A quote that nobody picked up on:

Quote from Kimi Raikkonen :

I got a pretty good start and got into the first place but then braking into the first corner I was trying to turn in and there was first one McLaren and then a second and I think they both hit me and I had nowhere to go.

You would hope that a drive would know if a car has hit you, let alone two cars. The evidence available on the very same website shows that there was absolutely no contact made.

Also, after seeing this footage, let's look at:

Incident #1: Hamilton outbreaked himself, and locked his tires up. See him turning the wheel at nearly 90 degrees right, towards the apex. He obviously didn't make it, because he was sliding. He also didn't make contact with any other cars, and everyone that might have been directly affected by Hamilton locking up, cleared the turn without incident. Hamilton was at fault, no doubt, but it's not worthy of a punishment.

Incident #2: Massa went wide, Hamilton took the place, and had racing line at the apex. At this point, Massa came off the grass and hit him. I would say that a stop and go penalty should have been the order here, as it forced Hamilton to sit and wait until everyone passed, before he could continue the race. The penalty incurred was not proportional.

Incident #3: Watch the side view, looking at Massa's helmet from the left hand side of the car. He didn't even appear to look for Bourdais's car at turn-in, yet he absolutely must have known he was there. Bourdais' front right wheel was in fact clear over the white line of the rumble strip, I expect because he was trying to avoid a collision, while Massa just turned in on him. Drive through penalty for Massa, or 25 seconds due to it being a post-race decision.

Farcical isn't a strong enough word.

Last edited by dawguk, Tue 14 Oct 2008, 21:13.

The damning thing is, the "Formula One Group" are self-regulated in many respects. They conform to FIA guidelines, but outside of that, they answer to nobody but themselves.

With the amount of money being thrown around by the (Privately owned) teams, the (Privately owned) circuits, and the fans that support this so-called "sport", somebody has to be held accountable for these recent debacles. I fear that the reason this hasn't happened, is because F1 is so full of money and self-regulated power, that challenging them is utterly futile.

There's the old "if everyone is so unhappy, why not break away and form a new group?" question. This has been a rumour that re-surfaces at least once every couple of years. Again though, the reason this doesn't happen, is money.

Example: Just look at how some of the drivers have made u-turns with their statements, days after "controversial" incidents or decisions. Perhaps "be a good boy / team and we'll make sure you have a team / pit garage to race in next year". It really does make you wonder...

Also, taking into account how much drivers get paid, team sponsorship, contractual agreements with circuits and all of the other mountains of paperwork that is undoubtedly involved, breaking away for the Formula One Group is sadly not as easy at it sounds. And this is all allowed to happen, because the FIA make their fattest wedge from Formula One - why on earth would they start bullying their biggest earner?

It's a sad state of affairs that's been allowed to grow over tens of years - I truly think that this recent spate of controversy and bewilderment is down to the fact that the F1 Group have been getting away with this for so long, and the cracks are starting to show.

I think that no matter what rule changes come into play next season, and no matter how teams are "regulated" in the future, the damage this last two years has been devastating.

I pray for the day that some of these teams grow a pair of bollocks, stand together and say: "THIS IS WRONG".

Quote from Intrepid :

The best thing to do is to STOP watching.

Nah, the best thing to do, would be to kidnap Ecclestone and his man-wife from their mansion, make him resign and apologise publicly for being a money grabbing, annoying little jumped up Ferrari ass kisser, throw out any people belonging to any team on the board, ensure that a new, unbiased board is elected, and start making some seriously good decisions, for the first time in twenty years.

Or just watch MotoGP. It's pretty good still.

Screamer and Screamer 2 were also major players. Also, there was Ultimate Race Pro.

Quote from DHRammstein :

how long does it take your crummy british 1.6 embarrasments to reach 60mph, or even worse, 100mph? Or can any of them?

Just for the record: In my crummy old French 1.6 (Saxo VTS), I could run a 0-60 in 6.2 seconds (ticketed), and top out at 133mph. In something that is quarter the size of your "muscle" car.

I wonder if he says this because he still wants a Ferrari seat, and with Kimi's current form, kissing up to Ferrari will do him only good?

