Ron Dennis' speech (merged)

Its quite a good speech and I would agree with a lot of it.

But - while F1 must reduce its operating costs, it has to reduce costs to the fans also. Drivers such as Rosberg, Hamilton and Alonso have increased popularity with casual viewers but the cost of them going and taking their kids to a race is prohibitive - unless you go GA.

I would argue with the comment about the closed winter season and the preview editions of magazines being the best selling. With the explosion of the internet and people surfing the web for their news or having it sent ot their desktop, theres less of a need to buy a magazine to get the stories. I get F1 Racing delivered every month but its rare that i sit and read it. As soon as its printed the stories are replicated on about ten different news sites and twice as many forums. Unless i avoid the internet, by the time i read the articles, i've already read them, formed my opinion and seen what other people think.

Originally posted by britishtrident



Rindt isn't mentioned in the article but I'll wager Ron Dennis knew Jochen pretty well a young lad called Ron Dennis was Rindt's mechanic at Cooper and went with him Brabham. Ron Dennis stayed at Brabham when Rindt left to become Jack Brabham's chief mechanic.


While Sir Black Jack Brabham left his F1 soul safely in the hands Ron Taurnac only for it to end up in Bernie's hands.


Genius though he was Chapman wasn't exactly above selling his soul if he hadn't died it might have ended up in jail along with his mate Fred. In any case it was Chapman that brought major league tobacco sponsorship into F1.

Spot on... and as for Chapman, IIRC, he didn't just bring tobacco into F1 exactly 40 years ago, but his illustrious team's name changed in the early 70s to that of their major sponsor?

Oh yes, of course, it's no longer a Lotus, it's a John Player Special...

That said, it kept the team going, and kept them competitive.

Originally posted by Patrik L
Ron's proposals are sound and all on their own, but shouldn't FIA look inside their organisation to find a successor to Max? And is Ron really aiming for that seat (or Jean for that matter)?

i don't think Ron's aiming for the spot, but isn't JT a member if the WMSC?

I didn't think Ron was making a presidential candidate's speech. It was a seminar on the future of F1, and he was one of several speakers wasn't he? I know that Ron has historically had a convoluted way of expressing himself - Ronspeak - which I think makes some people demean him. My feeling is that he is passionate and articulate about his sport, and I found his speech very thoughtful, and full of good sense.

Well, the start bit "Once upon a time"...."there was a boy"...."that boy was me!" was rather schoolboy-ish, (the equivalent of ending a fantasy story with "...and he woke up and it was all a dream"), but he has some reasonable points to say in the rest of it. A not very fascinating speech from not very fascinating man.

Someone got over the Beryllium fiasco of the 90s. Finally.

"Because every time the rules are changed, the result is almost always a cost increase. And, because the smaller teams are perhaps less able to meet those cost increases, they may not respond as effectively to a rule change as their more affluent competitors. ""

This is not true. The freeze of engine technology has contributed to the fact many highly skilled engine engineers are now looking for jobs elsewhere.

And while he proclaims to be behind lesser teams, it was dennis himself who demanded exclusive rights to mercedes engines and pulled the plug on the deal haug had made with alain prost end of 2000, mclarens former driver and advisor. Ferrari at least, sell customer engines to other teams.

The rest of his speech is indeed a product of either that conniving bishop or his own, selfish needs with disregard for any other competitor.

Mosley was right to distrust this man and claim it was mclaren and dennis who solely where against all his new regulation changes to improve the sport and increase competitiveness. And wichever way you look at it, mosley was right; his changes have now created a very tight and competitive field where engine power is very equal. Mosleys rules have produced a highly spectacular championship for the last 3 years where the brit press claims last seasons one was the most exciting in years.

If dennis would have his way it would still be a buyers championship i.e. the team who throws the most money to it, has the most chance of winning.


Do not trust this man!!!

Originally posted by dawg_7529
"Because every time the rules are changed, the result is almost always a cost increase. And, because the smaller teams are perhaps less able to meet those cost increases, they may not respond as effectively to a rule change as their more affluent competitors. ""

This is not true. The freeze of engine technology has contributed to the fact many highly skilled engine engineers are now looking for jobs elsewhere.

And while he proclaims to be behind lesser teams, it was dennis himself who demanded exclusive rights to mercedes engines and pulled the plug on the deal haug had made with alain prost end of 2000, mclarens former driver and advisor. Ferrari at least, sell customer engines to other teams.

