PDA

View Full Version : True Street Results



NMRA Jason
03-06-2010, 01:47 PM
The winner, Randy Seward, drove from Orlando to the event. Now THAT is a True Street car.

http://i172.photobucket.com/albums/w34/ownedbyhunter/Race%20Rumors/Seward.jpg

The True Street results have been updated to reflect accurate 10- and 11-second winners..

http://i172.photobucket.com/albums/w34/ownedbyhunter/Race%20Rumors/bradentonts.jpg

saleen_n_around
03-06-2010, 02:45 PM
Nice to see a Calypso car represent!!! Good job, stop for an ice cream on the way home!

Novi357
03-06-2010, 02:46 PM
Congrats to the winner!

That has to be one of the fastest fields to date. Seven cars with 9 teens or faster three pass averages and another three 8 second cars that couldn't finish.

Amazing!

NMRA Jason
03-06-2010, 03:40 PM
It was insane, Brian. Absolutely insane.

Big Daddy
03-06-2010, 03:55 PM
I brought a knife to a gun fight man.

paxtonpwr
03-06-2010, 05:06 PM
WOW WOW WOW what a stellar field!!!! 2010 Bringing some serious heat congrats to all that ran and finished !!!! :D :D

my00gtvert
03-07-2010, 06:40 AM
CONGRATS RANDY!!!! After watching your t/t vid I knew you would pull it off...now just turn up the wick a bit for the Shootout and show us all what that notch can do

GOOD LUCK!!!

wazslow
03-08-2010, 08:27 AM
Congrats to all who participated! Looks like a fast field! Congrats to Randy on the win, looks almost like a bracket car with that consistancy! Looks like there was some carnage though with all those DNF's!

RealPamgood
03-08-2010, 04:27 PM
http://img697.imageshack.us/img697/1807/eek.gif (http://bcyouthweek.com/gallery/g/index.php) Wow thats seems really interesting. Thanks for sharing ...

Blown347Hatch
03-08-2010, 09:05 PM
"There will be trophies and awards for not only quickest average, and runner up, but also for the following: closest averaged ET that is not quicker than the following – 9.00, 10.00, 11.00, 12.00, 13.00, 14.00, and 15.00."

10 second winner average: 9.999666
11 second winner average: 10.999666

Just seemed a little strange that these two worked out to be exactly on the class break-out parameter in the computed average, yet a simple calculator indicates them just under the category.

Topfun99
03-09-2010, 03:11 AM
"There will be trophies and awards for not only quickest average, and runner up, but also for the following: closest averaged ET that is not quicker than the following 9.00, 10.00, 11.00, 12.00, 13.00, 14.00, and 15.00."

10 second winner average: 9.999666
11 second winner average: 10.999666

Just seemed a little strange that these two worked out to be exactly on the class break-out parameter in the computed average, yet a simple calculator indicates them just under the category.

Actually, they did it right. It is normal in mathematically analysis' to round off the calculated value from a formula to the nearest significant number. Since the E.T.s are measured in 1000 of a second (.001), the answer should have rounded off to thousands of a second (the significant number of the measurement) for the correct answer.

Put another way, the 10.047, 10.098 and 9.854 E.T.s could have actually been 10.0474, 10.0984 and 9.8544 - if measured in 10 thousands of a second. If you do the math, you will see that the average of these numbers is actually 10.0001 if averaged and rounded off to the nearest 10 thousands of a second. However, if you round off the 10.0474, 10.0984 and the 9.8544 to the nearest thousands, you have 10.047, 10.098 and 9.854 which if averaged will give you 10.000 if rounded to the thousands, but only 9.9997 if rounded to 10 thousands of a second.

Blown347Hatch
03-09-2010, 05:37 AM
Actually, they did it right. It is normal in mathematically analysis' to round off the calculated value from a formula to the nearest significant number. Since the E.T.s are measured in 1000 of a second (.001), the answer should have rounded off to thousands of a second (the significant number of the measurement) for the correct answer.

Put another way, the 10.047, 10.098 and 9.854 E.T.s could have actually been 10.0474, 10.0984 and 9.8544 - if measured in 10 thousands of a second. If you do the math, you will see that the average of these numbers is actually 10.0001 if averaged and rounded off to the nearest 10 thousands of a second. However, if you round off the 10.0474, 10.0984 and the 9.8544 to the nearest thousands, you have 10.047, 10.098 and 9.854 which if averaged will give you 10.000 if rounded to the thousands, but only 9.9997 if rounded to 10 thousands of a second.

I understand what you're saying. But if I run an 8.9999 or 9.9999 I don't say I ran a 9.0 or 10.0, and most don't. I wasn't aware that the rules allowed for a rounding off when they are so specific. Perhaps the rules should state "whomever runs the closest to a ____.00 and/or gets rounded off to a ____.00" wins the event. But they actually specify "that is not quicker than" ____.00 so I would think that the final averaged number needs to be mathmetically slower than the ____.00 and not a faster number rounded up. This is a situation where it could be figured out without rounding since the rules are that specific. I'm just sayin......:)

Blown347Hatch
03-09-2010, 05:44 AM
Another thought, if you have 2 cars that ran nearly identical, and both cars ET gets rounded up, then they both get rounded up to an identical number which would show a tie.

paxtonpwr
03-09-2010, 08:13 AM
Another thought, if you have 2 cars that ran nearly identical, and both cars ET gets rounded up, then they both get rounded up to an identical number which would show a tie.

its always been rounded that way, i this series and every other series ive raced in.10.99999 would round up to 11.0. Wheres the confusion ?

pwrdbypsi
03-09-2010, 08:22 AM
Its basic math.What is there not to understand. The computer program has the mathematical rules programed into it and used them accordinly to give the results.

Novi357
03-09-2010, 09:17 AM
lol, I know I got my ass dq'ed from a ffw true street event for running a 9.996 because my cage was good to 10.0 and I didn't have a competition license.

I wish they had rounded up too!

Topfun99
03-09-2010, 11:39 AM
Maybe my explanation was hard to understand. They did not necessarily round up. If you want to make the number valid to 1-10,000 of a second then you have to measure the number to 1-10,000 of a second.

If the 10.047, 10.098, and 9.854 were measured to 1-10,000 of a second, then the actual numbers could have been 10.0474, 10.0984 and 9.8544. If you average these numbers and round them to the nearest 1-10,000 of a second, then the average is 10.0001.

Put another way, if you want to split hairs in a contest, you have to measure the diameter of the hairs with the same caliper to determine who won. In this hair splitting contest, the caliper is only good to 1-1000th of a second. Add the numbers up, average them and round the number to 1-1000th of second. You will come up with 10.000 every time.

The problem with computors and calculators is that they can produce numbers that are not necessarily meaningful or in this case, can be misleading.

TurboPete07
03-09-2010, 12:29 PM
The computer does not have mathematical rules in it , They use a simple spread sheet to list all cars and there times . When inputting the information into the spread sheet it simply did the math, and rounded it off.
In drag racing numbers determine elapsed time , not give or take
So lets say you run all three passes as 9.999 and list them into the spreadsheet you get a 10.000 average which is incorrect you ran a 9.99
Why is it so difficult for people to realize the screw up
Look at a time sheet , you cross the 1/4 and the board lights up 10.069 thats your time right , the board doest shut off for a moment and reads 10.070 because it does the math .
Bottom line Im tired of all the BS . NMRA screwed up everyone who goes drag racing looks at there time sheet and it is what it is , you dont go home and DO THE MATH and round it out.
As stated before rules were specific closest to 10.0 without breaking it .
10.047 + 10.098 + 9.854 = 29.999 NOT 30.000 = 9.9996666 AVERAGE Damn close but NOT A 10.000 there spreadsheet in the trailer rounded off not the rule book .
I dont care anymore about this . NMRA Officials told me to my face what did I want to do , and I said just do the right thing . If they feel that everything is correct the way it is then fine , everyone on these boards can voice there own opinions .
We all sat there before they called out the names and figured out I had Won , Numbers dont lie. We actually thought when they said someone won with a 10.000 that it might have been someone else , until they called out the winner. We all knew that was messed up , but maybe there was something we didn't know . Well it turned out they screwed up , and thats that .
Next year Ill just have to dial in 9.999 for the Win.

