|
| Site Partners: | SpotterGuides | Veloce Books |
| Related Sites: | Your Link Here |
|
|
|||||||||
|
||||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
|
||||||||||
|
|
1 May 2001, 04:38 (Ref:87419)
|
#1 | ||
|
Veteran
Join Date: Mar 2001
Posts: 732
 |
29 seconds
Putting aside the debate about whether the penalties where justified or not, does anyone know why Lowndes was penalised 29 seconds? (Did Ambrose receive 29 secs as well?) I am curious to know if there is some special significance in 29 secs, or is this something that could be put down to the general idiocy of officialdom?
|
||
|
|
|
1 May 2001, 04:46 (Ref:87422)
|
#2 | ||
|
Veteran
Join Date: Mar 2001
Posts: 2,221
|
It's the supposed time lost in making a stop and go penalty.
Reasonable thinking, but whether it was justified or not is another issue. |
||
|
|
|
|
1 May 2001, 14:35 (Ref:87549)
|
#3 | ||
|
Veteran
Join Date: Mar 2001
Posts: 732
|
Thanks for the info Ray - sounds reasonable enough. "29" just sounded like such a strange number.
|
||
|
|
|
|
1 May 2001, 23:35 (Ref:87784)
|
#4 | ||
|
Ten-Tenths Hall of Fame
Veteran
Join Date: Jun 1999
Posts: 12,053
|
yep according to CAMS or whoever's decision it was 29 seconds was the amount of time lost through a stop go penalty..but during the telecast ..mr greenway ( has anyone ever seen this guy or is his head always in some record book ?) who is channel 10's statistition worked out that both Lowndes and Ambrose actually only lost 21 seconds..so they made a gain of 8 seconds through the penalty..of course it had no bearing on the race..but if they were only penalised 21 seconds ..how much further up the grid would they have been for race 2 ???
|
||
|
|
__________________
In Loving memory of Peter Brock I hate it when im driving in a straight line & Seb Vettel runs into me GO THE MIGHTY HAWKS !!!!
|
|
1 May 2001, 23:59 (Ref:87793)
|
#5 | ||
|
Veteran
Join Date: Aug 1999
Posts: 9,208
|
What Mr Greenway calculated (BTW, there was a write up on him a few years ago in MRA) that the in and out lap when Murphy had a stop-go was only 21 seconds slower than his normal lap times, thus Ambrose and Lowndes were essentially dudded 8 seconds.
|
||
|
|
__________________
Love you long time
|
|
2 May 2001, 02:12 (Ref:87835)
|
#6 | ||
|
Veteran
Join Date: Mar 2001
Posts: 2,221
|
So is there a thread about whether or not it was justified?
|
||
|
|
|
|
2 May 2001, 06:51 (Ref:87865)
|
#7 | ||
|
Veteran
Join Date: Aug 1999
Posts: 9,208
|
|||
|
|
__________________
Love you long time
|
|
3 May 2001, 01:49 (Ref:88178)
|
#8 | ||
|
Ten-Tenths Hall of Fame
Veteran
Join Date: Jun 1999
Posts: 12,053
|
ok thanks crash test ...i knew it was something like that ..got a tad confused.
|
||
|
|
__________________
In Loving memory of Peter Brock I hate it when im driving in a straight line & Seb Vettel runs into me GO THE MIGHTY HAWKS !!!!
|
 |
|
|
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
| DTM on Australian TV - Gone In 60 Seconds! | Michael H | Australasian Touring Cars. | 15 | 7 May 2002 12:05 |
| What goes 0 - 200kph - 0 in 13.7 seconds? | ChrisUSA | Bike Racing | 7 | 9 Nov 2001 08:17 |
| Toyota 7 seconds of the pace | steve nielsen | Formula One | 17 | 3 Oct 2001 12:59 |
Linear Mode
