I'm not one to agree but that one is worthy of ridicule.Quote:
Originally Posted by Fast Eddie WRC
Printable View
I'm not one to agree but that one is worthy of ridicule.Quote:
Originally Posted by Fast Eddie WRC
Make sure you get the timing right...stay clear-headed for SS4 and SS5 but for SS6 you'll need the scotch workingQuote:
Originally Posted by racerx1979
It was based on his SS1 performance, and the time could be readjusted after they see how he performs on the second run.Quote:
Originally Posted by mknight
SS1 onboard is available on WRC+ if you have trouble spending the time before the afternoon loop
He was slower than Ogier in Split 1, by 1.1 seconds, which btw was the fastest split of all, but faster than Tänak at that point. In the End Tänak was faster than Ogier. So "losing" 1.1 seconds per split (x6) is quite logical. +6.6 to the stage winner on a 30km SS is fair also imho, when one didn`t drive most of it at full pace/risk/wear.
In SS1 Neuville was 0.06 s/km slower than Ogier and 0.04 than Tanak. The time he got in SS2 is 0.21 s/km slower than Tanak and 0.1 s/km than Ogier.Quote:
Originally Posted by AnttiL
Doesn't quite match to me.
-----
My point here is simply to find out what they based the time on, as this is not penalty and not the drivers fault in any way. As Neuville just mentioned he dropped 0.7s to Tanak in SS1 and took 0.7s in SS3 and then they give him 6s extra when he was ahead of him on the split
-----
That's the fist explanation which has at least some reason in it, but still seems rather random in relation to what I wrote above.Quote:
Originally Posted by Tarmop
In SS1, both Ogier and Tänak made a costly mistake, still they were faster in the end and well, like you said, this should not be a penalty and is not Neuville`s fault, but it is also his gain that he could go easier, saving his equipment and having more rubber left for SS3. So like i said imho it is fair, that those who did a clean flatout 30km SS are faster 6.6 seconds, whereas all the others were min. 2,5x slower than Neuville`s given time... especially on a stage, where top 10 was separated by 43,4 seconds.
E: If you look at SS1 splits from Ogier and Tänak, due to their incidents, at one point they were behind Neuville 4.7 and 2.6 seconds, in the end they were ahead of Neuville by 1 and 0.7 seconds, so they could`ve been faster than him 5.4 and 3.6 seconds. So on SS2, 10 seconds slower time would also make sense...
Luckily I'm in Brno and not Prague. Always a place here to stay away from tourists :). Beer here is amazing and I don't drink beer...Quote:
Originally Posted by Mirek
It has been interesting to hear driver comments in the end of stages vs. media zone from psychological point of view, since in the end of the stages most of drivers complained only grip & notes, but in the media zone more drivers has commented visibility issues as well. It might be that some drivers feel more embarrassing to say they were slow because they can't see well, instead of blaming just grip level. Surely visibility is issue for all drivers, but it would be nice to know some comparison of WRC driver eyesights in this type of direct sun / shadow condition or at night.
Probably...not. You are a top rally driver, driving in the top class and you say that you can`t go as fast as you colleauge because it is slippery...well, it is also for the others!. Whereas, a physical thing, and a physical thing not to be embarrased about and nothing you can do about should be "shameful"? Probably just having their minds full of this new challenge and experience and what disturbs whom more...or bursts into head.