2011 Formula One Canadian Grand Prix

[Ross Balfour]

If Kobayashi had a better car he would of won Montreal.

That could have been said of Schumacher, but "Ifs" and "buts" are meaningless unfortunately - thought Kobayashi drove well though - and the Sauber team had him in a good strategy - doubt he could have won though.

 

[My993C2]

I'm not sure why the teams all humph around and display those lovely full wet tyres around the place anymore,and Pirelli should shut down the production line of them,the first sniff of water on a track now means a safety car parade around until it becomes at least "inters" conditions,small teams looking for some cash savings,cancel your wet tyres order....
It wouldnt be so bad or look so embarrassing if the Moto GP was in nice Silverstone sunshine,but did anyone see what they went out and raced motorcyles on? ,im embarrassed on behalf of those F1 drivers who were more than happy safety car parading,shameful...

Ever wonder why Moto GP does NOT race on the Montreal Track? Comparing a wet race in Silverstone and a wet race in Montreal is like comparing apples to oranges. The Montreal track is a cross between the unforgiving walls of Monaco and the high speed straights with chicanes of Monza. There is no room for errors in Montreal when the track is wet. Do you people want to return to the era of racing where at least one driver per season dies?

 

[Ole Marius Myrvold]

When was the last time a driver died or got seriously injured in a wet race? Pironi at Hockenheim 1982? In these 30 years, that cars, tracks and safety technology has come so far that I feel that "people are going to die" argument is a bit strange. There wasn't even an injury in the crazy wet races since 94 when safety was important again.

EDIT: A Marshall broke his leg in Suzuka 94, in conditions like the ones that made the Red Flag come out. And that is fair, when it is that much water. But the start behind the SC was idiotic, and the SC stayed out for so long that the Full Wets didn't work anymore... Not much point in having them then.

 

[Fredrik Arbegard]

When was the last time a driver died or got seriously injured in a wet race? Pironi at Hockenheim 1982? In these 30 years, that cars, tracks and safety technology has come so far that I feel that "people are going to die" argument is a bit strange. There wasn't even an injury in the crazy wet races since 94 when safety was important again.

Correction, 2003 Interlagos:

And yes safety has improved but the kamikaze style racing we saw in the 70's and 80's aren't here anymore, the drivers aren't willing to put themselves at risk anymore (risk for life is what I am coming on to).
It's a different society all together, I stand in the pre-race inspection on karting races forcing people to saw off or cover a bolt that sticks out a centimeter because it can be a safety hazard (atleast according to the rules) .
Also with the organisations and insurance companies involved today people become more careful because they enforce the rules usually.
And finally a sport with many deaths isn't very good PR ...

 

[My993C2]

When was the last time a driver died or got seriously injured in a wet race? Pironi at Hockenheim 1982? In these 30 years, that cars, tracks and safety technology has come so far that I feel that "people are going to die" argument is a bit strange.

So you choose to ignore that Montreal is a different type of track than all the others. It is a track with little to no run offs, it is a track with walls like Monaco but the speed of Monza. Watch this video (from the 2007 Grand Prix at the Nurburgring) and then tell me wet races should never be called and that the drivers are nothing by wussy chimp whiners, that the fans know so much more about what F1 should do when it rains than the teams and the drivers.

 

[Bram Hengeveld]

the drivers aren't willing to put themselves at risk anymore

Then those hotshot teams should hire drivers that are willing to take the risks imo F1 is a dangerous sport and becuase of that the drivers are getting overpaid. Even with aquaplanning they should be able to adjust the rideheight of the car in a way that driving (at lower speeds) is possible.

I can remember a motorbike 500cc TT race i was in Assen many years ago with such an incredible amount of water on the track and that in the end raingods like Schwantz, Mamola and others just showed their amazing skills and became heroes of the spectators at the track (for life).

Motorsport is dangerous (see Le Mans last weekend) but the drivers are getting compensated enough

 

[Gary Lennon]

Ever wonder why Moto GP does NOT race on the Montreal Track? Comparing a wet race in Silverstone and a wet race in Montreal is like comparing apples to oranges. The Montreal track is a cross between the unforgiving walls of Monaco and the high speed straights with chicanes of Monza. There is no room for errors in Montreal when the track is wet. Do you people want to return to the era of racing where at least one driver per season dies?

An even more stark and glaring example of apples and oranges is racing motorcyles in the wet and racing F1 cars in the wet,my point was the Moto GP gang go out and race in the wet as and when required to do so,as for trying to paint some kind of image of those F1 heros risking life and limb racing at Montreal in the wet,Kubica gave us all a very graphic display of how a modern era F1 car copes with a very high speed crash in to one of those concrete walls,the speed and impact looked initially like it was going to be possible "fatal",but he walked away smiling ,whereas falling of a motorcyle will always be....falling off a motorcycle.
I will stand by my statement that it was very wrong for that race to be started behind a safety car,ofcourse it did reach a point where the rain turned torrential and cars were floating,i could understand the stoppage,but again just too long behind the safety car after....

 

[Ole Marius Myrvold]

Fredrik, did Alonso get injured? I thought he ended up a bit blue, purple and yellow, but no injury.

