MOSLEY: Ron Dennis Likely A Liar

What shocking revelation.

Anybody have a dead horse for Mad Max? He needs one to beat the crap out of.

 

i'm usually not a negative person, but I can't wait for Mad Max to croak!!....the day Max and Bernie pass will be celebrated all over the world!!!.....I just hope it happens before the completely murder F1!

 

If you had been following F1 for a little more than 15 minutes or so you should know without Bernie and to a lessor extent Max, there would be no F1...Bernie saved it from sure extinction decades ago...

 

Tune in next week, when Max reveals that contestants in the Dakar rallye may encounter some sand.

Later, he may express a suspicion that Blackbeard might have bent a naval regulation or two.

 

Here's one it's not dead though.
Image Unavailable, Please Login

 

More horse's ass than horse

 

+1

Max is just stating the obvious. When RD was gloating in Oz about reliable information about Ferrari's floor design, it was clear he knew the source, whistle-blowing or not. To think otherwise is just naive.

And before this turns into another flex-floor debate, don't forget that McLaren also had a flex-floor design that had to be changed to meet the new regs.

 

you guys are right, I didn't even think about the past.............I'm just a little sad about what they're doing to F1 now, that's all.....I don't want to see it turned into a Spec series

 

What did Mosley do that "kept F1 in business"?

 

While I'm no Mad Max fan he (along with Bernie) deserves a lot of credit for getting rid of the GPMA thread. That would have killed F1 for good and might not have lasted more than a year by itself.

GPMA was the single most serious thread to F1 since the pirate races in the early eighties (FISA/FOCA war). Luckily neither caused a split of F1. What happens to a racing series once they split, we saw at CART vs IRL.

 

I suppose if you actually value the F1 brand name - sure. I value the content, which is the highest level of manufacturer built open wheel racing. The series could be called GPMA or **** and I'd still watch it. Although, I doubt any split would have been longer than 2-3 years (that's for another thread though).

 

I value the brand name, but that's besides the point.

GPMA would have been a total failure for two reasons:

1) The FIA would have kept F1 alive and filled with whatever teams they could find. So just like in Boxing or CART vs IRL we would have ended up with two F1 type series each claiming to be the pinnacle of motorsports. When a boxer wins the heavy weight title today, what does that really mean? It means he won that series, but not necessarily that he is the best boxer in the world.

2) The egotistical car manufacturers would have never found a common ground on anything to create and maintain a meaningful rules package. It is painful to watch the morons running the FIA, but at least they are somewhat (not totally) neutral towards the manufacturers. Imagine the foxes policing themselves in guarding the hen house. It would never work.

Bernie made F1 profitable for its participants and hence brought the big players into the game. Mad Max/the FIA give it a more or less independent governing body keeping it together. None of this without flaws and fault, but GPMA would have never been an alternative. It would have been the end of the sport.

 

1) I doubt the series would have been split for more than 2-3 years. One side would cave and humpty dumpty would be put back together again when those teams tried go to the other series. If both folded then a new series would have formed in due time (due to the intense market desire for a high end racing series). Bernie + Max were part of the reason the GPMA existed in the first place...give credit where it's due.

2) You are comparing the rules/money agreement that would have been made by the GPMA to the Concorde agreement that exists already in F1. I really don't think you have a strong case. The current concorde agreement is a huge positive feedback loop which biases money allocation to the teams that were previously strong. I'm not sure this is the ideal format for money allocation.

 

F1 is no longer the "pinnacle of motorsport", anyway. The reason that I don't care about IRL or CART is that they're spec cars -- just like FIA wants to do to F1.

A manufacturer's series must let the manufacturers innovate. *That's* what makes for the "pinnacle" of motor vehicle technology -- innovation, not conformity.

"Quantum advancements come less from answering questions than from questioning answers."


And if you think FIA is neutral about MFRs, look at what they did to WRC when PSA wasn't there to "win" it anymore. Think McLunk got a raw deal? Look what happened to BAR for a difference of opinions on "fuel line" definition -- when they were challenging the euro mfrs.

 

If not F1, who is it?

 

SEMA?

Although it's getting to where there's more innovation going on among the street racer crowd.


