Michael Masi gets fired/replaced?

Nah, Ilmor are geniuses at hiding their speed advantages. They knew what kind power top power they could put out, and had every intention late the season of using new engines, given their position in the points.

 

The whole engine/gearbox limits thing is a mistake IMO. This is F1 not endurance racing. Each GP is a separate race so penalties shouldn't run over from one race to another.

Let the teams rebuild engines. Let them be more unreliable. That way we will have better racing because teams can use different strategies to push the limits or not as they choose.

Stewarding decisions have often been odd in the past, but we haven't had so many during the races and we haven't had all this nonsense about track limits.

 

Post proof. You have conjecture and conspiracy but zero foundation. Thats about half the posts in any thread on engines or Mercedes FIA influence. So post proof. RedBull had ZERO on the wings. Yet they were the ones who had to alter their design. If you have none stop posting anything about cheating. Thats what you are openly implying with such internet expertise so rampant here. Its a bit silly to change motors and place yourself further back in the pack etc etc and all the RISK that implies.

Makes about as much sense as your zero proof post. Internet expertise sounds great but lacks foundation upon MINOR examination.

 

Wasn't me, I don't agree with any of that 07 or16. Lewis just lost fair and square. But Abu Dahbi was a straight up farce.

 

Micheal had more races than Clark.....and so on

 

Disagree. I listen to alot of people, general F1 fans. Leaders lose the lead all the time. No contreversy. This falls on Masi.

 

The FIA could eventually nullify the result of a race soon after it happened if something untoward has occured, witnessed by everybody like in Abu Dhabi.

But to cancel the Singapore GP one year later because someone claimed there was a plot by a team to gain advantage, was near impossible.
The FIA couldn't act retroactively and alter the result; at most it had the power to sanction the individuals involved, which it did.

 

fully agreed

 

You cannot blame Mercedes when it shows superior engineering ! But this is essentially what the detractors have done for 8 years!

 

The driver shouldn't receive a grid penalty for engine change beyond the number allocated.

However, the team should be,be penalised a) by a substantial fine ($100K minimum) , b) by a 25 points deduction for each engine used beyond the allocation.

 

No,
Most critics of Mercedes blame this firm for its too great influence on the sport.
On the political level in particular.

 

Mercedes themselves admitted that they tuned Hamiltons engine for more power but less life, and named it a ''reliability upgrade''.

More to Hamilton's new engine: 'It will give him an extra 15 horsepower' (gpblog.com)

Ecclestone: Mercedes head-started as they knew a bit more (motorsport.com)

Montezemolo: Mercedes worked on their F1 engine since 2007 (gptoday.com)

 

Tuning doesn't mean developing. It could simply mean changing the engine mapping;

 

You're welcome to call me as irrelevant as you like. Despite an ongoing international semi-professional driving career lasting over 30 years, countless races, multiple championships, OEM manufacturer development work for tires, brakes, and suspension systems the truth is I have never raced an F1 car. We'll also ignore the fact that I have been closely following motorsports for as long as I can remember and just about everyone in the paddock knows me as the go to guy when racing history trivia is in question. Truth is that in the grand scheme of global motorsports I'm a total nobody and I'm ok with that. That said Ogier's opinion carries plenty of merit having competed and won in FIA sanctioned championships at the World Championship level. As a professional his intimate knowledge of the sporting regulations is a must and even if he knows nothing about F1 racing history it is an insult to dismiss his opinion.

I will ask beyond being a 'fan' what qualifies your 'expert opinion' on the matter? I'm sure I'm not the only one interested to know.

 

Did I say they did anything wrong? NO!

You people are unhinged over losing a championship. LOL!

 

That struck me as a very odd statement. I've been following F1 since Stewart and Icyx, but that only qualifies me as someone who has observed a sport. I would never place my insights at the level of anyone who has competed on the big stages. Jeff Gordon knows more about F1 racing than I do....to assume a racer from a different series is uninformed about another is a bit off the mark.

I also know that your posts have nothing to do with fandom for either driver. You're specifically addressing the problems with how this past F1 season was governed, and that final race in particular.

 

If you didn't say anything wrong, you are not concerned by my remark then.

 

I sometimes agree with points you raise but in this instance I personally think you are out of order. Making an assumption makes an ass out of you. An apology would be the correct thing to do!
Tony

 

I'm sorry, there's been a misunderstanding.

I don't follow bike racing at all and know very little about it outside of some older names, so when the poster I was replying to mentioned "Nuvolari" in the same breath as Sebastien Ogier, I assumed he was referring to the actual bike racer Nuvolari, not you. Again, I don't follow bike racing at all, but I've heard the name Nuvolari, and didn't know that he's long been dead. I was thinking "I don't care what some old fart bike racer has to say about this!" *faceplam*.

Yes, a very stupid and jackass mistake on my put. I'm new to the board and it's a little hard to remember the usernames, or I'd have realized the poster was referencing you.

I hope you can accept my sincere apologies. Obviously you're an informed fan with a right to your opinion.

 

Yes, it was a total misunderstanding on my part. I'm a new to the board and having been ignorant about both motorbike racing and remember the names around here, I put my foot in my mouth and made an unintentional insult of the user Nuvolari.

Totally my fault.

 

No worries all good on my end.

I will also say that the argument that Hamilton could have defended more on the last lap is just not on. I personally was astounded how close Hamilton was able to race Max but the difference in tires was so extreme that all the weaving and dirty tricks in the world would not have helped him. What a lot of people fail to realize is that a good chunk of the lap time from fresh tires comes in the braking zones. Max had several long braking areas where his advantage over Lewis could be measured in several car lengths. At that level and with drivers of that caliber there is just no chance to defend position over a whole lap when the tire delta is that big.

Again I don't have any issue with Max having the better tires. He chose them and is fully entitled to the advantage. That said if the argument is that as it was Lewis could have done better on the last lap, then that is totally lacking in reality. There are plenty of other legitimate things to criticize drivers of but in that last lap both Max and Lewis were mighty in their own respects.

 

Graham Hill, Jim Clark, Dan Gurney, AJ Foyt, Phil Hill, Juan Famgio, Alberto Ascari, Jackie Stewart, Mario Andretti, etc.

The true golden era of racing. Badasses.

The 50's -70's. What an amazing time in racing and music.

 

Before my time, I imagine it was awesome.

 

I've been lucky enough to spend time with Gurney, Foyt, Phil Hill (I'm still friends with his son Derek), Stewart, and Andretti. All just legendary characters. Regrettably the others passed and all (except Foyt and Andretti) raced well before my time. An amazing time for racing but also fraught with its own issues. Memories are sometimes better than reality.

 

The dark side of racing loomed large back in those times, but I still consider that most amazing era, even though it was also before my time.

My era was 90's CART and F1. Loved it, and it was it's own magical time.