HoseHeads.com | HoseHeads Classifieds | Racer's Auction
Home | Register | Contact | Verify Email | FAQ |
Blogs | Photo Gallery | Press Release | Results | HoseheadsClassifieds.com


Welcome Guest. Already registered? Please Login

 

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


Records per page
 
Topic: New WoO format Sat at Knoxville -- thoughts? Email this topic to a friend | Subscribe to this TopicReport this Topic to Moderator
Page 1 of 2   of  20 replies
chilly
June 15, 2015 at 02:52:15 PM
Joined: 12/01/2004
Posts: 975
Reply

Instead of piggy-backing on the prior thread that had thoughts on what WOULD happen... thought I'd start a new thread on what actually DID happen last Sat.  My first impression is that the format stinks - puts too much stock in the draw.  It can put certain drivers/cars at just as much advantage/disadvantage as the old format.  

In Flight #1, here were the top drivers and their respective rank in the Knoxville/WoO pts standings:

K'ville:  Lasoski (1), Brown (5), Tatnell (8), Schneiderman (12), Selvage (13), A-Mac (14), and Bunton (15) -- avg of 8.75

WoO:  Schatz (1), K. Madsen (3), Gravel (9), K. Kinser (10), Schuchart (11), and Allen (13) -- avg of 7.8

Invaders:  Veal, S. Kinser, and Marks

In Flight #2:  

K'ville:  I. Madsen (3), T-Mac (4), Zomer (6), Heskin (7), TK (9), Jeffrey (10), and Maeschen (11) - avg of 7.14

WoO:  Stewart (2), Sweet (4), Saldana (5), McMahan (6), Pittman (7), and Sides (8) -- avg of 5.33

Invaders:  Swindell

***

The reason (I think!?) for the new format was to make it more fair for drivers (ie, top WoO drivers) that draw a late number when the track is dryslick and slowing down (theoretically putting them at a disadvantage).  So on Saturday the track was dryslick and slowing down (check), a driver (ie, top WoO driver) drew a poor number (Saldana drew 37th out of 42 that signed in -- check) ... and ... and ... he ripped off a 15.591, which would've been good enough for 3rd overall.  Sweet.

My other rub with the format is when some of the faster guys in qualifying (Saldana/Pittman) didn't make it out of their heat.  The new format doesn't take the total population into account - just your flight.  Lasoski was a tenth faster than Jeffrey/Swindell, but since he was in a different flight, he didn't get bumped into the dash ... Jeffrey/Swindell did.  I'm not a Lasoski fan by any stretch of the imagination, but how is that fair to him?  You could say, well.... he was in the first flight and the track slowed down a ton... so it's only fair to compare him to just flight #1 ... but Saldana came out damn near last and was 3rd quick overall... doesn't seem right to me.

The other thing that is crazy to me is how much depth there was in flight #2.  Sure flight #1 has top-tier talent, but the depth in flight #2 is crazy.  The only way it could've possibly been worse would've been to trade K. Madsen for Sides!  If you look at the top 7 in heats #3 and 4 and compare it to the top 7 in heats #1 and 2...  it's pretty clear to me which group was loaded.  The end result of the disparity in talent was Stewart/TK having to pass Saldana/Pittman to get into the show in B Main #2... which even on a track that is passable, is asking a lot.  

This was the first show with the new format, and I'm sure they didn't know exactly how it would play out... but color me NOT a fan.  If you're going to rely so heavily on the draw, a passing pts format would do just fine.  This format is coming to a track near you PA Posse fans... have fun!  

 

 




SprintFan16
MyWebsite
June 15, 2015 at 03:14:47 PM
Joined: 05/03/2007
Posts: 1612
Reply

New format is fine - the only thing that needs reviewed is keeping the split features for the B's. Run a B and C if necessary, taking the cars in orders finished in heats (ie: 6th finisher in first heat is pole of B, 6th in second heat is outside Row 1 in B, and so on). Take 4 to A. 

Looking at one night is silly - get a sample size over a full season of this and you'll find the law of averages works out. 

Knoxville isn't the reason that this format was instituted - it generally provides a track that will hold throughout qualifying (evidenced by Saldana's late time that would have timed in 3rd quick).

This actually relies less on the draw as you're segmenting the field - the gap between qualifying against a guy 40 cars away becomes 20 cars away. Just because the field seemed loaded one way or another Saturday doesn't mean it'll be that way night in/night out.

