some interesting comments,
" But when the biggest talking point in a race is one driver’s dominance
and his interactions with his own race engineer, you know you’re in
trouble.----- The two are like an old married couple at the moment,
snapping at each other, lobbing the odd laced barb in the other’s
direction,"

from
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/formula-1/2023/07/30/belgian-grand-prix-f1-live-latest-updates-spa/

Red Bull turn F1 into the Max Verstappen and GP show with eighth
straight win
30 July 2023 • 8:09pm
Max Verstappen - Max Verstappen extends huge lead with eighth
consecutive win at Belgian Grand Prix
Max Verstappen claimed his eight straight win of the season CREDIT:
Getty Images/JOHN THYS
KEY MOMENTS
Chosen by us to get you up to speed at a glance

Next race
Dutch Grand Prix on August 27
Verstappen wins
He roars to a crushing eighth win in a row, one short of the all-time record
Verstappen takes the lead
WATCH: Verstappen takes the lead from his teammate on lap 17
Perez leads
Piastri is out after clashing with Sainz on the first corner
Starting grid
1. LER 2. PER 3. HAM 4. SAI 5. PIA 6. VER
By Tom Cary, at Spa-Francorhamps

There were a lot of film references being thrown around at Spa on Sunday.

Lewis Hamilton suggested Max Verstappen was so chilled out driving
around at the front of the race, en route to his eighth race win in a
row, he was in “shmoke and a pancake” mode, a reference to the Austin
Powers sequel Goldmember, in which the Dutch villain offers the British
spy a spliff and a snack.

Christian Horner, meanwhile, compared Verstappen’s race engineer
Gianpiero ‘GP’ Lambiase to Jason Statham, the British actor known for
playing hardman types, as he battled to keep his fiery driver in check
during the race.

All very jolly. But when the biggest talking point in a race is one
driver’s dominance and his interactions with his own race engineer, you
know you’re in trouble.

The truth is Verstappen is head and shoulders above the rest at the
moment. Despite starting sixth on the grid thanks to a change of gearbox
on Friday, the Dutchman cruised to victory by over 20 seconds from his
Red Bull teammate Sergio Perez.

Max Verstappen - Max Verstappen extends huge lead with eighth
consecutive win at Belgian Grand Prix
Despite starting from sixth place, Verstappen finished ahead of teammate
Sergio Perez to give Red Bull an easy 1-2 CREDIT: Getty Images/Joe Portlock
It was, as mentioned, his eighth win in a row. It was also Red Bull’s
22nd in the last 23 races. Verstappen has won 19 of them.

This one was never in doubt. Verstappen’s biggest fight was with GP,
which tells its own story.

The two are like an old married couple at the moment, snapping at each
other, lobbing the odd laced barb in the other’s direction, before
kissing and making up.

They had had one lovers’ tiff already during the weekend, on Friday,
when Verstappen accused the team of “s--- execution” in qualifying and
said he did “not give a f---” about scraping through to Q3 in P10 (he
later qualified on pole).

This time, after Verstappen questioned the team’s pitstop strategy,
Lambiase told him rather tartly: “Max, please follow my instruction and
trust it, thank you.”

tmg.video.placeholder.alt zHx0kdZv1XQ
That triggered a number of sarcastic exchanges between them in the
second half of the race, as Verstappen extended his lead over Perez with
worrying ease.

When Lambiase asked him whether he felt he could make his tyres last
with some rain incoming, Versteppen responded that he “couldn’t see the
weather radar”.

When Lambiase told Verstappen to “use his head” and questioned his
decision to use so much of his rubber on his out lap after a pitstop,
Verstappen banged in a fastest lap.

When Lambiase came on the radio again to tell him to save his tyres,
Verstappen suggested they could always do another pitstop “for the
practice”. “Not this time,” came the response.

He would still have won if he had done it.

In fact, so dominant is Verstappen at the moment, and so often are he
and ‘GP’ sniping at each other over team radio, it is tempting to ask
whether they have been asked to ham it up for the show, just so we have
something to laugh about.

“Absolutely not,” Horner insisted afterwards when that thesis was put to
him. “GP and Max have been together since the first race that Max
stepped into the car. Max is a demanding customer. And you’ve got to be
a strong character to deal with that and GP, you know, he’s our Jason
Statham equivalent, or certainly lookalike [Lambiase has a shaved head
like Statham]. And you know, he deals with him firmly but fairly.

“The problem is that conversation between the two of them, there’s 200
million people listening to it. But there’s mutual trust and respect.
There’s no counselling required.”

Verstappen, too, was adamant the exchanges were genuine, although he
admitted his contributions were probably “50-50” in terms of trying to
be funny and actually being serious.

“I know that the team doesn’t like to do another stop but I like to
mention it so they might get a bit nervous,” he said of the fact that he
was pushing more than his team were comfortable with, to give himself
the opportunity for a late stop and a fastest lap bonus point. “And then
I like the response [from GP]: ‘No, no, we’re not doing that today’.
It’s fine. We know each other very well and we have a very good
relationship.”

Behind Versteppan, Perez was a convincing runner-up from Ferrari’s
Charles Leclerc, with Mercedes’ Lewis Hamilton fourth, but taking an
extra bonus point for the fastest lap after he carved out a sufficient
gap over fifth-placed Fernando Alonso (Aston Martin) to stop for some
fresh tyres.

McLaren’s Oscar Piastri, the star of Saturday’s sprint qualifying and
race, was forced to retire on the opening lap with damage after a
collision with the Ferrari Carlos Sainz, who also later retired,
prompting a dispute afterwards between the two of them over who was at
fault. Piastri’s teammate Lando Norris managed to finish seventh, behind
the second Mercedes of George Russell.

The day, though, belonged to Verstappen; the double world champion
heading into the summer break with a massive 125pt lead as closes in,
inexorably, on a third title. The only misstep was Red Bull managing to
smash the winner’s trophy for the second race running during their
victory celebrations. Then again, maybe that was staged too. This is the
problem when one team gets too dominant. You start getting cynical.

LIVE REPORTING
RELATED STORIES
By
Tom Cary,
SENIOR SPORTS CORRESPONDENT, AT SPA-FRANCORCHAMPS and
Harri Thomas,
LIVE UPDATES

4:12PM
Verstappen romps to another victory
Max Verstappen’s grasp over this season tightens. He comfortably won
today, taking the lead on lap 17 after starting in sixth on the grid.

McLaren’s Oscar Piastri was the race’s first casualty, the Australian
stopping by the side of the track after Ferrari’s Carlos Sainz squeezed
him against the wall on the opening corner.

The summer break now follows, with the next race – the Dutch Grand Prix
– on August 27.

4:06PM
Lewis Hamilton speaks with Sky Sports
I think it was a non-eventful race really. Not much going on. I wasn’t
able to keep up with the cars ahead of me, struggled in the beginnnig.
And we had big bouncing this weekend.

In the end I was keeping the Ferrari within a few seconds.

It was gusty out there, difficult to keep on track.

To me it is a concern [the bouncing]. But we’ll work through the data
this week and try and figure out what we do in the next race.

Lewis Hamilton
CREDIT: Shutterstock/CHRISTIAN BRUNA
3:59PM
Here's how Piastri dropped out on the first corner

3:56PM
Updated constructor standings
Constructor Standings - F1
Pos. Team W Pts
1 Oracle Red Bull Racing 12 503
2 Mercedes AMG Petronas F1 team 0 247
3 Aston Martin Cognizant F1 Team 0 196
4 Scuderia Ferrari 0 191
5 McLaren F1 Team 0 103
6 BWT Alpine F1 Team 0 57
7 Money Gram Haas F1 Team 0 11
8 Williams Racing 0 11
9 Alfa Romeo F1 Team Orlen 0 9
10 Scuderia AlphaTauri 0 3
3:54PM
Updated driver standings
Driver Standings - F1
Pos. Driver Team W Pts
1 Max Verstappen Oracle Red Bull Racing 10 314
2 Sergio Pérez Oracle Red Bull Racing 2 189
3 Fernando Alonso Aston Martin Cognizant F1 Team 0 149
4 Lewis Hamilton Mercedes AMG Petronas F1 team 0 148
5 Charles Leclerc Scuderia Ferrari 0 99
6 George Russell Mercedes AMG Petronas F1 team 0 99
7 Carlos Sainz Scuderia Ferrari 0 92
8 Lando Norris McLaren F1 Team 0 69
9 Lance Stroll Aston Martin Cognizant F1 Team 0 47
10 Esteban Ocon BWT Alpine F1 Team 0 35
11 Oscar Piastri McLaren F1 Team 0 34
12 Pierre Gasly BWT Alpine F1 Team 0 22
13 Alexander Albon Williams Racing 0 11
14 Nico Hülkenberg Money Gram Haas F1 Team 0 9
15 Valtteri Bottas Alfa Romeo F1 Team Orlen 0 5
16 Guanyu Zhou Alfa Romeo F1 Team Orlen 0 4
17 Yuki Tsunoda Scuderia AlphaTauri 0 3
18 Kevin Magnussen Money Gram Haas F1 Team 0 2
19 Daniel Ricciardo Scuderia AlphaTauri 0 0
20 Logan Sargeant Williams Racing 0 0
21 Nyck de Vries Scuderia AlphaTauri 0 0
3:50PM
Here's how it finished

