Massa

Pit Crew
  • Content count

    3,656
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Massa

  1. Alonso Daytona 500

    Fernando Alonso is likely to run the Daytona 500 in 2019. This is good and cool. Vroom. Zoom. Have a nice day.
  2. I've always been fascinated by rumors/speculation that were popular for a time in the past and never came to fruition. I'd love to know some of the ones from days gone by. I was reminded of this topic (I'd explored it before in American racing for a blog entry on another site years ago) after reading about a Jochen Rindt rumor on another forum today (I don't want to link to the other forum because I got in trouble for that once years ago, but I do want to give credit to the poster, "Big G 94" for sharing this information). What I didn't know: when Jim Clark raced in the NASCAR event at Rockingham (North Carolina, not Corby, England) in 1967, he was actually going to hand the car over at some point to Jochen Rindt. Clark raced his way from twenty-fourth to twelfth before a mechanical failure sidelined him, and thus Rindt never drove. Anyway, it is being alleged, I think in a book about Rindt, that he had bet with Bill France, Jr., then the guy in charge of NASCAR, and was going to switch to NASCAR in 1971 had he lived. Apparently, he felt the pay for the amount of risk involved in NASCAR was much fairer than in F1 at the time, and there was seemingly a Ford connection (Holman-Moody was the team Clark drove for...big Ford team at the time), so he agreed to France's offer. To this day, NASCAR still solicits drivers/riders in other disciplines that they find marketable in hopes of enticing them to join, so it's not a surprise. I found that really interesting, maybe someone knows something about that, or any other really interesting rumors from any era of F1 (though telling us rumors from 2011 like Petrov to Marussia is probably not what I'm really looking for ). I'd love to hear some, since most of mine are U.S.-centric (either F1 drivers coming here to race, or drivers racing here going over there) and I'm sure there were some really interesting ones.
  3. Formula 5000

    Here's a cool documentary, about 30 minutes, that aired on ABC in 1971. It's about Sam Posey, David Hobbs, and Formula 5000. There's some awesome on-board footage of the F5000s at Mid-Ohio. A great exchange between the two drivers, too. Posey's sarcastically disappointed that Hobbs isn't on the front row with him, to which Hobbs reassures that "we'll be together again, sweetheart." Posey then suggests that "I tried to follow your line, but my car doesn't go through grasses that thick." You also get a glimpse of some Formula Vees and sports cars. Part 1 of 4 is here. You'll see the other parts in the related videos. 25 years later, they'd be calling the races together on SpeedVision, and did their final broadcast today. Really enjoyed this.
  4. 2014 Regulations

    I was just reading this article about the 2014 regulations, and found the part about the turbos very interesting, and very easy to understand: http://www.racecar-engineering.com/technology-explained/formula-1-and-the-environment/ I'd love to know what people's thoughts are on 2014. I'm admittedly not very well-versed in the technical stuff, though I'm finally making an effort to learn a little more. Are the 2014 regulations just PR, or will they have applications? Any anticipated impact on the racing? What other changes are going to be needed to accommodate smaller engines and lighter fuel loads? I believe I read that less drag will be required for cornering grip due to the cars carrying less fuel, but I'm too simple to be able to process the things I read and evaluate them fully. I'm personally of the opinion that more than just one type of engine should be allowed, as I find that makes for more interesting racing, but I'd be interested in some more technically-inclined perspectives on that next generation of F1 cars.
  5. A STAR is BORN !

    The future champion is the driver who is next number one on the best team/in the best car. I'm not sure where Leclerc will be number one and where Ferrari will be the best team/with the best car, but I guess it could somehow happen. That isn't inherently bad. I have no problem with F1 being a constructors' championship. There are millions of drivers' championships out there. But I have a problem with a constructors' championship where the cars produced are so alike, so uninspiring, and so constrained by the rules (such as the refueling ban and the tire situation) as to be unable to take advantage of differing strengths and weaknesses and "over-perform." If you're going to be a championship where the results are almost entirely down to the cars and the teams, then let's see some iconic cars that really push the limits of performance and challenge what we think of as a conventional racing car, and let's see some teams be allowed to play with strategy. Dominance isn't a new problem, but at one time, there were more paths for a non-dominant team to steal one (and they did). And this being a car sport, not a driver sport, isn't new. But, at one time, the cars were actually interesting. Everyone's spending so much money to produce something only the true nerds of F1 can tell the difference from any of the other cars on the track, and there is nothing about them that is particularly innovative. They're the predictable, boring answer to predictable, boring regulations. They break track records in qualifying, but give us zero emotion whatsoever in so doing.
  6. McLaren IndyCar

    I'm sure you've read about this somewhere. Zak Brown wants to do a full season IndyCar program in 2019. He's meeting with Andretti Autosport and RLL Racing this weekend in Detroit to talk about a partnership. Gil de Ferran, an Indy 500 winner who coached Fernando Alonso, is there with him. Oh, and a representative from Alonso's management is there, too. A lot of American racing media thinks Alonso's really going to do this. But I also think a lot of American racing media have an incentive to try to hype up IndyCar as much as they can, and putting out, "Alonso will still do the 500, but the full-time McLaren car will be driven by Graham Rahal," isn't going to do that.
  7. Grand Prix Canada 2018

    You could solve almost all of F1's on-track issues by bringing back refueling. Q3 must be done on starting race fuel load. Hell, if you really need to keep the 100 kg of fuel limit, do it—just don't require them to run all 100 kg at once. Divide it up however you want, and get rid of any fuel flow rate limits. The truth is that you cannot have an exciting race unless, at some point, a faster car is behind a slower car. There are only two ways to accomplish this: (1) Strategy. Cars on alternate strategies shuffle the field; this means sometimes slower cars are ahead of faster cars. Yet F1 has no fuel strategy anymore, and it barely has any tire strategy (which, plainly, got to be a bit too dangerous, even if exciting, so refueling is the better route). IndyCar puts on some great races on tight tracks because of fuel strategy; the field will split on two-stop vs. three-stop and the three-stop drivers will push like hell to try to make up a full pit stop delta. I highly recommend watching the second Detroit race from this year as an example of how fun this is. If everyone did two stops or everyone did three stops, as they would in Formula One, the race would've been dull as s##t. Likewise, NASCAR is dull as s##t, too, because everyone just pits at the same time under caution, so, by all pitting the way the leader pits, no one can beat the leader because the leader clearly has the fastest car and if you run the leader's strategy, you have to beat the leader on pace, which you can't do. You desperately need fuel strategy. It's the only way to make a race interesting. (2) Have qualifying regulations that don't reflect the race regulations. But this is more expensive than strategy and less effective because it only puts potentially slower cars ahead of potentially faster cars at the start; it gets sorted out quickly. Still, it can help; IndyCar qualifies with extra boost for the Indy 500, and people "trim out" (taking all the downforce off the car to reduce drag—radical wing angles, all winglets removed from the undertray, etc.) like crazy, so the starting lineup for the Indy 500 hasn't really reflected the true pecking order for the race in this era of the rules. In F1's case, having Q3 done on starting race fuel load, as it used to be, can put a lighter, but overall slower, car on pole, and create some intrigue. Yes, it'd help if the aerodynamic regulations allowed cars to run closer together without issue, but the truth is...how often do the cars actually run close together? Sure, Monaco and Montréal, but in most races, they're pretty spread apart. So, you can do all you want to facilitate overtaking, but if you don't do anything to create the situations when overtakes happen—faster cars trailing slower ones, as accomplished by fuel strategy—what good does it do?
  8. As promised, the schedule. Note that the race will not air on the NYC or Corpus Christi ABC affiliates. Check your local situation. All times Eastern. All events stream live on the ESPN app. The race may also stream live on WatchABC if your affiliate participates. All events are available for replay at any time on the ESPN app. Friday, June 8th FP1, 9:55 AM on ESPNU FP2, 1:55 PM on ESPNU Saturday, June 9th FP3, 10:55 AM on ESPN2 Qualifying, 1:55 PM on ESPNEWS Sunday, June 10th "On The Grid" pre-race show, 1:30 PM, ABC Race, 2:00 PM, ABC Encore presentation of race, 9:00 PM, ESPNEWS Monday, June 11th Encore presentation of race, 3:30 AM, ESPN2 Note that encore presentations have ad breaks; the live race on ABC will not. Shouldn't be too hard to synchronize your DVR to this well-publicized schedule of ESPN's unprecedented, comprehensive coverage of F1.
  9. Most boring race ever

