OT: Racing 2009 (Spoiler Alert)

fletcher21 · Post by **fletcher21** » Wed Mar 04, 2009 7:52 pm

Dale Jr is really in a slump. Seems weird not seeing him in the BUD car, also.

pk500 · Post by **pk500** » Wed Mar 04, 2009 8:49 pm

fletcher21 wrote:Dale Jr is really in a slump. Seems weird not seeing him in the BUD car, also.

Is Junior really in a slump? Or are we just seeing an overrated driver guided by a terribly overrated crew chief being exposed by racing for the best team in NASCAR?

Something to ponder.

Take care,
PK

GB_Simo · Post by **GB_Simo** » Thu Mar 05, 2009 8:59 am

FOTA's Formula One roadmap

I've only skimmed it so nothing too in-depth to say about it just yet. I like most of what I read, though I don't really want shorter races. 250 km represents a 55 km reduction in the current minimum distance for most circuits, and even a 10 km reduction on Monaco's distance, and that seems a little bit short to me.

pk500 · Post by **pk500** » Thu Mar 05, 2009 10:37 am

I have very mixed emotions about the desire to shorten races. Coming from a promoter's point of view, F1 wants to reduce practice time on Grand Prix weekends and also shorten races, but I'm sure there are no provisions in the FOTA proposals for reducing ticket price.

So let me get this straight: Less track time for the fans at the track, yet the same ticket price? That makes no sense.

And for those who say nothing happens in the closing laps of a Grand Prix, funny, I recall a slightly momentous happening on the final lap of the Brazilian GP last fall.

I think most of this FOTA document is Mosley-esque. Great PR because it appears that the ruling powers really care about the fans and making the sport better. But the reality is that it's a radical trial balloon, much like most of Max's proposals, from which the FIA and FOTA will distill, sift and reduce into some sort of compromise set of regulations that has about half the teeth and novelty of these proposals.

FOTA and the FIA don't give a f*ck about the fans, despite documents like these. They all care about lining their pockets and maximizing their exposure, and little more.

Take care,
PK

pk500 · Post by **pk500** » Thu Mar 05, 2009 3:08 pm

Honda F1 team apparently is saved:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport2/hi/motorsp ... 911490.stm

My biggest impression from this story is, holy sh*t, Nick Fry has aged 10 years in the last six months! Dude looks worn out.

Take care,
PK

GB_Simo · Post by **GB_Simo** » Thu Mar 05, 2009 8:18 pm

Brazil, Massa's engine in Hungary, the brilliant final few minutes at Spa, even if the stewards robbed us of those later...last year wasn't a bad one for late drama.

Agreed on the FOTA business, but - and I don't know whether this is for better or for worse, to be honest - at least there are some things in there that would work as serious proposals, which is more than I can usually say for Max's usual Looney Tunes attempts to pave the way for the more conservative measure he wanted all along.

I'm not sure what it is about Nick Fry, but I find him a very difficult guy to warm to. He's always struck me as a walking PR machine and the team's results during his tenure haven't exactly disabused me. Great news that the team look to be sticking around, though, and I can't help but love Rubinho so I'll be happy if he gets another year. His drives last season were not those of a man with nothing left to give.

GB_Simo · Post by **GB_Simo** » Thu Mar 05, 2009 8:29 pm

pk500 wrote:Honda F1 team apparently is saved:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport2/hi/motorsp ... 911490.stm

Official confirmation from the same source, who've clearly just given their Formula One website a hell of a makeover. You'd think they were broadcasting the sport again or something.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/motorsp ... 927488.stm

Brawn GP, Merc engines, Button and Barrichello at the controls.

pk500 · Post by **pk500** » Thu Mar 05, 2009 10:41 pm

Other than my hometown, this is the place I will love more than anywhere else until my dying breath, boys:

<embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/orN97ds0UjY&co ... edded&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed>

Take care,
PK

fletcher21 · Post by **fletcher21** » Sun Mar 08, 2009 10:43 am

Who do you guys have winning the Neck-car race today @ Atlanta? I think Kyle Busch, Jeff Gordon or Jimmie Johnson. I'd love to see Tony Stewart or Jr win, though.

pk500 · Post by **pk500** » Sun Mar 08, 2009 11:25 am

Edwards almost always runs well at Atlanta. And you never can count out The Wild Thing. He wins in anything he drives and is coming off the victory at Vegas.

