HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: timcc@brt.deakin.edu.au (Tim Cook)
Newsgroups: rec.autos.sport
Subject: John Berton F1GP reports anyone?
Date: 7 Apr 92 20:04:32 GMT
Organization: Computer Services, Deakin University, Melbourne

I am after any copies of John Berton's authoritative Formula 1 Grand Prix
reports, as I am building up an archive of them (among other things).

They are posted regularly to rec.autos.sport, and I have saved many, but
I have not been reading this newsgroup since it's creation, and have
missed a few while I have.

What I do have:
	1990 - round 14 to round 16 (the last round)
	1991 - all except rounds 7, 12 and 16
	1992 - round 1

I have tried to contact John, but so far I haven't heard anything back
from him.

If anyone out there has a John Berton F1GP report not listed above, could
they please respond to this?
From: ldahlmey@zia.aoc.nrao.edu (Lothar Dahlmeyer)
Newsgroups: rec.autos.sport
Subject: FYI - Indy Standings
Date: 14 Apr 92 14:56:13 GMT
Article-I.D.: zia.1992Apr14.145613.23709
Distribution: usa
Organization: National Radio Astronomy Observatory, Socorro NM


Indycar Standings as of 14-apr-1992
(Albuquerque Journal)

1.	Bobby Rahal			Lola-Chevy		 51
2. 	Emerson Fittipaldi		Penske-Chevy		 48
3.	Al Unser Jr.			Galmer-Chevy		 36
4.	Danny Sullivan			Galmer-Chevy		 31
5.	Rick Mears			Penske-Chevy		 29
6.	Eddie Cheever			Lola-Cosworth		 21
7.	John Andretti			Lola-Ilmor		 16
8.	Scott Goodyear			Lola-Chevy		 14
9.	Paul Tracy			Penske-Chevy		 12
10.	Scott Pruett			Truesports-Chevy	 10
11.	Mario Andretti			Lola-Cosworth		  6
11.	Michael Andretti		Lola-Cosworth		  6
11. 	Jim Vasser			Lola-Chevy		  6
14. 	Eric Bachelart			Lola-Cosworth		  5
15. 	Scott Brayton			Lola-Chevy		  4
16.	Hiro Matsushita			Lola-Chevy		  3
16.	Ted Prappas			Lola-Chevy		  3
18.	Ross Bentley			Lola-Cosworth		  2
18.	Tony Bettenhausen		Penske-Chevy		  2
18.	Brian Till			Truesports-Judd		  2
21.	Fabrizio Barbazza		Lola-Buick		  1
21.	Buddy Lazier			Lola-Buick		  1


-- 
            /MMMMMMMMMMM\             | ldahlmey@zia.aoc.nrao.edu 
          {|  /\  ~  /\  |}           | Lothar Dahlmeyer  
______nnnn_|_|_@|   |_@|_|_nnnn_______| National Radio Astronomy Observatory
      UUUU       \_/       UUUU       | Socorro, New Mexico, 87801
Newsgroups: rec.autos.sport
From: tomh@wes.on.ca (Tom Haapanen)
Subject: Re: Jordan-Yamaha
Organization: Waterloo Engineering Software
Date: Mon, 13 Apr 1992 12:47:11 GMT

madmax@maths.tcd.ie (Mark Taylor) writes:
>> Basically, Jordan found themselves on the receiving
>> end of Benneton hand-me-downs (Benneton were supposedly powered by
>> identical spec. FordV8s) with Ford quite happy to play ostrich.

> No Benneton always had a higher spec than Jordan, that is why he signed
> the Yamaha deal, because Walkinshaw wouldn't let them have the top spec
> motors for this season.

Not quite.  The main reason Eddie Jordan went with Yamaha was to get a works
engine deal instead of paying $millions for customer engines.  Despite a 
good sponsorship track record, Jordan is still running on a tight budget.

The customer HB is still a good engine: witness Jordan last year and Lotus
(in an ancient 102D chassis!) this year.

