You learn how it behaves in the wet when its wet.Quote:
Originally Posted by wedge
Printable View
You learn how it behaves in the wet when its wet.Quote:
Originally Posted by wedge
Indeed. A wet test can be very useful.Quote:
Originally Posted by SGWilko
profound words indeed.Quote:
Originally Posted by SGWilko
With a high probability that there will be 1 or 2 wet races, testing in the wet might prove useful.
Me personally, I don't care much for wet races, and feel that F1 should structure the calendar around minimizing that possibility. But It will continue and thus testing for it seems worthwhile.
Sandbagging? So I guess some teams are so sure of their pace before they even tested the car that they have absolutely no interest in seeing how fast it can actually go and instead they'd rather see how the car is actually going to behave if for no reason it will get fat or get full of sand? That makes sense actually if we consider that the first race is in Bahrain.
I think thatīs why Rosberg IRC was down 1.5 cm at the end of the day... the sand started spreading under his a$$ and filling the crack.
It would be nice to see a good battle between Lewis Hamilton and Fernando Alonso if the Ferrari and McLaren turn out to be well matched.
I wouldn't be surprised to see reliability problems playing their part with Ferrari's season, more so than with the McLaren.
:)
So true. Pity you did not expand your post to point out your reasons, although I totally agree with your view.Quote:
Originally Posted by wedge
The car's behavior in the wet depends very much on the surface of the track, cross falls, drainage, ambient temperatures, and basically how much water there is on the track and of course, the tyres being used.
The only advantage I can see is how different tyre patterns will affect traction, but we aren't going to get to test that, are we.
So basically, yeah! it is pointless to test in the wet.
I disagree that the magazine "hates" him.Quote:
Originally Posted by F1boat
A recent article by Mark Hughes was excellent. It explains Schumi technically and does not gloss over his "faultline" but at the same time mentions it within context of his great ability and achievements.
They think they have always been fair and truthful.
Hamilton and Alonso have been there and done that. There would be nothing special in that. In fact this season a Mclaren versus Ferrari [yawn] battle would be disappointing.Quote:
Originally Posted by Triumph
The focus which is going to suck all the proverbial air out of the room is Michael Schumacher versus the rest.
Until proven otherwise Schumi and Brawn during a race have to be a concern to everyone - you see, unlike the rest of the grid, Schumi does NOT have to have the quickest car to win.
This is off the thread..
We here in South Asia are fed up of the Star Sports F1 coverage..
Can any1 suggest the alternative?
he usually does,Quote:
Originally Posted by Saint Devote
funny enough the majority of his victories came when he had not just the quickest car, but a car that was ahead of all others by a country mile.
If by quickest car you mean the Brawn advantage over others at year's beginning then that is a place he is well accustomed to being. If by quickest you mean like the RB5 being slightly quicker than the competition but yet still somewhat of parity in the field, then I'm guessing that MSC will share the spoils with the likes of Vettel, Weber, Hamilton, Alonso, Massa, Button, probably Rosberg, and potentially a Sauber or Force India.
Its a different world for MSC now and he will have to perform without having an absolute dominant car...and we all know how that went in 2005/2006. I hope he is very competitive and outside of me wanting to see Hamilton win the WDC, I hope this year produces multiple winners and every race potentially being won by any given driver...or at least a field of 8-10 drivers