a425couple <a425couple@hotmail.com> wrote:

> “The problem is that conversation between the two of them, there’s 200
> million people listening to it. But there’s mutual trust and respect.
> There’s no counselling required.”

I’ve long felt that conversations between driver and engineer should not be
broadcast.

--
Sir Tim

On 7/31/23 14:25, Sir Tim wrote:
> a425couple <a425couple@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>> “The problem is that conversation between the two of them, there’s 200
>> million people listening to it. But there’s mutual trust and respect.
>> There’s no counselling required.”
>
> I’ve long felt that conversations between driver and engineer should not be
> broadcast.
>

Lots of very valid reasons can be used to support that view.
But, I think, the cat is out of the bag, and we are unlikely
to go back soon. YMMV

Sir Tim <no_email@invalid.invalid> wrote:
> a425couple <a425couple@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>> “The problem is that conversation between the two of them, there’s 200
>> million people listening to it. But there’s mutual trust and respect.
>> There’s no counselling required.”
>
> I’ve long felt that conversations between driver and engineer should not be
> broadcast.

But why? The sport has long needed to monitor communications, and has a
specific clause in the Technical Regulations (8.9.2) which means all
voice messages are available to both the FIA and broadcasters. That
keeps the teams and the FIA "clean" as they know they are being heard.
Imagine the conspiracy theories (even more than now!) if there could be
cosy deals going on which only team/driver or team/FIA participants were
privy to?

What's needed is for drivers and team representatives to remember that
their comms are played out in public and act in a professional manner.
There is always the "disrepute" clause that can be used to sanction
individuals who forget that.

Sadly, I suspect Horner quite likes these kinds of games.

On 8/1/2023 7:32 AM, Mark wrote:
> Sir Tim <no_email@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>> a425couple <a425couple@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>>> “The problem is that conversation between the two of them, there’s 200
>>> million people listening to it. But there’s mutual trust and respect.
>>> There’s no counselling required.”
>>
>> I’ve long felt that conversations between driver and engineer should not be
>> broadcast.
>
> But why? The sport has long needed to monitor communications, and has a
> specific clause in the Technical Regulations (8.9.2) which means all
> voice messages are available to both the FIA and broadcasters. That
> keeps the teams and the FIA "clean" as they know they are being heard.
> Imagine the conspiracy theories (even more than now!) if there could be
> cosy deals going on which only team/driver or team/FIA participants were
> privy to?
>
> What's needed is for drivers and team representatives to remember that
> their comms are played out in public and act in a professional manner.
> There is always the "disrepute" clause that can be used to sanction
> individuals who forget that.
>
> Sadly, I suspect Horner quite likes these kinds of games.

So does Sky. In touting their "follow the in-car camera on driver of
your choice" service they make a point of mentioning that one also gets
to listen to team radio.

--
Mark Jackson - https://mark-jackson.online/
Engineering is achieving function
while avoiding failure. - Henry Petroski

On 7/31/2023 8:56 PM, a425couple wrote:
> some interesting comments,
> " But when the biggest talking point in a race is one driver’s dominance
> and his interactions with his own race engineer, you know you’re in
> trouble.----- The two are like an old married couple at the moment,
> snapping at each other, lobbing the odd laced barb in the other’s
> direction,"

F1 died in AD2021...Lewis clinched 8th, and Formula 1 stopped being a sport.

