FORUMula1.com - F1 Forum

[mnmracer]

Will you address the 15 laps along with the 32 seconds ......

That's a fair question and, personally, I'd like to read a response that addresses that question. It's interesting that since Minardi raised that fundamental question immediately Singapore, and given all the time since, there has not been one attempt by the team to provide a rational explanation.

"there's nothing illegal on the car"
I know it's not the explanation you like, but that doesn't make it any less rational.
Red Bull has better things to do than address every accusation someone somewhere makes. If any team thought Minardi had a reasonable case, they would have filed an official complaint. You'd think after the ridiculousness of 'yellow flag gate' in Brazil, it would be clear why they have better things to do.

[racechick]

Was the Ferrari 312T2 also illegal? Was the McLaren MP 4/4 also illegal? What about the Ferrari F300? Illegal?
Or maybe, just maybe, the whole premise of "if you win by 30 seconds, your car must be illegal" is a 100% deceptive and false statement.

Will you address the 15 laps along with the 32 seconds or is that inconvenient for you therefore you choose to ignore it? In today's F1 2 second gaps don't exist. So either address it or just stop attacking others for their rationalization.

In today's F1 2 second gaps don't exist?
How big is the gap between Ferrari and the backmarkers?
Does that mean Ferrari is cheating? Does it mean the backmarkers are designing a different type of car?
Or do 2 second gaps exist under certain circumstances? Circumstances such as one car and driver being on top of their game, the car behind not only not being on top of their game but also being handicapped with a stuffed front wing?

Are you saying Vettel wasn't on top of his game, had a broken front wing,and STILL pulled out a big lead? HOW?

[What's Burning?]

Fascinating that this argument is now in the main stream (non F1) media. Wired has put up a pretty well summarized article on the subject. They also noted something I'd not heard nor believe to be relevant, as a few hundred thousand dollars is peanuts to an F1 organization, but interesting footnote none the less.

Wired Traction Control Article According to new rules set out by the FIA, the winning team from the previous season has to pay more money to race in the new season. Because Red Bull took the constructors’ championship in 2012, it was required to pay the standard $500,000 entry price to race this year, plus $6,000 for each point it gained in the 2012 World Constructors’ Championship. The rest of the field only had to pay $5,000 for each point it scored in 2012.

Considering Vettel has a 77 point lead in the 2013 season — 272 points compared to Fernando Alonso’s 195 — having two cars, with two drivers racking up the wins could cost a mint. And then some. So with the season nearly clinched, there’s no reason point in incurring even more fees by adding another competitor in the mix.

[spankyham]

Will you address the 15 laps along with the 32 seconds ......

That's a fair question and, personally, I'd like to read a response that addresses that question. It's interesting that since Minardi raised that fundamental question immediately Singapore, and given all the time since, there has not been one attempt by the team to provide a rational explanation.

"there's nothing illegal on the car"
I know it's not the explanation you like, but that doesn't make it any less rational.
Red Bull has better things to do than address every accusation someone somewhere makes. If any team thought Minardi had a reasonable case, they would have filed an official complaint. You'd think after the ridiculousness of 'yellow flag gate' in Brazil, it would be clear why they have better things to do.

I would have hoped that Red Bull would feel that the fans that make the sport for them to succeed in were worth an explanation and response to the reasonable question. They don't have to respond to those accusing them of cheating, but they should respect a reasonable question from a multitude of the sports fans.

No need to explain what isn't on the car, just explain how they managed to, in the space of one race , improve their car by 2.5 seconds per lap on the next closest car in the field.


Sent from my GT-I9500 using Tapatalk

[CookinFlat6]

The whole world has gone morally bankrupt, can't they see that Seb has the right foot of a God,

and the middle finger of an acne riddled teenager?

[Jabberwocky]

Fascinating that this argument is now in the main stream (non F1) media. Wired has put up a pretty well summarized article on the subject. They also noted something I'd not heard nor believe to be relevant, as a few hundred thousand dollars is peanuts to an F1 organization, but interesting footnote none the less.

Wired Traction Control Article According to new rules set out by the FIA, the winning team from the previous season has to pay more money to race in the new season. Because Red Bull took the constructors’ championship in 2012, it was required to pay the standard $500,000 entry price to race this year, plus $6,000 for each point it gained in the 2012 World Constructors’ Championship. The rest of the field only had to pay $5,000 for each point it scored in 2012.

Considering Vettel has a 77 point lead in the 2013 season — 272 points compared to Fernando Alonso’s 195 — having two cars, with two drivers racking up the wins could cost a mint. And then some. So with the season nearly clinched, there’s no reason point in incurring even more fees by adding another competitor in the mix.

So now Redbull are nobbling Webber so they do not have to pay so mich next year

Sent from my GT-N7100 using Tapatalk

[mnmracer]

Will you address the 15 laps along with the 32 seconds ......

That's a fair question and, personally, I'd like to read a response that addresses that question. It's interesting that since Minardi raised that fundamental question immediately Singapore, and given all the time since, there has not been one attempt by the team to provide a rational explanation.

"there's nothing illegal on the car"
I know it's not the explanation you like, but that doesn't make it any less rational.
Red Bull has better things to do than address every accusation someone somewhere makes. If any team thought Minardi had a reasonable case, they would have filed an official complaint. You'd think after the ridiculousness of 'yellow flag gate' in Brazil, it would be clear why they have better things to do.

