Competition Plus Team
Since our inception, we have been passionately dedicated to delivering the most accurate, timely, and compelling content in the world of drag racing. Our readers depend on us for the latest news, in-depth features, expert analysis, and exclusive interviews that connect you to the sport’s pulse.
NHRA’S COUNTDOWN PROBLEM DIDN’T START WITH SHAWN REED, BUT HIS CASE EXPOSED IT
NHRA had an opportunity to fix its Countdown to the Championship three years ago. Instead, it protected a flawed formula and eventually found itself in a controversy involving a racer who thought he had done enough to qualify for the championship.
Shawn Reed didn’t create NHRA’s Countdown problem. He just became the latest racer to get caught in it, and this time NHRA has some explaining to do.
Reed broke the rule, and there’s no arguing otherwise. The requirement was three qualifying attempts, and he didn’t make them. NHRA had every right to declare him ineligible.
But there’s more to this story.
Before Charlotte, Reed said he told NHRA Senior Vice President of Competition and Tech Josh Peterson he planned to make a couple of runs. Unless the English language has undergone a significant revision, a couple means two.
In football, a wide receiver often looks toward the sideline official to confirm whether he’s lined up legally. The official tells him whether he’s legal. If he isn’t, he moves.
Reed said he essentially did the same thing by communicating his intentions to Peterson. What he apparently didn’t receive was the equivalent of an official telling him he was lined up incorrectly.
Peterson wasn’t obligated to interpret the rule for Reed, and Reed wasn’t excused from knowing it. But when a racer tells an NHRA executive he’s about to make two runs when the rule requires three, a warning shouldn’t be too much to expect.
But there’s a difference between having no obligation to help someone and allowing someone to proceed toward an avoidable mistake without offering a warning.
History suggests racers shouldn’t assume NHRA will intervene. There was even an instance in which a run was disqualified over a safety issue allegedly observed before the car made its pass. – RELATED STORY – GARY DENSHAM DISQUALIFICATION
Then there’s Buddy Hull.
It’s the same rule with two racers and two different outcomes.
CompetitionPlus.com is still awaiting clarification from Peterson explaining why Hull was declared eligible while Reed was not. The issue isn’t whether Reed violated the rule, but why it apparently carried a different consequence for Hull.
And this isn’t some meaningless technicality.
Had Reed been declared eligible, he could be sitting as high as seventh in the Top Fuel championship standings based on the points he could have accumulated. Instead, a racer capable of a top-10 finish is excluded over a participation requirement.
Then there’s the timing, which makes this situation appear fishy.
When Reed’s eligibility situation unfolded at Charlotte, IHRA was still operating as a potential competitor to NHRA. Now, with IHRA having fallen by the wayside, the eligibility requirement has become the deciding factor in Reed’s exclusion.
Is that a coincidence? Maybe, but would NHRA have enforced the requirement the same way had IHRA remained a viable alternative for professional racers?
Maybe the timing means nothing. NHRA has had every opportunity to explain why the rule apparently worked one way for Hull and another for Reed. We’re still waiting.
When the Countdown debuted in 2007, it followed NASCAR’s attempt to create a playoff atmosphere. NHRA wanted championships decided late rather than watching dominant racers clinch titles with events remaining.
The original version was confusing, complete with eliminations and another points reset. NHRA simplified it the following year, and championships frequently came down to the final day.
Mission accomplished? Not necessarily.
There’s a difference between a championship going down to the wire and NHRA moving the wire to make sure it does.
The Countdown has produced deserving champions. It has also punished racers for doing what a season-long championship should reward: outperforming everyone else.
Build a substantial points lead through months of work, and NHRA eventually takes much of it away. Apparently, being better than everyone else isn’t good enough television.
NHRA got it right when it created a regular-season championship. At least the racer who dominated the first part of the year had something to show for it.
But a trophy and a bonus don’t replace the competitive advantage that racer spent months earning. Keeping those points would be better.
The racers aren’t playing fantasy football. These racers spend millions chasing championships, only to watch NHRA wipe away much of the advantage they paid to earn.
When concerns arose about racers outside the top 10 losing sponsorship exposure, NHRA created an avenue for full-season participants to qualify regardless of their standings.
Participation became a substitute for performance.
