164 replies to this topic

[Quiet One]

pabloh20, on 28 May 2012 - 12:43 PM, said:

Yeah, it does seem odd, but it comes down to the rules they have broken.  The Maldanado incident is open to interpreation by the stewards/FIA, whereas the running out of fuel is not.  Not saying I agree with it, it's just the nature of the beast.

Yup.
RE Vettel: the problem was not whether he should have crashed or not. Obviously he had to take evasive action. The problem was whether he gained any unfair advantage as a consequence of that, which he somewhat did as he overtook cars while avoiding the crash and he didn't gave the places back afterwards. Anyways, as Ikyrotz pointed out, they reviewed it and decided not to penalize him (or Ricciardo, who also gained many places thanks to that).

BTW, thanks Ikyrotz, I missed it, probably happened during the comercials here!

That, by the way, is a good example of the inconsistency of the rules. And whether they are good or bad. Any Kimi fan would no doubt be p**sed that Vettel overtook him with no consequences (except for our own main Kimi fan, who also happens to be our biggest Vettel fan, I mean Brad, of course ). I think in this case the stewards did the right thing. Enforcing the no overtaking off track at first corner's mayhem at Monaco is really complicated, if they did that at every Monaco race 99% whould have a restart and half the field penalized. Monaco's main excitement for those looking for a cheap thrill is precisely the first corner mayhem, so I guess the better they mess with it, the better. It is idiotic, but as you will see most people tend to consider Monaco as a borefest precisely because enterteainment is measure in terms or crashes/overtakes in a race which is entertaining  because of everything  but.

To enjoy Monaco (I mean actually enjoy it) you need to understand the strategy/attrition game. Trying to measure Monaco as by the uqnatity of crashes and overtakes is like listening to Bach's sonatas and expecting a guitar solo.

How the hell did I ended up ranting about this which has nothing to do with first corner incidents???

[BradSpeedMan]

Quiet One, on 28 May 2012 - 01:57 PM, said:

That, by the way, is a good example of the inconsistency of the rules. And whether they are good or bad. Any Kimi fan would no doubt be p**sed that Vettel overtook him with no consequences (except for our own main Kimi fan, who also happens to be our biggest Vettel fan, I mean Brad, of course ).

heheheheheheheehehee ...just could'nt resist

[freaky2]

Well, I will only refer to the "any Kimi fan..." part. Yep, that's me. And the deal is that the stewards could have told Vettel at ANY point in time during the first 5-10 laps to let Kimi through. What, Wonderboy doesn't get the privilege of running after the slow car? Think of how many places he would have gained then... at least one less in the long run. It wasn't difficult to fix, so it should have been fixed. b#####ds XD

[HandyNZL]

AleHop, on 28 May 2012 - 12:41 PM, said:

Monaco hides inadequacies in cars and shows inadequacies in drivers. Why is it that Massa was unable to finish among the best in recent races, yet he does in Monaco? Ferrari will probably struggle in Montreal as it is a medium/slow corners and top speed type of circuit but the car looks better now. Massa's problems are more related to the car and tires than it is to the 2009 accident.

I shall use an analogy that I used once before.

Even a broken clock is right two times a day.

Anyone can turn in a good race.  Simple as that.  If he manages this same performance over the next four or five races, then you can say that the clock is working again.

When I was mountainbike racing (national and oceania level i.e. pushing for NZ World Championships Teams and the like), I won two races.  Two out of the numerous that I competed in.  I was good enough to win, but I wasn't good enough consistently.  Just like Massa.

[The Shadow]

What I don't understand is how did the stewards ever allow RBR to race with that hole in the floor?
I wouldn't blame RBR for exploiting the rules (indeed one of the brilliant aspects of F1) but how is that legal when they explicitly say no perforations on the car floor, unless, of course, that particular part is actually part of the engine cowling, and not the floor. Doesn't seem to be the case.

Is it okay now to extend the floor skirting to get a ground effect? If your solution is clever you may get away with it. (ex. Brawn 2009 & D Diffuser)

Can you block your rivals and run them off the track (Rosberg Bahrain 2012)? Well, if your rivals don't crash, then you don't even get a penalty, even if it blatantly states in the rules that it is an offence

The comparisons of penalties recieved for Maldy in Monaco and Hammy in Spain discussed prior.

It just seems that even if the state of the rules in F1 now give us this spectacle, when it comes to interpretation of it and the punishments involved - consistency is the last word you would associate with it.

[Insider]

The Shadow, on 29 May 2012 - 03:12 AM, said:

What I don't understand is how did the stewards ever allow RBR to race with that hole in the floor?
I wouldn't blame RBR for exploiting the rules (indeed one of the brilliant aspects of F1) but how is that legal when they explicitly say no perforations on the car floor, unless, of course, that particular part is actually part of the engine cowling, and not the floor. Doesn't seem to be the case.

