Quote from DeKo :

and .1mm is absolutely tiny, definetely not measurable on a living breathing kart which moves about a lot by some random guy at a barely maintaned kart track. a few mm maybe, not 0.1mm.

sorry but it doesn't matter how tiny... in karting the tiniest of differences... .05 second can make all the difference between winning big, and losing out....

the exact regulations are there... engines have fiches... you brake them.. your excluded... there's a not a rule in any motorsport I know of that says... "you can go a little over the specific fiches if you want... only makes a tiny diff anyway". The numbers are written down, and the line is drawn quite clearly....

Quote from NitroNitrous :

You are wrong....



KIMI RAIKKONEN 2007 WINNER WITH FERRARI

From a spaniard?

Quote from Intrepid :

sorry but it doesn't matter how tiny... in karting the tiniest of differences... .05 second can make all the difference between winning big, and losing out....

the exact regulations are there... engines have fiches... you brake them.. your excluded... there's a not a rule in any motorsport I know of that says... "you can go a little over the specific fiches if you want... only makes a tiny diff anyway". The numbers are written down, and the line is drawn quite clearly....

And again, why should hamilton then just be allowed to break the rules and gain an advantage from running 2 sets of wets on friday when everybody else had to run 1?

Quote from Mazz4200 :

Erm, not sure about the biological aspects, but doesn't fuel become more efficient if its cooler or is it hotter, not sure ?, certainly the engines have an optimum operating temperature. And also, doesn't it change the density or something of the fuel, meaning it'd be lighter ?

generally injecting at lowish temps will lead to a small boost in performance ... however with the kind of movements you get in an f1 it will warm up pretty quickly
also the volume decreses if you cool it and since the teams most likely fill their cars by volume if anything the car would be heavier with cooler fuel

Quote from deggis :

http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/63569

begs the question... why have a rule you can't enforce? lol

Quote from deggis :

http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/63569

That destroys intrepids argument then, As with stepneygate where they couldnt really prove that mclaren gained a performance benifit from ferrari docs, they cant prove that bmw or williams gained an advantage, so the argument that they should be punished is null and void.

Quote from deggis :

http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/63569

Doh, someone forgot the temperature probe :chair:

Hmmm, by my reading of it, they either knew they were cheating but couldn't prove it, or they were acting on a tip off from someone who hoped they were.

Quote from DeKo :

That destroys intrepids argument then, As with stepneygate where they couldnt really prove that mclaren gained a performance benifit from ferrari docs, they cant prove that bmw or williams gained an advantage, so the argument that they should be punished is null and void.

huh....it doesn't 'destroy' my argument. What I said was on the basis they had conclusive proof. My argument was based upon that assumption.

Having read that my opinion has changed on whether they could have been justifiably punished, and I did say several times 'if' they cheated.

Your arguments were based on the same presumption that the FIA had conclusive proof also.

I still stand by my opinion that IF the FIA had conclusive proof, which it had appeared, BMW, and Willaims should have been excluded...

The situation now is they don't have conclusive proof, and I can now understand the FIA's decision!


though as always with the FIA, something isn't right!

Quote from Mazz4200 :

Hmmm, by my reading of it, they either knew they were cheating but couldn't prove it, or they were acting on a tip off from someone who hoped they were ?

The second one.

Quote from Albieg :

The second one.

wasn't Intrepid, was it ?

Quote from Intrepid :

huh....it doesn't 'destroy' my argument. What I said was on the basis they had conclusive proof. My argument was based upon that assumption.

Having read that my opinion has changed on whether they could have been justifiably punished, and I did say several times 'if' they cheated.

Your arguments were based on the same presumption that the FIA had conclusive proof also.

I still stand by my opinion that IF the FIA had conclusive proof, which it had appeared, BMW, and Willaims should have been excluded...

The situation now is they don't have conclusive proof, and I can now understand the FIA's decision!


though as always with the FIA, something isn't right!

and my argument is still that using your logic, hamilton shouldnt be allowed to race because of a petty mistake on friday. an argument which has been posted 3 or 4 times, and which every single time you have somehow managed to ignore.

Quote from DeKo :

From a spaniard? ....

