worst red light debate, again!

[bill dedman]

Originally Posted by Alan Roehrich

Bill,
How do you plan to compensate for the fact that the car that leaves last doesn't get a clean tree, and sees their opponent leave? Two things the slower car doesn't deal with.

Alan,

You CANNOT legislate advantages/disadvantages into the rules structure, BECAUSE there would be no end to it, once you started.

Allow me to elaborate, please:

For every situation that could be claimed to give an advantage or disadvantage to a faster car, there is a situation that creates an advantage, or disadvantage for a slower car. For example, yes, the slow car has a "clean tree" to leave off of... but a slow car is MUCH harder to dial, under changing weather conditions, (and, wind) because the quicker car doesn't pick up or lose e.t. nearly as severely as a slow car, and, yes, the quicker car has to watch the slower car leave, but he also sees the finish line come up as a movie, an unbroken series of visuals, which makes it a LOT easier than it is for the slower car, which sees the finish line as a series of snapshots, (looking forward, then back) with no continuity, and makes it a lot harder to "drive the stripe."

Then, there's the fact that this rule will be in effect for ANY handicapped race; it's not just about V/Stock vs. A/Stock.... More often, it will be F/Stock vs. G/Stock, with a handicap so short in duration that it cannot be seen with the naked eye.

So, I contend that "advantages" and "disadvantages" are all over the place (such as the disadvantage of excessive wheelspin on "faster" cars, or the inability to "cut a light" with slow cars now that the deep stage is disallowed, for example) and are impossible to accurately quantify, and surely can't be compensated for, by trying to write rules that "even the score" between cars with varying capabilities.

Virtually impossible, methinks.

The change I am recommending for the red light rule would give an advantage to NOBODY.

Who could be against that??? Hummmmmmm......

Just my 2-cents....

[bill dedman]

Originally Posted by cicero819

Thank You to all who have participated in this question. The quality of the debate is unparalleled in the annals of class racer. My conclusions are having a clean tree negates any advantage that faster cars have over slower cars. They have to survive seeing their opponents leave first which can make them lose their concentartion. I was told when negotiating with people that it doesn't always have to be be a big WIN it can be a win win situation. You have to leave something on the table for the other person also. Claude

Claude; if you think of the first red light rule as an advantage that somehow, evens the score for fast cars, then what would you say does the same (evens the score) for the fact that the second-to-leave car gets to "drive the stripe" at the finish line from behind, while the first- to-leave is out front, where he has to turn around (lose sight of the finish line) to monitor the faster car's progress?

"Super" category racers think that is a large enough advantage (being out front) that they spend BIG BUCKS to enable themselves to do just that, so it must be worth something... A whole "cottage industry" has sprung up to manufacture active throttle stops (and another, building high horsepower engines, to play "catch-up") to facilitate this modus operandus.

What is the "slow car advantage" that negates this situation???
I can't think of one; can you?

I reiterate: You CANNOT successfully, legislate advantages into the rules; the worsae red light rule gives an advantage to NOBODY.

[bill dedman]

Originally Posted by Neal Derochie

Bill, you were aware of the rules when you started racing, you made a choice about what combination to build, now because you think its unfair you want to change the rules to your liking.Bill maybe you don't realize it but not everybody thinks its unfair, its part of what drag racing is, time to give it a rest

Neal

When I started racing (1955) the electronic handicap feature was 8 years in the future....

I'm not Karnak, and could not foresee this skewed rule.

[bill dedman]

Originally Posted by Pvt Parts

That's true if the only purpose of this site is to generate page hits for advertising. I would like to think that most racers frequent this board to learn how to become more competitive, buy and sell race car part and evolve to become a better racer. People who visit this board for those reasons represent "quality" page hits that are more valuable to advertisers than "non qualified" hits that come here to watch a circus.

The results to that approach are often short lived and usually wind up being counterproductive in the end.

"I would like to think that most racers frequent this board to learn how to become more competitive."

When a person fouls first, with the rules as they are, they are "out"

If that person, due to his activities on this forum, is successful in getting this one-sided rule changed, the next time he fouls first, his opponent may foul WORSE, and he will win... and that makes him able to compete in the next round.

That is "more competitive."

[bill dedman]

[QUOTE= Why don't you tackle important issues and leave the "first or worst" alone?[/QUOTE]


If it were "First OR worse, it wouldn't need any attention. But, worse has no place in red lights, with the current rules.


"Why don't you tackle important issues and leave the "first or worst" alone?"

It's "twisted logic" that asks questions like that.

Not once have I heard a fellow racer tell me they lost via red light, then bitch about it or say "It's not fair, the other guy didn't have a chance to red light".

Don't you think that a red light is a lot like a breakout, in that everybody should have the same chance to disqualify themselves if they mess up?

They don't.

I don't know how many times it needs to be said before everybody "gets it," but if they ran the breakouts like they do the red lights, only the first car to break out would be eliminated instead of the one with the worse infraction.

Why don't they do that???

[bill dedman]

Originally Posted by Ed Fernandez

I just checked the entry list for Englishtown (Stock is full) and I see I'm the slowest turtle in the pond.Bill,please get on the horn with NHRA and get that red light rule changed fast.If I happen to get lucky and go some rounds I want the playing field leveled so I can win my first "big" Wally.

Thanks
Ed

That may be your big chance to win a national event, Ed. It would be the exquisite irony if you had a "first red light" in the final, and your opponent bulbed worse...

Of course, it wouldn't matter, the way the rules are, now....

You'd still be a loser...

[bill dedman]

Originally Posted by Jeff Lee

Nicely stated...

Just sidesteps the question, Why not change the unfair things we can?"

If you can tell me what is fair or equitable about a rule that treats different compititors, differently, please do.

The first red light rule treats the first-to-leave cars differently from the way it treats second-to-leave cars, if the first-to-leave red lights.

No reason to do that.

The only reason they do it that way, now, is that when the system was created, they had no alternative. Now, they do.

NHRA's "bottom line" is no legitimate reason to maintain an unfair rule.

Like I said, "If you can tell me what is fair or equitable about a rule that treats different compititors, differently, please do."

I will bet a dollar to a donut, you can't , and your response will be ANYTHING BUT, a rational, logical, reasonable answer to that question.


How about it, Jeff???

Here's a picture of Bracket racer, Bill Dedman, "not racing"...

Yes, I'm driving the brown Mopar, and yes, I got there first.

[bill dedman]

Originally Posted by Jeff Lee

Rate this thread! Presently a 2.00 out of 5.00!

SOMEBODY must like it, from the amazing number of posts...

[Bunkster]

Mr. Dedman, you remind me of Harry Markopolos: In an ocean of naysayers, YOU are correct.

Sleep easily, as one day, you WILL be vindicated on this issue.

[SStockDart]

If you can tell me what is fair or equitable about a rule that treats different compititors, differently, please do


Rhetorical question as you stated it. The rules do treat competitors equitably. Each have the opportunity to cut a good light and run the dial. The one with the best light and closer to the dial wins 100% of the time.

The first red light rule treats the first-to-leave cars differently from the way it treats second-to-leave cars, if the first-to-leave red light.

So you believe the slower cars deserve a "mulligan"?