questions concerning christmas tree

[SS 230]

Why dont the blinders go down far enough to cover the green and red lights? If you are going to block the tree, block the entire thing. The other question is the back drop on the tree. Wouldn't be better to have it white so you can see the bulbs better at night or when the sun is in your eyes at 7:30 in the morning at national events. Any thoughts on how to get these things changed,or leave well enough alone?

[SS 230]

Let me clarify, I'm talking on the tree its self. If you are chasing, watching the last bulb on your side then the green bulb on the other side comes on inches away from the bulb you are watching, it can be distracting. Just extend the blinder down on the tree to cover the bottom two bulbs.

[Ed Fernandez]

Originally Posted by SS 230

Let me clarify, I'm talking on the tree its self. If you are chasing, watching the last bulb on your side then the green bulb on the other side comes on inches away from the bulb you are watching, it can be distracting. Just extend the blinder down on the tree to cover the bottom two bulbs.

Build a lower classed car and voila!! problem solved.I wish people would just stop trying to reinvent a sport that has endured for 60 years.Just strap in,do your best,eat well and go home.

[Ed Wright]

I just with I could get them to spread the amber lights further apart on the tree, so I don't accidently get a glimps of the second light if I don't get behind my blinder just right. Those .4something reds like I had at Memphis are embarassing.

Or, I could just learn to drive...

[Ed Fernandez]

Originally Posted by Longbob

How is that reinventing? Blinders are in the rule book and it is my understanding that the original poster was asking about how to design them. Except for the backdrop part. I guess that would be a change that I don't see as needed.

You've been here long enough that I don't need to list the changes everyone "wishes" for.The one that really drove me up the wall was "Why does the first car to leave only get a red light".Because you chose,for one reason or another,to build a car that leave first most of the time.I always go 1st and if I go red shame on me.I don't want or see a reason to change what has worked since 1964.

The new sanctioning org. should be called the NWHRA,the W is for whiners or whingers.

[bill dedman]

Ed said, ".I don't want or see a reason to change what has worked since 1964."

Problem is, it HASN'T ever worked...

It has ALWAYS favored the second car to leave, in this way: It the first car to leave red lights, the second car to leave never has HIS chance to red light. He may well have a worse red light than the first car to leave, but he's never in that jeopardy if the first car bulbs.

That makes NO SENSE. Why should ANYBODY get a free ride like that?

They shouldn't... and it's the same if a AA/S car is running against an A/S, or a V/S car is running a W/S. The odds favor the second car to leave, if both leave before the green. This isn't about slow cars vs. fast cars; it's about ANY two cars that have dialin's... be they fast, or slow.

Using your "logic", Ed, we'd still be making a loser out of the first car to breakout. They had it that way, at first, but fixed it after everybody saw how stupid that was.

The worse breakout loses; why shouldn't the worse redlight lose???? Just because they couldn't fix that, back in 1963, doesn't mean it has "worked" for 46 years, They can fix it, now....

Oh yes, they have gotten the races run off, but then, there's more to fairness than just finishing the race on the day it started.

And, if you think that complaining about a system that screws the first car to leave is "whining," then I can't even talk to you...

[Alan Roehrich]

It hasn't worked? Well, I'll be damned. We haven't been racing for decades, because of the red light rule? Boy, I sure am glad all you guys came along to tell us all drag racing hasn't worked for 40 years, the rest of us would never have figured that one out.

I raced a slower car last year, a G/S Camaro and at least two rounds I lost to a faster car because I redlighted. I didn't feel the slightest bit cheated by the system or the rule. I felt like I screwed up. Because I screwed up, no one screwed me.

If you built a slower car after the christmas tree and the first to go red rule came along, you made a conscious decision to do so knowing the rules. No one forced you to do it, and no one came along and changed the rules on you.

How about we change the rules so that if the fast car spins, you have to rerun the race? Or, if the track is marginal, the slower car has to put WD-40 all over his slicks?

If I get lucky and get another ride next year, you can bet I won't whine if it isn't a fast car, and I'll do the same thing if I go red as I did last year. Ask Fred Suiter, I pulled up and told him he ran a great race and he kicked my red lighting ***. I took my loss like a man, and like a racer, and tried to do better the next time.

[bill dedman]

Alan; I thought you were smarter than that... I have read your many posts, and you always, before, seemed to make a lot of sense... but I am thinking now, that your logic has been short-circuited by the possibility that you run a higher-classed car that would never benefit from the level playing field that a worse red light rule will provide.

You said, "It hasn't worked? Well, I'll be damned. We haven't been racing for decades, because of the red light rule? Boy, I sure am glad all you guys came along to tell us all drag racing hasn't worked for 40 years, the rest of us would never have figured that one out."

Did I say it prevented us from racing at all???

No.

I said it didn't "work," and, it didn't... and it doesn't.

Would you like to return to "The first car to break out loses"??? That makes just as much sense...

Think about it.

What doesn't "work" about the current system is that it prevents equal red light jeopardy. The second car to leave is no longer in jeopardy of a red light, if the first car bulbs. Where is the other side of that coin???

There is none with the present system. But, this lopsided situation doesn't have to continue.

What we now have, is a system, born of necessity (in 1963) when there was no electronic capability to provide a dual reaction-timing system. That time has come and gone, and now it can be fixed by utilizing software that compares the lights (reaction times) of BOTH cars, before a red light is displayed.

People complain that it's "Just another change, and we've already had ENOUGH changes," but it's not a change that will affect anyone's driving program; nobody will be aware that it's even in place, until after both cars have left the line.

There's simply no legitimate reason NOT to change this.

But, since NHRA is what it is, and it won't make them one red cent, it will likely never happen there. I'd expect to see it in IHRA protocol before NHRA ever gets around to fixing it, so relax; your advantage is secure, for the moment.

[TOM KASCH]

1963 1st year of the christmas tree..we were there just to watch.

[Alan Roehrich]

Originally Posted by bill dedman

Alan; I thought you were smarter than that... I have read your many posts, and you always, before, seemed to make a lot of sense... but I am thinking now, that your logic has been short-circuited by the possibility that you run a higher-classed car that would never benefit from the level playing field that a worse red light rule will provide.

You said, "It hasn't worked? Well, I'll be damned. We haven't been racing for decades, because of the red light rule? Boy, I sure am glad all you guys came along to tell us all drag racing hasn't worked for 40 years, the rest of us would never have figured that one out."

Did I say it prevented us from racing at all???

No.

I said it didn't "work," and, it didn't... and it doesn't.

Would you like to return to "The first car to break out loses"??? That makes just as much sense...

Think about it.

What doesn't "work" about the current system is that it prevents equal red light jeopardy. The second car to leave is no longer in jeopardy of a red light, if the first car bulbs. Where is the other side of that coin???

There is none with the present system. But, this lopsided situation doesn't have to continue.

What we now have, is a system, born of necessity (in 1963) when there was no electronic capability to provide a dual reaction-timing system. That time has come and gone, and now it can be fixed by utilizing software that compares the lights (reaction times) of BOTH cars, before a red light is displayed.

People complain that it's "Just another change, and we've already had ENOUGH changes," but it's not a change that will affect anyone's driving program; nobody will be aware that it's even in place, until after both cars have left the line.

There's simply no legitimate reason NOT to change this.

But, since NHRA is what it is, and it won't make them one red cent, it will likely never happen there. I'd expect to see it in IHRA protocol before NHRA ever gets around to fixing it, so relax; your advantage is secure, for the moment.

Bill, do you own a car? Do you drive one? Do you even work on one?

Hell, there's a possibility that I might drive a Top Fuel car. That doesn't change the way I think, either.

I don't HAVE an advantage. I raced a SLOW G/S car last year. If I drive next year, I might race something else slow.

EVERYTHING is a trade off. The faster cars have traction problems that slow cars don't have, they sit on the line a long time when racing slow cars, they don't get a clean tree when racing slower cars. They get two advantages for those three disadvantages, they chase slow cars, and they don't get the first chance to go red.

Of all the things that can be done to improve the condition of sportsman racing, if that improves it at all, that would have to be all the way at the bottom of the list. Of all the things that are wrong, the same people keep bringing up the red light thing. That's like treating a hang nail on a guy with a sucking chest wound. People need to stop growing pearls.