Blown347Hatch
03-09-2010, 12:50 PM
The computer does not have mathematical rules in it , They use a simple spread sheet to list all cars and there times . When inputting the information into the spread sheet it simply did the math, and rounded it off.
In drag racing numbers determine elapsed time , not give or take
So lets say you run all three passes as 9.999 and list them into the spreadsheet you get a 10.000 average which is incorrect you ran a 9.99
Why is it so difficult for people to realize the screw up
Look at a time sheet , you cross the 1/4 and the board lights up 10.069 thats your time right , the board doest shut off for a moment and reads 10.070 because it does the math .
Bottom line Im tired of all the BS . NMRA screwed up everyone who goes drag racing looks at there time sheet and it is what it is , you dont go home and DO THE MATH and round it out.
As stated before rules were specific closest to 10.0 without breaking it .
10.047 + 10.098 + 9.854 = 29.999 NOT 30.000 = 9.9996666 AVERAGE Damn close but NOT A 10.000 there spreadsheet in the trailer rounded off not the rule book .
I dont care anymore about this . NMRA Officials told me to my face what did I want to do , and I said just do the right thing . If they feel that everything is correct the way it is then fine , everyone on these boards can voice there own opinions .
We all sat there before they called out the names and figured out I had Won , Numbers dont lie. We actually thought when they said someone won with a 10.000 that it might have been someone else , until they called out the winner. We all knew that was messed up , but maybe there was something we didn't know . Well it turned out they screwed up , and thats that .
Next year Ill just have to dial in 9.999 for the Win.

It kinda looks like running 9.999 three times would be the way to go if you could dial it in to do that. It would use the "rounding up" of the program to your advantage to boot out the other guy who averaged 10.01 to your "rounded up" 10.000.

TurboPete07
03-09-2010, 12:56 PM
It kinda looks like running 9.999 three times would be the way to go if you could dial it in to do that. It would use the "rounding up" of the program to your advantage to boot out the other guy who averaged 10.01 to your "rounded up" 10.000.

Hahahhaha didn't think about that . I also get the best of both worlds. Now I can tell my buddies that my 4100 LBS street car on 20" frt wheels went 9.99 all weekend long and I also won in the 10 sec class! LOL

paxtonpwr
03-09-2010, 02:11 PM
sorry jeff bringing some nmcaforum style here lol :D



http://www.woodstockmusicalinstruments.com/catalog/images/ORIGINAL_CRYBABY_WAH_GCB95_463X342.jpg

NMRAJeff
03-09-2010, 02:21 PM
As with anything there is no absolute way to be perfect. We do our best job with handling the massive amounts of data that it takes to make the True Street run as smooth as possible. Our Excel program was only set to go back (.000) three places past the decimal place. With this setting we did make an error in averaging 2 competitors runs at the NMRA Spring Break Shootout. We will be sending them out a new plaque and a check for the purse that was rightfully theirs.
The correct way to calculate is without rounding up. For future events we will be updating our spread sheets to show this change. We apologize for the miscalculation and hope to see you at the races.


The Corrections will be made to the original document and sent to the editor of Race Pages and Muscle Mustangs Fast Fords.

NMRA Jason
03-09-2010, 02:23 PM
The correct document is already uploaded and up above where the original was.

Blown347Hatch
03-09-2010, 02:51 PM
As with anything there is no absolute way to be perfect. We do our best job with handling the massive amounts of data that it takes to make the True Street run as smooth as possible. Our Excel program was only set to go back (.000) three places past the decimal place. With this setting we did make an error in averaging 2 competitors runs at the NMRA Spring Break Shootout. We will be sending them out a new plaque and a check for the purse that was rightfully theirs.
The correct way to calculate is without rounding up. For future events we will be updating our spread sheets to show this change. We apologize for the miscalculation and hope to see you at the races.


The Corrections will be made to the original document and sent to the editor of Race Pages and Muscle Mustangs Fast Fords.

It's nice to see NMRA stepping up to the plate. I haven't been in an event for a while but I am sure that I would not have been thrilled about a computer glitch making the wrong decision either, but my hat is off to the NMRA folks. This is what makes this a great organization.

Appears some know-it-all bloggers here are now eating some crow. The point of all of this was merely to point out a discrepancy. Then there are the types who just call names or know more than everybody else.

pwrdbypsi
03-09-2010, 03:39 PM
Thanks for the clarification on this matter Jeff. At least i got to run for free this weekend then. Congrats pete. Next year your going down. LOL

Team Hurley usa
03-09-2010, 03:40 PM
Randy,
Congrats on the win! Looked like a fast field and hate we missed it. We'll be in Atlanta and see if we can't bring a little something with us to add to the heat. Great job to everyone and nice work with the high 8 and 9 sec car count. See ya soon. A

TurboPete07
03-09-2010, 06:11 PM
Just noticed the new standings and posts.

Just wanted to say Thank You NMRA JEFF for doing the right thing, and clearing up the issue at hand, so everyone can understand.
It was my 1st event in several years, and I had a great time .
I was happy to just get the car down the track , now this is a Great Bonus.
Alex thanks Man for being such a Good Sport, hope there are no hard feelings, as far as racing you next year I doubt it by then you should be well in the high 8s and low 9s . :D
Again Thanks to NMRA and there staff for handling this appropriately.