The rest of his speech is indeed a product of either that conniving bishop or his own, selfish needs with disregard for any other competitor.

Mosley was right to distrust this man and claim it was mclaren and dennis who solely where against all his new regulation changes to improve the sport and increase competitiveness. And wichever way you look at it, mosley was right; his changes have now created a very tight and competitive field where engine power is very equal. Mosleys rules have produced a highly spectacular championship for the last 3 years where the brit press claims last seasons one was the most exciting in years.

If dennis would have his way it would still be a buyers championship i.e. the team who throws the most money to it, has the most chance of winning.


Do not trust this man!!!

Pretty sad letter really. Sad that anyone feels so bitter - you must struggle to enjoy the sport. That Ferrari "at least sell customer engines" has some bearing on the evil RD is utterly absurd. McLaren are and have always been what Enzo disdainfully tagged "garagistes". If this makes them somehow less worthy icons of F1 then that's your opinion and fine. The record (other than 2007) stands and they are the second oldest continual F1 team with I don't know how many wins. To most fans that would be enough but not some.

I don't feel any need to defend McLaren or Ferrari or any other F1 team. What needs defending is this forum from hateful claptrap. Your last line needs to be turned on yourself.

I'm out of here.

Oh spare me the sentiments. The truth is mclaren has done nothing for us, the fans and perhaps enzo had a greater foresight than wed ever imagined. And if you like numbers so much perhaps its even sadder the amount of times mclaren and ron dennis have been caught pants down, taking the mickey with the sport, the fans with ridiculous actions and plain misleading lies and mountains of ron speak.

As i just exampled with rons help there would never be equal engine power, customer engines, not even to his old friend prost, there would never be cost cutting, test miles cutting, no one make ecu.

There would stil be pit screen boxes invented by ron dennis and on order of bernie banned from the paddock, robbing fans from any insight on how a team runs inside. There would still be even less money to lesser teams and it was only because of Stoddarts stubborness that a deal was brokered for the small teams, unlike what the evil ron dennis proclaims in his message above. There would still be no rules to counter the anti-racing of mclaren at melbourne 1998, or their taking the mickey of the rules by placing fins on top of their chassis in 2000 to circumvent the minimal chassis height rules while in the meantime cry about
A- renaults mass damper
B- ferraris floor
C- williams supposed cheating with fuel

Whilst saying by the mouth of lewis-the second coming-hamilton that ""nobody at mclaren or me want to take the championship away from kimi at the court""while that was EXACTLY what the mclaren lawyer was asking in the technical hearing, dragging an already hugely smeared championship even further through the guther.

Being guilty of breaching about 14 points of the fia regulations including disrupting the sport yet have learned one yot and one week sneer against renault for breaking heiki, something even heiki has declared as bullshit, and a week later sneering bmw for not being able to sustain a challenge for the win. Aside the fact its not very collegaue like it sure as hell gives the impression they have learned one yout from the fine and do not play the good, low profile team wich they should. The numbers over the last 16 years say that ron dennis himself has trouble sustaining any championship challenge despite throwing the odd, oww say 2 bilion dollars to it.

So no, do not trust this man is probably a correct statement and not overly dramatic in light of the above mentioned events. It also gives mosleys resenment towards dennis more credibility and should be used to keep him in office.

Wouldn't have called the comments sentiment, not that there's anything wrong with well placed sentiment.

Your one-eyed hatred is better revealed in the world of football - play the man not the ball and fall over believing the world will clearly see you were fouled.

Team principals all play the business of F1 as business these days. Dennis created a massively successful business out of Bruce McLaren's successful 70s "Team". Enzo's passion or "sentiment" as you would call it has been replaced by ruthless and efficient striving for total domination, however it can be achieved. This is as it should be so I fail to see that the red team are squeaky clean and the grey or whatever team are all dirt. This is pure fanboy stuff that ignores the misdemeanours and rulebending and deceptions etc of most of the big teams including the Big Two. To draw a comparison with your example of Dennis manipulating the Mercedes engine deal how about Schumacher and Todt manipulating the exclusive Bridgestone usage back when? I think the anticompetitive reasoning was paramount to this although in later years it proved to be 2 edged.

