He asked who is he not who he was :-) I think he was co-driver for over ten different drivers, if I am not mistaken?Quote:
Originally Posted by Mirek
Printable View
He asked who is he not who he was :-) I think he was co-driver for over ten different drivers, if I am not mistaken?Quote:
Originally Posted by Mirek
We can firstly question why was WRC dying...immediatly comes to mind all the changes occured in mid 90's in order to accomplish Mr. Richards promises of larger media coverage.Quote:
Originally Posted by sollitt
Those (unnacomplished) promisses led to uncharacteristic rallys and killed much of WRC nature and glamour, forged during decades by an exciting mixture of chalenging elements based on an endurance spirit.
Bringing back those elements, like night stages or mixed surface courses, can only be seen as positive and even the economical issues arouse by extended rally routes could be resolved with an effective control of WRC cars engineering design.
Manufactureurs economic resources could be easily transferred to extended courses budgets with a contained and stable technical regulation and there's always less expensive solutions in order to keep runing privateers alongside factory teams.
Surely Mr. Todt isnīt the Messiah, but until now we can fairly judge him as a very decent prophet...
Who? And do we care?
The matter of Holmes' identity has already been answered. And are you asking "us" if "we" care? Perhaps you can see the people in the thread who have already posted opinions and decide for yourself. What about you? Who are you? Do you care? Have you read the article? Have you read this thread?Quote:
Originally Posted by GigiGalliNo1
MJW: I think it'd be a shame if we lost GPWeek's independent WRC coverage. Here in little old New Zealand there isn't much other than the occasional newspaper article - and, let's be honest, that's not usually worthwhile journalism.
Andy: Perhaps the cloverleaf format is stale. I think the teams make a big deal of being able to host corporate guests at service parks, etc. But service parks aren't the most glamorous places, certainly not the equivalent of an F1 paddock at a place like Monaco. Even the Monte doesn't tend to spend much time at Monte Carlo itself, these days. Rallying should be able to reach large amounts of fans by having long routes that visit many districts. Corporate guests might be better entertained at a glamourous cafe overlooking a stage through a town than at a muddy service park in the middle of the countryside.
However, the reality is that service parks are better than unlimited servicing between stages, and as long as service parks remain rallies will be somewhat 'cloverleafed.' And routes should be designed with the dedicated spectator in mind, enabling him/her to see most of a rally without having to resort to measures like having to camp in a different place each night, or drive extreme distances.
I think Holmes objects to the safety issue presented by the combination of dust and headlights such as those used by WRC cars at night, which is fair.Quote:
Originally Posted by Rally Power
Sorry, I take my comment back.
Is it a joke or you are too young?Quote:
Originally Posted by N.O.T
:-)
Just a figure for you: almost 450 WRC events covered as a photographer (so he has seen cars on action, not like new journalists), journalist or codriver (for example, Jean Ragnotti)
This guy acts like the holy cow of rallying...
WHO IS MARTIN HOLMES ????
Who is N.O.T.????
Have to say I disagree. As others have said, why is the WRC in such a poor state? Because of the changes which took it away from the successful series it was.Quote:
Originally Posted by sollitt
Take Rally Australia for instance..... in the past it used to go about as far as York in the east, harvey in the south (actually I think it went as far as Collie but can't confirm) and of course you had the bunnings stages to the South East. You had fantastic stages like Muresk, York Railway, Wellington dam and others which made for a fantastic event with unique and differing stages. Somewhere like Perth simply couldn't host a proper event without remote or chase servicing. The problem is that the FIA chose a one size fits all approach to evens when depending on where you are in the world, the situation is very different. I don't know the area around Monte Carlo for instance, but I can imagine a cloverleaf even probably doesn't effect things all that much.
I think the FIA need to look at the sport as a whole now and back in 2002 or so when it was at its last peak and see what changes were made, whether they've had a negative effect and whether those changes can be reversed. I know manufacturers will complain about the cost of running longer liaison's and stage mileages but the marketing value of their spend will surely be better if the sport is seen to present a real challenge rather than being like a rally sprint.
Having been to only 1 Rally NZ, 1 Rally GB and a couple of Rally Finland's I can't possibly comment on how the changes have affected those events for good or for bad. IIRC after the cloverleaf system was rigidly enforced which meant loads more repeated stages and "rally villages", spectator numbers fell at Rally Australia because people didn't want to go to a "rally village" where they could see two stages within a few hundred metres of each other, they wanted to see quality stages rather than seeing a higher quantity of stages.