OT: Racing 2007 (Spoiler Alert)

sfz_T-car · Post by **sfz_T-car** » Wed Sep 19, 2007 4:44 pm

pk500 wrote:
Smurfy wrote:Besides, how many lovable Formula One champions do you know of?
Jim Clark. The most humble gentleman ever to win the World Championship, by most accounts.

And how could you dislike James Hunt? Smoked like an exhaust header, drank like the village drunk and shagged endless birds yet still won the 1976 world title. Hero! Those were the days ...

Recently, Damon Hill was a likable guy when he was winning titles. He became a baby during his last year with Jordan, but he was likable in 1996. Hakkinen wasn't colorful, but I don't know anyone who disliked him. He was ethical on track.

But I see your point, Smurf: There wasn't much to like with Schumacher, Senna, J. Villeneuve, Mansell, Prost or Piquet. Respect? Yes. Like? No.

Take care,
PK

Add Alan Jones, Graham Hill, Phil Hill and Jackie Stewart to the list. But those were different times.

Rodster · Post by **Rodster** » Sun Sep 30, 2007 5:06 pm

What can you not say about Lewis Hamilton. The guy is destined to be the next Schumacher/Senna/Mansell/Hunt all rolled up into one. The guy is absolutely amazing. He starts going after his teammate verbally, then he gets pole and goes on to win a chaotic race. Wow.

F1 was worried when they lost their star after Michael retired but it looks like another star is born. If the rumors are true that Alonzo might drive for Ferrari next year I for one can't wait for next year.

I want to see Hamilton and Alonzo go at it on different teams.

GB_Simo · Post by **GB_Simo** » Sun Sep 30, 2007 7:18 pm

Not sure I've ever seen Lewis compared to James Hunt before, so I'll give you top marks for originality on that, Rod.

I must say that I'm more inclined to want to see Hamilton and Alonso in equal cars. Every battle between drivers is engaging in one way or another, but comparing Hamilton and Alonso, Senna and Prost or even Mansell and Piquet to, say, Villeneuve and Schumacher, the fight for supremacy has always been that little bit more interesting to me if it's been like the first three examples - drivers at the top of their game in the same machinery, and the constant to and fro as the man making best use of what he has changes race by race. Perhaps the battles between Schumacher and Alonso were a little different, with the master taking on the pretender to his throne, but otherwise I'd much prefer to watch evenly-matched drivers in races where we can see that one man simply made better use of what he had, instead of winning because his package was clearly superior to the different one of his rival.

All of that, of course, forgets drivers like Raikkonen who are more than capable of winning titles themselves - you'd get an equally compelling scrap between any combination of Raikkonen, Hamilton and Alonso (though one involving Raikkonen wouldn't have quite the same level of aggravation, what with Kimi having a demeanour at the track that verges on the catatonic), and maybe you could look at the performances of men like Kovalainen and Rosberg too and throw their names into the ring.

Rodster · Post by **Rodster** » Sun Sep 30, 2007 7:22 pm

I only thought of James Hunt because it was in Fuji where he nailed the Championship in conditions similar to todays and todays race probably nailed the Championship for Lewis.

GB_Simo · Post by **GB_Simo** » Sun Sep 30, 2007 7:54 pm

Indeed. Every winner of a Grand Prix at Mount Fuji has been English, and while there have only been 3 Grands Prix there, I'm finding that if I feed that nugget of information to people who don't know where the Japanese Grand Prix is usually held, they marvel at that particular stat.

Not really, of course.

As for the championship, he's certainly looking good, but coming into Fuji a lot of people would have put a lot of money on Fernando - there's time for things to change dramatically yet.

Rodster · Post by **Rodster** » Sun Sep 30, 2007 8:05 pm

GB_Simo wrote:Indeed. Every winner of a Grand Prix at Mount Fuji has been English, and while there have only been 3 Grands Prix there, I'm finding that if I feed that nugget of information to people who don't know where the Japanese Grand Prix is usually held, they marvel at that particular stat.

Not really, of course.

As for the championship, he's certainly looking good, but coming into Fuji a lot of people would have put a lot of money on Fernando - there's time for things to change dramatically yet.

Indeed, I think Alonzo even said today that he was in a similar situation last year with a couple of races to go and it looked really good for Michael and he went on take the title.

I personally think it was a bad idea putting Fuji back on the calendar, i'd rather see it at Suzuka. Some of the drivers today said after the race that the race should have been stopped.

GB_Simo · Post by **GB_Simo** » Sun Sep 30, 2007 8:30 pm

We appear to have taken over this thread, my man.

