Formula 1 2009

[azzaman333]

So, if the rules were re-written to clarify that the 3 teams aren't breaking any rules, you'd be happy?

 

[Rossiya]

Button wins! 5 points.

 

[Joe Harker]

That was confusing, good race though, expect hissy fits over the result though.....

 

[dutchfire]

That was interesting, once again.

It was a really nice race, pity it ended after an hour. Though, of course, they couldn't race on in these circumstances.

 

[Formaldehyde]

So, if the rules were re-written to clarify that the 3 teams aren't breaking any rules, you'd be happy?

I'll be 'happy' when 3 teams don't have a huge advantage over the other 7 teams due to poorly written rules which allowed interpretation to occur where there should be none.

This philosophy or ethos is typically called "sportsmanship" or "fair play". Perhaps you've heard of them before?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sportsmanship

http://www.fifa.com/aboutfifa/worldwideprograms/footballforhope/fairplay/index.html

 

[Darth_Pugwash]

Yeesh, I think it's safe to assume that he's familiar with the concept of sportsmanship. Really, are you here because you want to discuss F1, or because you like picking arguments?

Anyway, on the subject of sportsmanship, apparently Ross Brawn proposed a clean up the new regulations last year with the intent of closing loopholes such as the one that has led to the trick diffusers, but was essentially told to bugger off: http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/74282

 

[Formaldehyde]

Yeesh, I think it's safe to assume that he's familiar with the concept of sportsmanship. Really, are you here because you want to discuss F1, or because you like picking arguments?

Yeesh. I think it's safe to assume that both of you clearly didn't read what I posted so far, "or because you like picking arguments"?

Anyway, on the subject of sportsmanship, apparently Ross Brawn proposed a clean up the new regulations last year with the intent of closing loopholes such as the one that has led to the trick diffusers, but was essentially told to bugger off: http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/74282

If that is actually a fair assessment of what happened, good for him and doubly bad for the FIA. At least he knows that the word "sportsmanship" means even if you apparently don't.

It's perfectly fair, it's just the nature of F1... the teams that are protesting are only doing so because they didn't come up with a trick diffuser of their own.

The diffusers probably aren't going to ruin the season. If they do, it won't be due to the diffusers themselves or any performance advantage they give, but all the silly politicking and controversy stirring that's going on. Again, the teams that are protesting are only doing so because they fear that they will not be able to fully develope double decker diffusers of their own before the middle of the year, or later.

http://www.sidepodcast.com/2009/04/04/f1-digest-2009-malaysia-qualifying/

1. Jenson Button, Brawn GP, 660kg
2. Jarno Trulli, Toyota, 656.5
3. Timo Glock, Toyota, 656.5
4. Nico Rosberg, Williams, 656

No, nothing patently unfair there. It must be "silly politicking and controversy stirring", right?

 

[Darth_Pugwash]

Of course I know what sportsmanship is, and I did indeed read your posts. Honestly, what is the point of suggesting that I don't/didn't? That's just being petty and snide for no good reason.

The comments you quoted about fairness and politicking weren't meant to imply that the diffusers give no performance advantage or that the advantage is all hot air, pretty clearly.

And honestly, I'll take that post as confirmation that your main intent has indeed been to argue for arguments sake, and not to discuss a sport.

 

[Darth_Pugwash]

Just to follow on from the point of Brawn tabling a clean up of the new rules:

http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/74358

Head also confirmed that Ross Brawn offered teams the chance to cut off the ability to exploit this area of car design with a regulation change last year.

Head said: "Ross Brawn representing Honda raised in the TWG said we are getting quite a bit more than the 50 per cent downforce and they wrote in a proposal that closed off the possibility of doing what the three teams are doing.

"But it was actually Pat Symonds who said ‘no', that would be too restrictive. And he said that he did not approve those proposals.

So apart from being the most vocal protesters, Renault were also the ones that rejected the tidy up of the regs.

 

[Formaldehyde]

Of course I know what sportsmanship is...

So you still continue to claim?

It's perfectly fair, it's just the nature of F1...

Do you still think it's fair for 3 teams to have a dominant position due to their own interpretation of the rules?

And honestly, I'll take that post as confirmation that your main intent has indeed been to argue for arguments sake, and not to discuss a sport.

And honestly, I'll take that post as confirmation that you would prefer to continue to try to attack me and my supposed motives instead of argue the issues.

So apart from being the most vocal protesters, Renault were also the ones that rejected the tidy up of the regs.

That's apparently because he didn't comprehend the implications of the proposed change. Why is that so difficult to understand since 6 other teams apparently didn't either?

It also makes Symonds out to be a fool if he was actually told that it could increase the downforce by 50% and he failed to use the same technique on his own car.

Furthermore, it's not terribly surprising for Brawn and Williams to be trying to defend their own position in this matter. They aren't exactly uninvolved participants since they stand to lose most, if not all, the points they have accumulated by using their own interpretation of the rules. It's really too bad we won't be able to see all the testimony to be able to better determine whose version of what happened is actually correct.

 

[Joe Harker]

Do you still think it's fair for 3 teams to have a dominant position due to their own interpretation of the rules?

The fact their intreptation of the rules lead to the field being spilt is not the fault of the teams, rather the fault of the rulemakers for allowing the exploitation of the rule. The engineers were only doing their job getting the most out of the car within the rules.

It would not be fair to dock points form the three teams because they didn't take the rule as it was intended, rather how it was actually written (which is still legal and within the rule). There is no such thing as sportsmanship amongst engineers.

 

[Darth_Pugwash]

Do you still think it's fair for 3 teams to have a dominant position due to their own interpretation of the rules?

If the diffusers are within the rules, which it seems they are, then hats off to the diffuser three for taking an inventive approach, and too bad for the other teams who missed a trick, is the way I see it.

That some teams have better cars than others doesn't bother me: differences between the cars is part of what F1 is about.

The FIA are the ones at fault in this, not the teams or the designers. It's been obvious for weeks/months that there was going to be a protest - but it suits Bernie & Max to let the episode drag on as a way of destablising FOTA. It's a complete shambles really.

 

[Formaldehyde]

The fact their intreptation of the rules lead to the field being spilt is not the fault of the teams, rather the fault of the rulemakers for allowing the exploitation of the rule. The engineers were only doing their job getting the most out of the car within the rules.

Absolutely, which helps explain why I wrote this:

No, I "obviously want" rules that are not subject to interpretation, and are subsequently fair to everybody instead of providing a huge advantage to 3 out of 10 of the teams.

And this:

I'll be 'happy' when 3 teams don't have a huge advantage over the other 7 teams due to poorly written rules which allowed interpretation to occur where there should be none.

It would not be fair to dock points form the three teams because they didn't take the rule as it was intended, rather how it was actually written (which is still legal and within the rule).

So you suggest penalizing the other 7 teams instead by doing nothing? How is that being fair?

IThere is no such thing as sportsmanship amongst engineers.

Of course there is. Otherwise cheating would be rampant instead of isolated incidents.

 

[azzaman333]

So you suggest penalizing the other 7 teams instead by doing nothing? How is that being fair?

That's not penalising them, because to penalise them they would have to have done something wrong. They haven't done anything wrong, so there is no way the other 7 teams can be penalised. They are at a disadvantage, but that happens in sports.

 

[Rossiya]

Go Button!

 

[GravityWave]

Congrats to Red Bull. Not a surprise they are capable of getting a pole, though I will be if they are not lighter than Brawn. I think it will be Button and Vetal going for the win tomorrow, if Button can get a clean get away from the grid that is.

 

[Dell19]

It seems that the Red Bulls are 5 laps lighter with Alonso another lap lighter.

 

[Formaldehyde]

Grats to Red Bull and Vettel. And they did it with no KERS or trick diffuser.

And speaking of trick diffusers, it turns out both Red Bull and BMW specifially asked the FIA if a double decker diffuser would be considered legal after reviewing the new rules. And they were both told it would not be...

 

[Rossiya]

Grats to Red Bull and Vettel. And they did it with no KERS or trick diffuser.

And speaking of trick diffusers, it turns out both Red Bull and BMW specifially asked the FIA if a double decker diffuser would be considered legal after reviewing the new rules. And they were both told it would not be...

Accept their decision regarding diffisusers please.

 

[dutchfire]

Great job by the Red Bulls.