Ponderbox

[Nessafox]

If all of the Formula 1 designers all come up with the same ideas separately without knowing what the others are doing, and all F1 cars are unintentionally identical, are they spec cars?

No, it will only turn into a an endless legal battle.

[Wallio]

There wouldn't have been any penalties coming for Michelin-shod tyres if they had just made pit stops for tyres. As far as I can recall, the big problem was left-rear. But in the end, the teams would have probably run out of tyres because IIRC there was two sets of tyres available for qualifying and race.

Remembering also Turkish GP where Williams ran into tyre troubles and both Webber and Heidfeld had two right-rear punctures. Both retired after a second one.

That went to show that the 2005 rules were good if tyre manufacturers built a competent tyre, which Michelin's tyre wasn't built very well for banked corners. The 2005 rules were good, but Michelin wound up in trouble. Bridgestone did very well in terms of tyre construction, but it lacked pace. It's a year with an arguably mixed grid and results, just based off tyres. Very different to today, and maybe a mixed grid that is better than what happened this year.

Not quite. Remember, only yota had problems, and only because they ran both their rear tyre pressures, and rear camber at settings outside of Michelins recommendations. If they had just run them correctly, there would have been no failures. No other team had issues, but they jumped on the politics bandwagon and used it as a protest against Ferrari (who they new would veto anything they put forward) and the FIA. Hence why yota let Trulli qualify with only 5 laps of fuel on board, they knew they were never going to race.

[TomWazzleshaw]

There wouldn't have been any penalties coming for Michelin-shod tyres if they had just made pit stops for tyres. As far as I can recall, the big problem was left-rear. But in the end, the teams would have probably run out of tyres because IIRC there was two sets of tyres available for qualifying and race.

Remembering also Turkish GP where Williams ran into tyre troubles and both Webber and Heidfeld had two right-rear punctures. Both retired after a second one.

That went to show that the 2005 rules were good if tyre manufacturers built a competent tyre, which Michelin's tyre wasn't built very well for banked corners. The 2005 rules were good, but Michelin wound up in trouble. Bridgestone did very well in terms of tyre construction, but it lacked pace. It's a year with an arguably mixed grid and results, just based off tyres. Very different to today, and maybe a mixed grid that is better than what happened this year.

Well, to be fair, turn 13 at Indianapolis is the only banked corner they ran all year. Part of the problem with the Michelins was that the oval at Indy had been partially resurfaced between the 2004 and 2005 events, and the Indy 500 had been run just a few weeks beforehand, so Bridgestone managed to get a ton of valuable data from the engineers over from Firestone as a result. That plus Bridgestone had been more conservative than Michelin in tyre construction pretty much since Michelin re-entered in 2001.

[Bleu]

With Christmas Eve now here, I was pondering how to fit good words for 12 Days in F1 style.

Vettel won one race too many.

[Marco]

On my 12th day of christmas my true love gave to me

12 cylinder Ferraris
11 teams getting points
10 turbos exploding
9 reject drivers
8 cylinder cosworths
7 up sponsored Jordans
6 wheels on a tyrrell
5 Martini Stripes!
4 cars not qualifying
3 rejects on a podium
2 mastercard lolas
and 1 race on the Nordschleif-eeee

[Boomstick]

On my 12th day of christmas my true love gave to me

12 cylinder Ferraris
11 teams getting points
10 turbos exploding
9 reject drivers
8 cylinder cosworths
7 up sponsored Jordans
6 wheels on a tyrrell
5 Martini Stripes!
4 cars not qualifying
3 rejects on a podium
2 mastercard lolas
and 1 race on the Nordschleif-eeee

Ah love it!

If all of the Formula 1 designers all come up with the same ideas separately without knowing what the others are doing, and all F1 cars are unintentionally identical, are they spec cars?

The whole game is like a pyramid everybody keeps going towards the same solution, plus do you really think everybody works in a vacuum?

[mario]

If all of the Formula 1 designers all come up with the same ideas separately without knowing what the others are doing, and all F1 cars are unintentionally identical, are they spec cars?

The whole game is like a pyramid everybody keeps going towards the same solution, plus do you really think everybody works in a vacuum?

It's true that there will be copying of components from car to car, both via legal means (i.e. photographs etc) and, as past experience has shown, by more questionable means too. Besides, there is the more innocent copying that comes from a designer transferring from one team to another - he can still recall how things were done at his old team, and inevitably some of that experience will come through in the work that he does (such as Gustav Brunner's chassis designs at some of the backmarker teams reflecting the designs he developed at Ferrari, or elements from old Minardi's turning up on the F138 this season due to a senior designer transferring from Toro Rosso to Ferrari in 2012).

Equally, you're right that there will be, to some extent, technological convergence anyway - we've seen it in the past with other components, such as engine formats or front wing designs, since generally there will tend to be a relatively limited range of solutions to developing the optimal design for most components and cars.

[mario]

On a different note, there is an interesting article in Autosport on McLaren and Whitmarsh's explanation for why they went for a new car in 2013 rather than developing their existing one.
Around the middle of the season, McLaren went through a difficult period that Whitmarsh ascribes to a six week period in which McLaren struggled to enhance the performance of the car. Seeing their performance drop, it seems that the design team feared that the current car was running out of development potential and was starting to flat line, leading them to push Whitmarsh for a new design in 2013.

"We were looking at our development last year, we had a reasonable car, and then it did not respond in development terms. Every week you are delivering 1.5-2 points of downforce and when you go for a six week period of not doing that, you start to worry.

"It was maybe at that time that the engineer team thought maybe our progress is horizontal and we need to break out of here."

http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/111972

Now, whilst I can see why McLaren might have feared that they'd be left behind, it does come across as a slightly unusual response for McLaren to take - normally McLaren are famed for their calm, rational response to a problem, so to take what seems like a bit of a knee jerk reaction to their development issues does seem a little out of place for them. It also begs the question of what their response was after that development hiatus, since it would suggest that they decided to press on regardless with their new development direction even though whatever issues had plagued them during the middle of the 2012 season had been at least partially resolved.

[Aerospeed]

Could McLaren have been competitive with the old car in 2013, given then 2012 was still fighting for wins even at the end of the season?

Reverting to a new car this year was a good decision, under the circumstances (see king that I don't know the physics of designing a car as much as I should). But in this case, McLaren seem to have put their chips on one area and bottled it up. At least the new regulations give them a fresh start to (hopefully) recover. I just hope they didn't fire Perez in order to keep a bit of their ego.

[Salamander]

I just hope they didn't fire Perez in order to keep a bit of their ego.

They didn't. Regardless of how bad the car was, Perez's showing in 2013 was not to the standard that you'd expect from a McLaren driver.

[noiceinmydrink]

Someone please explain the Perez hate to me. I do not understand it. He outperformed Button on several occasions, which is more than most expected.

[good_Ralf]

He outperformed Button on several occasions, which is more than most expected.

I agree with this statement. But then people suggest that this happened because Button himself was having an off year and also age is now getting the better of him (he'll be 34 next month). Personally, I like Perez and I think he is fast enough to win races, although maybe not WDCs.

[Alextrax52]

Someone please explain the Perez hate to me. I do not understand it. He outperformed Button on several occasions, which is more than most expected.

One reason is at times he displays pieces of driving Andy Neate would have been proud of like China and Monaco for instance

[kevinbotz]

Someone please explain the Perez hate to me. I do not understand it. He outperformed Button on several occasions, which is more than most expected.

Let's dissect this question piece by piece.

McLaren's management view Jenson Button as an ideal number two driver; experienced, dependable, capable of producing valuable technical feedback to the engineers, and generally capable of delivering exceptional performances on race day. However, Button is generally considered to be slightly lacking in terms of latent, innate natural pace, a gap that was once filled by Lewis Hamilton, and an asset that they subsequently lost to Mercedes.

As such, Sergio Perez, when he was signed by McLaren, was never considered as a replacement candidate for Button, but rather for Hamilton. To justify his place at McLaren, Perez had to match or exceed the pace of Hamilton, or at least demonstrate the potential to match or exceed the pace of Hamilton. And on that front, he desperately underperformed. At the Abu Dhabi Grand Prix, Button, following a front wing change owing to another first lap incident, made up 23 seconds to Perez in the race. Corroborated by underwhelming simulator data and information collected over the season, McLaren concluded that Perez possessed a severe speed deficit to Button that would be either exceedingly difficult to address, or impossible to resolve at all.

