Shane2 0 Report post Posted June 13, 2007 Non sequitur (logic), logical fallacyNon sequitur (absurdism), a comment which has no relation to the comment it follows Logical fallacy, a flawed pattern of reasoning. The question is relevant because it is a bonus to have a powerful engine, and as the Renault engine is both powerful and reliable. But considering you have problems admitting anything not called ferrari can be good, I shall just ignore you Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Kay 0 Report post Posted June 13, 2007 Webber is really starting to struggle with Red Bull!He has'nt done that well in the 1st 6 races! I thought the reason was because he was with a new team but now I'm not sure what's gone into him! Evidence please? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Fed up 0 Report post Posted June 13, 2007 TBH I dont give a monkeys that Red Bull screwed up Webber's race whilst Wurz, the guy that repaced him at Williams, stood up on the podium basking in the moment. Mark showed a total lack of respect to the Williams team when he signed for Red Bull, but is now finding that the grass is not necessarily greener on the other side. This guy, like Button, is destined to have a mediocre F1 career as bad luck and poor reliability tends to follow him from team to team. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Red Light District 0 Report post Posted June 14, 2007 TBH I dont give a monkeys that Red Bull screwed up Webber's race whilst Wurz, the guy that repaced him at Williams, stood up on the podium basking in the moment. Mark showed a total lack of respect to the Williams team when he signed for Red Bull, but is now finding that the grass is not necessarily greener on the other side. This guy, like Button, is destined to have a mediocre F1 career as bad luck and poor reliability tends to follow him from team to team. But Williams signed Wurz before Red Bull signed Webber Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
cavallino 2 Report post Posted June 14, 2007 Logical fallacy, a flawed pattern of reasoning. The question is relevant because it is a bonus to have a powerful engine, and as the Renault engine is both powerful and reliable. But considering you have problems admitting anything not called ferrari can be good, I shall just ignore you Being fastest in a straight line doesn't iply you have the best engine. It it happened in Monza or the old Hockenheim you might have a case. It's a load of bulls##t anyway, as usual you haven't bothered to get any facts. HEre are the trap figures from Canada: Pos No Driver Time of Day Speed 1 9 Nick Heidfeld 14:04:26 324.2 2 4 Heikki Kovalainen 13:18:37 324.1 3 10 Robert Kubica 13:19:20 324.1 4 5 Felipe Massa 14:04:54 323.7 5 14 David Coulthard 13:04:19 322.1 6 6 Kimi R Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Sato 0 Report post Posted June 14, 2007 Alex was signed before Webber. Honda have a terrible engine, going on those figures.... all 4 cars towards the bottom. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Shane2 0 Report post Posted June 14, 2007 Being fastest in a straight line doesn't iply you have the best engine. It it happened in Monza or the old Hockenheim you might have a case.It's a load of bulls##t anyway, as usual you haven't bothered to get any facts. HEre are the trap figures from Canada: Pos No Driver Time of Day Speed 1 9 Nick Heidfeld 14:04:26 324.2 2 4 Heikki Kovalainen 13:18:37 324.1 3 10 Robert Kubica 13:19:20 324.1 4 5 Felipe Massa 14:04:54 323.7 5 14 David Coulthard 13:04:19 322.1 6 6 Kimi R Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Kay 0 Report post Posted June 14, 2007 But Williams signed Wurz before Red Bull signed Webber That is correct. Clicky Still indicates rumours but a lovely passage from Frank: "I must commend Mark Webber for his contribution to the team over the past two seasons as he has been a credit to himself and Williams and has never let up in his pursuit of competitive success," said Williams. "I know Mark will give his all until the end of the season and we wish him well in his future arrangements." This article also identifies it was this way around: Williams said that he felt Webber's decision to hold out for an opportunity to join another top team, widely understood to be Renault or Red Bull, was understandable."Mark recognised that we were trying to do our best with what we could, but it didn't work out," he said. "It may suddenly come good, who knows?" "I understand what the opportunity is. And anyone would do whatever it took to get that opportunity. He has a realistic good chance of getting it and I sincerely hope it falls into his lap." "He is a very good driver," Williams added. "If he gets the opportunity I feel he will make a lot of it. I will be very happy for him. He is a straight guy; he doesn't come with fancy ideas about himself. He tells it how it is. He is a man's man. He is everything. I would recommend him to anybody." Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
cavallino 2 Report post Posted June 14, 2007 Alex was signed before Webber. He was announced before Webber. Not the same thing. Webber wouldn't have refused Williams' offer if he didn't have the Red Bull deal at least practically sealed. Hmm, as usual you seem to be misquoting things. I never said it meant you definately had the best engine, i said it helps to have one that is powerful. Oh and seeing as you are dealing with facts, McLaren manufacture the chassis not the engine. The fastest cars in the speed trap are not necessarily the ones with the best engine. I remember a race a while ago (Hockenheim?) where Arrows were topping the trap figures. You are also wrong in saying that Renault cars have been at the top of the speed trap figures - they haven't. Still indicates rumours but a lovely passage from Frank: In sharp contrast to what Webber had to say about his former team on Australian TV... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Shane2 0 Report post Posted June 14, 2007 I only went on what i saw in quali, it obviously wasnt the case in the race. My mistake Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
cavallino 2 Report post Posted June 14, 2007 I only went on what i saw in quali, it obviously wasnt the case in the race. My mistake :blink: Ok, I'm going to try again. I promise to be civil and if things break down, it won't be me - I won't be the first to start anything . If I do something, point me to this post, and you'll get an apology and a retraction. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
cavallino 2 Report post Posted June 14, 2007 PS: Those are quali figures. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Shane2 0 Report post Posted June 14, 2007 I didn't realise they where quali figures sorry. Obviously listening to anything ITV's commentators say is a big mistake Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Sato 0 Report post Posted June 14, 2007 I didn't realise they where quali figures sorry. Obviously listening to anything ITV's commentators say is a big mistake You got that right. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Quiet One 15 Report post Posted June 14, 2007 I didn't realise they where quali figures sorry. Obviously listening to anything ITV's commentators say is a big mistake Damn...I am just realizing that reading you two being so civilized is no fun *runssssss* Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Shane2 0 Report post Posted June 14, 2007 Would you feel better if i put my steel toecapped boots on and kicked you up the butt? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mikathegreat2 2 Report post Posted June 14, 2007 I only went on what i saw in quali, it obviously wasnt the case in the race. My mistakeWhy have you made so many mistakes since you got back ??? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Shane2 0 Report post Posted June 14, 2007 Mainly because ITV's commentators are full of sh!t Share this post Link to post Share on other sites