Tony Stewart / Lewis Hamilton Watkins Glen tickets?

[F1 fan]

3 things.

1) Rossi's test was as Catalunya, which the Motogp races at in the same layout as the F1 series. Gordon's run was at Indy, using a completely different layout than the oval.

2) Fairly certain Rossi participated in an actual test type run where the Gordon/Montoya thing was merely a publicity thing(as was the Button/Lowndes at Bathurst and the Stewart/Hamilton at the Glen), so it's not like they were pushing the cars to get every last millisecond.

3) Prior to the Catalunya session Rossi tested an F1 car at Mugello, so he at least had some experience behind the wheel of an F1 car.

I'm not saying it wasn't impressive, but it's not really the same situation as Gordon.

Who said I was talking specifically about Catalunya? Besides, I think it's a bit different when you consider that Rossi is more familiar with 2 wheels than 4. The fact is, Rossi came closer. The gap between F1 and motogp is much bigger than the gap between F1 and Nascar.

 

[Northstar]

Who said I was talking specifically about Catalunya?

It's the only track he's tested an F1 car on that F1 has raced on. Mugello and Valencia have had tests but I don't put any faith in test times.

Besides, I think it's a bit different when you consider that Rossi is more familiar with 2 wheels than 4.

If Rossi never drove anything with 4 wheels, you may have a point. However he has done various F1, DTM, WRC and whatever other tests and presumably he also owns one of them fancy automobiles, chances are it probably also has a horse for an emblem(in other words, he can go fast).

The fact is, Rossi came closer.

Yes, on a track he knows(all the tracks he's tested on except Fiorano are used also by MotoGP), a type of car he has experience(Has had quite a few F1 tests) in and during anactual test.

Gordon's was at an unfamiliar track in a type of car he's never driven and it was a publicity show.

The gap between F1 and motogp is much bigger than the gap between F1 and Nascar.

How much do you know about MotoGP?

 

[F1 fan]

It's the only track he's tested an F1 car on that F1 has raced on. Mugello and Valencia have had tests but I don't put any faith in test times.

The fact that Valentino came so close is a real eye opener. I know that maybe Gordon wasn't pushing the limit, but we don't know that for sure. Do you have any evidence to suggest this? It's different from bathurst as that was a far more dangerous track.

If Rossi never drove anything with 4 wheels, you may have a point. However he has done various F1, DTM, WRC and whatever other tests and presumably he also owns one of them fancy automobiles, chances are it probably also has a horse for an emblem(in other words, he can go fast).

Still, the fact is he has far less experience of pushing the limit on 4 wheels. He has his toys, but in terms of racing/testing experience on 4 wheels, he has much less than the average f3 driver.

Yes, on a track he knows(all the tracks he's tested on except Fiorano are used also by MotoGP), a type of car he has experience(Has had quite a few F1 tests) in and during anactual test.

Gordon's was at an unfamiliar track in a type of car he's never driven and it was a publicity show.

Publicity or not, do you have any evidence to suggest that Gordon wasn't going flat out? I know Montoya was several seconds slower than the pole time for the season, but you have to take into account track condition, fuel loads, Tyres, setup engine revs etc. There is a lot to take into consideration. You can safely ignore how much slower Montoya was than the pole time and instead use his time as a base time. Gordon was considerably slower than Montoya. Maybe he wasn't pushing as hard, maybe it was a lack of talent.

As for track knowledge, it means little nowadays. You can be sure Gordon went through track briefings, walked the circuit, spoke to Montoya and engineers for advice and he would have seen so many videos of the lap complete with telemetry. He also probably had a good amount of time on a simulator or even a computer game. With all that info on board, he would have gained decent knowledge of the circuit... Look at Nico Hulkenberg's pole at Interlagos. It was a circuit he'd never been to. Granted, he'd had three practice sessions, and his pole came down to bravery in tough track conditions, but he walked over his teammate, who pretty much grew up at that track. That's where Rubens learned to race. The "not seen the track before" excuse doesn't wash anymore. There are plenty of stories of Rookies moving up to a series and doing well at a track they've never been to before. A good racing driver will always make the most of the conditions. Another example is Trevor Bayne. Good pace, good strategy and he won Nascar's biggest race at the first attempt. Iirc, he hadn't raced there before either, although I could be wrong, I'm not the biggest Nascar fan.

