planetf1.com

It is currently Mon Nov 11, 2019 10:08 pm

All times are UTC


Forum rules


Please read the forum rules



Post new topic Reply to topic
Author Message
PostPosted: Mon Sep 30, 2019 3:16 pm 
Online

Joined: Thu May 12, 2011 6:08 pm
Posts: 4281
Big V12's that go boom from time to time. matched with manual gearboxes, a clutch pedal and no rev limiters. That'll sort um out!

_________________
Power tends to corrupt and absolute power corrupts absolutely. [Lord Acton]
My own Google Earth Motor Sport file. http://www.mediafire.com/?jzm1ieatytv
Follow me @asphalt_world


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Sep 30, 2019 7:11 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Feb 23, 2014 3:53 am
Posts: 7401
Location: Michigan, USA
Asphalt_World wrote:
Big V12's that go boom from time to time. matched with manual gearboxes, a clutch pedal and no rev limiters. That'll sort um out!

Why would it sort them out? Is there any indication that the current formula doesn't sort them out? When Gasly was driving Max's car, did he look equally matched?

_________________
PICK 10 COMPETITION (4 wins, 15 podiums): 3rd in 2016
TOP THREE CHAMPIONSHIP (No Limit Excedrin Racing): Champions in 2015 & 2018 | 2nd in 2017
AUTOSPORT GP PREDICTOR: 2017 USA & P-F1 Champion | #2 in the world in 2017


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Sep 30, 2019 7:26 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2003 9:39 pm
Posts: 3608
mmi16 wrote:
Eliminate the Fuel Flow restrictions - they don't permit enough fuel flow to even get the engines to their maximum RPM limit. Rules limit RPM to 15K and fuel flow restrictions are holding them to about 12K. There is already a maximum amount of fuel permitted - that is enough.

The engine life requirements are only driving up costs - not reducing them and they are penalizing development of power, driveability and longevity, the grid place penalties are making F1 a running joke.

If you are trying to develop hybrid power - don't limit how much can be stored or used; let those who can develop more use what they developed.

Fuel flow limits only relate to engine speed for naturally aspirated engines. The only thing the current fuel flow limits do is cause them to not rev slower. This is because below 10,500rpm, the max fuel flow reduces in proportion to engine speed. If there was no fuel flow limit at all, the engines would rev even slower, probably around 7,000 to 8,000 rpm, as they could burn the name amount of fuel as at 12,000rpm, but have much smaller internal energy losses.

Be careful what you wish for. You won't always get the results you expect.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Oct 01, 2019 7:28 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Oct 06, 2006 12:07 pm
Posts: 9917
Alienturnedhuman wrote:
mmi16 wrote:
Eliminate the Fuel Flow restrictions - they don't permit enough fuel flow to even get the engines to their maximum RPM limit. Rules limit RPM to 15K and fuel flow restrictions are holding them to about 12K. There is already a maximum amount of fuel permitted - that is enough.

The engine life requirements are only driving up costs - not reducing them and they are penalizing development of power, driveability and longevity, the grid place penalties are making F1 a running joke.

If you are trying to develop hybrid power - don't limit how much can be stored or used; let those who can develop more use what they developed.

Fuel flow limits only relate to engine speed for naturally aspirated engines. The only thing the current fuel flow limits do is cause them to not rev slower. This is because below 10,500rpm, the max fuel flow reduces in proportion to engine speed. If there was no fuel flow limit at all, the engines would rev even slower, probably around 7,000 to 8,000 rpm, as they could burn the name amount of fuel as at 12,000rpm, but have much smaller internal energy losses.

Be careful what you wish for. You won't always get the results you expect.

But the engines would surely have peak power much higher than that so unless they were saving fuel I'm sure they'd rev much higher than what they do today.

_________________
Räikkönen - Vettel - Bottas
Thank you Nico - You´re the champ!

PF1 Pick 10 Competition 2016: CHAMPION (2 wins, 8 podiums)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Oct 01, 2019 3:02 pm 
Online

Joined: Thu May 12, 2011 6:08 pm
Posts: 4281
Exediron wrote:
Asphalt_World wrote:
Big V12's that go boom from time to time. matched with manual gearboxes, a clutch pedal and no rev limiters. That'll sort um out!

Why would it sort them out? Is there any indication that the current formula doesn't sort them out? When Gasly was driving Max's car, did he look equally matched?


Having to get as much from an engine and gearbox, without electronics protecting it all, used to be a big part of the sport and drivers with extra feel for how the car was behaving were at an advantage. When we see a car break down these days, it's nearly always a fault of the equipment and only rarely caused by the driver.

I'd love drivers to have to use their ears and general feel of the car to judge gear changes. It would make it far more challenging.

_________________
Power tends to corrupt and absolute power corrupts absolutely. [Lord Acton]
My own Google Earth Motor Sport file. http://www.mediafire.com/?jzm1ieatytv
Follow me @asphalt_world


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Oct 19, 2019 7:50 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon May 31, 2010 10:02 am
Posts: 2199
Location: Far side of Koozebane
I'll post it here seeing as there's the jump start convo going on in the Japanese GP thread.

Looks like reverse grid is gone for 2020. Apparently some top teams think they might lose a race.

I'm glad it's been shelved, for the time being anyway, though i'm not happy with the reason why it was rejected.

https://www.autosport.com/f1/news/146662/reversed-grid-trial-abandoned-amid-f1-team-impasse

_________________
Races since last non RB, Merc, Ferrari winner (After USA- 19) - 137 & counting.( Last win, Lotus, 17/3/13)

Non RB, Merc, Ferrari podiums won in Hybrid era - 357 trophies available, 24 won

2017 WCC CPTTC - Jalopy Racing (Herb & Me)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Oct 19, 2019 7:55 pm 
Offline

Joined: Thu Jul 25, 2019 6:04 pm
Posts: 52
Since we have three dry-weather tire grades, I'd like to see a requirement that all three are used in each race.

