motor

gucom · 06-20-2005, 01:04 PM

erm just on a critical note of the way things are going at Le Mans, after reading RC45's farce blablablaaaaaaaaah....
In thr 24hours of Le Mans, the ACO (the organiser of the event) wants the GT1 cars to have a certain speed (plus minus 3minutes 55 seconds per lap). To "stimulate" this, each car that is (alot) faster than this in the 2005 race, will get a weight penalty in 2006...ít's not about making the field more even, its just about keeping the GT1 cars slow. Alot of people think that Aston and Corvette might not have raced at their maximum, to still stand a chance next year...and in doing so not getting the advantage over the other car they might've had...how's that for a farce?
i obviously wasnt involved in the team orders etc, so i dont know if this actually happened, but its not good for the sports IMO

RC45 · 06-20-2005, 01:06 PM

Originally Posted by gucom

erm just on a critical note of the way things are going at Le Mans, after reading RC45's farce blablablaaaaaaaaah....
In thr 24hours of Le Mans, the ACO (the organiser of the event) wants the GT1 cars to have a certain speed (plus minus 3minutes 55 seconds per lap). To "stimulate" this, each car that is (alot) faster than this in the 2005 race, will get a weight penalty in 2006...ít's not about making the field more even, its just about keeping the GT1 cars slow. Alot of people think that Aston and Corvette might not have raced at their maximum, to still stand a chance next year...and in doing so not getting the advantage over the other car they might've had...how's that for a farce?
i obviously wasnt involved in the team orders etc, so i dont know if this actually happened, but its not good for the sports IMO

But then rule penalized everyone equally - and the race took place on the day and all is well.

Besides they have to do something to make sure that Ferrari can show up and have a chance of winning again this decade..

|Nuno| · 06-20-2005, 01:14 PM

Michelin teams summoned by FIA

The FIA has ordered the seven Michelin teams to appear at a hearing of its World Motor Sport Council on Wednesday June 29 following their controversial withdrawal from the US Grand Prix.

The summons follows a statement issued by Formula One racing’s governing body earlier on Monday, in which it outlines its position on Michelin's decision to pull out of the race. The statement reads:

"Formula One is a sporting contest. It must operate to clear rules. These cannot be negotiated each time a competitor brings the wrong equipment to a race.

"At Indianapolis we were told by Michelin that their tyres would be unsafe unless their cars were slowed in the main corner. We understood and among other suggestions offered to help them by monitoring speeds and penalising any excess. However, the Michelin teams refused to agree unless the Bridgestone runners were slowed by the same amount. They suggested a chicane.

"The Michelin teams seemed unable to understand that this would have been grossly unfair as well as contrary to the rules. The Bridgestone teams had suitable tyres. They did not need to slow down. The Michelin teams’ lack of speed through turn 13 would have been a direct result of inferior equipment, as often happens in Formula One. It must also be remembered that the FIA wrote to all of the teams and both tyre manufacturers on June 1, 2005, to emphasise that "tyres should be built to be reliable under all circumstances".

"A chicane would have forced all cars, including those with tyres optimised for high-speed, to run on a circuit whose characteristics had changed fundamentally – from ultra-high speed (because of turn 13) to very slow and twisting. It would also have involved changing the circuit without following any of the modern safety procedures, possibly with implications for the cars and their brakes. It is not difficult to imagine the reaction of an American court had there been an accident (whatever its cause) with the FIA having to admit it had failed to follow its own rules and safety procedures.

"The reason for this debacle is clear. Each team is allowed to bring two types of tyre: one an on-the-limit potential race winner, the other a back-up which, although slower, is absolutely reliable. Apparently, none of the Michelin teams brought a back-up to Indianapolis. They subsequently announced they were flying in new tyres from France but then claimed that these too were unsafe.

"What about the American fans? What about Formula One fans world-wide? Rather than boycott the race the Michelin teams should have agreed to run at reduced speed in turn 13. The rules would have been kept, they would have earned Championship points and the fans would have had a race. As it is, by refusing to run unless the FIA broke the rules and handicapped the Bridgestone runners, they have damaged themselves and the sport.

"It should also be made clear that Formula One Management and Indianapolis Motor Speedway, as commercial entities, can have no role in the enforcement of the rules."
______________________________

For the first time, I agree with the FIA.

ZfrkS62 · 06-20-2005, 01:35 PM

If what RC was saying is true about the FIA favoring Ferrari so much, then all the Michelin teams are going to get docked constructors points over this. anything to put Ferrari on top right? :roll:

But i don't think that is going to happen. I just hope someone gets punished for this

RC45 · 06-20-2005, 01:39 PM

Originally Posted by dani_d_mas

Originally Posted by |Nuno|

For the first time, I agree with the FIA.

Me too!

I think everything is clear now... Michelin teams didn't accept to reduce the speed in T13 (only solution according to the rules) so they decided not to race.

So it's ok for a "speed reduciton rule" to be enforced - but not a material change to improve track safety?

Please - it is a clear case of the FIA inadequately protecting the participants and the sport on the day.

Time for the F1 circus to split up and have more common sense governing and managing bodies take over.

The FIA and Ferrari can run a one make spec series - and the rest can go have some real racing

leo_26782 · 06-20-2005, 01:49 PM

Wouldn't it have been easier to give Michelin the authorization to run with the tyres they had brought from France, and give the car a penalty? Like that every one would have ran the race, but Michelin would have been "punished" and END OF THE STORY!

If they had told the drivers to slow down in the turn 13, do you really believe they would have done it? The safest option for Michelin was to retire before a major accident:

|Nuno| · 06-20-2005, 02:00 PM

Originally Posted by RC45

Originally Posted by dani_d_mas

Originally Posted by |Nuno|

For the first time, I agree with the FIA.

Me too!

I think everything is clear now... Michelin teams didn't accept to reduce the speed in T13 (only solution according to the rules) so they decided not to race.

So it's ok for a "speed reduciton rule" to be enforced - but not a material change to improve track safety?

Please - it is a clear case of the FIA inadequately protecting the participants and the sport on the day.

Time for the F1 circus to split up and have more common sense governing and managing bodies take over.

The FIA and Ferrari can run a one make spec series - and the rest can go have some real racing

Man, you're hilarious...

You complain about the FIA benefiting Ferrari with the rule changes, even when the FIA clearly states that the recent changes were to stop Ferrari (which they did this year), but then you say that they should have bended the rules yesterday to let the Michelin teams run, when they fucked up big time. Nice logic.

They did have the option to change the tyres during the race, but they refused. Hell, first they said that if they increased the pressures, everything would be fine. Why the sudden change?

Please - it is a clear case of the FIA inadequately protecting the participants and the sport on the day.

I don't like the tyre rule, but we have two tyre manufacturers.

One was able to make a durable and safe tyre, albeit slower. The other takes a different direction, going for softer compounds and constructions which weren't safe for this particular race.

Who's to blame? The FIA, or the people who couldn't deliver?

And please, don't come with the chicane argument, because you know as well as I do that it's not a valid option.

Of course that you didn't come here to complain on that ocasion, but I'll remind you that in Barcelona, Ferrari had similar problems - when a loss of pressure occurred, the sidewalls would fail (comproved by Michael's puncture). Bridgestone suggested the FIA to change the rules regarding the Safety Car, to avoid that. Guess what, both the FIA and Michelin teams said Ferrari & Bridgestone to make a better tyre. But now the tables turn, and here are you with your conspiracy theories...

Hell, I'm still trying to figure out why Ferrari is even brought to this subject, when clearly, they had nothing to do with it.

Time for the F1 circus to split up and have more common sense governing and managing bodies take over.

On that I agree with you.

@ leo:They (Michelin) said themselves that they didn't know if the Spain-spec tyres would work any better.

The chance to change tyres during the race was given to them, but they simply refused. That, IMO, would have been the best choice.

5vz-fe · 06-20-2005, 02:04 PM

LOL, RC, u just love to make this thread as long as possible don't u

pharzo · 06-20-2005, 02:06 PM

Originally Posted by RC45

So it's ok for a "speed reduciton rule" to be enforced - but not a material change to improve track safety?

Please - it is a clear case of the FIA inadequately protecting the participants and the sport on the day.

No, it's a case of Michelin bringing the wrong tyres and then attempting to change the track to compensate for their choice

Micheling wrote to the FIA and said their tires would be unsafe, so it would be callous for the FIA to allow them to take T13 at full speed, since Michelin admitted that they shouldn't....

Originally Posted by RC45

Time for the F1 circus to split up and have more common sense governing and managing bodies take over.

The FIA may have some problems, and some of the current rules may very well be quite dumb, the way they handled this particular event shows resolve, and I think any sporting authority would have done the same

Originally Posted by RC45

Imagine if 5 atheletes arrived at the pole vault event - and 2 major vendors/sponsors provided poles.

On the day the vendor/sponsor brings some new poles - and it seems they shatter when stressed during a vault. BUut the rules were cahnged to "only one pole per athelete per event" earllier in the year.

So - because they cannot switch to the opposing poles at this late stage, what should be done?

Lower the bar so the poles don't have to bend so much, ask the athletes to jump lower? Call off the event until better poles arrive?

As it is - the victory of the day will be a shallow victory proving nothing. Simply running towards the big cash payout of the "championship".

And this is why the FIA specifically allows for two tire compounds to be brought to the race

666fast · 06-20-2005, 04:36 PM

http://web.bsu.edu/mrpeters/Stoddart_Interview.mp3

5vz-fe · 06-20-2005, 05:11 PM

Stoddart is a tart.......Jordon race and he race....what kinda theory is that?

On a seperate issue:

Say in the Olympic game, the 400m race, a runner with a heart condition that can only run 200m, any more and he'll have a heart attack. So, for his safety sake, he requested the officials to shorten the race distance so that he could participate. In making it fair, he's allowing the rest of the runners 10 steps ahead at the startline.

Can u imagine how ridiculous this will look?

RC45 · 06-20-2005, 05:16 PM

Originally Posted by 5vz-fe

Stoddart is a tart.......Jordon race and he race....what kinda theory is that?

On a seperate issue:

Say in the Olympic game, the 400m race, a runner with a heart condition that can only run 200m, any more and he'll have a heart attack. So, for his safety sake, he requested the officials to shorten the race distance so that he could participate. In making it fair, he's allowing the rest of the runners 10 steps ahead at the startline.

Can u imagine how ridiculous this will look?

Stupid example - this weekend involved over half the field of entrants being affected by one of the 2 sanctioned product suppliers.

Very different situation.

SFDMALEX · 06-20-2005, 05:20 PM

Originally Posted by RC45

There is a reason why Ferrari doesn't run a prototype car - they would never be able to pull it off - as in create a winning prototype

\

Say what? Are you saying the 333SP was a bad car? You crack me up buddy.

SFDMALEX · 06-20-2005, 05:25 PM

Holly shit RC, you have outdone your self, why did you even bother posting all that rubbish? Every fucking time Ferrari is good at something you find some excuse........jezz man, its just funny watching you, you try so hard.........anyway have fun

Im done in this thread

yg60m · 06-20-2005, 06:19 PM

Originally Posted by dani_d_mas

BTW, Yann... your point of view is not realistic... because you're french, like Michelin!

LOL, I am french and I don't like Jean Todt very much

but I appreciate JJ His which works also for Ferrari