Forum: HoseHeads Sprint Car General Forum (go)
Moderators: dirtonly  /  dmantx  /  hosehead

Oh for fuck's sake, here we ago again with the "porch"...........

I know they weren't there, it's a hypothetical discussion.  At my advanced age the brain synapses don't always connect so could you please explain what you mean by "not to be mentioned in the same breath as those that competed at the Nations!"

Simple really.....there's no reason to discuss what might have been. Only the teams that pull to the Nationals deserve Nationals recognition.

I could have done without the Econo Stocks, but most of the people where I was sitting were big fans of them

Takes all kinds....

Show being over at midnite wasn't so bad, but how about the DEAD STOP traffic jam getting out? I got smart & got out the back way on Rt. 333, but then got hopelessly lost trying to get from 322 to I-80 West.... oh well

Interesting logic. I'll be sure to remind you of that the next time you make your usual comparison to how drivers in their prime today couldn't match the big three in their prime.

"There's no reason to discuss what might have been."

I'll bet you're a big Diamond Rio fan...

Comparing real numbers past and present isn't about what might have been, it's about real numbers and winning the big races regardless of time period! Plus.....I've never said drivers today....I can single them out. Schatz is as good as anybody ever. No question. More than a few of the drivers today overlapped the Kinser/Schatz dominations, so their numbers speak for themselves, and the rest of today's drivers have yet to prove themselves. They seem to come and go too fast to find a place in history. I don't believe that with just one good season going for Gravel that he's proven anything yet. Where he goes going forward will be the test of that. Feel free to remind me anytime. A good debate can be fun. But I don't think one can ever debate "ifs and buts". And Dewease at Knoxville present day is an "if". 

Kinser's prime years were 86-94. None of the younger drivers of today were in their prime in those given years, ergo, they shouldn't be debated. Just be consistent in your logic. Don't move the goalposts. Admittedly I'm being dickish, but damn that's what forums are for... debate.

You seem to be comfortable debating topics you want to debate, but quick to say other things shouldn't even be discussed. If others want to discuss where Dewease might have finished at Knoxville, let them. You didn't have to hit "post". 

Comparing real numbers past and present isn't about what might have been, it's about real numbers and winning the big races regardless of time period! Plus.....I've never said drivers today....I can single them out. Schatz is as good as anybody ever. No question. More than a few of the drivers today overlapped the Kinser/Schatz dominations, so their numbers speak for themselves, and the rest of today's drivers have yet to prove themselves. They seem to come and go too fast to find a place in history. I don't believe that with just one good season going for Gravel that he's proven anything yet. Where he goes going forward will be the test of that. Feel free to remind me anytime. A good debate can be fun. But I don't think one can ever debate "ifs and buts". And Dewease at Knoxville present day is an "if". 

There's nothing stock about an econo late model. They are not street stocks It's a 358 llm with a 2bbl. 

Not a mistake.....they weren't there, so not a factor plain and simple. They (the 69k team) are the ultimate "porch" racers....therefore not to be mentioned in the same breath as those that competed at the Nationals!

Guess again num-nuts! Kinser was winning WoO titles from 1978-2005! And had 10 wins and finished 3rd in points in 2010. So I'd say he and Schatz shared many WoO, drivers over the years as competitors. Saldana (until recently), Pittman, Haudenschild, McMahan and Stewart as active.....and both raced against Hodnett (once an Outlaw), Dewease in PA and a fist full of others that are still competitive today. There's a hell of a list of drivers that have seen their primes out there with good WoO feature win numbers that still run damn strong. And if your comprehension is poor, I did state the younger drivers today are yet to prove themselves. Once proven then maybe they will compare favorably to the past drivers. But not yet. I don't "move the goal post" as you say, but it appears as though you tried to by ending Kinser's prime in 1994.

You don’t really get my point, do you?  Don’t answer that, it’s rhetorical.  There are a lot of things to try and cover from your past two posts, so hopefully this doesn’t meander too much.  

