You obviously didn't pick up on the dichotomy of my statements. I was echoing all of the Kool-Aid scented Newspeak that has been spewing from the mouths of those opposed to any kind of power reduction plan, then clearly stating the sarcasm to which.
Pointing out, as has Head and Ace, that the NHRA style of nitro racing is as competitive as it has ever been and there is no need for rules changes. Puuuhhhllleeeaaassseee. Those statements make about as much sense as Troy Moe's claim that the entire state of Texas was "under siege" by tornados a couple of weeks ago. Go ahead and put me in the "ignorant at best" column because I don't agree with either of those gentlemen...nor do I agree with Moe. I don't care what length of track they run on. I do believe that the nitro car safety is steadily improving at a rapid pace. I don't think that the length of the tracks has a thing to do with the safety of the vehicles. I believe that NHRA and the nitro teams have been asleep at the wheel for a couple of decades and the health of the "premeire" drag racing class is at long-term risk...unless you are employed by one of two "teams" in the biz.
But I digress.
As previously stated, I recant any desire or statement aimed at re-packaging top-tier nitro rules/specs for the betterment of the sport/industry. There is nothing wrong (according to the cows refusing to budge). Running Top Fuel or Funny Car on the NHRA trail is as affordable and cost-effective today as it was in 1979. No need for change. Don't fix what's not broke, right? Just let it roll as-is and check back in with us all after five years.