Grand Prix Rejects

Posted: **29 Sep 2012, 15:27**

This is very unpopular, especially coming from a Finn, but I think if Caterham was to change a driver next season, they should keep Petrov instead of Kovalainen. Of course, the best choice would be to keep both.

Caterham's treatment of Petrov is awful, they see him as nothing more than a source of money. Petrov seems to have absolutely no chance to retain his seat next season and according to some rumors is even going to lose his seat to Giedo van der Garde for the last few races this season.

He needs more sponsorship money to retain his seat, even though he is already paying for his drive, unlike Heikki. This while he is actually often beating Kovalainen in the races, for which he gets no attention unlike Heikki for qualifying better. In my opinion, Petrov brings more value for money and has less experience and thus more potential.

I also consider Caterham the worst team in F1. At least Marussia and HRT have their smaller budgets as an excuse for their lack of performance. And they haven't constantly made false promises to their drivers and fans about improving their performance.

Posted: **30 Sep 2012, 12:34**

Meatwad wrote:This is very unpopular, especially coming from a Finn, but I think if Caterham was to change a driver next season, they should keep Petrov instead of Kovalainen. Of course, the best choice would be to keep both.

Caterham's treatment of Petrov is awful, they see him as nothing more than a source of money. Petrov seems to have absolutely no chance to retain his seat next season and according to some rumors is even going to lose his seat to Giedo van der Garde for the last few races this season. He needs more sponsorship money to retain his seat, even though he is already paying for his drive, unlike Heikki. This while he is actually often beating Kovalainen in the races, for which he gets no attention unlike Heikki for qualifying better. In my opinion, Petrov brings more value for money and has less experience and thus more potential.

I also consider Caterham the worst team in F1. At least Marussia and HRT have their smaller budgets as an excuse for their lack of performance. And they haven't constantly made false promises to their drivers and fans about improving their performance.

Thank you, I'm not the only one here who thinks Caterham/Lotus were run by complete idiots. I lay blame to the fact that they simply can't design a car well. Even with Renault engines. They somehow managed to find a way to not do well with Renault engines. If anything, they should just leave F1 as I see no potential in them. I for one wouldn't be surprised if HRT passed them in the constructors'. Both drivers deserve a better drive than this. (Yes, even "I'm Slower in a McLaren" Kovalainen.)

Posted: **30 Sep 2012, 14:41**

Meatwad wrote:This is very unpopular, especially coming from a Finn, but I think if Caterham was to change a driver next season, they should keep Petrov instead of Kovalainen. Of course, the best choice would be to keep both.

Caterham's treatment of Petrov is awful, they see him as nothing more than a source of money. Petrov seems to have absolutely no chance to retain his seat next season and according to some rumors is even going to lose his seat to Giedo van der Garde for the last few races this season. He needs more sponsorship money to retain his seat, even though he is already paying for his drive, unlike Heikki. This while he is actually often beating Kovalainen in the races, for which he gets no attention unlike Heikki for qualifying better. In my opinion, Petrov brings more value for money and has less experience and thus more potential.

I also consider Caterham the worst team in F1. At least Marussia and HRT have their smaller budgets as an excuse for their lack of performance. And they haven't constantly made false promises to their drivers and fans about improving their performance.

So when do I buy you a beer again?

Posted: **30 Sep 2012, 18:00**

eurobrun wrote:
BlindCaveSalamander wrote:
darkapprentice77 wrote:John Bintcliffe was better than Frank Biela and Yvan Muller.

I'll be impressed if anyone knows what the bathplug I'm talking about.

You can't be serious.

Thanks, I needed a good laugh. Now on the cubject of the BTCC...

Kieth O'dor had a lot of potential but he wasted it by staying with Nissan. Sadly it may of also cost him his life.

it did

Posted: **30 Sep 2012, 18:04**

roblomas52 wrote:
eurobrun wrote:Kieth O'dor had a lot of potential but he wasted it by staying with Nissan. Sadly it may of also cost him his life.

it did

Not. It was down to bad luck. He would have been killed the same driving a BMW or Audi.

