It took Ferrari several years of building on incremental successes to> become the scourge of the British Isle, it took Renault several years> of building on incremental successes to be in a position to take> advantage of Ferrari's stumble, it's taken several years of hard work> and excruciating incremental improvement for Toyota to just get to the> pointy end of the grid, but >> ...And yet not a one in the pub raises an eyebrow.

McLaren are suddenly now top dog after> years of laughable missteps, unconscionable diversions of sponsor> funding, unreliable while underpowered engines, and bodged together> chassis and aerodynamics, all of which are still evident in the> son-of-Frankenstein­ M/P4-20...

pointy end of the grid, but McLaren are suddenly now top dog after> years of laughable missteps, unconscionable diversions of sponsor> funding, unreliable while underpowered engines, and bodged together> chassis and aerodynamics, all of which are still evident in the> son-of-Frankenstein­ M/P4-20...>

...And yet not a one in the pub raises an eyebrow.

"F2005: 0 of 3" <Ron.Dennis@LyingCh­eatingSwine.com> wrote in message > news:8nrs719k3cfikb­m21bra8g04ntl71mv5ts­@4ax.com...>>

No reason to. They have great people and very experienced people there. > Now that they have settled into the new Technology centre (that's about 2 > miles from where I'm sitting) they are once again very much focussed on > racing & they also have some of the very best facilities available - and > plenty of money. Its been a slow & steady climb from the beginning of last > year through to a win at Spa last year to where they are now. In the > process a certain Italian team seems to have engaged an overdrive reverse > gear. If anything Toyota's progress is more impressive from the end of > last year to the beginning of this.>

Care to put some more substance behind that or is it just more of your > ranting and raving after the F-cars got well & trully stuffed again. Even > Brawn the Teddy Bear says the car is not strong enough. Maybe the problem > is that Ferrari spent too much time worrying about doing deals with Bernie > & not enough time building the F2005. They (and Bridgestone) have dropped > the ball in a major way.>

Winnning in F1 is always about the package of Design, Tyres, Aero, > Chassis, Engine, Gearbox, reliability etc. etc. (and, to an extent, the > driver). Ferrari are badly behind in at least two of these areas right > now. A measure of how good they really are will be whether they can go > from zero to hero & start finishing & then winning races as McLaren did > last year.

Captain's log. On StarDate sГ¶, 08 maj 2005 20:03:43 GMT received comm from > "F2005: 0 of 3" <Ron.Dennis@LyingCh­eatingSwine.com> on channel > rec.autos.sport.f1:­>

Shouldn't it be "F2005: 0 of 5"?>

Or did I miss anything?>

Keep calm. It's a single race they have won.>

...And yet not a one in the pub raises an eyebrow.

Captain's log. On StarDate sц, 08 maj 2005 20:03:43 GMT received comm> from "F2005: 0 of 3" <Ron.Dennis@LyingCh­eatingSwine.com> on channel > rec.autos.sport.f1:­>

Shouldn't it be "F2005: 0 of 5"?>

Or did I miss anything?

It took Ferrari several years of building on incremental successes to> become the scourge of the British Isle, it took Renault several years> of building on incremental successes to be in a position to take> advantage of Ferrari's stumble, it's taken several years of hard work> and excruciating incremental improvement for Toyota to just get to the> pointy end of the grid, but McLaren are suddenly now top dog after> years of laughable missteps, unconscionable diversions of sponsor> funding, unreliable while underpowered engines, and bodged together> chassis and aerodynamics, all of which are still evident in the> son-of-Frankenstein­ M/P4-20...>

...And yet not a one in the pub raises an eyebrow.>

Martin Tцrnsten wrote:>

'Mr. Fuckwit' tries to hide Ferrari's string of failure by> tying the name he hides behind to the record of the car model.

tying the name he hides behind to the record of the car model.> Today was only the third race for the F2005 cars.

...And yet not a one in the pub raises an eyebrow.

It took Ferrari several years of building on incremental successes to> become the scourge of the British Isle, it took Renault several years> of building on incremental successes to be in a position to take> advantage of Ferrari's stumble, it's taken several years of hard work> and excruciating incremental improvement for Toyota to just get to the> pointy end of the grid, but McLaren are suddenly now top dog after> years of laughable missteps, unconscionable diversions of sponsor> funding, unreliable while underpowered engines, and bodged together> chassis and aerodynamics, all of which are still evident in the> son-of-Frankenstein­ M/P4-20...>

...And yet not a one in the pub raises an eyebrow.>

Shouldn't it be "F2005: 0 of 5"?>

Or did I miss anything?

Keep calm. It's a single race they have won.

No reason to. They have great people and very experienced people there. Now >that they have settled into the new Technology centre (that's about 2 miles >from where I'm sitting) they are once again very much focussed on racing & >they also have some of the very best facilities available - and plenty of >money. Its been a slow & steady climb from the beginning of last year >through to a win at Spa last year to where they are now. In the process a >certain Italian team seems to have engaged an overdrive reverse gear. If >anything Toyota's progress is more impressive from the end of last year to >the beginning of this.

Care to put some more substance behind that or is it just more of your >ranting and raving after the F-cars got well & trully stuffed again. Even >Brawn the Teddy Bear says the car is not strong enough. Maybe the problem is >that Ferrari spent too much time worrying about doing deals with Bernie & >not enough time building the F2005. They (and Bridgestone) have dropped the >ball in a major way.

Winnning in F1 is always about the package of Design, Tyres, Aero, Chassis, >Engine, Gearbox, reliability etc. etc. (and, to an extent, the driver).

Ferrari are badly behind in at least two of these areas right now. A measure >of how good they really are will be whether they can go from zero to hero & >start finishing & then winning races as McLaren did last year.

Indeed. You didn't learn how to count properly.>

...Imbecile.>

...From _nowhere_.>

On Sun, 08 May 2005 20:21:05 GMT, "Iain Miller" <donot@spam.me> wrote:>>"F2005: 0 of 3" <Ron.Dennis@LyingCh­eatingSwine.com> wrote in message >>news:8nrs719k3cfi­kbm21bra8g04ntl71mv5­ts@4ax.com...>>>

Your time frame, unexpectedly, is predictably self-serving, and> self-servinglty shortsighted.>

...Nothing to do with Ferrari's obvious missteps: McLaren are> outstanding with no intermediate improvement.>

...None of which McLaren have evidenced in the last five years.>

Again... Ferrari have slipped, no question. McLaren's improvement is> truly 'out of thin air'.>

...And no one questions it at all.>

Not really out of thin air. If you'll have a look they've been not->quite-there, exhibiting exhilerating pace at times, whilst also >exhibiting complete stuidity beyond comprehension. Most of the time they >were off the pace, it appears to me to be through gross incompetence >rather than a lack of pace of the car.

It's not about a year ago, dickfist, it's about being the winner by> half-a-minute, suddenly, from not being on the podium for years.

F2005: 0 of 3 wrote:>

McLaren have been at the pointy end all season, they just kept not > making it to the end of the race. Have you been watching, or do you doze > off when the car on screen isn't painted red?>

Again... Ferrari have slipped, no question. McLaren's improvement is> truly 'out of thin air'.>

It took Ferrari several years of building on incremental successes to>become the scourge of the British Isle, it took Renault several years>of building on incremental successes to be in a position to take>advantage of Ferrari's stumble, it's taken several years of hard work>and excruciating incremental improvement for Toyota to just get to the>pointy end of the grid, but McLaren are suddenly now top dog after>years of laughable missteps, unconscionable diversions of sponsor>funding, unreliable while underpowered engines, and bodged together>chassis and aerodynamics, all of which are still evident in the>son-of-Frankens­tein M/P4-20...>

...And yet not a one in the pub raises an eyebrow.

...And yet not a one in the pub raises an eyebrow.>

It took Ferrari several years of building on incremental successes to>become the scourge of the British Isle, it took Renault several years>of building on incremental successes to be in a position to take>advantage of Ferrari's stumble, it's taken several years of hard work>and excruciating incremental improvement for Toyota to just get to the>pointy end of the grid, but McLaren are suddenly now top dog after>years of laughable missteps, unconscionable diversions of sponsor>funding, unreliable while underpowered engines, and bodged together>chassis and aerodynamics, all of which are still evident in the>son-of-Frankens­tein M/P4-20...>

....And yet not a one in the pub raises an eyebrow.>

F2005: 0 of 3 wrote:>> It took Ferrari several years of building on incremental successes to>> become the scourge of the British Isle, it took Renault several years>> of building on incremental successes to be in a position to take>> advantage of Ferrari's stumble, it's taken several years of hard work>> and excruciating incremental improvement for Toyota to just get to>the>> pointy end of the grid, but McLaren are suddenly now top dog after>> years of laughable missteps, unconscionable diversions of sponsor>> funding, unreliable while underpowered engines, and bodged together>> chassis and aerodynamics, all of which are still evident in the>> son-of-Frankenstein­ M/P4-20...>>

Are you a professional conspiracy theorist?>Or do you just 'dabble'?>

"F2005: 0 of 3" <Ron.Dennis@LyingCh­eatingSwine.com> wrote in message >news:8nrs719k3cfik­bm21bra8g04ntl71mv5t­s@4ax.com...>>

No reason to.