Some of the drivers did say that, and I don't agree with them. It's not for me to say they were wrong, mind - they were the gentlemen putting their necks on the line while I sat in front of my television, but nobody flew off the road due to the track being undriveable, and the visibility was good enough to allow for some overtaking (note also that while people did drive into each other, it was lack of brains and lack of talent that brought those incidents about), so why stop it?

I'd rather see a Formula One car lapping at Suzuka too, and in 2009 we'll get that again, but it seemed to me that even had it been dry today, the Fuji layout would surely promote overtaking in a way that Suzuka's doesn't. For a one-off flying lap I'm in total agreement with your choice of track, but for a race? It depends on what you want to see, I guess, but we can't complain about the lack of overtaking in the sport and then complain at losing a track that didn't tend to have all that much of it.

GB_Simo · Post by **GB_Simo** » Thu Oct 04, 2007 12:58 pm

Just when you thought it couldn't get any more peculiar, the Formula One world title might hinge on amateur footage posted on YouTube:

http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/62978

The video in question is contained within the link, and what strikes me is that while Hamilton undoubtedly gave the brakes a good press, Vettel still had an awful lot of time to plot a course that wouldn't have taken him into the back of Webber. Can't for the life of me see any justification for docking points, though I do wonder whether there might be a grid penalty in the offing. Mind, I don't seem to recall a certain Mr Schumacher being penalised for sparking the incidents that saw Jenson Button retire at Monza in 2000 and JPM nerf Schuey up the rear at Monaco in '04.

pk500 · Post by **pk500** » Thu Oct 04, 2007 1:01 pm

Adam:

Anything is possible. Remember, FIA stands for Ferrari International Aid.

Take care,
PK

GB_Simo · Post by **GB_Simo** » Thu Oct 04, 2007 1:27 pm

pk500 wrote:Adam:

Anything is possible. Remember, FIA stands for Ferrari International Aid.

Take care,
PK

That's exactly what I told my sister a few minutes ago when she questioned what on Earth they could do. I said I couldn't see justification for penalising Hamilton - as far as the FIA go, I'm pretty confident that they'll manage it one way or another.

Jimmydeicide · Post by **Jimmydeicide** » Thu Oct 04, 2007 1:52 pm

GB_Simo wrote:Just when you thought it couldn't get any more peculiar, the Formula One world title might hinge on amateur footage posted on YouTube:

http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/62978

The video in question is contained within the link, and what strikes me is that while Hamilton undoubtedly gave the brakes a good press, Vettel still had an awful lot of time to plot a course that wouldn't have taken him into the back of Webber. Can't for the life of me see any justification for docking points, though I do wonder whether there might be a grid penalty in the offing. Mind, I don't seem to recall a certain Mr Schumacher being penalised for sparking the incidents that saw Jenson Button retire at Monza in 2000 and JPM nerf Schuey up the rear at Monaco in '04.

Or mysteriously park it on the last bend at Monaco...sideways.

What would have happened if Webber overtook Hamilton for a few seconds right there ? a penalty ? It was very odd what hamilton was doing but if i was weber or even a driver in rfactor i overtake the leader in order to not brake hard expecting the guy behind me to stick it up my chuff.

Rodster · Post by **Rodster** » Thu Oct 04, 2007 4:14 pm

http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/62978

Frst of all Hamilton better not use the "rookie mistake" excuse Not when he's driving like Michael Schumacher in his 9th year in Formula 1. I saw the footage on the BBC and I would be pissed if I were Webber or Vettel. Either Hamilton was doing that on purpose to gain an advantage like Earnhardt Sr. use to do prior to the pace car going off or he had a serious brain fart. I think it was on purpose to gain an advantage. Michael use to do that as well but not to the degree Lewis did at Fuji.

When I saw the footage it appeared to me that Lewis was retiring when he went off to the right only to see him seconds later punch the throttle and that's when Vettel ran into the back of Webber. Everybody got too bunched up. Even Jenson Button said the pacing behind the pace car was VERY erratic. Lewis has some explaining to do tomorrow. If the FIA doesn't buy it, he could lose his ten points or fall back 10 places on the grid.

GB_Simo · Post by **GB_Simo** » Fri Oct 05, 2007 7:11 am

Rodster, forgive my ignorance (I'm ever so slightly hungover) but what kind of advantage does braking while the safety car is still on track ahead of you confer? It warms the brakes, but everyone behind then has to brake and warm theirs, and when they're done there's still a safety car ahead of them. I think I've managed to miss the point of that one.

Given that Toro Rosso and Red Bull are sister teams, Toro Rosso want Vettel's grid penalty removing and Webber was initially highly critical not of Hamilton but of Vettel, might someone have had a word in Markie's ear? "Stop slagging our driver, mate, switch your focus..."

