- Login or Register
No account yet? Sign up
Following lengthy investigations among the race stewards, Daniel Ricciardo has been disqualified from the Australian Grand Prix as the FIA's technical delegate found his RB10 using too much fuel during today's race.
Ferrari long run pace hasn't looked good in testing and practice.zeph wrote:If the car does not break, I think Alonso will be on the podium. Why would he not be? If he qualifies in the top 5 he is usually there.
No doubt Button would prefer to be on pole, but if you have noticed Buttons wet drives are usually stunningly "good" (or rather lucky) or stunningly bad... why? because of those gambles that he takes. 2010 Korea, 2011 GB, 2012 Malaysia and some others that escape me right nowmyurr wrote:Wrong. If you asked them if they'd like to switch places then I doubt Hamilton would agree and that Button would much rather be on pole.
You are right that when you have nothing to lose it allows you to gamble, but that's only a benefit if the gamble works. By definition a gamble has a high probability of not working. So whilst we all remember those stellar results where a gamble paid off massively there will be countless examples of gambles being taken that didn't work out or at best gave a neutral result.
It's not really his wet drives, it's more when conditions are changing from dry to wet or the other way round. Haven't yet seen Jenson showing a brilliant performance in a completely wet race, or have you?Powershift wrote:No doubt Button would prefer to be on pole, but if you have noticed Buttons wet drives are usually stunningly "good" (or rather lucky) or stunningly bad... why? because of those gambles that he takes. 2010 Korea, 2011 GB, 2012 Malaysia and some others that escape me right nowmyurr wrote:Wrong. If you asked them if they'd like to switch places then I doubt Hamilton would agree and that Button would much rather be on pole.
You are right that when you have nothing to lose it allows you to gamble, but that's only a benefit if the gamble works. By definition a gamble has a high probability of not working. So whilst we all remember those stellar results where a gamble paid off massively there will be countless examples of gambles being taken that didn't work out or at best gave a neutral result.
You may be right. But I'm still thinking that fuel consumption is somewhat of an unknown.ACJJ619 wrote:Ferrari long run pace hasn't looked good in testing and practice.zeph wrote:If the car does not break, I think Alonso will be on the podium. Why would he not be? If he qualifies in the top 5 he is usually there.
Of course it's only one qualifying session and any conclusion is far-fetched but one thing is plausible: maybe for the first time in his career Red Bull/Toro Rosso had 2 drivers in mind after Friday not only one. [applies to "then Webber sucks"]rifrafs2kees wrote:Not vettel's fan but I wouldn't think less of his championships than I do already if ricci beats him or turns out to be a heck of a challenge. I think there's something about his style that fit the exhaust blown era. Let's give him time and see. He's not done by any measure
I've never seen him drive brilliantly ever, wet dry or changing, he either lucks out or is lagging behind his teammate, he had some good drives in early 2009, but fell off badly at the end of the season. Even towards the end of last year I feel Sergio had the measure of him.Helios wrote:It's not really his wet drives, it's more when conditions are changing from dry to wet or the other way round. Haven't yet seen Jenson showing a brilliant performance in a completely wet race, or have you?
Bottas beat Maldonado 12:7 in 2013iotar__ wrote:- Williams ... miss Maldonado in nailing qualifying department
Friday times showed a pretty good picture already. Merc >> RBR > Ferrari/Williams/McLaren > others.Diesel wrote:Damn, I was hoping for a fairly standard qualifying to get an idea of the true pecking order, bloody rain! Not really many conclusions can be drawn from that session, other than Mercedes are fast, and Lotus are slow.
Only where others have struggled to make the tyres last.Helios wrote:It's not really his wet drives, it's more when conditions are changing from dry to wet or the other way round. Haven't yet seen Jenson showing a brilliant performance in a completely wet race, or have you?
Uhm... engine mode power... - right... Made up excuse, look at his body language, usually when you're lying you look into upper left corner as if contemplating the answer, scientifically provenJuzh wrote:[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_hOrHUbjB9g[/youtube]
.