Posted: **30 Sep 2012, 18:26**

Nuppiz wrote:F1 is too sterile at the moment.
the FIA is hell bent on banning anything that is innovative and might give someone an advantage.
brabham bt46 fancar springs to mind because the fia ban all the great stuff, i reckon the cars this year would have kers, drs, blown double diffuser, fduct, many aero flick ups, ground effect, turbos, twin chassis, the fan, twin rear wings ect........ yet all apart from kers, drs, and the twin rear wings have been banned at some point

Add to that the fact that a lot of the newly designed circuits are crap and only a couple of them have consistently provided us with good racing.
thats why i belive f1 should have races at clemont ferand, old hockenheim, montjuich park, a shorterned version of the nordschlife, mexico city, bremgarten, the old interlagos, mont tremblant, the long buenos aries circuit, osterreichring, rouen and the old zandvoort circuit all have 1 thing in comon, that they make drivers feel like there on a proper circuit

Posted: **30 Sep 2012, 18:34**

Phoenix wrote:
roblomas52 wrote:
eurobrun wrote:Kieth O'dor had a lot of potential but he wasted it by staying with Nissan. Sadly it may of also cost him his life.

it did

Not. It was down to bad luck. He would have been killed the same driving a BMW or Audi.

my bad just looked him up and the fact he had a rhd car compared to the lhd cars most others had as well as bad luck might have killed him

Posted: **30 Sep 2012, 19:43**

roblomas52 wrote:
Phoenix wrote:
roblomas52 wrote:
it did

Not. It was down to bad luck. He would have been killed the same driving a BMW or Audi.

my bad just looked him up and the fact he had a rhd car compared to the lhd cars most others had as well as bad luck might have killed him

It was those stupid high kerbed chicnaes you see at the start of the video that probably caused his suspension to fail. The guy who hit him must have felt terrible. I wouldn't like to be in the shoes of a racing driver involved in a crash where someone gets killed, even though it wasn't their fault, they must feel abysmal :cry:

Posted: **30 Sep 2012, 21:15**

Totally agree with you on that pasta I can't imagine how Collin Edwards and valentino rossi must have felt being involved in the crash that took Marco Simoncelli's life at sepang last year the week after Dan wheldon died in that crash in the final round of the indy car series last year :cry:

Posted: **01 Oct 2012, 00:25**

Phoenix wrote:
roblomas52 wrote:
eurobrun wrote:Kieth O'dor had a lot of potential but he wasted it by staying with Nissan. Sadly it may of also cost him his life.

it did

Not. It was down to bad luck. He would have been killed the same driving a BMW or Audi.

If he left Nissan he would have still been in the BTCC so as a result he would have been nowhere near AVUS on that fateful day

Posted: **01 Oct 2012, 17:31**

a lot of the newly designed circuits are crap and the fia ban all the good inovations

Posted: **01 Oct 2012, 17:53**

roblomas52 wrote:a lot of the newly designed circuits are crap and the fia ban all the good inovations

But that's not an unpopular opinion on the eyes of many people :lol:

Posted: **01 Oct 2012, 17:54**

roblomas52 wrote:a lot of the newly designed circuits are crap and the fia ban all the good inovations

I don't think that's too unpopular on this forum. Personally, I think the new tracks are okay, but as many have said, they do all have a similar character and challenge. As for the innovations, I hate when they ban things not because they're dangerous but just to close up the teams, like with the diffusers.

Posted: **01 Oct 2012, 19:48**

roblomas52 wrote:a lot of the newly designed circuits are crap and the fia ban all the good inovations

This thread is called UNpopular F1 opinions

Posted: **01 Oct 2012, 19:50**

roblomas52 wrote:a lot of the newly designed circuits are crap and the fia ban all the good inovations

Is this the most popular 'unpopular opinion' ever? Answers on a postcard. :lol:

Posted: **01 Oct 2012, 20:03**

If we're at circuits: the Abu Dhabi circuit is great, I would even put it in the calendar disregarding all economic reasons.

