|
||||||||||
|
||||||||||
20 Mar 2004, 13:04 (Ref:911971) | #1 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 3,191
|
Pantano first victim one engine-rule
I just read on a Dutch site that Panano is the first victim of the one engine-rule. Tomorrow he will start at the last position.
Fact is, he is put back two positions on the starting grid. If this would have been happen to someone in the top 10, he would be put back ten places. In my opinion that is unfair. |
||
|
20 Mar 2004, 13:24 (Ref:911986) | #2 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Dec 2001
Posts: 1,135
|
Well then again, the more the top teams are disadvantaged, and the less for the bottom teams....the better.
|
||
|
20 Mar 2004, 13:44 (Ref:911991) | #3 | ||
Ten-Tenths Hall of Fame
Veteran
Join Date: Dec 2000
Posts: 7,643
|
Not a big loss really, I'm still trying to work out if Pantano is bad or Bruni is good.
|
||
__________________
#Keepfightingmichael |
20 Mar 2004, 15:50 (Ref:912158) | #4 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 936
|
:confused: Let us know when you have worked that one out Wrex:confused: :confused:
|
||
|
20 Mar 2004, 16:44 (Ref:912279) | #5 | ||
Forum Host
Veteran
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 6,529
|
no loss really...
|
||
__________________
A byte walks into a bar and orders a pint. Bartender asks him "What's wrong?" Byte says "Parity error." Bartender nods and says "Yeah, I thought you looked a bit off." |
20 Mar 2004, 18:01 (Ref:912421) | #6 | ||
Racer
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 319
|
I'm not sure if i agree that if a front runner was to be put back ten places it is unfair. to make up ten places in a ferrari is proberly much easier than Pantano making up two in a Jordan. I think it makes the race more interesting i wonder how many places Alonso will make up on the start alone.
Last edited by hamsmith; 20 Mar 2004 at 18:02. |
||
|
20 Mar 2004, 18:59 (Ref:912539) | #7 | |
Racer
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 265
|
I think overall, the rule is good, but believe they should be able to replace an engine after Friday practice.
As for Pantano losing out, that is the way it is. He will start behind Alonso and Sato, who both failed to complete a lap for time. Had Pantano set a time that put him in the top ten, they would be behind him - other way 'round. |
|
__________________
Life is not a spectator sport! |
20 Mar 2004, 19:03 (Ref:912546) | #8 | |
20KPINAL
Join Date: May 2003
Posts: 29,853
|
The rule is stupid anyways....why punish a driver for an engineering fault/failure?
It's no loss to Pantano really.....he was abysmal in qualifying. I expected him to do well, but to get outqualified by Baumgartner in the most unstable car ever is something of a letdown. |
|
|
20 Mar 2004, 19:04 (Ref:912549) | #9 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Sep 2001
Posts: 2,508
|
To be honest it wouldn't matter where Pantano qualified as he'd be overtaken pretty quickly anyway.
|
||
|
20 Mar 2004, 23:09 (Ref:912937) | #10 | |||
Rookie
Join Date: Jul 2001
Posts: 86
|
Quote:
|
|||
|
21 Mar 2004, 11:14 (Ref:913848) | #11 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Sep 2001
Posts: 13,000
|
I've been amazed by Pantano's complete failure to get the hang of these cars. He's looked ragged in every sessiona dn extremely slow, as well as prone to spinning. The Jordan clearly isn't truly awful, Heidfeld's been quite competitive, and Pantano has a good record - maybe he's another Zanardi, and F1 cars of today just don't suit him.
He opted to start from the pitlane full of fuel, but who else noticed that the 18th, not 20th, grid spot was vacated - in other words, he wasn't put behind ALonso or Sato? Does that seem silly to anyone else, considering what the penalty is supposed to represent? |
||
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
A question about the one engine rule. | ralf fan | Formula One | 8 | 5 Mar 2004 22:05 |
1 engine rule | RWC | Formula One | 4 | 28 Sep 2003 12:46 |
One engine rule | Wrex | Formula One | 5 | 16 Feb 2003 06:06 |
engine rule | billiaml | Formula One | 4 | 30 Jul 2002 13:51 |
One engine rule | Roselady3 | NASCAR & Stock Car Racing | 28 | 29 Dec 2001 16:08 |