You cannot unlearn intellectual property once you have it, but you are entitled to your opinion whether it's right or wrong, just like I am Since you are so insistent on facts, PROVE to me with your in depth knowledge that mclaren didn't continue to benefit from the intellect they stole......... IMPOSSIBLE TO PROVE ISNT IT. Similarly, we a all convinced red bull had all manner of cheats installed on their car throughout their domination, but not one of us can prove categorically what they may or may not have been. Kraftys opinion of the cars still means that Elton won his first title with a questionable car in the context of what he tried to claim with regard to other, far more worthy, champions, and hence my observation of his admission still stands
Clearly you have missed the point, no surprise there, however you were stating the matter of Lewis winning his WDC was with a car that had used Ferrari data as in it was a fact, you were then asked to back up that claim, but to no avail you couldn't. Ian then offered up some facts to the contrary of your supposed facts. So now hopefully you have realized why you were pulled up on the matter, so without mentioning the more onerous aspects of this matter, I have no problem with you having an opinion....feel free carry on, it makes no odds to me at all.
I didn't need to back anything up, it wasn't a debate, I couldn't care less what your thoughts on me or my opinions are, I know it's hard for you to understand but I really have no interest in discussing anything with you at all, and if you have a new friend, good luck to you Forza Ferrari, and only Ferrari.
The difference between our positions is this: At no point have I claimed that McLaren didn't use the Ferrari information. However, I provided some evidence that I think would lead a reasonable, unbiased person to conclude that they probably hadn't used it; indeed, probably couldn't use it because of the intense scrutiny they were under. On the other hand you claimed that "the information they (McLaren) procured was incorporated into their design", but offered no evidence or links to source material to substantiate that claim. In the, admittedly very brief, search I did for information on this I found no evidence that the data were used. That's news to me, I thought we were all convinced that Red Bull had the best designer in the business.
I never claimed anything of the sort, my original post was to point out kraftwerk had suggested that other champs were in cars that had cheats built in, I pointed out that mclarens likely had the same, your witchhunt means absolutely nothing to me at all. End of story As for red bull, this forum has always banged on with various people suggesting that the red bull car carried illegal devices, as has the wider f1 fan base in general. If you don't think they did, that's your prerogative. I personally think they took full advantage of the rules, and had found ways to manipulate the tests, not necessarily illegally but just being extremely clever like Ross brawns double diffuser was proven to be. I don't know why you continue to try to hound me personally, but you really need to stop, as I don't actually give a damn whether you agree with me or not. I certainly don't have the time to start researching on your behalf every time I want to make a post. If you do, then carry on. There are posters on this forum who simply like to rile the masses with their inferments and blah blah, it's actually quite fun, but also pretty sad, seeing them get their knickers in a twist just because someone like me happens to dislike their favourite driver or team It might be worthwhile remembering that lawyers will argue a mistrial in legal cases sometimes getting 'nailed on convictions' overturned on the basis supposed declarations are made inferring a course of action, where actual physical proof is impossible to obtain, such as a professional opinion of a course of action. The FIA could not ever prove physically what mclarens were or were not running, and whether it was derived from Ferrari tech or not, once information was deconstructed for examination by their techs, so it is a matter of opinion the level of tech transfer that occurred. However, when dealing with racing teams, I have knowledge of occasions where information or developments learnt from others cannot be unlearned, yet no one would be stupid enough to put on record the detail of such potentially contentious actions as using or developing the tech as a direct result
you still haven't worked out what the original post meant - I stated that the mclaren Elton used to win the 2008 championship would have been designed and influenced with the benefit of knowledge gained from their spying of Ferrari in 2007, as kraftwerk had suggested other champions used illegal cars and means to achieve. That's it, I don't care if you agree, disagree, or what, I didn't go into it for a conversation or debate, it's my opinion, and that is my right, we don't live in a communist country, we don't have to agree, just like I don't have to drive a Ford Fiesta just because a neighbour does. Anyhow, rather than trying to pick at me, which seems to be your new hobby, shouldn't you be busy finding the physical, documented facts that show they didn't use the information, and that the intellectual property they stole had no tangible influence on their design for 2007, and as a result, filtering on into 2008 and beyond, as you are the one that seems to want to argue a point. Maybe max Mosley had one of those special pen things that will smith brandishes in men in black that wipes memory, and was able to purge the mclarens staff of everything they had read and evaluated - that could explain how they managed to forget how to build a decent car this season of course.... However, as you probably already realise, you cannot prove that the intellectual information did not influence, directly or indirectly, the design ethos of their cars. They themselves would never document it since the information was stolen in the first place, much like a sensible thief wouldn't keep stolen gear in his own house, you would hide any evidence. Still, it's amusing to think that my opinion is held in such regard by you that you feel obligated to confirm every detail
So what exactly has McLaren using Ferrari designs and I/P in 2007 and possibly in 2008 got to do whatsoever with Hamilton v Rosberg? - Answer?: Nothing whatsoever! Gentlemen, anyone who has been on Fchat's F1 section for more than 5 minutes knows exactly how this "discussion" will end: With escalating animosity, personal insults, absolutely no resolution and a big risk of someone getting a ban from Fchat for a period of time! Do yourselves a big favour and let it go!