Posted: **01 Oct 2012, 20:33**

QuickYoda41 wrote:If we're at circuits: the Abu Dhabi circuit is great, I would even put it in the calendar disregarding all economic reasons.

Very unpopular, I think. I admit, they have nice architecture, but that doesn't help if the circuit is boring. I can't remember an interesting race there, so I think they should redesign the whole circuit, because the location is really quite good.

Posted: **01 Oct 2012, 20:37**

I hope the Texas GP flops and New Jersey succeeds.

Posted: **01 Oct 2012, 21:16**

pi314159 wrote:
QuickYoda41 wrote:If we're at circuits: the Abu Dhabi circuit is great, I would even put it in the calendar disregarding all economic reasons.

Very unpopular, I think. I admit, they have nice architecture, but that doesn't help if the circuit is boring. I can't remember an interesting race there, so I think they should redesign the whole circuit, because the location is really quite good.

The track seems to be forced to go under the hotel in the final part of the lap,which is what really makes the final sector so boring.If I had my way,I would have placed the tunnel more to the inside,and join the two fast kinks at the beginning of the section to the last tight turn,creating an overtaking opportunity for the daring.

Posted: **02 Oct 2012, 02:11**

I really hope the New Jersey GP is a failure just so I can see the look on Bernie's face

Posted: **02 Oct 2012, 09:59**

roblomas52 wrote:
Nuppiz wrote:F1 is too sterile at the moment.
the FIA is hell bent on banning anything that is innovative and might give someone an advantage.
brabham bt46 fancar springs to mind because the fia ban all the great stuff, i reckon the cars this year would have kers, drs, blown double diffuser, fduct, many aero flick ups, ground effect, turbos, twin chassis, the fan, twin rear wings ect........ yet all apart from kers, drs, and the twin rear wings have been banned at some point

Add to that the fact that a lot of the newly designed circuits are crap and only a couple of them have consistently provided us with good racing.
thats why i belive f1 should have races at clemont ferand, old hockenheim, montjuich park, a shorterned version of the nordschlife, mexico city, bremgarten, the old interlagos, mont tremblant, the long buenos aries circuit, osterreichring, rouen and the old zandvoort circuit all have 1 thing in comon, that they make drivers feel like there on a proper circuit

I'd like to point out that, technically, the BT46B wasn't banned by the FIA - Brabham withdrew the car from competition before the governing body took any action because the row over the legality of the car threatened to tear FOCA apart (Chapman was especially vocal as he had the most to gain from the BT46B being banned). It is hard to argue, though, that it wasn't a violation of the long standing ban on movable aerodynamics that had been around since the late 1960's.

As for the circuits, I wouldn't agree in entirety with that list - I'll admit to being part of that minority that didn't really like the old Hockenheimring for a start.

TheBigJ wrote:I hope the Texas GP flops and New Jersey succeeds.

Any particular reason why you want that to happen? Of course, that does assume that both venues are able to hold a race in the first place - we know that Bernie has been rather critical of the organisers of the race in New Jersey, and there are still a few questions over how secure the funding is for that event (especially over the current lack of a title sponsor).

Posted: **02 Oct 2012, 10:12**

mario wrote:
As for the circuits, I wouldn't agree in entirety with that list - I'll admit to being part of that minority that didn't really like the old Hockenheimring for a start.

The track itself was meh, but driving through the middle of a forest always looked very good

Posted: **02 Oct 2012, 10:16**

mario wrote:Any particular reason why you want that to happen? Of course, that does assume that both venues are able to hold a race in the first place - we know that Bernie has been rather critical of the organisers of the race in New Jersey, and there are still a few questions over how secure the funding is for that event (especially over the current lack of a title sponsor).