It's really tiresome to read the Mac hating. Despite what you may think McLAren haven't been a negative influence in the sport. In fact without them Ferrari would have made F1 boring for longer than 6 years of the present decade

I'll happily concede Ronspeak is tedious and I have no great "sentiment" for RD the person but I greatly respect someone who has come from race mechanic to being the driving force of an undeniably great team. My views of Max Mosely's personal hatred of RD is that it is probably a British class thing, along with MM being jealous as a failed constructor of the 70s (March really was a rum outfit then). To deny McLaren is a great constructor is to claim there is only one great team - I think I'm getting the picture of where your true motivation lies.

Long may the great rivalry of these two giants continue (not MM and RD, Ferrari and McLaren!). They represent a sizable part of F1 heritage. Thats sentiment!

Originally posted by dawg_7529
and perhaps enzo had a greater foresight than wed ever imagined.

Enzo: "Aerodynamics are for people who can't build engines" ... yeah, what a damn wise man he was ...

I fail to see the hatred in stating the events and actions and in particular the statements of ron dennis, the team principal in a thread that goes about just that, a speech by ron dennis.

Im really sorry if i break your cinderella outlook with all your flowery romantic talk about how the paperboy finally became a millionaire etc. It is not about where dnenis came from, it is not about playing the man and not the ball. Ive only attacked his actions as team principal and as such, i think he is evil and sells lies, hence me saying dont trust him.

I find the bridgestone argument also not convincing. It was mclaren who after all, started out with bridgestone, even tested their tyres way before other teams much to the agony of the rivals, and therefore cannot be regarded as being the underdog. That bridgestone after 3 consecutive wins decided to give a bit more emphasis on ferrari is understandable but as it is the change to michelin came more to the fact dnenis did not want to share data of his team with them.

Regardless of that, i have failed to see the bitter statements towards other teams from renault or ferrari, or williams. Ive yet to see evidence or arguments those teams aply just the same holier than thou aporach as dennis. I think ive given enough arguments of current events that one should not rust dennis, and he is bad for the sport and he also is not part of the ''big 2''. theres nothing big about mansour ojehs money and mercedes pile of money.

anyway, my 2 cents, you dont have to agree, but the endless argument ''the other teams do the same'' simply dont go here. Dennis and mclaren really are a form of anti sport and do not belong in F1 imo.

Originally posted by Hyatt


Enzo: "Aerodynamics are for people who can't build engines" ... yeah, what a damn wise man he was ...

at least an honest statement wich cannot be said of dennis:""our drivers get equal treatment"" and then being recorded last year as"" we were racing alonso, not kimi"" blowing even the brit press out of the water.

Originally posted by dawg_7529

anyway, my 2 cents, you dont have to agree, but the endless argument ''the other teams do the same'' simply dont go here. Dennis and mclaren really are a form of anti sport and do not belong in F1 imo.

No you would be in the Maxxx camp in wanting them out of F1. Strangely that is not the view of fellow competitors - like Renault's Pat Symonds on Spygate ("what did McLaren do? Not a lot actually").

What Max said to the world was effectively "When Renault do it they're not really cheating, when McLaren do they should be treated worse than a sex offender".

Your personal and insulting attacks on people are nauseous (Dennis, Bishop, Roebuck to name a recent trio). The lack of even handed logic is completely missing from your every post. Serious followers of F1 deserve better than having to wade through hater files Dawg.

Its again a blatant example of your coloured vieuw towards mclaren and disregard the facts, saying everybody does it.

Not everybody got a 100 milion dollar fine for cheating, dude and worse, renault, just like mclaren, get away with a warning without further punishment. Mclaren got further penalties because new evidence came to light. As long as that doesnt happen with renault then your attempt to compare the 2 is futile and ridiculous.

My accusations on dennis and bishop are backed with numerous arguments. The only vage argument you bring back is an example of the bridgestone affair, no further quotes, no nothing but crying about hatred towards your beloved ron dennis.

The thing with roebuck is also very easy; he compared schumacher to a gauleiter, a nazi wartime officer sometime back in the late 90s. If youre being consistent with your hate towards anybody attacking people personally i take it you also denounce him now and say: dawg, you where absolutly right to call him an idiot.

But the fact is i merely called him an idiot for defending mclarens no race actions in melbourne 98 saying in his 5th column:""mclaren have no obligation to race towards anyone. they came to win the race as consumatly as possible". Thats not only anti racing, thats anti fans who DO want to see a race. If you then read his column after austria 2002 where he said with so many races to go, rubens should have been given the win, and that it was ridiculous that ferrari did this, you cannot conclude otherwise that this man has 2 agendas, double standards and is, plainly put, an idiot.

Have a nice day

One question...

Can you tell me what Jean Todt said when he spoke after Austria 2002?

Originally posted by dawg_7529
Its again a blatant example of your coloured vieuw towards mclaren and disregard the facts, saying everybody does it.

It would be more likely to be able to conduct a sensible discussion with a simpleton than one who has such a huge bias who seems to think it's everyone else who is biased.

Roebuck dislikes what Senna and Schumacher brought to driving standards, simple, because both considered it OK to drive a competitor off the road. You will twist and turn on this I'm sure but that's it, facts.

I have no bias for any team, except possibly the underdog, whoever that may be at the time. McLaren ceased to be a New Zealand team in the early 80s after which I had no allegiance whatever.

"Saying everyone does it" - is the logical use of argument to illustrate in this case that ALL teams will do whatever they can to gain an "unfair advantage". It's also the name of a book by the late great Mark Donohue about making your car as quick before you went out on the track to race. It was understood then and understood by most people today, apparently not by you.

Ferrari, despite a rule outlawing team orders have used this (Schumacher/Irvive, Shumacher/Barro) extensively and at times blatantly. To deny would be an admission of stupidity. This is one area where Mac have been a lot closer to the spirit of the regs - no team orders (until one driver is mathematicly out of the championship). And it has been to their detriment, like Williams over the years. Pleased to see Ferrari without Schumie has moved to this position on team orders. I don't have a big thing on team orders in the right context, calling off your drivers running 1-2 at Monaco where passing is unlikely is a good idea, Sorry Hamster you were wrong!

Your earlier use of a radio conversation between Hamster and RD to "prove" team tactics were against Alonso are understandable but in my opinion probably misconstrued. To elaborate would be too confusing but RD didn't pay big bucks to Alonso to shaft him. In fact Fred complained because he suspected he was getting No 2 treatment when he was gettiing equal and failing to beat his rookie teammate. Read the previous sentence again and come up with a motive other than this silly "evil man" notion to explain why you would create trouble for your top paid driver and champion. Fact is Fred tried to blackmail RD and confirmed what some were saying about his hatred of being beaten by Fissi at Renault (huge tantrums etc).

Your dismissal of the Bridgestone deal worked by Ferrari just amounted to either totally missing the point or scurrying for cover. Ferrari gained an anticompetitive advantage by their unique testing arrangement with the tyre manufacturer. McLaren did it earlier as well though not by negotiating the exclusion of other teams but by being first to develop the relationship. This "anticompetitive" sort of deal causes huge friction within F1 but it is business and Ferrari (like McLaren) is about business. Again I don't have a problem with it. It's up to the FIA to deal with this stuff as it sees fit, hopefully with greater transparency and consistency than has been apparent in the last 10 years when Mosely has started to go off the rails with his personal agendas.

regarding the whole Spygate beatup it is as all retired (and many current competitors of McLaren) F1 people are saying - pinching others technical ideas has always been around. The line seems to be what you take out the door when you leave should be contained in your top few inches - hire Adrian Newey. Coughlin received his file before Stepney left the Scuderia so this was an exception to the general case and it was actual drawings. A real no no but quite likely unsolicited (hard to prove either way). In Renault's case files were also misappropriated (by a departing employee) but were provably viewed at senior level within Renault F1. The cases are at least parallel but the closer to the inside the less surprise and outrage (other than at the Scuderia who played it like a great violin)! Most thought a punishment was in order in both cases (McLaren and Renault) and I guess i'd agree with a couple of 0s off the fine and no loss of points.

The gnashing of teeth (mainly from the fanboy types who have been around F1 for a few months) and squealing reveals a naive belief that F1 is a squeaky clean world of unsullied virgins. Well it isn't and never was. Go to any big corporate business and you will find a ruthless determination to put one over the competitors and so it is at planet F1.

Nowhere have I tried to talk one team (any team) up over another, I have been careful not to so pull your head in and stop saying I'm an apologist for one or other.

What a well-timed serendipitous series of events. Ron Dennis must have been preparing that talk a long time. I say give the man a chance to influence the course of Formula 1.

Your personal and insulting attacks on people are nauseous (Dennis, Bishop, Roebuck to name a recent trio). The lack of even handed logic is completely missing from your every post. Serious followers of F1 deserve better than having to wade through hater files Dawg.

