Re: A case for Tru-Start
 

crap

Re: A case for Tru-Start
 

I feel in an effort to level the playing field one should only be allowed to edit 9 out of every 10 posts...

Re: A case for Tru-Start
 

got snow yet

Re: A case for Tru-Start
 

Time for a classic, dead horse strategies...about as pertinent as most of the posts here and you may enjoy...

1. Buying a stronger whip.

2. Changing riders.

3. Threatening the horse with termination.

4. Appointing a committee to study the horse.

5. Visiting other sites to see how others ride dead horses.

6. Lowering the standards so that dead horses can be included.

7. Re-classifying the dead horse as “living, impaired”.

8. Hiring outside contractors to ride the dead horse.

9. Harnessing several dead horses together to increase the speed.

10. Attempting to mount multiple dead horses in hopes that one of them will spring to life.

11. Providing additional funding and/or training to increase the dead horse’s performance.

12. Doing a productivity study to see if lighter riders would improve the dead horse’s performance.

13. Declaring that as the dead horse does not have to be fed, it is less costly, carries lower overhead, and therefore contributes substantially more to the bottom line of the economy than do some other horses.

14. Re-writing the expected performance requirements for all horses.

15. Promoting the dead horse to a supervisory position

Re: A case for Tru-Start
 

Good Luck

Re: A case for Tru-Start
 

Mickey, it's time to move on brother! Nothing else to see here, me and the boys are getting worried about you......

PS I hit the edit button for Fletcher!

Re: A case for Tru-Start
 

Re: A case for Tru-Start
 

It will either happen or it won't. Either way all of us will continue to show up. Makes no difference.

Re: A case for Tru-Start
 

Peter Biondo post.

I am obviously for TruSTART and I AM typically the faster car/ chaser.

There will always be the finish line (chaser) advantage to being the faster car and that reason alone is incentive enough for me to continue being the faster car. I don't think anyone would argue that point regardless of if you are running Stock, Top Sportsman, or a Bracket car.

TruSTART simply fixes one starting line system deficiency (in a handicapped scenario) and will lead to long term health of the sport (along the same lines on when it made the sport healthier when we separated door cars and dragsters in our first Spring Fling). Over the past 7 years, I watched the bracket race market change for the better in front of my own eyes and the door car separation had alot to do with that. Encouraging (not discouraging) lower budget participation.

Kyle and I (and Compulink) had alot to lose when we introduced this new concept at our Spring Fling races in 2016 as we were now mixing in a new/ different concept with an already successful race. It was a race where we didn't need more cars; there was very little upside from that perspective versus the downside risk involved.

The bottom line was that we believed in it (along with believing in Brockmeyer from Compulink) enough to take that risk and the racers LOVED IT. I am not talking keyboard racers or "on paper"... I am talking real life racers who actually raced with it.

It is already being installed in tracks throughout the country and similar to cross-talk and auto-start, I believe it will spread and I really hope it does. But if for some reason it doesn't, I am perfectly fine in doing it at our Spring Fling events because its something I believe in.

With this being said, everyone is obviously entitled to their opinion and alot of good points have been made on both sides. If an overall vote was taken (in all classes including the Summit Bracket Race Series), I believe it would be 70% for Tru-START. More importantly, if racers raced on it for 3 or 4 days in a row and then voted on it, I believe the vote would be at least 80% for Tru-START.

Peter Biondo

__________________
Peter Biondo S/Pro 1136 SS1136 Stock 1136
Biondo Racing Products

Re: A case for Tru-Start
 

Thank You Peter