planetf1.com

Just an update, Honda confirms that Nando will test with a Honda powered car soon, it appears that it will be an Andretti-McLaren collaboration. Not that any of this is a surprise, but there was some speculation that he offended Honda so bad that he wasn't going to be in a Honda powered car and Andretti was going be be involved with him through his other partnership Harding Racing in a Chevy

https://autoweek.com/article/formula-on ... ourse-test

Andretti will have a hell of a lineup with fernando, but it makes since they already partnered with them for the indy500.

I think Fernando will probably be the best driver in Indycar, but do you guys that follow both Indycar and F1 think he will dominate the series? I think the cars are so close and that there is some serious talent now in Indycar that I doubt he will dominate in a way that say, Zanardi did back in his day. What do you guys think?

rodH wrote:Just an update, Honda confirms that Nando will test with a Honda powered car soon, it appears that it will be an Andretti-McLaren collaboration. Not that any of this is a surprise, but there was some speculation that he offended Honda so bad that he wasn't going to be in a Honda powered car and Andretti was going be be involved with him through his other partnership Harding Racing in a Chevy

https://autoweek.com/article/formula-on ... ourse-test

Andretti will have a hell of a lineup with fernando, but it makes since they already partnered with them for the indy500.

I think Fernando will probably be the best driver in Indycar, but do you guys that follow both Indycar and F1 think he will dominate the series? I think the cars are so close and that there is some serious talent now in Indycar that I doubt he will dominate in a way that say, Zanardi did back in his day. What do you guys think?

I think it's naive to think he'll walk in the door and dominate it. I do think he is a better driver than probably all of the Indy guys but there's a lot more to it, particularly the different ovals. IndyCar does often reward drivers with a "never say die" attitude, which should suit someone like Alonso

But he'll have some job on his hands trying to beat the Penske guys and Scott Dixon

mcdo wrote:

rodH wrote:Just an update, Honda confirms that Nando will test with a Honda powered car soon, it appears that it will be an Andretti-McLaren collaboration. Not that any of this is a surprise, but there was some speculation that he offended Honda so bad that he wasn't going to be in a Honda powered car and Andretti was going be be involved with him through his other partnership Harding Racing in a Chevy

https://autoweek.com/article/formula-on ... ourse-test

Andretti will have a hell of a lineup with fernando, but it makes since they already partnered with them for the indy500.

I think Fernando will probably be the best driver in Indycar, but do you guys that follow both Indycar and F1 think he will dominate the series? I think the cars are so close and that there is some serious talent now in Indycar that I doubt he will dominate in a way that say, Zanardi did back in his day. What do you guys think?

I think it's naive to think he'll walk in the door and dominate it. I do think he is a better driver than probably all of the Indy guys but there's a lot more to it, particularly the different ovals. IndyCar does often reward drivers with a "never say die" attitude, which should suit someone like Alonso

But he'll have some job on his hands trying to beat the Penske guys and Scott Dixon

I read somewhere that the title has gone down to the wire for the last 12 years so no driver tends to actually dominate, my impression is that for any given race you need to have luck on your side to win and then I believe in recent times they've had double points finales?

pokerman wrote:I read somewhere that the title has gone down to the wire for the last 12 years so no driver tends to actually dominate, my impression is that for any given race you need to have luck on your side to win and then I believe in recent times they've had double points finales?

Yes, they have unfortunately awarded double points for the season finale since 2015. The Indy 500 is also worth double points.

Additionally to that, the current Indy points system heavily rewards consistency over occasional wins. In F1, a win is worth more than double the points for the first place off the podium (4th). In Indy, a win is worth double the points for 8th place, and you get points for every position. The result is that simply running near the front is almost guaranteed to keep you within 100 points of the leader, which is the amount on offer for the final race.

However, I also don't think it's quite accurate to say that nobody dominates in IndyCar. No single driver has done so recently, but a small collection of drivers (mostly from only two or at most three teams) have taken the vast majority of the wins over the past seasons. There's currently a small crop at the top who are quite closely matched, and nobody else really has a look at the championship. It will be interesting to see what effect Alonso has on that dynamic.

Exediron wrote:

pokerman wrote:I read somewhere that the title has gone down to the wire for the last 12 years so no driver tends to actually dominate, my impression is that for any given race you need to have luck on your side to win and then I believe in recent times they've had double points finales?

Yes, they have unfortunately awarded double points for the season finale since 2015. The Indy 500 is also worth double points.

Additionally to that, the current Indy points system heavily rewards consistency over occasional wins. In F1, a win is worth more than double the points for the first place off the podium (4th). In Indy, a win is worth double the points for 8th place, and you get points for every position. The result is that simply running near the front is almost guaranteed to keep you within 100 points of the leader, which is the amount on offer for the final race.

However, I also don't think it's quite accurate to say that nobody dominates in IndyCar. No single driver has done so recently, but a small collection of drivers (mostly from only two or at most three teams) have taken the vast majority of the wins over the past seasons. There's currently a small crop at the top who are quite closely matched, and nobody else really has a look at the championship. It will be interesting to see what effect Alonso has on that dynamic.

And I'm ok with that. I don't see a problem with the motorsport world having a series that rewards consistency over outright wins. I'm definitely no fan of double points season finales though. Oh Montoya

Exediron wrote:

pokerman wrote:I read somewhere that the title has gone down to the wire for the last 12 years so no driver tends to actually dominate, my impression is that for any given race you need to have luck on your side to win and then I believe in recent times they've had double points finales?

Yes, they have unfortunately awarded double points for the season finale since 2015. The Indy 500 is also worth double points.

Additionally to that, the current Indy points system heavily rewards consistency over occasional wins. In F1, a win is worth more than double the points for the first place off the podium (4th). In Indy, a win is worth double the points for 8th place, and you get points for every position. The result is that simply running near the front is almost guaranteed to keep you within 100 points of the leader, which is the amount on offer for the final race.

