| Author |
 Topic  |
|
70 Boys
Administrator
USA
270 Posts |
 Posted - 04/15/2009 : 13:26:03
|
I agree - 3rd round losers should be paid something no matter what even if it's only $40-$50.
That top 16 spots for pay will only equal about 11 people being paid and with only 1 semi finalist.
75 cars to start.
38 cars after 1st round
19 cars after 2nd round ( 3rd round losers )
10 cars after 3rd round ( 4th round losers )5 paid $ 110
5 cars after 4th round ( 5th round losers 3 paid $ 150
3 cars after 5th round ( Semi 's ) 1 paid $ 275
2 cars after 6th round ( Final ) 1 paid $ 525 1 paid $ 1150
75 cars x $80 = $6000 Payout = $2925 50+% |
Edited by - 70 Boys on 04/15/2009 21:58:53 |
 |
|
|
andyschmall
Junior Member
245 Posts |
|
|
Travis Sorokie
Junior Member
USA
326 Posts |
Posted - 04/15/2009 : 14:45:01
|
I've warned the Dr. there might be a shortage of open rooms this summer...
See ya in Staging!!!
5939 S/ST
58 SS/KA
Internet Forum Racer Rehab Room #101---checking out soon! |
|
|
|
Prixmo
New Member
USA
67 Posts |
Posted - 04/15/2009 : 14:59:03
|
****Let me start by saying this is my opinion and has nothing to do with the track. ****
I am one of many who thought it would be better to load the upper payouts and take away the win 2 rounds get a trophy payment of $30-$40. As a racer (both myself and wife) we have won this "trophy payment" in the past and it really did not mean anything. Over the years I have heard it many times from many racers that winning more for going additional rounds was how they would like to see payouts, they are racing to win not be 3rd round loser. For the top to be paid higher that money needs to come from somewhere. The track is already fighting to cover overhead, is paying out higher than in the past, and was not going to add money to the payout, its a business and it has to be run that way. I thought this was a better way to go but apparently my thoughts were off base.
Unfortunately those with the least amount of common sense are unaware of their lack of it |
|
|
|
andyschmall
Junior Member
245 Posts |
Posted - 04/15/2009 : 15:08:18
|
| The easiest way for the track to make money and have high payouts is to have a combo race with buy backs. At Byron the entry fee is $265 and you race 3 days: 2 for $2,500 and 1 for $5,000. For the $2,500 race buy backs are $40 and $60 for the $5,000. If you win the buy back round you get your buy back money back. This way a track can have more money at the top and the "trophy payment" for 3rd round loser. |
|
|
|
Lenny5160
Junior Member
USA
278 Posts |
Posted - 04/15/2009 : 16:50:36
|
Andy, I like Byron as much as anybody but I really do like our little enclave of tracks with no buybacks. Keeping it pure, I guess. And relatively cheap. The lack of buybacks (and good round money) was always the thing we could look to if we wanted to justify the high entry and low top payout compared to what we find elsewhere.
Which gets back to the issue of removing the bottom layer of payout. Using Dave's car count above as an example, the weekend just got $75 more expensive than last year for the 9 guys who lost 3rd round. That is over 10% of the field. And why, so the winner gets an extra $150? Guys might want to see more money on top, but I don't think $150 (non-guaranteed) is going to make up anyone's mind one way or another on where to go racing. But it definitely bummed out the 9 guys who lost 3rd round.
I've raced where I didn't care about money at all unless I was winning and I've raced where all I really wanted to do was get my money back. If I want to race for big money, I take it upon myself to drive 5+ hours to find it. I DO prefer racing for more money but let's not kid ourselves that $1150 is a big enough purse that it should require sacrifices elsewhere in the purse. BIR is a huge, beautiful facility that has a lot of overhead. I can appreciate that although everyone knows that there is plenty of unnecessary overhead. As a racer I can decide that those amenities are worth the added expense, or I can find the nearest pumpkin patch with 2 lanes of pavement and a tree that pays $1500 or $2000 to win for $75, WITH money for 3rd round losers*.
* - buybacks admittedly required
Tony Leonard |
|
|
|
brandonschmall
New Member
USA
67 Posts |
Posted - 04/15/2009 : 17:54:57
|
| I probably shouldn't say any thing about buy backs because I have not raced the big cars yet, but from the tracks that we go racing at, that have buy backs, a lot of the time, the person who wins the race, has to buy back to do so. If you have them, they just add another round to the race, and with the right track, they will pay more to win. Also a way to keep the entry down a little, with still paying 2nd round winner money (depending on the track), and still make it a decent payout. |
Edited by - brandonschmall on 04/15/2009 18:04:55 |
|
|
|
andyschmall
Junior Member
245 Posts |
Posted - 04/15/2009 : 18:41:13
|
Tony, you seem to really despise buybacks.
