Quote:
Originally Posted by Indyracer
Apparently, nothing is your strong suit. Not reading comprehension, not logic, not intellect, nothing.
In post 13 you were the first to mention the AHFS.
In post 21 you first complained about the cars being underfactored.
In post 24 you complained that Drooze wouldn't be "respecting" other racers if he actually raced all 1320 feet instead of bagging it in 1000 feet.
In post 43 someone else complained about Drooze actually showing up at Pomona and RACING his car and getting HP added (an AHFS issue). Again chastizing him for not being "respectful" of cheaters who bag races at 1,000 feet. And "signing" his post on behalf of 98 DP owners (who apparently all want to cheat.)
In post 52 someone actually pointed out that AFHS won't work without people running their cars all out.
In post 65 you complained about the HP rating on the new cars (an AHFS issue).
So in post 70 I point out the two-faced arguments going on.
In post 78 you continue whining about HP factors (AHFS issue).
In post 83 I reply to you, pointing out the sum total of the above posts (because I can read).
Then in post 85 you complain that I brought up the AHFS and you hadn't said anything about it. Apparently Alzheimer's is also an issue you face.
In post 101 I suggested you re-read the thread.
So finally in post 104, after claiming you did rear the thread, multiple times, it's evident you simply cannot read, or cannot follow your own logic.
Why don't you try again?
|
Let me explain this a little more clearly for you.
Read post 13 carefully. The point is that the AHFS was altered to protect the new cars. A gift from NHRA to go along with absurd HP factors on cars that, for the first near 40 years of Stock would have been put in Super Stock where they belong.
In post 21, you actually grasped a concept without being lead to it like a 6 year old. Congratulations. Well, even a broken clock is correct twice a day. But we'll give you credit for it anyway.
Read post 24 again. I never mentioned drooze racing to 1000 or racing to 1320. The point there was he was racing a car that didn't belong in Stock, that the veterans he claimed to respect could not compete with unless they bought one too.
Post 43 doesn't have a damned thing to do with me. Nice try though. But you just couldn't stretch far enough to reach it.
Post 52, again, has nothing at all to do with me. Keep reaching.
Read post 65 again. It doesn't have a damned thing to do with the AHFS, it has to do with how poorly NHRA factored the cars to begin with. More to the point, it was actually an illustration of how incorrect the post I quoted was in trying to equate these new cars to anything else in the history of Stock.
Read post 78 again. The HP factors are just a small part of the greater issue. The fact that you are making a weak attempt to make that the point of the entire post does not make it so. You choose to only address what you want to address out of the first paragraph of a three paragraph post. How typical of a person who doesn't have a decent position to debate from. But then, I wouldn't expect anything else from you.
Read post 85 again. It was a reply to you quoting me from post 83, when I said nothing about the AHFS in the post you quoted, and then going of on a tangent about people gaming the AHFS, something I had not previously brought up.
Read post 104 again. Clearly, I once again addressed the fact that you quoted me, then drifted off to gaming the AHFS again, which once again, is not something I discussed until you brought it up, and did it while quoting a post I made that did not even mention the AHFS.
You are merely addressing one issue here, the fact that people game the AHFS. The subject of the thread was not "people are gaming the AHFS". The subject of the thread is "How the factory "Package" cars may save Stock". And in that first post that you like to quote, post 13, I clearly illustrated how NHRA made gaming the AHFS a moot point, by altering the AHFS to allow a one and a half tenth extra cushion, after lowering the indexes 3 tenths. At that point, your whole argument point, that people game the AHFS, a point that I never argued to begin with, became moot.
The fact that you cannot follow simple logic, and must repeatedly revert to one single side issue in a vain attempt to "win"
an argument from an untenable position is extremely obvious. And you claim I have Alzheimer's? I may have forgotten a few things in 46 years or so, but I'm sure I've forgotten more than you could possibly grasp on the subject at hand.