# Malaysian Grand Prix 2005 (spoilers)



## Jetfire (Jun 20, 2002)

So, an interesting way to start a race. I like having a wide track like Malaysia for cars like these. The first lap could've come from Daytona, in all the right ways.

Pity that both of Honda's engines blew up at about the same time. New engines, even. The look on the engineers' faces said it all.


----------



## beewang (Dec 18, 2001)

I love it when the bouncing horse is being pushed to the back  I love it , I love it, :thumbup: I love it!!!


----------



## Jetfire (Jun 20, 2002)

I'll say this much: 2005 is turning out to be a real challenge for Ferrari. I expected them to be a lot closer to the top, even this early in the season.

Damn, Kimi just can't get a break.  He was all set to take the lead.


----------



## beewang (Dec 18, 2001)

Damn!! I am entertained!! :thumbup: The Hiedfeld pass over Ralfie boy... 
and the Redbull's Cosworth over Ferrari!!  Go Old Man Coultard!! :thumbup:


----------



## beewang (Dec 18, 2001)

Fischella....  what a prick!! :tsk: He has to be penalized!! :eeps:


----------



## Jetfire (Jun 20, 2002)

beewang said:


> Fischella....  what a prick!! :tsk: He has to be penalized!! :eeps:


Nah. I don't think Fisi could have helped that one. Looks like he hit the brakes just a touch too hard and locked it up. That really sucked, but I would call it a racing incident.

But man, what a race. Heidfeld/Webber/Ralfie, then Webber/Fisi, and the random battles for P8. Great stuff.


----------



## Kaz (Dec 21, 2001)

Yeah, Fisi was completely sideways looking at the overhead replay they showed.


----------



## beewang (Dec 18, 2001)

Jetfire said:


> Nah. I don't think Fisi could have helped that one. Looks like he hit the brakes just a touch too hard and locked it up. That really sucked, but I would call it a racing incident.
> .


I disagree! It was clear that Fisichella was gradully losing speed. Being passed by the Williams dual is inevitable. However, after being passed by Webber, he was unwilling to call no joy... In an attempt to hold onto his spot, he breake to late into the corner. Lost control and took webber out w/ him.  Pretty poor loser IMO :throw:

But what a race to watch aye!!?? 

I am just waiting for Jarno's tire to pop so Nicky can take the 2nd place...

Looks like Ferrari just tossed in the towel... :eeps:


----------



## Jetfire (Jun 20, 2002)

Well, Barrichello's tires really looked like ass. Since he wsas so far out of the running, it's not an unreasonable decision to take his car into the garage. 

I still disagree on Fisichella and Webber. Even if Fisi was upset about being passed, there's no way he would've pulled off something like in order to maintain position. That's a race-ending move and he would've known it. 

There was some talk during the race about the lack of treads on the tires and the fact that technically they're not allowed. Supposedly, teams can contest race results in the competitors finish with grooveless tires. While I understand why the rule is still in place, I don't think it's really compatible with the new tire rule.

Other thoughts...Kimi was BOOKING all the way to the end. If it wasn't for his bad luck, I bet he would've had a nice podium finish. JPM wasn't looking bad either, but his starting position wasn't going to get him close enough to win. As for Renault, hats off to them. Two race and two wins.

And finally, what's going on with Ferrari and MS? Did the new rules reduce their competitiveness, or did everyone else catch up during the offseason? And what's going to happen when the F2005 rolls out?

Finally finally, I'll never understand why some people think that auto racing isn't a legitimate sport. Just surviving a professional race requires a level of fitness that a lot of ball players would have trouble keeping.


----------



## Kaz (Dec 21, 2001)

Australia looked to me like a combo of weather stuff during qualifying and some backfiring sandbagging tactics by Ferrari, but after this race, I'm not of that opinion. If, per some opinions, the F2005 is going to show up early in Bahrain, we'll know that everybody else has caught up. Not that Renault had much catching up to do considering they did decent last season.

And once again, RBR's 'got wings' of some kind that Jag never had.


----------



## The Roadstergal (Sep 7, 2002)

I didn't watch Australia, so this was interesting. I hadn't seen the Viking Helmet wings on the McLarens before. 

That was fun to watch. Some really good duking going on there. Really a shame about Webber, but it did look like just a Racing Incident. Fisi was pushing too hard, but wouldn't you?

M'boy Trulli got second, so it's all good. :thumbup: Renault is continiung to improve, and Toyota just took a great leap this year. Sucks to be BAR.

They need to go to slicks. The groove business is BS. The one-set rule has taken care of what the grooves were supposed to address, and IMO is a better idea, so scrap the grooves.


----------



## Jetfire (Jun 20, 2002)

The Roadstergal said:


> I didn't watch Australia, so this was interesting. I hadn't seen the Viking Helmet wings on the McLarens before.
> 
> That was fun to watch. Some really good duking going on there. Really a shame about Webber, but it did look like just a Racing Incident. Fisi was pushing too hard, but wouldn't you?
> 
> ...


Agreed on the slicks. I don't think that rule is so important any more. The one-race requirement puts enough constraints on tires and racing strategy that the grooves shouldn't matter. On a related note, I wonder how drivers deal with the replacement of only one tire during a race? Unless they're shaving the replacement prior to putting it on (didn't look like it), that's got to be an interesting experience.

BTW, I don't know what you see in Trulli. He's one ugly SOB.


----------



## Patrick (Dec 23, 2001)

I missed the race in OZ, so watching this race was sort of strange.

Nice to see RBR doing so well (again). DC still has it going on.

Räikkönen has no luck - a broken valve stem cost him a podium place.

Apparently, the rule changes have really mixed "things" up.

It is a good thing for FIAT that they do not abide by the testing restrictions - they need the new car to be fast, and they need it now. Their miserable performances so far, remind me of the days when Berger and Alesi drove the red cars.

Great for Toyota to finally get a podium finish!


.


----------



## AC (Apr 28, 2002)

beewang said:


> ....In an attempt to hold onto his spot, he breake to late into the corner....


 That's usually referred to as "RACING"* , *this kind of thin will happen from time to time


----------



## AC (Apr 28, 2002)

I think it's pretty obvious the Bridgestone is lagging far behind what Michelin has to offer this year.


----------



## AC (Apr 28, 2002)

Patrick 520iAT said:


> Apparently, the rule changes have really mixed "things" up.
> 
> .


 Hey, I thought rules were exclusively written to make Ferrari faster!


----------



## Jetfire (Jun 20, 2002)

AC said:


> I think it's pretty obvious the Bridgestone is lagging far behind what Michelin has to offer this year.


I hadn't thought of that possibility. If all of the teams stayed about the same relative to each other, then a big difference in tire compounds could explain what's going on.


----------



## Patrick (Dec 23, 2001)

Jetfire said:


> I hadn't thought of that possibility. If all of the teams stayed about the same relative to each other, then a big difference in tire compounds could explain what's going on.


Spoonface said himself (post-race) that it is not the tires.

I am fine with that, as long as whatever it is, keeps those red cars in at least P9 when the race is over.

.


----------



## SteveT (Dec 22, 2001)

Patrick 520iAT said:


> Spoonface said himself (post-race) that it is not the tires.
> 
> I am fine with that, as long as whatever it is, keeps those red cars in at least P9 when the race is over.
> 
> .


It might not be ALL tires, but they've got what they've been leaving other Bridgestone teams with, essentially and exclusive tire supplier. Development takes time, plain and simple. More teams can do more testing. The Michelin teams have done a huge amount of testing. The next thing, Ferrari will complain that the Michelin teams test too much.


----------



## Patrick (Dec 23, 2001)

SteveT said:


> The next thing, Ferrari will complain that the Michelin teams test too much.


Good point.

Then I suppose that the FIA will simply ban Michelin tires.

.


----------



## The HACK (Dec 19, 2001)

Anyone notice that Red Bull Racing (RBR for short) has now scored more points in 2 races than Jaguar did in 2 seasons?!

Maybe the team didn't suck, but the ownership (Jag/Ford) just didn't have the "drive" to win. I'm glad RBR rescued a team under horrible management and made them competitive.

