Advertisement
How to add spoiler tags, edit posts, add images etc. How to - a user's guide to the new version of Boards
Mods please check the Moderators Group for an important update on Mod tools. If you do not have access to the group, please PM Niamh. Thanks!

F1 2020 - British Grand Prix

11314151618

Comments



  • Glico Man wrote: »
    Not the best post I've read on here to be honest. Let's allow the Ferrari to keep running an illegal engine just to keep the front a bit interesting? That's just a silly suggestion that I hope was made in jest.

    Hamilton winning with a puncture may have been a bit more enthusiastic than if it was anyone else, a fair bit of British media bias will do that, but it made the end a bit more exciting because he was leading the race on the last lap with a charging Max on fresh tyres behind him. Amounted to nothing but woke me up from the rest of the race at least.

    It's worth pointing out that the FIA looked and failed to find any evidence to prove that the Ferrari engine was illegal. Ferrari agreed to stop running it in return for privacy because they didn't want technology that they also use in their road cars to be made public.




  • Glico Man wrote: »
    Not the best post I've read on here to be honest. Let's allow the Ferrari to keep running an illegal engine just to keep the front a bit interesting? That's just a silly suggestion that I hope was made in jest.

    Hamilton winning with a puncture may have been a bit more enthusiastic than if it was anyone else, a fair bit of British media bias will do that, but it made the end a bit more exciting because he was leading the race on the last lap with a charging Max on fresh tyres behind him. Amounted to nothing but woke me up from the rest of the race at least.

    There's some data analysis on Hamilton's last lap here - https://www.formula1.com/en/latest/article.data-analysis-how-impressive-was-hamiltons-performance-on-three-wheels.4o9akvkxtOT4zB2nIkkx7f.html.




  • quokula wrote: »
    It's worth pointing out that the FIA looked and failed to find any evidence to prove that the Ferrari engine was illegal. Ferrari agreed to stop running it in return for privacy because they didn't want technology that they also use in their road cars to be made public.

    Do you have a source for that info?




  • I've been an F1 fan for along long time, and the last couple of years have been the worst ever for the sport.
    Probably since these new silent crappy cars.
    I long for the days of refueling, sound and tactics.
    And funnily enough, actual racing.




  • Anjobe wrote: »
    Do you have a source for that info?

    https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2020/mar/05/fia-says-it-could-not-prove-ferraris-engine-operated-outside-rules-in-2019

    https://www.essentiallysports.com/f1-news-thats-the-reason-were-not-keen-to-do-it-ferrari-explains-why-its-so-secretive-about-its-fia-engine-settlement/

    Actually I can only find references to protecting their IP now. I'm sure I read previously that they wanted to protect the IP because it was relevant to their road cars, but I can't find that now.

    In any case, there are ample articles to be found confirming that the FIA tried and failed to find anything illegal with the engine.


  • Advertisement


  • AMKC wrote: »
    I... Who knows maybe Vertel would have been leading the Chamionship now and be giving it 120 per cent every weekend instead he just looks like someone who does not want to be there and shos heart is not in it anymore. He knows he can not beat the Mercs now as there car is just not good enough so why bother.

    I challenge this assumption that Vettel is just not trying and THAT'S why his performances are so lack lustre. Apart from being such an unprofessional attitude (which should weigh heavily against him when measuring him as a driver) he should always be trying to beat his teammate. When LeClerc beats him again this season, will Vettel fans say 'ah Yeah, but shur he wasn't trying those years against LeClerc'?

    He's the second highest paid driver after Hamilton, and somehow people are justifying his not even trying! Does that make him the worst value for money driver this year and last year?

    I think he might have thrown in the towel (or his toys out of the pram) because he has again been paired with a teammate who is better than him and he knows he can't beat.




  • quokula wrote: »
    https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2020/mar/05/fia-says-it-could-not-prove-ferraris-engine-operated-outside-rules-in-2019

    https://www.essentiallysports.com/f1-news-thats-the-reason-were-not-keen-to-do-it-ferrari-explains-why-its-so-secretive-about-its-fia-engine-settlement/

    Actually I can only find references to protecting their IP now. I'm sure I read previously that they wanted to protect the IP because it was relevant to their road cars, but I can't find that now.

