View Poll Results: I would like the IT rules to allow removal of dual purpose vestiges.
- Voters
- 131. You may not vote on this poll
-
>> ...what mechanism will we leave ourselves to make a correction? I really don't have an answer. I guess put the club data boxes in and hope people don't sand bag is one way...
The option of revisiting any listing with evidence that we need to use a different power multiplier is always available. That's the rationale - which I actually agree with, despite my desires to be as locked down as possible on processes - for the subjectivity in the process, applied to that step (and that step ONLY).
>> ...if you are giving that car a 25% gain, you damn well should be giving my car one too. Like I said, I would expect more gain from that low compression 5 pot than my high compression 4.
Yeahbut... We have boxed ourselves in such that we require "evidence" of what actual examples of any make/model under consideration achieve in terms of IT power gains - NOT "expectations" of what they might do. I'd posit that you don't REALLY want to give the power to a small group of people, to base weights on predictions grounded in no data. That's a recipe for all kinds of mischief. Or maybe I AM WRONG. I've heard lots of things that surprise me in the last 2 weeks or so.
EDIT - In short, we are equipped to deal with the possibility of an overdog emerging, but we are NOT - and should not, I don't think - be trying to proactively prevent that from happening through the manipulation of race weights. Unless pertinent evidence is available through happenstance somehow.
K
Last edited by Knestis; 09-09-2009 at 05:40 PM.
Posting Permissions
- You may not post new threads
- You may not post replies
- You may not post attachments
- You may not edit your posts
-
Forum Rules
Bookmarks