....ON THE TRACK:

At the SCCA National Runoffs this year at Road America in Wisconsin:

Fastest qualifier so far IS an FF Honda at 2:22.552.

But second fastest is a FF Ford just .181 behind at 2:22.733.

<https://cdn.connectsites.net/user_files/scca/downloads/000/073/365/FF%20Runoffs2024%20Qual%202%20Provisional.pdf>

And that's not even remotely a new Formula F chassis! The Swift DB6
chassis dates from 1991...that's 43 years ago!

So why is the field mostly Hondas?

Because (as I've explained before) time and money spent maintaining a
Formula F Kent in top shape can be spent on more profitable things.

On 2024-10-02 11:29, Alan wrote:
> ...ON THE TRACK:
>
> At the SCCA National Runoffs this year at Road America in Wisconsin:
>
> Fastest qualifier so far IS an FF Honda at 2:22.552.
>
> But second fastest is a FF Ford just .181 behind at 2:22.733.
>
> <https://cdn.connectsites.net/user_files/scca/downloads/000/073/365/
> FF%20Runoffs2024%20Qual%202%20Provisional.pdf>
>
> And that's not even remotely a new Formula F chassis! The Swift DB6
> chassis dates from 1991...that's 43 years ago!
>
> So why is the field mostly Hondas?
>
> Because (as I've explained before) time and money spent maintaining a
> Formula F Kent in top shape can be spent on more profitable things.
>

And, gee, what do you know?

The "uncompetitive" Kent...

....won the 2024 SCCA National Runoffs in Formula F.

Who'd have thought it?

:-)

On 10/4/2024 7:20 PM, Alan wrote:
> On 2024-10-02 11:29, Alan wrote:
>> ...ON THE TRACK:
>>
>> At the SCCA National Runoffs this year at Road America in Wisconsin:
>>
>> Fastest qualifier so far IS an FF Honda at 2:22.552.
>>
>> But second fastest is a FF Ford just .181 behind at 2:22.733.
>>
>> <https://cdn.connectsites.net/user_files/scca/downloads/000/073/365/
>> FF%20Runoffs2024%20Qual%202%20Provisional.pdf>
>>
>> And that's not even remotely a new Formula F chassis! The Swift DB6
>> chassis dates from 1991...that's 43 years ago!
>>
>> So why is the field mostly Hondas?
>>
>> Because (as I've explained before) time and money spent maintaining a
>> Formula F Kent in top shape can be spent on more profitable things.
>>
>
> And, gee, what do you know?
>
> The "uncompetitive" Kent...
>
> ...won the 2024 SCCA National Runoffs in Formula F.
>
> Who'd have thought it?
>
> :-)

Really?

https://cdn.connectsites.net/user_files/scca/downloads/000/073/541/FF%20Runoffs2024%20Race%20Official.pdf

The # 5 car, the Kent, finished 8th in the official results, 1st in
Provisional Results

Position changed per: Car 5 - Moved behind #81 per SOM - GCR 6.11.1.D,
Appendix P.5. Must have cheated to get moved down that far.

And the 5 car was the only Kent in the race.

On 2024-10-09 19:28, Tom Elam wrote:
> On 10/4/2024 7:20 PM, Alan wrote:
>> On 2024-10-02 11:29, Alan wrote:
>>> ...ON THE TRACK:
>>>
>>> At the SCCA National Runoffs this year at Road America in Wisconsin:
>>>
>>> Fastest qualifier so far IS an FF Honda at 2:22.552.
>>>
>>> But second fastest is a FF Ford just .181 behind at 2:22.733.
>>>
>>> <https://cdn.connectsites.net/user_files/scca/downloads/000/073/365/
>>> FF%20Runoffs2024%20Qual%202%20Provisional.pdf>
>>>
>>> And that's not even remotely a new Formula F chassis! The Swift DB6
>>> chassis dates from 1991...that's 43 years ago!
>>>
>>> So why is the field mostly Hondas?
>>>
>>> Because (as I've explained before) time and money spent maintaining a
>>> Formula F Kent in top shape can be spent on more profitable things.
>>>
>>
>> And, gee, what do you know?
>>
>> The "uncompetitive" Kent...
>>
>> ...won the 2024 SCCA National Runoffs in Formula F.
>>
>> Who'd have thought it?
>>
>> :-)
>
> Really?
>
> https://cdn.connectsites.net/user_files/scca/downloads/000/073/541/
> FF%20Runoffs2024%20Race%20Official.pdf
>
> The # 5 car, the Kent, finished 8th in the official results, 1st in
> Provisional Results
>
> Position changed per: Car 5 - Moved behind #81 per SOM - GCR 6.11.1.D,
> Appendix P.5. Must have cheated to get moved down that far.
>
> And the 5 car was the only Kent in the race.

<sigh>

All you show is your ignorance.

Yes; after the race, the SCCA determined that an on-track incident was
the fault of the driver of the Swift DB6 Kent, Jonathan Kotyk.

But none of that changes the fact that it THE CAR was clearly capable of
running at the front.

On 2024-10-09 19:28, Tom Elam wrote:
> On 10/4/2024 7:20 PM, Alan wrote:
>> On 2024-10-02 11:29, Alan wrote:
>>> ...ON THE TRACK:
>>>
>>> At the SCCA National Runoffs this year at Road America in Wisconsin:
>>>
>>> Fastest qualifier so far IS an FF Honda at 2:22.552.
>>>
>>> But second fastest is a FF Ford just .181 behind at 2:22.733.
>>>
>>> <https://cdn.connectsites.net/user_files/scca/downloads/000/073/365/
>>> FF%20Runoffs2024%20Qual%202%20Provisional.pdf>
>>>
>>> And that's not even remotely a new Formula F chassis! The Swift DB6
>>> chassis dates from 1991...that's 43 years ago!
>>>
>>> So why is the field mostly Hondas?
>>>
>>> Because (as I've explained before) time and money spent maintaining a
>>> Formula F Kent in top shape can be spent on more profitable things.
>>>
>>
>> And, gee, what do you know?
>>
>> The "uncompetitive" Kent...
>>
>> ...won the 2024 SCCA National Runoffs in Formula F.
>>
>> Who'd have thought it?
>>
>> :-)
>
> Really?
>
> https://cdn.connectsites.net/user_files/scca/downloads/000/073/541/
> FF%20Runoffs2024%20Race%20Official.pdf
>
> The # 5 car, the Kent, finished 8th in the official results, 1st in
> Provisional Results
>
> Position changed per: Car 5 - Moved behind #81 per SOM - GCR 6.11.1.D,
> Appendix P.5. Must have cheated to get moved down that far.
>
> And the 5 car was the only Kent in the race.

What's extra hilarious is that they literally listed the rule infraction
involved...

....but you just went with, "must have cheated".

On 10/9/2024 11:13 PM, Alan wrote:
> On 2024-10-09 19:28, Tom Elam wrote:
>> On 10/4/2024 7:20 PM, Alan wrote:
>>> On 2024-10-02 11:29, Alan wrote:
>>>> ...ON THE TRACK:
>>>>
>>>> At the SCCA National Runoffs this year at Road America in Wisconsin:
>>>>
>>>> Fastest qualifier so far IS an FF Honda at 2:22.552.
>>>>
>>>> But second fastest is a FF Ford just .181 behind at 2:22.733.
>>>>
>>>> <https://cdn.connectsites.net/user_files/scca/downloads/000/073/365/
>>>> FF%20Runoffs2024%20Qual%202%20Provisional.pdf>
>>>>
>>>> And that's not even remotely a new Formula F chassis! The Swift DB6
>>>> chassis dates from 1991...that's 43 years ago!
>>>>
>>>> So why is the field mostly Hondas?
>>>>
>>>> Because (as I've explained before) time and money spent maintaining
>>>> a Formula F Kent in top shape can be spent on more profitable things.
>>>>
>>>
>>> And, gee, what do you know?
>>>
>>> The "uncompetitive" Kent...
>>>
>>> ...won the 2024 SCCA National Runoffs in Formula F.
>>>
>>> Who'd have thought it?
>>>
>>> :-)
>>
>> Really?
>>
>> https://cdn.connectsites.net/user_files/scca/downloads/000/073/541/
>> FF%20Runoffs2024%20Race%20Official.pdf
>>
>> The # 5 car, the Kent, finished 8th in the official results, 1st in
>> Provisional Results
>>
>> Position changed per: Car 5 - Moved behind #81 per SOM - GCR 6.11.1.D,
>> Appendix P.5. Must have cheated to get moved down that far.
>>
>> And the 5 car was the only Kent in the race.
>
> What's extra hilarious is that they literally listed the rule infraction
> involved...
>
> ...but you just went with, "must have cheated".

It was a passing infraction, I looked it up. That is cheating. You said
he "won the 2024 SCCA National Runoffs in Formula F" the when confronted
with the truth changed it to "could have won", Liarboy. So typical of you.

On 2024-10-10 03:25, Tom Elam wrote:
> On 10/9/2024 11:13 PM, Alan wrote:
>> On 2024-10-09 19:28, Tom Elam wrote:
>>> On 10/4/2024 7:20 PM, Alan wrote:
>>>> On 2024-10-02 11:29, Alan wrote:
>>>>> ...ON THE TRACK:
>>>>>
>>>>> At the SCCA National Runoffs this year at Road America in Wisconsin:
>>>>>
>>>>> Fastest qualifier so far IS an FF Honda at 2:22.552.
>>>>>
>>>>> But second fastest is a FF Ford just .181 behind at 2:22.733.
>>>>>
>>>>> <https://cdn.connectsites.net/user_files/scca/
>>>>> downloads/000/073/365/ FF%20Runoffs2024%20Qual%202%20Provisional.pdf>
>>>>>
>>>>> And that's not even remotely a new Formula F chassis! The Swift DB6
>>>>> chassis dates from 1991...that's 43 years ago!
>>>>>
>>>>> So why is the field mostly Hondas?
>>>>>
>>>>> Because (as I've explained before) time and money spent maintaining
>>>>> a Formula F Kent in top shape can be spent on more profitable things.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> And, gee, what do you know?
>>>>
>>>> The "uncompetitive" Kent...
>>>>
>>>> ...won the 2024 SCCA National Runoffs in Formula F.
>>>>
>>>> Who'd have thought it?
>>>>
>>>> :-)
>>>
>>> Really?
>>>
>>> https://cdn.connectsites.net/user_files/scca/downloads/000/073/541/
>>> FF%20Runoffs2024%20Race%20Official.pdf
>>>
>>> The # 5 car, the Kent, finished 8th in the official results, 1st in
>>> Provisional Results
>>>
>>> Position changed per: Car 5 - Moved behind #81 per SOM - GCR 6.11.1.D,
>>> Appendix P.5. Must have cheated to get moved down that far.
>>>
>>> And the 5 car was the only Kent in the race.
>>
>> What's extra hilarious is that they literally listed the rule
>> infraction involved...
>>
>> ...but you just went with, "must have cheated".
>
> It was a passing infraction, I looked it up. That is cheating. You said
> he "won the 2024 SCCA National Runoffs in Formula F" the when confronted
> with the truth changed it to "could have won", Liarboy. So typical of you.

Your implication was clearly that the only reason he could have been
leading the race was that he cheated. The SCCA ruled that he moved to
aggressively to defend his position, and having seen the video, that's
certainly true. But your claim has always been that the Ford can't be
competitive with the Honda and there's no way that can be true if a Ford
can be in the lead on the last lap of the race.

And never said "could have won" anywhere, Liarboy.

On 10/10/2024 12:44 PM, Alan wrote:
> On 2024-10-10 03:25, Tom Elam wrote:
>> On 10/9/2024 11:13 PM, Alan wrote:
>>> On 2024-10-09 19:28, Tom Elam wrote:
>>>> On 10/4/2024 7:20 PM, Alan wrote:
>>>>> On 2024-10-02 11:29, Alan wrote:
>>>>>> ...ON THE TRACK:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> At the SCCA National Runoffs this year at Road America in Wisconsin:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Fastest qualifier so far IS an FF Honda at 2:22.552.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> But second fastest is a FF Ford just .181 behind at 2:22.733.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> <https://cdn.connectsites.net/user_files/scca/
>>>>>> downloads/000/073/365/ FF%20Runoffs2024%20Qual%202%20Provisional.pdf>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> And that's not even remotely a new Formula F chassis! The Swift
>>>>>> DB6 chassis dates from 1991...that's 43 years ago!
>>>>>>
>>>>>> So why is the field mostly Hondas?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Because (as I've explained before) time and money spent
>>>>>> maintaining a Formula F Kent in top shape can be spent on more
>>>>>> profitable things.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> And, gee, what do you know?
>>>>>
>>>>> The "uncompetitive" Kent...
>>>>>
>>>>> ...won the 2024 SCCA National Runoffs in Formula F.
>>>>>
>>>>> Who'd have thought it?
>>>>>
>>>>> :-)
>>>>
>>>> Really?
>>>>
>>>> https://cdn.connectsites.net/user_files/scca/downloads/000/073/541/
>>>> FF%20Runoffs2024%20Race%20Official.pdf
>>>>
>>>> The # 5 car, the Kent, finished 8th in the official results, 1st in
>>>> Provisional Results
>>>>
>>>> Position changed per: Car 5 - Moved behind #81 per SOM - GCR 6.11.1.D,
>>>> Appendix P.5. Must have cheated to get moved down that far.
>>>>
>>>> And the 5 car was the only Kent in the race.
>>>
>>> What's extra hilarious is that they literally listed the rule
>>> infraction involved...
>>>
>>> ...but you just went with, "must have cheated".
>>
>> It was a passing infraction, I looked it up. That is cheating. You
>> said he "won the 2024 SCCA National Runoffs in Formula F" the when
>> confronted with the truth changed it to "could have won", Liarboy. So
>> typical of you.
>
> Your implication was clearly that the only reason he could have been
> leading the race was that he cheated. The SCCA ruled that he moved to
> aggressively to defend his position, and having seen the video, that's
> certainly true. But your claim has always been that the Ford can't be
> competitive with the Honda and there's no way that can be true if a Ford
> can be in the lead on the last lap of the race.
>
> And never said "could have won" anywhere, Liarboy.

You flat out lied when you said "The "uncompetitive" Kent
won the 2024 SCCA National Runoffs in Formula F"

If you had said that a single Kent was competitive in this one race I
would have agreed. But no, you said the Kent WON the race. That is not
true. He broke a rule by aggressively blocking another driver. Had he
not done so he might have not placed first in the provisional standings.
In other words, he cheated the other driver out of an opportunity to
pass and was appropriately penalized. Had he followed the rules he very
likely would not have even won a provisional first.

