FORUMula1.com

[texasmr2]

I'm concerned for Chandock in particular.

Jamie also had a few spins, I just don't think hes ready at his age.

Jamie was lucky not to hit the barrier today

Do you folks mean Jaime?

No!

[Hanwombat]

I'm concerned for Chandock in particular.

Jamie also had a few spins, I just don't think hes ready at his age.

Jamie was lucky not to hit the barrier today

Do you folks mean Jaime?

No!

Maybe I did... maybe I didn't




Okay I did

[Hansy]

Jaime did it on purpose, obviously. He had the car under control the whole time.

[Hanwombat]

Jaime did it on purpose, obviously. He had the car under control the whole time.

[Balkan_scouser]

No the 107% rule is pointless.
The FIA should have issued them provisional licenses providing they brought their car to a satisfactory development level by the start of the season.
If say their car was 15 seconds of the pace in testing ...hold on, how can anyone be let to race without having done any testing!!
It's freakin crazy!

[bud]

only issue i see with this is that one of the established teams may miss out on the race due to technical issues or crashing out. This is not only bad for the team and drivers and bad for sponsors.

[cheekybru]

the replacement ferrari drivers were god knows how many seconds off the pace last year, and they managed not to crash, so the saftey aspect isnt that big a deal in my eyes

[cap-dude]

only issue i see with this is that one of the established teams may miss out on the race due to technical issues or crashing out. This is not only bad for the team and drivers and bad for sponsors.

Surely there would be exception. Common sense should prevail.

[bud]

only issue i see with this is that one of the established teams may miss out on the race due to technical issues or crashing out. This is not only bad for the team and drivers and bad for sponsors.

Surely there would be exception. Common sense should prevail.

They could make the rule for new teams entering the sport, kinda like a probation period of 3 seasons for them to Q 107% of pole. that way the established teams wont be screwed over.

[scotty]

By my calculations Senna would have missed out by about a second today.

only issue i see with this is that one of the established teams may miss out on the race due to technical issues or crashing out. This is not only bad for the team and drivers and bad for sponsors.

I'm sure exceptions would be made as they were before.

I can't help but think the 107% lap time would be a moot point by 2011 anyway, the new teams will catch up, especially HRT!

[What's Burning?]

To prove how pointless this whole argument is, if you look at the Q1 numbers today (rounding number) the low time is 115 seconds and the high time is 125 seconds... 107% would have only removed Chandhok from competition.

[magunkey]

Def no 107% rule. It didn't help. Nothing wrong with a few old back markers making trouble for the race leaders. HRT, Lotus and Virgin should be given a ten lap head start at every race just to make it interesting.

[cap-dude]

Those Hispania cars, if I'm right will be lapped around 13 laps in. Providing the car can complete 13 laps without breaking down.

We have 49 laps for tommorrows race. So they'll end up lapped 3 or 4 times. Just what Super Aguri did in their first ever race.

[Scotch F1]

They shouldn't bring back the rule. It won't help. James Allen made some points on his blog:

http://www.jamesallenonf1.com/2010/03/n ... rack-with/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Why is it unsafe to race with the slower cars, but they'll drive round with them for 2 days before deciding whether they're fast enough to be deemed safe?

[Jensonb]

Def no 107% rule. It didn't help. Nothing wrong with a few old back markers making trouble for the race leaders. HRT, Lotus and Virgin should be given a ten lap head start at every race just to make it interesting.

True. For a brief period there was a 110% rule I think, I guess they could have used that instead.

Either way, it's a bit pointless. Might as well just let them get on with it.