***** This thread is now closed, please CLICK HERE to go to Volume 25 *****
As the title suggests, a place to discuss Formula One, and all other types of motorsport (excluding MotoGP, which has a section of its own).
PLEASE NOTE:-
To try and maintain some kind of logical order of discussion, if you start a new subject then reply to this post and remember to change the default subject header.
Last edited by: VxFan on Mon 7 Apr 14 at 01:47
|
Interesting input from someone who knows what they're talking about
www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/formula1/26217777
|
Someone else who knows what they're talking about.
Williams recruit Ferrari engineer Rob Smedley
www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/formula1/26332252
|
>> Someone else who knows what they're talking about.
>>
>> Williams recruit Ferrari engineer Rob Smedley
>>
>> www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/formula1/26332252
>>
Hopefully this will ensure Williams improve.
|
>> Williams recruit Ferrari engineer Rob Smedley
"Felipe, all the other teams are faster than you" ;)
|
>> >> Williams recruit Ferrari engineer Rob Smedley
>>
>> "Felipe, all the other teams are faster than you" ;)
>>
With the results from testing, it looks like those words will not be required.:-)
|
|
Raise a glass to Williams Martini .
|
>> He's a wriggler isn't he
>>
>> www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-26273031
He's bad
|
Either this bloke's really good..or the others aren't trying. Look at the speed he carries through the corners.
www.youtube.com/watch?v=YbPK1XxCNqU
|
>> Either this bloke's really good..or the others aren't trying. Look at the speed he carries
>> through the corners.
>>
>> www.youtube.com/watch?v=YbPK1XxCNq
He's good.
|
Very good, though starting out of position meant he was way better than the cars near him at first.
I didn't think they did classic racing in Germany - that was the modern Nurburgring GP circuit I think.
|
This one's even better. The overtake at 1200 is a real close shave. Shame about the time running out at the end.
www.youtube.com/watch?v=AzaD8vUkFP8
|
|
Both of those look like the M25 on a busy (but moving) commute day. difference is the overtaker would be a Corsa or a BMW :)
|
Mclaren explains how they use their chassis's during a season
tinyurl.com/njlyyzp
|
Will it be a GP or a farce ?
How many cars will finish ?
Bernie must be smiling at the uncertain outcome there appears to be.
That would make a change fro running out of rubber.
Williams to win ?
|
1/ A farce
2/ Three
And number 3 thus getting on the podium will be Max Chilton. At a guess, three laps down on the other two.
I've also seen suggested that as points are awarded up to tenth, a car pitting for a mechanical fault will not be retired, but will come out at the very end of the race to get points - but perhaps 40 laps down!
|
Good race, I thought. Nice to see some different faces at the front for a change as well.
Too early to say, but it looks like McLaren have finally turned things around, and Red Bull have some work to do.
Don't like the engine sound. It's way too quiet for my liking.
|
>> Don't like the engine sound. It's way too quiet
A bit droning... but I started to get used to it and liked it more at the end of the race.
The right team won even if the right driver had an unlucky day. But the high point for me was hearing the Aussie driver Ricciardo's name pronounced correctly for the first time ever by an Italian bloke whose name I can't remember on someone's radio.
Everyone pronounces Ricciardo's name incorrectly, essentially because he does himself. I bet his grandfather didn't though.
His podium place went down well with the spectators.
Promising first race I thought.
|
>> The right team won even if the right driver had an unlucky day. But the
>> high point for me was hearing the Aussie driver Ricciardo's name pronounced correctly for the
>> first time ever by an Italian bloke whose name I can't remember on someone's radio.
>>
>>
>> Everyone pronounces Ricciardo's name incorrectly, essentially because he does himself. I bet his grandfather didn't
Rich-yard-oh, with a Yorkshire accent, is about right, pronounced as Italian.
|
>> Everyone pronounces Ricciardo's name incorrectly,
>> His podium place went down well with the spectators.
His 2nd place was shortlived though.
Red Bull's Daniel Ricciardo has been excluded from the Australian Grand Prix after breaching fuel consumption rules.
www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/formula1/26601418
|
>> Don't like the engine sound. It's way too quiet for my liking.
Its not the volume that worries me, its the flat "off tune" monotone that gets me. Horrid.
|
|
But there are some interesting turbo whistles and such like. Except the Renaults, which sound like a bucket of bolts.
|
I think the sound is o.k., you can hear a sort of V6 rasp to it.
The old ones were ridiculously loud, if you have to have ear plugs to sit in the stands and watch them, then they're too loud.
|
>> The old ones were ridiculously loud, if you have to have ear plugs to sit
>> in the stands and watch them, then they're too loud.
Never been to a drag race event then WP?
Can't vouch for other tracks but at Santa Pod you can walk around the pits and whenever a Top Fuel car is started up it attracts the crowds to that particular garage. For one brief second they 'blip' the throttle to settle the engine after a rebuild. The resulting noise is enough to make you jump back a couple of feet - and that's with ear plugs in and also hands over your ears.
Last edited by: VxFan on Mon 17 Mar 14 at 21:28
|
>> Never been to a drag race event then WP?
No...would like to though, never got around to it
|
|
I have, in truth unless some spectacular crash or explosion happens, its actually quite boring.
|
>> its actually quite boring.
I only ever went for the Top Fuelers and Jet Car. Mind you, the flame and thunder event on or around fireworks night is good. Damn cold though.
The "run wot you brung" events are crap.
|
|
Tractor pulling and its spin offs can be impressive, particularly when seen live in the USA. You need to remember that the dust thrown up in the air by the spinning wheels may come down on the spectators, you can be in need of a shower in a remarkably short time. :-)
Last edited by: Uncle Albert on Tue 18 Mar 14 at 11:07
|
I went a couple of times, at Blackbushe.
I found it a bit like a car show; impressive for about 5 minutes and then just monotonous.
Lots of people do love it though.
|
>> I found it a bit like a car show; impressive for about 5 minutes and
>> then just monotonous.
>>
>> Lots of people do love it though.
>>
A bit like the bike shows where they have a stunt rider giving a display. Very skilful, but as they go through the complete repertoire of what is actually possible on a bike in less than five minutes it soon rivals watching paint dry as a spectacle.
|
The thing about drag racing is that it's limited, essentially by the fact that dragsters aren't really cars being able to do one thing only: accelerate in a straight line. They do this with much noise and drama and consuming expensive rubber and fuel in vast quantities, but they can't go round corners or over bumps so the interest, such as it is, soon palls.
Can't help feeling a bit like that about F1 racing too. Aerodynamics in recent years have turned the cars into inverted aircraft with virtually no suspension movement, forced down by aerodynamic downforce and using slick tyres. They aren't cars any more. The racing would be far more interesting if aerodynamic wings etc. were greatly reduced, slicks banned and circuits allowed to have bumps and potholes in them like real roads. It would also sort out proper drivers from midget athletes.
I don't agree with Mr Ecclestone about the noise though. 'Racing cars' should all sound different if you ask me. They used to when they were still proper cars. The V8s all sounded the same. Perhaps these V6 hybrids will begin to sound more individual when we have recovered our hearing from the last couple of seasons.
|
>The "run wot you brung" events are crap
Probably not if you're a participant, though! And they do serve as contrast to the 'real' dragsters - if the road legal Porsches and TVR's look pedestrian when you know they trying quite hard, the sound and fury of a top fueller is all the more impressive.
|
>> >The "run wot you brung" events are crap
>>
>> Probably not if you're a participant, though! And they do serve as contrast to the
>> 'real' dragsters - if the road legal Porsches and TVR's look pedestrian when you know
>> they trying quite hard, the sound and fury of a top fueller is all the
>> more impressive.