Seriously, stop twisting and turning and admit that you either have double standards yourself or are to afraid to admit it. Either way, we were not discussing why roebuck happens to feel bad about shumi or senna, the issue was you felt bad about personal insults towards people wich made you feel nausseous. I gave you a typical example of roebuck doing that and suddenly you ignore that you even said it. That is weak, even more when i take the time and effort to take all your prejudiced feelings away. It also gives away on wich side you realy stand.

And i dont buy your allegation that all teams try to do whatever they can to get an unfair advantage. If that was the case there would be no customer engine deals, there also would be a lot, lot more spygate affairs and penalty pushings. The facts prove your allegation is without any foundation. Worse, the facts prove that it is mclaren who again and again, is caught pants down doing nothing for the sport in general but only busy with their own plan. In that i think what ferrari does and says, what renault does and says and frankly all butmclaren say and do, is thatthey want to improve the show and make it cheaper to run, regardless if that goes against their own technological advantages.

Given the example that stoddart had to threaten bernie with a lawsuit in order to make ron dennis put his money where his mouth was, is also anotehr indication we are dealing here with a bad cancer in f1 that needs to be erradicated. wichever way, your argument all teams do whatever they need to do is not only unproven, but also far fetched. It comes from someone who looks with pink specs and dramatises the whole thing whereas i merely relayed the facts.

as for the teamorders..lemme refresh your memory on melbourne 98; mclaren SAID their drivers made an agreement to stop racing after the first corner of lap1 from a 58 lap race. This was heavely defended by most of the britpress and nigel roebuck. Ferrari was in race 6 of a championship and had showed a good fight between barri and shumi, with the latter being on his gearbox for most of the last 15 laps. If you still think that cmlarens way was more to teh spirit of the rules than ferraris then i give up and ill be having whatever it is youre smoking or drinking, it sure must be good!!

More so, Ferrari was attacked because they made no bones about preferential treatment towards shumi. hell todt was screaming live on tv rubens please move over for ze championship. Here is another sign that it seems you love to believe the LIES mclaren sold the press that melbourne 98was a driversagreement and no teamorder. Something wich dennis finally defused last year at monaco when attacked by holding back THE GREAT hamilton on the black evil knight alonso."the only time i gave a teamorder, was at melbourne 98""cried dennis.

The fact teamorders exist dont bother me, the fact that mclaren LIES does. That whatever dennis says, is a bunch of crap!! Bullshit. PR idiocy of the higest degree.

And in the above speech he goes and claims to want stable rules otherwise the little teams fall out. He doesnt give a damn about the smaller teams!!! If he was pinochio theyd need a whole new mclaren partyplace just to accomodate his insanely long nose!!

As for the bridgestone example, it is inconclusive with vague evidence. You could also argue the way ferrari was forced out of their preffered good years was too much pro mclaren. That in the end dennis was mad cause he wanted bridgestone to take a different design route is too ridiculous for words, and in the end he was quite content with the michelin tyres. In fact, i also was more than happy with a tyrewar as it made tyres more sticky and gave opportunities to overtake on tracks previously thought not being able to.

As seen with dc in melbourne 98 and jerez 97, an incident with kimi at magny cours and silverstone 2003 and last year i think youre fighting a losing war claiming mclaren wasnt favouring hamilton. The fia didnt install a monitor in his pitbox for nothing. And like i said, even the invanhoe singing brit press admitted that was the hint that dennis was NOT treating both drivers equal.

And in case youve missed the point completely, it was not the gnawing of innocent f1 fanboys who think f1 is clean that made the difference, it was the fact that mclaren LIED AGAIN!!! again and again and again and again and over and over and again and again!! The bottomline of my speech was that you cannot trust this man because the aforementioned problems, not because spying happens!! Of course it happens!! But mclaren lied to their teeth about using it. renault didnt. mclaren got led off the first time and so did renault. Case closed. No comparisment possible. reading the very lenghty transcript of that 2nd hearing its you who must be very naive to think mclaren did ''nothing'' with it.

So please, read again, admit youre not excusing me but do roebuck and all in all your story is an unsubstantiated one from someone who looks for apologies and does not take a fellow forumist serious.

anything else?

