Official 2020 Austrian & Styrian Grand Prix Thread *Spoilers

[anonymous-user]

The onboard of Norris is a great illustration of what Albon should have done. He cut in too early, not using all the outside curb area. There were multiple examples of this in the last GP.

[anonymous-user]

Exactly.

[leef44]

jsf said:

Having seen so many overtakes and attempts at overtakes in the last GP at the turn Albon and Hamilton clashed, has that changed your opinion of the penalty?

I thought from the start it wasn't warranted, its now a slam dunk no penalty now.

This week, weren't the driver more cautious on the inside?

Either leaving more room or lifting off to tighten the turn?

[kambites]

leef44 said:

jsf said:

Having seen so many overtakes and attempts at overtakes in the last GP at the turn Albon and Hamilton clashed, has that changed your opinion of the penalty?

I thought from the start it wasn't warranted, its now a slam dunk no penalty now.

This week, weren't the driver more cautious on the inside?

Either leaving more room or lifting off to tighten the turn?

I certainly don't remember any situations in the second race where a car on the inside which was well behind the car on the outside ran them off the track.

[HustleRussell]

jsf said:

I thought from the start it wasn't warranted, its now a slam dunk no penalty now.

My thoughts exactly, Albon was able to hold a relatively tight line with his entry speed because of his tyre offset to Hamilton. He failed to account for the fact that Hamilton with his much older tyres, wouldn’t be able to run such a tight line. Hamilton’s options were contact with Albon or a Vettel in Bahrain esque spin if he attempted to avoid. Albon could’ve afforded another car’s width to the outside.

[Teddy Lop]

jsf said:

Having seen so many overtakes and attempts at overtakes in the last GP at the turn Albon and Hamilton clashed, has that changed your opinion of the penalty?

I thought from the start it wasn't warranted, its now a slam dunk no penalty now.

Perez was "worse" if you're blaming the inside driver - albon had far more room on the outside when he and Hamilton made contact. As ever the wacky wheel of witless wavering from the stewards. Personally as I said last week when you place a car on the outside like that you're playing the danger game whoever else does whatever, its akin to the blast-it-and-hope pool shot.

[ajprice]

4 way split screen of the end of the race with Norris, Perez, Stroll and Ricciardo https://www.instagram.com/tv/CCloPweochc/?igshid=6...

[anonymous-user]

ajprice said:

4 way split screen of the end of the race with Norris, Perez, Stroll and Ricciardo https://www.instagram.com/tv/CCloPweochc/?igshid=6...

Brilliant!

[vdn]

ajprice said:

4 way split screen of the end of the race with Norris, Perez, Stroll and Ricciardo https://www.instagram.com/tv/CCloPweochc/?igshid=6...

Love it!

[Stan the Bat]

Derek Smith said:

I saw Moss racing, although never in F1. He was a class above everyone else in a sports car race.

I saw Clark racing, again never in F1, but in F2, saloons, sports cars and other races. He once drove a 7-litre Ford saloon at Brands in pouring rain. At the end of the first lap, driving a car that was a handful in the dry, and, going by the other drivers in identical cars, even worse in the wet, he was approaching Druids when the next one appeared from under the bridge into Clearways. An awesome drive. He slowed later into the race, not, as we thought, because he had a problem but, it seems, to let the others catch up.

Stewart, Reuteman, Andretti (oh! him in that GE Lotus - made for each other) and then onto Senna, Schumacher, Mansell and many others, some taken too soon to see if they fulfilled their potential; which was best? It's a stupid question.

The driver who impressed me the most was Clark, but that is, I think, not only because me made everyone else look so slow, but that he enjoyed driving and transmitted this to the spectators. At Crystal Palace one race, I think the last race meeting ever held there, Clark was in a Ford Lotus-Cortina, up against a 4.9 Ford sports car, in the hands of a much fancied driver, at least by him. Clark harried him all the way, but could not pull enough acceleration from a corner to get in front, when he'd have left him for dead. On the 'slow down' lap, he hung the back out on the corners, generating lots of smoke and even more opposite lock, in theory to give the photographers a shot, but I reckon it was also because it was so much fun.

How would he fare now? I don't think he would, not because of lack of talent but because he would not have thought it fun. That means, of course, to some, that he could not be the best driver ever. Tell that to anyone who's seen him race.

Memories of great drivers and great drives aren't made better by suggesting the driver is the best ever.

I saw Clark in all types including F1.

To me he really was the best ever.


Don't forget 6th in the RAC rally as well.

[DeltonaS]

paulguitar said:

Piginapoke said:

Lewis is obviously a great driver, but his relative lack of competition and his 2014-on car advantage does mean his record is better than his talent.

He's well on his way to surpassing M. Schumacher, and doing so without most of the advantages MS enjoyed, and what's more, without resorting to dirty driving as Schumacher did several times.

Hamilton's achievements are a fair reflection of his talent, which has been mesmerizing since he was a kid in karts.

