Formula 1

[B.A.B.]

are you guys kidding me? hamilton not favored by mclaren? lol he definetly is

and by luck i mean no mechanical failures (except germany with hat flat tire, and even then he was able to continue the race!), no crashes with him being involved, no plain **** ups by the team (kimi and massa japan)

No mechanical failures means hes lucky? Not quite, no mechanical failures means the car is reliable. See Schumacher/Ferrari - Are you saying Schumacher was lucky for years? LOL!

No crashes means hes lucky? This statement is so ridiculous I dont even need to counter it.

No f*ck ups by the team mean hes lucky? No, it just means the team is organised. But for the record, I think the team f*cked up in China by not bringing him in when his tires were f*cked.

As for Hamilton being favoured by McLaren, well if he was, they wouldve protected him 110% in China, but they didnt, so I'm not convinced hes favoured massively. A little, yes, as hes English and Ron Dennis' "pet project" so to speak, but no way is he massively favoured.

[Pleb]

Ron Dennis!



Ron Howard is the red headed dweebloid from Happy Days. lol :]

[B.A.B.]

Ron Dennis!



Ron Howard is the red headed dweebloid from Happy Days. lol :]

LOL ****, edited, guess what was on TV when I was flicking through the channels just before I posted

[Pleb]

LOL ****, edited, guess what was on TV when I was flicking through the channels just before I posted

lol

I agree though, i think China showed me how Alonso hasn't had any worse treatment.

I was having a discussion with someone who was saying "well what about when the engineers where puttin Alonso's wheel on in the pits a few races back and they fked it up"

I'm thinkin wha!? Mistakes like that happen all the time in F1, to all drivers, these people are trying to think of anything to explain why Hamilton is beating him

I also talk to a girl in Spain, and the stuff that she tells me that comes out of the spanish media is rediculous, so to those who dont follow F1 in spain, will read rumours that their media spits out, like the other day... "Hamilton is now dating Dennis' daughter" (which as far as i know, is 100% fabricated, given that this has never been discussed by anyone other than the spanish media) So they're all like Omgz tHisS iS wHy HamIltoN is GEttin Teh Beter TreetmentS! PooR aLonsoZ!

It seems they're trying there hardest to explain why Alonso is being beat by a rookie, anyway they can. And while they're at it, subtley stiring up a bit of mass hatred for Hamilton because him an Dennis have a (naturally) closer relationship.

Me and this girl had a pretty heated argument over it the other night haha, and she dosnt even follow F1!, all she knows is that she hates Hamilton and Alonso is loosing because theres some big conspiracy against him.

[pantera02018]

No mechanical failures means hes lucky? Not quite, no mechanical failures means the car is reliable. See Schumacher/Ferrari - Are you saying Schumacher was lucky for years? LOL!

yea hes pretty damn lucky to have a reliable car.

No crashes means hes lucky? This statement is so ridiculous I dont even need to counter it.

obviosly crashes cause by him..yea thats not unlucky thats a **** up. what i meant by that no one plowing into his car or anything like that

No f*ck ups by the team mean hes lucky? No, it just means the team is organised. But for the record, I think the team f*cked up in China by not bringing him in when his tires were f*cked.

yea ill give you that i guess. o, and in china his race engeneer gambled on the tires lasting him that long. finally his luck runs out witht hat gamble not working.

As for Hamilton being favoured by McLaren, well if he was, they wouldve protected him 110% in China, but they didnt, so I'm not convinced hes favoured massively. A little, yes, as hes English and Ron Dennis' "pet project" so to speak, but no way is he massively favoured.

he is slightlly favored obviously, but nothing major



i believe hamilton is lucky because no matter how good of a driver you are, u need elements of luck to be on the podium at every race except 2..or 3 was it? see alonso getting screwed by safety car in canada.

another reason i consider hamilton lucky is because remember germany? he blew a tire. normally when something like htat happens the car winds up in a wall. hamilton was able to continue.

[Pleb]

yea hes pretty damn lucky to have a reliable car.

How is he lucky to have a reliable car?

He's earned his place in McLaren by out driving everyone in the lower formula's and other catagories, he's been sponsored by McLaren since he was 13.

McLaren have 1000 employee's who are always working on their car, thats not luck, they're just doing a good job.

obviosly crashes cause by him..yea thats not unlucky thats a **** up. what i meant by that no one plowing into his car or anything like that

Didn't you see Fuji?