Mark <mpconmy@gmail.com> writes:
> Sir Tim <no_email@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>> a425couple <a425couple@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>> “The problem is that conversation between the two of them, there’s 200
>>> million people listening to it. But there’s mutual trust and respect.
>>> There’s no counselling required.”
>>
>> I’ve long felt that conversations between driver and engineer should not be
>> broadcast.
>
> But why? The sport has long needed to monitor communications, and has a
> specific clause in the Technical Regulations (8.9.2) which means all
> voice messages are available to both the FIA and broadcasters. That
> keeps the teams and the FIA "clean" as they know they are being heard.
> Imagine the conspiracy theories (even more than now!) if there could be
> cosy deals going on which only team/driver or team/FIA participants were
> privy to?

Fully agree. All team comms were historically in the open, even if they
were just the unidirectional pit board. What's the problem that secrecy
solves?

Phil
--
We are no longer hunters and nomads. No longer awed and frightened, as we have
gained some understanding of the world in which we live. As such, we can cast
aside childish remnants from the dawn of our civilization.
-- NotSanguine on SoylentNews, after Eugen Weber in /The Western Tradition/

Mark <mpconmy@gmail.com> wrote:
> Sir Tim <no_email@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>> a425couple <a425couple@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>>> “The problem is that conversation between the two of them, there’s 200
>>> million people listening to it. But there’s mutual trust and respect.
>>> There’s no counselling required.”
>>
>> I’ve long felt that conversations between driver and engineer should not be
>> broadcast.
>
> But why? The sport has long needed to monitor communications, and has a
> specific clause in the Technical Regulations (8.9.2) which means all
> voice messages are available to both the FIA and broadcasters. That
> keeps the teams and the FIA "clean" as they know they are being heard.
> Imagine the conspiracy theories (even more than now!) if there could be
> cosy deals going on which only team/driver or team/FIA participants were
> privy to?

I do not say that the stewards should not be able to monitor team comms for
regulatory purposes but it seems wrong to me that conversations between a
driver and his engineer should be able to be overheard by their
competitors.

Obviously preventing this would also mean cutting access for broadcasters
but, in any case, these communications only serve to interrupt the flow of
the commentary (and possibly titillate the public when there is intemperate
language or disagreement).
>
> What's needed is for drivers and team representatives to remember that
> their comms are played out in public and act in a professional manner.
> There is always the "disrepute" clause that can be used to sanction
> individuals who forget that.
>
> Sadly, I suspect Horner quite likes these kinds of games.
>

--
Sir Tim

On 4/08/2023 10:52 am, Sir Tim wrote:
> Mark <mpconmy@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Sir Tim <no_email@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>>> a425couple <a425couple@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>> “The problem is that conversation between the two of them, there’s 200
>>>> million people listening to it. But there’s mutual trust and respect.
>>>> There’s no counselling required.”
>>>
>>> I’ve long felt that conversations between driver and engineer should not be
>>> broadcast.
>>
>> But why? The sport has long needed to monitor communications, and has a
>> specific clause in the Technical Regulations (8.9.2) which means all
>> voice messages are available to both the FIA and broadcasters. That
>> keeps the teams and the FIA "clean" as they know they are being heard.
>> Imagine the conspiracy theories (even more than now!) if there could be
>> cosy deals going on which only team/driver or team/FIA participants were
>> privy to?
>
> I do not say that the stewards should not be able to monitor team comms for
> regulatory purposes but it seems wrong to me that conversations between a
> driver and his engineer should be able to be overheard by their
> competitors.

But if they cover their mouths while speaking ...

geoff

On 2023-08-03 6:52 PM, Sir Tim wrote:
> Mark <mpconmy@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Sir Tim <no_email@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>>> a425couple <a425couple@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>> “The problem is that conversation between the two of them, there’s 200
>>>> million people listening to it. But there’s mutual trust and respect.
>>>> There’s no counselling required.”
>>>
>>> I’ve long felt that conversations between driver and engineer should not be
>>> broadcast.
>>
>> But why? The sport has long needed to monitor communications, and has a
>> specific clause in the Technical Regulations (8.9.2) which means all
>> voice messages are available to both the FIA and broadcasters. That
>> keeps the teams and the FIA "clean" as they know they are being heard.
>> Imagine the conspiracy theories (even more than now!) if there could be
>> cosy deals going on which only team/driver or team/FIA participants were
>> privy to?
>
> I do not say that the stewards should not be able to monitor team comms for
> regulatory purposes but it seems wrong to me that conversations between a
> driver and his engineer should be able to be overheard by their
> competitors.
>
> Obviously preventing this would also mean cutting access for broadcasters
> but, in any case, these communications only serve to interrupt the flow of
> the commentary (and possibly titillate the public when there is intemperate
> language or disagreement).

I'm not sure that driver/pits comms are of no purpose to the viewers.
For example, comments about tire wear, pitstop timing, etc. are of
interest to me at least. The pits telling a driver to "coast" to save
fuel/brakes/engine temps may go some way to explain the behaviour of a
driver on track.
>>
>> What's needed is for drivers and team representatives to remember that
>> their comms are played out in public and act in a professional manner.
>> There is always the "disrepute" clause that can be used to sanction
>> individuals who forget that.
>>
>> Sadly, I suspect Horner quite likes these kinds of games.

I think many of the teams use the comms to "send a dummy" to the other
teams. Like sending the crew out into pitlane as if in preparation for a
stop, and then pulling them back in again. When a driver complains about
something in the way their car is driving, is a real problem or just a
tease to the drivers behind? If memory serves, both Max and Lewis have
done this sort of thing.
>>
>
>

On 2023-08-03 02:01, RzR wrote:
> On 7/31/2023 8:56 PM, a425couple wrote:
>> some interesting comments,
>> " But when the biggest talking point in a race is one driver’s
>> dominance and his interactions with his own race engineer, you know
>> you’re in trouble.----- The two are like an old married couple at the
>> moment, snapping at each other, lobbing the odd laced barb in the
>> other’s direction,"
>
> F1 died in AD2021...Lewis clinched 8th, and Formula 1 stopped being a
> sport.
>

Nonsense.

On Thursday, August 3, 2023 at 6:32:31 PM UTC-6, Alan wrote:

> Nonsense.

logoff useless cock sucker

On 2023-08-03 18:29, texas gate wrote:
> On Thursday, August 3, 2023 at 6:32:31 PM UTC-6, Alan wrote:
>
>> Nonsense.
>
> logoff useless cock sucker

Make me.

:-)

Sir Tim <no_email@invalid.invalid> wrote:
> Mark <mpconmy@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Sir Tim <no_email@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>>> a425couple <a425couple@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>> “The problem is that conversation between the two of them, there’s 200
>>>> million people listening to it. But there’s mutual trust and respect.
>>>> There’s no counselling required.”
>>>
>>> I’ve long felt that conversations between driver and engineer should not be
>>> broadcast.
>>
>> But why? The sport has long needed to monitor communications, and has a
>> specific clause in the Technical Regulations (8.9.2) which means all
>> voice messages are available to both the FIA and broadcasters. That
>> keeps the teams and the FIA "clean" as they know they are being heard.
>> Imagine the conspiracy theories (even more than now!) if there could be
>> cosy deals going on which only team/driver or team/FIA participants were
>> privy to?
>
> I do not say that the stewards should not be able to monitor team comms for
> regulatory purposes but it seems wrong to me that conversations between a
> driver and his engineer should be able to be overheard by their
> competitors.
>
> Obviously preventing this would also mean cutting access for broadcasters
> but, in any case, these communications only serve to interrupt the flow of
> the commentary (and possibly titillate the public when there is intemperate
> language or disagreement).

I think that knowing what is being said by your competitor is precisely
the point, and certainly the point I was making.

In the first place, there have been multiple occasions where unnecessary
controversy has existed because of what may or may not have been said
between FIA and teams offline (for example, direct lobbying at the GP
that shall not be named). How much worse would that be if it could be
done in secret via electronic communication? Imagine the conspiracy
theories? For me, it's important that there is transparency in this, and
not just for the teams.

On the issue of intemperate language or disagreement, I'd make two
points:

1. The broadcasters can and should delay broadcasting these comms if
this is a major concern...but:
2. This is a professional sport with very highly-paid participants.
There should be great awareness from all that they are speaking with an
audience, and the appropriate penalties should be applied if anyone
finds themselves incapable of communicating in a professional manner.

On the issue of being heard by competitors...so what? There used to be
vast restrictions on how much coaching or team orders were allowed in
any case, the teams are more than capable of moderating their
communications to neutralise any issues with their competitors listening
in. For one (as others have observed) it can work both ways as you can
say things on the radio to catch your competitor out if they take it too
literally. For another, code words can render your chatter pretty
meaningless. That obfuscates decisions on pit stops, setup and tyre
degradation.

I really think it's a non-issue compared to the issues that would arise
if comms were encrypted and restricted.