No it isn't, it's a Mercedes achievement first and foremost.

{i}doing so without most of the advantages MS enjoyed[/i]

Incredible that you even dare to say that, you're just a silly, childish British flag waving fanboy who can't stand reality. MS didn't enjoy the advantages of the hybrid era. He actually had to beat other drivers from other teams to win 7 titles. And even then, Hamilton still hasn't beaten MS GP wins, even though Hamilton has the luxury of putting his car on cruise control in most races, turning up the engine power when needed.

It's not even a comparison.

[kambites]

Honestly anyone who claims to believe that either Michael Schumacher or Lewis Hamilton weren't mind-bindingly good drivers in their respective eras has got to be trolling or an idiot.

[Evangelion]

Absolutely true, but so many seem to be scared of saying it - for obvious reasons.

[The Moose]

kambites said:

Honestly anyone who claims to believe that either Michael Schumacher or Lewis Hamilton weren't mind-bindingly good drivers in their respective eras has got to be trolling or an idiot.

Of course. The difference that I see between the two is that Schumacher would do anything including quite serious cheating (traction control in a non-traction control era etc) and driving into other drivers.

[KevinCamaroSS]

DeltonaS said:

paulguitar said:

Piginapoke said:

Lewis is obviously a great driver, but his relative lack of competition and his 2014-on car advantage does mean his record is better than his talent.

He's well on his way to surpassing M. Schumacher, and doing so without most of the advantages MS enjoyed, and what's more, without resorting to dirty driving as Schumacher did several times.

Hamilton's achievements are a fair reflection of his talent, which has been mesmerizing since he was a kid in karts.

No it isn't, it's a Mercedes achievement first and foremost.

{i}doing so without most of the advantages MS enjoyed[/i]

Incredible that you even dare to say that, you're just a silly, childish British flag waving fanboy who can't stand reality. MS didn't enjoy the advantages of the hybrid era. He actually had to beat other drivers from other teams to win 7 titles. And even then, Hamilton still hasn't beaten MS GP wins, even though Hamilton has the luxury of putting his car on cruise control in most races, turning up the engine power when needed.

It's not even a comparison.

OK, I'm bored so I will bite.

MS was an extremely talented driver, no arguments from me on that score. But, and it is a big but, he always had preference from his team, enjoyed a season of tyres that were developed for the Ferrari alone even though all teams had to use them and also resorted to cheating in order to win. Many of his wins were also in a Ferrari, a team that has enjoyed 'extra support' from the FIA across the years. His Benetton was also a bit 'iffy' in regards to legality.

Those facts make his achievements somewhat tainted to me. In comparison, LH has got to his position through sheer ability throughout his whole career, from karting onwards. If he had not shown the ability he would not have got the backing of Mercedes and McLaren. In F1 he has proven, time and time again, to have the edge over the other drivers. He got the Mercedes drive because of his ability, nothing more and nothing less. He has made the best use of the tools given to him. The Mercedes is a better car than the others simply because they have done a better job with it. They have then retained the driver they perceive as the best in the world to get the results, and these are being delivered.

Nobody with any sense can say that the 1.4 seconds+ qualifying time difference between the 2 Mercedes drivers is down to the car, the difference in those conditions is always the driver, as in RBR where MV was 0.5 seconds quicker than AA.

[Derek Smith]

Fortitude said:

Derek, just prove you correct, here they come...

“No car, no philosophy, no drivers” – Ferrari face ‘intense’ scrutiny from Italian press Ferrari face 'intense' scrutiny from Italian press

Tuttosport
“That’s what we counted down to the season, and Ferrari has already lost. No car, no philosophy, no drivers: Vettel is completely confused after his contract situation and Leclerc thinks he’s still driving in virtual races online. This is the darkness.”
La Gazzetta dello Sport
“The Ferrari nightmare – SF1000 has no future. ‘Murphy’s Law’ will soon be called ‘Ferrari Law’. If there’s a chance that something is going to go wrong, it will. Yesterday we had a remake of what happened in Brazil, and Leclerc left the curtain.”

http://scuderiafans.com/no-car-no-philosophy-no-dr...


How did the Italian press react to the Ferrari disaster in Spain?

"Stepping on their own tails" was the phrase Martin Brundle used to describe Ferrari's Spanish Grand Prix. But the Italian media, who are always critical of Ferrari, responded with much more dissatisfaction and frustration with the performance.

https://www.gpblog.com/en/news/36976/how-did-the-i...

Although many might not believe me, but I can say I am not a genius when it comes to F1 and the prediction that the press would go for the throat was rather obvious.

I had a friend who worked in northern Italy and used to send me the occasional selection of Italian papers after a Ferrari victory against the odds - Senna crashing out at Monza, making Ferrari the only team to beat McLaren that season for instance was a classic example. There was a Milanese paper, not a sports periodical, that dedicated about 80% of its pages to a report on the race. Then there were the disasters. There was one time when the edges of the paper were in black, mimicking a report of a death of the pope. It got some criticism from locals, but, it seems, most felt it was justified.

One season the press in general ganged up on the team management and I anticipated a long fight. There was a week when it was on the front page, and after a couple of weeks, heads rolled, and Ferrari were, if anything, a bit worse, but the press made excuses. The press seemed to love their power. They would target non Italians on the team, and demand that they be replaced by Italians. With predictably disastrous results as it cut the selection base to all but zero in most cases.

Yet I was on the Amalfi coast one summer, arranged at a time of a GP. My plan was to watch a race with the locals. I thought it'd be fun. But the TV was tuned to football. I asked if it could be turned over, the waiter asked everyone, and got shrugs in reply. I was disappointed.

Not much in the papers the next day about the RB 1-2.

[Fortitude]

Derek Smith said:

Although many might not believe me, but I can say I am not a genius when it comes to F1 and the prediction that the press would go for the throat was rather obvious.

I had a friend who worked in northern Italy and used to send me the occasional selection of Italian papers after a Ferrari victory against the odds - Senna crashing out at Monza, making Ferrari the only team to beat McLaren that season for instance was a classic example. There was a Milanese paper, not a sports periodical, that dedicated about 80% of its pages to a report on the race. Then there were the disasters. There was one time when the edges of the paper were in black, mimicking a report of a death of the pope. It got some criticism from locals, but, it seems, most felt it was justified.

One season the press in general ganged up on the team management and I anticipated a long fight. There was a week when it was on the front page, and after a couple of weeks, heads rolled, and Ferrari were, if anything, a bit worse, but the press made excuses. The press seemed to love their power. They would target non Italians on the team, and demand that they be replaced by Italians. With predictably disastrous results as it cut the selection base to all but zero in most cases.

Yet I was on the Amalfi coast one summer, arranged at a time of a GP. My plan was to watch a race with the locals. I thought it'd be fun. But the TV was tuned to football. I asked if it could be turned over, the waiter asked everyone, and got shrugs in reply. I was disappointed.

Not much in the papers the next day about the RB 1-2.

Derek, MANY thanks for that update on the Scuderia Ferrari Tifosi Press… …a real comical and tragic soap opera, in the pursuit of excellence, winning and trophies…

[Will O. Bey jr]

Evangelion said:

Absolutely true, but so many seem to be scared of saying it - for obvious reasons.

What would they be, those obvious reasons? And if they are what I think what you're thinking then you can't seriously be thinking that you can use this in that context...

[Will O. Bey jr]

angrymoby said:

Will O. Bey jr said:

Or you could just use regular words like a normal person.

"didn't have to fight the GOAT for long, that's for sure"

which word/ words did you initially struggle with?

I have some news for you. And they aren't good. I showed your initial post, i.e. this in context

angrymoby said:

DeltonaS said:

Nope, it will mean Lewis's 7th world title means very little in the history of F1.

Schumacher had to fight for it, that's the difference.

didn't have to fight the GOAT for long, that's for sure

to 3 different grown ups, and they had 0 clue what you're on about.

Conclusion, "get off da insta old famalam, brakakaka" - that's what a kid of one of the person said, whatever that means, I'm sure you'll know and if you do can you translate it for me please?

[Europa1]

Derek Smith said:

Although many might not believe me, but I can say I am not a genius when it comes to F1 and the prediction that the press would go for the throat was rather obvious.

I had a friend who worked in northern Italy and used to send me the occasional selection of Italian papers after a Ferrari victory against the odds - Senna crashing out at Monza, making Ferrari the only team to beat McLaren that season for instance was a classic example. There was a Milanese paper, not a sports periodical, that dedicated about 80% of its pages to a report on the race. Then there were the disasters. There was one time when the edges of the paper were in black, mimicking a report of a death of the pope. It got some criticism from locals, but, it seems, most felt it was justified.

One season the press in general ganged up on the team management and I anticipated a long fight. There was a week when it was on the front page, and after a couple of weeks, heads rolled, and Ferrari were, if anything, a bit worse, but the press made excuses. The press seemed to love their power. They would target non Italians on the team, and demand that they be replaced by Italians. With predictably disastrous results as it cut the selection base to all but zero in most cases.

Yet I was on the Amalfi coast one summer, arranged at a time of a GP. My plan was to watch a race with the locals. I thought it'd be fun. But the TV was tuned to football. I asked if it could be turned over, the waiter asked everyone, and got shrugs in reply. I was disappointed.

Not much in the papers the next day about the RB 1-2.

Many moons ago, me and the then squeeze drove down to Italy in the then Lotus for a holiday in the Italian lakes, and took in the Italian Grand Prix. It was during the Schumacher era. For Grand Prix weekend, we stayed in Modena. Ferrari duly won, and that evening, as we enjoyed some excellent wine in a bar on the town square, there was a Ferrari flag hanging from the town hall balcony, obscuring the statues of saints. It was explained that there are effectively 2 religions in that part of Italy.