GB_Simo · Post by **GB_Simo** » Fri Oct 05, 2007 8:11 am

Um...keep your eye on this, chaps. BBC Radio 5 Live's David Croft says there is no investigation of any kind taking place, though the drivers were called to see the stewards:

http://www.planetf1.com/story/0,18954,3 ... 16,00.html

McLaren are saying exactly the same thing. What on Earth is going on?

pk500 · Post by **pk500** » Fri Oct 05, 2007 8:50 am

It would be one thing if F1 had compelling racing this season, which it hasn't. The numbers may indicate a close title race, but the action on track has been lukewarm, at best, with limited overtaking.

But this endless politicking is REALLY getting old and turning me away from the series more and more.

Can't these motherf*ckers just shut up and put on a proper motor race?

Take care,
PK

GB_Simo · Post by **GB_Simo** » Fri Oct 05, 2007 9:09 am

No. I've said before that a lot of the overtaking we've had this season has been exceptional, but that isn't to say that we've had all that much of it to start with. Formula One is like chess, remember. It must be, because Max said so.

Actually, on the subject of Max, did you see his comments on Jackie Stewart the other week? Max had very little credibilty in my eyes anyway, but bugger me if he didn't sink even lower with those...

More off track action, incidentally, as the FIA confirm Hamilton faces no penalty and Vettel now receives a reprimand, not a 10-place grid penalty:

http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/63039

Edit: I might say, PK, that you'll be doing bloody well to recall a time when Formula One wasn't full of politicking. Certainly, it's not in my lifetime, and not for a fair few years before that either.

pk500 · Post by **pk500** » Fri Oct 05, 2007 9:39 am

GB_Simo wrote:Edit: I might say, PK, that you'll be doing bloody well to recall a time when Formula One wasn't full of politicking. Certainly, it's not in my lifetime, and not for a fair few years before that either.

True. But that politicking was offset or at least balanced by good racing. Now you have shite racing and incredibly toxic politics. Not a great mix.

Every winner this season has come from the first two rows of the grid, with all but two or three from the front row. Only two teams have won.

How is that good racing? How many times have we seen any of the four title protagonists go wheel to wheel or battle like Alonso and Schumacher did in the final, scintillating 14 laps of the San Marino Grand Prix in 2005?

Thank God for Hamilton, or this would have been the most dreadful F1 season since the Ferrari steamroller of 2002.

Take care,
PK

GB_Simo · Post by **GB_Simo** » Fri Oct 05, 2007 9:56 am

pk500 wrote:Every winner this season has come from the first two rows of the grid, with all but two or three from the front row. Only two teams have won.

How is that good racing? How many times have we seen any of the four title protagonists go wheel to wheel or battle like Alonso and Schumacher did in the final, scintillating 14 laps of the San Marino Grand Prix in 2005?

Once, briefly, at the Nurburgring. That's probably about the extent of it, and really not a point I would argue. Not sure I follow your point on grid positions - based on that criteria, a season like 1988 would be classed as bloody awful, which it plainly wasn't even if the circumstances of it were exceptional - but it's a bit difficult to argue that it's been a season of classic on-track battles between the top title contenders.

There is good racing in Formula One, if you go looking far enough and hard enough for it. Shouldn't have to go looking, though, should we?

pk500 · Post by **pk500** » Fri Oct 05, 2007 10:09 am

You're right, Adam.

I guess what bothers me is the breathless proclamations by TV commentators and the flowery prose from some F1 writers -- not the great Nigel Roebuck, though -- that this has been a classic season. Mathematically, yes. On track, no.

Speaking of Roebuck, who is a superb writer and an even better guy, did you know he's leaving Autosport to write for Motorsport, the historic racing magazine?

I'm not sure if you read F1 Racing or not, but its editor, the influential Matt Bishop, is leaving that publication to work in a high-level communications and PR job with McLaren next season.

The Roebuck move doesn't surprise me. Nigel and I have shared e-mails and chats at the USGP about our distaste for the current state of GP racing. Plus he adores racing from the 60s and 70s, along with U.S. wingless sprint car racing!

But the Bishop move really surprised me. The Bish was a real bulldog for stories, a real maverick ass kicker. I can't imagine him working in a PR flack job for the most buttoned-down, corporate team in the paddock.

The Ron must be throwing a wheelbarrow full of dosh at him. Better to have The Bish on your side instead of slinging arrows at you, I guess!