This dictates 2 pit stops, of course. But the space between can be used for harder racing, rather than tire conservation.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Oct 20, 2019 7:01 am 
Offline

Joined: Sat Jan 28, 2012 4:13 pm
Posts: 16240
DFWdude wrote:
Since we have three dry-weather tire grades, I'd like to see a requirement that all three are used in each race.

This dictates 2 pit stops, of course. But the space between can be used for harder racing, rather than tire conservation.


I don't think we want to reduce strategy options tbh. The best races usually occur when you have a mix of 1 and two stoppers.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Oct 20, 2019 8:24 am 
Online

Joined: Thu May 12, 2011 6:08 pm
Posts: 4281
Scraping team to car radio would help for one. Far too much coaching - not to mention moaning - going on in races. Drivers should be left to their own devices in all situations other than those that threaten the safety of drivers.

All this information about tyre deg, other drivers tyre deg, pace etc. A pit board with the gap a couple of other drivers is all that's required.

_________________
Power tends to corrupt and absolute power corrupts absolutely. [Lord Acton]
My own Google Earth Motor Sport file. http://www.mediafire.com/?jzm1ieatytv
Follow me @asphalt_world


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Oct 20, 2019 11:37 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Aug 26, 2009 12:23 pm
Posts: 291
Asphalt_World wrote:
Scraping team to car radio would help for one.
All this information about tyre deg, other drivers tyre deg, pace etc. A pit board with the gap a couple of other drivers is all that's required.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Oct 20, 2019 8:46 pm 
Offline

Joined: Thu Jul 25, 2019 6:04 pm
Posts: 52
mikeyg123 wrote:
DFWdude wrote:
Since we have three dry-weather tire grades, I'd like to see a requirement that all three are used in each race.

This dictates 2 pit stops, of course. But the space between can be used for harder racing, rather than tire conservation.


I don't think we want to reduce strategy options tbh. The best races usually occur when you have a mix of 1 and two stoppers.
I don't see how using all three tires would reduce strategy options. At present, cars stay out on less than optimim tires to build "slot in" gaps down the line. (Racing a 7th place runner on time instead of someone up front)

I think the Hard tire would be the wildcard in a must use all three scenario... how long to run the white tire... just a few laps or many... and whether to use the white at the beginning, middle, or end of any race. Lots of options for strategy, not fewer.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Oct 21, 2019 12:32 am 
Offline

Joined: Sun Oct 28, 2012 7:29 pm
Posts: 2552
I would argue we should scrap the two tyre compound rule altogether. Pirelli tyres generally don't last an entire race, especially since you're likely to be starting on softs, so I think it actually goes against 'spicing' the race up.

I think it would be more interesting to see if a lead driver decides to go soft-mediums or soft-softs (or even soft-soft-soft) - rather than being restricted to a different tyre choice.

_________________
"Always believe you will become the best, but never believe you have done so"


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Oct 21, 2019 6:09 am 
Offline

Joined: Sat Jan 28, 2012 4:13 pm
Posts: 16240
DFWdude wrote:
mikeyg123 wrote:
DFWdude wrote:
Since we have three dry-weather tire grades, I'd like to see a requirement that all three are used in each race.

This dictates 2 pit stops, of course. But the space between can be used for harder racing, rather than tire conservation.


I don't think we want to reduce strategy options tbh. The best races usually occur when you have a mix of 1 and two stoppers.
I don't see how using all three tires would reduce strategy options. At present, cars stay out on less than optimim tires to build "slot in" gaps down the line. (Racing a 7th place runner on time instead of someone up front)

I think the Hard tire would be the wildcard in a must use all three scenario... how long to run the white tire... just a few laps or many... and whether to use the white at the beginning, middle, or end of any race. Lots of options for strategy, not fewer.


But everyone will be stopping twice and we will know that. No intrigue around will so and so have to stop again etc... Look at recent races. The most exciting element of the Japanese would be gone. The "will he have to stop again" dynamic has produced quite a few interesting moments.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Oct 21, 2019 11:42 am 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 33064
Jezza13 wrote:
I'll post it here seeing as there's the jump start convo going on in the Japanese GP thread.

Looks like reverse grid is gone for 2020. Apparently some top teams think they might lose a race.

I'm glad it's been shelved, for the time being anyway, though i'm not happy with the reason why it was rejected.

https://www.autosport.com/f1/news/146662/reversed-grid-trial-abandoned-amid-f1-team-impasse

No reverse grids, hallelujah! :)

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

2013: 5th Place
2014: Champion
2015: 3rd Place
2016: 4th Place

2017: 9th Place
2018: 7th place

Wins: Canada 2018, Abu Dhabi 2017
Podiums: (8)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Oct 21, 2019 11:45 am 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 33064
mikeyg123 wrote:
DFWdude wrote:
mikeyg123 wrote:
DFWdude wrote:
Since we have three dry-weather tire grades, I'd like to see a requirement that all three are used in each race.

This dictates 2 pit stops, of course. But the space between can be used for harder racing, rather than tire conservation.


I don't think we want to reduce strategy options tbh. The best races usually occur when you have a mix of 1 and two stoppers.
I don't see how using all three tires would reduce strategy options. At present, cars stay out on less than optimim tires to build "slot in" gaps down the line. (Racing a 7th place runner on time instead of someone up front)

I think the Hard tire would be the wildcard in a must use all three scenario... how long to run the white tire... just a few laps or many... and whether to use the white at the beginning, middle, or end of any race. Lots of options for strategy, not fewer.


But everyone will be stopping twice and we will know that. No intrigue around will so and so have to stop again etc... Look at recent races. The most exciting element of the Japanese would be gone. The "will he have to stop again" dynamic has produced quite a few interesting moments.

