Pags...
..you wrote:

Trust me, literacy is bliss, maybe you should try it -- here's what I said, in verbatim; "Never liked the guy, but this is a bullshit penalty" -- i.e., the penalty for breaking that rule is bullshit.

-- peer

Should they change the rule? "in motion at light change", or "in motion and
out of box at light change". I think Cal would have been guilty of the
first, but not the second. An advantage of the second rule idea is this:
who wants to risk a ride through penalty to try and get a 20 centimeter,
tenth of a second advantage on their opponents? I think it would not affect
the starting behavior of most riders.

On Mon, 1 Apr 2019 at 19:00, Peer Landa peer@ccrma.stanford.edu wrote:

C'Mon Peer, I've got one of those certificate things that say "English" on
it, so literacy is bonafide here.

Maybe, the "rule" is bullshit, if we're splitting hairs on it.  The penalty
is exactly what they described.

I get roll started regularly by one of my opponents.  Nobody says a thing,
and it's just a stupid mini class.  But the dude that does it doesn't need
an advantage.  And I sulk.  I sulk like a guy that hit the pit lane limiter
at the start.

Can we expect a Peer Starting Explained video soon?
Pags

On Mon, Apr 1, 2019 at 10:00 PM Peer Landa peer@ccrma.stanford.edu wrote: