Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Other Racing' started by bobafett, Mar 9, 2004.
Better watch out, this is how Max will make the races "more interesting." Lifted from MBW.
The thing is though, Ferrari would still be faster!
LOLOLOL too funny
from what I saw at the track last weekend, you're right
That cartoon is too funny,but thier right,how are they going to penalize Ferrari again this year if they dominate? It's just epidemic these days , blame others for your problems and don't take responsibilities for bettering yourself.Eat too much and don't exercise,it's McDonalds fault!
I would like to see MS have to start from the pits, and let the other gain a single lap ... now that would be interesting. With his current pace I think he could do it and man what a demonstration that would be
But don't tell Bernie about my suggestion
Why don't they just declare the ugliest looking car wins the WCC so they can lay the FW26 to rest, along with that sorry excuse of an aerodynamic effect they like to call a nose cone.
Seriously tho, it is only the first race. It is a long season, and I would caution my fellow Tifosi about jumping to conclusion too early they same way that most of you were just so ready to hand the WDC and WCC off to Williams-BMW when Ferrari unveiled their un-revolutionary F-2004.
Yes and I think I was one of them ... silly me, just worried I guess.
The magazines and F1 sites are blaming the huge win margin on the cold temperatures suiting the Bridgestone tyres. While this definitely helped Ferrari on race day, it was not exactly cold on the other days, and every time the Ferraris took to the track they went straight to the top of the time sheet ...
Anyway time will tell, and I am sure others will step up to the plate.
Well I glad that Ferrari is mopping up the field. They are making up for the past decades of very poor performance. But lets not forget the driver. It wasn't until Shumie showed up that Ferrari started winning again. He, in my opinion, is the reason for Ferrari's dominance.
Thats a really funny picture. Its like political satire at its best.
Reversed grid anybody?
Welcome to my camp, Pete. It is never too late...
the reverse grid idea has always been a good one, and would make for a great show, but you would have to give out the same points scheme for qualifying as for the race, otherwise nobody would try.
so ferrari could conceivably get 36 points every race !
I think reverse grid is a great idea. The current scheme promotes the rich get richer, and the poor get poorer, and leads to some boring races. In the olden days the local sprint car track always lined up on Friday nites in this reversed manner. The whole concept of qualifying could just go out the window and line up in reverse order by accumulated points, or average finishing positions of previous races. Obviously the first race of the season would need a rule, but that wouldn't be too hard. Hottest team umbrella girl or something equally as fascinating.
All true. I wasn't thinking of using qualifying anymore. We would loose that completely, but have some really cool races a la Silverstone 2003.
the only way the reverse grid order would have a hope of approval from the teams (and remember a unanimous agreement is required), is if the points were attached to grid position 1-8 with the equivalent race points.
ferrari/williams/macca would go for it because they think they have a good shot at maximizing both games.
the middle of the pack would go for it since either not much would change in their world (and they would use it to scratch back some tv money from bernie), or they might have a shot at a few points more than before.
the back end of the grid would immediately vote for it because their cars would get undue exposure at the front of the track on race day, and may occasionally get lucky at places like monaco and actually win !
so now thats settled, who here has the ear of max mosley?
I think one of the biggest selling points of reversed grid is, that it makes the show instantaneously more entertaining by leaps and bounds and requires absolutely no changes on the cars or tracks. Which is why I didn't understand it wasn't even mentioned after the 2002 season when Max pondered all kinds of goofy ideas to make the sport more attractive again.
And it's not even that terribly new, other motorsports classes do it already.
A--f&% ckin -- men! That's what I'm screaming! It's up to the others to LIFT their game...not dumb-down Ferrari!
Seriously, I don't understand why everyone is blaming Ferrari for making F1 boring. Today I read an article with DC talking and he said Ferrari is bad for formula 1. But thats not true , its McLaren and Williams that are hurting F1 with their poor performance.
Are you saying that we need to let loose Psyco people onto the track in the middle of the race????
Yeah, let's have some Christians vs the lions games. Throw them in front of the cars, huahuahua!
What I meant was, that the Silverstone race showed us the effects of reversed grid to some degree as it completely shook up the order of the field and top runners had to fight their way back to the front.
Think about it: Which race had the most dramatic wheel to wheel fights last year? British GP, yes. Why? Because of that loon, but reverse grid would do the same without endangering anybody.
Of course with the loon factor thrown in teams can not stratagize the race since they will not know when or where the bozo Would pop out at. Plus it does not have to be human the marshals could always drop ping pong balls or a blow up doll on to the racing surface....
I think what made the Britidh GP so good was that none of the teams expected the Loon and had to change there race stratagy on the fly.
dont forget about rubens!! its not like he's finishing in the middle of the field and michale finishes 1st. he's always right behind his team mate. and an incredible driver in his own right
Not sure about that. I think what made that race so great was, that everybody used the unexpected yellow/safety car situation to change tires and refuel and chaos was the consequence in the pits. Some drivers had to wait until they were serviced, that threw the order out of shape and some great runners (like the Ferrari boys) were all of a sudden in mid field as they exited the pits.
Theoretically we had similar situations in some of the rain races, but there the wet surface kinda overpowers the confusion. That's what made Silverstone such a classic: Perfect racing conditions, which allowed for real fighting and a completely random grid.
