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

Is there to much emphasis put on time trials during the nationals? Do you feel that they should be worth the same amount as the A main?

Discuss

It's about as perfect as system as you get in my opinion as every time a driver is on the track it is important.

Agreed...and it only works because Knoxville track prep USUALLY does a pretty good job of having the track not go away too much. If I remember correctly, Sammy went out last last year and still went top 10?

It is the ideal system for the ideal event and prevents sandbagging...you have to be good every time you hit the track. Quick time alone won't get you in the A on Saturday...

If this post isn't results, stories or something c
constructive, it isn't me! 
@BillWMedia
www.OpenWheel101.com

I never looked at it that way before. Very true it does prevent sandbagging.

The Nationals should not be like any other event and the whole idea is to be as close to perfect as possible in time trials, heats and the feature.

Perhaps the only improvement might be to use passing points in the heats. Sometimes in those early heats the track is a bit narrow and heavy and no one moves up at all.

To win the Nationals you have to earn it...

Ray Grimes and his family's legacy to Knoxville. The points system is what makes the guy who's best that week the winner. Since the points system went into effect in the late 70s, there haven't been many surprise winners and that makes a Knoxville champion a true champion. No flukes..you have to earn everything.

The time trial is in points the same as winning A main. It seems to be to important, but by feature time the fastest cars are in A main. Ii is the way Knoxville does it and it seems to work. There is so much luck in nationals. Yhe pill you draw for time trials, if in heat race you and another car get wrecked.

The last time I checked it is the same for every team that enters the race!! That being said, come prepared to do your very best on the track every time you are on the track!!! If a team, driver, or owner dosn't like the formate they have the stany at home option!!! Just saying!!!

Qualifying points should not be the same as A-Main points... The track changes A LOT (gets slower usually) from the time the first car goes out until the 50th car... Too much luck involved for my tastes. But it could be worse I guess.

For an average or even above average driver, this is true, but I've seen years where the track has been shot in qualifying and a heavy hitter will still lay out a top 10 time to get the much needed points.

The cream will rise to the crop in this scenario.

I think I know what Cedal was meaning in his original post. And I agree with Bill that it's a good system that prevents sandbagging........HOWEVER - should it really be 200 points going down just like the A feature???

I think that is what Cedar was gettin' at - and I agree. It seems to be too much emphasis on qualifying. time trials are already important - by doing 200 points going on down it's wayyy more.

Just a thought - and I am sincerely not meaning to make some sort of declaration that it is a failed system......but is it possible that 100 points for quick time and then descend by 1 or 2 (rather than 200 - just like the features) be better?

In principle I agree with the notion that there should not be as much emphasis on time trials as in the features, but unless there is something that really does work better - it is a moot point.

How much would could a wouldchuck chuck if a 
wouldchuck could chuck would

The system WAS perfect when the were TOTALLY inverting the heat races.

Now it is close to perfect.

The cream always rises to the top, NO ONE has ever won the Nats on luck alone.

Luck helps but by itself it won't win the Nats.

Great system the way it is. Only way to prevent sandbagging is to award same point totals as feature. The point system is perfect as it is.

I also agree with kooks: nobody wins the Nats on luck. Better yet, there is no such thing as "luck" in competitive motor-sports. It is fortune rather than luck; you have to put yourself in position for success to receive fortune. If it were luck then they would simply pill draw the champion.

Ya but what if the track is half a second slower when the 50th car qualifies compared to when the first car went out!? No matter how good the driver, it just doesn't seem right given so many critical points are up for grabs. I really don't see how qualifying should be as important as the A-Main. To be honest qualifying has always been boring to me (not just the nationals, any sprint race.) They try to make it exciting, the announcer "QUICK TIME" and everything but in reality it's just one car on track. Wake me up when the main events start.

I guess if it were up to me, I would give everyone 1 flying lap only (instead of 2) so that the track changes as little as possible over the course of 50 cars qualifying. Do this twice (each car still gets 2 laps, just not in a row..) so every car gets a lap on the track when the track is fresh and after it's been run in. It would take a lot longer (yawn) but it would be more fair and accurate I think.

And maybe on the second go around, invert the order the cars run in. And if we want to get really technical, average the 2 laps times instead of taking the best?

The 50th car has a better shot of starting near the front of their heat than the 1st car (and a better shot at starting at the front of the feature with the 8-car invert), but both still have to be hooked up to make a run in the feature. Regardless of what pill you draw you better be strong enough to put yourself in position for good fortune when the opportunity arises.

There's no real way to ensure the drivers get to qualify on the same track surface. There are things that you can't prepare for (part failures, other incidents, etc.) and pill draw is one of them.

I think the current system is as good as it will get.

Well just for kicks I am going to keep a close eye on qualy times on wed and thurs just to see how much the track slows from the first to the 50th car. I know it's not an exact science but with that many cars you can always see a trend with the track if it is getting slower or staying about the same. From my recollection I always noticed at the nationals that qualy times changed considerably over the course of 50 cars doing 2 laps each. For instance it's pretty telling when guys like kinser or schatz etc qualify later and dont come close to the fast time. That tells you its not the driver or equipment, it says the track has slowed.

Hmm I keep getting these ideas heh! How about the idea of getting rid of Friday scrambles and instead make it 3 qualifying nights (wed thurs fri), 33 +/- cars each night?

Just make sure you also keep track of where the top finishers in the heats start and where the top finishers in the features start. It all evens out; always has, always will.

Steve went out last (70th) one year and set fast time. And it was not a heavy track to start the night either.