    Yeah, though second place Sneva was on the same lap as winner Mears in that one (just 66 seconds back ;)). Alonso needs to cut the hyperbole. Most races in motorsports history have actually been really dull. "Exciting" races are more common now, but it still hasn't undone how truly awful most races were from the start of racing until the late 80s. The only excitement you ever had was if the car leading happened to be the one that failed.
  10. Dan's next move, Move or Stay?

    I hope everyone gets a chance to drive every car so we can know more facts.
  11. Relieved to be free from Leigh Diffey and Will Buxton, personally. Both were big ego a##holes who contributed little but loud noises. I hate that my beloved IndyCar is moving exclusively to NBC, so much so that I'll start attending the 500 at a great cost to never hear Diffey call the race I love most. David Hobbs and Steve Matchett were great for a while, but both way past it by 2017. Bob Varsha, too, has been awful in recent years when he's filled in for Diffey. Unfortunately, people get old. And, having spoken to Bob, I can tell you that "good guy" was your impression, but not mine. Maybe he was having an off-day or just didn't like me. Fair enough; I don't like myself, either! Also relieved to be free from ad breaks. And, for Spain and Monaco, every single session was on real TV—NBC never once did that (ESPN usually streams one practice session, but has been adding them all to TV. Monaco was even on real ESPN and ESPN2 rather than ESPNEWS). The ESPN coverage has ads on the encore presentations, though, so if you record those, you miss out. Anyway, I'll try to post the full ESPN F1 TV schedule with all sessions (did you know Formula 2 airs live on WatchESPN—even practice and qualifying?) and all encore presentations if that would help you synchronize your recordings. Not sure why your DVR isn't picking up the telecasts because ESPN isn't changing the start times or anything. They all air when the schedule says. They must be called something different in the guide from your cable provider.
  12. Race 4 - F1 2018 AZERBAIJAN GRAND PRIX

    I hope everyone wins the race!
  13. 2018 F1 season - discussion

    vroom zoom race car
  14. Williams seat - 2018

    RE: Wehrlein, I also find it interesting that Monisha Kaltenborn and Marcus Ericsson have both been saying positive things about Pascal in recent days/weeks. "Hard to work with" doesn't fit—the only person I know who didn't like working with Wehrlein was Esteban Ocon, who, incidentally, doesn't like working with Pérez. One wonders if perhaps Ocon is the problem. Also, people seem to forget that Wehrlein pulled himself from the early races because he didn't think he was at 100%. The media dragged him for it. Giovinazzi didn't even score points, but after one race, the media declared the ride Giovinazzi's permanently, and said Wehrlein had ruined his own career. Wehrlein took a big risk and a big hit to his reputation with the "experts" for the benefit of the team. Someone "hard to work with," I think, would've been selfish and insisted on staying in the car. Oh, well. He's off the grid in 2018, and I can only hope he'll get one more shot in the future, somehow.
  15. Williams seat - 2018

    (1) Correct. He was dropped because Ferrari needed a place for a junior driver, and Marcus Ericsson's backers bought into the team. (2) Wehrlein was doing just fine until Ericsson's backers bought into the team and fired Monisha Kaltenborn so that the underwhelming Ericsson could be the team leader. (3) The F1 paddock says that about everyone who isn't from the dominant ethnic/racial group of their home country. Wehrlein's not much different to work with from any other driver, but what is seen as "passion" or "fire" or "competitive spirit" in a white man is seen as disobedience and insubordination when it's someone else.
  16. Silly Season

    Not anymore! NASCAR once had 86 cars attempt for 43 spots—literally half the cars entered failed to qualify! More commonly, they'd get 50–55 entered for the 43. But now NASCAR has not only reduced the field size to 40, they usually only get 37–39 cars showing up. I think the most they had all year was 41 going for 40. The team owners formed an association, created "charters," and now chartered teams (1) are guaranteed a starting spot and (2) get paid a lot more per race than non-chartered teams. There are only 35 charters. So, for anyone beyond those 35 to show up is a bit of a money-loser. IndyCar also used to have more entries than spots (usually determined by safety—how many cars can safely pit at the track if, for example, all cars came in under a safety car at once) at many events in the CART days, and always at the Indy 500. But not anymore there, either. They do two days of qualifying, one of which is a "Bump Day" to set the 33 cars in the race, but there are only 33 entered now due to engine leasing rules, so it's very pointless. And sad. It used to be so much fun when cars got bumped out of the field.
  17. Kubica is back !!!

    His employer is a multi-million dollar business unit of a humongous, multinational corporation. One person cannot put that much pressure on them, even when there are relatively few drivers capable of winning in F1. The team knew the risks, knew that other teams didn't allow it, but determined that if that was what it took to get Kubica's services, then Kubica was worth it. And to imply that a racing driver wanting to race other types of cars is something on par with the decision-making of a hormonal adolescent would certainly be news to Jim Clark or Mario Andretti. There is more to life than what you do for work. Cycling on public roads is very dangerous. If I die or become incapacitated while cycling—which is an outcome that really does happen—my students will be without a teacher, and I like to think that my teaching adds value to their lives and the world around them. Maybe it will sound arrogant, but I think my job has more positive impact on the world than that of an F1 driver—my audience may be much smaller, and I may be paid much less, but I think people receiving a quality education is more important than people having an F1 race to watch. None of that stops me from cycling [vestibular migraines have, for the time being], though, because I have to live my life, too. There's no value in what I do if I have to destroy my life to do it, and there's no value in helping students realize what they can do if I set the example that they can't go on to do the things that make life livable. Plus, I won't do what I do well if I'm miserable from not being able to do things that help me recharge. And, plainly, I don't think anyone would say that I should stop cycling because it will cost my employer money trying to replace me if I get hit by a bus (sure, it may be harder to replace an F1 driver than it is to replace me, because fewer people are qualified to do what an F1 driver does, but there is still an excess of drivers with a Super License to the number of seats. Most of us have our "favorite" should-be-in-F1-but-is-instead-racing-sports-cars-or-sitting-at-home-or-doing-commentary-or-racing-IndyCar-or-what-ever driver). Like I said, you're totally entitled to your opinion that the team made the wrong choice to allow him to race, and that he made the wrong choice to race. But you can't say that the choice was wrong because he let his team down—his team allowed him to do it. If they didn't want him to, they could've stopped it, and Kubica, not having any other competitive rides open to him at that time, wouldn't have walked away. And if they didn't want him to, and he refused to drive for them, they could've hired any number of other drivers. Obviously, on everyone's free will, they decided that it was in both of their best interests to allow it. You act like Kubica wanted to throw his F1 career away. It seems to me that someone spending countless years trying to overcome a physical limitation just to race in F1 again, when he could have easily raced some other type of car for the rest of time, would have felt the exact opposite. He determined it was worth the risk, the same way it was worth the risk to drive in F1 in the first place and potentially be hit in the head by a spring like the driver he might replace, or worse.
  18. Kubica is back !!!

