This Will Make Your Blood Boil...

[maure 1]

You are a perfect example of a chameleon! You keep changing your words.

Bring back true fans of Alonso!

Not an Alonso fan.

Didn't change my words. I never said Hamilton crossed the line. I said "I noticed Hamilton driving over the white line" and "here is the picture of Hamilton right on top of the line". If you are gonna join the lynching, apply yourself better.

Hey, looking at the picture again, it does seem the tyre may have crossed the line just.

[maure 1]

Ignored? Are you sure? Many have posted logical counter-arguments in repsonse to your posts, and you have simply ignored them, or dodged the question, I am simply copying you, don't you see? I briefly entertained the thought of posting my opinion on the article, and some of your curious conclusions, then I read what others had posted and your replies, and realised that I would be wasting my time. Perhaps when I am slightly more bored I shall bother to post something decent, on the other hand, as I stated in another thread (right after you dodged my reply to you with more horse sh!t) - I can no longer be arsed.

I wonder, why did you take the time to make this thread if all you expected was to be ignored or insulted? Another fine example of your twisted logic.

You have two wishes remaining, use them wisely.

If your self-denial was more skilfull, it would at least be amusing.

But, hey, I may have stopped looking up a topic out of boredom while you were at your best. What "counter-arguments" (see, you have me laughing again) have you offered and to counter what exactly?

[Rainmaster 7]

If your self-denial was more skilfull, it would at least be amusing.

But, hey, I may have stopped looking up a topic out of boredom while you were at your best. What "counter-arguments" (see, you have me laughing again) have you offered and to counter what exactly?

Can you spot the contradiction in your post? I'll give you a hint 'it would at least be amusing..., you have me laughing again).

Here is the thread where you ignore my counter arguments. http://www.totalf1.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=9273 . I ask you to explain 'severely', you don't, I question your use of 'artificial', no response, I state a non-finish is a non-finish, no answer, I ask you how Hamilton's performace 'went to crap', nothing from you, I ask you to explain who Hamilton races for if not himself, I get ignored, again. So, now, please tell me you don't ignore people's questions. Even in my previous post I asked you a question regarding why you started this thread, (you guessed it) no response, did you miss that bit?

Here is the definition of a question mark: (intelligent people can stop reading here)

a punctuation mark (?) placed at the end of a sentence to indicate a question, placed over an area to indicate uncertainty or doubt.

Here is the definition of an answer: (the two go to together)

the information requested by a spoken or written question

I will be sure to work on my self-denial skills, glad I make you laugh (just so you know, I am quite sure everyone on this forum is laughing at you).

[maure 1]

You can be fun sometimes. Let's see what you got.

I'll explain it one more time for you, since you are being obtuse.

Naughty.

(1) Pat Symonds (from Alonso's favourite team) says Alonso has a weakness, and that Hamilton has shown it up this season. (2) Alonso himself says you're wrong, regarding equality in the team.

Right. The sources you faithfully believe as pure gospel. So, your position is that there isn't a single article where journalists claim that Alonso had said the opposite, that is, that he is being severely screwed by McLaren.

These totally destroy your claims

Totally.

(1) Alonso's reputation hasn't suffered this year

RD has tried and the gullible have believed. In as much as that is so, sure, Alonso's reputation has suffered. But, at the same time, the opposite is true too. Those of us that didn't give a rat's behind about Alonso now seen in him a guy with bullet-proof guts that can perform even in the mist of this brutal lynching.

(2) that Alonso doesn't have equal machinery at McLaren.

Unfortunately, I keep telling you, it is not possible to accept the "equality" mantra any longer.

Given that you keep asking everyone else to answer your own silly points,

Sharp's points. Focus, man, focus.

if you refuse to answer my points above

But you are being so amusing, why would I do that.

we can all conclude you are as much a hypocrite as you are a fool.

Now, now, don't lose your cool. You are doing not bad. Lighten up.