Exactly. :thumbup:

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

2013: 5th Place
2014: Champion
2015: 3rd Place
2016: 4th Place

2017: 9th Place
2018: 7th place

Wins: Canada 2018, Abu Dhabi 2017
Podiums: (8)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Oct 21, 2019 11:55 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Mar 06, 2004 8:07 am
Posts: 1248
I honestly don't think it needs "fixing". It's not broken. I've been watching for 25 years and there's always been dull races and good races.

What I don't understand though is why the biggest cause of dull racing is not more openly acknowledged - circuit design. We'll have a dull race at a dull circuit and the "how do we fix F1" discussions start, then just a wek or two later we will have a cracker where the circuit allows and all is good again.

Honestly whenever I hear a driver saying "and we all know you can't pass here" I always think - well then why the hell are "we" racing there?"

If someone with more time could do a "drop 5, add 5" poll of which circuits should be on a 20 race calender it would be interesting to see...

_________________
"I'd rather lose a race going fast enough to win it, than win one going slow enough to lose it".
-Stirling Moss


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Oct 21, 2019 12:04 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 33064
DOLOMITE wrote:
I honestly don't think it needs "fixing". It's not broken. I've been watching for 25 years and there's always been dull races and good races.

What I don't understand though is why the biggest cause of dull racing is not more openly acknowledged - circuit design. We'll have a dull race at a dull circuit and the "how do we fix F1" discussions start, then just a wek or two later we will have a cracker where the circuit allows and all is good again.

Honestly whenever I hear a driver saying "and we all know you can't pass here" I always think - well then why the hell are "we" racing there?"

If someone with more time could do a "drop 5, add 5" poll of which circuits should be on a 20 race calender it would be interesting to see...

I think basically it all surrounds the dominance of Mercedes and the need to stop them winning, intrinsically F1 has always been like this but this is the longest period of dominance.

What is needed is more race able cars which is being done for 2021, and then some kind of balance between budget caps but not dumbing down F1 too much, my main concern with budget caps is people losing jobs.

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

2013: 5th Place
2014: Champion
2015: 3rd Place
2016: 4th Place

2017: 9th Place
2018: 7th place

Wins: Canada 2018, Abu Dhabi 2017
Podiums: (8)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Oct 21, 2019 12:06 pm 
Online

Joined: Thu May 12, 2011 6:08 pm
Posts: 4281
DOLOMITE wrote:
I honestly don't think it needs "fixing". It's not broken. I've been watching for 25 years and there's always been dull races and good races.

What I don't understand though is why the biggest cause of dull racing is not more openly acknowledged - circuit design. We'll have a dull race at a dull circuit and the "how do we fix F1" discussions start, then just a wek or two later we will have a cracker where the circuit allows and all is good again.

Honestly whenever I hear a driver saying "and we all know you can't pass here" I always think - well then why the hell are "we" racing there?"

If someone with more time could do a "drop 5, add 5" poll of which circuits should be on a 20 race calender it would be interesting to see...


Whilst I agree that some circuits do not allow much overtaking and should be changed or thrown out of the sport, the reason drivers say that they know they can't pass at a particular circuit is not simply because they are criticising the circuit, but the combination of circuit and current F1 car design.

We all know that the inability to follow another car closely is a significant issue in F1. Solving it is the problem. Year after year I also believe the brakes are too good in F1 cars. The braking distances are so short it really reduces the chances of out-braking another driver.

_________________
Power tends to corrupt and absolute power corrupts absolutely. [Lord Acton]
My own Google Earth Motor Sport file. http://www.mediafire.com/?jzm1ieatytv
Follow me @asphalt_world


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Oct 21, 2019 12:09 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Oct 06, 2006 12:07 pm
Posts: 9917
People whining about the state of F1 extends much further back than that.

_________________
Räikkönen - Vettel - Bottas
Thank you Nico - You´re the champ!

PF1 Pick 10 Competition 2016: CHAMPION (2 wins, 8 podiums)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Oct 21, 2019 1:25 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue May 05, 2009 11:31 am
Posts: 7725
Covalent wrote:
People whining about the state of F1 extends much further back than that.

Yup, nothing to do with Mercedes dominance, they were complaining about processions since the early 00's, at least as far as I can remember.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Oct 21, 2019 3:20 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat Jan 28, 2012 4:13 pm
Posts: 16240
Siao7 wrote:
Covalent wrote:
People whining about the state of F1 extends much further back than that.

Yup, nothing to do with Mercedes dominance, they were complaining about processions since the early 00's, at least as far as I can remember.


There's an interview with Gilles Villeneuve from the very early 80s where they ask him what can be done to help make F1 less boring.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Oct 21, 2019 3:49 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun May 25, 2008 7:55 pm
Posts: 6939
mikeyg123 wrote:
Siao7 wrote:
Covalent wrote:
People whining about the state of F1 extends much further back than that.

Yup, nothing to do with Mercedes dominance, they were complaining about processions since the early 00's, at least as far as I can remember.


There's an interview with Gilles Villeneuve from the very early 80s where they ask him what can be done to help make F1 less boring.

Yeah it's a perpetual issue; people wanting racing to be more exciting than it is...

This time of year does highlight what's really missing in F1 today though. We just need a close title fight. It sucks to have several meaningless races at the end of the year.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Oct 21, 2019 3:56 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat Jan 28, 2012 4:13 pm
Posts: 16240
DOLOMITE wrote:
I honestly don't think it needs "fixing". It's not broken. I've been watching for 25 years and there's always been dull races and good races.

What I don't understand though is why the biggest cause of dull racing is not more openly acknowledged - circuit design. We'll have a dull race at a dull circuit and the "how do we fix F1" discussions start, then just a wek or two later we will have a cracker where the circuit allows and all is good again.

Honestly whenever I hear a driver saying "and we all know you can't pass here" I always think - well then why the hell are "we" racing there?"

If someone with more time could do a "drop 5, add 5" poll of which circuits should be on a 20 race calender it would be interesting to see...


I don't know we have a hell of a lot more circuits now that you can't overtake on that we did even 5 years ago.

I think different circuits suit different rules as well. Bahrain and Hungary were awful until 2011 but great since. More traditional circuits like Spa, Monaco and Suzuka have been a lot duller since 2011 than they were before.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Oct 22, 2019 9:43 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 29, 2012 11:57 am
Posts: 746
Location: Scotland/U.A.E
I don't think it is the dominance that is the problem, it's the absolute predictability outside a few variables.

I will make a prediction...... The last 3 races of the season.... the podium will be 3 of Hamilton, Bottas, Leclerc, Vettel or Verstappen - and that has been true in 16/17 races this season - only a freak race in Germany being the exception. I will make a prediction as well...... Next year will be pretty much the same - although me may get a legit title fight (which is very welcome)

2018 season we can add both Red Bulls to the party, and that theme was true in 20/21 races.
2017 at 19/20 races that was true.
2016 it was really spiced up in the sense that 18/21 were dominated by the big 3.
2015 the podium was dominated by just 2 teams in 13/20 races
2014 was dominated by Mercedes, although a strong Williams team took some 2nd places - the last time a team from outside the big 3 stood above the 3rd podium step - nigh on 90 races ago!

F1 has performance lock in like never before. The gap between the cars is close by historical standards, but.... the cars are what they are, and they perform accordingly, rarely break down (at the front), outside a few top drivers (who do make a difference), the grid talent is quite even and F1 drivers now perform fairly robotically - the superstars maybe eek out a couple of extra tenths, but you're steady #2's deliver the cars performance. Strategy is usually fairly homogeneous across the front end.

Add in the fact that unless there is a big performance advantage, induced artificially due to tyres and DRS, there is almost no prospect of overtaking at the front as the cars cannot really run within a second of each other - without either cooking their engines, brakes, tyres, whatever. If a driver is, for example, a couple of tenths faster over the race distance.... He has no chance of overtaking without the lead driver making an error.

Fairer distribution of money and sensible aero policy would go a long way! Also lets roll back the brakes to make them more road car relevant and not costing £100k a corner.

_________________
I'm competing if anyone is interested in how I am getting on.
Car #36 - Blog


Last edited by Badgeronimous on Tue Oct 22, 2019 10:06 am, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Oct 22, 2019 10:01 am 
Offline

Joined: Sat Jan 28, 2012 4:13 pm
Posts: 16240
Badgeronimous wrote:
I don't think it is the dominance that is the problem, it's the absolute predictability outside a few variables.

I will make a prediction...... The last 3 races of the season.... the podium will be 3 of Hamilton, Bottas, Leclerc, Vettel or Verstappen - and that has been true in 16/17 races this season - only a freak race in Germany being the exception.

2018 season we can add both Red Bulls to the party, and that theme was true in 20/21 races.
2017 at 19/20 races that was true.
2016 it was really spiced up in the sense that 18/21 were dominated by the big 3.
2015 the podium was dominated by just 2 teams in 13/20 races
2014 was dominated by Mercedes, although a strong Williams team took some 2nd places - the last time a team from outside the big 3 stood above the 3rd podium step - nigh on 90 races ago!

F1 has performance lock in like never before. The gap between the cars is close by historical standards, but.... the cars are what they are, and they perform accordingly, rarely break down (at the front), outside a few top drivers (who do make a difference), the grid talent is quite even and F1 drivers now perform fairly robotically - the superstars maybe eek out a couple of extra tenths, but you're steady #2's deliver the cars performance. Strategy is usually fairly homogeneous across the front end.

Add in the fact that unless there is a big performance advantage, induced artificially due to tyres and DRS, there is almost no prospect of overtaking at the front as the cars cannot really run within a second of each other - without either cooking their engines, brakes, tyres, whatever. If a driver is, for example, a couple of tenths faster over the race distance.... He has no chance of overtaking without the lead driver making an error.

Fairer distribution of money and sensible aero policy would go a long way! Also lets roll back the brakes to make them more road car relevant and not costing £100k a corner.


Yes, it's this stability that is the largest problem. There has never been a time in F1 where the order is so set. TYou mention those 5 drivers that will be on the podium for the remainder of the races. I would go further and say it is almost certain that a combination of those drivers will be on the podium in Australia in March.

There has never been a time in F1 where I could have so confidently made that prediction.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Oct 22, 2019 2:23 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 33064
Siao7 wrote:
Covalent wrote:
People whining about the state of F1 extends much further back than that.

Yup, nothing to do with Mercedes dominance, they were complaining about processions since the early 00's, at least as far as I can remember.

I did say it's always been like this just that the Mercedes dominance is making things worse for some.

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

2013: 5th Place
2014: Champion
2015: 3rd Place
2016: 4th Place

2017: 9th Place
2018: 7th place

Wins: Canada 2018, Abu Dhabi 2017
Podiums: (8)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Oct 22, 2019 2:45 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue May 05, 2009 11:31 am
Posts: 7725
pokerman wrote:
Siao7 wrote:
Covalent wrote:
People whining about the state of F1 extends much further back than that.

Yup, nothing to do with Mercedes dominance, they were complaining about processions since the early 00's, at least as far as I can remember.

I did say it's always been like this just that the Mercedes dominance is making things worse for some.

They said the same about the Ferrari dominance. Each time someone dominates the non-fans will hate it. As in any sport.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Oct 22, 2019 4:37 pm 
Offline

Joined: Thu Jul 25, 2019 6:04 pm
Posts: 52
Siao7 wrote:
Covalent wrote:
People whining about the state of F1 extends much further back than that.

Yup, nothing to do with Mercedes dominance, they were complaining about processions since the early 00's, at least as far as I can remember.
Team dominance (and processions) goes waaaay further back. During the McLaren/Honda era (the first one, 1985-1990), Senna or Prost frequently lapped the entire field. Now THAT was a boring progression.