    In any case, there are ample articles to be found confirming that the FIA tried and failed to find anything illegal with the engine.

    So the notion that Ferrari were protecting their IP comes directly from Ferrari themselves, so we can't rule out that being a self-serving misdirection. The FIA statements quoted in the Guardian article are the reason why people find the whole affair so unsatisfactory.

    There is nothing we can conclusively say about it without knowing what was in the secret agreement they concocted between themselves, but Ferrari protecting IP used in their road cars sounds unlikely. Any competitor could get their hands on one of the cars and reverse engineer it, the only protection from that would be patents I would think.




  • quokula wrote: »
    It's worth pointing out that the FIA looked and failed to find any evidence to prove that the Ferrari engine was illegal. Ferrari agreed to stop running it in return for privacy because they didn't want technology that they also use in their road cars to be made public.

    Do you think their engine performance going off a cliff the second the FIA introduced a second encrypted fuel flow sensor is a coincidence?




  • I've been an F1 fan for along long time, and the last couple of years have been the worst ever for the sport.
    Probably since these new silent crappy cars.
    I long for the days of refueling, sound and tactics.
    And funnily enough, actual racing.

    The 2020 cars are the fastest cars in the history of Formula 1. Refueling is not coming back and let's be honest the racing wasn't great in the old days either, there's a bit of rose tinted glasses here about the good old days.

    The current Mercedes domination is certainly no fun but the other teams don't look up to the task of catching them either. Red Bull and Ferrari have gone backwards this year. Maybe the 2022 regulations will even things out a bit.




  • Anjobe wrote: »
    So the notion that Ferrari were protecting their IP comes directly from Ferrari themselves, so we can't rule out that being a self-serving misdirection. The FIA statements quoted in the Guardian article are the reason why people find the whole affair so unsatisfactory.

    There is nothing we can conclusively say about it without knowing what was in the secret agreement they concocted between themselves, but Ferrari protecting IP used in their road cars sounds unlikely. Any competitor could get their hands on one of the cars and reverse engineer it, the only protection from that would be patents I would think.

    But that's a bit of a catch 22 isn't it? We have no evidence whatsoever that you're cheating, but we won't accept that you're not unless you open up your engine for all your competitors to see and copy?

    I've yet to see anyone credibly point to anything in the rulebook and say that is the rule that Ferrari broke. The UK media (which is what we all consume for F1 coverage) have been openly hostile to Ferrari for decades because it's a foreign team so they always report things in a certain way, but these things should be innocent until proven guilty, not the other way around.


  • Advertisement


  • BikeRacer wrote: »
    Do you think their engine performance going off a cliff the second the FIA introduced a second encrypted fuel flow sensor is a coincidence?

    This is a good point.
    quokula wrote: »
    But that's a bit of a catch 22 isn't it? We have no evidence whatsoever that you're cheating, but we won't accept that you're not unless you open up your engine for all your competitors to see and copy?

    I've yet to see anyone credibly point to anything in the rulebook and say that is the rule that Ferrari broke. The UK media (which is what we all consume for F1 coverage) have been openly hostile to Ferrari for decades because it's a foreign team so they always report things in a certain way, but these things should be innocent until proven guilty, not the other way around.

    Can we even trust that the FIA statements on this are sincere though, or are they part of the confidential agreement too? Why would Ferrari stop doing something they believed was legal and the FIA couldn't prove otherwise, i.e. is the nature of the agreement essentially that Ferrari would stop it if the FIA would put out a statement that they couldn't prove it was cheating?

    I don't buy the Ferrari secrecy argument either, as all the power units are scrutineered and homologated by the FIA anyway, and this doesn't make their details available to the other engine providers.




  • quokula wrote: »
    But that's a bit of a catch 22 isn't it? We have no evidence whatsoever that you're cheating, but we won't accept that you're not unless you open up your engine for all your competitors to see and copy?

    I think they're safe enough.....




  • Completely agree with that. Hamilton is a great driver and rarely makes mistakes. But you're completely right to avoid the interviews. Total PR, copy and paste jobs. I find him so Inarticulate and boring to listen to. He was describing the last lap of Silverstone, driving with a burst tyre and Max closing in rapidly and managed to be boring talking about it.