Now, in a larger sense, is the Kent competitive? No. There have been
VERY few Kents entered in the Runoffs for many years. If they were
competitive on performance and cost there would be more. If the Kent was
a better engine overall on performance and cost the Kent would dominate.
Even you agree. After all you bought a Honda-powered car, Liarboy.

You stated "Because (as I've explained before) time and money spent
maintaining a Formula F Kent in top shape can be spent on more
profitable things." You admit here that the Kent is not competitive when
considering the overall metrics. Why spend the money on the Kent when it
can't go out and beat the Honda on a consistent basis? YOU said that.
THAT is why the Kent is so scarce in the Runoffs.

In an even larger sense you show in this instance that you are more than
willing to bend facts to make yourself look good. Major traits of a
narcissistic hypocrite. Of course, another trait of the narcissistic
hypocrite is that you can never admit being wrong, or that the other
person who disagrees with you is right. Such people are also totally
blind to their disorder.

On 10/10/24 4:30 PM, Tom Elam wrote:
> On 10/10/2024 12:44 PM, Alan wrote:
>> On 2024-10-10 03:25, Tom Elam wrote:
>>> On 10/9/2024 11:13 PM, Alan wrote:
>>>> On 2024-10-09 19:28, Tom Elam wrote:
>>>>> On 10/4/2024 7:20 PM, Alan wrote:
>>>>>> On 2024-10-02 11:29, Alan wrote:
>>>>>>> ...ON THE TRACK:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> At the SCCA National Runoffs this year at Road America in Wisconsin:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Fastest qualifier so far IS an FF Honda at 2:22.552.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> But second fastest is a FF Ford just .181 behind at 2:22.733.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> <https://cdn.connectsites.net/user_files/scca/
>>>>>>> downloads/000/073/365/
>>>>>>> FF%20Runoffs2024%20Qual%202%20Provisional.pdf>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> And that's not even remotely a new Formula F chassis! The Swift
>>>>>>> DB6 chassis dates from 1991...that's 43 years ago!
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> So why is the field mostly Hondas?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Because (as I've explained before) time and money spent
>>>>>>> maintaining a Formula F Kent in top shape can be spent on more
>>>>>>> profitable things.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> And, gee, what do you know?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The "uncompetitive" Kent...
>>>>>>
>>>>>> ...won the 2024 SCCA National Runoffs in Formula F.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Who'd have thought it?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> :-)
>>>>>
>>>>> Really?
>>>>>
>>>>> https://cdn.connectsites.net/user_files/scca/downloads/000/073/541/
>>>>> FF%20Runoffs2024%20Race%20Official.pdf
>>>>>
>>>>> The # 5 car, the Kent, finished 8th in the official results, 1st in
>>>>> Provisional Results
>>>>>
>>>>> Position changed per: Car 5 - Moved behind #81 per SOM - GCR 6.11.1.D,
>>>>> Appendix P.5. Must have cheated to get moved down that far.
>>>>>
>>>>> And the 5 car was the only Kent in the race.
>>>>
>>>> What's extra hilarious is that they literally listed the rule
>>>> infraction involved...
>>>>
>>>> ...but you just went with, "must have cheated".
>>>
>>> It was a passing infraction, I looked it up. That is cheating. You
>>> said he "won the 2024 SCCA National Runoffs in Formula F" the when
>>> confronted with the truth changed it to "could have won", Liarboy. So
>>> typical of you.
>>
>> Your implication was clearly that the only reason he could have been
>> leading the race was that he cheated. The SCCA ruled that he moved to
>> aggressively to defend his position, and having seen the video, that's
>> certainly true. But your claim has always been that the Ford can't be
>> competitive with the Honda and there's no way that can be true if a
>> Ford can be in the lead on the last lap of the race.
>>
>> And never said "could have won" anywhere, Liarboy.
>
> You flat out lied when you said "The "uncompetitive" Kent
> won the 2024 SCCA National Runoffs in Formula F"
>
> If you had said that a single Kent was competitive in this one race I
> would have agreed. But no, you said the Kent WON the race. That is not
> true. He broke a rule by aggressively blocking another driver. Had he
> not done so he might have not placed first in the provisional standings.
> In other words, he cheated the other driver out of an opportunity to
> pass and was appropriately penalized. Had he followed the rules he very
> likely would not have even won a provisional first.

Such rule infractions often have a big old dose of grey.

> Now, in a larger sense, is the Kent competitive? No. There have been
> VERY few Kents entered in the Runoffs for many years. If they were
> competitive on performance and cost there would be more. If the Kent was
> a better engine overall on performance and cost the Kent would dominate.
> Even you agree. After all you bought a Honda-powered car, Liarboy.

Unfortunately, it doesn't really matter if its one team or a dozen teams
that get to the final rounds: it is as if you're trying to claim that
the baseball team that loses in the World Series must "suck" because
they didn't win in the final round. Sorry, but they had to have beaten
a lot of other teams before they got to the final rounds. Point is that
the mere presence of a Kent in the finals indicates that the Formula
organizers have done a good job in balancing their index of performance.

> You stated "Because (as I've explained before) time and money spent
> maintaining a Formula F Kent in top shape can be spent on more
> profitable things." You admit here that the Kent is not competitive when
> considering the overall metrics. Why spend the money on the Kent when it
> can't go out and beat the Honda on a consistent basis? YOU said that.
> THAT is why the Kent is so scarce in the Runoffs.

No, that's trying to incorrectly use a statistical bias to make an
invalid claim: that a Kent requires higher maintenance explains why
fewer teams run that combination, not that it isn't just as good of a
performer on the track.

In a competitive field which has weeded out the lower performing ones in
qualifying rounds, if 90% of the teams have a red car (eg Honda) and the
outcome is purely random chance, reversion to the means means that
there's a 90% probability that the winning car is going to be red.

Same principle applies here: if Kents really are objectively inferior
performers on the track, then the above 'random chance' doesn't apply
and they wouldn't have placed high enough in the prior elimination
rounds to even appear as 5% of the field in the finals.

OTOH, when they are objectively even on the track, then their
representation in the final playoff field should be similar to what % of
the total population of competitive cars are fielded, no matter if
that's 10%, 50% or 90%. Ditto for Honda.

> In an even larger sense you show in this instance that you are more than
> willing to bend facts to make yourself look good. Major traits of a
> narcissistic hypocrite. Of course, another trait of the narcissistic
> hypocrite is that you can never admit being wrong, or that the other
> person who disagrees with you is right. Such people are also totally
> blind to their disorder.

Speaking of disorders, the above is pretty basic statistics when
examining factors within populations: why did you miss it so badly?

-hh

On 2024-10-10 13:30, Tom Elam wrote:
> On 10/10/2024 12:44 PM, Alan wrote:
>> On 2024-10-10 03:25, Tom Elam wrote:
>>> On 10/9/2024 11:13 PM, Alan wrote:
>>>> On 2024-10-09 19:28, Tom Elam wrote:
>>>>> On 10/4/2024 7:20 PM, Alan wrote:
>>>>>> On 2024-10-02 11:29, Alan wrote:
>>>>>>> ...ON THE TRACK:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> At the SCCA National Runoffs this year at Road America in Wisconsin:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Fastest qualifier so far IS an FF Honda at 2:22.552.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> But second fastest is a FF Ford just .181 behind at 2:22.733.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> <https://cdn.connectsites.net/user_files/scca/
>>>>>>> downloads/000/073/365/
>>>>>>> FF%20Runoffs2024%20Qual%202%20Provisional.pdf>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> And that's not even remotely a new Formula F chassis! The Swift
>>>>>>> DB6 chassis dates from 1991...that's 43 years ago!
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> So why is the field mostly Hondas?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Because (as I've explained before) time and money spent
>>>>>>> maintaining a Formula F Kent in top shape can be spent on more
>>>>>>> profitable things.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> And, gee, what do you know?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The "uncompetitive" Kent...
>>>>>>
>>>>>> ...won the 2024 SCCA National Runoffs in Formula F.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Who'd have thought it?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> :-)
>>>>>
>>>>> Really?
>>>>>
>>>>> https://cdn.connectsites.net/user_files/scca/downloads/000/073/541/
>>>>> FF%20Runoffs2024%20Race%20Official.pdf
>>>>>
>>>>> The # 5 car, the Kent, finished 8th in the official results, 1st in
>>>>> Provisional Results
>>>>>
>>>>> Position changed per: Car 5 - Moved behind #81 per SOM - GCR 6.11.1.D,
>>>>> Appendix P.5. Must have cheated to get moved down that far.
>>>>>
>>>>> And the 5 car was the only Kent in the race.
>>>>
>>>> What's extra hilarious is that they literally listed the rule
>>>> infraction involved...
>>>>
>>>> ...but you just went with, "must have cheated".
>>>
>>> It was a passing infraction, I looked it up. That is cheating. You
>>> said he "won the 2024 SCCA National Runoffs in Formula F" the when
>>> confronted with the truth changed it to "could have won", Liarboy. So
>>> typical of you.
>>
>> Your implication was clearly that the only reason he could have been
>> leading the race was that he cheated. The SCCA ruled that he moved to
>> aggressively to defend his position, and having seen the video, that's
>> certainly true. But your claim has always been that the Ford can't be
>> competitive with the Honda and there's no way that can be true if a
>> Ford can be in the lead on the last lap of the race.
>>
>> And never said "could have won" anywhere, Liarboy.
>
> You flat out lied when you said "The "uncompetitive" Kent
> won the 2024 SCCA National Runoffs in Formula F"

Nope. When I wrote it, I didn't know about the SCCA's decision.

>
> If you had said that a single Kent was competitive in this one race I
> would have agreed. But no, you said the Kent WON the race. That is not
> true. He broke a rule by aggressively blocking another driver. Had he
> not done so he might have not placed first in the provisional standings.
> In other words, he cheated the other driver out of an opportunity to
> pass and was appropriately penalized. Had he followed the rules he very
> likely would not have even won a provisional first.

And where have I said the penalty wasn't appropriate, Liarboy?

>
> Now, in a larger sense, is the Kent competitive? No. There have been
> VERY few Kents entered in the Runoffs for many years. If they were
> competitive on performance and cost there would be more. If the Kent was
> a better engine overall on performance and cost the Kent would dominate.
> Even you agree. After all you bought a Honda-powered car, Liarboy.

And the only reason you now hold that position is that, /I/ had to
explain that there is more to racing that speed on the track.

And your original position was that the Honda made me FASTER ON THE TRACK.

>
> You stated "Because (as I've explained before) time and money spent
> maintaining a Formula F Kent in top shape can be spent on more
> profitable things." You admit here that the Kent is not competitive when
> considering the overall metrics. Why spend the money on the Kent when it
> can't go out and beat the Honda on a consistent basis? YOU said that.
> THAT is why the Kent is so scarce in the Runoffs.

I never said it couldn't go out and beat the Honda on a consistent
basis, Liarboy.

I said it would COST more in money and time.

>
> In an even larger sense you show in this instance that you are more than
> willing to bend facts to make yourself look good. Major traits of a
> narcissistic hypocrite. Of course, another trait of the narcissistic
> hypocrite is that you can never admit being wrong, or that the other
> person who disagrees with you is right. Such people are also totally
> blind to their disorder.

Right back at ya, ashole.

On 2024-10-10 13:30, Tom Elam wrote:
> On 10/10/2024 12:44 PM, Alan wrote:
>> On 2024-10-10 03:25, Tom Elam wrote:
>>> On 10/9/2024 11:13 PM, Alan wrote:
>>>> On 2024-10-09 19:28, Tom Elam wrote:
>>>>> On 10/4/2024 7:20 PM, Alan wrote:
>>>>>> On 2024-10-02 11:29, Alan wrote:
>>>>>>> ...ON THE TRACK:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> At the SCCA National Runoffs this year at Road America in Wisconsin:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Fastest qualifier so far IS an FF Honda at 2:22.552.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> But second fastest is a FF Ford just .181 behind at 2:22.733.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> <https://cdn.connectsites.net/user_files/scca/
>>>>>>> downloads/000/073/365/
>>>>>>> FF%20Runoffs2024%20Qual%202%20Provisional.pdf>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> And that's not even remotely a new Formula F chassis! The Swift
>>>>>>> DB6 chassis dates from 1991...that's 43 years ago!
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> So why is the field mostly Hondas?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Because (as I've explained before) time and money spent
>>>>>>> maintaining a Formula F Kent in top shape can be spent on more
>>>>>>> profitable things.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> And, gee, what do you know?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The "uncompetitive" Kent...
>>>>>>
>>>>>> ...won the 2024 SCCA National Runoffs in Formula F.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Who'd have thought it?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> :-)
>>>>>
>>>>> Really?
>>>>>
>>>>> https://cdn.connectsites.net/user_files/scca/downloads/000/073/541/
>>>>> FF%20Runoffs2024%20Race%20Official.pdf
>>>>>
>>>>> The # 5 car, the Kent, finished 8th in the official results, 1st in
>>>>> Provisional Results
>>>>>
>>>>> Position changed per: Car 5 - Moved behind #81 per SOM - GCR 6.11.1.D,
>>>>> Appendix P.5. Must have cheated to get moved down that far.
>>>>>
>>>>> And the 5 car was the only Kent in the race.
>>>>
>>>> What's extra hilarious is that they literally listed the rule
>>>> infraction involved...
>>>>
>>>> ...but you just went with, "must have cheated".
>>>
>>> It was a passing infraction, I looked it up. That is cheating. You
>>> said he "won the 2024 SCCA National Runoffs in Formula F" the when
>>> confronted with the truth changed it to "could have won", Liarboy. So
>>> typical of you.
>>
>> Your implication was clearly that the only reason he could have been
>> leading the race was that he cheated. The SCCA ruled that he moved to
>> aggressively to defend his position, and having seen the video, that's
>> certainly true. But your claim has always been that the Ford can't be
>> competitive with the Honda and there's no way that can be true if a
>> Ford can be in the lead on the last lap of the race.
>>
>> And never said "could have won" anywhere, Liarboy.
>
> You flat out lied when you said "The "uncompetitive" Kent
> won the 2024 SCCA National Runoffs in Formula F"
>
> If you had said that a single Kent was competitive in this one race I
> would have agreed. But no, you said the Kent WON the race. That is not
> true. He broke a rule by aggressively blocking another driver. Had he
> not done so he might have not placed first in the provisional standings.
> In other words, he cheated the other driver out of an opportunity to
> pass and was appropriately penalized. Had he followed the rules he very
> likely would not have even won a provisional first.
>
> Now, in a larger sense, is the Kent competitive? No. There have been
> VERY few Kents entered in the Runoffs for many years. If they were
> competitive on performance and cost there would be more. If the Kent was
> a better engine overall on performance and cost the Kent would dominate.
> Even you agree. After all you bought a Honda-powered car, Liarboy.
>
> You stated "Because (as I've explained before) time and money spent
> maintaining a Formula F Kent in top shape can be spent on more
> profitable things." You admit here that the Kent is not competitive when
> considering the overall metrics. Why spend the money on the Kent when it
> can't go out and beat the Honda on a consistent basis? YOU said that.
> THAT is why the Kent is so scarce in the Runoffs.
>
> In an even larger sense you show in this instance that you are more than
> willing to bend facts to make yourself look good. Major traits of a
> narcissistic hypocrite. Of course, another trait of the narcissistic
> hypocrite is that you can never admit being wrong, or that the other
> person who disagrees with you is right. Such people are also totally
> blind to their disorder.