Firstly I'm not a Lewisteric or even a fan of Lewis.

Right.

Secondly, the claims of bias against Alonso are denied by Alonso himself!

Yet, they have been admitted by RD. Odd world.

Personally I think Alonso is a better authority than John L Sharp on the matter.

Same as above.

Your argument (and the famous expert that is John L Sharp's argument) is shot to bits by the fact that Alonso himself says you're (both) wrong!

Same as above.

Everything else is irrelevant until you explain how Alonso says you are wrong

Again, your faith on biased media is... touching... almost endearing.

but since I'm too generous I'll discuss your points.

Condescending now, my friend? I thought you btched about that kind of tone some time back. Ah well. Not the same rules apply to us all, right?

The second one, about tyre pressure, is not clear to me. Can you provide proof that the tyre pressures were wrong?

You mean that the numbers Sharp mentions are correct for you. Please elaborate.

All I found was an autosport article describing the claims as "speculation" in the spanish media.

Well, if it is in the Spanish media, then it must a lie. Those evil Spaniards must have Sharp in the payroll.

Likewise I don't yet believe the claim about 7 against 2 extra laps.

Of course you don't. I still remember Hungary and how the evil spaniards doctored radio conversations to make the world believe that Hamilton was stealing the extra lap.

Please provide good evidence so we can discuss it.

It is you who desperately needs to believe that all is straight as an arrow in F1 and, thanks to RD, the burden of proof falls on the likes of you.

Since RD unequivocally and blatantly admitted, leaving no room whatsoever for error, that his sole and unique objective is to defeat Alonso, every single event during the season that didn't seem right is now suspect... unless you are gullible or blind. Furthermore, McLaren was found guilty of espionage and RD not only refused to admit responsability but cowardly chose Alonso as scapegoat. Summing up, neither RD not McLaren have any credibility left. Their word is worth nothing.

All in all, any reasonable person is asking what the fck is going on... except the likes of you that have it all clear and, indeed, presume that all is just dandy. It is only posturing, I know, you seem intelligent enough to realize that the whole season stinks. But your ego is gotten in the way and you are just hoping to look good in front of your friends. That makes this exchange a bit boring, you understand. Try harder please.

[Rainmaster 7]

It is you who desperately needs to believe that all is straight as an arrow in F1 and, thanks to RD, the burden of proof falls on the likes of you.

It is, in actual fact, your job to prove your opinions, like in criminal law - you must prove guilt, it's not everyone else's job on this forum to show why you are wrong. Try backing up some of your arguments with concrete fact (if there is any), then people won't be able to argue with you. I notice in your above reply that you once again dodge questions, you are a class act and respond with the same drivel, just because you repeat something a thousand times does not make it any truer.

Any response to my other post? C'mon, I need a laugh!

[Jean Todt 4]

Not an Alonso fan.

Didn't change my words. I never said Hamilton crossed the line. I said "I noticed Hamilton driving over the white line" and "here is the picture of Hamilton right on top of the line". If you are gonna join the lynching, apply yourself better.

Hey, looking at the picture again, it does seem the tyre may have crossed the line just.

Who said the following?

"As "semantic" as the screencap following the link below?

http://bayimg.com/PaHhMAAbI

I have also attached it for your viewing pleasure. I was just watching the Monaco GP when I noticed Hamilton driving over the white line after leaving his second pitstop. Of course, that should have resulted in a penality... except that in Hamilton's case, well, it didn't.

So, here is the picture of Hamilton right on top of the line. Can the lewisterics explain it satisfactorily or is this another case of "semantics"?"

"All you have to do is follow the link, look up the lap number at the top and see who pitted when.

Not necessary though. We know it is Hamilton because if it would have been Alonso, he would have been penalized."

