Well, we had a race back to the yellow at the Martinsville race,
if you ignore the fact that the yellow wasn’t actually displayed
when Ragan spun and parked himself crosswise to the track in
turn 1.
And guess what – despite the field blasting past the start/finish
line at full race pace, and Ragan being totally crosswise in the
groove, no disasters occured.
John
"John McCoy" wrote …
> Well, we had a race back to the yellow at the Martinsville race,
> if you ignore the fact that the yellow wasn’t actually displayed
> when Ragan spun and parked himself crosswise to the track in
> turn 1.
> And guess what – despite the field blasting past the start/finish
> line at full race pace, and Ragan being totally crosswise in the
> groove, no disasters occured.
> John
You noticed that too.
On Mon, 22 Oct 2007 19:21:12 CST, John McCoy <igop…@ix.netcom.com> wrote in <Xns99D1CFDDF14F7pogosupern…@216.168.3.30>:
> … despite the field blasting past the start/finish
>line at full race pace, and Ragan being totally crosswise in the
>groove, no disasters occured.
Good work by the spotters, no doubt.
I wouldn’t take it as "proof" that the no-racing rule
is unnecessary. Ragan was in a decent place to be seen
and avoided–and there was enough lead time for the
spotters to call his position in.
Maybe a good late flag. I wouldn’t change the rule
on the basis of this one example.
Marty
—
Big-8 newsgroups: humanities.*, misc.*, news.*, rec.*, sci.*, soc.*, talk.*
See http://www.big-8.org for info on how to add or remove newsgroups.
"John McCoy" <igop…@ix.netcom.com> wrote in message
news:Xns99D1CFDDF14F7pogosupernews@216.168.3.30…
> Well, we had a race back to the yellow at the Martinsville race,
> if you ignore the fact that the yellow wasn’t actually displayed
> when Ragan spun and parked himself crosswise to the track in
> turn 1.
> And guess what – despite the field blasting past the start/finish
> line at full race pace, and Ragan being totally crosswise in the
> groove, no disasters occured.
> John
Well, yeah, but…at M’ville they’re only doing about 60 mph in the middle of the
turns after lifting at S/F and climbing on the binders.
–
Tom in Bristol
—-== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com – Unlimited-Unrestricted-Secure Usenet News==—-
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
—-= East and West-Coast Server Farms – Total Privacy via Encryption =—-
Martin X. Moleski, SJ wrote:
- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -
> On Mon, 22 Oct 2007 19:21:12 CST, John McCoy <igop…@ix.netcom.com> wrote in <Xns99D1CFDDF14F7pogosupern…@216.168.3.30>:
>> … despite the field blasting past the start/finish
>> line at full race pace, and Ragan being totally crosswise in the
>> groove, no disasters occured.
> Good work by the spotters, no doubt.
> I wouldn’t take it as "proof" that the no-racing rule
> is unnecessary. Ragan was in a decent place to be seen
> and avoided–and there was enough lead time for the
> spotters to call his position in.
> Maybe a good late flag. I wouldn’t change the rule
> on the basis of this one example.
> Marty
I would take it as *proof* NASCAR is very inconsistent in their
decisions used to throw cautions. Earlier in the race (maybe more than
once as I didn’t watch the entire race) a car spins but keeps moving and
the caution flag waves automatically, even before the car is through
spinning…
–
>G< ©
On Tue, 23 Oct 2007 09:23:30 CST, ">G< ©" <jimmyga…@gmail.com> wrote in <ffkukv$cc4…@usenet.osg.ufl.edu>:
>> … Maybe a good late flag.
>I would take it as *proof* NASCAR is very inconsistent in their
>decisions used to throw cautions.
It’s a judgment call, not something done by robots.
>Earlier in the race (maybe more than
>once as I didn’t watch the entire race) a car spins but keeps moving and
>the caution flag waves automatically, even before the car is through
>spinning…
I imagine it all depends on where the skin happens with respect to
the rest of the field.
I didn’t see a good replay of the spin.
By the time Ragan came into the picture that I saw,
he was stopped. No smoke, no one else around him.
The leaders must have been eight or ten seconds
away from him.
The flag man may have looked things over for a little
bit before throwing the flag. I doubt that he had
much time to talk with folks about it.
