News On F1 Forums - Talk Formula 1

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

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.

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!!!!)

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

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.

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

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.

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

julian mayo wrote:no (respectfully)

K-D wrote:

julian mayo wrote:no (respectfully)

Drat....

Foiled at the gate.

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.

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...)

julian mayo wrote: