HM The King Greets F1 Star Webber Ahead Of Bangkok Event

[whybother]

Found this on youtube.

[edwinchester]

Is F1 coming to Bangkok then?

Can't see it happening in the near future.

A street circuit would be a non starter due to the appalling state of the roads here and it takes years to design and build a F1 track.

[Nawtier]

Thailand could become the HUB of F1 racing......

I would imagine that with the red bull boos pulling this off and the King involved....all stops will be pulled out to try to get F1 here at some time in the future.....just you waitn see.....

[dekbahnnok]

Anyhow, I for one will be there this afternoon, it'll be the first time I've seen/heard an F1 car in the flesh, I've never had the opportunity to go to a race and may never have the chance either, but I've always been incredibly excited by F1 - Just as the expected large crowds will be today!

Any ideas on a good vantage point for this even? It seems only the Hi-So's have elevated seating, the rest of us will have to fight our way to the front or be happy with the sounds

H.H. Prince Bira Bhanubhand was a great F1 driver. It is fantastic that Red Bull has had the opportunity to exhibit one of their cars to His Majesty and Thailand. Perhaps one day Thailand will have opportunity to host a F1 race with a Thai driver competing.

[MaiDong]

Found this on youtube.

Yes, these people were the lucky ones, I didn't think we would have been allowed to stand there, I would like to say 'next time' but there won't be a next time, these promos are always a one-off, my fingers are crossed!

[cdnvic]

Just a reminder, Lese Magiste laws are not something you can make jokes about in Thailand.

[brahmburgers]

Enjoy it - to each his own mode of entertainment.

[cook]

F1 is often boring on TV, and you can only see a small part of the race if you go to the track. Alonso followed one car he couldn't overtake for about half of the last race, what a yawn.

Motobike racing is much more exciting, no pitstops and the lead changes on the track.

Green Day wrote a song about Mark Webber "Nice guys finish last". Sorry Mark but you're much too nice for F1.

F1 might be very interesting for many people, doing high speed. Technology is being used for ordinary cars driving on the streets, it helps to improve our safety. So why not F1?

Aehm, what's a "Motobike"????

My dog likes to eat Brits, my cat loves to bite Americans. Where's the difference? :jap:

1. because it's often boring

2. an acronym

3. one's a dog, the other's a cat

[hyperdimension]

I can see how it can be exciting, but the bigger picture problem is the influence on driving behavior of ordinary people; some may want to emulate the high speeds in their own cars. Was there any promotion of safe driving at this event? Or at least a "please don't try this yourself" statement?

Edited December 19, 2010 by hyperdimension

[nisakiman]

I can see how it can be exciting, but the bigger picture problem is the influence on driving behavior of ordinary people; some may want to emulate the high speeds in their own cars. Was there any promotion of safe driving at this event? Or at least a "please don't try this yourself" statement?

Oh purrrleease...

Are you, or have you ever been a health & safety inspector? Certainly sounds like it.

[smedly]

what a fantastic story, long live the king

and there was no mention or question for those that don't follow or like the sport so why bother, your comments are completely irrelivant

[tomyummer]

At a race it's all about the atmosphere. The race itself is limiting because of the split second views of the cars whizzing by. It's about the fans, food, beer, souvenirs, and hot chicks. If you're lucky enough to get a pit pass or team pass, well, that's another story.

Some people see this as a huge PR ploy by RedBull (it is, although they could care less about Thai consumers since they make the majority on global sales), but it's a way for RedBull to bring back the champion team to treat the home fans. Well done RedBull!

[brahmburgers]

I stand corrected on my earlier comments about stamina (or lack thereof) - though you gotta admit F1 drivers sit down at their job. And the winner in an F1 race depends about 80% on technology & funding, 10% on the pit crew, and about 10% on the guy seated in the car who presses the pedals and turns the steering wheel. In other words, you get an adept driver at a 2nd rate car and an ok driver at the most expensive car, and you can guess who's going to come out ahead.

It's a Roger Ramjet or Star Wars sort of game, more than a sport. I'm not saying that in a bad way. If zooooom zooooom sounds and low riding cars plastered with corporate logos rocks your boat, then go for it.

In a marathon running race, it's about 1% the quality of shoes and 99% the stamina and determination of the runner - though Kenya's Kip Keino won his first Olympic marathon running barefoot.

And no one commented about the disparity of prize monies awarded between low stamina sports like golf and high stamina sports like triathlons. A golf tourney will award tens of thousands of dollars to guys placing in the thirties, whereas a triathlon winner might get a fraction of that amount.