>> That display 
>> of immaturity on Schmmackers part did not nothing to deflect the POACH of
>> the season by Tom Walkinshaw for Benneton.

> Haha we'll see what Merc-Sauber have to say about that.

Actually, Schumacher has confirmed that he will be staying at Benetton, and
Sauber is now searching for a second driver (they already have a contract
with Karl Wendlinger).

[ \tom haapanen    "i don't even know what street canada is on" -- al capone ]
[ tomh@wes.on.ca                   "trust the programmer" -- ansi c standard ]
[ waterloo engineering software      "to thine own self be true" -- polonius ]
From: thos@suite.sw.oz.au (Thomas Cohen)
Newsgroups: rec.autos.sport
Subject: Re: F1: Piquet
Date: 9 Apr 92 21:55:14 GMT
Organization: Softway Pty Ltd

In <rpnegINN2o6@ashley.cs.widener.edu> dxandy@cs.widener.edu (Andrew Greenshields) writes:

>In article <thos.702513817@suite.sw.oz.au> thos@suite.sw.oz.au (Thomas Cohen) writes:
>>In <1992Apr2.153632.2921@fs7.ece.cmu.edu> mayor@bayes.ece.cmu.edu
>(Gilberto S. Mayor) writes: [I think]
>>>I can not agree with you. What is the goal of F1 ? Obviously it is win the
>>>championship. Every sport has its own rules. If points were given to the
>>
>>As Stirling Moss put it "you may drive fast, you may even win races but 
>>unless you take every corner as fast as you can, you're not a racing
>>driver" (quote necessarily mangled by memory.)
>>
>  And how many times did Stirling Moss walk away with the World
>Championship?

Which has what to do with anything?
No one ever called Moss a failure because he didn't win
the World Championship. 
I don't see the World Championship as be all to end all.

>Andrew J. Greenshields N3IGS |      "It looks like the top part fell on
-- 
thos cohen  				       |Softway Pty Ltd
 The best way to make a Japanese engineer wince|ACSnet:         thos@softway.oz
 is (when talking about an NSX) to say slowly  |UUCP: ...!uunet!softway.oz!thos
 'but its _not a Ferrari_ is it?' R.Bulgin, CAR|Internet:    thos@softway.oz.au
From: Ric.Johnson@f4.n290.z1.aisbbs.com (Ric Johnson)
Sender: postmaster@aisbbs.com
Newsgroups: rec.autos.sport
Subject: F1: Moss
Date: Fri, 10 Apr 1992 11:07:02

On 4/06/92 Andrew Greenshields writes:

AG>   And how many times did Stirling Moss walk away with the World
AG> Championship?

Anyone familiar with Moss's career is aware that Stirling's
preference for driving British cars in an era when they were less
than fully competitive, along with his preference for driving for
private teams, were the main reasons he never captured the
championship.  I do not think this in any way diminishes his status
as one of the finest drivers to ever compete.

                                   rj
___
 X MegaMail 2.10 #0:S. Moss:Only World Champ. who never was W. Champ

Newsgroups: rec.autos.sport
From: Tim Dudley
Subject: Re: David Wells-Mansell
Organization: Bell-Northern Research
Date: Thu, 16 Apr 1992 14:01:31 GMT

In article <1992Apr15.214036.15743@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu> cjp53999@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu
(Cory James Padfield) writes:
>     I would have to agree with you that Mansell's spin at Imola in 1989
>was one of the most fantastic recoveries of all time. However, Imola is
>the Grand Prix of San MArino, not the Italian Grand Prix, which is in Monza.
>
>
Villeneuve's recovery of a 320 spin coming onto the pit straight at
Mosport in the Wolf CanAm car (well, several years ago) is unsurpassed
by anyone, anytime.  He was correcting the whole time, thrashing the
gear box, whipping the steering wheel, and knew exactly where he was
and what was going on, the whole time.  Absolutely awesome to watch.
(We don't want to know why he got into the spin in the first place...)