Yes man, I think nationality doesn´t matter in motorsport. There are only two things: the driver and the team. The rest are completely irrelevant (colour of socks, colour of eyes, weight, height, nationality, time of going to the bathroom, what they eat... etc) this are all irrelevants things in motorsport IMO. Only Kimi and Ferrari won today, so Spanish mustn´t be sad and Finnish mustn´t be happy because F1 is not about countries.
My born place doesn´t obligate me to support nobody, I love Ferrari, I hate Alonso and I´m so happy today

but why have a rule that they can't seem to conclusively enforce? Or why have they not got measure to ensure it can be enforced??? this is very odd to me!

Quote from Shotglass :

the fia has been selectively making decisions through the use of dice and coins for years now ... its not like they have any credibility left that could be lost
all that could happen at this point is turning the whole thing from comical to a complete farce

This season has been so blatantly stage managed, from keeping McLaren in whilst getting control of them over what was probably not a big issue to using it to stop Hamilton winning in China, then keeping him in in Brazil then not letting him win all so it's convenient for TV.

The FIA really needs to get set penalties for common offences, all European motorsport seems to suffer from this issue as well, in my experience of club racing the same offence can go from just being ignored as being insignificant on grounds it was probably unintentional to people running round with pitch forks and trying to ban people because they suspect cheating. Some of the American championships do seem much better about it, I think it's the SPEED races where contact automatically results in penalty points for any cars involved, regardless of who was at fault, imagine how much better the BTCC would be with those kind of rules. Or how about how much better F1 would be if you automatically applied the same rules to drivers and constructors based on the fact the car/driver is one unit...

Quote from Intrepid :

I still stand by my opinion that IF the FIA had conclusive proof, which it had appeared, BMW, and Willaims should have been excluded...

So obviously by that logic if there was conclusive proof that Maclaren had cheated then Alonso and Hamilton should be thrown out then?

Quote from DeKo :

which every single time you have somehow managed to ignore.

And again.

Quote from Mazz4200 :

wasn't Intrepid, was it ?

If the selective whistleblower was hysterical like that, I perfectly understand FIA's decision.

Quote from DeKo :

and my argument is still that using your logic, hamilton shouldnt be allowed to race because of a petty mistake on friday. an argument which has been posted 3 or 4 times, and which every single time you have somehow managed to ignore.

eermm... Are you seriously suggesting Hamilton should have been punished with points, or grid positions for a MINOR infringement in Friday practise s. Any punishment above what they gave would be disproportionate.

With your thinking then you should also support the exclusion of the ENTIRE field for cutting the first hairpin. hey... maybe they should!

Running illegal parts on the car during the race always has to be punished properly, and is totally different ball game. having a performance enhancing advantage in a race is only punishable by exclusion!

You don't send someone to jail for stealing bread!

Arrgghh, This rule bending thing has been part of F1 since it began in the 50's. Sometimes it works in your favour, sometimes it doesn't, sometimes it makes the sport more interesting, sometimes it makes it a farce.

Perhaps next year they should ditch the cars and use space hoppers or tricycles or something.....

Quote from Albieg :

If the selective whistleblower was hysterical like that, I perfectly understand FIA's decision.

Must have been Max then or James Allen

Quote from Mazz4200 :

Must have been Max then or James Allen

dont be stupid, james allen is still sitting in the commentary box crying, he hasnt moved for 5 hours.

Quote from Intrepid :

You don't send someone to jail for stealing bread!

But they used to send them to Australia...



{edit} @Deko, then lets hope he stays there for a couple of years so we can get a decent commentator

Quote from Mazz4200 :

Arrgghh, This rule bending thing has been part of F1 since it began in the 50's. Sometimes it works in your favour, sometimes it doesn't, sometimes it makes the sport more interesting, sometimes it makes it a farce.

Perhaps next year they should ditch the cars and use space hoppers or tricycles or something.....

No doubt there would be a problem with air pressure inside the hopper being hotter than another teams.

and haha yeah.

Quote from Intrepid :

You don't send someone to jail for stealing bread!

And what a tempting slice of bread it is, worth millions of dollars. Can I have a slice too?