Unpopular F1 opinions

The place for anything and everything else to do with F1 history, different forms of motorsport, and all other randomness
User avatar
Londoner
Posts: 6467
Joined: 17 Jun 2010, 18:21
Location: Norwich, UK
Contact:

Re: Unpopular F1 opinions

Post by Londoner »

DanielPT wrote:Since we are at it, Schumacher could have won at least another one, since 1999 was to be his year if not for that broken leg. 1997 was very contentious but had he not decided for that idiotic manoeuvre then we don't know what could have happened. Who knows if Villeneuve would have pushed his car into breaking down.

Now going with Jim Clark, well, besides his three titles he should have won 1962 had he not retired from the lead in the final race. He should have also won 1964 if his engine had not given up in the penultimate lap, causing him to retire from the lead yet again. Finally, 1968 would have been yet another Jim Clark year had he survived it (he won the first race) since Graham Hill, his team-mate, went on to win the championship. That should have been at least 6 for Jim.


If only that was true. :|

Is there any truth to the rumour that Schumacher had a radiator problem during Jerez 97, which would have seen him retire from the race even if he hadn't driven into Villeneuve?
Fetzie on Ferrari wrote:How does a driver hurtling around a race track while they're sous-viding in their overalls have a better understanding of the race than a team of strategy engineers in an air-conditioned room?l
User avatar
DanielPT
Site Donor
Site Donor
Posts: 6126
Joined: 30 Dec 2010, 18:44
Location: Porto, Portugal

Re: Unpopular F1 opinions

Post by DanielPT »

East Londoner wrote:
DanielPT wrote:Since we are at it, Schumacher could have won at least another one, since 1999 was to be his year if not for that broken leg. 1997 was very contentious but had he not decided for that idiotic manoeuvre then we don't know what could have happened. Who knows if Villeneuve would have pushed his car into breaking down.

Now going with Jim Clark, well, besides his three titles he should have won 1962 had he not retired from the lead in the final race. He should have also won 1964 if his engine had not given up in the penultimate lap, causing him to retire from the lead yet again. Finally, 1968 would have been yet another Jim Clark year had he survived it (he won the first race) since Graham Hill, his team-mate, went on to win the championship. That should have been at least 6 for Jim.


If only that was true. :|

Is there any truth to the rumour that Schumacher had a radiator problem during Jerez 97, which would have seen him retire from the race even if he hadn't driven into Villeneuve?


Oh dear... It is two titles, though should have been five then...
Colin Kolles on F111, 2011 HRT challenger: The car doesn't look too bad; it looks like a modern F1 car.
User avatar
CoopsII
Posts: 4698
Joined: 15 Dec 2011, 09:33
Location: Starkiller Base Debris

Re: Unpopular F1 opinions

Post by CoopsII »

People who post inordinately long posts on these forums really should think twice before doing so.
Just For One Day...
User avatar
TomWazzleshaw
Posts: 14370
Joined: 01 Apr 2009, 04:42
Location: Curva do lel
Contact:

Re: Unpopular F1 opinions

Post by TomWazzleshaw »

East Londoner wrote:I dare say Prost could have won in 1982 as well, if that Renault had been slightly more reliable and Rene Arnoux had agreed to let Prost through for the win at Paul Ricard that year. He was only 10 points adrift of Rosberg in the final standings that year.

So, we're potentially looking at a 9-time world champion.


By the same token, 1982 should have been a ridiculously easy cakewalk for Enzo's mob, if they didn't have the ridiculously bad luck of having one main driver killed and the other having his career ended in the same year.
Biscione wrote:"Some Turkemenistani gulag repurposed for residential use" is the best way yet I've heard to describe North / East Glasgow.
User avatar
Wallio
Site Donor
Site Donor
Posts: 2697
Joined: 22 Feb 2012, 22:54
Location: The Wyoming Valley, PA

Re: Unpopular F1 opinions

Post by Wallio »

F1 should do away with the drivers title. The WCC is where the money is anyway, and F1 should really harp on how it really is the only series left where everyone build separate cars in house (save for the WEC I suppose, although they have customer cars).

Honestly does it matter? Who's the best driver on the grid the past three years? Alonso without question (and if you question this, please seek help). How many titles did he win? 0 of course. Does that mean he isn't the best driver? Certainly not. So just dump it. The prestige of F1 will still draw in the best drivers in the world.
Professional Historian/Semi-Retired Drag Racer/Whiskey Enthusiast

"When I was still racing, I never once thought 'Oh, I can't damage the car here'." - Jolyn Palmer
Me either Jolyn, maybe that's why we're both out, eh?
User avatar
takagi_for_the_win
Posts: 3061
Joined: 02 Oct 2011, 01:38
Location: The land of the little people.

Re: Unpopular F1 opinions

Post by takagi_for_the_win »

East Londoner wrote:
DanielPT wrote:Since we are at it, Schumacher could have won at least another one, since 1999 was to be his year if not for that broken leg. 1997 was very contentious but had he not decided for that idiotic manoeuvre then we don't know what could have happened. Who knows if Villeneuve would have pushed his car into breaking down.

Now going with Jim Clark, well, besides his three titles he should have won 1962 had he not retired from the lead in the final race. He should have also won 1964 if his engine had not given up in the penultimate lap, causing him to retire from the lead yet again. Finally, 1968 would have been yet another Jim Clark year had he survived it (he won the first race) since Graham Hill, his team-mate, went on to win the championship. That should have been at least 6 for Jim.


If only that was true. :|

Is there any truth to the rumour that Schumacher had a radiator problem during Jerez 97, which would have seen him retire from the race even if he hadn't driven into Villeneuve?


I'm not 100% sure about that, but from what I've red, Schumacher had killed his tyres, so it would only have been a matter of time before JV got past.

Having read some stuff on here and the PMMF about track design, I think its safe to say this is unpopular: I don't mind the "new" Hockenheim
TORA! TORA! TORA!
User avatar
Gerudo Dragon
Posts: 1766
Joined: 12 May 2012, 04:42
Contact:

Re: Unpopular F1 opinions

Post by Gerudo Dragon »

Wallio wrote:F1 should do away with the drivers title. The WCC is where the money is anyway, and F1 should really harp on how it really is the only series left where everyone build separate cars in house (save for the WEC I suppose, although they have customer cars).

Honestly does it matter? Who's the best driver on the grid the past three years? Alonso without question (and if you question this, please seek help). How many titles did he win? 0 of course. Does that mean he isn't the best driver? Certainly not. So just dump it. The prestige of F1 will still draw in the best drivers in the world.
I agree, it would mostly get rid of team orders aswell.

Also Button was better than Alonso in 2011.
Trump 2016
User avatar
takagi_for_the_win
Posts: 3061
Joined: 02 Oct 2011, 01:38
Location: The land of the little people.

Re: Unpopular F1 opinions

Post by takagi_for_the_win »

darkapprentice77 wrote:
Wallio wrote:F1 should do away with the drivers title. The WCC is where the money is anyway, and F1 should really harp on how it really is the only series left where everyone build separate cars in house (save for the WEC I suppose, although they have customer cars).

Honestly does it matter? Who's the best driver on the grid the past three years? Alonso without question (and if you question this, please seek help). How many titles did he win? 0 of course. Does that mean he isn't the best driver? Certainly not. So just dump it. The prestige of F1 will still draw in the best drivers in the world.
I agree, it would mostly get rid of team orders aswell.

Also Button was better than Alonso in 2011.


No, Button was a close second at times. Alonso would've smoked anyone else in equal machinery in 2011, just like he would've done last year or 2010 or pretty much any other year you care to mention since 2005.
TORA! TORA! TORA!
User avatar
Wallio
Site Donor
Site Donor
Posts: 2697
Joined: 22 Feb 2012, 22:54
Location: The Wyoming Valley, PA

Re: Unpopular F1 opinions

Post by Wallio »

darkapprentice77 wrote:
Wallio wrote:F1 should do away with the drivers title. The WCC is where the money is anyway, and F1 should really harp on how it really is the only series left where everyone build separate cars in house (save for the WEC I suppose, although they have customer cars).

Honestly does it matter? Who's the best driver on the grid the past three years? Alonso without question (and if you question this, please seek help). How many titles did he win? 0 of course. Does that mean he isn't the best driver? Certainly not. So just dump it. The prestige of F1 will still draw in the best drivers in the world.
I agree, it would mostly get rid of team orders aswell.

Also Button was better than Alonso in 2011.



I'm not trying to start a flame war, but I must've watched a different series in 2011. Button was certainly 3rd best and I can even see the argument for second as he had a fine year, but Alonso has been unworldly lately, and I'm a Vettel fanboi who HATED Alonso at Renault and Macca.
Professional Historian/Semi-Retired Drag Racer/Whiskey Enthusiast

"When I was still racing, I never once thought 'Oh, I can't damage the car here'." - Jolyn Palmer
Me either Jolyn, maybe that's why we're both out, eh?
User avatar
Gerudo Dragon
Posts: 1766
Joined: 12 May 2012, 04:42
Contact:

Re: Unpopular F1 opinions

Post by Gerudo Dragon »

F3000 is better than GP2.
Trump 2016
User avatar
Klon
Site Donor
Site Donor
Posts: 7244
Joined: 28 Mar 2009, 17:07
Location: Schleswig-Holstein, FRG
Contact:

Re: Unpopular F1 opinions

Post by Klon »

Wallio wrote:Honestly does it matter? Who's the best driver on the grid the past three years? Alonso without question (and if you question this, please seek help). How many titles did he win? 0 of course. Does that mean he isn't the best driver? Certainly not. So just dump it.


Yeah, the guy who won the championships in those last three years - he must be a total goof and holds no candle to the great Alonso. Oh wait, that guy is a great racing driver and perhaps the best qualifier in the history of our sport which means he is not a goof at all and more than equal to Alonso? Oh my, that will make Wallio's statement look rather silly, now wouldn't it?

takagi_for_the_win wrote:No, Button was a close second at times. Alonso would've smoked anyone else in equal machinery in 2011, just like he would've done last year or 2010 or pretty much any other year you care to mention since 2005.


Nonsense. The implication that the 2010 and 2011 Ferraris were bad is asinine. The 2010 car was never anything but on par with Red Bull and McLaren and 2011, well in 2011 RBR were on a slightly higher level nut the Ferrari was not utterly non-competitive. Hell, even 2012 was not the Alonso miracle job it was advertised as. Ever since the Mugello tests, the Ferraris were never anything below the third-best cars and while a championship challenge with the third-best car is undoubtably a job well done it is not a unique miracle (in the ponderbox I had some names collected) so assuming he would have "smoked" the competition is daring to say the very least. Vettel would have always been tough to beat.
User avatar
Wallio
Site Donor
Site Donor
Posts: 2697
Joined: 22 Feb 2012, 22:54
Location: The Wyoming Valley, PA

Re: Unpopular F1 opinions

Post by Wallio »

Klon wrote:
Wallio wrote:Honestly does it matter? Who's the best driver on the grid the past three years? Alonso without question (and if you question this, please seek help). How many titles did he win? 0 of course. Does that mean he isn't the best driver? Certainly not. So just dump it.