Is it okay now to extend the floor skirting to get a ground effect? If your solution is clever you may get away with it. (ex. Brawn 2009 & D Diffuser)

Can you block your rivals and run them off the track (Rosberg Bahrain 2012)? Well, if your rivals don't crash, then you don't even get a penalty, even if it blatantly states in the rules that it is an offence

The comparisons of penalties recieved for Maldy in Monaco and Hammy in Spain discussed prior.

It just seems that even if the state of the rules in F1 now give us this spectacle, when it comes to interpretation of it and the punishments involved - consistency is the last word you would associate with it.

The only reason no one has challenged the RBR hole is because it looks relatively cheap to copy.

I know my view isn't popular but Maldonado would have a Super Licence now if I had my way. End of. He is mentally ill, IMO.

Hamilton breached FIA standing regulations. As far as Stewards are concerned there will always be a reasonably wide interpretation of the racing rules. They should all be professionals drawn from an elite pool.

[dribbler]

Quiet One, on 28 May 2012 - 01:57 PM, said:

To enjoy Monaco (I mean actually enjoy it) you need to understand the strategy/attrition game. Trying to measure Monaco as by the uqnatity of crashes and overtakes is like listening to Bach's sonatas and expecting a guitar solo.

Ha! Nice.

[AleHop]

@HandyNZL

I shall use an analogy that I used once before.

Even a broken clock is right two times a day.

Anyone can turn in a good race. Simple as that. If he manages this same performance over the next four or five races, then you can say that the clock is working again.

When I was mountainbike racing (national and oceania level i.e. pushing for NZ World Championships Teams and the like), I won two races. Two out of the numerous that I competed in. I was good enough to win, but I wasn't good enough consistently. Just like Massa.

You mean you are a broken clock? :-p

I know what you mean. I simply don't buy the "Massa is a broken clock because of his accident in Hungary 2009" argument.

Massa was good enough to win every now and then, he was never that far from Raikkonen or Schumacher, he did a great 2008 season...

I never rated him a top driver but he used to be a good pole-to-win driver. Very good in some circuits like Barcelona, Istanbul, Sakhir, Sao Paulo...

He should be at his peak or retire mid season if he can't handle the heat.

[apexhead]

Anyone know (mod?) if it's OK for me to post my Monaco review here? It doesn't include links or anything, just text copy.

Wanted to ask because I am a new member. Thanks!

[AleHop]

apexhead, on 31 May 2012 - 03:24 PM, said:

<br />
Anyone know (mod?) if it&#39;s OK for me to post my Monaco review here? It doesn&#39;t include links or anything, just text copy.<br />
<br />
Wanted to ask because I am a new member. Thanks!<br />

Welcome aboard.

Of course you can, only if you realised that Alonso purpled his in-lap time. Aaaarrrggghhh!!! Idiots!!!

Advice: Never ask, just do it.

[apexhead]

AleHop, on 31 May 2012 - 03:37 PM, said:

Welcome aboard.

Of course you can, only if you realised that Alonso purpled his in-lap time. Aaaarrrggghhh!!! Idiots!!!

Advice: Never ask, just do it.

Thanks mate! Last time I "just did it", I got my hand slapped! Haha. OK, posting now...

[apexhead]

A historic start to the season has just taken  place -- while Red Bull is the first team to get two victories from its drivers, we saw a record-setting 6th winner as many races to start a Formula One season.

Mark Webber was able to hold to win the fabled race for the second time in three years and Red Bull looks to take control of the Constructor race, but we still have a long way to go to decides the season's outcomes. Thanks to handful of 4th place finishes leading up to the race, Webber's victory leaves him tied with teammate Sebastian Vettel with 73 points, a respective 2nd and 3rd place rankings in the Driver standings.

The lack of overtaking at Monaco is offset by virtue of the track's grand history, as well as opportunity for error given its narrow and unforgiving turns.
But that also means that we can't always put a lot of stock into the field's pace at Monaco -- the entire GP basically boils down to some well-earned points for a handful of drivers, and then it's onto the next race where we may see true pace starting to take shape.

That being said, here are a few thoughts I had following the Monaco Grand Prix:

Biggest Winners

Red Bull - While their pace has been good but not dominant, Red Bull's clever pit stop strategies played a huge role in their 1st and 4th finishes. With the threat of rain looming the majority of the race, Red Bull staggered their stops with Webber and Sebastian Vettel to almost ensure that one of their drivers would win, depending on the weather. Despite the rain making things a bit slippery at the end, intermediates were never necessary and Webber was able to hang onto the win.

Fernando Alonso, Felipe Massa and Ferrari as a whole - Who would have guessed in winter testing that Fernando Alonso would be leading the Standings after 6 rounds, given how poor the pace of the F2012 was to start? But improvements to the car coupled with Alonso's abilities have made it a reality. Felipe Massa was able to pull out his best result of the year and unquestionably, the Brazilian hope it's the start of a rebound after a miserable start to 2012.

Nico Rosberg - A great result for Nico (2nd), who has been clawing since his surprise first career victory in China earlier this year. Because of the nature of Monaco, it's hard to know if this is as legitimate of a result as it would appear, but Mercedes certainly hopes so. For now, Nico adds to the notion he is finally elevating his game.

Bruno Senna - Given Pastor Maldonado's miserbale weekend coming off his first career F1 victory and a late retirement by Michael Schumacher, Bruno was able to sneak into the points. He is the first Senna to finish in the points since his late uncle Ayrton. Solid drive from Bruno and one he'll hope to capitalize on.

Biggest Losers

McLaren - What is going on here? Jenson Button was stuck behind Heikki Kovalainen for the majority of the race and for one reason or another, Lewis Hamilton finished 5th -- even though early on, his pace suggested a podium finish. While pit problems have been to blame from time to time, McLaren's strong start has gotten increasingly degraded as the season has gone on. They need to use Montreal as a springboard to close the gap to Red Bull and fend off Ferrari and Lotus.

Pastor Maldonado, Romain Grojean and Michael Schumacher - To many, Pastor had been a favorite to win his first race at Monaco given his victory at Catalunya, as well as success in Monte Carlo in the GP2 ranks. But his weekend could not have been more miserable -- he collided into Sergio Perez in practice, earning a 10-spot grid penalty and ensuring he started 24th on the starting grid; to cap off the horror, Pastor was out of the race before the end of lap 1 due to an accident at Turn 1.

Speaking of that accident, chalk up Romain Grojean as another unlucky Monaco victim. He qualified an impressive 4th, but that was squandered when he was competing for space within seconds of the race start. Before turn 1, he was clipped by Michael Schumacher, taking off his left-rear wheel and leaving him awkwardly stranded on the track. It was the third time Romain was not able to finish the race, all incidents coming before completing 4 laps. If luck can get back on side, I see no reason he can't win his first race sometime this year.

What can be said for 7-time world champion Michael Schumacher? His pace gave him pole at Monaco, but a 5-place grid penalty negated that position at race start. Despite his early collision with Grojean, Michael was holding up well until his car failed him very late in the race due to a fuel-pressure problem. Another bitter retirement for the F1 legend and after six races, he only has 2 points to show for it.

Jean-Eric Vergne - One might think finishing 12th is a good result for the French rookie in the Toro Rosso, but it could have been as high at 8th ... A team decision to put him on inters very late in the race cost him key positions and it was a gamble that did not pay off. Still, he continues to show decent consistency and I would still qualify his season thus far as exceeding expectations.

That's all for now, let's see how thing progress as we head to North America for the first time for the Montreal Grand Prix, which proved to be one of, if not the most, memorable race in 2011.

[AleHop]

Thank you apexhead.

Do it more often.

[apexhead]

AleHop, on 31 May 2012 - 04:08 PM, said:

Thank you apexhead.

Do it more often.

Sure thing. I have been posting them all year on my site, but will start posting them on this forum I like the discussions a lot, this is a great board.

[HandyNZL]

AleHop, on 31 May 2012 - 02:27 PM, said:

@HandyNZL

I shall use an analogy that I used once before.

Even a broken clock is right two times a day.

Anyone can turn in a good race. Simple as that. If he manages this same performance over the next four or five races, then you can say that the clock is working again.

When I was mountainbike racing (national and oceania level i.e. pushing for NZ World Championships Teams and the like), I won two races. Two out of the numerous that I competed in. I was good enough to win, but I wasn't good enough consistently. Just like Massa.

You mean you are a broken clock? :-p

I know what you mean. I simply don't buy the "Massa is a broken clock because of his accident in Hungary 2009" argument.

Massa was good enough to win every now and then, he was never that far from Raikkonen or Schumacher, he did a great 2008 season...

I never rated him a top driver but he used to be a good pole-to-win driver. Very good in some circuits like Barcelona, Istanbul, Sakhir, Sao Paulo...

He should be at his peak or retire mid season if he can't handle the heat.

Yes I am.

It is currently 10:36am.

At the tone it will be 10:36am.

It is currently 10:36am.

At the tone it will be 10:36am.

It is currently 10:36am.

At the tone it will be 10:36am.

It is currently 10:36am.

At the tone it will be 10:36am.

It is currently 10:36am.

At the tone it will be 10:36am.

It is currently 10:36am.

At the tone it will be 10:36am.

It is currently 10:36am.

At the tone it will be 10:36am.

It is currently 10:36am.

At the tone it will be 10:36am.