Your Reject of the Race - Australia!

Bob · Post by **Bob** » 25 Mar 2011, 01:34

Well someone had to!

I nominate Karun Chandhok

Collieafc · Post by **Collieafc** » 25 Mar 2011, 01:40

That...is going to be hard to top, after that on first practice. Epic fail! :lol:

TomWazzleshaw · Post by **TomWazzleshaw** » 25 Mar 2011, 01:58

Bob, I'ld run if I were you

And I nominate Chandhok. I mean how can you top THAT?

jp22 · Post by **jp22** » 25 Mar 2011, 02:10

Collieafc wrote:That...is going to be hard to top, after that on first practice. Epic fail!

Well this is only first practice, but if he ends up racing this weekend and I don't know how he could do that now unless he finishes P1 at the end of the session.

For actual ROTR I would nominate a fair choice of one of the rookies probably Di Resta or D'Ambrosio I think (and I don't know why, but everytime I hear D'Ambrosio I always think of the Ambrosia custard I haven't had in years :lol:

)

Bob · Post by **Bob** » 25 Mar 2011, 03:36

jp22 wrote:
Collieafc wrote:For actual ROTR I would nominate a fair choice of one of the rookies probably Di Resta or D'Ambrosio I think (and I don't know why, but everytime I hear D'Ambrosio I always think of the Ambrosia custard I haven't had in years )

Yeah I think of rice pudding :lol:

sswishbone · Post by **sswishbone** » 25 Mar 2011, 08:02

An early bath for Karun Chandhok here I think, unless HRT/Virgin manage to DNQ both cars

GwilymJJames · Post by **GwilymJJames** » 25 Mar 2011, 08:07

Based on 1 & 2, I'm going with Virgin. Yes, HRT are utterly incompetent, but we expect that of them. Virgin have had their car since the second test; long enough to ensure that the car is actually fast enough to qualify. But on current form they've got no chance.

Captain Hammer · Post by **Captain Hammer** » 25 Mar 2011, 08:43

Bob wrote:Well someone had to!

And that someone is me. It's long been established that this is my baby. Mine!

For that reason, you are now crowned Reject of the Race for Melbourne. Don't do it again.

Paul Hayes · Post by **Paul Hayes** » 25 Mar 2011, 09:07

Looks like Virgin at the moment - I don't think the dire performance of HRT is surprising to anybody, but Virgin being this bad must come as something of a shock.

Klon · Post by **Klon** » 25 Mar 2011, 09:59

Captain Hammer wrote:And that someone is me. It's long been established that this is my baby. Mine!

You were too late. F1 is a cut-throat business, no time for slowness. :mrgreen:

My first nomination is the 107 % rule for most likely ruining the chances of HRT (and perhaps Virgin) to make up ground.

Ferrim · Post by **Ferrim** » 25 Mar 2011, 10:06

I didn't expect HRT not running at all, so for me is HRT.

Although if somehow they manage to go faster than Virgin, which is highly unlikely but not impossible, then it's a clear ROTR for Virgin.

BTW I don't understand why the new teams are SO slow. I mean teams which have a bit of a budget, like Lotus or Virgin. When BAR joined the sport in 1999 they were competitive. Unreliable as hell, but always qualifying in the middle of the pack, a couple of seconds off the pace. The same for Toyota less the unreliability. And that was an era of bigger technical freedom, now everyone uses almost the same engines and aerodynamics are even more restricted.

Lotus have money and Mike Gascoyne knows his stuff, but it seems they are still going to be like four seconds off the pace again... :shock:

Klon · Post by **Klon** » 25 Mar 2011, 10:11

Ferrim wrote:I don't understand why the new teams are SO slow. I mean teams which have a bit of a budget, like Lotus or Virgin.

Virgin doesn't have a budget. They're running on an self-imposed budget cap which is way below anything the top teams, or Lotus for that matter, use.

Post by **mario** » 25 Mar 2011, 10:14

Paul Hayes wrote:Looks like Virgin at the moment - I don't think the dire performance of HRT is surprising to anybody, but Virgin being this bad must come as something of a shock.

Yes and no - the car looked like a bit of a dog in testing, and only a very small step on from the VR-01 (Hulkenberg watched it going round Barcelona in the last test, and in an interview with Auto Motor Und Sport said that the MVR-02 looked very difficult to drive, with a clear lack of downforce). I had thought that they might squeeze through into qualifying if, as Glock is hoping, the top runners do not push too hard in Q1 to save tyres for Q2 and Q3. And the MVR-02 might have a little more left in the tank if they were, as Glock seemed to hint at, they were a bit conservative during practise, especially with the fuel load; still, they are in a precarious position, and could easily DNQ.

