Grand Prix Rejects

AndreaModa wrote:Personally I find the stuff CoopsII and Mexicola trot out on a regular basis absolutely hilarious. Keep it up boys!

Exactly, and this ~is~ the rantbox so it's expected that some opinions here are designed to raise a few heckles from time to time! Nothing wrong with people trying to make light of some of the things that are said!

Klon wrote:So yeah, you and Cynon are monkeymen of the highest calibre. Since I cannot afford plane tickets to Finland and Chicago, could you two please find yourself a guy of two metres to slap you across the face as hard as he possibly can so you actually feel my disapproval of your stupidity? Thank you very much.

Hey, man, I know I have too much hair on my forearms, but I promise, I'm not a monkeyman. It's just that Chewbacca is my homeboy and I took some fashion tips from him. Never doing that again, not even on Life Day...

Cynon wrote:not even on Life Day...

Ew...no...not that...anything but that...

Ataxia wrote:

Cynon wrote:not even on Life Day...

Ew...no...not that...anything but that...

It's not a phantom menace, that's for sure...

Insert capital letters there if you so choose.

Cynon wrote:

Ataxia wrote:
Ew...no...not that...anything but that...

It's not a phantom menace, that's for sure...

Only the return of the Jedi can prevent such puns from happening.

You guys are Yavin a laugh, right? Star Wars puns are good for Alderaan reasons...but they're also Forcing a Wedge between us.

You know one complaint about Formula 1 that I absolutely have no time or patience for? That the drivers cannot handle rain - hence all the safety car starts and such. That is such complete and utter bullshite. The complaint should instead be about the fact that Pirelli cannot make a wet tyre worth a damn.

Salamander wrote:You know one complaint about Formula 1 that I absolutely have no time or patience for? That the drivers cannot handle rain - hence all the safety car starts and such. That is such complete and utter bullshite. The complaint should instead be about the fact that Pirelli cannot make a wet tyre worth a damn.

I agree, go back to the days of three wet compounds, let them pick one, and let'em loose.

Wallio wrote:

Salamander wrote:You know one complaint about Formula 1 that I absolutely have no time or patience for? That the drivers cannot handle rain - hence all the safety car starts and such. That is such complete and utter bullshite. The complaint should instead be about the fact that Pirelli cannot make a wet tyre worth a damn.

I agree, go back to the days of three wet compounds, let them pick one, and let'em loose.

You don't even need that; you just need the ridiculous Bridgestone inters, which excellently covered every track condition from slightly damp, to more or less what you'd see in a heavy monsoon.

Salamander wrote:You know one complaint about Formula 1 that I absolutely have no time or patience That the drivers cannot handle rain - hence all the safety car starts and such. That is such complete and utter bullshite. The complaint should instead be about the fact that Pirelli cannot make a wet tyre worth a damn.

I agree and wonder if drivers in the future will require the bullsh1t you mentioned as, having little experience of racing in the wet, letting them loose in it would be futile.

CoopsII wrote:

Salamander wrote:You know one complaint about Formula 1 that I absolutely have no time or patience That the drivers cannot handle rain - hence all the safety car starts and such. That is such complete and utter bullshite. The complaint should instead be about the fact that Pirelli cannot make a wet tyre worth a damn.

I agree and wonder if drivers in the future will require the bullsh1t you mentioned as, having little experience of racing in the wet, letting them loose in it would be futile.

That's the problem that infuriates me. It becomes systematic within newer drivers so that ability is lost. At which point somewhere down the line you end up with a grid of drivers that can't actually drive in the wet, because they're not given the opportunity to!

CoopsII wrote:

Salamander wrote:You know one complaint about Formula 1 that I absolutely have no time or patience That the drivers cannot handle rain - hence all the safety car starts and such. That is such complete and utter bullshite. The complaint should instead be about the fact that Pirelli cannot make a wet tyre worth a damn.

I agree and wonder if drivers in the future will require the bullsh1t you mentioned as, having little experience of racing in the wet, letting them loose in it would be futile.

Racing in the rain seems to becoming a lost art in just about every category, not just in F1...

Cynon wrote:

CoopsII wrote:

Salamander wrote:You know one complaint about Formula 1 that I absolutely have no time or patience That the drivers cannot handle rain - hence all the safety car starts and such. That is such complete and utter bullshite. The complaint should instead be about the fact that Pirelli cannot make a wet tyre worth a damn.

I agree and wonder if drivers in the future will require the bullsh1t you mentioned as, having little experience of racing in the wet, letting them loose in it would be futile.

Racing in the rain seems to becoming a lost art in just about every category, not just in F1...

True. In Euro F3 they have red-flagged twice a race in conditions where intermediates should be used.

Why do we see so few driver changes over the course of a year nowadays? 2013 we had one driver change for the last two races of the year, 2012 we had one driver change for one race.

We all know who's under-performing, and the last few years there's been some excellent under-performers who've kept their seats because their bosses have been too "safe". The comment article "Reign of the Finger" brings up the point that the team managers are being far too safe. Specific cases that I recall such as Bruno Senna having his seat threatened at Williams, and Caterham planning on putting Kovalainen in the Caterham half-way through last year, never materialised into actual action, and even this year the bottom three ranked drivers from last year are still all here, some seemingly secure!

I'd just like to see some variety, instead of teams like Ferrari waiting, waiting, waiting, waiting, waiting, and waiting for their drivers to perform and instead just freshen up the grid a little bit.

Rob Dylan wrote:Why do we see so few driver changes over the course of a year nowadays? 2013 we had one driver change for the last two races of the year, 2012 we had one driver change for one race.

We all know who's under-performing, and the last few years there's been some excellent under-performers who've kept their seats because their bosses have been too "safe". The comment article "Reign of the Finger" brings up the point that the team managers are being far too safe. Specific cases that I recall such as Bruno Senna having his seat threatened at Williams, and Caterham planning on putting Kovalainen in the Caterham half-way through last year, never materialised into actual action, and even this year the bottom three ranked drivers from last year are still all here, some seemingly secure!

I'd just like to see some variety, instead of teams like Ferrari waiting, waiting, waiting, waiting, waiting, and waiting for their drivers to perform and instead just freshen up the grid a little bit.

In the case of Williams and Bruno Senna, part of that was probably because Williams used Bruno Senna's free practise sessions to train Bottas - with the money Bruno was reportedly bringing in, he effectively paid Williams to train a driver to replace him.

Kovalainen also highlighted one of the other issues with bringing in a driver partway through a season, which is the time it takes for a new driver to adapt to a car. Hulkenberg was made the same offer that Kovalainen was to drive for Lotus at the end of the 2013 season, but he refused because he believed that, were he to drive for Lotus and to do poorly, it would kill his career - which is what effectively happened to Kovalainen.

That, I think, is part of the issue - whilst some drivers in the field are poor, at the same time they are holding onto their places partially because the teams cannot afford to let them go, and partially because a mid season change means the risk of having to accept a potential short term drop in performance on the gamble that said driver can then regain or enhance that position later in the season. With large differences in prize money between each rank in the WCC, the team bosses are probably so risk averse that they would prefer a known quantity, even if that driver isn't the best, over a potentially better but completely unknown quantity who might not be able to make up for any losses in the short term, particularly if the changes are made later on in the season.

After posting that Sauber are my ROTHWP nominee, I feel a proper rant is needed about this lot.

Things need to happen, that much is clear. Monisha Kaltenborn may be a very smart lady, but motorsport does appear to be one of her strong points, if you want to know how a businessman/woman runs a team, just ask Ferrari about their Domenicali years.

Things that need to happen: #1 Sauber REALLY need to look at their tech dept., them keeping technical personel is like pouring water through a sieve, and still no tech director, for what, three years now? #2 Alex Sauber should go, replace him with Monisha Kaltenborn, even though even though teams like Williams and McLaren don't have sidepod sponsors, the Sauber looks more bare each season.

It's my last day in work today before going away for a week and I've bloody tonnes of paperwork to do before I can get gone

I know technically this isn't F1 related but I am going to miss Qualifying in Belgium due to travelling home that day, does that help?

CoopsII wrote:It's my last day in work today before going away for a week and I've bloody tonnes of paperwork to do before I can get gone

I know technically this isn't F1 related but I am going to miss Qualifying in Belgium due to travelling home that day, does that help?

Are you new at this or what? Stick it all in the shredder and claim you never got the forms in the first place! Saves so much time!

Cynon wrote:

CoopsII wrote:

Salamander wrote:You know one complaint about Formula 1 that I absolutely have no time or patience That the drivers cannot handle rain - hence all the safety car starts and such. That is such complete and utter bullshite. The complaint should instead be about the fact that Pirelli cannot make a wet tyre worth a damn.

I agree and wonder if drivers in the future will require the bullsh1t you mentioned as, having little experience of racing in the wet, letting them loose in it would be futile.

Racing in the rain seems to becoming a lost art in just about every category, not just in F1...

In some series, rain races could be a bit of a cop-out if they have to bring out safety cars every other lap for someone spinning off.

I know Bridgestone were praised IIRC for having a good wet-weather tyre, although the original monsoon-tyres were abadoned, because if it got so wet to use them, it would be unsafe for the medical helicopter to fly. Pirelli wet weather tyres just don't seem as good though. (Not that in recent seasons we've seen much need for them)

Cynon wrote:

CoopsII wrote:

Salamander wrote:You know one complaint about Formula 1 that I absolutely have no time or patience That the drivers cannot handle rain - hence all the safety car starts and such. That is such complete and utter bullshite. The complaint should instead be about the fact that Pirelli cannot make a wet tyre worth a damn.

I agree and wonder if drivers in the future will require the bullsh1t you mentioned as, having little experience of racing in the wet, letting them loose in it would be futile.

Racing in the rain seems to becoming a lost art in just about every category, not just in F1...

There has certainly been an increased tendency to deploy safety cars or red flag a session in other series apart from F1 - just look at the World Endurance Championship, for example, where there seems to have been an increase in the use of safety cars in wet weather.
Part of it is perhaps that, in the wake of Simonsen's fatal accident in mixed conditions, that the organisers are much more inclined to err on the side of caution in wet conditions - there also seems to be signs that Michelin's wet weather tyres, in 2013 at least, seem to have not met the expectations of the teams (Michelin have reportedly had to completely redesign their wet weather tyres for 2014, whilst their "slick intermediate" tyres seem to be relatively unpopular despite heavy promotion from Michelin).

andrew2209 wrote:In some series, rain races could be a bit of a cop-out if they have to bring out safety cars every other lap for someone spinning off.

I know Bridgestone were praised IIRC for having a good wet-weather tyre, although the original monsoon-tyres were abadoned, because if it got so wet to use them, it would be unsafe for the medical helicopter to fly. Pirelli wet weather tyres just don't seem as good though. (Not that in recent seasons we've seen much need for them)

Bridgestone were generally complimented for the performance of their intermediate tyres given that they had a very wide operating range, to the point where for a time it almost rendered the full wet tyre obsolete.

Whilst the current intermediates produced by Pirelli don't have quite as wide an operating range, they seem to perform acceptably - it's the full wet tyres where things seem trickier, which, given that the F1 teams tend to be much more reluctant about testing in full wet conditions, does make collecting data to develop those tyres more difficult. After all, there were supposed to be a number of dedicated "wet weather" testing days in the off season this year for Pirelli's benefit, but the track dried out so quickly that they were struggling to make sure it was wet enough for the conditions to be representative and eventually they abandoned the notion.

mario wrote:Bridgestone were generally complimented for the performance of their intermediate tyres given that they had a very wide operating range, to the point where for a time it almost rendered the full wet tyre obsolete.

Whilst the current intermediates produced by Pirelli don't have quite as wide an operating range, they seem to perform acceptably - it's the full wet tyres where things seem trickier, which, given that the F1 teams tend to be much more reluctant about testing in full wet conditions, does make collecting data to develop those tyres more difficult. After all, there were supposed to be a number of dedicated "wet weather" testing days in the off season this year for Pirelli's benefit, but the track dried out so quickly that they were struggling to make sure it was wet enough for the conditions to be representative and eventually they abandoned the notion.

Well if they want some wet weather testing, just go to the Circuit of Wales in the winter

Although I went to Wales a few weeks ago, it rained 1 morning and 1 afternoon there in the 7 days I stayed there

andrew2209 wrote:
Although I went to Wales a few weeks ago, it rained 1 morning and 1 afternoon there in the 7 days I stayed there

That's what happens when you stay in the South. Try staying in the North, you sissy!

watka wrote:

andrew2209 wrote:
Although I went to Wales a few weeks ago, it rained 1 morning and 1 afternoon there in the 7 days I stayed there

That's what happens when you stay in the South. Try staying in the North, you sissy!

Weren't there floods recently in the north (of Scotland)?

watka wrote:

andrew2209 wrote:
Although I went to Wales a few weeks ago, it rained 1 morning and 1 afternoon there in the 7 days I stayed there

That's what happens when you stay in the South. Try staying in the North, you sissy!

Oh I've been to North Wales 3 times. Rhyl is basically the biggest dump of a town I've seen (well, maybe second biggest, Luton is the worst)

andrew2209 wrote:

watka wrote:

andrew2209 wrote:
Although I went to Wales a few weeks ago, it rained 1 morning and 1 afternoon there in the 7 days I stayed there

That's what happens when you stay in the South. Try staying in the North, you sissy!

Oh I've been to North Wales 3 times. Rhyl is basically the biggest dump of a town I've seen (well, maybe second biggest, Luton is the worst)

And yet their football team beat bloody Tranmere FFS

(Irrelevant but the mention of Rhyl made me just want to point that out)

andrew2209 wrote:Oh I've been to North Wales 3 times. Rhyl is basically the biggest dump of a town I've seen (well, maybe second biggest, Luton is the worst)

And then there's that building on the seafront with "Sunny Rhyl" painted on the wall. That has to be the single most optimistic seaside decoration I've ever seen...

Max Verstappen is a year and two weeks younger than me. Max Verstappen will be driving F1 cars in 2015. If I'm lucky I'll be getting a driving license and a 1990 Toyota Carina with 300,000 miles on the clock in 2015. Is it alright for me to erect a Max Verstappen hate shrine in my bedroom?

takagi_for_the_win wrote:Max Verstappen is a year and two weeks younger than me. Max Verstappen will be driving F1 cars in 2015. If I'm lucky I'll be getting a driving license and a 1990 Toyota Carina with 300,000 miles on the clock in 2015. Is it alright for me to erect a Max Verstappen hate shrine in my bedroom?

Yeah, it is ok.

At the start of the race...

David Croft (Sky): "It's Lights out and away we go!"
Ben Edwards (BBC): "Lights out and away we go!"

...REALLY?

If every language commentary team has to say this, how tedious.

David Croft is the most overrated commentator in F1 history. He's just not at all good. Ben and Martin Brundle would have made a great pair.

ADx_Wales wrote:If every language commentary team has to say this, how tedious.

Hungarian commentary isn't like that.

Mexicola wrote:David Croft is the most overrated commentator in F1 history. He's just not at all good.

How so?

SgtPepper wrote:

Mexicola wrote:David Croft is the most overrated commentator in F1 history. He's just not at all good.

How so?

I don't find his commentary exciting or interesting and can sometimes rely too much on clichés. A bit like James Allen, but James was exciting to listen to.

The problem with most British commentators is they're constantly trying to emulate Murray. He had his "pants on fire" style that could make a processional jaunt around Catalunya (what year was it where no-one changed from the places they qualified in?) seem like the most exciting race in the history of the universe.

Okay that's exaggerating, because he was frequently honest about poor races, but the way in which he delivered his commentary was exceptional. It was honest, sincere and on the level of the viewers. The only person I think who's come close to that since is Brundle. When the BBC put him in the lead role he did a fantastic job, I'd say he's wasted in the analyst role, even though he's said he prefers that.