However, I also don't think it's quite accurate to say that nobody dominates in IndyCar. No single driver has done so recently, but a small collection of drivers (mostly from only two or at most three teams) have taken the vast majority of the wins over the past seasons. There's currently a small crop at the top who are quite closely matched, and nobody else really has a look at the championship. It will be interesting to see what effect Alonso has on that dynamic.

Fair enough so the fastest drivers do win the races it's just the points system that tends to keep things close?

pokerman wrote:

Exediron wrote:

pokerman wrote:I read somewhere that the title has gone down to the wire for the last 12 years so no driver tends to actually dominate, my impression is that for any given race you need to have luck on your side to win and then I believe in recent times they've had double points finales?

Yes, they have unfortunately awarded double points for the season finale since 2015. The Indy 500 is also worth double points.

Additionally to that, the current Indy points system heavily rewards consistency over occasional wins. In F1, a win is worth more than double the points for the first place off the podium (4th). In Indy, a win is worth double the points for 8th place, and you get points for every position. The result is that simply running near the front is almost guaranteed to keep you within 100 points of the leader, which is the amount on offer for the final race.

However, I also don't think it's quite accurate to say that nobody dominates in IndyCar. No single driver has done so recently, but a small collection of drivers (mostly from only two or at most three teams) have taken the vast majority of the wins over the past seasons. There's currently a small crop at the top who are quite closely matched, and nobody else really has a look at the championship. It will be interesting to see what effect Alonso has on that dynamic.

Fair enough so the fastest drivers do win the races it's just the points system that tends to keep things close?

The point is, there are several drivers who can and have won races... that ALSO helps keep things close. F1 cannot say the same. Like F1, there are some dominate teams.. ie Penske, Ganassi and Andretti, but even other teams have won races.

pokerman wrote:

Exediron wrote:

pokerman wrote:I read somewhere that the title has gone down to the wire for the last 12 years so no driver tends to actually dominate, my impression is that for any given race you need to have luck on your side to win and then I believe in recent times they've had double points finales?

Yes, they have unfortunately awarded double points for the season finale since 2015. The Indy 500 is also worth double points.

Additionally to that, the current Indy points system heavily rewards consistency over occasional wins. In F1, a win is worth more than double the points for the first place off the podium (4th). In Indy, a win is worth double the points for 8th place, and you get points for every position. The result is that simply running near the front is almost guaranteed to keep you within 100 points of the leader, which is the amount on offer for the final race.

However, I also don't think it's quite accurate to say that nobody dominates in IndyCar. No single driver has done so recently, but a small collection of drivers (mostly from only two or at most three teams) have taken the vast majority of the wins over the past seasons. There's currently a small crop at the top who are quite closely matched, and nobody else really has a look at the championship. It will be interesting to see what effect Alonso has on that dynamic.

Fair enough so the fastest drivers do win the races it's just the points system that tends to keep things close?

The points system is certainly one part. Applying the current IndyCar points to the 2017 Formula One season (and bearing in mind that there are more races in an F1 season than an IndyCar season), Hamilton would have been on 787 points heading into the final race and Vettel would have been on 712. That would have made the championship technically still undecided at the final race, despite Vettel taking two DNFs to Hamilton's none. It would have been highly unlikely to go any way other than how it did, but that's just an example of the fragility of the championship 'going to the last round'.

Additionally, as Blake says, there are usually 4-5 drivers in a season who split the wins rather than the 1-3 more common in F1 (and only two in a season with a really dominant car). Over the last five years, the multiple race winners are:

(*) Power: 13
(*) Dixon: 11
(*) Newgarden: 10
(*) Pagenaud: 9
(*) Hunter-Reay: 6
(*) Bourdais: 6
Rahal: 5
Rossi: 4
Montoya: 4
Hinchcliffe: 3
Castroneves: 2
Conway: 2

With the drivers marked with a star being series champions. The wins definitely do tend to accumulate with the faster drivers, it's just that since everyone has a much more equal shot at winning there aren't any top level drivers who don't challenge for wins. If the F1 field were driving IndyCars, I'm fairly certain we'd have had some more winners over the past years as well (Alonso certainly would have won since 2013, for example).

Blake wrote:

pokerman wrote:

Exediron wrote:

pokerman wrote:I read somewhere that the title has gone down to the wire for the last 12 years so no driver tends to actually dominate, my impression is that for any given race you need to have luck on your side to win and then I believe in recent times they've had double points finales?

Yes, they have unfortunately awarded double points for the season finale since 2015. The Indy 500 is also worth double points.

Additionally to that, the current Indy points system heavily rewards consistency over occasional wins. In F1, a win is worth more than double the points for the first place off the podium (4th). In Indy, a win is worth double the points for 8th place, and you get points for every position. The result is that simply running near the front is almost guaranteed to keep you within 100 points of the leader, which is the amount on offer for the final race.

However, I also don't think it's quite accurate to say that nobody dominates in IndyCar. No single driver has done so recently, but a small collection of drivers (mostly from only two or at most three teams) have taken the vast majority of the wins over the past seasons. There's currently a small crop at the top who are quite closely matched, and nobody else really has a look at the championship. It will be interesting to see what effect Alonso has on that dynamic.

Fair enough so the fastest drivers do win the races it's just the points system that tends to keep things close?

The point is, there are several drivers who can and have won races... that ALSO helps keep things close. F1 cannot say the same. Like F1, there are some dominate teams.. ie Penske, Ganassi and Andretti, but even other teams have won races.

You would expect that in a spec series though, to be fair. The better funded teams will dominate, but circumstance will give every other driver a chance for victories, too. F1 used to give the minnows a chance, albeit small, but the current rigidity of the regulations makes that all highly unlikely now

That's true, Zoue. The point is that it is unlikely for one particular driver to totally dominate the series, even one as talented as Alonso. While Alonso maybe the best talent in Indy cars if he goes that way, I suspect he will find the competition every bit as tough as what he sees in F1... If not tougher. However, for a change he should have a competitive car. I would be surprised if Nando I did not find the Top step of the podium sometime during even in his first year. The best thing is that he should have more fun and less frustration.

Blake wrote:

pokerman wrote:

Exediron wrote:

pokerman wrote:I read somewhere that the title has gone down to the wire for the last 12 years so no driver tends to actually dominate, my impression is that for any given race you need to have luck on your side to win and then I believe in recent times they've had double points finales?

Yes, they have unfortunately awarded double points for the season finale since 2015. The Indy 500 is also worth double points.

Additionally to that, the current Indy points system heavily rewards consistency over occasional wins. In F1, a win is worth more than double the points for the first place off the podium (4th). In Indy, a win is worth double the points for 8th place, and you get points for every position. The result is that simply running near the front is almost guaranteed to keep you within 100 points of the leader, which is the amount on offer for the final race.

However, I also don't think it's quite accurate to say that nobody dominates in IndyCar. No single driver has done so recently, but a small collection of drivers (mostly from only two or at most three teams) have taken the vast majority of the wins over the past seasons. There's currently a small crop at the top who are quite closely matched, and nobody else really has a look at the championship. It will be interesting to see what effect Alonso has on that dynamic.

Fair enough so the fastest drivers do win the races it's just the points system that tends to keep things close?

The point is, there are several drivers who can and have won races... that ALSO helps keep things close. F1 cannot say the same. Like F1, there are some dominate teams.. ie Penske, Ganassi and Andretti, but even other teams have won races.

Well that's what you can basically expect in a spec series, let's stick all the F1 drivers into F2 cars then?

I don't understand what I said to get such a reply?

Exediron wrote:

pokerman wrote:

Exediron wrote:

pokerman wrote:I read somewhere that the title has gone down to the wire for the last 12 years so no driver tends to actually dominate, my impression is that for any given race you need to have luck on your side to win and then I believe in recent times they've had double points finales?

Yes, they have unfortunately awarded double points for the season finale since 2015. The Indy 500 is also worth double points.

Additionally to that, the current Indy points system heavily rewards consistency over occasional wins. In F1, a win is worth more than double the points for the first place off the podium (4th). In Indy, a win is worth double the points for 8th place, and you get points for every position. The result is that simply running near the front is almost guaranteed to keep you within 100 points of the leader, which is the amount on offer for the final race.

However, I also don't think it's quite accurate to say that nobody dominates in IndyCar. No single driver has done so recently, but a small collection of drivers (mostly from only two or at most three teams) have taken the vast majority of the wins over the past seasons. There's currently a small crop at the top who are quite closely matched, and nobody else really has a look at the championship. It will be interesting to see what effect Alonso has on that dynamic.

Fair enough so the fastest drivers do win the races it's just the points system that tends to keep things close?

The points system is certainly one part. Applying the current IndyCar points to the 2017 Formula One season (and bearing in mind that there are more races in an F1 season than an IndyCar season), Hamilton would have been on 787 points heading into the final race and Vettel would have been on 712. That would have made the championship technically still undecided at the final race, despite Vettel taking two DNFs to Hamilton's none. It would have been highly unlikely to go any way other than how it did, but that's just an example of the fragility of the championship 'going to the last round'.

Additionally, as Blake says, there are usually 4-5 drivers in a season who split the wins rather than the 1-3 more common in F1 (and only two in a season with a really dominant car). Over the last five years, the multiple race winners are:

(*) Power: 13
(*) Dixon: 11
(*) Newgarden: 10
(*) Pagenaud: 9
(*) Hunter-Reay: 6
(*) Bourdais: 6
Rahal: 5
Rossi: 4
Montoya: 4
Hinchcliffe: 3
Castroneves: 2
Conway: 2

With the drivers marked with a star being series champions. The wins definitely do tend to accumulate with the faster drivers, it's just that since everyone has a much more equal shot at winning there aren't any top level drivers who don't challenge for wins. If the F1 field were driving IndyCars, I'm fairly certain we'd have had some more winners over the past years as well (Alonso certainly would have won since 2013, for example).

Yes as what you would kind of expect in what are basically spec cars and as you pointed out the points system is specifically designed to take the series down to the wire as it's done these past 12 years.

Blake wrote:That's true, Zoue. The point is that it is unlikely for one particular driver to totally dominate the series, even one as talented as Alonso. While Alonso maybe the best talent in Indy cars if he goes that way, I suspect he will find the competition every bit as tough as what he sees in F1... If not tougher. However, for a change he should have a competitive car. I would be surprised if Nando I did not find the Top step of the podium sometime during even in his first year. The best thing is that he should have more fun and less frustration.

More fun?

I'm watching the red flagged Ponoco race, Wickens and Hinchcliffe aren't having much fun at the moment, is oval racing really safe?

Hoping Wickens is not too badly hurt.

How scary is this?

https://twitter.com/ryanpistana/status/ ... 0676545536

pokerman wrote:

Blake wrote:

pokerman wrote:

Exediron wrote:

pokerman wrote:I read somewhere that the title has gone down to the wire for the last 12 years so no driver tends to actually dominate, my impression is that for any given race you need to have luck on your side to win and then I believe in recent times they've had double points finales?

Yes, they have unfortunately awarded double points for the season finale since 2015. The Indy 500 is also worth double points.

