I know it's off-topic, but how on earth does that work? Is it positive rep from someone with no rep to give?
I didn't really get neutral rep but I have done recently. My recent rep shows a few grey bars alongside the greens. No reds of course
The bbc have 2 articles on the subject: http://m.bbc.co.uk/sport/formula1/24514661 Gary says its unusual that Webber was made to do the slowest strategy while being the lead car. Surely Vettel would be the one needing to gamble? http://m.bbc.co.uk/sport/formula1/24511974 Webber thinks Red Bull made a mistake on his strategy. No ****.
It was only after the Hungarian GP, six races ago that the drivers title looked wide open and that the battle might go down to the wire. It's no wonder that some people are losing interest in F1 when the second half of the year has turned into a complete rout, again. It doesn't help when Red Bull, quite unnecessarily, appear to use different strategies to help Vettel win over Webber. If that was the case, it's no wonder that people are getting turned off. In a sport where only coming first matters and coming second is the first of the losers, knowing the likely winner in each race almost makes it pointless. What a contrast yesterdays race was compared to the excellent Touring Car races at Brands.
I've wondered what the grey 'neutral' is. Don't know why I got it or how I'd give it to someone else. If I'm honest, I'm not sure I really get the rep thing as it seems I can hardly ever use it
That's a big part of their problem for me: they're like a cracked, musty old handbag when what they need is fresh, supple leather. "It would be nice to go back to the old days in Ferrari", just says it all really! Maybe Allison will give them something new.
I don't know why Ferrari used a coded message when they've admitted it's a team order, used them openly in the past and when team orders are legal. Why not just tell Massa to get out of the way? You could tell it was a team order by Smedley's tone anyway.
Anderson, good designer, but obviously not so hot on strategy, he obviously would've gone for 2nd and 3rd. Webber followed Grosjean for the whole of the first stint, forcing Webber to stop early, yet for some reason Anderson totally ignores this. Typical BBC, it's no wonder people have it in for Vettel with such blatant slanting of facts. As for the 2nd part "Webber crying because Vettel beat him again, shock", fact is Webber was 2nd when they changed strategies, and not realy looking like getting first using a 2 stop strategy.
I don't think Ferrari should have issued team orders, and Massa was right to ignore them, but what the hell is this? "At the end of the day Fernando overtook him on the track. I can understand his feeling. The team will totally support him until the end of the season, no problem." Todt would never have said this. Grow some balls Domenicali.
like the new name Reminds me of when they called him Nico Battenberg at Williams as his results were chequered
I think what some people may feel aggrieved by (and I'm not detracting from the fact that Vettel made "his" strategy work) is that Red Bull made the decission to give Vettel track position over Webber and that is confrimed by the engineer's comment that he was not "racing Webber". Now I would imagine that was calculated very early on (probably before the race) to prevent the potentially explosive situation of Webber & Vettel sharing the same tarmac and fighting for the lead. You have rightly pointed out in a previous comment that there is no way of knowing if Webber's tyres would last, if he could have passed etc.... but I think the thing for the neutral fan (or anyone wanting to see an element of competition) is we will never know because the situation was "potentially" manipulated. If's, but's and maybe's - but its a shame that Red Bull seem to do everything they can to avoid letting the fans see an equal opportunity. It is merely a perception but for me Vettel is edging closer to being one of the most successful F1 drivers without being given the opportunity to be classed as or show that he is one of the greatest F1 drivers. In a way, it is devaluing his own brand - you are your own currencey, spend it wisely!
Miggs if they were going to do that to Webber why didnt they bring him in earlier when he had a bigger lead? Wouldnt it make sense to pit him when he had quite a good lead? And instead of sending him out on the softer used tyres why not bring him in earlier with the bigger lead and send him back out on new hard tyres...remember there wasnt much difference between the hard and soft tyres in terms of performance. I think Webber got the shaft again to be honest...but what's new? Didnt we all expect that anyway? no surprise there.
Possibly because pitting him earlier would've put him in traffic. Fact is RBR turned a 2-3 into a 1-2 by changing MW's strategy, Webber didn't win or lose anything by it, he couldn't pass Grosjean for most of the race, all he was sit in Romains dirty air, something everyone knows ruins tyres. To make the strategy work one driver had to attack Grosjean, if it was to be Webber that wonm then it would've had to have been Vettel, 3-4 seconds behind, to do it, meaning Webber being told to let Vettel past, he's never done so before when ordered, why would he start now, he doesn't have the brain to see the long game. And why do people believe Webber would've overtaken Grosjean and his tyres be in great condition and able to do a 2-stop, when it goes against all the evidence of what happened, Grosjean changed later, had clean air most of the time, and his tyres were shot at the end.
Bold: I doubt it was calculated before the race, the only way they could justify splitting the strategies was by Grosjean (or Hamilton) leading, with Webber second and Vettel third with both unable to pass. Blue: Their only concern was with winning the race. They were never going to shadow the strategy of the car in front and bring the cars home in second or third just to give the fans what they want to see (which isn't Vettel and Webber having a fair fight, it's Webber finishing ahead of Vettel). If Vettel had pitted first and three stopped they'd have been criticised for giving him the undercut at the first stop so they can't win either way, not with the fans at least. Edit: Also this. Webber couldn't get past Grosjean with fresh options until two laps from the end, he'd never have managed it with old primes. If they hadn't switched him to a three stopper he'd have finished behind Grosjean.
Why not pit Webber when he had 15 seconds on Vettel and instead of soft scrubs send him on New Hards which were giving almost the same performance as the soft but lasting longer? he would have come back out and have the tyres to run down anybody at the front and with a couple more laps to do it..
