Mark Webber's promoting his book. Had a lengthy chat on radio down here this morning.
http://www.abc.net.au/local/audio/20...ate=%28none%29
Printable View
Mark Webber's promoting his book. Had a lengthy chat on radio down here this morning.
http://www.abc.net.au/local/audio/20...ate=%28none%29
Whilst discussing Bianchi's accident, a friend of mine has expressed curiosity over the fact that FOM only records half of the cars' cameras at any time. Does anyone have a source for this? I've read it quite a few times, but I'm not sure I can find a reliable source.
Edit: never mind. http://thejudge13.com/2015/06/22/les...l-go-unheeded/
Since the current rules make an f1 season pretty much concluded after the first round of tests they've decided it's pointless to keep testing for too long so from next year 2 pre-season tests and 0 in-season tests will be just enough. On the other hand we'll have a record of 21 races to confirm the first test... unless of course some traditional venue goes belly up in the mean time. I'm looking forward to great Sunday afternoon naps powered by Formula 1.
Close , but you don't have it quite right. All of the points paying positions, including champion and manufacturer, will be decided by testing. Sponsors will still pay the same amount to everyone especially Bernie. And all the race weekends will still be held except there will be no cars there. Jumbotrons will be placed in each spectator area showing replays from testing. Expect ticket prices to go up.Quote:
Originally Posted by Big Ben
"The British driver maintains he is fully focused on the task but did admit, as he approaches matching his hero Ayrton Senna’s achievements, he is finding it hard to comprehend just how far his career has taken him." Dream on baby. You can win twice as many races and titles and you will have not matched Senna
You can't compare different era's of F1 for obvious reasons. Rules are different, Engine size, Clutch, aero characteristics, speed level, chassis structure etc. Hence, Hammy is not seeking to match his hero but to create his own folklore. Between Senna and Hamilton, there hase been a few aces that deserve their own folklore, Michael Schumacher 7 times world champion, Vettel 4 times world champion. Each making their own mark on F1's history. Take the moment in, as one day you shall speak of this moment with reverence.Quote:
Originally Posted by Big Ben
That said. Is Hamilton the best British driver since Clark?
It depends on how one defines best. Since Clark there has been a few more successful British drivers than Hamilton. Jackie Stewart for one, a 3 times world champion.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mark
Hamilton is exciting to watch even in a less competitive car. But the same point raised in the previous post apply here also. It is difficult to say one era is better than the other as the driver for each era face different challenges. I think the best way to compare drivers across eras, is to ask how well each driver performed in their era with the opposition they were against, the car they drove and the state of the track they competed on compared a similar criteria for driver of this era. You have to factor in that it got easier, safer but more complex to operate the F1 car as time passed. In clark's time, l am not sure if the speed was anywhere as fast as it is now. 160mph tops probably compared 200mph plus currently.
Obviously, characteristic of the opposition, car and track would be significantly different. A few thing would be common, how the driver strives to achieve the level of success they attained, their work ethics, self discipline, determination to succeed and pure natural talent would be unmistakably similar. If you have those information for each of the drivers in question, then you may be able to answer some to questions about who was best.
As mentioned below your post, there is Stewart. I also agree that it is very difficult to reasonably compare drivers from different eras. Though Clark and Stewart are not that far removed from each other.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mark
I don't have the habit to compare drivers of different eras. I only started to watch F1 in 1996 so even if I did attempt to make such silly comparisons it would be based on hearsay and subjective opinions formed well after the facts (people tend to romanticize the past, don't they?) so they wouldn't hold much value. But for Hamilton to say he'll soon have matched Senna's achievements.. oh boy, what an ego he has. For a start, Formula 1 was then just slightly more difficult. Some would say dangerous. I might be wrong but I do think that facing death makes achievements slightly bigger. I don't think that climbing Everest is as big an achievement today as it was when Tenzing Norgay and that other guy he guided did it first a few years back.
It would be pretty pathetic for me to climb now Everest and say I'm the new Edmund Hillary.:laugh:
I like F1 history a lot, so I often find these kind of questions intriguing. But as Nitrodaze says, any comparisons are only going be relative.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mark
I would take Hamilton above Mansell. Mansell, while spectacular, was a notch below Senna and Prost in terms of overall performance. Anyone else there in that timeframe? Hunt, D. Hill? Hamilton still looks more impressive. However, I can't put Hamilton above Stewart. Stewart in his prime was a clear benchmark driver of the field, which puts him into an absolute elite group of all time drivers.
I think you would find that Hamilton was speaking statistically. At the rate he is going, he can statistically match Senna, hence it is not ego but a matter of fact. But on sheer driving excellence, that is a different matter as most would approach this subjectively. But there are a few hints that would suggest that Hamilton is a notch short of Senna in sheer grit and determination to overcome the odds. An example would be Silverstone 2014, it was a little slippery due to rain, Lewis pitted because he felt nobody would beat his time in these condition. Rosberg stayed out and found a drying track come to him as he persevered and took pole. Lewis was clearly gutted about this and went out the next and won the race.Quote:
Originally Posted by Big Ben
My point is, Senna would have stayed out while his rival is out trying. There is also Senna's incredible focus on all aspects of the job. This is not to say Hamilton is not focused. 2015 has been his noticeably highest level of focus for a long time. Even so, his level of focus is not anywhere near that of Senna. Apart from mandatory commercial activities, Senna was very much concentrated on how to do better next time out. Nikki Lauda was very much like that too.
Lewis sometimes seemed slightly distracted. That said, Hamilton on his day is every bit Senna like and unbeatable.
For those who didn't know, just wanted to mention that Scott Dixon won the Indycar title - due to double points since it was such a contentious issue in F1. Glad F1 got rid of it.
Also, I am a believer in Grosjean, since the day he put his car 3rd on the grid at Melbourne in 2012. Mark Hughes also thinks so here
http://www.skysports.com/f1/news/324...er-rated-in-f1
I also agree with the post above that Hamilton doesn't seem like the most focused driver of all time, which is frustrating if you like him. I'd say Vettel applies himself the most of the current top drivers, while I believe Alonso is still very good, but definitely declining. I was just thinking the other day of his qualifying lap and race at Monza 2006. He doesn't seem quite as scintillating these days, though is probably benefitting from being more experienced now.
Um no. It was Montoya's contact with his team mate after the restart that enabled Dixon to win the title :mark: .Quote:
Originally Posted by rjbetty
In a normal racing situation it would have been JPM's fault for initiating contact and should be called that way. In this particular instance, one has to wonder why Dixon did not just let his team mate through to go after the championship - he would have been royally and vocally pissed had in been the other way around.Quote:
Originally Posted by schmenke
I think you mean why Will Power didn't let his team mate through. But yes, it was a rather bizarre incident. It actually looked to me more like Power cut JPM off, but I think it could be called either way. JPM outbraked himself a little going in to the corner, and Power took an exit line that was tighter than it needed to be.Quote:
Originally Posted by Starter
Yeah, a good example of typing before engaging your brain. Something I do way too often.Quote:
Originally Posted by Duncan
Double points are BS! I'm sure they'll do away with them as well!
Would love to have seen Juan Pablo win it!
Here is a random post. How come no one took notice of the sparks coming from underneath the cars this season? It seems to me like a another gimmick to keep the fans interested.
I've seen it mentioned several times. And at the upcoming night race in Singapore, I think it will be mentioned even more. Gimmick? Yeah, pretty much. But in pictures from days gone by, the "light show" is pretty fascinating to look at. One of my favorite Senna pictures features a shower of sparks trailing his car. I can only imagine what it would be like to stand at a corner in Singapore or Bahrain and wait for the cars to bottom out and light up the night.Quote:
Originally Posted by zako85
Random thought...
While it's obvious that the Honda power unit isn't up to snuff, is anyone else tired of McLaren's whining? What I mean is, when McLaren had Mercedes power last year, they got their butts kicked by Williams-Mercedes and just edged Force India-Mercedes in the final standings.
Ronnie, my man, the car sucks. Yes, you have a dud engine. But even if you still had a Merc, I don't think you'd be challenging Mercedes for wins. And I doubt you'd be roughing up Ferrari or Williams either. Honda is a (sadly) different company from what it was in the 80's and 90's. But McLaren is a very different constructor too. You do less with more. While Force India, for instance, does more with less.
Agree completely. For the resources they have, I think McLaren are the most under-performing constructor of the last 22 years. 1998 Is the only year in 23 years that they haven't claimed both constructor and drivers championship. That's pretty appalling considering the resources available to them.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jag_Warrior
In Monza they reached the milestone of 50 races without a win.
The points system is too weighted in far of consistency imo.
A single DNF has far too much effect on the title race. Back in the day, if Hakkinen retired, it didn't cause a massive swing in the wdc that made it almost over. A DNF could be recovered from.
I want them to change the points to 25-15-12-10 etc. Then DNFs aren't as costly. I believe the points since 2003 punish a DNF far too much. For example Hamilton needing 4 wins in a row to cancel out just 1 DNF seemed totally wrong, with the most famous example being the Liuzzi-Toccacelo situation in F3000 in 2004 that was mentioned. And now due to a single DNF Rosberg seems completely wiped out of the title for now.
I think this is a contributing factor to this playstation era of all cars just driving round and finishing like on a game, cos top runners simply can't afford a single DNF anymore. Time was when you daren't go put the kettle on, as one fan said, cos by the time you got back, someone could have dropped out and the race would be changed, and you missed it.
As far as the decline in overall TV viewership, I've been wondering how much of that is down to the Mercedes/Hamilton domination and how much is down to Bernie's move toward the pay-TV model, while leaving more over air viewers without a way to view... unless they're willing to pay. At least in the U.S., "cord cutting" is on the upswing. IMO, Bernie is too old school and doesn't understand the longer term damage being done to F1 by excluding so many viewers. Sponsors want eyeballs. And Bernie's "gimme gimme gimme" model runs counter to that.
But anyway, I'd be curious to know how many have stopped viewing because they don't subscribe to pay TV and how many have stopped watching because they're bored or turned off? Has anyone seen any studies?
I have read a number of detailed analyses about the McLaren chasis and it is not bad at all. The most recent even quoted it as the 4th best behind Merc, RB and STR based upon detailed GPS info. I imagine that with a much better PU that it would show much better, just like RB. If true, that would put their chassis in front of Ferrari and Williams!Quote:
Originally Posted by Jag_Warrior
The ICE is down some 80HP, but the real issue for McLaren is the Energy Recovery system. You can read more here http://www.motorsport.com/f1/news/an...dache/?v=2&s=1
Honda so far have not allowed any outside know-how into their world and that is costing them and McLaren valuable time.
We will have to wait for the season to start again before they can fully show what they have learned about their first year PU. This is unfortunately the way the current F1 development rules are written. Honda is already working on the revised PU behind the scenes.
It truly is a test of patience. Just ask ALO, BUT, Boullier or any fan!
All Rejoice!
Apparently, the Mercedes domination is not as bad as we used to think. After all, because of Singapore, Hamilton and Mercedes couldn't break a number of Formula 1 records.
Most consecutive pole positions by driver: 8 by Ayrton Senna in 88-89. Hamilton's streak ended at 7 in Monza.
Most consecutive pole positions by team: 24 by Williams in 1992-1993. The Mercedes streak ended at 23 in Monza.
Now they have to start all over again because of Singapore to try to break those records.
Nigel Mansell at 63 years old says he can match Hamilton's times in the petronas mercedes car, given a couple of weeks to practise. In his hay days l would not doubt it for a moment, at 63 l have to say dream on. But l would put my money on him getting close to a second off the pace of Hamilton. That said, who can tell what is possible with a former world champion. I would definitley like to see him try if Mercedes and the FIA would oblige. Treble world champion Stewart was able to get close to a second of his best driver, Webber in the Stewart F1 car on one day of trying, who knows what is possible given a couple of weeks.
I suppose the racer in Mansell is still raging. I suppose a FIA series for retired racing drivers may be a great idea. The series could be based on three generation old f1 cars using cars retired by F1 teams from 3 major regulation updates back. For example, racing 2007 f1 cars and 2007 regulations. To qualify, drivers must have retired for at least 3 seasons before the regulations used for the series. That would be a very interesting series and you heard it here first.
When you put it like this, then you have to wonder how come Mercedes had a freak mysterious faze in performance at Singapore. How come Ferrari with what is obviously a significantly underpowered engine compared to the Mercedes winning races. The whole thing looks somewhat stage managed. Ferrari winning is good for the sport and l am sure some would want to see Ferrari win. The circumstances of their wins this year looks abit fishy to me. It feels abit like Mercedes is masking their dominance in the interest of the show, hence a few Ferrari win would pacify the fans as opposed to one team winning everything which would no doubt foster resentment and criticism of mercedes winning everythingQuote:
Originally Posted by zako85
Call me a conspiracy theorist, but the unexplained drop in performance on the occasions Ferrari has won has seemed to be stage managed to me. And l have looked very carefully at all of the info available to the public obviously. And l have found these coincidences abit too convenient. And the key spokenmen are such bad actors, you could smell a rat from a mile off. That said l was pleased to see Ferrari win some of the races this year. I just wished it did not seem abit phoney to me.
He did pretty well in that Grand Prix Masters series they ran about 10 years ago. I think they had to be over 40 for that and it was a one-make series. It's a shame that only lasted a year or two.Quote:
Originally Posted by Nitrodaze
Any series that's too close to current F1, in terms of cars or drivers, would face some serious opposition from those with fingers in the F1 pie.