I agree Phill, however I believe on this occasion I'am asking civil questions in order to back up claimed facts, as was Ian.
I can appreciate that Steve, but you and I have had enough of this type of "discussion" in the past to know that you're not going to change daytona355's point of view, and he's not going to change your point of view. Sometimes you just have to agree to disagree and move on, otherwise it's just a never ending circle that can get out of hand.
What! it was impaired as in weakened or damaged...and you are referring to the wrong year! he won in 2008....ok enough already I give up.
Where did I state a year in that post? Beats me, I said his championship year, so obviously 2008. Making it up as you go along again then
Next year then I guess, title decided for this, and unless the FIA sort out things, then it's going to be the same two fighting over the title on their own again. Hopefully next year Nico will toughen up and make a fight of it, he has the raw speed, just needs the belief and the backing of his team
Nico has the "raw speed" on occasions, especially over a single lap when qualifying, but too often he seems to struggle to maintain that speed over a race distance in the same way that Lewis can. I totally agree that he needs to toughen up and stand his ground better (especially against Lewis). He's already seen that when you battle Lewis wheel to wheel and give as good as you get, Lewis can lose a bit of composure and lose concentration (their 2014 Spa battle showed that perfectly), so you would think he would learn from it. The problem is, in many ways Nico is just too nice a guy for his own good when it comes to winning the WDC, and I'm not sure he can change. Going into the 2015 season he was making all the right noises pre-season about taking the battle to Lewis more, but it hasn't really happened to the degree that it needs to. It would be great to see Nico give Lewis a tougher fight in 2016, but recent history has already shown us that it's highly unlikely to happen - Sadly!
If it were your team, would you be happy at your drivers fighting. Or would you not think lessons have been learnt from days gone by, or of late for that matter, Mclaren: Hamilton v Alonso, then RB: Vettel v not bad for #2 driver Webber.
I would certainly expect them to respect each other on and off the track. Bad-mouthing and dirty tricks shouldn't be tolerated in a team. Apart from that, they can compete against each other, but no contact. At 2/3 of the season, tactics should come in place to help the driver who has the most point in the team, that means team orders. Once/if one driver is champion, he must help the other to score the most points, that also means team orders.
Exactly...And not few think that exactly this happened after Spa 2014...Mercedes (or better Wolff and Lauda) learnt their lesson and decided to prefer one side. Although not officially named so (btw was Webber ever named so?) I think Rosberg is a #2 driver in their view. I said it long time ago: not even in the time against Schumacher Rosberg got the status he deserved. Even when beating Schumacher in general view this was Schumachers team. Then Mercedes put him a WDC driver in front of his nose for mega money showing that they did not expect him to lead the team in near future and Rosberg was never able to turn this in his direction. And as soon as the first race went wrong even the word "team order" was mentioned at Mercedes as an option showing that this "equal drivers" thing only works as long as there is absolutely nobody near to challenge them for one of the titles... Just in case Vettel/Ferrari might be a challenge next year for Hamilton/Mercedes, it will be interesting whether they let Rosberg take away any needed points from Hamilton in case he is in front...I doubt
Pretty logical conclusions, imo. I think it's definitely fair to say that Merc has never embraced Nico as its team leader. If you pair him alongside two WDCs, there is incredible pressure to be flawless just to be considered as the leader. Any mistake under pressure is only magnified to illustrate why they should support the hired guns. I think you're 100% correct that Ferrari will be closer next season, and I would not be surprised to see team orders officially come into play.
