Re: Think about this.........
 

I made this personal? I don't think so. Not until now.

"If you'd be willing to re-seed the qualifiers based on percentage run under the index, then perhaps a "worst red-light" rule makes sense. And they should block the red/green from the other driver's sight."

My friend, you have no idea what's even going on here.
You should be trying to convince the guys with the Chevys in AA/SA they're getting a fair shake. You 've never seen a new CJ go 1.50 under?
This has nothing , I repeat , nothing to do with fast ET's
Yesterday's "A/Stockers" (50 Old's) are so slow , by today's standards, that they don't even have a class to run in...and so it goes.

Re: Think about this.........
 

Indyracer said: "Here's all the reason you need:"

THIS is what Indyracer thinks is a reason NOT to change to a worse red light system:

He said:
1) This is racing. Quicker car gets the advantage. So first red light loses.
2) This is racing. We hate sandbaggers. So worst breakout loses.

Let's look at those statements, individually, in an effort to see what he thinks the reasons NOT to change the red light rule are:

1 "This is racing."

I don't think that statement has anything to do with the contention that a rule needs to be changed. Or, much of anything we didn't already know...

2 Then, he said, "Quicker car gets the advantage."

The whole idea in writing rules for the aforementioned "racing" is to create a "rules" environment that is as fair to everybody as it can be. That's why racing HAS rules. Is "Quicker car gets the advantage" in the spirit of that concept, one that attempts to create an environment wherein NOBODY should get an advantage?

Indyracer, did somebody tell you that somewhere it is written that the faster car should get an advantage? At any time? Anywhere??? Show it to me... It's not in the NHRA rulebook. The fist red light situation was created by default (they didn't know how to fix it) in 1963.... maybe even before you were born...

You failed to come up with a legitimate and logical reason not to change it (first red light)... I said a "legitimate and logical reason"...
"Quicker car gets the advantage" is not even a reason... it's just the status quo.

3. Then, Indyracer said, "So first red light loses."

I don't find a reason there, either; just the lopsided status quo, again... Everybody knows that with the current system, the first red light ALWAYS loses.... That's the problem.

4. Then he again,said, "This is racing."

Is that a reason not to change the first red light rule???

No.

5. He then said, "We hate sandbaggers." in reference to "worst breakout loses."

. Nobody is talking about changing the breakout rule.... There's no advantage to any car under the present rule; why would anyone want to change that? They wouldn't.... so once again, you bring up something that's not pertinent to this discussion.

Even if there WAS something wrong with the breakout rule (and, there's NOT,) tell me what you think sandbagging has to do with breaking out? Handicap racing is all brakelight racing, anyway; what would sandbagging have to do with that? Nothing...

6 He wrote, finally, "So, worst breakout loses.

I don't think ANYBODY has a problem with that, but it has NOTHING to do with the worse red light rule...

What are you smokin'???????

I broke NO promise, because you presented nothing that was even CLOSE to an argument or reason NOT to change what we have, now. You told me what we are doing... and that in doing it like we do, it gives the advantage to the second car to leave, but where in that, is a reason NOT to change the rule?

There's not one. It's not that "I don't like the answer" because it doesn't suit my opinion, I don't like the answer because it answers questions not asked, while totally failing to address the question that WAS asked, which was:

"Can anybody give me a legitimate and logical reason to NOT change the first red light rule."

I'm still waiting for an answer to that. Simply stating how it works under the present ules is in no way, an answer as to why not to change it.

I think I'm going to have a long wait....

Thanks for listening, if you really WERE listening... :)

Re: Think about this.........
 

Against my better judgement...

There is no logical or legitamate reason the leave the rule as is. The worst redlight rule is the fairest way to do it, for all handicap-tree racers. The current system favors the faster car in a bracket racing situation. I, and just about anyone else, would agree with that.