How much do you know about MotoGP?

Quite a bit as a fan, not much on the technical side. I know that they are prototype motorcycles, but the fact is that racing prototype motorcycles and prototype cars are two different worlds. Don't get me wrong, Nascar and F1 are two different worlds, but the difference between them will never be as huge as the difference between motogp (or SBK etc) and F1. Just look at how well Michael Schumacher fared racing motorbikes. I'm sure he would have done much better in Nascar. How much do you know about F1?

 

[ROAD_DOGG33J]

I know that maybe Gordon wasn't pushing the limit, but we don't know that for sure. Do you have any evidence to suggest this?

He didn't crash.

 

[Northstar]

The fact that Valentino came so close is a real eye opener. I know that maybe Gordon wasn't pushing the limit, but we don't know that for sure. Do you have any evidence to suggest this? It's different from bathurst as that was a far more dangerous track.

Publicity or not, do you have any evidence to suggest that Gordon wasn't going flat out? I know Montoya was several seconds slower than the pole time for the season, but you have to take into account track condition, fuel loads, Tyres, setup engine revs etc. There is a lot to take into consideration. You can safely ignore how much slower Montoya was than the pole time and instead use his time as a base time. Gordon was considerably slower than Montoya. Maybe he wasn't pushing as hard, maybe it was a lack of talent.

It was a publicity event, meaning he basically only did 1 or 2 runs with likely a basic tune, unlike a test where they do a greater number of runs and various tunes.

As for track knowledge, it means little nowadays. You can be sure Gordon went through track briefings, walked the circuit, spoke to Montoya and engineers for advice and he would have seen so many videos of the lap complete with telemetry. He also probably had a good amount of time on a simulator or even a computer game. With all that info on board, he would have gained decent knowledge of the circuit...

Of course he probably did all that, it's a totally different thing once you actually get on the track though.

Look at Nico Hulkenberg's pole at Interlagos. It was a circuit he'd never been to. Granted, he'd had three practice sessions, and his pole came down to bravery in tough track conditions, but he walked over his teammate, who pretty much grew up at that track. That's where Rubens learned to race.

Fairly certain that came down to track conditions and strategy more than skill. Besides, in the actual race he fell to 8th place.

The "not seen the track before" excuse doesn't wash anymore. There are plenty of stories of Rookies moving up to a series and doing well at a track they've never been to before.

Most of those stories also seem to go along with various things like weather and a dominant car.

A good racing driver will always make the most of the conditions. Another example is Trevor Bayne. Good pace, good strategy and he won Nascar's biggest race at the first attempt. Iirc, he hadn't raced there before either, although I could be wrong, I'm not the biggest Nascar fan.

He had driven there several times in lower tier series and really anyone can win at superspeedways.

Quite a bit as a fan, not much on the technical side. I know that they are prototype motorcycles, but the fact is that racing prototype motorcycles and prototype cars are two different worlds. Don't get me wrong, Nascar and F1 are two different worlds, but the difference between them will never be as huge as the difference between motogp (or SBK etc) and F1.

From a technical standpoint they do have similar performance, only thing is that F1 cars obviously have more down force which is why F1 cars are overall faster.

Just look at how well Michael Schumacher fared racing motorbikes. I'm sure he would have done much better in Nascar.

Decent?

He was only 5 seconds off the pace during a test at Valencia and finished 4th in his only race in the KTM Trophy series. Granted I doubt he would have been anything more than a midpack driver in MotoGP but he wouldn't be horrible.

How much do you know about F1?

To be honest, I hadn't really had the chance to follow it until a couple years ago so not as much as I would like.

 

[Ardius]

Quite a bit as a fan, not much on the technical side. I know that they are prototype motorcycles, but the fact is that racing prototype motorcycles and prototype cars are two different worlds. Don't get me wrong, Nascar and F1 are two different worlds, but the difference between them will never be as huge as the difference between motogp (or SBK etc) and F1. Just look at how well Michael Schumacher fared racing motorbikes. I'm sure he would have done much better in Nascar. How much do you know about F1?

Yawn, so basically its a case of belittle NASCAR drivers again, eh? As has already been stated quite clearly for you, the conditions of each test were wildly different and you can never take an accurate analysis of any kind of testing..especially not publicity stunts like this. We can never know what restrictions Gordon was given, how good the setup was, how fresh the tyres were, etc etc. Just the same as we don't know the details of Rossi's testing.