Additionally to that, the current Indy points system heavily rewards consistency over occasional wins. In F1, a win is worth more than double the points for the first place off the podium (4th). In Indy, a win is worth double the points for 8th place, and you get points for every position. The result is that simply running near the front is almost guaranteed to keep you within 100 points of the leader, which is the amount on offer for the final race.

However, I also don't think it's quite accurate to say that nobody dominates in IndyCar. No single driver has done so recently, but a small collection of drivers (mostly from only two or at most three teams) have taken the vast majority of the wins over the past seasons. There's currently a small crop at the top who are quite closely matched, and nobody else really has a look at the championship. It will be interesting to see what effect Alonso has on that dynamic.

Fair enough so the fastest drivers do win the races it's just the points system that tends to keep things close?

The point is, there are several drivers who can and have won races... that ALSO helps keep things close. F1 cannot say the same. Like F1, there are some dominate teams.. ie Penske, Ganassi and Andretti, but even other teams have won races.

Well that's what you can basically expect in a spec series, let's stick all the F1 drivers into F2 cars then?

I don't understand what I said to get such a reply?

?
What the hell did I say for you to be upset about??????

You appear to have a monster chip on your shoulder if you find offense at that post. This is getting old.

pokerman wrote:

Blake wrote:That's true, Zoue. The point is that it is unlikely for one particular driver to totally dominate the series, even one as talented as Alonso. While Alonso maybe the best talent in Indy cars if he goes that way, I suspect he will find the competition every bit as tough as what he sees in F1... If not tougher. However, for a change he should have a competitive car. I would be surprised if Nando I did not find the Top step of the podium sometime during even in his first year. The best thing is that he should have more fun and less frustration.

More fun?

I'm watching the red flagged Ponoco race, Wickens and Hinchcliffe aren't having much fun at the moment, is oval racing really safe?

Hoping Wickens is not too badly hurt.

How scary is this?

https://twitter.com/ryanpistana/status/ ... 0676545536

Yes, fun. These drivers... All race drivers...are well aware of the risks, yet they still do it. Why?

That was a horrendous accident and hopefully he is going to be OK. BTW, Pocono is not an oval, not that it matters in this case.

Blake wrote:

pokerman wrote:

Blake wrote:

pokerman wrote:

Exediron wrote: Yes, they have unfortunately awarded double points for the season finale since 2015. The Indy 500 is also worth double points.

Additionally to that, the current Indy points system heavily rewards consistency over occasional wins. In F1, a win is worth more than double the points for the first place off the podium (4th). In Indy, a win is worth double the points for 8th place, and you get points for every position. The result is that simply running near the front is almost guaranteed to keep you within 100 points of the leader, which is the amount on offer for the final race.

However, I also don't think it's quite accurate to say that nobody dominates in IndyCar. No single driver has done so recently, but a small collection of drivers (mostly from only two or at most three teams) have taken the vast majority of the wins over the past seasons. There's currently a small crop at the top who are quite closely matched, and nobody else really has a look at the championship. It will be interesting to see what effect Alonso has on that dynamic.

Fair enough so the fastest drivers do win the races it's just the points system that tends to keep things close?

The point is, there are several drivers who can and have won races... that ALSO helps keep things close. F1 cannot say the same. Like F1, there are some dominate teams.. ie Penske, Ganassi and Andretti, but even other teams have won races.

Well that's what you can basically expect in a spec series, let's stick all the F1 drivers into F2 cars then?

I don't understand what I said to get such a reply?

?
What the hell did I say for you to be upset about??????

You appear to have a monster chip on your shoulder if you find offense at that post. This is getting old.

You was making a point about something I wasn't even questioning.

Blake wrote:

pokerman wrote:

Blake wrote:That's true, Zoue. The point is that it is unlikely for one particular driver to totally dominate the series, even one as talented as Alonso. While Alonso maybe the best talent in Indy cars if he goes that way, I suspect he will find the competition every bit as tough as what he sees in F1... If not tougher. However, for a change he should have a competitive car. I would be surprised if Nando I did not find the Top step of the podium sometime during even in his first year. The best thing is that he should have more fun and less frustration.

More fun?

I'm watching the red flagged Ponoco race, Wickens and Hinchcliffe aren't having much fun at the moment, is oval racing really safe?

Hoping Wickens is not too badly hurt.

How scary is this?

https://twitter.com/ryanpistana/status/ ... 0676545536

Yes, fun. These drivers... All race drivers...are well aware of the risks, yet they still do it. Why?

That was a horrendous accident and hopefully he is going to be OK. BTW, Pocono is not an oval, not that it matters in this case.

Well compared to F1 it's a bit like a look into the past, this level of risk of course is no longer acceptable in F1.

I guess it's just unfortunate the last time I ventured into Indycars was last year in the Indy500, there had to witness Bourdais smashing his legs up in qualifying and in the race Dixon was launched in the air almost landed upside down onto the top of a wall, it's crazy stuff.

pokerman wrote: You was making a point about something I wasn't even questioning.

NO, poker... You made the comment

Fair enough so the fastest drivers do win the races it's just the points system that tends to keep things close?

To which I responded:

The point is, there are several drivers who can and have won races... that ALSO helps keep things close. F1 cannot say the same. Like F1, there are some dominate teams.. ie Penske, Ganassi and Andretti, but even other teams have won races.

You then responded:

I don't understand what I said to get such a reply?

I then responded:

What the hell did I say for you to be upset about??????

You appear to have a monster chip on your shoulder if you find offense at that post. This is getting old.

You was making a point about something I wasn't even questioning[/quote].

And now you say:

You was making a point about something I wasn't even questioning.

