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