Just picked this up from Autosport:
http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/87530

I'm not sure whether Gascoyne is talking about the same tyre, or just the same compound. It's a weird decision for Pirelli to use the same compound or tyre in F1 as it does in GP2. You'd think they'd develop something different!

Congratulations.

Peter Brock + Bathurst + Rain + Slicks = http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TmHPV8NwWiI

Quote from amp88 :

He may have been in control of what he was doing in the majority of the moves, but he wasn't in control of what his opponents were doing in any of them.

You're never really in control of what the other driver is doing. There is always a trust factor involved when a driver is trying to pass another. So to say "he wasn't in control of what his opponents were doing" is an unrealistic criticism.

Aside from the first pass on Jaime Alguersuari, all the other so-called "divebombs" could have been prevented by adequately covering the inside line. None of the drivers did that. Alguersuari tried to defend against the second pass by covering the inside, but Kobayashi outplayed him by passing around the outside (which was very cleanly done)! So really, the drivers all had a choice: try to defend the inside line and be passed around the outside, or hold the outside position and get divebombed. They all got corralled into making one of two bad choices, and that sort of corralling takes skill.

Kamui Kobayashi should be sponsored by No Fear.

Quote from Mustafur :

When you have such a Big front wing the is obviously going to be front flex, its just everyone is targeting the car thats been fastest all season.

Agreed. A lot of critics seem to be jumping on the "flexing wing" bandwagon just because the wing flexes. The issue isn't that it flexes, but how much it flexes under a particular load. The FIA upped the load test and the car passes that, along with the revised floor flex test, so it should be a non-issue by now.

BTW, what a fun FP3.

Quote from Mustafur :

Autosport thinks Raikkonen is the only driver Renault where looking at, Sutil is a more likely option then him in the first place really.

Frankly, all the drivers in your list would be nuts not to talk to Renault about a drive for next season, unless they're already signed (in the case of Timo Glock).

So he would have been in his 3rd year in karting. Not bad.

Quote from JCTK :

And law lecturers most certainly do like to use that as examples...

None of my law courses have ever mentioned mass trademark-related legal actions by Virgin in Australia.

Virgin's Australian brands has been involved in noteworthy legal actions, but as a defendant, not as a plaintiff.

Quote from Mustafur :

Either way if Renault had of Chosen anyone there other then Petrov they would pretty much be in 4th place in the constructors without a doubt.

That depends on how much money Petrov is bringing in. No money means no development: just look at HRT.

Kamui Kobayashi: Accidental Hero

Nice interview.

He wanted to be a comedian, but wasn't funny enough! His father runs a sushi shop, but he hates raw fish! His parents don't own a road car.

QUITE different from the background of the average F1 driver.

Raikkonen, provided that he doesn't demand an exorbitant salary.

Otherwise, it's a hard call. Both Sutil and Kovalainen deserve better seats: Sutil is probably faster, but Kovalainen had driven well for Renault in 2007. Petrov has been woefully bad, so he shouldn't be re-signed. I'm not sure about Glock. Heidfeld should probably move on, although he's still an excellent driver. I'm tempted to say they should sign Jules Bianchi, by virtue of his French nationality (Renault still owns 25% of the team) and his solid junior results, but bringing on a rookie is high-risk.

Last edited by samjh, Sat 2 Oct 2010, 00:48.

Quote from JCTK :

Sir Richard Branson (aka Virgin) also went around your country and did something similar to what Proton is planning to do, by sueing everyone with the name Virgin in their business name/identity, and failed pretty badly.

Eh? You're the first person I heard that from.

Lancia Delta S4:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-Y-iRifVkJc

Quote from richo :

Its Proton that have the right to the Lotus name , after all they did make a Satria with a Lotus badge on it and surely that has to be enough justification to let them be the sole Lotusee

It does have something to do with Proton's right to the "Lotus" brand.

In 1994, David Hunt bought rights to "Team Lotus", which is what Tony Fernandez's company has now bought. But Group Lotus has rights to "Lotus". The question is whether, in the context of Formula One racing, the trademark for "Team Lotus" is stronger than the trademark for "Lotus".

Quote from CSF :

http://sniffpetrol.com/2010/09 ... d-lotus-fight-over-lotus/

Over the weekend, there has been quite a saga brewing over Tony Fernandez and his Lotus F1 company's purchase of the rights to the famous "Team Lotus" name and their intention to run in F1 in 2011 as "Team Lotus".