Now, with that said, Bill, why don't you e-mail/call/write/fax/postcard/Facebook/Myspace/smoke signal/morse code/pigeon carrier/whatever you have to do, send it to NHRA/IHRA and air your grievance with them? Instead of taking up valuable space on here to argue and complain about a system that affects REAL Class Racers? Seriously. We get it. We got it a long time ago. Again, based on most racers post(s) on here, it seems very few care at all, or at least as strongly as you, about this issue. Take it up with someone that can actually change the way things work, instead of constantly yammering about it on here. I still say, as would the majority of Class Racers, that there are bigger problems that the xHRA's need to address and fix first for Class Racing before the Christmas Tree issue.

Re: Think about this.........
 

I like the Worst red light rule. I agree it is fair. But just sit back and think when and where the first red light rule came from. Why would a new(back then) organization like NHRA come up with such a rule. The problems with the electronics... no I don't think so. They developed electronics that tell you which car got to the finish line first... Could it go back and be a carry over from the days of flagging... Bill, You and I are old enough to remember those days. Yes, it could be just a carry over. How could a flagger determine which was the worst red light? Now with that said lets throw in the big MAYBE....MAYBE there was another issue that gives us the first red light rule. Could it be for the best Show for the spectators? How you say? Because a new organization was wanting to grow and spectators wanted to watch faster cars. The slow car red lighting first was/is a clear cut advantage for those who build a fast car. Yesterday and today and it promotes the building of faster cars. So NHRA gets faster cars built, grows and gives the spectators a faster show. I would say since we have had it like this for so long it is probably one of those "Things" that management thinks should be left alone. I can tell you Bill isn't the first guy to wear this issue out.
My .02 for free...
Merry Christmas

Re: Think about this.........
 

Thanks. Adger. I was told that it (the first redlight rule) came about as a result of no software existing at the time that could handle the task of comparing reaction times, and not turning on either red light until the worse infraction was decided. I can believe that... it WAS 46 years ago, after all... LOL!

Insofar as NHRA simply leaving it alone, as an advantage for the faster cars all these years, that's very possible, but, I think unlikely because

1. a double red light doesn't happen very often, and,

2. it can just as easily happen in a race between an M Stocker and a V stocker as it can an A car and an H.... There's not that much opportunity for the higher class cars to benefit, but that's just my opinion. Been wrong before... for sure.

My personal opinion is that NHRA is just L-A-Z-Y, eaten up with apathy, and will never be proactive in getting rid of something like this if they can get around it. But, that's just my 2-cents, too.

I appreciate your input, Adger.... I do.

I should give it a good letting alone. My only reason for posting it was to try and make as many people as possible, aware of how it all works; There are people who, like myself, just never paid that much attention... If they knew, they might talk amongst themselves and develop a consensus.... one way or another.

It could be argued that such a consensus already exists, in that there's no viable protest group lobbying NHRA right now, on this issue, but the problem with that view is that something like this has inertia on the side of "It's always been this way," and a lot of people don't care enough to think beyond that viewpoint. That becomes an "immoveable object" when new concepts and arguments for change go ignored by that kind of complacency...

I am convinced that NHRA will never change to a worse red light rule, unless they are coerced into it.

I don't see that happening.

Have a great Christmas and a very happy New Year, Adger!!!

Re: Think about this.........
 

Mike, I'm glad you "get it." If you, and guys like you truly "get it," why don't you do anything about it? It's a 46 year-old problem that affects half the racers in any round of handicap racing.
I guarantee you if NHRA came out with new rule than said all red cars now have to carry 50 additional pounds of ballast, there would be moaning, groaning, gnashing of teeth and whining 'til NHRA did something about it.

Why not this???

"they just don't care..."

You act like Class racers are the only ones affected by this.

I KNOW you know a LOT about Bracket racing. If I line up against your Bracket car, and you have the slower car, does it not bother you that your red light just took me out of red light jeopardy, and deposited me in the winners' circle, even though you only bulbed..002 and I left .023 early??

I think that bracket racers everywhere, are affected equally, by the first red light rule.

