It is currently Fri Jul 03, 2020 2:10 pm

All times are UTC


Forum rules


Please read the forum rules



Post new topic Reply to topic
Author Message
PostPosted: Wed Oct 23, 2019 2:01 pm 
Online

Joined: Sat Jan 28, 2012 4:13 pm
Posts: 16972
pokerman wrote:
mikeyg123 wrote:
pokerman wrote:
DFWdude wrote:
mikeyg123 wrote:

But there was a lot of things going on then. 85-90 we couldn't predict who would be fastest from season to season and just about anyone had a chance of a podium. Stefan Johansson proved that.

The problem isn't that we have dominance it's that the dominance has been locked in. 2000-2006 the races were often dull but there was a hell of a lot else to keep us excited an interested. Right now we are going through and unprecedented era of stability.
You must have watched a different F1 than I did 85-90. I remember the race comentators wondering aloud whether anyone could beat team McLaren, especially after the 88 season (when McLaren won 15 of 16 races). The only reason that anyone got a chance at a podium was for third place, since McLaren (and all teams) fielded only two cars. The excitement was over which McLaren would win, Senna or Prost.

2000-2006 was also a snoozefest, on balance. Ferrari's dominance overshadowed anything else worth noting. I could not wait long enough for Schumacher to retire.

Same with the Red Bull dominance with Vettel (early teens), and the Mercedes dominance since.

Really, one's assessment of processional years is based on which team one favors. But OBJECTIVELY speaking, there have been several periods of one team dominating over the others dating back decades.

Indeed dominance is quite normal as is 2 or 3 teams being that much better than everyone else, it's strange seeing the 85-90 period as being any different.


No it's quite different at the moment as I have explained a few posts above.

I wouldn't care a jot if Mercedes happened to keep winning if we had 7 or 8 teams actually able to fight for podiums like we had in that period. It's not the dominance of Merc that is the issue. It's how fixed the top 3 are.

At no other time in F1 history could I predict with certainty the teams fighting at the front years in advance.

I don't think that much has changed apart from the level of reliability and professionalism we see today which makes it that bit harder for the lower teams to see a podium.

Let's also not forget some of the systems that were put in place to hamper the top teams, I'm looking at the qualifying systems like the reverse 1 lap qualifying were the faster cars had to go out first on a green track, I guess not too dissimilar to what you have with FE, and also the race fueled qualifying.

This was done obviously because the top teams dominating has always been a problem, I'd rather this be addressed on more sporting grounds like a fairer distribution of funds rather than the more draconian ideas of trying to nobble the top teams/drivers going into the race like what was put forward with the reverse grid races which you and some others were supporters of.


I think you're wrong.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Oct 23, 2019 3:32 pm 
Offline

Joined: Thu May 12, 2011 6:08 pm
Posts: 4569
pokerman wrote:
Asphalt_World wrote:
I think it's fair to say we all enjoy a good wet race. Now why is this? I'm guess the lack of grip meaning cars struggling to accelerate and brake, getting all twitchy and the sight of drivers having to demonstrate serious car control. This leads to much more passing than usual.

There, we actually do enjoy a fair amount of passing, not a oval racing levels of course.

I think F1 really needs to reduce the grip of the cars. Before you all shout me down, I don't mean they should be so lacking in grip the cars handle in the dry like they do in the wet, but surely we'd all enjoy the racing more if there were cars sliding a bit as they brake or accelerate and a bit more passing. Surely this would be worth something like a 5 second drop in lap time.

They did that for 2014 but people then complained that the cars were not much quicker than GP2 cars and it wasn't F1.


Well, kind of tried it. The cars were still totally wrong and loopholes were found to circumnavigate some of the rules. This resulted is possibly the ugliest F1 grid ever!!!!!

