1994 replies to this topic

[Myrvold]

White has four bishops

And the board is only 6 squares wide.

Black has two tails

Let’s hope so!

I thought it was just coiled round.

 

I will not spam more AI stuff, and try to generate better ones after this. This is just 8x7 (or 7x8 depending on how you count ) and have some other issues. Decent attempt at "monaco grand prix" though.

Edited by Myrvold, 26 May 2024 - 20:11.

[Heyli]

And the board is only 6 squares wide.

Which is logical. Mice are small, so the chessboard should also be small!

[Risil]

I will not spam more AI stuff, and try to generate better ones after this. This is just 8x7 (or 7x8 depending on how you count ) and have some other issues. Decent attempt at "monaco grand prix" though.

Suicidal opening from White!

[Collombin]

Suicidal opening from White!

Illegal jump start by the look of it.

[Disgrace]

Suicidal opening from White!

 

The king also appears to move like a knight in this game.

[Anderis]

Suicidal opening from White!

Like, how do you even get your king in the center of the board without moving your pawns?

[BoDarvelle]

I'm not sure we need Pirelli to make their tyres less durable, I'd argue the opposite, make the tyres more durable so the drivers can race instead of the constant tyre saving nonsense we pretty much see at every race with practically every stint.

Personally I think tyres that allow the drivers to properly race coupled with a minimum of 2 pit stops and tyre change (depending on the track) requirement could be an option...

 

Harder tires that wear would seem to provide better racing.

 

Engineering F1 tires has to be quite a challenge with the forces being put through them. but if they could come up with a compound that allows them to run hard without them going off completely, while also wearing out in about 20 laps, that would make for some pretty good racing.

 

No need to drag 3 compounds to every race either. For being so "environmentally conscious" the rules requiring 10(?) sets of softs for every race to generally only be used for qualifying is comical.

[Deeq]

Suicidal opening from White!

..and illegal!
This is more exciting than the race!
Keep it up guys 😂

[Mat13]

I will not spam more AI stuff, and try to generate better ones after this. This is just 8x7 (or 7x8 depending on how you count ) and have some other issues. Decent attempt at "monaco grand prix" though.

What programme are you using for this?

[PayasYouRace]

I will not spam more AI stuff, and try to generate better ones after this. This is just 8x7 (or 7x8 depending on how you count ) and have some other issues. Decent attempt at "monaco grand prix" though.

 

How can it do mice so well and cars so badly?

[Myrvold]

What programme are you using for this?

 

Copilot.

 

How can it do mice so well and cars so badly?

Mice playing chess in the main focus, while the "cars on tv" is not, so it will just not care too much. So I guess I lied with not posting more, but now I feel like it is "educational"  Also. A mice is a mice so to speak. A "Formula One Car" can be anything that the AI has "seen" as a Formula One Car. From 1950 to 2024.
If I ask it to create mice watching Formula One Race Cars at Monaco it will be better. Red Bull Ferrari anyone? It tends to be a bit iffy with logos and styles. I think it is a bit of copyright safety so to speak.

 

Just focusing on the car makes it even better. Or less bad.

 

A cheat is to make it create a poster from it.

Edited by Myrvold, 26 May 2024 - 20:47.

[PayasYouRace]

I love that first one.

 

Edit: The jets in the poster look like some of the 1950s submissions for Operational Requirement F.155.

[Myrvold]

Edit: The jets in the poster look like some of the 1950s submissions for Operational Requirement F.155.

 

80% of the flying things in these generated pictures are the main subject. So on an F1 poster, the flying things tends to be F1 cars.

 

Or one of the mice "watching F1" ones, had loads of mice flying around

[Celloman]

I'm not sure we need Pirelli to make their tyres less durable, I'd argue the opposite, make the tyres more durable so the drivers can race instead of the constant tyre saving nonsense we pretty much see at every race with practically every stint.

Personally I think tyres that allow the drivers to properly race coupled with a minimum of 2 pit stops and tyre change (depending on the track) requirement could be an option...