Insofar as "valuable space" on this forum, goes, I can't think of a better use of it than trying to "right" an ongoing, 46-year old, injustice to the slower car. There are people who post jokes, private conversations, unfounded rumors, political opinions and just about everything you can think of, on on this forum... I appreciate the opportunity to have it at my disposal, but when the subject matter is something as pertinent and serious as NHRA rules, I can't see that I am doing anything wrong. This forum is for people who want to discuss racing, and the rules are part and parcel of that.

If someone doesn't want to read it, they should do what I do when I find a subject boring, impertinent, or of no value; go to the next forum... there are lots of excellent subjects here to read; they don't have to read my Don Quixote prattle... (Thank you, Ed.)

Thanks again for your comments, Mike. Have a happy Holiday!!!

Re: Think about this.........
 

The late Steve Taylor comes to mind. In case the name dosent ring a bell he ran stock back in the 70's with a 396/375 HP Chevelle. He did well and almost won a couple of IHRA National events back in the day by getting down to the semi's. His wife also ran her own car in stock. As time went on and it became more expensive he went ( THE HORROR OF IT) bracket racing. He became a "Killer" and won several high dollar electronics races running against dragsters and lite wt. door cars loaded with every electronic devise invented while FOOT braking a cavalier FWD slug. The fast guys got pissed and they had the min. ET changed to eliminate him and his wife in twin Cavaliers from competing and "stealing their Glory". Kind of sounds like what stock and S/S is turning into dosent it !

Re: Think about this.........
 

Rules, by nature, are arbitrary.

Re: Think about this.........
 

Wow, Bill... 46 years ago I raced at Hope Ar airport and it was off Flags and distance Spots. Add to the list of tracks that ran the same way:
The old Shreveport track and the Airport at Haynesville La. The first time I went to the Hallsville Tx track, can't remember the year but had to be 68 or earlier, they had distance spots with an old stop light hanging down track between the Strips of pavement. In late1969 when I went to the Paris Tx track they had a Pro Tree handicap start system. I think it was a 3 light. It was the same tree system that I raced on and won an IHRA National Event at the old Dallas International track in 1971. The first Full trees I ever ran on were at Carlisle Ar. and I-20 Tyler Tx sometime in the early 70's. I started racing in a friends fast Stock class 1962 Impala at Hope. I raced in "Stock" class until I moved my 69 Camaro up to SS in 1973. I built a Modified 1966 Vette in 1974. The first bracket race I raced in was when my 69 Camaro Stocker broke a rear end at Paris in early 71.
Jerry Bob Stevens allowed me to use my "Stock" entry in brackets and I ran the tow car, 68 Dodge Dart w/383 auto. WOW, Sorry your 46 year ago comment swept up all those thoughts from the cobwebs and dust of my mind!!! :~) I guess things have changed, yet stayed the same; my love for the sport of racing.
Merry Christmas, to All

Re: Think about this.........
 

Bill Dedman, I also 'get' it and I agree with you completely. I see no logical reason why "worst" shouldn't get the red light.

Re: Think about this.........
 

Yes, but it ain't gonna change because a few old men keep cryng about it on an internet message board. Also, some get tired of the endless long posts complaining about it.

Only a person with a lower class car that doesn't have to give a lot of spots think the faster car has all the advantages, and thinks the "dirty tree" / "clean tree" talk is B.S.
I usually leave first, but with the rule like it is I still prefer leaving first. No car leaving in the other lane or lights coming down on the other side of the tree to distract me. I'm not the only one that will tell you that.

I know, guys say I need to "FOCUS!", but also "JUST DON'T RED LIGHT!"

Just because the faster car went ahead and left instead of sitting on the converter or 2 step does not mean they would have been red if the slower car weren't red. If I spot a car and it goes red, I just say "I'm gone" and leave. I don't spot many by a lot, so won't be a half second red. I know several others in faster cars that do the same thing. People can whine all they want, but the rule is what it is.

May as well give it a rest.

Re: Think about this.........
 

[QUOTE=bill dedman;158823]Alan, Mike, and Ed, I'll give it up when any one of the three of you can give me a logical reason why it should NOT be changed.

I have never heard one... and, I'm waiting.

Bill Dedman, I'm not Alan, Mike or Ed but I've got a little bit of experience with being the "slow" car so I'd like to take a "logical" crack at it if you don't mind me playing.
The way I look at it I'm taking the risk of being the first one to foul but I'm gaining a "clean" look at the tree and the track. Now before you go questioning what the track has to do with it let me finish. One of the better racers in my division would almost always have a terrible (.100+) light against me and knowing that he's better than that I asked him about it and was very suprised by his answer. He told me that my car is always passing behind the tree just as his tree is coming down and it distracts the "hell" out of him. I'll take that advantage.
Now I've got the advantage of a clean tree, distracting my opponent by passing through his field of vision AND if the spot is long enough, I get to watch your light. Now I can't tell you if your light is a .000 or an .020 but I can tell you if you had a good one or a bad one and that just might help me at the finish line.
Now I've gone and given up all of my secrets (almost)
That's as "logical" as it gets Bill.

Re: Think about this.........
 

Bill, the reason(s) I "don't do anything about it" are 1) I don't care as strongly as you do about it 2) I quit racing three years ago, so even if it were to change, it doesn't affect me 3) it wouldn't make me hurry back to racing until NHRA/IHRA pull their heads out of their rear ends and fix the other problems that are more important than the Christmas tree (payouts, run schedule, race formats, entry fees, 1/8 mile racing, getting bumped for whatever flavor-of-the-week eliminator is there, T/S, T/D, Sportsman Motorcycle, Snowmobiles, etc). Like I stated earlier, you should take this issue up with NHRA/IHRA, Compulink/TSI/Accutime and the other electonics people. They are the ones that can change it. Not Kenny, not the moderators and not the readers of this great Forum. I'll give you an example. A few years ago, there were a few racers with 1964-1966 Mercury 289's, in Super Stock and SS/GT that were very fast (this was before the AHFS was in place). NHRA hit all the 1964-66 289 cars, Ford and Mercury, five HP. Problem was, the Mercury's had a 600 cfm carb, and the Fords had a 480 carb. Instead of complaining on here for weeks, Alex and others sent e-mails and petitions to NHRA, showing the error and NHRA took the five HP off of the Ford 289, as they should have. Point is, you need to talk to the people that can actually change the problem, not debate it on here. I will agree with one thing--I doubt NHRA/IHRA would change it. Maybe, just maybe, if hundreds of Class Racers were to e-mail/call NHRA and request the Tree be changed, they would consider it, and maybe even do it. Unlikely, but would be worth the shot. If enough people wanted it changed. From what I've read from your numerous posts about this subject, not too many people (publicly, anyway) support your position. Why, who knows. I guess everyone has their reasons. Maybe Ken could start a poll on this subject. I drove for Billy Nees for several years, and I can agree with what he said. I drove Billy's HF/SA Sunbird. A 17-18 second car. When racing a 10 or low 11 second car, I could leave, shift into second and watch the tree count down for my opponent. I could tell if the racer had a good light or bad, and could help me (sometimes) at the finish line. In that respect, this was just two of the advantages to driving a slow car. I also had several disadvantages. There are some advantages to each. Each racer, knowing the rules beforehand, can weigh all the advantages for each type of car (slow and fast) and choose which type of car he or she wants.

Bottom line is, if I ever do come back to driving, if the tree is worst redlight loses--great, another advantage to me. If the tree is first redlight loses, oh well, I'll have to work on not redlighting and put the pressure on my opponent. I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree, Bill. I do hope that you take my advice, I think we'd all be better off.

Re: Think about this.........
 

Based on the text a couple guys have written, here's what I've learned:

1) You guys drive slow cars.
2) You're old (bragging about what you were doing "back in the day," commenting on things that happened "probably before I was born," etc.)

So it looks like we have some grumpy old men in slow cars.

How often are there double red-lights where the first red-light wasn't the worst anyway?

Why don't you focus your efforts with people who can make a difference? I actually don't car one way or another. I just thought it would be interesting to see where you all stood. I won't invade this debate again.

Thanks.

Re: Think about this.........
 

