worst red light debate, again!

[Chad Rhodes]

not this **** again, really? i expect it every 6 months to a year, but hell its only been like 3 months. give it a rest, i mean can we wait for another horse to die before you beat it?

[bill dedman]

Originally Posted by Chad Rhodes

not this **** again, really? i expect it every 6 months to a year, but hell its only been like 3 months. give it a rest, i mean can we wait for another horse to die before you beat it?

It will be a dead horse when somebody, anybody, posts a good, reasonable, legitimate reason why it should not be changed.

That hasn't happened in twenty kazillion posts from people who give a million and one reasons why they don't WANT to see it changed, but never from anyone who can tell me:

1. what is fair about it, as it stands.
2. how changing it will impact racing (as we know it) in any negative way.
3. any LEGITIMATE reason NOT to change it.

Instead, people post, "Oh, not again!!!" messages to try to negate the real reasons why It needs to be changed, and personal insults and ridicule from people who, when they can't come up with sensible comments advocating leaving it alone, try to direct attention away from the factual issues at hand, and rely on "killing the messenger"...

They can't defend it, because, it's so unnecessarily unfair to the first car to leave, it's indefensible.

Until someone comes up with a defense of the current rule, (not gonna happen!) and proves that changing it to a "worse red light" rule would be some sort of a mistake, it will live on in infamy as proof positive that NHRA cares little or nothing about the fairness of their rules.

This is not just about "slow" cars vs. fast cars. ANY 2 cars, a AA/SA vs. an A/SA car that run handicap races against each other, for example, are affected.

Not a dead horse at all... yet.

[bill dedman]

Originally Posted by 7423

Bill Dedman
I will say that your opinion on the VERY DEAD topic is entertaining. But ya know what they say, "You can't fight city hall", because in this case, city hall doesn't really give a damn. Lets take it from the top, you leave first, you go red first, you loose first. Its been that way for a long while and will stay like that for a longer while. I think you should put your efforts into another fantasy, maybe Pam Anderson, seems to work for some of the other patrons here.

Charlie, did you like the "first car to break out" rule? Maybe you weren't racing at that time...

NHRA had the digital wherewithall at the time, to fix it, and they did.

Now, many years later, they have the digital wherewithall to fix THIS.

Can you tell me a good, legitimate, reason why it should remain in its antiquated, patently unfair state, now that there's a cheap, easy-to-implement, "fix" (software modification) available???

I hope you still find this "enteraining" when someone with a quicker-handicap car, puts you on the trailer because even though his redlight infraction was much worse than yours, he was able to send you home, because you had the bad luck to HAVE to leave first.

Maybe you'll think about this conversation in a different light, if that ever happens (and, it could.)

[jimi]

Originally Posted by cicero819

Do fast car have an advantage? Probably, you have your competitor in sight at all times: the slower car has the disavantage of leaving first, if he red lights he's done regardless if the faster car red lights worse than him. I think that's an unfair disaventage for a slower car. What should be done is to change the right light rule to mirror the first or worse rule this sport was built on. Let's make the worse light offender, the loser. The faster car wouldn't see the red light until he's made his start and then if a red light had come on in the other lane the worst would be shown. Let's make it fair on everybody, brackets to class. I know that this has been debated until everyone is tired of hearing this being recycle every month, but the ever high cost of racing is being push up because everybody wants the faster car causing so people to be pushed out of racing. This is just my opinion and I know what they say about opinions. Claude Ruel

the problem is your canadian!!!! just kidding............. i own faster class cars for just this reason if you dont like the rule build a faster car. for the most part the nhra s/ss sportsman rules have been just fine for a long time stop trying to change them.

[jimi]

Originally Posted by bill dedman

Charlie, did you like the "first car to break out" rule? Maybe you weren't racing at that time...

NHRA had the digital wherewithall at the time, to fix it, and they did.

Now, many years later, they have the digital wherewithall to fix THIS.

Can you tell me a good, legitimate, reason why it should remain in its antiquated, patently unfair state, now that there's a cheap, easy-to-implement, "fix" (software modification) available???

I hope you still find this "enteraining" when someone with a quicker-handicap car, puts you on the trailer because even though his redlight infraction was much worse than yours, he was able to send you home, because you had the bad luck to HAVE to leave first.

Maybe you'll think about this conversation in a different light, if that ever happens (and, it could.)

happened to me at the e town national 2010, .005 red to a .061 red (i think that was his red light) i was the slower car and lost due to the red light. oh well !!!! i went home kicking my self for pushing that hard but still would not change the rules. i screwed up not nhra the tree my car his car the starter or anyone but me!!!!!! leave the rules alone.

[Casey Miles]

Originally Posted by bill dedman

It will be a dead horse when somebody, anybody, posts a good, reasonable, legitimate reason why it should not be changed.

That hasn't happened in twenty kazillion posts from people who give a million and one reasons why they don't WANT to see it changed, but never from anyone who can tell me:

1. what is fair about it, as it stands.
2. how changing it will impact racing (as we know it) in any negative way.
3. any LEGITIMATE reason NOT to change it.

Instead, people post, "Oh, not again!!!" messages to try to negate the real reasons why It needs to be changed, and personal insults and ridicule from people who, when they can't come up with sensible comments advocating leaving it alone, try to direct attention away from the factual issues at hand, and rely on "killing the messenger"...

They can't defend it, because, it's so unnecessarily unfair to the first car to leave, it's indefensible.

Until someone comes up with a defense of the current rule, (not gonna happen!) and proves that changing it to a "worse red light" rule would be some sort of a mistake, it will live on in infamy as proof positive that NHRA cares little or nothing about the fairness of their rules.

This is not just about "slow" cars vs. fast cars. ANY 2 cars, a AA/SA vs. an A/SA car that run handicap races against each other, for example, are affected.

Not a dead horse at all... yet.

I'm in agreement with Bill, people seem to ridicule you if you have a different point of view on this site. Not everyone is whinning about rules that should have been changed years ago to make competition on an evan playing field for everyone. If you don't agree with the comments, put up an arguement why it shouldn't be changed, rather then just demean the person who made the statement.
As far as deep staging, the only reason the pre-stage light is there is to let you know that you are close to the starting line, without that light, alot of people would never be able to stage period.

Casey Miles
248H Stock?

[Chad Rhodes]

Originally Posted by Casey Miles

I'm in agreement with Bill, people seem to ridicule you if you have a different point of view on this site. Not everyone is whinning about rules that should have been changed years ago to make competition on an evan playing field for everyone. If you don't agree with the comments, put up an arguement why it shouldn't be changed, rather then just demean the person who made the statement.
As far as deep staging, the only reason the pre-stage light is there is to let you know that you are close to the starting line, without that light, alot of people would never be able to stage period.

Casey Miles
248H Stock?

no one is being ridiculed for having a different opinion. I have said before that i am not opposed to it, really don't care one way or the other. However i have said time and again that stock/ss is not the place to test a new system, bracket racing would be best for that, start from the ground up. NO ONE built a car and decided to go racing without knowing how the system worked, if it bothers you that much, quit. This issue is not even in the top 10 of things that concern 95% of class racers with what is going on at NHRA right now.

People are being ridiculed because they are a one trick pony, and are beating to death a subject which is not going to change any time soon. This keeps getting brought up, and the same crap happens. It reminds me of Ralph Nader constantly running for president. Everyone knows he doesn't stand a snowballs chance in hell, but you will see small groups of his supporters, and they look like idiots.

[Bobby DiDomenico]

[QUOTE=Rob Petrie E395;254660]I agree it does not matter But I will say this. It is a advantage if the slow car goes red but if he goes green and the faster car has to sit there for a long time before the tree comes down whos advantage is it then? Ever sat at the tree for over 10 seconds waiting for your turn? Its not easy either. I dont race S/SS but this rule will effect everybody.[/QUOT

Would implementing this make slower class cars have an advantage then? U/SA would become the killer class?

The idea of "first to break out" would bring out some cars with really big brakes!

[Ed Wright]

In the end, Bill's ( or anybody else's) long-azzed rants do not matter. It won't change.

[7423]

Bill
I really think you need a different hobby, something a bit more soothing......................maybe meditation or yoga

Or maybe JUST BUILD A FASTER CAR!!!!