That isn't exactly news. RSC's Simbin department has been branded ever since GTR and they didn't do that for free. Whoever thought to the contrary must have missed how such things work in the real world.
We had to change the format for the finals a bit and as consequence tried to find a mix between being nice for the drivers and fun to watch.
Personally, I agree that you need a spectator friendly format if you want to widen the audience.
Personally, I agree that you need a spectator friendly format if you want to widen the audience.
If it was sanctioned by the FIA, wouldn't it show up on their page?
It might very well be that they follow FIA safety rules and it may even very well be that they hired Charlie Whiting, but that does not necessarily mean it's sanctioned by the FIA. The officially sanctioned championships are these: http://www.fia.com/sport/Championships/2006.html
It might very well be that they follow FIA safety rules and it may even very well be that they hired Charlie Whiting, but that does not necessarily mean it's sanctioned by the FIA. The officially sanctioned championships are these: http://www.fia.com/sport/Championships/2006.html
Funny that A1GP is not sanctioned by the FIA.
How about you simply tell your kid it's a bad word and that he must not use it?
Security by obscurity has never worked, it's better to explain stuff. It's called upbringing a kid. But then angle-saxon folks always have had a problem with bad words. Saying shit is a serious offence, but saying crap and meaning shit is okay? Anyone knows what is meant...
Security by obscurity has never worked, it's better to explain stuff. It's called upbringing a kid. But then angle-saxon folks always have had a problem with bad words. Saying shit is a serious offence, but saying crap and meaning shit is okay? Anyone knows what is meant...
One of the top 5 races in MS career. What a way to end the most successful career in F1.
Different situation. In Monza Alonso was on his outlap, meaning not putting in a timed lap. Therefore he was in blue flag situation, which means he must yield (all in theory, I didn't see any blocking there either). The BMW yesterday was on his flying lap meaning he does not have to yield.
If you wanna bitch, try to get your facts straight.
Can the suspension geometry be found anywhere?
Things like wheelbase, trackwidth, cog and so on?
Things like wheelbase, trackwidth, cog and so on?
I just hope for Renault they aren't playing it too safe. I mean, I wouldn't mind MS winning it, but just running for one point is a lot of the time much harder than going out and win it. You tell yourself "ah, I just need one point" and that's when errors slip in and you lose your concentration.
Why not say "he is the god of bike racing". I mean, he's the only world champion on MotoGP bikes and he also won the last of the 500cc championships.
I remember that in one of my car-cardgames there was a Rolls Royce rally car. 
Can't be 2003, since post-quali parc fermé rules were in place by then. I'd rather think he'd have switched to the t-car with Barichello's setup in such a case. That, however, was a very common was of handling things with all teams before parc fermé rules were put in place.
Other than that you're pretty much spot on about Alonso's abilities, anyone who seriously doubts them must have missed quite a bit since his entry. He is hard on his fronts (that was stated by a few experts, it was quoted on TV this weekend, forgot who said it, though), which is not so much of a factor though since Michelin provides Renault with other tires than say McLaren anyways and can consider this. But it is within reasonable use of tires and can only bite him in extraordinary conditions.
Right. First Engine failure in 6 years and maybe 2 or 3 other technical related retirements in that period. He must really destroy his cars. NOT.
Right, and your prove would be some third grade F1 driver that suddenly pops up again when it is the most feasable time to actually get some attention. You should also mention that Peter Sauber denied any influence was taking by Ferrari with regards to Sauber and/or their drivers ever. And please don't doubt Mr. Sauber's integrity, he's the only one in the whole F1 world who actually can be trusted.
Whoops, didn't see you changed from Shanghai to Sepang. Damn Tilke circuits, not only do they look alike, they also start with the same first letter. 
I was in fact thinking you were still talking about Shanghai and using that line in a sarcastic way. I still stand with my opinion though, that I'd rather have open team orders than the "save the engine" "brake problem" "tire issue" crap that goes on nowadays.
I was in fact thinking you were still talking about Shanghai and using that line in a sarcastic way. I still stand with my opinion though, that I'd rather have open team orders than the "save the engine" "brake problem" "tire issue" crap that goes on nowadays.
Right. Thats why Fisi finished ahead of Alonso and wasn't told to "save the engine". Come on, you are making it yourself way too easy.
When exactly was MSC lapped at Hungary? If my memory serves me correctly, the safety car saved him from being lapped.
I don't doubt that Alonso was brillant in the beginning stages of the race, I simply have no memory of him lapping MSC in that race.
So you are rather lied to than being openly told what game is played? (and see the comments I wrote on this in a different thread: http://www.lfsforum.net/showthread.php?p=230921#post230921)
On the topic of Alonso insulting his team: The things he tells the media in Spain and then what he says on race weekends seem to differ quite a bit all the time. This started with "MS is the most unsporting guy in history", of which a radio transcript does exist and then he goes on "nonono, I was misunderstood, I said Zidane was the better sportsman" and now the sabotage accusations which all of a sudden don't exist anymore. Either Spanish media always and no matter who they are invent interviews with him or he should choose his interview partners more carefully or he simply speaks, as the native American would say, with two tungs. I suspect the latter.
Sources: http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/54924
http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/54926
Oh, and just why did you leave out the first sentence in his answer? His answer starts with "I think it's a difficult question" which tells more than just one story about his attitude. And just for the reason you want sources, here you get one as well, the official transcript of the press conference: http://www.formula1.com/race/news/5068/768.html
Last edited by Hoellsen, .
Depends on the definition of "team order". If you only see team order when the team boss says "let him pass now", then of course there was no team order. However, if you see the bigger picture, there was very well one. Pat Symmonds stated that they talk about situations like this one before the race so that the drivers know what to do. That does not differ one bit from an order given in a special situation, only the public does not see it or hear it.
The whole team order deal is blatantly ****ed up anyways. Ferrari used them openly, albeit in a wrong situation and everyone knew what was played. However, it seems as if the public rather gets told lies like "brake problem", "saving engine" and so on and pretending there was no team order.
Judging by the grammar, missing words and way too long sentences, that "journalist" is an amateuer. The article looks like being directly taken out of some forum.
Tbh, any racing driver would do anything to win a championship. Otherwise they arent championship calibre. If it is done right (Suzuka 90, Adelaide 94) it works, if it is done wront (Jerez 97) it ****s you up. But then you dont really care about it, since you didnt win the championship anyways.
Dont think there is any driver out there "oh, pls pass me, I will lose the WDC, but if you pass me fair and square, thats ok!"
Are we missing a smiley there?
Could we quit the awfully stupid "he is better, no he is better - but he cheats, no he is more unfair" crap finally? It's boring, repetitive and on both sides in 99.9% of the time far from the truth.
It was a great race and sets up a stunning season finale. Let's go with that view of the happenings, shall we?
It was a great race and sets up a stunning season finale. Let's go with that view of the happenings, shall we?
Dislike is okay, but wishing people harm is way beyond the line of acceptable behaviour.
He's got a point about the tracks, though. Especially in the Formula cars, LFS tracks mostly are "too" flat.
As an example: Kyoto GP, the Esses around split 1 should be designed in a way that they are 3rd-4th gear corners in that you have to fether the throttle in the BF1, not just plow through them flatout.
As an example: Kyoto GP, the Esses around split 1 should be designed in a way that they are 3rd-4th gear corners in that you have to fether the throttle in the BF1, not just plow through them flatout.
On the start: you are seeing things that arent there. I have read of no opinion by anyone that has anything to say that would support your view.
They are still running them, just like anyone else.
You are forgetting that it was the other way round at Hockenheim. Scruteneering is done by the race stewards and not the FIA and of the three stewards two are changed for each race. So it is very much thinkable that the opinion of the non-permanent stewards in Hockenheim and Budapest differed. Nothing the FIA can do about that under the current steward-rules.
I do think, though, that the system used for the stewards is bullshit.
They are still running them, just like anyone else.
You are forgetting that it was the other way round at Hockenheim. Scruteneering is done by the race stewards and not the FIA and of the three stewards two are changed for each race. So it is very much thinkable that the opinion of the non-permanent stewards in Hockenheim and Budapest differed. Nothing the FIA can do about that under the current steward-rules.
I do think, though, that the system used for the stewards is bullshit.
Have you even tried understanding my post? I did not write a single line regarding the basis of the ruling and wether I find that acceptable.
I simply wrote why the FIA "all of a sudden stamped there foot". They weren't involved before McLaren filed the protest and they do not act without being presented a device and/or without a protest being filed.
I guess you havent seen any onboard videos from the same perspective as the Ferrari ones. That Renault's front wing was flexibel could already be seen last season. The only reason it became more apparent with Ferrari's wing was that Ferrari had the upper part of the wing touching the nose and that this part was bending away. The back lip of the lower shelf has been moving on all front wings quite some time now, not just since Bahrain when the issue got hot.
Just one word: lol
Is MS now not allowed to attack the pole sitter when he is in P2 and/or defend his position? Must he look that no car that is behind him not spin? I guess he should better start from the back of the grid from now on so he can make sure none of the Super Aguri and Midland get affected by him turning into a corner.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GJQ0wpkus38
Maybe Fisico should complain to Alonso for cutting across in the way he did? But in no means had MS anything to do with Fisico spinning.
FGED GREDG RDFGDR GSFDG