Forum: HoseHeads Sprint Car General Forum (go)
Moderators: dirtonly  /  dmantx  /  hosehead

Unless you actually like watching cars racing side by side and passing each other...

So, I will once again ask the question.  If you are inverted, what is the incentive of being fast when on the track?  No one wants to answer this.  They just want to see everyone unload the car, run their asses off, and be punished by being inverted to 12th.  

So----if all series did an invert based on times and/or heat race finishes, what is the incentive for being fast.  Better yet, if I unload my car, why do I tell my driver to give it 100%?  That has to be answered first.  If there is no incentive for going 100%, drivers won't want to give 100% for fear of timing "too fast" and then you really don't have a good product anyways.   

What's the incentive?  

That's one perspective and I don't disagree but what's the fans or "grandstanders" incentive to pay 30 to 40 bucks to watch a car unload set fast time go uncontested in the heat and dash then lead every lap in a remember "Sprint" race only about ten minutes green to checker race? I mean if there's no fans there's no sport.

I would think money and points for qualifying and winning the heat races.  It can be done. Just takes time with the calculator and some thinking.

Maybe changing the invert from night to night might make it more interesting and prevent sand bagging?

Small minds can not understand the invert concept being a good one.

In a 500 mile event perhaps starting position is not as important but lately late race track position in NASCAR races has gotten really important as it is hard to pass on many tracks with the current crop of race cars. I call them IROC (remember them) or kit cars.

Uhhhh...yep

The incentive is to get as many points as possable if the race is ran like the Trophy cup or the Hangtown 100. The big money goes to the points leader even if he is not the first car to take the checkered flag. I can say the best races I've seen in the last 40 years were total inverted races.

Kofoid won 32k last year at the Hangtown 100 because he had high points and passed most if not all the cars in front of him. Same goes for the Trophy cup, high points starts 20th in the Sat. A main. As long as hes still high point man at the end of the race he went home with 29k this year(it goes up 1k a year). 

All inverted races are not bad. If they go by points, then you reward hard, fast driving.

Rod

Weren't redraws only invented to keep Steve from winning every race every year?  Now that competition is closer, probably should do away with it.

Brandon McLain
United Sprint Car Series Driver
2014 Season
National Rookie of the Year!
National Points - 8th
Southern Points - 3rd
Asphalt Points - 3rd
18 Races, 3 Top 5's, 14 Top 10's

From the perspective of a racer, what would be an equitable way to set up the line-up for a sprint car feature race that would be entertaining for the fans and make the racer want to come back next time?

Inverts were in existance since the 50s that I am aware of. fast guys always hated it

For me the incentive is points.  In a championship season if one guy averages 5th best time throughout the year and another guy averages 8th best time throughout the year.  Assuming there's a 2 point differential between positions in a 50 race season, that's a 300 point advantage.  I've gotta be honest though I don't know how the WOO point system works anymore but I'm assuming it's pretty close to the Wednesday and Thursday nights of the Knoxville Nationals.  In that case you could have a guy who doesn't even make the A main score more points than the feature winner (it's rare but totally possible).  So yes in that case timing fast gives you a distinct advantage even if you might end up starting further back some nights.

For your second question of why should you tell your driver to be fast.  Just looking at the results for Wednesday night of the nationals this year.  David Gravel set quick time with 15.468 which "penalized" him the 8th starting spot in the first heat.  Brady Bacon qualified 36th with a time of 16.145 which "gifted him the pole position that he didn't earn".  I didn't see this race, I'm just going off of the results but Gravel crashed though it says he was making progress.  Brady Bacon "unfairly won that race" and with his good fortunes of timing in 36th and then winning his heat race, he was rewarded with the 16th starting position in the A feature.  Again looking at the results only because I didn't see this race, David Gravel crashed in his heat race and finished last, started on the pole of the C main and won, started 21st in the B main and finished 11th.  Well Brady Bacon qualified 36th, won his heat and then finished 12th in the A feature.  Just looking at those results it looks like Bacon had a WAY better night than Gravel but when all was said and done Gravel's point total at the end of the night 403 and Bacon's is 408.  So IF you're a car owner by all means, tell your driver to slow down .65 seconds in time trials on a track like Knoxville so you can get that huge advantage of starting up front in your heat.  And then you better hope that nobody else has the same idea.  Honestly I kind of like the idea, it wouldn't hurt the show one bit.  As a fan are you going to notice if someone is going 1/2 second slower in qualifying?  Is that any worse than a guy riding in his position and not trying to race the guy in front of him because he's already got his transfer spot?