The Lotus 49 era in the 60's was also boring for some. Only thing keeping it interesting was seeing how individual teams built their cars around the same Cosworth DFV engine. Back then, car design and innovative ideas (wings on stilts, fan cars, the first turbos, etc) kept the interest in the sport for me. Today, the cars are so tightly regulated, they all look the same and (surprise) perform the same...

F1 is as much a technology showcase as it is a "racing series." Dominant car design has always made the races processional from time to time, and frankly, there is nothing wrong with it.

If you want passing 4 times a lap, watch NASCAR. And even THAT gets boring, too.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Oct 22, 2019 7:20 pm 
Online

Joined: Thu May 12, 2011 6:08 pm
Posts: 4281
I think it's fair to say we all enjoy a good wet race. Now why is this? I'm guess the lack of grip meaning cars struggling to accelerate and brake, getting all twitchy and the sight of drivers having to demonstrate serious car control. This leads to much more passing than usual.

There, we actually do enjoy a fair amount of passing, not a oval racing levels of course.

I think F1 really needs to reduce the grip of the cars. Before you all shout me down, I don't mean they should be so lacking in grip the cars handle in the dry like they do in the wet, but surely we'd all enjoy the racing more if there were cars sliding a bit as they brake or accelerate and a bit more passing. Surely this would be worth something like a 5 second drop in lap time.

_________________
Power tends to corrupt and absolute power corrupts absolutely. [Lord Acton]
My own Google Earth Motor Sport file. http://www.mediafire.com/?jzm1ieatytv
Follow me @asphalt_world


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Oct 22, 2019 8:08 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat Jan 28, 2012 4:13 pm
Posts: 16240
Asphalt_World wrote:
I think it's fair to say we all enjoy a good wet race. Now why is this? I'm guess the lack of grip meaning cars struggling to accelerate and brake, getting all twitchy and the sight of drivers having to demonstrate serious car control. This leads to much more passing than usual.

There, we actually do enjoy a fair amount of passing, not a oval racing levels of course.

I think F1 really needs to reduce the grip of the cars. Before you all shout me down, I don't mean they should be so lacking in grip the cars handle in the dry like they do in the wet, but surely we'd all enjoy the racing more if there were cars sliding a bit as they brake or accelerate and a bit more passing. Surely this would be worth something like a 5 second drop in lap time.


Is that possible though? We had a recent period of slow cars. They didn't slide around anymore.

I just think we need cars that can easily get within a second of each other.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Oct 22, 2019 8:12 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat Jan 28, 2012 4:13 pm
Posts: 16240
DFWdude wrote:
Siao7 wrote:
Covalent wrote:
People whining about the state of F1 extends much further back than that.

Yup, nothing to do with Mercedes dominance, they were complaining about processions since the early 00's, at least as far as I can remember.
Team dominance (and processions) goes waaaay further back. During the McLaren/Honda era (the first one, 1985-1990), Senna or Prost frequently lapped the entire field. Now THAT was a boring progression.

The Lotus 49 era in the 60's was also boring for some. Only thing keeping it interesting was seeing how individual teams built their cars around the same Cosworth DFV engine. Back then, car design and innovative ideas (wings on stilts, fan cars, the first turbos, etc) kept the interest in the sport for me. Today, the cars are so tightly regulated, they all look the same and (surprise) perform the same...

F1 is as much a technology showcase as it is a "racing series." Dominant car design has always made the races processional from time to time, and frankly, there is nothing wrong with it.

If you want passing 4 times a lap, watch NASCAR. And even THAT gets boring, too.


But there was a lot of things going on then. 85-90 we couldn't predict who would be fastest from season to season and just about anyone had a chance of a podium. Stefan Johansson proved that.

The problem isn't that we have dominance it's that the dominance has been locked in. 2000-2006 the races were often dull but there was a hell of a lot else to keep us excited an interested. Right now we are going through and unprecedented era of stability.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Oct 22, 2019 9:20 pm 
Offline

Joined: Thu Jul 25, 2019 6:04 pm
Posts: 52
mikeyg123 wrote:
DFWdude wrote:
Siao7 wrote:
Covalent wrote:
People whining about the state of F1 extends much further back than that.

Yup, nothing to do with Mercedes dominance, they were complaining about processions since the early 00's, at least as far as I can remember.
Team dominance (and processions) goes waaaay further back. During the McLaren/Honda era (the first one, 1985-1990), Senna or Prost frequently lapped the entire field. Now THAT was a boring progression.

The Lotus 49 era in the 60's was also boring for some. Only thing keeping it interesting was seeing how individual teams built their cars around the same Cosworth DFV engine. Back then, car design and innovative ideas (wings on stilts, fan cars, the first turbos, etc) kept the interest in the sport for me. Today, the cars are so tightly regulated, they all look the same and (surprise) perform the same...

F1 is as much a technology showcase as it is a "racing series." Dominant car design has always made the races processional from time to time, and frankly, there is nothing wrong with it.

If you want passing 4 times a lap, watch NASCAR. And even THAT gets boring, too.


But there was a lot of things going on then. 85-90 we couldn't predict who would be fastest from season to season and just about anyone had a chance of a podium. Stefan Johansson proved that.

The problem isn't that we have dominance it's that the dominance has been locked in. 2000-2006 the races were often dull but there was a hell of a lot else to keep us excited an interested. Right now we are going through and unprecedented era of stability.
You must have watched a different F1 than I did 85-90. I remember the race comentators wondering aloud whether anyone could beat team McLaren, especially after the 88 season (when McLaren won 15 of 16 races). The only reason that anyone got a chance at a podium was for third place, since McLaren (and all teams) fielded only two cars. The excitement was over which McLaren would win, Senna or Prost.

2000-2006 was also a snoozefest, on balance. Ferrari's dominance overshadowed anything else worth noting. I could not wait long enough for Schumacher to retire.

Same with the Red Bull dominance with Vettel (early teens), and the Mercedes dominance since.