Tire saving is only part of the problem. If you are in a good track position in Monaco, why would you risk a contact with the wall when you can just drive safely in the queue and achieve the same result?

[Dolph]

"The farce at Monaco"

 

Cars on parade pretending to be going fast.

 

All cars in top 10 finished in same order that they started. Nobody passed nobody.

 

7 race pitstops.

[JeanAlesi27]

A.I. Spam... check

[dia6olo]

Tire saving is only part of the problem. If you are in a good track position in Monaco, why would you risk a contact with the wall when you can just drive safely in the queue and achieve the same result?

Because if they enforced a number of pit stops you need to build safety gaps.

[Muzzyf1]

The red flag killed any chance of anything happening.
Get rid of this track

[catent]

A.I. Spam... check

Yeah, I get the AI content doesn’t require much creative effort and there’s something unsettling about it, but at least the photos were contributing to / expanding the conversation, and I enjoyed some of the latter few images (particularly the mice watching the race from the barrier). Your post exists exclusively to complain about those AI posts, with no thoughtful/constructive feedback packaged with the complaint; in that sense, I think one could argue your above post is arguably more spammy than the AI photos.

[Alexis*27]

Just need a rule where both compounds must be used, but are not permitted to run any compound for less than 15 laps.

[1player]

I will not spam more AI stuff, and try to generate better ones after this. This is just 8x7 (or 7x8 depending on how you count ) and have some other issues. Decent attempt at "monaco grand prix" though.

Unrealistic, look at how wide the track is! Would love a Monaco track like that though

[Boing 2]

this year was the first year I voluntarily missed the race live and recorded the highlights, ended up watching the last third at 1.25x and was done in about 40 mins, genius!

[JimmyClark]

Unrealistic, look at how wide the track is! Would love a Monaco track like that though

Then you'd just have Baku.

[Ben24]

this year was the first year I voluntarily missed the race live and recorded the highlights, ended up watching the last third at 1.25x and was done in about 40 mins, genius!

I don't know how you didn't put it up to 5x for most of the race

[TomNokoe]

TomNokoe, though I’m not about to deny Monaco its spectacle and occasion value, as an actual sporting event, it was a total dud so LET US HAVE THIS!

I have been ruminating on my original post for a few days, and want to explain in more detail.

 

The reason why the commentary offends me so much is because it speaks to the fundamental change in F1 since Liberty took over, which is to prioritise narrative and content over sporting performance.

 

In the good old days, it felt like sporting performance was the priority. For example, Spain 1996 is remembered for Schumacher's dominance in the rain, not because it was his first win with Ferrari. There are many other examples of this, where the story and celebration was the race itself, not just the outcome.

 

I felt similar when Sainz won in Australia and particularly Norris in Miami. The result became the story and was blown up to epic proportions, in spite of a fairly dull event. It's the same here: Jacques says Leclerc has "fulfilled his destiny". Give me a break! It is too much.

 

This is one of the main problems with F1 today, the sport, paddock, media, everyone involved has to pretend that you are watching the best race you've ever seen. When you combine this with the new Gen Z fan culture that is parasocial and hyper-polarised, you have commentators like Jacques basically performing fan service. His monologue was nicely worded and expertly delivered, but I didn't believe a word he said. I felt like he was performing the act of a commentator. Saying what he thought was the right thing, rather than his true feelings. I found it very inauthentic and lacking personality.

 

The problem with this ethos is that you give yourself no room to breath. To wax lyrical over a non-race puts you in a weak position the next time Leclerc does something actually impressive. I understand the media are obliged to promote the sport, but it's gone sooooooo far in the wrong direction. Content used to be a natural by-product of great racing, but now it is found by any which way to fill up news feeds and keep you engaged.

 

For me, Monaco 24 was as close to a non-race as Spa 21, and so regardless of Leclerc's history and emotional connection, the last lap celebration just doesn't fit. To be clear, I don't begrudge Leclerc his happiness whatsoever, I just think the reaction is OTT. I know you can argue that his qualifying performance was worthy of high acclaim, but F1 grand prix have and always will be won on race day - as you said, "a dud"! The whole thing reeked of insincerity.