I know we disagree on this and I think this is why.  We view the importance of time trials different.  I'll be honest, I hate the whole idea of time trials but it is what it is.  The way I view a WOO event is there's three races or events that set the lineup for the feature, time trials, heats and the dash.  I guess the dash is the be all end all for the lineup of the feature but I guess I don't think time trials should carry the majority of the weight for lining up the event.  I'm guessing you view time trials as kind of seeding the competition and it being a major factor in who should win the feature?  But in the days when I really followed the WOO it was a huge luck of the draw with the earlier you timed, the faster you were.  Also there used to be guys who were really good at time trials but it didn't necessarily mean they were better racers.  Steve Kinser didn't set a lot of fast times but he was there when it counted.  As I've said before, I wish they would get rid of time trials because I think it creates a false sense of entitlement.

So, you bash those not wanting inverts as having small minds, but then in your final sentence you outline why inverts, in reality, won't work properly in today's winged 410 racing.   

For the most part, everyone has kept it civilized, which is why I enjoy this forum more than the Facebook pages.

A couple of thoughts:

I don't have a problem with inverts as long as there is an incentive to go fast when the cars hit the track. Right now, there's no incentive for that in a lot of cases if inverts are involved.  (see the joke known as the King's Royal qualifying system)   So, some of you have some great ideas.  Points for qualifying.  Points for heat race finish.  Etc, etc. 

 I'm hoping by "points" we are talking about points for the evening and not series points, correct?  Much like the Knoxville Nationals points system to determine starting order on Saturday?  I like this system the best of all formats in racing.  Everyone gets the best of both worlds. Cars are inverted based on qualifying time.  You MUST qualify fast----your goal is to start on row 4 of the heat.  You MUST try to gain every spot possible in the heat races.  And finally, you MUST try to gain every position possible during your preliminary feature.  As much as everyone loves this format, as I do, I still heard nothing but non-stop bitching and whining at the actual event about Larson/Rico front row.  Comments like "it's like giving them the race" or "make them earn it."  ????  Isn't that what they did in the prelim night running the inverts? 

I hope when some aren't referring to "points" as giving championship points to drivers for qualifying and heat finishes and then inverting them in the feature too.  Everyone complains about having to sit in the stands and watch a follow the leader race where the fastest car wins wire to wire.  How can that possibly be worst than watching the 12th fastest car of the night run away with a feature wire to wire, while the 4 quickest cars run from 12th to 8th?   Stupid in my opinion.  They're not getting to the front guys.  The 12th place car is not much slower than the 1st and 2nd place car and in most cases, being as it's a sprint, the race will be over before anyone can run them down. 

I know some think this will "shake it's way out" during the season, and yes it will.  But, the Outlaws and HL series should not be about watching middle of the road cars being given a chance to win because of handicapping.  It should be about beating the best.

Once again, some want to claim a race is boring if won from the front 2 rows.  In the same breath, they refer back to Kinser running through a field of 305's and 360's as exciting.  Personally, I find Donny Schatz win in the 2013 Nationals from the B-main to be far more of an accomplishment than Wolfgang running from the D to the A in 1990.  JMO though.  

A Knoxville Nationals(-ish) format each night. (not exactly the same, but the same concept) Points for qualifying.  8-car invert for heats.  Points for heat finish.  Points for passing in heats.  No transfer spots-----just points!!!   For instance, winning your heat with the 24th fastest time doesn't "earn" you an A-main spot unless your points add up to an A-main starting spot.  Line up features straight up on points or do a mini invert of 4 or 6 if that makes everyone happy.   Tah-dah!!!!!   Best of both worlds.  All of the invert groupies get to see inverted races in the heats.  People like me who like to see drivers rewarded for their performance, are rewarded by getting the correct spots in the feature event.  

Inverts can be made to work but some folks will never want to admit that. They are busy trying to twist peoples words around. Not creative types I suspect. Perhaps they are never happy in life with anything?

I think the season points standings should be determined by the finishing positions for the nights events. 