For the first time you see it, maybe the second or at a push the third. After that its tedious. Until the wheels come off.
|
"After that its tedious"
Not to me. I used to go to Santa Pod regularly when I lived nearer (I saw the first 200mph run by 'The Commuter' over 40 years ago) and still love the smell of Nitromethane.
|
>> Don't like the engine sound. It's way too quiet for my liking.
Even Bernie agrees with me.
tinyurl.com/ocv7wpp - Telegraph
www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/formula1/26656258
|
|
It's not really the top formula if it's so constrained. I don't know why the rules have to be so tight - why not just allow anything within sensible size and weight limits, and a fixed fuel allowance? Allow the engineers full reign - I bet it wouldn't involve batteries!
|
Bernie's not an idiot. He was instrumental in the changes, and everybody knows turbo engines are quiet, not to mention electric ones. When F1 goes fully electric, what will they do, put lollipop sticks in the spokes?
I was at gathering recently where Alastair Caldwell, who cheerfully takes credit for McLaren's 1974 & 76 championships, was more or less ranting about the stupidity of F1 along these lines. The low minimum weight means only jockeys need apply;the artificial measures to enable overtaking have only been necessary because the cars stop far too quickly - put them all on conventional brakes and make them cars, not upside down aeroplanes, and they would have to brake a lot earlier which is what creates the overtaking opportunities (see bike racing, where the lap times are much lower but the racing is better).
Ricciardo's disqualification is idiotic and shameful. It it a race or an economy run? It's a complete nonsense that fuel conservation can overrule racing - it's called a race for a reason, or should be.
I'm closer to giving up on it than I have been for a while.
|
>> to brake a lot earlier which is what creates the overtaking opportunities (see bike racing,
>> where the lap times are much lower but the racing is better).
Errr, Ever ridden a high performance bike? the brakes are astonishingly good. Bike racing has more overtaking because the bikes narrow not racks made for cars, riders employing differing racing lines, there is a larger difference in machinery ability and an even larger difference in rider abilities. Its not the braking point.
|
I claim no special knowledge but Alastair Caldwell disagrees with you.
If I had to rationalise it I'd say the F1 car will corner faster, and at high speed generate more braking force, owing to the aerodynamically generated downforce - depending on speed, it can more or less double its weight and therefore available friction.
The actual braking point might not be so far apart if the m/c isn't going as fast to start with.
F1 cars are a LOT faster than Moto GP bikes.
|
I've yet to see a formula one car go over its handlebars under braking.
|
|
Moto GP bikes can be geared for around 220mph, same as an F1 car and accelerate a lot quicker. What they can't do is match the car's cornering speed or it's braking so overall they lose out round a race track.
|
|
I just had a look at lap times around Silverstone for F1 and MotoGP. I couldn't confirm the circuit was identical, but it looks as if the cars are doing nearly 4 laps to the bikes' 3.
|
>> I just had a look at lap times around Silverstone for F1 and MotoGP. I
>> couldn't confirm the circuit was identical, but it looks as if the cars are doing
>> nearly 4 laps to the bikes' 3.
>>
Yes, because the bikes lose time under braking and shedloads through the corners.
|
Ok the difference between MotoGp and F1 is just the braking distances. Nothing else.
Thats that sorted.
|
It isn't really sorted though, from the point of view of an old-fogey enthusiast. I am not alone in denouncing modern F1 cars as inverted aircraft whose braking and cornering are such, combined it must be said with their enormous width, that overtaking is virtually impossible until someone makes a mistake.
The drivers still pull the occasional rabbit out of their helmets but it's uphill work because the cars aren't cars. Actually these V6 hybrid thingies are a little bit more like cars than their predecessors, but only a little bit alas and that's to do with the hybrid car as modern icon, not because they have proper suspension.
Getting performance out of engines isn't the real problem. The real problem is translating that into speed over a race distance. The regulations have led to an evolution of downforce aerodynamics with virtually no suspension movement combined with slick tyres, the entire system only viable really on special super-smooth circuits. It's a huge PITA if you like cars and appreciate drivers, the whole thing turned into a TV 'spectator sport' for beer-guzzling proles. And me of course. I gripe but I wouldn't miss a race if I could help it.
|
"inverted aircraft"
That's the difference. The cars enjoy (if that's the word) some 5G when braking and about 4G on corners. MotoGP bikes have less than half that to play with, and even that is stretching the physics to breaking point - what happened to the coefficient of friction never exceeding 1?! (Tyres are different, I know.)
|
"It it a race or an economy run?"
Precisely. It seems to be turning into the latter.. :-(
|
|
I am surprised the flow of fuel is so strictly controlled and monitored. They already restrict them to 100kg of fuel for the race. How they use that should be up to them surely? They can't use anymore fuel but having a higher flow rate.
|
Motorsport (even F1) HAS to have some relevance to cars and motoring in general. A large proportion of the advertising AND the finance is car related.
Given that, it has to reflect the pinnacle of the latest car technology. That means fuel efficient.
|
Given that, it has to reflect the pinnacle of the latest car technology. That means fuel efficient.
Which the overall limit does in a nice unarguable way. Weights can be measured very accurately, but a flow meter not only has to be calibrated, it has to stay in calibration.
I could believe the FIA flow meter isn't very good and a good case could be made for it to no longer be needed. But seeing as the other teams managed to keep to the rules, I think the exclusion should stand.
Last edited by: Slidingpillar on Mon 24 Mar 14 at 19:22
|
Silly over-regulation. It's made the cars tend to be all the same. These V6 hybrid thingies still are much the same as each other, although they are heavier and a bit slower than their all-the-same V8 predecessors.
Slick tyres should be banned. They are for dragsters. Let the tyre designers go as close to slicks as they dare. Let there be several competing tyre companies. Let elaborate aerodynamics be curbed on safety grounds (all those puncture-producing shards of hard plastic whenever someone overcooks it). Let F1 cars have a formula like the fifties one, 4.5 litre normally aspirated/1.5 litre supercharged. That could be updated but it would allow for a bit of engineering competition surely?
Damn Bernie and his computer-game racing.
|
Red Bull 'may quit F1', says owner Dietrich Mateschitz
www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/formula-one/26721387
Bernie has an unhappy friend so lets see what happens.
|
The piece says Ricciardo was disqualified for using too much fuel. He wasn't was he? More a matter of using some of the measured 100 litres of fuel too fast.
That is over-regulation, damn silly.
|
That is over-regulation, damn silly.
I must admit, I thought so too, but then I read an analysis last night. Put simply, if you don't have a flow limit, you are encouraging the building of a more powerful engine that uses a lot of fuel to get in front and leading by a good margin, and then goes into economy mode for the rest of the race in order that the total fuel used is within the limit.
Does that seem similar to what Vettal did in the last three seasons?
|
>> That is over-regulation, damn silly.
>>
>> I must admit, I thought so too, but then I read an analysis last night.
>> Put simply, if you don't have a flow limit, you are encouraging the building of
>> a more powerful engine that uses a lot of fuel to get in front and
>> leading by a good margin, and then goes into economy mode for the rest of
>> the race in order that the total fuel used is within the limit.
>>
>> Does that seem similar to what Vettal did in the last three seasons?
Eggsactly
|
>>Eggsactly
It's still a yolk.
The rules are the same for everybody. Others might choose to optimise the engines for best average race speed. The benefit of getting in front is mostly from the overtaking problem.
I don't think DRS was a good solution to that. Overtaking should require skill and effort, not just a faster car that qualifies for a free pass by dint of getting within range.
|
>> >>Eggsactly
>>
>> It's still a yolk.
>>
>> The rules are the same for everybody. Others might choose to optimise the engines for
>> best average race speed. The benefit of getting in front is mostly from the overtaking
>> problem.