 

 

 



Super Chuck
June 15, 2015 at 03:30:57 PM
Joined: 11/27/2004
Posts: 194
Reply

Super Chuck says they actually implemented the new format Friday night.  He would like to see the same analysis done to see if the results were similar.  Personally, he thinks the biggest issue with the new format is taking two out of the B's.  Call him crazy, but Super Chuck can see stacked decks similar to Saturday's second B becoming a problem (Stewart, Saldana, Pittman & TK) when only taking two.  Combine the two B's and take four.

Super Chuck




chilly
June 15, 2015 at 03:35:13 PM
Joined: 12/01/2004
Posts: 975
Reply
Reply to:
Posted By: Super Chuck on June 15 2015 at 03:30:57 PM

Super Chuck says they actually implemented the new format Friday night.  He would like to see the same analysis done to see if the results were similar.  Personally, he thinks the biggest issue with the new format is taking two out of the B's.  Call him crazy, but Super Chuck can see stacked decks similar to Saturday's second B becoming a problem (Stewart, Saldana, Pittman & TK) when only taking two.  Combine the two B's and take four.

Super Chuck



I'll see what I can do on the Denison analysis.  Yes, taking only 2 out of that stacked B-Main wasn't cool...



dsc1600
June 15, 2015 at 04:12:33 PM
Joined: 05/31/2007
Posts: 4373
Reply

I think it's fine, but the main issues I have with it are as follows:

1) It's overkill to do it for 32 cars. It's a pretty big change and I think on average, the big issues with the old format happened at places like Lincoln, the Grove and Attica. Track actually got faster (or at a minimum stayed equal) at Denison. I think the really big issues were for 40+ cars.

2) Had they had this format last night, some really weird results would have happened. Last night's draw was REALLY loaded toward the earlier group, and you may have had some loaded heats in Heats 1 and 2 and some guys getting into the dash that may not have deserved it in Heats 3 and 4.

3) I don't like the 2 B Mains idea. Should be a logical C, then B format with 40 or more cars.



IADIRT
June 15, 2015 at 04:13:11 PM
Joined: 04/29/2014
Posts: 1204
Reply
Reply to:
Posted By: Super Chuck on June 15 2015 at 03:30:57 PM

Super Chuck says they actually implemented the new format Friday night.  He would like to see the same analysis done to see if the results were similar.  Personally, he thinks the biggest issue with the new format is taking two out of the B's.  Call him crazy, but Super Chuck can see stacked decks similar to Saturday's second B becoming a problem (Stewart, Saldana, Pittman & TK) when only taking two.  Combine the two B's and take four.

Super Chuck



Right on Super Chuck. The Denison race showed some similarities. I think the first flight was a little weaker than the second. (See heat 2 of 4) The draw can by accident stack portions of the show including heats and the B's which are the bigger problem. 




tjmatthews12
June 15, 2015 at 04:15:45 PM
Joined: 08/08/2013
Posts: 23
Reply
This message was edited on June 15, 2015 at 04:17:29 PM by tjmatthews12

The main problem with the stacked B-Main #2 comes from the fact that the 2 quickest qualifiers didn't do their job and qualify for the A-Main out of their heats.  All Saldana and Pittman had to do was hold their starting positions in their heats and we wouldn't have had the discussion about the stacked B #2. 



chilly
June 15, 2015 at 04:30:05 PM
Joined: 12/01/2004
Posts: 975
Reply
Reply to:
Posted By: tjmatthews12 on June 15 2015 at 04:15:45 PM

The main problem with the stacked B-Main #2 comes from the fact that the 2 quickest qualifiers didn't do their job and qualify for the A-Main out of their heats.  All Saldana and Pittman had to do was hold their starting positions in their heats and we wouldn't have had the discussion about the stacked B #2. 



True... but it happened... and the guys that passed them don't suck.  Heats 3 and 4 were stacked as hell..... and as some others have alluded, this won't be the last time that happens with this wonderful new change.  



BigRightRear
June 15, 2015 at 04:54:19 PM
Joined: 11/27/2004
Posts: 3751
Reply

Stacked B mains is what provisionals are all about...wait until the circus brings this new format to PS before you throw it away.

If the luck of the pill draw locks toocmany travelers into a tough B main, then maybe the officials can implement a Kville nationals policy where half the outlaws are in the first flight and half in the second?

 

Or maybe the outlaw officials will fast forward to a "draw for finish" rule set... and just run an exhibition race instead...declare everyone the winner to sell more tshirts?


