FORUMula1.com - F1 Forum

[Robert12010]

canada i would say is better than melbourne, dancing through the chicanes at 130mph is great, turn 3 is fantastic espically in qualifying

[Jensonb]

when I read the title of this thread I thought Scotty had gone off on one

to be fair i thought the same!

Yeah, me too.

ITS. CLEARLY. THE. CARS.

We can't say that yet; we'll have to wait until a few races have passed to see if the new regulations; double diffuser ban, KERS, moveable rear wing etc improves the spectacle...

which proves my point mate , all those things are changes to the CARS.

...No it doesn't, we still haven't seen if changing the cars actually makes a difference.

Yes it does..... If the cars are able to overtake easier/ly this season, then considering its soleyl changes to the car, id say thats damning evidence its the cars fault for the lack of overtaking PRE 2011, if the changes make no difference, there is an equally big enough argument to say its still the cars, as i could point out the braking and acceleration etc is still there unchanged, and that is why they cant overtake. Either way these changes go id still have a concrete argument to suggest its the cars. BUT a better one if it seems these changes to the cars do work.

Are you just not paying attention?

we still haven't seen if changing the cars actually makes a difference.

Ie.: We have to wait until the season is underway to draw any conclusion. Last time I checked, the season doesn't get underway until March 27. There's noting wrong with your argument (Except the claim that if the changes to the cars hurt overtaking it proves it's the fault of the cars - that's called post hoc ergo proctor hoc and it's a logical fallacy. It could still be both the cars and the tracks), just with your claim that your point has already been proved. You have to actually wait for an experiment to be conducted to draw conclusions, you can't just set it up and declare your hypothesis correct without doing anything.

[FRAFPDD]

when I read the title of this thread I thought Scotty had gone off on one

to be fair i thought the same!

Yeah, me too.

ITS. CLEARLY. THE. CARS.

We can't say that yet; we'll have to wait until a few races have passed to see if the new regulations; double diffuser ban, KERS, moveable rear wing etc improves the spectacle...

which proves my point mate , all those things are changes to the CARS.

...No it doesn't, we still haven't seen if changing the cars actually makes a difference.

Yes it does..... If the cars are able to overtake easier/ly this season, then considering its soleyl changes to the car, id say thats damning evidence its the cars fault for the lack of overtaking PRE 2011, if the changes make no difference, there is an equally big enough argument to say its still the cars, as i could point out the braking and acceleration etc is still there unchanged, and that is why they cant overtake. Either way these changes go id still have a concrete argument to suggest its the cars. BUT a better one if it seems these changes to the cars do work.

Are you just not paying attention?

we still haven't seen if changing the cars actually makes a difference.

Ie.: We have to wait until the season is underway to draw any conclusion. Last time I checked, the season doesn't get underway until March 27. There's noting wrong with your argument (Except the claim that if the changes to the cars hurt overtaking it proves it's the fault of the cars - that's called post hoc ergo proctor hoc and it's a logical fallacy. It could still be both the cars and the tracks), just with your claim that your point has already been proved. You have to actually wait for an experiment to be conducted to draw conclusions, you can't just set it up and declare your hypothesis correct without doing anything.

I understand what you mean. But i never remember saying anything would prove anything, this is the closest i got to claiming proof " ITS.CLEARLY.THE.CARS" which is only written in such a way in order to show how much i believe in my case as an opening statement. What your still missing although you countered it with some hocus pocus latin spell thing, is that either way i CAN form an argument to support my case, and thats what arguing is, a tactical display of facts. I will use whatever outcome to my advantage of what my belief is.

All the changes myownalias initially listed where all CHANGES to the CARS labelled countless times by those in charge as " changes to improve the spectacle of overtaking" now that is clearly very telling in what may be the cause of the lack of it, considering the changes are limited to solely car changes, hell even the tyres are part of the cars, and theyve been radically changed to improve it. Do you see what i mean, all these changes and all the problems in overtaking in F1 from whenever to 2010 so far point a massive neon arrow at the cars being at fault. Ive never stated anything has proved anything, but that what the year ahead has in store can be used either way, but then you must realise if the overtaking spectacle is increased this argument becomes slightly invalidated as theres no problem anymore.......

[Jensonb]

I understand what you mean. But i never remember saying anything would prove anything, this is the closest i got to claiming proof " ITS.CLEARLY.THE.CARS" which is only written in such a way in order to show how much i believe in my case as an opening statement. What your still missing although you countered it with some hocus pocus latin spell thing, is that either way i CAN form an argument to support my case, and thats what arguing is, a tactical display of facts. I will use whatever outcome to my advantage of what my belief is.

All the changes myownalias initially listed where all CHANGES to the CARS labelled countless times by those in charge as " changes to improve the spectacle of overtaking" now that is clearly very telling in what may be the cause of the lack of it, considering the changes are limited to solely car changes, hell even the tyres are part of the cars, and theyve been radically changed to improve it. Do you see what i mean, all these changes and all the problems in overtaking in F1 from whenever to 2010 so far point a massive neon arrow at the cars being at fault. Ive never stated anything has proved anything, but that what the year ahead has in store can be used either way, but then you must realise if the overtaking spectacle is increased this argument becomes slightly invalidated as theres no problem anymore.......

Well sure, but that doesn't change the fact that what myownalias said doesn't really prove the point, it just suggests it is the dominant stance within the F1 fraternity itself.

[vlad]

Finally, some "action"!

http://pitpass.com/fes_php/pitpass_news_item.php?fes_art_id=43052

[texasmr2]

Updated article:
http://mobile.racer.com/f1-circuits-cou ... le/197827/

[vlad]

I taught about chicanes as well! They really don't help overtaking, but you should have at least one on each track!