Ferrari Mailing List: Re: *** SPOILER *** OZ GRAND PRIX *** SPOILER ***

[JAshburne (JAshburne]

I agree with the open technology viewpoint but there is something in me  that 
likes the no traction control requirement.  I think that it will  really help 
to separate the drivers from the "plant the right foot and steer"  crowd.
 
While traction control obviously doesn't prevent the car from going off the  
track, it still is a little like setting your video car race game on  the 
"easy, no damage" option.
 
These guys might need a race or two to relearn what it is like to actually  
have to control the throttle.  I think it will be fun to watch to see who  can 
do it and who can't.
 
John
 
In a message dated 3/16/2008 11:39:23 A.M. Central Daylight Time,  
rolindsay [at] yahoo.com writes:

Clyde  wrote,

--- clyderomero [at] worldnet.att.net wrote:

> I agree mu  quess is after there is a serious crash
> in turn one like SPA this no  traction control will
> go away

...and that may be true but I'd  rather think that what
happened in Melbourne is, (1) Ferrari's engines  aren't
quite stable yet and, (2) A whole bunch of talented
drivers just  learned that there is a honkin-big
difference between practicing against  the clock,
without driver aids, and dicing with 20+ other racers
AND  having to deal with a car just being a car.

What I expect is that  instead of reinstalling driver
aids (in the short term), the drivers will  learn to be
more cautious WHILE competing.  That may be counter  to
what the F1 Management wanted.  It may make more
boring races,  not more competitive driving.

Opinions?

rick 
PS: Personally,  I'd like F1 to follow the old CanAm
model and be free to do anything  technologically that
they please!


 



**************It's Tax Time! Get tips, forms, and advice on AOL Money & 
Finance.      (http://money.aol.com/tax?NCID=aolprf00030000000001)