Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Just to bounce this seems to me the rule changes, principally no refuelling, have removed the main variable from things. In theory now if I qualify a second quicker than you on a 40 lap race and out pit crews are on a par I will finish 40 seconds ahead of you, so the race is stretching the differences.


Apparently Bernie is trying to get 2 compulsory pit stop so they can take a bit more risk with their tyres and, even better, short cuts to overtake.

Still waiting for mushrooms or blue shells.


(By the way I love F1 and watch all of every race, but this season threatens to be a massive disappointment imho)

ruffers Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------



> Apparently Bernie is trying to get 2 compulsory

> pit stop so they can take a bit more risk with

> their tyres and, even better, short cuts to

> overtake.

> Still waiting for mushrooms or blue shells.

>

> (By the way I love F1 and watch all of every race,

> but this season threatens to be a massive

> disappointment imho)

_____________________________________________________


Ruffers...



In less than say 75 words ( so no one falls asleep ) can you expand on the above a little


So we can be F1 "crazeeee..." too



Please ( see my new "nice guy" logo below )



W:):)F

big dissapointment was the opening race.


They need to sort out the aero\dirty air issues - which they've all been aware of for years - and enable overtaking.


bring in some form of nitros turbo boost system (limited number of boosts per race - say 10) - Kers was pants.


Schumacher looks solid though considering he's been away for 3 years...lets give him a couple more races.


However, i fear ferrari will run away this season...unless Alonso and Massa start tripping each other up.

woofmarkthedog Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> ruffers Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

>

>

> > Apparently Bernie is trying to get 2 compulsory

> > pit stop so they can take a bit more risk with

> > their tyres and, even better, short cuts to

> > overtake.

> > Still waiting for mushrooms or blue shells.

> >

> > (By the way I love F1 and watch all of every

> race,

> > but this season threatens to be a massive

> > disappointment imho)

> __________________________________________________

> ___

>

> Ruffers...

>

>

> In less than say 75 words ( so no one falls asleep

> ) can you expand on the above a little

>

> So we can be F1 "crazeeee..." too

>

>

> Please ( see my new "nice guy" logo below )

>

>

> W:):)F


The "short cuts" are just that. Bernie Ecclestone (who owns/runs F1) has mooted the idea of short cuts on the track that drivers would be allowed to use a maximum number of times per race (3 for example) to enable them to overtake a slower car in front that had been holding them up.


The "mushrooms and blue shells" idea, whilst funny, is a parody of mario kart that enable racers to either go very quickly for a short period or fire a projectile from their car to knock an opponent off the track.


A sidewinder missile might be more appropriate for F1.


*yawn*

Thanks for that David.


I read one suggestion re dirty air was to get rid of diffusers and have a flat bottomed car rule, job done (possibly).


I know it's easy in retrospect but you'd have though someone would have realised that the no refuelling would lead to drivers needing to preserve tyres, meaning they won't follow close and have a real go at an overtake, combined with the key weight/fuel variable being removed as said above = even less overtaking.


What was the reason for refuelling being banned anyway? I can't see it as a cost saving measure like some of the other changes as can't see how it would save money.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • A positive update from Southwark Council - “We are currently updating our Enforcement Policy and changes will allow for the issuing of civil penalties ranging from £175 to £300 for visible smoke emissions, replacing the previous reliance on criminal prosecution.“  
    • A solicitor is acting as the executor for our late Aunt's will.  He only communicates by letter which is greatly lengthening the process.  The vast majority of legal people deal by modern means - the Electronic Communications Act that allows for much, if not all of these means is now 25 years old.   Any views and advice out there? In fuller detail: The value of the estate is not high.  There are a number of beneficiaries including one in the US.  It has taken almost three years and there is no end in sight.  The estate (house) is now damp, mouldy and wall paper falling off the wall. The solicitor is hostile, has threatened beneficiaries the police (which would just waste the police's time), and will not engage constructively. He only communicates by letter.  These are poorly written, curt or even hostile, in a language from the middle of last century, he clearly is typing these himself probably on a type writer.  Of course with every letter he makes more money. We've taken the first steps to complain either through the ombudsman and/or the SRA.  We have taken legal advice a couple of times, which of course isn't cheap, and were told that his behaviour is shocking and we'd be in our right to have him removed through the courts. But.... we just want him to get on with executing the will, primarily selling the house. However he refuses to use any other form of communication but letter.  So writing to the beneficiary in the 'States can take a month to get a reply. And even in this country a week or more. Having worked with lawyers in the past I am aware that email, tele and video conferencing and even text and WhatApp are appropriate means for communication.  There could be an immediate response to his questions.   Help!        
    • Labour should be applauded for bringing in the Renter's Rights Act.  But so many of you are carried away with slagging them off. Married couples with busy lives sometimes forget who did what. On this occasion Mr Rachel Reeves was sorting out the rental agreement.  Ms Reeves was a bit flumoxed with all the grief/demonsing/witch hunts she is getting so forgot to check with her other half.   Not the first or last time this will happen with couples. (That's not having a go at the post above)
    • Hello! I'm looking for a talented, affordable people photographer to do headshots for my start up's website, for 4 people. If you're keen I'd love to see examples of your work please. Many thanks
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...