Yeah, the guy who won the championships in those last three years - he must be a total goof and holds no candle to the great Alonso. Oh wait, that guy is a great racing driver and perhaps the best qualifier in the history of our sport which means he is not a goof at all and more than equal to Alonso? Oh my, that will make Wallio's statement look rather silly, now wouldn't it?

takagi_for_the_win wrote:No, Button was a close second at times. Alonso would've smoked anyone else in equal machinery in 2011, just like he would've done last year or 2010 or pretty much any other year you care to mention since 2005.


Nonsense. The implication that the 2010 and 2011 Ferraris were bad is asinine. The 2010 car was never anything but on par with Red Bull and McLaren and 2011, well in 2011 RBR were on a slightly higher level nut the Ferrari was not utterly non-competitive. Hell, even 2012 was not the Alonso miracle job it was advertised as. Ever since the Mugello tests, the Ferraris were never anything below the third-best cars and while a championship challenge with the third-best car is undoubtably a job well done it is not a unique miracle (in the ponderbox I had some names collected) so assuming he would have "smoked" the competition is daring to say the very least. Vettel would have always been tough to beat.



Ummm you realize I'm the biggest (sometimes I think only) Vettel fan here right? I never said he was a goof, he has mad skills, But face facts Alonso has just been god-like these past few years. He really has brought the ".6ths" And the 2010-2011 Ferraris weren't that bad? Really? In what series? ALMS, right? Because they were cleary the #3 car AT BEST those years, and many races were #4 behind Lotus as well. If you think the Ferrari was "on par with Red Bull" as you say, especially in 2011, I really must question you're knowledge of cars and racing, especially since the drivers THEMSELVES ranked Alonso as the best last year, due to nearly winning it all in that heap. And also by your logic, if the Ferrari was "on par" and if Fernado wasn't that great, what was Massa? A drooling hunk of flesh? You probably thought the F60 was "on par" too.........

So while I realize its unpopular, I see nothing wrong with F1 ditching the WDC. The constructors is the only one the teams care about (Ferrari, Red Bull, and Macca have all said this, and in his books Steve Matchett mentions Bennetton was the same way in the 90s), its where the money is, it would cut down on silly team orders, and it still would attract the best drivers on earth (the way Indy and Le Mans still do). Of course I still want teams to run 3 cars (with only the top two scoring) but thats another unpopular opinion.
Professional Historian/Semi-Retired Drag Racer/Whiskey Enthusiast

"When I was still racing, I never once thought 'Oh, I can't damage the car here'." - Jolyn Palmer
Me either Jolyn, maybe that's why we're both out, eh?
User avatar
pasta_maldonado
Site Donor
Site Donor
Posts: 6461
Joined: 22 Apr 2012, 16:49
Location: Greater London. Sort of.

Re: Unpopular F1 opinions

Post by pasta_maldonado »

Wallio wrote:
Klon wrote:
Wallio wrote:Honestly does it matter? Who's the best driver on the grid the past three years? Alonso without question (and if you question this, please seek help). How many titles did he win? 0 of course. Does that mean he isn't the best driver? Certainly not. So just dump it.


Yeah, the guy who won the championships in those last three years - he must be a total goof and holds no candle to the great Alonso. Oh wait, that guy is a great racing driver and perhaps the best qualifier in the history of our sport which means he is not a goof at all and more than equal to Alonso? Oh my, that will make Wallio's statement look rather silly, now wouldn't it?

takagi_for_the_win wrote:No, Button was a close second at times. Alonso would've smoked anyone else in equal machinery in 2011, just like he would've done last year or 2010 or pretty much any other year you care to mention since 2005.


Nonsense. The implication that the 2010 and 2011 Ferraris were bad is asinine. The 2010 car was never anything but on par with Red Bull and McLaren and 2011, well in 2011 RBR were on a slightly higher level nut the Ferrari was not utterly non-competitive. Hell, even 2012 was not the Alonso miracle job it was advertised as. Ever since the Mugello tests, the Ferraris were never anything below the third-best cars and while a championship challenge with the third-best car is undoubtably a job well done it is not a unique miracle (in the ponderbox I had some names collected) so assuming he would have "smoked" the competition is daring to say the very least. Vettel would have always been tough to beat.



Ummm you realize I'm the biggest (sometimes I think only) Vettel fan here right? I never said he was a goof, he has mad skills, But face facts Alonso has just been god-like these past few years. He really has brought the ".6ths" And the 2010-2011 Ferraris weren't that bad? Really? In what series? ALMS, right? Because they were cleary the #3 car AT BEST those years, and many races were #4 behind Lotus as well. If you think the Ferrari was "on par with Red Bull" as you say, especially in 2011, I really must question you're knowledge of cars and racing, especially since the drivers THEMSELVES ranked Alonso as the best last year, due to nearly winning it all in that heap. And also by your logic, if the Ferrari was "on par" and if Fernado wasn't that great, what was Massa? A drooling hunk of flesh? You probably thought the F60 was "on par" too.........

So while I realize its unpopular, I see nothing wrong with F1 ditching the WDC. The constructors is the only one the teams care about (Ferrari, Red Bull, and Macca have all said this, and in his books Steve Matchett mentions Bennetton was the same way in the 90s), its where the money is, it would cut down on silly team orders, and it still would attract the best drivers on earth (the way Indy and Le Mans still do). Of course I still want teams to run 3 cars (with only the top two scoring) but thats another unpopular opinion.

While I agree with you that the 2-011 Ferrari was the 3rd best car, if that, the 2010 car was definitely on par with the McLaren and Red Bull. Although there was that dip in form during the mid-season, the pace showed at the very start and the end of the season proved it was a top car.
Klon wrote:more liek Nick Ass-idy amirite?
User avatar
Klon
Site Donor
Site Donor
Posts: 7244
Joined: 28 Mar 2009, 17:07
Location: Schleswig-Holstein, FRG
Contact:

Re: Unpopular F1 opinions

Post by Klon »

Wallio wrote:And the 2010-2011 Ferraris weren't that bad? Really? In what series? ALMS, right? Because they were cleary the #3 car AT BEST those years, and many races were #4 behind Lotus as well.


