Well, Kimi's 2005 Nurburgring crash comes to mind, and also, Indy 2005. I don;t know mate, but i think the 1 tyre rule is as silly as the in season testing ban.
I think you are confusing talent with motivation: Kimi got tons of talent but lacks motivation. Massa is super talented but mildly talented. Quoting Clinton: So it depends what the meaning of the word "it" is. To me "having it" means having talent.
Remy, Pitstops remove the need to try and pass. Simple as that. Thus if you want quality racing you remove pitstops. This is why club racing at your local club is a million times more exciting to watch than any F1 race, just a lot slower ... but passing everywhere . Regarding Kimi's 2005 Nurb crash; that was with a tyre that was only designed for say 40 laps tops. If they go to a single tyre per race the tyres will be designed to do the laps required and be just as safe. Heck your road car tyre does thousands of miles so Bridgestone can easily make a safe tyre, it just won't be as light and grippy. Pete
Yes but the goal of F1 is to win the WDC which requires a whole season and pre-season effort. If Kimi isn't prepared to give it 110% every day of the year he hasn't got "IT" ... the whole package. Kimi was a poor choice by Ferrari and even the WDC he won was more luck than talent. Pete
I understand your facts, Pete. But, this is just a personal opinion. I really don't like the 1tyre rule-at all. For me, overtaking means going back to basics, not with KERS nonsense and all. Bring back those V10s at least.
Again does not matter what you do with the cars LESS passing will happen if you have pitstops. All cars could have 10 litre engines with 2000 hp and no difference. Even if we had the full 1968 Silverstone grid with all the 1968 cars (pre-wings, etc.) and raced them. With pitstops the drivers and team managers will NOT take the risk and instead use the pitstops to enginer a position improvement. We watched Ross Brawn and MS do it for years ... and it is boring! Totally the fault of mandatory pitstops. You know before the race starts that your opposition is going to be weak a couple of times during the race, as they have pitted. With real racing you have to work out where they are weak on the track and then try and find an advantage ... mandatory pitstops took the real racing out of F1. Pete
A post lifted from a blog; It makes good sense to me, I highlighted bits. Clive Bowen, who is the boss of Apex Circuit Design, which does a lot of work in racing, although Hermann Tilke continues to get much of the F1 work, for reasons that are not entirely clear. ermm... Bowen reckons that “research and liaison with teams and drivers” has genuinely achieved good results in his projects and he believes that the secret is to design the track geometry “to ‘build in’ confidence and grip for drivers just where they need it the most to make a pass”. Bowen reckons that there are three ways to create more overtaking when one designs a circuit; the first is to ensure an ‘easy short apex, low-medium speed’ corner preceding a long straight which leads to a big braking zone. The key is the short apex as it results in the least period of feathered throttle; if the transition from braking to acceleration is as fast as a driver can make it then the car following can keep closer to the car in front at the start of the acceleration run and his opportunity for a tow is increased… a medium speed (i.e.120kph or so) corner with mechanical grip provided by banking or compression allows the following car to stay close despite wake turbulence and reduced aero grip. The second way is to engineer grip into a corner – achieved either with compression or banking – just where a driver needs it to give confidence for a manoeuvre. This and the third option (or a combination of both) should result in more than one ideal line for a corner or should at least ensure an overlap in the braking transition into a corner to spoil the guy in front’s line. The third is to have compound radii in corners – especially those where the apex can be made to be really late; this means the ideal line leaves the ‘door open’ for an opportunistic pass. A subtle combination of all three – and different each time – is the best solution. This should mean some corners have multiple lines (i.e. same time through the corner irrespective of line), some other corners can act as mistake generators to spook the guy in front to overdrive and create the opportunity for passing and any other corners should instil confidence for a driver to be braver than he might otherwise be. Bowen says that “I suspect it is the subtlety of a track’s corner sequencing and detail which affects its personality and this in recent times has been lost because of modern design processes”.
