Think about this.........

[SS Engine Guy]

No car has been devalued by another combination. Only the obviously low hp factors ASSigned to other combinations.

[randy wilson]

dial in racing has hurt drag racing whether we like to admit it or not. that and the cost. i remember when only class winners were allowed to run in eliminations with no breakout and there were more cars in a single class than there is at some div. now.some people went to several nats. without a chance to race sunday, but it was exciting. now, you have to bring a crowd with you just to have someone to show off to.

[Alan Roehrich]

Originally Posted by Evan Smith

I love working on my car, as most do, and I love the heads-up portion of Stock and SS. Here is an observation: I woud guess that 99 percent of the talk on this site is about performance, rules and the competitiveness of different combinations, however, 95 percent of the racing we do is bracket racing.

For all the talk about the CJ, Challengers and other so-called out-of-line combos, how many people have lost a heads-up race to one of these cars? I bet the number is very few and the percentage is very low.

On the topic of value, we race beacuse we love racing and many of us have an emotional attachment to the cars we race. I doubt any car has been devalued by any other combination. I don't think there is a line of people waiting to buy fast Stocker, just becaue they "own" a class. And if that is your motivation, go build a car that is a winner out of the gate. It is done in NASCAR and other forms of motorsports.

Evan,
Should everyone wait until a racer with one of the older cars has to race one of the new under factored cars in the final of a national event with no chance to beat him before anything is said? They are not "so-called out of line combos", we all know how fast they are. And now we all know NHRA has changed the rules to protect the advantage these cars have. And yeah, I've seen a really fast 69 Camaro run one of the new Challengers heads up. Not only was it not even close, it wasn't even in the same zip code. So yeah, it has happened, and no it wasn't pretty, or fun.

[Dale Shannon]

I guess every thread is going to end up on the subject of the CJ or the mopars why don't some of your guys just put the gun in you mouth and pull the trigger? I think the world is coming to a end.

[7423]

"Here is an observation: I woud guess that 99 percent of the talk on this site is about performance, rules and the competitiveness of different combinations, however, 95 percent of the racing we do is bracket racing."
Evan Smith quote

I would have never guessed I would read this on a "Class racer" message board.
Very well stated Evan although I believe your 95% should really be 99%. Stock and SS racers use more shoe polish than the average "bracket racer"........................

[bill dedman]

Alan, Mike, and Ed, I'll give it up when any one of the three of you can give me a logical reason why it should NOT be changed.

I have never heard one... and, I'm waiting.

Is the best you can do, when asked by the novice, to tell the kid, "READ THE RULEBOOK," when he asks, "What's the reason for this "First redight ALWAYS loses," BUT, "First Breakout doesn't lose; 'Worse' breakout loses."

The rulebook doesn't address the reason for that basic difference in protocol.

We all know that that "First red light" procedure was born of necessity; they didn't know how to fix it...

THAT'S NO LONGER TRUE. Easy software adjustment/fix, now....

So, I'd say that if you are really as sick of reading that fact as you seem to be, just tell me ONE legitimate and logical reason why NHRA should NOT spend the small amount of money to change this current procedure to a worse red light system, I promise the three of you, who don't seem to care much about fairness in this sport (it's a foregone conclusion that a first red light is an advantage for the faster car, even if it's a V/S over a W/S) that I will never, EVER post another word about it on this forum. NEVER.

That's something that nobody has ever done.... give me a legitimate reason not to change it. In place of reasons not to do it, I am subject to character assassination, regarded as a motor-mouthed KOOK, and generally ridiculed, in a transparent effort to divert attention away from the inability of anyone to show me ONE SOLID REASON not to change it.

I'll make good on my promise, I promise. You'll never find another post on this forum about that subject from ME, if any of you can tell me what reason exists NOT to change it.

Don't tell me you run a AA/S car and are always the chaser; that doesn't count...

Happy Holidays!

[art leong]

Originally Posted by bill dedman

Alan, Mike, and Ed, I'll give it up when any one of the three of you can give me a logical reason why it should NOT be changed.

I have never heard one... and, I'm waiting.

Is the best you can do, when asked by the novice, to tell the kid, "READ THE RULEBOOK," when he asks, "What's the reason for this "First redight ALWAYS loses," BUT, "First Breakout doesn't lose; 'Worse' breakout loses."

The rulebook doesn't address the reason for that basic difference in protocol.

We all know that that "First red light" procedure was born of necessity; they didn't know how to fix it...

THAT'S NO LONGER TRUE. Easy software adjustment/fix, now....

So, I'd say that if you are really as sick of reading that fact as you seem to be, just tell me ONE legitimate and logical reason why NHRA should NOT spend the small amount of money to change this current procedure to a worse red light system, I promise the three of you, who don't seem to care much about fairness in this sport (it's a foregone conclusion that a first red light is an advantage for the faster car, even if it's a V/S over a W/S) that I will never, EVER post another word about it on this forum. NEVER.

That's something that nobody has ever done.... give me a legitimate reason not to change it. In place of reasons not to do it, I am subject to character assassination, regarded as a motor-mouthed KOOK, and generally ridiculed, in a transparent effort to divert attention away from the inability of anyone to show me ONE SOLID REASON not to change it.

I'll make good on my promise, I promise. You'll never find another post on this forum about that subject from ME, if any of you can tell me what reason exists NOT to change it.

Don't tell me you run a AA/S car and are always the chaser; that doesn't count...

Happy Holidays!

Bill you are beating a dead horse about this subject. Give it a rest.
I have the slowest car in Superstock I get to leave first everytime. The rule would help me more than anyone.
BUT.
When I built the car the rule was first redlight. I'm not one to build something then lobby to get the rules changed to suit me.
To me that is the same as buying a house near a race track then wanting the track shut down for noise.

[rayfin]

I love stock and super stock. The thing is, I think the only reason drag racing has lasted this long is that bracket racing has kept it alive. A guy can drive his street car to the track and have a chance. That fast and furious crap is what killed it. All these young kids want a fast Honda. Sorry but things change and it's a shame.

[bill dedman]

Originally Posted by art leong

Bill you are beating a dead horse about this subject. Give it a rest.
I have the slowest car in Superstock I get to leave first everytime. The rule would help me more than anyone.
BUT.
When I built the car the rule was first redlight. I'm not one to build something then lobby to get the rules changed to suit me.
To me that is the same as buying a house near a race track then wanting the track shut down for noise.

Art,

This horse is not dead, because it has the advantage of logical thought on its side.

You just told me that you are willing to play the goat in this theater of the absurd, to eternity, because you CHOSE to run a class with a built-in disadvantage from the git-go.

That's noble, I suppose, in a twisted way, but it's certainly no reason not to change the system from one that favors certain cars (*second-to-leave") over other ones ("first to leave.")

You act like I'm trying to give an unfair advantage to somebody, with this change.

I'm not. I'm trying to get the system changed to one that gives NOBODY an advantage.

Is that the same thing? I don't think so....

How can anyone, with an appreciation for the positive sportsmanship aspects of a system that doesn't bestow an advantage to ANYONE, be against this change?

It takes the advantage away from the second car to leave, and that's ALL IT DOES.

Now, tell me what's wrong with that, if you can. Where is it written that NHRA is entitled to run a system wherein they give an advantage to one car, or another, at their whim?

I'm not talking about horsepower factors; I'm talking about the rules structure.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ ++++++++

"Give it a rest"??? LOL!

I said it before, and I'll say it again.... this forum has enough moderators, already...

Is somebody selling those "temporary moderator" hats???????
I know Santa didn't bring you one; it's not Christmas,yet...

If you don't like what I write, DON'T READ IT! Nobody's holding a gun to your head and forcing you to participate in this discussion.

My offer still stands; if ANYONE can post (on this forum) a legitimate and logical reason not to change to a "worse red light" system, I will never write another word about it.

I'd welcome the "vacation." I'm sure everyone else would, too!!!

So far, nobody has.. because there IS no logical and legitimate reason not to change to a system of red lights that stops favoring the quicker car, be it a AA/S or a V/SA....

NHRA spends $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$ on trying to make racing as fair as it can be (teardowns, factors, etc.) To ignore this "easy fix" for an admittedly unfair rule is incredibly remiss, I think

But, it'll never happen, in the real world, because NHRA can't make any money with it...

Not a plugged nickel...

[JMatt]

Originally Posted by bill dedman

That's something that nobody has ever done.... give me a legitimate reason not to change it. In place of reasons not to do it, I am subject to character assassination, regarded as a motor-mouthed KOOK, and generally ridiculed, in a transparent effort to divert attention away from the inability of anyone to show me ONE SOLID REASON not to change it.

I'll make good on my promise, I promise. You'll never find another post on this forum about that subject from ME, if any of you can tell me what reason exists NOT to change it.

Here's all the reason you need:

1) This is racing. Quicker car gets the advantage. So first red light loses.
2) This is racing. We hate sandbaggers. So worst breakout loses.

The two are in harmony with each other. There is no reason to change any rules. So now you can explain it to a novice using steps 1 & 2 above.

The end.