Belgian Grand Prix -- Formula One

F1 returns next Sunday with one of the best tracks on the calender, the legendary Spa-Francorchamps! OMG I STARTED A RACE THREAD I R SO COOL!!!1

I'm hoping we hear this...:

...or this....:

....on the podium!

>implying we're not going to hear this.

But this is what we're gonna hear.




or

pennst24 wrote:F1 returns next Sunday with one of the best tracks on the calender, the legendary Spa-Francorchamps! OMG I STARTED A RACE THREAD I R SO COOL!!!1

I'm hoping we hear this...:

...or this....:

....on the podium!

Mother of Invention wrote:But this is what we're gonna hear.




or

Heikki Kovalainen, Timo Glock, Pedro de la Rosa and Charles Pic are going to be battling for the podium?

BurningThunder wrote:

pennst24 wrote:F1 returns next Sunday with one of the best tracks on the calender, the legendary Spa-Francorchamps! OMG I STARTED A RACE THREAD I R SO COOL!!!1

I'm hoping we hear this...:

...or this....:

....on the podium!

Mother of Invention wrote:But this is what we're gonna hear.




or

Heikki Kovalainen, Timo Glock, Pedro de la Rosa and Charles Pic are going to be battling for the podium?

Then again, it IS Belgium, so if it rains...

Everyone knows that we will hear this on the podium.

I hope I hear Spaniard or Brasilian national anthem, I'm going to this race with Ferrari

Go Ligier....I mean Benneton.......no wait Renault.......or is it Lotus!
Anyway we need some rain. I'm off tomorrow to film some Modified saloons and 1960's racing, I'll post the vid if you want.

Milan655 wrote:I hope I hear Spaniard or Brasilian national anthem, I'm going to this race with Ferrari

You watch. It'll be Senna and Perez.

Alpineopossum wrote:

Milan655 wrote:I hope I hear Spaniard or Brasilian national anthem, I'm going to this race with Ferrari

You watch. It'll be Senna and Perez.

I thought Perez was Mexican, anyway we're going to hear this at the end of the race

no, you're all wrong, you're going to hear this



wait, wrong one....

you're going to hear this

ahh... forget it.

Metro 6r4 wrote:Go Ligier....I mean Benneton.......no wait Renault.......or is it Lotus!
Anyway we need some rain. I'm off tomorrow to film some Modified saloons and 1960's racing, I'll post the vid if you want.

I think you mean Toleman, chief.

Also, you're all wrong, clearly the Venezuel-PFAHAHAHAHAHAHAH, sorry, I can't say that with a straight face.

You wouldn't be alone. Although, if Pirelli fuck up again...

Milan655 wrote:You wouldn't be alone. Although, if Pirelli fuck up again...

Pirelli never really fucked up IMO. Yeah, Maldonado winning came kinda out of nowhere, but aside from that, I wouldn't say anybody is really that far out of position. The apparent randomness isn't really that random when you factor in upgrades, and who's actually doing what. I'd rather have a year where Maldonado wins a race than a whole year of VETTELWINSLOL like last year.

Dunno what Pirelli messed up. They just intentionally made tires that don't last and told the field to deal with it.

Cynon wrote:Dunno what Pirelli messed up. They just intentionally made tires that don't last and told the field to deal with it.

READ PLS GOODYEAR

Cynon wrote:Dunno what Pirelli messed up. They just intentionally made tires that don't last and told the field to deal with it.

I found the first 7 races terrible. I am aware Pirelli have made them intentionally terrible, but it's ruined racing. That's what they fucked up. I'd prefer proper racing rather than tyre management.

Nonsense! Grosjean will have some sort of injury, will get replaced by d'Ambrosio, and we all hear this:

Milan655 wrote:

Cynon wrote:Dunno what Pirelli messed up. They just intentionally made tires that don't last and told the field to deal with it.

I found the first 7 races terrible. I am aware Pirelli have made them intentionally terrible, but it's ruined racing. That's what they fucked up. I'd prefer proper racing rather than tyre management.