    Yes, Kubica had a contract year-round. But that contract allowed him to race that rally car. So, you can't really argue, "BUT HE LET HIS EMPLOYER DOWN!!!!" when his employer allowed him to do that. You're more than welcome to the opinion that teams should not allow drivers to race outside F1; that's up to you. But if the team and driver didn't agree to that (which they did not), you can't try to use the team's interests against the driver. I'm also curious what you do for work and if you spend all your free time in the way you think creates the least risk or even the most benefit to your employer...
  19. Under New Management

    Everyone's worried about Liberty's technical regs, but I'm worried about something else: David Hill from FOX has been hired by Liberty to help with the world TV feed. Here's the thing: if there is one thing in F1 that is 100% NOT wrong, it's the world TV feed images. F1 has always been beautifully produced since moving from local production to a standard FOM feed. I'm not sure many sports, if any, are better in terms of video than F1. Meanwhile, FOX is one of the worst at covering sports. FOX ruined NASCAR, for example, by selling not just commercials, but actually SELLING the race. So, basically, a sponsor like Budweiser would pay money, and then the Budweiser car would be shown on TV, regardless of where it was running, or what else was happening on track. It is the standard for NASCAR to this day that almost everything you see on the telecast was paid for, and it's horrible. They don't just cover the race. So, I'm very worried that FOX influence and American influence will make F1 unwatchable TV, especially with Liberty's plans to have a world streaming service. In America, for the record, F1 has moved to ESPN for next year, with ESPN paying F1 nothing at all. ESPN will not hire announcers; Liberty is going to provide announcers they are testing for their streaming service. Who they hire will say a lot about their plans—credible, good announcers like Jack Nicholls, James Allen, Will Buxton, or Peter Windsor would give me some confidence; getting some yahoos would not.
  20. I thought the race was good. I have only watched two races this year: that one and the Australian Grand Prix. I thought this one was good. I thought it was good. I watched it, and I thought, "That was pretty good!" I think that was a good race. What it was, to me, was, that it was a good race, and my opinion of it was, and still is, to be quite honest, that the race was good. I am glad that I watched it in large part because it was good. That's what I think about it. For what it's worth, I thought the race was good.
  21. One of the few races on the NASCAR tour that bills itself by km instead of miles (though in reality it is slightly longer than 500 km), Phoenix comes next on the calendar of NASCAR-sanctioned thrill shows that reenforce every stereotype any non-NASCAR viewer could ever have about the series. Last year, Phoenix reconfigured the track, to include slightly more banking, and a controversially redesigned dogleg. Not that the dogleg played any role; everyone just took a short-cut and avoided it altogether. This year, however, NASCAR will set cones up such that drivers must stay on the track. Assuming it will be a penalty if you hit/go below the cones, similar to the commitment cone rules on pit lane. Cup, Nationwide, and K&N Pro Series West this weekend. Saturday 2:30 PM: Bashas' Supermarkets 200 NNS race (200 miles) 5:30 PM: Talking Stick Resort 50 K&N Pro race (50 miles) (not televised live...air date TBD) Sunday 1:00 PM: Subway Fresh Fit 500 Cup race (312 miles) NOTE THAT ALL TIMES ARE LOCAL TO PHOENIX...MOUNTAIN TIME IN AMERICA...GMT -7. Also those times are not accurate at all. Cup will probably star around 1:17.
  22. Why I Like DR