Really, one's assessment of processional years is based on which team one favors. But OBJECTIVELY speaking, there have been several periods of one team dominating over the others dating back decades.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Oct 22, 2019 9:41 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat Jan 28, 2012 4:13 pm
Posts: 16240
DFWdude wrote:
mikeyg123 wrote:
DFWdude wrote:
Siao7 wrote:
Covalent wrote:
People whining about the state of F1 extends much further back than that.

Yup, nothing to do with Mercedes dominance, they were complaining about processions since the early 00's, at least as far as I can remember.
Team dominance (and processions) goes waaaay further back. During the McLaren/Honda era (the first one, 1985-1990), Senna or Prost frequently lapped the entire field. Now THAT was a boring progression.

The Lotus 49 era in the 60's was also boring for some. Only thing keeping it interesting was seeing how individual teams built their cars around the same Cosworth DFV engine. Back then, car design and innovative ideas (wings on stilts, fan cars, the first turbos, etc) kept the interest in the sport for me. Today, the cars are so tightly regulated, they all look the same and (surprise) perform the same...

F1 is as much a technology showcase as it is a "racing series." Dominant car design has always made the races processional from time to time, and frankly, there is nothing wrong with it.

If you want passing 4 times a lap, watch NASCAR. And even THAT gets boring, too.


But there was a lot of things going on then. 85-90 we couldn't predict who would be fastest from season to season and just about anyone had a chance of a podium. Stefan Johansson proved that.

The problem isn't that we have dominance it's that the dominance has been locked in. 2000-2006 the races were often dull but there was a hell of a lot else to keep us excited an interested. Right now we are going through and unprecedented era of stability.
You must have watched a different F1 than I did 85-90. I remember the race comentators wondering aloud whether anyone could beat team McLaren, especially after the 88 season (when McLaren won 15 of 16 races). The only reason that anyone got a chance at a podium was for third place, since McLaren (and all teams) fielded only two cars. The excitement was over which McLaren would win, Senna or Prost.

2000-2006 was also a snoozefest, on balance. Ferrari's dominance overshadowed anything else worth noting. I could not wait long enough for Schumacher to retire.

Same with the Red Bull dominance with Vettel (early teens), and the Mercedes dominance since.

Really, one's assessment of processional years is based on which team one favors. But OBJECTIVELY speaking, there have been several periods of one team dominating over the others dating back decades.


No, you're not getting what I'm saying.

In 1985 we had Ferrari, Lotus and Mclaren fighting for wins. Then along came Willaims later in the season and could compete with them. Then in 86 Ferrari fell away and we had a championship battle with drivers from 3 teams. Those 3 teams continued to win into 87. By 88 Mclaren were dominant and that continued into 89 but with Ferrari able to challenge them. Williams slipped back into the midfield. By 1990 Ferrari and Mclaren were equal again and Bennetton were able to compete for occasional wins. Lotus had become back markers.

Through the early 00s you had an even greater ebb and flow. Mclaren, Williams, Renault, Toyota and BAR/Honda came and went at the front of the field as well as Ferrari.

There was never a season where one could predict who all the race winners would be the following season.

in 87 nobody would have predicted Mclaren dominating as thoroughly as they did in 88.

Where as now I could have predicted the pecking order for 2019 back in 2016. Things have changed now. We have so much more stability in terms of performance.

Even in 1988 we had 10 different drivers on the podium.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Oct 23, 2019 9:20 am 
Online

Joined: Thu May 12, 2011 6:08 pm
Posts: 4281
mikeyg123 wrote:
Asphalt_World wrote:
I think it's fair to say we all enjoy a good wet race. Now why is this? I'm guess the lack of grip meaning cars struggling to accelerate and brake, getting all twitchy and the sight of drivers having to demonstrate serious car control. This leads to much more passing than usual.

There, we actually do enjoy a fair amount of passing, not a oval racing levels of course.

I think F1 really needs to reduce the grip of the cars. Before you all shout me down, I don't mean they should be so lacking in grip the cars handle in the dry like they do in the wet, but surely we'd all enjoy the racing more if there were cars sliding a bit as they brake or accelerate and a bit more passing. Surely this would be worth something like a 5 second drop in lap time.


Is that possible though? We had a recent period of slow cars. They didn't slide around anymore.

I just think we need cars that can easily get within a second of each other.


It's not simply about changing the regs to generally slow the car. It's about making the right changes. Personally, I'd love the tyres to be far harder than they currently are, tyre warmers banned and brake efficiency reduced. This would me braking would be far harder and accelerating out of corners would be far more difficult, leading to mistakes. The small amount of steering input from drivers, even during a lot of flat out qualifying laps, is a real shame in my opinion.

_________________
Power tends to corrupt and absolute power corrupts absolutely. [Lord Acton]
My own Google Earth Motor Sport file. http://www.mediafire.com/?jzm1ieatytv
Follow me @asphalt_world


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Oct 23, 2019 11:48 am 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 33064
DFWdude wrote:
Siao7 wrote:
Covalent wrote:
People whining about the state of F1 extends much further back than that.

Yup, nothing to do with Mercedes dominance, they were complaining about processions since the early 00's, at least as far as I can remember.
Team dominance (and processions) goes waaaay further back. During the McLaren/Honda era (the first one, 1985-1990), Senna or Prost frequently lapped the entire field. Now THAT was a boring progression.

The Lotus 49 era in the 60's was also boring for some. Only thing keeping it interesting was seeing how individual teams built their cars around the same Cosworth DFV engine. Back then, car design and innovative ideas (wings on stilts, fan cars, the first turbos, etc) kept the interest in the sport for me. Today, the cars are so tightly regulated, they all look the same and (surprise) perform the same...

F1 is as much a technology showcase as it is a "racing series." Dominant car design has always made the races processional from time to time, and frankly, there is nothing wrong with it.

If you want passing 4 times a lap, watch NASCAR. And even THAT gets boring, too.

I kind of view NASCAR like basketball, how exciting is it to see a basket being scored as opposed to a goal being scored in football?

