Once upon a time on usenet Sir Tim wrote:
> On 18/10/2017 00:44, ~misfit~ wrote:
>> If I thought there was a chance of a Torro Rosso making it to the
>> podium [barring catastrophe] I'd have picked Hartley for third.
> I'm interested in people's pool entries and why they make them. I
> think most of us try to be objective and choose what we genuinely
> think will be the result but there are undoubtedly some who, at least
> in part, are making some sort of statement.
It's an interesting subject. As there is no 'prize' per se (other than the
satisfaction I guess some people would get for winning) I tend to pick a
mixture of head, 'insight' and heart. It's nice to score points but even
nicer when either a ringer scores and I've picked them[*] or a liked-driver
is picked and finishes where I predicted.
> There was one guy, not sure whether he still posts here, whose
> nomination for 1st and 2nd was always Ferrari. You, I think, have a
> definite Antipodean bias, which influences your selections and "news"
> has never been known to mention Hamilton in his entry, even if Lewis
> is leading the championship :-)
I actually like to pick on personality and who I think of as deserving as
much as anything. I don't like brats so rarely pick them - especially brats
from certain European countries whose populations tend to have elitist
outlooks. I like 'nice guys' (which is why I used to pick Jens a lot) and
also the underdog. <shrug> It's a fault I know.
> I like to think that I'm strictly objective but I must admit that, if
> I select someone other than Hamilton for pole I always have the
> thought in the back of my mind that if I'm right I get a point in the
> pool and if I'm wrong it will probably mean that Lewis is on pole, so
> it's a win/win AFAIAC :-)
[*] I think me liking to pick a ringer (or long-odds driver) who then does
well (or not LOL) likely reflects my preference for instant rather than
delayed gratification. It certainly doesn't get me to the top of the pool.
"Humans will have advanced a long, long way when religious belief has a cozy
little classification in the DSM*."
David Melville (in r.a.s.f1)
(*Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders)