F1Rejects.com

by **CarlosFerreira** » 13 Mar 2010, 03:32

Warren Hughes wrote:Jaime Alguersuari has genuine potential.

So does Buemi.

by **JeanDenisAlcatraz** » 13 Mar 2010, 03:54

Don't know if it's already been stated, but both Timo Glock and Adrian Sutil could be world champions in the right car.

by **Klon** » 13 Mar 2010, 04:15

The 107 % rule is, even with the new slower teams, absolute BS and who ever brought up introducing it again should forever be banned from having anything at all to do with motorsport *exaggeration*

by **ADx_Wales** » 13 Mar 2010, 04:15

Stalling the rear wing? how bout Stalling the engines for a change!!!

by **Cynon** » 13 Mar 2010, 09:20

Klon wrote:The 107 % rule is, even with the new slower teams, absolute BS and who ever brought up introducing it again should forever be banned from having anything at all to do with motorsport *exaggeration*

I wouldn't could that as an exaggeration. Jean Todt puts F1 into disrepute.

Vitaly Petrov and Nico Hulkenberg are two of the most underestimated drivers in years.

by **FullMetalJack** » 13 Mar 2010, 10:13

CarlosFerreira wrote:
Warren Hughes wrote:Jaime Alguersuari has genuine potential.

So does Buemi.

Buemi having potential isn't unpopular, lots of people believe that.

by **Jordan** » 13 Mar 2010, 13:26

If Chandhok got a superlicense, so should have Sebastien Loeb

by **thehemogoblin** » 13 Mar 2010, 13:51

Jordan wrote:If Chandhok got a superlicense, so should have Sebastien Loeb

Chandhok won two races in GP2. I think he's pretty qualified.

by **watka** » 13 Mar 2010, 20:49

JeanDenisAlcatraz wrote:Don't know if it's already been stated, but both Timo Glock and Adrian Sutil could be world champions in the right car.

Hells yes. I think that last season proved that most people could be world champion in the right car (other than Kazuki Nakajima).

by **dr-baker** » 14 Mar 2010, 00:59

watka wrote:
JeanDenisAlcatraz wrote:Don't know if it's already been stated, but both Timo Glock and Adrian Sutil could be world champions in the right car.

Hells yes. I think that 1997 proved that most people could be world champion in the right car (other than Kazuki Nakajima).

Fixed.

by **JeanDenisAlcatraz** » 14 Mar 2010, 01:47

dr-baker wrote:
watka wrote:
JeanDenisAlcatraz wrote:Don't know if it's already been stated, but both Timo Glock and Adrian Sutil could be world champions in the right car.

Hells yes. I think that 1997 proved that most people could be world champion in the right car (other than Kazuki Nakajima).

Fixed.

Nonetheless, I rate both Glock and Sutil highly.

by **IdeFan** » 14 Mar 2010, 06:24

dr-baker wrote:
watka wrote:
JeanDenisAlcatraz wrote:Don't know if it's already been stated, but both Timo Glock and Adrian Sutil could be world champions in the right car.

Hells yes. I think that 1997 proved that most people could be world champion in the right car (other than Heinz-Harald Frentzen).

Fixed.

Double fized!

by **FloProAct** » 14 Mar 2010, 08:09

IdeFan wrote:
dr-baker wrote:
watka wrote:
Hells yes. I think that 1997 proved that most people could be world champion in the right car (other than Heinz-Harald Frentzen).

Fixed.

Double fized!

Whereas 1999 proved he could get far closer in the wrong one!

by **coops** » 15 Mar 2010, 17:44

Bahrain was an anti-climax and the current rules and regulations could lead to a dull season and Prost, with his FIA money in his back pocket, can claim as much as he wants that things will get better but its not looking promising.

by **CarlosFerreira** » 15 Mar 2010, 19:01

Breandan Hartley looks like a girl. So does Nico Rosberg, and so did nick Heidfeld - even when he had a beard.

by **FullMetalJack** » 16 Mar 2010, 09:18

David Coulthard was good enough to be World Champion back in his prime.

by **Stramala** » 16 Mar 2010, 09:27

redbulljack14 wrote:David Coulthard was good enough to be World Champion back in his prime.

When was his prime then? 'Cause I thought his 'prime' was during the late 90s, when he had the best car in the field, hence rendering your statement false :lol:

But under different circumstances I'd agree anyway.

by **ADx_Wales** » 16 Mar 2010, 10:02

Brendan Hartley hangs around outside the Red Bull garage looking like he's just asked someone to go in there to buy some alcohol for him.

by **coops** » 17 Mar 2010, 05:14

Gah! If only the FIA had introduced Bernies Medal System then the Bahrain GP would have been ten times more exciting with a tonne of over taking and attempts to win!!!

by **Cynon** » 18 Mar 2010, 05:05

F1 would be more exciting if it included four oval races.

by **coops** » 18 Mar 2010, 05:19

Cynon wrote:F1 would be more exciting if it included four oval races.

I'D VOTE FOR THAT!

And Rockingham is a great circuit. And using Rockingham would end the annual "SAVE SILVERSTONE, NO, NO LETS USE BRANDS HATCH" nonsense that I personally get bored of.

by **Stramala** » 18 Mar 2010, 05:37

Rockingham, Eurospeedway Lausitz, Indy, (a resurfaced) Daytona. Simples

by **dr-baker** » 18 Mar 2010, 06:17

Rockingham, Eurospeedway Lausitz, Indy, Martinsville! (I love this track on NASCAR console games!)

by **Stramala** » 18 Mar 2010, 06:35

dr-baker wrote:Martinsville! (I love this track on NASCAR console games!)

Prepare for broken nosecones and strained necks! (Turning left 400 times is going to cause some serious problems considering the G-force they can pull round the turns compared to NASCAR).

by **thehemogoblin** » 18 Mar 2010, 06:42

Cynon wrote:F1 would be more exciting if it included four oval races.

Spoken like a true American. I agree wholeheartedly.

by **dr-baker** » 18 Mar 2010, 07:08

kostas22 wrote:
dr-baker wrote:Martinsville! (I love this track on NASCAR console games!)

Prepare for broken nosecones and strained necks! (Turning left 400 times is going to cause some serious problems considering the G-force they can pull round the turns compared to NASCAR).

That will prevent a repeat of Bahrain...

by **Phoenix** » 18 Mar 2010, 07:46

Grounds effects should be taken back to F1 (it's more of a controversial point than an unpopular one).

by **P_Friesacher** » 18 Mar 2010, 08:00

Formula one needs the return of steel brakes to replce the carbon composite ones currently in use.

by **Cynon** » 18 Mar 2010, 09:57

Lausitzring, Rockingham UK, Darlington, and Martinsville on the F1 calendar. What do you say to that?

Formula 1 needs to go to Algarve and needs to go to Russia, Bulgaria, and India.

F1 needs the United States GP more than the United States needs F1.

by **RAK** » 18 Mar 2010, 20:51

Cynon wrote:Formula 1 needs to go to Algarve and needs to go to Russia, Bulgaria, and India.

It's already going to India. The proposed track sucks harder than a supercharged Vax.

by **dr-baker** » 19 Mar 2010, 02:10

As well as going to Eurospeedway Lausitz, Rockingham UK, Indy and Martinsville, F1 also needs the Manx TT track and to visit the Vatican City State. After all we have Monaco and the Hungaroring...

by **coops** » 19 Mar 2010, 02:55

kostas22 wrote:Prepare for broken nosecones and strained necks! (Turning left 400 times is going to cause some serious problems considering the G-force they can pull round the turns compared to NASCAR).