Marty
—
Big-8 newsgroups: humanities.*, misc.*, news.*, rec.*, sci.*, soc.*, talk.*
See http://www.big-8.org for info on how to add or remove newsgroups.
In article mole…@canisius.edu wrote:
>It’s a judgment call, not something done by robots.
And I think they wanted to wait until the absolute last second
to insure a checkered finish, if at all possible. Giving the stalled car
every opportunity to re-fire.
It wasn’t… it didn’t… case closed.
Dan
****************************************
Sometimes when you cry, no one sees your tears.
Sometimes when you are worried, no one sees your pain.
Sometimes when you are happy, no one sees your smile.
But fart just one time in church….
Chuck Steak wrote:
> In article mole…@canisius.edu wrote:
>> It’s a judgment call, not something done by robots.
during mid race race it seems robotic, IMO… car spin no contact,
yellow flag…
> And I think they wanted to wait until the absolute last second
> to insure a checkered finish, if at all possible. Giving the stalled car
> every opportunity to re-fire.
> It wasn’t… it didn’t… case closed.
> Dan
And would agree except the 6 was sideways, a very vulnerable position…
I’m not really concerned about the last lap and no yellow, it was other
cautions….and we see them almost weekly, car spins : caution flag
right away…
–
>G< ©
"Martin X. Moleski, SJ" <mole…@canisius.edu> wrote in
news:13hsateaug35g1d@news.supernews.com:
- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -
> On Tue, 23 Oct 2007 09:23:30 CST, ">G< ©" <jimmyga…@gmail.com> wrote
> in <ffkukv$cc4…@usenet.osg.ufl.edu>:
>>> … Maybe a good late flag.
>>I would take it as *proof* NASCAR is very inconsistent in their
>>decisions used to throw cautions.
> It’s a judgment call, not something done by robots.
>>Earlier in the race (maybe more than
>>once as I didn’t watch the entire race) a car spins but keeps moving
>>and the caution flag waves automatically, even before the car is
>>through spinning…
> I imagine it all depends on where the skin happens with respect to
> the rest of the field.
> I didn’t see a good replay of the spin.
> By the time Ragan came into the picture that I saw,
> he was stopped. No smoke, no one else around him.
> The leaders must have been eight or ten seconds
> away from him.
> The flag man may have looked things over for a little
> bit before throwing the flag. I doubt that he had
> much time to talk with folks about it.
(minor point – the flag man has nothing to do with deciding
when to throw the flag in modern NASCAR – it’s all decided by
the folk in the NASCAR booth. This was due to the mass
confusion in a Busch race a couple of years back, when the
flagman put out the yellow but the folk in the booth didn’t
turn on the lights).
The point here, Marty, is not where the leaders where when Ragan
spun, but where they were when the yellow came out – which was
somewhere between the S/F line and turn 1. And despite that
they were entering turn 1 pretty much at green flag speeds,
everyone avoided Ragan.
So, in this case it was OK to race back to the S/F. Why isn’t
always OK to race back to the S/F? There wasn’t a problem,
there never has been a problem in the past. While I can’t
prove that there never will be a problem (it’s a logical
impossibility to prove a negative), all the weight of many
years of evidence says there’s no problem with racing back to
the line.
John
On Tue, 23 Oct 2007 20:27:16 CST, John McCoy <igop…@ix.netcom.com> wrote in <Xns99D2DB14CB8E1pogosupern…@216.168.3.30>:
>> … The flag man may have looked things over for a little
>> bit before throwing the flag. I doubt that he had
>> much time to talk with folks about it.
>(minor point – the flag man has nothing to do with deciding
>when to throw the flag in modern NASCAR – it’s all decided by
>the folk in the NASCAR booth. This was due to the mass
>confusion in a Busch race a couple of years back, when the
>flagman put out the yellow but the folk in the booth didn’t
>turn on the lights).
What I mean by "flag man" is the fellow who has to make
the decision–the guy in the booth, not the fellow holding
the flag.
>The point here, Marty, is not where the leaders where when Ragan
>spun, but where they were when the yellow came out – which was
>somewhere between the S/F line and turn 1. And despite that
>they were entering turn 1 pretty much at green flag speeds,
>everyone avoided Ragan.
