1. correct
2. correct
3. do the Skoda rumors count as 25% on this? :D
4. no
5. no
Printable View
Where's the proof that the updated aero has helped Ogier in any way? Also they didn't implement it on other cars...
But Ott says it here https://www.autosport.com/wrc/news/1...ris-after-wins
Like Gary Boyd said, that makes my prediction a little bit correct :DQuote:
"Normally the car is good when the conditions are consistent, but if they are constantly changing then we struggle a little bit."
1) Wrong, but he could have taken it
2) Wrong, but they would have taken it with a decent Mikkelsen
3) 50% correct
4) 50% correct? They still had cars but fired him...
5) I think somewhere during the season he did say something positive about the potato dog
I'm not good at this...
Apparently I made no predictions, which means none of my predictions were wrong!
1 - Partly correct, he won more events but he won the title also
2 - Wrong! (Glad to say it, his win was epic!)
3 - Wrong, a close second in Sweden but season went downwards from there unfortunately
4 - Partly correct. Toyota is now the quickest car but they won the Manufacturers
5 - Correct!
I think it would be the right time for the 2019 Crystal Ball Thread!
Well curtain down on this thread - 2019 looking like just as much fun. As independent judge (and only scoring 2 correct) no one scored more than 4 correct (You know who you are).
'Almost correct' is just as wrong as totally wide of the mark.
Anything a driver says in an interview is not allowable as evidence when the position in the championship points to the contrary.
Retirement means 'does not finish the rally'
Many predictions failed because of multiple conditions in one sentence - Keep it simple with no ifs and buts.
Thanks to KiwiWRCfan for kicking us off this year.