"AT BEST"? I don't think so. Just look at the results at the last six races of 2010: three wins for Alonso and Vettel each with Alonso having FLAP at each of his wins and pole at two of them. By the time of the season finale, the F10 was pretty much ahead of the MP4-25 and, to use my own words from before, "on par" with the RB6.

... especially since the drivers THEMSELVES ranked Alonso as the best last year, due to nearly winning it all in that heap.


The same drivers who voted Ayrton Senna the greatest driver of all time a few years before that? That alone tells the whole story about how legitimate their opinions are.

And also by your logic, if the Ferrari was "on par" and if Fernado wasn't that great, what was Massa? A drooling hunk of flesh? You probably thought the F60 was "on par" too.........


You will be hard pressed to find people claiming that Massa had anything resembling a great year in either 2010, 2011 or 2012 (until the season finale). Even then, however, you can still see Massa as a proof of my claims: he was driving on level with Alonso in the final races of 2012 and finished pretty much always near to or in the top 5, which should tell you that by then the Ferrari has become more than competitive. 2010 he was able to take two podiums as well despite being off Alonso's pace which again shows that the car must have been at least on level with the other teams in the top three.

it would cut down on silly team orders, and it still would attract the best drivers on earth (the way Indy and Le Mans still do).


I don't see how that would remove team orders, if only WCC points would matter we would only lose a few team orders at the season finale in order to aid a driver but other than that they would pretty much stay how they are or even increase.
User avatar
Wallio
Site Donor
Site Donor
Posts: 2697
Joined: 22 Feb 2012, 22:54
Location: The Wyoming Valley, PA

Re: Unpopular F1 opinions

Post by Wallio »

Klon wrote:
Wallio wrote:And the 2010-2011 Ferraris weren't that bad? Really? In what series? ALMS, right? Because they were cleary the #3 car AT BEST those years, and many races were #4 behind Lotus as well.


"AT BEST"? I don't think so. Just look at the results at the last six races of 2010: three wins for Alonso and Vettel each with Alonso having FLAP at each of his wins and pole at two of them. By the time of the season finale, the F10 was pretty much ahead of the MP4-25 and, to use my own words from before, "on par" with the RB6.

... especially since the drivers THEMSELVES ranked Alonso as the best last year, due to nearly winning it all in that heap.


The same drivers who voted Ayrton Senna the greatest driver of all time a few years before that? That alone tells the whole story about how legitimate their opinions are.

And also by your logic, if the Ferrari was "on par" and if Fernado wasn't that great, what was Massa? A drooling hunk of flesh? You probably thought the F60 was "on par" too.........


You will be hard pressed to find people claiming that Massa had anything resembling a great year in either 2010, 2011 or 2012 (until the season finale). Even then, however, you can still see Massa as a proof of my claims: he was driving on level with Alonso in the final races of 2012 and finished pretty much always near to or in the top 5, which should tell you that by then the Ferrari has become more than competitive. 2010 he was able to take two podiums as well despite being off Alonso's pace which again shows that the car must have been at least on level with the other teams in the top three.

it would cut down on silly team orders, and it still would attract the best drivers on earth (the way Indy and Le Mans still do).


I don't see how that would remove team orders, if only WCC points would matter we would only lose a few team orders at the season finale in order to aid a driver but other than that they would pretty much stay how they are or even increase.



I'm honestly curious how you figure this? If drivers aren't scoreing points theres no need to switch them. If Marussia is running 9th and 10th, thats 3 points. If they switch Jules and Max, its still 3 points. Simple addition. Why would they even bother? So please explain that one too me. Of course I'm still waiting on your expalination of the 2011 Ferrari was "on par" with the Red Bull.........
Professional Historian/Semi-Retired Drag Racer/Whiskey Enthusiast

"When I was still racing, I never once thought 'Oh, I can't damage the car here'." - Jolyn Palmer
Me either Jolyn, maybe that's why we're both out, eh?
User avatar
Salamander
Posts: 9614
Joined: 29 Mar 2009, 20:59
Location: Embittered former NASCAR fan.

Re: Unpopular F1 opinions

Post by Salamander »

Wallio wrote:I'm honestly curious how you figure this? If drivers aren't scoreing points theres no need to switch them. If Marussia is running 9th and 10th, thats 3 points. If they switch Jules and Max, its still 3 points. Simple addition. Why would they even bother? So please explain that one too me.


I can field that one - they'd still use team orders to stop them from overtaking. Because that would risk a collision, and thus the loss of those 3 points. Because it's the nature of drivers to want to beat each other, and removing the WDC will not change that.
Sebastian Vettel wrote:If I was good at losing, I wouldn't be in Formula 1
User avatar
Wallio
Site Donor
Site Donor
Posts: 2697
Joined: 22 Feb 2012, 22:54
Location: The Wyoming Valley, PA

Re: Unpopular F1 opinions

Post by Wallio »

BlindCaveSalamander wrote:
Wallio wrote:I'm honestly curious how you figure this? If drivers aren't scoreing points theres no need to switch them. If Marussia is running 9th and 10th, thats 3 points. If they switch Jules and Max, its still 3 points. Simple addition. Why would they even bother? So please explain that one to me.


I can field that one - they'd still use team orders to stop them from overtaking. Because that would risk a collision, and thus the loss of those 3 points. Because it's the nature of drivers to want to beat each other, and removing the WDC will not change that.