[Jean Todt 4]

It is, in actual fact, your job to prove your opinions, like in criminal law - you must prove guilt, it's not everyone else's job on this forum to show why you are wrong. Try backing up some of your arguments with concrete fact (if there is any), then people won't be able to argue with you. I notice in your above reply that you once again dodge questions, you are a class act and respond with the same drivel, just because you repeat something a thousand times does not make it any truer.

Any response to my other post? C'mon, I need a laugh!

I was just reading some of his replies. WOW! we are as idiotic as him for even spending time to read it!

[maure 1]

Can you spot the contradiction in your post? I'll give you a hint 'it would at least be amusing..., you have me laughing again).

I do wish you were laughing but since you close you post with a desperate dive for bigotry, I doubt it.

Here is the thread where you ignore my counter arguments. [/color]http://www.totalf1.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=9273 . I ask you to explain 'severely', you don't,

You are truly amusing. You ask me explain "severely", in relation to what?

I question your use of 'artificial'

Same nonsense.

I ask you how Hamilton's performace 'went to crap', nothing from you

Go to the F1 site and check the results of races. It is all there.

I ask you to explain who Hamilton races for if not himself,

Here you got me. McLaren, as a team, is a figment of the imagination and it is in no way related to Hamilton.

Even in my previous post I asked you a question regarding why you started this thread,

The answer is staring at you in the face... so that you could ignore Sharp's observations and launch this tirade.

Here is the definition of a question mark:

Yep. The same desperate crap I hear when the desperate don't know what to say. If it is not the spelling, it is my choice of reciprocal pronouns, or common collocates, or dactylic rhyme. If we were talking, the complain would be about inappropriate voice-onset-times, or unacceptable phonological processes involving plosives and fricatives, whatever. It all comes down to hysteria and bigotry.

[maure 1]

Who said the following?

"As "semantic" as the screencap following the link below?

http://bayimg.com/PaHhMAAbI

I have also attached it for your viewing pleasure. I was just watching the Monaco GP when I noticed Hamilton driving over the white line after leaving his second pitstop. Of course, that should have resulted in a penality... except that in Hamilton's case, well, it didn't.

So, here is the picture of Hamilton right on top of the line. Can the lewisterics explain it satisfactorily or is this another case of "semantics"?"

"All you have to do is follow the link, look up the lap number at the top and see who pitted when.

Not necessary though. We know it is Hamilton because if it would have been Alonso, he would have been penalized."

And where does it say that he crossed it? I'll bold it for you. Do you see it now? I suppose you really can't.

[maure 1]

It is, in actual fact, your job to prove your opinions, like in criminal law - you must prove guilt, it's not everyone else's job on this forum to show why you are wrong. Try backing up some of your arguments with concrete fact (if there is any), then people won't be able to argue with you. I notice in your above reply that you once again dodge questions, you are a class act and respond with the same drivel, just because you repeat something a thousand times does not make it any truer.

Any response to my other post? C'mon, I need a laugh!

So now F1 is criminal law? Hilarious.

Ok, sure. McLaren has been found guilty of espionage.

Deal.

[maure 1]

I was just reading some of his replies. WOW! we are as idiotic as him for even spending time to read it!

Idiotic indeed. I claim that there is enough to suspect foul play... and you pretend there isn't despite McLaren's spying and RD's admision of favoritism.

[YHR 0]

I see Maure taking a lot of trash talk and personal insults, but I don't think he himself has slung any at any member????? I kind of favour guys who don't take THINGS TO A PERSONAL LEVEL. Civil debate is about the issues.

I admit this is along drawn out thread that doesn't interest me much, so I might have missed something, but with just a quick read I noticed a lot of trashed aimed at the individual who is maure.

Too bad guys have to sink to that level.

[Rainmaster 7]

So now F1 is criminal law? Hilarious.

Ok, sure. McLaren has been found guilty of espionage.

Deal.