Just for absolute clarity, Liarboy:

I posted about the Runoffs win at 16:20PDT on October 4...

....and the official results weren't posted until 17:00 (Wisconsin time
presumably)...

....on October 5.

Just another example of your careful understanding of the situation, hmmm?

On 10/10/2024 5:14 PM, -hh wrote:
> On 10/10/24 4:30 PM, Tom Elam wrote:
>> On 10/10/2024 12:44 PM, Alan wrote:
>>> On 2024-10-10 03:25, Tom Elam wrote:
>>>> On 10/9/2024 11:13 PM, Alan wrote:
>>>>> On 2024-10-09 19:28, Tom Elam wrote:
>>>>>> On 10/4/2024 7:20 PM, Alan wrote:
>>>>>>> On 2024-10-02 11:29, Alan wrote:
>>>>>>>> ...ON THE TRACK:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> At the SCCA National Runoffs this year at Road America in
>>>>>>>> Wisconsin:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Fastest qualifier so far IS an FF Honda at 2:22.552.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> But second fastest is a FF Ford just .181 behind at 2:22.733.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> <https://cdn.connectsites.net/user_files/scca/
>>>>>>>> downloads/000/073/365/
>>>>>>>> FF%20Runoffs2024%20Qual%202%20Provisional.pdf>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> And that's not even remotely a new Formula F chassis! The Swift
>>>>>>>> DB6 chassis dates from 1991...that's 43 years ago!
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> So why is the field mostly Hondas?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Because (as I've explained before) time and money spent
>>>>>>>> maintaining a Formula F Kent in top shape can be spent on more
>>>>>>>> profitable things.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> And, gee, what do you know?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The "uncompetitive" Kent...
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> ...won the 2024 SCCA National Runoffs in Formula F.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Who'd have thought it?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> :-)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Really?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> https://cdn.connectsites.net/user_files/scca/downloads/000/073/541/ FF%20Runoffs2024%20Race%20Official.pdf
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The # 5 car, the Kent, finished 8th in the official results, 1st
>>>>>> in Provisional Results
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Position changed per: Car 5 - Moved behind #81 per SOM - GCR
>>>>>> 6.11.1.D,
>>>>>> Appendix P.5. Must have cheated to get moved down that far.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> And the 5 car was the only Kent in the race.
>>>>>
>>>>> What's extra hilarious is that they literally listed the rule
>>>>> infraction involved...
>>>>>
>>>>> ...but you just went with, "must have cheated".
>>>>
>>>> It was a passing infraction, I looked it up. That is cheating. You
>>>> said he "won the 2024 SCCA National Runoffs in Formula F" the when
>>>> confronted with the truth changed it to "could have won", Liarboy.
>>>> So typical of you.
>>>
>>> Your implication was clearly that the only reason he could have been
>>> leading the race was that he cheated. The SCCA ruled that he moved to
>>> aggressively to defend his position, and having seen the video,
>>> that's certainly true. But your claim has always been that the Ford
>>> can't be competitive with the Honda and there's no way that can be
>>> true if a Ford can be in the lead on the last lap of the race.
>>>
>>> And never said "could have won" anywhere, Liarboy.
>>
>> You flat out lied when you said "The "uncompetitive" Kent
>> won the 2024 SCCA National Runoffs in Formula F"
>>
>> If you had said that a single Kent was competitive in this one race I
>> would have agreed. But no, you said the Kent WON the race. That is not
>> true. He broke a rule by aggressively blocking another driver. Had he
>> not done so he might have not placed first in the provisional
>> standings. In other words, he cheated the other driver out of an
>> opportunity to pass and was appropriately penalized. Had he followed
>> the rules he very likely would not have even won a provisional first.
>
> Such rule infractions often have a big old dose of grey.
>
>
>> Now, in a larger sense, is the Kent competitive? No. There have been
>> VERY few Kents entered in the Runoffs for many years. If they were
>> competitive on performance and cost there would be more. If the Kent
>> was a better engine overall on performance and cost the Kent would
>> dominate. Even you agree. After all you bought a Honda-powered car,
>> Liarboy.
>
>
> Unfortunately, it doesn't really matter if its one team or a dozen teams
> that get to the final rounds:  it is as if you're trying to claim that
> the baseball team that loses in the World Series must "suck" because
> they didn't win in the final round.  Sorry, but they had to have beaten
> a lot of other teams before they got to the final rounds.  Point is that
> the mere presence of a Kent in the finals indicates that the Formula
> organizers have done a good job in balancing their index of performance.
>
>
>> You stated "Because (as I've explained before) time and money spent
>> maintaining a Formula F Kent in top shape can be spent on more
>> profitable things." You admit here that the Kent is not competitive
>> when considering the overall metrics. Why spend the money on the Kent
>> when it can't go out and beat the Honda on a consistent basis? YOU
>> said that. THAT is why the Kent is so scarce in the Runoffs.
>
>
> No, that's trying to incorrectly use a statistical bias to make an
> invalid claim:  that a Kent requires higher maintenance explains why
> fewer teams run that combination, not that it isn't just as good of a
> performer on the track.
>
> In a competitive field which has weeded out the lower performing ones in
> qualifying rounds, if 90% of the teams have a red car (eg Honda) and the
> outcome is purely random chance, reversion to the means means that
> there's a 90% probability that the winning car is going to be red.
>
> Same principle applies here:  if Kents really are objectively inferior
> performers on the track, then the above 'random chance' doesn't apply
> and they wouldn't have placed high enough in the prior elimination
> rounds to even appear as 5% of the field in the finals.
>
> OTOH, when they are objectively even on the track, then their
> representation in the final playoff field should be similar to what % of
> the total population of competitive cars are fielded, no matter if
> that's 10%, 50% or 90%.  Ditto for Honda.
>
>
>> In an even larger sense you show in this instance that you are more
>> than willing to bend facts to make yourself look good. Major traits of
>> a narcissistic hypocrite. Of course, another trait of the narcissistic
>> hypocrite is that you can never admit being wrong, or that the other
>> person who disagrees with you is right. Such people are also totally
>> blind to their disorder.
>
> Speaking of disorders, the above is pretty basic statistics when
> examining factors within populations:  why did you miss it so badly?
>
> -hh

Thanks for validating all my arguments. There are so few Kents in the
runoffs because the Kent-powered car are either so inferior that there
are few left or if their are many they don't perform well enough to make
the Runoffs.

On 10/10/2024 8:31 PM, Alan wrote:
> On 2024-10-10 13:30, Tom Elam wrote:
>> On 10/10/2024 12:44 PM, Alan wrote:
>>> On 2024-10-10 03:25, Tom Elam wrote:
>>>> On 10/9/2024 11:13 PM, Alan wrote:
>>>>> On 2024-10-09 19:28, Tom Elam wrote:
>>>>>> On 10/4/2024 7:20 PM, Alan wrote:
>>>>>>> On 2024-10-02 11:29, Alan wrote:
>>>>>>>> ...ON THE TRACK:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> At the SCCA National Runoffs this year at Road America in
>>>>>>>> Wisconsin:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Fastest qualifier so far IS an FF Honda at 2:22.552.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> But second fastest is a FF Ford just .181 behind at 2:22.733.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> <https://cdn.connectsites.net/user_files/scca/
>>>>>>>> downloads/000/073/365/
>>>>>>>> FF%20Runoffs2024%20Qual%202%20Provisional.pdf>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> And that's not even remotely a new Formula F chassis! The Swift
>>>>>>>> DB6 chassis dates from 1991...that's 43 years ago!
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> So why is the field mostly Hondas?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Because (as I've explained before) time and money spent
>>>>>>>> maintaining a Formula F Kent in top shape can be spent on more
>>>>>>>> profitable things.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> And, gee, what do you know?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The "uncompetitive" Kent...
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> ...won the 2024 SCCA National Runoffs in Formula F.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Who'd have thought it?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> :-)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Really?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> https://cdn.connectsites.net/user_files/scca/downloads/000/073/541/ FF%20Runoffs2024%20Race%20Official.pdf
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The # 5 car, the Kent, finished 8th in the official results, 1st
>>>>>> in Provisional Results
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Position changed per: Car 5 - Moved behind #81 per SOM - GCR
>>>>>> 6.11.1.D,
>>>>>> Appendix P.5. Must have cheated to get moved down that far.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> And the 5 car was the only Kent in the race.
>>>>>
>>>>> What's extra hilarious is that they literally listed the rule
>>>>> infraction involved...
>>>>>
>>>>> ...but you just went with, "must have cheated".
>>>>
>>>> It was a passing infraction, I looked it up. That is cheating. You
>>>> said he "won the 2024 SCCA National Runoffs in Formula F" the when
>>>> confronted with the truth changed it to "could have won", Liarboy.
>>>> So typical of you.
>>>
>>> Your implication was clearly that the only reason he could have been
>>> leading the race was that he cheated. The SCCA ruled that he moved to
>>> aggressively to defend his position, and having seen the video,
>>> that's certainly true. But your claim has always been that the Ford
>>> can't be competitive with the Honda and there's no way that can be
>>> true if a Ford can be in the lead on the last lap of the race.
>>>
>>> And never said "could have won" anywhere, Liarboy.
>>
>> You flat out lied when you said "The "uncompetitive" Kent
>> won the 2024 SCCA National Runoffs in Formula F"
>
> Nope. When I wrote it, I didn't know about the SCCA's decision.
>
>>
>> If you had said that a single Kent was competitive in this one race I
>> would have agreed. But no, you said the Kent WON the race. That is not
>> true. He broke a rule by aggressively blocking another driver. Had he
>> not done so he might have not placed first in the provisional
>> standings. In other words, he cheated the other driver out of an
>> opportunity to pass and was appropriately penalized. Had he followed
>> the rules he very likely would not have even won a provisional first.
>
> And where have I said the penalty wasn't appropriate, Liarboy?
>
>>
>> Now, in a larger sense, is the Kent competitive? No. There have been
>> VERY few Kents entered in the Runoffs for many years. If they were
>> competitive on performance and cost there would be more. If the Kent
>> was a better engine overall on performance and cost the Kent would
>> dominate. Even you agree. After all you bought a Honda-powered car,
>> Liarboy.
>
> And the only reason you now hold that position is that, /I/ had to
> explain that there is more to racing that speed on the track.
>
> And your original position was that the Honda made me FASTER ON THE TRACK.
>
>>
>> You stated "Because (as I've explained before) time and money spent
>> maintaining a Formula F Kent in top shape can be spent on more
>> profitable things." You admit here that the Kent is not competitive
>> when considering the overall metrics. Why spend the money on the Kent
>> when it can't go out and beat the Honda on a consistent basis? YOU
>> said that. THAT is why the Kent is so scarce in the Runoffs.
>
> I never said it couldn't go out and beat the Honda on a consistent
> basis, Liarboy.
>
> I said it would COST more in money and time.
>
>>
>> In an even larger sense you show in this instance that you are more
>> than willing to bend facts to make yourself look good. Major traits of
>> a narcissistic hypocrite. Of course, another trait of the narcissistic
>> hypocrite is that you can never admit being wrong, or that the other
>> person who disagrees with you is right. Such people are also totally
>> blind to their disorder.
>
> Right back at ya, ashole.
>

You misspelled asshole

You bought the Honda because you can't afford to maintain a Kent in top
racing form. It did make you faster.

On 2024-10-10 20:20, Tom Elam wrote:
> On 10/10/2024 8:31 PM, Alan wrote:
>> On 2024-10-10 13:30, Tom Elam wrote:
>>> On 10/10/2024 12:44 PM, Alan wrote:
>>>> On 2024-10-10 03:25, Tom Elam wrote:
>>>>> On 10/9/2024 11:13 PM, Alan wrote:
>>>>>> On 2024-10-09 19:28, Tom Elam wrote:
>>>>>>> On 10/4/2024 7:20 PM, Alan wrote:
>>>>>>>> On 2024-10-02 11:29, Alan wrote:
>>>>>>>>> ...ON THE TRACK:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> At the SCCA National Runoffs this year at Road America in
>>>>>>>>> Wisconsin:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Fastest qualifier so far IS an FF Honda at 2:22.552.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> But second fastest is a FF Ford just .181 behind at 2:22.733.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> <https://cdn.connectsites.net/user_files/scca/
>>>>>>>>> downloads/000/073/365/
>>>>>>>>> FF%20Runoffs2024%20Qual%202%20Provisional.pdf>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> And that's not even remotely a new Formula F chassis! The Swift
>>>>>>>>> DB6 chassis dates from 1991...that's 43 years ago!
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> So why is the field mostly Hondas?
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Because (as I've explained before) time and money spent
>>>>>>>>> maintaining a Formula F Kent in top shape can be spent on more
>>>>>>>>> profitable things.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> And, gee, what do you know?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> The "uncompetitive" Kent...
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> ...won the 2024 SCCA National Runoffs in Formula F.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Who'd have thought it?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> :-)
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Really?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> https://cdn.connectsites.net/user_files/scca/
>>>>>>> downloads/000/073/541/ FF%20Runoffs2024%20Race%20Official.pdf
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The # 5 car, the Kent, finished 8th in the official results, 1st
>>>>>>> in Provisional Results
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Position changed per: Car 5 - Moved behind #81 per SOM - GCR
>>>>>>> 6.11.1.D,
>>>>>>> Appendix P.5. Must have cheated to get moved down that far.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> And the 5 car was the only Kent in the race.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> What's extra hilarious is that they literally listed the rule
>>>>>> infraction involved...
>>>>>>
>>>>>> ...but you just went with, "must have cheated".
>>>>>
>>>>> It was a passing infraction, I looked it up. That is cheating. You
>>>>> said he "won the 2024 SCCA National Runoffs in Formula F" the when
>>>>> confronted with the truth changed it to "could have won", Liarboy.
>>>>> So typical of you.
>>>>
>>>> Your implication was clearly that the only reason he could have been
>>>> leading the race was that he cheated. The SCCA ruled that he moved
>>>> to aggressively to defend his position, and having seen the video,
>>>> that's certainly true. But your claim has always been that the Ford
>>>> can't be competitive with the Honda and there's no way that can be
>>>> true if a Ford can be in the lead on the last lap of the race.
>>>>
>>>> And never said "could have won" anywhere, Liarboy.
>>>
>>> You flat out lied when you said "The "uncompetitive" Kent
>>> won the 2024 SCCA National Runoffs in Formula F"
>>
>> Nope. When I wrote it, I didn't know about the SCCA's decision.
>>
>>>
>>> If you had said that a single Kent was competitive in this one race I
>>> would have agreed. But no, you said the Kent WON the race. That is
>>> not true. He broke a rule by aggressively blocking another driver.
>>> Had he not done so he might have not placed first in the provisional
>>> standings. In other words, he cheated the other driver out of an
>>> opportunity to pass and was appropriately penalized. Had he followed
>>> the rules he very likely would not have even won a provisional first.
>>
>> And where have I said the penalty wasn't appropriate, Liarboy?
>>
>>>
>>> Now, in a larger sense, is the Kent competitive? No. There have been
>>> VERY few Kents entered in the Runoffs for many years. If they were
>>> competitive on performance and cost there would be more. If the Kent
>>> was a better engine overall on performance and cost the Kent would
>>> dominate. Even you agree. After all you bought a Honda-powered car,
>>> Liarboy.
>>
>> And the only reason you now hold that position is that, /I/ had to
>> explain that there is more to racing that speed on the track.
>>
>> And your original position was that the Honda made me FASTER ON THE
>> TRACK.
>>
>>>
>>> You stated "Because (as I've explained before) time and money spent
>>> maintaining a Formula F Kent in top shape can be spent on more
>>> profitable things." You admit here that the Kent is not competitive
>>> when considering the overall metrics. Why spend the money on the Kent
>>> when it can't go out and beat the Honda on a consistent basis? YOU
>>> said that. THAT is why the Kent is so scarce in the Runoffs.
>>
>> I never said it couldn't go out and beat the Honda on a consistent
>> basis, Liarboy.
>>
>> I said it would COST more in money and time.
>>
>>>
>>> In an even larger sense you show in this instance that you are more
>>> than willing to bend facts to make yourself look good. Major traits
>>> of a narcissistic hypocrite. Of course, another trait of the
>>> narcissistic hypocrite is that you can never admit being wrong, or
>>> that the other person who disagrees with you is right. Such people
>>> are also totally blind to their disorder.
>>
>> Right back at ya, ashole.
>>
>
> You misspelled asshole
>
> You bought the Honda because you can't afford to maintain a Kent in top
> racing form. It did make you faster.

Not because it was inherently faster, asshole. (did I spell it right for
you this time, Asshole?).

The guy who holds the fastest time at Mission in an FF had a Kent,
prepared by one of the two best FF Kent engine builders certainly in
North America and probably in the world (Arnie Loyning) that was prepped
by his brother-in-law's professional prep shop.

I was fast because I'm that good.

On 2024-10-10 20:17, Tom Elam wrote:
> On 10/10/2024 5:14 PM, -hh wrote:
>> On 10/10/24 4:30 PM, Tom Elam wrote:
>>> On 10/10/2024 12:44 PM, Alan wrote:
>>>> On 2024-10-10 03:25, Tom Elam wrote:
>>>>> On 10/9/2024 11:13 PM, Alan wrote:
>>>>>> On 2024-10-09 19:28, Tom Elam wrote:
>>>>>>> On 10/4/2024 7:20 PM, Alan wrote:
>>>>>>>> On 2024-10-02 11:29, Alan wrote:
>>>>>>>>> ...ON THE TRACK:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> At the SCCA National Runoffs this year at Road America in
>>>>>>>>> Wisconsin:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Fastest qualifier so far IS an FF Honda at 2:22.552.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> But second fastest is a FF Ford just .181 behind at 2:22.733.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> <https://cdn.connectsites.net/user_files/scca/
>>>>>>>>> downloads/000/073/365/
>>>>>>>>> FF%20Runoffs2024%20Qual%202%20Provisional.pdf>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> And that's not even remotely a new Formula F chassis! The Swift
>>>>>>>>> DB6 chassis dates from 1991...that's 43 years ago!
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> So why is the field mostly Hondas?
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Because (as I've explained before) time and money spent
>>>>>>>>> maintaining a Formula F Kent in top shape can be spent on more
>>>>>>>>> profitable things.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> And, gee, what do you know?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> The "uncompetitive" Kent...
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> ...won the 2024 SCCA National Runoffs in Formula F.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Who'd have thought it?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> :-)
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Really?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> https://cdn.connectsites.net/user_files/scca/
>>>>>>> downloads/000/073/541/ FF%20Runoffs2024%20Race%20Official.pdf
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The # 5 car, the Kent, finished 8th in the official results, 1st
>>>>>>> in Provisional Results
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Position changed per: Car 5 - Moved behind #81 per SOM - GCR
>>>>>>> 6.11.1.D,
>>>>>>> Appendix P.5. Must have cheated to get moved down that far.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> And the 5 car was the only Kent in the race.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> What's extra hilarious is that they literally listed the rule
>>>>>> infraction involved...
>>>>>>
>>>>>> ...but you just went with, "must have cheated".
>>>>>
>>>>> It was a passing infraction, I looked it up. That is cheating. You
>>>>> said he "won the 2024 SCCA National Runoffs in Formula F" the when
>>>>> confronted with the truth changed it to "could have won", Liarboy.
>>>>> So typical of you.
>>>>
>>>> Your implication was clearly that the only reason he could have been
>>>> leading the race was that he cheated. The SCCA ruled that he moved
>>>> to aggressively to defend his position, and having seen the video,
>>>> that's certainly true. But your claim has always been that the Ford
>>>> can't be competitive with the Honda and there's no way that can be
>>>> true if a Ford can be in the lead on the last lap of the race.
>>>>
>>>> And never said "could have won" anywhere, Liarboy.
>>>
>>> You flat out lied when you said "The "uncompetitive" Kent
>>> won the 2024 SCCA National Runoffs in Formula F"
>>>
>>> If you had said that a single Kent was competitive in this one race I
>>> would have agreed. But no, you said the Kent WON the race. That is
>>> not true. He broke a rule by aggressively blocking another driver.
>>> Had he not done so he might have not placed first in the provisional
>>> standings. In other words, he cheated the other driver out of an
>>> opportunity to pass and was appropriately penalized. Had he followed
>>> the rules he very likely would not have even won a provisional first.
>>
>> Such rule infractions often have a big old dose of grey.
>>
>>
>>> Now, in a larger sense, is the Kent competitive? No. There have been
>>> VERY few Kents entered in the Runoffs for many years. If they were
>>> competitive on performance and cost there would be more. If the Kent
>>> was a better engine overall on performance and cost the Kent would
>>> dominate. Even you agree. After all you bought a Honda-powered car,
>>> Liarboy.
>>
>>
>> Unfortunately, it doesn't really matter if its one team or a dozen
>> teams that get to the final rounds:  it is as if you're trying to
>> claim that the baseball team that loses in the World Series must
>> "suck" because they didn't win in the final round.  Sorry, but they
>> had to have beaten a lot of other teams before they got to the final
>> rounds.  Point is that the mere presence of a Kent in the finals
>> indicates that the Formula organizers have done a good job in
>> balancing their index of performance.
>>
>>
>>> You stated "Because (as I've explained before) time and money spent
>>> maintaining a Formula F Kent in top shape can be spent on more
>>> profitable things." You admit here that the Kent is not competitive
>>> when considering the overall metrics. Why spend the money on the Kent
>>> when it can't go out and beat the Honda on a consistent basis? YOU
>>> said that. THAT is why the Kent is so scarce in the Runoffs.
>>
>>
>> No, that's trying to incorrectly use a statistical bias to make an
>> invalid claim:  that a Kent requires higher maintenance explains why
>> fewer teams run that combination, not that it isn't just as good of a
>> performer on the track.
>>
>> In a competitive field which has weeded out the lower performing ones
>> in qualifying rounds, if 90% of the teams have a red car (eg Honda)
>> and the outcome is purely random chance, reversion to the means means
>> that there's a 90% probability that the winning car is going to be red.
>>
>> Same principle applies here:  if Kents really are objectively inferior
>> performers on the track, then the above 'random chance' doesn't apply
>> and they wouldn't have placed high enough in the prior elimination
>> rounds to even appear as 5% of the field in the finals.
>>
>> OTOH, when they are objectively even on the track, then their
>> representation in the final playoff field should be similar to what %
>> of the total population of competitive cars are fielded, no matter if
>> that's 10%, 50% or 90%.  Ditto for Honda.
>>
>>
>>> In an even larger sense you show in this instance that you are more
>>> than willing to bend facts to make yourself look good. Major traits
>>> of a narcissistic hypocrite. Of course, another trait of the
>>> narcissistic hypocrite is that you can never admit being wrong, or
>>> that the other person who disagrees with you is right. Such people
>>> are also totally blind to their disorder.
>>
>> Speaking of disorders, the above is pretty basic statistics when
>> examining factors within populations:  why did you miss it so badly?
>>
>> -hh
>
> Thanks for validating all my arguments. There are so few Kents in the
> runoffs because the Kent-powered car are either so inferior that there
> are few left or if their are many they don't perform well enough to make
> the Runoffs.

Way to misunderstand every argument he made, Asshole.

Are you sure you have a Ph.D.?

On 2024-10-10 17:46, Alan wrote:
> On 2024-10-10 13:30, Tom Elam wrote:
>> On 10/10/2024 12:44 PM, Alan wrote:
>>> On 2024-10-10 03:25, Tom Elam wrote:
>>>> On 10/9/2024 11:13 PM, Alan wrote:
>>>>> On 2024-10-09 19:28, Tom Elam wrote:
>>>>>> On 10/4/2024 7:20 PM, Alan wrote:
>>>>>>> On 2024-10-02 11:29, Alan wrote:
>>>>>>>> ...ON THE TRACK:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> At the SCCA National Runoffs this year at Road America in
>>>>>>>> Wisconsin:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Fastest qualifier so far IS an FF Honda at 2:22.552.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> But second fastest is a FF Ford just .181 behind at 2:22.733.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> <https://cdn.connectsites.net/user_files/scca/
>>>>>>>> downloads/000/073/365/
>>>>>>>> FF%20Runoffs2024%20Qual%202%20Provisional.pdf>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> And that's not even remotely a new Formula F chassis! The Swift
>>>>>>>> DB6 chassis dates from 1991...that's 43 years ago!
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> So why is the field mostly Hondas?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Because (as I've explained before) time and money spent
>>>>>>>> maintaining a Formula F Kent in top shape can be spent on more
>>>>>>>> profitable things.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> And, gee, what do you know?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The "uncompetitive" Kent...
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> ...won the 2024 SCCA National Runoffs in Formula F.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Who'd have thought it?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> :-)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Really?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> https://cdn.connectsites.net/user_files/scca/
>>>>>> downloads/000/073/541/ FF%20Runoffs2024%20Race%20Official.pdf
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The # 5 car, the Kent, finished 8th in the official results, 1st
>>>>>> in Provisional Results
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Position changed per: Car 5 - Moved behind #81 per SOM - GCR
>>>>>> 6.11.1.D,
>>>>>> Appendix P.5. Must have cheated to get moved down that far.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> And the 5 car was the only Kent in the race.
>>>>>
>>>>> What's extra hilarious is that they literally listed the rule
>>>>> infraction involved...
>>>>>
>>>>> ...but you just went with, "must have cheated".
>>>>
>>>> It was a passing infraction, I looked it up. That is cheating. You
>>>> said he "won the 2024 SCCA National Runoffs in Formula F" the when
>>>> confronted with the truth changed it to "could have won", Liarboy.
>>>> So typical of you.
>>>
>>> Your implication was clearly that the only reason he could have been
>>> leading the race was that he cheated. The SCCA ruled that he moved to
>>> aggressively to defend his position, and having seen the video,
>>> that's certainly true. But your claim has always been that the Ford
>>> can't be competitive with the Honda and there's no way that can be
>>> true if a Ford can be in the lead on the last lap of the race.
>>>
>>> And never said "could have won" anywhere, Liarboy.
>>
>> You flat out lied when you said "The "uncompetitive" Kent
>> won the 2024 SCCA National Runoffs in Formula F"
>>
>> If you had said that a single Kent was competitive in this one race I
>> would have agreed. But no, you said the Kent WON the race. That is not
>> true. He broke a rule by aggressively blocking another driver. Had he
>> not done so he might have not placed first in the provisional
>> standings. In other words, he cheated the other driver out of an
>> opportunity to pass and was appropriately penalized. Had he followed
>> the rules he very likely would not have even won a provisional first.
>>
>> Now, in a larger sense, is the Kent competitive? No. There have been
>> VERY few Kents entered in the Runoffs for many years. If they were
>> competitive on performance and cost there would be more. If the Kent
>> was a better engine overall on performance and cost the Kent would
>> dominate. Even you agree. After all you bought a Honda-powered car,
>> Liarboy.
>>
>> You stated "Because (as I've explained before) time and money spent
>> maintaining a Formula F Kent in top shape can be spent on more
>> profitable things." You admit here that the Kent is not competitive
>> when considering the overall metrics. Why spend the money on the Kent
>> when it can't go out and beat the Honda on a consistent basis? YOU
>> said that. THAT is why the Kent is so scarce in the Runoffs.
>>
>> In an even larger sense you show in this instance that you are more
>> than willing to bend facts to make yourself look good. Major traits of
>> a narcissistic hypocrite. Of course, another trait of the narcissistic
>> hypocrite is that you can never admit being wrong, or that the other
>> person who disagrees with you is right. Such people are also totally
>> blind to their disorder.
>
> Just for absolute clarity, Liarboy:
>
> I posted about the Runoffs win at 16:20PDT on October 4...
>
> ...and the official results weren't posted until 17:00 (Wisconsin time
> presumably)...
>
> ...on October 5.
>
> Just another example of your careful understanding of the situation, hmmm?

<crickets.wav>

On 10/11/24 1:59 AM, Alan wrote:
> On 2024-10-10 20:17, Tom Elam wrote:
>> On 10/10/2024 5:14 PM, -hh wrote:
>>> On 10/10/24 4:30 PM, Tom Elam wrote:
>>>> On 10/10/2024 12:44 PM, Alan wrote:
>>>>> On 2024-10-10 03:25, Tom Elam wrote:
>>>>>> On 10/9/2024 11:13 PM, Alan wrote:
>>>>>>> On 2024-10-09 19:28, Tom Elam wrote:
>>>>>>>> On 10/4/2024 7:20 PM, Alan wrote:
>>>>>>>>> On 2024-10-02 11:29, Alan wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> ...ON THE TRACK:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> At the SCCA National Runoffs this year at Road America in
>>>>>>>>>> Wisconsin:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Fastest qualifier so far IS an FF Honda at 2:22.552.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> But second fastest is a FF Ford just .181 behind at 2:22.733.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> <https://cdn.connectsites.net/user_files/scca/
>>>>>>>>>> downloads/000/073/365/
>>>>>>>>>> FF%20Runoffs2024%20Qual%202%20Provisional.pdf>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> And that's not even remotely a new Formula F chassis! The
>>>>>>>>>> Swift DB6 chassis dates from 1991...that's 43 years ago!
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> So why is the field mostly Hondas?
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Because (as I've explained before) time and money spent
>>>>>>>>>> maintaining a Formula F Kent in top shape can be spent on more
>>>>>>>>>> profitable things.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> And, gee, what do you know?
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> The "uncompetitive" Kent...
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> ...won the 2024 SCCA National Runoffs in Formula F.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Who'd have thought it?
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> :-)
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Really?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> https://cdn.connectsites.net/user_files/scca/
>>>>>>>> downloads/000/073/541/ FF%20Runoffs2024%20Race%20Official.pdf
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> The # 5 car, the Kent, finished 8th in the official results, 1st
>>>>>>>> in Provisional Results
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Position changed per: Car 5 - Moved behind #81 per SOM - GCR
>>>>>>>> 6.11.1.D,
>>>>>>>> Appendix P.5. Must have cheated to get moved down that far.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> And the 5 car was the only Kent in the race.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> What's extra hilarious is that they literally listed the rule
>>>>>>> infraction involved...
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> ...but you just went with, "must have cheated".
>>>>>>
>>>>>> It was a passing infraction, I looked it up. That is cheating. You
>>>>>> said he "won the 2024 SCCA National Runoffs in Formula F" the when
>>>>>> confronted with the truth changed it to "could have won", Liarboy.
>>>>>> So typical of you.
>>>>>
>>>>> Your implication was clearly that the only reason he could have
>>>>> been leading the race was that he cheated. The SCCA ruled that he
>>>>> moved to aggressively to defend his position, and having seen the
>>>>> video, that's certainly true. But your claim has always been that
>>>>> the Ford can't be competitive with the Honda and there's no way
>>>>> that can be true if a Ford can be in the lead on the last lap of
>>>>> the race.
>>>>>
>>>>> And never said "could have won" anywhere, Liarboy.
>>>>
>>>> You flat out lied when you said "The "uncompetitive" Kent
>>>> won the 2024 SCCA National Runoffs in Formula F"
>>>>
>>>> If you had said that a single Kent was competitive in this one race
>>>> I would have agreed. But no, you said the Kent WON the race. That is
>>>> not true. He broke a rule by aggressively blocking another driver.
>>>> Had he not done so he might have not placed first in the provisional
>>>> standings. In other words, he cheated the other driver out of an
>>>> opportunity to pass and was appropriately penalized. Had he followed
>>>> the rules he very likely would not have even won a provisional first.
>>>
>>> Such rule infractions often have a big old dose of grey.
>>>
>>>
>>>> Now, in a larger sense, is the Kent competitive? No. There have been
>>>> VERY few Kents entered in the Runoffs for many years. If they were
>>>> competitive on performance and cost there would be more. If the Kent
>>>> was a better engine overall on performance and cost the Kent would
>>>> dominate. Even you agree. After all you bought a Honda-powered car,
>>>> Liarboy.
>>>
>>>
>>> Unfortunately, it doesn't really matter if its one team or a dozen
>>> teams that get to the final rounds:  it is as if you're trying to
>>> claim that the baseball team that loses in the World Series must
>>> "suck" because they didn't win in the final round.  Sorry, but they
>>> had to have beaten a lot of other teams before they got to the final
>>> rounds.  Point is that the mere presence of a Kent in the finals
>>> indicates that the Formula organizers have done a good job in
>>> balancing their index of performance.
>>>
>>>
>>>> You stated "Because (as I've explained before) time and money spent
>>>> maintaining a Formula F Kent in top shape can be spent on more
>>>> profitable things." You admit here that the Kent is not competitive
>>>> when considering the overall metrics. Why spend the money on the
>>>> Kent when it can't go out and beat the Honda on a consistent basis?
>>>> YOU said that. THAT is why the Kent is so scarce in the Runoffs.
>>>
>>>
>>> No, that's trying to incorrectly use a statistical bias to make an
>>> invalid claim:  that a Kent requires higher maintenance explains why
>>> fewer teams run that combination, not that it isn't just as good of a
>>> performer on the track.
>>>
>>> In a competitive field which has weeded out the lower performing ones
>>> in qualifying rounds, if 90% of the teams have a red car (eg Honda)
>>> and the outcome is purely random chance, reversion to the means means
>>> that there's a 90% probability that the winning car is going to be red.
>>>
>>> Same principle applies here:  if Kents really are objectively
>>> inferior performers on the track, then the above 'random chance'
>>> doesn't apply and they wouldn't have placed high enough in the prior
>>> elimination rounds to even appear as 5% of the field in the finals.
>>>
>>> OTOH, when they are objectively even on the track, then their
>>> representation in the final playoff field should be similar to what %
>>> of the total population of competitive cars are fielded, no matter if
>>> that's 10%, 50% or 90%.  Ditto for Honda.
>>>
>>>
>>>> In an even larger sense you show in this instance that you are more
>>>> than willing to bend facts to make yourself look good. Major traits
>>>> of a narcissistic hypocrite. Of course, another trait of the
>>>> narcissistic hypocrite is that you can never admit being wrong, or
>>>> that the other person who disagrees with you is right. Such people
>>>> are also totally blind to their disorder.
>>>
>>> Speaking of disorders, the above is pretty basic statistics when
>>> examining factors within populations:  why did you miss it so badly?
>>>
>>> -hh
>>
>> Thanks for validating all my arguments. There are so few Kents in the
>> runoffs because the Kent-powered car are either so inferior that there
>> are few left or if their are many they don't perform well enough to
>> make the Runoffs.
>
> Way to misunderstand every argument he made, Asshole.

On 2024-10-11 04:38, -hh wrote:
> On 10/11/24 1:59 AM, Alan wrote:

>>> Thanks for validating all my arguments. There are so few Kents
>>> in the runoffs because the Kent-powered car are either so
>>> inferior that there are few left or if their are many they don't
>>> perform well enough to make the Runoffs.
>>
>> Way to misunderstand every argument he made, Asshole.
> >
> Unsurprising that Tommy believed I was affirming him, not debunking
> him.

That's what narcissists do.

It's the same reason he now parrots back that the things about racing
that I've had to painstakingly explain to him.

>
>> Are you sure you have a Ph.D.?
>
> If he did, it wasn't in anything STEM which required mathematics.
He claims it to be something in economics, IIRC.

On 10/11/2024 2:17 AM, Alan wrote:
> On 2024-10-10 17:46, Alan wrote:
>> On 2024-10-10 13:30, Tom Elam wrote:
>>> On 10/10/2024 12:44 PM, Alan wrote:
>>>> On 2024-10-10 03:25, Tom Elam wrote:
>>>>> On 10/9/2024 11:13 PM, Alan wrote:
>>>>>> On 2024-10-09 19:28, Tom Elam wrote:
>>>>>>> On 10/4/2024 7:20 PM, Alan wrote:
>>>>>>>> On 2024-10-02 11:29, Alan wrote:
>>>>>>>>> ...ON THE TRACK:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> At the SCCA National Runoffs this year at Road America in
>>>>>>>>> Wisconsin:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Fastest qualifier so far IS an FF Honda at 2:22.552.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> But second fastest is a FF Ford just .181 behind at 2:22.733.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> <https://cdn.connectsites.net/user_files/scca/
>>>>>>>>> downloads/000/073/365/
>>>>>>>>> FF%20Runoffs2024%20Qual%202%20Provisional.pdf>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> And that's not even remotely a new Formula F chassis! The Swift
>>>>>>>>> DB6 chassis dates from 1991...that's 43 years ago!
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> So why is the field mostly Hondas?
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Because (as I've explained before) time and money spent
>>>>>>>>> maintaining a Formula F Kent in top shape can be spent on more
>>>>>>>>> profitable things.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> And, gee, what do you know?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> The "uncompetitive" Kent...
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> ...won the 2024 SCCA National Runoffs in Formula F.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Who'd have thought it?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> :-)
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Really?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> https://cdn.connectsites.net/user_files/scca/
>>>>>>> downloads/000/073/541/ FF%20Runoffs2024%20Race%20Official.pdf
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The # 5 car, the Kent, finished 8th in the official results, 1st
>>>>>>> in Provisional Results
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Position changed per: Car 5 - Moved behind #81 per SOM - GCR
>>>>>>> 6.11.1.D,
>>>>>>> Appendix P.5. Must have cheated to get moved down that far.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> And the 5 car was the only Kent in the race.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> What's extra hilarious is that they literally listed the rule
>>>>>> infraction involved...
>>>>>>
>>>>>> ...but you just went with, "must have cheated".
>>>>>
>>>>> It was a passing infraction, I looked it up. That is cheating. You
>>>>> said he "won the 2024 SCCA National Runoffs in Formula F" the when
>>>>> confronted with the truth changed it to "could have won", Liarboy.
>>>>> So typical of you.
>>>>
>>>> Your implication was clearly that the only reason he could have been
>>>> leading the race was that he cheated. The SCCA ruled that he moved
>>>> to aggressively to defend his position, and having seen the video,
>>>> that's certainly true. But your claim has always been that the Ford
>>>> can't be competitive with the Honda and there's no way that can be
>>>> true if a Ford can be in the lead on the last lap of the race.
>>>>
>>>> And never said "could have won" anywhere, Liarboy.
>>>
>>> You flat out lied when you said "The "uncompetitive" Kent
>>> won the 2024 SCCA National Runoffs in Formula F"
>>>
>>> If you had said that a single Kent was competitive in this one race I
>>> would have agreed. But no, you said the Kent WON the race. That is
>>> not true. He broke a rule by aggressively blocking another driver.
>>> Had he not done so he might have not placed first in the provisional
>>> standings. In other words, he cheated the other driver out of an
>>> opportunity to pass and was appropriately penalized. Had he followed
>>> the rules he very likely would not have even won a provisional first.
>>>
>>> Now, in a larger sense, is the Kent competitive? No. There have been
>>> VERY few Kents entered in the Runoffs for many years. If they were
>>> competitive on performance and cost there would be more. If the Kent
>>> was a better engine overall on performance and cost the Kent would
>>> dominate. Even you agree. After all you bought a Honda-powered car,
>>> Liarboy.
>>>
>>> You stated "Because (as I've explained before) time and money spent
>>> maintaining a Formula F Kent in top shape can be spent on more
>>> profitable things." You admit here that the Kent is not competitive
>>> when considering the overall metrics. Why spend the money on the Kent
>>> when it can't go out and beat the Honda on a consistent basis? YOU
>>> said that. THAT is why the Kent is so scarce in the Runoffs.
>>>
>>> In an even larger sense you show in this instance that you are more
>>> than willing to bend facts to make yourself look good. Major traits
>>> of a narcissistic hypocrite. Of course, another trait of the
>>> narcissistic hypocrite is that you can never admit being wrong, or
>>> that the other person who disagrees with you is right. Such people
>>> are also totally blind to their disorder.
>>
>> Just for absolute clarity, Liarboy:
>>
>> I posted about the Runoffs win at 16:20PDT on October 4...
>>
>> ...and the official results weren't posted until 17:00 (Wisconsin time
>> presumably)...
>>
>> ...on October 5.
>>
>> Just another example of your careful understanding of the situation,
>> hmmm?
>
> <crickets.wav>

Competition weeds out the weak - individuals, companies, entire species,
and race car engines. HH has confused cause and effect. The cause of so
few Kents at this level of competition is that all things considered
they are not competitive. If the Kent is, all things considered, a more
competitive engine than the Honda, there would be a lot more entered.
The Runoffs FF engine market has for years been dominated by Honda.
Prove me wrong.

Alan, you were in such a rush to brag about that outcome you did not
even wait for the official results. Then after they were posted you
never corrected your post. Liar either way. Yes, it was a case of
cheating. That driver was not allowing faster cars to pass. Do you
understand that the fact that he had to do that meant under the rules he
illegally placed first? Or that other cars were faster?

I never claimed that a Kent can't win a race. I'm looking at FF engine
choices. Can the Kent compete straight-up against the Honda? Interesting
question, no?

In fact, in 2011 SCCA established Formula 1600, limited to the Kent
engine cars. These cars are eligible for FF races too. Do they show up
at Runoffs? Yes. Likely only the best do that. Did any show up this
year? Just one. So why do we now have a class limited to the Kent? Why
not just one class?

In fact, over in England the Brands Hatch Formula Ford Festival is
restricted to Kent engines.
https://www.brandshatch.co.uk/2024/october/formula-ford-festival

Why is that? Why not allow Honda engines to compete too? What are they
afraid of?

