Singapore Grand Prix 2010, Marina Bay Street Circuit - Race 15/19
- Thread starter Glaucus
- Start date
Yep he can manage to be 1 second slower whether he wanted to or not
Cruel. So cruel.
Yeah and that too....
and his own team mate.
I think Singapore proved how much of a tit leg-end is, how annoying was his commentary? I'd love them to give him the boot and let DC sit along side Brundle, I say DC because its so cringeworthy how every single word Eddie makes in the little stand up they have DC is clearly dying inside and wanting to tell him to shut up.
Soldato
Every time EJ opens his mouth, irrespective of what EJ is saying, DC does indeed look as if he itching to punch EJ's lights out. And it really does look like genuine hatred. DC just needs to chill out and accept that EJ is there to provide an alternative argument and some light relief.
Without EJ, the after show discussion/forum would be boring as hell.
Yeah defo, its funny how they contrast so wildly with opinions, it really does work I guess but I find myself looking for DCs reaction more than listening to what Eddie is saying heh.
Yes Frentzen did it on purpose, it allowed JV to close the gap after the pitstops. They ran Frentzen longer on purpose to hold up MS.
JV also did the go slow to back the pack up in 97 at suzuka. Unfortunately for him the mclarens didn't understand the plan and kept backing off as well instead of overtaking MS.
Just watching the video on formula1.com of the Italian GP... the music in the background is just so appropriate (This is War) and at the end with the Alonso/Massa/champagne shower/fans etc and the chanting music.... just pure pure pure pure epic winnage.
Cant wait for the Singapore one....
And I cant wait for the season finale one
Cant wait for the Singapore one....
And I cant wait for the season finale one
From what you written there, you are suggesting that Williams ran Frentzen on a longer stint. As a result, Frentzen was unable to go faster than he was due to the fact that he was on a compromised fuel/tyre strategy. Are you sure Frentzen was purposely going slow, off his own back (or under team order)?
So, are you suggesting that JV was going slower than he could. But not only this, but the McLaren cars were also going slower, even though they could've gone a lot of faster? This is all news to me.
Whenever I've seen an F1 race, if a car is going slow "on purpose", the driving style of that driver/car is obvious. It is VERY obvious that it is braking earlier and accelerating later out of corners. The only time I have witnessed this is during practise sessions and qualifying sessions, when drivers are trying to make room for themselves, on the track, before posting a flat-out lap. I can honestly say that I have never seen this happen in a race, EXCEPT when MSc purposely went slower than Irvine. It was VERY obvious when he did this.
I have also witnessed when D.Hill went slow "on purpose" in 1993, when he was No.2 to Alain Prost. However, once again, this was VERY obvious. Hill even stated after the race that he wanted to test just how fast he could go, so on some laps would drop far back from Prost and then on the following laps would go on the limit...but all the time would remain in 2nd. This of course, was the year when Williams had a car which was 1s-2s/lap faster than the next faster car (in the dry). At not stage though, did Hill back the opposition to up, to allow Prost to pull away.
JRS where are you and what is your take on this...all this "driving slow on purpose" is complete news to me.
Soldato
Oh, I'm here and I'm reading. And when I have something to add to the conversation I'll let you know
Just because it's news to you doesn't mean it didn't happen.
Yes Frentzen went slower not just under a team order but because it had already been discussed more than likely within the team. Re-watch Jerez it's bloody obvious.
5 seconds too slow JV was going round suzuka.
Yes it's well known what happened in 97. JV was racing under appeal at suzuka. He qualified on pole and purposely slowed the pack. His intention was to allow the mclarens to pass and hold up MS. Thereby taking points from MS incase he lost his appeal. Mclaren after the race said they stayed out of the battle and had they known Jacques plan in advance they would have over took MS. Williams had an agreement with Mclaren that as they now had the fastest car they would stay out of the battle and in return if an opportunity presented itself they would give them the win. Hence the rather sickening fiasco at Jerez where DC moved over and JV let Hakinnen win.
