In reply to Adrian_Thompson: My bet is that Felipe Nasr brings a boat full of money to Williams and Button retires or stays put. Stoffel cries himself a river.
In reply to Adrian_Thompson: My bet is that Felipe Nasr brings a boat full of money to Williams and Button retires or stays put. Stoffel cries himself a river.
Massa's record probably won't really reflect how good he actually was. I mean, he never really beat Michael much, but he sure kept him honest.
And, he was world champion for about 20 seconds.
And Jensen is gone. Not sure what exactly a "Maclaren Honda Ambassador" will do, exactly...
Other than Lewis blowing the start, not much of a race.
Mercedes seemed to show a weakness in the rules, though. Hamilton's engine change has worked out pretty well, 3 new engines, almost no losses, and given his pole speed, that should have been a major advantage had the start not been so bad.
WTF happened with Alonso? He got fastest lap but also lost 2 places compared to his start and spent a lot of the race running in the points.
In reply to markwemple:
He was out raced by his forced to retire, err sorry, take a two year sabbatical team mate so stopped for fresh tires with two laps to go just to snag the fastest lap bragging rights
Streetwiseguy wrote: And Jensen is gone. Not sure what exactly a "Maclaren Honda Ambassador" will do, exactly...
Act as a backup in case the new kid can't hack it while handling PR duties with the sponsors and lending his "former world champion" name to the team.
My guess is that there aren't any top team slots available for him, he doesn't want to drive for a back marker team (well, you could argue he already is with McLaren, but...) and this gives him a better shot at a seat in 2018 than anything else.
F1: Magnussen to find out '17 fate by next race I predict that both drivers are gone at Renault, Perhaps Ocon and maybe a paid driver if Perez doesn't bite.
In reply to Adrian_Thompson:
So it was a fluke he spent most of the race ahead of Button and was in the points after pit stop rotations. Hmmmm..... ok
06HHR wrote: Changes afoot, looks like F1 will have a new boss next week TTAC report US Magnate to buy F1
Bernie remains. Ecclestone to remain F1 CEO after takeover
If the deal goes through. Sure, it seems like a done deal at this point, but pen has not been put to paper. I've seen Bernie and CCV kill deals at the last minute before.....
-Rob
Is it too soon to hope this could mean a legal way to stream in the US?
unevolved wrote: Is it too soon to hope this could mean a legal way to stream in the US?
Well Liberty owns stake in SiruisXM and TWC. Plus, some say that an American firm buying it means much more U.S. exposure. If they want to make more money than now, they need to pull the U.S. back into the game. So, it's quite possible.
May even mean one or two more races in the U.S.
-Rob
My only concern about Liberty purchasing a portion of F1 is making it as gimmicky and fake as WWE Nascar racing. Yes it will bring a bigger audience, but why have another reality TV form of racing. Perhaps this is where the likes of Bernie and all the power he has would block it.
In reply to trigun7469:
Those are my concerns as well. F1 has become more about money and less about racing over the years. It may be game over for real racing. Just like Indy car, NASCAR, etc.....
trigun7469 wrote: My only concern about Liberty purchasing a portion of F1 is making it as gimmicky and fake as WWE Nascar racing. Yes it will bring a bigger audience, but why have another reality TV form of racing. Perhaps this is where the likes of Bernie and all the power he has would block it.
Wait, wut....
You're thinking the gnome is the voice of reason when it comes to gimmickry? The same guy who proposed introducing sprinklers, a grid lottery, and an Olympics-style rewards system to F1?
markwemple wrote: In reply to trigun7469: Those are my concerns as well. F1 has become more about money and less about racing over the years. It may be game over for real racing. Just like Indy car, NASCAR, etc.....
F1 is edging awfully close to a spec series with their highly controlled regulations anyhow. Let's hear it for the ACO, folks!
I can hear the cries of anguish coming from Europeans like Jeremy Clarkson already. "The Americans will destroy everything and add a jump in the front straight! Aaaaaggghhhh!!!"
And really, you guys should watch a few Indy races. They have been pretty darn interesting, with some real tough strategy decisions making the difference between winning and 18th.
Keith Tanner wrote:markwemple wrote: In reply to trigun7469: Those are my concerns as well. F1 has become more about money and less about racing over the years. It may be game over for real racing. Just like Indy car, NASCAR, etc.....F1 is edging awfully close to a spec series with their highly controlled regulations anyhow. Let's hear it for the ACO, folks!
And yet the cars are very, very different. Odd how that works out.
One would think that the very, very, very tightly controlled engine rules would make all the power systems equal- and they have not even come close to that.
Nor have the problems of super slowness really kept up- Hamilton's pole time was less than .1 sec of Baricello's lap record. All using much less fuel.
My hope for this is that more focus is on the viewing customers and giving them a quality thing to spend money on vs. just wringing the tracks for as much money as possible. And then giving more of that money back to the teams so that we can have more teams being able to compete with the big money teams.
There's no question there's a variation in performance between the different power units. But what could Mercedes do if they weren't restricted to a very specific set of dimensions? I understand why capacity might be limited (even though the fuel flow limits should be more of a guide), but why is bore and stroke set?
I do love what they're doing with the small amounts of fuel these days. But I love the variety of LMP1 even more.
I agree that soaking the track owners for loads of cash needs to stop, and I'd love to see the Ferrari bonus get reallocated to the backmarkers. But that's thinking of F1 as a race series, not as an entertainment spectacle.
Not to say that the super defined regulations are perfect, as I'd stop at "here's your fuel flow restriction, and total fuel limit- go. But the rules are not spec.
That's why I said they were edging towards it instead of calling it spec. The regulations have been getting tighter and tighter.
In reply to Keith Tanner: All race series are spec series, even though the WEC with LMP1 may have some rules different then other series with batteries and diesel engines, it is still a spec series with only 3 different variants with Porsche, Audi, and Toyota. I am hoping that the new tires and new rules open to closer racing, heck a sprinkler system would actually be racing rather then a bunch of Neanderthals throwing helmets, gloves, and tackling each other.
You and I have very different definitions of what a spec series is. Yes, all race series have rules. But those rules can either leave room for innovation or they can be so rigid that no innovation is allowed. The latter is the spec approach. You will run 1.6 V6 engines with X stroke and Y bore and Z redline and and and. F1 isn't a full-on spec series as noted before, but the ruleset is very restrictive. The days of sucker fans and six wheels are long gone.
Le Mans definitely leaves room for innovation. Just look at the energy storage and ICE options being raced by the three teams over the past couple of years in your example. IIRC we have two different fuels, three different engine configurations (some with forced induction, some without) and three energy storage technologies (flywheel, supercap and battery). And don't forget Nissan - they might not have raced in 2016, but they gave it a shot with a really unusual car.
You'll need to log in to post.