I find it funny that we never see anyone from Cedar Falls, Byron, or Great Lakes at any of our bracket races yet we travel to their tracks more than once a year. Some of us even drive right by other tracks that are running. There is potential to draw these racers to our local tracks but it won't happen if they keep running things the way they do now.
So Tony, if Brainerd started to run their bracket events like Byron you would rather go to Rock Falls? I find that hard to believe.
|
|
|
|
Lenny5160
Junior Member
USA
278 Posts |
Posted - 04/15/2009 : 20:51:20
|
I don't think I would say I despise buybacks. I use them more often than I would probably like and won at least the 2nd biggest race of my life off a buyback. I do despise what they say (on a local level) which is, "we are offering a purse that our entry fee and car count cannot support." It basically means that your program is on life support.
Buybacks started down South where there are too many tracks, so for any track to draw a decent number of cars they needed to jack the purse up beyond their means. Nowadays, bracket racing in the Carolinas is in a bad place. If a track shows a $2000 to win purse, everyone will drive past it for a $5000 to win race that has double-buybacks. The race is so top-heavy that it gets split around 10 cars, and the winner leaves with $2000. I have been in a decent number of finals and not once have I been involved in a split, which I think is a testament to the fairly-distributed purses we race for around the midwest.
At big-dollar races, we admit that we are there for a big purse and have some money to burn by being there. Then I am cool with buybacks. I believe that the goal of a local bracket series should be more about good competition and a reasonable purse while staying affordable for everyone who has a car and wants to play. In 2001, the final 5 no-box cars at the IHRA Bracket Finals were all from Cedar Falls. That is quite an accomplishment for a track and they were very good local racers. Right after that is when Cedar Falls went to a format of big-bucks points races. Of those 5 no-box racers, ONE is still racing regularly. Those races brought us travellers in but a lot of local regulars couldn't afford it and disappeared. With fuel prices last season, a large percentage of the travellers quit coming and the locals still couldn't afford it. Now they have had to reduce purses while keeping entry the same, and the result will likely be even fewer racers.
Even on the big-dollar stage, the longest-running and most successful series are the Tenn-Tuck and Winter Series; 2 series that do not offer buybacks. (I believe Moroso did have them a couple years ago. The reason: that race was dying and they needed them to maintain the purse.) The fastest-rising new big-dollar race, the Jeg's US Open in Indianapolis, removes the buyback option once the race hits 256 entrants. If buybacks are what racers want, why would they present that policy as a "feature"?
As for why we travel to Byron but those racers don't come up here? They don't have to. For us, that is the nearest big-money action. For them, they can drive east or south those same 5-6 hours and have big-money action whenever they want it. The bottom-line is there is almost nothing BIR can do to draw a significant number of racers that it doesn't already have. As it is, most tracks would LOVE to draw the cars that BIR does.
To answer your last question, of course I wouldn't go to Rock Falls or anywhere else for that matter if BIR had Byron's program. My question is, who would guys like you and I be racing against? BIR doesn't have the luxury of two major cities nearby with one of them being the 2nd largest city in the country. We love Byron and think it is the best ever, but their local racers complain about it the same as we complain about our local tracks. You can also be sure that there are plenty of local racers there that can't afford their format. Look at all the 10-11 second cars that come in to run low-buck Pro on Sunday only.
This discussion, for me, is not about what I want but what I think is best for the long-term health of local bracket racing. I have spent the last 2-3 years racing where getting some of my money back was the difference between racing the following month or not. I raced when I couldn't bring enough cash to buy back both days if I needed to. I didn't race with money I couldn't afford to lose, but it still hurt a little when I did. Every bit that someone can get back helps. This year I don't have to worry about that, but more racers than ever do. Do I have the ultimate solution? No. Can I see that going from a payout structure that gives money to (using Dave's car count again) 25% of the racers to one that rewards 13% of the racers is a step in the wrong direction? Yes I can.
Tony Leonard |
Edited by - Lenny5160 on 04/15/2009 22:06:22 |
|
|
|
andyschmall
Junior Member
245 Posts |
Posted - 04/15/2009 : 22:02:47
|
| Byron has a Pro Eliminator class that I think is $40 to enter and pays $1000 to win. The no-box racer who wants to race for big money can enter super pro (in the no box side), many super pro cars have so much money into them already that another couple hundred bucks spent on a race isn't going to matter, and everyone who doesn't want to race for the big money can enter pro for a chance at $1000. I don't see how a system like this could keep the bracket racers who want to keep expenses low from racing. |
|
|
|
Prixmo
New Member
USA
67 Posts |
Posted - 04/15/2009 : 22:09:50
|
Dave with your 75 car figure BIR is paying out 49.17% Using the same amount of entries and using the tracks entry fees both Rockfalls and Grovecreek are paying back 8-9% less than BIR Both tracks with lower overhead, neither track a National event caliber track, and neither tracks changing payouts until reaching additional rounds (BIR has multiple levels based on cars for same amount of rounds) So why is it ok for them to pay racers less and BIR is made to be the bad guys?
