Unpopular Motorsport Opinions

  • Thread starter Liquid
  • 1,983 comments
  • 176,351 views
Philip Morris don't technically sponsor Ferrari any more (Mission Winnow notwithstanding) but, as far as I know, they do purchase the team's advertising spaces to resell to other sponsors, don't they?
 
Last edited:
Liquid
Philip Morris don't technically sponsor Ferrari any more (Mission Winnow notwithstanding) but, as far as I know, they do purchase the team's advertising spaces to resell to other sponsors, don't they?
Click to expand...
They used to pay the driver's salaries. I don't know if that's still the case.
 
  1. Jack Brabham is a massively underrated former World Champion
  2. Based off many precedents (and postedents - yes I made that word up), Rosberg should not have been penalised for Austria 2016.. (puts armour on)
 
Last edited:
toastet
Overtaking is not a problem. Just leave at least a car width space for your opponent and don't crash into him.
Click to expand...
Again, that leads me to the issue of, if you need to ask which overtake attempt he is talking about, then overtaking will never exist.
 
WiisardNic
Again, that leads me to the issue of, if you need to ask which overtake attempt he is talking about, then overtaking will never exist.
Click to expand...
Overtaking is not a problem. Just leave at least a car width space for your opponent and don't crash into him.
 
I really don't like the way Max Verstappen races wheel-to-wheel. Moves like Saubi Arabia, Brazil, and Monza (not the crash, but in the opening laps where Lewis was forced across the kerbs) should not be allowed. I don't mind aggression, but those kinds of moves are a bit too much. The whole "yield or we crash" mentality just isn't racing IMO. I don't mind it as much in a series like GT racing or TCR, but in Formula 1 where moves like that can and very likely would take your opponent out of the race? Not for me...
 
toastet
Overtaking is not a problem. Just leave at least a car width space for your opponent and don't crash into him.
Click to expand...
Jimlaad43
Are we talking about the one where Hamilton had to massively turn out of the way to avoid a certain collision or the one where Hamilton had to massively turn out of the way to avoid a certain collision?
Click to expand...
Wow, you two are THAT bitter about Max that you've found an (on track) issue with the last lap overtake? I have not seen that suggested anywhere at all until now. Talk about an unpopular opinion..
 
WiisardNic
Wow, you two are THAT bitter about Max that you've found an (on track) issue with the last lap overtake? I have not seen that suggested anywhere at all until now. Talk about an unpopular opinion..
Click to expand...
I think the problem is that the whole Masi thing of making up his own rules was so bad that the Championship being robbed took centre stage and the racing itself of that lap went completely unnoticed. From what I saw it was a pretty aggressive move but I also took it as Lewis just gave up by then, and rightly so, he couldn't do anything against Max on new soft tyres. There two other issues, first was the bullying kinda move under safety car where Max technically did overtake under SC conditions, and we all know that was protested and obviously they dismissed it. Funny how you can be sent to the back of the grid if a wing misses out by 0.2 mm but when it comes to track action they can be so lenient. Then there was also the excessive weaving Max did after he overtook Lewis.

So again, I think there was so much to complain about and had that race occured in the middle of the calendar we would have things those incidents being discussed more. And perhaps Max would have been penalised for every one of those actions bar the aggressive yet still legalish overtake move.
 
As much as Masi got it wrong at the last race of 2021, the FIA governing body actually got it RIGHT at Indianapolis in 2005, refusing to break the rules in interest of "putting on a show". And the mob was equally insensed.
 
jjaisli
the FIA governing body actually got it RIGHT at Indianapolis in 2005, refusing to break the rules in interest of "putting on a show".
Click to expand...
But they still did put on a show. I'm sure the Bridgestone teams would have complained because they were able to compete but that 'race' just shouldn't have gone ahead. It was correct to order the Michelin teams not to race but the event should have been rescheduled or outright cancelled.
 
Liquid
But they still did put on a show. I'm sure the Bridgestone teams would have complained because they were able to compete but that 'race' just shouldn't have gone ahead. It was correct to order the Michelin teams not to race but the event should have been rescheduled or outright cancelled.
Click to expand...

I feel like people would have been more forgiving if it was a six-way fight with Renault, McLaren and Ferrari fighting for the win rather than Jordan and Minardi getting more screen time in one race than they had in the previous five seasons. Stoddart was furious that it was going ahead because he knew it would destroy any chances Minardi had of beating Jordan that year.
 
I watched a video about the NASCAR tire war between Goodyear and Hoosier, and in that there was a regulation that said each manufacturer HAD to turn up to each race with enough tyres to give to the whole grid. Why wasn't that enforced in F1, and if it was, why didn't every team get forced to run Bridgestones for the round even if it gave them no points. There were still plenty of options to getting something out of the 2005 US Grand Prix. F1 doesn't seem to like rescheduling races under any circumstances once they've been to the circuit (Spa 1985 is the only example I can think of) with Australia 2020 being the only one I can think of being outright cancelled while at the circuit.

