[bill dedman]

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!!!