Some may make comparison with other series saying how much more exciting they are but they get nowhere near the audience that F1 gets, and it's F1 that needs fixing?

I'm not saying that F1 can't be improved though.

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

2013: 5th Place
2014: Champion
2015: 3rd Place
2016: 4th Place

2017: 9th Place
2018: 7th place

Wins: Canada 2018, Abu Dhabi 2017
Podiums: (8)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Oct 23, 2019 11:59 am 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 33064
Asphalt_World wrote:
I think it's fair to say we all enjoy a good wet race. Now why is this? I'm guess the lack of grip meaning cars struggling to accelerate and brake, getting all twitchy and the sight of drivers having to demonstrate serious car control. This leads to much more passing than usual.

There, we actually do enjoy a fair amount of passing, not a oval racing levels of course.

I think F1 really needs to reduce the grip of the cars. Before you all shout me down, I don't mean they should be so lacking in grip the cars handle in the dry like they do in the wet, but surely we'd all enjoy the racing more if there were cars sliding a bit as they brake or accelerate and a bit more passing. Surely this would be worth something like a 5 second drop in lap time.

They did that for 2014 but people then complained that the cars were not much quicker than GP2 cars and it wasn't F1.

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

2013: 5th Place
2014: Champion
2015: 3rd Place
2016: 4th Place

2017: 9th Place
2018: 7th place

Wins: Canada 2018, Abu Dhabi 2017
Podiums: (8)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Oct 23, 2019 12:06 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 33064
DFWdude wrote:
mikeyg123 wrote:
DFWdude wrote:
Siao7 wrote:
Covalent wrote:
People whining about the state of F1 extends much further back than that.

Yup, nothing to do with Mercedes dominance, they were complaining about processions since the early 00's, at least as far as I can remember.
Team dominance (and processions) goes waaaay further back. During the McLaren/Honda era (the first one, 1985-1990), Senna or Prost frequently lapped the entire field. Now THAT was a boring progression.

The Lotus 49 era in the 60's was also boring for some. Only thing keeping it interesting was seeing how individual teams built their cars around the same Cosworth DFV engine. Back then, car design and innovative ideas (wings on stilts, fan cars, the first turbos, etc) kept the interest in the sport for me. Today, the cars are so tightly regulated, they all look the same and (surprise) perform the same...

F1 is as much a technology showcase as it is a "racing series." Dominant car design has always made the races processional from time to time, and frankly, there is nothing wrong with it.

If you want passing 4 times a lap, watch NASCAR. And even THAT gets boring, too.


But there was a lot of things going on then. 85-90 we couldn't predict who would be fastest from season to season and just about anyone had a chance of a podium. Stefan Johansson proved that.

The problem isn't that we have dominance it's that the dominance has been locked in. 2000-2006 the races were often dull but there was a hell of a lot else to keep us excited an interested. Right now we are going through and unprecedented era of stability.
You must have watched a different F1 than I did 85-90. I remember the race comentators wondering aloud whether anyone could beat team McLaren, especially after the 88 season (when McLaren won 15 of 16 races). The only reason that anyone got a chance at a podium was for third place, since McLaren (and all teams) fielded only two cars. The excitement was over which McLaren would win, Senna or Prost.

2000-2006 was also a snoozefest, on balance. Ferrari's dominance overshadowed anything else worth noting. I could not wait long enough for Schumacher to retire.

Same with the Red Bull dominance with Vettel (early teens), and the Mercedes dominance since.

Really, one's assessment of processional years is based on which team one favors. But OBJECTIVELY speaking, there have been several periods of one team dominating over the others dating back decades.

Indeed dominance is quite normal as is 2 or 3 teams being that much better than everyone else, it's strange seeing the 85-90 period as being any different.

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

2013: 5th Place
2014: Champion
2015: 3rd Place
2016: 4th Place

2017: 9th Place
2018: 7th place

Wins: Canada 2018, Abu Dhabi 2017
Podiums: (8)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Oct 23, 2019 12:19 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat Jan 28, 2012 4:13 pm
Posts: 16240
pokerman wrote:
DFWdude wrote:
mikeyg123 wrote:
DFWdude wrote:
Siao7 wrote:
Yup, nothing to do with Mercedes dominance, they were complaining about processions since the early 00's, at least as far as I can remember.
Team dominance (and processions) goes waaaay further back. During the McLaren/Honda era (the first one, 1985-1990), Senna or Prost frequently lapped the entire field. Now THAT was a boring progression.

The Lotus 49 era in the 60's was also boring for some. Only thing keeping it interesting was seeing how individual teams built their cars around the same Cosworth DFV engine. Back then, car design and innovative ideas (wings on stilts, fan cars, the first turbos, etc) kept the interest in the sport for me. Today, the cars are so tightly regulated, they all look the same and (surprise) perform the same...

F1 is as much a technology showcase as it is a "racing series." Dominant car design has always made the races processional from time to time, and frankly, there is nothing wrong with it.

If you want passing 4 times a lap, watch NASCAR. And even THAT gets boring, too.


But there was a lot of things going on then. 85-90 we couldn't predict who would be fastest from season to season and just about anyone had a chance of a podium. Stefan Johansson proved that.

The problem isn't that we have dominance it's that the dominance has been locked in. 2000-2006 the races were often dull but there was a hell of a lot else to keep us excited an interested. Right now we are going through and unprecedented era of stability.
You must have watched a different F1 than I did 85-90. I remember the race comentators wondering aloud whether anyone could beat team McLaren, especially after the 88 season (when McLaren won 15 of 16 races). The only reason that anyone got a chance at a podium was for third place, since McLaren (and all teams) fielded only two cars. The excitement was over which McLaren would win, Senna or Prost.

2000-2006 was also a snoozefest, on balance. Ferrari's dominance overshadowed anything else worth noting. I could not wait long enough for Schumacher to retire.

Same with the Red Bull dominance with Vettel (early teens), and the Mercedes dominance since.

