Its Quite Ironic Mr Bajo

[monkey man 0]

bajo, i can remember a few weeks ago where sato had his nose damaged in a first corner incident and you mauled him for it, well what goes around comes around - the same thing happened to JV, first corner of the race, knocked his nose and if i was to use your logic then i would say and i quote from you "he was entering the first corner at such a spedd that would not allow for evasive action in the event of an incident. Any sensible driver would leave a margin there."

[monkey man 0]

thewsame thing happened and by your reasoning then it would clearly be JV's fault, but by mine i would say it was one of these incidents, the car infront which was sato slowed down for the turn and the concentina effect caught JV out, because JV like sato does not have god like reactions and could not react to the sudden breaking fast enough.

[Max Mosley 2]

Interesting to see what Bajo thinks. Personally I think its a bit suspect given the two drivers involved. They each say the other was to blame.

[bajo39 0]

bajo, i can remember a few weeks ago where sato had his nose damaged in a first corner incident and you mauled him for it, well what goes around comes around - the same thing happened to JV, first corner of the race, knocked his nose and if i was to use your logic then i would say and i quote from you "he was entering the first corner at such a spedd that would not allow for evasive action in the event of an incident. Any sensible driver would leave a margin there."

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Racing incidents are not often black and white. Let me explain the differences between these two for you:

Sato's incident - drove straight into the back of the preceeding car.

Villeneuve's incident - preceeding car cut across his nose unexpectedly and damaged his front wing (I was worried about Sato's proximity to JV at the start of the race, when the Japanese is at his most dangerous).

Both are racing incidents but in the first scenario there is surely more culpability to the driver than in the second. Shades of grey my friend.

[Sato 0]

No biast what so ever.

[bajo39 0]

No biast what so ever. 

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

For you, there is clearly an enormous amount of bias. Perhaps this warps your perception of my impartiality?

[Sato 0]

Well lets consider the fact in the Sato incident, the car infront, actually hit the car infront of it also, so Sato was not the only one to do it on this case, and obviously he had a short distance to react.

You say here Sato choped infonrt of JV giving him no time to react basically. So, Sato has little time to react. JV has little time to react. Sato's is his fault, JV's isn't his fault.

What am i missing?

[bajo39 0]

Well lets consider the fact in the Sato incident, the car infront, actually hit the car infront of it also, so Sato was not the only one to do it on this case, and obviously he had a short distance to react.

You say here Sato choped infonrt of JV giving him no time to react basically. So, Sato has little time to react. JV has little time to react. Sato's is his fault, JV's isn't his fault.

What am i missing?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Sato was fully behind Rubens, I think it was a car length or two but I would have to check, and Sato ran directly into the back of him. Clearly this is his fault.

JV was not fully behind Sato because if he was, there would not have been any contact when Sato came accross his nose. Obviously he was somewhat alongside when Sato came accross and hit him. If you want to claim that it was the other way round, then you would have to explain why Jacques with full view of the car infront would turn his nose into the side of its rear wing.

The incident between Jacques was very much like the incident between Webber and MOntoya at the start of the European GP. That incident was 50/50 in terms of blame... much like, I suggest to you, this one is.

If you cannot visualize in three dimensions as I can, try getting out some dinky cars and reinacting the two incidents. I am sure this exercise will clear the matter up for you

[Kay 0]

I have to agree that every incident is different because of different circumstances, I don't know whether Jvi was to fault or not (not seen enough of it to make a valid opinion) but if there are differences then there can be different amounts of blame to be handed out.

[monkey man 0]

there really is no point in talking to you bajo, i now know you are super biased and would do anything as well as looking forward to seeing sato fail, i saw how you posted the topic title "takuma sato crashes" even though it was button - i just can't believe someone could have this much bias and hatred towards one driver.

[bajo39 0]

I have to agree that every incident is different because of different circumstances, I don't know whether Jvi was to fault or not (not seen enough of it to make a valid opinion) but if there are differences then there can be different amounts of blame to be handed out.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Right, but the incident between JV and Sato sounds awfully similar to Montoya-Webber at the Euro GP, doesn't it?

[bajo39 0]

there really is no point in talking to you bajo, i now know you are super biased and would do anything as well as looking forward to seeing sato fail, i saw how you posted the topic title "takuma sato crashes" even though it was button - i just can't believe someone could have this much bias and hatred towards one driver.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

It is not compelling in the least to issue a stream of unsupported, nonsensical insults in the way that you have above.