Novi357
03-09-2010, 07:02 PM
As with anything there is no absolute way to be perfect. We do our best job with handling the massive amounts of data that it takes to make the True Street run as smooth as possible. Our Excel program was only set to go back (.000) three places past the decimal place. With this setting we did make an error in averaging 2 competitors runs at the NMRA Spring Break Shootout. We will be sending them out a new plaque and a check for the purse that was rightfully theirs.
The correct way to calculate is without rounding up. For future events we will be updating our spread sheets to show this change. We apologize for the miscalculation and hope to see you at the races.


The Corrections will be made to the original document and sent to the editor of Race Pages and Muscle Mustangs Fast Fords.

Soooooo, they are going to mail out a check?

Topfun99
03-10-2010, 03:27 AM
It's nice to see NMRA stepping up to the plate. I haven't been in an event for a while but I am sure that I would not have been thrilled about a computer glitch making the wrong decision either, but my hat is off to the NMRA folks. This is what makes this a great organization.

Appears some know-it-all bloggers here are now eating some crow. The point of all of this was merely to point out a discrepancy. Then there are the types who just call names or know more than everybody else.

If any of the above is directed at me, I can assure you that I certainly am not eating any crow. I am a registered Professional Engineer, have worked as an Engineer for 35 years, been racing for 37 years (including a lot of bracket racing), building and flying aircraft for 30 years and would only be called a "know-it-all" by someone who does not know me well. Virtually everything on my car is designed and built by myself. If that means nothing, then how about my car winning the true street event?

I stand by my mathematical analysis that I posted above. In the world of Engineering, the original results were correct and the NMRA staff of Jason and Jeff have nothing to apologize for. I don't criticize them for revising the results, that is their prerogative as officials of the race and certainly a good public relations move. However, in the technical world I live in, numbers are represented only to the accuracy that they are measured.

Oh, and 9.999, 9.999, 9.999 averaged is 9.999. My slide rule confirmed this.....

TurboPete07
03-10-2010, 03:49 AM
Oh, and 9.999, 9.999, 9.999 averaged is 9.999. My slide rule confirmed this.....

Exactly my original point 9.999 is still a 9.999 NOT A 10.000 Thank you for clearing that up .

Topfun99
03-10-2010, 05:07 AM
I thought I would add one more comment. I do not know if the timing equipment at the track measures the times to 1-10,000 of an second. If they do, and if these numbers are available to the NMRA officials for use in averaging the three runs and it changes the computed average to less than the 10.000 and 11.000, then it could be appropriate to change the results. However, based on the average of the elapsed times accuracy (.001) we have available, the original results would hold true.

Blown347Hatch
03-10-2010, 05:47 AM
I thought I would add one more comment. I do not know if the timing equipment at the track measures the times to 1-10,000 of an second. If they do, and if these numbers are available to the NMRA officials for use in averaging the three runs and it changes the computed average to less than the 10.000 and 11.000, then it could be appropriate to change the results. However, based on the average of the elapsed times accuracy (.001) we have available, the original results would hold true.

Topfun, without a rounding off program, the averaged results are still not 10.0 & 11.0. Leaving rounding off out of the equation still gives 9.999 and 10.999.
For example, in racing, if we rounded up using tenths (to make a point), then a 9.60 would be a 10.0 That's not what racing is about, and your continued defense of the matter makes little sense considering what the spirit of this whole point is about. This is about racing, not classroom mathmatics. The original rounding off program skewed the actual results, and we, as human beings do not have to continue to allow a program in a computer to force us to accept results that are less accurate when simply doing the math to figure out more exactly the true results when two cars' ET's are close enough together. Maybe races will be measured in ten thousandths going forward, but even if not, we have the ability to determine outcome more accurately than using a generally applied rounding off program. :)

Topfun99
03-10-2010, 07:02 AM
Topfun, without a rounding off program, the averaged results are still not 10.0 & 11.0. Leaving rounding off out of the equation still gives 9.999 and 10.999.
For example, in racing, if we rounded up using tenths (to make a point), then a 9.60 would be a 10.0 That's not what racing is about, and your continued defense of the matter makes little sense considering what the spirit of this whole point is about. This is about racing, not classroom mathmatics. The original rounding off program skewed the actual results, and we, as human beings do not have to continue to allow a program in a computer to force us to accept results that are less accurate when simply doing the math to figure out more exactly the true results when two cars' ET's are close enough together. Maybe races will be measured in ten thousandths going forward, but even if not, we have the ability to determine outcome more accurately than using a generally applied rounding off program. :)

Hey, I have no dog in this fight. The facts are simple. If you "simply do the math" and add up 10.047, 10.098 and 9.854, average it to the thousands of a second, you get 10.000. And I have no argument that if one were to take that average to the 1-10,000 of a second that the results are 9.9997 - less than 10.0. I was merely pointing out that, in an engineering analysis, the accuracy of the measurements do no justify representing the answer in 1-10,000 of an inch. This would be considered "sound engineering practice".