Makes sense. There's logic to that argument, but if the drivers aren't racing each other for pits, I wonder how strong their will would be? Clearly nowadays theres no doubt that "hold station" orders are quite useful for saving points. And I agree that if one teammate x was quite a bit faster than teammate y and had a decent chance of catching driver z I could see team orers in play. But if we go back to my Marussia example, if they're 25secs behind the 8th place driver, I can't imagine the team would need to issue orders. If the drivers aren't racing for indivdual points, they wouldn't race each other would they? Are they that dense? As a part-time "weekend warrior" racer myself, I hope we aren't! :lol: But I do agree it wouldn't eliminate team orders 100%, but it would greatly reduce them. I should have said "it will all but eliminate team orders".
Professional Historian/Semi-Retired Drag Racer/Whiskey Enthusiast

"When I was still racing, I never once thought 'Oh, I can't damage the car here'." - Jolyn Palmer
Me either Jolyn, maybe that's why we're both out, eh?
User avatar
pasta_maldonado
Site Donor
Site Donor
Posts: 6461
Joined: 22 Apr 2012, 16:49
Location: Greater London. Sort of.

Re: Unpopular F1 opinions

Post by pasta_maldonado »

Wallio wrote:
BlindCaveSalamander wrote:
Wallio wrote:I'm honestly curious how you figure this? If drivers aren't scoreing points theres no need to switch them. If Marussia is running 9th and 10th, thats 3 points. If they switch Jules and Max, its still 3 points. Simple addition. Why would they even bother? So please explain that one to me.


I can field that one - they'd still use team orders to stop them from overtaking. Because that would risk a collision, and thus the loss of those 3 points. Because it's the nature of drivers to want to beat each other, and removing the WDC will not change that.



Makes sense. There's logic to that argument, but if the drivers aren't racing each other for pits, I wonder how strong their will would be? Clearly nowadays theres no doubt that "hold station" orders are quite useful for saving points. And I agree that if one teammate x was quite a bit faster than teammate y and had a decent chance of catching driver z I could see team orers in play. But if we go back to my Marussia example, if they're 25secs behind the 8th place driver, I can't imagine the team would need to issue orders. If the drivers aren't racing for indivdual points, they wouldn't race each other would they? Are they that dense? As a part-time "weekend warrior" racer myself, I hope we aren't! :lol: But I do agree it wouldn't eliminate team orders 100%, but it would greatly reduce them. I should have said "it will all but eliminate team orders".

And it would all but eliminate everything about Formula One.
Klon wrote:more liek Nick Ass-idy amirite?
User avatar
dr-baker
Posts: 15687
Joined: 29 Mar 2009, 17:30
Location: Here and there.

Re: Unpopular F1 opinions

Post by dr-baker »

I could still see Vettel racing for the win in Malaysia even without any WDC, because he races to win. He believes the team pay him to win and that is what I would imagine he would do. He would not have gone into F1 simply to finish second, just because there was no WDC.
watka wrote:I find it amusing that whilst you're one of the more openly Christian guys here, you are still first and foremost associated with an eye for the ladies!
dinizintheoven wrote:GOOD CHRISTIANS do not go to jail. EVERYONE ON FORMULA ONE REJECTS should be in jail.
MCard LOLA
User avatar
girry
Posts: 844
Joined: 31 May 2012, 19:43

Re: Unpopular F1 opinions

Post by girry »

ok here's one seriously unpopular I would assume:

First time ever I dared to listen to a Jacques Villeneuve song. And, in all honesty - it's not that bad. Actually, I would not turn the radio off if it occasionally played Jacq, but be happy to listen.

Now why do people say I have no musical ear? :lol:
when you're dead people start listening
User avatar
Nessafox
Site Donor
Site Donor
Posts: 6314
Joined: 30 Nov 2009, 19:45
Location: Stupid, sexy Flanders.

Re: Unpopular F1 opinions

Post by Nessafox »

giraurd wrote:ok here's one seriously unpopular I would assume:

First time ever I dared to listen to a Jacques Villeneuve song. And, in all honesty - it's not that bad. Actually, I would not turn the radio off if it occasionally played Jacq, but be happy to listen.

Now why do people say I have no musical ear? :lol:

But that's mainly because of the crap on the radio these days, which will make Jacques Villeneuve look like Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart. There are lots of things that are worse. But i defenitely wouldn't pay to see a Jacques Villeneuve concert (unless if it's an F1 rejects forum reunion)
I don't know what i want and i want it now!
User avatar
Ataxia
Not Important
Posts: 6872
Joined: 23 Jun 2010, 12:47
Location: Sneed's Feed & Seed (formerly Chuck's)
Contact:

Re: Unpopular F1 opinions

Post by Ataxia »

This wrote:
giraurd wrote:ok here's one seriously unpopular I would assume:

First time ever I dared to listen to a Jacques Villeneuve song. And, in all honesty - it's not that bad. Actually, I would not turn the radio off if it occasionally played Jacq, but be happy to listen.

Now why do people say I have no musical ear? :lol:

But that's mainly because of the crap on the radio these days, which will make Jacques Villeneuve look like Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart. There are lots of things that are worse. But i defenitely wouldn't pay to see a Jacques Villeneuve concert (unless if it's an F1 rejects forum reunion)


Jacques Villeneuve concert running order: starts off relatively well and he plays a couple of decent songs. Then it all begins to go downhill before he decides to stop singing and uses the stage to start spouting a load of political drivel.
Mitch Hedberg wrote:I want to be a race car passenger: just a guy who bugs the driver. Say man, can I turn on the radio? You should slow down. Why do we gotta keep going in circles? Man, you really like Tide...
User avatar
Hound55
Posts: 326
Joined: 26 Nov 2012, 01:45
Location: Ohio, 'murica

Re: Unpopular F1 opinions

Post by Hound55 »

Not F1, but here it goes.

