[Marc Fiorano]

(Original post by f1mad)
Gary Anderson claimed it was up to a tenth. Which is doubtful since, the teams at Monaco mulled over an actual protest and decided otherwise, going for this clarification instead.

If it had a big performance gain, they would've gone ahead with the protest. But they didn't.

That's not a source that's just words...

Also if he said it's up to a tenth why are you saying hundredths?

That's not necessarily the reason they didn't go ahead with it. They could've just wanted to avoid compromising the reputation of the sport by having the result changed in this manner.

[f1mad]

(Original post by Marc Fiorano)
...

Sigh, not going to reply to most that as I will end up repeating myself .

However this:

As I said, if that is how it's going to work then the teams should focus on pushing the interpretations to the extreme, gain the results, let the FIA deem it illegal after clarification but the results remain. Obviously that's going to maintain the integrity of the championship.

Do you think this is something new? There is no such thing as in "the spirit of rules". Every single team goes out to gain the maximum, if it means border-line cheating; they will do it.

Red Bull have (arguably) got away with that for the past 2 years, along the way winning championships. In my view, it was declared illegal upon clarification in order to stop any further clever interpretation of the floor.

[f1mad]

(Original post by Marc Fiorano)
That's not a source that's just words...

Also if he said it's up to a tenth why are you saying hundredths?

That's not necessarily the reason they didn't go ahead with it. They could've just wanted to avoid compromising the reputation of the sport by having the result changed in this manner.

Sorry but:

compromising the reputation of the sport by having the result changed in this manner.

If you want to do finger pointing, you need to do it towards the FIA and CW. Not Red Bull, as far as I'm concerned they've been abiding within the rules of process for the regulations.

As they say: don't hate the player, hate the game.

Brawn: 'it's a very clever interpretation. Work it out for yourselves'.

[Marc Fiorano]

(Original post by f1mad)
Sigh, not going to reply to most that as I will end up repeating myself .

In other words, you couldn't really come up with a counter argument, that's okay

But good on you for not wasting your time repeating the wrong stuff again.

However this:

Do you think this is something new? There is no such thing as in "the spirit of rules". Every single team goes out to gain the maximum, if it means border-line cheating; they will do it.

Red Bull have (arguably) got away with that for the past 2 years, along the way winning championships. In my view, it was declared illegal upon clarification in order to stop any further clever interpretation of the floor.

No, I don't think this is something new. That's your, somewhat deluded, opinion. Teams may/may not do it because of spirit of rules, but they may refrain from doing it with the fear that they could potentially get disqualified. So no, teams don't always necessarily push the boundaries to this extent.

Also it'd be foolish to think some of the teams can afford the time and resources to 'border-line cheat' with designs, knowing that all that money and effort will be undone after a race or two upon the FIA clarifying it.

[Marc Fiorano]

(Original post by f1mad)
Sorry but:




If you want to do finger pointing, you need to do it towards the FIA and CW. Not Red Bull, as far as I'm concerned they've been abiding within the rules of process for the regulations.

Oh, so you've forgotten how to read?
Let me say it again

(Original post by Marc Fiorano)
I can see RBR's point of view, they were told by that dwarf Whiting that it's okay.

As they say: don't hate the player, hate the game.

Oh dear
Please tell me you didn't just say that? The 1990's called, they want their cheesy line back

P.S you still haven't provided a source for the performance gain, and also haven't explained why you said it's worth a few hundredths despite giving a 'source' saying it's worth a tenth.

[AlexInWonderland]

New thread for this weekend:

http://www.thestudentroom.co.uk/show....php?t=2023842