    It is true that Ocon won the European Formula 3 title the year Verstappen finished third, with Tom Blomqvist in second. And it is true that both Ocon and Verstappen were rookies in Formula 3. However, Ocon had been racing cars for two years as a somewhat mediocre Formula Renault 2.0 driver. Verstappen came almost straight out of karts; he had only run 14 car races, all in the Florida Winter Series, which is a 1400cc Formula Abarth (Fiat) car. Plus, Ocon was racing for Prema, the best team, powered by Mercedes, the best engine. Verstappen had a Volkswagen, which was still competitive (in fact, Blomqvist had a Volkswagen), but not the absolute best equipment. So, while Ocon beat him, Verstappen was far more impressive. And believe me—I like Ocon, and strongly dislike Verstappen, so it sucks to write that. But it's also the truth of junior formulae. Paul di Resta beat Sebastian Vettel to the title in Formula 3. Not sure anyone today is arguing that di Resta is better than Vettel. In fact, the subject of this thread, Daniel Ricciardo, lost the Formula BMW Asia title to Earl Bamber, someone you'd only know if you watch sports car racing. That year, Ricciardo finished a mere fifth in the World Final, won by Christian Vietoris, a GP2 journeyman who became a DTM journeyman. In 2010, Ricciardo move to Formula Renault 3.5. Mikhail Aleshin won the title; his career peaked as a crash-prone IndyCar back-of-the-fielder. Esteban Guerrieri scored more points per race than Ricciardo, too, but did not have the budget for a full season (Guerrieri won six races in a partial season; Ricciardo four in a full). Guerrieri went to Indy Lights, not even IndyCar, and now races touring cars. Finally, in 2011, Ricciardo ran part-time in FR3.5; his points per race would have put him third in the standings behind Robert Wickens (DTM race winner who is now going to IndyCar) and Jean-Éric Vergne (who you may remember Ricciardo beating to the Red Bull drive while at Toro Rosso). Alexander Rossi also posted similar numbers to Ricciardo; Rossi's time in F1 was brief and uninspiring, and he now races IndyCar. So, you can't really go by that stuff. They pay people to find young talent specifically because it is a skill to recognize who has the right package to develop into an F1 driver and who doesn't. The results don't always tell that because, in these categories, drivers have such a spread. And because of driving style—certain styles may win you shorter races on shorter tracks with less powerful cars, but the real show won't be so forgiving (see Lance Stroll's early career).
  23. Hamilton

    It seems to me that what he and his team of lawyers/accountants did is unethical. It seems to me that it was probably illegal, too. It is no surprise that a driver I like proves to be bad in the end!
  24. Hamilton

    And in general terms, it is reasonably accurate to say that A LOT of athletes have evaded taxes and while they get in legal trouble, they do not go to jail, as you fantasize for Hamilton.
  25. Hamilton

    [Not defending the laws that allow the rich to avoid taxes, nor am I defending the people who take advantage of them]. "Not paying taxes" is not a clear enough statement. There is tax evasion (illegal) and tax avoidance (legal, unfortunately—and certainly not always ethical, even if legal). Tax evasion may get you jail time. Tax avoidance is the goal of the teams of lawyers and accountants rich people hire. Of course, very aggressive tax avoidance can turn into tax evasion, but that tends to not be punished with jail. I haven't looked into this much; I am not a British tax lawyer. Certainly, offshore entities cross into tax evasion all the time. But even if they determine this is evasion, the rich elites like Lionel Messi and Valentino Rossi don't go to prison. Both Messi and Rossi got a suspended sentence (meaning if they broke the law during that time, they'd go to prison, but they obviously don't break the law, and so they never serve the sentence) and paid millions to the tax authorities. Also, Nico Rosberg came up in the Panama Papers, like Messi, for doing the whole shell corporation thing, but no one's ever prosecuted that issue. An IndyCar star, Hélio Castroneves, used a shell corporation for tax evasion, too, but walked free. Obviously, all of these are different jurisdictions; none are the UK. But it's all the same: rich athletes who are like eighteen layers removed from their own finances don't go to jail when their lawyers/accountants push things too far. Most countries just want to get paid; the rich athletes pay them. Everyone moves on. So, you're really sensationalizing it with the "jail" thing, cowboy.