I’ll bet their spotters told there was trouble in turn 2.
The flag man SEEMS to have taken time to survey the situation
before putting out the yellow. It SEEMS to have been a
safe enough decision, all things considered.
>So, in this case it was OK to race back to the S/F.
I think the flag man was asking himself whether it would
be safe enough to finish the whole race. It happens that
he threw the flag around the S/F line, but I don’t count
that as a "race back to the S/F."
>Why isn’t
>always OK to race back to the S/F?
Not all tracks are as slow as Mville.
>There wasn’t a problem,
>there never has been a problem in the past.
If you wait until there is a death (or three),
people get angry about not being proactive.
If you’re proactive, people get angry about there
being no proof of a problem.
In this case, I’ll take the more conservative,
safer route.
>While I can’t
>prove that there never will be a problem (it’s a logical
>impossibility to prove a negative), all the weight of many
>years of evidence says there’s no problem with racing back to
>the line.
If it is impossible to prove a negative, you cannot
prove that "it is impossible to prove a negative,"
in which case it is merely a religious sentiment and
not a guide to right reasoning. :o)
There are, in fact, a vast multitude of proven
and provable negatives:
<http://www3.canisius.edu/~moleski/proof/provenegs.htm>
I grant you that IN THIS PARTICULAR CASE, neither of us
can know the future and therefore you cannot prove the
negative on which your case depends.
Marty
—
Big-8 newsgroups: humanities.*, misc.*, news.*, rec.*, sci.*, soc.*, talk.*
See http://www.big-8.org for info on how to add or remove newsgroups.
"Martin X. Moleski, SJ" wrote …
> What I mean by "flag man" is the fellow who has to make
> the decision–the guy in the booth, not the fellow holding
> the flag.
That seems to be a new use of the term "flag man".
>>And despite that
>>they were entering turn 1 pretty much at green flag speeds,
>>everyone avoided Ragan.
> I’ll bet their spotters told there was trouble in turn 2.
> The flag man SEEMS to have taken time to survey the situation
> before putting out the yellow. It SEEMS to have been a
> safe enough decision, all things considered.
I’m note really sure I can imagine a situation that would have, upon being
carefully surveyed, been less safe than a car stalled crosswise on a skinny
track with little place for anyone to go after barreling down the front stretch
to take the checkered flag. That’s almost the perfect definition of why you’d
NOT race back to the caution, except for him sitting on the S/F line itself.
Hard to see how the flagman would survey the situation and say, "this’ll turn
out ok, let ‘em race" under the current nascar way of thinking.
It did turn out OK, which is why I think the current nascar way of thinking is
wrong … inconsistent as heck, as it has been pointed out with all the
inconsequential spin-n-goes that did cause a yellow, but wrong.
>>So, in this case it was OK to race back to the S/F.
> I think the flag man was asking himself whether it would
> be safe enough to finish the whole race. It happens that
> he threw the flag around the S/F line, but I don’t count
> that as a "race back to the S/F."
>>Why isn’t
>>always OK to race back to the S/F?
> Not all tracks are as slow as Mville.
But I believe that’s all relative, Slow on a small close track, fast on a big
track with all kinds of room … what’s the difference?
- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -
>>There wasn’t a problem,
>>there never has been a problem in the past.
> If you wait until there is a death (or three),
> people get angry about not being proactive.
> If you’re proactive, people get angry about there
> being no proof of a problem.
> In this case, I’ll take the more conservative,
> safer route.
>>While I can’t
>>prove that there never will be a problem (it’s a logical
>>impossibility to prove a negative), all the weight of many
>>years of evidence says there’s no problem with racing back to
>>the line.
> If it is impossible to prove a negative, you cannot
> prove that "it is impossible to prove a negative,"
> in which case it is merely a religious sentiment and
> not a guide to right reasoning. :o)
> There are, in fact, a vast multitude of proven
> and provable negatives:
> <http://www3.canisius.edu/~moleski/proof/provenegs.htm>
> I grant you that IN THIS PARTICULAR CASE, neither of us
> can know the future and therefore you cannot prove the
> negative on which your case depends.
> Marty
> —
> Big-8 newsgroups: humanities.*, misc.*, news.*, rec.*, sci.*, soc.*, talk.*
> See http://www.big-8.org for info on how to add or remove newsgroups.
