it is still the longest continuous thread to be posted her. Let's give this
thread a hand. It beat the previous longest tread, "Your Mother!" by over 15
replies, and is still going.
Wow.
The Mocker
Wow.
The Mocker
Cheers!
John
No, I fully expected Ferrari's points to be reinstated and so perhaps,
with hindsight, my recent posts have been as a result of getting angry
in advance and hence quite acerbic. My apologies for that being the
case!
I lost faith with F1 for their ineptitude over the treatment of Senna
in 1989 and early into 1990, and watched incredulous at Senna's manner
of winning the 1990 championship going unpunished. Since then the
racing has been as good as the rules have allowed, but the balance of
sport versus commercial interests can no longer even remotely be
considered a balance.
For all that I still love it, and with no way back and no way to turn
the clock back see little point in yearning for the old days.
Nostalgia is fine, but ultimately fruitless.
Cheers!
John
> From an earlier post, the quote is lifted ad nauseam from the
> Autosport of 21st October 1999, page 6, column 3, paragraph 7.
Again, it's the same old story of all historiography: those writing
after the fact tend to condense, combine, and embellish -- in a way that
enhances the impact of their story, but misrepresents the chronological
truth of events.
While this may seem mere hogwash and nitpicking to some or most here,
this is a very important issue in a sport that is largely perceived and
propelled through the medium of the motorsports press, and in
present-day motorsports, especially F1, there is no journal more
respected for its accuracy than Autosport. If they have editorialized
where they should have been reporting, they have performed a grave
disservice, not only to their readers, but to the sport.
Bart Brown
Barton Spencer Brown wrote
Though it was a British company sponsoring a British car. I always
associated a degree of national pride with the JPS Lotus - something lost
with the Camel (RJ Reynolds) sponsorship. Very different to the modern day
duo branded BAR - designed to appeal to as many world markets as possible by
a multi-national organisation. The JPS Lotus looked a darn sight better too
IMHO.
Tony
don
[|]-(_)-[|]
<snip>
While this may seem mere hogwash and nitpicking to some or most here,
Well, the nonsense EI uttered during the last couple of weeks certainly
didn't improve my oppinion of him...
l8er
ronny
--
The box said "Windows 95 or better", so I installed LINUX!
|\ _,,,---,,_ I want to die like my Grandfather,
ZZZzz /,`.-'`' -. ;-;;,_ in his sleep.
|,4- ) )-,_. ,\ ( `'-' Not like the people in his car,
'---''(_/--' `-'\_) screaming their heads off!
> On Sat, 23 Oct 1999 01:10:29 +0200, Ronald Stoehr
> >Sorry, EI may be a pretty good racer, but questions about performance
> >improvements resulting from different aerodynamic devices on an F1 car
> >are better answered by even a Minardi engineer.
> Why? If you sit in on a fluid dynamics lecture when they tell you the
> answers to exam question will you be in a better position to answer it
> than a professor who's had a brief glimpse of a glass of water?
Oh, now nobody is able to determine if this modified board makes a diff??
They design the cars (or planes, or trains) by throwing the dices, yes?
I give up...
Hopefully not.
--
The box said "Windows 95 or better", so I installed LINUX!
|\ _,,,---,,_ I want to die like my Grandfather,
ZZZzz /,`.-'`' -. ;-;;,_ in his sleep.
|,4- ) )-,_. ,\ ( `'-' Not like the people in his car,
'---''(_/--' `-'\_) screaming their heads off!
Eh? Where do die come in? The car was ILLEGAL as defined by the FIA,
the meeting stewards and by Ferrari - whether or not it was an
advantage is irrelevant and an irrelevancy that in any case we cannot
measure. That was my point. Nothing to do with designing the car by
Snakes and Ladders.
Cheers!
John
--
> don
> [|]-(_)-[|]
> <snip>
> While this may seem mere hogwash and nitpicking to some or most here,
> >this is a very important issue in a sport that is largely perceived and
> >propelled through the medium of the motorsports press, and in
> >present-day motorsports, especially F1, there is no journal more
> >respected for its accuracy than Autosport. If they have editorialized
> >where they should have been reporting, they have performed a grave
> >disservice, not only to their readers, but to the sport.
> >Bart Brown
> The car was ILLEGAL as defined by the FIA,
No, John, it was not.
BB
>No, John, it was not.
Cheers!
John
>If you would just like to spread that message out to those whackos amongst
>us who want to do things like save rain forests, plant more trees, reduce
>hydrocarbon emmissions, rid the waterways of plastic bags....you know, all
>those yukky things that have happened and continue to happen to this planet?
>Tell them that it's no good being nostalgic about what the environment was
>like 40, 50, 60 years ago. Make it your lifes work, John. Oh....but don't
>get nostalgic on the way, will you? :o)
The odd action or two will save infinitely more trees than nostalgia
ever will.
Cheers!
John
There is nothing wrong with the environment that about 3 billion less humans
wouldn't cure, but then that would mean for humanity to exercise a collective
process of thought. Very unlikely. We spend all of our time at the same time doing
everything we can to both increase the population and destroy the resources we need
to maintain a livable planetary surface.
The inescapable, objective fact of the matter is that the planet could care less
what we do to it. It'll survive long after we've created a sludge covered ball in
space populated with nothing but microbes.
> If you would just like to spread that message out to those whackos amongst
> us who want to do things like save rain forests, plant more trees, reduce
> hydrocarbon emmissions, rid the waterways of plastic bags....you know, all
> those yukky things that have happened and continue to happen to this planet?
> Tell them that it's no good being nostalgic about what the environment was
> like 40, 50, 60 years ago. Make it your lifes work, John. Oh....but don't
> get nostalgic on the way, will you? :o)
> > On Sat, 23 Oct 1999 09:41:00 -0500, Barton Spencer Brown
> > >I'm more curious than ever, now: while I've found the Irvine quote that
> > >begins "An all Ferrari front row is not bad for tomorrow. The car is
> > >pretty much the same as before the Nurburgring..." several times
> > >(including Autosport), I still haven't found the all-important
> > >contextual prolegomenon that you've quoted above. If you have the
> > >Autosport issue (paper mag) or E-zine quote at hand, please let me know
> > >the date of (better yet, a hypertext link to) the quote. I've been
> > >through every online archived story from the Sepang weekend at
> > >Autosport's site, and I just can't find it. I'd truly appreciate help in
> > >solving this mystery, moot point though it may seem to some...I'm
> > >keeping a chronicle of this season, and I hate to miss a direct quote as
> > >important as this.
> > From an earlier post, the quote is lifted ad nauseam from the
> > Autosport of 21st October 1999, page 6, column 3, paragraph 7.
> > >Speaking of moot points, did anyone seriously expect the FIA to rule
> > >otherwise? The F1 Drivers' and Manufacturers' championships are a
> > >business, not a sport -- though I still believe that on the track and in
> > >the pits, it's very much a sport for the drivers, engineers, and
> > >mechanics.
> > No, I fully expected Ferrari's points to be reinstated and so perhaps,
> > with hindsight, my recent posts have been as a result of getting angry
> > in advance and hence quite acerbic. My apologies for that being the
> > case!
> > I lost faith with F1 for their ineptitude over the treatment of Senna
> > in 1989 and early into 1990, and watched incredulous at Senna's manner
> > of winning the 1990 championship going unpunished. Since then the
> > racing has been as good as the rules have allowed, but the balance of
> > sport versus commercial interests can no longer even remotely be
> > considered a balance.
> > For all that I still love it, and with no way back and no way to turn
> > the clock back see little point in yearning for the old days.
> > Nostalgia is fine, but ultimately fruitless.
> > Cheers!
> > John
> -----------== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News ==----------
> http://www.newsfeeds.com The Largest Usenet Servers in the World!
> ------== Over 73,000 Newsgroups - Including Dedicated Binaries Servers ==-----