Dark horse: Bobby Labonte. He has more victories at Atlanta than any other active driver, and that Hall of Fame-Yates team has enjoyed a very nice start, with Labonte in the top 10 of the standings.

Take care,
PK

Rodster · Post by **Rodster** » Sun Mar 08, 2009 12:37 pm

fletcher21 wrote:Who do you guys have winning the Neck-car race today @ Atlanta? I think Kyle Busch, Jeff Gordon or Jimmie Johnson. I'd love to see Tony Stewart or Jr win, though.

I have almost zero interest in Nascar these days. I wonder why people still call it neckcar because the sport has not only shifted itself from the south but have brought in drivers from Cali, and Columbia. If i'm not mistaken isn't Smoke a Indy native? Jeff Gordo as well as J. Johnson are both from Cali. Kyle Busch, Matt Kenseth and Kevin Harvick aren't southern boys either.

fletcher21 · Post by **fletcher21** » Sun Mar 08, 2009 6:09 pm

Wow what an entertaining finish this could shape up to be!

Rodster · Post by **Rodster** » Wed Mar 11, 2009 1:11 pm

I know it doesn't count but it's nice to see Brawn GP kicking ass in testing. Today Jenson Button set the fastest time beating everyone by 1 sec, although it was on a low fuel level. Yesterday I believe the car placed 3rd and many thought the same thing and Ross Brawn said "you would be surprised at how much fuel was in the car". It appears to be a good moral boost for a team that might not have been on the grid this year.

GB_Simo · Post by **GB_Simo** » Fri Mar 13, 2009 9:43 pm

If James Allen is right, Rod, then it might be more than just a morale boost:

http://allenonf1.wordpress.com/2009/03/ ... ourne-win/

I'm nothing like as confident as he is that Melbourne is between two men driving a Brawn Mercedes, but it's certainly beginning to look like they'll be somewhere in the hunt.

Does this mean greasy millionaire playboy Jenson Button is my best bet for a British world champion this year? Dear Lord, is the Earth still turning?

Rodster · Post by **Rodster** » Fri Mar 13, 2009 9:55 pm

It appears that the BGP 001 is the real deal. Even Massa and Alonso admitted their car is not as quick and that their teams will be playing catchup to the Brawn 001 car. Now to put things in perspective the BGP 001 has had at least a 1 year head start to the rest of the teams. They knew before the start of last year season opener that the car was going to suck and decided to rubbish it for this year's car.

I have to tip Rubens over Jenson at the moment. Yes Jenson is younger and supposedly has more talent than Rubens but has never really cashed it in with the exception of one win. I get the feeling Rubens smells blood as he's in the twilight of his career.

What the hell has happened to McLaren and Lewis? Their car is near the bottom of the testing timesheets. I wonder if Ron will make a cameo appearance to help out Whitmarsh?

This year has so many surprises with all the new regulations. I can't wait for the start of the new season. I'm actually rooting for Brawn GP even though I bleed Ferrari Red and dislike Nick "The Snake" Fry.

pk500 · Post by **pk500** » Fri Mar 13, 2009 10:25 pm

Rodster wrote:What the hell has happened to McLaren and Lewis? Their car is near the bottom of the testing timesheets. I wonder if Ron will make a cameo appearance to help out Whitmarsh?

Whitmarsh didn't design the car, and he doesn't engineer it. Hard to point the finger at him if the car is a dog, especially since The Ron is still at Paragon every day, overseeing everything.

I'll believe Brawn if it performs at Melbourne. The history of F1 is littered with teams that torch the testing time charts and fall flat in racing.

That said, I hope Brawn is for real. F1 needs a new team to disrupt the balance of power, and I've always liked Ross Brawn and Rubens Barrichello. I can do without Button, as I think he's quite overrated. But if he can take it to Ferrari and McLaren, all the power to Jense.

Take care,
PK

Smurfy · Post by **Smurfy** » Sun Mar 15, 2009 11:02 pm

I'm hoping that BMW and Brawn are very competitive this year. It would be a crying shame for Kubica to have had last season thrown away for the greater goals of the team only to have them fail this year.

