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

[Mark Yacavone]

I made this personal? I don't think so. Not until now.

"If you'd be willing to re-seed the qualifiers based on percentage run under the index, then perhaps a "worst red-light" rule makes sense. And they should block the red/green from the other driver's sight."

My friend, you have no idea what's even going on here.
You should be trying to convince the guys with the Chevys in AA/SA they're getting a fair shake. You 've never seen a new CJ go 1.50 under?
This has nothing , I repeat , nothing to do with fast ET's
Yesterday's "A/Stockers" (50 Old's) are so slow , by today's standards, that they don't even have a class to run in...and so it goes.

[bill dedman]

Indyracer said: "Here's all the reason you need:"

THIS is what Indyracer thinks is a reason NOT to change to a worse red light system:

He said:
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.

Let's look at those statements, individually, in an effort to see what he thinks the reasons NOT to change the red light rule are:

1 "This is racing."

I don't think that statement has anything to do with the contention that a rule needs to be changed. Or, much of anything we didn't already know...

2 Then, he said, "Quicker car gets the advantage."

The whole idea in writing rules for the aforementioned "racing" is to create a "rules" environment that is as fair to everybody as it can be. That's why racing HAS rules. Is "Quicker car gets the advantage" in the spirit of that concept, one that attempts to create an environment wherein NOBODY should get an advantage?

Indyracer, did somebody tell you that somewhere it is written that the faster car should get an advantage? At any time? Anywhere??? Show it to me... It's not in the NHRA rulebook. The fist red light situation was created by default (they didn't know how to fix it) in 1963.... maybe even before you were born...

You failed to come up with a legitimate and logical reason not to change it (first red light)... I said a "legitimate and logical reason"...
"Quicker car gets the advantage" is not even a reason... it's just the status quo.

3. Then, Indyracer said, "So first red light loses."

I don't find a reason there, either; just the lopsided status quo, again... Everybody knows that with the current system, the first red light ALWAYS loses.... That's the problem.

4. Then he again,said, "This is racing."

Is that a reason not to change the first red light rule???

No.

5. He then said, "We hate sandbaggers." in reference to "worst breakout loses."

. Nobody is talking about changing the breakout rule.... There's no advantage to any car under the present rule; why would anyone want to change that? They wouldn't.... so once again, you bring up something that's not pertinent to this discussion.

Even if there WAS something wrong with the breakout rule (and, there's NOT,) tell me what you think sandbagging has to do with breaking out? Handicap racing is all brakelight racing, anyway; what would sandbagging have to do with that? Nothing...

6 He wrote, finally, "So, worst breakout loses.

I don't think ANYBODY has a problem with that, but it has NOTHING to do with the worse red light rule...

What are you smokin'???????

I broke NO promise, because you presented nothing that was even CLOSE to an argument or reason NOT to change what we have, now. You told me what we are doing... and that in doing it like we do, it gives the advantage to the second car to leave, but where in that, is a reason NOT to change the rule?

There's not one. It's not that "I don't like the answer" because it doesn't suit my opinion, I don't like the answer because it answers questions not asked, while totally failing to address the question that WAS asked, which was:

"Can anybody give me a legitimate and logical reason to NOT change the first red light rule."

I'm still waiting for an answer to that. Simply stating how it works under the present ules is in no way, an answer as to why not to change it.

I think I'm going to have a long wait....

Thanks for listening, if you really WERE listening...

[Mike Carr]

Against my better judgement...

There is no logical or legitamate reason the leave the rule as is. The worst redlight rule is the fairest way to do it, for all handicap-tree racers. The current system favors the faster car in a bracket racing situation. I, and just about anyone else, would agree with that.

