Think about this.........

[Alan Roehrich]

Originally Posted by bill dedman

I don't think bracket racing is complicated until I am asked to explain why the first car in a handicapped race to red light, ALWAYS loses, but the first car to break out, doesn't.

How do you explain the reason for that disparity to a novice?

You show him the rule book. If he can read, he can grasp the concept. And then you stop dragging your agenda into every thread you can possibly find an imagined reason to insert it into.

[bill dedman]

Merry Christmas, Alan; it's comforting to know that wherever I post the illogic of that rule disparity, you'll be there to totally ignore the content of the post, but put on your moderator hat and try to control the subject matter that gets posted on this otherwise "open" forum.

This forum has enough moderators; put your portable hat away ,and try to understand the content of my post for once, and ignore where it's coming from.

That wouldn't be asking too much, or, would it??? Maybe so...

Happy Hollidays!

[Mike Carr]

Bill, has it occurred to you thay maybe, just maybe, the majority of us DO NOT CARE?? Yes, anyone can see that the advantage of the redlight rule favors the faster car. But, since you seem to be the (not so silent) minority in constantly beating this drum, it should occur to you that maybe the rest of us don't feel as strongly as you.

As a FWD Stock racer, changing the rule would help me. I retired from Stock three years ago. Not because of who can redlight first, or worst. If NHRA/IHRA changes the rule to worst redlight loses, I still won't come back to racing. Because, there are bigger problems with NHRA and IHRA right now than who got screwed by the Christmas Tree. Now, can you please give it a rest? I'm begging you (and I hate begging).

[JMatt]

OK - I'm not a class racer. I'm a bracket racer and plan on running some .90 races this year.

Why not S/SS?

Knowledge. Pure and simple. Knowledge. Face it - you true class racers are a pretty dang smart bunch. So since I'm on my own, and not a 2nd or 3rd generation racer, how can I go S/SS racing? Which of you is going to teach me how to make cylinder heads that work? Pistons? Cranks? Who among you is giving up all the secrets to make a "Stock" car magically run 2-3 full seconds quicker than a true "stock" car from off the dealership floor?

That's right - none of you. So I can find a professional builder and write a huge check. But I like doing my own wrenching. So maybe I have to buy parts from Reher-Morrison, etc. At least I can build my own stuff and go racing.

Think about it: I can build whatever I want, pay attention to virtually no rules at all, and go bracket racing, 8.90 racing, 9.90 racing, Quick 16 racing, and if my car is old enough (it is in my case) I can go nostalgia racing in B-Gas or other "index" racing.

And I don't have to be part of an inner circle with 40 years of knowledge. And I don't need $100,000.

My car runs 8.0xx all out, and I have $40,000 in it. I can find races any week any where.

But take it as a compliment: You guys are smarter than the average racer by a HUGE margin. Who will publish their book of secrets first?

[Ed Fernandez]

Originally Posted by bill dedman

Ed, I don't like beer....

Believe it or not, there are people who think more deeply than to simply accept such a cockeyed situation... "Well, here (on a red light) we disqualify the first car to create an infraction, but HERE, (on a breakout infraction) we don't..."

Where is the consistency?

I'd be too embarrassed for NHRA to simply ask the novice to just close his eyes to intelligent thought, and accept that glaring disparity in logic just because "IT'S THE RULE."

Rules owe it to their constituency to provide a logical reason why they're written the way they are. Anything less, is chaos...

Nobody can do that in this case. It's a travesty to anyone who looks at it with more than a cursory glance.

This may be a novice who can understand the lopsided situation it creates.

Some people are deep thinkers, Ed... and can see that if you're going to eliminate the first car to redlight, shouldn't you also eliminate the first car to break out?

They used to.... in the beginning of Christmas Tree handicap racing. But, at some point, early-on, someone said, "Hey; that makes NO SENSE!"

"Let's eliminate the racer who breaks out the MOST!!"

And so they did. I assume you have no problem with that.

Now, it's possible to eliminate the racer who RED LIGHTS the MOST!

No reason not to change to a system that mimics the breakout protocol.

If the novice asks me, I can't just dumb the question down to "READ THE RULEBOOK;" there's more to it than that, because it needs attention.... the novice MAY be as stupid and thick-headed as I was; it took me YEARS before somebody took me aside and explained the problems with the current system, and even THEN, I didn't really "get it." A few more weeks, and it began to dawn on me that, "Hey; this guy's got something, here."

Comparing it with the breakout situation, and how it's handled, might be the easiest way to understand why the way they've been doing it since 1963 is not consistent with the way they prosecute breakouts... and breakouts are EXACTLY LIKE REDLIGHTS... a case of being in the wrong place at the wrong time... maybe by milliseconds, but nevertheless, the wrong place at the wrong time.

Same type infraction; needs to be handled the same way.

The novice is owed an explanation beyond "READ THE RULEBOOK."

I'd like to be there when he asks you why the difference in how red lights are treated, vs. breakouys and see what you tell him!!! "Read the Rulebook, sonny!!!" LOL!

