Although Sean has made some sense, but I think making scenario to describe grammatical point is almost misleading. I prefer the comprehensive definitions.
I think, too, all three are right, depending on what the speaker means.
However, a Past Perfect tense [had had] refers to a verb that took place in the past and was finished [itself and/or its influence] BEFORE another past tens (in whatever form) either in the same sentence or in the whole context. Draw a line; mark a pint on it and call it Present; mark another point and call it Past Perfect. Mark a third point between these to marks. Whatever action (in a verbal sense) beginning from the second mark and ending before the 3rd mark could be conjugated as Pas Perfect IF you are ALSO mentioning the time between the 1st and the 3rd mark in the same sentence or the same context.
The exception is the indirect quotation that will change the tense one step back towards the past. i.e. “he has done it.” Would be quoted as “She said, he had done it.”

Native speakers who know grammar, help!

Dear Sarah
Yes it was "race" but I wasn't sure what I heard was race or raise. Speedwell suggested that it is more likely to be raise.
You seem to be a good slang source! Keep in touch :-)

So what does "Go raise some V-cards" mean then?

Aima Akhazemea, you gotta read Barba's books then. And see some of the videos fron Odin Teatret.

I dunno about that, but Marx says, "Quantity effects quality!" I think when the Communism gets as soupy as goulash then it goes as awry as it went. Hence Goulash Communism! ;-)

"In the beginning was dictionary and dictionary was God!"

OK! :-)

Speed, if beforehandedly isn't wrong, I'm happy with it.
as to the ignorance stuff, I wouldn't take statements like lysdexia's serious. Because s/he is either an English speaker so that THINKS s/he knows the language because s/he talks to her/his pet in that language or just have been told a "rule" in an English school and is convinced and happy with it for the rest of her/his life.
So I don't bother to show examples that contradicts that "rule."

Speed,
You should be careful that "poet Rilke" and "the poet, Rilke" (note the comma) are not grammatically the same.

But we are getting far from the subjevt here. My post was about deliberate alternative spelling in purpose. Of course it is wrong spelling to write 2 instead of to. because they are two different things. But it is also cool sometimes to write like this. I just wonted to know how far back we can trace this.