F1 - Technical Analysis

Julian Mayo · Post by **Julian Mayo** » Fri May 20, 2005 7:54 pm

JayVee wrote:
You obviously are but that is your choice. We may all be getting older but we should adjust to the realities of this life.

Relying on barge boards for example is retro whichever way you look at it!!

As for Fangio, look at his win ratio and Michael is nowhere in his league.

Michael is such an overrated driver that only those who just look at numbers think he is great. I know this is not the right thread but you started it and I'll state my opinion. Michael isn't that great, had Senna not been killed in that accident he wouldn't have won any championship. Look at his record this year, nothing to brag about. If his car/tyres work he'll do well otherwise he is nowhere. Not the sign of a great!
The only reason Michael won the last 5 championships is becuase of a superior car and no team-mate to fight with. Sure it is legal but let me tell you it SUCKS and that is why F1 has lost its appeal. Not the overtaking, not the aerodynamics but Michael and Co and their tactics to win at any cost

I courteously, and with respect to all, concur

sgd · Post by **sgd** » Fri May 20, 2005 8:02 pm

K-D wrote:Chosing to think that MS can only win "because" of the intra-team support, is in my view a denial of what it really takes to win in F1.

JV didn't say that.
(you miss the superior car and no team-mate to fight!!!!)

Julian Mayo · Post by **Julian Mayo** » Fri May 20, 2005 8:08 pm

sgd wrote:
K-D wrote:Chosing to think that MS can only win "because" of the intra-team support, is in my view a denial of what it really takes to win in F1.
JV didn't say that.
(you miss the superior car and no team-mate to fight!!!!)

I humbly agree

K-D · Post by **K-D** » Fri May 20, 2005 8:49 pm

julian mayo wrote:
sgd wrote:
K-D wrote:Chosing to think that MS can only win "because" of the intra-team support, is in my view a denial of what it really takes to win in F1.
JV didn't say that.
(you miss the superior car and no team-mate to fight!!!!)

I humbly agree

I have bolded the part where I think I said that very thing.

Julian Mayo · Post by **Julian Mayo** » Fri May 20, 2005 8:57 pm

K-D wrote:
julian mayo wrote:
sgd wrote:
JV didn't say that.
(you miss the superior car and no team-mate to fight!!!!)

I humbly agree
I have bolded the part where I think I said that very thing.

I obsequisciously concur

K-D · Post by **K-D** » Fri May 20, 2005 9:45 pm

julian mayo wrote:
K-D wrote:
julian mayo wrote:

I humbly agree
I have bolded the part where I think I said that very thing.

I obsequisciously concur

Do you mean obsequiously or obsequisciously???

If you mean obsequiously I thank you, if you mean obsequisciously I humbly ask for explanation of what you mean.

Julian Mayo · Post by **Julian Mayo** » Fri May 20, 2005 9:50 pm

K-D wrote:
julian mayo wrote:
K-D wrote:
I have bolded the part where I think I said that very thing.

I obsequisciously concur
Do you mean obsequiously or obsequisciously???

If you mean obsequiously I thank you, if you mean obsequisciously I humbly ask for explanation of what you mean.

Both

K-D · Post by **K-D** » Fri May 20, 2005 10:06 pm

julian mayo wrote:
K-D wrote:
julian mayo wrote:
I obsequisciously concur
Do you mean obsequiously or obsequisciously???

If you mean obsequiously I thank you, if you mean obsequisciously I humbly ask for explanation of what you mean.

Both

LOL

See how we need that "General recreationalary" area??

Julian Mayo · Post by **Julian Mayo** » Fri May 20, 2005 10:08 pm

no (respectfully)

K-D · Post by **K-D** » Fri May 20, 2005 10:22 pm

julian mayo wrote:no (respectfully)

Drat....

Foiled at the gate.

Julian Mayo · Post by **Julian Mayo** » Fri May 20, 2005 10:36 pm

K-D wrote:
julian mayo wrote:no (respectfully)
Drat....

Foiled at the gate.

Ring the bell

sgd · Post by **sgd** » Fri May 20, 2005 10:37 pm

K-D wrote:
julian mayo wrote:
sgd wrote:
JV didn't say that.
(you miss the superior car and no team-mate to fight!!!!)

I humbly agree
I have bolded the part where I think I said that very thing.

You are quite wrong... Albers (or MShumieda, the same) could have all the possible intra-team support and anyway he won't won nothing in his (a) Minardi!!!! The point is when you have a superior car and no team-mate to fight. -> that is why MS wins. not just because of the intra-team support as you want JV to say... again: That is not what JV said. (i respectfully suggest you read JV again...)

K-D · Post by **K-D** » Fri May 20, 2005 11:10 pm

sgd wrote:
K-D wrote:
julian mayo wrote:

I humbly agree
I have bolded the part where I think I said that very thing.

You are quite wrong... Albers (or MShumieda, the same) could have all the possible intra-team support and anyway he won't won nothing in his (a) Minardi!!!! The point is when you have a superior car and no team-mate to fight. -> that is why MS wins. not just because of the intra-team support as you want JV to say... again: That is not what JV said. (i respectfully suggest you read JV again...)

I did.

I stand by what I write.

Julian Mayo · Post by **Julian Mayo** » Fri May 20, 2005 11:14 pm

K-D · Post by **K-D** » Fri May 20, 2005 11:17 pm

julian mayo wrote:

**edited out, not sure it was agreable with forum posting rules**

Was funny though