    In the car he's probably a genius. Out of the car he's a bore and a dope and saddest of all, a try-hard

    Nail on the head with that one. I often find what Hamilton says very tiring in that he tries to create some sort of challenge he had to overcome (see what he said over the weekend where he suffered all weekend with his set up prior to qualy, only to hen break the lap record TWICE in Q3).

    He may well be doing this to try and create some sort of justification around his achievements. You can see it on the Autosport forum that most are tiring of this dominance, which then in turn can put a mark against the general achievement in a way, his only challenge is himself, but no one really cares about that, do they?

    He is clearly on another level in a car like he has now, Merc have the quintessential second driver who can be fast at times, but not all the time. Some will point the finger at other teams with "they use the same rules blah blah blah", Merc have the budget and muscle to work the car to the rules and then some. I remember reading or hearing (can't fully recall) that after the Friday practice, they ran multiple race simulations all through the night to get the set up tight. They applied that to the car and off they went. Not every team can even run a light bulb for the night without factoring it into a budget.




  • Saw Hulk is on standby while they await the Perez decision.

    Would be gutting if he couldn't take the car onto the track for race day.




  • Adamocovic wrote: »
    Saw Hulk is on standby while they await the Perez decision.

    Would be gutting if he couldn't take the car onto the track for race day.

    Is Perez not stuck in quarantine?




  • Gintonious wrote: »
    Is Perez not stuck in quarantine?


    Racing Point CEO said:
    “There was a little bit of confusion because it was on that cusp,” he said. “The inconclusive test was only inconclusive by FIA standards. By [Public] Health England standards that inconclusive test on Wednesday would have been a positive.

    “So you could look at it and say, well, it’s the [Public] Health England standards and therefore a positive on Wednesday already. On Wednesday you had to quarantine for seven days. The 10 days that came in the following day may or may not be retroactive. That’s the bit I don’t know.

    “So we’ll ask that question of [Public] Health England and whatever they say, that’s what we’ll do. We will comply with whatever they deem is right in this situation. But I think the ambiguity comes in because it was just on that transition.”

    I would imagine Perez wont be racing regardless as a precaution, but knowing Hulk's luck I wouldn't be surprised.

    Brundle had it right with "If he didn't have bad luck he'd have no luck"




  • I've been an F1 fan for along long time, and the last couple of years have been the worst ever for the sport.
    Probably since these new silent crappy cars.
    I long for the days of refueling, sound and tactics.
    And funnily enough, actual racing.

    I disagree with this. My own opinion is that the 2000s were worse. Virtually no overtaking on track, though at least there was some competitive seasons post 2004. I'm glad they banned refueling, pit stops are now decided on the fly rather than on a spreadsheet before the race. There have been a lot of good races the last few years, 2017 and 2018 were both competitive with Ferrari challenging Mercedes. Very disappointing to see the gap between Merc and the rest at the moment though, can't deny that.




  • Paul di Resta has had a seat fitting and is now McLaren's reserve driver while Stoffel is in Germany.




  • Heard a rumour /conspiracy theory that Hulkenburg was sabotaged so he wouldn't outperform young Stroll. Sound daft but not really bound the realms of possibility really.




  • pjohnson wrote: »
    Paul di Resta has had a seat fitting and is now McLaren's reserve driver while Stoffel is in Germany.

    I wonder is it the race that he filled in for Massa a few years ago that has kept his super license?


  • Advertisement


  • I wonder is it the race that he filled in for Massa a few years ago that has kept his super license?

    Basically - though to be more precise it means that he does not need to do 300km in a modern car before participating in a race.
    Turns out Esteban does not have those 300km so although he processes a super licence he is ineligible to step in for eg Sergio or Lewis etc if needed !




  • Heard a rumour /conspiracy theory that Hulkenburg was sabotaged so he wouldn't outperform young Stroll. Sound daft but not really bound the realms of possibility really.

    He wasn't quicker than Stroll all weekend. If they were sabotaging him all weekend then they were doing a grand job without stopping him from competing in the race. And Perez outperforms Stroll most of the time anyway.

    I'd wouldn't mind that idea that they sabotaged him. Most plausible explanation is that hulk is out of practice and hasn't had any time in the car. He wasn't exactly top drawer anyway so it's not like he'd be beating stroll by half a second if he had loads of practice since the start anyway. He'd probably beat Stroll over a season.