Exacerbating Perez's predicament was the rise of Kevin Magnussen, who convincingly outpaced Perez in the simulator and established a time in the YDT that would have placed him sixth on the grid for the British Grand Prix. In addition, the reticence of Force India and Marussia to provide Magnussen with a race seat raised fears within McLaren that Magnussen could be poached by another team, namely Ferrari or Red Bull.

All of these factors resulted in McLaren's decision to drop Sergio Perez for 2014. Yes, the equipment was severely lacking, and perhaps the circumstances were unusually onerous. But ultimately, the core issues leading to Perez's dismissal rest with Perez himself, and him alone.

[AdrianSutil]

Someone please explain the Perez hate to me. I do not understand it. He outperformed Button on several occasions, which is more than most expected.

One reason is at times he displays pieces of driving Andy Neate would have been proud of like China and Monaco for instance

Don't forget Bahrain too. It all added up.

[Salamander]

Someone please explain the Perez hate to me. I do not understand it. He outperformed Button on several occasions, which is more than most expected.

Perez hate? What? I don't hate Perez - he's one of my favourite drivers. But I won't let that blind me to the fact that he was disappointing at McLaren. As for the rest, well, kevinbotz has summed up the situation absolutely perfectly.

[mario]

Someone please explain the Perez hate to me. I do not understand it. He outperformed Button on several occasions, which is more than most expected.

Let's dissect this question piece by piece.

McLaren's management view Jenson Button as an ideal number two driver; experienced, dependable, capable of producing valuable technical feedback to the engineers, and generally capable of delivering exceptional performances on race day. However, Button is generally considered to be slightly lacking in terms of latent, innate natural pace, a gap that was once filled by Lewis Hamilton, and an asset that they subsequently lost to Mercedes.

As such, Sergio Perez, when he was signed by McLaren, was never considered as a replacement candidate for Button, but rather for Hamilton. To justify his place at McLaren, Perez had to match or exceed the pace of Hamilton, or at least demonstrate the potential to match or exceed the pace of Hamilton. And on that front, he desperately underperformed. At the Abu Dhabi Grand Prix, Button, following a front wing change owing to another first lap incident, made up 23 seconds to Perez in the race. Corroborated by underwhelming simulator data and information collected over the season, McLaren concluded that Perez possessed a severe speed deficit to Button that would be either exceedingly difficult to address, or impossible to resolve at all.

Exacerbating Perez's predicament was the rise of Kevin Magnussen, who convincingly outpaced Perez in the simulator and established a time in the YDT that would have placed him sixth on the grid for the British Grand Prix. In addition, the reticence of Force India and Marussia to provide Magnussen with a race seat raised fears within McLaren that Magnussen could be poached by another team, namely Ferrari or Red Bull.

All of these factors resulted in McLaren's decision to drop Sergio Perez for 2014. Yes, the equipment was severely lacking, and perhaps the circumstances were unusually onerous. But ultimately, the core issues leading to Perez's dismissal rest with Perez himself, and him alone.

Your comments are an excellent assessment of McLaren's viewpoint of Perez. That said, there is still something that I wonder about McLaren's decision, and that is whether they were going for a driver who didn't really fit the role that they had in mind.

After all, Perez's 2011 season was disrupted by his accident in Monaco - although he was able to get back into the car reasonably quickly, he did later admit that he experienced after effects from his accident for a few months after that crash - and his 2012 season, whilst still reasonably strong, did seem to indicate that he was still finding his feet after a somewhat difficult first season. I'm fairly sure that I recall Jo Ramirez saying that signing for McLaren was a mistake, since he felt that Perez did not have sufficient experience or mental preparation to cope with the expectations of McLaren, and that McLaren in turn were putting Perez under too much pressure to perform before he'd even stepped in the car.

What is interesting is that, by comparison, Magnussen is being treated in a much more careful manner than Perez was - McLaren have said that they intend to "protect" Magnussen during his first season with them to ensure that he isn't pushed too hard too soon, which makes me wonder if perhaps there is a slight feeling at McLaren that they could have managed Perez a little better.