Edited by TomNokoe, 29 May 2024 - 14:09.

[DW46]

Agree, happy LeClerc won but it was so foreshadowed it almost seemed comical watching him celebrate at the end.

[Ferrari2183]

Agree, happy LeClerc won but it was so foreshadowed it almost seemed comical watching him celebrate at the end.

 

The guy has had bad luck to last a lifetime around Monaco despite dominating almost every visit in terms of pace. I think he can be excused for the exaggerated celebrations.

[Garagista]

I have been ruminating on my original post for a few days, and want to explain in more detail.

The reason why the commentary offends me so much is because it speaks to the fundamental change in F1 since Liberty took over, which is to prioritise narrative and content over sporting performance.

In the good old days, it felt like sporting performance was the priority. For example, Spain 1996 is remembered for Schumacher's dominance in the rain, not because it was his first win with Ferrari. There are many other examples of this, where the story and celebration was the race itself, not just the outcome.

I felt similar when Sainz won in Australia and particularly Norris in Miami. The result became the story and was blown up to epic proportions, in spite of a fairly dull event. It's the same here: Jacques says Leclerc has "fulfilled his destiny". Give me a break! It is too much.

This is one of the main problems with F1 today, the sport, paddock, media, everyone involved has to pretend that you are watching the best race you've ever seen. When you combine this with the new Gen Z fan culture that is parasocial and hyper-polarised, you have commentators like Jacques basically performing fan service. His monologue was nicely worded and expertly delivered, but I didn't believe a word he said. I felt like he was performing the act of a commentator. Saying what he thought was the right thing, rather than his true feelings. I found it very inauthentic and lacking personality.

The problem with this ethos is that you give yourself no room to breath. To wax lyrical over a non-race puts you in a weak position the next time Leclerc does something actually impressive. I understand the media are obliged to promote the sport, but it's gone sooooooo far in the wrong direction. Content used to be a natural by-product of great racing, but now it is found by any which way to fill up news feeds and keep you engaged.

For me, Monaco 24 was as close to a non-race as Spa 21, and so regardless of Leclerc's history and emotional connection, the last lap celebration just doesn't fit. To be clear, I don't begrudge Leclerc his happiness whatsoever, I just think the reaction is OTT. I know you can argue that his qualifying performance was worthy of high acclaim, but F1 grand prix have and always will be won on race day - as you said, "a dud"! The whole thing reeked of insincerity.

Ohh cmon again "I have got to stop because I have got a lump in my throat" went down as one of the most memorable pieces of commentary and Hill was champion since lap 37.

I am not against criticising the exagerations and over the board things like "police motorcycles" filming it with a 80s filter, having a random rapper calling the drivers or the let's get ready to rumble guy, convenient Red Flags and timely SC. Etc.

But like everything there are nuances, as Murray's lump was understandable, Alex's commentary in my opinion was also understandable, even if not only for his connection to Bianchi.

[TomNokoe]

Ohh cmon again "I have got to stop because I have got a lump in my throat" went down as one of the most memorable pieces of commentary and Hill was champion since lap 37.

I am not against criticising the exagerations and over the board things like "police motorcycles" filming it with a 80s filter, having a random rapper calling the drivers or the let's get ready to rumble guy, convenient Red Flags and timely SC. Etc.

But like everything there are nuances, as Murray's lump was understandable, Alex's commentary in my opinion was also understandable, even if not only for his connection to Bianchi.

Murray was authentic and trustworthy, plus a championship is far, far more important than a race win.

[Garagista]

Murray was authentic and trustworthy, plus a championship is far, far more important than a race win.

Well Hill, himself hehe, said in his social media that this is probably Leclerc dream more than the championship. He was born there in the track. Closer case probably only Barrichello and Interlagos, and we all saw how not winning it broke Barrichello.