My993C2: I understand why it was red flagged, but it wasn't any need to start behind the SC, neither was there any reason to drive behind the SC for so long time as they did after the red flag.

And yes, I do give a flying * in that the track is different. Then they have to adjust. Just as you can't drive like you do in Bahrain in Monaco. That is what separates the truly great drivers from the good ones. F1 is being amputated.

 

[Colin Doessel]

Not sure if Aussie's can get BBC iPlayer - but it's worth a shot! [video]http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b011y3b4/Formula_1_2011_The_Canadian_Grand_Prix_Highlights/[/video]

only if we set up a uk proxy can we watch it

but how one does that

 

[ufunacaoenn]

My opinion of safety is that F1 MOST be safe for drivers and for the spectators ofcourse but there should be a limit to how the view of safety should be looked at. If we take the last race at Montreal with Safety Car after the red flag was OK for just one or two laps as the cars were not lined up on the grid properly but to go on for around 10 laps was wrong.

Look at the Nurburgrind example, as what Ole Marius Myrvold mentioned drivers most be able to adjust, specially for a track like Nurburgrind were the cars don't use as low wings as in Montreal. We all know that in Montreal cars go with low wings and cars strugle with brake balance but that is no excuse to let the SC drive 10 laps. But back to the Nurburgrind example, I sow the race myself live and one thing I can say is that todays drivers are not like the old days drivers who could adjust do the weather dispite the setup and win (or just finish the race). Those were my heroes because it didn't matter what the nature would through on them, they would just adjust and continue fighting for positions.

If you ask me to compare a driver from the older generation of F1 with todays generation then I can't do that because the sport doesn't have the same weather challenges as the drivers from the old generation had.

 

[TheHemps]

Then those hotshot teams should hire drivers that are willing to take the risks imo F1 is a dangerous sport and becuase of that the drivers are getting overpaid. Even with aquaplanning they should be able to adjust the rideheight of the car in a way that driving (at lower speeds) is possible.

I can remember a motorbike 500cc TT race i was in Assen many years ago with such an incredible amount of water on the track and that in the end raingods like Schwantz, Mamola and others just showed their amazing skills and became heroes of the spectators at the track (for life).

Motorsport is dangerous (see Le Mans last weekend) but the drivers are getting compensated enough

I've often supported your view, in fact as recently as a few days ago I said something similar in this thread. However after a bit of thought I came to a different conclusion.

Would I die for your entertainment? No I wouldn't. Is it therefore reasonable to expect anyone else racing driver or not, to lose their life, leave their families behind, widows, fatherless children, so that we can have something to watch on a Sunday afternoon?

 

[Tom Barratt]

Look at the Nurburgrind example, as what Ole Marius Myrvold mentioned drivers most be able to adjust, specially for a track like Nurburgrind were the cars don't use as low wings as in Montreal. We all know that in Montreal cars go with low wings and cars strugle with brake balance but that is no excuse to let the SC drive 10 laps. But back to the Nurburgrind example, I sow the race myself live and one thing I can say is that todays drivers are not like the old days drivers who could adjust do the weather dispite the setup and win (or just finish the race). Those were my heroes because it didn't matter what the nature would through on them, they would just adjust and continue fighting for positions.

1. Teams and drivers cant just "adjust" anymore, the rules of F1 state that once qualification 3 has started no more changes can be made to the car. These rules cant just be changed when they want so its not possible to just completely change the setup of the car before a race.
2. Drivers nowadays are as talented as previous generations. The way the cars handle now are completely different to how they used to handle and the rules are also completely different.

 

[Jekabs Elerts]

I've often supported your view, in fact as recently as a few days ago I said something similar in this thread. However after a bit of thought I came to a different conclusion.

Would I die for your entertainment? No I wouldn't. Is it therefore reasonable to expect anyone else racing driver or not, to lose their life, leave their families behind, widows, fatherless children, so that we can have something to watch on a Sunday afternoon?

Amen. That's what I'm talking about. You are a reasonable man.

 

[Ole Marius Myrvold]

No idea, would I die? Of course I don't want that.

Would I like to drive F1, even with a high risk of death? Yes.

 

[William Levesque]

High risk of death in F1 nowadays ?

*laughs*

You have more chance of dying walking on the sidewalk in a peaceful village !

 

[Luke McVicar]

Safety has defintely gone abit overboard in the wrong direction IMO. If anything try make the cars a bit more safer, but the safety car periods in Canada where a joke, also pirelli should make a thicker grooved wet tyre so they can race in any conditions.

 

[Ole Marius Myrvold]

I think the problem is more on the cars itself (and the plank) than the tyres.

 

[Luke McVicar]

It depends on the set up, but yeah that's a big reason as well.

 

[Chris Jenkins]

Safety has defintely gone abit overboard in the wrong direction IMO. If anything try make the cars a bit more safer, but the safety car periods in Canada where a joke, also pirelli should make a thicker grooved wet tyre so they can race in any conditions.

I reckon the torque and downforce would rip chunks out of thicker-grooved tyres.I think it's more a visibility issue than car setup or tyres.The drivers simply can't see anything with all the spray being generated.

 

[Luke McVicar]

so what, hasn't stopped them before.