Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

2009 Formula One Thread

CWallace said:
I still firmly believe he put Rubens on a three-stop strategy to ensure Button would win. Not out of nationalism or favoritism, but because he knows who is the stronger driver and with Button only getting half-points in Malaysia, they need to make sure he maximizes points because the RBR look(ed) like a threat.

If Malaysia had been full points, I think he could have afforded to let Rubens win. But with the last two championships decided by one point, two points were too much to risk at that stage of the game.
Click to expand...

I don't think he was put on a 3 stop - he started with the same amount of fuel as Webber.

One of the problems Rubens (and Vettel) have at the moment is their tyre wear. IMHO one of the factors behind Button's success has been his ability to manage the option - I think Barrichello's problems in this department have caused Brawn to worry about this and thus have given themselves the option to change him to a 3 stop if necessary. Rubens also seems to prefer running on a lower fuel load.
 
Well I read comments yesterday that Vettle's plan was always for a 3 stop strategy. Don't know if they were changing their tune after the race or not. His 2nd pit stop did seem sudden due to his inability to pass Button.

Meanwhile, looks like the drama is heating up:

It's all or nothing for the Formula One Teams Association. The body representing the majority of the teams is still in the process of negotiating with the FIA over the proposed drastic budget cuts, but insists that the FIA has to take all of them or none of them. If Max Mosley's budget cuts are imposed as planned, Ferrari, McLaren, BMW, Renault, Toyota, Red Bull and Toro Rosso say they will all pick up and leave, and take with them many of the sport's best drivers. Two-time World Champion Fernando Alonso and reigning World Champion Lewis Hamilton, along with Felipe Massa, Nick Heidfeld, Mark Webber and Jarno Trulli have all pledged to follow their teams out from under the FIA's purview. But where will they all go? To a new break-away series.

The teams have threatened to leave the FIA Formula One World Championship before, but this time, things are getting serious. According to the latest reports, FOTA has already begun negotiations with Dorna Sports in anticipation of Mosley's rejection of their counter-proposal. The chief executive of Dorna, the company that runs F1's two-wheeled counterpart MotoGP, has reportedly agreed to run the new series for the break-away F1 teams. A few years ago, Dorna managed to wrestle the rule-making authority away from the Federation Internationale de Motocyclisme – the FIA's motorcycling equivalent – and place it in the hands of the manufacturers. That's just what FOTA is looking for, and if Mosley sticks to his guns, it could be exactly what they'll get.
Click to expand...
 
Superman07 said:
Well I read comments yesterday that Vettle's plan was always for a 3 stop strategy. Don't know if they were changing their tune after the race or not. His 2nd pit stop did seem sudden due to his inability to pass Button.

Meanwhile, looks like the drama is heating up:
Click to expand...

Sorry about the confusion – I meant that Rubens was on a 2 stop. Autosport claim that Vettel was always on a 3 stop to try and force a mistake from Button.

BTW – peace appears to have broken out. It seems we'll have a resolution soon, with a "halfway house" reached somewhere along the lines.
 
Vettel was always on a 3 stopper. The only reason I can think of this was that Vettel couldn't run the softs for more than 15 laps or so. Now, why didn't they put him on the softs at the start? Get ahead of JB at the start and pull away a big gap then hold onto the softs for the last 5 laps of the stint and then do 3 runs on brand new hards and run until the end?

I think it comes back to the point of just how good JB is on the softs. He could run them for 30 laps if he had to. His driving style is just so smooth it works perfectly, I don't think any other driver can do that. In my opinion, that is why he is doing so well this year.

EDIT: sorry MOFS, just seen you made the exact same point as me at the top of this page, great minds think alike eh!
 
actual in german tv it sounded a little bti different when vettel was interviewed right after the race where he said that he went into the pit expecting a change to a 2 pit strategy, as it would have been more logical, which he only realized after the first corners with the car handling very light

he also talked about "looking forward to get to know _who_ made that decision "
 
takao said:
actual in german tv it sounded a little bti different when vettel was interviewed right after the race where he said that he went into the pit expecting a change to a 2 pit strategy, as it would have been more logical, which he only realized after the first corners with the car handling very light

he also talked about "looking forward to get to know _who_ made that decision "
Click to expand...

That's what he said to the BBC too, and Martin Brundle thought they should've changed to a 2 stop too. Vettel was even bizarrely going for the fastest lap in the later stages according to Christian Horner/ Autosport. All very strange.
 
i still don't get how Williams and force India were thrown out. let alone why did those two teams submit there entries without the other teams.

i don't know who is in fota but wouldn't those two teams be in there too?


ya im missing something here.
 
benlangdon said:
i still don't get how Williams and force India were thrown out. let alone why did those two teams submit there entries without the other teams.
Click to expand...

Williams has contract agreements with sponsors to be in F1 in 2010. If they had not filed their application, they might have been found in violation of those agreements and the sponsors possibly could have walked. Considering how some of those sponsors (RBS, for example) are looking financially, they may want to leave F1, but it's cheaper for them to stay and complete their terms then break those agreements early. So Williams may have had to file or risk losing those sponsors and ending up not being able to compete in 2010 due to lack of money.

As for Force India, the owner seems to be the largest sponsor, so it may be the case that they worried that considering their performance (while much better in 2009, they still are the worst-performing team on the grid), they might have feared they would not get a spot if they held out with FOTA. But I admit that is pure conjecture on my part.
 
CWallace said:
Williams has contract agreements with sponsors to be in F1 in 2010. If they had not filed their application, they might have been found in violation of those agreements and the sponsors possibly could have walked. Considering how some of those sponsors (RBS, for example) are looking financially, they may want to leave F1, but it's cheaper for them to stay and complete their terms then break those agreements early. So Williams may have had to file or risk losing those sponsors and ending up not being able to compete in 2010 due to lack of money.

As for Force India, the owner seems to be the largest sponsor, so it may be the case that they worried that considering their performance (while much better in 2009, they still are the worst-performing team on the grid), they might have feared they would not get a spot if they held out with FOTA. But I admit that is pure conjecture on my part.
Click to expand...

The reason why they've been thrown out is apparently they signed a deal with FOTA that would prevent them entering as a single entity (ie not with FOTA). By entering on their own, they've broken this deal and thus been thrown out of FOTA. There is apparently a further $50million fine should a FOTA manufacturer team "go solo" – presumably to stop Ferrari.
 
MOFS said:
The reason why they've been thrown out is apparently they signed a deal with FOTA that would prevent them entering as a single entity (ie not with FOTA). By entering on their own, they've broken this deal and thus been thrown out of FOTA. There is apparently a further $50million fine should a FOTA manufacturer team "go solo" – presumably to stop Ferrari.
Click to expand...

CWallace said:
Williams has contract agreements with sponsors to be in F1 in 2010. If they had not filed their application, they might have been found in violation of those agreements and the sponsors possibly could have walked. Considering how some of those sponsors (RBS, for example) are looking financially, they may want to leave F1, but it's cheaper for them to stay and complete their terms then break those agreements early. So Williams may have had to file or risk losing those sponsors and ending up not being able to compete in 2010 due to lack of money.

As for Force India, the owner seems to be the largest sponsor, so it may be the case that they worried that considering their performance (while much better in 2009, they still are the worst-performing team on the grid), they might have feared they would not get a spot if they held out with FOTA. But I admit that is pure conjecture on my part.
Click to expand...



ahhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh, now i get it. nice, thanks.
 
Yes, Williams had stated they were contractually obligated to enter 2010 and FOTA understood this. That was a few weeks ago so I understood there were "no hard feelings". I don't know what the reasoning was behind FI entering.

Meanwhile, I'm kind of excited by the idea of this split. Imagine F1 coming back to the Indy (or elsewhere in the US) and Montreal in the same year and having fans flock there due to cheaper ticket sales showing Bernnie and Max that they were wrong. Okay, not likely but a nice thought.
 
Looks like Renault is taking the fight to Bernnie's doorstep too.

http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/76004

Speaking to France's National Assembly on Wednesday, Ghosn was in feisty mood as he urged F1 supremo Bernie Ecclestone and owners CVC to reform the payment structure.

"We are the ones doing the show, who bring in the technology, who bring in the engines, who hire the drivers. And if we do the show, the revenues of Formula 1 must come back to us," he was quoted as saying by news agency AFP.
Click to expand...
 
Superman07 said:
Yes, Williams had stated they were contractually obligated to enter 2010 and FOTA understood this. That was a few weeks ago so I understood there were "no hard feelings". I don't know what the reasoning was behind FI entering.

Meanwhile, I'm kind of excited by the idea of this split. Imagine F1 coming back to the Indy (or elsewhere in the US) and Montreal in the same year and having fans flock there due to cheaper ticket sales showing Bernnie and Max that they were wrong. Okay, not likely but a nice thought.
Click to expand...


haha, that's what i was thinking too. There would be plenty of "classic" circuits that have been excluded by bernie that would be happy to have back the rebel AutoGP formula.
And i can only imagine how pissed the Dubai/Behrein people would be if they get GP2 teams instead of Ferrari/McLaren/Renault etc..
 
Don't panic said:
haha, that's what i was thinking too. There would be plenty of "classic" circuits that have been excluded by bernie that would be happy to have back the rebel AutoGP formula.
And i can only imagine how pissed the Dubai/Behrein people would be if they get GP2 teams instead of Ferrari/McLaren/Renault etc..
Click to expand...

I'm just not convinced a split would work, or indeed happen. Indy's split allowed NASCAR to forge ahead, leaving us all scratching our heads for top drawer American open-wheel drivers. New tracks? No Monaco. No BBC coverage – 400000 viewers on Sky anyone? You'd have to convince a lot of broadcasters that this new series is gonna attract a lot of viewers with just 6 teams guaranteed. And I can't see Mclaren listening to Ferrari's rules for too long.
 
