one moto format in 09?

WhKnuckle wrote: One moto format is a joke as it was generally done in Europe. The only way it'll work at all is to have one moto per class but riders can ride both classes, and there'd be a "Super National Champ" with the most points in both classes combined.

that'd be pretty cool in my opinion.

WhKnuckle wrote: One moto format is a joke as it was generally done in Europe. The only way it'll work at all is to have one moto per class but riders can ride both classes, and there'd be a "Super National Champ" with the most points in both classes combined.

that'd be pretty cool in my opinion.

JustMX wrote: I believe there are things that are having a much more negative impact on our sport than what format they come up with to try at the nationals.

First and for most Amateur racing is about to go through a bad slump. Racing is now to expensive for the masses, and would be even without rising fuel cost.

AMA waited 5 years to long to adjust the racing structure to keep the two strokes as an option.

There are simply not the new people coming into this sport the replace those quitting.

Television is not going to fix that.

Noise has not been addressed either. Having riding areas convenient to urban areas is going to get harder and harder.

Personally, I believe that the biggest problem our sport has in presenting ti to TV is that in the last 10 years there has been very little actual racing drama in the 450 classes.

Even die hard Motocross fans get tired of huge leads, win streaks, and very little suspense.

Something has to happen to tighten the racing up and make it more exciting.

This is where DMG may help.

If they actually want to be invloved in MX they need to do something to make the racing better.

In Nascar if one driver were to win half the races they would be considered dominant and the powers that be would start researching what that drivers advantage is and adjust technical issues to make sure that if that driver continued to win that it would be strictly driver skill.

They should start with tightening up the "production" rules.

Revalving and spring changes only on suspension.

Bring back the claim rule.

Choke the bikes down with some QUIET exhaust systems. Implement claiming on exhaust systems at retail plus 10%.

Take away the huge advantages that the factory and satellite, and then make the standard format two 45 minute motos, with 2 or 3 races getting to try different formats each season.

Maybe this would tighten up racing and start to produce some "Rocky Balboa" types in motocross .

Guys like Cooper, Stanton, Hannah, and Kiedrowski that used hard training and desire to compete.

The more you level the playing field the better the racing will be.

Better racing is what our sport needs, not squables over what format to run.

JustMX wrote: I believe there are things that are having a much more negative impact on our sport than what format they come up with to try at the nationals.

First and for most Amateur racing is about to go through a bad slump. Racing is now to expensive for the masses, and would be even without rising fuel cost.

AMA waited 5 years to long to adjust the racing structure to keep the two strokes as an option.

There are simply not the new people coming into this sport the replace those quitting.

Television is not going to fix that.

Noise has not been addressed either. Having riding areas convenient to urban areas is going to get harder and harder.

Personally, I believe that the biggest problem our sport has in presenting ti to TV is that in the last 10 years there has been very little actual racing drama in the 450 classes.

Even die hard Motocross fans get tired of huge leads, win streaks, and very little suspense.

Something has to happen to tighten the racing up and make it more exciting.

This is where DMG may help.

If they actually want to be invloved in MX they need to do something to make the racing better.

In Nascar if one driver were to win half the races they would be considered dominant and the powers that be would start researching what that drivers advantage is and adjust technical issues to make sure that if that driver continued to win that it would be strictly driver skill.

They should start with tightening up the "production" rules.

Revalving and spring changes only on suspension.

Bring back the claim rule.

Choke the bikes down with some QUIET exhaust systems. Implement claiming on exhaust systems at retail plus 10%.

Take away the huge advantages that the factory and satellite, and then make the standard format two 45 minute motos, with 2 or 3 races getting to try different formats each season.

Maybe this would tighten up racing and start to produce some "Rocky Balboa" types in motocross .

Guys like Cooper, Stanton, Hannah, and Kiedrowski that used hard training and desire to compete.

The more you level the playing field the better the racing will be.

Better racing is what our sport needs, not squables over what format to run.

-eagle- wrote: -Bailey nailed the "made for tv format scam" on dmxs.
MLB isn't 4 innings and Nascar isn't 250 miles for TV's sake.
Those events take FOREVER and constantly on TV.
I dont know how the format has become the main issue in this, "save the nationals movement." If you interviewed a cross section of the industry ( riders,managers, reps, sponsors,promoters) I would venture to guess that having two 30 minute motos is not what is making the nationals play bridesmaid to sx, ax & x games.
Entry fees for riders, purse payouts, saturday practices, and virtually no television coverage are the problems i see and hear.
How was it so easy for espn 2, doing great shows with bailey eckman and dc almost a decade ago?