[noiceinmydrink]

That's cool guys, just wanted to hear people's opinion on it. All I heard previously elsewhere was "OH THAT PEREZ" etc.

[Shizuka]

This is where Joe Saward would step in and say that Button had the better of him, as he finished 24 points ahead.

[tommykl]

Doing research on the evolution of aerodynamics in F1 for a big-arse school assignment, and since I'm going to have to at least give Jim Hall a mention in the oral part of the job, does anyone actually know how Chaparral is pronounced?

[roblo97]

Doing research on the evolution of aerodynamics in F1 for a big-arse school assignment, and since I'm going to have to at least give Jim Hall a mention in the oral part of the job, does anyone actually know how Chaparral is pronounced?

I think it's pronounced Sh-ap-ar-al.
Hope this helps and good luck with the assignment.

[Faustus]

Doing research on the evolution of aerodynamics in F1 for a big-arse school assignment, and since I'm going to have to at least give Jim Hall a mention in the oral part of the job, does anyone actually know how Chaparral is pronounced?

Best of luck with that. If you need any help, don't hesitate to ask.

[tommykl]

Doing research on the evolution of aerodynamics in F1 for a big-arse school assignment, and since I'm going to have to at least give Jim Hall a mention in the oral part of the job, does anyone actually know how Chaparral is pronounced?

Best of luck with that. If you need any help, don't hesitate to ask.

I might indeed need a hand for the finer details of a few innovations if I can find space to talk about it, thanks

[watka]

Here's a thought, did Jules Bianchi do the right thing in being so keen to sign on for another year at Marussia rather than talking to other teams?

Yes, I understand he's supported by Ferrari, and yes, their probably wouldn't have been too many doors open to him (Force India maybe?) given that he doesn't seem to have many sponsors BUT I still think he'd have been better fending for himself.

Firstly, it's hard enough to make an impression at Caterham/Marussia for one season, let alone two. Look at Charles Pic; he had a good season in 2012 where he scrubbed up well alongside Timo Glock but he could do nothing with the Caterham in 2013 and basically his chances of getting further up the grid are practically nil. Bianchi could go the same way, especially as his best performances were at the start of last season rather than the end.

Secondly, you could say that the risk is mitigated by Ferrari support, but realistically when are Ferrari going to want him? They won't let Alonso go by choice (unless Vettel or Hamilton is available) and they must have Raikkonen on at least a 2 year deal. So that then means that Bianchi is committed to Marussia for another two years (unless Ferrari can wield their influence over Sauber to give him a 2015 seat)? Also remember that Ferrari had a chance to sign Hulkenberg this year, i.e. a young-ish talent, and turned him down. Is there really much point in him holding out for a Ferrari seat?

[Shizuka]

I think the answer to that is a yes.

His first get-to-know-you year was alright, and his result in Malaysia brought Marussia some cash. Now, that the team opted for Ferrari engines, he could form the 2014 car a little more to his liking. His performances will also bring Ferrari data about how he uses their V6s, plus he'll be watched closely by Domenicali et al - given the fact he has not left the driver academy yet, he's right now a shoe-in for a Ferrari drive... perhaps in 2015 already. Alonso might be finally fed up with the possibility of five years wasted with no titles won and actually join McLaren, who knows?

The Sauber link is something that's on the cards as well. I wouldn't be surprised if the Sirotkin deal falls through and to cover some losses, Kaltenborn would bring Bianchi in, cutting the engine price a little. Don't forget: Sauber is a team that has brought us some good talent - like a certain Japanese driver - and they always worked well as springboards to top teams (Frentzen to Williams, Kimi to McLaren, Massa to Ferrari, Kobayashi and Perez to Ferrari and McLaren, respectively) - of course, the aftermath not always worked well, but that never really was Sauber's fault.

Ferrari first off needs to get new talent onboard. Not on the drivers front, but on the team front. They seem to lag more and more behind in aerodynamical terms, and they haven't had a car in years that was quick of out the box and had no downturns in performance. The last time they had a decent-all-year car was 2010...

[mario]

Here's a thought, did Jules Bianchi do the right thing in being so keen to sign on for another year at Marussia rather than talking to other teams?

Yes, I understand he's supported by Ferrari, and yes, their probably wouldn't have been too many doors open to him (Force India maybe?) given that he doesn't seem to have many sponsors BUT I still think he'd have been better fending for himself.

