-
Protip: Profile posts are public! Use Conversations to message other members privately. Everyone can see the content of a profile post.
The (2nd) Official 2016 F1 thread
- Thread starter SFNSXguy
- Start date
The guy hanging out at the Ferrari hospitality shack.
The guy hanging out at the Ferrari hospitality shack.
.and he caused quite a stir apparently...
- Joined
- 12 January 2016
- Messages
- 18
Rosberg's manager
fastaussie
Suspended
yep, that'll stir things up.
better get that perfect German season in this year...
better get that perfect German season in this year...
hmmm so it seems the reason hamo was able to accelerate and close on nico was nico was in the wrong kers setting or fuel map...he forgot to switch after start.....from his tone he might have known he was down on power and blocked.....double douche
fastaussie
Suspended
first time since 2012 without a Merc on pole, can't say i'm upset about that!
Alexander Rossi wins 100 running of Indy ... Take that Manor! Of course Lewis wonderful Monaco win.
Rossi showed a lot of talent at Manor last season but such are the economics of F1.
Riccardo got screwed by his team. But that does happen even by the best teams: just ask Hamilton?
Riccardo got screwed by his team. But that does happen even by the best teams: just ask Hamilton?
fastaussie
Suspended
yep, way to go Red Bull. thoroughly balls'd that one up for Ricciardo... :frown:
Yep, if anyone knows just how Ricciardo feels it'd be Hamilton after last year's Monaco race! But it really sucks for Ricciardo this year - punctured out of leading the race in China, torpedoed out of a probable podium in Sochi, robbed of a win in Spain [though I blame luck and not the team for that one] and now this. Wore his heart on his sleeve in the post race interviews, but still had class written on his semi-scowling face, which still managed to break into his customary grin a few times. Gotta love the guy.
fastaussie
Suspended
class bloke...
After last year Lewis really deserved this win, but I can't help feeling sorry for Daniel.
Should have definitely been Daniel's day !
You guys should subscribe to Mark Hughes'. His F1 race reports are some of the best.
http://www.motorsportmagazine.com/r...nGP_report&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Mark
You guys should subscribe to Mark Hughes'. His F1 race reports are some of the best.
http://www.motorsportmagazine.com/r...nGP_report&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Mark
Not only follow the web site, I buy the hard copy magazine! Fabulous look at racing from yesterday to right now.
Hmm.. The tin hat conspiracist in me has some serious doubts that DR pit mixup at Monaco was just a simple error by the RBR staff.
Given the large number of celebrities that were paraded on the pre-race show mostly wearing Purple MB hats it would not surprise me if the powers that be nudged RBR to gift Hamilton his 44th win so that it would result in a big publicity stunt for Formula 1.
From NR ceding track position so easily, the mixup in the RBR garage when DR came into the pits for slicks, the lack of action by the stewards when LH took a shortcut through the chicane and the blocking move on track out during the same sequence.
I also can't think of any other reason why someone who is irrelevant to most F1 fans (JB) was allowed into the area close to the awards ceremony stage.. Lewis passing the champagne to JB seemed so scripted as well.
Kind of similar to how Nico Rosberg was gifted the win last year with that strange pit call for LH during the VSC/SC period, was it just bad luck for Lewis that allowed NR to win his 3rd straight Monaco title?
Anyways, just my tin hat conspiracy given the erratic behavior by two of the best managed teams in F1 which resulted in major news for Formula 1 two years in a row.
Just coincidence? or was it BE/FOM working it's magic behind the scenes to maximize publicity for the F1 circus?
Given the large number of celebrities that were paraded on the pre-race show mostly wearing Purple MB hats it would not surprise me if the powers that be nudged RBR to gift Hamilton his 44th win so that it would result in a big publicity stunt for Formula 1.
From NR ceding track position so easily, the mixup in the RBR garage when DR came into the pits for slicks, the lack of action by the stewards when LH took a shortcut through the chicane and the blocking move on track out during the same sequence.
I also can't think of any other reason why someone who is irrelevant to most F1 fans (JB) was allowed into the area close to the awards ceremony stage.. Lewis passing the champagne to JB seemed so scripted as well.
Kind of similar to how Nico Rosberg was gifted the win last year with that strange pit call for LH during the VSC/SC period, was it just bad luck for Lewis that allowed NR to win his 3rd straight Monaco title?
Anyways, just my tin hat conspiracy given the erratic behavior by two of the best managed teams in F1 which resulted in major news for Formula 1 two years in a row.
Just coincidence? or was it BE/FOM working it's magic behind the scenes to maximize publicity for the F1 circus?
Please guys, enough of the conspiracy theories!
Here is a copy of an email I sent to my local radio stations evening Sports program. They had some dill on air last night mouthing off, which for someone on public radio, he should get the facts right at least! Please remember, I'm in Daniel Ricciardo's home town, so you can understand there was some angst on the show.
