The Official 2015 Spanish Grand Prix tread ** SPOILERS**
Discussion
VladD said:
REALIST123 said:
007 VXR said:
VladD said:
I thought it was a shame that Merc messed up Lewis' first stop. The race would have been far more interesting if we'd seen Lewis trying to close Nico down before the second stop.
don't use the IF word 
Very true, but was still good to see the fans at the track cheering him on every lap, enjoyed the race anyway and got a nice tan
Lewis was beaten this weekend; end of story.
Jasandjules said:
It is fair to say that Lewis was beaten fair and square. But my word he put in some stonking laps to get in front of Vettel.
......
Not according to lewis. "The team made my job pretty hard......"......
Well, they have made it pretty easy quite a lot over the last couple of years, Lewis.
Jasandjules said:
It is fair to say that Lewis was beaten fair and square. But my word he put in some stonking laps to get in front of Vettel.
And now for the best overtaking circuit, Monaco.........
Yeah but IF he'd of got a better start AND the left rear went on in a timely manner then Nico would of been beaten fair n square.......again!And now for the best overtaking circuit, Monaco.........
But its that 'IF' again
revrange said:
Regards Tyres, i am beginning to wonder if Frank Dernie had a point a few years ago when he said the cars need rock hard tyre to race on. Once lewis was on the hardest tyre he could lean on it hard and push, over take etc. Maybe we have been going wrong way with soft tyres to aid over taking? The problem with theses is that you get marbles plus they need to be nursed to get the stint length. Rock hard ones wouldn't give either of these problems. May create an aero load problem though, but i guess cars would be slowed due to lack of mechanical grip?
The reason he was able to push and overtake was the contrast between new and old tyres though. Stick them all on rock hard tyres and there's no performance contrast between the them, so it would be back to less overtaking as the cars would be the only difference. Now we get more overtaking because even if one car is faster overall the contrast in performance due to tyre deg happens at different times in the race due to strategies. You could say it's fake in some ways, but it's also part of the challange, and I do enjoy seeing some of the close racing in the corners you get (better than just a DRS pass).REALIST123 said:
Jasandjules said:
It is fair to say that Lewis was beaten fair and square. But my word he put in some stonking laps to get in front of Vettel.
......
Not according to lewis. "The team made my job pretty hard......"......
Well, they have made it pretty easy quite a lot over the last couple of years, Lewis.
andyps said:
There must be a reason for the complexity of the wings, and if they are really effective in clean air I can see that they might not be good in dirty air. But the other point is that it is really easy to see how much they must cost to make and, with how often they are replaced, they could be a major part of a small team budget. A single element wing would save massive costs and maybe improve the show if cars could get closer together (that probably requires other aero changes too though).
The problem is it could also do the opposite. Red Bull did well last season because of aero. So if you'd removed a lot of the aero stuff you'd have had the pack even further behind Mercedes. It just depends on the teams, regulations and season as to what is the "problem" and so needs fixed. Back in the day of hard tyres where you could get over a second difference per lap by being on a different brand it was that, Red Bull years was aero and downforce, now different engines mean a lot of the aero benefits are not as important because of the powder difference (at least to the Mercedes).MG CHRIS said:
Only 16 pages on this race has that got to be the lowest number for some years.
I am based in Australia and we no longer get all of the races on Freeview. I was relying on this thread to keep me updated with what was happening during the race and I couldn't believe how little activity there was.Ended up with a combination of the BBC live updates (rubbish), this thread and the official F1 timing website.
jbudgie said:
Roo said:
Doink said:
Yeah but IF he'd of got a better start AND the left rear went on in a timely manner then Nico would of been beaten fair n square.......again!
But its that 'IF' again
Have. But its that 'IF' again
Eric Mc said:
Yep - watch F1 gradually slip of the radar as it is watched be fewer and fewer people - like boxing and cricket did in the UK years ago.
I'm concerned too. None of my petrolhead friends are watching F1 anymore. I turned over to BTCC 10 laps from the end of this. I see that Michelin are talking up a return to F1 now. I'm convinced a well managed tyre war is what we need to spice up F1. When I say 'well managed' I mean like WEC, where specs have to be declared and homologated at the start of the season to prevent airfreighting of special tyres between qualifying and the race.Then, we'd have decent tyres (because of the competition) but variables that lead to exciting racing (one spec of tyre may suit one circuit or climate better)
Vaud said:
Eric Mc said:
Yep - watch F1 gradually slip of the radar as it is watched be fewer and fewer people - like boxing and cricket did in the UK years ago.
Cricket is more complicated - the shift towards 20/20, the reduced interest in 5 day tests, etc.And some of those eyeballs belong to kids and other non-enthusiasts who simply won't have had their interest sparked the future.
Course, the people who make these decisions are usually long gone, classed as heroes for bringing funding into the sport (not to mention their own pockets), by the time this is realised.
swisstoni said:
Vaud said:
Eric Mc said:
Yep - watch F1 gradually slip of the radar as it is watched be fewer and fewer people - like boxing and cricket did in the UK years ago.
Cricket is more complicated - the shift towards 20/20, the reduced interest in 5 day tests, etc.And some of those eyeballs belong to kids and other non-enthusiasts who simply won't have had their interest sparked the future.
Course, the people who make these decisions are usually long gone, classed as heroes for bringing funding into the sport (not to mention their own pockets), by the time this is realised.
te that is 'The Voice'.So more to blame the Beeb for .
And isn't the Open Golf now going.
jbudgie said:
I agree, but wasn't it the case that the BBC dropped half of the races to fund the ste that is 'The Voice'.
So more to blame the Beeb for .
And isn't the Open Golf now going.
My understanding is that 'the BBC' did all it could to keep F1 but in the end, due to cuts, had to choose between Wimbledon and F1. This was forced on the BBC.te that is 'The Voice'.So more to blame the Beeb for .
And isn't the Open Golf now going.
Some suggest that there was some encouragement to drop F1 as there was no buyer for Wimbledon. Dropping half of F1 saved both sports, although, of course, only half of one.
It had the option of asking ITV to share but their income from advertising had dropped as well.
I'm never clear what is meant by 'the BBC'. Is is those who work for the corporation? Those who manage various departments? Those who run the whole thing? It is not, surely, all of them as they will have differing points of view. Some of those in the BBC, but probably not 'the BBC' were shattered that they lost half of the sport.
On an entirely different matter of course, Sky wants to dominate sport broadcasting. Not having F1, at the time the biggest puller of viewing figures, was something that irritated their boss. I feel certain, though, that there was no undue influence exerted by the Digger in any of his many meetings with those in the cabinet.
swisstoni said:
As soon as sports take the Sky shilling and leave the Beeb or ITV they face a slow decline IMHO. There just won't be as many eyeballs on your sport any more.
And some of those eyeballs belong to kids and other non-enthusiasts who simply won't have had their interest sparked the future.
Course, the people who make these decisions are usually long gone, classed as heroes for bringing funding into the sport (not to mention their own pockets), by the time this is realised.
My point is actually different - Cricket is doing just fine for viewers, just not in the UK.And some of those eyeballs belong to kids and other non-enthusiasts who simply won't have had their interest sparked the future.
Course, the people who make these decisions are usually long gone, classed as heroes for bringing funding into the sport (not to mention their own pockets), by the time this is realised.
Gassing Station | Formula 1 | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff