Results 71 to 80 of 86
-
25th March 2019, 17:19 #71
- Join Date
- May 2015
- Location
- Greenwich, London UK
- Posts
- 3,442
- Like
- 14
- Liked 790 Times in 652 Posts
I wonder if any of you have seen the Mercedes Twitter podcasts after the Australian GP. They answer questions put to the team after the race and explain the reasons for why certain things happen during the race. They are the only team having a go at being very transparent with their fans at the moment. Initially, l thought it was brilliant but then later, l thought it took away from the speculative conversations that take place in forums about events during the race. While it appears great, l think it may hamper the dialogues of forum communities. If you are going to spoon fed the info, why bother chatting about it.
I think Mercedes should not be too sensitive to the potential for forum threads to woefully get things wrong. That is the point of forums. Speculative to the point of conspiracy theories. But great fun to have the banter even when some are annoying and others are plain rude. But generally, a very respectful and and easy going racing communities. Hence, l think the podcast is an overkill. Let the people get it right or wrong, c'est la vie.Last edited by Nitrodaze; 26th March 2019 at 22:36.
Better a witty fool than a foolish wit.
William Shakespeare
- Likes: truefan72 (25th March 2019)
-
25th March 2019, 17:38 #72
- Join Date
- May 2011
- Posts
- 2,858
- Like
- 62
- Liked 478 Times in 371 Posts
We don’t know for certain what caused the damage to Lewis floor. But yes, I’m quite happy to put that down as a black mark against Lewis as, unless the kerb was loose, then it would be his fault for running wide to begin. I was viewing onboard with him the first ten laps and don’t remember seeing him go off but I may have missed it as wasn’t watching his onboard 100% of the time.
Last edited by The Black Knight; 25th March 2019 at 18:13.
- Likes: truefan72 (25th March 2019)
-
25th March 2019, 17:43 #73
- Join Date
- May 2011
- Posts
- 2,858
- Like
- 62
- Liked 478 Times in 371 Posts
You’re not really getting my point. The point is you can either take reliability into account or you can set it aside. If you’re taking it onboard, all of what you say is valid just as it’s valid to state that reliability decided the 2016 title. Otherwise, you must ignore the DNF’s and just look at the points conveniently ignoring the reasons behind it to reach the conclusions you want.
Last edited by The Black Knight; 25th March 2019 at 18:11.
-
25th March 2019, 18:13 #74
- Join Date
- May 2005
- Location
- Philadelphia
- Posts
- 5,943
- Like
- 1,228
- Liked 373 Times in 289 Posts
Maybe we are 2 ships sailing past each other in the fog. I hear you and from my perspective, I take the reliability and other mitigating factors into account.
It's funny how a certain unnamed member will defend Ricciardo's performance in 2018 and summarily dismiss the same points and reasons (most importantly reliability) for Hamilton in 2016.
lol. Anyways, we are all good now that I get where you are coming from. cheersLast edited by truefan72; 25th March 2019 at 18:17.
you can't argue with results.
-
25th March 2019, 18:15 #75
- Join Date
- May 2011
- Posts
- 2,858
- Like
- 62
- Liked 478 Times in 371 Posts
- Likes: truefan72 (25th March 2019)
-
25th March 2019, 18:17 #76
- Join Date
- Sep 2001
- Location
- To the right of the left
- Posts
- 3,746
- Like
- 3
- Liked 141 Times in 111 Posts
"Old roats am jake mit goats."
-- Smokey Stover
- Likes: truefan72 (27th March 2019)
-
25th March 2019, 18:22 #77
- Join Date
- Sep 2001
- Location
- To the right of the left
- Posts
- 3,746
- Like
- 3
- Liked 141 Times in 111 Posts
-
25th March 2019, 18:30 #78
- Join Date
- May 2011
- Posts
- 2,858
- Like
- 62
- Liked 478 Times in 371 Posts
-
25th March 2019, 21:55 #79
- Join Date
- Nov 2013
- Location
- Melbourne, Australia
- Posts
- 1,077
- Like
- 256
- Liked 146 Times in 113 Posts
Ok, you've twisted my arm. Taking into mechanical failures, Nico Rosberg wins the 2016 Monaco GP. If he didn't have a faulty car, MB wouldn't have applied team orders to benefit Hamilton. As Ricciardo proved last year, you can have a significantly faulty and still defend your position for a large portion of the race.
To say that Ricciardo was hammered by Verstappen is to say that Ricciardo has been diminished. But he's not diminished, and is still recognised as a top tier driver.
Feel free to analyse all of Ricciardo's dnf and speculate where he would/could've finished had they not occurred. I'll be interested to read it.
-
26th March 2019, 19:53 #80
No way Ricciardo has diminished. .
95%+ of it is all about the car so going to Renault won't do his reputation any favours. 45 million dollars is also a bit much (I'd rather spend that money on Neweys services..) but If I was a boss in a top team I'd seriously consider him. Put it this way.. I'd choose him before Vettel.
I think Starter was bang on the money in saying Danny was relegated to No2 status at RB. Despite any concrete evidence/admissions its pretty clear to most people thats what happened
- Likes: truefan72 (27th March 2019)
Sordo https://youtu.be/NKqJQLKlqDA?si=199ai_aOf2Qs8qJ7 Munster https://youtu.be/c_7JuAJ1W18?si=_GaShLZCbhDzO1Y3 Neuville https://youtu.be/squR_MO6I6c?si=rJEuQEKWMo-qghX5
WRC Testing