Tim

 - Salud Gilles - 
Newsgroups: rec.autos.sport
From: winalski@tle.enet.dec.com (Paul S. Winalski)
Subject: Re: Senna at it again..
Reply-To: winalski@tle.enet.dec.com (Paul S. Winalski)
Organization: Digital Equipment Corporation, Nashua NH
Date: Mon, 6 Apr 92 16:59:13 GMT


In article <ktttq7INN65d@spim.mips.com>,
trevc@mips.com (Trevor Cotton) writes:
|>
|>Appears that Senna is feeling the pressure, and is re-deploying some
|>of his old tactics - if you can't beat 'em, take 'em off!
|>
|>Fortunately, our Nige survived this one.
|>
Well, I'm a big Mansell fan, but I have to disagree.  I saw a replay of the
accident, and I'm afraid that "our Nige" caused this one.  Senna was in front
going into the corner and took the normal racing line.  Mansell went for an
opening that just plain wasn't there, lost control of the car, and hit the
wall.  It was a foolish move, given that he was well over 2 seconds in front
of Senna in qualifying and a full second ahead of Patrese at the time, with only
a few minutes left to go.  He's damn lucky he didn't injure himself so badly
that it affected his performance in the actual race (as happened to Senna
in Mexico).

--PSW
From: thos@suite.sw.oz.au (Thomas Cohen)
Newsgroups: rec.autos.sport
Subject: Re: F1 Fuel
Date: 7 Apr 92 23:11:16 GMT
Organization: Softway Pty Ltd

In <6716@sirius.ucs.adelaide.edu.au> francis@cs.adelaide.edu.au (Francis Vaughan) writes:

>Tyrrel had a car disqualified at Detroit, Michaele Alboretto finished well up
>despite driving a normally aspritated car aginst the might of the turbos,
>and actually passed a Ferrari on the straight towards the end of the race.

>This gets a lot hazy, someone else may have a better memory. I think
>Tyrrel were using "water injection" but explicitly pitted in the last few
>laps of the race to top up the water tanks. People assumed from the
>outset that this was simply a weight limit scam similar to the
>water cooled brakes scam. However not only did the pit crew refill the
>water spray tanks, they sluced them right through and a lot of water
>spilled out onto the pit road. Effectivly they rinsed the tanks right out
>and left them full of water. The lead shot went in as well, getting the
>weight up. Possibly the tanks had to be empty for weigh in anyway.

>Other pit crews had complained about the stench and other effects of breathing
>the left overs of a Tyrrel refilling. The obvious upshot was that perhaps
>the water tanks had something a bit more interesting than just water
>in them when a race began. Tested after a race there were sufficient traces 
>of volatiles to convict and Alboretto was disqualified.

Unfortunately I don't have a better memory and I can't find my
information on this (which was quite detailed), but as I recall
it, the amount of hydrocarbons in the water injection was only
trace, and this probably due to using drums that had contained 
fuel. I also recall that the FIA, when investigating the complaint
got some basic things wrong, to do with decimal places etc.

In any case, I am firmly convinced that Tyrrell was a fall guy,
and had made enough enemies in the FIA and FISA that they decided
to make an example of him. I also believe that he was innocent.

BTW, do you have a reference to the complaints of other pit crews?
This would obviously change the balance of the evidence.

>All of this is quite fuzzy now, corrections, illuminations, all greatfully
>received.

