#F1 Race Review: 2016 FORMULA 1 PIRELLI CHINESE GRAND PRIX

RaceReview
Brought to you by TheJudge13 contributor Mattpt55

Ambient 21° Track 45° Humidity 36% Wind 6.1 m/s

Prelude

Apparently a gearbox wasn’t enough for Lewis as it was a brand new Power Unit that was required to solve his woes. Add Rosberg’s ignition issues and almost dead brakes in Bahrain and perhaps it’s time to wonder whether staying one step ahead of the competition is starting to extract a toll in terms of reliability. Red Bull on the front row, Hamilton on the back and wonky ass tyre strategery plus Bottas P5 and theoretically the ingredients for a quite interesting race had been assembled. Oh, did I mention the track was much hotter than the previous 2 days? Well, I definitely should have as it could precipitously change the tyre strategy.

Summary

Well well well, sat here in the wee small hours of the morning with the remnants of a glass of whisky and the things we don’t know loom almost as large as the things we do.

It seemed like a perfect set up, Ricciardo ahead of Rosberg at the start and both Ferrari’s in hot pursuit, Lewis launching a stonking drive from the back to the podium and then it all went so wrong as Kvyat launched a move that ricocheted Vettel into Raikkonen, wiping out Vettel’s front wing and Kimi’s race.

And as the living embodiment of if it weren’t for bad luck he’d have no luck at all (except for y’know all the money and lifestyle and stuff) Lewis, way way way at the back got collected by Nasr who was busy avoiding Raikkonen wandering aimlessly back onto track after his being punted by Vettel. The net result of that was Hamilton’s front wing went skating up under the car for almost the entirety of the first lap and forcing him to pit, ending his race before it had really begun.

It still wasn’t over, though, for despite the fratricide at Ferrari, Daniel Ricciardo actually led the race and thus held out hope that for the first time it might be possible to see Mercedes properly tested. At least until the third lap, when with the assistance of DRS Rosberg blistered past the Aussie who suddenly seemed defenseless as a kitten with an unfortunate haircut.

Or possibly a puncture, which turned out to be the case as his left rear tyre failed spectacularly down the back straight, forcing him to pit and setting him up for a stellar recovery drive, but one that would see him still shy of a podium and Rosberg doing Etch a Sketch on his steering while to pass the time till he won the race.

The failure of Ricciardo’s tyre prompted the stewards to do something about all the debris on track by calling out the safety car, which led to all sorts of shenanigans, including the overtake of the race, Vettel up the inside passing 3 cars between safety car lines, all the while blaming Kvyat for an incident that the stewards didn’t even deign to investigate

The entertainments continued as Lewis was called in 3 times under the Safety Car, Soft, SuperSoft, Soft, to avoid having to pit to satisfy the regs later on, basically a free pit stop under the Safety Car. Of course, as it turned out, the damage to Lewis’ car was such that no amount of cleverness would make up for the lost aero, and in the end trying to run him long on anything was a fool’s errand.

AS the folks on the quali tyre all beat themselves about the head and shoulders for not knowing the rules as well as Vettel whilst they pitted, those further back moved up fairly rapidly, including Wehrlein in a remarkable P4 for a bit. Once the Safety car was lifted though, it was time for some completely mental racing, proving the one thing we do know, that good racing comes when it’s ready, and changing regs every 2 weeks to artificially help that may not be the best long term strategy for the sport.

As previously mentioned, said racing had nothing to do with the actual race winner, who was basically done 3 laps after the Safety Car came in as Massa dropped off Nico’s pace like a stone.
Hamilton fanned the flames of Mercedes being terrible in traffic by ultimately being terrible in traffic, but along the way he raised the hopes of Hamfosi everywhere by ranging all the way up to P3, but the loss of aero meant he would never be able to run the tyres long enough to make it stick.

There was literally so much action in the midfield from lap 9 to lap 20 that one of the announcers succumbed to hypoxia (/humour) trying to cover the action. And it was all wonderful, with overtakes on the inside and outside. Ricciardo pulled a beautiful double overtake, and Vettel came scything through the field, despatching slower runners left and right while continuing to whinge about Kvyat (guilty much?). Kvyat, meanwhile, took a page out of Seb’s book to rather roundly condemn poor blue flag etiquette with a epithet that was, apparently,not fit for out ears.

By the mid 30’s the race had settled except for the unmistakeable spectacle of Lewis Hamilton racing Felipe Massa for position creeping up in the mirror.

By lap 40 it was on and Hamilton continued to get closer and closer without ever being able to get by. Whilst he was thus engaged Ricciardo and Raikkonen both got by him and frankly, by lap 52 or so it was literally all done as the earlier exertions had apparently tired everyone out.

Ehhh, anyway have fun talking about the race. Rosberg was spectacular, Seb made an ass of himself post race, Mercedes needs to get on top of reliability and I’m too tired to have tried to write this up.

Thanks for stopping by and play nice in the comments!

Shanghai16Race

Advertisements

145 responses to “#F1 Race Review: 2016 FORMULA 1 PIRELLI CHINESE GRAND PRIX

    • I have already said it before, it’s paying very high dividends like never seen before on here or elsewhere.

      • but while relaxed moderation of comments are sure paying dividends and it is right for any Participants on the forum to have a right to feel comments has breached your rules, it will still boil down to what one would or not like to hear. in a world of real men, a man out to be able to stand his ground, be able to give as much as he can take and not go crying to mummy or let his likes and dislikes dictate his mind to supress others.

  1. Looks like Ham has found himself. He found found out that Ricciardo is quite good.
    We’ve also found ourselves confirming what we knew all along.
    Lewis cracks under pressure.

    • And where’s your evidence that he cracked under pressure today?

      Did you watch the race or just spouting your usual crap as always?

      • Now now gents lets play fair. Lewis was driving a pig of a car and did well but there was a couple of laps in the mid race where he was really pushing the car way past what it really needed, a 7th on the day was way better than a dnf. I was really hoping that the young Max could have been closer to him at the end as it was really shaping up to be a good battle. Now that aside…when will my red stallions get a break? The boss really didn’t sound happy at the start..’we need to improve’ ..now that’s a challenge I am looking forward to.

    • Didn’t Martin Brundle describe one of Hamilton’s laps as the worst he has ever seen? Didn’t he also criticize some of his positioning, that if done correctly (aka Senna or Schumi), would have resulted in proper passes? Some people are going to have problems accepting that their deity does not actually walk on water.

      • …says the guy who goes so far as to troll Hamilton in comment sections after ridiculously biased You Tube video posts. On Brundle: as if SkyF1’s commentary isn’t the most hyperbole-filled telecast there is (and if you were aware enough to comprehend anything about the news/sports/entertainment media you’d know this was and is a Murdock-mandated practice for both print and televised Murdoch media).

        • Wow, I’ll have to add you name to the list of my stalkers.
          So are you saying that Brundle is playing a part of some grand conspiracy woven by the all powerful Murdock? So did Murdock play a role in manipulating the newest research ranking of all the F1 drivers where Lewis is below Christian Fittipaldi?
          https://www.researchgate.net/publication/274080402_Formula_for_success_Multilevel_modelling_of_Formula_One_Driver_and_Constructor_performance_1950-2014
          I wonder if Murdock had anything to do with Lewis failing to qualify Saturday?

          • Response to Andy from Beaverton

            https://thejudge13.com/2016/04/17/f1-race-review-2016-formula-1-pirelli-chinese-grand-prix/#comments

            Sorry you jumped to conclusions rather than think this through. But then again, knee-jerk reactions, an inability to comprehend what is being read and fallacious arguments are par for the course.

            So to explain this to you, since you could only come to a conclusion that feeds your ego: I’m watching a GP2 full race video of Lewis Hamilton’s. In the (knee-jerk time) — SIDEBAR list of vids is a video by some girl or woman trashing Hamilton. The caption is nasty enough that I want to, not only watch her video but read the comments to see if people are ignorant of F1, biased, racist, enough to actually agree with her.

            I watch said video. It is as inane and off base as its caption purported it to be. So, I begin reading some of the many comments. About one-quarter of the way down the comment section is a comment from, “Andy From Beaverton.” I think aloud, “No way!”… yes way. There you are in all your glory rash-talking Lewis Hamilton. Your comment is about as purposely uninformed (I can only come to that conclusion lest I actually believe you have some more heinous animus toward Hamilton) as your comments always are.

            I, then, see your initial comment here and reply… BUT. I’m stalking you.

            Your ego can now have a seat facing the corner.

            As far as the rest of the drivel that is your reply to me, how about you re-read what I wrote about Rupert Murdoch-owned media entities, think about FOX News, since you’re in Oregon, then think about SKY and SKYF1, think about the reactionary, hyperbole-filled verbiage used to purposely to incite arguments, or worse, and to inflame the base senses of the vast majority of its faithful viewers who are already prone to the faulty thought patterns that lead to knee-jerk reactions, an inability to comprehend what is being read and fallacious arguments, and then ask yourself if the remainder of your comment has ANY relativity to my comment…. or the “research” paper to which you you linked.

            Oh, and a hint as to how research is bent to the will of the researcher: waaaayyy back in time, in the late 1980s to mid 1990s there was a movement in academia called… Postmodernism. It was derived to thwart the 1960s through mid-late 1970s data-filled research; full of numbers, but numbers used selectively to back the hypotheses and biases of academic researchers and to stem the harrowing late 1970s through to the mid-1980s research period that was the equivalent of the “Girls Gone Wild” phase of near pornographic video making, wherein, if the viewer was to believe the premise of the video makers, young White women had but a few thoughts when inebriated: showing boobs, slurred talk, and the hope for wanton sex (I’m sure someone will hop right on this purposely-used example to show that their quest for maturity, in fact, never was). In other words, research had bent in an extreme fashion (actually matching the hyperbole-filled ideology-based lies of Western leaders) toward reductionism.

            Erstwhile researchers of the day, led by anthropologists and archeologists tired of reading papers that were little more than means to a personal end, the end being to trivialize and make archaic non-Western cultures, looked for a way to reign in this disturbing trend.

            What they came up with was this: every researcher should, in their research hypotheses, engage in critical introspection and state their biases toward the their research subject(s). Additionally, they should lay out what they expect their research to yield THROUGH the pronouncement of their stated biases.

            As you can imagine, due to the ever-so painful act of revealing one’s biases toward their intended subject matter and what that would say about the researchers’ world views, postmodernism didn’t last too long in academia. In fact, almost immediately, academicians began to go so far as to lie about their biases so they could carry on and arrive at whatever conclusions they predetermined (god forbid their research arrive at some unintended result like, gee, these people weren’t as backward, ignorant and archaic as history books and prior researchers make them out to be!).

            Unfortunately for advanced undergrads and post-graduate researchers who were steeped in postmodernism and understood its worth, this toxic brew led to intense clashes with principle investigators in the field and in the resultant papers from the field work by these hopeful academicians-to-be. In the end, many undergrads and post-graduate students either left their chosen majors, or halted their postgrad theses and left he sacred halls of the quadrivium miffed at the time wasted in the hope of advancing their chosen fields of study.

            The principle investigators – professors – who were either explicitly charged with or felt themselves that ensuring modern Western civilization is to be perceived as the pinnacle of socio-cultural forms went on their merry way… taking us farther and farther back in time to the point where today people actually take any person’s You Tube video at face value and use it to argue a point or five or swallow whole the missives from authoritarians who seek to keep them – most importantly keep them from THINKING CRITICALLY – in tow (this is how authoritarians are citizens as well as the powerful who need the mask of authority to wield power).

            To end, stating, BEFORE any evidentiary data is explained or elucidated that Fangio is the greatest driver in F1 history, makes, literally, the entirety of the so-called research nothing more than an expounded upon fallacy).

            ———————————
            Sadly, an all-too often end is this and other comment exchanges on the myriad websites of the Internet; and end that is no longer the purview of the anti-social introvert creating a wholly opposite character to mask their perceived inadequacies but is part-and parcel of, not just the Internet but of face-to-face conversation.

            “In the beginning was The Word.” The powerful know this all too well and use the word to subvert this most important – divine, even – sentence. For far too many of the rest of us, the word is but an excuse to buttress and make primary our lizard brain, ever seeking to make the adage, “It’s my world and everyone else is a tourist in it,” a base and sordid reality.

          • Sorry you jumped to conclusions rather than think this through. But then again, knee-jerk reactions, an inability to comprehend what is being read and fallacious arguments are par for the course.

            So to explain this to you, since you could only come to a conclusion that feeds your ego: I’m watching a GP2 full race video of Lewis Hamilton’s. In the (knee-jerk time) — SIDEBAR list of vids is a video by some girl or woman trashing Hamilton. The caption is nasty enough that I want to, not only watch her video but read the comments to see if people are ignorant of F1, biased, racist, enough to actually agree with her.

            I watch said video. It is as inane and off base as its caption purported it to be. So, I begin reading some of the many comments. About one-quarter of the way down the comment section is a comment from, “Andy From Beaverton.” I think aloud, “No way!”… yes way. There you are in all your glory rash-talking Lewis Hamilton. Your comment is about as purposely uninformed (I can only come to that conclusion lest I actually believe you have some more heinous animus toward Hamilton) as your comments always are.

            I, then, see your initial comment here and reply… BUT. I’m stalking you.

            Your ego can now have a seat facing the corner.

            As far as the rest of the drivel that is your reply to me, how about you re-read what I wrote about Rupert Murdoch-owned media entities, think about FOX News, since you’re in Oregon, then think about SKY and SKYF1, think about the reactionary, hyperbole-filled verbiage used to purposely to incite arguments, or worse, and to inflame the base senses of the vast majority of its faithful viewers who are already prone to the faulty thought patterns that lead to knee-jerk reactions, an inability to comprehend what is being read and fallacious arguments, and then ask yourself if the remainder of your comment has ANY relativity to my comment…. or the “research” paper to which you you linked.

            Oh, and a hint as to how research is bent to the will of the researcher: waaaayyy back in time, in the late 1980s to mid 1990s there was a movement in academia called… Postmodernism. It was derived to thwart the 1960s through mid-late 1970s data-filled research; full of numbers, but numbers used selectively to back the hypotheses and biases of academic researchers and to stem the harrowing late 1970s through to the mid-1980s research period that was the equivalent of the “Girls Gone Wild” phase of near pornographic video making, wherein, if the viewer was to believe the premise of the video makers, young White women had but a few thoughts when inebriated: showing boobs, slurred talk, and the hope for wanton sex (I’m sure someone will hop right on this purposely-used example to show that their quest for maturity, in fact, never was). In other words, research had bent in an extreme fashion (actually matching the hyperbole-filled ideology-based lies of Western leaders) toward reductionism.

            Erstwhile researchers of the day, led by anthropologists and archeologists tired of reading papers that were little more than means to a personal end, the end being to trivialize and make archaic non-Western cultures, looked for a way to reign in this disturbing trend.

            What they came up with was this: every researcher should, in their research hypotheses, engage in critical introspection and state their biases toward the their research subject(s). Additionally, they should lay out what they expect their research to yield THROUGH the pronouncement of their stated biases.

            As you can imagine, due to the ever-so painful act of revealing one’s biases toward their intended subject matter and what that would say about the researchers’ world views, postmodernism didn’t last too long in academia. In fact, almost immediately, academicians began to go so far as to lie about their biases so they could carry on and arrive at whatever conclusions they predetermined (god forbid their research arrive at some unintended result like, gee, these people weren’t as backward, ignorant and archaic as history books and prior researchers make them out to be!).

            Unfortunately for advanced undergrads and post-graduate researchers who were steeped in postmodernism and understood its worth, this toxic brew led to intense clashes with principle investigators in the field and in the resultant papers from the field work by these hopeful academicians-to-be. In the end, many undergrads and post-graduate students either left their chosen majors, or halted their postgrad theses and left he sacred halls of the quadrivium miffed at the time wasted in the hope of advancing their chosen fields of study.

            The principle investigators – professors – who were either explicitly charged with or felt themselves that ensuring modern Western civilization is to be perceived as the pinnacle of socio-cultural forms went on their merry way… taking us farther and farther back in time to the point where today people actually take any person’s You Tube video at face value and use it to argue a point or five or swallow whole the missives from authoritarians who seek to keep them – most importantly keep them from THINKING CRITICALLY – in tow (this is how authoritarians are citizens as well as the powerful who need the mask of authority to wield power).

            To end, stating, BEFORE any evidentiary data is explained or elucidated that Fangio is the greatest driver in F1 history, makes, literally, the entirety of the so-called research nothing more than an expounded upon fallacy).

            ———————————
            Sadly, an all-too often end is this and other comment exchanges on the myriad websites of the Internet; and end that is no longer the purview of the anti-social introvert creating a wholly opposite character to mask their perceived inadequacies but is part-and parcel of, not just the Internet but of face-to-face conversation.

            “In the beginning was The Word.” The powerful know this all too well and use the word to subvert this most important – divine, even – sentence. For far too many of the rest of us, the word is but an excuse to buttress and make primary our lizard brain, ever seeking to make the adage, “It’s my world and everyone else is a tourist in it,” a base and sordid reality.

          • Andy, you should try your all to avoid being on the road when someone with no effective foot or hand brake and a prone to get stuck-fully-open throttle is using that road.

          • @dwil
            Agreed, but did you have to do it so long and skinny?
            And twice?!
            I almost dislocated my thumb scrolling back up to like your post! (shall I send you the bill for my physiotherapist?)
            Could we all agree to start a fresh post if launching into a rant/epic discourse, please?
            Or the option to flip to last comments first?

          • @Dwill….

            Your comment was so good, they had to post it twice….😂😂

          • Wowzers… Dwilligan, you doth protest too much, methinks.

            Andy, you don’t have a stalker. You really, really, really, really, REALLY don’t!

            Haha. Amusing.

            @WTF_F1

  2. Entertaining. Ricciardo was fantastic (again…hmmm, think I’m becoming a fan in spite of myself), Vettel drove superbly (I’m becoming a fan….no wait, bitching and moaning…cancel my subscription to the fan club…..Danii boy should just have replied I’m allowed to race you now you’re no longer a bull). Kimi, poor Kimi….stay away from cats and ladders, but def top of my list for Sebs teammate in 2017. Bottas, yup, the new Hulk…promising future behind both it would seem. Kudos for Kvyat! Good drive, no nonsense from Max. For Lewis, 18 to go, just one of those days (am I alone in thinking Merc shoulda just started him from the pit lane to avoid the carnage? ).

    • Seems it all started with Kimi avoiding Rosberg and locking up, then turning in to the centre of the track. Vettel had nowhere to go, as Kyvat was getting past him on the inside. So better to nerf Kimi off and give himself a better chance of scoring more points. It worked too. He could have just backed off slightly, but he is a born racer.
      If you have Twitter, look here at it, as seen from Vettel and Kyvat cars. “Sebastian Vettel ‏@FansOfSebVettel”

      • nice side by side view of the starts, cheers. I def don’t see any problem with Kvyat’s driving, he backed off at first to avoid Vettel (when there wasn’t space on inside) and took the inside when offered it (on a plate I would add) by Vettel, plenty of room there, hardly think Seb would back off and not take such a gap if offered!!
        This one is on the Ferrari boys.
        Vettel seemed just caught by surprise, and his reaction catches Kimi out. Kimi did have plenty of room on the outside at the point he turned in, think he was caught out by the late course correction to the outside from Vettel. Still, always risky on the outside like that.

        Backing off is generally unpopular, I still remember Eddie Irvine response to his crash in Brazil ’94….he had no other choice but to veer across the track, lifting/braking wasn’t an option!!!!

  3. just can’t get interested any more. as a fan since 1962 who has seen many a US and Canadian GP live and planned my life around seeing virtually EVERY live broadcast of an F1 weekend for many a decade, I am totally disinterested…

    of 15 broadcast F1 events so far this year, I have seen 1 boring practice!

    me thinks I will watch paint dry or grass grow or Golf instead of this bullshit garbage…

  4. It was an entertaining race with a lot of overtaking action. Unfortunately the opportunistic Kyat move made it just a mid field race instead of race for the P1. So yes I’d agree with Vettel’s view that he was lucky to make without a crash, had Vettel noticed how close Kimi was the natural reaction would have been to not give way to Kyat. Ferraris seemed to have the pace that could have challenged Rosberg or at least make him race, now he could cruise to win. Possibly also the better red bull. Bottas was a total sissy after last race’s penalty, he didn’t even try to defend any position. Hamilton quite a dissapointment too, partially I guess related to the merc’s weird strategy.

    • Kvyat’s move was kosher. Vettel may be BWW’ing (Bitching, Moaning and Wining) as much as he wants, but Kvyat caught him off-guard making a clean move and ending up side-by-side/slightly-in-front of the Ferrari: he didn’t touch anyone, there was a gap, and he braked as needed. What Vettel didn’t do however, is back off as he should have, and instead he drove into his team mate. And as Matt correctly pointed out, Vettel overtook at least two cars under safety car with impunity, so he has absolutely nothing to pontificate about…

      Moreover, Vettel has a history of questionable T1 driving, including this incident in which he drove Button onto the grass in Suzuka:

      So at best what Finger Boy is doing is being disingenuous…

        • I’m not sure about Kimi… He was well in front of Seb (which is not under discussion as Seb’s front wing went straight into the side of Kimi’s chassis), and the snail section there tightens quickly and without mercy. I recall Magnussen in his first season failed to account for this and clipped Raikkonen’s rear tire from the behind, earning him a penalty. Today in T1 we had Kimi rather in front on the outside, and Daniil who put his car just slightly in front of Vettel on the inside. My reading of the incident (but I’d love to see a replay) was that Vettel found himself on the inside of a sandwich between Raikkonen and Kvyat, with nowhere to go and with no upper-hand either on the right or on the left. His only choice was to back off sufficiently to avoid his front wing being clipped by either of the other cars, instead he chose to keep going…

          And as Matt points out, the lengths to which he went on the radio and after the race to accuse Kvyat of “suicidal” and what-have-you driving seems to point to Seb feeling on the defensive about the whole incident and in need of justification…

          • Oh don’t get me wrong. I hated the wining. That’s pretty sad to hear. And I do believe vettel is guilty he crashed in Kimi. No doubt. But I’m saying it’s a bit more than just that. Kimi made a bad move. But I think kvyat didn’t do anything wrong. There was space enough. It looked like vettel jumped because he didn’t expect kvyat to be there

    • IMHO, edging someone off the racing line/track is a legitimate, if robust, tactic.
      Getting round a corner by bouncing off another car – or by forcing a (better driving) competitor to take action to avoid an inevitable crash – is simply bad driving.
      Supporters of the move take for granted Kvyat’s continued presence in the race… if Vettel had done the same and merely driven the line he was already on – irrespective of the consequences – then, in all likelihood, neither of them would have made it round T1.
      Verstappen was guilty of this several times last year. Luckily for him, he got away with it, but I feel that the lack of consistency and rigour from the FIA regarding rooting out and penalising dangerous driving, (avoiding ‘headache’ decisions via the conveniently flexible ‘racing incident’ explanation), is bad governance and part of an increasingly conspicuous slide into a culture of ‘I’ll just take my eye off the ball for a second… just a second…. I’ve been watching it for aaaaaages …well, maybe two seconds…..

      • When you are racing and there is a wide open gap like Vettel left there, you go into that gap. Else you should stop racing. Vettel should have kept that line tight and closed but either he was in to hot before that or was trying to force people to the outside to gain position. That’s all great, but in the 1st lap you should expect people to go for big wide open gaps. He would have gone full Kvyat himself in the same situation. Any real racer would have.

  5. So congratulations to nico. World champion of 2016. Lewis won’t beat him now. It’s done. #HeWontRiseNoMore

  6. 😂😂😂…. Look at that, 2 of the 3 stooges are continuing with their trolling. 😂😂😂

    #AntiHero

    • Did you just use the word “fair” when it comes to assessing any situation involving Lewis? Come come now, we know that’s not allowable.

      Stooge 1 would have you believe that this all started because he didn’t run in FP3, something put forward by James Allen, but both conveniently forgot to mention that Nico also didn’t run in FP3. In fact they both only did 2 laps. So its clear that they felt Lewis was already aware of the issue with his PU and should’ve run just to check it out.

      But hey, I don’t need to go into specifics of what happened in the race, it’s all there for everyone to see and people will take from it what they want, so as to fit their own agendas.

      #AntiHero

      • As you probably guess,I just can’t get a handle of Lewis and I’m just not a fan,if you don’t drive a red car then you just don’t make the cut at this stable but that said I am the first to raise my hand and say the chap can drive and I just don’t subscribe to the lack of motivation or the teams/fom conspiracy against him..its just the run of the green. He always tried to drive the wheels off the car and sadly today it just wasn’t on the cards. I am waiting for the fight to really start this year as we have been robbed of a true scap at the front,Seb seems to have his dander up and Nico looks to be on form and now the Redbull are coming on song I am waiting for the proper tracks to give us our fume fix rather than these sandboxes…roll on Europe and the COTA,we should be in for a real thriller

        • Reports after the race that along with damage to the floor and other bits, he also had damage to the front suspension. He said the car was pulling to either the right or left (can’t fully remember) on the straights and he was struggling to keep it in a straight line.

          I too am looking forward to him challenging ROS. So far he has had the rub of the green, that will change. Still a long way to go.

  7. Is this Mercedes’s way of making F1 more interesting again for the fans, by sidelining their 3xwdc to insure that other teams get a podium chance?

    • Thing is, you look at the table and while Lewis has had a pretty bad start to the season, he is still second in the WDC. Things have conspired against him yet no-one has stepped up to become ‘best of the rest’ behind the other Merc.

      The only question is whether Nico can maximise results over the rest of the season and take advantage of any further slips Lewis has to stay ahead, or if normal service will be resumed.

      And I know Fortis will have something to say about this, but I can’t see Nico having scored the same results if he’d been in Lewis’s car at the end of the first lap in these last three races.

  8. I feel that Vettel was to blame for the Kvyat indecent! Vettel left the door open, if there had been no gap Kvyat would have not tried to go up the inside! After Kvyat went for the move Vettel was stuck with nowhere to go. If he had backed off cars behind him would have rammed him, if he went right he would have hit Kvyat, go left and he hit his team mate! I think he was caught off guard and did not expect anyone to be on his inside so, without looking left, took avoiding action to the left and hit his team mate. Then to try and duck the blame makes a big deal of Kvyat going up the inside.

    It did spice things up a bit but would have hopefully been better if Nico had some competition.

    Looked at some points like McHonda were doing well only for the pit stops to pan out and they were back 12/13.
    Was quite an enjoyable race.

    • yes, both FERRARIS left the door open, exactly like Lulu did in Bahrain, but in Bahrain Lulu had a God given right to close that door, this time in China the FERRARIS had no right to do that, kimi actually did try close the door, Vettel did not, Kvyat having found the door open had all the right to be there, on the other hand Bottas having found the door open had no right to be there.
      this is only the third race but some on here are already talking like Nico got the championship in his bag, sounds like such people are very experienced re F1 racing.

      • Is it that difficult to actually refer to the guy by his actually name than continue with the childish name calling?

      • Haha, @Bruznic. There’s still a loooong way to go. But it’s been a very good start by Nico.

        @Salvuborg, contradiction noted re: Lulu-Bottas / Sebastian-Kvyat situations.

        Anyway, take 2 or 3 on posting a comment, but congrats to Nico on his 6th consecutive victory. He is now one of four drivers in the history of F1 to have won six (or more) consecutive races.

        Just curious, do ‘greats’ normally have their teammates deliver six consecutive wins over them? Just wondering… 😀

        Perhaps Lewis’ post-Austin ’15 taunts directed at Nico were not quite as wise as he thought.

        “For the times they are a-changin.” – Dylan
        —-
        Incidentally, I watched the 2012 Abu Dhabi GP again… yeah, the one where Vettel starts last and ends 3rd on a track harder to overtake than the Shanghai International, and with a car that had a smaller advantage than this year’s Mercedes. Good race. Just thought I’d mention it. Randomly. Ya know… for whatevs. 😉

        Peace and love,

        @WTF_F1

        #SexyStart

          • As I always say, its a matter of what one would like to hear or not, depending on the mood, one tends to put aside the fact that he himself calls drivers by their popular nicknames when it suites him.
            I have been present in 2012 after demonstrating the MP4-26 he was told that he is affectionately called by his nickname “LULU” he not only laughed, but signed caps for all present, that was a time when he was blindingly in love with pussycat but before he started designing his own caps and also before he had his body looks like a printed circuit.

      • Haha had Lewis turned left into Rosberg the situations would’ve been similar,but as is rather than closing the door on Kvyat Vettel chose to punt his teammate off track instead. THAT’S the problem he had to solve, especially with Marchionne in town.

        • Vettel closing the door on Kvyat would have been bad/a grave crime/a stupidity, him turning left to avoid contact with Kvayt and punting his team mate ditto, *******COMMENT MODERATED*******

          • according to what is called “the voice of reason (Senna) ” but of course, when it suits us! you are no longer a racing driver if you do not try to take a gap when there is one. than how some one here says Kvyat had the right to drive into the gap left open by the FERRARI, yet they say that Bottas not only had no right to be there, but getting a penalty for doing exactly the same thing was right. does it matter why and who you drive into?.

      • Cmom, dude, leave this childish “Lulu” name calling to those trolls over at bashnet!!

  9. Wonder how fast Mercedes will snap up this next batch of, “drunk Nico with floozy” photos? Oh wait, he’s a “family man.”

      • There — was. I first saw a picture on Twitter with one of his, now Hamilton’s mechanics to his right and groupie hanging over a bombed Nico’s shoulder. I later found it in Google images… it’s since been scrubbed one of those, “get that out of search engines!!!” moments).

      • It was in a group of photos, all explaining what a great, fun-loving teammate Nico still is despite being married. Another was Nico, drunk, dancing and singing on a club table after a fly-away race. I remember all of this distinctly because I tweeted about the the on the table photo, as it was taken after a race he LOST (I commented, if this is Nico after losing a race who plowed must he get when he wins?!).

        • Saddening. You feel the continuous need to attempt side-swipes continuously —- and ignorantly. The result? Continuous feet in mouth… well since it’s the Internet and you’re typing… “bum fingers” is more accurate.

          After Monaco, 2013: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zie6KIbAptI. Scroll 17 posts down: https://www.tumblr.com/tagged/princess-nico. Here, too: http://mindthegraveltrap.tumblr.com/post/103545646549/broomstick-nico-rosberg-you-glorious-drunken. After losing F1 title in Austin: http://www.foxsports.com.au/news/pit-talk-nico-rosberg-sings-away-the-blues-of-losing-the-2015-f1-title-at-an-austin-karaoke-bar/news-story/d943f0c7dd459c5578638a3f8725bd3e?nk=11b8010d1973fd3921cf74a16fc9f0cc-1461347326. (I’ll wait for the “but…” and “but” excuses.)

          • Like I said, the floozy photo was scrubbed. The others either of you could’ve fund with a simple, “drunk nico rosberg” Google search. I gather, thugh, acting like they don’t exist is far easier.

          • Gidday DWil, just saw this post, mate.

            Saddening? I certainly hope that’s not the case. I’ve attended a few ANZAC services over the last two days and I’m off to the official dawn service tomorrow morning. The reason I mention this is, well, there’s a lot more to be sad about than anything said here. It may be time to harden up.

            “continuous need to attempt side-swipes continuously…” I imagine the keys were pressed quite severely as you doubled up, which leads me to my next point.

            You’re losing your edge here – and elsewhere. The façade is falling. It always does, eventually, for those who anger quickly. If you glance over your last 5-6 posts (not including the 2-3 in this conversation), you’ll probably see what I’m referring to. However, even I’ve a level of class that doesn’t care to point out specifics of the emergent litany of errors. That has been the most unexpected part of our discussion of late given your profession. I’m assuming they’re correlated to emotion.

            With respect to your Nico links… very interesting and no excuses. None needed. However, the answer to Paul remains no. The point is left to stand.

            In the interests of cheering you up a little, I’ve added a video here that you may enjoy. We’ve started a kind of tradition…

            Take care,

            @WTF_F1

            PS: As for waiting for responses. I wouldn’t if I were you. You see, unlike our docile Bumboclaat Parrot, I’m not plugged into the 24hr cycle of check n’ respond. Your serve… chat soon, mate.

          • I suppose no one else clicks the box to receive updates to one’s comments. It must be due to “emotion” and being “quick to anger” that I reply… *yawn*… you trot out not-so subtle pejoratives like they’re cheap boxes of chocolates.

            “As for waiting for responses. I wouldn’t if I were you.” Excellent – meaning this missive that should be the logical end to this back-and-forth, will be.

            Onto the, “continuous need to attempt side-swipes continuously.” I write, you go hurtling forth with your racer’s ramblings thinking, “easy hill ahead.” The road is smooth and you believe wholly in the thought that should you take the time to craft carefully enough, beyond the crest is but the easy inertial result that is effortless downhill gliding, whilst everyone else who fails to share in your self-perceived splendour is sure to, at some point, flounder, trapped by your spinster’s web.

            But. Since you’ve taken to more than one social media format to swipe ‘n go (your protestations of involvement with other facets of life aside) you leapt in for the kill only to find yourself trapped in an ego-sized Chinese finger puzzle, pulled by tight by the thought of a “gotcha” moment; now THAT is emotion… and your persistence in praying (the only litanies in this service are defined as your, “continuous side-swiping, continuously”) you are not faced with dangerous waters is hubris, a thinly-veiled veneer of sanguine thoughtfulness cloaking a thick, shellac coat of Bell Curve-boosted dreams that you and yours (the “we” in your video mention) are the “A” in Aristotle’s Law of Non-Contradiction; the capstone of the resultant, infamous hierarchical chart.

            Postscript: “We’ve started a kind of tradition…” Traditions are only diachronic artifacts. Your “we” cannot know a tradition is such, other than through retrospection.

  10. Vettel / Kimi / Kvayt = Racing incident. Kimi runs wide, Seb tries to get under him, at the same time the RBR goes under Vettel and Kimi starts pinching inwards not knowing Vettel has a car inside him. Vettel see’s it starting to unfold as he moves left to avoid Kvyat and stamps on the brakes to the point where he’s already locked up before hitting Kimi. Having watched it a few times Kimi is more the cause that Kvyat or Vettel in this one, he turns across the track expecting people to move. The same sort of thing happens moments latter when the Finn, in his damaged car turns across in front of Nasr (?) who then has to take evasive action and hits Hamilton.

    I’ve said time and time again that you cannot close the door when someone is on your inside you have to leave them a cars width, Vettel did just that, but Kimi’s tightening line effectively drove the two Ferrari’s into each other. The alternative for Vettel was a Hamilton/Bottas incident of last week, shut the door on the car inside you.

    All that said, once that had happened Kimi did pretty well, given both he and Hamilton had damaged cars, but Kimi’s is naturally about 0.8s slower a lap, the Finn did a very good job to finish P5. A large portion of that was his patience and consistently on the medium tyre run and knowing not to kill the tyres.

    Whilst the first corner incident and having to start last certainly wasn’t a fault of Lewis, his recovery drive from there on was pretty shoddy. Sure Mercedes can claim the car was oh so damaged, missing 9 billion points of downforce and running 45 minutes a lap slower than normal, but to be honest that’s highly highly unlikely and the more likely scenario is that just like Vettels infamous ‘cracked chassis’ this is a team helping to massage it’s drivers ego after a bad day at the office.

    • So you think Mercedes comments about the damage on Lewis’s car is nothing more than an attempt to massage his ego?

      Ok, 2 things I’d like you to consider, first….take a look at Matt Somers Twitter account and you’ll see the damage to the underside of the car…

      Second, Paddy Lowe’s post race comments

      ” Paddy Lowe, Executive Director (Technical) ++
      “Starting on Lewis’ side, one of the debates we actually had overnight was whether to do a bit more work to the car and start him from the pit lane, which ironically would have been a better decision in hindsight given what happened at the first corner. Equally, Lewis had by far his best start of the season, which ironically contributed to him being caught up in the cascade of collisions ahead of him. So, a perfect storm of unfortunate circumstances all round put him on the back foot straight away. We could see that there were problems with the car – both aerodynamic and mechanical – affecting him through the low-speed corners in particular. Under the safety car, we chose to perform consecutive pit stops with Lewis to get rid of the SuperSoft and enable us to run the rest of the race on the Soft, which was the stronger race tyre. As it transpired, his first set of softs were cut from the first corner incident – something we were unaware of at the time – which meant we were then forced to run the medium at the end of the race, rendering our SuperSoft eliminating tactic redundant. So, overall, Lewis did a great job to recover what he could with a car that was significantly underperforming.”

      I do agree with your assessment of Kimi and the manner in which he rejoined the track. He has a history of this, we only need to go back to Silverstone 2014.

      • Obviously his car was damaged, I said that, it’s the degree of the damage that I take some issue with. Every single time a Mercedes has the slightest bit of damage they claim it costs them huge chunks of time. I struggle to believe that. Yesterday Ricciardos floor was damaged, and Red Bulls pace is all about aero unlike Merc who have the best PU on the grid. And how about Kimi, who’s car suffered similar damage to that of the Mercedes? What I’m saying is that when these things happen to other teams we rarely hear them claiming to have lost so much time from it, why is that?

        • The guy drove with his front wing trapped under his car for half a lap, there’s no exaggerating on the damage.

          Sorry where was Ricciardo’s floor damaged? He had his tire blowout on the long back straight and limped to the pits with no damage to his car. Your comparisons don’t hold up as RIC didn’t get run into

          Kimi got hit on the side of his car and he didn’t drive half the lap dragging the wing under his car damaging the turning veins, floor and splitter of his car.

          So because other team does not report what they lost due to damage, somehow negates Mercedes’s response? That’s ridiculous and very simplistic.

          • Don’t try to talk facts and truths to him he doesn’t understand that. Just say lewis is holy and what he did yesterday is better than what moses did when he parted the sea. How can it be that a blown up tire damages your car or that an impact at turn 1 does? It can’t be. Unless it happens to Lewis. Mercedes also twittered the stat about the overtakes he did and how many times he got overtaken. That’s just using statistics to your advantage. Something he hates when it’s against him. Like wtf_f1 sometimes does. Common sense tells us with that stat that only a ferrari and a williams are faster than a damaged mercedes. It’s not like we ever expected a sauber or manor to overtake him no matter what.

          • Maybe you should try reading what k wrote again, before jumping in with your bullshit!

            His comparisons on what damage was sustained by each car and the performance thereafter is nonsense as the damages weren’t the same.

            So ok RedBull had a damaged floor, it’s not the same has having a damaged suspension is it? Rhetorical…

            The fact that he’s disregarding Mercedes reports on what effect the damage caused in performance and replacing that with his own assumptions based on other teams, is ridiculous. I’m talking about damage/performance comparisons, but feel free to turn my comment into something it’s not intended for.

          • What I’m suggesting, Fortis, is that it becomes tough to believe that Mercedes suffers such a major impact in performance terms from such minor contact. Others on the grid have similar contact levels on a regular basis and don’t seem to suffer the same sort of fate, even though many of the developments on the cars are similar. Have built Mercedes the most fragile car for years and is that what leads to the appearance of their staff going overboard in terms of praising their drivers when they finish with such hampered machinery? Or as I suspect is the more likely scenario, is it simply Mercedes know how to manage their drivers and know to get the best from them they’ve got be treated with kid gloves, and massaging their sub 5ft 10″ egos when things don’t work out for them on a Sunday afternoon is part and parcel of the directors in the team ensuring they get the best results possible?

            I tend to think it’s probably a larger dose the latter than the former.

        • Perhaps but they weren’t telling porky pies this time round. @SomersF1 had pretty good coverage of this post race but a lot of the underbody aero and suspension was damaged by that front wing being trapped under the car.

          • Come now Matt, they don’t want to hear or believe such things, they’d rather rely on their “opinion”

          • Reminds me of someone called fortis. Oh wait. You don’t like irony do you 😂

          • Hi Matt, my point wasn’t solely relating to this race, as there was obviously some car damage. Mercedes however, even with the most minor of issues, always paint a picture as if the driver has driven a Gilles style 3 wheeled car for the entire bloody race with one arm hanging off and what’s that… something in their eye too!!. Take Bahrain for example, the claims were they lost over a second a lap from the contact with Bottas. If that were really the case Lewis would have won the race by over 30 seconds from Nico and lapped everyone up to P4. If that is really the case the Mercedes guys are both vastly underperforming in qualifying surely or the entire field of drivers raises their game just for qualifying? The presumption from Mercedes is much like that of Red Bull of old, that ‘the punters believe whatever we say’. Sorry Mercedes, you just cry “Wolff” too damn much. In fact if this were Red Bull of 2013 Forits you’d be calling bullshit, but you’re not because you’re so partisan that quite frankly Mercedes and Lewis could say or do anything and you’d still defend them. Top loyalty, if nothing else.

          • Lol @salvuborg you can believe Somers not credible if you like, you can also believe the world is flat. He has been hired to write on F1 tech which is a lot more than you can say for yourself. As for my credibility, most of my readers can judge for themselves. Given your inability to understand the point of a lot of articles, never mind the comments on them, however, I’d be careful of sweeping generalizations if I were you, which I decidedly am not.