You probably would...

Merry Christmas.

Yes I would.I've pretty much lived my life by following the rules.I have very limited debt,own
my own house,got and kept the same job for 30 years,paid my taxes,didn't break the law and wind out in the slammer and so on and so on.So yeah,I'd tell the kid go read the rules.You can never go wrong if you read and follow the rules.

[Ed Wright]

Bill, give it up PLEASE!!

[bill dedman]

Alan, Mike, and Ed, I'll give it up when any one of the three of you can give me a logical reason why it should NOT be changed.

I have never heard one... and, I'm waiting.

Is the best you can do, when asked by the novice, to tell the kid, "READ THE RULEBOOK," when he asks, "What's the reason for this "First redight ALWAYS loses," BUT, "First Breakout doesn't lose; 'Worse' breakout loses."

The rulebook doesn't address the reason for that basic difference in protocol.

We all know that that "First red light" procedure was born of necessity; they didn't know how to fix it...

THAT'S NO LONGER TRUE. Easy software adjustment/fix, now....

So, I'd say that if you are really as sick of reading that fact as you seem to be, just tell me ONE legitimate and logical reason why NHRA should NOT spend the small amount of money to change this current procedure to a worse red light system, I promise the three of you, who don't seem to care much about fairness in this sport (it's a foregone conclusion that a first red light is an advantage for the faster car, even if it's a V/S over a W/S) that I will never, EVER post another word about it on this forum. NEVER.

That's something that nobody has ever done.... give me a legitimate reason not to change it. In place of reasons not to do it, I am subject to character assassination, regarded as a motor-mouthed KOOK, and generally ridiculed, in a transparent effort to divert attention away from the inability of anyone to show me ONE SOLID REASON not to change it.

I'll make good on my promise, I promise. You'll never find another post on this forum about that subject from ME, if any of you can tell me what reason exists NOT to change it.

Don't tell me you run a AA/S car and are always the chaser; that doesn't count...

Happy Holidays!

[art leong]

Originally Posted by bill dedman

Alan, Mike, and Ed, I'll give it up when any one of the three of you can give me a logical reason why it should NOT be changed.

I have never heard one... and, I'm waiting.

Is the best you can do, when asked by the novice, to tell the kid, "READ THE RULEBOOK," when he asks, "What's the reason for this "First redight ALWAYS loses," BUT, "First Breakout doesn't lose; 'Worse' breakout loses."

The rulebook doesn't address the reason for that basic difference in protocol.

We all know that that "First red light" procedure was born of necessity; they didn't know how to fix it...

THAT'S NO LONGER TRUE. Easy software adjustment/fix, now....

So, I'd say that if you are really as sick of reading that fact as you seem to be, just tell me ONE legitimate and logical reason why NHRA should NOT spend the small amount of money to change this current procedure to a worse red light system, I promise the three of you, who don't seem to care much about fairness in this sport (it's a foregone conclusion that a first red light is an advantage for the faster car, even if it's a V/S over a W/S) that I will never, EVER post another word about it on this forum. NEVER.

That's something that nobody has ever done.... give me a legitimate reason not to change it. In place of reasons not to do it, I am subject to character assassination, regarded as a motor-mouthed KOOK, and generally ridiculed, in a transparent effort to divert attention away from the inability of anyone to show me ONE SOLID REASON not to change it.

I'll make good on my promise, I promise. You'll never find another post on this forum about that subject from ME, if any of you can tell me what reason exists NOT to change it.

Don't tell me you run a AA/S car and are always the chaser; that doesn't count...

Happy Holidays!

Bill you are beating a dead horse about this subject. Give it a rest.
I have the slowest car in Superstock I get to leave first everytime. The rule would help me more than anyone.
BUT.
When I built the car the rule was first redlight. I'm not one to build something then lobby to get the rules changed to suit me.
To me that is the same as buying a house near a race track then wanting the track shut down for noise.

[JMatt]

Originally Posted by bill dedman

That's something that nobody has ever done.... give me a legitimate reason not to change it. In place of reasons not to do it, I am subject to character assassination, regarded as a motor-mouthed KOOK, and generally ridiculed, in a transparent effort to divert attention away from the inability of anyone to show me ONE SOLID REASON not to change it.

I'll make good on my promise, I promise. You'll never find another post on this forum about that subject from ME, if any of you can tell me what reason exists NOT to change it.

Here's all the reason you need:

1) This is racing. Quicker car gets the advantage. So first red light loses.
2) This is racing. We hate sandbaggers. So worst breakout loses.

The two are in harmony with each other. There is no reason to change any rules. So now you can explain it to a novice using steps 1 & 2 above.

The end.

[rayfin]

I love stock and super stock. The thing is, I think the only reason drag racing has lasted this long is that bracket racing has kept it alive. A guy can drive his street car to the track and have a chance. That fast and furious crap is what killed it. All these young kids want a fast Honda. Sorry but things change and it's a shame.