-eagle- wrote: -Bailey nailed the "made for tv format scam" on dmxs.
MLB isn't 4 innings and Nascar isn't 250 miles for TV's sake.
Those events take FOREVER and constantly on TV.
I dont know how the format has become the main issue in this, "save the nationals movement." If you interviewed a cross section of the industry ( riders,managers, reps, sponsors,promoters) I would venture to guess that having two 30 minute motos is not what is making the nationals play bridesmaid to sx, ax & x games.
Entry fees for riders, purse payouts, saturday practices, and virtually no television coverage are the problems i see and hear.
How was it so easy for espn 2, doing great shows with bailey eckman and dc almost a decade ago?

-eagle- wrote:

-eagle- wrote:

gt80rider wrote: as long as the one moto is over an hour long, i love the idea!

but seriously..... sx has been reduced to a circus show with very little racing involved... hate to see'em do it to the nationals as well....

gt80rider wrote: as long as the one moto is over an hour long, i love the idea!

but seriously..... sx has been reduced to a circus show with very little racing involved... hate to see'em do it to the nationals as well....

Tiki wrote: how many do you attend currently. From what I understand the outdoors generate 10-12,000 entries from the viewing public. Hell a SX gets 40,000, plus parking and consessions. So who makes more money?

Seems logical to me. One moto format makes it easier to sell to TV. Do any of you think Baseball players make $20 Million a year because baseball is the national pastime?

harescrambled wrote: Where are you getting your numbers from? I've been to Kenworthy's, Steel City, Hi Point, and Red Bud, and there have been more than 10,000-12,000 people there. Every outdoor I've been to has been over 18,000 spectators on Sunday.

Sondy132001 wrote: Actually from what I have been told the AMA (pre Dingman) have been inflating the numbers for years for sponsorship reasons and the 18,000+ plus you hear about are false. Serious if you really think about it, it's just not true and 10-12,000 is not bad, that's a shit load of people. For instance at Colorado you aren't allowed to park there at the track, you get bussed in, well 18,000 people on busses, that would take days to bus in not hours. Glen Helen is a big place, but think about 20,000 people and the cars they would have to park there, just doesn't make sense.

Someone posted pics of the National tracks from Google Earth I believe and the one thing that I thought was amazing is how small the venues were, that surprised me, so the numbers that are "true" makes more sense to me.

S

Sondy132001 wrote: Actually from what I have been told the AMA (pre Dingman) have been inflating the numbers for years for sponsorship reasons and the 18,000+ plus you hear about are false. Serious if you really think about it, it's just not true and 10-12,000 is not bad, that's a shit load of people. For instance at Colorado you aren't allowed to park there at the track, you get bussed in, well 18,000 people on busses, that would take days to bus in not hours. Glen Helen is a big place, but think about 20,000 people and the cars they would have to park there, just doesn't make sense.

Someone posted pics of the National tracks from Google Earth I believe and the one thing that I thought was amazing is how small the venues were, that surprised me, so the numbers that are "true" makes more sense to me.

S

Sondy132001 wrote: Actually from what I have been told the AMA (pre Dingman) have been inflating the numbers for years for sponsorship reasons and the 18,000+ plus you hear about are false. Serious if you really think about it, it's just not true and 10-12,000 is not bad, that's a shit load of people. For instance at Colorado you aren't allowed to park there at the track, you get bussed in, well 18,000 people on busses, that would take days to bus in not hours. Glen Helen is a big place, but think about 20,000 people and the cars they would have to park there, just doesn't make sense.

Someone posted pics of the National tracks from Google Earth I believe and the one thing that I thought was amazing is how small the venues were, that surprised me, so the numbers that are "true" makes more sense to me.

S

flarider wrote: I agree.
Many of the numbers are impractical and inflated.

flarider wrote: I agree.
Many of the numbers are impractical and inflated.

docweedon wrote: ^^does anyone remember when ESPN would dedicate 2 hrs. for the Nationals on TV?!! For both the 125s and 250s?! We got 4 hrs. total of outdoor motocross racing?!!
That wasn't that long ago fellas.

zookrider62 wrote: Yes, I remember that, but those days are long gone.

zookrider62 wrote: Yes, I remember that, but those days are long gone.

harescrambled wrote: Where are you getting your numbers from? I've been to Kenworthy's, Steel City, Hi Point, and Red Bud, and there have been more than 10,000-12,000 people there. Every outdoor I've been to has been over 18,000 spectators on Sunday.

Sondy132001 wrote: Actually from what I have been told the AMA (pre Dingman) have been inflating the numbers for years for sponsorship reasons and the 18,000+ plus you hear about are false. Serious if you really think about it, it's just not true and 10-12,000 is not bad, that's a shit load of people. For instance at Colorado you aren't allowed to park there at the track, you get bussed in, well 18,000 people on busses, that would take days to bus in not hours. Glen Helen is a big place, but think about 20,000 people and the cars they would have to park there, just doesn't make sense.

Someone posted pics of the National tracks from Google Earth I believe and the one thing that I thought was amazing is how small the venues were, that surprised me, so the numbers that are "true" makes more sense to me.

S

APLMAN wrote: I think the car situation is much different than from, say, a baseball or football game. At those because of the "assigned seating" it's not as often that you might have 6 or 8 people crammed into an SUV to drive to the event. Tickets generally seem to be sold in pairs, and sometimes 4 at a time. Occasionally the block, but when you have an event that is not assigned seating, like the Nationals, then you can cram tons of people into a car for the road trip to the race.

Just in looking at the parking at Washougal, I could see them having close to 20K. The parking "lots" are crammed to the gills and there always seems to be lots of people falling out of those SUVs, etc.

APLMAN wrote: I think the car situation is much different than from, say, a baseball or football game. At those because of the "assigned seating" it's not as often that you might have 6 or 8 people crammed into an SUV to drive to the event. Tickets generally seem to be sold in pairs, and sometimes 4 at a time. Occasionally the block, but when you have an event that is not assigned seating, like the Nationals, then you can cram tons of people into a car for the road trip to the race.

Just in looking at the parking at Washougal, I could see them having close to 20K. The parking "lots" are crammed to the gills and there always seems to be lots of people falling out of those SUVs, etc.

Sondy132001 wrote: Actually from what I have been told the AMA (pre Dingman) have been inflating the numbers for years for sponsorship reasons and the 18,000+ plus you hear about are false. Serious if you really think about it, it's just not true and 10-12,000 is not bad, that's a shit load of people. For instance at Colorado you aren't allowed to park there at the track, you get bussed in, well 18,000 people on busses, that would take days to bus in not hours. Glen Helen is a big place, but think about 20,000 people and the cars they would have to park there, just doesn't make sense.

Someone posted pics of the National tracks from Google Earth I believe and the one thing that I thought was amazing is how small the venues were, that surprised me, so the numbers that are "true" makes more sense to me.

S

APLMAN wrote: I think the car situation is much different than from, say, a baseball or football game. At those because of the "assigned seating" it's not as often that you might have 6 or 8 people crammed into an SUV to drive to the event. Tickets generally seem to be sold in pairs, and sometimes 4 at a time. Occasionally the block, but when you have an event that is not assigned seating, like the Nationals, then you can cram tons of people into a car for the road trip to the race.

Just in looking at the parking at Washougal, I could see them having close to 20K. The parking "lots" are crammed to the gills and there always seems to be lots of people falling out of those SUVs, etc.

Sondy132001 wrote: Yeah I'm not going to say that some Nationals don't have big turn outs, and with Washougal they do have a big turnout for sure. Guesstimating numbers isn't easy and I am sure in an open area like mx race tracks it would be hard to tell if there were more then 12,000 there or not ?? I only handle a small amount of people when I am there, pit access, but I do have a lot of envelopes at will call. I'll have to ask Ralph that question about numbers.

Would be cool to have aeiral shots taken during a national of the ebtire facility.

Sondy132001 wrote: Yeah I'm not going to say that some Nationals don't have big turn outs, and with Washougal they do have a big turnout for sure. Guesstimating numbers isn't easy and I am sure in an open area like mx race tracks it would be hard to tell if there were more then 12,000 there or not ?? I only handle a small amount of people when I am there, pit access, but I do have a lot of envelopes at will call. I'll have to ask Ralph that question about numbers.

Would be cool to have aeiral shots taken during a national of the ebtire facility.

Tiki wrote: Either way it still isnt 40,000 people. The gate and concessions are less. Is this a professional motocross event for entertainment or is this a Sunday race for fun?

If I was in charge... (I liked how that sounded) I would go for more people to the event. More money. If TV likes one long moto, I would change in a heartbeat to get more people to the event.

In my opinion the Nationals suck to actually see. I understand the east coast is different then out here. Sunday's Glen Helen is an atrocious event to attend. No crappers, expensive food. Drunk fools, dusty event. Not family friendly at all. Not to mention high population of thieves. I know more people that have had shit stolen from their trucks in the parking lot...

So I am basing this on west coast events in comparison to SX events. Have at it.