All we know is that Gordon set a time several seconds off the pace with only a couple of laps of practice and Rossi set more competitive laps after extensive testing and with many more laps available to him. Trying to use this as evidence for how much skill (or lack of) some drivers have over others is foolish.

Schumacher did ok on motorbikes, the stupid thing is that the best drivers of any racing category are nearly always going to do a decent job wherever you put them. Why people constantly feel the need to apply some restriction to what NASCAR drivers can do compared to anyone else I don't know, typical prejudice I guess.

For the record, I think if Rossi had filled in for Massa as Badoer did, he wouldn't have been much better than Badoer. I don't think he is good enough to fight with the top F1 drivers, but he would have been decent (and before anyone replies in outrage, comparing him to Badoer is not an insult, Fisico didn't do much better either). But this only my opinion, I'd happily accept the possibility that Rossi could be fast in F1....it seems though that some people can't accept the idea of a NASCAR driver being fast in F1.

 

[F1 fan]

And where exactly have I been belittleing Nascar drivers Ardius??? I was speculating as to why Gordon wasn't as fast. I also said maybe Gordon wasn't pushing hard... I didn't say he definately wasn't pushing hard like Justin implied. I was also saying that the difference between Moto Gp and f1 is bigger than the gap between nascar and f1. Justin implied that it wasn't.

So is this a case of me supposedly putting down nascar drivers (again) or is it a case of you not reading peoples posts and coming to your own conclusion(again)?

Please answer, because I can provide evidence of one of those.

 

[Northstar]

And where exactly have I been belittleing Nascar drivers Ardius??? I was speculating as to why Gordon wasn't as fast. I also said maybe Gordon wasn't pushing hard... I didn't say he definately wasn't pushing hard like Justin implied.

I said it was a publicity event, than explained why it could lead to him being slower. I never said he wasn't pushing it, you are the one that brought that up.

Please don't put words in my mouth.

I was also saying that the difference between Moto Gp and f1 is bigger than the gap between nascar and f1. Justin implied that it wasn't.

Well, F1 and MotoGP both have similar 0-60 times and similar top speeds and a much closer weight/HP ratio, NASCAR isn't close on any of those stats. Really the only things NASCAR and F1 have in common is that they have 4 wheels, race on a track and have questionable management at times.

or is it a case of you not reading peoples posts and coming to your own conclusion(again)?

I'm starting to think that whole practice before preaching thing right now.

Please answer, because I can provide evidence of one of those.

Only one? You've made 4 claims above, proving 1/4 doesn't seem like a good stat.

 

[F1 fan]

I said it was a publicity event, than explained why it could lead to him being slower. I never said he wasn't pushing it, you are the one that brought that up.

You used the publicity event as a reasoning for him being slower. I was saying it could be a reason for it but not necessarily. I didn't definitively say it was or wasn't. Just speculating.

Please don't put words in my mouth.

I'm not.

Well, F1 and MotoGP both have similar 0-60 times and similar top speeds and a much closer weight/HP ratio, NASCAR isn't close on any of those stats. Really the only things NASCAR and F1 have in common is that they have 4 wheels, race on a track and have questionable management at times.

That and the fact that they race V8 of similar power. Plus Gordon has experience of single seaters. Similar 0-60 times, top speeds and weight to hp still does not make motogp closer to F1. They are 3 technical similarities. It means absolutely nothing. Are you trying to tell me that a successful F1 driver will be able to automatically make the jump to moto gp and still be successful? They are two totally different disciplines. A Motogp rider, will not have the feel for a racing car acquired through years of racing cars. Likewise, an F1 driver will not have the feel for a motogp bike. Think it through.

Only one? You've made 4 claims above, proving 1/4 doesn't seem like a good stat.

No, in this case I was talking about Ardius claiming I was automatically putting Nascar drivers down. Which I wasn't. If he'd have read my post in it's entirety, he'd have seen that. I've called Ardius up on this before. He has a habit of not fully reading someones posts then coming to his own conclusions. I wasn't automatically putting NASCAR drivers down, and I'm no hater of Nascar. I urge you to find one example that I was putting nascar drivers down... In this instance, I was talking about one driver and saying that him being slower might be down to a lack of talent, or not pushing hard. I didn't just come out and say he was S***. Which, going by your response, you seem to think I did.