The 1976 Tampa Bay Buccaneers went 0-14. Under that philosophy, they could have qualified for the NFL playoffs simply by showing up every Sunday and playing the required number of downs.
That’s when the Countdown jumped the shark, a shark that needed to be put down.
NHRA created a participation loophole and somehow managed to turn it into a reason to exclude somebody.
There is a better way, and NHRA doesn’t need another committee to figure it out.
I proposed an alternative in 2023, and Reed’s situation hasn’t changed my opinion.
End the regular season at Brainerd. Allow the top 10 in points to earn double elimination points for the remaining events without resetting the standings.
Those finishing 11th through 20th would earn points at one-and-a-half times the normal rate. Somebody outside the top 10 could still get hot and make a run at the championship. They’d just have to earn it.
Everyone could race, earn points, and improve their position. Performance, not a participation loophole, would determine the championship.
Qualifying bonus points would remain at their normal value. NHRA could also restore a world-record incentive during the final stretch, backed by a technical inspection program capable of policing those performances.
NHRA keeps treating the symptoms while protecting the disease. It could have avoided the Shawn Reed controversy by eliminating the participation-trophy provision and fixing the Countdown three years ago.
Instead, NHRA chose the status quo. And just as it has chosen not to fix the Countdown, it has yet to answer questions about why the same rule apparently produced two different outcomes.
The Countdown doesn’t need another eligibility clarification. It needs an overhaul.
Share the Insights?
Click here to share the article.
ad space x ad space
ad space x ad space
Competition Plus Team
Since our inception, we have been passionately dedicated to delivering the most accurate, timely, and compelling content in the world of drag racing. Our readers depend on us for the latest news, in-depth features, expert analysis, and exclusive interviews that connect you to the sport’s pulse.
Sign up for our newsletters and email list.
NHRA’S COUNTDOWN PROBLEM DIDN’T START WITH SHAWN REED, BUT HIS CASE EXPOSED IT
NHRA had an opportunity to fix its Countdown to the Championship three years ago. Instead, it protected a flawed formula and eventually found itself in a controversy involving a racer who thought he had done enough to qualify for the championship.
Shawn Reed didn’t create NHRA’s Countdown problem. He just became the latest racer to get caught in it, and this time NHRA has some explaining to do.
Reed broke the rule, and there’s no arguing otherwise. The requirement was three qualifying attempts, and he didn’t make them. NHRA had every right to declare him ineligible.
But there’s more to this story.
Before Charlotte, Reed said he told NHRA Senior Vice President of Competition and Tech Josh Peterson he planned to make a couple of runs. Unless the English language has undergone a significant revision, a couple means two.
In football, a wide receiver often looks toward the sideline official to confirm whether he’s lined up legally. The official tells him whether he’s legal. If he isn’t, he moves.
Reed said he essentially did the same thing by communicating his intentions to Peterson. What he apparently didn’t receive was the equivalent of an official telling him he was lined up incorrectly.
Peterson wasn’t obligated to interpret the rule for Reed, and Reed wasn’t excused from knowing it. But when a racer tells an NHRA executive he’s about to make two runs when the rule requires three, a warning shouldn’t be too much to expect.
But there’s a difference between having no obligation to help someone and allowing someone to proceed toward an avoidable mistake without offering a warning.
History suggests racers shouldn’t assume NHRA will intervene. There was even an instance in which a run was disqualified over a safety issue allegedly observed before the car made its pass. – RELATED STORY – GARY DENSHAM DISQUALIFICATION
Then there’s Buddy Hull.
It’s the same rule with two racers and two different outcomes.
CompetitionPlus.com is still awaiting clarification from Peterson explaining why Hull was declared eligible while Reed was not. The issue isn’t whether Reed violated the rule, but why it apparently carried a different consequence for Hull.
And this isn’t some meaningless technicality.
Had Reed been declared eligible, he could be sitting as high as seventh in the Top Fuel championship standings based on the points he could have accumulated. Instead, a racer capable of a top-10 finish is excluded over a participation requirement.
Then there’s the timing, which makes this situation appear fishy.
When Reed’s eligibility situation unfolded at Charlotte, IHRA was still operating as a potential competitor to NHRA. Now, with IHRA having fallen by the wayside, the eligibility requirement has become the deciding factor in Reed’s exclusion.
Is that a coincidence? Maybe, but would NHRA have enforced the requirement the same way had IHRA remained a viable alternative for professional racers?
Maybe the timing means nothing. NHRA has had every opportunity to explain why the rule apparently worked one way for Hull and another for Reed. We’re still waiting.
When the Countdown debuted in 2007, it followed NASCAR’s attempt to create a playoff atmosphere. NHRA wanted championships decided late rather than watching dominant racers clinch titles with events remaining.
The original version was confusing, complete with eliminations and another points reset. NHRA simplified it the following year, and championships frequently came down to the final day.
Mission accomplished? Not necessarily.
There’s a difference between a championship going down to the wire and NHRA moving the wire to make sure it does.
The Countdown has produced deserving champions. It has also punished racers for doing what a season-long championship should reward: outperforming everyone else.
Build a substantial points lead through months of work, and NHRA eventually takes much of it away. Apparently, being better than everyone else isn’t good enough television.
NHRA got it right when it created a regular-season championship. At least the racer who dominated the first part of the year had something to show for it.
But a trophy and a bonus don’t replace the competitive advantage that racer spent months earning. Keeping those points would be better.
The racers aren’t playing fantasy football. These racers spend millions chasing championships, only to watch NHRA wipe away much of the advantage they paid to earn.
When concerns arose about racers outside the top 10 losing sponsorship exposure, NHRA created an avenue for full-season participants to qualify regardless of their standings.
Participation became a substitute for performance.
The 1976 Tampa Bay Buccaneers went 0-14. Under that philosophy, they could have qualified for the NFL playoffs simply by showing up every Sunday and playing the required number of downs.
That’s when the Countdown jumped the shark, a shark that needed to be put down.
NHRA created a participation loophole and somehow managed to turn it into a reason to exclude somebody.
There is a better way, and NHRA doesn’t need another committee to figure it out.
I proposed an alternative in 2023, and Reed’s situation hasn’t changed my opinion.
End the regular season at Brainerd. Allow the top 10 in points to earn double elimination points for the remaining events without resetting the standings.
Those finishing 11th through 20th would earn points at one-and-a-half times the normal rate. Somebody outside the top 10 could still get hot and make a run at the championship. They’d just have to earn it.
Everyone could race, earn points, and improve their position. Performance, not a participation loophole, would determine the championship.
Qualifying bonus points would remain at their normal value. NHRA could also restore a world-record incentive during the final stretch, backed by a technical inspection program capable of policing those performances.
NHRA keeps treating the symptoms while protecting the disease. It could have avoided the Shawn Reed controversy by eliminating the participation-trophy provision and fixing the Countdown three years ago.
Instead, NHRA chose the status quo. And just as it has chosen not to fix the Countdown, it has yet to answer questions about why the same rule apparently produced two different outcomes.
The Countdown doesn’t need another eligibility clarification. It needs an overhaul.
John Doe
Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet consectetur adipiscing elit dolor
More Posts
Send Us A Message
Don’t miss these other exciting stories!
Explore more action packed posts on Competition Plus, where we dive into the latest in Drag Racing News. Discover a range of topics, from race coverage to in-depth interviews, to keep you informed and entertained.
NHRA’S COUNTDOWN PROBLEM DIDN’T START WITH SHAWN REED, BUT HIS CASE EXPOSED IT
BUTNER GOES BACK-TO-BACK, SURVIVES WORLD FINALS CHAOS FOR SECOND PRO NITRO TITLE
NHRA SCORES SECOND-LARGEST TV AUDIENCE IN HISTORY AS ST. LOUIS DELIVERS ON FOX
LIVE VIDEO – NHRA D3 DIVISIONAL WORLD WIDE TECHNOLOGY RACEWAY
FROM ‘WALMART BARGAIN’ TO TOP FUEL CONTENDER, WILL SMITH ISN’T SNEAKING UP ON ANYONE NOW
IN THE END, CUTTELL DIDN’T REJUVENATE IHRA – HE FINISHED IT
NHRA’S COUNTDOWN PROBLEM DIDN’T START WITH SHAWN REED, BUT HIS CASE EXPOSED IT
NHRA had an opportunity to fix its Countdown to the Championship three years ago. Instead, it protected a flawed formula and eventually found itself in