Kubica ploughed into him while trying to (unnessecarily) pass him, and almost took him out of the race.

What about in Germany where he he had a tire blow out in practice?, then a tire blow out in the actual race?, then after that he aqua-plained off the track?, You can call this good luck that he didn't die ploughing into a wall, and be sinical. Or you can call it bad luck as he was set to win that race. Either way, he kept his engine running, and got back in the race, and came back to lap everyone to get back in the race, then re-lapped everyone to finish in 5th place. That was a piece of amazing driving.

o, and in china his race engeneer gambled on the tires lasting him that long. finally his luck runs out witht hat gamble not working.

You just contradicted yourself. That wasn't bad luck, that was just a plane bad decision on behalf of the team. A bad decision because they didn't need to be so strict about his tire choice/pit time, because he didn't need to win the race to win the championship.

i believe hamilton is lucky because no matter how good of a driver you are, u need elements of luck to be on the podium at every race except 2..or 3 was it?

I know what you're saying, but i have to strongly disagree. It's like saying Stephen Hendry only won the world championship 7 times over in Snooker because of 'bits' of luck here and there. Yes, everyone gets a bit of luck and bad luck here n there, but the best people in any sport will always make the best of a piece of bad luck.

[martydaman]

Luck has little to do with it. You might get lucky and the people in front of you crash in you get a few places. You might get lucky and catch a safety car at the perfect moment.

Hamilton isn't running on luck.

Just look at M Schumacher and Massa/Barachello. Same car, yet for how long did Schuie best his team-mate, again and again. Some people think "Oh he gets the better car"... they are the same car, each is tuned for each specific driver, thats the only difference.
It's not like one car makes 1:15s laps and the another makes 1:17s laps, the factors that a driver makes during a lap far outwiegh any possible difference between the cars in a team.

[pantera02018]

eh we could argue forever..whatever lol lets get back to racing.

it would suck if kimi wins in brazil and then hamilton still takes the WDC..with kimi having 6 wins vs. hamilton's 4. points should reward the winner more..like maybe 12 8 6 vs. the current 10 8 6

speaking of luck i think we can all at least agree that kimi is the unluckiest driver of them all

[B.A.B.]

eh we could argue forever..whatever lol lets get back to racing.

it would suck if kimi wins in brazil and then hamilton still takes the WDC..with kimi having 6 wins vs. hamilton's 4. points should reward the winner more..like maybe 12 8 6 vs. the current 10 8 6

speaking of luck i think we can all at least agree that kimi is the unluckiest driver of them all

As far as points go, I prefer the old system, only the top 6 drivers get points, 10/6/4/3/2/1. Rewards the better drivers much more IMO. Top 8 getting points just means people are being rewarded for not being good enough.

[martydaman]

As far as points go, I prefer the old system, only the top 6 drivers get points, 10/6/4/3/2/1. Rewards the better drivers much more IMO. Top 8 getting points just means people are being rewarded for not being good enough.

I don;t mind the top 8 getting points. You kind of need it because the field is very divided. I'm not going to go through each team but you can pretty much see that there are 3 levels of "quality" and where each team slots in.
Giving fewer drivers points would mean less teams get them.
The middle/lower end teams may not be fighting for the world championship but they are still trying to prove themselves by getting the few points that are available, having 6 points paying positions would pretty much lock out most of the grid of anything at the end of season (moreso than now).

I think there should be a greater focus on the winner(podium) and even just points for finishing a race to bring a more important emphasis on reliability.

[Pleb]

Yeah F1 is typically divided into 3 races, the lesser cars try to break into the middle ground and pick up a point or 2, and the middle ground cars always try and get the most they can by trying to get a 4-5th place and if they get a top 3 finish, then bonus, and the front runners are always racing for the podium.

So i don't mind the scoring as it is now because it gives everyone a goal to aim at.

[Budweiser]

Yeah F1 is typically divided into 3 races, the lesser cars try to break into the middle ground and pick up a point or 2, and the middle ground cars always try and get the most they can by trying to get a 4-5th place and if they get a top 3 finish, then bonus, and the front runners are always racing for the podium.

So i don't mind the scoring as it is now because it gives everyone a goal to aim at.

Just curious, are there pit stops in and F1 race? and how many miles is each race?

[Pleb]

Just curious, are there pit stops in and F1 race? and how many miles is each race?

Yeah there are pits, cars usually pit once or twice (for fuel/tire changes, and tweaks to the areodynamic componants), sometimes a 3rd pit if theres some problem.

Each track is usually between 2-4 miles long and they do between about 50-70 laps depending on the track.

Sometimes a team will try and get away with pitting just once and really filling up on fuel, so they can try and 'leap frog' a few positions when other cars are pitting, sometimes that dosnt always work out though, and filling up to the brim on fuel makes the car go considerably slower for a fair few laps until they burn some off, so its a bit of a gamble on which stratagy to take.

[Budweiser]

Yeah there are pits, cars usually pit once or twice (for fuel/tire changes, and tweaks to the areodynamic componants), sometimes a 3rd pit if theres some problem.

Each track is usually between 2-4 miles long and they do between about 50-70 laps depending on the track.

Sometimes a team will try and get away with pitting just once and really filling up on fuel, so they can try and 'leap frog' a few positions when other cars are pitting, sometimes that dosnt always work out though, and filling up to the brim on fuel makes the car go considerably slower for a fair few laps until they burn some off, so its a bit of a gamble on which stratagy to take.

how many cars are on the track at a time?

[b_r_o_w_n]

how many cars are on the track at a time?

22. there are 11 teams of two racers

[Budweiser]

Yeah there are pits, cars usually pit once or twice (for fuel/tire changes, and tweaks to the areodynamic componants), sometimes a 3rd pit if theres some problem.

Each track is usually between 2-4 miles long and they do between about 50-70 laps depending on the track.

Sometimes a team will try and get away with pitting just once and really filling up on fuel, so they can try and 'leap frog' a few positions when other cars are pitting, sometimes that dosnt always work out though, and filling up to the brim on fuel makes the car go considerably slower for a fair few laps until they burn some off, so its a bit of a gamble on which stratagy to take.

22. there are 11 teams of two racers

doesn't seem nearly as exciting as NASCAR.

NASCAR 4 pits, 43 cars, largest oval track 2.5miles, shortest .75 miles? Much better racing in NASCAR because it is so tight vs F1 where it spreads out.

Every time I turn on an F1 race it seems like there is only 1 car in the picture.

[Pleb]

...oval track

Thats the very reason i will never watch NASCAR.

Every time I turn on an F1 race it seems like there is only 1 car in the picture.

Thats like saying everytime i stare at a painting all i see is...paint. :]

It's deeper than that, if there is just 1 car on the screen then that could be quite significant thing.

If i watch (American) football for example, all i see is some people running into each other. But thats because im not a fan, i dont know the game indepth, and how significant a certin tackle/play might be.

[Budweiser]

Thats like saying everytime i stare at a painting all i see is...paint. :]

It's deeper than that, if there is just 1 car on the screen then that could be quite significant thing.

na, it's not deeper than that, how could it be. There is 1 car on is this location of the track and there is another car over here, and one over there. They aren't even racing each other, they are racing the clock.

[Pleb]

na, it's not deeper than that, how could it be. There is 1 car on is this location of the track and there is another car over here, and one over there. They aren't even racing each other, they are racing the clock.

I dont know how you dont understand what i said.

And it is far deeper than what meets the eye, the same applies for every single sport out there. The significance of something is only significant to the viewer if the viewer knows the sport, and how costly, or important a certin gap, play, tackle, pot, hit. etc maybe. And not just in terms of the actual race/game itself, but the relative importance it will have on the league/championship.

You might see a big gap, and thats that. A fan might see a signifcant win/loss for a driver who may or may not win/loose oftern.

There is no clock in F1... (Well there is a 2 hour limit, but they're generally always finished by that point)

Maybe what you saw of F1 was qualifying? In qualifying they are souly racing against the clock, because the faster your time, the higher on the grid you will be come the proper race (the next day).

In qualifying you have 3 parts, each being 15minutes long, the 1st part is to decide who starts in the last posistions on the grid in the actual race (the slowest times around the track)

In the second part of qualifying those cars who came last are eliminated, so the remaining 15 or so cars go out again and do a couple of laps to try and get as fast as they can, again, the 5 slowest will be eliminated. (they will start in positions 11-15 on the grid)

Then the last part, the remainin 10 cars will do another few laps, there times in this one will decide their positions. Quickest around the track will start in 1st, next quickest in 2nd, and so on.

When it comes to the actual race the next day, they are not going around the track to see who can be quickest (per-se), its not about lap times, they are racing against each other.

[Budweiser]

I dont know how you dont understand what i said.

And it is far deeper than what meets the eye, the same applies for every single sport out there. The significance of something is only significant to the viewer if the viewer knows the sport, and how costly, or important a certin gap, play, tackle, pot, hit. etc maybe. And not just in terms of the actual race/game itself, but the relative importance it will have on the league/championship.

You might see a big gap, and thats that. A fan might see a signifcant win/loss for a driver who may or may not win/loose oftern.

There is no clock in F1... (Well there is a 2 hour limit, but they're generally always finished by that point)

Maybe what you saw of F1 was qualifying? In qualifying they are souly racing against the clock, because the faster your time, the higher on the grid you will be come the proper race (the next day).

In qualifying you have 3 parts, each being 15minutes long, the 1st part is to decide who starts in the last posistions on the grid in the actual race (the slowest times around the track)

In the second part of qualifying those cars who came last are eliminated, so the remaining 15 or so cars go out again and do a couple of laps to try and get as fast as they can, again, the 5 slowest will be eliminated. (they will start in positions 11-15 on the grid)

Then the last part, the remainin 10 cars will do another few laps, there times in this one will decide their positions. Quickest around the track will start in 1st, next quickest in 2nd, and so on.

When it comes to the actual race the next day, they are not going around the track to see who can be quickest (per-se), its not about lap times, they are racing against each other.

yeah it just seems like there is not much passing in F1, at least no compared to NASCAR.

[pantera02018]

yeah it just seems like there is not much passing in F1, at least no compared to NASCAR.

there is a lack of passing in f1 compared to nascar mainly due to the fact that these cars generate so much downforce that the torbulance from the car in front makes the following car lose a redicoulous amount of it. i believe they are working on changing rules to somehow limit the amount of torbulance produced by the cars to allow for closer racing.

I personally don't think it takes away from the racing, not thought the passes are fewer, each one is much more decisive and important and when pulled off requires much more skill.

in nascar there are many many passes ill give you that. but the racing..its 4 identical turns over and over again. not to mention i love the technical side of f1 and in nascar its well..non existent as everyone runs the same car mandated by the rules

[Budweiser]

there is a lack of passing in f1 compared to nascar mainly due to the fact that these cars generate so much downforce that the torbulance from the car in front makes the following car lose a redicoulous amount of it. i believe they are working on changing rules to somehow limit the amount of torbulance produced by the cars to allow for closer racing.

I personally don't think it takes away from the racing, not thought the passes are fewer, each one is much more decisive and important and when pulled off requires much more skill.

in nascar there are many many passes ill give you that. but the racing..its 4 identical turns over and over again. not to mention i love the technical side of f1 and in nascar its well..non existent as everyone runs the same car mandated by the rules

In NASCAR it is more about the driver and different strategies. Though each team does make their own engines they just have to be within the rules.

Last week at Talladega 3/7 of the same team's engines blew this did not happen to other teams, why? because they built their engine differently. Its not like NASCAR says "ok, here is your car for this week, have fun", it is up to each to build the engine the way the performs the best. IMO Hendrick motorsports has the best engines in NASCAR followed by Joe Gibbs Racing

[Pleb]

there is a lack of passing in f1 compared to nascar mainly due to the fact that these cars generate so much downforce that the torbulance from the car in front makes the following car lose a redicoulous amount of it. i believe they are working on changing rules to somehow limit the amount of torbulance produced by the cars to allow for closer racing.

When the cars are going fast, its the car behind that has the advantage, the car behind can actually pass the one infront more easily because of the slip-stream the one in front creates.

The reason there isnt as much passing in F1 is due to the nature of the cars, they arnt like a real car where you can barge into one another, if you even clip another car with your wheel in F1 traveling at and inexcess of 200mph, you will sumasualt (sp) and probably kill yourself. And even if your not traveling at such speeds, you only have to tap someone pretty lightly to loose half of your front wing or completly shatter your suspension. F1 cars arnt made for taking damage. So people only try and pass when the opportunity is there, like a long straight, or when they slowing coming to a corner and theres room to slip inside or outside of the car.

In NASCAR it is more about the driver and different strategies. Though each team does make their own engines they just have to be within the rules.

The same in F1.

[pantera02018]

drag is reduced but it comes at a loss of downforce. its a common problem thats why the FIA has actually set u the Overtaking Working group whoes number one suggestion was the reduction of downforce.

and slipstreaming is different. slipstraming is the reduction of drag due to the car being in a low pressure area behind the other car. low pressure gives you more speed as there is less air to pass through, but at the expense of less downforce as there is less air being pushed up by wings.

ill give you the articles once i find them.

