questions concerning christmas tree

[bill dedman]

Alan,

This situation cannot be saddled with a thousand and one OTHER inequities that exist in handicap racing, in an effort to "level the playing" field, because there is no way to quantify the effects of "leaving on a clean tree", or "driving the stripe from behind." You know there are many, many ways in which a faster car has an advantage over a slow car, and vice-versa. You cannot justify legislating advantages for either group, in an effort to "level the playing field."

This worse red light situation cannot be viewed as an effort to do that, because of the crazy-quilt that is Eliminator racing. By that I mean, it changes, every time you're up to bat, depending on what class of car you're racing.

You run an F car with your G car (your dial-in will almost always be slower) you are the victim; if you red light... he never is under "red light jeopardy."


You run an H car with your G car (your dial-in will almost always be faster) HE is the victim if HE red lights, never putting YOU in the jeopardy of a red light.

Giving the quicker car (second to leave) a free ride, if the first car red lights, is a benefit to anyone, ONLY when they are the second to leave, and the other car red lights.

The only place this becomes a significant inequity, it could be argued, is when a car is classed either very high, or very low in the hierarchy of the classes.

For example, you don't need a statistical analysis to conclude that Ellis Buth's W/SA wagon is on the wrong end of this system (virtually, always leaving first), or that the new, 9-second Mustangs are on the "right" end of it.

The Mustangs enjoy an immunity from red lights IF their opponent bulbs.
Ellis's Pinto NEVER enjoys such an advantage.

I asked, "Where is the other side of that coin" relative to the fact that the quicker car sometimes enjoys this advantage, but there is none.

THAT is an "inexcusable inequity," in my book, because it is unnecessary, now, and accomplishes nothing.

Can you show me the other side of that coin?

Thanks for your input; I enjoy discussing things with you.

[John Dinkel]

When you are racing are you watching if the other guy turns on the red light, or you watching the tree?

[bill dedman]

John,

NOBODY's red light comes on until BOTH cars have left the line. Once they've both launched, the computer decides who had the worst red light and turns it on.

It can't do that before both cars have left, so nobody will see any red lights until after they've launched.

Hope this helps...

[Alan Roehrich]

Originally Posted by bill dedman

John,

NOBODY's red light comes on until BOTH cars have left the line. Once they've both launched, the computer decides who had the worst red light and turns it on.

It can't do that before both cars have left, so nobody will see any red lights until after they've launched.

Hope this helps...

And then neither will see the red light, because the tree is behind them, because both cars have launched and then the computer makes up its mind after the fact. MAYBE one or both drivers will see a win light come on, or maybe they won't.

[bill dedman]

>>>"Again, you ignore the law of unintended consequences simply because it is easy, convenient, and suits your agenda."

Okay; Alan, please give me an example of ANY "unintended consequence" that might come from this rule change I'm advocating.

I can't think of one; can you???

Please tell me of an "unintended consequence" that could come from this rule change that could have a negative impact on racing.

Just one... please.

RE: "And then neither will see the red light, because the tree is behind them, because both cars have launched and then the computer makes up its mind after the fact. MAYBE one or both drivers will see a win light come on, or maybe they won't."

And, this will affect the race how??? I don't know anybody who is oblivious to a win light... but then, I don't know everybody. Maybe they could install a red light beside the win lights that would appear as the win light in the other lane comes on... a minor issue, at worst. And, it will take the computer a millisecond to turn on the red light, once the second car has driven out of the beam; think he might see it as he passes the tree???

Finally, I don't have an agenda; I'll be racing no matter if they never change this, and they probably won't.

[Michael Beard]

Originally Posted by bill dedman

I don't know anybody who is oblivious to a win light... but then, I don't know everybody. Maybe they could install a red light beside the win lights that would appear as the win light in the other lane comes on... a minor issue, at worst.

Um, me, I'm afraid... More than once I've been backing into guys at the stripe, get my timeslip, and discover they were red. Granted it's only been at one certain track where the win lights are hard to see, and 1/8th mile racing, where you don't have all day to look around while you're motoring down the track. Good practice anyway... right?

As for red lights on the scoreboard, a number of southern tracks actually have a row of colored lights on the scoreboard... red for red light, yellow for a breakout, blue for who got there first, green for a win. (May have mixed some of them up... all I remember is thinking, "Dang, there were a whole bunch of lights on my scoreboard, I must've won!" only to find out I 'got there first' and 'broke out'.)


This topic got completely away from the original poster's question in regard to how the tree is blinded anyway. The first or worst red light deal is going to be rehashed a million times this winter. No one of one mindset is going to change one of the opposing view.

Now, RE: tree blinders... I don't even notice. We were at Bristol for the World Footbrake Challenge, and about 3rd round, my buddy says, "Man! I just can't get a handle on the tree. There's no blinder." 'What are you talking about? Yes there is!' "NO, there's NOT!"... I go up for the next round... huh! No blinder. I don't know if I'm 1) that focused or 2) that unobservant. (See Win Lights, above)

Work on being 1) that focused or 2) that unobservant.

[Alan Roehrich]

That you choose to believe that a balance does not exist does not make it so.

Citing extremes in order to make rules or to justify them is never a good idea.

Again, you ignore the law of unintended consequences simply because it is easy, convenient, and suits your agenda.

Just because something can be done does not make it the right thing to do, nor does it mean that it should be done.

I know plenty of guys with slower cars, the red light rule doesn't seem to matter to most of them, in fact, I'd say more than 1/2 of them would rather the rule not be changed, and most of the rest just don't care. Ever thought that maybe, just maybe, they don't want your help?

This whole thing reminds me a lot of "we're from the government, and we're here to help".