Do we need sanctioning bodies??

Status
Not open for further replies.
my thoughts. I remember when there were no sanctioning bodies, or just local ones. When two or three tracks worked together to run the same classes of cars from week to week and run friday, saturday and sunday so that a racer could race three nights a week. And think of the cost that the track-promoter- pays to the sanctioning body, if there were none that is more money for his pocket, or payout or whatever. I have worked at tracks over the years that had no sanctioning body and did great every week. Promoters set a set of rules, and a pay schedule and raced. If the racers didn't like it they went somewhere else, just like today. But think about it, when tcs was nascar sanctioned they had "make believe" late models, some of the best modifieds in the area, and a good program every week. Some of he things that made it difficult was that the price to join nascar. that hurt a pocket book. Well as far as i'm concerned, some sanctioning bodies, like WoO, or Mars, or SCOA and one like that are good for the traveling series.

jumpinjackdw
Dave Wulf
 
Well as far as I'm concerned, some sanctioning bodies, like WoO, or Mars, or SCOA and one like that are good for the traveling series.
duh aren't all travelling series you mentioned
 
dirt hound said:
Well as far as I'm concerned, some sanctioning bodies, like WoO, or Mars, or SCOA and one like that are good for the traveling series.
duh aren't all travelling series you mentioned
Click to expand...


yes that is what i meant,said, they are good for a traveling series, but do we really need them locally??
 
See Peoria#75Fan, post # 4

That should be everyones biggest fear, but the people supporting it don't even see it coming.
 
I think that if a track runs a quality show, has a consistent format, is fair, and enforces the rules then they don't have to have a sanctioning body to be successful.
I think a sanctioning body keeps the show organized which is why you see, for the most part, a track that is UMP usually having good car counts. examples would be.....Pevely, Belleville, TCS (previously UMP).

I don't think a track has to be sanctioned to have good car counts. In addition, a sanctioning body does not mean a track will have high car counts.

Its all about the final product. If its a good show then drivers and fans will continue to show up.
 
when allied did the three tracks they paid pretty well and had alot of cars.i dont think the tracks necessarilly need ump now to survive now because the late models points were favoring the local racers,but with the new format the give the big teams that can afford to run the summernationals and do well an advantage. look at shannon babb where he finished last year in the national points.dennis erb finished 2nd.but he ran a local track most of the year.
 
racer20 said:
OK guys I am going to jump in here. Now here is my idea of what a Sanctioning Body should really be. Otherwise why would a local track be invovled with it period.


From the beginning the entrie reason a sanctioning body was ever created or at least accepted is the fact that most tracks make a just a little tweak in thier rules that will not allow their cars to go to another track and race. For example track A runs this brand and compound of tire so track B runs this type and compound so guess who pays the price for having to buy two brands of tires? The teams! And of course the list goes on and on. I really think Bob had the right idea. I think he could see things coming and really did want to look after the racer.

From the tracks point of view a sanctioning body should be able to negotiate things on their behalf. Sort of like a big co-op. Make sense? Negotiate fuel deals, insurance policies, tire deals and so forth. That also filters down to the price the racers and fans have to pay.

So do we need sanctioning bodies? I guess it is really no difference than anything else we deal with in the world. What are their motives? Are they willing to work for thier money or do they just want to rule the racing world? Do the head people involved really know anything about racing? Have they ever been involved in a team as a driver or car owner and know the REAL costs involved with the sport?

I guess like everything in the world it is just according to the motives of the people behind it. Is it greed or is it real passion for the sport itself?
Click to expand...
id say yours is greed:mad:
 
Allied was sucessful for a long time, but their rules were so restrictive that they not only kept their drivers IN, but also kept other drivers OUT, thus robbing the fans of seeing some of the best talent in the area.

I hope we never go back to that again
 
why have a sanctioned track when you have a vehical that is UMP LEGAL!!! But ' some UMP tracks still refuse to let you run?? example>> Camaro UMP LEGAL / S-10 >>UMP LEGAL >> BUT' yet they still tell you it is up to the track owner.Why have UMP if they will not stay to the standard??I thought the reason was so we could go to ANY UMP track and run as long as we were UMP LEGAL and havn't been thrown out for any thing.:confused: I think if a track is UMP then they should be FORCED to run ALL UMP LEGAL vehicals or loose there sanction!!
 
bolo said:
I think if a track is UMP then they should be FORCED to run ALL UMP LEGAL vehicals or loose there sanction!!
Click to expand...

THATS WHERE UMP NEEDS TO COME UP WITH COMMON RULES. THERE IS NO WAY TO GO FROM WHERE WE ARE NOW, TO HAVING COMMON RULES AT ALL UMP TRACKS, WITHOUT SOMEONE HAVING TO SPEND SOME MONEY. UMP NEEDS TO BITE THE BULLET AND COME UP WITH A RULES PACKAGE AND SAY HERE IT IS. NEXT YEAR THESE ARE OUR RULES. TAKE IT OR LEAVE IT. IF NOT ENOUGH TRACKS BUY IN, DROP THE CLASS SANCTION. JMO...
 
