questions concerning christmas tree

[Alan Roehrich]

Bill, once again, it is your perception. Further you want it "fixed for everybody's benefit", but you absolutely and adamantly refuse to consider that others do not want it "fixed" at all, and not all of them drive faster cars, either.

The point was made earlier that if it was a really big deal, and any problem at all for that matter, to the guys running slower cars, they'd have all written letters to NHRA by now. Evidently they have not. Has another "light bulb" come on in your head yet?

[Ed Fernandez]

It came to him in a dream.

[K Stubbs]

Good point Alan, I do not think enough people have a problem with this to get it changed, however, the fact that I live in Arkansas must mean something. Ed, im 37 I dont think I will be in any senior citizen hangouts just yet.

[Ed Fernandez]

Originally Posted by K Stubbs

Good point Alan, I do not think enough people have a problem with this to get it changed, however, the fact that I live in Arkansas must mean something. Ed, im 37 I dont think I will be in any senior citizen hangouts just yet.

As long as you keep far away from Conway Ark. and Tightwad Tx. you should be good to go for many years.Be careful when near Tempe Az.I hear there's a lot of thin skin syndrome appearing in the area.

[bill dedman]

Originally Posted by Alan Roehrich

Bill, once again, it is your perception. Further you want it "fixed for everybody's benefit", but you absolutely and adamantly refuse to consider that others do not want it "fixed" at all, and not all of them drive faster cars, either.

The point was made earlier that if it was a really big deal, and any problem at all for that matter, to the guys running slower cars, they'd have all written letters to NHRA by now. Evidently they have not. Has another "light bulb" come on in your head yet?

Alan,

Many people who race don't comprehend the way this rule plays favorites, so they don't complain. They accept it because they've never known anything else; it's the "norm," and it's "the way it's always been."
That alone, gives it tremendous inertia and acceptance, but when you closely examine what it actually DOES, it's not a good thing. What's good about giving the faster car a free ride to the next round, and removing them from red light jeopardy just because the first car (which had no choice, but to leave first, when he pulled up to stage) left a thousandth (or more) too soon?????????

Your contention would make sense (that everybody would be complaining, writing letters to NHRA, etc.), if everybody understood, IN DEPTH, how this FIRST RED LIGHT system works, but, they don't. I know I didn't, for years and years...

Throughout this discussion, I have asked you pointed questions that you have ignored, choosing, instead, to comment on things that are completely removed from the question at hand. You seem to like to divert attention away from questions I have asked you by commenting on things that have nothing to do with a worse red light rule; for instance:

Alan said,

1. "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 that was an attempt at humor, it was lost on me....


2. "It's not a "software problem", it's a "problem" in YOUR perception."


And, I am responding:
"No, the reality is, it is what it is, regardless of my opinion about it. And, that you don't see a system that rewards a percentage of the cars at the expense of others, as a problem, then I think that that situation may be responsible for the over-long discussion we've had, here."

Alan said,
3. ""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."

If that had been a heads-up race, I'd commend you on your great attitude and exemplary sportsmanship!

But, if it was a handicapped race in which you had to leave before him, and thereby deprive him of his own red-light jeopardy by bulbing FIRST, then I'd say you were screwed by the system, unnecessarily. What if he had bulbed worse than you? Don't you think you deserved to win that round, just as if you had broken out less than him, on the big end???

Would you like to return to "The first car to break out loses"??? It was that way, for awhile, and if everybody thought like you do, it would STILL be that way. No difference in a red light and a breakout; they're both just cases of poor judgment placing your car at the wrong place at the wrong time. Samo/Samo...



I wrote,
"Hope you'll think about this, and if you can think of any rational, logical, legitimate, reason that it wouldn't be an improvement in the "level playing field" aspect of handicapped drag racing. please tell me; I'm all ears!!!

The silence was deafening....



I wrote, "What doesn't "work" about the current system is, that it prevents EQUALred 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???

You never answered, I assume, because there is no "other side".... It's ALWAYS beneficial to the second car to leave. Always...

4. You also wrote, "Beware the law of unintended consequences."

But, even after I asked just what might be even ONE of these "unintended consequences," you never even attempted to answer the question. I'm still wondering what one might be.... if, in fact, there could be any.


I wrote:

"For example, you don't need a statistical analysis to conclude that Ellis Buth's W/SA wagon is on the wrong end of this system (virtually, always leaving first), or that the new, 9-second Mustangs are on the "right" end of it.