On 2024-10-12 04:36, Tom Elam wrote:
> On 10/11/2024 2:17 AM, Alan wrote:
>> On 2024-10-10 17:46, Alan wrote:
>>> On 2024-10-10 13:30, Tom Elam wrote:
>>>> On 10/10/2024 12:44 PM, Alan wrote:
>>>>> On 2024-10-10 03:25, Tom Elam wrote:
>>>>>> On 10/9/2024 11:13 PM, Alan wrote:
>>>>>>> On 2024-10-09 19:28, Tom Elam wrote:
>>>>>>>> On 10/4/2024 7:20 PM, Alan wrote:
>>>>>>>>> On 2024-10-02 11:29, Alan wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> ...ON THE TRACK:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> At the SCCA National Runoffs this year at Road America in
>>>>>>>>>> Wisconsin:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Fastest qualifier so far IS an FF Honda at 2:22.552.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> But second fastest is a FF Ford just .181 behind at 2:22.733.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> <https://cdn.connectsites.net/user_files/scca/
>>>>>>>>>> downloads/000/073/365/
>>>>>>>>>> FF%20Runoffs2024%20Qual%202%20Provisional.pdf>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> And that's not even remotely a new Formula F chassis! The
>>>>>>>>>> Swift DB6 chassis dates from 1991...that's 43 years ago!
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> So why is the field mostly Hondas?
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Because (as I've explained before) time and money spent
>>>>>>>>>> maintaining a Formula F Kent in top shape can be spent on more
>>>>>>>>>> profitable things.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> And, gee, what do you know?
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> The "uncompetitive" Kent...
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> ...won the 2024 SCCA National Runoffs in Formula F.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Who'd have thought it?
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> :-)
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Really?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> https://cdn.connectsites.net/user_files/scca/
>>>>>>>> downloads/000/073/541/ FF%20Runoffs2024%20Race%20Official.pdf
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> The # 5 car, the Kent, finished 8th in the official results, 1st
>>>>>>>> in Provisional Results
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Position changed per: Car 5 - Moved behind #81 per SOM - GCR
>>>>>>>> 6.11.1.D,
>>>>>>>> Appendix P.5. Must have cheated to get moved down that far.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> And the 5 car was the only Kent in the race.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> What's extra hilarious is that they literally listed the rule
>>>>>>> infraction involved...
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> ...but you just went with, "must have cheated".
>>>>>>
>>>>>> It was a passing infraction, I looked it up. That is cheating. You
>>>>>> said he "won the 2024 SCCA National Runoffs in Formula F" the when
>>>>>> confronted with the truth changed it to "could have won", Liarboy.
>>>>>> So typical of you.
>>>>>
>>>>> Your implication was clearly that the only reason he could have
>>>>> been leading the race was that he cheated. The SCCA ruled that he
>>>>> moved to aggressively to defend his position, and having seen the
>>>>> video, that's certainly true. But your claim has always been that
>>>>> the Ford can't be competitive with the Honda and there's no way
>>>>> that can be true if a Ford can be in the lead on the last lap of
>>>>> the race.
>>>>>
>>>>> And never said "could have won" anywhere, Liarboy.
>>>>
>>>> You flat out lied when you said "The "uncompetitive" Kent
>>>> won the 2024 SCCA National Runoffs in Formula F"
>>>>
>>>> If you had said that a single Kent was competitive in this one race
>>>> I would have agreed. But no, you said the Kent WON the race. That is
>>>> not true. He broke a rule by aggressively blocking another driver.
>>>> Had he not done so he might have not placed first in the provisional
>>>> standings. In other words, he cheated the other driver out of an
>>>> opportunity to pass and was appropriately penalized. Had he followed
>>>> the rules he very likely would not have even won a provisional first.
>>>>
>>>> Now, in a larger sense, is the Kent competitive? No. There have been
>>>> VERY few Kents entered in the Runoffs for many years. If they were
>>>> competitive on performance and cost there would be more. If the Kent
>>>> was a better engine overall on performance and cost the Kent would
>>>> dominate. Even you agree. After all you bought a Honda-powered car,
>>>> Liarboy.
>>>>
>>>> You stated "Because (as I've explained before) time and money spent
>>>> maintaining a Formula F Kent in top shape can be spent on more
>>>> profitable things." You admit here that the Kent is not competitive
>>>> when considering the overall metrics. Why spend the money on the
>>>> Kent when it can't go out and beat the Honda on a consistent basis?
>>>> YOU said that. THAT is why the Kent is so scarce in the Runoffs.
>>>>
>>>> In an even larger sense you show in this instance that you are more
>>>> than willing to bend facts to make yourself look good. Major traits
>>>> of a narcissistic hypocrite. Of course, another trait of the
>>>> narcissistic hypocrite is that you can never admit being wrong, or
>>>> that the other person who disagrees with you is right. Such people
>>>> are also totally blind to their disorder.
>>>
>>> Just for absolute clarity, Liarboy:
>>>
>>> I posted about the Runoffs win at 16:20PDT on October 4...
>>>
>>> ...and the official results weren't posted until 17:00 (Wisconsin
>>> time presumably)...
>>>
>>> ...on October 5.
>>>
>>> Just another example of your careful understanding of the situation,
>>> hmmm?
>>
>> <crickets.wav>
>
> Competition weeds out the weak - individuals, companies, entire species,
> and race car engines. HH has confused cause and effect. The cause of so
> few Kents at this level of competition is that all things considered
> they are not competitive. If the Kent is, all things considered, a more
> competitive engine than the Honda, there would be a lot more entered.
> The Runoffs FF engine market has for years been dominated by Honda.
> Prove me wrong.

I don't HAVE to "prove" you wrong, you mendacious asshole.

You are literally parroting back to me what I explained to you when you
tried to claim that using a Honda made the car faster...

....ON THE TRACK,

>
> Alan, you were in such a rush to brag about that outcome you did not
> even wait for the official results. Then after they were posted you
> never corrected your post. Liar either way. Yes, it was a case of
> cheating. That driver was not allowing faster cars to pass. Do you
> understand that the fact that he had to do that meant under the rules he
> illegally placed first? Or that other cars were faster?

I only just discovered the the fact a couple of days ago.

>
> I never claimed that a Kent can't win a race. I'm looking at FF engine
> choices. Can the Kent compete straight-up against the Honda? Interesting
> question, no?

What you claimed (and I have the receipts) is that a Honda was faster...

....ON THE TRACK.

>
> In fact, in 2011 SCCA established Formula 1600, limited to the Kent
> engine cars. These cars are eligible for FF races too. Do they show up
> at Runoffs? Yes. Likely only the best do that. Did any show up this
> year? Just one. So why do we now have a class limited to the Kent? Why
> not just one class?
>

On 10/12/24 7:36 AM, Tom Elam wrote:
> On 10/11/2024 2:17 AM, Alan wrote:
>> On 2024-10-10 17:46, Alan wrote:
>>> On 2024-10-10 13:30, Tom Elam wrote:
>>>> On 10/10/2024 12:44 PM, Alan wrote:
>>>>> On 2024-10-10 03:25, Tom Elam wrote:
>>>>>> On 10/9/2024 11:13 PM, Alan wrote:
>>>>>>> On 2024-10-09 19:28, Tom Elam wrote:
>>>>>>>> On 10/4/2024 7:20 PM, Alan wrote:
>>>>>>>>> On 2024-10-02 11:29, Alan wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> ...ON THE TRACK:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> At the SCCA National Runoffs this year at Road America in
>>>>>>>>>> Wisconsin:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Fastest qualifier so far IS an FF Honda at 2:22.552.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> But second fastest is a FF Ford just .181 behind at 2:22.733.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> <https://cdn.connectsites.net/user_files/scca/
>>>>>>>>>> downloads/000/073/365/
>>>>>>>>>> FF%20Runoffs2024%20Qual%202%20Provisional.pdf>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> And that's not even remotely a new Formula F chassis! The
>>>>>>>>>> Swift DB6 chassis dates from 1991...that's 43 years ago!
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> So why is the field mostly Hondas?
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Because (as I've explained before) time and money spent
>>>>>>>>>> maintaining a Formula F Kent in top shape can be spent on more
>>>>>>>>>> profitable things.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> And, gee, what do you know?
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> The "uncompetitive" Kent...
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> ...won the 2024 SCCA National Runoffs in Formula F.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Who'd have thought it?
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> :-)
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Really?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> https://cdn.connectsites.net/user_files/scca/
>>>>>>>> downloads/000/073/541/ FF%20Runoffs2024%20Race%20Official.pdf
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> The # 5 car, the Kent, finished 8th in the official results, 1st
>>>>>>>> in Provisional Results
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Position changed per: Car 5 - Moved behind #81 per SOM - GCR
>>>>>>>> 6.11.1.D,
>>>>>>>> Appendix P.5. Must have cheated to get moved down that far.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> And the 5 car was the only Kent in the race.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> What's extra hilarious is that they literally listed the rule
>>>>>>> infraction involved...
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> ...but you just went with, "must have cheated".
>>>>>>
>>>>>> It was a passing infraction, I looked it up. That is cheating. You
>>>>>> said he "won the 2024 SCCA National Runoffs in Formula F" the when
>>>>>> confronted with the truth changed it to "could have won", Liarboy.
>>>>>> So typical of you.
>>>>>
>>>>> Your implication was clearly that the only reason he could have
>>>>> been leading the race was that he cheated. The SCCA ruled that he
>>>>> moved to aggressively to defend his position, and having seen the
>>>>> video, that's certainly true. But your claim has always been that
>>>>> the Ford can't be competitive with the Honda and there's no way
>>>>> that can be true if a Ford can be in the lead on the last lap of
>>>>> the race.
>>>>>
>>>>> And never said "could have won" anywhere, Liarboy.
>>>>
>>>> You flat out lied when you said "The "uncompetitive" Kent
>>>> won the 2024 SCCA National Runoffs in Formula F"
>>>>
>>>> If you had said that a single Kent was competitive in this one race
>>>> I would have agreed. But no, you said the Kent WON the race. That is
>>>> not true. He broke a rule by aggressively blocking another driver.
>>>> Had he not done so he might have not placed first in the provisional
>>>> standings. In other words, he cheated the other driver out of an
>>>> opportunity to pass and was appropriately penalized. Had he followed
>>>> the rules he very likely would not have even won a provisional first.
>>>>
>>>> Now, in a larger sense, is the Kent competitive? No. There have been
>>>> VERY few Kents entered in the Runoffs for many years. If they were
>>>> competitive on performance and cost there would be more. If the Kent
>>>> was a better engine overall on performance and cost the Kent would
>>>> dominate. Even you agree. After all you bought a Honda-powered car,
>>>> Liarboy.
>>>>
>>>> You stated "Because (as I've explained before) time and money spent
>>>> maintaining a Formula F Kent in top shape can be spent on more
>>>> profitable things." You admit here that the Kent is not competitive
>>>> when considering the overall metrics. Why spend the money on the
>>>> Kent when it can't go out and beat the Honda on a consistent basis?
>>>> YOU said that. THAT is why the Kent is so scarce in the Runoffs.
>>>>
>>>> In an even larger sense you show in this instance that you are more
>>>> than willing to bend facts to make yourself look good. Major traits
>>>> of a narcissistic hypocrite. Of course, another trait of the
>>>> narcissistic hypocrite is that you can never admit being wrong, or
>>>> that the other person who disagrees with you is right. Such people
>>>> are also totally blind to their disorder.
>>>
>>> Just for absolute clarity, Liarboy:
>>>
>>> I posted about the Runoffs win at 16:20PDT on October 4...
>>>
>>> ...and the official results weren't posted until 17:00 (Wisconsin
>>> time presumably)...
>>>
>>> ...on October 5.
>>>
>>> Just another example of your careful understanding of the situation,
>>> hmmm?
>>
>> <crickets.wav>
>
> Competition weeds out the weak - individuals, companies, entire species,
> and race car engines. HH has confused cause and effect.

Nope.

> The cause of so
> few Kents at this level of competition is that all things considered
> they are not competitive.

But there are still Kents present in the final elimination rounds, which
indicates that they *are* competitive on the track: "cause & effect".

> If the Kent is, all things considered, a more
> competitive engine than the Honda, there would be a lot more entered.

Incorrect: the correct statement is that if Kents were more
advantageous on the track, then more teams would be willing to pay the
higher off-track maintenance costs to run Kents, and Kents would be
dominant in the finals.

> The Runoffs FF engine market has for years been dominated by Honda.
> Prove me wrong.

No need to: the _effect_ of there being any Kents in the finals is
*because* they're competitive on the track. Similarly, the *cause* of
there being few Kents overall is because they have the effect of being
higher overhead off . the . track !

>
> Alan, you were in such a rush to brag about that outcome you did not
> even wait for the official results. Then after they were posted you
> never corrected your post. Liar either way. Yes, it was a case of
> cheating. That driver was not allowing faster cars to pass. Do you
> understand that the fact that he had to do that meant under the rules he
> illegally placed first? Or that other cars were faster?
>
> I never claimed that a Kent can't win a race.

In effect, yes you did.