Tiki wrote: Either way it still isnt 40,000 people. The gate and concessions are less. Is this a professional motocross event for entertainment or is this a Sunday race for fun?

If I was in charge... (I liked how that sounded) I would go for more people to the event. More money. If TV likes one long moto, I would change in a heartbeat to get more people to the event.

In my opinion the Nationals suck to actually see. I understand the east coast is different then out here. Sunday's Glen Helen is an atrocious event to attend. No crappers, expensive food. Drunk fools, dusty event. Not family friendly at all. Not to mention high population of thieves. I know more people that have had shit stolen from their trucks in the parking lot...

So I am basing this on west coast events in comparison to SX events. Have at it.

Sondy132001 wrote: I stated this on another board but you are all worried about spectator turn out, and how long a moto will be and tv I'd be more worried about rider participation, with gas prices and the fact sx can't get enough people to a sx, how do you think TX will do ??? so far off the beaten path...you need riders to have a race...
S

Sondy132001 wrote: I stated this on another board but you are all worried about spectator turn out, and how long a moto will be and tv I'd be more worried about rider participation, with gas prices and the fact sx can't get enough people to a sx, how do you think TX will do ??? so far off the beaten path...you need riders to have a race...
S

Sondy132001 wrote: I stated this on another board but you are all worried about spectator turn out, and how long a moto will be and tv I'd be more worried about rider participation, with gas prices and the fact sx can't get enough people to a sx, how do you think TX will do ??? so far off the beaten path...you need riders to have a race...
S

Foster576 wrote: And who the hell wants to race just ONE moto?

Foster576 wrote: And who the hell wants to race just ONE moto?

Mod Killer wrote: justmx wrote: "They should start with tightening up the "production" rules."


that would require enforcing them in the first place.

and if youre going to enforce the production rules, where you gonna get the revenue from when the OEM's quit financing this whole circus? Nascrap rules and single motos arent going to magically bring in new sponsors.

You made a great point, the 450 class is for the most part boring. They need to figure out how to get all this sports top talent into one premier class/series. That would be a great start, not stupid tweaks like a single moto format.

Mod Killer wrote: justmx wrote: "They should start with tightening up the "production" rules."


that would require enforcing them in the first place.

and if youre going to enforce the production rules, where you gonna get the revenue from when the OEM's quit financing this whole circus? Nascrap rules and single motos arent going to magically bring in new sponsors.

You made a great point, the 450 class is for the most part boring. They need to figure out how to get all this sports top talent into one premier class/series. That would be a great start, not stupid tweaks like a single moto format.

WhipMeister wrote: I think the point everyone is trying to make is how to improve things.

I know this unassailable fact: More money provides the war chest which funds improvements. The best (only?) way to get more money into MX is to attract NON-RIDERS to become interested in the sport. Period. Riders already use the stuff being sold by the advertisers (if you haven't noticed, moto-event advertising is dominated by OEMs. The OEMs now fund pretty much everything, except for the portion kicked in by the energy drink companies.).

Riders already watch the events on TV. Riders already attend the events. And you know what? We will continue to do so, no matter how pissed off we get about any format changes, because it will be the only game in town. Non-riders generally do not give a rat's ass about this sport. That's the problem.

The task is to figure out how to make this sport attractive and interesting to your golfing next door neighbor. Understanding that, I understand where the motivation comes from to tinker with the packaging to make it more friendly. I'm encouraged by that. At least the powers-that-be understand the problem. They haven't, always.

WhipMeister wrote: I think the point everyone is trying to make is how to improve things.

I know this unassailable fact: More money provides the war chest which funds improvements. The best (only?) way to get more money into MX is to attract NON-RIDERS to become interested in the sport. Period. Riders already use the stuff being sold by the advertisers (if you haven't noticed, moto-event advertising is dominated by OEMs. The OEMs now fund pretty much everything, except for the portion kicked in by the energy drink companies.).

Riders already watch the events on TV. Riders already attend the events. And you know what? We will continue to do so, no matter how pissed off we get about any format changes, because it will be the only game in town. Non-riders generally do not give a rat's ass about this sport. That's the problem.

The task is to figure out how to make this sport attractive and interesting to your golfing next door neighbor. Understanding that, I understand where the motivation comes from to tinker with the packaging to make it more friendly. I'm encouraged by that. At least the powers-that-be understand the problem. They haven't, always.

Mod Killer wrote: they get their numbers based on the total weekends attendance.

so if the same person, goes friday, saturday, and sunday, then they count as three people.

if they say that they had 18000 live spectators that meant 6000 per day (if its a three day event)

sponsors/marketing firms know this. its common practice.