I'm starting to think that whole practice before preaching thing right now.

Right back at you.

 

[Northstar]

You used the publicity event as a reasoning for him being slower. I was saying it could be a reason for it but not necessarily. I didn't definitively say it was or wasn't. Just speculating.

I was doing the same thing you were, giving possible reasons. Than you made it seem like I said that was the only reason in your response to Ardius.

I'm not.

Yes, you were.

That and the fact that they race V8 of similar power. Plus Gordon has experience of single seaters. Similar 0-60 times, top speeds and weight to hp still does not make motogp closer to F1. They are 3 technical similarities. It means absolutely nothing.

It's more than F1 has with NASCAR.

Are you trying to tell me that a successful F1 driver will be able to automatically make the jump to moto gp and still be successful? They are two totally different disciplines. A Motogp rider, will not have the feel for a racing car acquired through years of racing cars. Likewise, an F1 driver will not have the feel for a motogp bike. Think it through.

No, they would have a hell of a time going to any series different from their own. Just that MotoGP to F1 would be slightly easier due to performance being semi similar more so than most series compared to F1.

No, in this case I was talking about Ardius claiming I was automatically putting Nascar drivers down. Which I wasn't. If he'd have read my post in it's entirety, he'd have seen that. I've called Ardius up on this before. He has a habit of not fully reading someones posts then coming to his own conclusions. I wasn't automatically putting NASCAR drivers down, and I'm no hater of Nascar. I urge you to find one example that I was putting nascar drivers down... In this instance, I was talking about one driver and saying that him being slower might be down to a lack of talent, or not pushing hard. I didn't just come out and say he was S***. Which, going by your response, you seem to think I did.

I never said you were putting anyone down, In fact I felt we were having a perfectly fine debate, but your attitude in that post responding to Ardius was rather uncalled for. I wasn't even going to respond to it as it's between you two until I saw you're accusations towards me.

Right back at you.

Whatever, I'm done with this argument.

 

[F1 fan]

It's more than F1 has with NASCAR.

Well since that's you're reasoning, you should be aware that Nascar has a similar top speed to F1 and MotoGP. You should also be aware that Nascar drivers will better react to things like countersteering, faster cornering etc.

No, they would have a hell of a time going to any series different from their own. Just that MotoGP to F1 would be slightly easier due to performance being semi similar more so than most series compared to F1.

I disagree for reasons previously given.

I never said you were putting anyone down, In fact I felt we were having a perfectly fine debate, but your attitude in that post responding to Ardius was rather uncalled for. I wasn't even going to respond to it as it's between you two until I saw you're accusations towards me.

Well maybe I was a bit harsh towards you, but I was responding to Ardius and I was a bit irritated as he's done this to me (and many others) far too many times. I know you never said anything about me putting Nascar drivers down. I was enjoying our debate, then all of a sudden, along came Ardius claiming I was putting Nascar drivers down. If I seemed a bit short tempered in my response, I'm sorry, but it wasn't aimed at you.

Whatever, I'm done with this argument.

Hope you read this. I thought we were having a good debate too. I strongly disagree with your points, but I still have room to be convinced, as I'm sure you do.

 

[Ardius]

And where exactly have I been belittleing Nascar drivers Ardius??? I was speculating as to why Gordon wasn't as fast. I also said maybe Gordon wasn't pushing hard... I didn't say he definately wasn't pushing hard like Justin implied. I was also saying that the difference between Moto Gp and f1 is bigger than the gap between nascar and f1. Justin implied that it wasn't.

So is this a case of me supposedly putting down nascar drivers (again) or is it a case of you not reading peoples posts and coming to your own conclusion(again)?

Please answer, because I can provide evidence of one of those.

By saying that the gap between bikes vs F1 is bigger than NASCAR vs F1 and referring to how Rossi did, you were suggesting that even though Gordon had completely different circumstances to Rossi, he should have done better simply because a NASCAR has 4 wheels. Therefore implying that even a MotoGP driver can do better than a NASCAR driver.

As I said, its foolish to start making such comparisons especially with publicity stunts. Rossi came from bikes, yes, but he also had much more time to get used to the car and had a set test programme which requires setting decent laptimes for any meaningful data. Gordon was given a couple of laps to try the car - hardly a reliable comparison about how fast each driver was and certainly not a reflection on how much harder Rossi or Gordon found it.