If JV was at fault, please explain why. If Sato was not at fault, please explan this also but do not come out here with no history that would lend credibility to your opinion and rail accusations at an established, veteran poster like myself. You do nothing to subtract from my standing and only litter the forum in a way that is most unnapreciated.

[Kay 0]

Right, but the incident between JV and Sato sounds awfully similar to Montoya-Webber at the Euro GP, doesn't it?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I'd have to watch it again, as I don't remember it.

[monkey man 0]

It is not compelling in the least to issue a stream of unsupported, nonsensical insults in the way that you have above.

If JV was at fault, please explain why. If Sato was not at fault, please explan this also but do not come out here with no history that would lend credibility to your opinion and rail accusations at an established, veteran poster like myself. You do nothing to subtract from my standing and only litter the forum in a way that is most unnapreciated.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

litter the forum? you post a topic saying some one crashed when they did not because you though and wanted them to, so don't tell me about littering the forum.

and if you read, i already stated what i thought of the incident, but i was also using your reasoning and i say what you said again which could also be applied to JV "he was entering the first corner at such a spedd that would not allow for evasive action in the event of an incident." however i find that you do not hold true to the things you say which i do not apreciate.

[Kay 0]

there really is no point in talking to you bajo,

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Why did you start the thread then?

[bajo39 0]

litter the forum? you post a topic saying some one crashed when they did not because you though and wanted them to, so don't tell me about littering the forum.

and if you read, i already stated what i thought of the incident, but i was also using your reasoning and i say what you said again which could also be applied to JV

[monkey man 0]

Why did you start the thread then? 

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

because i didn't know tht he would have double standards and such biased, i underestimatd his bias.

[monkey man 0]

no i am not of indian decent, are you white and american?

and you ahve proven yourself to be wrong before as you have even incriminated yourself twice saying:

"I made the post immediately following the GP and I have not yet had time to analyise the information followed."

"The shots of the incident were from a distance so I could not tell from the helmet"

you were wrong then, you are wrong now and your posts will be wrong in the future. and trying to hang on with your imaganary status by being a "veteran poster" isn't going to work because being a veteran poster or not has nothing to do with post credibilty. you have shown that even though some one may have made many posts, they could all still be totally non creditable as you have proven quite alot through out your canadian grand prix postings.

what ever, im not saying no more.

[bajo39 0]

[quote name='monkey man' date='Jun 13 2005, 05:52 PM']no i am not of indian decent, are you white and american?

and you ahve proven yourself to be wrong before as you have even incriminated yourself twice saying:

"I made the post immediately following the GP and I have not yet had time to analyise the information followed."

"The shots of the incident were from a distance so I could not tell from the helmet"

you were wrong then, you are wrong now and your posts will be wrong in the future. and trying to hang on with your imaganary status by being a "veteran poster" isn't going to work because being a veteran poster or not has nothing to do with post credibilty. you have shown that even though some one may have made many posts, they could all still be totally non creditable as you have proven quite alot through out your canadian grand prix postings.

what ever, im not saying no more.
[right][post="43315"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post][/right][/quote]
Good Lord, what are you on about?

Those two quotes refer to separate incidents you fool. Get your facts straight! I am done responding to you, the record will show you as the most despicable sort of forum troll we have seen in a long time. Enough of you!

[Sato 0]

I watched it last night before going to sleep. Jv is further behind Sato then Sato was behind RB in Europe. Sato doesn't swerve across at all, what the hell?

Are we talking the second corner of the race here?

[Sato 0]

Hmm Sato is infront of him here, so JV should be braking to keep from touching him already.....

[nojvnof1 0]

JV says Sato chopped across him leaving him no room.

Sauber says Sato braked way too early, in a place you don't brake, leaving JV no chance to avoid him. (SIDE NOTE: Good to see PS sticking up for JV considering all that's happened this weekend)

Sato says he had to brake to avoid Rubens.

I don't think Sato or JV are 100% to blame, but after viewing the incident, I'm inclined to siding with JV. No bias here before you all say it.

[Sato 0]

Sato brakes so he doesn't run into Trulli. If Sato doesn't he rams Trulli, simple as that, if TS can slow down to miss Trulli, why can't JV slow down to miss TS? JV had more time and distance to do so.

[Sato 0]

that shows what happens just after, Sato is on the right line, making sure he isn't hitting JT, whilst JV has just hit TS.

[Sato 0]

*bump*