Um im sorry but WHAT????
What planet were you on back then? Or were you not even born?
I think you really need to take a step back and think about some of the things you are saying.
2008 Italian GP - Race 14/18
- Thread starter rpstewart
- Start date
Um im sorry but WHAT????
What planet were you on back then? Or were you not even born?
I think you really need to take a step back and think about some of the things you are saying.
I'm pretty sure every country gets the same feed during the race though?
Yes the same feed, im on about the interviews and all the chatting just about Lewis that people like sausage fingers and Fathead do.
Must have only been 2 drivers in 96 as DH clearly only beat one other person according to "TheStig"
in 96 would have been as well being 2 drivers such was the gulf williams had over everyone if you watched it you would know that though
Wet races show who has pure driver skill? You mean the same driver skill that netted 7th position to Hamilton?
Wet - lottery. As proven last race. Hamilton SHOULDVE won it had it continued to rain, but it didnt.
I believe dry raecs show TRUE drivers skill, because you dont have that "which tyre to switch to" dilemna, which is somethng that lies outside of driver skill as Hamilton discovered in Italy.
You know people keep saying that Ferrari did poorly this race.
I think they did tremendously well to have closed the gap to LH, dont forget the Mclaren engine has more BHP on the Ferrari, and should have made short work of the field...
No, I saw loads of it. People in walls, all sorts.
BTCC is defined as a non contact sport, in EXACTLY the same way as F1.
It doesnt mean people adhear to the rules though... And you can get away with a lot more in a Touring Car.
What has 7th place got to it?
he came from the back of the midfield.
Wet = reduced grip, changing track and changing race line.
It most certainly shows the best and the worst of a driver. yes as I said there is luck involved in the pit stops. But it most certainly shows the bets drivers much more than dry. But it requires watching the race not the end resyult.
that is most certainly driver skill. Something MS excelled out, changing tactics and tyres. not just in wet races, it's just more apparent in wet races.
Uh....that rookie was reigning Champ Car champion, and won the F1 title the next season. I'm far from being Villeneuve's biggest fan, but to say Hill was crap because he only just beat him....no, I'm sorry - you're talking out of a part of your anatomy that is some way south of your face.
Really?
So, Hill looked "silly" when he blew by Schumacher's Ferrari at Hungary in '97 while driving an Arrows? Oh, and of course he looked really silly when he beat Schumacher in the torrential rain at Suzuka in '94. And lets not forget his pitiful performance in Brazil in '96 when he only beat Schumacher by a lap.
My God, he certainly didn't deserve to be in F1 did he?
in 96 would have been as well being 2 drivers such was the gulf williams had over everyone if you watched it you would know that though
I wonder how you know what i was doing in 1996 and how you know what i watched? You are beginning to worry me
I wonder how you know what i was doing in 1996 and how you know what i watched? You are beginning to worry me
well you cant have been watching f1 thats for sure was a title between hill and jv from the get go
who said he never deserved to be in f1? he was a bit crap though
and hungary was all about the tyres and beating schumacher in 96 lol big achievement that is haha
hill was very average another overhyped brit
schumacher made him look silly
What, another fashion clash or something?
im sure there is a forum more suited to your fetish about blokes looking good, go find it and leave us alone
To be honest you set yourself up for it.
Well, you're sure implying that you think he shouldn't have been there.
Again - 22 wins, 42 podiums, 360 points, 20 poles, 19 fastest laps, a title. You don't get these by being crap. You don't even get handed them by having the best car - if you did, then DC would have been world champion long ago....
Uh....I'm pretty sure that the Bridgestones in '97 were not demonstrably superior to the Goodyears. Not to the point at which a sodding Arrows-Yamaha could be considered a legitimate threat to a Ferrari without some serious racecraft in the cockpit.
We-e-ell....Schumacher did make the rest of the field look pretty rubbish in the torrential rain at Barcelona. And he did win at Spa. And he did win at Monza. And this despite being blessed with a car that made most South American dictatorships look reliable.
Mods, would I lose posting priviledges if I told this guy exactly how stupid I think he is?