But without MS Ferrari would not be what they are today. Rubens yes is a tallented driver but i dont think that if RB was the #1 driver that the team would have pulled in Ross and Rory. Ferrari built the team around Micheal and Rubens became a better driver because of it.
Why not throw out the safety car without warning and where it picks up the field the car first behind the safety car on the lead lap becomes the new leader of the race.
The one stipulation is that the safety car can only be sent out this way between 35 - 55 % race distance and at tracks that have the ability for overtaking.
Exactly John. Besides, who gives a shat what DC says, he's just a frustrated woulda', coulda', shoulda' been WC who never has and never will live up to all the ill-placed hype he had early on in his worthless career. He will always carry some other driver's jock (Hakkinen) as long as he is still in the game, which MIGHT not be much longer. Sour grapes if you ask me.
That's all nice and good what you're saying 69, but you're forgetting one thing:
This is DC's year. Really it is. I talked to his mother.
To me that is obvious, does anyone think otherwise?
If you include in Schumi his entourage (as in Todt, Brawn, Byrne etc) and also give Montezemolo some credit, then yes.
Interestingly some younger folks who haven't seen the bad days of Ferrari (before 98) now believe that MS is just another driver who happened to stumble upon the perfect car and team. I guess there is one born every minute.
Yes, you have to include his entourage, the point being that schumi is the complete package. Great driver, and understands the team concept. Montezemolo gets credit for listening and anteing up the cash.
...and for the occasional word of reprimand. He is IMHO the perfect manager, provides all the resources, lets them do their job, but once in a while whips them as necessary. Allegedly Monday morning after the Hungarian GP was not much fun in Maranello.
One thing buying Schumi (and his team) into the Ferrari family did, was take away any excuses the racing team had in the past about their car being great while the driver allegedly sucked. With Schumi they knew they had the best, so if he didn't win, it was because of the car. Quite effective.
A few comments:
DC "I am better this year" will not even finish the season with McLaren!
Reverse grid would be great if in F-1 you could pass in every corner, but not like on some circuits (monaco) where you cannot pass at all.
I american football, soccer or any other sport for that matter, do you punish the best team(s)? Then why in F-1; because it is Ferrari? Did they try to handicap McLaren when they were running away with the championships? Get real!
Yes, but I think there are 2 other better reasons not to do it is. First is safety. Passing is the most dangerous part of the race and gridding was devised to minimize it. The second is sandbaging. If I knew I couldn't grab the pole points, I would want to be dead last. If I thought I might grab the pole points, but I knew I would be locked wheel to wheel with another driver I think I'd want to be last again and walk away with a win. If fact, I think the pole points would need to equal the race points before I would try to start a race from the back....and if I already had my points, I guess I would just run qualifying and skip the race. A revese grid will turn qualifying into a slow race, how slow can you go and still qualify. I think it's a bad idea.
Reverse grid is not to punish Ferrari but to give the spectators what we want most: Fighting and passing (and I mean real passing, not like NASCAR drive bys). I would love to see reverse grid just as much if this were 1988, 1990 or whatever year somebody else was dominant.
Mark has a good point about safety. It would make racing more dangerous. So what? "Remember the days when racing was dangerous and sex safe?"
Not to be too cavalier about it, but one of the reasons these guys are paid a lot, is because they risk their lives every time they get into one of these machines. It is almost ironic, that in the most dangerous times of racing (sixties) the drivers got almost the least pay.
I would give up on qualifying altogether. Sandbagging would be the issue, that's true. Just don't do qualifying. Let's be honest, how much would we loose compared to today's "qualifying" where poles have become a bit hollow.
Of course reverse grid will never happen. Too radical a concept. FIA rather continues to strangle the sport by adding more silly regulations. Whereas what is really needed is new land for the engineers which can only come from a new regulation. Currently it is all about CFD, that has to change.
If you want to see more passing, change the cars:
1- remove all the wings
2- use slick tires again
This will you get better racing. None of the rules tried in past years and now and suggested wil change racing as much as these changes.
I think you're right on that one. What is so interesting is, that it would even work from a safety perspective: The grooved tires were introduced to reduce speed in turns, but they also made the cars very nervous and harder to control on the edge of an outbraking maneuvre.
Removing the wings would reduce the speeds in turns so much, that slick tires could be reintroduced without a safety problem.
And it would open the door again for more creative engineering.
Hey--thats my mantra--but not just the wings--all aerodynamics. In mathematical terms, what you want is called a convex hull in 3 dimensions concerning the external body parts.
If you ban all aerodynamics you can leave the engine formula alone, and free up the wheels, tires, brakes formulas.
Acceleration distances go up 3X-4X because the cars would be traction limited up towards 170 MPH.
Braking distances goe up 4X-5X due to tire traction
Cornering speeds go down 3X due to tire traction
Allowing the driver to drive the car if he can.
What would they look like?
Like pre 1968?
I don't like the reverse grid idea since it's really an artificial manipulation. F1 has always prided itself on being the most technologically advanced form of racing, but it's gone over the edge to where it no longer enhances the sport. The cars need to be "dumbed down". I've always loved the thought of tearing off the wings, or perhaps restricting them to either one element, or not allowing them outside the axles. But either way, they need a round table of racing engineers to bring ideas forward for consideration. Large amounts of budgets go into hours in the windtunnel to find thousandths of seconds. I'm really craving something radical in F1.
great cartoon!! the red cars will be hard to beat but with the new points system and other teams close it will be an exiting season!!!