_________________
Power tends to corrupt and absolute power corrupts absolutely. [Lord Acton]
My own Google Earth Motor Sport file. http://www.mediafire.com/?jzm1ieatytv
Instagram @simply_italian_car_pics


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Oct 24, 2019 12:45 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Feb 23, 2014 3:53 am
Posts: 7761
Location: Michigan, USA
pokerman wrote:
I don't think that much has changed apart from the level of reliability and professionalism we see today which makes it that bit harder for the lower teams to see a podium.

Let's also not forget some of the systems that were put in place to hamper the top teams, I'm looking at the qualifying systems like the reverse 1 lap qualifying were the faster cars had to go out first on a green track, I guess not too dissimilar to what you have with FE, and also the race fueled qualifying.

This was done obviously because the top teams dominating has always been a problem, I'd rather this be addressed on more sporting grounds like a fairer distribution of funds rather than the more draconian ideas of trying to nobble the top teams/drivers going into the race like what was put forward with the reverse grid races which you and some others were supporters of.

In the 1990s, the budget difference between a top team and a midfield team was $60m vs $30m. Today, it's $400m vs. $100m.

Tighter regulations and enormous budgets allow the big teams to simply buy competitiveness at the expense of the smaller teams who can't afford to match them. That is what has changed.

_________________
PICK 10 COMPETITION (4 wins, 15 podiums): 3rd in 2016
TOP THREE CHAMPIONSHIP (No Limit Excedrin Racing): Champions in 2015 & 2018 | 2nd in 2017 & 2019
AUTOSPORT GP PREDICTOR: 2017 USA & P-F1 Champion


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Oct 24, 2019 11:50 am 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 34239
Exediron wrote:
pokerman wrote:
I don't think that much has changed apart from the level of reliability and professionalism we see today which makes it that bit harder for the lower teams to see a podium.

Let's also not forget some of the systems that were put in place to hamper the top teams, I'm looking at the qualifying systems like the reverse 1 lap qualifying were the faster cars had to go out first on a green track, I guess not too dissimilar to what you have with FE, and also the race fueled qualifying.

This was done obviously because the top teams dominating has always been a problem, I'd rather this be addressed on more sporting grounds like a fairer distribution of funds rather than the more draconian ideas of trying to nobble the top teams/drivers going into the race like what was put forward with the reverse grid races which you and some others were supporters of.

In the 1990s, the budget difference between a top team and a midfield team was $60m vs $30m. Today, it's $400m vs. $100m.

Tighter regulations and enormous budgets allow the big teams to simply buy competitiveness at the expense of the smaller teams who can't afford to match them. That is what has changed.

Yeah obviously budget plays a big part which is why I mentioned a fairer distribution of funds, I would say this probably started in the 2000's with Ferrari, then carried on by the likes of Red Bull and then Mercedes also joined the party.

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

2013: 5th Place
2014: Champion
2015: 3rd Place
2016: 4th Place

2017: 9th Place
2018: 7th place

Wins: Canada 2018, Abu Dhabi 2017
Podiums: (8)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Oct 24, 2019 12:10 pm 
Online

Joined: Sat Jan 28, 2012 4:13 pm
Posts: 16972
pokerman wrote:
Exediron wrote:
pokerman wrote:
I don't think that much has changed apart from the level of reliability and professionalism we see today which makes it that bit harder for the lower teams to see a podium.

Let's also not forget some of the systems that were put in place to hamper the top teams, I'm looking at the qualifying systems like the reverse 1 lap qualifying were the faster cars had to go out first on a green track, I guess not too dissimilar to what you have with FE, and also the race fueled qualifying.

This was done obviously because the top teams dominating has always been a problem, I'd rather this be addressed on more sporting grounds like a fairer distribution of funds rather than the more draconian ideas of trying to nobble the top teams/drivers going into the race like what was put forward with the reverse grid races which you and some others were supporters of.

In the 1990s, the budget difference between a top team and a midfield team was $60m vs $30m. Today, it's $400m vs. $100m.

Tighter regulations and enormous budgets allow the big teams to simply buy competitiveness at the expense of the smaller teams who can't afford to match them. That is what has changed.

