no gravel cars on gravel rallies nowQuote:
Originally Posted by Blitzerflitzer
Printable View
no gravel cars on gravel rallies nowQuote:
Originally Posted by Blitzerflitzer
No, just the junctions where there is a concern about. That seems logical.Quote:
Originally Posted by Rallyper
It might just be me.. But I cant see the "4 second gain" anywhere in the splits, maybe 1 or 2sec..
World Rally Championship - Results - Rally Argentina
it is you...its way more that 4 seconds
So where (what splits)? towards the end??Quote:
Originally Posted by N.O.T
More information from Tuominen: Tuomisen analyysi: Uusi käänne tiekirjasotkussa! - MTV3.fi - Urheilu - Ralli - Uutiset
My translation concerning the main points:
The junction was discussed prior to the start at the Team Manager's meeting. In that meeting, the participants of the meeting had made a spoken deal that the specific junction (page 55, box 18) could be driven in any fashion the drivers would like to. Basically this meant the shorter route. When the mess came up, Ford announced that nothing like that had been discussed.
Unfortunately, the deal was never put on paper (=released as an official bulletin). That's why it can't be found from the official notice board. This leaves an interesting question: what and whose bulletin was the paper (=new page 55, the one with "//") which was distributed to competitors prior to recce? It was not an official document issued by the stewards. Where did it came from?
It's like a novel. "Sherlock Holmes: The Argentine roundabout" :D
World Rally Championship - Results - Rally ArgentinaQuote:
Originally Posted by Viking
It is between split 6 and split 7.
Jari Matti -1.9 up on loeb next split +0.8 down and at Finish -2 sec
Jari-matti -6.5 on Ogier and next split -5.5 up on Ogier and finally -6.7 up on Ogier
So, compared to Ogier he gained approximately 2.5 sec in two and half minutes but there he lost approximately 1 sec, that is around 3.5 sec
Compare Mikko and Ogier
Mikko was approximately sec or 2 faster than Ogier in Split 6 and final sections but was 5.2 sec slower than Ogier on split 7.
Compare Mikko and Loeb
he had approximately the same speed in split3, 4, 5, 6 (lost only 0.4 sec) and in final split he was 5.5 sec slower than Loeb. and only 1.8 sec slower than Loeb on final section. So, it is just around 4 sec.
The only important thing is that Loeb won.
Picture taken from Google Earth of the famous "roundabout":
http://s4.postimage.org/8rkqry5bf/Rotunda.jpg
Sounds like an issue with the crew setting up tape or the book they used. It should have been caught by an advance car, steward or one or the zero cars before the first run unless they all had the wrong book as well. For someone to have to land a helicopter between stages to address the problem is a bit silly. Still, it's not as bad as earlier years where spectators would block shortcuts with no warning.
Thanks, my mistake :)Quote:
Originally Posted by bowler
(Français) Au rond-point, ça tourne pas rond | Best of Rally Live
"This hasn’t been a straightforward end to the 2011 Rally Argentina. Following a change at the top of the order on the ultimate stage, then rumours of Ogier’s Citroën receiving a penalty because its rear wing wasn’t fitted for the podium ceremony (finally no action was taken), news soon filtered through that Ford had lodged a protest."
Is this rally sponsored by Citroen, right? :rolleyes: Is this good for the new WRC?
what is your opinion about the main sponsor of acropolis rally being the BP ultimate ??? who was also the main sponsor of the Ford team ??
Well apart from all this penalties stuff, watching the coverage of the rally I thought it looked an excellent event. Nice stages, plenty of action, crowds of spectators and lots of good attacking driving :up: Hopefully I'll get there in the next few years....
So how someone won is never important?Quote:
Originally Posted by Barreis
Spare us your comments, please.
I think that is little bit to harsh, Loeb got 1 minute penalty and has not cheat to win the rally. Organizers or FIA or whoever else involved has made mistake and was penalized. Simple as that.Quote:
Originally Posted by J.Lindstroem
Official after the last service reported the issue with Ogier car. So, the case was discussed during the stewards meeting.Quote:
Originally Posted by Bobcat
Citroen officials explained that Ogiers car was badly damaged and fitting the aerodynamics was not safe and Ogier drove from service to podium without rear aero package.
So, they (stewards) decided to close the case.
Normally such cars will not be allowed to continue or get some kind of penalty (Mostly DNF). Everybody who has done some rallying know that when they leave from the service even without rear spoiler, then they will be excluded.. most probably. I think Iskald can tell about his experience in Rally Norway and how the reused one rear spoiler several times just for entering and leaving the service:-P You can come into the service with all parts hanging off, but you have to leave with normal looking car.
So, the only reason might be related to the fact that it was only last drive from service to podium. But I must admit that stewards are always more kind to factory cars than they are to privateers. Which is not good.
guys, 3 videos of Rally Argentina!!! enjoy ;)
VIDEOS RALLY ARGENTINA 2011
Is this matter case closed? Or still ongoing?Quote:
Originally Posted by Bobcat
Document on the Ogier case:
http://200.58.126.155/wp-content/upl...DECISION-7.pdf
WRC.com being stupid again:
"Like the absolute professional that he also is, Malcolm Wilson refuses to apportion blame to Latvala for the suspension breakage that cost him the rally win, but the truth is that these things don’t tend to break on their own."
