Andy,
Are you saying to start the shot clock "earlier" but keep it at 25 secs?
Alan "a little confused" Pozner
On Tuesday, June 20, 2000 11:09 AM, Andrew_Bettencourt@kingston.com
[SMTP:Andrew_Bettencourt@kingston.com] wrote:
>
>
> Here is the caveat though....there was a significant amount of time saved
> because most people had themselves staged in 20 seconds. The point to
make is
> that the (manual) starter, didn't pressure anyone to get staged. They
didn't
> ask for your "ready" reply until both cars were in the lights (BTW: no pre
stage
> light either).
>
> I think 20 seconds could work as well but there is always a few seconds
delay
> from the start until the shot clock actually begins to start down.
>
> How about the 25 seconds from time of launch?
>
> AB
>
>
>
>
> Alan Pozner <AlanP@identicard.com> on 06/20/2000 11:29:55 AM
>
> Please respond to Alan Pozner <AlanP@identicard.com>
>
> To: "'autox@autox.team.net'" <autox@autox.team.net>
> cc: (bcc: Andrew Bettencourt/FIELD SALES/Kingston)
>
> Subject: RE:why the harrisburg pro took less time
>
>
>
>
> Alek Tziortzis wrote:
>
> >...they had to use manual starts (I hate manual starts). The time between
> cars
> >which is normally about 30-35 seconds (total) was now 25 seconds.
> >...
> >I vote that the shot clock be changed to 20 seconds for subsequent
events.
> >...
>
> I agree with Alek's analysis and with his suggestion. Although manual
starts
> are more stressful than the shot clock, I still felt I had plenty of time
at
> the line. 20 seconds for the shot clock seems reasonable to me.
>
> Regards,
> Alan
>
>
>
>
>
>
|