Vote: Heads-UP in S/SS

[Ed Wright]

Originally Posted by Jack Matyas

At Englishtown there were probably 20 cars that could have contended for the #1 spot and most chose not to -- simply because of the AHFS . We really need to lower the indexes and get everyone racing to the finish line again .

I agree. Many Stock guys don't like the idea, I don't have a dog in that fight anyway. I sure think the SS indexes need lowered, 1/2 sec anyway. If you can't run 1/2 under in SS, you ain't tryin'.

[Lynn A McCarty]

AHFS if done the right way with a little science, sandbagging wouldnt matter. The trigger method for running fast would be immaterial. The only thing that would matter would be the curve for the whole engine. The only exception I could think of would be an obsure data point for an engine with no "like" data points.

Statistically, the slow cars and the average cars are more important in a true calculation. The really fast cars would only raise a red flag if they are way above the group of the other fast cars. These could be evaluated on a case by case basis for cheating, innovation, money spent, engineering prowess, unfair parts allocation. If you cant find anything wrong with what he is doing, then you must let him go.

The proper statistics bear out if a combo is soft on its original factoring which is the true shame of the current system. There is nothing wrong with a fast car. It is the American way. If the average of the combo is normal, and a guy is fast, unless you can catch him cheating, he should win. This isnt China.

[Ed Wright]

Originally Posted by Lynn A McCarty

AHFS if done the right way with a little science, sandbagging wouldnt matter. The trigger method for running fast would be immaterial. The only thing that would matter would be the curve for the whole engine. The only exception I could think of would be an obsure data point for an engine with no "like" data points.

Statistically, the slow cars and the average cars are more important in a true calculation. The really fast cars would only raise a red flag if they are way above the group of the other fast cars. These could be evaluated on a case by case basis for cheating, innovation, money spent, engineering prowess, unfair parts allocation. If you cant find anything wrong with what he is doing, then you must let him go.

The proper statistics bear out if a combo is soft on its original factoring which is the true shame of the current system. There is nothing wrong with a fast car. It is the American way. If the average of the combo is normal, and a guy is fast, unless you can catch him cheating, he should win. This isnt China.

Well stated.

[Michael Beard]

Originally Posted by Lynn A McCarty

AHFS if done the right way with a little science, sandbagging wouldnt matter. The trigger method for running fast would be immaterial. The only thing that would matter would be the curve for the whole engine. The only exception I could think of would be an obsure data point for an engine with no "like" data points.

Statistically, the slow cars and the average cars are more important in a true calculation. The really fast cars would only raise a red flag if they are way above the group of the other fast cars. These could be evaluated on a case by case basis for cheating, innovation, money spent, engineering prowess, unfair parts allocation. If you cant find anything wrong with what he is doing, then you must let him go.

The proper statistics bear out if a combo is soft on its original factoring which is the true shame of the current system. There is nothing wrong with a fast car. It is the American way. If the average of the combo is normal, and a guy is fast, unless you can catch him cheating, he should win. This isnt China.

Makes sense to me.