Now, with that said, Bill, why don't you e-mail/call/write/fax/postcard/Facebook/Myspace/smoke signal/morse code/pigeon carrier/whatever you have to do, send it to NHRA/IHRA and air your grievance with them? Instead of taking up valuable space on here to argue and complain about a system that affects REAL Class Racers? Seriously. We get it. We got it a long time ago. Again, based on most racers post(s) on here, it seems very few care at all, or at least as strongly as you, about this issue. Take it up with someone that can actually change the way things work, instead of constantly yammering about it on here. I still say, as would the majority of Class Racers, that there are bigger problems that the xHRA's need to address and fix first for Class Racing before the Christmas Tree issue.

[Adger Smith]

I like the Worst red light rule. I agree it is fair. But just sit back and think when and where the first red light rule came from. Why would a new(back then) organization like NHRA come up with such a rule. The problems with the electronics... no I don't think so. They developed electronics that tell you which car got to the finish line first... Could it go back and be a carry over from the days of flagging... Bill, You and I are old enough to remember those days. Yes, it could be just a carry over. How could a flagger determine which was the worst red light? Now with that said lets throw in the big MAYBE....MAYBE there was another issue that gives us the first red light rule. Could it be for the best Show for the spectators? How you say? Because a new organization was wanting to grow and spectators wanted to watch faster cars. The slow car red lighting first was/is a clear cut advantage for those who build a fast car. Yesterday and today and it promotes the building of faster cars. So NHRA gets faster cars built, grows and gives the spectators a faster show. I would say since we have had it like this for so long it is probably one of those "Things" that management thinks should be left alone. I can tell you Bill isn't the first guy to wear this issue out.
My .02 for free...
Merry Christmas

[bill dedman]

Thanks. Adger. I was told that it (the first redlight rule) came about as a result of no software existing at the time that could handle the task of comparing reaction times, and not turning on either red light until the worse infraction was decided. I can believe that... it WAS 46 years ago, after all... LOL!

Insofar as NHRA simply leaving it alone, as an advantage for the faster cars all these years, that's very possible, but, I think unlikely because

1. a double red light doesn't happen very often, and,

2. it can just as easily happen in a race between an M Stocker and a V stocker as it can an A car and an H.... There's not that much opportunity for the higher class cars to benefit, but that's just my opinion. Been wrong before... for sure.

My personal opinion is that NHRA is just L-A-Z-Y, eaten up with apathy, and will never be proactive in getting rid of something like this if they can get around it. But, that's just my 2-cents, too.

I appreciate your input, Adger.... I do.

I should give it a good letting alone. My only reason for posting it was to try and make as many people as possible, aware of how it all works; There are people who, like myself, just never paid that much attention... If they knew, they might talk amongst themselves and develop a consensus.... one way or another.

It could be argued that such a consensus already exists, in that there's no viable protest group lobbying NHRA right now, on this issue, but the problem with that view is that something like this has inertia on the side of "It's always been this way," and a lot of people don't care enough to think beyond that viewpoint. That becomes an "immoveable object" when new concepts and arguments for change go ignored by that kind of complacency...

I am convinced that NHRA will never change to a worse red light rule, unless they are coerced into it.

I don't see that happening.

Have a great Christmas and a very happy New Year, Adger!!!

[bill dedman]

Originally Posted by Mike Carr

There is no logical or legitimate reason the leave the rule as is. The worst redlight rule is the fairest way to do it, for all handicap-tree racers. The current system favors the faster car in a bracket racing situation. I, and just about anyone else, would agree with that.

Now, with that said, Bill, why don't you email/call/write/fax/postcard/Facebook/Myspace/smoke signal/morse code/pigeon carrier/whatever you have to do, send it to NHRA/IHRA and air your grievance with them? Instead of taking up valuable space on here to argue and complain about a system that affects REAL Class Racers? Seriously. We get it. We got it a long time ago. Again, based on most racers post(s) on here, it seems very few care at all, or at least as strongly as you, about this issue. Take it up with someone that can actually change the way things work, instead of constantly yammering about it on here. I still say, as would the majority of Class Racers, that there are bigger problems that the xHRA's need to address and fix first for Class Racing before the Christmas Tree issue.

