|
Register | Blogging | Today's Posts | Search |
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
04-06-2009, 03:13 PM | #2 (permalink) |
The Sexual Intellectual
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Somewhere cooler than you
Posts: 18,605
|
It's the most open year I can remember.
And i've been following F1 since 1984
__________________
Urb's RYM Stuff Most people sell their soul to the devil, but the devil sells his soul to Nick Cave. |
04-13-2009, 02:09 PM | #4 (permalink) |
Groupie
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Scotland
Posts: 50
|
well the likes of mclaren, ferrari and BMW have had a week and a half now to get there thumbs outta there arses so i can see them coming out strong especially ferrari but i just cant see past brawn just now they have a fantastic machine working for them just now so yeah jenson has it in his owns hands but never underestimate rubens tho
|
04-14-2009, 10:20 AM | #6 (permalink) |
Music Addict
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 154
|
If the FIA decide tomorrow that Brawn, Toyota and Williams' cars aren't legal, then It's anybody's guess what'll happen! It sounds to me at the moment like they might have an "unfair advantage" and if The FIA see it this way then that would really stir things up!
__________________
Below Zero. |
04-15-2009, 04:35 AM | #7 (permalink) |
Barely Disheveled Zombie
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Australia
Posts: 1,196
|
Good year... And they weren't deemed illegal, which is good news.
It was a great decision simple because it keeps the competition a little more balanced than it otherwise would be (Though Barichello's was broken in Aus apparently early on, and was still a fast as hell beast on the track, so the Brawn would still be fast either way). Brawn wasn't focussing on last year, which meant they could start developing their new car earlier. I was hesitant when Honda jumped on the Brawn name, simply because I've always been a Honda man, but at least they're still alive. The diffuser was given three 'okays' before this trial so I would have been mighty surprised if they overturned their legality. The only thing I can say is thank to fuck that they held off the 'Who ever wins the most races wins it all' for at least a year. It was the dumbest idea in a while. And in all likelihood Button would have had the thing sewn up before the other teams got their diffusers in line and calibrations all set. A few have to rush to get their plans in order... McLaren didn't push too hard, so maybe they have something in line without altering the entire back wing |
04-16-2009, 02:46 PM | #8 (permalink) | |
The Sexual Intellectual
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Somewhere cooler than you
Posts: 18,605
|
Quote:
It means drivers have to race each other. A world champion should be a champion for winning races , not holding back in 2nd or 3rd content to pick up points. Making the world champion by race wins rewards those drivers who go for it.
__________________
Urb's RYM Stuff Most people sell their soul to the devil, but the devil sells his soul to Nick Cave. |
|
04-16-2009, 10:43 PM | #9 (permalink) |
Barely Disheveled Zombie
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Australia
Posts: 1,196
|
I would say up to certain point it doesn't encourage 'going for all' on every race... If you are starting from the back grid, and know you won't get to first, why bother? Save the car for the next race so you don't **** anything up.
You aren't going to win the championship unless you can win certain amount of races anyway. FWIW this year would be over even quicker if they had the winners take all rule. Last edited by Zarko; 04-16-2009 at 11:18 PM. |
04-20-2009, 09:56 AM | #10 (permalink) |
Barely Disheveled Zombie
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Australia
Posts: 1,196
|
Good race purely because Webber came second (Not normally an Australia fanboy but whatever).
It was a very entertaining race, with some great overtakes, Hamilton was just pushing it too hard in the end. |
|