The Mustangs enjoy an immunity from red lights IF their opponent bulbs.
Ellis's Pinto NEVER enjoys such an advantage in handicapped racing.

I asked, "Where is the other side of that coin" relative to the fact that the quicker car sometimes enjoys this advantage, but there is none.
THAT is an "inexcusable inequity," in my book, because it is unnecessary, now, and accomplishes nothing.

Can you show me the other side of that coin?


5. You wrote,"Again, you ignore the law of unintended consequences simply because it is easy, convenient, and suits your agenda"

No, Alan, I ignore it because I can't think of a single thing that could result from a worse red light rule change that would qualify as a (negative) unintended consequence. Apparently, you can't, either...


If you CAN think of one, even at this late date, I would be VERY INTERESTED in hearing what it might be.. Enlighten me....


6. At some point, you wrote, "And then neither will see the red light, because the tree is behind them, because both cars have launched and then the computer makes up its mind after the fact. MAYBE one or both drivers will see a win light come on, or maybe they won't."

And, this will affect the race how??? I asked at the time, but, you never responded.....


In all your verbiage, you still have not come up with one single reason NOT to change it... none. Even YOU can't logically defend keeping this lopsided rule in effect.


7. Finally, you wrote, "Bill, it doesn't matter what anyone says. You want the rule changed, and nothing else will satisfy you."

Au contraire, mon ami.... if ANYBODY can show me that this rule change is a bad idea, will change racing for the worse, or, will have dire, "unintended consequences," I will clam up like a mobster in front of a Senate, organized crime investigating committee, and apologize for wasting everybodys' time!

I will!!!

But, so far, that hasn't happened.

[Bushwacker]

For several years I have bitched about the 1st redlight rule...off course nobody cared .
If I win a race I want it to be because I earned it....not because of an unfair rule that gives
faster cars an advantage!!! At a Local race it came down to me in my 4cyl Tbird Stocker & a 9 sec full electronics car for the top elim spot. He rolled thru the lights after staging...they told me you win...I told them
Bull****...re-stage us I want to earn this.. we restaged & I won on my merit... I am more proud of that trophy than I am of my wallys. Fix an unfair advantage....not first red ....make it worst red.

[bill dedman]

Thanks for that little vignette, Bushwhacker; you, sir, are a true sportsman... I'd be proud of that trophy, too!!!

[Tom keedle]

Originally Posted by Bushwacker

For several years I have bitched about the 1st redlight rule...off course nobody cared .
If I win a race I want it to be because I earned it....not because of an unfair rule that gives
faster cars an advantage!!! At a Local race it came down to me in my 4cyl Tbird Stocker & a 9 sec full electronics car for the top elim spot. He rolled thru the lights after staging...they told me you win...I told them
Bull****...re-stage us I want to earn this.. we restaged & I won on my merit... I am more proud of that trophy than I am of my wallys. Fix an unfair advantage....not first red ....make it worst red.

..and that's the way sportsman racing SHOULD be...

[Alan Roehrich]

Once again, the slow car and the fast car each have advantages.

The slow car spends less time "on the chip" or "on the converter".
The slow car driver has less time in which to anticipate the light.
The slow car is less sensitive to track prep.
The slow car gets a clean tree.

The fast car is less affected by weather.
The fast car almost always has his opponent and the finish line in the same field of vision.
The fast car is easier to get to react.
The fast car, as it stands, has the "first red light" rule.

They each have disadvantages.

The slow car is harder to get to react.
The slow car is more affected by weather.
The slow car almost never has his opponent and the finish line in the same field of vision.
The slow car often has less options at the finish line.

The fast car does not get a clean tree.
The fast car spends more time on the chip and/or on the converter.
The fast car has more time to anticipate the light.
The fast car is far more sensitive to track prep.

Bill,
I always loved it when the so called "smart people" tell everybody else they "don't understand how they're getting screwed", and the "smart people" are "there to help them". Do you really think you are that much smarter than everyone else? Really? I think Stock and Super Stock racers understand how the "first or worst" rule works as it stands. Just about every one of them I've ever met understand the rules just fine, and they're pretty smart people.

The race with Fred Suiter was not heads up, and I didn't get screwed out of a damned thing. I went red, I screwed up and lost the race.

