[Adger Smith]

Yes, Wesley is no longer working for NHRA.
He runs the Tech side of the Engine Masters Challenge.
RJ.Sledge, Sidney J. Bonnecarrere & I work for him.
He also does Tech work for a Mud racers association and a couple of other well known racing series.
A couple of years ago he and I had this discussion about rocker ratio. The paygrade above us at EMC was wanting us to limit Rocker Ratio.
According to him there is no real way to measure rocker ratio correctly.
Too many variables.
Example: In a Small Block Chevy you are dealing with three distinct intersecting angles. Pushrod, Rocker Stud, Valve angles. Yes, if extended far enough those angles will intersect. Where you locate the rocker on any of the various planes between those angles influences the effective ratio of the rocker.
Say you have a cam lift of .275 and you are looking for a 1.5 ratio to give you a net lift of .410. You set your valve length and pushrod length to get that .410 net lift. OK Presto we have 1.5 Rocker ratio. Does that make the rocker a 1.5 ratio rocker? Probably not. Now you drop the pushrod length by .100 and reposition the rocker and woops the valve lift is now .418.
OOPS, have we changesd the ratio of the rocker, what ratio was it and what is it now. Humm, lets see we lower the length of the valve tip and, oops again the measured valve lift goes to .412. Then if you want to get serious you can mill the stud bosses at an angle and tilt the stud back and the measured lift will change again, all with the same rocker. Wesley told me that measuring Rocker ratio on an engine is not a place you want to go.
Danny must know rocker ratio is a slippery slope. Wesley does.