I would have hoped that Red Bull would feel that the fans that make the sport for them to succeed in were worth an explanation and response to the reasonable question. They don't have to respond to those accusing them of cheating, but they should respect a reasonable question from a multitude of the sports fans.

But what do you consider a reasonable question?
Fans thought it was reasonable to question the oscilating tire marks from Mark Webber in Canada, where the technical journalists considered it so obviously a non-issue, it was a waste of time to address it.
Fans thought it was reasonable to question 5 times whether or not Vettel had undertaken under yellow, where the FIA considered it so obviously a non-issue, it was a waste of time to address it.
Fans still think it is reasonable to question how an on-top top driver in a top car was able to set a number of laps 2.5 times faster than an arguably slower driver in an arguably slower car with a factual handicap on his front wing. The teams that have the ability to question and complain about it, think it so obviously a non-issue, it is a waste of time to address it.

I'm sorry you think it is the biggest thing in the world, but those who matter in this case, think it is a waste of time.

No need to explain what isn't on the car, just explain how they managed to, in the space of one race , improve their car by 2.5 seconds per lap on the next closest car in the field.

So to please some fans, not even their fans, they should open up their book of tricks for all the competitors to steal.

[spankyham]

But what do you consider a reasonable question?

How did Red Bull, in the space of one race, improved by 2.5 seconds over the next best car?

but [b]those who matter in this case, think it is a waste of time

Agreed, Red Bull haven't offered any plausible reason.

So to please some fans, not even their fans, they should open up their book of tricks for all the competitors to steal.

Reasonable F1 fans of any persuasion deserve the respect of all teams, without the fans of all teams there would be no F1 glory or titles to win.
Red Bull don't have to give any secret away, they simply need to provide an explanation - no need for blueprints or diagrams.

[bud]

The thing is Redbull passed scrutineering at Singapore , that's all the explaining they need to do.

[Jabberwocky]

Look at Ferrari in Singapore. Alonso beat Massa by over 30 seconds. Massa would of been in clear air at the end as well.

How do we know that Alonso did not think "I can not catch him, I will take it easy on the car"

Sent from my GT-N7100 using Tapatalk

[spankyham]

The thing is Redbull passed scrutineering at Singapore , that's all the explaining they need to do.

That is all they are obliged to do, yes. However, it would have been a positive gesture to the fans and pundits who have asked the question in a reasonable way to put forward a response.

Look at Ferrari in Singapore. Alonso beat Massa by over 30 seconds. Massa would of been in clear air at the end as well. How do we know that Alonso did not think "I can not catch him, I will take it easy on the car"

Fernando is normally 2 or 3 tenths faster than Felipe. If Fernando was, in the space of one race, 2.8 seconds faster than Felipe I'd be asking the same question of Ferrari - but I'd be asking with a huge grin on my face.

I doubt that Nando would have given up, it was immediately after a SC and his position was he really had to finish ahead of Vettel to have any chance. Plus the fact that it was the same gap Seb was able to pull in the opening laps of the race - I doubt any of the front runners were giving up then

[mnmracer]

Why do you ignore the Brazil/Canada drama's in your reply?
These so-called 'fans' have made a mockery out of demanding answers to the most useless questions. Why would any reasonable team care about a collective group that overblow the smallest things, no matter how ridiculous? Even more so when members of that group are completely unwilling to accept any reasonable explanation. You do not once address why better car+better driver+better tires+handicapped front wing can not account for the 10 faster laps. If you are unwilling to accept or even address that, what would you accept from Red Bull other than a written confession that they are killing puppies and use their tears to boost the engine power?

[bud]

The thing is Redbull passed scrutineering at Singapore , that's all the explaining they need to do.

That is all they are obliged to do, yes. However, it would have been a positive gesture to the fans and pundits who have asked the question in a reasonable way to put forward a response.

But why should they? When every other dominant performance in F1 history hasn't had to.

[Hammer278]

The thing is Redbull passed scrutineering at Singapore , that's all the explaining they need to do.

That is all they are obliged to do, yes. However, it would have been a positive gesture to the fans and pundits who have asked the question in a reasonable way to put forward a response.

But why should they? When every other dominant performance in F1 history hasn't had to.

I'd agree with this...why should Redbull go the extra length just to look more 'sporting'. The impetus is to win, and as long as they're winning they are assured of selling a lot more drinks/merchandise out there. Bandwagon supporters are never of shortage.

[mnmracer]

The thing is Redbull passed scrutineering at Singapore , that's all the explaining they need to do.

That is all they are obliged to do, yes. However, it would have been a positive gesture to the fans and pundits who have asked the question in a reasonable way to put forward a response.

But why should they? When every other dominant performance in F1 history hasn't had to.

I'd agree with this...why should Redbull go the extra length just to look more 'sporting'. The impetus is to win, and as long as they're winning they are assured of selling a lot more drinks/merchandise out there. Bandwagon supporters are never of shortage.

'Bandwagon supporters' coming from a fan of a driver who was put straight in a championship worth car .
I'm sure his long struggle to the top, showing his merit at lower teams, overcoming great car deficiencies, is what made you a 'true' fan of Lewis right?