How do you force someone to turn into the car that's halfway up their inside?

 

 

 

If lewis had been half a car further up the road there would have been no one to turn into ? But I take your point, where the car goes is down to the driver.

Edited 5 April, 201610 yr by Laurie61

Bottas took a lunge from way back and locked up his right front causing a collision so I saw him at fault. However, I was surprised by the penalty though. The first corner is always such a melee the stewards rarely take any action on incidents.

Why was Hamilton not penalised for bits of his barge board flying off to hen they were clearly dangerous following the collision with Botas?

It looks like the teams have won their battle to revert to last years qualifying system. 

 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/formula1/35987323

I actually like the idea of an aggregate time from different sessions.

In sportscars it would seem fair to aggregate the qualli times of all the drivers, but in F1 it should just be fastest lap (of the whole session - not just Q3) only.

So if Q3 is slower for any reason - track temp for instance - the fastest time overall should get pole be it from Q1 or Q2.

Edited 7 April, 201610 yr by camelspyyder

In sportscars it would seem fair to aggregate the qualli times of all the drivers, but in F1 it should just be fastest lap (of the whole session - not just Q3) only.

So if Q3 is slower for any reason - track temp for instance - the fastest time overall should get pole be it from Q1 or Q2.

 

That would be great. I'd love to see a rain threat, a typically back row team set a lap, then it rains for 2 hours

 

If qualifying is to mix it up then the only way is for the boffins to play with weight so everyone's even in the race... but then you just game that too.... so as you say the only truth is fastest lap. The dominant well budgeted teams will just have there day, after all McLaren, Williams have and will again.

 

First few laps & incidents as SWMBO put it, it's the only bit I watch, after which I drift. A rolling start might make for better overall races as keeping cars in the race increases chances cars will be able to race, albeit marginally.

In sportscars it would seem fair to aggregate the qualli times of all the drivers, but in F1 it should just be fastest lap (of the whole session - not just Q3) only.

So if Q3 is slower for any reason - track temp for instance - the fastest time overall should get pole be it from Q1 or Q2.

I thought this made sense at first, but let's say it starts raining kittens after Q2, then you have an empty track for Q3, which is what the present system (either 2015 version or "de'il tak the hindmost") was supposed to avoid.

I like the way they do it in the BTCC - weight penalties, Plato at the front with weight one moment, at the back without weight for another.....

 

Imagine that weight penalty somehow for each Q session....after Q1 the top five fastest get a ???kilo weight addition, then the same for Q2 and so on.

 

Everyone starts off with 'nil' in race 1 of the season in Australia, then the top five (?) finishers get a weight penalty (they have to eat a Big Mac meal with fries and full fat coke ) for start of qualifying for race two then continue as above or something....

 

That could sort the men out from the boys a little....possibly

 

I know....silly idea possibly but in essence it could work ish...

Edited 8 April, 201610 yr by Wile7

5 place gearbox change penalty for Hamilton in Shanghai.

Bad luck does happen in 3s so that should be Hamilton clear for the rest of the year. Too easy for Rosberg at the moment imo

May be a repeat, but "de'il tak the hindmost" has been dropped for Shanghai!

May be a repeat, but "de'il tak the hindmost" has been dropped for Shanghai!

?

Hamilton at the back then

I hope not....bang goes my fantasy Briskoda points        :p 

Ok so Lewis not out of the bad luck woods yet. Makes the race fun seeing one Mercedes at the back, just wish it could be Nico for once

New Gearbox and engine......Should be an interesting race to watch for a change.

Poor  old Nico is going to be lapping on his own for most of the race until Lewis catches up...

That's Bernies plan ...isn't it?  

Quiet on here after today's race!?

Great race, but poor Lewis has had some torrid luck so far this season.

I thought Seb was a bit out of line for having a crack at Kvyat after the race!

Sent from my D5503 using Tapatalk

All too easy for Nico still because of Lewis' luck. Surely that will swap eventually as I would love to see Nico trying to get through the field with a damaged car. If it is Nico's year then so be it but I just hope Lewis can get a fair shot too. Agree with you about Seb, saw absolutely wrong with what Kvyat did, the gap was there. Liked Kvyats reaction to Seb though, made me chuckle

Edited 18 April, 201610 yr by ben1990

May be a repeat, but "de'il tak the hindmost" has been dropped for Shanghai!

 

 

?

 

 

 

"Devil take the hindmost" - any system whereby the last placed competitor is eliminated at regular intervals.

That was the 1st time they all finished since Valencia 2011- how reliable are these hybrids? 

 

Ignoring Indy 2005 (only 6 starters after 14 retired on the formation lap) this has only happened 4 times since race 1 at Silverstone 1950.

Edited 18 April, 201610 yr by camelspyyder

Champion-elect Rosberg is now on the 4th longest winning streak in F1 history, and will go equal second with Ascari and Schumacher if he wins the next one.

 

 

 

 

As an aside some Sheffield boffins recentlly graded the F1 drivers in history by taking out the influence of the teams they drove for.

 

The almost invincible through '51 '52 '53 Ascari was rated only 76th best driver which for me completely destroyed the validity of their argument. (I agree the Ferrari was the best car in '52 and maybe 53)

 

Whereas his competition of the time Fangio was rated number 1 (despite driving for the dominant team in 3 or 4 out of his 5 championship years) with Prost at 2 (Titles at dominant McLaren and Williams).

 

Maybe Ascari got docked points for dying in a testing crash?

Edited 18 April, 201610 yr by camelspyyder

That was the 1st time they all finished since Valencia 2011- how reliable are these hybrids? 

 

Ignoring Indy 2005 (only 6 starters after 14 retired on the formation lap) this has only happened 4 times since race 1 at Silverstone 1950.

How many retirements have been the result of crash damage or suspension failure rather than drivetrain problems though?

All too easy for Nico still because of Lewis' luck. Surely that will swap eventually as I would love to see Nico trying to get through the field with a damaged car. If it is Nico's year then so be it but I just hope Lewis can get a fair shot too. Agree with you about Seb, saw absolutely wrong with what Kvyat did, the gap was there. Liked Kvyats reaction to Seb though, made me chuckle

 

I did enjoy Kvyat's reaction... he was just smiling and laughing. Couldn't care less.

How many retirements have been the result of crash damage or suspension failure rather than drivetrain problems though?

 

Loads, clearly.  However the point was that this Sunday we had proven 100% reliability in an F1 GP for only the 4th time ever.

Edited 18 April, 201610 yr by camelspyyder