Yeah obviously budget plays a big part which is why I mentioned a fairer distribution of funds, I would say this probably started in the 2000's with Ferrari, then carried on by the likes of Red Bull and then Mercedes also joined the party.


Red Bull's is the most scandalous. Basically a straight up bribe to break ranks and sign the Concorde agreement.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Oct 24, 2019 3:53 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Mar 06, 2004 8:07 am
Posts: 1388
Asphalt_World wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Asphalt_World wrote:
I think it's fair to say we all enjoy a good wet race. Now why is this? I'm guess the lack of grip meaning cars struggling to accelerate and brake, getting all twitchy and the sight of drivers having to demonstrate serious car control. This leads to much more passing than usual.

There, we actually do enjoy a fair amount of passing, not a oval racing levels of course.

I think F1 really needs to reduce the grip of the cars. Before you all shout me down, I don't mean they should be so lacking in grip the cars handle in the dry like they do in the wet, but surely we'd all enjoy the racing more if there were cars sliding a bit as they brake or accelerate and a bit more passing. Surely this would be worth something like a 5 second drop in lap time.

They did that for 2014 but people then complained that the cars were not much quicker than GP2 cars and it wasn't F1.


Well, kind of tried it. The cars were still totally wrong and loopholes were found to circumnavigate some of the rules. This resulted is possibly the ugliest F1 grid ever!!!!!


Image

You think?

_________________
"I'd rather lose a race going fast enough to win it, than win one going slow enough to lose it".
-Stirling Moss


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Oct 24, 2019 10:54 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Feb 23, 2014 3:53 am
Posts: 7761
Location: Michigan, USA
DOLOMITE wrote:
You think?

I actually thought the Red Bull and Mercedes cars looked pretty good. The rest were varying degrees of hideous, however.

_________________
PICK 10 COMPETITION (4 wins, 15 podiums): 3rd in 2016
TOP THREE CHAMPIONSHIP (No Limit Excedrin Racing): Champions in 2015 & 2018 | 2nd in 2017 & 2019
AUTOSPORT GP PREDICTOR: 2017 USA & P-F1 Champion


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Oct 26, 2019 6:29 pm 
Offline

Joined: Thu May 12, 2011 6:08 pm
Posts: 4569
I know I keep going on about grip levels, but honestly. During Q1 in Mexico, I've just been treated to an action reply of Vettel getting oversteer on corner exit. It was the most minuscule amount of oversteer you've ever seen. but due to the fact that cars have so much grip these days, this is deemed suitable for a replay.

These cars need less grip and regular sliding around............

_________________
Power tends to corrupt and absolute power corrupts absolutely. [Lord Acton]
My own Google Earth Motor Sport file. http://www.mediafire.com/?jzm1ieatytv
Instagram @simply_italian_car_pics


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Oct 27, 2019 1:50 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Nov 09, 2005 8:26 am
Posts: 831
DOLOMITE wrote:
Asphalt_World wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Asphalt_World wrote:
I think it's fair to say we all enjoy a good wet race. Now why is this? I'm guess the lack of grip meaning cars struggling to accelerate and brake, getting all twitchy and the sight of drivers having to demonstrate serious car control. This leads to much more passing than usual.

There, we actually do enjoy a fair amount of passing, not a oval racing levels of course.

I think F1 really needs to reduce the grip of the cars. Before you all shout me down, I don't mean they should be so lacking in grip the cars handle in the dry like they do in the wet, but surely we'd all enjoy the racing more if there were cars sliding a bit as they brake or accelerate and a bit more passing. Surely this would be worth something like a 5 second drop in lap time.

They did that for 2014 but people then complained that the cars were not much quicker than GP2 cars and it wasn't F1.


Well, kind of tried it. The cars were still totally wrong and loopholes were found to circumnavigate some of the rules. This resulted is possibly the ugliest F1 grid ever!!!!!


Image

You think?


