worst red light debate, again!

[bill dedman]

Originally Posted by Chuck Rayburn

Bill, before this gets carried away. I would really like to know how many times in the last 10 seasons this "unfair" situation has occurred during all the rounds of competition. I'd be willing to bet big money the probability is less than 5%.
I don't know if you have done the research or not. I do know that in order to be taken seriously by the competition committee, you will need to present some sort of empirical data to support your arguement. If the probability isn't at least 20%, I don't see any reason why NHRA would regard this as an issue.

Chuck,
Regarding the "5%" you bring up...

I am not just referring to the fact that you can lose a race to a car that should not have won, if the rules for red lights were identical to breakout rules (worse infraction loses.)

That is ONE issue, and is a legitimate one, I feel; Why should people be racing under TWO sets of parameters (First infraction for red lights, and worse infraction, for breakouts) when there's no longer a reason for that kind of inconsistency?

Can you tell me?

However.... that is a part of the problem, but not THE problem.

The real problem (and though it's related, it's different) is:

The rule, itself. And, what it brings about.

The current red light rule makes it possible for a second-to-leave (quicker-handicapped car) to be awarded a"round-win" after having done NOTHING for it, but to stage his car.

There is NO WAY a first-to-leave car can EVER enjoy that advantage.

Doesn't matter if it's a B/SA car racing an A/SA car, with a handicap differential of .012-sec... if the first-to-leave car red lights, the A/SA car goes to the next round without EVER having to face the same red light jeopardy that the first car faced.

How can anybody with the ability to analyze ANYTHING, on a comparative basis, think that's fair???

It was implemented in 1963, as a matter of necessity but that doesn't apply any more.

1. With the electronics (NHRA) has available, nowadays, it's a situation that is totally unnecessary. With today's technology, the 'tree's computer can withold the first car's red light until BOTH cars have left the line, compare the infractions, and declare a winner, just like the breakouts are handled.

2. EVERY race (heat) that is run, unless it's a heads-up race, embodies the possibility for this inequity.

So, it may or may not result in a "first red light" victory for the second car to leave, but the potential is ALWAYS THERE. THAT is the inequity that the first car faces that is unnecessary, unneeded, and unfair... (and, outmoded.) The potential for unequal red light jeopardy.

The actual wins that a first-to-leave car might be awarded because the second-to-leave car bulbed worse, may be a low percentage, but the second to leave car NEEDS to face equal red light jeopardy every time he's involved in a handicapped race, or there exists the potential for a "FREE RIDE", for that second car to leave.

This "FREE RIDE" is something that flies in the face of rules parity, and as long as the potential for it still exists, there is no parity. Or, fairness.

The worse red light rule simply guarantees that EVERY CAR will have the same chance to red light. Every time.

Anything less is favoritism.

If any of that can be proven wrong, please do so...