The fact that you didn't get the "WD-40 on the starting line" comment shows you didn't understand it, and you do not grasp the concept at all. Bad track prep is getting VERY common. In fact, it always has been. I recently attended one race where at least a dozen fast cars never had a prayer, they couldn't get down the track. Every one of them was beaten by a slower car that did not have the disadvantage of being sensitive to track prep.

Hell, right now there's a thread about track prep at an NHRA National Event. So yes, the slow cars have an advantage the fast cars do not enjoy, are you going to fix that? If not, how do you justify "fixing" the red light rule, but not "fixing" the track prep problems? Well, in your case, you do not care, because you want to "fix" things, because you think you are smarter than the rest of the racers, they don't "know they're getting screwed". You do not understand balance. Balance is where there are advantages and disadvantages to everything, and they cancel each other out as close as possible, achieving some level of balance. Which is what we have now.

If slow cars are getting screwed so bad, why do people keep building them? If slow cars are getting screwed so bad, why are people who can run A or AA running B, C, or D? Because there are advantages to being slower, just like there are advantages to being faster. Because they are smart, a lot smarter than you give them credit for.

As to unintended consequences, well, since you can't seem to understand that some level of balance exists as things stand right now (if the rule was killing slower cars, they'd all quit) then you'll never grasp the concept that changing the balance is a consequence. Of course, I'm giving you credit for not intending to screw up the balance. Maybe I'm being too generous.

I really do find it amusing, but not at all surprising, that you seem to think you are so much smarter than all of the rest of the racers, that you know "they're getting screwed" but they don't know or understand they are, or how and why they are.

[John Kelley]

Originally Posted by Alan Roehrich

Once again, the slow car and the fast car each have advantages.

The slow car spends less time "on the chip" or "on the converter".
The slow car driver has less time in which to anticipate the light.
The slow car is less sensitive to track prep.
The slow car gets a clean tree.

The fast car is less affected by weather.
The fast car almost always has his opponent and the finish line in the same field of vision.
The fast car is easier to get to react.
The fast car, as it stands, has the "first red light" rule.

They each have disadvantages.

The slow car is harder to get to react.
The slow car is more affected by weather.
The slow car almost never has his opponent and the finish line in the same field of vision.
The slow car often has less options at the finish line.

The fast car does not get a clean tree.
The fast car spends more time on the chip and/or on the converter.
The fast car has more time to anticipate the light.
The fast car is far more sensitive to track prep.

Bill,
I always loved it when the so called "smart people" tell everybody else they "don't understand how they're getting screwed", and the "smart people" are "there to help them". Do you really think you are that much smarter than everyone else? Really? I think Stock and Super Stock racers understand how the "first or worst" rule works as it stands. Just about every one of them I've ever met understand the rules just fine, and they're pretty smart people.

The race with Fred Suiter was not heads up, and I didn't get screwed out of a damned thing. I went red, I screwed up and lost the race.

The fact that you didn't get the "WD-40 on the starting line" comment shows you didn't understand it, and you do not grasp the concept at all. Bad track prep is getting VERY common. In fact, it always has been. I recently attended one race where at least a dozen fast cars never had a prayer, they couldn't get down the track. Every one of them was beaten by a slower car that did not have the disadvantage of being sensitive to track prep.

Hell, right now there's a thread about track prep at an NHRA National Event. So yes, the slow cars have an advantage the fast cars do not enjoy, are you going to fix that? If not, how do you justify "fixing" the red light rule, but not "fixing" the track prep problems? Well, in your case, you do not care, because you want to "fix" things, because you think you are smarter than the rest of the racers, they don't "know they're getting screwed". You do not understand balance. Balance is where there are advantages and disadvantages to everything, and they cancel each other out as close as possible, achieving some level of balance. Which is what we have now.

If slow cars are getting screwed so bad, why do people keep building them? If slow cars are getting screwed so bad, why are people who can run A or AA running B, C, or D? Because there are advantages to being slower, just like there are advantages to being faster. Because they are smart, a lot smarter than you give them credit for.

As to unintended consequences, well, since you can't seem to understand that some level of balance exists as things stand right now (if the rule was killing slower cars, they'd all quit) then you'll never grasp the concept that changing the balance is a consequence. Of course, I'm giving you credit for not intending to screw up the balance. Maybe I'm being too generous.

I really do find it amusing, but not at all surprising, that you seem to think you are so much smarter than all of the rest of the racers, that you know "they're getting screwed" but they don't know or understand they are, or how and why they are.

All that BABBLE and you never answered Mr.Dedman's question............