This is only the front... As a whole, todays cars are the ugliest (and too big, too long, too wide). That the trend started years ago is not an excuse... On the contrary, they could have stopped it before.
As long as the stupid bubble doesn't explode, F1 future is hopeless.

_________________
As my brother said : "I've got the brain of a four year old. I'll bet he was glad to be rid of it".


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Oct 27, 2019 3:42 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Aug 03, 2009 6:54 pm
Posts: 1528
How to fix f1.

Go back to 1997 regulations

Single element front wings.
No end plates on the front wing.
1 element rear wing.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Oct 27, 2019 7:01 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 30, 2017 12:58 am
Posts: 1392
Location: Kansas
wire2004 wrote:
How to fix f1.

Go back to 1997 regulations

Single element front wings.
No end plates on the front wing.
1 element rear wing.


Add a ban on aerodynamic devices between the front and rear axles and above the floor pan, except for a barge board on each side.

Every element in the wind must have an aspect ratio of no more than 3.5 to 1 to prevent things like mirror stalks being used as wings.

Image
source: https://cdn-2.motorsport.com/images/amp ... renaul.jpg
Image
Source: https://cdn.silodrome.com/wp-content/up ... ne-Car.jpg
Image
Source: https://cdn-5.motorsport.com/images/mgl ... mp4-12.jpg

_________________
Mission WinLater


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Oct 27, 2019 8:42 pm 
Online

Joined: Sat Jan 28, 2012 4:13 pm
Posts: 16972
The fact that they can't get within a second of each other is clearly a huge problem.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Oct 27, 2019 9:41 pm 
Offline

Joined: Thu May 12, 2011 6:08 pm
Posts: 4569
And there were the Sky commentators going on about how fantastic this race was, and then we got the final 30 minutes of processional racing. Yes the top 4 were all within 10 seconds, but nothing happened.

_________________
Power tends to corrupt and absolute power corrupts absolutely. [Lord Acton]
My own Google Earth Motor Sport file. http://www.mediafire.com/?jzm1ieatytv
Instagram @simply_italian_car_pics


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Oct 27, 2019 9:41 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Feb 23, 2014 3:53 am
Posts: 7761
Location: Michigan, USA
mikeyg123 wrote:
The fact that they can't get within a second of each other is clearly a huge problem.

It's just the top cars. Ricciardo ran the last 10 or 15 laps within a second of Perez pretty much the whole time.

_________________
PICK 10 COMPETITION (4 wins, 15 podiums): 3rd in 2016
TOP THREE CHAMPIONSHIP (No Limit Excedrin Racing): Champions in 2015 & 2018 | 2nd in 2017 & 2019
AUTOSPORT GP PREDICTOR: 2017 USA & P-F1 Champion


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Oct 28, 2019 8:13 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Aug 03, 2009 6:54 pm
Posts: 1528
Mort Canard wrote:
wire2004 wrote:
How to fix f1.

Go back to 1997 regulations

Single element front wings.
No end plates on the front wing.
1 element rear wing.


Add a ban on aerodynamic devices between the front and rear axles and above the floor pan, except for a barge board on each side.

Every element in the wind must have an aspect ratio of no more than 3.5 to 1 to prevent things like mirror stalks being used as wings.

Image
source: https://cdn-2.motorsport.com/images/amp ... renaul.jpg
Image
Source: https://cdn.silodrome.com/wp-content/up ... ne-Car.jpg
Image
Source: https://cdn-5.motorsport.com/images/mgl ... mp4-12.jpg


Some of the most beautiful cars ever in my opinion.