Funny that most overtaking in F1 happens in the braking area tho.......
|
>Funny that most overtaking in F1 happens in the braking area
Or accelerating area. Most importantly, overtaking happens at the point where drivers have to change the current course of action - be that braking, accelerating or turning..
Its not going to happen if they are accelerating or braking together since most F1 cars have similar, or at least not sufficiently different, capabilities.
It's surely more a question of when one does, or begins to do, these things.
e.g. braking later or accelerating earlier.
|
Overtaking (or lack of in F1) is a principle that applies to all circuit racing from your most basic saloon car racing upwards.
Where F1 has gone wrong is the aerodynamics.
If the car behind cannot keep up with a car in front through a corner, then it cannot properly slip stream up the straight (or be near enough to make it worthwhile before the straight ends) and/or be near enough for a lunge at the next corner.
Having little wings open on the straight for the car following is a falseness that should not be necessary.
F1 cars need less downforce so the cars cannot corner as fast and the dirty air being received by the second car does not seriously affect its corner speed.
Less grippy tyres might well improve things as well.
This years cars are already better, because there are some corners that used to be taken 'flat' so weren't really corners, but now have to be taken with care and treated as a corner, which makes for better racing.
|
>>That is over-regulation, damn silly
Agreed. It seems a fair engineering challenge, within reason and the context of high speed motor racing, to have some limit on fuel - especially when turbos are allowed. But how you use it is surely part of that challenge?
To your earlier point about cars with suspension, proper tyres, etc. I had much the same thoughts recently looking at a 250F (well a newly restored Cameron Millar one, probably better than the originals).
What a beautiful object, as a machine and aesthetically. Square section tyres, a stiff transverse leaf spring over the rear axle, steering wheel a yard across and a comical splayed leg driving position with conventional accelerator and brake on the right and clutch and footrest on the left. Probably quite good for the driver to brace himself for cornering and braking, given the lack of seat belts.
No seat belts, even though the one I saw will be raced - the driver must have decided he won't crash, and if he does he will be no better off in it, which is probably true. It has been updated with a bag tank, so that's OK!
I stood there for a good while, thinking how spectacularly that those cars would drift at the limit, rather than snapping off the rails and into the gravel, and whether the rules could be written to bring that sort of car up to date without inevitably ending up where we are now.
It must be possible. After all, without rules, the cars might have evolved into full real ground effect aeroplanes, with aerodynamic steering and thrust engines for the long straights. Is it just a matter of degree? Perhaps it's enough to put limits on the downforce, which should be fairly easy to measure.
The danger with the 'retro' approach is that you just end up with a dead end, and a formula that is not distinct enough. Not really at the cutting edge of anything. Perhaps F1 should be less regulated, why not allow movable surfaces for example, and we'd see lunatic speeds on the straights and amazing cornering speeds?
I suppose they must have these discussions between themselves often enough. I'd love to hear them.
Sorry to ramble.
|
>> whether the rules could be written to bring that sort of car up to date without inevitably ending up where we are now.
Trouble is you can't put the clock back. We're stuck with F1 as it is. And the V6 hybrid thingies are a bit, just a bit, more like cars than the V8s.
|
I like Motorsport and in theory I'd like a free for all with the best combination of driver/car winning.
But...
...who wants just one or two outfits with a mega budget trouncing the rest, just because they've thrown the most money at it. That's what F1 was in danger of, with less and less teams willing to join the fray.
Then there's the relevance angle. F1 had/has become somewhat irrelevant because it was so far removed from the rest of us i.e. what we drive on the roads.
Where it's going now (slowly) it is slightly more relevant. Fuel saving is what the rest of us are all now doing, whereas 10 -15 years ago plus, most of us weren't.
I don't mind the new V6 engines..and suspect some of this is the 'I don't like change mob'.
|
>> ...who wants just one or two outfits with a mega budget trouncing the rest, just
>> because they've thrown the most money at it.