Mod Killer wrote: they get their numbers based on the total weekends attendance.

so if the same person, goes friday, saturday, and sunday, then they count as three people.

if they say that they had 18000 live spectators that meant 6000 per day (if its a three day event)

sponsors/marketing firms know this. its common practice.

APLMAN wrote: I think they should do AWAY with the production rule!!!!

And if the bikes "devolve" back to 1979 levels, then let's do it! I'd pay just as much to watch the fast guys ride around on 1979 era bikes and out of box vans as I would to watch them ride todays stuff out of semis.......

APLMAN wrote: I think they should do AWAY with the production rule!!!!

And if the bikes "devolve" back to 1979 levels, then let's do it! I'd pay just as much to watch the fast guys ride around on 1979 era bikes and out of box vans as I would to watch them ride todays stuff out of semis.......

Mod Killer wrote: they get their numbers based on the total weekends attendance.

so if the same person, goes friday, saturday, and sunday, then they count as three people.

if they say that they had 18000 live spectators that meant 6000 per day (if its a three day event)

sponsors/marketing firms know this. its common practice.

APLMAN wrote: I think Washougal's numbers must be much higher then, especially when they do the amateur days leading up to the National.......

That track is packed pretty good several days before the National, and the crowd on Sunday is immense. I don't doubt the 25-28K numbers I have seen as being for Sunday alone, there is no way it'd be that low if you counted people twice for being there Saturday and Sunday.....

APLMAN wrote: I think Washougal's numbers must be much higher then, especially when they do the amateur days leading up to the National.......

That track is packed pretty good several days before the National, and the crowd on Sunday is immense. I don't doubt the 25-28K numbers I have seen as being for Sunday alone, there is no way it'd be that low if you counted people twice for being there Saturday and Sunday.....

Scott Kalisch wrote: Win need an Iron Man series. Race both moto's etc.

Surely these guys can do 2 motos.

Scott Kalisch wrote: Win need an Iron Man series. Race both moto's etc.

Surely these guys can do 2 motos.

Mod Killer wrote: they get their numbers based on the total weekends attendance.

so if the same person, goes friday, saturday, and sunday, then they count as three people.

if they say that they had 18000 live spectators that meant 6000 per day (if its a three day event)

sponsors/marketing firms know this. its common practice.

APLMAN wrote: I think Washougal's numbers must be much higher then, especially when they do the amateur days leading up to the National.......

That track is packed pretty good several days before the National, and the crowd on Sunday is immense. I don't doubt the 25-28K numbers I have seen as being for Sunday alone, there is no way it'd be that low if you counted people twice for being there Saturday and Sunday.....

Mod Killer wrote: believe it. if sx was a two day event, they'd be claiming 80,000 spectators.

im just sayin that when promoters approach potential sponsors, this is the format that is accepted.

the numbers given in press releases by the event, could be actual numbers or these seemingly inflated numbers, usually its the inflated ones.

Mod Killer wrote: believe it. if sx was a two day event, they'd be claiming 80,000 spectators.

im just sayin that when promoters approach potential sponsors, this is the format that is accepted.

the numbers given in press releases by the event, could be actual numbers or these seemingly inflated numbers, usually its the inflated ones.

Bret28g wrote: Quote from Dave Coombs on racerxill.com:

"Next, before we get into a whole bunch of interesting events from last weekend, I would like to squash the rumor that started on DMXS Radio when David Bailey inadvertently mentioned something about the outdoor nationals going to a one-moto format in 2009. That is absolutely not true; it was just one of many, many things thrown out there in discussions about the future of the series, live TV, etc. Rest assured the AMA Toyota Motocross Championship will be running two motos in 2009, and likely for a long time to come."

http://racerxill.com/...89/racerhead-19.aspx

I was glad to read this. Going to a one moto format would ruin the nationals. Lets hope DC is right!

Bret28g wrote: Quote from Dave Coombs on racerxill.com:

"Next, before we get into a whole bunch of interesting events from last weekend, I would like to squash the rumor that started on DMXS Radio when David Bailey inadvertently mentioned something about the outdoor nationals going to a one-moto format in 2009. That is absolutely not true; it was just one of many, many things thrown out there in discussions about the future of the series, live TV, etc. Rest assured the AMA Toyota Motocross Championship will be running two motos in 2009, and likely for a long time to come."

http://racerxill.com/...89/racerhead-19.aspx

I was glad to read this. Going to a one moto format would ruin the nationals. Lets hope DC is right!