All or None?

In order to have a common set of rules for all classes at a sanctioned track it will cost you and UMP some money.

Suppose You were to receive a letter next year telling you there is a specific set of rules for each class at all UMP tracks.

How much would it cost the racer to adhere to these rules?

Would you expect ump points and money at the end of the year?

Who would foot the bill for all these payouts?

Would the sanction fee for the track increase?

Would pit passes increase?

Would the front gate prices increase?

Would some classes be dropped?

Would tracks drop the sanction? Then what would the rules be?

Tracks need to work together for betterment of racing. But this is a competive market and each track has to try and get it's share. Unfortunatly sometimes it is done with the rules package. Don't like it it but the alternitive could be more track closings.

As has been said many times,Be carefull what you ask for.

JMO

JMO
 
I Can't See How It Should Be Any Harder To Get Done Than When Memmer Did It With The Lm's And Mods. The Way Its Done Now, There Are Some Who Have A Big Advantage Over Others. Some Don't Have A Snowballs Chance In Hell To Win No Matter How Good They Do!
 
PITDRIFTER said:
I Can't See How It Should Be Any Harder To Get Done Than When Memmer Did It With The Lm's And Mods. The Way Its Done Now, There Are Some Who Have A Big Advantage Over Others. Some Don't Have A Snowballs Chance In Hell To Win No Matter How Good They Do!
Click to expand...

Of course it can be done. Much more difficult today to get the job done.
If UMP would take 3 years to phase in their rules for each class they could perhaps pull it off.

If someone is at a disadvatage at one track then it is the tracks fault,and the racers.

If someone travels to other tracks and the rules package puts them at a disadvatage then I hope they are racing for fun.

Racers have the #'s. Just can't work together either.
 
I would think that it would be cheaper. How would you think it would cost more to have all UMP tracks go by the SAME rules?? What cost more is being forced to build somthing new to run a certain track because that track has a dif. set of rules.But ' yet they are UMP sanctioned?? How can that be?? Thats kind of like some of our unions>> You pay the dues but' there aint a DAMNED thing they can do to help you when you need them.OI would think comman sence would make them as one.Why do you think they made up the crate class?? ALL THE SAME!!! INCUDING RULES!!!! If you have a LEGAL crate you can run ANYPLACE they run crates!! But ' if you have a LEGAL UMP say street stock>> You may or may not be able to run @ all tracks that run UMP street stocks.EVEN THOUGH YOU ARE UMP LEGAL!! So again I ask how would it NOT be cheaper to run one. Unstaed of having a dif. car for every track?? :confused: It would be nice to build just ONE car and get to race ALL tracks that run your class.But NO it seems the tracks do what they want to no matter if they are UMP or not. SO what good is UMP if they can NOT enforce there rules?? And are forced to go by what ever the track owner wants.I have a BIG tree fell over in the yard>> Would it be easier for me to just pick that ****er up by my self OR combine many many folks together and get it out?? Thats really no dif. than the UMP tracks. Working together as one is VERY hard to beat!!
 
I think UMP should set a rules package for the sportaman class and only have 3 classes under the UMP umbralla.

If race tracks feel they need more classes then any additional classes would be track classes, this business of UMP street stocks and 4cyl is getting silly.
 
How many guys are building more than one S/S to run at different tracks? I did not realize this. Whatever rule package that a sanction comes up with some are going to make a lot of changes to their car or start over. That is a simple fact. Changes cost $$$. Not argueing the fact about uniformity. Of couse you right,If UMP sanctions the S/S class at every UMP track then all rules should be the same at all tracks. No argument there.

So how many racers have contacted UMP or their local tracks to work towards that goal. So UMP isn't listening? Local tracks blowing you off?
Guess I did not totally understand the situation. Makes no difference if you are sanctioned or not. I think I get that. No you do not need a sanction.

Crates are a late model. Most rules were already the same for them anyway.
Course they are having a little problem at Macon.
 
I AGREE W/ YOU TO A POINT.THATS WHY MY NEXT WILL BE A CRATE.BUT' I DO HAVE A ? FOR YOU.HAVE YOU CHECKED THE HORSE POWER ON THE UMP STREET STOCKS VERSES THE CRATE?? IF NOT?? PLEASE DO SO?? YOU MIGHT GET A SURPRIZE ON THAT.:eek:
racefantoo said:
I think UMP should set a rules package for the sportaman class and only have 3 classes under the UMP umbralla.

If race tracks feel they need more classes then any additional classes would be track classes, this business of UMP street stocks and 4cyl is getting silly.
Click to expand...
 
Status
Not open for further replies.




Back
Top