You stated “there’s no reason to discuss what might have been.” Besides it being a patently absurd comment, it’s not a difficult thing to discuss.  Anyone with an imagination and some critical thinking skills can discuss “what might have been”.  The argument didn’t suit your tastes, so you dismissed it with what I consider to be a weak reason. I’m still not sure why you were so dismissive about others discussing something hypothetical when you, yourself have talked about “what might have been” on multiple occasions.  I thought it was very hypocritical of you, so I called you out with an example.

I know tone can be a tough thing to get across in a post, but I feel as though yours consistently take on a know-it-all, dismissive tone.  Frankly I find it irritating.  If you’re not trying to sound that way, then that’s on me and I apologize. That’s why I felt the need to post something with such a wiseass tone.

You are showing me that you don’t know what “moving the goalposts” actually means. Its ok, Google is your friend. 

As far as the Kinser thing and when his prime was, (sigh) you do know that I’m aware that he won races consistently from the time the Outlaws were founded?  How dumb do you think I am?  I still maintain that 86-94 was the King at his absolute peak.  If you wanted the best Steve Kinser to win you a race I think a majority of fans would pick one from this time period. 

Lastly, and this is really minor, but if you are going to call me names can you at least be creative? Oh and perhaps spell it correctly? Please?

Thanks for the update.... don't know the specifics about these classes, but I think you know what I meant: "taxicabs"

As for my porch comment, truth sometimes stings, I know. I'm probably as disapointed as any that they choose not to show. They are a great team.  And....there is plenty of money to be had at the Nationals besides the $150k!

+1

Johnny, I think we've broached this before (not on this particular thread) but damn I think we're cut from the same cloth.  I mean that as a compliment.  Not that I'm a prize or anything, but still.  Level headed-ness, objectivity, etc. are sometimes difficult to find on message boards.  Cheers.  That's all.  Hope your day is going well

You don’t really get my point, do you?  Don’t answer that, it’s rhetorical.  There are a lot of things to try and cover from your past two posts, so hopefully this doesn’t meander too much.  

You stated “there’s no reason to discuss what might have been.” Besides it being a patently absurd comment, it’s not a difficult thing to discuss.  Anyone with an imagination and some critical thinking skills can discuss “what might have been”.  The argument didn’t suit your tastes, so you dismissed it with what I consider to be a weak reason. I’m still not sure why you were so dismissive about others discussing something hypothetical when you, yourself have talked about “what might have been” on multiple occasions.  I thought it was very hypocritical of you, so I called you out with an example.

I know tone can be a tough thing to get across in a post, but I feel as though yours consistently take on a know-it-all, dismissive tone.  Frankly I find it irritating.  If you’re not trying to sound that way, then that’s on me and I apologize. That’s why I felt the need to post something with such a wiseass tone.

You are showing me that you don’t know what “moving the goalposts” actually means. Its ok, Google is your friend. 

As far as the Kinser thing and when his prime was, (sigh) you do know that I’m aware that he won races consistently from the time the Outlaws were founded?  How dumb do you think I am?  I still maintain that 86-94 was the King at his absolute peak.  If you wanted the best Steve Kinser to win you a race I think a majority of fans would pick one from this time period. 

Lastly, and this is really minor, but if you are going to call me names can you at least be creative? Oh and perhaps spell it correctly? Please?

No pain felt - doesn't sting me one way or the other.  I just tend to look at things a little different than many of the "porch vs off the porch" folk.  Way I look at is if one can make a decent living ON the porch, then why in the hell would you leave it?  Yes, yes....I know, when you're young and full of piss and vinegar that traveling bug gets ahold of you but that bug is also a fucking pig with one hell of an appetite for $$$$.  When you factor in travel expenses and wear and tear on man and machine traveling across the country for a $100,000 race, a $50,000 local "porch" race is possibly damn near a more profitable venture.  $100k may be twice the money, but when you truly start crunching the numbers it may surprise you.

Think of it this way - you live in Mechanicsburg and have two job offers.  One pays $50k a year and you have to commute to Harrisburg while the other pays $100k a year but you have to commute to Philadelphia every day.  I find the "porch" rather comfy. Lol