F1 2010: Testing sessions thread

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by truefan72

Err, a problematic Ferrari that shot up the grid at the start and still had genuine pace over the other cars in the hand of a quality driver?

btw I don't recall a diminished field in qualy where Fisi took the pole.

Let's not rewrite history please! The cars involved in the accident where down in p12-p17 not the top runners.

Do not try and "diminish" the accomplishments of genuine pace by Force India in Spa and Monza. In those two races they were the real deal.

---

The Ferrari F60 was a problematic car in 2009 - other than in the hands of Kimi at Spa and the advantage of KERS, it could not have been anywhere near the front. The Force India was at its best.

The dimnished field was after people such as Hamilton - also not in the best of Mclaren's - and Button were out of the race on the first laps.

And just general underperformance by the top drivers for the race. This is a coincidence of circumstances that also saw Heidfeld on the podium.

So unless you expect this sort of thing to occur in 2010 the probability of a Sauber podium is extremely low. Possible yes, but it is probabilities that rule.

FI did not win a podium at Monza.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Saint Devote

So unless you expect this sort of thing to occur in 2010 the probability of a Sauber podium is extremely low. Possible yes, but it is probabilities that rule.

FI did not win a podium at Monza.

---

No offence but if you expect anything less from a motor race you are a fool. No motor race is ever black & white & if you have been watching F1 for as long as you say you have you would know that. Winning or even getting a decent result in a motor race is all about having a good package to start with, making the right moves at the right time and the one thing nobody has any control over... LUCK!

Having said all of this Ferrari, McLaren, Mercedes & Red Bull gives themselves the best chances because they have the best people. This does not mean nobody else has the potential to get a good result.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by macksrallye

No offence but if you expect anything less from a motor race you are a fool. No motor race is ever black & white & if you have been watching F1 for as long as you say you have you would know that. Winning or even getting a decent result in a motor race is all about having a good package to start with, making the right moves at the right time and the one thing nobody has any control over... LUCK!

Having said all of this Ferrari, McLaren, Mercedes & Red Bull gives themselves the best chances because they have the best people. This does not mean nobody else has the potential to get a good result.

---

No chance or luck is involved because these are very personal terms and must be considered quantitatively undefinable - you and I have different approaches.

Deviation from expected return - aka risk - for Sauber is a minimum deviation. You view it from the opposite side, a maximum deviation. Numerically 1 [33% at most] versus 3 [99%]. I am saying that at the most based on what we know they have at most a 33% probability. You are saying that basedon what we have to guess they have a 99% probability.

I would not decide to bet on a podium for Sauber in 2010, but you should, you could do well.

That is why Spa 2009 was such an anomally - the unusual coincidence of factors laid the groundwork. If the top teams were all functioning properly - as I expect in 2010 and you do not - a podium in Belguin would not have occurred for FI or even for Sauber even though they were backed by one of the world's best and biggest auto manufacturers.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Saint Devote

I would not decide to bet on a podium for Sauber in 2010, but you should, you could do well.

---

I wouldn't bet on them getting a podium either, but they will be nibbling on the heals of those top guys should something happen, which I am sure will at some stage during 2010. Where... I do not know.

Chance, Luck, Deviation, whatever you want to call it is there in motorsports. For instance, a car goes off & spreads gravel/kitty litter over the track which Button (first to come across said gravel & leading at the time) hits fully committed, he in turn goes off falling back a couple of places & damaging underside of the car at the same time. With the damage the car is not performing the same & no matter how hard he tries he cannot get the time or positions back. What do you call that out of interest?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by winer

I've heard other people say this too, but never seen any real facts or figures to back it up. It boggles my mind how you can design and build something as complex as an F1 car, and then proceed to racing with only a "minimal" amount of testing. I know a lot of "testing" is done on simulators, but surely "wheels on the ground" is the only real testing that matters. Does anyone have a link to explain the process for testing a new car?

---

There was an interview with the three primary engineers at Mclaren and they spoke about discovering other ways not involved in testing a car to accomplish tasks.

The Mclaren experience of 2009 it appears had a gigantic impact on the team. The lack of testing, the forced rush to get things done resulted in changed methods and greater efficiency.

The result was they could make better use of the testing time available than ever before and this they explained as needing less testing and making it less important in accomplishing the end result.

However I am sure that all teams would make full use of increased testing time.

One of my favorite parts was how the Mclaren guys explained that they had people normally never at the track literally finishing aero parts over night in the garage - and how people from the factory, the testing team and the race team all functioned in the small garage space to primarily get the Mclaren competitive.

One of the great stories of 2009 was how Mclaren did NOT give up, like Ferrari did and worked 24/7 - a great team the Woking crowd.

And of course Lewis drove his heart out - I think they all pushed each other to greater heights and this was not lost on Jenson when he received the opportunity to join Mclaren.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by macksrallye

I wouldn't bet on them getting a podium either, but they will be nibbling on the heals of those top guys should something happen, which I am sure will at some stage during 2010. Where... I do not know.

Chance, Luck, Deviation, whatever you want to call it is there in motorsports. For instance, a car goes off & spreads gravel/kitty litter over the track which Button (first to come across said gravel & leading at the time) hits fully committed, he in turn goes off falling back a couple of places & damaging underside of the car at the same time. With the damage the car is not performing the same & no matter how hard he tries he cannot get the time or positions back. What do you call that out of interest?

---

Chance or luck versus risk is not at all the same thing.

It would be a racing incident. But one cannot depend on the unexpected - because that is what you are doing. You are raising possibility above probability.

St.D... when did I put an amount/percentage to the luck involved... never. My understanding of what you are saying is that you should expect a standard race & therefore the top teams should win (very basic I know). However it is because the top teams are so adaptable & prepared for the the unexpected (racing incidents as you call them) that they are at the top.

Chance/Luck always have a part to play but don't count on it helping you, you must be as prepared as possible from every angle to be successful. I know this as I am a competitor in Aus.

I like it!

Lotus isn´t so far off.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mia 01

I like it!

Lotus isn´t so far off.

---

6.7 seconds off the pace (in the wet, with a novice driver) with 20-odd laps under their belt. A very respectable start. Especially since they've had the least amount of time to get ready. Much more impressive than certain other teams who announced they were entering F1 a year ago and still haven't even shown a picture of a completed car.

Solid base but they need to get closer. That said it does look nice in those colours with the yellow wheels!