>						Francis Vaughan
-- 
thos cohen  				       |Softway Pty Ltd
 The best way to make a Japanese engineer wince|ACSnet:         thos@softway.oz
 is (when talking about an NSX) to say slowly  |UUCP: ...!uunet!softway.oz!thos
 'but its _not a Ferrari_ is it?' R.Bulgin, CAR|Internet:    thos@softway.oz.au
From: mjackson.wbst147@xerox.com (Mark Jackson)
Newsgroups: rec.autos.sport
Subject: F1: Williams Suspension
Date: 8 Apr 92 14:56:55 GMT
Reply-To: mjackson.wbst147@xerox.com
Organization: Xerox Corporation, Webster NY

The April 3 issue of /On Track/ contains a commentary by Forrest Bond
calling for the banning of active suspension systems.  His arguments
aside, there are a couple of technical tidbits.  A simple drawing
(credited to Terrie Nakamura) is labelled "Williams-Renault's active
suspension system"; it depicts a two-sided piston moved by two
regulated pressure supplies to push or pull (through a pressure seal) a
suspension pushrod.  Unless there is further detail between the pushrod
shown and the road (aside from tire sidewall compliance) this would
represent all of the suspension action.

Bond also remarks in passing, "Active uses oil pressure differential on
either side of a piston in the actuator to push the wheel down or pull
it up.  (In a reactive system the actuator can push down, but can't
pull.)"

It's not at all clear where he got this distinction, but the
description of what the Williams has (trademarked nomenclature aside)
is quite clear.  Whether it is correct or not is of course another
matter.

---
Mark <MJackson.Wbst147@Xerox.COM>
    "Intelligence is nothing without delight"
			- Paul Claudel
From: Dino_P._Chiesa@TRANSARC.COM
Newsgroups: rec.autos.sport
Subject: Re: F1: Magic fuels -- and a proposal
Date: 9 Apr 92 21:53:36 GMT


in response to a proposal to ban MagicGas (soon available at a WalMart
near you),...

joeh@ami.sps.mot.com (Joe Hollinger) writes:
-> F1 used to have a similar rule, only it was aviation since av gas
-> is more standardized around the world. Great idea, too bad they don't
-> do it anymore. While we're rewriting the rulebook how about dumping
-> "reactive" suspension, electronic throttles, traction control, abs and
-> all of those other technical marvels that do nothing but make races
-> boring? Formula One is getting to be like the old Can Am only I'm not
-> 10 years old anymore!


Well, sure, and why don't we require that all the teams choose an
engine from about 3 available, and require that everyone use the same
tire, and allow only 2 or 3 different chassis designs...  That would
make F1....

IndyCar.


-dpc

disclaimer: I have never even been in an F1 car, an IndyCar, or a WalMart.
From: dxandy@cs.widener.edu (Andrew Greenshields)
Newsgroups: rec.autos.sport
Subject: Re: Faster drivers
Date: 6 Apr 1992 10:30:30 -0400
Organization: Widener University CS Department, Chester PA
NNTP-Posting-Host: ashley.cs.widener.edu

In article <thos.702513493@suite.sw.oz.au> thos@suite.sw.oz.au (Thomas Cohen) writes:
[in a reply to me, about Mansell]
>
>Because the man is a racer. Can't you understand that? To be as fast
>as your car will let you be, not as fast as your car will let you
>and have a > 75% chance of finishing. Most of the famous names from
>the past were like this, probably most recently Villeneuve.
>
  I hope your comparison isn't too accurate.  Villeneuve is dead.  My
memories of Villeneuve are rather distant.  I hadn't really discovered F1
when he was in his prime.  I do remember one occasion, though, when he
had gone of the course and badly damaged his car.  Instead of pulling
off the track and parking his car, he continued to drive around the
track with car skewing violently around the track, throwing bits in
every diriection.

  I remember the commentator saying that Villeneuve was such racer
that he couldn't bear to park his car and that this was a brave thing
to do (my memory is hazy on the exact words, but this is what was
being implied).  I thought to myself that this was an incredibly
stupid thing to do.  What if another driver had hit Villeneuve's
disabled car, or debris from it?  

  Anyway, to give Mansell credit where credit is due, he noticibly
slowed in the closing laps of the race.  That is the way to win races
and he deserved his victory yesterday.

-- 
Andrew J. Greenshields N3IGS |      "It looks like the top part fell on
dxandy@cs.widener.edu        |         the bottom part." - Dan Quayle     
dxandy@cyber.widener.edu     |    ****** STANDARD DISCLAIMERS APPLY ******     
===============================================================================
From: pmh2962@zeus.tamu.edu (Pat Hayes)
Newsgroups: rec.autos.sport
Subject: Re: there I was, there I was, .... in CS, TX   (ARCA)
Date: 13 Apr 92 15:47:00 GMT
Organization: Department of Meteorology, TAMU
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.41

In article <1992Apr13.075129.16875@sequent.com>, dafuller@sequent.com writes...
>In article <1992Apr11.194403.12367@usenet.ins.cwru.edu> ah335@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Richard Banks) writes:
>>In a previous article, pmh2962@zeus.tamu.edu (Pat Hayes) says:
>>>
>>>Howdy! 
>>>	Things that make you go "Hmmmmmmm...."
>>>
>>>	The pole for tomorrow's Slick 50 ARCA 500K race at Texas World
>>>Speedway was snatched yesterday by Loy Allen.  Allen is driving a
>>
>>What are the dimensions of this track ?
>Before it was rebuilt, the track was a copy of Michigan:
>2 miles, moderate trioval banks, less than Daytona corner banking.
>Dave Fuller		 	All opinions expressed are my own and not
>Sequent Computer Systems	those of Sequent Computer Systems, Inc.
>dafuller@sequent.com
*********** reply **********
Howdy <again>,

	Well, this may show up on TNN someday <their *RaceDay* show was
live from there last night>, but here goes:

	1.	Ed Bierschwale	Olds
	2.	Cliff Allison	Buick
	3.	Clay Young	Buick	(-1)
	4.	Frank Kimmel	Pont	(-2)
	5.	Bob Keselowski	Chry!	(-4)
	6.	Ron Esau	Olds	(-4)
	7.	Al Russsell	Pont	(-5)
	8.	Terry Bivins	Pont	(-6)
	9.	Gary Wright	Chev	(-6)
	10.	Tom Sherrill	Chev	(-6)
	11.	Rob Ham		Buick	(-12)
	12.	Ben Hess	Olds	(-14)
	13.	Bob Brevak	Buick	(-15)
	14.	David Hall	Pont	(-17)
	15.	Glenn Brewer	Buick	(-20)
	16.	Bob Bowsher	Ford	(-21)
	17.	Bob Dotter	Chev	(-24)	oil pump
	18.	Craig Rubright	Olds	(-24)
	19.	Bob Massey	Buick	(-26)
	20.	Roy Payne	Chev	(-34)
	21.	Dave Simko	Olds	(-37)
	22.	HB Bailey	Pont	(-50)	engine

more later ....

Pat Hayes--Meteorology--TAMU  INT: pmh@tamu.edu  BIT: pmh2962@tamzeus *whoop*
************************ standard disclaimer applies ************************
From: cornutt@lambda.msfc.nasa.gov (David Cornutt)
Subject: Re: F1 - water injection.
Organization: NASA/MSFC
Date: Mon, 6 Apr 1992 20:19:33 GMT

v058l789@ubvmsb.cc.buffalo.edu (Ethan A Bowerman) writes:

>	Water is not used in the form of steam to drive the piston.  The energy
>to turn the water to steam has to come from somewhere- in this case from
>the work done on the intake charge during compression.  If this were so, the 
>compression stroke would create a higher drag on the engine and actually
>hurting it's preformance rather than helping. 

>	But you can bet that the F1 teams ( that spend millions on R & D) have
>got it set up just right. :)

Hmmm... take a crack at this.  Back in the days of the early turbojet
airliners, the old 707s and DC-8s used to use water injection at
takeoff.  My flying friends tell me that this increased effective
thrust by increasing the mass (and hence the momentum) of the exhaust.
I've always wondered about this, because it seems to me that this
would just lower the temperature of the exhaust and inhibit expansion.
Doesn't seem to gain anything.

Then again, I'm not the expert.  What was the zeroeth law of
thermodynamics again?
From: sf1x+@andrew.cmu.edu (Shinya Fujimoto)
Newsgroups: rec.autos.sport
Subject: Fwd: Pro Baseball as of 92.04.08
Date: 9 Apr 92 16:33:26 GMT
Article-I.D.: andrew.Qdt77Ky00WBK046HJr
Organization: Freshman, Electrical and Computer Engineering, Carnegie Mellon, Pittsburgh, PA

>The Japanese professional baseball began last Saturday (4/4).
>The weather has been pretty bad recently so there have been a
>few rainouts.

>*********************************************************************
>*The TIGERS DEFEATED the GIANTS last night 5-4 as Saitoh got knocked*
>*out in the 5th inning.  Paciorek (who used to be on the Whales last*
*year) hit two doubles and drove in 3 runs for the Tigers.          *
>*********************************************************************

Well I am hearing some real good news! Right, Doi?

Shinya Fujimoto
Carnegie Mellon University
fujimoto+@cmu.edu
From: mcculley@racy.zko.dec.com (Bruce McCulley)
Newsgroups: rec.autos.sport
Subject: Re: Faster drivers
Date: 6 Apr 92 16:53:48 GMT
Reply-To: mcculley@racy.zko.dec.com (Bruce McCulley)
Organization: Digital Equipment Corporation


In article <thos.702513493@suite.sw.oz.au>,
 thos@suite.sw.oz.au (Thomas Cohen) writes:
 
|> In <ktihecINNhgp@ashley.cs.widener.edu>
 dxandy@cs.widener.edu (Andrew Greenshields) writes:
|> >  I am disappointed that Mansell hasn't
|> >learn from his experiences on the track.  I can't understand why he
|> >still sets fast laps in the closing stages of the race when he has a
|> >30 odd second lead.
|> 
|> Because the man is a racer. Can't you understand that? To be as fast
|> as your car will let you be, not as fast as your car will let you
|> and have a > 75% chance of finishing. Most of the famous names from
|> the past were like this, probably most recently Villeneuve.

No.

Self-indulgent egoist, perhaps.  Great (driven?) driver, perhaps.

But not a *RACER*.

The difference between being a *racer* and being a *driver* is that
racing is about finishing in front of everyone else.  Being a driver
is about driving as well as possible.

"To finish first, first finish."

Racing at the highest levels is a team sport.  When the car breaks, or
when a pit crew flubs things like tightening a wheelnut, the team loses.
When a driver overcooks the car trying to set lap records during a 
meaningless tour with a comfortable margin of victory already in hand,
the team loses.  That's why it is self-indulgent egoism on the part of the
driver to push the car beyond necessity.

"The secret to racing is to go slow enough to win."

That said, I do not consider setting fastest lap in and of itself to
demonstrate irresponsible pacing on the part of a leading driver.  As
has already been mentioned in this thread, the rythm is important and
breaking it by slowing down is as easy a route to disaster as is over-
driving.  A good driver can sense the machine and exact the maximum
performance potential without overstressing it.  Another driver might
always push it just a tad harder and break it.  Looking at the history
of various drivers might give a clue as to their charactersitics in this
regard.

How often does Mansell experience car problems, versus, say, Patrese?
Or Senna, or Berger?  How about some others, consider Andretti (Mario has
long had a reputation as a car-breaker) or Prost or Lauda or Villeneuve.  
Or going much farther back, how about Stewart or Clark?

Mansell is certainly a racer, he is a driven competitor.  He is not, IMHO,
an especially canny racer.  Stewart or Lauda or Prost merit that title.
Senna comes close, but has not yet shown the ability to temper emotion
with cold logic.  Rating those five as racers and drivers, it becomes
clear that there is a level at which the differences become more qualitative
than quantitative.


Is Mansell a better driver than Senna?
Was Picasso a better artist than Van Gogh?

Who cares, appreciate them both for their qualities (including their human
flaws, none are without those!)
Newsgroups: rec.autos.sport