      • no doubt about their attempt to massage his ego, only a oneeyed hamfosu will doubt that. “Nico is not title favourite” (totonator). Lowe does tell fibs/porkies when it suits him, “Honda and Renault now have more power than the 2015 FERRARI” how come Torro Rosso are still several KM/H faster than all 6 of these cars?. The damage photos shown to try prop up support by the self appointed technical expert are from “one of ours”.

          • So what? doesn’t make any difference, what do you believe? it is all about credibility of sources, people trust sources that have not failed them in the past, good information is power, unlike the renault engine/ilmor/rbr porky and the push forward of the possibility of FERRARI being able to make use of 64 tokens this year.

          • …and all this from people who like to mock others of being “conspiracy theorists” every chance they get. wonderful.

          • He Is as credible as you are no more no less, he was part of the Renault/ilmor/rbr story, the other story (tokens) was most probably in completion with his likes (competition between back rubbing friends).

  11. (Why / How) is there such a big gap between Renault and Tag Heuer powerplants or are they the same but the chassis is a full second a lap faster, i dont get it???

    • Chassis design and money. Lotus now Renault basically ran all last season with no money for development and doesn’t seem like Ghosn will be dropping tons of cash on them just yet.

      • Stop spreading this rubbish, I will keep calling you out on it. RBR use the exact same PU as Renault, no secret mods.

        • Garry, this might not be what you would have liked to hear/read but aren’t the red bullies using only a Renault block topped-up with Mario heads, injection system and a watch sticker on the valve cover?

    • hahah, Somers is as credible as much as the above two porkies I mentioned, one of which he was part off himself, the other I suspect was a try at out-smarting people like him, such is the competition between back rubbing friends. .

  12. One final point regarding the race. The safety car deployment.

    Was a full SC required? As far as I could tell from coverage and driver comments there was a minimal amount of debris removed. It looked like an over-reaction to the Ricciardo puncture.

    Why wasn’t the Virtual Safety car used? Isn’t it for exactly that sort of issue?

    As a long term fan of Touring Car Racing the SC deployment had a real feel of ‘we need to get Danny, Kimi and Lewis back in the race’.

    How much the likes of Perez/Alonso/Button feel about it? Effectively the decision to go full SC over virtual cost them points.

    • Think they tried using VSC during one of the practices and it didn’t work out well. And Sky were remarking on amount of debris prior to RIC puncture.

    • Marshalls on track, SC on track imho. We do not need Bianchi kind of stuff hapenning again to drivers or track workers.

  13. 😂😂😂😂 of the hilarity of that comment…

    “Seb drove from the back of the grid in 2012 Abu Dhabi Grand Prix and finished 3rd on a track notoriously harder than China to overtake”….

    Hmm didn’t think that one through properly did you?

    Bet he couldn’t do it driving with a damaged front suspension? Or how about a damaged splitter and leading edge of the floor?

    But I’ll give you that, it was impressive, but not as impressive as Hungary 2014….

    #AntiHero
    #Sexylap
    #F1Great
    #Negus
    #BlingGod
    #DabbingOnSuckas

    • “#AntiHero
      #Sexylap
      #F1Great
      #Negus
      #BlingGod
      #DabbingOnSuckas”

      Hashtags don’t work on here chap.

        • Most of the comments on here are you snapping at people/whining like something else. Really doesn’t help for a decent discussion…

          • Sorry, but who are you? Go away mate and don’t come at me with your nonsense.

          • Haha, that did make me chuckle Fortis. “who are you? …don’t come at me with your nonsense”, who do you think you are? Some royalty I’d this site? You seem more like a frustrated teenager arguing at any chance safe in your room.

          • Am I?… Well someone should call my parents and let them know I’m misbehaving and I need to be punished…..

            “Fortis, you’re grounded and no computer for a week! Now go to your room”……

            😏🤔

  14. Ricciardo driver of the day by a long way. The official F1 driver of the day vote is a joke – millions of russians voting for Kvyat – they would have voted for him even if he finished 10th !

  15. @dobzizzle I hear you. I sent a message to whomever at TJ that there was a dupe comment. When I edited the initial comment the 1st wasn’t on the page. I posted the 2nd and the 1st showed, too. I don’t know if WordPress is advanced enough to have an “Edit” button shown after comments are posted. I also have no idea how this comment came out in the long and skinny format rather than the wide format (perhaps a format artifact of my Day One Macbook Diary app).

    I’ll try to do better next time. For now all I can say about these errors is, “Still I rise.” 😉

  16. Here’s the best view of the Seb, Kimi and Daniil incident I could find. Hope it helps solve some issues as to fault (if any): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qZJv2TrkmgE.

    The only questions I have are: 1) should Seb have anticipated Kimi, who was ahead, dropping into the turn, 2) should Kimi, though he was ahead, have backed off since he was well outside the racing line and Seb was on the racing line? I feel as though, if it’s just Kimi and Seb going into the turn just like they were positioned, it’s Seb’s corner even though Kimi was ahead. Seb was on the racing line and Kimi was floating above it and dipping into the line.

    As for Kvyat, I was unable to find fault in his actions. It just seemed like a helluva bold move where he trusted his grip and just blew right by everyone.

    • @dwil
      Nice angles. From what I see, Kimi was well in front of Seb and had the upperhand in the corner — Seb had NO claim to the apex. This is all the more obvious since Seb’s front wing clipped Kimi’s rear tire. Dani boy made a bold, controlled move which caught out Seb… But which placed the Red Bull on just about the same level (relative to Seb) as the 2nd Ferrari. Seb’s only choice when he found no way left or right was to find his brakes, which he didn’t…

    • Thanks for posting the link. I’m pretty satisfied that was a racing incident. I’m not sure how either Ferrari could avoid it.

      Kimi tightens his line after Seb has to jink left slightly, Kimi doesn’t know Seb has a car inside him, Seb can’t go left or right and if he just brakes hard he’d probably spin. Kvyat does nothing wrong at all. That is racing. As Murray Walker used to say, three into two won’t go, and it didn’t.

      I can see why Vettel was frustrated, given he and Kimi hit each other, but saying what he said to Kvyat wasn’t required the young Russian did nothing wrong.

      Driver of the day though. Who the hell votes for that? Did they not watch Ricciardos performance?

      • Hi Paul,

        +1, I’m with you on all counts on the Kimi/Seb/Daniil sandwich.

        As there’s no poll here, just thought I had to reply to support the Ricciardo driver of the day comment – stellar performance – the type that fills me with hope for the future of the sport!!

      • @landroni… awesome explanation. I TOTALLY missed that it was Seb’s wing that clipped Kimi… agree with you and Paul on Kvyat.

        • Having re-watched the incident closely, I’m actually starting to come around on Kimi’s involvement in this whole affair. After he slid wide and Seb put his nose on par with Kimi’s rear tyre, you have Daniil coming in and putting his Red Bull quickly and well in front of Seb (and on par with Kimi). THEN Kimi seems to notice Daniil (but doesn’t realize Seb’s nose is on his inside) and it looks as if he’s cutting across Seb to try to cover Daniil, with Seb’s front wing in the way. Actually Kimi’s steering seems a bit strange (as others have already mentioned), as he could have stayed on his wider line inside the corner… In this shot Kimi’s car positioning looks overly aggressive:

          I guess if there ever was a racing incident, this is it… 🙂

  17. Talk to me about the Grosjean Ericson bust up folks. What’s that all about? RoGro crying??

    • Ericsson, “Romain ran to me and called me all sorts of words he sais I was an idiot, i’m blind, Grosjean was not behaving like a mature adult, but to hear this from a driver who was suspended for dangerous driving, I think it’s a little strange”.
      Grosjean confronted Ericson over turn 1 clash and was not impressed with the Sauber driver response “OH I didn’t see you, you passed all the way around the outside how could you not see me?”.

  18. Look at that, Larry, Curly and Mo have managed to form an orderly queue without tripping over each other….

    I thought Australian’s were more into teaching aboriginals new trick as opposed to parrots?….

    • You may not share other peoples view points, but that is completely out of line. Discrimination, be it in the form of a nation and it’s indigenous people or someone’s race, is just the same. I think you need to take that back and apologise.

          • Sorry, am I suppose to feel offended that you don’t like me? You’re all a bunch of faceless people sitting behind a keyboard typing away. I lose no sleep over whether I’m liked on here or not, not here to look friends, I’ve got plenty of those that I see daily.

            But if it makes you feel all tingly inside that you’re a like by everyone on here, well I’m happy for you. And I mean that truthfully, I’m very happy for you.

          • I don’t think everyone here likes me. But I do know you care. You’re only kidding yourself. But fuck it. I don’t care anymore right. Consider this the last thing I’ll ever say to you and you to me. Have a good one. Hope you’ll lead the hamifosis in to battle.

          • I know you do. You know it. You just don’t like to admit it. But hey no worries mate. Consider it the last thing I’ll ever say to you. And you to me. Lead them hamifosis in to battle and do whatever you want. Just don’t blame the world for things you do to yourself. Bye bye

          • Ok this one did.
            I’ll say this mate. I don’t care. This is the last thing I’ll ever say to you. I’m out. You like to blame the world for your own faults and you like to use weapons you hate when people use them against you. So I say to you farewell. Lead them hamifosis in to battle and leave me alone. I know you care to much but I’m not participating anymore.

          • Unless I’m mistaken, it was you who felt the need to address me in the comments not I…

            So bon voyage/ au revoir/ adios…..

          • no no no I don’t agree, this is a forum and like/dislike of a poster irrespective of what one would like to hear or not should not come into it at all, to be fair to Fortis (the poster pen name) he has been taking as much as he gave, and that’s the way it should be, if there is anyone on this page that can complain it is me because when the pen name changed to judge duty I was the one that had one of my posts edited.

          • Thank you Salvuborg….

            I’ve been subjected to various taunts, name calling and disrespect on this site on a regular basis, with no one stepping to say, “hey that’s not cool or unfair”..

            So I have strong opinions? Yes I do, but majority of my replies I tend to reason out in a proper manner. Why? Just because I’m a Lewis Hamilton fan and I don’t agree with those who continue to spew the same bullshit rhetoric on a daily basis, some of which are outright racist! But when I point that out, I’m accused of playing the “race card”. Well if you don’t want that “card” to be played, then don’t say stupid shit! It’s that simple.

            So if you come at me, don’t think I’m going to sit idly by and have anyone trying and disrespect or mock me, solely because they harbour the thought that they’re better than or more intelligent than I am. It’s not going to happen! Period!

          • Having been abused in the past is no justification, not even an excuse, to abuse others in the future. When you snap at people when unprovoked with gems like just spouting your usual crap as always or spew the same bullshit rhetoric or don’t say stupid shit!, which recently has become a recurring theme, you are being abusive…

          • Ok I’ll make this the last then. I never ever came at you with anything regarding race. Nor name calling. Nor anything else of that level. You’re sitting on a high horse there in your last comment but much of it isn’t true. Furthermore there have been posts of me that didn’t come true because of their nature of having my weird humour toward hamilton. If you did that or not thats not for me to decide. It did however shift things here in not having comments go tru mods so there was something up. So don’t just play victim. You are guilty to as much as anyone else.

          • OK, the way I see things now is that The Judge (who after all is in control of this site) is happy for Fortis to post in a way which puts a lot of other commentators off.

            That’s fine, it’s his site.

            My opinion is the level of interaction on the site was far superior with much more worth-while comments being made before Fortis found the place but that is just my opinion.

            As a result, my decision is to step away from the comments and only read the articles. I feel it is a shame that others have felt the need to make the same decision but it is up to The Judge to decide if this is to the detriment of the site or not…

  19. and Fortis I don’t agree that there would/should/could have been any difference if it was a female on this forum.

  20. @Racer’sRamblings… so it’s drive-bys now? I provide someone with a full explanation of what I did and you say —- what?! It’s far easier to be snarky and passive-aggressiveness than it is to stand up and get real. I blocked you on Twitter but you can’t help yourself but to side-swipe me here?! Now, who’s the stalker, Stalker?

  21. Fortis, what is yours I gave it to you and as i said this is a big improvement to this site, and I will add that Bruznic showed that he could not stand the heat in the ketchen, but I will also add that he like others before him was always at an Unfair disadvantage against you being the judge and juror, you acting as a poster is a right of yours, feeling that you have been abused ditto, all along as I said, you have been giving as much as you took, regardless of your feelings, but hey, there things end when it comes to handling the other role of being the judge/moderator, a judge/moderator being part of the forum is never going to work/never going to be fair.

    • I was one of the moderators and at no time did I act I an unfair manner to anyone. I was given specific instructions as to what comments should and should not be let through and I acted accordingly.

      So him implying that I haven’t been doing that, is pure speculation.

      • you was one of the moderators, you are one of the moderators, you was one of the posters, you are one of the posters, are you John Myburgh? because that is what I believe.
        The problem was/is, posts has been blocked when in argument/s with you and or what you term those that contribute “for free” when you or those are/was/were participating in the forum as posters, not only that but people that not only contributed to the site by their participating/contributing to the forum but always championed this site as one of the best were blocked/black-listed when in arguments with you and or one of your “for free contributors”. it was not a fair playing ground, it was damaging to the site, it did not work, and it will not work, an F1 site with a forum will be BAH without followers who with their participating are the biggest contributor to the site. things did change a lot lately, and for the better at that, but the old way/s of judgement/s are tending to force a return, with a little bit of effort things can get better, lets try to make this site as good as it once was, aim should be to make it even better.
        And by the way, I see nothing wrong in you being a HAMFOSU FAN, it is a right of yours, I like it when arguing with such, and be assured I do so with no ill feelings.

  22. @Racer’s Ramblings …and next time don’t truncate – nice word for cherry-pick by purposely omitting the remainder of the sentence in your screenshot – a sentence from the above, or any, article in a tweet to try to, again, side-swipe/demean me about the length of my comment on your timeline (churlish and social media attention deficient enough on its own). THAT is pretty damn lame.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s