Really, one's assessment of processional years is based on which team one favors. But OBJECTIVELY speaking, there have been several periods of one team dominating over the others dating back decades.

Indeed dominance is quite normal as is 2 or 3 teams being that much better than everyone else, it's strange seeing the 85-90 period as being any different.


No it's quite different at the moment as I have explained a few posts above.

I wouldn't care a jot if Mercedes happened to keep winning if we had 7 or 8 teams actually able to fight for podiums like we had in that period. It's not the dominance of Merc that is the issue. It's how fixed the top 3 are.

At no other time in F1 history could I predict with certainty the teams fighting at the front years in advance.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Oct 23, 2019 1:40 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Oct 21, 2003 11:06 am
Posts: 7825
Location: Belgium
mikeyg123 wrote:
In 1985 we had Ferrari, Lotus and Mclaren fighting for wins. Then along came Willaims later in the season and could compete with them. Then in 86 Ferrari fell away and we had a championship battle with drivers from 3 teams. Those 3 teams continued to win into 87. By 88 Mclaren were dominant and that continued into 89 but with Ferrari able to challenge them. Williams slipped back into the midfield. By 1990 Ferrari and Mclaren were equal again and Bennetton were able to compete for occasional wins. Lotus had become back markers.

Through the early 00s you had an even greater ebb and flow. Mclaren, Williams, Renault, Toyota and BAR/Honda came and went at the front of the field as well as Ferrari.

There was never a season where one could predict who all the race winners would be the following season.

in 87 nobody would have predicted Mclaren dominating as thoroughly as they did in 88.

Where as now I could have predicted the pecking order for 2019 back in 2016. Things have changed now. We have so much more stability in terms of performance.

Even in 1988 we had 10 different drivers on the podium.
I remember that period fairly well, and I think one factor overrode all others almost permanently; having the engine to compete, and being able to incorporate it into your car in good time. Honda became the best engine to have, and the preferred Honda team became the top team, regardless of which top drivers were there. While allowed turbo boost was gradually brought down by the FIA, it was still the turbo engines that fought for the titles. I've never really understood why Ford chose to switch to atmospheric engines a year too soon, when Benetton's Boutsen came out of testing convinced that staying with the turbo was the way to remain competitive in 1988.
McLaren and Prost won a fantastic WDC in 1986, but already the TAG engine was no longer the engine to have. Perhaps because it was meant for the "ground-effect" cars rather than the flat-bottomed ones that followed.

_________________
Use every man after his desert, and who should scape whipping? Use them after your own honour and dignity.

Maria de Villota - Jules Bianchi


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Oct 23, 2019 1:42 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 33064
mikeyg123 wrote:
pokerman wrote:
DFWdude wrote:
mikeyg123 wrote:
DFWdude wrote:
Team dominance (and processions) goes waaaay further back. During the McLaren/Honda era (the first one, 1985-1990), Senna or Prost frequently lapped the entire field. Now THAT was a boring progression.

The Lotus 49 era in the 60's was also boring for some. Only thing keeping it interesting was seeing how individual teams built their cars around the same Cosworth DFV engine. Back then, car design and innovative ideas (wings on stilts, fan cars, the first turbos, etc) kept the interest in the sport for me. Today, the cars are so tightly regulated, they all look the same and (surprise) perform the same...

F1 is as much a technology showcase as it is a "racing series." Dominant car design has always made the races processional from time to time, and frankly, there is nothing wrong with it.

If you want passing 4 times a lap, watch NASCAR. And even THAT gets boring, too.


But there was a lot of things going on then. 85-90 we couldn't predict who would be fastest from season to season and just about anyone had a chance of a podium. Stefan Johansson proved that.

The problem isn't that we have dominance it's that the dominance has been locked in. 2000-2006 the races were often dull but there was a hell of a lot else to keep us excited an interested. Right now we are going through and unprecedented era of stability.
You must have watched a different F1 than I did 85-90. I remember the race comentators wondering aloud whether anyone could beat team McLaren, especially after the 88 season (when McLaren won 15 of 16 races). The only reason that anyone got a chance at a podium was for third place, since McLaren (and all teams) fielded only two cars. The excitement was over which McLaren would win, Senna or Prost.

2000-2006 was also a snoozefest, on balance. Ferrari's dominance overshadowed anything else worth noting. I could not wait long enough for Schumacher to retire.

Same with the Red Bull dominance with Vettel (early teens), and the Mercedes dominance since.

Really, one's assessment of processional years is based on which team one favors. But OBJECTIVELY speaking, there have been several periods of one team dominating over the others dating back decades.

Indeed dominance is quite normal as is 2 or 3 teams being that much better than everyone else, it's strange seeing the 85-90 period as being any different.


No it's quite different at the moment as I have explained a few posts above.

I wouldn't care a jot if Mercedes happened to keep winning if we had 7 or 8 teams actually able to fight for podiums like we had in that period. It's not the dominance of Merc that is the issue. It's how fixed the top 3 are.

At no other time in F1 history could I predict with certainty the teams fighting at the front years in advance.

I don't think that much has changed apart from the level of reliability and professionalism we see today which makes it that bit harder for the lower teams to see a podium.

Let's also not forget some of the systems that were put in place to hamper the top teams, I'm looking at the qualifying systems like the reverse 1 lap qualifying were the faster cars had to go out first on a green track, I guess not too dissimilar to what you have with FE, and also the race fueled qualifying.

This was done obviously because the top teams dominating has always been a problem, I'd rather this be addressed on more sporting grounds like a fairer distribution of funds rather than the more draconian ideas of trying to nobble the top teams/drivers going into the race like what was put forward with the reverse grid races which you and some others were supporters of.

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

2013: 5th Place
2014: Champion
2015: 3rd Place
2016: 4th Place

2017: 9th Place
2018: 7th place

Wins: Canada 2018, Abu Dhabi 2017
Podiums: (8)


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic

All times are UTC


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group