Hmm, did I say Mclaren? Or did I say 'opinions'? - the quotation marks are a clue. Personally, I don't see the point of going around saying a load of rubbish just to provoke argument, which is clearly what you are (quite successfully) doing. Well done to you, but anyone can make up a load of stuff and shout it in the street, intelligent people back up arguments with evidence. Speaking of, do you have any yet?

[shampion 0]

I see Maure taking a lot of trash talk and personal insults, but I don't think he himself has slung any at any member????? I kind of favour guys who don't take THINGS TO A PERSONAL LEVEL. Civil debate is about the issues.

I admit this is along drawn out thread that doesn't interest me much, so I might have missed something, but with just a quick read I noticed a lot of trashed aimed at the individual who is maure.

Too bad guys have to sink to that level.

Agreed!

A litttle surprised at the reaction of certain members also.

Too Bad!

[Fed up 0]

I see Maure taking a lot of trash talk and personal insults, but I don't think he himself has slung any at any member????? I kind of favour guys who don't take THINGS TO A PERSONAL LEVEL. Civil debate is about the issues.

I admit this is along drawn out thread that doesn't interest me much, so I might have missed something, but with just a quick read I noticed a lot of trashed aimed at the individual who is maure.

Too bad guys have to sink to that level.

Trust me that guy Maure is a real fool -

[Rainmaster 7]

Can you spot the contradiction in your post? I'll give you a hint 'it would at least be amusing..., you have me laughing again).

I do wish you were laughing but since you close you post with a desperate dive for bigotry, I doubt it.

WTF? I quoted you, you said 'it would at least be amusing' - implying it was not amusing, you later said 'you have me laughing again' - the again meaning you were laughing for a second time, when earlier you said you weren't laughing!

Here is the thread where you ignore my counter arguments. [/color]http://www.totalf1.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=9273 . I ask you to explain 'severely', you don't,

You are truly amusing. You ask me explain "severely", in relation to what?

I question your use of 'artificial'

Same nonsense.

It was a genuine and simple request to you to explain the severity of the punishments to Alonso, have they been severe? As for 'artificial' - I wanted you to explain how Hamilton's points are artificial, he has go them himself hasn't he?

I ask you how Hamilton's performace 'went to crap', nothing from you

Go to the F1 site and check the results of races. It is all there.

I ask you to explain who Hamilton races for if not himself,

Here you got me. McLaren, as a team, is a figment of the imagination and it is in no way related to Hamilton.

So his performance 'went to crap' did it? You must have a loose definition of crap.

Even in my previous post I asked you a question regarding why you started this thread,

The answer is staring at you in the face... so that you could ignore Sharp's observations and launch this tirade.

So you started a thread so I could ignore Sharp's observations? Thanks for thinking of me. Seriously though, why start a thread if all you expect is to be ignored or insulted?

Here is the definition of a question mark:

Yep. The same desperate crap I hear when the desperate don't know what to say. If it is not the spelling, it is my choice of reciprocal pronouns, or common collocates, or dactylic rhyme. If we were talking, the complain would be about inappropriate voice-onset-times, or unacceptable phonological processes involving plosives and fricatives, whatever. It all comes down to hysteria and bigotry.

OK mate, your right, you've done nothing to start any of this - it's all one sided, not your fault at all, everyone is against you, they're all wrong etc etc.

[Jean Todt 4]

And where does it say that he crossed it? I'll bold it for you. Do you see it now? I suppose you really can't.

When did I say, you said he crossed it? did I?

You first point out that he made a mistake and he was never punished and if it were Nando, he would have been punished, and later on you tone down as Paul corrects you.

[Rainmaster 7]

I see Maure taking a lot of trash talk and personal insults, but I don't think he himself has slung any at any member????? I kind of favour guys who don't take THINGS TO A PERSONAL LEVEL. Civil debate is about the issues.

I admit this is along drawn out thread that doesn't interest me much, so I might have missed something, but with just a quick read I noticed a lot of trashed aimed at the individual who is maure.

Too bad guys have to sink to that level.

