: Shortening the Grove
|
Email this topic to a friend |
Subscribe to this Topic
| Report this Topic to Moderator
|
|
Page 3 of 3 of 57 replies
|
|
|
|
|
September 04, 2019 at
04:01:55 PM
|
|
|
Joined:
|
04/23/2015
|
|
Posts:
|
881
|
|
|
Reply to:
Posted By: larsonfan on September 04 2019 at 05:28:39 AM
Never said they were.
|
Not meant directly for you larsonfan. And shortening the track would make for better racing and probably improve car counts. I just think there's ways to improve those things without changing the configuration. 25% of the races up there are awesome. They just need more consistency with track prep imo. As for the car counts in Pa......I have no idea how to convince people to spend (not invest) millions of dollars towards 410 sprint car racing.
|
|
|
|
|
September 04, 2019 at
04:49:30 PM
|
|
|
Joined:
|
10/26/2014
|
|
Posts:
|
2489
|
|
|
Reply to:
Posted By: larsonfan on September 04 2019 at 02:47:42 PM
What's the point of having a discussion board if you can't discuss anything? Man o man, some people just need to relax. I never said it was going to happen, just thought it would be interesting to talk about. Sheesh.
|
Agreed. There's nothing wrong with fans discussing hypothetical "what if's". I think everyone here knows that it won't happen. I actually enjoy these discussions. In fact, there's a lot of good points being made here and my own opinion has changed a bit based on the other points made here.
|
|
|
|
|
September 04, 2019 at
09:00:18 PM
|
|
|
Joined:
|
12/17/2009
|
|
Posts:
|
2254
|
|
|
Reply to:
Posted By: larsonfan on September 04 2019 at 02:47:42 PM
What's the point of having a discussion board if you can't discuss anything? Man o man, some people just need to relax. I never said it was going to happen, just thought it would be interesting to talk about. Sheesh.
|
Agreed LarsonFan, many people on here could stand to chill out. And I would add that it's been a very interesting discussion. Why else would a thread that was just started this morning generate so many replies? This board needs more of that!
|
|
|
|
|
|
September 04, 2019 at
09:22:34 PM
|
|
|
Joined:
|
06/04/2012
|
|
Posts:
|
1737
|
|
|
|
I guess in a hypothetical sense, the most cost efficient way of going about would be to just eliminate the inside guardrails, bridge, and buildings in the infield. Then put new dirt in the new corners that would shorten the total length of the track & maybe add more banking. That way you would happen to have a run off effect with no walls similar to an Attica or Lernerville. Would eliminate some safety issues, reduce cost of construction. Only issue then would be how many Tix you lose with eliminating the infield
|
|
|
|
|
September 05, 2019 at
11:17:49 AM
|
|
|
Joined:
|
08/18/2017
|
|
Posts:
|
16
|
|
|
Reply to:
Posted By: larsonfan on September 03 2019 at 02:57:21 PM
I see comments sometimes suggesting shortening Williams Grove. Though I don't have a dog in this hunt, I agree with those that say shorten it. That goes for any of the other big halfmiles like Selinsgrove, or even, gasp, Eldora. I'm in the camp of better racing on a bullring - easier on equipment, less relaince on engine, more reliance on setup and driver ability.
So with that said - how would you shorten Williams Grove? Pull 3 and 4 in, thereby keeping the existing grandstands/flag stand, facilities, etc. Or pull 1 and 2 in...or both?
Keep the bridge? Move beer hill? Keep the frontstretch and backstretch where they are? Add more banking?
What would be the best final configuration? High banked third or quarter?
Finally, how much would it cost to do?
Fun to think about and envision. I'm sure there are the big fast half mile(+) purest out there who think I need an ass whooping for even sugesting this!
|
Everybody complains about NASCAR's "Cookie Cutter" mile and a half tracks. Now everyone wants cookie cutter dirt tracks. Next everyone will want a participation trophy :-(
|
|
|
|
|
September 05, 2019 at
11:47:37 AM
|
|
|
Joined:
|
07/29/2010
|
|
Posts:
|
759
|
|
|
Reply to:
Posted By: Fairlaniac on September 05 2019 at 11:17:49 AM
Everybody complains about NASCAR's "Cookie Cutter" mile and a half tracks. Now everyone wants cookie cutter dirt tracks. Next everyone will want a participation trophy :-(
|
^^^^ worth repeating
I'll take the big old track with 17 cars over a new track and 30 cars.
Old Sharon - many times
New Sharon - 0
Haven't been to Selinsgrove in a long time. I better get there soon. I think it might go first.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
September 05, 2019 at
12:34:57 PM
|
|
|
Joined:
|
06/16/2014
|
|
Posts:
|
69
|
|
|
|
Get rid of infield parking.
Create a new turn 1/2 in the infield ala Bridgeport Speedway like. Then you could run both configurations.
Eliminate the bridge for safety.
Make it a Boy Scout Eagle Project - no cost.
|
|
|
|
September 05, 2019 at
02:19:31 PM
|
|
|
Joined:
|
03/24/2013
|
|
Posts:
|
1449
|
|
|
Reply to:
Posted By: wolfie2985 on September 05 2019 at 11:47:37 AM
^^^^ worth repeating
I'll take the big old track with 17 cars over a new track and 30 cars.
Old Sharon - many times
New Sharon - 0
Haven't been to Selinsgrove in a long time. I better get there soon. I think it might go first.
|
How is 17 cars better than 30 cars?
|
|
|
|
September 05, 2019 at
02:50:00 PM
|
|
|
Joined:
|
01/24/2018
|
|
Posts:
|
386
|
|
|
Reply to:
Posted By: Chuck_DeFrank on September 04 2019 at 12:00:44 PM
WOO measure the same way they measure every track they go to... .437 mile Eldora
WOO measured Williams Grove... .512 mile
No one has to agree with their measurements, but at least they measure them all the same way...
Largest Track the WOO actually raced at and wasn't rained out this year is .515 mile Knoxville...
Smallest Track the WOO actually raced at and wasn't rained out this year is .245 mile Fairbury Speedway...
My information all comes from WOO Twitter Page...
|
They get their measurements by measuring inside wall distance and outside wall distance, then averaging the two... But at Eldora nobody runs completely on the inside wall ALL THE WAY AROUND. On the other hand... running the outside wall all the way around does happen. I've measured the two "racing lines" on google earth and averaged them to find its 0.447-mile or 0.45 if I rounded up.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
September 05, 2019 at
04:13:32 PM
|
|
|
Joined:
|
09/14/2010
|
|
Posts:
|
7620
|
|
|
Reply to:
Posted By: lpjazz on September 04 2019 at 02:41:29 PM
If you think I am missing the point, then list the owners that fielded a car 15-20 years ago and then list the car owners right now with the same deep pockets.
The track was a big half mile 15-20 years ago and it is still a big half mile. That part has not changed. It was expensive to run the big half mile 15-20 years ago as well as today. It is also expensive to run a sprint car anywhere. Are their other factors that are associated with this discussion? You bet. I am not in disagreement of some of the other reasons provided, but I think my point on a lack of car owners with deep pockets is a valid one.
|
What I was trying to get at is, WHY are there less owners?
I don't know, but many people have suggested expenses of running big 1/2 miles
Just saying there are fewer Big $ owners doesn't mean much... why?
|
|
|
|
|
September 05, 2019 at
04:15:35 PM
|
|
|
Joined:
|
09/14/2010
|
|
Posts:
|
7620
|
|
|
Reply to:
Posted By: amyjur on September 04 2019 at 02:08:07 PM
I'm seeing your point but I also think there's more to it. I think the cost of racing in general is out of hand and as a result there are a lot of teams that can afford to run only one night a week. Look at the Sat night run down at both tracks and you can see there are multiple teams in that category. I believe part of the reason some, not all, choose to run a Sat night track is because the field is watered down as opposed to running on Fri. All the heavy hitters so to speak are going to be there on Fri but they will be split up on Sat thus giving a smaller team a chance to get a few spots closer to the front. If I can only afford to run one night a week, I'm running on Sat because my chances at a top 10 or even a top 5 are better than they are at the Grove. If the Grove would be changed and made smaller, do you think it would make a substantial difference in the car count? I don't. I will accept it might bring in a few but it's not going to make enough of a difference to justify the time and expense to change the track. If a team has only so much money to run one night a week, they only run one night a week and they are going to run where they feel they have the best chance.
|
I'm sure that makes sense, plenty of reasons that its too expensive. I never owned a sprint car team
|
|
|
|
|
September 05, 2019 at
04:32:10 PM
|
|
|
Joined:
|
06/20/2017
|
|
Posts:
|
498
|
|
|
Reply to:
Posted By: wolfie2985 on September 05 2019 at 11:47:37 AM
^^^^ worth repeating
I'll take the big old track with 17 cars over a new track and 30 cars.
Old Sharon - many times
New Sharon - 0
Haven't been to Selinsgrove in a long time. I better get there soon. I think it might go first.
|
New Sharon, especially with the red clay, is way better than 1/2 mile Sharon
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
September 05, 2019 at
04:35:25 PM
|
|
|
Joined:
|
03/22/2008
|
|
Posts:
|
2441
|
|
|
Reply to:
Posted By: amyjur on September 04 2019 at 03:48:21 PM
It's not simply about the where but who is there and the quality of that competition. For a one night a week team, it just makes more sense to run on a Sat. Ok, so they change the Grove. Now what? Are all these teams that currently only run either Lincoln or Port now going to be flocking to the Grove? No. You still haven't fixed the real problem. Teams that are currently able to run only one night a week aren't suddenly going to be able to run two. They still can only run one night and the likelihood that they will pick Sat night to run and not Fri night is very high because of the competition. Back in the 80's there were 3 410 tracks on a Sat night and all generally had good fields. Did all those cars go to the Grove the night before? Definitely not because there would have been 60+ car fields every night. Same reason then as now. Some only ran one night and they picked to run Sat because of the competition. Why do outsiders always say you haven't beaten the Posse until you win at the Grove? Because all the top guys are there each week but they get scattered at the Sat tracks. All this said, while the debate is interesting, it's totally pointless because I don't see it happening especially under current ownership.
|
Look at Williams Grove field this week compoared to Port and Lincoln. No way was the competition tougher at Willimas Grove. It used to be that way but your argument is at least a decade outdated, just like big, strung out, single-file, 1/2 mile paper clip tracks.
A
|
|
|
|
|
September 05, 2019 at
06:22:19 PM
|
|
|
Joined:
|
12/01/2004
|
|
Posts:
|
155
|
|
|
Reply to:
Posted By: revjimk on September 05 2019 at 04:13:32 PM
What I was trying to get at is, WHY are there less owners?
I don't know, but many people have suggested expenses of running big 1/2 miles
Just saying there are fewer Big $ owners doesn't mean much... why?
|
Here is a portion of my post from before:
Racing has always been expensive and yes it has become more and more expensive, but number of car owners is probably the biggest difference. Lack of car owners means lack of available rides which means lack of drivers and therefore not as many quality drivers. Central Pa still has some great drivers and some up and coming drivers, but it is not as deep as it once was and I believe it starts with fewer car owners. Plus, you have many drivers who have left to race with the outlaws and the all-stars.
When you have fewer big $ owners it dilutes the possible field because of the expense. The top drivers don't have the top of the line equipment and they also do not race as often. How many central drivers are racing 2-3 nights each weekend right now? Probably not as many as 15-20 years ago, but I do not know for sure. Changing WIlliams Grove to a smaller track is not the answer. Fewer big dollar owners is part of the problem. Why are there fewer big dollar owners? Again good question. but I do not have that answer. Maybe it is because the big dollar owners from the past were grass roots kind of guys. I think Bob Weikert would definitely fall into that category. I believe the big dollar guys from yesteryear also first got into racing and then they had that special something called wanting to be the best.
|
|
|
|
|
September 05, 2019 at
09:13:03 PM
|
|
|
Joined:
|
08/13/2005
|
|
Posts:
|
98
|
|
|
This message was edited on
September 05, 2019 at
09:20:17 PM by amyjur
Reply to:
Posted By: HoldenCaulfield on September 05 2019 at 04:35:25 PM
Look at Williams Grove field this week compoared to Port and Lincoln. No way was the competition tougher at Willimas Grove. It used to be that way but your argument is at least a decade outdated, just like big, strung out, single-file, 1/2 mile paper clip tracks.