Looking at the situation, and based on the practise times (I've not had a chance to watch the replays of practise just yet), I would be more inclined to suggest Renault as a ROTR. Yes, a touch out of the blue, but bear with me.
If we are going to talk about performance against expectations, then most of the teams have performed as expected (with McLaren arguably performing a bit better than expected). Renault were expected to at least be in the top 10, but Barrichello's Williams and either Perez or Kobayashi have been able to get ahead of them, and push Renault out of the top 10. If both Renaults really do go out in Q2, which is possible, that would be a real disappointment for a team that some thought might be an outside bet for podium finishes this year, and would be expected to score points on a regular basis.

Ferrim · Post by **Ferrim** » 25 Mar 2011, 10:25

Klon wrote:
Ferrim wrote:I don't understand why the new teams are SO slow. I mean teams which have a bit of a budget, like Lotus or Virgin.

Virgin doesn't have a budget. They're running on an self-imposed budget cap which is way below anything the top teams, or Lotus for that matter, use.

But it's more than what HRT have, and better managed (not that that's very difficult).

Jeroen Krautmeir · Post by **Jeroen Krautmeir** » 25 Mar 2011, 10:26

Captain Hammer wrote:
Bob wrote:Well someone had to!

And that someone is me. It's long been established that this is my baby. Mine!

For that reason, you are now crowned Reject of the Race for Melbourne. Don't do it again.

I don't know why, but I agree. As in, Captain should start the ROTR threads.

I'll wait till' the race to vote.

DanielPT · Post by **DanielPT** » 25 Mar 2011, 10:49

I would agree that Virgin looks set to be ROTR. I said that they could be 4 to 5 secs off the pace when in testing, but I was hoping that they would make some ground or hiding a their pace a bit. It looks awful nevertheless. As for Renault, mario, I also agree that they look disappointing but I will wait for qualifying to pass my judgement. They could be going for race set up over there and not top times.

Valrys · Post by **Valrys** » 25 Mar 2011, 10:50

I nominate the 107% rule as well, as there's a very good chance of 4 cars not qualifying, and when two of them are slow but not that slow, and the other two were only assembled at the last minute on a pocket money budget, that's not very helpful towards future improvement.

patrick · Post by **patrick** » 25 Mar 2011, 12:02

Going to throw Maldonado into the ring. He looks slow and cautious, which is understandable, but I think he's going to be miles off rubens' pace and then do stupid things in the race to try and make up.

Phoenix · Post by **Phoenix** » 25 Mar 2011, 12:45

HRT, no contest. One can't get enough of his antics :lol:

Waris · Post by **Waris** » 25 Mar 2011, 13:34

I predict Virgin and Hispania will be rejectful, so no surprises there.
Di Resta and/or Maldonado may also be a little disappointing, but I don't think they will be as laughably bad.

dinizintheoven · Post by **dinizintheoven** » 25 Mar 2011, 14:03

On early indications I'm going with Virgin, though I'll hold off making the final nomination until Q1 is done at least. As it's been said, most of us are expecting a double DNQ from Hispania. Virgin doing the same would be just plain embarrassing, and with the current rules it's not as if they can make changes to the car until this time next year.

As it stands (and it's way too early in the season to be making this kind of prediction, but still...) I'd only be prepared to hand Reject Of The Year to Hispania if they put in a performance that's worthy of Coloni, EuroBrun or Andrea Moda, with Narain Karthikeyan failing to make the cut at every race and Tonio Liuzzi getting into no more then two or three races, because that would surpass any expectations of their obvious rejectfulness.

Ferrim · Post by **Ferrim** » 25 Mar 2011, 14:05

Valrys wrote:I nominate the 107% rule as well, as there's a very good chance of 4 cars not qualifying, and when two of them are slow but not that slow

It's over six seconds off the Q1 pace not that slow?

I believe Virgin will make it and if they can't then they don't deserve to start.

FullMetalJack · Post by **FullMetalJack** » 25 Mar 2011, 16:20

Phoenix wrote:HRT, no contest. One can't get enough of his antics

Basically what you said.

golic_2004 · Post by **golic_2004** » 25 Mar 2011, 16:37

HRT and Virgin. Virgin just not enough to qualify and HRT doesn't even come CLOSE.