Firstly, it's hard enough to make an impression at Caterham/Marussia for one season, let alone two. Look at Charles Pic; he had a good season in 2012 where he scrubbed up well alongside Timo Glock but he could do nothing with the Caterham in 2013 and basically his chances of getting further up the grid are practically nil. Bianchi could go the same way, especially as his best performances were at the start of last season rather than the end.

Secondly, you could say that the risk is mitigated by Ferrari support, but realistically when are Ferrari going to want him? They won't let Alonso go by choice (unless Vettel or Hamilton is available) and they must have Raikkonen on at least a 2 year deal. So that then means that Bianchi is committed to Marussia for another two years (unless Ferrari can wield their influence over Sauber to give him a 2015 seat)? Also remember that Ferrari had a chance to sign Hulkenberg this year, i.e. a young-ish talent, and turned him down. Is there really much point in him holding out for a Ferrari seat?

What is interesting is that, earlier in the season, Bianchi stated that he wanted to stay at Marussia because, by virtue of being in a backmarker team, the reduced pressure would enable him to hone his skills as a driver without the distraction of heavy media commitments and an inquisitive press.

For now, he seems to be content to take things a little more slowly and not to rush himself into a top team, which is in some ways perhaps not a bad thing - perhaps he is wary that a number of drivers (such as Grosjean and Perez) both nearly wrecked their careers by moving up to a top team a little too quickly and found themselves overwhelmed by the expectations put upon them.

Ferrari first off needs to get new talent onboard. Not on the drivers front, but on the team front. They seem to lag more and more behind in aerodynamical terms, and they haven't had a car in years that was quick of out the box and had no downturns in performance. The last time they had a decent-all-year car was 2010...

They have been making some attempts to bring in new designers to rectify some of those issues, with Allison probably being one of the higher profile signings this season. The substantial overhaul of their wind tunnel facilities should also help them too, since it should cut down on their correlation issues and stop them from having to outsource so much of their work to Sauber or Toyota's consultancy service in Cologne.

[Sublime_FA11C]

Good points on both sides regarding Pic. After 2 years in backmarker teams he seems washed-up as an F1 driver. Or to be more tactful, 'retired'. OTOH Bianchi must know best how much there is still to learn about being in F1, and he still has an opportunity to exceed expectations and a very handsome excuse should he appear slow. Blue flags that badly hurt laptimes.

I can't know why no F1 team was is a rush to sign Pic, can only assume he failed in some way or dissapointed somehow. Could very well be a personal issue. Di Resta had enough talent to stay in F1 but made enough mistakes (and not enough friends) to blow his chance when the field was full of talented drivers, some perhaps with more of a future, some easier to get along with, etc.

Having read many profiles on the main F1Rejects site i'm aware how difficult it is for many obviously talented racers to adapt to being part of F1, or their team or who knows, maybe something else, but there's hurdles to clear in the early stages of F1 careers that some young rookies never get past. The general public is very rarely priviledged or interested in knowing all the reasons why.

Back to Bianchi then. Being highly regarded but unproven carries with it an element of danger. Belief in such drivers can dissapear quickly if they find themselves in trouble with just a few bad races. That can in turn hurt confidence and pretty much spell doom for their careers. Had Hulkenberg been signed to Ferrari it's not impossible he would have found himself in Perez' shoes. And Perez himself got criticised far too much, far too soon in McLaren. Kovalainen got some overdue hype when he was signed to replaced Kimi, and it took two races for him to be completely writtn off by most fans. Actually the damage done by bad luck alone in his first race was probably enough to set the pressure very high. Unfair to Kovi perhaps but it has happened before.

With Bianchi staying put in Marussia he gets a chance to make himself a more complete package without much danger of being written off at the end of the year.

[Faustus]

With Bianchi staying put in Marussia he gets a chance to make himself a more complete package without much danger of being written off at the end of the year.

Exactly. He has nothing to lose by staying at Marussia, because if nothing else, it keeps him in Formula 1.

[watka]

With Bianchi staying put in Marussia he gets a chance to make himself a more complete package without much danger of being written off at the end of the year.