Other things to improve f1.
The floor of the car must be the same dimensions of the car. Not a floor that overhangs and comes put to give aerodynamic aid. (Basically hamilton shown the area to ellimimate. It's not needed)
Single plane barge boards
The rear wing is to be held on by 1 element in the middle of the wing.
No adjustments at all on the steering wheel. The only thing that can be on there is the pit limiter. The drinks bottle and the radio button.
Manual clutch.
Stick shift gearbox. I dont mind it being btcc style where its pull to go up and push to down shift. But nothing behind the steering wheel in relation to gears or clutch.
No pit to car telemetry at all.
7 speed gearbox at most. But they can have a pool of 50 cogs that they can use for the whole season.
Scrap drs.
Engines increased to a 2.0 litre turbo but with a emphasis on emitions. So under 50kg/100km (the basis on that is my car is 99kg/100km and has zero road tax (in the uk). Yes it's only a 1.5 turbo and a 16 plate. But if formula 1 leads the way in innovation. This is more relevant than the hybrids we have now)
Fuel restricted to 75kg for the race. (Increase to 100kg if my dream of increasing the races by 25% becomes reality)
Tyres. 2 compounds. Soft or hard. We didnt have this problem in the 90s with tyre compounds.
Either give us tyres like in the 90s. Or bring back refilling and they can only have a 50kg tank in the car.
Bring 3 types of wet tyres. Bring the monsoon tyres back. Let them race.
Reduce the size of the car to 1.75m width (98 regs were 1.8m) and decrease the length by 50cm as well. Let the cars be more compact as well.
Turbo of a maximum of 2 BAR. This will again take some speed of the car.
I know engine cost will be high in season 1 due to development. But Engine cost for season 2 must not be over 25 million in spend regulated by the fia. If a new supplier. (Ford for example) comes in in year 3 of the rules. They start in year 1. Of development too not disadvantage them coming into the sport.
Spending cap on the car of 75million per year. With year 1 being set at 150 million. Again a new team entering the sport in year 4 or something will have a 1st year development cost of 150 million to not disadvantage them. I found the problem was Honda came in in year 3 I think when merc Ferrari and Renault already had development sorted. So were disadvantaged until now.

I think I could go on. But I've given what I think could be some good changes along with my other post too reduce laptimes by 3 or so seconds a lap. Make racing closer and racing exciting.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Oct 28, 2019 10:05 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun Aug 28, 2011 8:48 pm
Posts: 3398
Location: UK
Exediron wrote:
mikeyg123 wrote:
The fact that they can't get within a second of each other is clearly a huge problem.

It's just the top cars. Ricciardo ran the last 10 or 15 laps within a second of Perez pretty much the whole time.

Cooling seemed to be the limiting factor more than anything, certainly for the Mercedes drivers who kept being told to back away whenever they got within 2 seconds of the car in front. I think it adds to the case for banning pit-to-car communication - currently the engineers design everything right on the limit knowing they can tell the driver to back off and manage it if they've pushed things too far. Without that ability, they'd have to design things much more conservatively.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Oct 29, 2019 11:09 am 
Offline

Joined: Wed Aug 26, 2009 12:23 pm
Posts: 299
Location: Amesbury
wire2004 wrote:
Mort Canard wrote:
wire2004 wrote:
How to fix f1.


Other things to improve f1.
The floor of the car must be the same dimensions of the car. Not a floor that overhangs and comes put to give aerodynamic aid. (Basically hamilton shown the area to ellimimate. It's not needed)

Could all cars using the same FIA floor be a possible rule?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Oct 29, 2019 7:39 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Aug 03, 2009 6:54 pm
Posts: 1528
Kev627 wrote:
wire2004 wrote:
Mort Canard wrote:
wire2004 wrote:
How to fix f1.


Other things to improve f1.
The floor of the car must be the same dimensions of the car. Not a floor that overhangs and comes put to give aerodynamic aid. (Basically hamilton shown the area to ellimimate. It's not needed)

Could all cars using the same FIA floor be a possible rule?


Although a intresting concept. I would like to think that although the floor must follow the dimensions of the car. That we could see some innovation of the floor. Maybe we go all out and tell the teams they cant have a floor.
The way I see it. Does your standard car at home have a floor underneath the car. The only place I see some sort of a floor is under the bonnet. If you look under the car you see the exhaust and everything.with the wires being housed in covers
Why not something like this???