I fail to see where I, in anyway, posted an out-of-line post, as your initial response tends to suggest. I simply pointed out that it is not ONLY the points system that keeps INDYcar scoring close, it is several competitive drivers in competitive cars. If you find that inappropriate, please explain, as I don't get it.

pokerman wrote:

Blake wrote:

pokerman wrote:

Blake wrote:That's true, Zoue. The point is that it is unlikely for one particular driver to totally dominate the series, even one as talented as Alonso. While Alonso maybe the best talent in Indy cars if he goes that way, I suspect he will find the competition every bit as tough as what he sees in F1... If not tougher. However, for a change he should have a competitive car. I would be surprised if Nando I did not find the Top step of the podium sometime during even in his first year. The best thing is that he should have more fun and less frustration.

More fun?

I'm watching the red flagged Ponoco race, Wickens and Hinchcliffe aren't having much fun at the moment, is oval racing really safe?

Hoping Wickens is not too badly hurt.

How scary is this?

https://twitter.com/ryanpistana/status/ ... 0676545536

Yes, fun. These drivers... All race drivers...are well aware of the risks, yet they still do it. Why?

That was a horrendous accident and hopefully he is going to be OK. BTW, Pocono is not an oval, not that it matters in this case.

Well compared to F1 it's a bit like a look into the past, this level of risk of course is no longer acceptable in F1.

I guess it's just unfortunate the last time I ventured into Indycars was last year in the Indy500, there had to witness Bourdais smashing his legs up in qualifying and in the race Dixon was launched in the air almost landed upside down onto the top of a wall, it's crazy stuff.

Poker, there is no doubt that there are dangers in racing.. all forms of racing. Is Indy car racing more dangerous than F1, perhaps, but it is a different racing discipline. The drivers know that there is a risk in any kind of racing In fact, as Mario Andretti was saying during the red flag period for repairs, the danger is part of the reason that drivers race. If that were not a part of the appeal, they might well seek employment sitting behind a monitor at a desk. Isn't it up to the individual drivers to determine if the specific racing series is too dangerous, and if so, then they don't enter it. Schumi was reportedly uncomfortable with racing with cement walls so close at such great speed, so he chose not to do it. That is fine, it is his choice and I certainly respected it. Perhaps there are others who feel that way too, again, fine, it is their choice. The flip side of that is that I tend to have even greater respect for drivers who like to challenge themselves in multiple racing series... again, that is my personal criteria, not everybody feels the same.

That does not mean that the series should not be continuously working to improve the safety or all involved. Mario also addressed that question as well, pointing out that safety is a constant work-in-progress. The Safer Barriers, Driver tubs, Hans devices, etc are all examples of that. All racing series work to do that, and are obligated to do so. You find Indy car racing to be more dangerous than F1, and perhaps you are right, then again, it is a different racing discipline with different risks. I watch WRC and think, WOW, that is dangerous, and of course it is. Off-shore boat racing can be incredibly dangerous, yet people still do it. Is F1 inherently safer than other types of racing, or has it just been luckier in recent years?

pokerman wrote:

Blake wrote:

pokerman wrote:

Blake wrote:That's true, Zoue. The point is that it is unlikely for one particular driver to totally dominate the series, even one as talented as Alonso. While Alonso maybe the best talent in Indy cars if he goes that way, I suspect he will find the competition every bit as tough as what he sees in F1... If not tougher. However, for a change he should have a competitive car. I would be surprised if Nando I did not find the Top step of the podium sometime during even in his first year. The best thing is that he should have more fun and less frustration.

More fun?

I'm watching the red flagged Ponoco race, Wickens and Hinchcliffe aren't having much fun at the moment, is oval racing really safe?

Hoping Wickens is not too badly hurt.

How scary is this?

https://twitter.com/ryanpistana/status/ ... 0676545536

Yes, fun. These drivers... All race drivers...are well aware of the risks, yet they still do it. Why?

That was a horrendous accident and hopefully he is going to be OK. BTW, Pocono is not an oval, not that it matters in this case.

Well compared to F1 it's a bit like a look into the past, this level of risk of course is no longer acceptable in F1.

I guess it's just unfortunate the last time I ventured into Indycars was last year in the Indy500, there had to witness Bourdais smashing his legs up in qualifying and in the race Dixon was launched in the air almost landed upside down onto the top of a wall, it's crazy stuff.

Indycar is definitely more dangerous than F1 but you can't go through life living on your knees. People have fun doing a lot riskier things than racing Indycars.

Blake wrote:

pokerman wrote: You was making a point about something I wasn't even questioning.

NO, poker... You made the comment

Fair enough so the fastest drivers do win the races it's just the points system that tends to keep things close?

To which I responded:

The point is, there are several drivers who can and have won races... that ALSO helps keep things close. F1 cannot say the same. Like F1, there are some dominate teams.. ie Penske, Ganassi and Andretti, but even other teams have won races.

You then responded:

I don't understand what I said to get such a reply?

I then responded:

What the hell did I say for you to be upset about??????

You appear to have a monster chip on your shoulder if you find offense at that post. This is getting old.

You was making a point about something I wasn't even questioning

.

And now you say:

You was making a point about something I wasn't even questioning.

I fail to see where I, in anyway, posted an out-of-line post, as your initial response tends to suggest. I simply pointed out that it is not ONLY the points system that keeps INDYcar scoring close, it is several competitive drivers in competitive cars. If you find that inappropriate, please explain, as I don't get it.[/quote]


Lost in interpretation, I said fastest drivers win as opposed to fastest cars so I didn't need the F1 comparison like I was missing the point.

The reference to the points system was from my post were I questioned whether winning races was down to luck were the lottery nature of the races dictated the winners to which I was told that the fastest drivers do tend to win, so then I said it was the points system that tended to keep things close then bearing in mind that the last 12 titles went down to the wire and the points system has such things as a double points finale, you know even with multiple winners it's unusual for titles to go down to the wire year after year if I just say use any other spec series as an example.

Your reply was like you read one short post and didn't read what I said previously.

Blake wrote:

pokerman wrote:

Blake wrote:

pokerman wrote:

Blake wrote:That's true, Zoue. The point is that it is unlikely for one particular driver to totally dominate the series, even one as talented as Alonso. While Alonso maybe the best talent in Indy cars if he goes that way, I suspect he will find the competition every bit as tough as what he sees in F1... If not tougher. However, for a change he should have a competitive car. I would be surprised if Nando I did not find the Top step of the podium sometime during even in his first year. The best thing is that he should have more fun and less frustration.

More fun?

I'm watching the red flagged Ponoco race, Wickens and Hinchcliffe aren't having much fun at the moment, is oval racing really safe?

Hoping Wickens is not too badly hurt.

How scary is this?

https://twitter.com/ryanpistana/status/ ... 0676545536

Yes, fun. These drivers... All race drivers...are well aware of the risks, yet they still do it. Why?

That was a horrendous accident and hopefully he is going to be OK. BTW, Pocono is not an oval, not that it matters in this case.

Well compared to F1 it's a bit like a look into the past, this level of risk of course is no longer acceptable in F1.

I guess it's just unfortunate the last time I ventured into Indycars was last year in the Indy500, there had to witness Bourdais smashing his legs up in qualifying and in the race Dixon was launched in the air almost landed upside down onto the top of a wall, it's crazy stuff.

Poker, there is no doubt that there are dangers in racing.. all forms of racing. Is Indy car racing more dangerous than F1, perhaps, but it is a different racing discipline. The drivers know that there is a risk in any kind of racing In fact, as Mario Andretti was saying during the red flag period for repairs, the danger is part of the reason that drivers race. If that were not a part of the appeal, they might well seek employment sitting behind a monitor at a desk. Isn't it up to the individual drivers to determine if the specific racing series is too dangerous, and if so, then they don't enter it. Schumi was reportedly uncomfortable with racing with cement walls so close at such great speed, so he chose not to do it. That is fine, it is his choice and I certainly respected it. Perhaps there are others who feel that way too, again, fine, it is their choice. The flip side of that is that I tend to have even greater respect for drivers who like to challenge themselves in multiple racing series... again, that is my personal criteria, not everybody feels the same.

That does not mean that the series should not be continuously working to improve the safety or all involved. Mario also addressed that question as well, pointing out that safety is a constant work-in-progress. The Safer Barriers, Driver tubs, Hans devices, etc are all examples of that. All racing series work to do that, and are obligated to do so. You find Indy car racing to be more dangerous than F1, and perhaps you are right, then again, it is a different racing discipline with different risks. I watch WRC and think, WOW, that is dangerous, and of course it is. Off-shore boat racing can be incredibly dangerous, yet people still do it. Is F1 inherently safer than other types of racing, or has it just been luckier in recent years?

A very reasoned post, me personally I feel uncomfortable seeing people badly injured, of course such things can happen in motorsport in general, oval racing or to be more precise with Ponoco, super speedways seem to have much higher odds on drivers getting injured or even killed, with Wickens it seemed more a case I hope he's still alive rather than I hope he's not injured, the injured part seemed to be an almost inevitability.

mikeyg123 wrote:

pokerman wrote:

Blake wrote:

pokerman wrote:

Blake wrote:That's true, Zoue. The point is that it is unlikely for one particular driver to totally dominate the series, even one as talented as Alonso. While Alonso maybe the best talent in Indy cars if he goes that way, I suspect he will find the competition every bit as tough as what he sees in F1... If not tougher. However, for a change he should have a competitive car. I would be surprised if Nando I did not find the Top step of the podium sometime during even in his first year. The best thing is that he should have more fun and less frustration.

More fun?

I'm watching the red flagged Ponoco race, Wickens and Hinchcliffe aren't having much fun at the moment, is oval racing really safe?

Hoping Wickens is not too badly hurt.

How scary is this?

https://twitter.com/ryanpistana/status/ ... 0676545536

Yes, fun. These drivers... All race drivers...are well aware of the risks, yet they still do it. Why?

That was a horrendous accident and hopefully he is going to be OK. BTW, Pocono is not an oval, not that it matters in this case.

Well compared to F1 it's a bit like a look into the past, this level of risk of course is no longer acceptable in F1.

I guess it's just unfortunate the last time I ventured into Indycars was last year in the Indy500, there had to witness Bourdais smashing his legs up in qualifying and in the race Dixon was launched in the air almost landed upside down onto the top of a wall, it's crazy stuff.

Indycar is definitely more dangerous than F1 but you can't go through life living on your knees. People have fun doing a lot riskier things than racing Indycars.

As a spectator sport though do people want to watch anybody get seriously hurt, of course such things can happen but oval racing in particular seems to be a discipline were you don't really want to be having a crash.

Fans are petitioning for an Alonso return to Ferrari....
https://www.gpfans.com/en/articles/2960 ... t-ferrari/

Alonso won a race recently!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XCSOVsiVaok

Very nice 5 part article(s) about Alonso and his career. Contributions from Dennis,Luca,Domenicalli and Stella as well as some anon contributions. Some things some might know, might not know, it fleshes out some things we already knew and Stella gives a nice comparison insight into Fernando and Michael and their differences.

Something for everyone is touched upon, 2007,his technical feedback, behaviour within a team and interestingly his fathers role in one of his decisions. It hints a few times Alonso was getting bad advice throughout.

Well worth a read whatever your opinion of him, its not a glossed over hard luck story but neither is it a bash fest.

Part 1 and you can click on the next part at the bottom of part 1...

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/formula1/46225204

Thank you Lotus, will give it a read

No worries.

A snippet from Stella being asked to pick a couple of his highlights. Interestingly he chose Singapore this year...

The second is from this year's Singapore Grand Prix, one of McLaren's more competitive races in the worst year in their history.

"We knew the chance to score points was all about going long on the first stint when other people would feel they have to pit," Stella says. "But we weren't sure how long you could go, so we were relying a lot on Fernando to tell us how the tyres were going.

"We were expecting him to say maybe around lap 20, 'I can go another 10 laps.' But around lap five/six, he came on the radio, and said: 'I think we can go 35.' And we stopped lap 34. And when we stopped, the tyres were finished.

"I don't want to create a myth like he is a magician. Nothing like that. It is just a matter of preparation, and developing an immense competence in what you do. Similar to playing the violin."

Just read parts 1 & 2. The bit about Hungary in part 2 is very interesting, never heard some of the detail before!

Lotus49 wrote:Very nice 5 part article(s) about Alonso and his career. Contributions from Dennis,Luca,Domenicalli and Stella as well as some anon contributions. Some things some might know, might not know, it fleshes out some things we already knew and Stella gives a nice comparison insight into Fernando and Michael and their differences.

Something for everyone is touched upon, 2007,his technical feedback, behaviour within a team and interestingly his fathers role in one of his decisions. It hints a few times Alonso was getting bad advice throughout.

Well worth a read whatever your opinion of him, its not a glossed over hard luck story but neither is it a bash fest.

Part 1 and you can click on the next part at the bottom of part 1...

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/formula1/46225204

I think one of the great tragedies of 2007 was the race fuelled qualifying, shame it wasn't the same as today and let the best man win rather than one or the other car being disadvantaged.

pokerman wrote:

Lotus49 wrote:Very nice 5 part article(s) about Alonso and his career. Contributions from Dennis,Luca,Domenicalli and Stella as well as some anon contributions. Some things some might know, might not know, it fleshes out some things we already knew and Stella gives a nice comparison insight into Fernando and Michael and their differences.

Something for everyone is touched upon, 2007,his technical feedback, behaviour within a team and interestingly his fathers role in one of his decisions. It hints a few times Alonso was getting bad advice throughout.

Well worth a read whatever your opinion of him, its not a glossed over hard luck story but neither is it a bash fest.

Part 1 and you can click on the next part at the bottom of part 1...

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/formula1/46225204

I think one of the great tragedies of 2007 was the race fuelled qualifying, shame it wasn't the same as today and let the best man win rather than one or the other car being disadvantaged.

You don't think that some cars, and subsequently their drivers, aren't disadvantaged in today's qualifying? It is not necessarily the "best man" winning the pole...best car/crewis a factor in qualifying as it is in the race.

Blake wrote:

pokerman wrote:I think one of the great tragedies of 2007 was the race fuelled qualifying, shame it wasn't the same as today and let the best man win rather than one or the other car being disadvantaged.

You don't think that some cars, and subsequently their drivers, aren't disadvantaged in today's qualifying? It is not necessarily the "best man" winning the pole...best car/crewis a factor in qualifying as it is in the race.

I think he means only between teammates, where it is a pretty fair representation now. I don't believe any teams give one car a material advantage in qualifying over the other.

JN23 wrote:Just read parts 1 & 2. The bit about Hungary in part 2 is very interesting, never heard some of the detail before!

If true, the allegation that he wanted the team to let Hamilton run out of fuel during the race, is a sign of a massive character flaw.
A different man would have taken the higher ground when Hamilton went out first in Qualifying and would have come away from that race with the full backing of the team.
One petulant decision and a blackmail plot later and instead of multiple WDC's he won nothing again.

Laz_T800 wrote:

JN23 wrote:Just read parts 1 & 2. The bit about Hungary in part 2 is very interesting, never heard some of the detail before!

If true, the allegation that he wanted the team to let Hamilton run out of fuel during the race, is a sign of a massive character flaw.
A different man would have taken the higher ground when Hamilton went out first in Qualifying and would have come away from that race with the full backing of the team.
One petulant decision and a blackmail plot later and instead of multiple WDC's he won nothing again.

Yes that was shocking. The whole thing was shocking, Hamilton's conduct in the first place, then Alonso's (though I do admire somewhat the trick he pulled to disadvantage Hamilton, it showed that he was cunning). The article does say that he took it back and apologized, but too little too late I guess. I do not see it so much as a character flaw, as in being a massive d*ck really. Wanting to rectify a situation is fine; but actively trying to sabotage your own team mate, not very stylish...

I disagree with your last sentence, you can't put everything that followed down to that decision. If he stuck with Ferrari for example, he could have gone for more titles.

"Fernando Alonso is refusing to rule out returning to the F1 grid in 2020 after a year of recharging his batteries."

Why does this feel akin to Arnold Schwarzenegger's declaration of "I'll be back"? Is this a promise or a threat?

Like Michael Schumacher's return to Mercedes, I don't see Fernando's return as having any opportunity to enhance his legacy. It will most likely only further add to the mediocrity exhibited in the last few years at McLaren. The chance that he would come back to a top team and resume winning races appear to be less than zero.

Like Jenson Button, Fernando should have plenty of opportunity to win in WEC or he could test himself by trying to become a winning driver in Indycar. Winning in Indycar would not be a given, but I would think he still has the chops to pose a credible threat in a decent car.

pokerman wrote:

Lotus49 wrote:Very nice 5 part article(s) about Alonso and his career. Contributions from Dennis,Luca,Domenicalli and Stella as well as some anon contributions. Some things some might know, might not know, it fleshes out some things we already knew and Stella gives a nice comparison insight into Fernando and Michael and their differences.

Something for everyone is touched upon, 2007,his technical feedback, behaviour within a team and interestingly his fathers role in one of his decisions. It hints a few times Alonso was getting bad advice throughout.

Well worth a read whatever your opinion of him, its not a glossed over hard luck story but neither is it a bash fest.