On 10/11/2024 1:58 AM, Alan wrote:
> On 2024-10-10 20:20, Tom Elam wrote:
>> On 10/10/2024 8:31 PM, Alan wrote:
>>> On 2024-10-10 13:30, Tom Elam wrote:
>>>> On 10/10/2024 12:44 PM, Alan wrote:
>>>>> On 2024-10-10 03:25, Tom Elam wrote:
>>>>>> On 10/9/2024 11:13 PM, Alan wrote:
>>>>>>> On 2024-10-09 19:28, Tom Elam wrote:
>>>>>>>> On 10/4/2024 7:20 PM, Alan wrote:
>>>>>>>>> On 2024-10-02 11:29, Alan wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> ...ON THE TRACK:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> At the SCCA National Runoffs this year at Road America in
>>>>>>>>>> Wisconsin:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Fastest qualifier so far IS an FF Honda at 2:22.552.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> But second fastest is a FF Ford just .181 behind at 2:22.733.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> <https://cdn.connectsites.net/user_files/scca/
>>>>>>>>>> downloads/000/073/365/
>>>>>>>>>> FF%20Runoffs2024%20Qual%202%20Provisional.pdf>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> And that's not even remotely a new Formula F chassis! The
>>>>>>>>>> Swift DB6 chassis dates from 1991...that's 43 years ago!
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> So why is the field mostly Hondas?
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Because (as I've explained before) time and money spent
>>>>>>>>>> maintaining a Formula F Kent in top shape can be spent on more
>>>>>>>>>> profitable things.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> And, gee, what do you know?
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> The "uncompetitive" Kent...
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> ...won the 2024 SCCA National Runoffs in Formula F.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Who'd have thought it?
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> :-)
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Really?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> https://cdn.connectsites.net/user_files/scca/
>>>>>>>> downloads/000/073/541/ FF%20Runoffs2024%20Race%20Official.pdf
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> The # 5 car, the Kent, finished 8th in the official results, 1st
>>>>>>>> in Provisional Results
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Position changed per: Car 5 - Moved behind #81 per SOM - GCR
>>>>>>>> 6.11.1.D,
>>>>>>>> Appendix P.5. Must have cheated to get moved down that far.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> And the 5 car was the only Kent in the race.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> What's extra hilarious is that they literally listed the rule
>>>>>>> infraction involved...
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> ...but you just went with, "must have cheated".
>>>>>>
>>>>>> It was a passing infraction, I looked it up. That is cheating. You
>>>>>> said he "won the 2024 SCCA National Runoffs in Formula F" the when
>>>>>> confronted with the truth changed it to "could have won", Liarboy.
>>>>>> So typical of you.
>>>>>
>>>>> Your implication was clearly that the only reason he could have
>>>>> been leading the race was that he cheated. The SCCA ruled that he
>>>>> moved to aggressively to defend his position, and having seen the
>>>>> video, that's certainly true. But your claim has always been that
>>>>> the Ford can't be competitive with the Honda and there's no way
>>>>> that can be true if a Ford can be in the lead on the last lap of
>>>>> the race.
>>>>>
>>>>> And never said "could have won" anywhere, Liarboy.
>>>>
>>>> You flat out lied when you said "The "uncompetitive" Kent
>>>> won the 2024 SCCA National Runoffs in Formula F"
>>>
>>> Nope. When I wrote it, I didn't know about the SCCA's decision.
>>>
>>>>
>>>> If you had said that a single Kent was competitive in this one race
>>>> I would have agreed. But no, you said the Kent WON the race. That is
>>>> not true. He broke a rule by aggressively blocking another driver.
>>>> Had he not done so he might have not placed first in the provisional
>>>> standings. In other words, he cheated the other driver out of an
>>>> opportunity to pass and was appropriately penalized. Had he followed
>>>> the rules he very likely would not have even won a provisional first.
>>>
>>> And where have I said the penalty wasn't appropriate, Liarboy?
>>>
>>>>
>>>> Now, in a larger sense, is the Kent competitive? No. There have been
>>>> VERY few Kents entered in the Runoffs for many years. If they were
>>>> competitive on performance and cost there would be more. If the Kent
>>>> was a better engine overall on performance and cost the Kent would
>>>> dominate. Even you agree. After all you bought a Honda-powered car,
>>>> Liarboy.
>>>
>>> And the only reason you now hold that position is that, /I/ had to
>>> explain that there is more to racing that speed on the track.
>>>
>>> And your original position was that the Honda made me FASTER ON THE
>>> TRACK.
>>>
>>>>
>>>> You stated "Because (as I've explained before) time and money spent
>>>> maintaining a Formula F Kent in top shape can be spent on more
>>>> profitable things." You admit here that the Kent is not competitive
>>>> when considering the overall metrics. Why spend the money on the
>>>> Kent when it can't go out and beat the Honda on a consistent basis?
>>>> YOU said that. THAT is why the Kent is so scarce in the Runoffs.
>>>
>>> I never said it couldn't go out and beat the Honda on a consistent
>>> basis, Liarboy.
>>>
>>> I said it would COST more in money and time.
>>>
>>>>
>>>> In an even larger sense you show in this instance that you are more
>>>> than willing to bend facts to make yourself look good. Major traits
>>>> of a narcissistic hypocrite. Of course, another trait of the
>>>> narcissistic hypocrite is that you can never admit being wrong, or
>>>> that the other person who disagrees with you is right. Such people
>>>> are also totally blind to their disorder.
>>>
>>> Right back at ya, ashole.
>>>
>>
>> You misspelled asshole
>>
>> You bought the Honda because you can't afford to maintain a Kent in
>> top racing form. It did make you faster.
>
> Not because it was inherently faster, asshole. (did I spell it right for
> you this time, Asshole?).
>
> The guy who holds the fastest time at Mission in an FF had a Kent,
> prepared by one of the two best FF Kent engine builders certainly in
> North America and probably in the world (Arnie Loyning) that was prepped
> by his brother-in-law's professional prep shop.
>
> I was fast because I'm that good.

LOL! How many Honda cars have competed at Mission? And, you make my
point. It takes extensive and expensive prep for the Kent to even come
close to the Honda. Anything less is not competitive. You were faster
driving a Honda-powered car. I proved that some time back.

So answer my question. What are Honda engines not welcome at F1600 and
the Brands Hatch events while SCCA welcomes the Kent at the Runoffs?

On 10/11/2024 7:38 AM, -hh wrote:
> On 10/11/24 1:59 AM, Alan wrote:
>> On 2024-10-10 20:17, Tom Elam wrote:
>>> On 10/10/2024 5:14 PM, -hh wrote:
>>>> On 10/10/24 4:30 PM, Tom Elam wrote:
>>>>> On 10/10/2024 12:44 PM, Alan wrote:
>>>>>> On 2024-10-10 03:25, Tom Elam wrote:
>>>>>>> On 10/9/2024 11:13 PM, Alan wrote:
>>>>>>>> On 2024-10-09 19:28, Tom Elam wrote:
>>>>>>>>> On 10/4/2024 7:20 PM, Alan wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> On 2024-10-02 11:29, Alan wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> ...ON THE TRACK:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> At the SCCA National Runoffs this year at Road America in
>>>>>>>>>>> Wisconsin:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Fastest qualifier so far IS an FF Honda at 2:22.552.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> But second fastest is a FF Ford just .181 behind at 2:22.733.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> <https://cdn.connectsites.net/user_files/scca/
>>>>>>>>>>> downloads/000/073/365/
>>>>>>>>>>> FF%20Runoffs2024%20Qual%202%20Provisional.pdf>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> And that's not even remotely a new Formula F chassis! The
>>>>>>>>>>> Swift DB6 chassis dates from 1991...that's 43 years ago!
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> So why is the field mostly Hondas?
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Because (as I've explained before) time and money spent
>>>>>>>>>>> maintaining a Formula F Kent in top shape can be spent on
>>>>>>>>>>> more profitable things.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> And, gee, what do you know?
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> The "uncompetitive" Kent...
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> ...won the 2024 SCCA National Runoffs in Formula F.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Who'd have thought it?
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> :-)
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Really?
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> https://cdn.connectsites.net/user_files/scca/
>>>>>>>>> downloads/000/073/541/ FF%20Runoffs2024%20Race%20Official.pdf
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> The # 5 car, the Kent, finished 8th in the official results,
>>>>>>>>> 1st in Provisional Results
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Position changed per: Car 5 - Moved behind #81 per SOM - GCR
>>>>>>>>> 6.11.1.D,
>>>>>>>>> Appendix P.5. Must have cheated to get moved down that far.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> And the 5 car was the only Kent in the race.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> What's extra hilarious is that they literally listed the rule
>>>>>>>> infraction involved...
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> ...but you just went with, "must have cheated".
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> It was a passing infraction, I looked it up. That is cheating.
>>>>>>> You said he "won the 2024 SCCA National Runoffs in Formula F" the
>>>>>>> when confronted with the truth changed it to "could have won",
>>>>>>> Liarboy. So typical of you.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Your implication was clearly that the only reason he could have
>>>>>> been leading the race was that he cheated. The SCCA ruled that he
>>>>>> moved to aggressively to defend his position, and having seen the
>>>>>> video, that's certainly true. But your claim has always been that
>>>>>> the Ford can't be competitive with the Honda and there's no way
>>>>>> that can be true if a Ford can be in the lead on the last lap of
>>>>>> the race.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> And never said "could have won" anywhere, Liarboy.
>>>>>
>>>>> You flat out lied when you said "The "uncompetitive" Kent
>>>>> won the 2024 SCCA National Runoffs in Formula F"
>>>>>
>>>>> If you had said that a single Kent was competitive in this one race
>>>>> I would have agreed. But no, you said the Kent WON the race. That
>>>>> is not true. He broke a rule by aggressively blocking another
>>>>> driver. Had he not done so he might have not placed first in the
>>>>> provisional standings. In other words, he cheated the other driver
>>>>> out of an opportunity to pass and was appropriately penalized. Had
>>>>> he followed the rules he very likely would not have even won a
>>>>> provisional first.
>>>>
>>>> Such rule infractions often have a big old dose of grey.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> Now, in a larger sense, is the Kent competitive? No. There have
>>>>> been VERY few Kents entered in the Runoffs for many years. If they
>>>>> were competitive on performance and cost there would be more. If
>>>>> the Kent was a better engine overall on performance and cost the
>>>>> Kent would dominate. Even you agree. After all you bought a
>>>>> Honda-powered car, Liarboy.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Unfortunately, it doesn't really matter if its one team or a dozen
>>>> teams that get to the final rounds:  it is as if you're trying to
>>>> claim that the baseball team that loses in the World Series must
>>>> "suck" because they didn't win in the final round.  Sorry, but they
>>>> had to have beaten a lot of other teams before they got to the final
>>>> rounds.  Point is that the mere presence of a Kent in the finals
>>>> indicates that the Formula organizers have done a good job in
>>>> balancing their index of performance.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> You stated "Because (as I've explained before) time and money spent
>>>>> maintaining a Formula F Kent in top shape can be spent on more
>>>>> profitable things." You admit here that the Kent is not competitive
>>>>> when considering the overall metrics. Why spend the money on the
>>>>> Kent when it can't go out and beat the Honda on a consistent basis?
>>>>> YOU said that. THAT is why the Kent is so scarce in the Runoffs.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> No, that's trying to incorrectly use a statistical bias to make an
>>>> invalid claim:  that a Kent requires higher maintenance explains why
>>>> fewer teams run that combination, not that it isn't just as good of
>>>> a performer on the track.
>>>>
>>>> In a competitive field which has weeded out the lower performing
>>>> ones in qualifying rounds, if 90% of the teams have a red car (eg
>>>> Honda) and the outcome is purely random chance, reversion to the
>>>> means means that there's a 90% probability that the winning car is
>>>> going to be red.
>>>>
>>>> Same principle applies here:  if Kents really are objectively
>>>> inferior performers on the track, then the above 'random chance'
>>>> doesn't apply and they wouldn't have placed high enough in the prior
>>>> elimination rounds to even appear as 5% of the field in the finals.
>>>>
>>>> OTOH, when they are objectively even on the track, then their
>>>> representation in the final playoff field should be similar to what
>>>> % of the total population of competitive cars are fielded, no matter
>>>> if that's 10%, 50% or 90%.  Ditto for Honda.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> In an even larger sense you show in this instance that you are more
>>>>> than willing to bend facts to make yourself look good. Major traits
>>>>> of a narcissistic hypocrite. Of course, another trait of the
>>>>> narcissistic hypocrite is that you can never admit being wrong, or
>>>>> that the other person who disagrees with you is right. Such people
>>>>> are also totally blind to their disorder.
>>>>
>>>> Speaking of disorders, the above is pretty basic statistics when
>>>> examining factors within populations:  why did you miss it so badly?
>>>>
>>>> -hh
>>>
>>> Thanks for validating all my arguments. There are so few Kents in the
>>> runoffs because the Kent-powered car are either so inferior that
>>> there are few left or if their are many they don't perform well
>>> enough to make the Runoffs.
>>
>> Way to misunderstand every argument he made, Asshole.
>
>
> Unsurprising that Tommy believed I was affirming him, not debunking him.
>
>> Are you sure you have a Ph.D.?
>
> If he did, it wasn't in anything STEM which required mathematics.
>
>
> -hh
>