This is not even getting into more detailed analysis such as the fact they were running different circuits, which can be easier or harder to set competitive laptimes.

 

[CarolinaBlue704]

By saying that the gap between bikes vs F1 is bigger than NASCAR vs F1 and referring to how Rossi did, you were suggesting that even though Gordon had completely different circumstances to Rossi, he should have done better simply because a NASCAR has 4 wheels. Therefore implying that even a MotoGP driver can do better than a NASCAR driver.

As I said, its foolish to start making such comparisons especially with publicity stunts. Rossi came from bikes, yes, but he also had much more time to get used to the car and had a set test programme which requires setting decent laptimes for any meaningful data. Gordon was given a couple of laps to try the car - hardly a reliable comparison about how fast each driver was and certainly not a reflection on how much harder Rossi or Gordon found it.

This is not even getting into more detailed analysis such as the fact they were running different circuits, which can be easier or harder to set competitive laptimes.

I will say this. Circuit de Catalunya is easily the more technical track of the two when compared to the Indy "Roval".

 

[Ardius]

But equally the F1 teams have so many test kilometres there that setups are presumably much more straight-forward. Whereas F1 teams only ran Indy for the race weekend.

 

[F1 fan]

By saying that the gap between bikes vs F1 is bigger than NASCAR vs F1 and referring to how Rossi did, you were suggesting that even though Gordon had completely different circumstances to Rossi, he should have done better simply because a NASCAR has 4 wheels. Therefore implying that even a MotoGP driver can do better than a NASCAR driver.

So where did I put NASCAR drivers down. I'm not suggesting a NASCAR driver should do better purely because NASCAR has 4 wheels. It's more to do with knowing the behaviour of a car driven in anger. A motogp rider will not have this experience. Which is why I was so impressed by rossi's performance.

I wasn't putting NASCAR drivers down. I think you've not read my post properly AGAIN.

 

[Ardius]

So where did I put NASCAR drivers down. I'm not suggesting a NASCAR driver should do better purely because NASCAR has 4 wheels. It's more to do with knowing the behaviour of a car driven in anger. A motogp rider will not have this experience. Which is why I was so impressed by rossi's performance.

I wasn't putting NASCAR drivers down. I think you've not read my post properly AGAIN.

Thats the same thing, the only thing that an F1 car shares with a NASCAR is 4 wheels. They are completely different disciplines just like MotoGP is. There is nothing at all that Gordon (or Stewart) can carry across from NASCAR, their experience is with a heavy car which has long braking distances and requires a different kind of control at speed.
You also still don't address the point that has repeatedly been mentioned to you with regards to Rossi's background and the fact his drive was a "Test" whereas Gordon's drive was simply a publicity stunt. Which is why I feel you have an agenda in this respect and why I take such comments to imply a negative picture for NASCAR drivers.

Stop hiding behind the excuse of "you don't read my posts properly". There is more than one way to read a post, this is why I question your opinions so that I can understand what you really mean and why you ignore crucial facts.

 

[Tornado]

Right back at you.

Generally for this to work as a clever comeback there has to be some basis for it.

 

[F1 fan]

Stop hiding behind the excuse of "you don't read my posts properly". There is more than one way to read a post, this is why I question your opinions so that I can understand what you really mean and why you ignore crucial facts.

I'm not hiding behind any excuse of you not reading my posts properly. I have called you up on this before and I can think of several occasions where you have done. Not just to me. To several people. You need to come down off your high horse.

Generally for this to work as a clever comeback there has to be some basis for it.

Oh I'm sorry, I didn't realise I had to waste time coming up with a witty retort. Is it in the aup? Go ahead. Find one example of me not reading someone's post and coming to my own conclusions. You won't find one where I haven't acknowledged it. Justin implied i'd been misreading his posts. Show me proof of that.

 

[RACECAR]

I dont see how IRL is a feeder series for F1, I dont know of any drivers who came from IRL to F1.

There was Jacque Villenueve.

 

[vfrmaverick]

What the heck did you guys do here?

 

[Tornado]

I'm not hiding behind any excuse of you not reading my posts properly. I have called you up on this before and I can think of several occasions where you have done. Not just to me. To several people. You need to come down off your high horse.

Irony is a bitch. You've done nothing in this thread but dump on NASCAR drivers (and by extension NASCAR). When people have attempted to play Devil's Advocate to explain why the things you are saying may not be accurate, you've completely ignored (and, several times, intentionally misread) their reasoning and went straight for the jugular.
You really need to step back and think about why everyone is ganging up on you before you try to play the "oh, no one understands me" victim card, and especially before you try to call out others for doing things you've been doing from the start. I understand exactly what you are saying, and I know exactly what you are trying to do, and you need to cut it out.

Hence my original comment.

Oh I'm sorry, I didn't realise I had to waste time coming up with a witty retort.

I was actually speaking of the hypocrisy you've been displaying, so I suppose its a good thing you didn't try to be witty in response.

Find one example of me not reading someone's post and coming to my own conclusions. You won't find one where I haven't acknowledged it. Justin implied i'd been misreading his posts. Show me proof of that.

You couldn't have made this easier if you had done it for me.

Here's just one example of something Justin said:

Well, F1 and MotoGP both have similar 0-60 times and similar top speeds and a much closer weight/HP ratio, NASCAR isn't close on any of those stats. Really the only things NASCAR and F1 have in common is that they have 4 wheels, race on a track and have questionable management at times.

Here's the main gist of how you responded:

Are you trying to tell me that a successful F1 driver will be able to automatically make the jump to moto gp and still be successful?

Not even remotely the same statement, and about as close as you can get to intentional misrepresentation of his argument because there is no real way that you could get that from what Justin said.

It took me longer to format this post than to find that passage, so you better believe it wouldn't be hard to find more.

 

[F1 fan]

Irony is a bitch. You've done nothing in this thread but dump on NASCAR drivers (and by extension NASCAR). When people have attempted to play Devil's Advocate to explain why the things you are saying may not be accurate, you've completely ignored (and, several times, intentionally misread) their reasoning and went straight for the jugular.
You really need to step back and think about why everyone is ganging up on you before you try to play the "oh, no one understands me" victim card, and especially before you try to call out others for doing things you've been doing from the start. I understand exactly what you are saying, and I know exactly what you are trying to do, and you need to cut it out.

Hence my original comment.

Excuse me, for the millionth time, I have NOT[/QUOTE] been putting down Nascar drivers. In this thread I was having a debate with Justin as to why one Nascar driver was slower. I didn't come out and say he sucks or that Nascar sucks. I did also say that perhaps he wasn't pushing hard. That's not necessarily an insult. Stepping into a completely different car in front of the press, I can understand that he might get nervous and not want to bin the car. I never said it was solely down to lack of talent. Just possibly. I don't understand how debating why one Nascar driver was over a second off the pace means I'm automatically saying Nascar sucks. I could say yuji ide was terrible. It does not mean I'm saying f1 sucks.

What has happened in this thread is that I was having a perfectly fine debate with Justin (and he agreed with this) then Ardius came in saying I was putting down Nascar drivers. Look through it and you'll see that. When I called Ardius up on this (as I have done before) it turned into an arguement...

I was actually speaking of the hypocrisy you've been displaying, so I suppose its a good thing you didn't try to be witty in response.

There's no point wasting good humour on idiots is there? I'm tired of talking this over with you... I really don't think Ardius needs people to fight his battles. Just remember, before Ardius' post, everything was fine, then he said I was putting down Nascar drivers and look how the conversation changed.

Here's just one example of something Justin said:[/font][/color]

Here's the main gist of how you responded:

Are you a moron or are you just illiterate? Way to misquote me. Just deliberately skip to the bottom of the paragraph.

Not even remotely the same statement, and about as close as you can get to intentional misrepresentation of his argument because there is no real way that you could get that from what Justin said.

I'm sorry. Justin was trying to say that riding a Motogp bike is closer to F1 than driving a Nascar car. I'd be willing to bet that F1 drivers would find Nascar easier to transition to that MotoGP

It took me longer to format this post than to find that passage, so you better believe it wouldn't be hard to find more.

Whatever you say. I'm fed up talking to you. As for Ardius, I've called him up on that before, and if you were to give me access to his long term post history, I'd find some of said examples. Like the time he berated a poster for claiming that F1 cars still used traction control, despite the fact that if he'd bothered to have checked the date of the op, he'd have seen that it was infact made during the 07 season, when traction control as legal.