>>>>> You're welcome

Re: Think about this.........
 

You drive a 14+ second car. That is slow.
"Seasoned" and "veteran" seems to equal "old" and based on your posts, you are "grumpy."

Thus, you are a grumpy old man driving a slow car.

You can use any adjective that makes you feel warm and fuzzy, but the facts are the same: Grumpy. Old. Slow.

So keep bragging about yourself. If you were so good you wouldn't have to complain about all the red-light losing you apparently do.

And by the way - I'm sure virtually everyone on this site, including of course you, is better than me. Some people come to learn, some come to brag. I am one. You are the other.

Re: Think about this.........
 

[QUOTE=Indyracer;

And by the way - I'm sure virtually everyone on this site, including of course you, is better than me. Some people come to learn, some come to brag. I am one. You are the other.[/QUOTE]

Well, Indyracer, you're right about something anyway! Mark's not braging he's making statements about his accomplishments.

Take his advice and stop embarassing yourself.

You would be wise to take your storebought dragster chassis, put your storebought RMS motor in it and go race with your buddies somewhere, stop on the way home, have a few beers and brag about how fast you went today.

Re: Think about this.........
 

Look! Another grumpy guy! You guys are the best!

And for what it's worth, I drive a door car. I do my own wrenching. And 100% of everything on my car has been done by myself. I run S/Pro brackets and S/Gas. And I'm a lot closer to Schumacher's ET than I am to Mark's. But who cares? Not me. Am I seasoned ("old")? Nope. I'm not bragging about me. But you grumpy old slow guys keep bringing it up.

If I wanted to drive a 14 second car I'd go pull 6 plug wires. LOL. See how fun this can be? I love it when you guys gang up on someone. I have big shoulders. Bring it on.

Re: Think about this.........
 

Sometime you should try and make a 20 second car into a 14 second car using the stock topend of the engine. There's more personal satisfaction there than just buying and bolting on parts.

Re: Think about this.........
 

Wow, someone mentioned 6 plug wires... must have been talking about what I race... Oh, that can't be mine ... 14 seconds is tooooo slow.. about 5 seconds slower than mine...was that you, Billy?
Humm...I wonder how old we were when our Smart a** attitude turned to Grumpy? Oh!

Re: Think about this.........
 

Wow! Another sophomoric attempt to belittle me.

I'm sure you're right. Just look at all the guys running V/S Stock eliminator. Maybe I should build a V/S car so there's one East of the Rockies to match the one that's West of them. At least I could brag about all my Wally's, right? Show up at any Regional or National event running Class eliminations and take home a Wally.

You should try to make a 9 second car run 7.90's NA without changing the motor. More personal satisfaction there than running a class no one else on the planet runs, and no one wants to watch.

I hope you're enjoying this as much as me. :D

Re: Think about this.........
 

Would be good if every one had to use there real name not a bull---t one.

Re: Think about this.........
 

Yes.

Re: Think about this.........
 

[QUOTE=Indyracer;159015]Wow! Another sophomoric attempt to belittle me.

Well kid you got me there! You're right, I'm just too dumb and too old to argue with you and I can't defend myself without "bragging".
One thing that I've learned in my old age is "don't try and teach a pig to whistle". "It will just aggrevate me and upset the pig".
Good luck with you're "racing" career!

Re: Think about this.........
 

Quote: I have big shoulders. Bring it on.

Jeez it must look awful funny with those broad shoulders holding up a pinhead...............
Probably like the character in Beetljuice. Another slow,old grump.
T/SA

Re: Think about this.........
 

Because S/C is for dragsters. S/G is now mostly 7.80 - 8.50 cars t-stopping down to 9.90. In brackets I run all out but only 1/8th mile. All out 1/4 opportunities are rare.

Re: Think about this.........
 

I just turned thirty last month. Is that old enough to be a "grumpy old man"?

Re: Think about this.........
 

"Broad shoulders holding up a pinhead". That's very funny Ed.