RockFalls
1st Round
2nd Round
(3rd round looser)3rd Round 10 @ $50.00 $500.00
(4th round looser)4th Round 5 @ $75.00 $375.00
(5th round looser)5th Round 3 @ $100.00 $300.00
(semi's)6th Round 1@ $150.00 $150.00
(Final) 7th Round 1@ $350.00 $350.00
1@ $850.00 $850.00
$2,525.00 42.08%
Entry $80.00 $6,000.00
$3,475.00
Grovecreek
1st Round
2nd Round
3rd Round 10 @ $40.00 $400.00
4th Round 5 @ $60.00 $300.00
5th Round 3 @ $105.00 $315.00
6th Round 1 @ $125.00 $125.00
7th Round 1 @ $300.00 $300.00
1 @ $750.00 $750.00
$2,190.00 41.71%
Entry $70.00 $5,250.00
$3,060.00
|
Edited by - Prixmo on 04/15/2009 22:11:40 |
|
|
|
70 Boys
Administrator
USA
270 Posts |
Posted - 04/15/2009 : 22:15:19
|
I want to make it clear that i like the BIR payouts for 2009 BUT it states that it pays out 16 places when it actually doesn't or wont.
I only mentioned it to spark an interest in maybe taking what the payout chart doesn't end up paying out and maybe splitting whats left between the 3rd rounds losers ? I think everyone makes out on that deal both the 3rd round losers and the top finishers AND even BIR.
Wouldn't this satisfy everyone involved without someone feeling short handed ? I think it's a good solution and felt it necessary to at least bring it up.
What do you guys think ? Bill ?
BIR is my home track and Bill works very hard at communicating with the racers which I appreciate.
Dave |
|
|
|
Lenny5160
Junior Member
USA
278 Posts |
Posted - 04/15/2009 : 22:15:35
|
I made an edit to my previous post while you were typing, Andy, that mentions demographics of Byron's area. If you compared the populations within a 150 mile radius of each track, the difference would be absolutely staggering. An approximation of that difference will be reflected in the car count, not to mention the average household incomes within those circles. Apples and oranges, and Byron wasn't exactly overflowing with cars last season either. You know I love to race for money, but if it was a smart thing to do then someone would have done it already. Oh wait, it was tried once and I don't think it drew as many cars as a normal bracket race. Let's even forget the Legal-class side of that race and the scheduling debacle involved there.
Tony Leonard |
|
|
|
70 Boys
Administrator
USA
270 Posts |
Posted - 04/15/2009 : 22:35:17
|
Prixmo I just read your post above. Im not saying or making BIR out to be the bad guy. I just reflected off the new BIR payout chart that you guys posted. I really like the payouts with a
request to split the remaining unpaid spots in the payout chart among the 3rd round losers. BIR has posted to already pay that full amount so does it seem unfair that I suggest to spread it out evenly to more cars ? I felt that was an honest and fair statement to make.
This is the BIR forum - We are here to suggest any supportive ideas and promote the sport of drag racing. With that said my intent was never to offend any of the BIR staff but to possibly help promote more interest to all parties involved.
Dave Engler
|
|
|
|
Lenny5160
Junior Member
USA
278 Posts |
Posted - 04/15/2009 : 22:40:21
|
quote:
Originally posted by Prixmo
Dave with your 75 car figure BIR is paying out 49.17% Using the same amount of entries and using the tracks entry fees both Rockfalls and Grovecreek are paying back 8-9% less than BIR Both tracks with lower overhead, neither track a National event caliber track, and neither tracks changing payouts until reaching additional rounds (BIR has multiple levels based on cars for same amount of rounds) So why is it ok for them to pay racers less and BIR is made to be the bad guys?
Let's use real numbers instead of pie-in-the-sky examples from the various payout charts. Percentages don't pay the track's bills. This is economies of scale. I think we can all agree that 75 cars is a legit number at BIR. How about a typical Rock Falls event with 28 cars in Super Pro:
1st Round 14 losers
2nd Round 7 losers
(3rd round loser)3rd Round 3 @ $50.00 $150.00
(Semis) 4th Round 2 @ $125.00 $250.00
(Final) 5th Round 1 @ $300.00 $300.00
1 @ $750.00 $750.00
Payout $1450.00 64.7%
Entry $80.00 $2240.00
Track's Take $790.00
Now, the track is paying almost 2/3 of the entry back to the racers and is keeping a profit of only $790 compared to over $3000 for BIR. Those are real-world numbers. You can talk about the overhead of the track and national-event blah blah blah but that stuff does not matter to me. I am a bracket racer. I would like to support the place if all else were equal, but I am not willing to impact my own bottom line to do so. Those are the facts.
Tony Leonard |
Edited by - Lenny5160 on 04/15/2009 22:43:13 |
|
|
|
Topic |
|
Website
