okay... I'll take the accept the correction because of Leffler's status> ~ but I don't think calling the basic call of two out of four ROTY> canidates finishing a lap down is any more of a gimmie than your> prediction that a Dodge wouldn't win the race. Dodges have won less> than 10% of the races since the beginning ot last season, haven't won> one at all this year and haven't won in Darlington since spring 2002.

"Julia" <jpchick83@gmail.co­m> wrote in message> news:20050508115658­50073%jpchick83@gmai­lcom...>> On 2005-05-08 05:31:26 -0400, "Somebody" <somebody@nospam.ru­ssdoucet.com>> said:>>

No, they hadn't, but given that they had inside and outside pole, and spots> 2,3,4,5 on the speed chart from practice, it seemed to me that it was not a> gimmie that they wouldn't win this week. And in fact, dodges were right> there at the very end and up front all day, except Biffle and in the end> Gordon spoiled the party.>

Without the qualifier of how this week was shaping up, ie most any other> week dodge not winning would be a gimmie, yes.

I submitted on Friday so that people would have a chance to look at it.>

I also questioned your rookie prediction on Friday, but didn't see any> response back. The way I saw it, if the prediction was that at least two> drivers that had not graduated beyond rookie status would be a lap down for> contact at Darlington, I bet that's happened nearly ever darlington race> forever. If the prediction was that 2, 3, or 4 of the roty contenders> would... close to gimmie also when two of them are Stanton Barret and Eric> McClure. Have those two even finished on the lead lap yet this year? Now,> predicting exactly 2 of them would be at least 1 lap down, that's a great> prediction. I had hoped to clarify which one of these you were stating.> Looks as if it's the first one, again, I challenge you to find a race at> Darlington where this hasn't been the case, ever.>

Oh and sorry for the way I posted it I didn't mean to say you get -1 as a> total score now! +1 is of course the correct amended score! (math is not> my strong suit lol)>

-Russ.

Dodge never has a problem posting great times in practice, winning> poles or running up front ~ it's taking the checkered flag that's the> issue (especially in the last year and a half). Until their winning> percentage improves, I would say that saying that they won't win is a> gimmie. IMO, any statistic that is over true over 90% of the time for> the past 45 races would have to fall into "gimmie" territory and Dodge> not winning falls into that category ~ pretty sorry state of affairs> for a make that fields 40% of the cars.>

It's kinda shocking when you actually look at these stats:>

Ford comprises roughly 20% of the field and wins about 30% of the races.> Chevy comprises about 40% of the field and wins about 60% of the races.> Dodge makes up the other 40% but wins just under 10% of the races.>

The way I interpret that (and I could be completely wrong) it that Ford> and Chevy are basically even and Dodge is way, way behind ~ I think> they would be totally justified in seeking some sort of concession.

BTW ~ you couldn't have questioned me on Friday unless you were reading> my mind, 'cause I didn't post it until Saturday... so there really> wasn't a chance to question it ~ another reason I have no problem> accepting the gimmie call now.

okay... I'll take the accept the correction because of Leffler's status> ~ but I don't think calling the basic call of two out of four ROTY > canidates finishing a lap down is any more of a gimmie than your > prediction that a Dodge wouldn't win the race. Dodges have won less than > 10% of the races since the beginning ot last season, haven't won one at > all this year and haven't won in Darlington since spring 2002.>

Well I'm certainly open to accepting a new ruling on the Dodge question. I> thought given how strong they looked across the board predicting they> wouldn't win would be a fair prediction, but I didn't bother looking at> history where they qualified and practiced well.

I must be in some sort of time warp, probably the saturday race thing as I> didn't realise the race was on saturday originally. My bad then.

The way I interpret that (and I could be completely wrong) it that> Ford and Chevy are basically even and Dodge is way, way behind ~ I> think they would be totally justified in seeking some sort of> concession.

On 2005-05-08 23:44:40 -0400, "Somebody"> <somebody@nospam.ru­ssdoucet.com> said: >

dewd, I understand completely... being a hippie chick myself, I > basically live in a time warp.