Webber and team orders

Webber and team orders

Post by Bobste » Tue, 16 Apr 2013 17:45:57



Quote:




> >> [snips]
> >>>> Sometimes, when I'm reading your posts I can almost count the
> >>>> number of drinks that you've had. Almost time for the typos to
> >>>> start......

> >>> Well's there's always the ad hominen if you can't get your own way.

> >> There's the typo, right on queue.

> >>> Not, of course, that YOU would do such a thing.

> >> Drinking *** isn't illegal or immoral. The only reason a comment
> >> about it would be taken as ad hominem is if you're sensitive about
> >> it for some reason? ;)

> > ~misfit~, couple the comments I've replied to with your other rant in
> > my direction about people who drink too much and dish out insults your
> > intent is clear.

> LOL! Really? I didn't even think of the *** component of that other
> comment until now you mention it. The other part was what your posts have
> made me think of a couple times - the attitude to 'feelings' et al. The
> *** involvement was incidental to the anecdote - until now, you bringing
> it up......

> > Now, you can carry on as you wish. The person most likely to get
> > demeaned by your rantings is yourself.

> Yup. I'm not as skilled at the subtle put-down, twisting things around, as
> you are. I tend to be more obvious, say what I mean. I guess I need to work
> on it <shrug> or not. It's not something I'd be particularly proud of.

That's another ad hominen.

Face it, ~misfit~, you're the thing you profess to loathe.

 
 
 

Webber and team orders

Post by ~misfit » Wed, 17 Apr 2013 10:15:22


Quote:






>>>> [snips]
>>>>>> Sometimes, when I'm reading your posts I can almost count the
>>>>>> number of drinks that you've had. Almost time for the typos to
>>>>>> start......

>>>>> Well's there's always the ad hominen if you can't get your own
>>>>> way.

>>>> There's the typo, right on queue.

>>>>> Not, of course, that YOU would do such a thing.

>>>> Drinking *** isn't illegal or immoral. The only reason a
>>>> comment about it would be taken as ad hominem is if you're
>>>> sensitive about it for some reason? ;)

>>> ~misfit~, couple the comments I've replied to with your other rant
>>> in my direction about people who drink too much and dish out
>>> insults your intent is clear.

>> LOL! Really? I didn't even think of the *** component of that
>> other comment until now you mention it. The other part was what your
>> posts have made me think of a couple times - the attitude to
>> 'feelings' et al. The *** involvement was incidental to the
>> anecdote - until now, you bringing it up......

>>> Now, you can carry on as you wish. The person most likely to get
>>> demeaned by your rantings is yourself.

>> Yup. I'm not as skilled at the subtle put-down, twisting things
>> around, as you are. I tend to be more obvious, say what I mean. I
>> guess I need to work on it <shrug> or not. It's not something I'd be
>> particularly proud of.

> That's another ad hominen.

> Face it, ~misfit~, you're the thing you profess to loathe.

I refuse to be trolled further Bob. Sorry.
--
/Shaun.

"Humans will have advanced a long, long, way when religious belief has a
cozy little classification in the DSM."
David Melville (in r.a.s.f1)

 
 
 

Webber and team orders

Post by Bobste » Tue, 23 Apr 2013 15:04:18


Quote:
> There is also the issue that at that last pit stop the team quite unusually gave the 2nd driver, Vettel, theundercut. Without that they wouldn't even have been close at the pit exit, Mark would have been possibly eight seconds ahead. Mark was about four seconds ahead before the pit stops, zero gap after Vettel used theundercut.

> In all previous stops in Malaysia (and generally in other races too) the leading driver pits first.

OK... at Bahrain Webber, who was always running behind Vettel, got the
undercut every time (and really it's an OPPORTUNITY to undercut). He
pitted on laps 8, 21 and 37. Seb pitted on 10, 25 and 42. Also in
China Webber's first stop was earlier than Vettel's - Vettel was ahead
on the road. OK... they were running very different strategies.

Point is it's not a given that the RBR driver who has track position
will be serviced first, and stops may be decided by strategy. So too
much can be read into who stops when.

 
 
 

Webber and team orders

Post by ~misfit » Wed, 24 Apr 2013 11:27:19


Quote:

>> There is also the issue that at that last pit stop the team quite
>> unusually gave the 2nd driver, Vettel, theundercut. Without that
>> they wouldn't even have been close at the pit exit, Mark would have
>> been possibly eight seconds ahead. Mark was about four seconds ahead
>> before the pit stops, zero gap after Vettel used theundercut.

>> In all previous stops in Malaysia (and generally in other races too)
>> the leading driver pits first.

> OK... at Bahrain Webber, who was always running behind Vettel, got the
> undercut every time (and really it's an OPPORTUNITY to undercut). He
> pitted on laps 8, 21 and 37. Seb pitted on 10, 25 and 42. Also in
> China Webber's first stop was earlier than Vettel's - Vettel was ahead
> on the road. OK... they were running very different strategies.

> Point is it's not a given that the RBR driver who has track position
> will be serviced first, and stops may be decided by strategy. So too
> much can be read into who stops when.

The old 'leading driver pits first' rule went out of the window with the
tyres that lasted 20 laps.
--
/Shaun.

"Humans will have advanced a long, long, way when religious belief has a
cozy little classification in the DSM."
David Melville (in r.a.s.f1)