Lincoln 1845 ft/.35 mile T1=118MPH 
Eldora 2287 ft/.43mile T3=135MPH
Port 2716 ft/.51 mile T3=TBD
Grove 2792 ft/.53 mile T3=135MPH
Selinsgrove 2847 ft/.54 mile T1=136MPH
"I didn't move to PA from El Paso in search of better 
weather." Van May


armyduke
June 15, 2015 at 05:45:04 PM
Joined: 08/12/2005
Posts: 787
Reply

Or they'll implement a rule where there are just as many posse provisionals as there are Outlaws... oh, wait... nevermind



scottb15
June 15, 2015 at 05:53:29 PM
Joined: 02/17/2014
Posts: 223
Reply

Im glad they are making the effort to improve the show, i would only have 1 B instead of splitting it but other than that im good with it.



brettco
June 15, 2015 at 06:03:43 PM
Joined: 12/03/2004
Posts: 517
Reply

 I think qualifying just adds cost to the owners By needing badass fresh engines- and causes shit hold your place heat races. Its time for passing points in all sprint classes. Heat races have become a joke!




MissouriSprintFan
June 15, 2015 at 06:28:07 PM
Joined: 09/13/2008
Posts: 419
Reply

I personally like time trials. But, the only thing time trials should be used for, is to line up the heats. As soon as heats are over, the time trial sheet should be thrown out the window. 



Paintboss
MyWebsite
June 15, 2015 at 07:13:12 PM
Joined: 12/02/2004
Posts: 2098
Reply
Reply to:
Posted By: MissouriSprintFan on June 15 2015 at 06:28:07 PM

I personally like time trials. But, the only thing time trials should be used for, is to line up the heats. As soon as heats are over, the time trial sheet should be thrown out the window. 




I totally agree with this. And I am not a fan AT ALL of twin B Features.



tjmatthews12
June 15, 2015 at 08:33:12 PM
Joined: 08/08/2013
Posts: 23
Reply
Reply to:
Posted By: chilly on June 15 2015 at 04:30:05 PM

True... but it happened... and the guys that passed them don't suck.  Heats 3 and 4 were stacked as hell..... and as some others have alluded, this won't be the last time that happens with this wonderful new change.  



True....but this is also one instance we are looking at, I think overall it will be a decent format.

I would only change the car count to 40+ to use format (granted it still would've been used at K'ville) and find a fair way to run one B-Main, maybe inside row Flight #1, ouside row Flight #2 and take top 4?!?! I'm not sure.  I do know that B-Main #2 could've been exciting had the rain not have come




Anthony Corini
MyWebsite
June 16, 2015 at 01:14:23 AM
Joined: 08/14/2014
Posts: 165
Reply

Agreeing with the majority here. Not a fan of the split B Main/Heat system. It results in having 2 drivers not be on the track at any time throughout the night until the feature. 

Personally, I would line up a single B main up by heat race finish - 6th in heat 1 starts on the pole of the B, 6th in heat 3 starts 2nd in the B. 6th in heat 2 starts 3rd and so on. This also allows a driver that qualified poorly to salvage their night with a respectable starting position in the B if they can move forward in their heat race. 

(Also can we stop calling it a Last Chance Showdown and simply refer to it as the B main) 

Someone previously mentioned that Knoxville is historically known for being able to "hold on" during time trials. Upcoming is Williams Grove and that is a track where pill draw is generally important which could be a more accurate test of the new format. 

 



Speedbump
June 16, 2015 at 08:50:24 AM
Joined: 11/30/2004
Posts: 1461
Reply

Knoxville and even Denison were not good tests of what the new format is trying to do.    Both shows were affected by more by mother nature than the pill draw.    

I would be in favor of a 2 consi format if they took 4 from each.   That would put two from each heat in the dash plus two more starting 9-16 with the top four from each B making up 17-24.  


Time trials are stale and as many have noted,  the current format (and it's new variation) does not encourage much drama in the heats.   I get it that the tour regulars would like to eliminate any drama brought on by the possibility of a "bad draw"  but I think exactly that sort of thing is needed to create excitement and increase interest during the heats.   (they kind of feel like extended hot laps now)    Personally I think a major shakeup of the format is needed, whether it be scrapping time trials or maybe even a complete reboot by eliminating the traditional TT, heat, consi, feature order of events.   (no,  I do not know the answer) 

 

Remember that for every "bad draw" by definition someone else has a "good draw".   When a local or underdog has a good night or even a good start to the night,  that is good for the WoO brand.   Remember Carmen Manzardo and the struggles Steve Kinser had getting around him during their 1985-ish Nationals heat race?   That added more the legend of the Nationals more than any number of wins the King or Schatz can post.     



