The "Freeola Customer Forum" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only. You cannot post here or create a new thread or review on this forum.
This is a place where I basically say what I want about the Formula 1 season.
My (ultra long) preview to the new season has been posted.
Formula 1.com Launches Page
Click Here
Ferrari
New Car
McLaren
New Car
Toyota
New Car
BMW
New Car
Red Bull
New Car
Williams
New Car
Renault
New Car
Honda
New Car
Force India
New Car
Toro Rosso are only releasing a revision of their 2007 car with the new chassis coming after a few races.
My (ultra long) preview to the new season has been posted.
Formula 1.com Launches Page
Click Here
Ferrari
New Car
McLaren
New Car
Toyota
New Car
BMW
New Car
Red Bull
New Car
Williams
New Car
Renault
New Car
Honda
New Car
Force India
New Car
Toro Rosso are only releasing a revision of their 2007 car with the new chassis coming after a few races.
Page:
The way I see it, it's better for Hamilton that they didn't give him the points back.
Why? Well, with the FIA ruling it will look so much better at the end of the season if he wins 'against the odds' and also if he loses there will be further pressure on the FIA to change.
If Hamilton was given the points back and then won the championship then his detractors would have plenty of ammunition to say he won it unfairly.
Why? Well, with the FIA ruling it will look so much better at the end of the season if he wins 'against the odds' and also if he loses there will be further pressure on the FIA to change.
If Hamilton was given the points back and then won the championship then his detractors would have plenty of ammunition to say he won it unfairly.
Grandprix wrote:
> So, the appeal was thrown out. The FIA's integrity is looking
> shakier by the moment.
The FIA and integrity have never gone well together.
> So, the appeal was thrown out. The FIA's integrity is looking
> shakier by the moment.
The FIA and integrity have never gone well together.
Grandprix wrote:
> Can't really say Vettel was a fluke winner because he dominated.
> You could say Hamilton had a chance to win but the tyre choice at
> their only pit stop cost them so they had to pit again.
Lewis overworked the tyres so had to come in again, although it would have been too early to switch to wets (intermediates) when he came in for fuel.
> Singapore in a couple of weeks and early weather predictions
> have it down as 60% chance of rain. A wet night race will really
> make them earn their kudos. :)
I think this is the most worrying addition to this years calendar. There was a lot of data available with Valencia (due to support races etc), when with Singapore you have the different surfaces, which would be a problem before you factor in poor weather at night time.
Also GP you don't have to talk to yourself, a conversation about F1 has actually broken out in general chat.
> Can't really say Vettel was a fluke winner because he dominated.
> You could say Hamilton had a chance to win but the tyre choice at
> their only pit stop cost them so they had to pit again.
Lewis overworked the tyres so had to come in again, although it would have been too early to switch to wets (intermediates) when he came in for fuel.
> Singapore in a couple of weeks and early weather predictions
> have it down as 60% chance of rain. A wet night race will really
> make them earn their kudos. :)
I think this is the most worrying addition to this years calendar. There was a lot of data available with Valencia (due to support races etc), when with Singapore you have the different surfaces, which would be a problem before you factor in poor weather at night time.
Also GP you don't have to talk to yourself, a conversation about F1 has actually broken out in general chat.
That was a bit of a crazy weekend. I think every driver out there deserves credit because those conditions weren't easy and the lack of contact and retirements just shows how well they all did.
Can't really say Vettel was a fluke winner because he dominated. You could say Hamilton had a chance to win but the tyre choice at their only pit stop cost them so they had to pit again.
Singapore in a couple of weeks and early weather predictions have it down as 60% chance of rain. A wet night race will really make them earn their kudos. :)
Can't really say Vettel was a fluke winner because he dominated. You could say Hamilton had a chance to win but the tyre choice at their only pit stop cost them so they had to pit again.
Singapore in a couple of weeks and early weather predictions have it down as 60% chance of rain. A wet night race will really make them earn their kudos. :)
Grandprix wrote:
> Suppose Raikkonen had finished 2nd. If the stewards believed
> that Hamilton had gained an advantage then a penalty putting
> Hamilton behind Raikkonen would have made more sense. The fact
> that Raikkonen went out just means that any penalty handed down
> is going to look extremely harsh.
True, although can you imagine the outcry if Hamilton would have been demoted behind both Ferrari's. For Massa to come away with the win sends out the wrong message though. He didn't try to catch Lewis when the rain came and that's not what I watch F1 for. It'll be a shame if he takes the WDC (even with much improved performances on his least favourate tracks this year).
> Suppose Raikkonen had finished 2nd. If the stewards believed
> that Hamilton had gained an advantage then a penalty putting
> Hamilton behind Raikkonen would have made more sense. The fact
> that Raikkonen went out just means that any penalty handed down
> is going to look extremely harsh.
True, although can you imagine the outcry if Hamilton would have been demoted behind both Ferrari's. For Massa to come away with the win sends out the wrong message though. He didn't try to catch Lewis when the rain came and that's not what I watch F1 for. It'll be a shame if he takes the WDC (even with much improved performances on his least favourate tracks this year).
McLaren are much better in cooler conditions. Ferrari and McLaren were on the harder tyre at this point, so it's harder to heat the tyres up. Ferrari are much kinder on their tyres but that would probably mean they have trouble getting heat in the harder tyre, particularly in cooler temperatures.
Suppose Raikkonen had finished 2nd. If the stewards believed that Hamilton had gained an advantage then a penalty putting Hamilton behind Raikkonen would have made more sense. The fact that Raikkonen went out just means that any penalty handed down is going to look extremely harsh.
It's a shame the PPV F1 coverage fell flat on its face a few years ago. It was probably a little too early for it and too expensive but we at least would have had a choice of cameras etc.
Suppose Raikkonen had finished 2nd. If the stewards believed that Hamilton had gained an advantage then a penalty putting Hamilton behind Raikkonen would have made more sense. The fact that Raikkonen went out just means that any penalty handed down is going to look extremely harsh.
It's a shame the PPV F1 coverage fell flat on its face a few years ago. It was probably a little too early for it and too expensive but we at least would have had a choice of cameras etc.
Grandprix wrote:
> No, I'm not insinuating that Raikkonen did a brake test on
> Hamilton. Hamilton's car was working much better and Raikkonen
> obviously wasn't confident in braking at the normal point. The
> whole braking early just seems to be a confidence thing because
> Raikkonen does not enjoy the tricky conditions and I don't think
> the Ferrari car does either.
I think he does with the right stuff underneath him. Remember Fuji last year? On the Monaco grid the team fitted his tyres late so the resulting drive through left him out of position, with Silverstone he still had his worn inters on, whilst at spa it was obvious that Hamilton had a car that was a lot easier to handle on dry tyres in those conditions (could this possibly stem back to the mythical Ferrari heat issue).
> I just don't think any racing driver, Massa included, would have
> done any different. Raikkonen was struggling and any driver worth
> his money would have gone round the outside, thought Raikkonen
> would have at least given him enough room as he was comfortably
> alongside, taken action to avoid a collision and then let
> Raikkonen back into the lead. I also don't expect any driver to
> sit there and wait behind Raikkonen round La Source when he
> brakes early.
I have to admit Räikkönen was a bit more cut throat than usual (for example his move on Massa at the start). Normally Kimi does move across but leaves enough room, unlike say Alonso or Webber. I also don't believe after moving wide that he expected Lewis to still be at the apex of the hairpin, as he usually isn't one for contact.
> The thing about the penalty is that the time cost does not fit
> the crime, if there even is one.
What would ten seconds have achieved? Similarly how would a five or ten place grid drop at the next round gone down? I honestly find all pre/post race interference fairly draconian, but then if all decisions where taken instantly, we may see more unjust drive through penalties etc.
> The onboard footage is great. It just shows how bad the coverage
> is in the UK. We get nothing really and we also have to put up
> with James Allen. It was Rosberg recovering.
James really is unpopular, although I can see why, when he shouted that Lewis had spun when it was a red car swapping ends. Here's hoping the BBC improves coverage next year, although after this years Olympics, I'm not so sure.