[SophieB]

I have been ruminating on my original post for a few days, and want to explain in more detail.

 

The reason why the commentary offends me so much is because it speaks to the fundamental change in F1 since Liberty took over, which is to prioritise narrative and content over sporting performance.

 

In the good old days, it felt like sporting performance was the priority. For example, Spain 1996 is remembered for Schumacher's dominance in the rain, not because it was his first win with Ferrari. There are many other examples of this, where the story and celebration was the race itself, not just the outcome.

 

I felt similar when Sainz won in Australia and particularly Norris in Miami. The result became the story and was blown up to epic proportions, in spite of a fairly dull event. It's the same here: Jacques says Leclerc has "fulfilled his destiny". Give me a break! It is too much.

 

This is one of the main problems with F1 today, the sport, paddock, media, everyone involved has to pretend that you are watching the best race you've ever seen. When you combine this with the new Gen Z fan culture that is parasocial and hyper-polarised, you have commentators like Jacques basically performing fan service. His monologue was nicely worded and expertly delivered, but I didn't believe a word he said. I felt like he was performing the act of a commentator. Saying what he thought was the right thing, rather than his true feelings. I found it very inauthentic and lacking personality.

 

The problem with this ethos is that you give yourself no room to breath. To wax lyrical over a non-race puts you in a weak position the next time Leclerc does something actually impressive. I understand the media are obliged to promote the sport, but it's gone sooooooo far in the wrong direction. Content used to be a natural by-product of great racing, but now it is found by any which way to fill up news feeds and keep you engaged.

 

For me, Monaco 24 was as close to a non-race as Spa 21, and so regardless of Leclerc's history and emotional connection, the last lap celebration just doesn't fit. To be clear, I don't begrudge Leclerc his happiness whatsoever, I just think the reaction is OTT. I know you can argue that his qualifying performance was worthy of high acclaim, but F1 grand prix have and always will be won on race day - as you said, "a dud"! The whole thing reeked of insincerity.

 

To stop kidding about, because you've plainly put thought and effort into this and it's food for thought, I suspect a lot of this gets to the heart of what formula one really is, or should be. How much of it is sport, how much of it is showbusiness? how much should commentators be working to accurately inform, how much should they be educating and how much should they be entertaining? it sounds like you think the entertaining is happening too much at the expense of the informing and tbh, some of the time I think that definitely happens. Like when they  hype up overtaking chances that frankly I don't believe they even believe are viable.

 

Yet, I had no problem with this one. It was obvious for a lot of that race that barring something really crazy like him being carried away by a giant bird, that Leclerc was going to get his win so is it really fair to be marking him down for his remarks being a touch more considered than they might be because he had the time to think about it? There's magic when a commentator is startled by something unexpected and that in turn makes them come out with something that's obviously spontaneous but I don't think it means the other stuff is not sincere. The bottom line is Alex called that one at the time like Leclerc called it - meaningful to him because it harked back to his boyhood dreams with his dad -  that wasn't just bullshit. It plainly genuinely meant that to Leclerc so it seemed meaningful to the commentator, and by extension the audience (well, to some of us!). This, as an aside, I think the very essence of sport - we only care if they care.

 

 As a minor thought, I also think the praise wasn't just for that race, it was for the earlier, lost, nearly Monaco wins which were (arguably) lost through little fault of his,.

[NCB619]

The guy has had bad luck to last a lifetime around Monaco despite dominating almost every visit in terms of pace. I think he can be excused for the exaggerated celebrations.

 

 

Ohh cmon again "I have got to stop because I have got a lump in my throat" went down as one of the most memorable pieces of commentary and Hill was champion since lap 37.

I am not against criticising the exagerations and over the board things like "police motorcycles" filming it with a 80s filter, having a random rapper calling the drivers or the let's get ready to rumble guy, convenient Red Flags and timely SC. Etc.

But like everything there are nuances, as Murray's lump was understandable, Alex's commentary in my opinion was also understandable, even if not only for his connection to Bianchi.

 

 

Oh c'mon really? It's his home race of course the emotions are going to be ramped up. We see and hear it at British GP's with AND THROUGH GOES HAMILTON, and the way he would parade around with the flag after a victory (just as a couple examples).

Heck, we even saw it with Webber's 5th place on debut, and Ricciardo 'finishing' on the podium for his Red Bull debut in Melbourne. Or Massa when he won at Interlagos.

[Muppetmad]

Jacques and Coulthard were very open throughout the race that it was a very boring one, and even made a joke along the lines of "good luck to whoever has to make the highlights of this". That's already a massive step up from Sky F1, who, in my years of watching them, always created false narratives/false excitement to insist to the viewer that a tedious race was actually good. With that in mind, I can forgive Jacques for his monologue at the end, which indeed he had clearly prepared in advance, but he delivered with sincerity.

[southernstars]

I have been ruminating on my original post for a few days, and want to explain in more detail.

 

The reason why the commentary offends me so much is because it speaks to the fundamental change in F1 since Liberty took over, which is to prioritise narrative and content over sporting performance.

 

In the good old days, it felt like sporting performance was the priority. For example, Spain 1996 is remembered for Schumacher's dominance in the rain, not because it was his first win with Ferrari. There are many other examples of this, where the story and celebration was the race itself, not just the outcome.

 

I felt similar when Sainz won in Australia and particularly Norris in Miami. The result became the story and was blown up to epic proportions, in spite of a fairly dull event. It's the same here: Jacques says Leclerc has "fulfilled his destiny". Give me a break! It is too much.

 

This is one of the main problems with F1 today, the sport, paddock, media, everyone involved has to pretend that you are watching the best race you've ever seen. When you combine this with the new Gen Z fan culture that is parasocial and hyper-polarised, you have commentators like Jacques basically performing fan service. His monologue was nicely worded and expertly delivered, but I didn't believe a word he said. I felt like he was performing the act of a commentator. Saying what he thought was the right thing, rather than his true feelings. I found it very inauthentic and lacking personality.

 

The problem with this ethos is that you give yourself no room to breath. To wax lyrical over a non-race puts you in a weak position the next time Leclerc does something actually impressive.

 

If you had made this criticism about, say Hamilton winning Silverstone in 2021, or Verstappen winning by thirty seconds, or some such, I might have agreed with you.

 

But you picked literally the three worst examples to complain about because they were special moments.

 

I mean, I did think the whole Sainz and his appendix thing in Australia was a little overblown. But we were in Melbourne, a known tifosi stronghold, and after Bahrain and Jeddah plenty of people - including, no doubt, yourself - thought we were in for another long season of Verstappen dominance. That it wasn't was a delightful surprise. The fact that Sainz won before Leclerc, when Sainz was the one who lost his seat, helped that. It was exciting. It was special. Sure, the race was a bit processional, but that doesn't make the win any less special.

 

Norris' win in Miami might have been lucky, but it was still a maiden win for a driver that is generally well-liked, and who had been waiting a long time in comparison to the talent people ascribe to him. He had had to watch every single teammate he had win a race before him, and indeed, plenty of us were accepting that Piastri would win a Grand Prix before him. To overcome all of that and pull out a miracle was still a really special moment. The race wasn't even that boring. If you want to cringe about something, you should probably be cringing at the way Crofty jackhammered the criminal defendant in there.

 

And as for Leclerc at Monaco, his luck at his home race was horrendous. I would not have been surprised if at some point during the race he clipped a kerb a little too hard and ended up in the wall, or the engine blew. He does have a tragic backstory with it, with his father, with Jules. Of course he was emotional and of course a lot of people were emotional with him. I am not even the biggest Leclerc fan out there, and I was smiling when he came across the line. There's always something nice when a driver overcomes personal adversity to take a popular win. The race doesn't have to be a classic to get a reaction.