Edited December 20, 2010 by brahmburgers

[whybother]

I stand corrected on my earlier comments about stamina (or lack thereof) - though you gotta admit F1 drivers sit down at their job. And the winner in an F1 race depends about 80% on technology & funding, 10% on the pit crew, and about 10% on the guy seated in the car who presses the pedals and turns the steering wheel. In other words, you get an adept driver at a 2nd rate car and an ok driver at the most expensive car, and you can guess who's going to come out ahead.

It's a Roger Ramjet or Star Wars sort of game, more than a sport. I'm not saying that in a bad way. If zooooom zooooom sounds and low riding cars plastered with corporate logos rocks your boat, then go for it.

In a marathon running race, it's about 1% the quality of shoes and 99% the stamina and determination of the runner - though Kenya's Kip Keino won his first Olympic marathon running barefoot.

And no one commented about the disparity of prize monies awarded between low stamina sports like golf and high stamina sports like triathlons. A golf tourney will award tens of thousands of dollars to guys placing in the thirties, whereas a triathlon winner might get a fraction of that amount.

Every sport relies on technology and funding at the highest level, whether it is in training or in the actual event. Whether it's swimming, running, cycling, sailing, or motor sports, you are not going to be the fastest, strongest, best ANYTHING in the world without that technology and funding.

But it ends up being the skills, strength and stamina of the athlete that separate these people from "us". The technology and funding just help them be that little bit better than the next best.

[Deeral]

F! - is NOT on th way out - Bernie Ecclestone may be.

As for the physical excursion - I firstly can't see that is a rational yardstick, but the strains put on a body during a race require top athlete strength and stamina. To think otherwise is to be profoundly ignorant of the speeds ad forces achieved in F1.I'm not great fan f F1 as it is but I was employed in cutting edge motor racing including F1 a while back and unless you have been in - I'd recommend getting driven - a full race car of ANY kind you will simply fail to imagine how fast these cars are. There was a time when virtually ALL F1 drivers had enormous neck sizes, just to cope with the G-forces of cornering.

as for fossil fuels - well the amount burned as a percentage of the world's consumption is of of course minute. But motor racing especially at the top end pushes the limits of technology and weight and fuel constrictions put a huge pressure on winning teams to develop systems that are fuel efficient to the highest degree.

Many technologies used in every day motoring have been developed tried and tested in motor-racing and F1 is the techno-leader in this. Crash technology and our understanding of the forces involved in particular have been tested to the limit in F1.

In its present state F1 has manny shortcomings but in the long run their will always be an urge to test motor cars to their ultimate limits in speed, performance handling and endurance, F1 will continue to do this in one form or another

[Deeral]

"And the winner in an F1 race depends about 80% on technology & funding, 10% on the pit crew, and about 10% on the guy seated in the car who presses the pedals and turns the steering wheel." - this poster is making up figure now - simply hasn't a clue!

[animatic]

"And the winner in an F1 race depends about 80% on technology & funding, 10% on the pit crew, and about 10% on the guy seated in the car who presses the pedals and turns the steering wheel." - this poster is making up figure now - simply hasn't a clue!

Agreed.

[brahmburgers]

"And the winner in an F1 race depends about 80% on technology & funding, 10% on the pit crew, and about 10% on the guy seated in the car who presses the pedals and turns the steering wheel." - this poster is making up figure now - simply hasn't a clue!

so clue us in, ....what are your estimates?

[MaiDong]

"And the winner in an F1 race depends about 80% on technology & funding, 10% on the pit crew, and about 10% on the guy seated in the car who presses the pedals and turns the steering wheel." - this poster is making up figure now - simply hasn't a clue!

so clue us in, ....what are your estimates?

Come on bramhs, admit defeat

[Charlieben]

"And the winner in an F1 race depends about 80% on technology & funding, 10% on the pit crew, and about 10% on the guy seated in the car who presses the pedals and turns the steering wheel." - this poster is making up figure now - simply hasn't a clue!

so clue us in, ....what are your estimates?

Mate, you clearly do not know when to stop. You have embarrassed yourself in front of hundreds of readers initially, and you continue to make some of the most stupid comments I have seen on this site.

This is the most gruelling motorsport on the planet, and only a handful of drivers can actually drive these cars at the limits that you see in F1. Sitting down makes absolutely no difference to the physical intensity. If you had actually gone to a modern GP, and seen how fast these cars go, and how fast the drivers reaction times required are, you would not have made any of these comments - or maybe you just like to look like a goose.

