Formula 1 Grand Prix du Canada 2017

codename_47 · PostPosted: Thu Jun 15, 2017 7:42 pm

All good jokes, but then don't forget 2005 happened so don't put it past the FIA to suggest such stupid things.

kals · PostPosted: Thu Jun 15, 2017 9:30 pm

2005 wasn't stupid. It worked well, apart from Melbourne. What stopped the 2005 rules continuing on was Bridgestone bitching about not having a competitive advantage over Michelin.

codename_47 · PostPosted: Thu Jun 15, 2017 9:56 pm

Actually I agree, even though at the time I remember reading the FIA were considering a toss up between banning refueling and banning tyre changes and still think they went the wrong way.

But it did bring tyre life back into play in an era that completely scrubbed it (one of the main reasons why 1994-2008 wasn't stellar from an overtaking point of view)

Monaco was amazing that year because of it. Quite a few other races got more interesting as the race went on too, as opposed to the usual situation in the refueling era as racing to the last pit stop then everyone backing off and conserving (lol...100% flat out driving in this era? Bollocks!

) until the finish.

LucasWheldon · PostPosted: Fri Jun 16, 2017 6:58 pm

the best thing about 2005 they could bring back (alongside with V10) is the qualifying

codename_47 · PostPosted: Sat Jun 17, 2017 12:45 am

That's around the time I stopped watching Qualifying because of the boredom

Single lap qualifying is only exciting at the Indy 500

SBan83 · PostPosted: Sat Jun 17, 2017 3:04 am

I liked it during the first season of soft tyres when they were having to manage the tyre wear themselves but once the teams got it scienced out and started running the drivers to deltas, it was rather procedural and that's what the drivers hated, I think.

iks · PostPosted: Sat Jun 17, 2017 3:06 am

SB83 wrote:

I liked it during the first season when they were having to manage the tyre wear themselves but once the teams got it scienced out and started running the drivers to deltas, it was rather procedural and that's what the drivers hated, I think.

2003 was a great season. Not saying it was the best ever but it was great.

mclaren2008 · PostPosted: Sat Jun 17, 2017 3:31 am

2003 was a nice season after the total snoozefest the previous year. Montoya had the fastest car over the whole year but it was unreliable.

iks · PostPosted: Sat Jun 17, 2017 3:40 am

mclaren2008 wrote:

2003 was a nice season after the total snoozefest the previous year. Montoya had the fastest car over the whole year but it was unreliable.

The Mclaren wasn't very reliable either. Nurburgring and Kimi is the best example. Leading dominantly only to retire with a smoking engine.

Soul Reaver · PostPosted: Sat Jun 17, 2017 6:13 am

And Fia helping Ferrari

Fabs · PostPosted: Sat Jun 17, 2017 10:23 am

iks wrote:

mclaren2008 wrote:

2003 was a nice season after the total snoozefest the previous year. Montoya had the fastest car over the whole year but it was unreliable.

The Mclaren wasn't very reliable either. Nurburgring and Kimi is the best example. Leading dominantly only to retire with a smoking engine.

Kimi hardly had any issues afaik. His car just wasn't really quick. He finished 2nd a lot.

mclaren2008 · PostPosted: Sat Jun 17, 2017 10:32 am

7 second places

LucasWheldon · PostPosted: Sat Jun 17, 2017 2:44 pm

if they didn't gave the victory rightly to Fisichella Kimi would have been the youngest champion at the time

codename_47 · PostPosted: Sun Jun 18, 2017 1:23 pm

Soul Reaver wrote:

And Fia helping Ferrari

Definitely.

2003 was good until "Must you keep laughing" tyre loophole B.S. that handed the championship to Ferrari.

Ferrari probably pulled every trick they knew, including "you pushed through changes to hobble us to make the championship more exciting, now do this to give us the championship we rightly deserved.

iks · PostPosted: Sun Jun 18, 2017 6:53 pm

codename_47 wrote:

Soul Reaver wrote:

And Fia helping Ferrari

Definitely.

2003 was good until "Must you keep laughing" tyre loophole B.S. that handed the championship to Ferrari.

Ferrari probably pulled every trick they knew, including "you pushed through changes to hobble us to make the championship more exciting, now do this to give us the championship we rightly deserved.

And that was the relatively tasty meat in the middle of the farce sandwich that was book-ended by the stale bread of 2002 and 2004. It was boring back then but looking back now it is interesting to compare that to Red Bull's and Mercedes' more recent domination.

codename_47 · PostPosted: Sun Jun 18, 2017 10:42 pm

iks wrote:

codename_47 wrote:

Soul Reaver wrote:

And Fia helping Ferrari

Definitely.

2003 was good until "Must you keep laughing" tyre loophole B.S. that handed the championship to Ferrari.

Ferrari probably pulled every trick they knew, including "you pushed through changes to hobble us to make the championship more exciting, now do this to give us the championship we rightly deserved.

And that was the relatively tasty meat in the middle of the farce sandwich that was book-ended by the stale bread of 2002 and 2004. It was boring back then but looking back now it is interesting to compare that to Red Bull's and Mercedes' more recent domination.

It was definitely worse back then.

Ferrari was a 1 car team and it wasn't as if 3rd on back was a massive scrap either, the aero and refueling rules kept everyone at least 2 seconds from each other.

Red Bull domination featured some great racing for 2nd (Webber usually choked the start so it was rare they pulled a 1-2 except for Multi-21)
Merc domination featured them racing each other pretty hard and the rest of the field fighting too

webbsy · PostPosted: Sun Jun 18, 2017 11:24 pm

Oh yes, you can't even compare the Ferrari domination to the Red Bull and Merc years. At least with Red Bull and Merc you got the feeling that either driver could win, but Ferrari was all about Schumi. Hence you got one of the most farcical scenes in F1 in my opinion. Austria 02. And not forgetting the bitch slap to F1 fans that was a few races later in Indy.

The Ferrari dominance was just plain boring. 2002 and 2004 were arguably the worst seasons in F1 history in my opinion. One or two battles aside, the racing sucked.

Mika Kimi · PostPosted: Mon Jun 19, 2017 7:37 am

LucasWheldon wrote:

if they didn't gave the victory rightly to Fisichella Kimi would have been the youngest champion at the time

Not quite, Schumacher and Raikkonen would have been equal on points but Schumacher would have won the championship because he had more victories.

mclaren2008 · PostPosted: Mon Jun 19, 2017 8:07 am

Nurburgring cost Kimi the championship, not Brazil. Fisichella passed him on merit.

kals · PostPosted: Mon Jun 19, 2017 1:32 pm

mclaren2008 wrote:

Nurburgring cost Kimi the championship, not Brazil. Fisichella passed him on merit.

No, just no. One race didn't cost Kimi the title, it was lost over the entire season. Kimi had a great season in 2003 and did so thanks to consistency. But his aged McLaren and he were far from the fastest package out there. Assuming that the rest of the season would have acted out as it had if Kimi had won Nurburgring is nonsense. That's not how things works.

TBK-Light.com

Formula 1 Grand Prix du Canada 2017

Who is online