What is Martini racing? - 986 Forum - The Community for Porsche Boxster & Cayman Owners

Timco · 11-09-2014, 03:54 PM

And why does Porsche sometimes wear their colors?

Porsche9 · 11-09-2014, 04:29 PM

Martini Racing - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Tarek307 · 11-09-2014, 07:13 PM

i've always wondered about this

schnellman · 11-10-2014, 03:53 AM

Looks like someone needs to update the Wikipedia information regarding Martini racing and Formula 1 -- especially since they ended up on the podium in Brazil with Massa.

unibagel · 11-10-2014, 06:02 AM

^Yes! He drove a great home race, despite a couple of "mistakes". ;-) LOL.

Perfectlap · 11-10-2014, 06:32 AM

They were the RedBull of the 60's and 70's.

Although RedBull made so much stinkin money they could actually start their own first class F1 team. Which is nuts.

Martini Boxster

jmatta · 11-10-2014, 06:45 AM

Great to see Massa on the podium, but he had nothing for the Mercedes boys, even with the pit lane violation. Good to see Martini racing colors again. Abu Dhabi is going to be interesting, in spite of the the gimmick double points.

Perfectlap · 11-10-2014, 07:08 AM

^ Botas picked the right weekend to have issues.

This new points system is ridiculous. I can't think of another time in F1 or any major formula where a driver could had 10 wins, including 5 in a row, and still lost the title.
Hamilton's mechanical issues during the season aren't Nico's fault but they're the only reason he still has a shot going into the last race.

amagalla · 11-10-2014, 10:36 AM

I love that Hamilton spins and still only finishes 1.4 seconds down. I think I know who the better driver is.

Perfectlap · 11-10-2014, 10:46 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by amagalla

I love that Hamilton spins and still only finishes 1.4 seconds down. I think I know who the better driver is.

He also burns less fuel than Rossberg. I thought that was going to be the big difference between them. Hamilton could go harder at the end. I'll give Rosberg credit though over a single lap he's better under pressure. But races are won on Sunday.

Also, if Rossberg does win the title, he'll be just like his old man who won the title while other drivers had way more wins. That might be the craziest F1 season ever.
I think there were 10 different race winners that year.

TeamOxford · 11-10-2014, 02:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Perfectlap

This new points system is ridiculous. I can't think of another time in F1 or any major formula where a driver could had 10 wins, including 5 in a row, and still lost the title.

Not so. The points system is no more "ridiculous" than in any other time in F1 history.

If the points system that was in place from 1961-1990 (9-6-4-3-2-1), Hamilton would lead Rosberg 116 to 108, with the Championship to be decided at the last race.

If the points system that was in place from 1991-2009 (10-8-6-5-4-3-2-1), Hamilton would lead Rosberg 136 to 135, with the Championship to be decided at the last race.

How can someone with 10 wins lose the Championship? Same way that Jeff Gordon cannot win the Championship with the best record. Same way Keke Rosberg can win the Championship with only one win. Same way Joni Wiman can win the Championship with NO wins.

TO

coreseller · 11-10-2014, 06:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TeamOxford

Not so. The points system is no more "ridiculous" than in any other time in F1 history.

If the points system that was in place from 1961-1990 (9-6-4-3-2-1), Hamilton would lead Rosberg 116 to 108, with the Championship to be decided at the last race.

If the points system that was in place from 1991-2009 (10-8-6-5-4-3-2-1), Hamilton would lead Rosberg 136 to 135, with the Championship to be decided at the last race.

How can someone with 10 wins lose the Championship? Same way that Jeff Gordon cannot win the Championship with the best record. Same way Keke Rosberg can win the Championship with only one win. Same way Joni Wiman can win the Championship with NO wins.

TO

Just Wait..................He's Typing Now......................

Perfectlap · 11-10-2014, 06:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TeamOxford

Not so. The points system is no more "ridiculous" than in any other time in F1 history.

If the points system that was in place from 1961-1990 (9-6-4-3-2-1), Hamilton would lead Rosberg 116 to 108, with the Championship to be decided at the last race.

If the points system that was in place from 1991-2009 (10-8-6-5-4-3-2-1), Hamilton would lead Rosberg 136 to 135, with the Championship to be decided at the last race.

How can someone with 10 wins lose the Championship? Same way that Jeff Gordon cannot win the Championship with the best record. Same way Keke Rosberg can win the Championship with only one win. Same way Joni Wiman can win the Championship with NO wins.

TO

Not entirely true. Hamilton would already be champion going into the last race under the “11 best results" rule that cost Prost the title to Senna. Hamilton would have 10 wins and a second place as his best 11 results. So even if Rosberg won the last race he would not have more wins and seconds than Hamilton.

TeamOxford · 11-10-2014, 09:49 PM

OMG, I can't believe it. (Actually I can.)

You're enlisting the ONLY time in the 64 year history of modern F1 racing that the "Best 11" rule existed just to make a weak point?

That was back in 1990 when there were only 16 races, not 19 like today. That was when retirements were more commonplace than the reliable cars of F1 now.

Even so, if both drivers were allowed to drop two races from their schedule, the result would be the same. Just enjoy the Championship fight for what it is. At least it's not Vettel or Schumacher dominating every F1 snorefest.

Do you actually Google this stuff just to make a point that you think is valid?

Just wonderin............

TO

p.s. Not really

Perfectlap · 11-11-2014, 12:36 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TeamOxford

OMG, I can't believe it. (Actually I can.)

You're enlisting the ONLY time in the 64 year history of modern F1 racing that the "Best 11" rule existed just to make a weak point?

That was back in 1990 when there were only 16 races, not 19 like today. That was when retirements were more commonplace than the reliable cars of F1 now.

Even so, if both drivers were allowed to drop two races from their schedule, the result would be the same. Just enjoy the Championship fight for what it is. At least it's not Vettel or Schumacher dominating every F1 snorefest.

Do you actually Google this stuff just to make a point that you think is valid?

Just wonderin............

TO

p.s. Not really

You think a long-time fan of F1 would need to Google search the reason why Prost missed out on a fifth title that would have put him level (back then) with the only other driver to reach five titles? The greatest grand prix driver of all time Juan Manuel Fangio?
C'mon TO!!!
You totally missed the big exception to your statement (Senna Prost 88) which also happens to be the best parallel of the current season: two equally fast team mates, one already a world champion, in a steam-rolling car that was a marvel of technology, with neither driver having #1 status... You think I have to Google f1 history to find such a parallel?
Every loyal fan of F1 knows this...
But the real heart of the matter is the double points within this points system (and not a weak point as you claim). In 1988 Senna surpassed Clark for single season wins, (that I will admit most don't know) and the points system emphasized going for the win. Today, you can win an astonishing 11 races without the luxury of #1 driver status within your team, and still lose the title in the final race from an engine failure or getting punted from behind. All because of the RIDICULOUS double points finale. This while your team mate, in the fastest car on the grid, with literally half as many wins, cruises home to a world title by simply finishing third rather than being forced to race for all the marbles for an outright win.. If this happens, albeit with "only" 10 wins for Hamilton, millions will indeed be saying ridiculous! In fact a driver could win 13 races of 19 and still lose the title because of the double points finale. You seemed to gloss over this distinction vs points systems of the past.

TeamOxford · 11-11-2014, 06:00 PM

Agreed that the "double points" system for the last race is ludicrous. Hamilton and Rosberg are not the only ones with final standings on the line.

The "11 race" rule was even more ludicrous. Everyone likes a winner, but a smart, quick, consistent driver should not be overshadowed by a "win or nothing" banzai artist.

When Nico's father Keke won the Championship, he only won one GP, but there were 11 different winners that season. Consistent results won it for him. It was not a runaway season for Williams; it was true competition among several teams and drivers.

The 2014 Championship is not a competition among 9-11 teams and 18-22 drivers. It's solely between two men. All results count. The spread is 17 points. Regardless what historical point system is employed (except the ridiculous 11 race version), it's a fight to the finish.

Odds are that Hammy will take it, but don't discount Nico's talent and results.

TO