In the process a certain Italian team seems to have engaged an overdrive reverse gear.

F2005: 0 of 3 wrote:>> It took Ferrari several years of building on incremental successes to>> become the scourge of the British Isle, it took Renault several years>> of building on incremental successes to be in a position to take>> advantage of Ferrari's stumble, it's taken several years of hard work>> and excruciating incremental improvement for Toyota to just get to> the>> pointy end of the grid, but McLaren are suddenly now top dog after>> years of laughable missteps, unconscionable diversions of sponsor>> funding, unreliable while underpowered engines, and bodged together>> chassis and aerodynamics, all of which are still evident in the>> son-of-Frankenstein­ M/P4-20...>>

Are you a professional conspiracy theorist?> Or do you just 'dabble'?>

On Sun, 8 May 2005 18:18:44 -0400, "CFster" <cf68@nospamcox.net­>> wrote:>> "F2005: 0 of 3" <Ron.Dennis@LyingCh­eatingSwine.com> wrote in message>> news:8nrs719k3cfikb­m21bra8g04ntl71mv5ts­@4ax.com...>>> It took Ferrari several years of building on incremental successes>>> to become the scourge of the British Isle, it took Renault several>>> years of building on incremental successes to be in a position to>>> take advantage of Ferrari's stumble, it's taken several years of>>> hard work and excruciating incremental improvement for Toyota to>>> just get to the pointy end of the grid, but McLaren are suddenly>>> now top dog after years of laughable missteps, unconscionable>>> diversions of sponsor funding, unreliable while underpowered>>> engines, and bodged together chassis and aerodynamics, all of which>>> are still evident in the son-of-Frankenstein­ M/P4-20...>>>

It's not about a year ago, dickfist, it's about being the winner by> half-a-minute, suddenly, from not being on the podium for years.

I think he's trying to point out the contrast between the legion of> brainless anti-Ferrari conspiracy theorists - who've been suggesting> Ferrari used everything from special gels to secret fuel mixes at> Imola - and the deafening silence when McLaren similarly get their> act together. Went straight over your head did it?

Well, to begin with, Kimi was on the podium 4 times in the previous 9 > races, one of them a win, in Belgium last year, and he was leading > comfortably in the last race before his car crapped out, so it's no > surprise really. Then consider this: in the last 10 races Alonso has 58 > points, Raikkonen has 44 points, Barrichello, 40 points, and Schumi 38 > points...

Indeed. You didn't learn how to count properly.

...Imbecile.

He's living in the past because that's all they've got.>

The next time the Italian anthem is played will be for Trulli, not> Team Fellatio.> Then you should expect to see Trulli's bandwagon collapse from the> weight of> Mark F. Porcine jumping on it.>

True, I'd certainly find a team that wins almost every race in a> season VERY suspicious and certainly fixed...Did'nt see him> complaining at Ferrari though.

Isn't that odd? I mean, you've been dominant for an amount of seasons,>then suddenly you become nothing more than a (slowly) moving chicane.>I believe it happened to other teams in the past and I just can't>figure it out(*) - I know, Murphy's law and all that, but still... >

How about the front flexible wing? Ivan Capelli couldn't stop>mentioning that during race commentary ("look at it flex! Amazing!")>as if it were something not quite by the book. Maybe. He wasn't sure>and I've stopped trying to keep up with the regulations a while ago,>so I wouldn't know - but assuming (as one should) it is legal, it>looks like something that'll give some serious advantage.

Greg Watson wrote:

No you are wrong. He is exactly the same as those guys. He always has> been. Partisan way past the point of pathetic.>

Amazing that that has gone straight over your head IMO.>

Interesting that you share his views about there being similarity in > McLarens and Ferraris change in performance this year. I suspect you> are in a minority.

It's not about a year ago, dickfist, it's about being the winner by> half-a-minute, suddenly, from not being on the podium for years.

He sure is no "Dr Watson".>