Follow us on Facebook and Twitter 
 
   
       
  A homeland for road rogues.  - by Julius Dilemma (31/10/2011)  
     


         Julius's fictitious double cab BMW Homelander.

Who am I to generalise, because it is a dangerous science. And it can get you in trouble too. Take rugby players for example. Somebody once said that not all rugby players are stupid, but that all stupid people play rugby. He is not with us anymore.
 

Bearing that – and the fact that I don’t have any facts or figures to verify my findings – in mind, I have come to the conclusion that road rogues can be divided into four categories. He or she drives a BMW. His or her car has an NW registration plate. He drives a pre-2005 double cab. He drives a taxi.

 

How did I come to this staggering conclusion? Well, BMW owners think they are rich and because of that, they expect respect from the rest of us. Pre-2005 double cab owners are pissed off because they’re not rich. NW plate carriers? Well, they are (n)o (w)here, if you catch my drift. Taxi drivers are everywhere.

What’s the solution to the problem? Let’s organise a strike and march to BMW’s headquarters, demanding that they design and build a cheap BMW double cab. We then get Julius to unilaterally change our sacred constitution to force BMW double-cab owners to go and live wherever NW is. Something similar to a homeland in the apartheid days.

We’ll then have all the padvarke in one kraal, leaving them to irritate, annoy, endanger and eliminate each other.

What about taxi drivers? Goodness knows. They’re a law unto themselves. It seems that even our highly respected policemen and women are scared of and subservient to them.    

 
     
     
  Track vs field. - by Adri Bezuidenhout (03/09/2011)  
     
 
 
 
 


Who are the most skilled drivers? Those behind the wheel of a Formula One car, or those flying through a forest on a special stage during a World Rally Championship (WRC) event?

It is a question often asked but seldom resolved.

In a way, it’s like comparing fast and spin bowlers in cricket. Many fast bowlers find themselves in national squads at the relatively tender age of 22. Spin bowling is a different kettle of fish altogether. Great spinners such as Australians Richie Benaud and Shane Warne, or our own Pat Symcox, only made their mark in their late twenties and thereafter.

Formula One drivers are like fast bowlers. The late Bruce McLaren won his first Grand Prix – at Sebring in America in 1959 – when he was 22 years old. Emerson Fittipaldi became world champion – in 1972 - when he was 25. Red Bull Racing’s Sebastian Vettel re-wrote the record books when he became the youngest champion that Formula One has ever produced. He was only 23 years and 135 days when he clinched the title during the last race of the 2010 season in Abu Dhabi.

The following appeared in F1 Racing, The world’s best-selling F1 magazine: “Of all the drivers who have competed in F1 in the past five years, only two who made their F1 debut over the age of 23 have won a grand prix.

This prompted former McLaren driver and currently Formula One TV commentator for the BBC, David Coulthard, to remark about all the young drivers as follows: “Mum packs your bags and off you go to a Grand Prix.”

Sebatien Loeb won his first of many WRC titles when he was 30 years old. Hannu Mikkola was 41 and Bjorn Waldegard 39 when they carried the world rally crown for the first time.

Maybe one should look at the careers of two Formula One stars to come to a conclusion.

Kimi Raikkonen won the Formula One drivers’ title in 2007. He subsequently took up rallying with dismal results. His sponsors get tremendous coverage though thanks to photographs and TV coverage of Kimi’s car lying in a ditch after one of his many accidents.

Renault Formula One driver Robert Kubica also tried his hand at rallying. This prompted him to remark: “I’ve tried rallying and I know what big balls these guys have. Big balls.” Robert was later involved in a serious accident behind the wheel of a rally car which put him out of the 2011 season thus far. Hopefully he will recover to continue his potentially brilliant career in Formula One.

So, who are the best drivers? To me, Formula One, with massive and endless run-off areas scattered around the circuits for safety reasons is a glorified form of video games. You can go off the circuit almost anywhere without serious consequences. If you go off a tree- or boulder-lined road in a rally car you are in for a rude awakening. You might, as the late and outspoken Australian racing legend Frank Gardner once put it, attend your own barbeque.

Frank died of natural causes close on 80 years of age. Fortunately he didn’t have to attend his own barbeque.

 
     
     
  Strategic racing: What a farce. (part 2) - by Adri Bezuidenhout  
     
 
 

Hate to say so, but I told you so. In my first instalment for We discuss entitled Grand Prix farce pasted on this site earlier (see below). I gave you my reasons why modern-day Formula One racing has become a show to attract large TV audiences. Why it isn’t pure racing anymore, thanks to so-called short-life tyres developed to induce excitement.
 

Since then I came across a number of interesting quotations that strengthen my case even more. Here are some of them.
 

“In 2011 we have tyres of limited life, tyres which ‘go off’ abruptly so that the timing of pit stops is more crucial than ever to the outcome of a race.” Seasoned Formula One reporter Nigel Roebuck in Motor Sport, the original motor racing magazine in the UK.

“The Chinese Grand Prix was all about tyres and we’d better get used to that.” Nigel Roebuck once again.

“So you bring in things to spice it up – and then you ask: ‘Where’s the race gone?’ They start and then they get all muddled up and the race finishes and you can’t work out what happened. That’s a danger.” Damon Hill. 1996 world champion Damon Hill.

Maybe, just maybe, I’ve got it all wrong. Or have I? This is what former Formula One driver and later TV commentator on A1GP John Watson believes: “With the BBC (referring to their TV coverage of Formula One races) the biggest proportion of the audience are those who aren’t enthusiasts.”
This remark opened my eyes. The Formula One show, thanks to all the gimmicks they have brought in, is staged to attract those who aren’t enthusiasts.

Maybe former Formula One driver and currently BBC TV commentator Martin Brundle hit the nail on the head when he stated: “Formula One is moving more and more to video games.”

In my first instalment of Grand Prix farce I also elaborated on the message Pirelli is conveying to the buying public regarding the durability of their road-going tyres. I stated: How the decision makers at Pirelli could allow themselves to become part of such a farce boggles the mind. What is the message they convey to a mega-massive, world-wide TV audience? Our tyres aren’t up to it. They don’t last.
The following strengthens my case.

“Jenson Button steers clear of the treacherous marbles off-line caused by the rapid degradation of the new Pirelli rubber.” A caption to a photograph in the July edition of F1 Racing, the most informative publication in the world of Formula One:

“To produce a race tyre with a very limited life? If you watch a race – and don’t know the rules – you might conclude that that manufacturer’s tyres don’t last very long.” A Bridgestone representative when asked about the short-life tyres Pirelli is compelled to supply to Formula One teams.

“It astounds me that a company such as Pirelli has been persuaded to build an artificially ineffective tyre. If I was merely quite interested in motor racing, and – without knowing the background – casually watched a 2011 Grand Prix, I’m not sure that my conclusion, when next buying tyres, would be that Pirelli tyres would be the things to have.” Nigel Roebuck.

Your views on this subject would be appreciated. Click here to submit your valued opinion or send an email to info@wheelsannual.co.za.

 
     
  Strategic racing: What a farce. (part 1) - by Adri Bezuidenhout  
     
  Modern-day Grand Prix racing has become a show. In fact, it has degenerated into a total farce. Here are a few reasons why.  
 
 


In days gone by a Formula One driver got a car filled with petrol and fitted with four tyres that would last the distance of the race. It was man and machine against man and machine.

When Pirelli became the sole tyre supplier for Formula One at the beginning of the 2011 season, they were told - instructed is a better word - by the FIA, the controlling body of motorsport, to develop tyres that would not last more than 14 or 15 laps during a race. The objective was to force drivers into the pits for tyre changes at least three times during a Grand Prix.

 
 

 
It has become nothing less than artificially inducing excitement into a business - not a sport anymore.

Racing should take place on the race track, not in the pits. The outcome should be in the hands of the driver, not on tyre wear, how quickly wheels can be changed or where the driver flows into the race after one of his many visits to the pits.

So what happens? Grand Prix races have become economy runs based on tyre wear. You beg to differ? Well, this is what Lewis Hamilton’s race engineer told him on lap 48 of the 56 lap Grand Prix in China: “Keep looking after your tyres. Other cars are struggling badly on their tyres.” This is followed a few laps later by yet another instruction by the very same engineer: “You are sixth tenths faster than Vettel. Look after your tyres.”

This prompted BBC commentator Martin Brundle to remark: “That is not how Hamilton likes going racing.”

You still disagree? At one stage during the Grand Prix in China, Sebatian Vettel was lapping a full ten seconds a lap slower than his qualifying lap. One understands why if you listen to his remark after the race: “You have to be patient and look after your tyres.”

Be patient? Look after your tyres?

Sir Stirling Moss once critised drivers who race for points rather than victories. “That’s not racing, that’s driving,” he said.

Wonder what his views are on the tyre farce, seeing that the drivers are driving, not racing.

Martin Brundle likes the show. After the race in China he enthused: “I love this new setup in Formula One. It’s about tyre wear isn’t it? And there is so much going on in the pits.” But then, Brundle was a driver, never a racer.

Fellow commentator David Coulthard was very proud of Hamilton’s victory: “Hamilton has made great use of his tyres this afternoon.”

Made great use of his tyres? That’s not racing, that’s driving.

Then comes the jewel in the crown. Commentator Coulthard proclaimed with utter delight: “Thank you Pirelli. What they have given us is great strategic racing.”

Strategic racing? Before it was called racing, now it has become strategic racing. True racing greats such as Fangio, Senna and Gilles Villeneuve must have turned in their graves when Coulthard came up with that ridiculous statement.
 

 
 
If strategic racing in Formula One is so great, why not strategic Olympics? Imagine Usain Bolt getting a pair of running shoes that will wear out before the finish line during the 200-metre final.

If he runs a strategic race, he might win. If not, the spikes on his specially designed shoes will wear out, enabling slower runners to overtake him.

Ridiculous? Maybe, but so is present day Grand Prix racing.
 
 
 


Guess who said the following: “Grand Prix racing is not as pure as it was in the past. We have gone too far with artificial elements. It’s like telling footballers to wear tennis shoes in the rain. To have so many pit stops. I want to see competition. I want to see cars on the track. I don’t want to see competition in the pits. In the last Grand Prix there were 80 pit stops. Come on, it’s too much. And viewers don’t understand anymore because drivers come out of the pits and they – the viewers - don’t know what position he is in.” It is a verbatim remark by Ferrari president Luca di Montezemolo. I couldn’t wish for a bigger name to support my concern about modern day so-called Grand Prix racing.

Just another thought. How the decision makers at Pirelli could allow themselves to become part of such a farce boggles the mind. What is the message they convey to a mega-massive, world-wide TV audience? “Our tyres aren’t up to it. They don’t last.”

I call Martin Brundle to the witness stand once again to strengthen my case. After the Grand Prix in China he said: “There is at least half a ton of discarded rubber on the race track by the end of the Grand Prix.” That is half a ton of Pirelli rubber. Shreds from tyres that don’t last. Bad publicity, very bad publicity.

Come to think of it, maybe that’s why Bridgestone told the FIA to go away with a two-fingered wave at the end of the 2010 season. Maybe, just maybe, they weren’t willing to produce 15-lap tyres to spruce up the Grand Prix show.

Click here  to submit your views or send an email to info@wheelsannual.co.za and let us have it from the hip.

 
     

The information contained on this website, including attachments is meant to serve as information only.
The publishers of WHEELS and its editorial team do not accept any liability regarding details contained on this website.
© Copyright 2011 Wheels Annual.
For more information, please click here to read our internet disclaimer.

 

Website developed by: Jasper Consultants Develops the Best Custom Websites.