Forum Replies Created
28th August 2015, 18:52 at 6:52 pm #303912
@omarr-pepper Don’t get me wrong, I like this topic and it was interesting to read all the examples, it’s just how I see it: A win is a win and sometimes F1 is really about winning as slowly as possible, as Fangio once said.28th August 2015, 15:19 at 3:19 pm #303901
I agree with the penalty. Such offences are unacceptable and that should be made completely clear as you can easily imagine how the series would look like if similar “strategy” was adapted by Mercedes and BMW and if all manufacturers regularly used it.
On the other hand, I also do not think the punishment should be even harsher. Firstly, every manufacturer is represented by four teams and eight drivers and even though they are connected, it would be unfair to punish the Audi teams and drivers that were not involved in the incident. Secondly, Audi is one of only three players in DTM and if they felt the damage was too big and decided to leave, it would be a huge blow to the series. Thirdly, it looked like the team order was issued in the heat of the moment, unlike in Singapore 2008 where everything was carefully planned beforehand.28th August 2015, 14:55 at 2:55 pm #303900
+1 We <3 Keith! :)
The race weekends on F1 Fanatic are great but I especially love to spend the time between the races and the off-season here as then you can take a step back and analyse the sport without rush.28th August 2015, 14:46 at 2:46 pm #303899
To be honest, I do not think that victories are ever “inherited”. Even if you call them like that, inherited victories are no less worthy than the ones where the winner leads every lap or overtakes the whole grid on his way to the first place. F1 is a combination of a lot of things so if your rival breaks down (Hungary 2008), crashes (Canada 2005) or simply has the wrong tyres (Indianapolis 2005), then you still fully deserve to win because you have built the more reliable car, your driver has been more consistent (maybe also a bit slower but it does not matter) and you have done a deal with the better supplier.12th August 2015, 18:30 at 6:30 pm #303154
The 1991-2002 points system, which rewarded winning more, would give Hamilton a bigger advantage over Rosberg (13 points or a victory and a fourth place) but it would also mean that Vettel would trail Hamilton by 24 points (two victories and a third place) instead of 42 (a victory and a second place) under the current system. That would probably not be fair, given how good Vettel has been this year.
As for this season, Mercedes’ dominance makes Rosberg look a bit stronger in the standings than he has been on the track but Hamilton has also made several errors and you cannot say that he has blown away his team mate.
Every points system might seem unfair in certain situations but I think that currently we have an acceptable balance between consistency and rewarding victories. Personally, I would rather reduce the difference between the points’ scorers than increase it.
In fact, almost every sport rewards consistency to some extent and fastest, strongest or most impressive athletes are often beaten by their weaker but more stable competitors. For instance, just one missed dive / run / jump can easily lose you the Olympic medal.6th August 2015, 15:23 at 3:23 pm #302927
1999 Italian Grand Prix is one of my favourites – it did not feature any of the “usual suspects” and all three drivers seemed to be really satisfied with their performances. It also turned out to be the final victory for Heinz-Harald Frentzen and the final podium for Mika Salo.17th May 2015, 16:06 at 4:06 pm #298447
@KeithCollantine If only governments cared about their people as much as you do ;)
Anyway, this is a nice feature but I will never use it because I always love to read experts’ views before forming my own opinion!30th April 2015, 8:50 at 8:50 am #297513
I agree with @junior-pilot, they look good and I like them. OK, they remind me a bit of the episode from Penguins of Madagascar where King Julien’s throne made explosions every time someone said “Julien” so it might be a bit silly but hey, what is wrong with that? It improves the show without doing any harm to racing and if there were more such cool features in F1, then no one would ask for DRS and similar gimmicks.17th April 2015, 19:12 at 7:12 pm #296909
@lockup I agree, you cannot ignore the facts, racism still exists and there is no reason to think that it exists only outside of F1 or that the proportion of prejudiced people in F1 is significantly smaller than in the whole society:17th April 2015, 9:58 at 9:58 am #296856
It is a nonissue but it once again makes you ask whether those girls should be there at all. The girl has said that her employee told her to go up there so she did without thinking about it a lot.
It is not a problem that beautiful girls are standing beside drivers on the grid or on the podium but “I have no clue about F1 and I am standing here because I get paid for it” is often just written all over their faces. So I think the concept should be changed. Yesterday I had a discussion with a friend about this topic and he said that grid girls should be replaced by fans like the kids in football. I think it is an idea that should be considered.17th April 2015, 9:24 at 9:24 am #296854
There are probably many reasons for this.
1) All the great drivers get more criticism than the “decent” ones, you can say the same thing about Schumacher or Alonso. Partly it is because they get much more attention, their every step is closely watched and social media has only increased the exposure (drivers like Senna would probably get even more flak nowadays). It could also be that the best drivers tend to be closer to the limit – not only on the track – and sometimes they overstep the
2) If we are talking about the British fans, then I have noticed that the “dissidents” are particularly active on the Internet. For instance, you can find a lot of scathing comments about Vettel in German and I assume it’s the same in the UK – those fans, who don’t like their local heroes, tend to be particularly loud.
3) Some fans are simply unintelligent and do not get that a driver’s tattoos and his appearance have nothing to do with his driving. It is OK not to like tattoos (I do not like them too) but it is his own choice to have them and they do not make him a worse driver or a worse man.
4) Racism is still alive so I guess there are at least some people, who simply do not like him because he is black but do not admit it and hide their phobia behind other reasons.
5) Hamilton is not perfect and sometimes he says or does controversial things. That does not mean he is a bad person but sometimes the criticism makes sense.
6) F1 is about passion and you cannot really expect Vettel fans or Rosberg fans to love Hamilton. However, some fans are able to express their opinions in an intelligent way and some are not.1st April 2015, 8:04 at 8:04 am #295665
Jos Verstappen and Sainz Sr to do FP1 in China: http://www.grandprix247.com/2015/04/01/jos-verstappen-and-sainz-senior-to-do-fp1-in-china/
The pair, who have been practicing to learn the Shanghai track on their son’s Playstations, are this weekend expected at the team’s Faenza HQ where they will go through a crash course on the nuances of the STR10 and also spend time on the simulator.5th March 2015, 19:31 at 7:31 pm #293594
I have lost the count of places where I have turned on my laptop, phone, tablet or a PC to visit F1 Fanatic. Home, work, hotel lobbies, business class lounge at Frankfurt airport, Spa, Hockenheim…
Happy birthday, F1 Fanatic. I’m thankful there is you and I.27th February 2015, 19:26 at 7:26 pm #293167
I kept watching it after the first 90 seconds but just couldn’t focus on the song or the video, I guess I started thinking about Bernie (can’t think why). I guess you have to drink before watching / listening to this. And I never drink that much.19th January 2015, 10:06 at 10:06 am #290439
I lost respect for Joe Saward when “the silent majority” (that is, three pro-government lobbyists) in Bahrain convinced him that everything was fine and well in their country. And I lost respect for Christian Sylt when he claimed that a 14-word comment on an F1F article was “highly damaging” to his “reputation and credibility”. This silly “rivalry” only once again reminds me why I am an F1 Fanatic supporter and also pay for Autosport Plus instead of spending these pounds to support the likes of Saward and Sylt.
Professional journalists would never lower themselves to this. I read F1 blogs / websites because I want to know what is going on in F1, what are the stories behind news and I want to read reasonable, well-written opinions. If I want to have some fun, then I go to SniffPetrol but I am certainly not interested in pillow fights between self-proclaimed F1 experts.
For sure, some of their articles or opinions might still be worth reading but they are certainly not among my top F1 news sources.
@andae23 Sylt sometimes comments on F1F (so he at leasts contributes to high-quality journalism by giving F1F a few clicks :)) but I think he does not have an account.