As for your break down of what success means, please. I think the components to success would be far more complex than the 3 basic categories you dreamt up in your head (and the percentages you pulled out your ae. There are many components working in unison to create a winning team, of which the drivers capabilities are pivotol. Why do you think the drivers get paid so much? Most people in F1 are at the very top of their game, business managers as well. Do you think they are going to just give millions away to elite drivers because they like them? No, it's performace based, and the risks are rewarded.

Realistically there are only a handful of people on the planet who can do what the elite drivers of F1 do, and there is very good reason for that.

Go to the bathroom, stand in front of the mirror, and have a good look at yourself! You clown!

[WarpSpeed]

"And the winner in an F1 race depends about 80% on technology & funding, 10% on the pit crew, and about 10% on the guy seated in the car who presses the pedals and turns the steering wheel." - this poster is making up figure now - simply hasn't a clue!

Actually I'd say thats about right but I think it's closer to 60% funding etc. 30% team and 10% driver in F1..

[WarpSpeed]

"And the winner in an F1 race depends about 80% on technology & funding, 10% on the pit crew, and about 10% on the guy seated in the car who presses the pedals and turns the steering wheel." - this poster is making up figure now - simply hasn't a clue!

so clue us in, ....what are your estimates?

Mate, you clearly do not know when to stop. You have embarrassed yourself in front of hundreds of readers initially, and you continue to make some of the most stupid comments I have seen on this site.

This is the most gruelling motorsport on the planet, and only a handful of drivers can actually drive these cars at the limits that you see in F1. Sitting down makes absolutely no difference to the physical intensity. If you had actually gone to a modern GP, and seen how fast these cars go, and how fast the drivers reaction times required are, you would not have made any of these comments - or maybe you just like to look like a goose.

As for your break down of what success means, please. I think the components to success would be far more complex than the 3 basic categories you dreamt up in your head (and the percentages you pulled out your ae. There are many components working in unison to create a winning team, of which the drivers capabilities are pivotol. Why do you think the drivers get paid so much? Most people in F1 are at the very top of their game, business managers as well. Do you think they are going to just give millions away to elite drivers because they like them? No, it's performace based, and the risks are rewarded.

Realistically there are only a handful of people on the planet who can do what the elite drivers of F1 do, and there is very good reason for that.

Go to the bathroom, stand in front of the mirror, and have a good look at yourself! You clown!

Actually if it were less about a drivers funding then it is about their talent, the drivers pool would be much larger then you think and many of the current drivers would likely not even be in seats..

That's not to say that they aren't good but they really aren't the cream of the available crop as it were..

[Charlieben]

"And the winner in an F1 race depends about 80% on technology & funding, 10% on the pit crew, and about 10% on the guy seated in the car who presses the pedals and turns the steering wheel." - this poster is making up figure now - simply hasn't a clue!

so clue us in, ....what are your estimates?

Mate, you clearly do not know when to stop. You have embarrassed yourself in front of hundreds of readers initially, and you continue to make some of the most stupid comments I have seen on this site.

This is the most gruelling motorsport on the planet, and only a handful of drivers can actually drive these cars at the limits that you see in F1. Sitting down makes absolutely no difference to the physical intensity. If you had actually gone to a modern GP, and seen how fast these cars go, and how fast the drivers reaction times required are, you would not have made any of these comments - or maybe you just like to look like a goose.

As for your break down of what success means, please. I think the components to success would be far more complex than the 3 basic categories you dreamt up in your head (and the percentages you pulled out your ae. There are many components working in unison to create a winning team, of which the drivers capabilities are pivotol. Why do you think the drivers get paid so much? Most people in F1 are at the very top of their game, business managers as well. Do you think they are going to just give millions away to elite drivers because they like them? No, it's performace based, and the risks are rewarded.

Realistically there are only a handful of people on the planet who can do what the elite drivers of F1 do, and there is very good reason for that.

Go to the bathroom, stand in front of the mirror, and have a good look at yourself! You clown!

Actually if it were less about a drivers funding then it is about their talent, the drivers pool would be much larger then you think and many of the current drivers would likely not even be in seats..

That's not to say that they aren't good but they really aren't the cream of the available crop as it were..

Actually not that true, the elite drivers in modern f1, if you do your research, have consistantly been at the top of their categories all throughout their careers. Even when they were juniors, and money and sponsorship were not such a big determining factor (but given the fact that motorsport needs a certain amount of money at all levels), these same drivers where clearly more skilled than their competitors that didn't make it to the top. The numbers of people capable of driving an f1 at those levels are still a handful - plain and simple.