Exactly. He has nothing to lose by staying at Marussia, because if nothing else, it keeps him in Formula 1.

I guess that Bianchi is in a similar position to any generic Toro Rosso driver, but without the pressure of having a large roster of other drivers to compete with. Perhaps I am under-estimating how keen Ferrari are on him; my view is that Ferrari are the sort of team who can put anyone they want in the car if they persue their man hard enough and that Bianchi would have to continually pull rabbits out of hats in a dud car to impress them enough for a drive. I guess that this might not be the case and they have may have a true plan that sees Bianchi in car by 2016 - they do have a precedent for this sort of thing, being the grooming of Felipe Massa into the Ferrari team via Sauber and test driving.

[go_Rubens]

With Bianchi staying put in Marussia he gets a chance to make himself a more complete package without much danger of being written off at the end of the year.

Exactly. He has nothing to lose by staying at Marussia, because if nothing else, it keeps him in Formula 1.

I guess that Bianchi is in a similar position to any generic Toro Rosso driver, but without the pressure of having a large roster of other drivers to compete with. Perhaps I am under-estimating how keen Ferrari are on him; my view is that Ferrari are the sort of team who can put anyone they want in the car if they persue their man hard enough and that Bianchi would have to continually pull rabbits out of hats in a dud car to impress them enough for a drive. I guess that this might not be the case and they have may have a true plan that sees Bianchi in car by 2016 - they do have a precedent for this sort of thing, being the grooming of Felipe Massa into the Ferrari team via Sauber and test driving.

I agree with this statement here. It also seems like Ferrari are being logical about who they want in their cars after Räikkönen and Alonso leave or retire, and their nurturing Bianchi is a good idea. Adding Bianchi to Ferrari's lineup in the future should be good to get Ferrari out of the past with the driver front.

Now, for a thought on Ferrari. I think a good lineup for Ferrari in the future would be Bianchi and Hülkenberg. Bianchi is keeping himself in F1 by staying at Marussia, and he'll improve as a driver there. Hülkenberg just has do do what he always has been doing: pulling off giant-killing performances in a midfield car or good ones in an average or poor car. If he does that, I see no reason why Hülk doesn't wind up at Ferrari as long as someone else doesn't take him. Having what I feel is going to be a strong lineup will not only bring the fresh blood that Ferrari needs to keep the team going in the right direction, it'd be a very interesting teemate battle to watch. I think it's also possible that they're good enough to challenge Vettel and possibly Ricciardo if Red Bull stay on form and Ricciardo does well, and Ferrari improve, or possibly beat them. Is it possible that there could be an epic battle for F1 supremacy in the future?

[UncreativeUsername37]

Pic was pretty anonymous, but you know who was almost as anonymous?

Sebastian Vettel.

Seriously. Apart from Sepang, can anyone name anything that actually happened to him this year? Because I hardly remember seeing him this season.

This was discussed on the podcast, of course, but I realised how funny the word "anonymous" was for him this season and had to do something about it.

[Sublime_FA11C]

He was very ragged in Suzuka, and there were a couple of races where he had to deal Webber or Grosjean who gave him a good fight. And the earlier half of the season Mercs were locking out the front row, and the RB had nowhere near the performance advantage it enjoyed post Pirelli tyre change. In China we had a very exciting race finish with Vettel chasing down Hamilton, and losing out. In Nurburgring Kimi was in with a chance of victory and here was Hugary as well... All in all there was a lot of laps that weren't led by him. :)

Results wise, you could hardly call Vettel's 2013 as anonymous considering all the accolades and records. It's just that such results became expected of him and he delivered so looking at results only it may appear monotonous. But that's not only very harsh it's also inaccurate. You can only call him anonymous if you ignore facts and events. And donuts. The image of him bowing to the RB9 looked to me to be an instant classic.

It's fine to say you're not impressed nor excited and just plain don't like him. I don't know why F1 fans are so very quick to criticise and even quicker to dismiss. 2013 was a very good year in F1 in my own opinion, though it could have been much better had teams other than Merc kept up the development race and had Pirelli been allowed to more striclty enforce their "suggestions" on tyre parameters. If teams had not been allowed excessive camber angles or to switch left tyres onto the right side wheels and vice-versa who knows if Silverstone would have happened. Reading many comments it seems a majority of fans found this year a bore, and i sometimes wonder just what the expectations were, and in some cases i wonder if they were watching the same race as me.

