[Mike Carr]

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.