Part 1 and you can click on the next part at the bottom of part 1...

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/formula1/46225204

I think one of the great tragedies of 2007 was the race fuelled qualifying, shame it wasn't the same as today and let the best man win rather than one or the other car being disadvantaged.

Agree yeah, it was a useless system.

Mort Canard wrote:"Fernando Alonso is refusing to rule out returning to the F1 grid in 2020 after a year of recharging his batteries."

Why does this feel akin to Arnold Schwarzenegger's declaration of "I'll be back"? Is this a promise or a threat?

Like Michael Schumacher's return to Mercedes, I don't see Fernando's return as having any opportunity to enhance his legacy. It will most likely only further add to the mediocrity exhibited in the last few years at McLaren. The chance that he would come back to a top team and resume winning races appear to be less than zero.

Like Jenson Button, Fernando should have plenty of opportunity to win in WEC or he could test himself by trying to become a winning driver in Indycar. Winning in Indycar would not be a given, but I would think he still has the chops to pose a credible threat in a decent car.

As much as I admire Alonso as a driver, sometimes he is contradicting himself. Only a couple of days ago he said that he is leaving as F1 is a weak show (https://www.grandprix247.com/2018/11/17 ... weak-show/). Just can't take him seriously sometimes.

Laz_T800 wrote:

JN23 wrote:Just read parts 1 & 2. The bit about Hungary in part 2 is very interesting, never heard some of the detail before!

If true, the allegation that he wanted the team to let Hamilton run out of fuel during the race, is a sign of a massive character flaw.
A different man would have taken the higher ground when Hamilton went out first in Qualifying and would have come away from that race with the full backing of the team.
One petulant decision and a blackmail plot later and instead of multiple WDC's he won nothing again.

That's what I always felt (That if he'd played it differently he could've left Hungary with the backing from Ron because of Lewis's action) but I assume after both the Monaco reaction and the refusal to punish Lewis in Hungary, not just for ignoring the order but (allegedly) telling Ron to go beeping swivel and not getting so much as a wrist slap for either, he didn't think the team were ever going to go against Lewis in any situation.

This was Ron Dennis getting told what to do by a rookie in no uncertain terms and for the whole team to hear twice within a handful of races, the big scary Ron. That's pretty unthinkable back then and he did nowt in return. That's obviously going to influence Alonso's thinking about who holds the power there right now.

Not that it makes the threat any better, he should've been sacked on the spot*, but I don't think McLaren were ever going to go against Lewis however Alonso played it tbh.



*Didn't know that was an option Macca were going to do, I knew Whitmarsh wanted to but not Ron. I wonder why Mosley convinced them not to? Did he really just dislike Ron so much he wanted him to suffer those two going at it all year or what?

Siao7 wrote:

Mort Canard wrote:"Fernando Alonso is refusing to rule out returning to the F1 grid in 2020 after a year of recharging his batteries."

Why does this feel akin to Arnold Schwarzenegger's declaration of "I'll be back"? Is this a promise or a threat?

Like Michael Schumacher's return to Mercedes, I don't see Fernando's return as having any opportunity to enhance his legacy. It will most likely only further add to the mediocrity exhibited in the last few years at McLaren. The chance that he would come back to a top team and resume winning races appear to be less than zero.

Like Jenson Button, Fernando should have plenty of opportunity to win in WEC or he could test himself by trying to become a winning driver in Indycar. Winning in Indycar would not be a given, but I would think he still has the chops to pose a credible threat in a decent car.

As much as I admire Alonso as a driver, sometimes he is contradicting himself. Only a couple of days ago he said that he is leaving as F1 is a weak show (https://www.grandprix247.com/2018/11/17 ... weak-show/). Just can't take him seriously sometimes.

He's not really wrong though but he wouldn't be saying it (or leaving in the first place) if McLaren were the ones up there winning I think we all know that, so the possibility of return was always there as he's not leaving because he can't perform anymore but because he can't get the chance too car-wise. If that changed for whatever reason I think we all know he'd be back.

2021 isn't looking like the big promised shake up of the Sport we thought it might be so I think his chances of return are already plummeting but he's forever contradicting himself though yeah.

Lotus49 wrote:

Siao7 wrote:

Mort Canard wrote:"Fernando Alonso is refusing to rule out returning to the F1 grid in 2020 after a year of recharging his batteries."

Why does this feel akin to Arnold Schwarzenegger's declaration of "I'll be back"? Is this a promise or a threat?

Like Michael Schumacher's return to Mercedes, I don't see Fernando's return as having any opportunity to enhance his legacy. It will most likely only further add to the mediocrity exhibited in the last few years at McLaren. The chance that he would come back to a top team and resume winning races appear to be less than zero.

Like Jenson Button, Fernando should have plenty of opportunity to win in WEC or he could test himself by trying to become a winning driver in Indycar. Winning in Indycar would not be a given, but I would think he still has the chops to pose a credible threat in a decent car.

As much as I admire Alonso as a driver, sometimes he is contradicting himself. Only a couple of days ago he said that he is leaving as F1 is a weak show (https://www.grandprix247.com/2018/11/17 ... weak-show/). Just can't take him seriously sometimes.

He's not really wrong though but he wouldn't be saying it (or leaving in the first place) if McLaren were the ones up there winning I think we all know that, so the possibility of return was always there as he's not leaving because he can't perform anymore but because he can't get the chance too car-wise. If that changed for whatever reason I think we all know he'd be back.

2021 isn't looking like the big promised shake up of the Sport we thought it might be so I think his chances of return are already plummeting but he's forever contradicting himself though yeah.

Yes, your first sentence is the key one. If he was winning, he wouldn't be saying that the show is weak and he prefers something else. He'd be praising his latest win as the hardest and most impressive ever (a'la Le Mans!).