Ill get some tea now if you dont mind ;)

Originally posted by dawg_7529
"Because every time the rules are changed, the result is almost always a cost increase. And, because the smaller teams are perhaps less able to meet those cost increases, they may not respond as effectively to a rule change as their more affluent competitors. ""

This is not true. The freeze of engine technology has contributed to the fact many highly skilled engine engineers are now looking for jobs elsewhere.

And while he proclaims to be behind lesser teams, it was dennis himself who demanded exclusive rights to mercedes engines and pulled the plug on the deal haug had made with alain prost end of 2000, mclarens former driver and advisor. Ferrari at least, sell customer engines to other teams.

The rest of his speech is indeed a product of either that conniving bishop or his own, selfish needs with disregard for any other competitor.

Mosley was right to distrust this man and claim it was mclaren and dennis who solely where against all his new regulation changes to improve the sport and increase competitiveness. And wichever way you look at it, mosley was right; his changes have now created a very tight and competitive field where engine power is very equal. Mosleys rules have produced a highly spectacular championship for the last 3 years where the brit press claims last seasons one was the most exciting in years.

If dennis would have his way it would still be a buyers championship i.e. the team who throws the most money to it, has the most chance of winning.


Do not trust this man!!!

Old man Ferrari was bank rolled by Mussolini --- that is what paid for the firms factory at Maranello, interestingly exactly the same Mussolini that bank rolled Max's Mosley's dad with used bank notes handed over in a plain brown paper bag outside the Italian embassy. Mussolini was not exactly a nice man he had anybody who got in his way on his climb to power killed. In the end the proud Italian people managed to get rid of the monster and gave him his just deserts.
Commendatore Ferrari to use the title bestowed on him by Mussolini must have been more than well aware of who he was dealing with.

Later old man Ferrari got a justified reputation for shaking hands on deals and then renaging on them two good examples; are his deal to sell out to Ford and his offer to Jackie Stewart. Most top drivers who drove for him walked out because he was too exasperating to deal with.

Originally posted by dawg_7529


Something wich dennis finally defused last year at monaco when attacked by holding back THE GREAT hamilton on the black evil knight alonso."the only time i gave a teamorder, was at melbourne 98""cried dennis.

The fact teamorders exist dont bother me, the fact that mclaren LIES does. That whatever dennis says, is a bunch of crap!! Bullshit. PR idiocy of the higest degree.

A

Sigh. Its pretty clear you hate McLaren and don't hate Ferrari. Bias perhaps Dawg?
Judge the entire history on Melbourne 1998 if you like, then ignore the fixing of races throughout Rubens' Ferrari career (all strenuously denied by Todt et all). BOTH were wrong but fairly minor on the F1 scale of misdemeanour.

BTW it was you who introduced Roebuck into the thread in a personal attack, not me. I'm sure Nigel doesn't need me to defend his good name sunshine. Your sweeping condemnation of the British press also betrays some kind of twisted racial bias (doesn't wind me up, I'm not British) but again it gets in the way of sensible debate on ISSUES which should be the basis for a thread (with a little humour and good manners).

Your use of your black evil knight term betrays your fantasies (dungeons and dragons, perhaps with bondage and SM sex thrown in!?) Seriously though son, get help for your anger problem.

Originally posted by Muz Bee


Your use of your black evil knight term betrays your fantasies (dungeons and dragons, perhaps with bondage and SM sex thrown in!?) Seriously though son, get help for your anger problem.

But I guess that only opens up the further question, is Fernando Neutral or Chaotic Evil?

Look it means he's got a good speechwriter, coach, and promoter, even if it's himself. It just so happens that those are all essential, if not extremely helpful, things to have as FIA president.

Did he somehow assemble such a team in between the time the Mosely scandal erupted and he gave his speech?

Originally posted by Hyatt


Enzo: "Aerodynamics are for people who can't build engines" ... yeah, what a damn wise man he was ...

Which propbaly explains what the late Dr Harvey Postlewaithe & co were doing inside the Williams garage in the wee small hours at Hockenheim in 1980.

Originally posted by dawg_7529


And i dont buy your allegation that all teams try to do whatever they can to get an unfair advantage.

Of course they don't. They don't care whether they win or lose, right?

dawg - you have some interesting opinions and arguments. its nice to hear another angle on things around here instead of the same old preaching from Ron's cronies.

but beware, throwing all those facts and examples around is sure to piss of many a poster. im sure ron's stormtroopers will be after you!!

keep it coming though - dont let them run you off. many around here hate to hear facts and truth but your opinion and posts are appreciated ... by some of us........