MOFS said:
No BBC coverage – 400000 viewers on Sky anyone? You'd have to convince a lot of broadcasters that this new series is gonna attract a lot of viewers with just 6 teams guaranteed.
Click to expand...

As I always say at this sort of point: how many people watch A1GP on TV?
 
MOFS said:
I'm just not convinced a split would work, or indeed happen. Indy's split allowed NASCAR to forge ahead, leaving us all scratching our heads for top drawer American open-wheel drivers. New tracks? No Monaco. No BBC coverage – 400000 viewers on Sky anyone? You'd have to convince a lot of broadcasters that this new series is gonna attract a lot of viewers with just 6 teams guaranteed. And I can't see Mclaren listening to Ferrari's rules for too long.
Click to expand...

i don't think it will happen, but i think it would work if it was to happen.

I think it would have more appeal than the devalued 'F1' of max and bernie without the best teams, so i think TV station would carry it.
I know which one i'd watch if given the alternative. and i would make sure i'd write to SpeedTV letting them know my preference.

robbieduncan said:
As I always say at this sort of point: how many people watch A1GP on TV?
Click to expand...
but the questions is: which of the series would become the one the watch, and which one the 'new A1GP'. My guess is that fans would stick with their teams, not with inferior cars from unknown teams only because they call themselves F1.
 
Don't panic said:
i don't think it will happen, but i think it would work if it was to happen.

I think it would have more appeal than the devalued 'F1' of max and bernie without the best teams, so i think TV station would carry it.
I know which one i'd watch if given the alternative. and i would make sure i'd write to SpeedTV letting them know my preference.

but the questions is: which of the series would become the one the watch, and which one the 'new A1GP'. My guess is that fans would stick with their teams, not with inferior cars from unknown teams only because they call themselves F1.
Click to expand...

The problem with the split is that it would be done for the wrong reasons in the wrong way. MotoGP teams cost approximately £40 million to run per year and were cheaper to run, which is why they can attract more teams. Considering the crux of this argument is the budget cap (IMHO, Ferrari's unwillingness to consider a budget is fuelling this palava entirely), I can only see Mclaren, Ferrari and Brawn definitely being in a breakaway next year. Renault, BMW and Toyota are looking to reduce costs, and starting a new series is not the way. Red Bull/STR are essentially a marketing engine, so the negative publicity regarding a breakaway series could well be unsustainable.

This split, as I mentioned before, is now entirely about Ferrari wanting to make sure they can win every season, now that the "two-tier system" idea has gone. By ensuring a lack of a budget cap, they can pile money into the team to get up to speed with the leaders. With a budget cap, the season would be more open (more teams would be spending approximately the same), and thus Ferrari would no longer be guaranteed to be near the top. The people at the team matter more than the money in it – it's a resource management sport then. Brawn is very good at that, and Christian Horner and Adrian Newey too. Ferrari this year have been rudderless, and reducing the sizeable advantage that their budget brings would exacerbate the problem.
 
I'll be amazed if this is truely smoothed over and not just a band-aid only to come up next year.

Team announced by the FIA. * means conditional.

Scuderia Ferrari Marlboro Ferrari
Scuderia Toro Rosso STR TBA
Red Bull Racing Red Bull Racing TTBA
At&T Williams Williams Toyota
Force India F1 Team Force India Mercedes
Campos Grand Prix Campos Cosworth
Manor Grand Prix Manor Cosworth
Team US F1 Team US F1 Cosworth
Vodafone McLaren Mercedes* McLaren Mercedes
BMW Sauber F1 Team* BMW Sauber
Renault F1 Team* Renault
Panasonic Toyota Racing* Toyota
Brawn GP Formula One Team* Brawn TBA
 
robbieduncan said:
how many people watch A1GP on TV?
Click to expand...
Nope. Switched our Sky package to watch the first race. One month later, switch out sky package back. It was a circus. The cars looked dreadful at speed, the country/team/driver combo was inconsistent, some of the talent was..er.. 'lacking'.

No interest at all.

GP2, on the other hand, I enjoy watching. Pity I can't watch it this year as it's with Setanta.
 
djellison said:
Nope. Switched our Sky package to watch the first race. One month later, switch out sky package back. It was a circus. The cars looked dreadful at speed, the country/team/driver combo was inconsistent, some of the talent was..er.. 'lacking'.

No interest at all.

GP2, on the other hand, I enjoy watching. Pity I can't watch it this year as it's with Setanta.
Click to expand...

The new "Powered by Ferrari" cars are actually quite good (basically F2004 F1 cars with 600bhp F360 V8s in them). I've never seen it on TV, only live. I don't have Sky through choice so I can't watch it. And that's the problem for non-F1 motorsport. Getting viewers.
 
robbieduncan said:
The new "Powered by Ferrari" cars are actually quite good (basically F2004 F1 cars with 600bhp F360 V8s in them). I've never seen it on TV, only live. I don't have Sky through choice so I can't watch it. And that's the problem for non-F1 motorsport. Getting viewers.
Click to expand...


Only watched the Brands races incase I spotted you on the telly...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back