Sorenson's 1.408 under decision

bill dedman · 05-26-2009, 02:41 AM

Chad,

If Fred didn't go to the scales after the run, he avoided them, whether intentionally, or not. He had no reason to go to them, having just lost that round.

This is not in any way shape, or form critical of what Fred did; it's just an effort to get the two situations (Sorensen and Henson) "on the same page" so some logical conclusions can be drawn.

Your contention that he wasn't light is probably correct, but because it's just YOUR OPINION, it's not the sort of thing that NHRA could hang a far-reaching decision on.

The fact is, nobody (but Fred) knows what his car weighed when he made that run.

Nobody will EVER know, for sure. Ballast (some of it) is easily removeable.

In that vein, the car POSSIBLY could have been light, in spite of your considered opinion. I'm certainly not saying it was, because there's no way for me to know FOR SURE.

If it was, (in this case, a distinct possibility), then how can they give him HP? Even if it were NOT, how can they give him HP since they don't REALLY know what the car weighed on that run? They can't just ASSUME it was of legal weight... nobody's crystal ball is accurate under those circumstances.

The circumstances and similarities between what happened at Boise and in Fred's case would seem to me to be very similar in view of the fact that one car was weighed and was light; the other car was NOT weighed so cannot be proven NOT to have been light at that time.

But then, that's just MY take on it... I'm sure NHRA is going to do whatever THEY want to do with this.
Nothing could matter less than what ~I~ think...

05-26-2009, 02:41 AM	#17
bill dedman VIP Member Join Date: Feb 2002 Location: Conway, AR Posts: 1,739 Likes: 0 Liked 6 Times in 4 Posts	Re: Sorenson's 1.408 under decision Chad, If Fred didn't go to the scales after the run, he avoided them, whether intentionally, or not. He had no reason to go to them, having just lost that round. This is not in any way shape, or form critical of what Fred did; it's just an effort to get the two situations (Sorensen and Henson) "on the same page" so some logical conclusions can be drawn. Your contention that he wasn't light is probably correct, but because it's just YOUR OPINION, it's not the sort of thing that NHRA could hang a far-reaching decision on. The fact is, nobody (but Fred) knows what his car weighed when he made that run. Nobody will EVER know, for sure. Ballast (some of it) is easily removeable. In that vein, the car POSSIBLY could have been light, in spite of your considered opinion. I'm certainly not saying it was, because there's no way for me to know FOR SURE. If it was, (in this case, a distinct possibility), then how can they give him HP? Even if it were NOT, how can they give him HP since they don't REALLY know what the car weighed on that run? They can't just ASSUME it was of legal weight... nobody's crystal ball is accurate under those circumstances. The circumstances and similarities between what happened at Boise and in Fred's case would seem to me to be very similar in view of the fact that one car was weighed and was light; the other car was NOT weighed so cannot be proven NOT to have been light at that time. But then, that's just MY take on it... I'm sure NHRA is going to do whatever THEY want to do with this. Nothing could matter less than what ~I~ think... __________________ Bill Last edited by bill dedman; 05-26-2009 at 02:44 AM.