Or the time I was talking about Okayama, aka T.I Aida (the home of the pacific grand prix) and he pretty much reworded my post, but kept his authoritarian manner.

 

[Ardius]

I'm not hiding behind any excuse of you not reading my posts properly. I have called you up on this before and I can think of several occasions where you have done. Not just to me. To several people. You need to come down off your high horse.

Really? So while I have tried to go back and explain why I read what I did from your posts, you have just ignored it. I've quoted and responded to all of your questions and points but you haven't of mine. Who is not reading whose posts, eh?
I read your original post and felt it implied something. I question this and gave reasons why I felt it was wrong. You explain you didn't think that way and then suggest I didn't read your post. I explain why I felt you were implying something else. What more do you want me to say? All you had to do was just respond saying that you didn't intend to imply such things because this was all I was asking.

I'm sorry that Justin and Tornado are jumping down your throat using my conclusion though. It was only something I had read from your post and (perhaps blindly) I didn't intend to cause a furious argument against you. Then again, maybe I still had a point other people agree with. In any case, I've explained my position quite plainly and I can and have read your posts.

Whatever you say. I'm fed up talking to you. As for Ardius, I've called him up on that before, and if you were to give me access to his long term post history, I'd find some of said examples. Like the time he berated a poster for claiming that F1 cars still used traction control, despite the fact that if he'd bothered to have checked the date of the op, he'd have seen that it was infact made during the 07 season, when traction control as legal.

Or the time I was talking about Okayama, aka T.I Aida (the home of the pacific grand prix) and he pretty much reworded my post, but kept his authoritarian manner.

As I have told you before, its quite an easy mistake to make. How often do you really look at post dates?
I don't remember the other one, you'll have to show me that.

If you want, I'll happily discuss this over PM with you.

 

[Tornado]

I'm tired of talking this over with you... I really don't think Ardius needs people to fight his battles.

I really don't think it is any of your damn business what I choose to respond to.

Just remember, before Ardius' post, everything was fine, then he said I was putting down Nascar drivers and look how the conversation changed.

Yeah. He made an offhand comment and then did a long-ish post with several reasonable explanations for why you were incorrect. And rather than try to refute any of his explanations you latched onto the first sentence of his post and went completely ballistic on everyone involved, in the process basically proving him right.

Are you a moron or are you just illiterate? Way to misquote me. Just deliberately skip to the bottom of the paragraph.

Oh boy. Way to be a mature and contributing member, and way to completely prove that the allegations that have been raised against you are unfounded.

By the way, that wasn't a misquote. That was the main point of that paragraph, where you intentionally exaggerated what Justin said to prove your point; and the rest of that paragraph was built on that sentence.

Whatever you say. I'm fed up talking to you.

Good. Hopefully that means that no one has to put up with any more of your nonsense, and members who are actually capable of having a discussion without going into a frothing rage when questioned will be the only ones that continue to post.

As for Ardius, I've called him up on that before, and if you were to give me access to his long term post history, I'd find some of said examples. Like the time he berated a poster for claiming that F1 cars still used traction control, despite the fact that if he'd bothered to have checked the date of the op, he'd have seen that it was infact made during the 07 season, when traction control as legal.

Or the time I was talking about Okayama, aka T.I Aida (the home of the pacific grand prix) and he pretty much reworded my post, but kept his authoritarian manner.

Good thing I don't particularly care because its not relevant to this thread, isn't it? Your inability to let things go or keep yourself from jumping down other's throats at the slightest provocation sounds an awful lot like your problems more than mine anyways.

 

[CarolinaBlue704]

You guys need to calm down. No one has tried to belittle any NASCAR drivers. You guys are way too sensitive.

 

[Tornado]

That's not even really the issue at hand anymore.

 

[F1 fan]

You guys need to calm down. No one has tried to belittle any NASCAR drivers. You guys are way too sensitive.

👍 Thank you. Glad someone can see that.

 

[vfrmaverick]

Tonight at 8pm on speed!

 

[Hun200kmh]

Tonight at 8pm on speed!

I don't think I'll get to see that here but I hope the fans there upload a lot of stuff to YT. A few amateur videos up already, this one's good for the build up

[YOUTUBEHD]G88rTi_I2o4[/YOUTUBEHD]

 

[vfrmaverick]

ohh god it better not be raining.