JonR
June 16, 2015 at 06:36:48 PM
Joined: 05/28/2008
Posts: 872
Reply

Overall, I am a fan of the new format.   I even liked the twin B-main features.   Of course, I have become familiar with them because many tracks/series use them for large modified shows.

The reason that I liked the twin B feature concept is because it causes another battle for a transfer spot.   During a B-main, I rarely watch the leader, but instead watch the transfer battle.   With two B-mains, there is twice the entertainment.   I also think that Saturday was unique because of the draw of the flights.   On most nights, the flights are going to have an equal distrubution of cars.

Finally, I hate passing points.   I have been going to races my entire life and I sitll get confused on who transfers with passing points.  I should not have to remember if the driver started on the pole or started shotgun to know how many points he earned.   I also think that it is crazy that a driver can finish ahead of another driver, but not transfer.

 




oswald
June 16, 2015 at 07:11:05 PM
Joined: 11/30/2004
Posts: 1982
Reply
Reply to:
Posted By: JonR on June 16 2015 at 06:36:48 PM

Overall, I am a fan of the new format.   I even liked the twin B-main features.   Of course, I have become familiar with them because many tracks/series use them for large modified shows.

The reason that I liked the twin B feature concept is because it causes another battle for a transfer spot.   During a B-main, I rarely watch the leader, but instead watch the transfer battle.   With two B-mains, there is twice the entertainment.   I also think that Saturday was unique because of the draw of the flights.   On most nights, the flights are going to have an equal distrubution of cars.

Finally, I hate passing points.   I have been going to races my entire life and I sitll get confused on who transfers with passing points.  I should not have to remember if the driver started on the pole or started shotgun to know how many points he earned.   I also think that it is crazy that a driver can finish ahead of another driver, but not transfer.

 



I'm not a fan of passing points either. You never know who made the A till the B rolls out. Unless you keep track of start & finish positions yourself and do the Math all night. Even tracks I have been to with scoreboards never post the points as the heats finish. Anouncers do not update the fans on points either. They miss a great chance to build drama by saying "Wayne Johnson is starting 8th in the last heat & after all the other heats he will need x # of points to make the A". But they anounce nothing and till the B comes out and you know who is not in it or broke is in the A you have no way to be sure who all transferd through the heats.

 

As for the new WoO format it is too soon to say. May work much better at a track that changes a lot during time trials. But the draw could still put all but 1 or 2 of the fastest cars in 1 set of heats leaving 1 set of heats full of mid pack cars that will then make the A. Just need a larger sample.



tjmatthews12
June 16, 2015 at 11:37:17 PM
Joined: 08/08/2013
Posts: 23
Reply
Reply to:
Posted By: oswald on June 16 2015 at 07:11:05 PM

I'm not a fan of passing points either. You never know who made the A till the B rolls out. Unless you keep track of start & finish positions yourself and do the Math all night. Even tracks I have been to with scoreboards never post the points as the heats finish. Anouncers do not update the fans on points either. They miss a great chance to build drama by saying "Wayne Johnson is starting 8th in the last heat & after all the other heats he will need x # of points to make the A". But they anounce nothing and till the B comes out and you know who is not in it or broke is in the A you have no way to be sure who all transferd through the heats.

 

As for the new WoO format it is too soon to say. May work much better at a track that changes a lot during time trials. But the draw could still put all but 1 or 2 of the fastest cars in 1 set of heats leaving 1 set of heats full of mid pack cars that will then make the A. Just need a larger sample.



I totally agree with you on the passing points.  I think with having X number of cars transfer, you allow the fans to know exactly what your driver or another driver has to do in order to advance to the A.  It also helps the casual fan know that this many transfer, instead of having to explain that "yeah your driver passed 5 cars but still finished 5th and didn't score enough points" or whatever.





Post Reply
You must be logged in to Post a Message.
Not a member register Here.
Already registered? Please Login





If you have a website and would like to set up a forum here at HoseHeadForums.com
please contact us by using the contact link at the top of the page.

© 2024 HoseHeadForums.com Privacy Policy