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Oct 29, 2019 7:50 pm 
Offline

Joined: Thu May 12, 2011 6:08 pm
Posts: 4569
wire2004 wrote:
Kev627 wrote:
wire2004 wrote:
Mort Canard wrote:
wire2004 wrote:
How to fix f1.


Other things to improve f1.
The floor of the car must be the same dimensions of the car. Not a floor that overhangs and comes put to give aerodynamic aid. (Basically hamilton shown the area to ellimimate. It's not needed)

Could all cars using the same FIA floor be a possible rule?


Although a intresting concept. I would like to think that although the floor must follow the dimensions of the car. That we could see some innovation of the floor. Maybe we go all out and tell the teams they cant have a floor.
The way I see it. Does your standard car at home have a floor underneath the car. The only place I see some sort of a floor is under the bonnet. If you look under the car you see the exhaust and everything.with the wires being housed in covers
Why not something like this???


A lot of cars, especially performance cars, do have a floor or at least a good proportion of the underneath covered with something similar to a flooring. This is to air airflow underneath and create downforce too.

_________________
Power tends to corrupt and absolute power corrupts absolutely. [Lord Acton]
My own Google Earth Motor Sport file. http://www.mediafire.com/?jzm1ieatytv
Instagram @simply_italian_car_pics


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Oct 29, 2019 7:56 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Aug 03, 2009 6:54 pm
Posts: 1528
That would mean my view would be to have no floor to take away the aero and the down force and to take away dirty air.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Oct 29, 2019 8:46 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Feb 23, 2014 3:53 am
Posts: 7761
Location: Michigan, USA
wire2004 wrote:
That would mean my view would be to have no floor to take away the aero and the down force and to take away dirty air.

Downforce generated through the floor is almost immune to dirty air. Ground effects is by far the best way to produce a fast car that can follow closely.

_________________
PICK 10 COMPETITION (4 wins, 15 podiums): 3rd in 2016
TOP THREE CHAMPIONSHIP (No Limit Excedrin Racing): Champions in 2015 & 2018 | 2nd in 2017 & 2019
AUTOSPORT GP PREDICTOR: 2017 USA & P-F1 Champion


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Oct 29, 2019 10:19 pm 
Offline

Joined: Thu May 12, 2011 6:08 pm
Posts: 4569
Exediron wrote:
wire2004 wrote:
That would mean my view would be to have no floor to take away the aero and the down force and to take away dirty air.

Downforce generated through the floor is almost immune to dirty air. Ground effects is by far the best way to produce a fast car that can follow closely.


Exactly. Give more freedom on the floor, the plank was introduced for a reason and reduced downforce massively, they could be just as quick as today's cars but run far less or more simple wings. This would indeed allow closer following.

_________________
Power tends to corrupt and absolute power corrupts absolutely. [Lord Acton]
My own Google Earth Motor Sport file. http://www.mediafire.com/?jzm1ieatytv
Instagram @simply_italian_car_pics


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Oct 30, 2019 4:19 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Aug 03, 2009 6:54 pm
Posts: 1528
In that case. I apologise if the dirty air was negligible and wont affect the racing. If it is safe. Allow the floor (as I said though. Only around the dimensions of the car) and maybe allow skirts down the sides too allow as much ground effect as possible.

I have 2 other ways that I can improve formula 1.

Do not allow teams too contribute to the regulations.
Get rid of Ferrari's power too veto anything they like.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Oct 30, 2019 6:08 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 29, 2012 11:57 am
Posts: 794
Location: Scotland/U.A.E
Quote:
A lot of cars, especially performance cars, do have a floor or at least a good proportion of the underneath covered with something similar to a flooring. This is to air airflow underneath and create downforce too.


My own car, fitting a flat floor (made out of thin plastic sheeting) and rear diffuser was worth around 1 second per lap.

That's at base level motorsport, with a not particularly fast car, with something I made in a shed.


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic

All times are UTC


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Mod Titanium and 35 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group