Sounds like football. Inevitable consequence of professionalism without Socialist style controls, which they have, ironically, implemented in American sports. It allows for a competitive league.
|
I'd like to see an end to tyre changes unless it rains or someone punctures. Harder tyres would have to be less grippy and would lower cornering speeds.
F1 cars today are also considerably longer than their older counterparts giving less overtaking room, particularly through corners. Although I suspect crumple zones to protect the driver are a large part of the reason for that.
|
|
I see that the online Daily Mail is reporting that a former F1 doctor is claiming that there were errors in Schumachers treatment.
Last edited by: Uncle Albert on Tue 25 Mar 14 at 19:37
|
>>Given that, it has to reflect the pinnacle of the latest car technology. That means fuel efficient. <<
Where's the fun in that?
Next stop diesel I suppose, a la Le Mans. At least the DPFs won't block up...
|
>> >>Given that, it has to reflect the pinnacle of the latest car technology. That means
>> fuel efficient. <<
>>
>> Where's the fun in that?
>>
>> Next stop diesel I suppose, a la Le Mans. At least the DPFs won't block
>> up...
A reply to Zero's post, not mine. now tagged onto the correct post
But I think the economy thing is pointless. Economy is a different compromise. Racing is about going fast, and that uses a lot of fuel. They are already crippled at 100kg total - IIRC they were doing about 4mpg last year, and will now be doing c. 7mpg. No wonder they are slower despite much more energy recovery. It's easy to see why the cars will be miles off the pace if the ER fails, unlike the previous implementation when the car could still stay more or less with the pack. There was already a benefit in efficiency because a more efficient car will use less fuel.
The counter argument I suppose is that the very fact of the car being effectively out of the race without ER means that resources will go into advancing that technology, to the benefit of all. But it's a strange way to do it.
Last edited by: VxFan on Wed 26 Mar 14 at 01:33
|
>> A reply to Zero's post, not mine.
>>
>> But I think the economy thing is pointless. Economy is a different compromise. Racing is
>> about going fast, and that uses a lot of fuel. They are already crippled at
>> 100kg total - IIRC they were doing about 4mpg last year, and will now be
>> doing c. 7mpg. No wonder they are slower despite much more energy recovery. It's easy
>> to see why the cars will be miles off the pace if the ER fails,
I am not sure you have really watched or understood F1 from your descriptions or assertions. Fuel use has always been a relevant factor in winning in F1 racing, even when it was unlimited.
you say "It's easy to see why the cars will be miles off the pace if the ER fails" its alway been the case that if any part of the power train fails they will be miles off the pace. If they run out of fuel (and they have in the past) they are even further off the pace.
F1 is, and always has been for the last 40 years, about car technical innovation (many F1 technologies have made it into road cars) and this year is no different. I suspect you need to change viewing and go watch rally cross if you want drifting cars.
|
I don't really disagree with your view of F1 Zero. I may have said a few inconsistent things too for the sake of the discussion, I'm not trying to win (or start) an argument.
Nor do I claim to understand everything;)
|
>> I don't really disagree with your view of F1 Zero. I may have said a
>> few inconsistent things too for the sake of the discussion, I'm not trying to win
>> (or start) an argument.
>>
>> Nor do I claim to understand everything;)
It has to be said, there is much for petrol heads to enjoy in Rallycross, a motor sport that IMHO does not get the coverage or money it deserves.
|
>> It has to be said, there is much for petrol heads to enjoy in Rallycross,
>> a motor sport that IMHO does not get the coverage or money it deserves.
>>
Not enough laps to be meaningful.
|
Rallycross is fun in a brutal way, there's a wide spread of classes too from amateur up to manufacturers-only, but for anyone who hasn't tried it I would recommend VSCC Shelsley Walsh or Prescott. They are hillclimbs admittedly where cars run one at a time, but they are on roads, rather difficult in places with dodgy camber etc., and there's a huge variety of cars from vintage or even veteran via fifties, sixties and seventies cars to modern Mclaren hillclimb specials and so on.
For those who want to see overtaking, free-formula circuit races are organized here and there by the VSCC and local clubs.
|
>> >> It has to be said, there is much for petrol heads to enjoy in
>> Rallycross,
>> >> a motor sport that IMHO does not get the coverage or money it deserves.
>>
>> >>
>>
>> Not enough laps to be meaningful.
Yes true its a sprint, but there are lots of them in a days meeting, heats and finals.
|
>> Yes true its a sprint, but there are lots of them in a days meeting,
>> heats and finals.
>>
For a race to be meaningful for me, I want to see proper racing action and cars driving in an event long enough for a lead to change and/or many overtaking manoeuvres.
A 3 lap blast, where often the car on the inside line on pole just whizzes off into the distance, doesn't do it for me.
|
>> >> Don't like the engine sound. It's way too quiet for my liking.
>>
>> Even Bernie agrees with me.
And then changes his mind again
www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/formula1/26783422
|
If you take energy out of the exhaust, ie a turbo, you quieten it a bit. Hardly rocket science.
Mind you the Audi Quatro which brought turbos to rallying used to sound magic on a stage, as the anti-lag systems of the time popped and banged a heck of a lot. So you had this quietish 5 cylinder growl interspersed with pops and bangs echoing off the trees.
|
|
Maybe the fact these are using electric powered turbos instead of using exhaust gas explains the noise? They will be electric to avoid any lag I'd have thought.
|
"electric to avoid any lag"
It's gratifying to see an idea I had 40-odd years ago come to fruition. I mentioned it in a letter to Car magazine in 1973.. :-)
|
|
I've seen some imprecise references to this from which I inferred that the turbo is exhaust driven, with a supplementary electric compressor to keep the pressure up when the exhaust pressure is low.
|
>> Don't like the engine sound. It's way too quiet for my liking.
Vettel says they sound '****'
tinyurl.com/kaorav2 (Telegraph)
Last edited by: VxFan on Mon 19 May 14 at 01:21
|
|
Bet Vettel wouldn't be complaining if he had won....
|
|
Indeed. Put him in a slightly inferior car and, quelle surprise, he doesn't win! Ricciardo's giving him a run for his money, too - I bet Webber's enjoying it!
|
>> Boring.
>>
That's proper sport for you, no choreographed script to introduce false drama or excitement. Sometimes it provides edge of the seat thrills, other times it doesn't, but it does it all on it's own.
|
recording the BTCC today so will playback over next few nights.
Guaranteed to me a lot more action, thrills and enjoyment than the F1 borefest processions.
Think there are also a few older names returning to the BTCC this year.
|
|
Don't miss the Clio Cup, it was an absolutely cracking race.
|
|
Of the little I saw, by fast forwarding through my recording of it, I was annoyed and surprised that after a short interview with Button by someone, Suzi thought is necessary to apologise to we viewing/listening public for saying b*****! This is the 21st century for God's sake.
|
|
And the anti-swearing brigade are very vociferous in their complaints to broadcasters.
|
>> And the anti-swearing brigade are very vociferous in their complaints to broadcasters.
>>
But they swear all the time on TV nowadays don't they?Well I suppose that is only in plays and films.
|
>> Boring.
Good race I thought. What we are seeing is that a good driver is necessary but not sufficient to win races.
There is still a lot of learning going on and Mercedes will not necessarily stay dominant, but if they do then there seems likely to be a fairly even competition between Rosberg and Hamilton. Ricciardo and Vettel also seem set to have a good contest.
Ferrari and McLaren with their resources will surely come into play though, as their teams get to grips with all the opportunities presented by such a big change in rules. And Williams might be rowing out of the doldrums.
I feel more optimistic than I was following Ricciardo's disqualification, and I imagine that will be resolved and probably not repeated. Rules is rules, but the audience won't put up with the results being changed too often after the podium.
|
2014 Regs - Westpig