In article jimmyga…@gmail.com wrote:
>I’m not really concerned about the last lap and no yellow, it was other
>cautions….and we see them almost weekly, car spins : caution flag
>right away…
And I have ALWAYS said, that there are too many
"too quick on the draw" yellows.
I absolutely CRINGE when a car does a 360, hits nothing,
keeps on going…. and the yellow is shown…
HATE that….
Dan
****************************************
Sometimes when you cry, no one sees your tears.
Sometimes when you are worried, no one sees your pain.
Sometimes when you are happy, no one sees your smile.
But fart just one time in church….
On Wed, 24 Oct 2007 13:00:36 CST, "WildWeasel" <wweasel…@www.carracing.com> wrote in
<ep6dndNMw6K6FYLanZ2dnUVZ_rSrn…@comcast.com>:
>"Martin X. Moleski, SJ" wrote …
>> What I mean by "flag man" is the fellow who has to make
>> the decision–the guy in the booth, not the fellow holding
>> the flag.
>That seems to be a new use of the term "flag man".
It’s the man who is responsible for having the caution
lights come on and the yellow flag displayed.
He’s the real flag man. The guy holding the cloth
thingy is his surrogate.
>I’m note really sure I can imagine a situation that would have, upon being
>carefully surveyed, been less safe than a car stalled crosswise on a skinny
>track with little place for anyone to go after barreling down the front stretch
>to take the checkered flag. That’s almost the perfect definition of why you’d
>NOT race back to the caution, except for him sitting on the S/F line itself.
>Hard to see how the flagman would survey the situation and say, "this’ll turn
>out ok, let ‘em race" under the current nascar way of thinking.
And yet, according to folks here, there was a noticeable delay
between the spin and the onset of the caution period.
My hypothesis is that the flag man was surveying the situation.
I suppose other interpretations are possible.
>It did turn out OK, which is why I think the current nascar way of thinking is
>wrong … inconsistent as heck, as it has been pointed out with all the
>inconsequential spin-n-goes that did cause a yellow, but wrong.
It’s people, not machines, making the calls.
There may be other motives as well mid-race
(get more commercials in).
I don’t see the present policy as harming the
sport. I see safety advantages in not racing
back to the S/F line under yellow.
> … Slow on a small close track, fast on a big
>track with all kinds of room … what’s the difference?
I’m not up on my dynamics any more, but I think
there’s a pretty substantial difference between
being hit at 75 mph and 175 mph. And there’s
a big difference in braking from 75 to a dead
stop and 175 mph and a dead stop. The laws of
physics aren’t changed for the big, roomy tracks.
Marty
—
Big-8 newsgroups: humanities.*, misc.*, news.*, rec.*, sci.*, soc.*, talk.*
See http://www.big-8.org for info on how to add or remove newsgroups.
"Martin X. Moleski, SJ" <mole…@canisius.edu> wrote in message
news:13hv58k4qnm1b92@news.supernews.com…
>> … Slow on a small close track, fast on a big
>>track with all kinds of room … what’s the difference?
> I’m not up on my dynamics any more, but I think
> there’s a pretty substantial difference between
> being hit at 75 mph and 175 mph. And there’s
> a big difference in braking from 75 to a dead
> stop and 175 mph and a dead stop. The laws of
> physics aren’t changed for the big, roomy tracks.
That would only make sense if one assumes there is no alternative to car A
slamming into car B. Fortunately, other things besides the laws of physics
come into play during a race. Things like the potential for an incident,
historical reference, simple considerations like the fact that drivers are
advised of trouble up ahead, slow, avoid, and then speed back up when racing
back to a yellow. It’s not like they just charge through with no regard for
what’s on the track. And yes – bigger tracks decrease the probability of
those laws of physics from becoming an eternal law for someone.
–
-Mike-
mmarlowREM…@alltel.net
"Martin X. Moleski, SJ" <mole…@canisius.edu> wrote in
news:13htgg29lp31m81@news.supernews.com:
> On Tue, 23 Oct 2007 20:27:16 CST, John McCoy <igop…@ix.netcom.com>
> wrote in <Xns99D2DB14CB8E1pogosupern…@216.168.3.30>:
>>The point here, Marty, is not where the leaders where when Ragan
>>spun, but where they were when the yellow came out – which was
>>somewhere between the S/F line and turn 1. And despite that
>>they were entering turn 1 pretty much at green flag speeds,
>>everyone avoided Ragan.
> I’ll bet their spotters told there was trouble in turn 2.
Yes, I would very much imagine so. That is, after all, what normally
happens when there’s any kind of incident on the track.
>>So, in this case it was OK to race back to the S/F.
> I think the flag man was asking himself whether it would
> be safe enough to finish the whole race. It happens that
> he threw the flag around the S/F line, but I don’t count
> that as a "race back to the S/F."
Well, they raced, that’s undisputable. They crossed the S/F line,
that is also undisputable. It would be difficult to call it
anything other than a race to the S/F.
> In this case, I’ll take the more conservative,
> safer route.
Except, all the evidence is that not racing to the yellow is
not safer, in any meaningful way. Every instance, including
this most recent, has happened without any problems. You can’t
say it’s safer when you can’t show there was an unsafe condition
to begin with.
John
On Wed, 24 Oct 2007 20:07:34 CST, John McCoy <igop…@ix.netcom.com> wrote in <Xns99D3D7BCA20F2pogosupern…@216.168.3.30>:
>Well, they raced, that’s undisputable. They crossed the S/F line,
>that is also undisputable. It would be difficult to call it
>anything other than a race to the S/F.
They raced until the caution flag was thrown.
Then they stopped racing.
It’s different from the old days when they kept
on racing AFTER the caution flag was flown until
they got to the S/F line.
>> In this case, I’ll take the more conservative,
>> safer route.
>Except, all the evidence is that not racing to the yellow is
>not safer, in any meaningful way. Every instance, including
>this most recent, has happened without any problems. You can’t
>say it’s safer when you can’t show there was an unsafe condition
>to begin with.
I’m just talking what seem like probabilities to me.
Our fireman has talked often about how the new rule
lets the emergency crews get going faster.
One reason NASCAR ***had*** to allow racing back to the
S/F line was that they had no way of enforcing a freeze
of the field other than through incomplete video replays.
Now that they have the scoring loops, they can slow things
down sooner, which, in my opinion, is a reasonable safety
precaution.
I understand that you disagree with my view.
Marty
—
Big-8 newsgroups: humanities.*, misc.*, news.*, rec.*, sci.*, soc.*, talk.*
See http://www.big-8.org for info on how to add or remove newsgroups.
"Martin X. Moleski, SJ" <mole…@canisius.edu> wrote in
news:13i0c3g44qk1aab@news.supernews.com:
> On Wed, 24 Oct 2007 20:07:34 CST, John McCoy <igop…@ix.netcom.com>
> wrote in <Xns99D3D7BCA20F2pogosupern…@216.168.3.30>:
>>Well, they raced, that’s undisputable. They crossed the S/F line,
>>that is also undisputable. It would be difficult to call it
>>anything other than a race to the S/F.
> They raced until the caution flag was thrown.
> Then they stopped racing.
> It’s different from the old days when they kept
> on racing AFTER the caution flag was flown until
> they got to the S/F line.
In what way do you see it to be different? In the old days, they
threw the yellow, then raced to the S/F. In this instance, they
raced to the S/F, then threw the yellow. There’s no difference in
what happened on the track, there was a spun car and a race back
to the line in both cases.
>>> In this case, I’ll take the more conservative,
>>> safer route.
>>Except, all the evidence is that not racing to the yellow is
>>not safer, in any meaningful way. Every instance, including
>>this most recent, has happened without any problems. You can’t
>>say it’s safer when you can’t show there was an unsafe condition
>>to begin with.
> I’m just talking what seem like probabilities to me.
That’s the point, tho. All the evidence says there is no
probability. If one goes by actual experience, not random
guesswork, one has to say that the evidence shows that the
drivers will avoid a car stopped on the track.
> Our fireman has talked often about how the new rule
> lets the emergency crews get going faster.
Getting the emergency crews moving sooner is a valid thing to
desire. I beleive there are other ways that could have been
accomplished than freezing the field under yellow.
> I understand that you disagree with my view.
Well, I disagree with NASCAR’s view
John
On Thu, 25 Oct 2007 08:02:36 CST, John McCoy <igop…@ix.netcom.com> wrote in <Xns99D45CD4C4EDDpogosupern…@216.168.3.30>:
>> On Wed, 24 Oct 2007 20:07:34 CST, John McCoy <igop…@ix.netcom.com>
>> wrote in <Xns99D3D7BCA20F2pogosupern…@216.168.3.30>:
>>>Well, they raced, that’s undisputable. They crossed the S/F line,
>>>that is also undisputable. It would be difficult to call it
>>>anything other than a race to the S/F.
>> They raced until the caution flag was thrown.
>> Then they stopped racing.
>> It’s different from the old days when they kept
>> on racing AFTER the caution flag was flown until
>> they got to the S/F line.
>In what way do you see it to be different?
If they were racing back to the S/F under caution,
they would have kept on racing past the #6.
By the time they got to the #6, they had been under
yellow for about 1/4 lap, which is plenty of time
to get on the brakes and get ready to move around
the stopped car.
>> I’m just talking what seem like probabilities to me.
>That’s the point, tho. All the evidence says there is no
>probability. If one goes by actual experience, not random
>guesswork, one has to say that the evidence shows that the
>drivers will avoid a car stopped on the track.
I don’t have the kind of memory that will allow me
to dispute this.
I don’t find racing under caution a huge part of the
race or a major factor in why I watch NASCAR.
I’m happy with the change in the rule. It seems to
me to be safer to slow things down sooner rather than
later and not run the risk of hurting someone stuck
on the track–and who may be in need of help.
Marty
–
Big-8 newsgroups: humanities.*, misc.*, news.*, rec.*, sci.*, soc.*, talk.*
See http://www.big-8.org for info on how to add or remove newsgroups.
"Martin X. Moleski, SJ" <mole…@canisius.edu> wrote in message
news:13i17c8ptmfd92e@news.supernews.com…
<snip>
I don’t think we would be having this extended conversation if the flying of
the yellow wasn’t followed by too many laps of just riding around in a
circle.
With today’s technology, it’s pretty darn easy to get everybody lined up
quickly and properly. There are scoring monitors in every pit. It’s easy
to tell your driver to line up behind #xyz. It just seems like every
caution is a minimum of five laps, sometimes more. A simple spin and go
with no debris or hazards should get no more than three laps of caution.
One to collect the field, one to line up, one to the green. Cautions have
become free pit passes these days AND convenient television timeouts.
—
Gotta Go…FAST!
Bill
On Thu, 25 Oct 2007 09:13:34 CST, "DollarBill" <nospambillg…@nospamearthlink.net> wrote in
<ypKdndJWJ5PtOb3anZ2dnUVZ_gudn…@comcast.com>:
>I don’t think we would be having this extended conversation if the flying of
>the yellow wasn’t followed by too many laps of just riding around in a
>circle.
You may be right.
>With today’s technology, it’s pretty darn easy to get everybody lined up
>quickly and properly. There are scoring monitors in every pit. It’s easy
>to tell your driver to line up behind #xyz. It just seems like every
>caution is a minimum of five laps, sometimes more. A simple spin and go
>with no debris or hazards should get no more than three laps of caution.
>One to collect the field, one to line up, one to the green. Cautions have
>become free pit passes these days AND convenient television timeouts.
Agreed.
I do wish they would adjust the number of caution laps to
the nature of the caution.
And I do think that the #1 motivation for overlong caution
periods is to allow for commercials and commentary on TV.
When the caution flag flies, I surf. Sometimes it takes
me a while to come back. Of course, any time commercials
come on, I surf, so maybe it’s not a decisive issue for
the producers of the show. :-O
Marty
—
Big-8 newsgroups: humanities.*, misc.*, news.*, rec.*, sci.*, soc.*, talk.*
See http://www.big-8.org for info on how to add or remove newsgroups.
"Martin X. Moleski, SJ" <mole…@canisius.edu> wrote in
news:13i17c8ptmfd92e@news.supernews.com:
- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -
> On Thu, 25 Oct 2007 08:02:36 CST, John McCoy <igop…@ix.netcom.com>
> wrote in <Xns99D45CD4C4EDDpogosupern…@216.168.3.30>:
>>> On Wed, 24 Oct 2007 20:07:34 CST, John McCoy <igop…@ix.netcom.com>
>>> wrote in <Xns99D3D7BCA20F2pogosupern…@216.168.3.30>:
>>>>Well, they raced, that’s undisputable. They crossed the S/F line,
>>>>that is also undisputable. It would be difficult to call it
>>>>anything other than a race to the S/F.
>>> They raced until the caution flag was thrown.
>>> Then they stopped racing.
>>> It’s different from the old days when they kept
>>> on racing AFTER the caution flag was flown until
>>> they got to the S/F line.
>>In what way do you see it to be different?
> If they were racing back to the S/F under caution,
> they would have kept on racing past the #6.
> By the time they got to the #6, they had been under
> yellow for about 1/4 lap, which is plenty of time
> to get on the brakes and get ready to move around
> the stopped car.
Ah, I see the problem - we’re talking about different laps.
If you’ll allow me to reset the scene:
Field takes the green and accelerates to racing speed. As
the leaders approach T3, Ragan spins. Under the old system,
the caution would come out, and the leaders would race to
the S/F. Under the modern system, the caution does not come
out, and the leaders race to the S/F.
Same-same, right? Either way the leaders race to the S/F with
a spun car in front of them in T1.
> I’m happy with the change in the rule. It seems to
> me to be safer to slow things down sooner rather than
> later and not run the risk of hurting someone stuck
> on the track–and who may be in need of help.
It is frustrating to me that, especially at the end of the race,
a driver can’t try to improve his position. A guy might have
set hisself up for the perfect pass in T3, and then the caution
comes out on the backstretch, and he has no chance. It’s not
like he can say "well, I know the caution is coming out, so I’ll
make my pass in T1 instead".
What I would like to see NASCAR have done is implement a 2-tiered
caution flag. Someone spins harmlessly – put out the yellow, and
race back to the line. Someone’s on fire, or upside down, or
some other serious situation – put out the red, field is frozen,
everyone slowly returns to the pits. That would cover both the
legitimate concerns you raise, and allow the preservation of
competition.
John
On Thu, 25 Oct 2007 17:51:56 CST, John McCoy <igop…@ix.netcom.com> wrote in <Xns99D4C0BFC2E27pogosupern…@216.168.3.30>:
>Ah, I see the problem - we’re talking about different laps.
>If you’ll allow me to reset the scene:
>Field takes the green and accelerates to racing speed. As
>the leaders approach T3, Ragan spins. Under the old system,
>the caution would come out, and the leaders would race to
>the S/F. Under the modern system, the caution does not come
>out, and the leaders race to the S/F.
I’m saying that it was a human decision to delay throwing
the caution until the leaders reached the S/F line in this
case–not part of the new system.
I don’t know why the human in charge of calling cautions
(whom I refer to as the flag man–the decision maker)
delayed 1/4 lap before throwing the flag.
Under the old system, if he delayed throwing the flag
the same length of time as he did in the new system,
the field would race one more lap, going through
T2 hell-for-leather (in my mind’s eye, that’s where
the #6 was, not T1).
As I understand it, they should have been slowing
down from the S/F line until they reached T2 under
the current rules, heading down to Mville pace speed
(35 mph????).
>Same-same, right? Either way the leaders race to the S/F with
>a spun car in front of them in T1.
It doesn’t look the same to me, given my interpretation
of when the caution came out and how it would have
played out under the old system (one whole lap racing
under yellow). I admit I may be wrong, but that’s
the view I’m reasoning from.
>> I’m happy with the change in the rule. It seems to
>> me to be safer to slow things down sooner rather than
>> later and not run the risk of hurting someone stuck
>> on the track–and who may be in need of help.
>It is frustrating to me that, especially at the end of the race,
>a driver can’t try to improve his position. A guy might have
>set hisself up for the perfect pass in T3, and then the caution
>comes out on the backstretch, and he has no chance. It’s not
>like he can say "well, I know the caution is coming out, so I’ll
>make my pass in T1 instead".
Agreed.
>What I would like to see NASCAR have done is implement a 2-tiered
>caution flag. Someone spins harmlessly – put out the yellow, and
>race back to the line. Someone’s on fire, or upside down, or
>some other serious situation – put out the red, field is frozen,
>everyone slowly returns to the pits. That would cover both the
>legitimate concerns you raise, and allow the preservation of
>competition.
OK. That’s a genuinely new idea. I haven’t heard that
before. It might be viable. Presumably most situations
would be yellow rather than red.
Marty
—
Big-8 newsgroups: humanities.*, misc.*, news.*, rec.*, sci.*, soc.*, talk.*
See http://www.big-8.org for info on how to add or remove newsgroups.
"Martin X. Moleski, SJ" <mole…@canisius.edu> wrote in
news:13i2c6nm93oje4@news.supernews.com:
> On Thu, 25 Oct 2007 17:51:56 CST, John McCoy <igop…@ix.netcom.com>
> wrote in <Xns99D4C0BFC2E27pogosupern…@216.168.3.30>:
>>Ah, I see the problem - we’re talking about different laps.
>>If you’ll allow me to reset the scene:
>>Field takes the green and accelerates to racing speed. As
>>the leaders approach T3, Ragan spins. Under the old system,
>>the caution would come out, and the leaders would race to
>>the S/F. Under the modern system, the caution does not come
>>out, and the leaders race to the S/F.
<…>
> Under the old system, if he delayed throwing the flag
> the same length of time as he did in the new system,
> the field would race one more lap, going through
> T2 hell-for-leather (in my mind’s eye, that’s where
> the #6 was, not T1).
That would not have happened, tho, based on how things used to
be done. There was no penalty for throwing the caution as soon
as someone spun. The yellow would come out immediately, and
the drivers, being now warned something was amiss, would be
left to use their best judgement in dealing with it.
>>What I would like to see NASCAR have done is implement a 2-tiered
>>caution flag. Someone spins harmlessly – put out the yellow, and
>>race back to the line. Someone’s on fire, or upside down, or
>>some other serious situation – put out the red, field is frozen,
>>everyone slowly returns to the pits. That would cover both the
>>legitimate concerns you raise, and allow the preservation of
>>competition.
> OK. That’s a genuinely new idea. I haven’t heard that
> before. It might be viable. Presumably most situations
> would be yellow rather than red.
I can’t claim any huge mental triumph there. It’s just a variation
of the local/full caution idea that F1 and other road course series
have used for years.
John
"Martin X. Moleski, SJ" wrote …
>>What I would like to see NASCAR have done is implement a 2-tiered
>>caution flag. Someone spins harmlessly – put out the yellow, and
>>race back to the line. Someone’s on fire, or upside down, or
>>some other serious situation – put out the red, field is frozen,
>>everyone slowly returns to the pits. That would cover both the
>>legitimate concerns you raise, and allow the preservation of
>>competition.
> OK. That’s a genuinely new idea. I haven’t heard that
> before. It might be viable. Presumably most situations
> would be yellow rather than red.
I’d suggested or endorsed that way back when the ‘no racing to the SF’ was first
started. Still like it.
"WildWeasel" wrote …
- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -
> "Martin X. Moleski, SJ" wrote …
>>>What I would like to see NASCAR have done is implement a 2-tiered
>>>caution flag. Someone spins harmlessly – put out the yellow, and
>>>race back to the line. Someone’s on fire, or upside down, or
>>>some other serious situation – put out the red, field is frozen,
>>>everyone slowly returns to the pits. That would cover both the
>>>legitimate concerns you raise, and allow the preservation of
>>>competition.
>> OK. That’s a genuinely new idea. I haven’t heard that
>> before. It might be viable. Presumably most situations
>> would be yellow rather than red.
> I’d suggested or endorsed that way back when the ‘no racing to the SF’ was
> first started. Still like it.
here, ’twas:
- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -
—– Original Message —–
From: "WildWeasel"
Newsgroups: rec.autos.sport.nascar
Sent: Monday, September 15, 2003 9:04 AM
Subject: Re: That’s why they shouldn’t race back!!
> OR, make a YELLOW that you race back to the yellow and a YELLOW/RED
> (displayed simultaneously …) where
> the race is immediately frozen under caution and there is no racing back
> to the flag. They have lights around the track and radios to all the cars,
> communicating this shouldn’t be an issue.