Take care,
PK

GB_Simo · Post by **GB_Simo** » Fri Oct 05, 2007 10:33 am

I didn't know of Roebuck's move, though I've read his regular column in Motorsport for a while. I'm hugely surprised by Bishop's going to McLaren, which I did hear about a week or two back - I just hope this doesn't mean the end of the pre-race game that involves trying to spot Matt, in some incredibly loud shirt, loitering on the edge of shot while Martin Brundle goes through his gridwalk.

pk500 · Post by **pk500** » Fri Oct 05, 2007 10:40 am

Yep, it's almost like The Bish took the mantle from former McLaren designer Gordon Murray to wear the wildest shirt possible in the paddock. Murray still shows up in the F1 paddock once or twice per year dressed in lurid Hawaiian shirts.

But that's OK: Anyone who designed the AWESOME McLaren F1 GTR sports car can wear anything he wants.

Take care,
PK

pk500 · Post by **pk500** » Fri Oct 05, 2007 12:10 pm

Adam:

I want to clarify my dismay over the politicking this year.

I have no problem with the McLaren infighting. Intramural squabbles have existed since the World Championship started in 1950, and I find the menage-a-trois between Lewis, Alonso and The Ron fascinating.

But my big beef is just how often the FIA has stuck its nose into proceedings this year, rightly (Stepneygate) or wrongly (Budapest qualifying flap, Fuji Safety Car flap). And the responses by Ferrari, McLaren and Renault (why Renault?) to these episodes have been unprofessional at best and childish at worst.

Combine that with the apparent lack of progress by the Overtaking Working Group and the Technical Working Group on new, more racy specs for the upcoming season, and I'm annoyed.

Take care,
PK

Zeppo · Post by **Zeppo** » Fri Oct 05, 2007 12:57 pm

What was that the Speed guys were saying during practice today after Windsor finished talking to Jackie Stewart, about Mosley calling Stewart a bunch of names, saying he 'dresses like a carnival character,' how he 'thinks people listen to him but nobody does,' etc. etc.? I mean, jeez, that's some pretty low class monkey s*** to be throwing around. Good ol' classy Stewart didn't say a thing about it when he was talking to Windsor, either, as he quite lucidly explained how stupid the FIA has been behaving, especially with this last thing about Hamilton behind the pace car four days after the race.

pk500 · Post by **pk500** » Fri Oct 05, 2007 1:07 pm

Max Mosley is a very smart, very shrewd man, but he's also a twat. He is a human flag, changing directions in whichever way will benefit him the most politically.

Just look at his stances regarding traction control, common ECU's, green fuels, etc. Flip-flop, flip-flop.

JYS is one of the few guys in F1 who I think is above attack. First, a great driver, easily one of the top 10 of all time. Second, along with Sid Watkins probably the greatest champion of F1 safety of all time. Third, a guy who built Stewart Grand Prix into a race-winning team from scratch in just a few years, something that the big-money manufacturers can't manage these days.

Stewart GP was a tight, well-run team that Ford managed to ruin in one season, 2000, after it bought the team and renamed it Jaguar Racing.

JYS represents everything Mosley isn't or wasn't: A great driver, principled, an entrepreneur, self-made man and visionary. I think that's the source of the friction between Mosley, the silver-spoon child of Sir Oswald Mosley, creator of the British Union of Fascists in 1932, and JYS.

Mosley appears annoyed with the amount of deserved respect JYS earns in the paddock despite not owning an F1 team since the end of the 1999 season.

JYS can play the political game very well, but people still know he puts what's best for the sport first. No one can make the same claim about Max Mosley.

Take care,
PK

GB_Simo · Post by **GB_Simo** » Fri Oct 05, 2007 1:14 pm

That's the one I was referring to earlier, Zep - Max said this:

"He said the FIA's decision would not have worked in a civil court. He has no qualification to say that.

"Then he starts saying this is personal between me and Ron Dennis, at great length, because everything he does is at extreme length.

"It's annoying that some of the sponsors listen to him because he's won a few championships. But nobody else in F1 does - not the teams, not the drivers.

"He's a figure of fun among drivers. He goes round dressed up as a 1930s music hall man. He's a certified halfwit."

As ill-considered as it is incorrect, that rant. There are those in F1 who might fit the "certified halfwit" label, but JYS isn't one of them, and at times it seems that Max might be better off looking a little closer to home for them.

Edit: Or, you know, what PK said.
Edity edit: I was flicking through this week's Autosport in a supermarket earlier tonight and read this week's star letter, a defence of Jackie which, in strong terms, accuses Max of bringing the sport into disrepute and making statements towards JYS that are tantamount to abuse. I was, I must admit, a little taken aback when I got to the end and saw the letter had been written by the president of the British Racing Drivers Club, one Damon Hill.