 

At the end of the day, commentators are humans too. Alex Brundle probably spent some time preparing what he would say because he wanted to make sure he expressed what people were feeling properly. And that's not a bad thing. I don't think Croft had properly prepared anything to say when Norris crossed the line in Miami, for example, and if I was a Norris fan I would be quite annoyed that the commentary on that special moment was ruined forever (heck, I am not a Norris fan and I'm annoyed for him).

 

Like, I don't get it. If Mick Schumacher someday won the German Grand Prix, but the race was a procession, would you be grousing and complaining that everyone was too emotional about it? We watch for the sport, but part of the sport itself is the stories of the drivers.

[Nemo1965]

I have been ruminating on my original post for a few days, and want to explain in more detail.

The reason why the commentary offends me so much is because it speaks to the fundamental change in F1 since Liberty took over, which is to prioritise narrative and content over sporting performance.

In the good old days, it felt like sporting performance was the priority. For example, Spain 1996 is remembered for Schumacher's dominance in the rain, not because it was his first win with Ferrari. There are many other examples of this, where the story and celebration was the race itself, not just the outcome.

I felt similar when Sainz won in Australia and particularly Norris in Miami. The result became the story and was blown up to epic proportions, in spite of a fairly dull event. It's the same here: Jacques says Leclerc has "fulfilled his destiny". Give me a break! It is too much.

This is one of the main problems with F1 today, the sport, paddock, media, everyone involved has to pretend that you are watching the best race you've ever seen. When you combine this with the new Gen Z fan culture that is parasocial and hyper-polarised, you have commentators like Jacques basically performing fan service. His monologue was nicely worded and expertly delivered, but I didn't believe a word he said. I felt like he was performing the act of a commentator. Saying what he thought was the right thing, rather than his true feelings. I found it very inauthentic and lacking personality.

The problem with this ethos is that you give yourself no room to breath. To wax lyrical over a non-race puts you in a weak position the next time Leclerc does something actually impressive. I understand the media are obliged to promote the sport, but it's gone sooooooo far in the wrong direction. Content used to be a natural by-product of great racing, but now it is found by any which way to fill up news feeds and keep you engaged.

For me, Monaco 24 was as close to a non-race as Spa 21, and so regardless of Leclerc's history and emotional connection, the last lap celebration just doesn't fit. To be clear, I don't begrudge Leclerc his happiness whatsoever, I just think the reaction is OTT. I know you can argue that his qualifying performance was worthy of high acclaim, but F1 grand prix have and always will be won on race day - as you said, "a dud"! The whole thing reeked of insincerity.

I commend you for your post. A lot of good arguments. You are right on many levels, but let me comment with what coach Brad Gilbert said to his pupil Andre Agassi when the latter finally won Roland Garros: ‘So many stories end bad. But this story ends so ****ing right.’

That’s what I thought when Zhou was honored (a bit over the top) in China, and likewise with Norris in Miami and Leclerc in Monaco.

[SenorSjon]

I have been ruminating on my original post for a few days, and want to explain in more detail.

 

The reason why the commentary offends me so much is because it speaks to the fundamental change in F1 since Liberty took over, which is to prioritise narrative and content over sporting performance.

 

In the good old days, it felt like sporting performance was the priority. For example, Spain 1996 is remembered for Schumacher's dominance in the rain, not because it was his first win with Ferrari. There are many other examples of this, where the story and celebration was the race itself, not just the outcome.

 

I felt similar when Sainz won in Australia and particularly Norris in Miami. The result became the story and was blown up to epic proportions, in spite of a fairly dull event. It's the same here: Jacques says Leclerc has "fulfilled his destiny". Give me a break! It is too much.

 

This is one of the main problems with F1 today, the sport, paddock, media, everyone involved has to pretend that you are watching the best race you've ever seen. When you combine this with the new Gen Z fan culture that is parasocial and hyper-polarised, you have commentators like Jacques basically performing fan service. His monologue was nicely worded and expertly delivered, but I didn't believe a word he said. I felt like he was performing the act of a commentator. Saying what he thought was the right thing, rather than his true feelings. I found it very inauthentic and lacking personality.

