Originally Posted by bill dedman
Jeff, I apologize for the lateness of this reply, but the truth is, I just didn't see it until now. My bad...
Point-by-point...
Jeff sed: "long time ago, the powers-that-be were sitting around and trying to plan a path for drag racing involving the Sportsman racers and the time delay start. The starting system was in discussion, about the same time they were discussing "how can we continuously promote the sport, feed our advertisers, and keep the fans interested".
Bill contends: Even back in 1962, when this "program" was in the planning stages, the NHRA DRUIDS were never that insightful, when attempting to give us a game-plan that would do three things, successfully, at once. Remember, these were the guys that gave us class racing based on SAE Gross HP numbers (replaced at a later date, with SAE "NET" figures and HP "Factors." A TOTALLY different set of classes for the very same cars. My '72 Valiant 318; 2-bbl went from 230 (gross) HP to 150 net...and the class changed (later, changed again, with factored HP)..... the "now it's legal', now it's NOT" rules chages that defined what constituted a Stocker, that resulted in Cast iron manifolds replacing tubing headers for a while), camshaft rules that went all the way from "Stock lift/duration, and overlap" to this virtually wide-open cam situation that exists, today and the attendant valve spring rule that makes it all work (ALMOST,) today... nevermind the illegal status of aftermarket rockers, which would make it ACTUALLY work... No, these geniusses aren't going to be thinking about THREE things ("marketing, sport promotion, and keeeping the fans interested") at one time, during the genesis of the handicap system.
Nope, the handicap system that included the "first red light loses, PERIOD" was born, not because of any far-sighted thinking on the part of the authors, and their efforts to further the fortunes of Stock-Super.Stock racing, but nothing more complicated than "There's no other way to do it. Maybe no one will notice."
No one did... At that time, they were trying to work out software that would, instead of eliminating the first car to break out, eliminate the car with the WORST amount of breakout.
They got that glitch taken care of, and apparently, so many people were happy with that new method of prosecuting the breakout system, the red light problem was swept under the rug.
Years went by... the red light system in use (first red light loses) in handicapped racing was identical to the one in use for heads-up racing (where it makes TOTAL sense), so it became the "industry standard," and went virtually unchallenged for many years.
Then, Jeff wrote: "And if the status quo on race cars was "slow is good enough", then the fans would be bored to death, never to return.
And Bill countered, " But, that didn't happen, and it had nothing to do with a "first red light rule," It had everyting to do with Drag Racers having the mindset that hot rodding IS engineering one-upmanship, that manifests itself in the never-ending search to go faster and quicker... even in Stock.
One only has to look at the maximum horsepower available from Chevy (for example) in those salad days of Stock Eliminator to realize that it was no secret that performance sold cars, and dominance on the drag strip was first and foremost in racers' minds, in those early years. Beginning in 1955, the numbers, yearly, went up from (1955) 195, 225 or 240 (depending on whether you "buy" the Duntov cam in a '56 265), 283, 315, 335, 350 etc....
The desire for a fast car had nothing to do with a "first red light" starting line advantage. Folks just wanted to go F-A-S-T.... In fact I don't remember that ever being discussed back then, as an advantage for a quicker classed car, do you?
Seriously...
Then Jeff wrote, "So NHRA ingeniously merged all these concepts into one. Slower cars could still race but there was a carrot to going faster and faster as his budget grew. The racer figured out he might have an advantage by leaving second with a faster car than the other guy. He found that not only was leaving second an advantage but his faster car reacted on the starting line differently. Word spread and others wanted faster cars. Speed equipment flourished, advertising budgets increased and fans had something to marvel at. Everybody was happy except the slow guy. Too bad."
Bill contends, that "It IS too bad, because NHRA has spent its entire, organized LIFE trying to make a "level playing field" for ALL it's competitors, especially, in Stock and Super Stock.
Cases in point...
I had a friend who ran his '55 Chevy in Stock at the '55 Nationals. He was disqualified on the starting like because the tech inspectior opened his hood and found his air cleaner wing nut "too loose."
I have a friend who lost in class racing because one of his exhaust valves was too SMALL, by a few thousandths,
The tear down barn can only be called an obsessive/compulsive attempt to remove cheaters from the equation...
The NHRA dedication to fairness in their Modus Operandi is legendary.
No one can fault them for that.
But, to sit idly by, and watch as one car, that was forced into leaving first by circumstances (his car was the slower-dialed car) get eliminated by a red light, and not require the second car to leaave, to face the SAME red light jeopardy, demonstrates a double standard worthy of Adolph Hitler... especially, since the "fix" for the digital mechanations, is so easy these days.
You have to remember, this is not about slow cars vs. fast cars. If a B/SA car is racing an A/SA car, it applies equally as much as if a AA.SA car is up against a V/SA car.
I am in no way involved with the invention of this "worse red light" rule concept. I am a slow learner, and it took me a good 2 months to figure it out, after a good friend of mine had the patience to teach me the vagaries of it.
Now, I don't see how I could have been so thick headed,,, but, I was... too steeped in the tradition of the first red light rule... (since 1963)
|