Well? Do they want to get paid or not? T'other week I sprained by shoulder chopping a tree down. No-one cared about me!

by **dr-baker** » 19 Mar 2010, 03:23

coops wrote:
kostas22 wrote:Prepare for broken nosecones and strained necks! (Turning left 400 times is going to cause some serious problems considering the G-force they can pull round the turns compared to NASCAR).

Well? Do they want to get paid or not?

Well, initially I only suggested Martinsville because I was good at it in games - and it was short. But with this much popularity, somebody should get onto Bernie straightaway! At least there shouldn't be any shortage of pit lane space, considering as how they're used to 43-car fields... And it'll sort out who's good at getting past other cars as everybody will be quickly having to either lap or get lapped by others. And imagine all that dirty turbulent air around the whole track all the time!!!

And at least it would beat going to another Mickey Mouse track, the likes of which we've seen too many of recently:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Walt_Disney_World_Speedway

by **coops** » 19 Mar 2010, 05:08

dr-baker wrote:
coops wrote:
kostas22 wrote:Prepare for broken nosecones and strained necks! (Turning left 400 times is going to cause some serious problems considering the G-force they can pull round the turns compared to NASCAR).

Well? Do they want to get paid or not?

Well, initially I only suggested Martinsville because I was good at it in games - and it was short. But with this much popularity, somebody should get onto Bernie straightaway!

I've always believed the Ovals or Superspeedways (Is there a difference?) should be introduced to the F1 calendar as they are a discipline in themselves, unique as it were. And I recall and interview with DC who thought the same as me.

by **Stramala** » 19 Mar 2010, 05:15

coops wrote:
dr-baker wrote:Well, initially I only suggested Martinsville because I was good at it in games - and it was short. But with this much popularity, somebody should get onto Bernie straightaway!

I've always believed the Ovals or Superspeedways (Is there a difference?) should be introduced to the F1 calendar as they are a discipline in themselves, unique as it were. And I recall and interview with DC who thought the same as me.

There is one problem the FIA wouldn't like however - cost.

Millions would be spent developing what would basically be a B-spec car especially for the ovals to achieve much lower levels of drag.

by **thehemogoblin** » 19 Mar 2010, 05:33

coops wrote:
dr-baker wrote:
coops wrote:Well? Do they want to get paid or not?

Well, initially I only suggested Martinsville because I was good at it in games - and it was short. But with this much popularity, somebody should get onto Bernie straightaway!

I've always believed the Ovals or Superspeedways (Is there a difference?) should be introduced to the F1 calendar as they are a discipline in themselves, unique as it were. And I recall and interview with DC who thought the same as me.

A superspeedway is generally over two miles in length. The only two currently on the schedule are Talladega and Daytona.

by **coops** » 19 Mar 2010, 05:48

kostas22 wrote:Millions would be spent developing what would basically be a B-spec car especially for the ovals to achieve much lower levels of drag.

Thats quite true but if it worked they'd be happy with the points it earned them. Despite what some F1 team leaders say in public I'm sure they're happy to spend whatever it takes to get points.

by **Phoenix** » 19 Mar 2010, 07:34

kostas22 wrote:Millions would be spent developing what would basically be a B-spec car especially for the ovals to achieve much lower levels of drag.

Why not introduce a rule that makes teams have to run on ovals with the standard car then?

by **Klon** » 19 Mar 2010, 08:34

dr-baker wrote:And at least it would beat going to another Mickey Mouse track, the likes of which we've seen too many of recently:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Walt_Disney_World_Speedway

Argh! I really hope HWNSNBM does PUNish you!

by **Stramala** » 19 Mar 2010, 08:40

Phoenix wrote:
kostas22 wrote:Millions would be spent developing what would basically be a B-spec car especially for the ovals to achieve much lower levels of drag.

Why not introduce a rule that makes teams have to run on ovals with the standard car then?

Easier said than done. The only way I'd see that working without it being exploited is a blanket ban on modifications throughout the season. And we don't want that, it means whoever wins the first race will automatically win the titie.

F1Rejects.com

Who is online