M.g.

Jack Matyas · 05-22-2009, 03:33 PM

Mark -- if you remember when we started doing this it was a good thing to have a slow car -- what changed?

Mark Yacavone · 05-22-2009, 03:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jack Matyas

Mark -- if you remember when we started doing this it was a good thing to have a slow car -- what changed?

Jacko, I could write a book on this subject.

Here's a blurb for the cover:

" Remember when you used to have to win your class to get in the eliminator?"

Robert Pare Racing · 05-22-2009, 03:52 PM

John, here's an idea..drive your own car and don't red light. If you can cut a bulb you don't need to worry about it. Think of having a slow car as leaving on a clean tree.

S.E. Buchanan · 05-22-2009, 04:02 PM

John's comment brings back the comment of all these past years. "If you don't like Stock/Super Stock Class Racing get an ET car."

We work on our cars and try to go fast and be the fastest in our class otherwise we would go bracket racing. That's what Class Racing was designed for.

No offense to you John but we have been over this a thousand times and it gets tiresome.

bill dedman · 05-22-2009, 04:21 PM

No, what gets tiresome, S.E., is the refusal of NHRA to level the playing field for this antique glitch in the system. It won't make them a red cent, so they can't be bothered.

Dunno if you remember, but when they first started having break-outs, the first car to break-out lost the race.

They fixed that, so that the car that breaks-out out the MOST is the loser.

Why should red lights be any different?

The car that has the worse red light should always lose the race. Having it be the FIRST car to redlight be the loser makes NO sense because it will ALWAYS BE that the first car to leave; the slower one. can deprive the seconf car to leave of THE SAME OPPORTUNITY, if the first (slower) car redlights.

There is no moral justification for that.

Now, there's no practical justification for it, either, since the electronic technology to compare the two lights and determine a winner has existed for some time, now. There's just no reason not to fix it.

Don't give me a list of reasons why the slower cars should face this red light jeopardy to a greater extent than the faster cars... I can give you an equally long list of reasons why they shouldn't.

When this first red light rule was instated, there was no alternative; now there is.

NHRA needs to fix it.

Mark Yacavone · 05-22-2009, 05:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Robert Pare Racing

John, here's an idea..drive your own car and don't red light. If you can cut a bulb you don't need to worry about it. Think of having a slow car as leaving on a clean tree.

I agree with Robert about one thing. It all depends on how you're looking at the tree. That's why I don't stay up nights worrying about redlighting first.
On the other hand , I don't see any reason to not fix it, in this day and age.
Oh yes I do . It might help out a slower car once in a while. Just look at who's usually against this change.

"I need wheelie bars. I can't leave hard enough on the last bulb without them"
OK, no problem . Here ya' go. You slower cars can have them too.

"I don't like that deep staging thing. It might give a slower leaving car some flexibility in leaving on the last bulb"
Ok, let's take a poll. Guess what? There's more fast cars around now. Look who wins? Imagine that.

"I can't win class at Indy with my new A-B-C fi car. Help me out. Change that 40 year old rule."

OK, no problem. Let's take a poll. Guess what ? There's more class losers with 10 second cars nowadays . Look who wins this one?

to be continued...

bill dedman · 05-22-2009, 05:40 PM

This advice, "don't red light." is a lot like the advice, "WIN THE RACE."

Reminds me of that that one lady said, "It's the same every time; just BOOM BOOM BOOM, GO! Whats' the problem???"

LOL!

"Don't red light." Riiiiight..

It's nice that there's a sense of humor on this board.

bsa633 · 05-23-2009, 10:41 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mark Yacavone

I agree with Robert about one thing. It all depends on how you're looking at the tree. That's why I don't stay up nights worrying about redlighting first.
On the other hand , I don't see any reason to not fix it, in this day and age.
Oh yes I do . It might help out a slower car once in a while. Just look at who's usually against this change.

"I need wheelie bars. I can't leave hard enough on the last bulb without them"
OK, no problem . Here ya' go. You slower cars can have them too.

"I don't like that deep staging thing. It might give a slower leaving car some flexibility in leaving on the last bulb"
Ok, let's take a poll. Guess what? There's more fast cars around now. Look who wins? Imagine that.

"I can't win class at Indy with my new A-B-C fi car. Help me out. Change that 40 year old rule."

OK, no problem. Let's take a poll. Guess what ? There's more class losers with 10 second cars nowadays . Look who wins this one?

to be continued...

I think this post shows that people with nothing better to do will just keep on asking for changes..it has changed to much and to fast the last ten years..the first red light rule has cons and pro's...It will not change anything in the end...but just be another "Change" ..dual redlights where the first car did not drag the other car along isn't that many..and the cases were the slower cars in that scenario is the winner is even fewer...just a another way for a "redlight looser" to get back in the race as i see it..DONT REDLIGHT..put the pressure on the other guy...if you have problems with redlights you wont win anything anyway...so change that manner instead!

S.E. Buchanan · 05-23-2009, 11:03 AM

Well, I thought I had said all I was going to on this subject but I unfortunately read the last several
posts and decided I would say one or two more things.

#1. If you ain't been there you got no right to try to change things.