Bob · Post by **Bob** » 25 Mar 2011, 17:30

Virgin are probably more rejectworthy than HRT. HRT is an underfunded, understaffed and underprepared outfit that we love purely for comedy value, it's sort of expected. Virgin are actually serious and managing to humiliate themselves, there's no excuse really, they've had longer than a lot of teams to test and prepare.

golic_2004 · Post by **golic_2004** » 25 Mar 2011, 17:32

Bob wrote:Virgin are probably more rejectworthy than HRT. HRT is an underfunded, understaffed and underprepared outfit that we love purely for comedy value, it's sort of expected. Virgin are actually serious and managing to humiliate themselves, there's no excuse really, they've had longer than a lot of teams to test and prepare.

Good point!

Dj_bereta · Post by **Dj_bereta** » 25 Mar 2011, 17:59

I nominate 107% rule too (or jean todt as well). All efforts for racings with more cars in last years was thrown in the trash.

dr-baker · Post by **dr-baker** » 25 Mar 2011, 19:09

Ferrim wrote:
Valrys wrote:I nominate the 107% rule as well, as there's a very good chance of 4 cars not qualifying, and when two of them are slow but not that slow

It's over six seconds off the Q1 pace not that slow?

It's been quite a few years since we had any significant field spread, but back in the mid-1990s, 6 seconds might be a normal field spread (Williamses back to Pacifics/Fortis, excluding Lolas!)

F1000X · Post by **F1000X** » 25 Mar 2011, 19:18

Hysterically Rubbish Team, for bringing back memories of true rejects.

Cynon · Post by **Cynon** » 25 Mar 2011, 20:07

107% Rule for giving us a grid of 18 cars -- making F1's car count dip so low that it matched that of Champ Car post-2003.

watka · Post by **watka** » 25 Mar 2011, 21:54

Obviously HRT have barely got a lap in yet, but Virgin have been massively disappointing. They seem to be falling further behind and I don't think their CFD approach will ever work. It's also surprised me that so far D'Ambrosio has been faster than Glock in both practice sessions.

McDuck · Post by **McDuck** » 26 Mar 2011, 00:31

ROTR = Virgin Racing/Wirth Engineering, because wind tunnels are kind of important.

Captain Hammer · Post by **Captain Hammer** » 26 Mar 2011, 01:00

Klon wrote:You were too late.

Actually, Bob was too quick. It was decided last year that these threads should not be created until after FP3 at the earliest, the reason being to prevent a useless thread cluttering the forum and to allow the drivers time to actually do something Reject-worthy. Judging by the time-stamps on Bob's post, he created it within two minutes of Chandhok crashing, which meant he made it in the first five minutes of FP1. Which is way too soon.

TomWazzleshaw · Post by **TomWazzleshaw** » 26 Mar 2011, 01:10

Captain Hammer wrote:
Klon wrote:You were too late.

Actually, Bob was too quick. It was decided last year that these threads should not be created until after FP3 at the earliest, the reason being to prevent a useless thread cluttering the forum and to allow the drivers time to actually do something Reject-worthy. Judging by the time-stamps on Bob's post, he created it within two minutes of Chandhok crashing, which meant he made it in the first five minutes of FP1. Which is way too soon.

But you have to admit that Chandhok crashing in what was effectively the first minute of the season is pretty rejectworthy.

Myrvold · Post by **Myrvold** » 26 Mar 2011, 02:08

Cynon wrote:107% Rule for giving us a grid of 18 cars -- making F1's car count dip so low that it matched that of Champ Car post-2003.

18? If you lack two fingers and are counting with them, you might get that number

Aerospeed · Post by **Aerospeed** » 26 Mar 2011, 02:13

Nine teams? I can't remember the last time we had that many teams in F1 trying to compete :S

GwilymJJames · Post by **GwilymJJames** » 26 Mar 2011, 04:33

If, as is rumoured, drivers over 107% will be allowed to start anyway, I nominate the 107% rule, for how quickly it was removed.

If the rumours are not true, I nominate the 107% rule, for depriving us of the chance to see the true glory of the Hispanias!

Post by **tommykl** » 26 Mar 2011, 05:51

David Coulthard, for shamefully beaching his car in the turn 4 gravel trap in a celebrity race, and also for his excuse:

David Coulthard wrote:Well, I saw there were a lot of fans sittig there, so I thought I'd excite the crowd a little bit.

Or something like that.

sswishbone · Post by **sswishbone** » 26 Mar 2011, 06:21

NICK HEIDFELD

DanielPT · Post by **DanielPT** » 26 Mar 2011, 06:23

I change my mind to Nick Heidfeld. Virgin actually qualifyed, HRT had 11 laps and only 2 secs off D'Ambrosio(!) and Petrov was third...