 

The problem with this ethos is that you give yourself no room to breath. To wax lyrical over a non-race puts you in a weak position the next time Leclerc does something actually impressive. I understand the media are obliged to promote the sport, but it's gone sooooooo far in the wrong direction. Content used to be a natural by-product of great racing, but now it is found by any which way to fill up news feeds and keep you engaged.

 

For me, Monaco 24 was as close to a non-race as Spa 21, and so regardless of Leclerc's history and emotional connection, the last lap celebration just doesn't fit. To be clear, I don't begrudge Leclerc his happiness whatsoever, I just think the reaction is OTT. I know you can argue that his qualifying performance was worthy of high acclaim, but F1 grand prix have and always will be won on race day - as you said, "a dud"! The whole thing reeked of insincerity.

 

Fully agree. Especially since the race pace was horrendously slow and nobody had a chance to overtake, it was driving his shopping route 78 times to finally get the trophy. To get very excited about something you hardly could keep awake for, was way too much.

 

Verstappens first home win in 2021 was with the Mercs breathing down his neck for a massive home crowd. THAT is pressure. 

[Muppetmad]

There are different kinds of pressure. Sometimes an open goal is the ultimate pressure.

[IrvTheSwerve]

So leading the Monaco GP, your home GP to boot, from start to finish, with all of his emotions regarding his father and Jules Bianchi, with all of the talk about him being 'a bit crashy' and awful under pressure...without binning it or making a mistake...is not being 'under pressure'? Lol.

[SenorSjon]

He goes faster for shopping than racing last Sunday.

[SCUDmissile]

Well we will continue being happy and celebrating and being impressed with this win.

[Garagista]

So leading the Monaco GP, your home GP to boot, from start to finish, with all of his emotions regarding his father and Jules Bianchi, with all of the talk about him being 'a bit crashy' and awful under pressure...without binning it or making a mistake...is not being 'under pressure'? Lol.

There is an aura around Leclerc that people feel like it is necessary to force the negative views like no other.

Norris does 1 good race in terms of tyre management, and people immediately saying Leclerc doesn't have it, when leclerc has done 1 stops with tyre eating cars and multiple times.

Folds under pressure, in 2022 he got Max multiple times with brilliant moves or defensive drives, without a single mistake. But he binned in France immediately crashprone.

But it is what it is, the rest of us enjoy an amazing driver, like the other amazing drivers in the grid.

It is

[gpking]

There is an aura around Leclerc that people feel like it is necessary to force the negative views like no other.

Norris does 1 good race in terms of tyre management, and people immediately saying Leclerc doesn't have it, when leclerc has done 1 stops with tyre eating cars and multiple times.

Folds under pressure, in 2022 he got Max multiple times with brilliant moves or defensive drives, without a single mistake. But he binned in France immediately crashprone.

But it is what it is, the rest of us enjoy an amazing driver, like the other amazing drivers in the grid.

It is

Don't forget the "Leclerc is faster in qualifying while Sainz is better in the race" narrative which is popular even amongst journalists.

[Sterzo]

There is an aura around Leclerc that people feel like it is necessary to force the negative views like no other.

Norris does 1 good race in terms of tyre management, and people immediately saying Leclerc doesn't have it, when leclerc has done 1 stops with tyre eating cars and multiple times.

Quote the posts and we'll join you in disagreeing with them. Assert what "people feel" and we'll suspect a straw man argument.

[Garagista]

Quote the posts and we'll join you in disagreeing with them. Assert what "people feel" and we'll suspect a straw man argument.

Norris one, just visit mclaren topic.

Crashprone/pressure you just need to scroll up.

Strawman my....

Edited by Garagista, 30 May 2024 - 17:24.

[MissingApex]

Norris one, just visit mclaren topic.

Crashprone/pressure you just need to scroll up.

Strawman my....

That’s just how it goes, Norris vs Charles fans > Charles crash prone, Charles vs Max fans, Max crash prone, Max vs Lewis fans, Lewis crash prone.