Hello Karl,
Love your approach to sport, and your commentary.
I was disappointed and shocked with your Motorsport correspondent last night, showing a total lack of understanding about the intricacies of F1 and Daniel Ricciardo's team.
My interest and knowledge is based on a 50 year following of motorsport in general, and F1 in particular, 25 years as a competitor at Barbagallo raceway, and an "up to date" background reading from on the spot, reputable correspondents in the F1 media, such as Mark Hughes of Motorsport Magazine [ http://www.motorsportmagazine.com/reports/f1/2016-monaco-grand-prix-report ], and the definitive general motorsport website Autosport [ http://www.autosport.com/ ].
Unlike Mark Webber, who was "shafted" many times by the Red Bull team, Ricciardo has just been very unlucky these past few months!
The Spanish GP outcome was a result of the team using it's knowledge of the race as it transpired, to change it's strategy for it's lead driver, in the hope of maximizing his [and the team's] chances of winning. I, like many, initially thought it must have been a conspiracy, but on reflection the fact Ricciardo didn't win was due to a flawed strategy, and to the surprising durability of the tyres on Verstappen and Raikkonen's cars, and not on any nefarious shenanigans by someone in the team! Flawed and DUMB strategy in hindsight, but a long bow to pull on the conspiracy front.
The Monaco GP is another case of the team reacting badly, and in this case there is no excuse for what transpired! At a place like Monaco, where track position is King, and where Ricciardo was comfortable on the "Wets" and had a 9 second lead on Hamilton and daylight back to the next car in Rosberg, he should not have come in until after Hamilton had pitted. 1st big mistake. For the second pit stop, they had previously decided to fit the Soft tyre option [yellow banded] to Ricciardo's car [as they had already fitted to his team mate Verstappen], but when Hamilton finally came in for his pit stop and changed onto the Ultra Softs [purple banding] the Red Bull strategists decided to change Ricciardo's tyres to the Super Softs [red banding], a slightly more durable tyre than the Ultra Softs fitted onto Hamilton's car, but supposedly faster than the Softs they had originally chosen for Ricciardo. It was an unnecessary change of strategy, but the team felt it was covering all bases by making the change. 2nd mistake [not as big as the first].
Then the pitstop. Oh dear, what can one say? The change of tyre to be used is not of itself a big deal, and normally it would be a very simple matter to make such a change. In the teams feeble defence, the smallness of Garage floor area and general Pit layout at the Monaco track did heavily influence the outcome of what transpired. Because the floor area was restricted, they would have had a set of Wets and Intermediates ready to fit to the car [in case it started raining again] and the original choice of Softs sitting at the front, in the heater blankets waiting to be used. Unfortunately the Super Softs were "out the back" somewhere.
Now had the pit layout been like a normal GP track, they would have had room to have all the tyre options ready at the front of the garage, and the engineer's [sitting on the pit wall, trackside] making the decision to change tyre strategy would have been able to turn around and see into the garage that the new tyre called for was not readily available. At that point, they could have just told the mechanics to go with the original tyres and there would have been no delay. Unfortunately the engineers at Monaco sit above the garages and cannot see into them, so they could not see the problem. The change of strategy was made after Hamilton's pit stop. The lap at Monaco was about 1minute 25 seconds, during this time, they would have to have debated the pros and cons of changing the tyre choice and relayed that onto the mechanics. The mechanics then had to find the tyres and ran out of time to have them ready, or even to notify the engineers above that there was a problem! Tragic, avoidable, big mistake #3 for the engineers, but not a conspiracy. Poor Daniel [and I do know the family personally].
Finally ex F1 driver Helmut Marko is NOT in charge of the race team, that is Christian Horner [who is/was in partnership with Mark Webber in a lower category race team]. Marko has a reputation here in Australia, of not liking Australians, that goes back to the 1990s when Craig Lowndes drove for his F3000 team in Europe one year [team mate to Montoya that year]. But that's another story. He very obviously did not like Webber, because Webber was not a protege of his Red Bull Junior Driving academy, but Daniel Ricciardo most definitely is.
My apologies for such a lengthy diatribe, but it does take some explaining.
Here is a copy of an email I sent to my local radio stations evening Sports program. They had some dill on air last night mouthing off, which for someone on public radio, he should get the facts right at least! Please remember, I'm in Daniel Ricciardo's home town, so you can understand there was some angst on the show.
Hello Karl,
Love your approach to sport, and your commentary.
I was disappointed and shocked with your Motorsport correspondent last night, showing a total lack of understanding about the intricacies of F1 and Daniel Ricciardo's team.
My interest and knowledge is based on a 50 year following of motorsport in general, and F1 in particular, 25 years as a competitor at Barbagallo raceway, and an "up to date" background reading from on the spot, reputable correspondents in the F1 media, such as Mark Hughes of Motorsport Magazine [ http://www.motorsportmagazine.com/reports/f1/2016-monaco-grand-prix-report ], and the definitive general motorsport website Autosport [ http://www.autosport.com/ ].