  • Infoanon wrote: »
    Basically - though to be more precise it means that he does not need to do 300km in a modern car before participating in a race.
    Turns out Esteban does not have those 300km so although he processes a super licence he is ineligible to step in for eg Sergio or Lewis etc if needed !

    It seems a complete oversight by Mercedes but they plan on getting him the run time ASAP but aren't able to until the next break in races. (By which stage Stoffel will be free anyway)




  • pjohnson wrote: »
    It seems a complete oversight by Mercedes but they plan on getting him the run time ASAP but aren't able to until the next break in races. (By which stage Stoffel will be free anyway)

    Not sure there is any point in then giving him the seat time if Vandorne is available. Is he even any good on track. Didn't Grosjean firmly outperform him when he was at Haas?




  • He wasn't quicker than Stroll all weekend. If they were sabotaging him all weekend then they were doing a grand job without stopping him from competing in the race. And Perez outperforms Stroll most of the time anyway.

    I'd wouldn't mind that idea that they sabotaged him. Most plausible explanation is that hulk is out of practice and hasn't had any time in the car. He wasn't exactly top drawer anyway so it's not like he'd be beating stroll by half a second if he had loads of practice since the start anyway. He'd probably beat Stroll over a season.

    The theory I heard was that they were afraid that Hulkenburgs race pace was going to be better than Stroll. It's all a bit far fetched in fairness.




  • He wasn't quicker than Stroll all weekend.

    In fairness he just stepped into the car for the first time with absolutely minimal notice having not driven an f1 car in months, and still he was getting closer and closer to Stroll every session to the point he was only half a tenth off in Q3. I doubt there was sabotage, but he stood a good chance of beating Stroll in the race.




  • Completely agree with that. Hamilton is a great driver and rarely makes mistakes. But you're completely right to avoid the interviews. Total PR, copy and paste jobs. I find him so Inarticulate and boring to listen to. He was describing the last lap of Silverstone, driving with a burst tyre and Max closing in rapidly and managed to be boring talking about it.

    In the car he's probably a genius. Out of the car he's a bore and a dope and saddest of all, a try-hard

    Not convinced by the statement Hamilton rarely makes mistakes. In the last five races he’s crashed into Albon twice, he cost himself the first race of this season by earning a penalty in qualifying, and he spun off in qualifying for the last race, which could have cost him badly had it not resulted in a red flag and allowed them to get the car prepared for another run.

    It’s easy to make few mistakes when you have the best car by miles and never have to push more than 90%. He had a reputation for making frequent mistakes back when he was at McLaren - that is the main reason Button beat him in their time as teammates.

    Not making mistakes in the Merc is pretty easy. Bottas hasn’t made a single mistake so far this year. He won when Hamilton screwed up, and he did exactly what the team wanted in staying comfortably in second and not challenging Hamilton in the other races, right down to slamming on the brakes into turn 1 at Silvestone after he made a superior start to Lewis.




  • quokula wrote: »
    Not convinced by the statement Hamilton rarely makes mistakes. In the last five races he’s crashed into Albon twice, he cost himself the first race of this season by earning a penalty in qualifying, and he spun off in qualifying for the last race, which could have cost him badly had it not resulted in a red flag and allowed them to get the car prepared for another run.

    It’s easy to make few mistakes when you have the best car by miles and never have to push more than 90%. He had a reputation for making frequent mistakes back when he was at McLaren - that is the main reason Button beat him in their time as teammates.

    Not making mistakes in the Merc is pretty easy. Bottas hasn’t made a single mistake so far this year. He won when Hamilton screwed up, and he did exactly what the team wanted in staying comfortably in second and not challenging Hamilton in the other races, right down to slamming on the brakes into turn 1 at Silvestone after he made a superior start to Lewis.

    I'm sorry but that's complete rubbish from start to finish. Your consistent anti Merc/Hamilton posts are getting embarrassing now.




  • Weather for weekend changed a bit on my app.

    Friday - Sunshine. Max temp 33
    Saturday - Sunshine & Clouds. Max temp 28
    Sunday - Rain. Max temp 29


  • Advertisement


  • Renault bringing some updates which they say should bring them in line with Mclaren or just a head (if they work )

    Was impressed with Renaults pace at the end of the last race Dani Ric made some serious progress.


Advertisement