"Proper racing", according to you, would be weekly finishing intervals of <30 seconds.

PRAWBLEMS wrote:

Milan655 wrote:

Cynon wrote:Dunno what Pirelli messed up. They just intentionally made tires that don't last and told the field to deal with it.

I found the first 7 races terrible. I am aware Pirelli have made them intentionally terrible, but it's ruined racing. That's what they fucked up. I'd prefer proper racing rather than tyre management.

"Proper racing", according to you, would be weekly finishing intervals of <30 seconds.

No. Proper racing is the 80s and 90s. Proper racing is being able to drive the car without having to maintain tyres that won't last even 1/4 of the race. Pirelli are, I feel, ruining Formula 1.

Milan655 wrote:

PRAWBLEMS wrote:

Milan655 wrote:

Cynon wrote:Dunno what Pirelli messed up. They just intentionally made tires that don't last and told the field to deal with it.

I found the first 7 races terrible. I am aware Pirelli have made them intentionally terrible, but it's ruined racing. That's what they fucked up. I'd prefer proper racing rather than tyre management.

"Proper racing", according to you, would be weekly finishing intervals of <30 seconds.

No. Proper racing is the 80s and 90s. Proper racing is being able to drive the car without having to maintain tyres that won't last even 1/4 of the race. Pirelli are, I feel, ruining Formula 1.

So? It adds another dimension of challenge for the drivers. It rewards those who think and plan ahead, and I see absolutely nothing wrong with that. Would you rather we go back to those godawful Bridgestones? Where the possible compounds were 'very very very hard' and 'practically made of iron'? Because that was ruining Formula 1, tyres that you could push forever on and would just not wear, so it accentuated the differences between cars even more.

Milan655 wrote:

Cynon wrote:Dunno what Pirelli messed up. They just intentionally made tires that don't last and told the field to deal with it.

I found the first 7 races terrible. I am aware Pirelli have made them intentionally terrible, but it's ruined racing. That's what they fucked up. I'd prefer proper racing rather than tyre management.

So you would rather have tires that wouldn't fall off, have some teams come up with creative strategies, and force drivers to know when and where to use their tires... essentially have a F1 race like the late 90's-early 00's

PYLrulz wrote:

Milan655 wrote:

Cynon wrote:Dunno what Pirelli messed up. They just intentionally made tires that don't last and told the field to deal with it.

I found the first 7 races terrible. I am aware Pirelli have made them intentionally terrible, but it's ruined racing. That's what they fucked up. I'd prefer proper racing rather than tyre management.

So you would rather have tires that wouldn't fall off, have some teams come up with creative strategies, and force drivers to know when and where to use their tires... essentially have a F1 race like the late 90's-early 00's

Just reminding me of how boring most of those races were is making me sleepy.

PYLrulz wrote:So you would rather have tires that wouldn't fall off, have some teams come up with creative strategies, and force drivers to know when and where to use their tires... essentially have a F1 race like the late 90's-early 00's

RetrogradeRenegade wrote:So? It adds another dimension of challenge for the drivers. It rewards those who think and plan ahead, and I see absolutely nothing wrong with that. Would you rather we go back to those godawful Bridgestones? Where the possible compounds were 'very very very hard' and 'practically made of iron'? Because that was ruining Formula 1, tyres that you could push forever on and would just not wear, so it accentuated the differences between cars even more.

If you look at the Senna-Prost period and the early 80's, the racing was incredible. Probably the most exciting in Formula 1 history. There was no need to worry about your tyres falling 'off the cliff' like they do now, and you could race. And the problem with the 1998 and 2000-2006 seasons (although I'm not sure what was wrong about the late 90s. The 1997 and 1999 season I thought were quick good) was that you had one team dominating, and one driver dominating.
Now the teams are much closer together (as is seen in qualifying) so why not let them race like you did 5-10 years ago? Maybe the 'good' racing we have seen this year is not due to the tyres, but for the similarities in cars, and the tyres are just getting in the way of even better racing.