Every time I've been to Montreal I've given Rubens a big cheer during the drivers parade. I'd love to seem him do something special for a privateer team. If Brawn GP were to be competitive this year, it would also give Button the chance to finally prove once and for all if he's got the right stuff. I've been a Button defender on these forums but I'm begining to doubt him these days. Perhaps he needs a teammate who's a bit more of a self-centred jerk to motivate him, eh Jacques?

fletcher21 · Post by **fletcher21** » Mon Mar 16, 2009 12:07 pm

It's too bad it costs SO much to compete in F1. I truly believe if they had 43 car fields like Nascar, there would be a lot more interest from Americans. Most American fans are bored to tears by F1, and consider it no more than a 90 minute hot-lapping session. I'd love to see a 43 car F1 field, also. A road course is ideal for a large field. Give Nascar the 22 car field, and F1 43 cars. Would be quite a show!

pk500 · Post by **pk500** » Mon Mar 16, 2009 12:41 pm

I'll take quality over quantity any day. Approximately 25 to 30 of the cars in a Cup race every weekend have NO chance of winning.

The only form of racing in which large fields are essential is multi-class endurance sports car racing. The difference in speeds of the classes, combined with the sheer volume of cars, creates an insane challenge for the fastest cars in lapped traffic.

If there's an excellent, lengthy duel up front among two or three machines in races other than endurance sports cars, I could care less what the rest of the field is doing.

Take last year's MotoGP race at Laguna Seca, for example. There were only 19 bikes on the starting grid, and Stoner and Rossi ran away from the field within two or three laps. But their battle for the lead was so amazing over about four or five laps that it produced one of the most compelling motor races I saw all year.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sfPM77TsGaA

Another video of the Rossi-Stoner battle at Laguna, sadly with horrible music:

<embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/IPUPeTI9r_4&hl=en&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed>

Take care,
PK

Rodster · Post by **Rodster** » Tue Mar 17, 2009 9:50 am

F1 to adopt medals system for 2009 season

http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/73744

And I thought it was all a joke.

pk500 · Post by **pk500** » Tue Mar 17, 2009 10:49 am

Large technical freedom opened in regulations for teams that agree to adhere to 30-million pound budget cap, too. Teams can stick with existing, unlimited budgets if they adhere to tight technical regulations.

It boggles my mind how F1 continues to be this popular worldwide when the sport's bosses tinker with the rules like their personal Lego set.

Just pick a set of rules, regulations and schedule, and stick with them, for Christ's sake!

Take care,
PK

Rodster · Post by **Rodster** » Tue Mar 17, 2009 10:55 am

I remember Nascar doing similar stuff in the 90's to keep competition close between manufactures.

pk500 · Post by **pk500** » Tue Mar 17, 2009 10:59 am

Rodster wrote:I remember Nascar doing similar stuff in the 90's to keep competition close between manufactures.

Allowing teams to participate in the same championship under different sets of technical regulations? No way. That didn't happen.

NASCAR allowed slight changes to cylinder head design and minor changes to front valance shape to equal competition, but it didn't allow Ford to run a completely different aero package and engine rev configuration than Chevy if Ford agreed to spend less money, for example.

Equivalency formulas to create technical diversity are fine, such as F1's efforts to keep turbo and normally aspirated engines on an even keel in the 80s. But using equivalency formulas for the sake of cost-cutting? That's a gimmick.

Take care,
PK

Gangrel · Post by **Gangrel** » Tue Mar 17, 2009 1:32 pm

Rodster wrote:F1 to adopt medals system for 2009 season

http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/73744

And I thought it was all a joke.

TSN is reporting no medals, but that wins determine the driver's championship and not points.

http://www.tsn.ca/auto_racing/story/?id ... lines_main

Personally, I hated when they decided in Nascar to have the "Race" for the cup. In my mind, if I can build my team to finish second all year long and accrue enough points, why shouldn't I win the trophy????

GB_Simo · Post by **GB_Simo** » Tue Mar 17, 2009 9:45 pm

Suppose for a moment that Ferrari, say, come out of the traps with a slight advantage on everyone else and manage to place 1-2 in the first 4 races, Kimi ahead of Felipe each time. In round 5 Kimi bins it, Felipe wins. Under the 2008 scoring system Felipe has a slight lead, which I don't think is quite right. Under the 2009 scoring system, he's ahead on points (which we'll have to keep tracking for tie-break purposes, don't forget) but behind in the championship, which to me seems faintly ridiculous. Edited to add: In fact, he's a couple of further Raikkonen wins away from being pretty much out of title contention, even though he's still amassing points, as surely we'll be seeing much earlier shifts towards having an assigned number one driver among title-contending teams?

Surely the solution is, if you're going to change anything at all, to just change the weighting of points a little? Make winning worth a little more, reward consistency a little less?