Instead of some run-up let me just go with the list.
1.ASCS-style draw/passing points/redraw for the sprints.
I've hated the idea of a draw/redraw system for a weekly show, and I still do. I understand it for a touring series that doesn't run time trials.
I used to take issue with the ASCS system, until they started re-drawing the top eight in passing points for the A feature. In the past, the highest passing point totals would start up front, often resulting in a follow the leader race as the lead dog would run from the field. The invert was a nice twist, but still doesn't totally prevent this from happening.
My concern is the fans. Yes, there were flaws in the old invert system. Fast guys would always be at the back, especially as the season wore on. My personal favorite was a full invert by point average, but over a four week span. That way, a guy who was down on his luck would find his way to the front of the lineup after a couple weeks, and the fast guys would be at the back.
But, with parity (despite the car count, the overall competitiveness of the class was better than it has been for years), it makes it tough on the guy to make the move up front – though I think that's less so on a short track like Eagle.
The thing is, no system is perfect. We will have some runaways when a hot dog starts up front. It WILL happen. It's also possible that we'll have some great shows where a guy gets a break up front and makes the most of it – but again, it's a short track. It isn't going to make an average guy a winner just because the started up front. On the other hand, no longer is racing to qualify going to be enough – the heats will be more intense.
I wish they would've inverted five rows though. The competition, the drive to the front from row six has made the class pretty impressive for the last quarter century. I worry that the racing may not be as good come feature time. And boring shows will kill a crowd just as much as lack of cars.
We'll see, I'm still unsure about this one. The changes needed to be made, I'm just hoping there's room to tweak. I could be overstating it, but this concerns me the most – the fans are the ones who make it possible to have the sprints, they're the last who should be getting follow-the-leader shows.
2.Increased purse
I've never been one to think that the answer to any of this has been to just throw money at the cars. Several cars will race for fractions of what they get at Eagle when the travel to places like Albion, or they'll travel to races with bigger purses, only to have a greater chunk eaten by travel expense.
That said, I've thought that the payout toward the back of the field was awful, and the fact that the purse has remained at pre-2000 levels for six seasons while costs have escalated hasn't helped. I've never thought that the payout had a responsibility to cover the race to race expenses, but given the overall expense of a sprint car (you can't just pound out the dents), paying more to the back of the field was a good way to help maintain the car count.
I like the initial plan of making the purse dependent on car count. I think that some of the onus has to be placed on the racing community to keep the count up.
3.Increased point fund
A few years ago, during the pre-season Midwest Racer's Autograph Day event, I had an opportunity to speak with a few of the teams. Interestingly, one of the biggest gripes the teams had was the paltry end-of-the-season point fund. The common theme was that the point fund money would help get equipment and repairs for next year, and I agree. I think that with an increased payout, and a payout further down the line, there's at least some incentive for sticking out the year and not taking a Saturday off to hit a competing show.
So, there's my take on the recent changes. What say you?
-Jason
