worst red light debate, again!

[Andys dad]

Why does the second car get a mulligan?

Why not both lose?

[bill dedman]

Originally Posted by 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.

Thanks, Bunkster; it's easy to maintan a position when you have facts on your side.

Fact: the current rule treats first-to-leave cars differently from second-to-leave cars.
Fact: this rule is the ONLY rule I know of that treats cars unequally, in this manner (depriving one of red light jeopardy, if the first car bulbs.)
Fact: there's no reason (any more) to continue this unequal treatment.
Fact: no one YET has offered up a solution for this problem other than a new rule (worse red light.)
Fact: it will never be changed because NHRA doesn't stand to make any money off changing it.
Fact: knowing NHRA's selfish policy doesn't condone its continued use.
Fact: realizing the facts is a plus.

[bill dedman]

Originally Posted by 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"?

This rule does NOTHING for the slower car beyond offering as way to give it an EQUAL chance to compare red lights with the faster car.

Two cars; two chances. Where's the "gimmee"????

To award a win to one car for an infraction he never had a chance to commit, IS a "gimmee."

We don't need "gimmee's" in Class racing... or, Bracket racing.

Let's get rid of it.

[Ed Fernandez]

Originally Posted by bill dedman

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.

Jeff,he didn't tell you the picture was taken in 1922.

[Bob Mulry]

Ed,

OOPS...

I see how the counter works now....

It updates all of your past posts to the current counter number...

You didn't break the counter, but you sure stretched the heck out of it

OK.....

Soup for you...

Bob

[bill dedman]

Originally Posted by Ed Fernandez

Jeff,he didn't tell you the picture was taken in 1922.

Of what significance is that?

[Jim Wahl]

Aww, Ed's nothing but a post hog! Don't ya hate guys like him? Jim

[Ed Fernandez]

Bob:Chicken noodle

Mr Bill:No present or future ride in a S/SS car.Go break the bracket racers ball$.

Jim:

[SStockDart]

Bill, a "Mulligan" is not the same as a "Gimmie".........Sorry if I confused you. Oh, and I decided to change my avatar from my "class car" to my "bracket car" so I will feel more at home. LOL

[Jeff Lee]

Originally Posted by bill dedman

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

5 votes for 2.60 average