So how is every bike running Bridgestone supposed to reduce corner speeds? Posted by Tokehashi Wakibakki
Quite simply really. Without any competition, they've no-one to beat, so they no longer have to make 'super sticky' tyres. Whatever compound softness they decide to make affects speed as Dorna will probably ask them to reign tyre development costs in and as sticky rubber is more expensive to develop and produce, they'll produce harder, cheaper tyres, which conversely means slower tyres.
Bodie, dont forget Valencia 2008, Massa rejoins curcuit and causes Sutil's crash into the barriers. Damn lucky he never got a 10 place grid penalty for Japan for that one!
Can you please ban this idiot, lulu the chicane master off this forum as all they do is post derisory comments about people who post on here. I know they'll probably come back as some other unfunny name, but please, this is a site about motor racing, not an site for childish insult throwing!
Well done Fernando, after wht happened to you yesterday, you deserve it. I once said he'd never win another race after leaving McLaren last season, and I'm happy to be proved wrong.
What on earth were Ferrari thinking of? That's twice this year that they've released a car dangerously AND buggered up leaving while the fuel nozzle's still connected. Must say I cheered when it was obvious it'd mucked Feerari's race up, but felt sorry again for Massa, this is not the way to lose a championship.
Fantastic drive from Rosberg, especially before being given the 10 second penalty.
I felt Hamilton was just trying to keep his nose clean by not risking an accident.
How about putting a high-ish kerb on the outside of the track where safely possible? Obviously it couldn't be used in the higher speed corners as it would act as a launch pad!! But on areas such as that chicane at Spa they could be high enough to make a driver think twice about doing what Lewis did.
Totally agree with you Tim. Like you I'm not a Hamilton fan any more than any other driver, but whenever there's a Hamilton thread on this site there's just so much hate for the guy I feel I have to stick up for him!
About the racism thing, I work with someone who's in his mid 50s and a big F1 fan. Ask him about what he thinks about McLaren and he'll say 'They're a good team but I wish Kovalainen would win over that ************* any day!'
did Hamilton lose his 1st position for passing someone in a most exiting way. The rules never stated how much of an advantage you gave back, or when you where allowed to start racing again, and THIS is my beef about the whole thing. If the same thing had happened to ANY other driver on the grid whilst dicing for the lead in THOSE conditions and their victory was taken away from them, I would still be pissed off with the whole thing. I am a fan of Formula One, not just a McLaren fan, which as I've already said, I'm not any more than I'm a fan of any other team.
Rich ard, I have no particular affinity to any F1 team, so there's no tint to my specs, thanks very much! I have been a fan of the sport since seeing James Hunt become Champion in 1976, aged 5yrs. I see you've been a fan for longer, but can't you see this whole debarcle is totally damaging towards Formula One? I know rules are rules, but there's no consistancy in the way that they're applied as I've already said 2 or 3 times on this particular thread. I admit Hamilton was wrong for taking the escape route he did, but as I've said before I feel he didn't have a choice if he wanted to avoid a collision. I've had friends come up to me who've no interest in F1 ask WTF happened and why (Cont)
But Donnie, a certain M.Schumacher driving a red car did something at Hungaroring in 2006 that was 100 times worse that what Lewis did at Magny-Cours, but the issue wasn't brought up by the FIA stewards at all. It's not about whether there's any Ferrari bias, but there's just no consistancy in the stewards decisions at all.
There's no consistancy within the punish ment system in the FIA, so there's no wonder that people think the FIA have a Ferrari bias.
no longer a ferrari fan, the reason the STR penalty was recinded was because Liuzzi should've been given a drive through during the race as there was time, but it was added after the race. STR sucessfully argued that the penaly should've been awarded there and then, not post-race.
I hope that this whole debacle wills Lewis Carl Hamilton on to win the 2008 WDC because although I've nothing against Felipe Massa, he wouldn't deserve it if he won because of this ruling.
LEWIS HAMILTON, 2008 BELGUIM GRAND PRIX WINNER.
Posted by ramjam 69 (17 days ago)
Last Edited 17 days ago
Now there's a surprise, rich ard siding against McLaren.
What surprises me is that the FIA went to all the expense of convening a (Kangaroo) court of appeal, dragging Hamilton and various members of the McLaren team away from their Singapore preparations when they could've just said 'There's no room to appeal, it's a drive-through penalty' and left it at that. What a waste of money and everyone's time!
Mark, how many times have I explained this? McLaren KNEW Lewis was wrong for cutting the chicane. They asked for clarification of whether Hamilton had given the position back as to not gained an advantage. Of course they're going to ask the question, look at the Alonso/ Klein incident at Suzuka 05.
So every time you ask your Partner 'Is that alright?' do you know it's not right, or are you asking whether what you did is acceptable to them?
What are the 2 people who disagreed with my comment disagreeing with exactly? Both points I raised were factual and actually happened. It's not as if I said the FIA had a Ferrari bias, is it? I suppose one of the disagreers was Karga. Not my fault you can't spell, just putting you right, mate.......
Posted by ramjam 69 (18 days ago)
Last Edited 18 days ago
Although the administrators and moderators of this website will attempt to keep all objectionable comments off these pages, it is impossible for us to review all messages.
All messages express the views of the poster, and neither Crash Media Group nor Crash.Net will be held responsible for the content of any message.
We do not vouch for or warrant the accuracy, completeness or usefulness of any message, and are not responsible for the contents of any message.
If you find a message objectionable, please contact us and inform us of the problem or use the [report] function next to the offending post.
Any message that does not conform with the policy of this service can be edited or removed with immediate effect.
