Quote:
Originally Posted by bill dedman
This, from a guy who has steadfastly refused to answer every question about procedural red light rules I have asked for the last several weeks. You usually just act like you didn't SEE the question, but this time you failed to answer the quetion I asked, and instead, answered one I didn't ask.
A handout, regarding whom you think benefits ("slow cars?") as to the rules change, because NHRA made the change has NOTHING to do with a rules-oriented "handout" that might give an advantage to one group, or another.
This rule change would not benefit ANY ONE GROUP, but instead would benefit EVERYONE by placing EVERY COMPETITOR under EQUAL red light jeopardy, something that doesn't exist, now... a fact you don't seem to want to talk about, and one I'm not at all sure you understand.
Don't you think that the goal of protocol/rules would be to have rules that apply to EVERYONE RACING?
I think that's a "no brainer." The teardown barn has ONE SET of measuring tools to ensure that a 4" bore on one car is the same size as a 4" bore on eevery other car.
But you think it's perfectly OK to have ONE SET of red light rules for first-to-leave cars and a different set for second-to-leave cars. Full red light jeopardy for the first-to-leave car, but NO red light jeopardy, for the second-to-leave car, if the first car "bulbs."
It's unnecessary and unfair. Time to change it.
If you can't understand THAT, then I have nothing more to say to you.
|
Bill, I answered with I DON'T CARE IF THEY CHANGE OR NOT, and YOUR WASTING YOUR TIME COMPLAINING HERE. and WHY DON'T YOU APPROACH THE PEOPLE THAT CAN CHANGE IT? What don't you understand about that? I tried typing slower, guess that didn't help.
Many people have answered your silly questions, but most of their answers don't fit what you want to hear so you just keep repeating them and complaining that nobody will answer you.
I usually enjoy tweaking you just to see how long you will go, but your starting to get a little testy. LOL