From grandprix.com
It quickly became clear that the plan was to hold up Michael. "He drove that way to make things difficult for me so others could overtake," Michael suggested after the race. The computers suggested that this was the case with Jacques' lap times being remarkably slow.
Behind Jacques and Michael, Irvine had made a poor start and had dropped behind Hakkinen, while Frentzen made a better start than Berger and was able to take fifth place.
On the second lap Irvine passed both Hakkinen and Schumacher in what looked like a brilliant move going up through The Esses - an unusual place for overtaking maneuvers. In fact it had been pre-planned. "We had discussed it before the race," Michael confessed. "He said it was a possibility and he did it and I let him through."
When the opportunity presented itself Eddie went outside Hakkinen and Schumacher in one move. "Michael had a good idea I was going to try it," said Eddie, "and he assisted me."
Immediately Eddie was attacking Villeneuve. A lap and a half later, as they were braking for the chicane, Eddie made his move. "Jacques tried to block me," Irvine said, "so I sailed around the outside."
Once ahead Eddie showed just how slow Jacques had been going. His first lap free of Villeneuve gave him a 5.3secs advantage and within three laps he was 12secs ahead of the Williams. Jacques did not attempt to give chase, preferring to stay where he was, ahead of Schumacher. All the curious fluctuations in the normal pace of the front-runners had completely obscured the likely pit stop strategies. It looked as though Irvine was on a three-stopper: in fact Eddie was going for two stops.
Last edited:
That article is basically stating that the McLaren agreed to stay out of the title fight (between MSc and JV), which doesn't have any cynical undertones. It also talks exclusively about JV himself, holding up MSc and not JV's team-mate.
At no stage in that article does it suggest a team-mate (Heinz Harold) assisting in either holding up MSc or attempting to take him out of the race. Yes, JV was playing games, however, he is completely entitled to do this. He was doing it for his own title chances and not for his team-mate's. I would do the same if push came to shove, even though I feel it was risky strategy.
The only clear cut example of a driver obviously holding up his team-mate's main title rival, is what MSc did in Malaysia in 1999, to help Irvine win, ahead of Hakkinen.
I dunno why I bother, you said that was news to you all I proved was your memory isn't what it was. Now you change tune again.
I give up at no point in your above quote where we talking about his team mate.
You change the rules so often what you looking for it's pointless, you said....
Whenever I've seen an F1 race, if a car is going slow "on purpose", the driving style of that driver/car is obvious. It is VERY obvious that it is braking earlier and accelerating later out of corners. The only time I have witnessed this is during practise sessions and qualifying sessions, when drivers are trying to make room for themselves, on the track, before posting a flat-out lap. I can honestly say that I have never seen this happen in a race, EXCEPT when MSc purposely went slower than Irvine. It was VERY obvious when he did this.
Rather than admit you maybe wrong in your assessment you now start mentioning it not counting because Frentzen wasn't something to do with it.
Literally pointless, so I won't bother from now on.
Gotta love the "axe grinding" (as Frank put it once) in these threads 
Guys, go watch the Italian GP video edit on the formula1.com website and inspire yourself in the awesomeness of Ferrari on that day
*braces for somebody to correct me that Ferrari we're not awesome on that day
*
Guys, go watch the Italian GP video edit on the formula1.com website and inspire yourself in the awesomeness of Ferrari on that day
*braces for somebody to correct me that Ferrari we're not awesome on that day
*To be fair, there are some statistical calculations involved (mostly on the precise odds offered), but the majority of it is calculated on a mixture of sheer obviousness, and current betting patterns.
What annoys me is that people seem to take bookie's odds as some kind of gospel premonitions of the future. I'd bet when Hamilton was top of the pile he had the lowest odds. Swings and roundabouts.
Soldato
If they didn't give him the lowest odds, they would a) be out of a job, and b) be responsible for said company's downfall
But you're correct, Hamilton was 11/8 for the title when leading it.
Soldato
Is that real?