|
You're using just one week to base your argument and still I wouldn't concede that Port had a tougher field. Yes Port had more cars but Was it easier to get a top 10 at Port or the Grove? I believe Port would be but I'm betting you'd say the Grove. Ports field was tougher this week than their norm with Deitrich, Dewease and Brown. However, looking at Ports top 10 from the prior two weeks and you get quite a different picture. Generally speaking over the long haul the Groves top 10 is going to be stiffer competition than either Sat track. Put the blame where it belongs and that's the cost of racing.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
September 06, 2019 at
12:01:56 PM
|
|
|
Joined:
|
07/29/2010
|
|
Posts:
|
759
|
|
|
|
I used to deny that I was resistant to change. Now I fess right up to it
|
|
|
|
|
September 06, 2019 at
02:09:57 PM
|
|
|
Joined:
|
05/26/2005
|
|
Posts:
|
3322
|
|
|
Reply to:
Posted By: amyjur on September 04 2019 at 02:08:07 PM
I'm seeing your point but I also think there's more to it. I think the cost of racing in general is out of hand and as a result there are a lot of teams that can afford to run only one night a week. Look at the Sat night run down at both tracks and you can see there are multiple teams in that category. I believe part of the reason some, not all, choose to run a Sat night track is because the field is watered down as opposed to running on Fri. All the heavy hitters so to speak are going to be there on Fri but they will be split up on Sat thus giving a smaller team a chance to get a few spots closer to the front. If I can only afford to run one night a week, I'm running on Sat because my chances at a top 10 or even a top 5 are better than they are at the Grove. If the Grove would be changed and made smaller, do you think it would make a substantial difference in the car count? I don't. I will accept it might bring in a few but it's not going to make enough of a difference to justify the time and expense to change the track. If a team has only so much money to run one night a week, they only run one night a week and they are going to run where they feel they have the best chance.
|
I suspect that you've hit on something else that's a big factor. The issue might not be the motor killer track as much as it is racing on a Friday night.
If a team races once a week, Saturday probably works out a lot better for logistics than Friday or Sunday. For most people, you don't have to get off work early to get everything to the track and you don't have to work early the next morning. It's my observation that Friday night tracks tend to attract local fans and local cars (usually the more affordable classes.) The higher test the cars are, the farther the teams usually travel. In southeastern S.D., a 410 sprint car race would have weekly competitors from 360 miles away.
|
|
|
|
|
September 07, 2019 at
05:14:55 PM
|
|
|
Joined:
|
12/26/2017
|
|
Posts:
|
8
|
|
|
Reply to:
Posted By: amyjur on September 04 2019 at 02:08:07 PM
I'm seeing your point but I also think there's more to it. I think the cost of racing in general is out of hand and as a result there are a lot of teams that can afford to run only one night a week. Look at the Sat night run down at both tracks and you can see there are multiple teams in that category. I believe part of the reason some, not all, choose to run a Sat night track is because the field is watered down as opposed to running on Fri. All the heavy hitters so to speak are going to be there on Fri but they will be split up on Sat thus giving a smaller team a chance to get a few spots closer to the front. If I can only afford to run one night a week, I'm running on Sat because my chances at a top 10 or even a top 5 are better than they are at the Grove. If the Grove would be changed and made smaller, do you think it would make a substantial difference in the car count? I don't. I will accept it might bring in a few but it's not going to make enough of a difference to justify the time and expense to change the track. If a team has only so much money to run one night a week, they only run one night a week and they are going to run where they feel they have the best chance.
|
Exactly! And even if they would change it, whether its smaller/bigger, for the better/worse, if a team doesn’t want to run on a Friday they’re not going to. It wouldn‘t change car counts. Cars would still have the same weekly expenses. When Lincoln doesn’t run they don’t all go to Port. When Port doesn’t run they don’t all go to Lincoln. Baps and Selinsgrove run uncontested just like the Grove and they don’t get 40-50 cars either. Teams are going to run what and where they want to. Just be happy we have as many cars as we do in our area.
|
|
|
