Discuss the sport you love with other motorsport fans
If we could hear a difference with on a youtube vid, the teams could've done a lot more by now but we haven't heard anything come out yet.
The observations Minardi makes ....
As I said before, because Vettel is the driver involved the 'observations' that Giancarlo Minardi made have elevated him from a has-been team's genial boss who probably needs his hearing-aids retuned to an F1 senior statesman oozing with wisdom of the ages. He'll be lucky if RBR don't sue his pension off his back for slander.
The observations Minardi makes ....
As I said before, because Vettel is the driver involved the 'observations' that Giancarlo Minardi made have elevated him from a has-been team's genial boss who probably needs his hearing-aids retuned to an F1 senior statesman oozing with wisdom of the ages. He'll be lucky if RBR don't sue his pension off his back for slander.
People only tend to lose respect for individuals like that when they keep hanging on in their own world, after the real world has passed them by. Minardi knew his time was up when it was, and bowed out while at the same time ensuring his team progressed to new ownership rather than sinking to oblivion, as others have done in the past.
Giancarlo Minardi deserves respect and not ridicule. The way you have written your quote is actually quite hypocritical i.e. the way you are describing Minardi is probably equally as 'slanderous' as what you are accusing him of doing.
The observations Minardi makes ....
As I said before, because Vettel is the driver involved the 'observations' that Giancarlo Minardi made have elevated him from a has-been team's genial boss who probably needs his hearing-aids retuned to an F1 senior statesman oozing with wisdom of the ages. He'll be lucky if RBR don't sue his pension off his back for slander.
People only tend to lose respect for individuals like that when they keep hanging on in their own world, after the real world has passed them by. Minardi knew his time was up when it was, and bowed out while at the same time ensuring his team progressed to new ownership rather than sinking to oblivion, as others have done in the past.
Giancarlo Minardi deserves respect and not ridicule. The way you have written your quote is actually quite hypocritical i.e. the way you are describing Minardi is probably equally as 'slanderous' as what you are accusing him of doing.
OK, I accept what you are saying. But looking at the "big-picture" if you like, IMO a lot of people should step back and look at their own views about this situation. A lot of otherwise intelligent people are latching onto almost any straw that hints at discrediting Vettel and his wins. I accept that such continued dominance can be monotonous to neutrals and upsetting to supporters of other drivers but as I asked in another thread, what to people expect him to do? Hold back because many F1 fans don't like it?
Actually, I am not particularly supportive of the Red Bull team, as such. I have nothing against them, of course but feel that they lack pedigree and character. But those are not reasons to accuse them of cheating simply because they are so dominant. There have been other cases like this. In 1988 McLaren Honda won 15 out of 16 races on the calendar and in 2002 Ferrari were on top in 15 out of 17 races. In that year, Michael Schumacher was on the podium of every one of those 17 races. So why this anti-Vettel and ant-Red Bull vehemence now?
PS: Please don't say "Multi-21". It would be worse than ridiculous.
"zurich_allan"
I think it's more of a middle ground between what they are saying and those that simply say 'Vettel is the absolute best'
What Minardi is saying is that Red Bull have 'something' that is making them dominant. And that is undoubtedly true! The question is - is that something Vettel? (He genuinely could be the difference), or is that something a part of the car - this is equally as plausible. It could be something entirely legal - they obviously don't want to give the game away to the other teams and rightly so if this is the case! Adrian Newey is in my opinion the greatest designer / aero tech guy in the history of F1, so it's absolutely possible, in fact likely, that he has found either a loophole or a way to develop that is within the rules but not known to others.Most likely, it is a combination of both factors - a superbly designed car by Newey which is being superbly driven by Vettel. But more importantly, that design has ideally suited Vettel's driving style and hence the results that you often see. IMO, that is no guarantee - a great car design may not necessarily suit a great driver and so it is not as simple as saying that if so&so had been in that Red Bull car they too would have achieved similar results OR for that matter claiming that Vettel would or would not have achieved similar success with another leading team. Anyone can speculate but no one knows for sure until the evidence is there. Right now Vettel is doing a brilliant job with the tools that he has been given and people have to accept it whether they like it or not.
On the other hand, it IS possible, that there is an advantage being gained unfairly. Perhaps they have found another way to mimic traction control? It is possible, in fact there are multiple ways it could be done, without it actually being traction control itself. That could be a grey area rather than being outright illegal.You can either follow rules or break them. 'Bending' them is not as simple as it would appear. Not too long ago people made noises about the flexible front wings used by Ferrari & Red Bull but subsequent checks exonerated them. But as long as Newey or anyone else is working within the framework of existing rules, there is nothing wrong if one or more of them finds loopholes in that framework. Is that not the reason why designers and techs paid big money for? Newey might be smarter than others in finding such loopholes or routing a bypass but there is nothing unfair about it unless such an action is expressly forbidden. For example, if the rule book says that length of a certain rod used in the car chassis has to be within 1.5 and 1.7 metres and Newey has, by his own hard work, found out that a length of 1.635 metres achieves optimal performance, why is that unfair? Just because the others don't yet know?
I don't go for conspiracy theories - but I DO believe that teams at the sharp end of F1 like to 'bend' the rules as far as is possible without snapping them in two.
If this is true why would rbr run it on only 1 car?
I'd like to know how the engine sounding different is a contributing factor in Newey''s design?
I'd like to know how the engine sounding different is a contributing factor in Newey''s design?
It would sound different of Newey put a banana in one of Webber's car's exhausts.
I'd like to know how the engine sounding different is a contributing factor in Newey''s design?
It would sound different of Newey put a banana in one of Webber's car's exhausts.
Come now. You know better than to start a conspiracy.
I'd like to know how the engine sounding different is a contributing factor in Newey''s design?
It would sound different of Newey put a banana in one of Webber's car's exhausts.
Come now. You know better than to start a conspiracy.
Why not? My idea is not any more outrageous than some of the others going around.
I asked about Webbers car because if you where going to go to the effort of designing traction control (or a legal form of it) why would you only put it on one car?
Then again it could be a double bluff so RBR can turn around and say "nope Webber is spinning his tyres up, Sebs driving is what is stopping the wheel spin?
Maybe Webbers dodgy clutches is part of the system
See our F1 related articles too!
