+ Reply to Thread
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 1 2
Results 21 to 30 of 30

Thread: San Marino

  1. #21
    Registered Member
    Location
    New York, NY, United States
    Member No: 20628 arfboo is an unknown quantity at this point arfboo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Posts
    31,592
    Rep Power
    0


    Yes | No

    there used to be only 2 engines...

    ....there was a period where the choice was Ferrari or Cosworth....then there were Turbo's vs normaly aspirated. There used to be only one tire goodyear, then there were periods where you had goodyear and pirelli or Firestone or way back Dunlops...Why stop there, Ferrari use Brembos, Bar uses Alcon.....
    F1 is a team-development excercise. Why would a team not seek the best advantage?
    I'm for less restrictions not more. Otherwise you end up with CART or IRL<p align=center>
    <img src="http://homepage.mac.com/booboo/.Pictures/axis.jpg"height=180 width=180">
    <img src="http://www.vmsc.org/fun/images/topslalom.gif"WIDTH=180 HEIGHT=100>
    <img src="http://www.corriere.it/Media/Foto/2003/08_Agosto/21/loghini/milan1.gif"ALIGN=CENTER>
    </p>


  2. #22
    petpnyc
    Guest
    Location
    , ,
    Member No: petpnyc's Avatar


    Yes | No

    well..

    as much as it looks like its gonna be a repeat of the 2002 season, lets not forget last year when williams had a great 2nd half.

  3. #23
    Registered Member
    Location
    , ,
    Member No: 48238 EricHall is an unknown quantity at this point EricHall's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Posts
    2,855
    Rep Power
    0


    Yes | No

    Sounds like FIA agrees with Jim....


    <a href="http://www.speedtv.com/articles/auto/formulaone/10752/">FIA 2008 Proposed Rules Changes</a><html>
    <body>
    <br/>
    ======================================<br>Eric Hall<br>1994 740iL<br><font color=#000000><b>Schwarz / </b></font><font color=#b7ac9d><b>Pergament</b></font> 80k<br>Albany, OR<br>eric@[remove.this.before.emailing]@tdsway.com<p/><i>No matter where you go... There you are!</i><br>Buckaroo Bonzai<p/><font face="Wingdings" size=2></font><font face="Wingdings 2" size=2></font><font face="Lucida Sans Unicode" size=3>=</font><font face="Wingdings 2" size=4>55</font><font face="Lucida Sans Unicode" size=3>=</font><font face="Wingdings 2" size=2></font><font face="Wingdings" size=2></font><p><img src="http://members.roadfly.com/erichall/SigGraphic.gif" alt="">
    </body>
    </html>

  4. #24
    Jim Derrig 93 750
    Guest
    Location
    , ,
    Member No: Jim Derrig 93 750's Avatar


    Yes | No

    wrong . . .

    I've been out of town so it took me a while to get back to this.

    Again, you are incorrect. There NEVER has been a period in F1 when only two engines were available. see the link below.

    More important, even when the Cosworth DFV was dominant, it was available to ANYONE who wanted it, and it was not designed with any specific team in mind.

    And so it is with the other items you've mentioned. Sure, Williams uses Alcon and Ferrari uses Brembo, but if Williams wants Brembo's they can go down to the store and get 'em. Indeed, McLaren switched brakes suppliers this year (and is regretting it, imho).

    Anyway, you've almost asked the right question, but once again it asssmes the conclusion: "F1 is a team-development excercise. Why would a team not seek the best advantage?"

    It would be more correct to say "F1 is a team-development exercise. Why would a team not seek the best advantage WITHIN THE RULES." Obviously, a team will and should and I'm not "blaming" Ferrari or Bridgestone for the current situation. They had a perfect right to act as they did and maximise their advantage.

    I'm just saying the rules are far from immutable and right now the rules suk because they allow a situation which consistently favors the one team that has its own, personal tire manufacturer.

    So change the stupid rule.

    I guess much of this comes from my background as an attorney with an economics background. I see Ferraristone as an artificial technology monopoly that has manipulated the circumstances to gain an advantage. I have no more problem with destroying this consortium than I have with the sherman antitrust act busting up the standard oil monopoly back in the early 1900's.

    Sure, Ferrari made a "great" move in forming Ferraristone, but it was a "great" business/legal move, not a great racing move. I watch F1 for racing, not to see which team has the best lawyers. When off-track legal relationships leave one team with a practical death-grip on the track, its time to do a little "trust busting" and change the rules.



  5. #25
    Jim Derrig 93 750
    Guest
    Location
    , ,
    Member No: Jim Derrig 93 750's Avatar


    Yes | No

    revisionist history . . .

    If I recall correctly, Ferraristone gained back its edge after the FIA determined after Hungary that the tire Michelin used was not legal. Assuming the FIA was correct, why does it say about the situation when the only way Ferraristone can be defeated is by breaking the rules?

    I agree advantages are transient. However, I think the best analogy is that of a weighted nickle. If the "heads" side is a bit heavy, then tails will come up more often, but it still is possible to get heads on a given throw.

    A team with its own personal tire manufacturer is playing with a weighted nickle. It has a distinct advantage which cannot be overcome CONSISTENTLY, although on occassion a Michelin team will find an advantage (e.g., Button's pole this weekend). Over the course of many races, however, the team with the advantage will prevail statistically.

    Do I think Ferrari and MS would not be winning a sh-tload of races if everyone was on a spec tire? Not at all, since they are very good in other areas. The racing certainly would be closer, though.

    As for your comment about the "team I like," I've been watch F1 since 1969 and don't favor any team. Although I own a BMW, I don't root for Williams. So please don't suggest my argument is an emotional rant against Ferrari.

  6. #26
    DLS
    Guest
    Location
    , ,
    Member No: DLS's Avatar


    Yes | No

    Baloney; The best TEAM wins; TEAM consists >

    of driver, builder, mechanics, component suppliers, pit crew, sponsors. Right now Ferrari has the best, most reliable combination. There is nothing--NOTHING--stopping any other team in the top tier from replacing them, EXCEPT the sum of all these parts. If one part (such as JPM, the whiny baby driver), is lacking, the sum--the TEAM--will not win.

    What if McLaren-Michelin were winning 70% of the races? Would you be whining then? LOL.

    Your conspiracy theories about Ferrari & Bridgestone is all just sour grapes, Jimbo.

    Please purchase a larger tinfoil helmet, and add yourself to this esteemed group:


  7. #27
    Registered Member
    Location
    New York, NY, United States
    Member No: 20628 arfboo is an unknown quantity at this point arfboo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Posts
    31,592
    Rep Power
    0


    Yes | No

    the fly in your ointment....

    there is absolutely nothing to prevent Michelin from doing exactly the same thing if they thought it was a good idea.<p align=center>
    <img src="http://homepage.mac.com/booboo/.Pictures/axis.jpg"height=180 width=180">
    <img src="http://www.vmsc.org/fun/images/topslalom.gif"WIDTH=180 HEIGHT=100>
    <img src="http://www.corriere.it/Media/Foto/2003/08_Agosto/21/loghini/milan1.gif"ALIGN=CENTER>
    </p>

  8. #28
    Jim Derrig 93 750
    Guest
    Location
    , ,
    Member No: Jim Derrig 93 750's Avatar


    Yes | No

    \"Michewilliams\" would be just as bad . . .

    . . . as Ferraristone. Two wrongs do not make a right and a "formula one" limited to two competitive teams due to rules/economic/legal manipulations would be a disaster.

    Anyway, I've already discussed this and we're going around in circles.

    Seriously, would you really be happy if Michelin signed a 5-year contract with Renault to focus 100% of its efforts on that team and supply the other teams with junk? This would guarentee that for the next 5 years the ONLY consistently competitive teams would be "Ferraristone" and "Renaulin." Why the heck should a sport put up with off-track lawyer moves like that? Why defend it.

    Since F1 is a developmental formula and not a spec formula, money/economics always will play SOME part, but when ONE team gains the sort of economic advantage which Ferraristone has, there is nothing wrong with saying "this is too much" and pulling in the reigns.

  9. #29
    Jim Derrig 93 750
    Guest
    Location
    , ,
    Member No: Jim Derrig 93 750's Avatar


    Yes | No

    When you learn to argue on a level greater than

    that of a 14 year old, maybe I'll talk with you again.

    Contrary to your assertion that "nothing" prevents another team from acquiring its own, personal tire manufacturer, the unfortunate fact is that no other tire manufacturer in the whole darned world is willing to do it!

    Put down your comic books and video games and look up the term "monopoly." Ferraristone is a technological monopoly created by a combination of economic factors that the other F1 teams have no control over.

  10. #30
    DLS
    Guest
    Location
    , ,
    Member No: DLS's Avatar


    Yes | No

    Bitter sour grapes, troll; You just got badly.....

    <img src="http://members.roadfly.org/dls/chair%20grind.gif">

+ Reply to Thread
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 1 2


Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

     

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may post new threads
  • You may post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
1e2 Forum