By the way, virtually every number in our lifes is rounded up or down to a significant figure. The bank rounds the interest we collect or pay to the nearest penny. That's because a penny makes "cents" in this case. (that was the joke part of the response)

In the spirit of the competition, I would like to congratulate both of the "winners" and will respectfully agree with NMRA's final standings. I do find this whole situation remarkable that the competition in this case was so close. To prevent this from being a painful arguement in the future, NMRA should simply establish and post the methodology used to compute the averages.

Blown347Hatch
03-10-2010, 07:41 AM
Hey, I have no dog in this fight. The facts are simple. If you "simply do the math" and add up 10.047, 10.098 and 9.854, average it to the thousands of a second, you get 10.000. And I have no argument that if one were to take that average to the 1-10,000 of a second that the results are 9.9997 - less than 10.0. I was merely pointing out that, in an engineering analysis, the accuracy of the measurements do no justify representing the answer in 1-10,000 of an inch. This would be considered "sound engineering practice".

By the way, virtually every number in our lifes is rounded up or down to a significant figure. The bank rounds the interest we collect or pay to the nearest penny. That's because a penny makes "cents" in this case. (that was the joke part of the response)

In the spirit of the competition, I would like to congratulate both of the "winners" and will respectfully agree with NMRA's final standings. I do find this whole situation remarkable that the competition in this case was so close. To prevent this from being a painful arguement in the future, NMRA should simply establish and post the methodology used to compute the averages.


Thumbs up!!;)

RacinJason1032
03-11-2010, 03:03 PM
I brought a knife to a gun fight man.

You didn't do bad, dude! You took out both of our cars in the Shootout on Sunday. KUDOS!

Big Daddy
03-11-2010, 08:05 PM
You didn't do bad, dude! You took out both of our cars in the Shootout on Sunday. KUDOS!

Well that's called luck I think. I haven't run the car with this new set up until then. We hope to go 8's next time out, but not low enough to beat the guys in this last crowd. I'm seriously considering losing the a/c and putting the car on a diet. It weighs 3800 pounds with me and still needs a chute and a couple other things. Just really enjoy the ac since I drive it 2-3000 miles a year.

SPAWN
03-13-2010, 05:20 PM
I just want to thank all those involved for putting on a great event and as my first event in NMRA I had a blast. winning True Street 12 was a kick as well.

http://showandgofast.com/images/SPAWN/NMRA2010Braden/NMRAImage4.png

Topfun99
03-21-2010, 04:03 PM
Randy,
Congrats on the win! Looked like a fast field and hate we missed it. We'll be in Atlanta and see if we can't bring a little something with us to add to the heat. Great job to everyone and nice work with the high 8 and 9 sec car count. See ya soon. A

Well, it looks like I will drive my green coupe to Atlanta this weekend. I may be at a disadvantage to the Team Hurley car, but I won't use it as an excuse. I expect Chris will be there also, maybe Blair. Bring it on Team Hurley (and others), let's have some fun in Atlanta.

factoryengine
03-21-2010, 05:53 PM
Did you get it back together Randy? What happened this time? Chris said he's going to Atlanta but I don"t think Blairs gonna make it.

Shamus O'Toole
03-21-2010, 07:41 PM
/\/\ don't count your chickens...

Topfun99
03-22-2010, 09:49 AM
Did you get it back together Randy? What happened this time? Chris said he's going to Atlanta but I don"t think Blairs gonna make it.

I have a new spool coming tomorrow. I don't hardly have time to do much working 12-14 hour days this week but I can find time to break down a 9" center section and replace the broken Lenco locker with the spool. Sometimes it takes me a while to correctly set up the ring & pinion pattern but I see no problem in making time to get everything done.

factoryengine
03-22-2010, 06:30 PM
Looks like Blair's in.

SPAWN
03-22-2010, 08:46 PM
I will be heading to Atlanta as well Thursday. See yall there!