I think having been involved in motorsport for over 20 years, plus being involved with a young cousin successfully coming through the ranks of open wheelers, I have a good insight into this area.

To say they are not the cream of the crop shows you are not that close to the sport really, you may have watched a lot of it on tv and gone to the track. Yes some guys who have talent, but not the know how to bring money don't make it, but mostly the guys who were performing well at a very young age are the same guys who are at the top today, that's been proven again and again and again. If you do your research, and get involved in the sport you will know this to be a fact!

What can I say...If you can't afford to keep a cart on the track by the time your 12, but you were putting in a few good laps, well that's life! The kids that were beating you, and kept going all the way, were probably bloody talented as well. I'm sure there would be a lot more black tennis players if only they could have had access to a tennis court. I'm sure a lot of football players could have been star cricket players, and visa versa.

The reality is that many F1 drivers have been successful all their careers from kids to adults, and to say they are not cream of the crop is a mute point in the context of what you are saying. It's never an even playing field in any sport, so it's almost impossible to say that you could even properly identify exactly who is the cream of the crop.

The 'cream of the crop', as you refer to, in motorsport do rise to the top, it's the one's who get there with money that don't last long at the highest levels.

Any doubts about talent rising to the top in f1 I just have 1 word for you...Schumacher

(do you research about him before you put your foot in your mouth)

[brahmburgers]

"And the winner in an F1 race depends about 80% on technology & funding, 10% on the pit crew, and about 10% on the guy seated in the car who presses the pedals and turns the steering wheel." - this poster is making up figure now - simply hasn't a clue!

so clue us in, ....what are your estimates?

Mate, you clearly do not know when to stop. (name calling omitted for brevity)

Well at least the poster below had the cojones to offer an articulate response. Some others, like the poster above, can only get red faced and call names like kids at a schoolyard. If you don't like the question, then go on to something else. If you think it's wrong, then offer some thoughtful response. Or, just keep doing as you do, and frustratingly point fingers, and call names.

Actually I'd say thats about right but I think it's closer to 60% funding etc. 30% team and 10% driver in F1..

[Deeral]

"And the winner in an F1 race depends about 80% on technology & funding, 10% on the pit crew, and about 10% on the guy seated in the car who presses the pedals and turns the steering wheel." - this poster is making up figure now - simply hasn't a clue!

so clue us in, ....what are your estimates?

Why in God's name would engage in such a facile argument? Don't be such a baby - try to use commonsense , some critical thinking and then say something intelligent =rather than just making up statements to justify your own prejudices.

[WarpSpeed]

Mate, you clearly do not know when to stop. You have embarrassed yourself in front of hundreds of readers initially, and you continue to make some of the most stupid comments I have seen on this site.

This is the most gruelling motorsport on the planet, and only a handful of drivers can actually drive these cars at the limits that you see in F1. Sitting down makes absolutely no difference to the physical intensity. If you had actually gone to a modern GP, and seen how fast these cars go, and how fast the drivers reaction times required are, you would not have made any of these comments - or maybe you just like to look like a goose.

As for your break down of what success means, please. I think the components to success would be far more complex than the 3 basic categories you dreamt up in your head (and the percentages you pulled out your ae. There are many components working in unison to create a winning team, of which the drivers capabilities are pivotol. Why do you think the drivers get paid so much? Most people in F1 are at the very top of their game, business managers as well. Do you think they are going to just give millions away to elite drivers because they like them? No, it's performace based, and the risks are rewarded.

Realistically there are only a handful of people on the planet who can do what the elite drivers of F1 do, and there is very good reason for that.

Go to the bathroom, stand in front of the mirror, and have a good look at yourself! You clown!

Actually if it were less about a drivers funding then it is about their talent, the drivers pool would be much larger then you think and many of the current drivers would likely not even be in seats..

That's not to say that they aren't good but they really aren't the cream of the available crop as it were..

Actually not that true, the elite drivers in modern f1, if you do your research, have consistantly been at the top of their categories all throughout their careers. Even when they were juniors, and money and sponsorship were not such a big determining factor (but given the fact that motorsport needs a certain amount of money at all levels), these same drivers where clearly more skilled than their competitors that didn't make it to the top. The numbers of people capable of driving an f1 at those levels are still a handful - plain and simple.

I think having been involved in motorsport for over 20 years, plus being involved with a young cousin successfully coming through the ranks of open wheelers, I have a good insight into this area.

To say they are not the cream of the crop shows you are not that close to the sport really, you may have watched a lot of it on tv and gone to the track. Yes some guys who have talent, but not the know how to bring money don't make it, but mostly the guys who were performing well at a very young age are the same guys who are at the top today, that's been proven again and again and again. If you do your research, and get involved in the sport you will know this to be a fact!