> No, I'm not insinuating that Raikkonen did a brake test on
> Hamilton. Hamilton's car was working much better and Raikkonen
> obviously wasn't confident in braking at the normal point. The
> whole braking early just seems to be a confidence thing because
> Raikkonen does not enjoy the tricky conditions and I don't think
> the Ferrari car does either.
I think he does with the right stuff underneath him. Remember Fuji last year? On the Monaco grid the team fitted his tyres late so the resulting drive through left him out of position, with Silverstone he still had his worn inters on, whilst at spa it was obvious that Hamilton had a car that was a lot easier to handle on dry tyres in those conditions (could this possibly stem back to the mythical Ferrari heat issue).
> I just don't think any racing driver, Massa included, would have
> done any different. Raikkonen was struggling and any driver worth
> his money would have gone round the outside, thought Raikkonen
> would have at least given him enough room as he was comfortably
> alongside, taken action to avoid a collision and then let
> Raikkonen back into the lead. I also don't expect any driver to
> sit there and wait behind Raikkonen round La Source when he
> brakes early.
I have to admit Räikkönen was a bit more cut throat than usual (for example his move on Massa at the start). Normally Kimi does move across but leaves enough room, unlike say Alonso or Webber. I also don't believe after moving wide that he expected Lewis to still be at the apex of the hairpin, as he usually isn't one for contact.
> The thing about the penalty is that the time cost does not fit
> the crime, if there even is one.
What would ten seconds have achieved? Similarly how would a five or ten place grid drop at the next round gone down? I honestly find all pre/post race interference fairly draconian, but then if all decisions where taken instantly, we may see more unjust drive through penalties etc.
> The onboard footage is great. It just shows how bad the coverage
> is in the UK. We get nothing really and we also have to put up
> with James Allen. It was Rosberg recovering.
James really is unpopular, although I can see why, when he shouted that Lewis had spun when it was a red car swapping ends. Here's hoping the BBC improves coverage next year, although after this years Olympics, I'm not so sure.
No, I'm not insinuating that Raikkonen did a brake test on Hamilton. Hamilton's car was working much better and Raikkonen obviously wasn't confident in braking at the normal point. The whole braking early just seems to be a confidence thing because Raikkonen does not enjoy the tricky conditions and I don't think the Ferrari car does either.
I just don't think any racing driver, Massa included, would have done any different. Raikkonen was struggling and any driver worth his money would have gone round the outside, thought Raikkonen would have at least given him enough room as he was comfortably alongside, taken action to avoid a collision and then let Raikkonen back into the lead. I also don't expect any driver to sit there and wait behind Raikkonen round La Source when he brakes early.
The thing about the penalty is that the time cost does not fit the crime, if there even is one.
The onboard footage is great. It just shows how bad the coverage is in the UK. We get nothing really and we also have to put up with James Allen. It was Rosberg recovering.
I just don't think any racing driver, Massa included, would have done any different. Raikkonen was struggling and any driver worth his money would have gone round the outside, thought Raikkonen would have at least given him enough room as he was comfortably alongside, taken action to avoid a collision and then let Raikkonen back into the lead. I also don't expect any driver to sit there and wait behind Raikkonen round La Source when he brakes early.
The thing about the penalty is that the time cost does not fit the crime, if there even is one.
The onboard footage is great. It just shows how bad the coverage is in the UK. We get nothing really and we also have to put up with James Allen. It was Rosberg recovering.
Grandprix wrote:
> I've seen the onboard footage. Hamilton was reeling Raikkonen in
> heading into the Bus Stop. Raikkonen broke really early and
> Hamilton did well to avoid hitting him so went round the outside.
I hope you’re not insinuating that Kimi brake tested him, as Hamilton’s reactions where per any F1 driver (possibly with the exception of David Coulthard). Did you also see from the onboard my point, about Lewis reeling him in by using the curbs, when Räikkönen was by this point staying off them.
> I can't see how anyone expects Hamilton, who was in front of
> Raikkonen for a brief period, to lift off and let Raikkonen take
> the line, which was tighter than you would normally take.