I hope this sort of comment doesn't come back to bite him in the ass - if he so much as comes close to making contact with Hamilton for the last two races, this statement is going to damn him, whether intentional or not.

Further to Bourdais incident - why has Massa not come out and said that the decision was the right one to make? Because everyone knows it was the wrong decision, and he doesn't want to look stupid.

Again, if it's true, shout about it (as Bourdais has done here). Those that keep quiet have normally got a reason for it.

I think that the worst thing the FIA and F1 could do at this point, is sit on their hands, and not provide the world with information, regarding decisions made this year that have affected outcomes of races.

If I was in the position of being accused of making biased decisions towards a particular driver or a particular team, I would absolutely go out of my way to make sure everybody knew I was innocent, and provide evidence to suggest this. However, everything at the FIA is suspiciously quiet. Why is this? Why don't they just stop all the speculation and arguments, and come out and make their decisions and their decision making process public? I suspect the reason is, because they would give away too much information...

In fact, the only people making statements, is drivers, and even this makes you wonder if they are being paid or "asked" to do so, because the statements are always biased towards the FIA.

What was that head-motion-detection-stuff you were talking about the other day, and can it be used in this flight sim / LFS / GTR / anything else?

- Silver Mini 25 Special Edition 1275 GT
- Petrol Green Mk II 1.1 Fiesta
- Hearing-Aid beige Mk II 1.1 Fiesta
- Silver Peugeot 309 1.6 SRi
- British Racing Green Vauxhall Vectra 1.8 SRi 120
- Black Saab 9-5 2.3 Aero
- Electric Blue Citroen Saxo 1.6 VTS
- Grey MG ZS 2.5 V6 180

Quote from crashgate3 :

haha.. Cyber-stalking...

2+2= ... :d

Quote from Crashgate3 :

KA-50 Black Shark

Screenshots

This is a game I've been looking forward to for ages... <snip>

Haven't you got some C++ to be getting on with?

Ever thought about a Mitsubishi FTO? Or even a GTO for that matter. The GTO is barking mad, with a new dump valve, induction kit and a sports exhaust. Bags of fun, and with them being Japanese, you can get some crazy kit for them both. Also, a Mazda RX7 with a big spoiler (the only way it keeps it's ass on the floor at speed) will also see you have some fun, and has space for shopping should you need it.

I used to have a Saab 9-5 Aero - that was stupidly fast, but front wheel drive. You'd have loads of fun modding in the engine bay, and turning it into a Porsche beater.

These days though, I need something a bit more sensible, but with enough poke to make me grin when needed. So now I drive an MG ZS 180. Sure, you can say that it's an old Rover chassis (which it is), but that's pretty much as far as it goes - the car is absolutely bags of fun to drive, has some nice kit and is cheap as hell to run and buy.

We went this year. It persisted down with rain, and was bloody freezing cold. We were at the Farm enclosure, so we could see Bridge too. Actually, the rain made it quite a fantastic race in the end.

Ear plugs aren't needed unless you are sitting in a relatively enclosed portion of the track. At Bridge, you had to wear ear plugs, because your ears nearly bleed from the engine notes reverberating off the walls. Apart from this, Silverstone is quite a well "ventilated" track, so sound dissipates quite well.

If you plan on taking a camera (still or video) get yourself a monopod, or you will not be able to take a single decent shot.

Bus links to and from the circuit are fantastic, from either the M1 or the M40. We arrived at the circuit via shuttle bus at 06:30ish, and spent the whole day mooching around until the F1 started.

Don't bother with the Kangaroo TV things - they are a waste of money, they stop working with even the smallest amount of cloud cover.

Soak up as much as you can, it's quite a fantastic day, thoroughly recommend it

Quote from STROBE :

Imho, asking which team is "strong" over the race means which team outperformed themselves over the weekend. Williams & Rosberg were "strong" as normally they're down at the back somewhere but performed beyond all expectations. Renault & Alonso were "strong" because normally they're in the midfield, but situations granted them a good opportunity and they had the pace & tactics to take the win. McLaren & Hamilton were not strong, even though they finished third, because we know how fast they can be from previous races and they were slightly underwhelming in Singapore. Ferrari were a clown team this weekend, managing to cock up a pitstop in monumental fashion and both drivers screwing up.