What can I say...If you can't afford to keep a cart on the track by the time your 12, but you were putting in a few good laps, well that's life! The kids that were beating you, and kept going all the way, were probably bloody talented as well. I'm sure there would be a lot more black tennis players if only they could have had access to a tennis court. I'm sure a lot of football players could have been star cricket players, and visa versa.

The reality is that many F1 drivers have been successful all their careers from kids to adults, and to say they are not cream of the crop is a mute point in the context of what you are saying. It's never an even playing field in any sport, so it's almost impossible to say that you could even properly identify exactly who is the cream of the crop.

The 'cream of the crop', as you refer to, in motorsport do rise to the top, it's the one's who get there with money that don't last long at the highest levels.

Any doubts about talent rising to the top in f1 I just have 1 word for you...Schumacher

(do you research about him before you put your foot in your mouth)

I don't need to do research, I'm well versed and personally experienced enough to know what I'm taking about without Google..

How about you? What is your empirical experience based on that provides you with the insight and experience to post your comments? Fan perception or actual insider knowledge?

That crap about it not being even in any sort is just plain bunk! No other sport in the world requires as much financing to display your talents as any form of racing, most just require a ball, some shorts and a place to play and grow your talent and only the very most deprived of youths have this against them most others do not..And sometimes even those get noticed, that will NEVER happen to any child or young adult in motorsports...

Even Micheal Schumacher is the product of that very circumstance he was from a poor family and was noticed and sponsored by a local businessman who took his career further..

Edited December 21, 2010 by WarpSpeed

[hyperdimension]

I can see how it can be exciting, but the bigger picture problem is the influence on driving behavior of ordinary people; some may want to emulate the high speeds in their own cars. Was there any promotion of safe driving at this event? Or at least a "please don't try this yourself" statement?

Oh purrrleease...

Are you, or have you ever been a health & safety inspector? Certainly sounds like it.

I have not been a "health & safety inspector".

It just upsets me when innocent people die from others' reckless behavior. How many young drivers do you think feel an urge to take their (or their parents') car out for a spin and rev it up to the max after having watched Webber speed past on Ratchadamnoen road with the crowd cheering on? Surely some would at least think that it looks like fun to drive so fast, and everyone cheering means it's Ok to do so.

This glorification of high speed driving, together with the support of the most highly revered person in the country, could be sending the wrong message to ordinary people, especially youth. It certainly does not help to reduce the high death toll on the roads.

Let's see how many people will die during the New Year holiday and the next Songkran holidays due to high speed driving.

Edited December 21, 2010 by hyperdimension

[brahmburgers]

Thus far, the name callers who insist F1 racing entails as much or more stamina than other sports have talked about G-forces and neck muscles (don't they have helmets and special headrests to lessen the impact of such things?). Oh, and one spoke about a driver who placed respectably in a triathlon race - good for him. But some of the basic issues have been avoided by the die-hard fans of F1, and because they can't address them head on, they devolve to childish name-calling.

There's still the unavoidable facts that drivers sit down on the job and their multi million dollar machines and pit crews are mostly what separates winners and also-rans. All in all, if it rocks your boat, great (as long as it's not causing harm). Personally, I admire sportsmen and women who rely on their own personal skills and stamina, and don't have to rely so heavily on corporate sponsors and expensive machinery to win. To each his own, I reckon.

[whybother]

Thus far, the name callers who insist F1 racing entails as much or more stamina than other sports have talked about G-forces and neck muscles (don't they have helmets and special headrests to lessen the impact of such things?). Oh, and one spoke about a driver who placed respectably in a triathlon race - good for him. But some of the basic issues have been avoided by the die-hard fans of F1, and because they can't address them head on, they devolve to childish name-calling.

There's still the unavoidable facts that drivers sit down on the job and their multi million dollar machines and pit crews are mostly what separates winners and also-rans. All in all, if it rocks your boat, great (as long as it's not causing harm). Personally, I admire sportsmen and women who rely on their own personal skills and stamina, and don't have to rely so heavily on corporate sponsors and expensive machinery to win. To each his own, I reckon.

What separates the top two fastest runners in the world (or event he top ten)? Funding and the support around them. Same with the top levels of any sport.

[MaiDong]

There's still the unavoidable facts that drivers sit down on the job and their multi million dollar machines and pit crews are mostly what separates winners and also-rans.

Brahms, please. Research before you speak. It's ridiculous what you're saying.