Belgium 2021 was a farce, but it was handled much better than that Indianapolis race hands down.
 
Jimlaad43
there was a regulation that said each manufacturer HAD to turn up to each race with enough tyres to give to the whole grid.
Click to expand...

What was the approximate split between Hoosier teams and Goodyear teams? At the time in F1, there were 6 Bridgestone cars vs 14 Michelin cars.

Jimlaad43
Belgium 2021 was a farce, but it was handled much better than that Indianapolis race hands down.
Click to expand...

Agreed. I said in the race thread that Spa was nothing like Indy 2005; the Indy farce is in a league of its own.
 
Liquid
What was the approximate split between Hoosier teams and Goodyear teams? At the time in F1, there were 6 Bridgestone cars vs 14 Michelin cars.
Click to expand...
Hoosier had a small number of drivers contracted in, but it became apparent pretty soon that all teams just bought whichever tyre was better/safer for each circuit and it became the mess it was.

This is the video I am getting all the info from because I know NOTHING about NASCAR and don't want to begin saying things those in the know can easily disprove.
 
Last edited:
Liquid
What was the approximate split between Hoosier teams and Goodyear teams? At the time in F1, there were 6 Bridgestone cars vs 14 Michelin cars.
Click to expand...
There wasn't really a split per-se. At the time, NASCAR just simply had a rule stating that any tire manufacturer who turned up had to make sure that they had enough tires to supply every car on the track. Hoosier I believe had a few contracted drivers, but for the most part teams could basically run whatever tire they wanted.

Slapshoes (who makes a lot of solid NASCAR content) made a video about the tire wars:



Edit: Tree'd.
 
Last edited:
Jimlaad43
I watched a video about the NASCAR tire war between Goodyear and Hoosier, and in that there was a regulation that said each manufacturer HAD to turn up to each race with enough tyres to give to the whole grid. Why wasn't that enforced in F1, and if it was, why didn't every team get forced to run Bridgestones for the round even if it gave them no points. There were still plenty of options to getting something out of the 2005 US Grand Prix. F1 doesn't seem to like rescheduling races under any circumstances once they've been to the circuit (Spa 1985 is the only example I can think of) with Australia 2020 being the only one I can think of being outright cancelled while at the circuit.

Belgium 2021 was a farce, but it was handled much better than that Indianapolis race hands down.
Click to expand...
I know next to nothing about NASCAR but aren't those cars all close to being the same? In F1 in those days they built their cars around the tyres, so just slapping completely different tyres on wouldn't be something they'd ever agree to, I'd imagine.
 
Last edited:
Samus
I know next to nothing about NASCAR but aren't those cars all close to being the same? In F1 in those days they built their cars around the tyres, so just slapping completely different tyres on wouldn't be something they'd ever agree to, I'd imagine.
Click to expand...

In 1981, you had four different tire companies in F1; switching mid-season wasn't unusual for the smaller teams.

Goodyear, Michelin, Pirelli, and Avon all took part. We'll never see that again!
 
Pupik
In 1981, you had four different tire companies in F1; switching mid-season wasn't unusual for the smaller teams.

Goodyear, Michelin, Pirelli, and Avon all took part. We'll never see that again!
Click to expand...
At the sharp end Williams switched from Michelin to Goodyear midseason in 1981. It affected record-keeping for the championships; Goodyear is the only tyre company in F1 history with more constructor's titles than driver's titles.
 
Fat Tyre
first was the bullying kinda move under safety car where Max technically did overtake under SC conditions, and we all know that was protested and obviously they dismissed it. Funny how you can be sent to the back of the grid if a wing misses out by 0.2 mm but when it comes to track action they can be so lenient. Then there was also the excessive weaving Max did after he overtook Lewis.

So again, I think there was so much to complain about and had that race occured in the middle of the calendar we would have things those incidents being discussed more. And perhaps Max would have been penalised for every one of those actions bar the aggressive yet still legalish overtake move
Click to expand...
Ah, but the regulations say only those overtakes under safety car not rectified before the safety car line will be penalised.

No one would ever be penalised for things that happened during that race, if they happened mid-season. Except, maybe Hamilton on lap 1. First citation for weaving had always been met with a black/white warning flag.

It’s one of those things where I can see/understand the whole Masi/Race Control issue for that race, but if anyone is seriously that upset about Verstappen’s race craft during that race, well.. I suggest they move on to slot car racing. But I suppose, even in that cars get close to each other
 
For me, the biggest issue I have with regards to Abu Dhabi is Masi's interpretation of allowing SOME lapped cars to pass the SC but not others.

There isn't a trace of consistency in that ruling.

That's what bugs the hell out of me with most classes in motorsport. Race Control inconsistencies.
 

Latest Posts

Back