Additionally, when I drove karts we had to chose the right tyres (there were no restrictions while I drove, although there are now). There was a phrase very often used-"A tyre can make the best drivers in the world look like the worst, likewise it can make the worst drivers look the best." Example-Pastor Maldonado.

I think the racing of the 80's and 90's were fantastic. I'm only 14 but I've seen the raw talent that you needed to keep a 1000bhp single seater on the road, where as now you just have to dawdle round and maintain tires. I happen to be very old fashioned and loved 1980's racing, we had group B, turbo F1, Turbo GTand Special saloons(which I happened to see today,a 5.7 chevy engine in an Opel Manta is amazing)I also highley recommend that we bring back the turbo.

I believe that in 2013, the engines will be 1.6 Turbo powered.

I also would add that the 80's had Group C

Milan655 wrote:I believe that in 2013, the engines will be 1.6 Turbo powered.

I also would add that the 80's had Group C

I love that they are reviving old series for group C and special saloons.

Will there be any pit stops if we still had the Bridgestone tires?

Refuelling would still be around.

Milan655 wrote:If you look at the Senna-Prost period and the early 80's, the racing was incredible. Probably the most exciting in Formula 1 history. There was no need to worry about your tyres falling 'off the cliff' like they do now, and you could race.

Yes, it was. But there were also plenty of races where a driver would disappear off into the distance. The 80's weren't all sunshine and roses in terms of on-track battles.

Now the teams are much closer together (as is seen in qualifying) so why not let them race like you did 5-10 years ago? Maybe the 'good' racing we have seen this year is not due to the tyres, but for the similarities in cars, and the tyres are just getting in the way of even better racing.

We did have a season like that, it was called 2010.

Additionally, when I drove karts we had to chose the right tyres (there were no restrictions while I drove, although there are now). There was a phrase very often used-"A tyre can make the best drivers in the world look like the worst, likewise it can make the worst drivers look the best." Example-Pastor Maldonado.

Pastor Maldonado is not a slow driver. His problem is just that he can't stop crashing, except for Barcelona. But he has shown tremendous pace in the past - he got that hateful Williams into Q3 on a few occasions last year, he was hounding Alonso in Melbourne, and was on for at least 4th in Valencia when he crashed into Hamilton.

Chives2112 wrote:Will there be any pit stops if we still had the Bridgestone tires?

If they were still around, we would be asking what Pit Stops are, and if that is something they do in NASCAR, not F1

RetrogradeRenegade wrote:Yes, it was. But there were also plenty of races where a driver would disappear off into the distance. The 80's weren't all sunshine and roses in terms of on-track battles.

We did have a season like that, it was called 2010.

Pastor Maldonado is not a slow driver. His problem is just that he can't stop crashing, except for Barcelona. But he has shown tremendous pace in the past - he got that hateful Williams into Q3 on a few occasions last year, he was hounding Alonso in Melbourne, and was on for at least 4th in Valencia when he crashed into Hamilton.

The 80's were definitely better. They may not have been "all sunshine and roses" but they were certainly better when it did come to the "on track battles". Now you see talentless wastes queuing up after each other, waiting for the DRS. The 80's were the days where you were rewarded for being quick, not using your tyres and KERS/DRS.

Sorry, I wasn't quite sure of your point "We did have a season like that, it was called 2010." I thought the 2010 season was quite good.

No, Pastor Maldonado does not deserve his drive at Williams. He's carved a career using the money of a corrupted man. He's won 3 championships in the past 10 years. He hasn't fought himself into the sport, he's bought it. Rubens deserves it more, and even Bruno does.

Milan655 wrote:

RetrogradeRenegade wrote:Yes, it was. But there were also plenty of races where a driver would disappear off into the distance. The 80's weren't all sunshine and roses in terms of on-track battles.

We did have a season like that, it was called 2010.

Pastor Maldonado is not a slow driver. His problem is just that he can't stop crashing, except for Barcelona. But he has shown tremendous pace in the past - he got that hateful Williams into Q3 on a few occasions last year, he was hounding Alonso in Melbourne, and was on for at least 4th in Valencia when he crashed into Hamilton.

The 80's were definitely better. They may not have been "all sunshine and roses" but they were certainly better when it did come to the "on track battles". Now you see talentless wastes queuing up after each other, waiting for the DRS. The 80's were the days where you were rewarded for being quick, not using your tyres and KERS/DRS.

Sorry, I wasn't quite sure of your point "We did have a season like that, it was called 2010." I thought the 2010 season was quite good.

No, Pastor Maldonado does not deserve his drive at Williams. He's carved a career using the money of a corrupted man. He's won 3 championships in the past 10 years. He hasn't fought himself into the sport, he's bought it. Rubens deserves it more, and even Bruno does.

I think it's pretty clear that the only thing that Bernie cares about is the green in his pocket, I'll be very glad when he's gone.

Metro 6r4 wrote:I think it's pretty clear that the only thing that Bernie cares about is the green in his pocket, I'll be very glad when he's gone.

Knowing Bernie, he'll live to 150 just to take the piss.

Milan655 wrote:The 80's were definitely better. They may not have been "all sunshine and roses" but they were certainly better when it did come to the "on track battles". Now you see talentless wastes queuing up after each other, waiting for the DRS. The 80's were the days where you were rewarded for being quick, not using your tyres and KERS/DRS.

I wouldn't call the likes of Alonso, Hamilton, Vettel, Button, and Webber 'talentless wastes'. And though DRS can make passing trivial, it's still a relatively new thing - you can't expect the FIA to get it right every single time. Personally I thought it was spot on in China this year - enough to make a bit of difference, but it isn't a guarantee. KERS is a lot like the push to pass in IndyCar - I see no problem with it.

Speaking of the 80's, I watched the 1987 Australian Grand Prix on YouTube yesterday. It was pretty interesting, especially how Senna ran conservatively in the early stages, then with about 25 laps left began piling on the pressure and started reeling Berger in hand over fist. Ultimately he wound up backing off, though, due to fuel concerns, and was later disqualified, but that's not the point - the point I'm trying to make here is Senna was able to make a charge for the win by managing his tyres for most of the race, saving them for chasing down the leader at the end of the race. This tyre management is something that was lacking for a few years with Bridgestone - the rock hard tyres that you could push forever on and wouldn't really wear much, and now Pirelli have brought this back by introducing tyres that are designed to fall apart after so long - it's to force drivers and teams to think intelligently and plan ahead, rather than just blindly charging like they did with the Bridgestones.

Sorry, I wasn't quite sure of your point "We did have a season like that, it was called 2010." I thought the 2010 season was quite good.

The point was that 2010 was a season where the teams were very close and the tyres didn't fall apart. The racing was great then, but I think it's even better now. I mean, hell, it made Valencia of all places actually look interesting - a track that up until this year has produced precisely zero entertainment value.

No, Pastor Maldonado does not deserve his drive at Williams.

For the record, I never said he did. All I said is he wasn't slow. That's more than I can say for Bruno Senna.

He's carved a career using the money of a corrupted man.

How many drivers have made it to F1 without some form of major backing in the last few years? The only one that comes readily to mind is Robert Kubica.

He hasn't fought himself into the sport, he's bought it.

He's not the first and he won't be the last.

Rubens deserves it more, and even Bruno does.

Rubens, yes, Bruno, not so much. What you need to consider though is that Williams' finances at the end of 2011 were not good. They needed money. Hence why Senna and Maldonado are there, and why Barrichello is in IndyCars.

RetrogradeRenegade wrote:I wouldn't call the likes of Alonso, Hamilton, Vettel, Button, and Webber 'talentless wastes'. And though DRS can make passing trivial, it's still a relatively new thing - you can't expect the FIA to get it right every single time. Personally I thought it was spot on in China this year - enough to make a bit of difference, but it isn't a guarantee. KERS is a lot like the push to pass in IndyCar - I see no problem with it.

But it's not the driver. The driver should be using his own skill, rather than a a mechanical aid which the other car in front cannot use.

This tyre management is something that was lacking for a few years with Bridgestone - the rock hard tyres that you could push forever on and wouldn't really wear much, and now Pirelli have brought this back by introducing tyres that are designed to fall apart after so long - it's to force drivers and teams to think intelligently and plan ahead, rather than just blindly charging like they did with the Bridgestones.

Yes, this form of tyre management is intelligent. However, the tyres we see today are not like those we saw 20/30 years ago. Yes, you had to manage them, but you could also drive aggressively on them, allowing a driver to drive before with intelligence and speed. Now you can only maintain your tyres, as if you push too hard on them, your tyres will 'fall of the cliff' many laps earlier.

The point was that 2010 was a season where the teams were very close and the tyres didn't fall apart. The racing was great then, but I think it's even better now. I mean, hell, it made Valencia of all places actually look interesting - a track that up until this year has produced precisely zero entertainment value.

I suppose it's an opinion then. I enjoyed 2010 more than this, and find the racing this year stupid.

For the record, I never said he did. All I said is he wasn't slow. That's more than I can say for Bruno Senna.

Considering Senna has 10 years less racing experience than anyone else, I think he has done very well.

How many drivers have made it to F1 without some form of major backing in the last few years? The only one that comes readily to mind is Robert Kubica.

Unfortunately, this is true.

Rubens, yes, Bruno, not so much. What you need to consider though is that Williams' finances at the end of 2011 were not good. They needed money. Hence why Senna and Maldonado are there, and why Barrichello is in IndyCars.

Bruno does deserve it. I know him irl, and he's a very nice person that always receives the worst luck (e.g. GP2 2008 Istanbul). Had Ayrton survived his incident and his dad not die in a motorcycle incident, Bruno could have been a champion. And again, yes, unfortunately I have to agree that the economy of the sport is no longer what it was in the late 80s/early 90s-it is unbelievably expensive to produce chassis etc. in comparison to, say, 1989.

How many drivers have made it to F1 without some form of major backing in the last few years? The only one that comes readily to mind is Robert Kubica.

I think you missed the point. Moldano is in F1 cause of a crazy South American dictator. Only Ricardo Londano-Bridge had a crazier sponsor, and that sponsor probably prevent Ricardo from getting his license.

Mother of Invention wrote:

How many drivers have made it to F1 without some form of major backing in the last few years? The only one that comes readily to mind is Robert Kubica.

I think you missed the point. Moldano is in F1 cause of a crazy South American dictator. Only Ricardo Londano-Bridge had a crazier sponsor, and that sponsor probably prevent Ricardo from getting his license.

Actually, Londono-Bridge was denied a license after slamming up the backside of Keke Rosberg in unofficial practice

tommykl wrote:

Mother of Invention wrote:

How many drivers have made it to F1 without some form of major backing in the last few years? The only one that comes readily to mind is Robert Kubica.

I think you missed the point. Moldano is in F1 cause of a crazy South American dictator. Only Ricardo Londano-Bridge had a crazier sponsor, and that sponsor probably prevent Ricardo from getting his license.

Actually, Londono-Bridge was denied a license after slamming up the backside of Keke Rosberg in unofficial practice

Yes, Rosberg was "testing his brakes"

Milan655 wrote:

RetrogradeRenegade wrote:I wouldn't call the likes of Alonso, Hamilton, Vettel, Button, and Webber 'talentless wastes'. And though DRS can make passing trivial, it's still a relatively new thing - you can't expect the FIA to get it right every single time. Personally I thought it was spot on in China this year - enough to make a bit of difference, but it isn't a guarantee. KERS is a lot like the push to pass in IndyCar - I see no problem with it.

But it's not the driver. The driver should be using his own skill, rather than a a mechanical aid which the other car in front cannot use.

It's still not a guaranteed pass though, or, at least, it shouldn't be. I'll concede that I think DRS is not particularly necessary in today's F1 though.

Yes, this form of tyre management is intelligent. However, the tyres we see today are not like those we saw 20/30 years ago. Yes, you had to manage them, but you could also drive aggressively on them, allowing a driver to drive before with intelligence and speed. Now you can only maintain your tyres, as if you push too hard on them, your tyres will 'fall of the cliff' many laps earlier.

