Re: worst red light debate, again!
 

Your definition of a reasonable balance is not necessarily the same as mine. You look at ONE facet of the situation, I look at more than one, I look at the entire situation.

He didn't get a chance to red light, I screwed up, let the clutch fly too soon, and beat him to the red light. My mistake. I commented on the situation all I needed to. I screwed up first, I lost. Brutally honest, brutally simple.

That's right Bill you "think" you know. But you do not. Next time, don't try to be so condescending, and assume you know what I'm thinking, because I don't think you're quite capable of knowing what I'm thinking. You're quite capable of ASSUMING. And you AMUSE me. Good luck with that, see how far it takes you.

Re: worst red light debate, again!
 

This may be a public forum but I don't see that allows people to make policy changes for something they are not even a member of.
Besides not even requiring an NHRA or IHRA membership on this board, a real name is not required. Neither is there an age requirement.
So conceivably, a 5 year old could get on here and start ranting about change that would suit him or her at the races.
Come to think of it, that may be happening on some of these posts...:rolleyes:

Bill,
You never did come back with my comment on the "why" we have this red light rule. You only commented that "it couldn't be". I provided a perfectly good, rational argument of the "why" yet you seem to have buried it and can not or will not acknowledge there is some merit to it. This seems to suggest you are no more open to reasoning than you suggest I and others are. Therefore, it would seem an impasse as neither side is listening. "It's not fair" is not good enough. Life is not fair.

Re: worst red light debate, again!
 

Jeff,
We both are on this board and have our own reasons for being here. I don't know why you would bring up "no name" posters, as neither you, nor I, use that M.O. as a part of our online presence, nor do we feel a need to. In that vein, I'm not sure why you brought it up, as it's not a factor, here. I'm in the Conway phone book, is you need to verify my existence.

Insofar as " "It's not fair" is not good enough. Life is not fair.", no, life is not fair, but this situation is not "life." It's just some rules that exist at the pleasure of a gouup of guys who clearly haven't had the time, or inclination to examine the content and consequences of the rule, as it was originally conceived when this fledgling handicap system was put into play 47 years ago, when there WAS NO ALTERNATIVE. The necessary software didn't exist.... yet.

In the ensuing years, everyone, myself included, got so used to it that it becaame a part of the "landscape" and just blended into the scenery, as a non-entity.

As I have said, it took ME several weeks before I could fully comprehend the difference in the two systems... guess I'm a slow learner.

But, when the facts finally hit home regarding the different way that system treats the red light infraction, I was moved to try to rectify it.

Life is not fair, for sure, but when it comes to rules, and racing, it needs to be as fair as it CAN be, and this is something I feel needs to be changed in the interest of creating a more level playing field for everyone.

Can you tell me who would be "damaged" by a worse red light rule? Aside from an AA/S car, I can't think of anyone...

I am "changing" nothing; I am ~suggesting~ this change in the interest of trying to righting a wrong that I feel, has been with us for way too long.

Just my 2-cents (and, probably overpriced, at that...)

Re: worst red light debate, again!
 

In the Pros it is WORST red light looses correct?

Re: worst red light debate, again!
 

Alan ,

Let's try to keep the personal nuances ("condescending") out of this and concentrate on the issue of the two red light rule protocal, shall we?

If I seemed "condescending" I apologize. My insulting people would serve no positive purpose, here; It's hard enough to get reasonable people to discuss this issue with me, without making them angry. If I did that, it was unintentional, and I'm sorry.

Aside from that, your contention, " He didn't get a chance to red light, I screwed up, let the clutch fly too soon, and beat him to the red light. My mistake. I commented on the situation all I needed to. I screwed up first, I lost. Brutally honest, brutally simple."
deftly side-steps the issue of, "Where was HIS chance to screw up and red light, maybe worse that YOU???"

That is part and parcel of the rationale that "You screwed up" and by doing so, removed that part of what I think, should be commensurate with HIS responsibility, to be fair to you. With the current setup, he escapes the kind of red light jeopardy that you were under, and there's no legitimate reason why he should enjoy that advantage,

That is, if you want a set of rules that treats everyone the same...

And, why would you not want that?

No, I DON'T know what you're thinking if you wouldn't want everyone to face the same red light jeopardy. Right now, they don't.

Re: worst red light debate, again!
 

Bill Dedman, I agree with you on this issue. However, beating it to death on this board will get us nowhere. I'd rather spend my time working on my car. I feel that would be more productive to me.

Re: worst red light debate, again!
 

Bobby D.
In the Pros its the FIRST red light looses. Tastes great, less filling, tastes great....
yea, I know.

Re: worst red light debate, again!
 

Which is always the WORST redlight right?

Re: worst red light debate, again!
 

Duplicate post...

Re: worst red light debate, again!
 

Bobby, I agree with you. I'm done here; go work on your car... that's what I'm gonna do! :)

Have a great week!