I would take that "Bernie has been rather critical of the organisers" with a pinch of salt. That is Bernie MO. And it is such that I, for instance, couldn't care less of what he says. Remember when he criticised the Circuit of Americas owners over financing and legal disputes? Well, it seems that we will have the race after all that. I sincerely think that this is the way of Bernie keeping those guys on the tip of their toes and that Texas survived less favourable circumstances than New Jersey. On top of all this, Bernie fought for a long time to have a race in the New York region and he didn't hide it (although he preferred Manhattan, but this is the closest he will ever get). There is absolutely no way that he will let it slip out of his fingers and not when he is so close to have it. Then there is the fact that Bernie always respects his contracts. As for renewing them, it is another matter altogether. Let's face it, New Jersey will happen.

Posted: **02 Oct 2012, 10:18**

DanielPT wrote:Bernie fought for a long time to have a race in the New York region and he didn't hide it (although he preferred Manhattan, but this is the closest he will ever get).

I still have to laugh at him for that

Posted: **02 Oct 2012, 16:58**

WaffleCat wrote:
pi314159 wrote:
QuickYoda41 wrote:If we're at circuits: the Abu Dhabi circuit is great, I would even put it in the calendar disregarding all economic reasons.

Very unpopular, I think. I admit, they have nice architecture, but that doesn't help if the circuit is boring. I can't remember an interesting race there, so I think they should redesign the whole circuit, because the location is really quite good.

The track seems to be forced to go under the hotel in the final part of the lap,which is what really makes the final sector so boring.If I had my way,I would have placed the tunnel more to the inside,and join the two fast kinks at the beginning of the section to the last tight turn,creating an overtaking opportunity for the daring.

you mean something like this
http://www.gmap-pedometer.com/?r=5690156

Posted: **07 Oct 2012, 06:14**

They are an idiotic and embarrassing tradition - they are dangerous, wholly unnecessary and it's a lottery as to which cars manage to survive.

Get rid.

Posted: **07 Oct 2012, 06:25**

You're totally wrong with your argument behind this. Standing starts are pretty much part of the picture and why racing in America sucksss. In fact, there's only two things Americans got wrong when they tried to import racing: Rolling starts and oval tracks.
Maybe one of your fave drivers left the race today at Turn one, but I'm sure you don't say the same when a driver you hate crashes in Turn one.
I don't know what point I'm exactly trying to make, but your comment is childish, soulless and should go in the rants thread. It shouldn't even have its own thread.

Posted: **07 Oct 2012, 06:34**

Aerond wrote:You're totally wrong with your argument behind this. Standing starts are pretty much part of the picture and why racing in America sucksss. In fact, there's only two things Americans got wrong when they tried to import racing: Rolling starts and oval tracks.
Maybe one of your fave drivers left the race today at Turn one, but I'm sure you don't say the same when a driver you hate crashes in Turn one.
I don't know what point I'm exactly trying to make, but your comment is childish, soulless and should go in the rants thread. It shouldn't even have its own thread.

It belongs at unpopular opinions thread, not in rantbox, hence my report to mods.

Posted: **07 Oct 2012, 06:43**

FMecha wrote:
Aerond wrote:You're totally wrong with your argument behind this. Standing starts are pretty much part of the picture and why racing in America sucksss. In fact, there's only two things Americans got wrong when they tried to import racing: Rolling starts and oval tracks.
Maybe one of your fave drivers left the race today at Turn one, but I'm sure you don't say the same when a driver you hate crashes in Turn one.
I don't know what point I'm exactly trying to make, but your comment is childish, soulless and should go in the rants thread. It shouldn't even have its own thread.

It belongs at unpopular opinions thread, not in rantbox, hence my report to mods.

So you're the only person in the world to use that, I never have.

Posted: **07 Oct 2012, 06:46**

Do you watch Indy Cars? I have seen rolling starts lead to pile ups, safety car, rolling start, pile up, safety car, rolling start, pile up.

Not to mention the number of times they have to wave off a rolling start because the drivers are not lined up properly. You also need to watch some WTCC where they have a Standing start and a rolling start and there is no difference other than the fact rolling starts get put back half the time.