I think our friend Antony would disagree. But so does the person they quote as evidence:
"As one senior engineer explained: 'You can easily build a car to resist most types of impact. But the problem is that this inevitably costs weight, which is why Safari cars are always so heavy, for example. So it’s a trade-off: if the driver wants a car that is light enough to be competitive, he will have to accept that there are some things he can’t hit.
“But equally, teams sometimes have to accept that they have made their car too vulnerable in the pursuit of performance. It’s a question of where you draw the line - and what makes that judgment more complicated is the fact that no two impacts are ever quite the same. An impact that a component might comfortably absorb in one direction could break it in a slightly different direction.”
Conclusion: the only thing you can practically do is design a car to resist the most common types of impact and tell your driver to avoid hitting anything, something that Loeb obviously remembered when he saw that bull all those years ago. And he obviously remembered it again this year, as his Citroen was bomb proof despite the severity of some of the stages.'
So, why exactly is it Latvala's fault, again? What if Ford simply designed their car badly - it wouldn't seem to be the first time! Also, why does the person they quote talk about Safari cars as if they are still made? How old is the quote? Silly wrc.com.
Maybe you can tell me how to make suspension link so strong that it survives the impact with a big rock at 120+ kph. :)Quote:
Originally Posted by cosmicpanda
Mystical forces:-) I guess it doesn't matter how strong you make a car or what you make it out of, if you hit something hard enough, its going to break.Quote:
Originally Posted by Juha_Koo
Sometimes you have time to avoid a big stone. Sometimes you dont. Obviousily JML hadnt time to avoid impact. The result was crusual to him of course.
Was the stone still there on the road waiting for the cars to come?
Is this case ongoing? Or has it been closed? The roundabout thing, I mean.
Except for Mikko. Nothing indicates that the citroens gained anything. JM was +2 to Loeb at finish and continued a loosing trend.Quote:
Originally Posted by bluuford
I look at the video and see Citroen gaining more than 3 seconds cuting off the roundabout.Quote:
Originally Posted by Gard
By other words, its obvious that if Citroen would had gone by the inside of the roundabout (lik Fords) would had made at least 3 seconds more on the stage.
We should look at that place exactly, not the whole stage.
Well, quite. I'm not sure if you're asking me rhetorically or not...Quote:
Originally Posted by Juha_Koo
closedQuote:
Originally Posted by tfp
It's irrelevant because Loeb's 1 minute penalty didn't fit the crime so he still beat Hirvonen by 59 sec. Loeb is clearly the deserved winner! Case closed.Quote:
Originally Posted by JAM
That´s simplifying the case very much. The one minute penalty was undoubtable and is added to the times on stages. Loeb was in the margin of being one or two depending on the roundabout passing. For me Mikko is moral winner.Quote:
Originally Posted by MikeD
here´s a video of that roundabout:Organización admite que hubo desprolijidades, pero dice que Sebastian Loeb ganó bien
you can clearely see that the citroens gained a pretty big advantage by shortcutting that roundabout.
once again citroen has more luck then what is normal. instead of getting a penalty, the argentina rallye organisators get a penatly and need to pay 5000€.
same in sweden, where loeb´s gear got stuck or whatever and solberg pushed the car away. or ogier leaving the road as shown in the roadbook by turning into sarvice to early. how can they always get away with stuff like that? especially the thing in sweden...
+1
Irrelevant is your point of view about the Loeb's penalty.Quote:
Originally Posted by MikeD
By your pont of view the winner should be Ogier. Subtracting mistakes...
Maybe he should show sometimes on the stages that he deserves to be a winner, he could do that by setting some besttimes.....Quote:
Originally Posted by Rallyper
We turn your say the other way around and let´s say Citroen show they win without cheating.Quote:
Originally Posted by wwbroe
Pffff!Quote:
Originally Posted by Rallyper
Quite an impressive cheating rate they have at Citroën. 6 manu titles and 7 driver's titles by cheating ... wow! ... They have fooled all of us, but a good thing you made us aware of all their cheating :rolleyes:
Maybe Ford should just change their approch to the WRC. It's pathetic the lack of titles despite their long involvement in the sport. The managament is not good enough. The reliability is not good enough. Their drivers aren't fast enough. That's why they keep losing and then you can all stand on the side shouting "cheaters" at their opponents instead of focusing on where the issue of the lack of results really are!
My understanding of th Roundabout issue is that:
1- Organizers did the roadbook, picturing both ways of the roundabout as valid.
2- Manufacturers teams (probably Ford) took this issue at a meeting prior to the stage
3- There was a propossal to agree that everyone was to take the outside way
4- Citroen did not agree (therefore, agreement is not valid)
5- First pass, there was a tape in the roundabout
6- This tape is wrongly placed, as the roadbook allow drivers to use this path, even if later the intention was to forbid it (it was just and intention, no real official modification of the route)
7- Local news say it was Borrione (safety agent from local organizer), and not Bartoz, who take the tape out. Which is of no importance,
8- Citroens took an acepted way, as well as Fords
9- No reason for penalizing any driver, as nobody run through a route ot of place
10- Organzers hadfautl in the confussion, its isright to penalize them
Imagine you are a driver who had your notes based on the shorter way, why would you accept a forbid of that option, andrun without noteson that roundabout, while your rivals are in the opposite case.
No way!
@ ZequeArgentina
There is nothing to add, if you look only at the facts, which is exactly what the stewards had to do.
On the other hand this incidents shows perfectly who is the predator and who is the prey inside WRC. You don't win championships by being the nice guy. Unfortunately, one might add
LOL...keep going...this is getting really funny....