I wonder if Felipe Masa got a call over the radio when he was about to pass MS and RB: "Um, Felipe, you *DO* realize who's in front of you, no? Slow the F**K down!" You know something is amiss when the Blue Ferrari's are faster than the Red Ferrari's. Spoonface may be diplomatic about the tires, but when Sauber is catching up to Ferrari by switching to Michelins you HAVE to wonder if Bridgestone can compete *this year* without the massive testing data available to Michelin.

But, this IS F1...B'Stone and the Diarreah, er, Scooteria will probably just protest to Charlie Whitting about the Michelins being too competitive again, and they'll make up some cacka-mimi rule about, oh, I dunno, the Michelins being too sticky or reliable or something. :dunno:


----------



## Salvator (Oct 14, 2003)

Alex Baumann said:


> As for the Bridgestone tires, I don't think that the tires are crap, it's the car which is not playing along.


Hmmm... Bridgestone disagrees!  

http://www.usatoday.com/sports/motor/formula1/2005-03-22-ferrari-bridgestone_x.htm


----------



## Lanc3r (Sep 5, 2004)

The Roadstergal said:


> I care who wins, but whoever wins, this race was more fun to watch than I've seen in a while. I hope that's the trend for the rest of the year.
> 
> Once again, though, credit must be given to the local TV crew, who showed the racing regardless of the position being fought for (the German Grand Prix last year comes to mind as another well-covered one).


 :thumbup:

Im loving the action. It seems everyone involved with race is a lot more attentive then in previous years. Its obvious a lot more teams have a chance. But we will see what happens when Ferrari puts out the new sled.

Im still rooting for Williams Alex!


----------



## WileECoyote (May 7, 2003)

I'm starting to have mixed feelings about the tire rules.

:soapbox:

This attitude of 'take it easy, save your tires' at the latter part of the race is turning what is supposed to be the premiere racing event into a highly technical form of accounting.


----------



## Jetfire (Jun 20, 2002)

I think that, in general, the current rulebook really prevents F1 from being a showcase of the best that motorsport has to offer the world. The tire rule, though, isn't so bad. It boils down to choosing a race strategy, which means it's just another facet like pit stops.

I would rather see F1 go the route of limiting budgets instead of becoming increasingly like a spec series. Keep some aerodynamic and safety rules in place, but throw out the displacement and cylinder rules, throw out the two-race engine rule, etc. Restrict each team to spending, say, $75M per year, and let the teams get creative again.

Of course, I realize that enforcing something like this would be nearly impossible and that no such rules change is likely.


----------



## The Roadstergal (Sep 7, 2002)

Jetfire said:


> Of course, I realize that enforcing something like this would be nearly impossible


Exactly.

I don't think specs make for bad racing. One series that I like to look at as a good example of rules minimally applied for maximum effect is the Legends. They have a spec tire, and it sucks - it's an all-season, IIRC. So it doen't matter much if you spend a lot of money making a high-hp engine; the tires limit the hp you can put down! I think the one-set rule is actually a step in the right direction for something easily enforceable that brings down what throwing money at the car can do. The groove rule is more subjective and more limiting to less good effect, IMO, and that's why I think one-set should stay and four-grooves should go.


----------



## SteveT (Dec 22, 2001)

Spec racing makes sense for Legends or where it's applied by rule like Formula BMW or Formula 3000. F1 is supposed to be the premier road racing series in the world and the teams are supposed to build their own cars. By rule they can't buy last year's car from someone or buy a Lola designed and built for F1. Minardi must build and race their own cars by rule. One of the more interesting aspects of F1 is engineering. I find the one tire rule sort of artificial. The race becomes more of a tire management exercise than a straight up race. I see what it's done though. Right now Michelin is some ways ahead of Bridgestone. As Michelin has said, Bridgestone will make progress and close the gap. The question will be how does the Ferrari respond and can they close the gap far enough?

I agree with Jetfire, as these rules become more restrictive there is less creativity allowed for the engineer and F1 is not the showcase it should be. Limiting testing is a way of limiting continued changes to the car and would lower costs. Ferrari doesn't see this because they own their own test track, so it doesn't cost them as much or it's already been paid for. I don't think you could throw out the displacement rules, but they could allow a variety of engine configurations. It would be hard to control the budgets directly, but limiting testing would effectively do the same thing. New things could be tested at the race weekend, but that still limits development costs.


----------

