I think he must mean in the recent past, otherwise the award would surely go to Nino Farina.
Back on topic: Kobayashi.
Back on topic: Kobayashi.
Hamilton won his WDC by 1 point. Raikkonen won his by 1 point. Vettel is leading Webber by 12 points. When 1 point wins a championship, 12 points is much more than "nothing".
What people should do is one thing. What people actually do is often something else. What happened to Webber isn't what should have happened, because what actually happened was dictated by the cold reality of a sport where winning ultimately trumps everything else. No, it's not fair, but neither is a small lion being chased away from his booty by a bigger and meaner lion.
It's a tough life. Vettel is higher in the WDC standings, and was faster than Webber in FP1 and FP3. It's a ruthless decision, and unfair from a personnel management perspective, but a rational one in terms of maximising performance.
Kovalainen
Chandhok
Red Bull
McLaren
Mobil (McL)
Chandhok
Red Bull
McLaren
Mobil (McL)
Oh how quickly we've forgotten. The "Walrus" Williams was probably the ugliest F1 car in modern times.
Protest = fine.
Destroying people's property and livelihoods = wrong.
If the money figure is true, it is ridiculously big. But video-conferencing? Don't kid yourself. Diplomacy and negotiations are best done physically, face-to-face.
As for effective decisions, what exactly would be the criteria for "effective decisions"? They have only held three summits in the organisation's history, and most of the agreements have been long-term strategy decisions, not short-term moves. The G20 doesn't exist to solve the world's economic problems within two years!
Let's not be hasty about passing judgement. Our children's children will write our history and judge us.
Destroying people's property and livelihoods = wrong.
If the money figure is true, it is ridiculously big. But video-conferencing? Don't kid yourself. Diplomacy and negotiations are best done physically, face-to-face.
As for effective decisions, what exactly would be the criteria for "effective decisions"? They have only held three summits in the organisation's history, and most of the agreements have been long-term strategy decisions, not short-term moves. The G20 doesn't exist to solve the world's economic problems within two years!
Let's not be hasty about passing judgement. Our children's children will write our history and judge us.
Good qualifying for me: RBR one-two and a McLaren in P3, Kovi and Trulli in the usual position as the best of the new teams, and Williams in the top ten.
Huh? An NDA doesn't prevent people from obtaining new employment. An NDA is a contract to prevent people from disclosing information protected by the agreement (hence the name, Non-Disclosure Agreement). For example, an NDA might cover things like aero data for McLaren's front wing.
Nice in theory, but it doesn't always work well in practice. You can't just erase someone's expertise, even if they can be prevented from using privileged information from another project.
What you're talking about is a clause in some people's employment contract which stipulates X months have to pass after the end of employment before working for a competitor.
+1
I was thinking they'd stop at 3 goals and cruise for the remainder of the match... but no. Ronaldo & Co were having a lot of fun.
South Korea v Nigeria tomorrow. It's going to be an early morning for me.
I think that the teams are required to use demo tyres for promo videos, or at least non-GP tyres. So it wouldn't help them much.
What a race! 
Nice to see the real "Stig" in action.
Nice to see the real "Stig" in action.
Fisi was up-to-date with driving F1 cars. Badoer was seriously out of practice.
However, I'd agree if you said Fisi is a more talented driver than Badoer.
However, I'd agree if you said Fisi is a more talented driver than Badoer.
Red Bull gives you fails.
I wish I could switch.
I wish I could switch.
Webber hasn't retired from any of his races this season.
This is 2010, not 2006 (the only season when Webber retired more than he finished).
They sign them up younger these days.
It's good and bad. Good that a very talented kid gets his future career bankrolled, but bad that the kid has probably signed away (or his agent has signed for him) a chance to grow up normally and make his own choices.
It's good and bad. Good that a very talented kid gets his future career bankrolled, but bad that the kid has probably signed away (or his agent has signed for him) a chance to grow up normally and make his own choices.
Are you talking about the Wall of Champions? Maybe just one crash. It hasn't claimed all that many victims.
It's nice to have a GP back at this circuit. I still remember the race in 2007: Takuma Sato overtaking Ralf Schumacher and Fernando Alonso, Anthony Davidson hitting a groundhog, and Kubica's awful crash.
According to Wikipedia, it's CA$15M per year.
Good news. Hopefully Red Bull can produce another leading car next season.
I thought you were hiding behind your words (ie. writing "might" when you actually think it as certain).
I might have assumed wrongly. My fault.
I might have assumed wrongly. My fault.
Ah, the Tony Pond video. I read that he set the time record for cars on that course.
Let's not play amateur psychologists.
Bringing one's hand to the face is not a definitive sign of untruthfulness. It may indicate nervousness or thoughtfulness, but unless you can discount other reasonable causes for the behaviour or corroborate it with other indicators, it carries no significant meaning.
When analysing behaviour, you have to establish a baseline. I don't think anyone here can say for sure what Vettel's baseline would be in that type of situation. The world of behaviour science is not so cut and dry as Dr Lightman of Lie to Me makes out.
Bringing one's hand to the face is not a definitive sign of untruthfulness. It may indicate nervousness or thoughtfulness, but unless you can discount other reasonable causes for the behaviour or corroborate it with other indicators, it carries no significant meaning.
When analysing behaviour, you have to establish a baseline. I don't think anyone here can say for sure what Vettel's baseline would be in that type of situation. The world of behaviour science is not so cut and dry as Dr Lightman of Lie to Me makes out.
Vettel didn't have to yield to Webber either, at that point. The knife of responsibility cuts both ways.
The onus of safety is not decided on whether a driver is overtaking, being overtaken, or is alongside. That is an over-simplification which only applies to the most basic situations. The onus of safety is assigned proportionately depending on the ability of each driver to prevent a collision. Generally that means if a driver is attempting to overtake the car in front, then the onus of safety is on him; when he is alongside the other driver, the onus falls equally on both; when he is ahead, the onus is on the driver being overtaken. There is no One Rule to Rule Them All; each situation is unique.
Vettel was nearly half a car-length ahead of Webber. He was not behind Webber, nor was he merely alongside in equal measure. Webber was not visible from Vettel's position, while Vettel's car was fully visible to Webber. Therefore, Webber was the driver who was in the best position to prevent a collision. Unfortunately for Vettel, he naively believed Webber would be a gentleman and provide fair room to move... the rest is history.
Vettel swerving into Webber when he knew Webber was there, is a separate issue. Vettel is the guilty party without a doubt.
I'd describe it like this: Webber was guilty of being unfair, and Vettel was guilty of being stupid. The former guilt is easy enough to dismiss as a "racing incident", the latter is not so easy to overlook.
Last edited by samjh, .
I doubt it. The Commodre Cup series will be racing at Sandown that weekend.
FGED GREDG RDFGDR GSFDG