Moreover, it's a case of "which team had most luck with the SC situation, and adapted their tactics to best suit the moment". In this case, it's obvious that it's Renault. Anybody claiming that Ferrari were strong, in the slightest, can be called out on being a blinkered fanboy/fangirl

Holy crapolla. I just did a search for Lee McKenzie on google, with the safe search turned off. Let's hope we get some of that action too

Quote from Hyperactive :

Formula archery 1

We could combine Skis and rifle shooting too. Genius.

Some F1 circuits should have jumps, ramps and a dirt-track section. That would make the sport perfect, imo

No, the graphics aren't that bad. Evolution looks significantly better than rFactor and GT4. Regardless of that, graphics are hardly what makes a game.

What we need is S40 estates racing against E30's and Cavalier SRi's.

http://www.btcc.net/forum/showthread.php?t=6917

FYI

Just going to dig this thread out perhaps one last time

I liked GTR2, but found the cars to behave stupidly under cornering, I'll explain.

You're racing on effectively road tires, and if you overcook it slightly into a corner, you should be able to decelerate, re-position the car for racing line, and at least steer your way around the corner. However, this never happened - if you overcooked it even slightly, the front wheels would just slide like they are on ice, and you'd find yourself in the gravel trap.

However (and I'm saying this as a big LFS fan) I've found GTR Evolution to be a much nicer representation of real cornering physics. For example, if you hit a corner too fast, you get enough (accute) feedback to understand how you should correct your line and speed. You also feel the road a lot more if you're not on the racing line, for example where the surface tarmac is less worn.

Another nice touch, which I've found only to occur in the smaller, high revving cars (such as the Radicals) is when you shift a gear under heavy acceleartion, you get steering wheel feedback which makes it feel like the car is torque steering. Nice touch of reality, regardless how useless people deem it.

And I have to say that the Green Hell is simply wonderful to drive - nicest simulation of Nordshleife that I've seen in any game.

I'm not comparing it to LFS at all, because it's different enough to compliment it for my on-line racing needs

Off-topic-ish.

If spacial awareness and observational skills were mandatory in the driving test, there would be very few women drivers. I'm not being sexist, but my god the majority of women (that I know at least) have very little awareness of their surroundings. They are more fun sometimes, but sitting in the passenger seat of their car while approaching a roundabout is not fun.

Sarcasm is the lowest common denominator.

I also didn't see any flame wars, just heated discussion. Forums are intended for discussion, after all.

I like the way that you claim I've said things, without actually saying or inferring them.

Quote from JamesF1 :

I'm quite capable of using my vocabulary correctly. I imagine you took the time to consult various other definitions of the word 'oxymoron', rather than the definition that suited your purpose? An oxymoron is 'two concepts {usually words} that do not go together' or even 'association of two contradictions'. You can't take both the tightest line into a corner and the racing line, they contradict. In light of that, the use of the word was valid from a conversational point of view, but probably less so from a formal point of view.

Fair enough, in which case your use here was invalid, as I didn't claim that you could take both the tightest line into a corner and the racing line. Not once.

Quote from JamesF1 :

Also, try looking up the word 'paradox', which is in your very own definition of 'oxymoron'. A paradox is 'logic that contradicts itself'. Oh look... contradiction.

If you'd have used these words instead, that would have been just fine. You didn't though.

Quote from JamesF1 :

Where on earth did you see me direct that at you (or, indeed, anyone else in the thread)? The comment was made as a reference to the previous subject - Kimi and his line through the corner. Now, either what you're saying is an obvious contradiction or everyone upholding the FIA rulebook, here, is moronic.

Who were you directing it at then? You commented directly after referencing points that I made in a previous post. This, in conversational terms, is called a reply or a response.

Quote from JamesF1 :

I can't count the number of times I've seen that video now. I realise it's not the normal line, but he was defending a position. Running slightly wider out is a normal, and perfectly valid, way to defend.

Nobody is disputing that, people are disputing the fact that Hamilton tried to gain an advantage by cutting the chicane.

This is obviously going nowhere, so let's just agree to disagree and move on, no?