Re: 2011 Stock/Super Stock Rule Changes
 

That's why you get a reaction time on your slip. I gotta a better idea ........... Don't show nothing but your et and speed like the old days. If they were not showing reaction times now this would not even be a subject matter. I vote leave it alone and i am one of the slower cars out there. Maybe someone will come up with a new dragracing game with worst red light and we can PLAY that. Just my -.02 worth

Re: 2011 Stock/Super Stock Rule Changes
 

I agree with you. Leave it alone.
Back in the old days (when you could get 4 or 5 time runs. We would stage the car at an angle. Then straighten it out till we got a red then add just a bit. It worked back then Buster didn't like it much, I remember once Jerry Stein was staged so crooked he was pointing at the tree. Not many people back then knew once the first car redlit the second car could leave at any point in the tree and the lights would keep coming down to a green.
We shook a lot of people up by leaving on the second (out of 5) amber. The catching the car and just blipping it to stay ahead. Rumors abounded that we could run well into the tens LOL.
Without those rumors we would not have won Indy in 1980

Re: 2011 Stock/Super Stock Rule Changes
 

[QUOTE=Chad Rhodes;220089]exactly. If I go red, I wasn't on my game and deserve to go home, whether it be first round or final round. If he red lit worse than me............oh well I gave him one. Had I not been red I would have gotten the freebie.

^^^^^^^
Thats a great attitude too have :)

Re: 2011 Stock/Super Stock Rule Changes
 

HAHA Jeff Lee your post was classic! I definitely know the feeling of the left leg going numb, the right thumb feeling like the line lock button is piercing through it, etc. Why are you bringing the Rs up before your top yellow comes on though?

Anyway, I have to disagree with you and stand behind my original post. I also think Bill D is making perfect sense here! And to the modest fellow who says "I shouldn't have went red so I deserved to lose" is being a little too modest.

Here is the best I can do, here it is in stat terms and I promise you will not hear anything out of me on this topic anymore. We will use discrete probability and analyze our sample space of four possible outcomes: both drivers green, first guy green and second guy red, first guy red and second guy green, both drivers red. In order for an event to be a "fair" event in the world of probability, all possible outcomes but possess equal probability, in this case each of the 4 outcomes should have a probability of 1/4 or .25. With our current system, the first two scenarios possess a probability of .25 (Probability of first guy going green = .5 AND probability of second guy going green = .5 so we multiply these to get a probability of .25 for this outcome. Same calculation for second outcome)

However, the third scenario possesses a probability of 1/2 or .5. (Probability of first guy going red = .5 AND probability of second guy going green = 1 since he/she has already won. Multiply these and we get .5). The probability of the last event is actually 0 because currently it can't happen and we revert to scenario 3. Since each outcome doesn't have the same probability, this event fails the "fair" event test. Conclusion: The first driver to leave is 25% more likely to lose the race on the starting line than the second driver. Sounds like an awful lot to me! Alright I'm a nerd, look what school has done to me..:eek:

Re: 2011 Stock/Super Stock Rule Changes
 

Mr. Dedman, never give up on this argument: You ARE correct as is only a few others such as Mr. Ashley.


It is so inconceivable, that so many cannot see how this situation, that is fixable in a nano second with a software change, is so unfair.


Imagine this change DID take place and no one was told about it. The first run at the Winternationals in 2011, and I’ll use the usual scenario that seems to be the only one that anyone understands, is an A/S and a V/S: And the V/S win light comes on.


The A/S guy gets his time slip, and sees that the V/S car fouled by .005, and he, the A/S car, fouled by .007.


The A/S car starts whining about how unfair it is for him to be the loser. When it’s pointed out to him that he fouled worse than the V/S guy, the A/S guy says so what…..the V/S guy fouled first.


The A/S guy is then told that of course, if the V/S guy fouls, it’s going to be first. How is that unfair? How in the Hell is the V/S guy ever going to foul last against an A/S guy like you?


How in the Hell is it unfair to expect BOTH cars to have to take a shot at the tree? The tree is a basic…a fundamental…a must.


Those faster cars that win via a slower car fouling against you….you got a freebie…..a gimme…and you ought to be ashamed: You’re no better than someone on welfare that refuses to work for what they receive.


You got something for nothing, only because technology wasn’t used properly. Sort of like someone NOT getting out of prison because DNA was not used.


Next time I see a car win via a slower car foul, I believe I’m going to flip them the bird, and laugh.

Re: 2011 Stock/Super Stock Rule Changes
 

Knock yourself out. It'll show what a first class individual you really are.

Re: 2011 Stock/Super Stock Rule Changes
 

I'm just going to go out on a limb and guess that you voted for Obama. Life is not fair, there will always be inequity. You can either choose to put your big boy pants on and deal with it, or you can whine, bitch and get in line with the rest of those expecting a handout or a rule/law change in favor "fairness".

Re: 2011 Stock/Super Stock Rule Changes
 

Oh, and Bill, let me give you a short list of cars not to flip the bird to and laugh.

1) black AA/SA vette
2) purple I/SA camaro
3)any camaro with a tall guy in a black cowboy hat standing next to it, lol

Re: 2011 Stock/Super Stock Rule Changes
 

Chilllllllllllllll pill they do make them

Re: 2011 Stock/Super Stock Rule Changes
 

This is NOT "rocket science." After all these hypothetical scenarios, and the conclusions that support the FACT that the present situation is NOT fair, never has been, and has sent many a car to the trailer when he should have won the round, it's abundantly clear that some people will argue with a gatepost, even when they can't supply ANY legitimate reasons for their position. They just want to argue.

Some say "Life is not fair."

Of course it's not... and racing is not fair, but it needs to be as fair as we can make it.
Why do you think NHRA Tech tosses cars out for valves that are a few THOUSANDTHS of an inch to big.... ot too small? Keeps voluminous technical records on carburetor part numbers, venturi size specs, and throttle bore sizes? Camshaft lift information???

So it will be a fair race... or, as fair as they can make it.

But, I'm just a "whiner" because I want to change a rule that screws, or has the potential to screw virtually half the cars running. Any race that's not "heads-up" is a candidate for this unforunate event.

So, if you think that you're a "good guy" for not complaining when a car that leaves after you, has a red light infraction that is worse than yours, I have news... you might not mind losing like that, but keeping quiet about it is just one way of telling NHRA that the first red light system is okay, and that's all they need to leave it alone. The others (and, their numbers are growing,) who can see the built-in inequities that are part and parcel of the first red light system, and want it changed, now have a steeper uphill battle to get a worse redlight system in place.

To use a very tired adage, you're either part of the solution, or you're part of the problem.

But, the biggest problem is NHRA's inertia with stuff like this. It won't make them any money, so they have no initiative to fix it... so, in all likelihood, they won't.

We're lucky that this bunch of Druids wasn't running NHRA back in the sixties, or we'd probably still have the "first breakout loses" rule...

Would you guys like that???