Posted: **07 Oct 2012, 06:46**

eurobrun wrote:
FMecha wrote:
It belongs at unpopular opinions thread, not in rantbox, hence my report to mods.

So you're the only person in the world to use that, I never have.

Report to mods? Explain to me what this black magic is, Mr Hamilton.

Posted: **07 Oct 2012, 06:48**

Wizzie wrote:
eurobrun wrote:
FMecha wrote:
It belongs at unpopular opinions thread, not in rantbox, hence my report to mods.

So you're the only person in the world to use that, I never have.

Report to mods? Explain to me what this black magic is, Mr Hamilton.

The upside down warning button next to the edit button

Posted: **07 Oct 2012, 06:54**

Wouldn't it be easier and safer to just retire Grosjean?

Posted: **07 Oct 2012, 06:56**

Svenko Wankerov wrote:Wouldn't it be easier and safer to just retire Grosjean?

This man speaks the truth

Posted: **07 Oct 2012, 06:58**

Don't feed the troll. :roll:

Posted: **07 Oct 2012, 07:06**

eurobrun wrote:
Svenko Wankerov wrote:Wouldn't it be easier and safer to just retire Grosjean?

This man speaks the truth

Typical... :roll:

Posted: **07 Oct 2012, 07:08**

FMecha wrote:
eurobrun wrote:
Svenko Wankerov wrote:Wouldn't it be easier and safer to just retire Grosjean?

This man speaks the truth

Typical...

What are you trying to say

Posted: **07 Oct 2012, 07:09**

eurobrun wrote:
FMecha wrote:
eurobrun wrote:This man speaks the truth

Typical...

What are you trying to say

Looks like we've got our headline match for the next F1R Pub Wrestling Pay-Per-View :lol:

Posted: **07 Oct 2012, 07:10**

eurobrun wrote:
FMecha wrote:Typical...

What are you trying to say

It refers to your anti-Grosjean sentiment. And maybe at Bottas and Reynolds too. :roll:

Posted: **07 Oct 2012, 07:17**

FMecha wrote:
eurobrun wrote:
FMecha wrote:Typical...

What are you trying to say

It refers to your anti-Grosjean sentiment. And maybe at Bottas and Reynolds too.

It is strange to put Reynolds in the same category when he isn't a F1 driver. And I'm allowed to like and dislike whoever I want

Grand Prix Rejects

Unpopular F1 opinions

Re: Unpopular F1 opinions

Re: Unpopular F1 opinions

Re: Unpopular F1 opinions

Re: Unpopular F1 opinions

Re: Unpopular F1 opinions

Re: Unpopular F1 opinions

Re: Unpopular F1 opinions

Re: Unpopular F1 opinions

Re: Unpopular F1 opinions

Re: Unpopular F1 opinions

Re: Unpopular F1 opinions

Re: Unpopular F1 opinions

Re: Unpopular F1 opinions

Re: Unpopular F1 opinions

Re: Unpopular F1 opinions

Re: Unpopular F1 opinions

Re: Unpopular F1 opinions

Re: Unpopular F1 opinions

Re: Unpopular F1 opinions

Re: Unpopular F1 opinions

Re: Unpopular F1 opinions

Re: Unpopular F1 opinions

Re: Unpopular F1 opinions

Re: Unpopular F1 opinions

Re: Unpopular F1 opinions

It's time to retire standing starts.

Re: It's time to retire standing starts.

Re: It's time to retire standing starts.

Re: It's time to retire standing starts.

Re: It's time to retire standing starts.

Re: It's time to retire standing starts.

Re: It's time to retire standing starts.

Re: It's time to retire standing starts.

Re: It's time to retire standing starts.

Re: It's time to retire standing starts.

Re: It's time to retire standing starts.

Re: It's time to retire standing starts.

Re: It's time to retire standing starts.

Re: It's time to retire standing starts.

Re: It's time to retire standing starts.