As long as the teams come to race there will be racing. Streaming services will show the races good or bad and the announcers will try to make them seem exciting no matter what. Keeping fans and getting more fans in the stands is what the tracks need and want. Events that are to long will and are killing attendance some.  It has done that for MLB is particular. MLB has gotten better but still needs improvements. NFL, NHL, NBA could all stand to shoprten up the event times. NASCAR suffers from the same time problem in my opinion. Thankfully I have and use a DVR.  Prices are becoming more of a factor all the time for everything for many people.

I'm not interested in seeing freight train racing.  Then I might as well watch it on TV and skip the boring parts. However I like sitting in the stands for events.  I usually go to the races with friends so we kill the boring times shooting the bull. If other people/teams/cars start to win that is not necessarily a terrible thing. Inverts can be adjusted.

What happens come dash time ? Drivers pull pills,  they make these races 8 laps,  if guys don't get good starts they pretty much get in whichever line in the fastest and hold there position.  They have no traffic to slow the front runners down.  The dash just gives guys the opportunity to make final adjustments on the cars. That alone is unfair to the cars that made the feature thru there heat race.

Raise the purse on the dash. 

Make it 15 laps, with  pill draws for all cars that qualified in there heat. 

Where you finish is your starting spot in the feature. 

I like the dashes especially when there are two. One for the inside row and one for the outside row.  I agree that the dashes should be longer. Maybe two laps for each car?  Top two, three, four or five qualifiers and the winners of the heats or top finishers other than the top qualifiers. Number of racers in the dash matches the number of heats times two.

I would say the incentive to run fast is to make the invert in the first place. It means you're starting somewhere near the front. The differences in qualifying are so small nowadays, it's tough to risk sandbagging. If you try it you might miss the invert and start behind those cars. A small invert works in my opinion.

People like to bring up the Kings Royal format, but lets be honest that's an extreme example. No one else does a 36 car invert for TT. I'm not really a fan of this race's format. Scale of 1-10? I give it a 3.

I like the PA Speedweek format. The fast timer for each heat starts 4th. The second fastest guy starts 1st, third fastest guy starts 2nd, and fourth fastest starts 3rd. If the fastest guy who was "penalized" simply maintains his position he makes the dash with the heat winner. If he drives forward and wins? He's the only guy to make the dash.

The invert draw for the A is usually between 8-10 guys depending on car count. You end up still starting towards the front and providing a good balance for racers as well as fans. 

I love it.  My only tweak would be that maybe an 8 car invert for the heats might be a little aggressive, I would go with a 6 car invert for the heats on a "normal" racing night.  I personally don't like time trials but if they had to stay, this is a great way.  I would rather combine the time trials and heats for the starting lineup of the feature and not make time trials weigh more in the lineup.  What I really like about this though is passing points in heats, this answers your dilemna about penalizing guys who are fast, they have the potential to gain more points than people starting in front of them.  I REALLY love having no transfer spots.  I have seen too many heat races where a driver will ride in their position because it doesn't do them any good to pass the car in front of them, so why take the chance of wrecking a car by racing someone?  I've heard a story about the 1958 NFL Championship game, which went into overtime.  The Colts got the ball first in OT and in the huddle someone asked Johnny Unitas what the rules were to win the game and his response was "I have no idea but if we're going to win this, we need to go down and score, that's all we can do".  I heard another fan say that passing points make it difficult for the fans to follow.  But honestly I think that's ok.  I would rather a racer know if he wants the best starting position he needs to finish as high as possible.  And honestly I really don't think an invert is necessary for the feature.  Like I've said before, if the track is decent, I think anyone in the first three rows can win the race, even further back if they nail the setup better than anyone else and get some timely cautions.  On top of that we've seen some entertaining features with the current format.  My only issue is making the rest of the night more entertaining.

Your point about making the rest of the night entertaining is spot on. That is also important.

Size of the inverts in heat races are a tough call I think. There needs to be enough laps to give everyone a chance to pass cars.

As others have said maybe a points system that includes qualifying and heat points. Every position is worth a point? Hard to do on a one night show but could be done. 30 cars, qualifying points go down by one per position. Heats completely inverted and each position is worth a point. Slower qualifier wins the heat after qualifying bad maybe that moves him into the feature? Maybe fast qualifyer runs 8th and he missed the invert. Mid pack qualifyer wins the heat and makes the dash? Mid pack qualifyer finishes 8th and missed the feature? Guess simulations would have to be run. Best solution is to un-hook the cars so they actually can pass but that will never happen.