Admittedly; I have a self-centered view of motorsports: it's purpose it to give the public neat cars to drive. Cars like the Stratos, the F40, the F50, the Delta Integrale, the GT-Four, the EVO ...

I'll never forgive FIA for inverting the WRC rules to give advantage to rebuilding a french cattle car econobox from the ground up over mfrs that started with performance cars sold to the public.

And dangit, I really wanted a Prodrive P2 for winter use. But they aren't building them.

 

http://semadigital.com/

???

You can't be serious.

 

... and don't call me "Shirley". (notice the wink?)

But look at the P2: There's a technology showcase .... and there's no place to race it.

There isn't a "pinnacle" of motorsports, anymore. It's one big flat valley, where the regs define the cars --- and often, define the winners, too.

The street racers are on their own, while the mfrs go looking for ways around political "green" regs, and Bernie is looking for ways to pull more money for FIA, rather than to make better racing -- or better technology.

And a half dozen channels on the satellite are running shows to convince us what kind of bland, eviscerated, cattle "futurecars" we're going to be "driving" in the future. Gah!

Pity about ProDrive's F1 efforts. Given their track record, I could imagine them taking McLaren technology --- and blowing the doors off McLaren with it. (But then, SA already did that to Honda.)

 

Regs don't define the winners. Drivers select their own cockpits. Designers make their own cars. The rules are equal for everybody. Interpretations and unjust stewart calls unfortunately make winners and loosers sometimes. As in any sport.

I define the pinnacle of motorsports by being capable of doing the fastest lap around a road track. If another series comes along beating F1 in that, then they own that crown. Something like CanAm got really close to it, but nowadays the FIA sees to it, that F1 remains the strongest class on the hill.

Pinnacle of motorsports doesn't mean necessarily pinnacle of technology. For better or worse.

 

GT2 was virtually designed for Porsche.

Just what tracks does F1 share with any other racing venue, other than production cars (or bikes)?

Even at Indy, they didn't run the same course as the other venues.

 

I agree to a point, its implementation of the reg's/rules that I have the problem with not being consistant it maybe the pinnicale of motorsport pity the rules are not. I hope they can streamline them and make them more black and white.
This will then help to stop the off track antic's as in trying to stop each other bending rules as much, thus then negating spying I suppose Oh well I'am rambling now, leave that to Mike...

But despite the the cock up with Spying in 2007, IMO F1 did what it does best by providing us with a new generation of exciting stars to look forward to.

 

Silverstone, Monza or Spa for instance.

It doesn't really matter, wherever a F1 car goes, it usually establishes the track record. If it doesn't it was because some bone headed event organizer/sponsor prevented it from happening (e.g. Heidfeld this year at the Nordschleife, although accumulated times would establish his run yet again as fastest).

F1 also holds the track record for the Goodwood hill climb. That goes back several years because again the organizers prefer them to do stupid donuts these days instead of pulverising the record.

Other race cars have raced btw at Indy. Indy lights (which run with historic F1 cars) came somewhat close (I believe within 10 seconds), but that was due to the non challenging nature of the Indy F1 track. And they couldn't break the record still.

Montreal CART ran on the same track and was lightyears behind.

Ferrari was about to set the track record at Laguna Seca, but they screwed it up. Which I really believe wasn't F1's fault, but Ferraris for coming unprepared.

And: If there actually was a race car capable of lapping faster than a F1, I'm sure shows like Topgear would have already put that to the test. Just as they compared F1 with WRC around Silverstone (a bit of a foregone conclusion).

 

When Dennis learned of the emails, he immediately contacted Mosley, knowing full well the implications for McLaren. That he did not contact Todt until he learned of Coughlan's involvement strongly suggests that he didn't know anything about it until he learned of the search of Coughlan's home.

I know a lot of folks here think Dennis is the anti-christ and try to twist every story to demonize the guy but everything that I have read and heard about him in the F1 paddock is that he is an honorable man. I can't say the same for others in the McLaren (and Ferrari, Stepney anyone?) organizations.

This bashing of Ron Dennis is reaching ridiculous proportions. Mosley is an arsehole.