Lotus to adopt Team Lotus name: http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/86640

Proton - Team Lotus name not allowed: http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/87038

Lotus insists it can use Team Lotus name: http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/87042

For those who are not aware, Team Lotus was the classic F1 team of Colin Chapman heritage. Once upon a time, there was a car company called Lotus Engineering, which built road cars. An engineer named Colin Chapman split off a dedicated racing team called Team Lotus for motorsports purposes, including F1. As time went by, Lotus Engineering became the Lotus Group of Companies, and eventually, Group Lotus. A Malaysian car manufacturer called Proton purchased Group Lotus in the 90s. However, during those decades, Team Lotus existed as a separate entity until it eventually stopped operating after 1994, and the name was sold off to David Hunt (brother of retired F1 ace, James Hunt).

Tony Fernandez, a Malaysian businessman, purchased a license to use the Lotus brand from Group Lotus for his F1 team, "Lotus Racing". The license was agreed for one year, and will expire at the end of the current F1 season. For next year and beyond, Fernandez purchased the "Team Lotus" name from David Hunt and intends to call Lotus Racing, "Team Lotus".

Proton, the owner of Group Lotus, is not impressed. They're alleging that David Hunt never had the rights to the "Team Lotus" name, and that Fernandez's purchase of the rights from Hunt is meaningless. Proton alleges that only their subsidiary, Group Lotus, has the full rights to "Team Lotus", and even further, that the name "Lotus" cannot be used in connection with F1 without their permission.

What's everyone's take on this? IMHO, I think Proton is just being ridiculous when they suggest David Hunt's rights were invalid. Team Lotus was owned by Colin Chapman and his wife, Hazel. They sold Team Lotus to Peter Collins and Peter Wright, who then sold it to David Hunt. You can't get clearer than that. Furthermore, Hazel Chapman owns Classic Team Lotus along with her son, Clive, so the "Team Lotus" moniker is in no way exclusively reserved for the Lotus Group.

Fernandez has launched legal action in the English High Court, so hopefully this can be sorted out soon, and we might end up with the "real" Lotus in F1.

Quote from Mustafur :

Its the same thing just with medals instead of points.

Too much beer for the footy finals?

Quote from Timo1992 :

HEIDFELD!!

haha yes baby 7 german drivers, we're taking over F1

Germany is to F1 what Finland is to the WRC.

Ouch. Remarkable that she was able to just walk out of it. Whoever built that roll-cage deserves a pay-rise.

Quote from J@tko :

It's 6.

Agreed.

Interesting question.

Quote from Mustafur :

Would you lose your job if you got a speeding ticket?

The issue isn't as simple as someone losing their job if they get a speeding ticket.

Many professions require people to be "clean" in their life outside of their jobs. You cannot be a company director if you are bankrupt or have been found guilty of a serious criminal offence, for example (and if it weren't legally prohibited, what board of directors would want to deal with such a person?). You cannot be a legal practitioner if you have a criminal record. I would certainly lose my job if I engaged in fraudulent behaviour, even if it had nothing to do with my job or did not amount to criminal liability. Breaches of law may have nothing to do with one's job specifically, but it still affects employability.

I think it's reasonable to expect an F1 driver to show themselves as responsible drivers. You usually have to do something ridiculous (or a large collection of driver misbehaviour) to lose a license. Copping a ticket for a minor "burn-out" is one thing, but would we be so forgiving of an F1 WDC who makes a habit of running red lights or drives into a car/person while drunk?

Last edited by samjh, Sun 12 Sep 2010, 08:23.

Quote from 5haz :

The most galling thing about it all is how uneccessary the whole affair is, from 9/11 right through to this, just religion causing people who would otherwise never think twice about eachother to chant death and preach hate, wage wars and destroy buildings.

It's not religion per se, but the mix of religion with political agendas.

The clerics in Iraq who preached against American troop presence were not doing it because of genuine patriotism for their nation. They preached against American troops because it would make them politically popular, and they used their status as religious figure-heads as a platform for their political agenda. They'd then use their influence to either gain positions in government or influence the government for their own ends.

Funnily enough, the so-called "separation of the church and state" was derived from the Christian preacher and founder of the Protestant movement, Martin Luther, whose Doctrine of the Two Kingdoms would later evolve into the modern concept. It's very strange that some of the more politically-minded Christian groups in the USA now tries to reverse the clock with their political lobbying activities.

Quote from GeForz :

Apple.

Blizzard.

RaceCraft FTW! They'll develop the car for 12 years, then it will pwn everyone.

Quote from Mustafur :

Wouldn't mind a Audi/VW team.

On a more serious note, it would be nice to see Honda.

Last edited by samjh, Sat 11 Sep 2010, 04:00.

Rip