Which is why teams explore the limits of the tyres in practice, so they know how hard they can push on race day.

I suppose it's an opinion then. I enjoyed 2010 more than this, and find the racing this year stupid.

Fair enough. I'm of the opinion that if a set of rules makes Valencia entertaining, it must be doing something right.

Considering Senna has 10 years less racing experience than anyone else, I think he has done very well.

Bruno does deserve it. I know him irl, and he's a very nice person that always receives the worst luck (e.g. GP2 2008 Istanbul). Had Ayrton survived his incident and his dad not die in a motorcycle incident, Bruno could have been a champion. And again, yes, unfortunately I have to agree that the economy of the sport is no longer what it was in the late 80s/early 90s-it is unbelievably expensive to produce chassis etc. in comparison to, say, 1989.

Yeah, he does seem like a nice guy. And had he been racing for those 10 years he might very well be capable of being World Champion. But he wasn't, and his pace does not suggest he belongs in F1 on that alone. It's a shame, certainly, but he's far from the first driver who could've potentially won a title but didn't for various reasons. Whereas Maldonado could belong in F1 if he would just stop hitting things, because for all the chaos he's caused, you don't duel Fernando Alonso and come out on top without some talent.

Mother of Invention wrote:I think you missed the point. Moldano is in F1 cause of a crazy South American dictator. Only Ricardo Londano-Bridge had a crazier sponsor, and that sponsor probably prevent Ricardo from getting his license.

No, I got that point, I just don't see how it's relevant to Maldonado's racing abilities. The fact that his sponsor is Hugo Chavez should not reflect on that.

Mother of Invention wrote:

How many drivers have made it to F1 without some form of major backing in the last few years? The only one that comes readily to mind is Robert Kubica.

I think you missed the point. Moldano is in F1 cause of a crazy South American dictator. Only Ricardo Londano-Bridge had a crazier sponsor, and that sponsor probably prevent Ricardo from getting his license.

I was curious, and decided to look that up.

Good lord! Maybe Rosberg was doing a good thing "brake testing"

@Retrogade, It's a matter of opinion I suppose. Some F1 fans hate it, others love it. But I can see why Bernie would create DRS, Kers and hire Pirelli to manufacture softer tyres-it has brought a lot more viewers to Formula 1.

Milan655 wrote:@Retrogade, It's a matter of opinion I suppose. Some F1 fans hate it, others love it. But I can see why Bernie would create DRS, Kers and hire Pirelli to manufacture softer tyres-it has brought a lot more viewers to Formula 1.

True. For the money grubbing midget that he is, going along with DRS, soft tires, and KERS was the best thing ever done to F1. It has made the boring races very watchable now.

Schumacher wins. END OF DISCUSSION

nepatsfan02 wrote:Schumacher wins. END OF DISCUSSION

>2012
>Schumacher
>Winning

The weather reports indicate wet Friday practice, but otherwise a dry weekend.

Practice 1:
Kobayashi 2:11.389
Maldonaldo 2:11.941
Ricciardio 2:12:004

Practice 2:
Pic 2:49.354
Ricciardio 2:49.75
Alonso 2:50.497

I would love to see a slower team to win it, maybe if marussia re-spray a lotus 72 they might do it.

Am I the only one that thought it was completely stupid to demand a team not change tires during and entire race? Especially when Michelin was having all their problems at Indy?

From what I can tell, back in the 80's you could make your tires last, if you tried, to be able to go like hell at the end, and then during Bridgestone's reign, the tires were just made as hard as possible and you could drive as hard as you wanted whenever. You could go 95% or more every lap, kind of like a computer game. IMO it demonstrates even more how remarkable the talent in the 80's was that they could conserve their tires and still race each other hard in the overpowered go karts they were crammed into. You need to be some kind of racing god to "go slow" and "be fast" at the same time like that.

But regardless of opinions, this year is way more interesting than pretty much all of the 00's put together