#2. The guy sitting there waiting on the slower car is not going to have the same light he/she
would have had if they see the red light before they react. It distracts you unless
you are using a blinder and most don't for their on reasons. Been there ,done that too many
times.

.

bill dedman · 05-23-2009, 12:32 PM

I have been there, so I guess that gives me the right to post on it.

S.E., neither driver will see a red light until after BOTH CARS have left the line.

A red light will mean "you lose," and the computer won't know who has "lost" until it compares both lights. It has no way to know whether the second car to leave will have had a worse red light than the first (and thereby become the loser) until he leaves the line, so there's NO WAY this system will affect the concentration of the faster car's driver. He will always assume the other car had a green light until he's left the line and sees a red, if there IS one.

He will see what he's always seen if the first car to leave had a good green light. NO additional distraction....

I can't see a downside to this.... really.

05-22-2009, 03:52 PM	#3
Robert Pare Racing Member Join Date: Aug 2004 Location: Mother Earth Posts: 265 Likes: 0 Liked 2 Times in 1 Post	Re: M.g. John, here's an idea..drive your own car and don't red light. If you can cut a bulb you don't need to worry about it. Think of having a slow car as leaving on a clean tree. __________________ Rapare-Racing.com

05-22-2009, 04:02 PM	#4
S.E. Buchanan Junior Member Join Date: Dec 2008 Posts: 37 Likes: 0 Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts	Re: M.g. John's comment brings back the comment of all these past years. "If you don't like Stock/Super Stock Class Racing get an ET car." We work on our cars and try to go fast and be the fastest in our class otherwise we would go bracket racing. That's what Class Racing was designed for. No offense to you John but we have been over this a thousand times and it gets tiresome.

05-22-2009, 04:21 PM	#5
bill dedman VIP Member Join Date: Feb 2002 Location: Conway, AR Posts: 1,739 Likes: 0 Liked 6 Times in 4 Posts	Re: M.g. No, what gets tiresome, S.E., is the refusal of NHRA to level the playing field for this antique glitch in the system. It won't make them a red cent, so they can't be bothered. Dunno if you remember, but when they first started having break-outs, the first car to break-out lost the race. They fixed that, so that the car that breaks-out out the MOST is the loser. Why should red lights be any different? The car that has the worse red light should always lose the race. Having it be the FIRST car to redlight be the loser makes NO sense because it will ALWAYS BE that the first car to leave; the slower one. can deprive the seconf car to leave of THE SAME OPPORTUNITY, if the first (slower) car redlights. There is no moral justification for that. Now, there's no practical justification for it, either, since the electronic technology to compare the two lights and determine a winner has existed for some time, now. There's just no reason not to fix it. Don't give me a list of reasons why the slower cars should face this red light jeopardy to a greater extent than the faster cars... I can give you an equally long list of reasons why they shouldn't. When this first red light rule was instated, there was no alternative; now there is. NHRA needs to fix it. __________________ Bill Last edited by bill dedman; 05-22-2009 at 07:19 PM.

05-22-2009, 05:40 PM	#7
bill dedman VIP Member Join Date: Feb 2002 Location: Conway, AR Posts: 1,739 Likes: 0 Liked 6 Times in 4 Posts	Re: M.g. This advice, "don't red light." is a lot like the advice, "WIN THE RACE." Reminds me of that that one lady said, "It's the same every time; just BOOM BOOM BOOM, GO! Whats' the problem???" LOL! "Don't red light." Riiiiight.. It's nice that there's a sense of humor on this board. __________________ Bill

05-23-2009, 11:03 AM	#9
S.E. Buchanan Junior Member Join Date: Dec 2008 Posts: 37 Likes: 0 Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts	Re: M.g. Well, I thought I had said all I was going to on this subject but I unfortunately read the last several posts and decided I would say one or two more things. #1. If you ain't been there you got no right to try to change things. #2. The guy sitting there waiting on the slower car is not going to have the same light he/she would have had if they see the red light before they react. It distracts you unless you are using a blinder and most don't for their on reasons. Been there ,done that too many times. .

05-22-2009, 03:33 PM	#1
Jack Matyas Live Reporter Join Date: Nov 2001 Location: Bethlehem , PA -Christmas City , USA Posts: 4,930 Likes: 406 Liked 2,051 Times in 399 Posts	Re: M.g. Mark -- if you remember when we started doing this it was a good thing to have a slow car -- what changed? __________________ Jack Matyas 1547 FS/C 2015 Camaro COPO # 62- 2012 Camaro Convertible COPO

05-23-2009, 12:32 PM	#10
bill dedman VIP Member Join Date: Feb 2002 Location: Conway, AR Posts: 1,739 Likes: 0 Liked 6 Times in 4 Posts	Re: M.g. I have been there, so I guess that gives me the right to post on it. S.E., neither driver will see a red light until after BOTH CARS have left the line. A red light will mean "you lose," and the computer won't know who has "lost" until it compares both lights. It has no way to know whether the second car to leave will have had a worse red light than the first (and thereby become the loser) until he leaves the line, so there's NO WAY this system will affect the concentration of the faster car's driver. He will always assume the other car had a green light until he's left the line and sees a red, if there IS one. He will see what he's always seen if the first car to leave had a good green light. NO additional distraction.... I can't see a downside to this.... really. __________________ Bill