Mr. Indy-noname, you know you're a real ***** don't you?
I tried so hard to keep out of this mud slinging, but I can't keep my mouth shut any longer.
Mr Indy-noname, tell us of your accomplishments please, we would like to hear of them instead of your just taking pot shots at us.

Obvously you "don't get it" about seeing that potential in a slow car and trying to squeez all you can out of it within a structured set of peramiters rather than an "anything goes" type of format.

Re: Think about this.........
 

I have no accomplishments. You're better than me.

Re: Think about this.........
 

I have a question regarding the "new" cars of S/SS. Or any fuel injected car for that matter. When is NHRA going to regulate the rules so that these guys have to run factory computers? I mean no "tune" or "tuning" with a lap top in the pits? I know a local Mustang that runs in one of these classes that has had the book thrown at it as far as the "tune" in the "factory" computer. I mean doesnt NHRa need to put a limit on this?

Just asking. I know the rules say OEM computers allowed. But has the NHRA looked into what tune can be applied and still be "stock"? Thats the question.

Re: Think about this.........
 

changing the tune in the computer on a N/A EFI motor is equal to changing carb jets, squirters, etc, and adjusting the timing. they don't regulate any of that on the carbureted cars, why would they do it on the EFI cars?

Re: Think about this.........
 

Ok....then what ? I can tune several comuters from a touch screen in the
car, VE tables across the board....no laptop.

The rules in STOCK are VERY clear, OEM-Type Aftermarket is allowed as long as its NHRA approved. These boxes are usually universal in nature and can be loaded with software for any engine the ECU is capable of.

You change your timing by turning your distibutor, I change mine with a setting in the computer. Same thing exactly, you have counterweights for your curve, I have a table in data.....your technology is 100 years old....litterally..

So you are handicapping FI cars saying they need to run factory timing, but carb cars dont ? You can use bigger jets in your carb but we cant send different signals to our injectors ?

Maybe you arent familiar with what can and cannot be accomplished with a "tune" its just that....you can do it BEYOND factory specs, we cant ?

Most factory computers have to be "cracked" some cant be, so the only option to run and be able to adjust these items, in some cases even tranny shifting is by using an aftermarket ECU......

It would be a great way to handicap them and give the old iron a longer competitive lifespan, but I dont see it as either representitive of Stock cars or something the NHRA wants to do (i.e. limit cars to only pre 1990 status)


I can

Re: Think about this.........
 

anyone who does not respect the grumpy old men on here who have helped create the mystic of s/ss lost my respect. some of these old men got more miles on them backing up after a burnout than some do going down the track!

Re: Think about this.........
 

I was going to say something but sometimes "grumpy old men" have the wisdom to know when to keep their mouths shut.

Re: Think about this.........
 

We're no better nor worse than you.We approach racing differently.I get alot of satisfaction making an "old man's" car go fast for what it is.It's gratifying when people see
a straight 6 with a "go cart" carb and and they are surprised it went as fast as it did.
You choose to go fast,guided by mostly safety rules.Apples and oranges.

Re: Think about this.........
 

Thanks Ed. I can respect that response and your brand of racing.
At least you didn't take a random potshot at me.

And yes - I go fast mostly constrained by safety rules. Anyone else get a new helmet and fireproof clothing for Christmas (adding a layer of CarbonX underneath the firesuit this year)? :D

Re: Think about this.........
 

Naaaa.......Wait until your about 64 years young......LOL.
P.S. Happy Belated Birthday (you old fart)

Re: Think about this.........
 

I just couldn't stand it anymore and had to jump in -- I may be old and seasoned and a veteran Stock /SuperStock racer ( yes , I started out with Billy and Mark in R/SA ) and some days I'm even grumpy but on my worst day would never ever jump into a 7.90 car . Why ? It's S / SS or nothing .....period . And just like Billy and Mark I've got a few good runs left ...........bring it on ! ! ! And I don't have to brag .....................

Re: Think about this.........
 

Hell, I can't even REMEMBER being 64.... :)

Re: Think about this.........
 

And some of your post confirms it.Hold on before you blow a gasket.I couldn't help it.Just kidding.You left a hole big enough to drive a truck through.