Redlight Poll (Revised)

[Ed Wright]

Uh, no he won't. Can't seem to accept it won't happen, but won't give up harping about it. Funny that many that leave first most of the time aren't on his band wagon, but he keeps going on, and on, and on, and on, and well, you know.....LMAO

[Ed Fernandez]

Originally Posted by Ed Wright

Uh, no he won't. Can't seem to accept it won't happen, but won't give up harping about it. Funny that many that leave first most of the time aren't on his band wagon, but he keeps going on, and on, and on, and on, and well, you know.....LMAO

Sort of like the Energizer rabbit,right Ed?

[Jason]

Hey Casey, on Saturday its 116 against and 67 for your "lets change the rules"...that means your losing dude!!!!!


Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha hahahahahahahaha

[Ed Wright]

Originally Posted by Ed Fernandez

Sort of like the Energizer rabbit,right Ed?

Haven't seen him, but I'm guessing he's not as cute. lol

Just went to eat with Gary and Ann Moore, and Vern Bucannon. Vern asked me if I knew Billl, told him only from here. First time I ever met Vern. Really cool guy.

[bill dedman]

Originally Posted by Ed Wright

Haven't seen him, but I'm guessing he's not as cute. lol

Just went to eat with Gary and Ann Moore, and Vern Bucannon. Vern asked me if I knew Billl, told him only from here. First time I ever met Vern. Really cool guy.

Ed,
I'll concede I'm wrong about that impertinent and off-the-wall statement that your namesake made when EITHER of you answers the question I have asked MANY times. but neither of you EVER answers, which is, "Can you give me ONE GOOD, LOGICAL, LEGITIMATE REASON NOT TO CHANGE THIS LOPSIDED, UNFAIR RULE?"

I think I'm safe....

[Ed Wright]

Originally Posted by bill dedman

Ed,
I'll concede I'm wrong about that impertinent and off-the-wall statement that your namesake made when EITHER of you answers the question I have asked MANY times. but neither of you EVER answers, which is, "Can you give me ONE GOOD, LOGICAL, LEGITIMATE REASON NOT TO CHANGE THIS LOPSIDED, UNFAIR RULE?"

I think I'm safe....

And on, and on, and on, .... :-). Bill, I personally don't really care either way. However, it ain't gonna happen. Get real. They aren't going to spend any money on a software change to change anything to suit any group of people that has been calling them crooks, thieves, and worse when that group is a minority. Just won't happen, no matter how much comaining goes on.

[bill dedman]

Originally Posted by Ed Wright

And on, and on, and on, .... :-). Bill, I personally don't really care either way. However, it ain't gonna happen. Get real. They aren't going to spend any money on a software change to change anything to suit any group of people that has been calling them crooks, thieves, and worse when that group is a minority. Just won't happen, no matter how much comaining goes on.

See? You can't do it.

He can't do it either, because there IS NO GOOD, LOGICAL, and LEGITIMATE reason NOT to change it.

Think about that... all the opportunities both you and Ed F. have had to shut me up for good, by explaining how what I am proposing is going to damage Class racing as we know it (or, Bracket racing, for that matter.)

All it will do is improve the fairness of the system. No longer will the first car to leave be the "patsy," if he bulbs, sending his opponent to the next round on a freebie that he did NOTHING to earn.

It is beyond my understanding, how anyone could think this is a "bad" change.

But, some people just like to argue, even when they know they're wrong.

[Mike Carr]

Originally Posted by bill dedman

He can't do it either, because there IS NO GOOD, LOGICAL, and LEGITIMATE reason NOT to change it.

Bill, we've been over this before, but I will repeat it. Again. There is NO good, logical, legitimate reson for the current system, in the picture of fairness. BUT...

The current redlight rule, in the big picture of the present and (possible) future of Class Racing, is 'small potatoes' compared to the many, more pressing issues we face. If I were making a list of the Top 10 complaints felt by many racers (or, at least by myself), this issue would not make it. In no particular order:
1) We run on sometimes suspect track conditions, and sometimes on a cold, dewy evening track.
2) Contigency money has dwindled significantly.
3) Class Eliminations as we know it has all but ceased to exist.
4) The major sanctioning bodies are 'enhancing' us right out of the sport, with rules changes, added costs for pit bikes, etc.
5) The AHFS is broken. See early season qualifying sheets.
6) We have many new cars, many of whom would deem them to be 'not in the spirit of a true Stock Eliminator car'.
7) Current rules on tech that are not uniformly enforced.
8) The current payouts are not much more than the payouts were many years ago.
9) Getting pushed back for a day or two at a Nat'l event due to weather, oildowns, etc.

And on and on. If the MAJOR issues are resolved, than I would be more inclined to talk about the redlight issue. I think that is the reason why many don't support your cause as much. We realize that this issue (first/worst redlight) is a misdemeanor in the world filled with felonies in regard to modern NHRA/IHRA Class Racing.

Also, like I stated to you before (probably last year or whenever the last time this annual topic comes up), if you feel so strongly about this issue: Take up a petition, get everyone who supports a worst redlight scenario to sign, and mail, e-mail, fax, whatever, to everyone at NHRA, IHRA, local tracks, etc etc. But please, stop beating this dead horse, and actually DO something about it, instead of contantly harping about it on here annually. Please? I don't beg very often, but I'm begging you now. And yes, I would probably sign the petition if/when you started one.

[johnny shot]

Originally Posted by bill dedman

"Can you give me ONE GOOD, LOGICAL, LEGITIMATE REASON NOT TO CHANGE THIS LOPSIDED, UNFAIR RULE?"

I think I'm safe....

Logical, and legitimate reason:

Once the first car fouls, THERE IS NO RACE from that point on. The red lighter has been ELIMINATED and the race is OVER.
It's O V E R. Can't get any more logical than that.

[bill dedman]

Originally Posted by johnny shot

Logical, and legitimate reason:

Once the first car fouls, THERE IS NO RACE from that point on. The red lighter has been ELIMINATED and the race is OVER.
It's O V E R. Can't get any more logical than that.

You think that's a reason not to change it?

That's the status quo; not a reason at all.

What's your opinion of a reason not to change it? When does the other car get HIS chance to red light in this race? Don't you think conditions should be the same for both cars?