On 10/12/2024 11:46 AM, Alan wrote:
> On 2024-10-12 04:36, Tom Elam wrote:
>> On 10/11/2024 2:17 AM, Alan wrote:
>>> On 2024-10-10 17:46, Alan wrote:
>>>> On 2024-10-10 13:30, Tom Elam wrote:
>>>>> On 10/10/2024 12:44 PM, Alan wrote:
>>>>>> On 2024-10-10 03:25, Tom Elam wrote:
>>>>>>> On 10/9/2024 11:13 PM, Alan wrote:
>>>>>>>> On 2024-10-09 19:28, Tom Elam wrote:
>>>>>>>>> On 10/4/2024 7:20 PM, Alan wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> On 2024-10-02 11:29, Alan wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> ...ON THE TRACK:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> At the SCCA National Runoffs this year at Road America in
>>>>>>>>>>> Wisconsin:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Fastest qualifier so far IS an FF Honda at 2:22.552.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> But second fastest is a FF Ford just .181 behind at 2:22.733.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> <https://cdn.connectsites.net/user_files/scca/
>>>>>>>>>>> downloads/000/073/365/
>>>>>>>>>>> FF%20Runoffs2024%20Qual%202%20Provisional.pdf>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> And that's not even remotely a new Formula F chassis! The
>>>>>>>>>>> Swift DB6 chassis dates from 1991...that's 43 years ago!
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> So why is the field mostly Hondas?
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Because (as I've explained before) time and money spent
>>>>>>>>>>> maintaining a Formula F Kent in top shape can be spent on
>>>>>>>>>>> more profitable things.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> And, gee, what do you know?
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> The "uncompetitive" Kent...
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> ...won the 2024 SCCA National Runoffs in Formula F.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Who'd have thought it?
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> :-)
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Really?
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> https://cdn.connectsites.net/user_files/scca/
>>>>>>>>> downloads/000/073/541/ FF%20Runoffs2024%20Race%20Official.pdf
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> The # 5 car, the Kent, finished 8th in the official results,
>>>>>>>>> 1st in Provisional Results
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Position changed per: Car 5 - Moved behind #81 per SOM - GCR
>>>>>>>>> 6.11.1.D,
>>>>>>>>> Appendix P.5. Must have cheated to get moved down that far.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> And the 5 car was the only Kent in the race.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> What's extra hilarious is that they literally listed the rule
>>>>>>>> infraction involved...
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> ...but you just went with, "must have cheated".
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> It was a passing infraction, I looked it up. That is cheating.
>>>>>>> You said he "won the 2024 SCCA National Runoffs in Formula F" the
>>>>>>> when confronted with the truth changed it to "could have won",
>>>>>>> Liarboy. So typical of you.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Your implication was clearly that the only reason he could have
>>>>>> been leading the race was that he cheated. The SCCA ruled that he
>>>>>> moved to aggressively to defend his position, and having seen the
>>>>>> video, that's certainly true. But your claim has always been that
>>>>>> the Ford can't be competitive with the Honda and there's no way
>>>>>> that can be true if a Ford can be in the lead on the last lap of
>>>>>> the race.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> And never said "could have won" anywhere, Liarboy.
>>>>>
>>>>> You flat out lied when you said "The "uncompetitive" Kent
>>>>> won the 2024 SCCA National Runoffs in Formula F"
>>>>>
>>>>> If you had said that a single Kent was competitive in this one race
>>>>> I would have agreed. But no, you said the Kent WON the race. That
>>>>> is not true. He broke a rule by aggressively blocking another
>>>>> driver. Had he not done so he might have not placed first in the
>>>>> provisional standings. In other words, he cheated the other driver
>>>>> out of an opportunity to pass and was appropriately penalized. Had
>>>>> he followed the rules he very likely would not have even won a
>>>>> provisional first.
>>>>>
>>>>> Now, in a larger sense, is the Kent competitive? No. There have
>>>>> been VERY few Kents entered in the Runoffs for many years. If they
>>>>> were competitive on performance and cost there would be more. If
>>>>> the Kent was a better engine overall on performance and cost the
>>>>> Kent would dominate. Even you agree. After all you bought a
>>>>> Honda-powered car, Liarboy.
>>>>>
>>>>> You stated "Because (as I've explained before) time and money spent
>>>>> maintaining a Formula F Kent in top shape can be spent on more
>>>>> profitable things." You admit here that the Kent is not competitive
>>>>> when considering the overall metrics. Why spend the money on the
>>>>> Kent when it can't go out and beat the Honda on a consistent basis?
>>>>> YOU said that. THAT is why the Kent is so scarce in the Runoffs.
>>>>>
>>>>> In an even larger sense you show in this instance that you are more
>>>>> than willing to bend facts to make yourself look good. Major traits
>>>>> of a narcissistic hypocrite. Of course, another trait of the
>>>>> narcissistic hypocrite is that you can never admit being wrong, or
>>>>> that the other person who disagrees with you is right. Such people
>>>>> are also totally blind to their disorder.
>>>>
>>>> Just for absolute clarity, Liarboy:
>>>>
>>>> I posted about the Runoffs win at 16:20PDT on October 4...
>>>>
>>>> ...and the official results weren't posted until 17:00 (Wisconsin
>>>> time presumably)...
>>>>
>>>> ...on October 5.
>>>>
>>>> Just another example of your careful understanding of the situation,
>>>> hmmm?
>>>
>>> <crickets.wav>
>>
>> Competition weeds out the weak - individuals, companies, entire
>> species, and race car engines. HH has confused cause and effect. The
>> cause of so few Kents at this level of competition is that all things
>> considered they are not competitive. If the Kent is, all things
>> considered, a more competitive engine than the Honda, there would be a
>> lot more entered. The Runoffs FF engine market has for years been
>> dominated by Honda. Prove me wrong.
>
> I don't HAVE to "prove" you wrong, you mendacious asshole.
>
> You are literally parroting back to me what I explained to you when you
> tried to claim that using a Honda made the car faster...
>
> ...ON THE TRACK,
>
>
>>
>> Alan, you were in such a rush to brag about that outcome you did not
>> even wait for the official results. Then after they were posted you
>> never corrected your post. Liar either way. Yes, it was a case of
>> cheating. That driver was not allowing faster cars to pass. Do you
>> understand that the fact that he had to do that meant under the rules
>> he illegally placed first? Or that other cars were faster?
>
> I only just discovered the the fact a couple of days ago.
>
>>
>> I never claimed that a Kent can't win a race. I'm looking at FF engine
>> choices. Can the Kent compete straight-up against the Honda?
>> Interesting question, no?
>
> What you claimed (and I have the receipts) is that a Honda was faster...
>
> ...ON THE TRACK.
>
>>
>> In fact, in 2011 SCCA established Formula 1600, limited to the Kent
>> engine cars. These cars are eligible for FF races too. Do they show up
>> at Runoffs? Yes. Likely only the best do that. Did any show up this
>> year? Just one. So why do we now have a class limited to the Kent? Why
>> not just one class?
>>
>
> And where did you pull this revelation from, Liarboy?
>
> Because it is absolutely not true:
>
> 'FORMULA
>
> The eight formula classes are all single-seat, open wheel racecars. They
> are built to detailed specifications for weight, size and engine
> displacement. There are incredible power to weight ratios in each class.
> The classes in order of fastest to slowest are: Formula Atlantic® (FA),
> Formula 1000 (FB), Formula SCCA® (FE), Formula Continental® (FC),
> Formula Mazda (FM), Formula F (FF), Formula 500 (F500) and Formula Vee®
> (FV).'
>
> <https://www.scca.com/pages/car-classifications-and-groups>
>
> There is no SCCA class called "Formula 1600". There IS a race series
> called "F1600" which was created by the SCCA in 2011 as a professional
> series for Formula F cars.
>
> But the cars are run under precisely the same rules as the SCCA's
> amateur series. Including the legality of the Honda.
>
> My guess is that you saw the same, and simply assumed that since there
> was "1600" in the name, it must obviously have meant the 1,600cc Kent
> engine and not the 1,500cc Honda.
>
> For a Ph.D., you really seem to lack the ability to do diligent
> research, don't you?
>
>> In fact, over in England the Brands Hatch Formula Ford Festival is
>> restricted to Kent engines.
>> https://www.brandshatch.co.uk/2024/october/ formula-ford-festival
>>
>> Why is that? Why not allow Honda engines to compete too? What are they
>> afraid of?
>
> They simply went a different way, Liarboy.
>
> In the US, there was a problem because the number of engine blocks for
> building Kent engines was drying up. And because Ford wasn't interested
> in doing anything to alleviate the situation, an engine builder
> (Quicksilver in Maryland) came up with a solution to the problem. They
> adapted the Honda Fit 1500cc engine to use in place of the Kent, because
> (most importantly) it was physically small enough that it would fit in
> the engine bays of most cars built for the Kent even after adding an
> adapter plate between the engine and bellhousing (otherwise the bolt
> holes on each wouldn't line up). Then the carefully programmed an ECU
> and included a restrictor in what would otherwise have been a 50mm
> throttle body, and after starting with too small a size, adjusted it
> upward until they landed on a 30.5mm restrictor to equalize the Honda
> with the Kent.
>
> In the UK, they addressed the issue of the drying up of Kent engines
> earlier, and created a version of Formula Ford using Ford's Zetec engine
> in 1993, and then later switching to the Ford Duratec engine for 2006.
>
> But there was no attempt made to equalize the performance of the two,
> but also no need for them to build a version with a Honda engine.
>
> So for the years 1993 to 2005, the overall Formula Ford Festival was
> using a Zetec engine, and from 2006 to 2012 it was using the Duratec,
> while they award a separate for the Kent-powered cars for some of those
> years.
>
> And in years 2009 to 2012, they awarded all three engines separately.
>
> But you aren't even really aware that there are differences between the
> classes called "Formula Ford" in different parts of the world, are you?
>

On 2024-10-15 08:05, Tom Elam wrote:
> On 10/11/2024 7:38 AM, -hh wrote:
>> On 10/11/24 1:59 AM, Alan wrote:
>>> On 2024-10-10 20:17, Tom Elam wrote:
>>>> On 10/10/2024 5:14 PM, -hh wrote:
>>>>> On 10/10/24 4:30 PM, Tom Elam wrote:
>>>>>> On 10/10/2024 12:44 PM, Alan wrote:
>>>>>>> On 2024-10-10 03:25, Tom Elam wrote:
>>>>>>>> On 10/9/2024 11:13 PM, Alan wrote:
>>>>>>>>> On 2024-10-09 19:28, Tom Elam wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> On 10/4/2024 7:20 PM, Alan wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> On 2024-10-02 11:29, Alan wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>> ...ON THE TRACK:
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> At the SCCA National Runoffs this year at Road America in
>>>>>>>>>>>> Wisconsin:
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Fastest qualifier so far IS an FF Honda at 2:22.552.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> But second fastest is a FF Ford just .181 behind at 2:22.733.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> <https://cdn.connectsites.net/user_files/scca/
>>>>>>>>>>>> downloads/000/073/365/
>>>>>>>>>>>> FF%20Runoffs2024%20Qual%202%20Provisional.pdf>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> And that's not even remotely a new Formula F chassis! The
>>>>>>>>>>>> Swift DB6 chassis dates from 1991...that's 43 years ago!
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> So why is the field mostly Hondas?
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Because (as I've explained before) time and money spent
>>>>>>>>>>>> maintaining a Formula F Kent in top shape can be spent on
>>>>>>>>>>>> more profitable things.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> And, gee, what do you know?
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> The "uncompetitive" Kent...
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> ...won the 2024 SCCA National Runoffs in Formula F.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Who'd have thought it?
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> :-)
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Really?
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> https://cdn.connectsites.net/user_files/scca/
>>>>>>>>>> downloads/000/073/541/ FF%20Runoffs2024%20Race%20Official.pdf
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> The # 5 car, the Kent, finished 8th in the official results,
>>>>>>>>>> 1st in Provisional Results
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Position changed per: Car 5 - Moved behind #81 per SOM - GCR
>>>>>>>>>> 6.11.1.D,
>>>>>>>>>> Appendix P.5. Must have cheated to get moved down that far.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> And the 5 car was the only Kent in the race.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> What's extra hilarious is that they literally listed the rule
>>>>>>>>> infraction involved...
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> ...but you just went with, "must have cheated".
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> It was a passing infraction, I looked it up. That is cheating.
>>>>>>>> You said he "won the 2024 SCCA National Runoffs in Formula F"
>>>>>>>> the when confronted with the truth changed it to "could have
>>>>>>>> won", Liarboy. So typical of you.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Your implication was clearly that the only reason he could have
>>>>>>> been leading the race was that he cheated. The SCCA ruled that he
>>>>>>> moved to aggressively to defend his position, and having seen the
>>>>>>> video, that's certainly true. But your claim has always been that
>>>>>>> the Ford can't be competitive with the Honda and there's no way
>>>>>>> that can be true if a Ford can be in the lead on the last lap of
>>>>>>> the race.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> And never said "could have won" anywhere, Liarboy.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> You flat out lied when you said "The "uncompetitive" Kent
>>>>>> won the 2024 SCCA National Runoffs in Formula F"
>>>>>>
>>>>>> If you had said that a single Kent was competitive in this one
>>>>>> race I would have agreed. But no, you said the Kent WON the race.
>>>>>> That is not true. He broke a rule by aggressively blocking another
>>>>>> driver. Had he not done so he might have not placed first in the
>>>>>> provisional standings. In other words, he cheated the other driver
>>>>>> out of an opportunity to pass and was appropriately penalized. Had
>>>>>> he followed the rules he very likely would not have even won a
>>>>>> provisional first.
>>>>>
>>>>> Such rule infractions often have a big old dose of grey.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> Now, in a larger sense, is the Kent competitive? No. There have
>>>>>> been VERY few Kents entered in the Runoffs for many years. If they
>>>>>> were competitive on performance and cost there would be more. If
>>>>>> the Kent was a better engine overall on performance and cost the
>>>>>> Kent would dominate. Even you agree. After all you bought a Honda-
>>>>>> powered car, Liarboy.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Unfortunately, it doesn't really matter if its one team or a dozen
>>>>> teams that get to the final rounds:  it is as if you're trying to
>>>>> claim that the baseball team that loses in the World Series must
>>>>> "suck" because they didn't win in the final round.  Sorry, but they
>>>>> had to have beaten a lot of other teams before they got to the
>>>>> final rounds.  Point is that the mere presence of a Kent in the
>>>>> finals indicates that the Formula organizers have done a good job
>>>>> in balancing their index of performance.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> You stated "Because (as I've explained before) time and money spent
>>>>>> maintaining a Formula F Kent in top shape can be spent on more
>>>>>> profitable things." You admit here that the Kent is not
>>>>>> competitive when considering the overall metrics. Why spend the
>>>>>> money on the Kent when it can't go out and beat the Honda on a
>>>>>> consistent basis? YOU said that. THAT is why the Kent is so scarce
>>>>>> in the Runoffs.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> No, that's trying to incorrectly use a statistical bias to make an
>>>>> invalid claim:  that a Kent requires higher maintenance explains
>>>>> why fewer teams run that combination, not that it isn't just as
>>>>> good of a performer on the track.
>>>>>
>>>>> In a competitive field which has weeded out the lower performing
>>>>> ones in qualifying rounds, if 90% of the teams have a red car (eg
>>>>> Honda) and the outcome is purely random chance, reversion to the
>>>>> means means that there's a 90% probability that the winning car is
>>>>> going to be red.
>>>>>
>>>>> Same principle applies here:  if Kents really are objectively
>>>>> inferior performers on the track, then the above 'random chance'
>>>>> doesn't apply and they wouldn't have placed high enough in the
>>>>> prior elimination rounds to even appear as 5% of the field in the
>>>>> finals.
>>>>>
>>>>> OTOH, when they are objectively even on the track, then their
>>>>> representation in the final playoff field should be similar to what
>>>>> % of the total population of competitive cars are fielded, no
>>>>> matter if that's 10%, 50% or 90%.  Ditto for Honda.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> In an even larger sense you show in this instance that you are
>>>>>> more than willing to bend facts to make yourself look good. Major
>>>>>> traits of a narcissistic hypocrite. Of course, another trait of
>>>>>> the narcissistic hypocrite is that you can never admit being
>>>>>> wrong, or that the other person who disagrees with you is right.
>>>>>> Such people are also totally blind to their disorder.
>>>>>
>>>>> Speaking of disorders, the above is pretty basic statistics when
>>>>> examining factors within populations:  why did you miss it so badly?
>>>>>
>>>>> -hh
>>>>
>>>> Thanks for validating all my arguments. There are so few Kents in
>>>> the runoffs because the Kent-powered car are either so inferior that
>>>> there are few left or if their are many they don't perform well
>>>> enough to make the Runoffs.
>>>
>>> Way to misunderstand every argument he made, Asshole.
>>
>>
>> Unsurprising that Tommy believed I was affirming him, not debunking him.
>>
>>> Are you sure you have a Ph.D.?
>>
>> If he did, it wasn't in anything STEM which required mathematics.
>>
>>
>> -hh
>>
>
> HH, I do know math and stats. The fact that there are so few Kent cars
> that make the Runoffs and that in general they finish poorly says they
> are not competitive at this level. There are statistical outliers in the
> last 2 years. Results: