Red light debate update.

[John Kelley]

Originally Posted by Chad Rhodes

Bill, read very carefully what I am writing here.

1) i, and most others, believe what you are saying about it being fair, its right there if you do the math. SO give that argument up.

2) Things have been this way for a very long time. People have built their cars to these fundamental rules, whether bracket, class, or otherwise for decades, knowing the inherent advantages and disadvantages of faster or slower cars. And YES there are advantages and disadvantages to both.

3) stock and SS is not lagging behind the times here. If bracket racing and all other forms of handicapped racing were already doing the WORST redlight rule then i think you would have a lot more support. I would seriously suggest you speak to some track owners and division directors about trying this in their bracket program. If it becomes widely adopted, then you may have a case for S/SS going to it. Until then work on it somewhere else.

I personally feel like there are much bigger issues in stock/ss to be dealt with at this time (the DP/CJ cars, Payouts, and figuring out a way to get more younger racers involved, etc) than trying to be the mavericks of drag racing by changing one of the fundamentals of how we run a race.

Another LAME reply......seems to be the norm.... :-(

[Jack McCarthy]

and by the way i just used ken as an example, he is another guy with a 50 year old classic car but his is a tad faster... im sure he is not even close to a leader in $$$$$ spent per pass in the eliminator !!!!!!!!!!!!!

jack

[Bobby Zlatkin]

We probably should have stayed with the flagman and handicapped by car lengths. Oh, and what's all this color television crap. We were perfectly happy with black & white.
Progress & technology sucks.

[bill dedman]

Originally Posted by Jack McCarthy

and by the way i just used ken as an example, he is another guy with a 50 year old classic car but his is a tad faster... im sure he is not even close to a leader in $$$$$ spent per pass in the eliminator !!!!!!!!!!!!!

jack

Jack,
You're another one of my heroes. I WISH I could do what you accomplish on a limited budget... plus for its class, your car is FAST! (How did that 3-speed work out?)

But the idea that Ken Miele's car is also fast, but he doesn't win a lot of races seems to me, to be not in any way pertinent to the red light rule. I don't see the connection.

A bad rule is a bad rule. And, almost everyone admits, it's not a fair rule. I admire Ken's efforts, but even HE could to fall victim to this rule when he runs a faster-dialed car. That's not a likelihood, but it's definitely a possibility.

Let's do him the favor of trying to get it changed.

[Chad Rhodes]

Originally Posted by John Kelley

Another LAME reply......seems to be the norm.... :-(

Care to counterpoint anything that I said? Or are you jus going to be LAME?

[John Kelley]

Originally Posted by Chad Rhodes

Care to counterpoint anything that I said? Or are you jus going to be LAME?

You skirted around the SUBJECT at hand.
It's like the battered wife syndrome...."he always beat me so I thought that was the way it was supposed to be"............. :-)

[John Kelley]

Originally Posted by Chad Rhodes

2) Things have been this way for a very long time. People have built their cars to these fundamental rules, whether bracket, class, or otherwise for decades, knowing the inherent advantages and disadvantages of faster or slower cars.

The Battered wife........
"Well he's been beating me since we got married 23 years ago so I figured that was the way it was supposed to be......."
But the breakout rule was changed...LONG AGO........ :-)

[Chad Rhodes]

Originally Posted by John Kelley

The Battered wife........
"Well he's been beating me since we got married 23 years ago so I figured that was the way it was supposed to be......."
But the breakout rule was changed...LONG AGO........ :-)

address point number 3, where this has not been implemented anywhere, and until it has, class racing has much bigger fish to fry

[John Kelley]

Originally Posted by Chad Rhodes

address point number 3, where this has not been implemented anywhere, and until it has, class racing has much bigger fish to fry

Another lame distraction from the issue at hand...........

[Bobby Fazio]

Originally Posted by Chad Rhodes

Bill, read very carefully what I am writing here.

1) i, and most others, believe what you are saying about it being fair, its right there if you do the math. SO give that argument up.

Chad, I'm not sure what math you are referring to but I've showed the math on the last thread. I'll show it again at the end of this post. Bill Dedman and his supporters are the only ones making sense. The rule clearly favors faster cars from a probability standpoint. Who cares if Bill is a bracket racer? I am a bracket racer too. Ladies and gentlemen, I don't know if you've noticed but from Friday-Sunday, Stock and Super Stock are in fact bracket races. I still have not read one single valid argument defending the rule as it stands, not even one! Unless of course "That's the way it is.. Stop whining...Bill is only a bracket racer, not a SS racer..." can be considered valid with their clear and concise reasoning.

If the only thing keeping it from being changed however many years ago was a software issue, then there is no reason not to change it now. The Worst red light rule is currently in effect for Top Fuel, Funny Car, Pro Stock, Pro Stock Bike, Super Street, Super Comp, Super Gas, Super Stock Class, and Stock Class. Why not for Stock and Super Stock eliminations? As far as brackets, the rule should also be introduced and enforced in all classes, especially in Super Eliminator where both drivers leave off the top bulb at the same time with the crosstalk feature. Give me one good reason why the first guy to redlight should ever lose in Super? I'm guessing his dragster might possibly distract the other dragster's delay box..

Here it is in stat terms again. We will use discrete probability and analyze our sample space of four possible outcomes: both drivers green, first guy green and second guy red, first guy red and second guy green, both drivers red. In order for an event to be a "fair" event in the world of probability, all possible outcomes but possess equal probability, in this case each of the 4 outcomes should have a probability of 1/4 or .25. With our current system, the first two scenarios possess a probability of .25 (Probability of first guy going green = .5 AND probability of second guy going green = .5 so we multiply these to get a probability of .25 for this outcome. Same calculation for second outcome)

However, the third scenario possesses a probability of 1/2 or .5. (Probability of first guy going red = .5 AND probability of second guy going green = 1 since he/she has already won. Multiply these and we get .5). The probability of the last event is actually 0 because currently it can't happen and we revert to scenario 3. Since each outcome doesn't have the same probability, this event fails the "fair" event test. Conclusion: The first driver to leave is 25% more likely to lose the race on the starting line than the second driver.