[Pleb]

drag is reduced but it comes at a loss of downforce. its a common problem thats why the FIA has actually set u the Overtaking Working group whoes number one suggestion was the reduction of downforce.

and slipstreaming is different. slipstraming is the reduction of drag due to the car being in a low pressure area behind the other car. low pressure gives you more speed as there is less air to pass through, but at the expense of less downforce as there is less air being pushed up by wings.

ill give you the articles once i find them.

Yeah i know what you're saying. But i don't see how the FIA are gunna rectify that, how are they planning on changing the laws of physics. ;]

If they reduce downforce, all the cars are effectively all gunna be faster, which kind of defeats the object.

And if they reduce downforce, dosnt that mean that there is higher pressure behind the car, and thus recucing the slipsteam-effect?

I can't see how they're gunna get round this 'problem'.

[pantera02018]

Yeah i know what you're saying. But i don't see how the FIA are gunna rectify that, how are they planning on changing the laws of physics. ;]

If they reduce downforce, all the cars are effectively all gunna be faster, which kind of defeats the object.

They took the turbos out of the cars decades ago, too, for a reason. :]

if they reduce downforce, they will be faster in a strait line, but MUCH slower around corners. the could make the engines smaller.

they tried to reduce downforce this season by mandating a maximum wing size (the maximum used to be bigger) also, in the 90-s the lures for front wing placement were changed allowing it to be placedto be higher- wich produces more downforce but is affected by torbulance more. For one, they can allow slicks again and mandate even smaller wings. this will shift grip from aerodynamic grip to mechanical grip, the latter obviously not affected by torbulance.

my solution, coming from a dude that has way too much free time at work to read about all this crap is to allow tiny wings, with a very low front wing, and allow huge slicks. maybe even ground effects as those are almoast not affected by torbulance at all

Pleb there are a couple of really good CFD simulation pictures out there showing just how much the turbulence affects the downforce of the follwoing car, ill post them once i find them


EDIT: this is what i was talking about in my original post



teh red is high pressure air..and lighter shades are lower and lower. the top part of the picture is current wing shapes in F1, the lower one is a proposed spec shape to allow more passing but keep the same levels of downforce.

[Pleb]

they tried to reduce downforce this season by mandating a maximum wing size (the maximum used to be bigger) also, in the 90-s the lures for front wing placement were changed allowing it to be placedto be higher- wich produces more downforce but is affected by torbulance more. For one, they can allow slicks again and mandate even smaller wings. this will shift grip from aerodynamic grip to mechanical grip, the latter obviously not affected by torbulance.

my solution, coming from a dude that has way too much free time at work to read about all this crap is to allow tiny wings, with a very low front wing, and allow huge slicks. maybe even ground effects as those are almoast not affected by torbulance at all

Pleb there are a couple of really good CFD simulation pictures out there showing just how much the turbulence affects the downforce of the follwoing car, ill post them once i find them


EDIT: this is what i was talking about in my original post



teh red is high pressure air..and lighter shades are lower and lower. the top part of the picture is current wing shapes in F1, the lower one is a proposed spec shape to allow more passing but keep the same levels of downforce.

Nice.

if they reduce downforce, they will be faster in a strait line, but MUCH slower around corners. the could make the engines smaller.

To me, thats only gunna make F1 worse. Drivers are gunna be more inclined to only pass at the start/finish line because theres only a few tracks out there that really let the cars get upto top speeds in other sections.

Personally i like the fact that certain cars designs have better/worse mechanical/areodynamic grip, because the likes of McLaren n Ferrari have their strong/weaks points where they fight it out on the whole of the circuit.

[pantera02018]

the likes of McLaren n Ferrari have their strong/weaks points where they fight it out on the whole of the circuit.

agree, and thats something nascar certainly doesn't have as all the cars are exactly the same, where as in f1 we know Ferrari is very good an high speed corners, and mclaren is good in tight corners and at using kerbs and honda is..well..not good at anything haha

speaking of wich i hope honda improves next year. i like that team and button deserves a better car hes a great driver i think

[Flip_d]

Hamliton FTW in Brazil...

[Pleb]

honda is..well..not good at anything haha

lol

speaking of wich i hope honda improves next year. i like that team and button deserves a better car hes a great driver i think

Yeah me too, i'd love to see him in the McLaren, but if not, he should at least have a reliable Honda.