Sutil is for example criticised as not being up to it, anonymous and the like. Australia was a long time ago now, but that was certainly not anonymous. His performances were very much average since but with few mistakes and also a few exceptional moments (He of all people passed Alonso of all people at the Monaco hairpin). Once FI lost it's bite, Sutil became more anonymous i admit, and the mistakes and bad luck with collisions from the earlier half of the season cost him dear, but he had a pretty good year and is a dependable and above-average F1 driver. Should have an ok season at least next year with Sauber.

I suspect it's because a lot of us were hoping for a spark of greatness from Sutil (among others like Perez) and when it became apparent he was no great, the dissapointment changed attitudes to be more or less indifferent. Even to the point of not really caring if he's in F1 next year or not.

[UncreativeUsername37]

I wasn't making that post as yet another "he sucks he wins because of his car f1 is boring blehhh" post. I liked this season, the racing was quite good. Because despite what most people even here seem to think, you don't have to stay fixated on the leader the entire race and not look at anything else. And I don't know how saying he has large margins of victory could be an insult anyway.

[RonDenisDeletraz]

I actually quite enjoyed the first half of the season. But I don't think anyone likes to see the winner of the race being a forgone conclusion, even if it is your favourite driver.

[Jocke1]

Countdown-in-Pictures:
http://gtaforums.com/topic/569516-gta-v ... -pictures/

Good / Bad for an F1 season-opener countdown? What are some opinions? Curious and pondering.

[good_Ralf]

Countdown-in-Pictures:
http://gtaforums.com/topic/569516-gta-v ... -pictures/

Good / Bad for an F1 season-opener countdown? What are some opinions? Curious.

I remember your thread counting down to Melbourne got locked for some reason, but I think it was a good, fun idea.

[Jocke1]

I remember your thread counting down to Melbourne got locked for some reason, but I think it was a good, fun idea.

Perhaps it wasn't explained well enough that time, I don't know.
But yes, first it got locked with only my one post made. Then after having been locked for three days, the thread was deleted. I was perplexed to be honest.
When Nuppiz wrote to me "Enough is enough. Go post in the word association thread.", I was kind of hurt, like I had a prior history.
I didn't understand.

[go_Rubens]

I remember your thread counting down to Melbourne got locked for some reason, but I think it was a good, fun idea.

Perhaps it wasn't explained well enough that time, I don't know.
But yes, first it got locked with only my one post made. Then after having been locked for three days, the thread was deleted. I was perplexed to be honest.
When Nuppiz wrote to me "Enough is enough. Go post in the word association thread.", I was kind of hurt, like I had a prior history.
I didn't understand.

I for one do have my views on threads that should and should not be on the forums. I am mixed about that idea you had. I was good with it because of the fact that it may vent out more F1 Deprivation than the Word Association Thread does, which may be a good thing. On the other hand, some people, who will not be named, may get the idea to perform post count inflation techniques in the thread, which is something highly regarded as an action not to honor yourself with. I think Nuppiz's point of view there was that we have the Word Association thread to vent ourselves a little, which was more or less enough for F1 Deprivation. I respect Nuppiz's decision on behalf of the thread either way.

[Jocke1]

I for one do have my views on threads that should and should not be on the forums. I am mixed about that idea you had. I was good with it because of the fact that it may vent out more F1 Deprivation than the Word Association Thread does, which may be a good thing. On the other hand, some people, who will not be named, may get the idea to perform post count inflation techniques in the thread, which is something highly regarded as an action not to honor yourself with. I think Nuppiz's point of view there was that we have the Word Association thread to vent ourselves a little, which was more or less enough for F1 Deprivation. I respect Nuppiz's decision on behalf of the thread either way.

Good points, Rubens.
I did make one rule clear, though. In the very first sentence of the thread I wrote, one image per day. Like first come...

[Jocke1]

Watch this and ponder (only 1 minute in length):

Published 5 jan 2014
No one should pay for a mistake with their life. When we drive, we share the road with others, so the speed we choose to travel at needs to leave room for any potential error.

http://youtu.be/bvLaTupw-hk