That's the argument, which leads onto Hamiltons attitude etc. Felipe Massa said he wouldn't have taken Kimi otherwise on such a short straight, which I believe Lewis well knew. Had he have waited for a clearer opportunity then there wouldn't have been any issue at all.
> Hamilton has two choices, stick to his line and take Raikkonen
> out or avoid a collision. He avoided a collision. Raikkonen went
> past Hamilton down the straight, swept across Hamilton and then
> broke early again. Hamilton was later on the brakes and easily
> took the place. Hamilton never moved behind Raikkonen. Raikkonen
> moved in front of him.
That's a whole different debate, why he's so good on the brakes, in relation to the Ferrari documents they had last year and why McLaren had to assure the FIA they wouldn't developed that area this season.
EDIT I forgot to mention that the version I gave was Hamilton’s (given during the press conference).
> The last time I checked, this was motor RACING. These are racing
> drivers having to make split second decisions. The argument that
> the stewards used was that Hamilton gained a advantage. Yeah, he
> gained an advantage in that both cars were still intact. The
> penalty is ridiculous. 25 seconds (effectively a drive through)
> is beyond crazy.
Agreed, although you could argue that a drive through would have been imposed had it not been towards the end of the race.
> Again, this is only my theory from the onboard footage I've
> seen. Make your own judgements.
I hadn't seen the Räikkönen onboard, which confirms what I suspected, that the Williams impeded him before his crash. Wasn't that Rosburg, who had already nearly taken the leaders out by recovering from a spin right in front of them.
Ps: I like the growl from the Ferrari when Kimi nearly hits the side of the recovering Rosburg (it kind of makes you wish that the entire race was made up of onboard footage).
> I've seen the onboard footage. Hamilton was reeling Raikkonen in
> heading into the Bus Stop. Raikkonen broke really early and
> Hamilton did well to avoid hitting him so went round the outside.
I hope you’re not insinuating that Kimi brake tested him, as Hamilton’s reactions where per any F1 driver (possibly with the exception of David Coulthard). Did you also see from the onboard my point, about Lewis reeling him in by using the curbs, when Räikkönen was by this point staying off them.
> I can't see how anyone expects Hamilton, who was in front of
> Raikkonen for a brief period, to lift off and let Raikkonen take
> the line, which was tighter than you would normally take.
That's the argument, which leads onto Hamiltons attitude etc. Felipe Massa said he wouldn't have taken Kimi otherwise on such a short straight, which I believe Lewis well knew. Had he have waited for a clearer opportunity then there wouldn't have been any issue at all.
> Hamilton has two choices, stick to his line and take Raikkonen
> out or avoid a collision. He avoided a collision. Raikkonen went
> past Hamilton down the straight, swept across Hamilton and then
> broke early again. Hamilton was later on the brakes and easily
> took the place. Hamilton never moved behind Raikkonen. Raikkonen
> moved in front of him.
That's a whole different debate, why he's so good on the brakes, in relation to the Ferrari documents they had last year and why McLaren had to assure the FIA they wouldn't developed that area this season.
EDIT I forgot to mention that the version I gave was Hamilton’s (given during the press conference).
> The last time I checked, this was motor RACING. These are racing
> drivers having to make split second decisions. The argument that
> the stewards used was that Hamilton gained a advantage. Yeah, he
> gained an advantage in that both cars were still intact. The
> penalty is ridiculous. 25 seconds (effectively a drive through)
> is beyond crazy.
Agreed, although you could argue that a drive through would have been imposed had it not been towards the end of the race.
> Again, this is only my theory from the onboard footage I've
> seen. Make your own judgements.
I hadn't seen the Räikkönen onboard, which confirms what I suspected, that the Williams impeded him before his crash. Wasn't that Rosburg, who had already nearly taken the leaders out by recovering from a spin right in front of them.
Ps: I like the growl from the Ferrari when Kimi nearly hits the side of the recovering Rosburg (it kind of makes you wish that the entire race was made up of onboard footage).
Page: