worst red light debate, again!

[Mark Yacavone]

Originally Posted by Neal Derochie

To Bill Dedman and others, if this were to change one of the unintended consequences that could happen will alter qualifing vs. eliminations, just a scenario, take Fontana's elimination's ladder first round for instance.

Index Runs
#4 B/SA 11.25 10.53 -.713
#34 C/S 11.35 10.81 -.536

one would tend to believe that in most cases first round would look like this,
C/sa leaves first by .28 (all things being equal)

Now what could happen is after qualifing and only seconds before you run 1st round B/sa decides to put 10.99 on his window C/s had already put his original 10.81 and pulled into the water box thinking in most cases he is leaving first , so now you have switched (B/sa now leaves first by .18, just looking over other races this could be played out time and time again. Bill these are hypotheticals but it could and probably would happen with the new rule, i also understand that in cases this could happen already but generally B/sa is going to want to leave second .Bill can you see the mess this could cause which then would lead to another rule to prevent this. Unintended consequences. Bill just look at other races and see how many times this could play out. P.S. I think my numbers are right but if there is an error it is unintended. Bill now have you given some cars an advantage to pick and choose again?

Neal

?????? What's the problem,again?

[Jim Wahl]

Originally Posted by Neal Derochie

To Bill Dedman and others, if this were to change one of the unintended consequences that could happen will alter qualifing vs. eliminations, just a scenario, take Fontana's elimination's ladder first round for instance.

Index Runs
#4 B/SA 11.25 10.53 -.713
#34 C/S 11.35 10.81 -.536

one would tend to believe that in most cases first round would look like this,
C/sa leaves first by .28 (all things being equal)

Now what could happen is after qualifing and only seconds before you run 1st round B/sa decides to put 10.99 on his window C/s had already put his original 10.81 and pulled into the water box thinking in most cases he is leaving first , so now you have switched (B/sa now leaves first by .18, just looking over other races this could be played out time and time again. Bill these are hypotheticals but it could and probably would happen with the new rule, i also understand that in cases this could happen already but generally B/sa is going to want to leave second .Bill can you see the mess this could cause which then would lead to another rule to prevent this. Unintended consequences. Bill just look at other races and see how many times this could play out. P.S. I think my numbers are right but if there is an error it is unintended. Bill now have you given some cars an advantage to pick and choose again?

Neal

What? Some of the "pro" Sportsman racers do this now, and have for years. It's called sandbagging. What's the problem again, and exactly how does it relate to Bill's debate here? Jim


.

[Ed Wright]

Originally Posted by Jim Wahl

This simply is just not true! It CAN change if you can get it through the "thick heads" and convince them, much as I was, that this is worth changing! I don't see anybody "crying" about anything here Ed. I see several people debating and putting forth facts and opinions. And to tell someone to " if you can't live with that, either build a fast car or don't race. Do something else. Go fishing" is asinine. How would you feel if a Top Fuel racer told you "if you can't run 4.50 in the quarter mile you should build a faster car go fishing"? Makes just as much sense. Jim

Then go get it done, don't cry about it on the internet. Do something, call somebody. So far we don't have to race top fuel cars. I don't have a fast car. I don't feel like I need a helping hand. Are you a liberal that wants Obama make everything easier for you?

[Jeff Lee]

Originally Posted by Jim Wahl

I saw no name calling in that post or any other that Bill has written so far. You must be confusing Bill with Ed Wright. Jim


.

Bill hit the grammar on this one, hit the name calling on another ("poor character" for which he did apologize) and others have done the insulting. I was generalizing the angle of those felt betrayed or otherwise annoyed by the issue. Both sides.
So to make it clear...the horse seems to be quite dead as its *** hangs on one side of the fence and it's head on the other but this thread will continue if for no other reason, internet bragging rights.

[Jim Wahl]

Originally Posted by Ed Wright

Then go get it done, don't cry about it on the internet. Do something, call somebody. So far we don't have to race top fuel cars. I don't have a fast car. I don't feel like I need a helping hand. Are you a liberal that wants Obama make everything easier for you?

This is exactly what I am talking about. Ed, my friend, you don't have a clue! If you had one you would not have written that last sentence. Me a liberal? Are you serious? Really? You really are reading comprehension challenged. Visit the lounge sometime.
The Top Fuel thing is called a metaphor. Look it up. I am so glad you pointed out we don't have to race a Top Fuel car! I never would have known that!
I get it now, you don't believe that the rules of Drag Racing should be consistent, I understand you. However, just because you don't doesn't mean everyone else does. Members of this forum are (believe it or not) allowed to discuss (crying according to you) things (rules included) without having to call Glendora (or you) to get approval to do so. Discussion IS allowed here without the requirement that you must act one way or the other on what has been discussed. Once again I say to you and others, if you are tired of this thread, DO NOT READ IT ANYMORE! Jim

[bill dedman]

Originally Posted by Jeff Lee

Bill hit the grammar on this one, hit the name calling on another ("poor character" for which he did apologize) and others have done the insulting. I was generalizing the angle of those felt betrayed or otherwise annoyed by the issue. Both sides.
So to make it clear...the horse seems to be quite dead as its *** hangs on one side of the fence and it's head on the other but this thread will continue if for no other reason, internet bragging rights.

Not to split hairs here, but my commenting on how an attitude reflects on a person's character, falls a long way from "name calling." If I'd said he was an " inconsiderate, small-minded, S.O.B." (which I did not,) THAT would have been "name calling."

You won't find that kind of personal rhetoric from me, on these boards. I apologized to the damaged party because he obviously had taken offense at my remark, and it was something I had said that I, in retrospect, regretted. He, in no way, deserved that judgment. Lucky for me, he accepted my apology.

The "worse" or "worst" red light subject isn't "Grammar," per se, but has to do with accurate communication, a staple of BB's like this one. In order for there to be a "worst" red light, there would have to be the ORIGINAL red light, a "worse" red light, and a third, or, "WORST" red light. And, as we all know, there are only two.... and, I thought it needed clearing up.

So the fact is, there is nothing in the world that can accurately be called a "WORST" red light.... it's just a matter of degree, not "Grammar."

Insofar as "bragging rights" relative to this thread is concerned, I am pretty sure there aren't any.

I know I haven't been able to accomplish anything (except Jim Wahl's welcome conversion) in the realm of winning supporters to the double red light system.

Maybe we could brag about how Big this thread is???? They say "size matters." LOL!

I'm in trouble...

[bill dedman]

[QUOTE=Jeff Lee;259759]So to make it clear...the horse seems to be quite dead as its *** hangs on one side of the fence and it's head on the other QUOTE]

The issue of having two distinctly different ways of treating two competitors. (one the first to leave, and the other being the second to leave,) with regard to having equal "red light jeopardy," will never die, until the first red light rule is changed.

Getting it changed is up to the NHRA, and until they get some personnel in charge of rules changes, who have some integrity, it probably IS a dead issue.

More's the pity...

[Jim Wahl]

Hey Bill, you better head on over to the ER. Your forehead must be bleeding badly by now! Jim



Use 'worse' if you're comparing two things: "I think eggplant is worse than squash, but that's just my opinion."

Use 'worst' if you're comparing multiple things: "I disagree. Eggplant and boiled cabbage are both vile, but squash is the worst!"


.

[Mike Gray]

.................................................. ....

[Ed Wright]

Jim, I've seen enough of your posts in the lounge to know your views. Many of them sound like they just fell out of glen beck's rear. That part was a joke. But when somebody builds a car knowing the rules, then expects a rule changed and some software re-written to make their life easier, it sounds like they maybe talk the talk but don't walk the walk. Looking for a little Obama care are ya? LOL
I understood the rules when I put mine together, I don't need handouts.

When are you guys going to do something other than talk?