Unlike Mark Webber, who was "shafted" many times by the Red Bull team, Ricciardo has just been very unlucky these past few months!
The Spanish GP outcome was a result of the team using it's knowledge of the race as it transpired, to change it's strategy for it's lead driver, in the hope of maximizing his [and the team's] chances of winning. I, like many, initially thought it must have been a conspiracy, but on reflection the fact Ricciardo didn't win was due to a flawed strategy, and to the surprising durability of the tyres on Verstappen and Raikkonen's cars, and not on any nefarious shenanigans by someone in the team! Flawed and DUMB strategy in hindsight, but a long bow to pull on the conspiracy front.
The Monaco GP is another case of the team reacting badly, and in this case there is no excuse for what transpired! At a place like Monaco, where track position is King, and where Ricciardo was comfortable on the "Wets" and had a 9 second lead on Hamilton and daylight back to the next car in Rosberg, he should not have come in until after Hamilton had pitted. 1st big mistake. For the second pit stop, they had previously decided to fit the Soft tyre option [yellow banded] to Ricciardo's car [as they had already fitted to his team mate Verstappen], but when Hamilton finally came in for his pit stop and changed onto the Ultra Softs [purple banding] the Red Bull strategists decided to change Ricciardo's tyres to the Super Softs [red banding], a slightly more durable tyre than the Ultra Softs fitted onto Hamilton's car, but supposedly faster than the Softs they had originally chosen for Ricciardo. It was an unnecessary change of strategy, but the team felt it was covering all bases by making the change. 2nd mistake [not as big as the first].
Then the pitstop. Oh dear, what can one say? The change of tyre to be used is not of itself a big deal, and normally it would be a very simple matter to make such a change. In the teams feeble defence, the smallness of Garage floor area and general Pit layout at the Monaco track did heavily influence the outcome of what transpired. Because the floor area was restricted, they would have had a set of Wets and Intermediates ready to fit to the car [in case it started raining again] and the original choice of Softs sitting at the front, in the heater blankets waiting to be used. Unfortunately the Super Softs were "out the back" somewhere.
Now had the pit layout been like a normal GP track, they would have had room to have all the tyre options ready at the front of the garage, and the engineer's [sitting on the pit wall, trackside] making the decision to change tyre strategy would have been able to turn around and see into the garage that the new tyre called for was not readily available. At that point, they could have just told the mechanics to go with the original tyres and there would have been no delay. Unfortunately the engineers at Monaco sit above the garages and cannot see into them, so they could not see the problem. The change of strategy was made after Hamilton's pit stop. The lap at Monaco was about 1minute 25 seconds, during this time, they would have to have debated the pros and cons of changing the tyre choice and relayed that onto the mechanics. The mechanics then had to find the tyres and ran out of time to have them ready, or even to notify the engineers above that there was a problem! Tragic, avoidable, big mistake #3 for the engineers, but not a conspiracy. Poor Daniel [and I do know the family personally].
Finally ex F1 driver Helmut Marko is NOT in charge of the race team, that is Christian Horner [who is/was in partnership with Mark Webber in a lower category race team]. Marko has a reputation here in Australia, of not liking Australians, that goes back to the 1990s when Craig Lowndes drove for his F3000 team in Europe one year [team mate to Montoya that year]. But that's another story. He very obviously did not like Webber, because Webber was not a protege of his Red Bull Junior Driving academy, but Daniel Ricciardo most definitely is.
My apologies for such a lengthy diatribe, but it does take some explaining.
Excellent synopsis of Red Bull Fubar...
Yes good explanation but far from an acceptable excuse. These teams spend $millions on staff and to make such a high profile error is in my mind inexcusable.
...unless it was on purpose.....
With all the money on the line for every point, what plausible motivation is there to purposely sabotage a driver, especially when the teammate has crashed out? Personality conflicts notwithstanding I still don't see it ......
If so then color me naïve.
Not an excuse at all. Just an explanation of how things transpired to someone who knows diddly squat about F1.
As for a team conspiring to deliberately sabotage a driver's chances, well lets not forget that Red Bull gets about $82 million from the performance payout of the F1 kitty. If it ends up a place lower in the pecking order, that could mean a $20 million difference in payout. Not to be sneezed at, even for a well funded team like Red Bull me thinks. Spain was a little different, they still had a chance with their second driver, but Monaco...................
As for a team conspiring to deliberately sabotage a driver's chances, well lets not forget that Red Bull gets about $82 million from the performance payout of the F1 kitty. If it ends up a place lower in the pecking order, that could mean a $20 million difference in payout. Not to be sneezed at, even for a well funded team like Red Bull me thinks. Spain was a little different, they still had a chance with their second driver, but Monaco...................