I really dislike oval races in Indycar. Not because I think the are too easy, but because it all seems stupidly dangerous. They are too fast, too fragile, and too prone to getting airborne for me to feel comfortable watching. Wheldon's crash at Las Vegas really reaffirmed my distaste for open wheelers on ovals. Honestly, I really wish Indianapolis weren't so important so that there wouldn't be races there anymore.

I'm really soft when it comes to amplifying the danger factor in motorsport. I felt incredibly nervous watching the Daytona 500 after watching Kyle Larson rip an enormous hole in the fence just the day prior. Call me a wuss, but I just don't feel comfortable with there being more danger than there needs to be.

I am lucky I grew up in the modern era of racing. I don't think I could have dealt with the amount of casualties in early racing.
LONG LIVE MARUSSIA

Things I was wrong about:
Kimi to Ferrari, Perez out of McLaren, Maldonado to Lotus, Kobash comes back, Gutierrez stays, Chilton stays, Boullier leaves Lotus.

I stream Ustream, we all scream for PRC.
User avatar
go_Rubens
Posts: 3415
Joined: 25 Mar 2013, 21:12
Location: A raging river somewhere in the Eastern (cough) United States (cough)

Re: Unpopular F1 opinions

Post by go_Rubens »

Hound55 wrote:Not F1, but here it goes.

I really dislike oval races in Indycar. Not because I think the are too easy, but because it all seems stupidly dangerous. They are too fast, too fragile, and too prone to getting airborne for me to feel comfortable watching. Wheldon's crash at Las Vegas really reaffirmed my distaste for open wheelers on ovals. Honestly, I really wish Indianapolis weren't so important so that there wouldn't be races there anymore.

I'm really soft when it comes to amplifying the danger factor in motorsport. I felt incredibly nervous watching the Daytona 500 after watching Kyle Larson rip an enormous hole in the fence just the day prior. Call me a wuss, but I just don't feel comfortable with there being more danger than there needs to be.

I am lucky I grew up in the modern era of racing. I don't think I could have dealt with the amount of casualties in early racing.

I would have to agree.
Felipe Baby, Stay Cool

Albert Einstein wrote:Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity; and I'm not sure about the universe.
User avatar
roblo97
Posts: 3847
Joined: 16 Sep 2012, 16:42
Location: my house \M/ (Brent Knoll)
Contact:

Re: Unpopular F1 opinions

Post by roblo97 »

This wrote:
giraurd wrote:ok here's one seriously unpopular I would assume:

First time ever I dared to listen to a Jacques Villeneuve song. And, in all honesty - it's not that bad. Actually, I would not turn the radio off if it occasionally played Jacq, but be happy to listen.

Now why do people say I have no musical ear? :lol:

But that's mainly because of the crap on the radio these days, which will make Jacques Villeneuve look like Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart. There are lots of things that are worse. But i defenitely wouldn't pay to see a Jacques Villeneuve concert (unless if it's an F1 rejects forum reunion)

Justin Beibers crap
Mexicola wrote:
shinji wrote:
Mexicola wrote: I'd rather listen to a dog lick its balls. Each to their own, I guess.

Does listening to a dog licking its balls get you excited?

That's between me and my internet service provider.

One of those journalist types.
270 Tube stations in 18:42:50!
User avatar
CoopsII
Posts: 4698
Joined: 15 Dec 2011, 09:33
Location: Starkiller Base Debris

Re: Unpopular F1 opinions

Post by CoopsII »

Hound55 wrote:I am lucky I grew up in the modern era of racing. I don't think I could have dealt with the amount of casualties in early racing.

Yeah me too and its frustrating when unintelligent watchers accuse of modern racing of being 'too safe'. As if we want a world where the likes of Hakkinen, Wendlinger, Button, Villenueve, both Schumachers, Alonso and others would've lost their lives in F1 alone. And they're just a handful of drivers I can remember having big accidents in the last twenty years.
Just For One Day...
User avatar
RonDenisDeletraz
Posts: 7380
Joined: 27 Oct 2011, 08:21
Location: Flight 643
Contact:

Re: Unpopular F1 opinions

Post by RonDenisDeletraz »

CoopsII wrote: Alonso and others would've lost their lives in F1 alone.


When would Alonso been in danger of losing his life if not for modern safety. Don't really remember him having any massive crashes
aerond wrote:Yes RDD, but we always knew you never had any sort of taste either :P

tommykl wrote:I have a shite car and meme sponsors, but Corrado Fabi will carry me to the promised land with the power of Lionel Richie.
User avatar
Nuppiz
Site Donor
Site Donor
Posts: 5966
Joined: 30 Mar 2009, 12:10
Location: Vantaa, Finland
Contact:

Re: Unpopular F1 opinions

Post by Nuppiz »

eurobrun wrote:
CoopsII wrote: Alonso and others would've lost their lives in F1 alone.


When would Alonso been in danger of losing his life if not for modern safety. Don't really remember him having any massive crashes

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bpOSE6RqN5g
Eurosport broadcast for the 1990 Mexican GP prequalifying:
"The Life, it looked very lifeless yet again... in fact Bruno did one, slow lap"
User avatar
mario
Posts: 8269
Joined: 31 Oct 2009, 17:13

Re: Unpopular F1 opinions

Post by mario »

CoopsII wrote:
Hound55 wrote:I am lucky I grew up in the modern era of racing. I don't think I could have dealt with the amount of casualties in early racing.

Yeah me too and its frustrating when unintelligent watchers accuse of modern racing of being 'too safe'. As if we want a world where the likes of Hakkinen, Wendlinger, Button, Villenueve, both Schumachers, Alonso and others would've lost their lives in F1 alone. And they're just a handful of drivers I can remember having big accidents in the last twenty years.

I suppose that the problem is the rather strong generational split between those who came to the sport before and after the safety campaigns in the 1970's to make the sport safer. Before that, the sport effectively gloried in its adversarial, almost gladiatorial, image, one which many felt was reinforced by the rather insular nature of motorsport journalism at the time (where those attempting to push through changes were mocked and harassed by the specialist press, perhaps in reflection to the fact that they felt harassed by the increasingly critical attitude of the mainstream press).

The sport was, in a number of ways, cut off from the wider world until the 1970's, when the advent of television broadcasts meant that, all of a sudden, the wider world could see for themselves the consequences of a major accident - it was one thing for the death or serious injury of a driver to be off handedly referred to in a newspaper column by a journalist, and quite another when the viewer themselves could see a driver having to be hauled out of a car on a medial stretcher if he was lucky.
It took a lot of external pressure to force that change in mindset through, and quite a few figures weren't always happy about it when they had to pay the consequences, so, especially amongst a certain sect of the older part of the F1 fan base, that sense of resentment about the increasing safety measures and celebration of the adversarial nature of the sport still has a strong hold.

In fact, thinking about it, it could be argued that the increased commercialisation of the sport in the 1970's was one of the major factors in driving safety standards up - with the wider public becoming increasingly aware, and uncomfortable about, the bloody nature of the sport, that public pressure, no doubt coupled to pressure from the sponsors, probably helped some realise that things could not continue as they were.
Martin Brundle, on watching a replay of Grosjean spinning:
"The problem with Grosjean is that he want to take a look back at the corner he's just exited"
User avatar
dinizintheoven
Posts: 3998
Joined: 09 Dec 2010, 01:24

Re: Unpopular F1 opinions

Post by dinizintheoven »

CoopsII wrote:Yeah me too and its frustrating when unintelligent watchers accuse of modern racing of being 'too safe'. As if we want a world where the likes of Hakkinen, Wendlinger, Button, Villenueve, both Schumachers, Alonso and others would've lost their lives in F1 alone. And they're just a handful of drivers I can remember having big accidents in the last twenty years.

Robert Kubica (for the crash in Canada in 2007 that handed Sebastian Vettel his F1 debut) is the other one who should be very obvious. Others I can think of would be Andrea Montermini (Spain 1994), Sergio Pérez (Monaco 2011, at the same place as Jenson Button), Pedro Diniz (Nürburgring 1999, upside down), anyone else who went off the road at the top of Eau Rouge, which is what I am assuming you're referring to with Jacques Villeneuve (so that means Ricardo Zonta and Luciano Burti at least), and the mess that was the opening lap of Spa in 1998 is probably best not mentioned under such conditions.

Any more for any more?
James Allen, on his favourite F1 engine of all time:
"...the Life W12, I can't describe the noise to you, but imagine filling your dustbin with nuts and bolts, and then throwing it down the stairs, it was something akin to that!"
User avatar
ibsey
Posts: 1485
Joined: 12 Jan 2010, 00:25

Re: Unpopular F1 opinions

Post by ibsey »

Hamilton at Nurburgring in 2007. Or Hekki at Spain 2008. JV at Oz 2001 was arguably worst than his Eau Rouge shunts. Also Salo had a massive crash at Eau Rouge in FP3 in 1998. Brundle at Oz in 1996. Verstappen at Spa 1996. How De la Rosa survived his barrel roll into the gravel trap during that 1st lap pile up at Monza 2000 i will never know? Webber at Valencia 2010. Wurz at Canada 1998.

I'll stop there. But Ithink it is safe to say a few modern day GP drivers owe their lives to the safety changes in recent years. Without them todays F1 grid might look very different indeed.
Coming January 2019 a new F1 book revisiting 1994.


Pre order it here; www.performancepublishing.co.uk/1994-th ... eason.html


The book's website; www.1994f1.com/
User avatar
roblo97
Posts: 3847
Joined: 16 Sep 2012, 16:42
Location: my house \M/ (Brent Knoll)
Contact:

Re: Unpopular F1 opinions

Post by roblo97 »

dinizintheoven wrote:
CoopsII wrote:Yeah me too and its frustrating when unintelligent watchers accuse of modern racing of being 'too safe'. As if we want a world where the likes of Hakkinen, Wendlinger, Button, Villenueve, both Schumachers, Alonso and others would've lost their lives in F1 alone. And they're just a handful of drivers I can remember having big accidents in the last twenty years.

Robert Kubica (for the crash in Canada in 2007 that handed Sebastian Vettel his F1 debut) is the other one who should be very obvious. Others I can think of would be Andrea Montermini (Spain 1994), Sergio Pérez (Monaco 2011, at the same place as Jenson Button), Pedro Diniz (Nürburgring 1999, upside down), anyone else who went off the road at the top of Eau Rouge, which is what I am assuming you're referring to with Jacques Villeneuve (so that means Ricardo Zonta and Luciano Burti at least), and the mess that was the opening lap of Spa in 1998 is probably best not mentioned under such conditions.
Any more for any more?

Timo Glock Germany 2008
Heikki Kovaleinen Spain 2008 IIRC he said his bpm went down to 0 but came back a few seconds later
Olivier Panis Canada 1997
Trulli Britain 2004
Firman Hungary 2003
Raikonen Germany 2003&2004
Sato Austria 2002
Any more
Mexicola wrote:
shinji wrote:
Mexicola wrote: I'd rather listen to a dog lick its balls. Each to their own, I guess.

Does listening to a dog licking its balls get you excited?

That's between me and my internet service provider.