Edwards, Croft, Legard, Allen, the rest, they all just shout down the microphone to try and create a false sense of excitement. They either know too much about the sport, and don't appreciate it in the same way as the viewers (an almost cynicism), or they know f*ck all and don't get excited by it. Murray knew everything, he did all of his own research, and was as enthralled by the cars, drivers, tech, overtakes, etc as any 10 year old on the street. That's the sort of person they need in there - someone at the level of joe public. Not some saggy-eyed weary beige journalist who, when the chips are down, just smiles for the camera, cashes the cheque and mauls our eardrums.

Ben Edwards was good for the first half of 2012, but I got quickly fed up with him after that. Every race begins with "Lights out and away we go! There's a good start for [polesitter]" regardless of whether the polesitter had a good start. While it was at first nice to have some enthusiasm back in the race, it got pretty draining. He is too complimentary and not critical enough for his job. Just like many other commentators, he bases his opinions on the different drivers based on the very first session he sees them in. When Grosjean lined up 3rd on the grid in Australia 2012, from there on in Edwards took Romain's side during the countless first lap crashes, being genuinely nonobjective, in my opinion. And just like many other commentators he gets caught up in what he's saying that when Grosjean was having on a really scruffy qualifying lap on his return at Singapore that year, Edwards started saying how excellent the lap was and how excellent Grosjean's comeback had been when he clearly hadn't been watching the lap at all!

Edwards' other problem is that he's too stuck in statistics. Everything is a statistic to him - it's like he's got a big book open with all the possibilities and irrelevant milestones that the different results would bring:
"That's the seventh time a Mexican driver has scored a point in 13 races"
"That's the 147th win for a Renault-engined car"
"That crash puts Gutierrez 217 points of the championship lead, whereas last year he was 219 points off the lead. Amazing!"


But then again, even he's not as bad as Coulthard

I like Crofty. Don't quite know why, he's not anything special, but he seems genuine and pretty laid back. Ben Edwards' voice does grate on me, he's overly enthusiastic without being interesting.

Rob Dylan wrote:But then again, even he's not as bad as Coulthard

BBC should just sack Coulthard and replace him with McNish (who unlike Coulthard, is a champion in a major motorsport series ), because I have loads of problems with DC's commentary and his BBC online column but none with McNish's work.

Ataxia wrote:I like Crofty. Don't quite know why, he's not anything special, but he seems genuine and pretty laid back. Ben Edwards' voice does grate on me, he's overly enthusiastic without being interesting.

I also like Crofty, he's pretty genuine and while he's no Murray Walker his style is still exciting. He and Brundle are a good team that I enjoy listening to.

Mexicola wrote:

SgtPepper wrote:

Mexicola wrote:David Croft is the most overrated commentator in F1 history. He's just not at all good.

How so?

I don't find his commentary exciting or interesting and can sometimes rely too much on clichés. A bit like James Allen, but James was exciting to listen to.

I feel the same... I like Ben Edwards, he was kind of out of place in CART coverage, but his enthusiasm was pretty genuine when paired with Jeremy Shaw. Here he is in action at Vancouver.

Rob Dylan wrote:Why do we see so few driver changes over the course of a year nowadays? 2013 we had one driver change for the last two races of the year, 2012 we had one driver change for one race.

We all know who's under-performing, and the last few years there's been some excellent under-performers who've kept their seats because their bosses have been too "safe". The comment article "Reign of the Finger" brings up the point that the team managers are being far too safe. Specific cases that I recall such as Bruno Senna having his seat threatened at Williams, and Caterham planning on putting Kovalainen in the Caterham half-way through last year, never materialised into actual action, and even this year the bottom three ranked drivers from last year are still all here, some seemingly secure!

I'd just like to see some variety, instead of teams like Ferrari waiting, waiting, waiting, waiting, waiting, and waiting for their drivers to perform and instead just freshen up the grid a little bit.

I find it amusing that in the week since you posted this, we've had two midseason driver changes, equal to the number of the last two years combined. Sometimes, the F1 gods really do grant wishes.