Mike, I'm glad you "get it." If you, and guys like you truly "get it," why don't you do anything about it? It's a 46 year-old problem that affects half the racers in any round of handicap racing.
I guarantee you if NHRA came out with new rule than said all red cars now have to carry 50 additional pounds of ballast, there would be moaning, groaning, gnashing of teeth and whining 'til NHRA did something about it.

Why not this???

"they just don't care..."

You act like Class racers are the only ones affected by this.

I KNOW you know a LOT about Bracket racing. If I line up against your Bracket car, and you have the slower car, does it not bother you that your red light just took me out of red light jeopardy, and deposited me in the winners' circle, even though you only bulbed..002 and I left .023 early??

I think that bracket racers everywhere, are affected equally, by the first red light rule.

Insofar as "valuable space" on this forum, goes, I can't think of a better use of it than trying to "right" an ongoing, 46-year old, injustice to the slower car. There are people who post jokes, private conversations, unfounded rumors, political opinions and just about everything you can think of, on on this forum... I appreciate the opportunity to have it at my disposal, but when the subject matter is something as pertinent and serious as NHRA rules, I can't see that I am doing anything wrong. This forum is for people who want to discuss racing, and the rules are part and parcel of that.

If someone doesn't want to read it, they should do what I do when I find a subject boring, impertinent, or of no value; go to the next forum... there are lots of excellent subjects here to read; they don't have to read my Don Quixote prattle... (Thank you, Ed.)

Thanks again for your comments, Mike. Have a happy Holiday!!!

[X-TECH MAN]

Originally Posted by Adger Smith

I like the Worst red light rule. I agree it is fair. I can tell you Bill isn't the first guy to wear this issue out.
My .02 for free...
Merry Christmas

The late Steve Taylor comes to mind. In case the name dosent ring a bell he ran stock back in the 70's with a 396/375 HP Chevelle. He did well and almost won a couple of IHRA National events back in the day by getting down to the semi's. His wife also ran her own car in stock. As time went on and it became more expensive he went ( THE HORROR OF IT) bracket racing. He became a "Killer" and won several high dollar electronics races running against dragsters and lite wt. door cars loaded with every electronic devise invented while FOOT braking a cavalier FWD slug. The fast guys got pissed and they had the min. ET changed to eliminate him and his wife in twin Cavaliers from competing and "stealing their Glory". Kind of sounds like what stock and S/S is turning into dosent it !

[Michael Beard]

Rules, by nature, are arbitrary.

[Adger Smith]

Wow, Bill... 46 years ago I raced at Hope Ar airport and it was off Flags and distance Spots. Add to the list of tracks that ran the same way:
The old Shreveport track and the Airport at Haynesville La. The first time I went to the Hallsville Tx track, can't remember the year but had to be 68 or earlier, they had distance spots with an old stop light hanging down track between the Strips of pavement. In late1969 when I went to the Paris Tx track they had a Pro Tree handicap start system. I think it was a 3 light. It was the same tree system that I raced on and won an IHRA National Event at the old Dallas International track in 1971. The first Full trees I ever ran on were at Carlisle Ar. and I-20 Tyler Tx sometime in the early 70's. I started racing in a friends fast Stock class 1962 Impala at Hope. I raced in "Stock" class until I moved my 69 Camaro up to SS in 1973. I built a Modified 1966 Vette in 1974. The first bracket race I raced in was when my 69 Camaro Stocker broke a rear end at Paris in early 71.
Jerry Bob Stevens allowed me to use my "Stock" entry in brackets and I ran the tow car, 68 Dodge Dart w/383 auto. WOW, Sorry your 46 year ago comment swept up all those thoughts from the cobwebs and dust of my mind!!! :~) I guess things have changed, yet stayed the same; my love for the sport of racing.
Merry Christmas, to All

[Bobby Zlatkin]

Bill Dedman, I also 'get' it and I agree with you completely. I see no logical reason why "worst" shouldn't get the red light.