One of those journalist types.
270 Tube stations in 18:42:50!
User avatar
Shadaza
Posts: 2783
Joined: 05 Jun 2009, 23:49

Re: Unpopular F1 opinions

Post by Shadaza »

Not to mention the couple of times a car has been inches from taking off another drivers head.

Schumacher nearly got decapitated by Liuzzi, Abu Dhabi 2010.
Coulthard nearly killed Wurz, Melbourne 2007.
Message me on Discord.
User avatar
Backmarker
Posts: 1126
Joined: 19 Mar 2012, 17:59

Re: Unpopular F1 opinions

Post by Backmarker »

I think they should get rid of the blue flags. If you're quick enough to catch a slow car, you should be quick enough to pass it.
The Iceman Waiteth
What if Kimi Räikkönen hadn't got his chance in 2001?
User avatar
pasta_maldonado
Site Donor
Site Donor
Posts: 6461
Joined: 22 Apr 2012, 16:49
Location: Greater London. Sort of.

Re: Unpopular F1 opinions

Post by pasta_maldonado »

Backmarker wrote:I think they should get rid of the blue flags. If you're quick enough to catch a slow car, you should be quick enough to pass it.

Not necessarily. Coulthard 2001, anybody?
Last edited by pasta_maldonado on 15 Apr 2013, 19:08, edited 1 time in total.
Klon wrote:more liek Nick Ass-idy amirite?
User avatar
Klon
Site Donor
Site Donor
Posts: 7244
Joined: 28 Mar 2009, 17:07
Location: Schleswig-Holstein, FRG
Contact:

Re: Unpopular F1 opinions

Post by Klon »

pasta_maldonado wrote:
Backmarker wrote:I think they should get rid of the blue flags. If you're quick enough to catch a slow car, you should be quick enough to pass it.

Not necessarily. Could hard 2001, anybody?


That was for position and is therefore a completely different ballgame. Cars that are to be lapped generally will try to make room sooner or later because keeping cars that you have no business dueling behind you takes time you need somewhere else.
User avatar
AndreaModa
Posts: 5806
Joined: 30 Mar 2009, 17:51
Location: Bristol, UK

Re: Unpopular F1 opinions

Post by AndreaModa »

McNish, Japan 2002 in qualifying: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wVLFVHie3Fw

Not often cars end up the wrong side of the barriers in recent times, that was a massive impact.
I want my MTV...Simtek Ford

My Motorsport Photos

@DNPQ_
User avatar
ibsey
Posts: 1485
Joined: 12 Jan 2010, 00:25

Re: Unpopular F1 opinions

Post by ibsey »

Shadaza wrote:Not to mention the couple of times a car has been inches from taking off another drivers head.

Schumacher nearly got decapitated by Liuzzi, Abu Dhabi 2010.
Coulthard nearly killed Wurz, Melbourne 2007.


Also M Schumi nearly got decapitated by his own brother Ralf at Nurburgring in 1997.

Then there was Alonso off the start at Spa last year.
Coming January 2019 a new F1 book revisiting 1994.


Pre order it here; www.performancepublishing.co.uk/1994-th ... eason.html


The book's website; www.1994f1.com/
User avatar
Onxy Wrecked
Posts: 1762
Joined: 11 Dec 2012, 03:23
Location: Dodging Potholes and Snowshowers

Re: Unpopular F1 opinions

Post by Onxy Wrecked »

Hound55 wrote:Not F1, but here it goes.

I really dislike oval races in Indycar. Not because I think the are too easy, but because it all seems stupidly dangerous. They are too fast, too fragile, and too prone to getting airborne for me to feel comfortable watching. Wheldon's crash at Las Vegas really reaffirmed my distaste for open wheelers on ovals. Honestly, I really wish Indianapolis weren't so important so that there wouldn't be races there anymore.

I'm really soft when it comes to amplifying the danger factor in motorsport. I felt incredibly nervous watching the Daytona 500 after watching Kyle Larson rip an enormous hole in the fence just the day prior. Call me a wuss, but I just don't feel comfortable with there being more danger than there needs to be.

I am lucky I grew up in the modern era of racing. I don't think I could have dealt with the amount of casualties in early racing.

The Indianapolis oval is very flat at 9 degrees of banking. Las Vegas has 18-20 degrees. The dangers of IndyCar increase with the banking in the corners. Higher banking means more pack racing and more airborne cars.
More Moneytron, more problems for Onyx!
A flock of Kroghs appear on the NASCAR Track and cause caw-tions!
User avatar
UncreativeUsername37
Posts: 3420
Joined: 25 May 2012, 14:36
Location: Earth

Re: Unpopular F1 opinions

Post by UncreativeUsername37 »

Onxy Wrecked wrote:
Hound55 wrote:Not F1, but here it goes.

I really dislike oval races in Indycar. Not because I think the are too easy, but because it all seems stupidly dangerous. They are too fast, too fragile, and too prone to getting airborne for me to feel comfortable watching. Wheldon's crash at Las Vegas really reaffirmed my distaste for open wheelers on ovals. Honestly, I really wish Indianapolis weren't so important so that there wouldn't be races there anymore.

I'm really soft when it comes to amplifying the danger factor in motorsport. I felt incredibly nervous watching the Daytona 500 after watching Kyle Larson rip an enormous hole in the fence just the day prior. Call me a wuss, but I just don't feel comfortable with there being more danger than there needs to be.

I am lucky I grew up in the modern era of racing. I don't think I could have dealt with the amount of casualties in early racing.

The Indianapolis oval is very flat at 9 degrees of banking. Las Vegas has 18-20 degrees. The dangers of IndyCar increase with the banking in the corners. Higher banking means more pack racing and more airborne cars.

It's still super high-speed turns with no runoff, though.
Rob Dylan wrote:Mercedes paying homage to the other W12 chassis by breaking down 30 minutes in
Post Reply