He gets what he gives. You don't get something for nothing in life.

Agreed!

A litttle surprised at the reaction of certain members also.

Too Bad!

I'm not.

The issues I have with maure are many, he ignores questions, sidesteps requests, changes his words to name but a few.

Perhaps I have been a little harsh, I apologise, but going in circles can get frustrating.

[YHR 0]

Trust me that guy Maure is a real fool -

Yah that sure helps. Come on guys raise the bar a little will you.

[shampion 0]

He gets what he gives. You don't

I'm not.

The issues I have with maure are many, he ignores questions, sidesteps requests, changes his words to name but a few.

Perhaps I have been a little harsh, I apologise, but going in circles can get frustrating.

Don't recall mentioning you...

A guilty conscience maybe????

[Rainmaster 7]

Don't recall mentioning you...

A guilty conscience maybe????

You didn't, I couldn't help but feel it was aimed at me to an extent. Slightly guilty, although in my opinion it's more to do with maure who caused all this bullsh!t.

[Max Mosley 2]

Right. The sources [Alonso and Pat Symonds themselves, quoted by the BBC] you faithfully believe as pure gospel. So, your position is that there isn't a single article where journalists claim that Alonso had said the opposite, that is, that he is being severely screwed by McLaren.

Yes I believe those sources. I haven't seen any contradictory articles, no. I suspect the spanish press produce them, and you may feel free to show them to me. All I will conclude is that Alonso is a liar, or small sections of the spanish press are corrupt, since the BBC is trusted worldwide and would never make up quotes. If your argument relies on the fact that the BBC does just that, then I think it's about as ludicrous as any argument ever can be.

Secondly, the claims of bias against Alonso are denied by Alonso himself!

Yet, they have been admitted by RD. Odd world.

No they haven't. Ron has always said McLaren give each driver equal chances to win.

The second one, about tyre pressure, is not clear to me. Can you provide proof that the tyre pressures were wrong?

You mean that the numbers Sharp mentions are correct for you. Please elaborate.

I have not seen any evidence whatsoever that Alonso's tyre pressures were incorrect in Q3 for the Shanghai GP.

Likewise I don't yet believe the claim about 7 against 2 extra laps.

Of course you don't. I still remember Hungary and how the evil spaniards doctored radio conversations to make the world believe that Hamilton was stealing the extra lap.

Notice how the word "yet" was inserted into my sentence. It was clearly an invitation for you to produce evidence to back up your position.

Please provide good evidence so we can discuss it.

It is you who desperately needs to believe that all is straight as an arrow in F1 and, thanks to RD, the burden of proof falls on the likes of you.

Not at all. I simply want to show how ridiculous your position is. I think my job is almost done. When Alonso himself says there's no foul play, I'm satisfied.

All in all, any reasonable person is asking what the fck is going on... except the likes of you that have it all clear and, indeed, presume that all is just dandy. It is only posturing, I know, you seem intelligent enough to realize that the whole season stinks. But your ego is gotten in the way and you are just hoping to look good in front of your friends. That makes this exchange a bit boring, you understand. Try harder please.

This bit honestly made me laugh!

I was just reading some of his replies. WOW! we are as idiotic as him for even spending time to read it!

Yes.

Trust me that guy Maure is a real fool -

Indeed.

[Rainmaster 7]

Yah that sure helps. Come on guys raise the bar a little will you.

The problem with raising the bar is that it only works if maure does it too, otherwise it's futile really.

I do agree about that particular comment though, shame on you Fed Up!

[Max Mosley 2]

I don't agree with civilised debate at all costs. This isn't PC Canada. An idiot should be told to improve themselves, for everyone's benefit.

[shampion 0]

You didn't, I couldn't help but feel it was aimed at me to an extent. Slightly guilty, although in my opinion it's more to do with maure who caused all this bullsh!t.

Well ... maure did call the thread "This will make your blood boil"...

Seems to me he has succeeded...