Discussion:
MV immune ?
Add Reply
geoff
2018-05-14 04:40:59 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
How come no penalty for MV driving up Stroll's arse ? (That should give
texasserbater a semi at least ...).

geoff
M2T
2018-05-14 08:14:16 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by geoff
How come no penalty for MV driving up Stroll's arse ? (That should give
texasserbater a semi at least ...).
geoff
They both received the green go lights on their dashboards at the same
time. Stroll was in another world and missed it, he contiued to tour
not accellerate as all the other drivers did.
~misfit~
2018-05-14 10:02:03 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by M2T
Post by geoff
How come no penalty for MV driving up Stroll's arse ? (That should
give texasserbater a semi at least ...).
geoff
They both received the green go lights on their dashboards at the same
time. Stroll was in another world and missed it, he contiued to tour
not accellerate as all the other drivers did.
Do that at traffic lights and see what happens....
--
Shaun.

"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)
~misfit~
2018-05-14 12:49:38 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by ~misfit~
Post by M2T
Post by geoff
How come no penalty for MV driving up Stroll's arse ? (That should
give texasserbater a semi at least ...).
geoff
They both received the green go lights on their dashboards at the
same time. Stroll was in another world and missed it, he contiued
to tour not accellerate as all the other drivers did.
Do that at traffic lights and see what happens....
.. my point being that usually anyone who drives straight into the back of
another car has nobody to blame but themself. Yeah Stroll was slow to go
back to green but that doesn't make Max blameless.
--
Shaun.

"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)
Bigbird
2018-05-14 13:40:47 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by M2T
Post by geoff
How come no penalty for MV driving up Stroll's arse ? (That should
give texasserbater a semi at least ...).
geoff
They both received the green go lights on their dashboards at the
same time. Stroll was in another world and missed it, he contiued to
tour not accellerate as all the other drivers did.
That can happen and does, it hardly mitigates accelerating into another
driver.
larkim
2018-05-14 14:12:00 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Bigbird
Post by M2T
Post by geoff
How come no penalty for MV driving up Stroll's arse ? (That should
give texasserbater a semi at least ...).
geoff
They both received the green go lights on their dashboards at the
same time. Stroll was in another world and missed it, he contiued to
tour not accellerate as all the other drivers did.
That can happen and does, it hardly mitigates accelerating into another
driver.
I can excuse Max this one. These are supposedly the best drivers out there,
you'd expect the car in front to react to the green light in the same way
that you do.

Though perhaps it does point to a flaw in the VSC protocols - under a normal
SC you just react to what the guy in front has done, and on the grid you
react to the lights up ahead in your vision. VSC you're looking down at
your wheel to see when to hit the gas, so it's not utterly bonkers that you
are not watching to check that the car in front has accelerated too.
DumbedDownUSA
2018-05-14 15:08:04 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by larkim
Post by Bigbird
Post by M2T
Post by geoff
How come no penalty for MV driving up Stroll's arse ? (That
should give texasserbater a semi at least ...).
geoff
They both received the green go lights on their dashboards at the
same time. Stroll was in another world and missed it, he
contiued to tour not accellerate as all the other drivers did.
That can happen and does, it hardly mitigates accelerating into
another driver.
I can excuse Max this one. These are supposedly the best drivers out
there, you'd expect the...
...the drivers to look where they are going.

The trackside lights are on the same system.
--
Trump averages six falsehoods a day; how you doin'?
Edmund
2018-05-14 16:10:28 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by larkim
Post by Bigbird
Post by M2T
Post by geoff
How come no penalty for MV driving up Stroll's arse ? (That should
give texasserbater a semi at least ...).
geoff
They both received the green go lights on their dashboards at the
same time. Stroll was in another world and missed it, he contiued to
tour not accellerate as all the other drivers did.
That can happen and does, it hardly mitigates accelerating into another
driver.
I can excuse Max this one. These are supposedly the best drivers out there,
you'd expect the car in front to react to the green light in the same way
that you do.
Though perhaps it does point to a flaw in the VSC protocols - under a normal
SC you just react to what the guy in front has done, and on the grid you
react to the lights up ahead in your vision. VSC you're looking down at
your wheel to see when to hit the gas, so it's not utterly bonkers that you
are not watching to check that the car in front has accelerated too.
Well I think it is.
Add that mad max collided at least once in every race this year,
you do the math :-)

Edmund
geoff
2018-05-14 20:55:34 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by larkim
Post by Bigbird
Post by M2T
Post by geoff
How come no penalty for MV driving up Stroll's arse ? (That should
give texasserbater a semi at least ...).
geoff
They both received the green go lights on their dashboards at the
same time. Stroll was in another world and missed it, he contiued to
tour not accellerate as all the other drivers did.
That can happen and does, it hardly mitigates accelerating into another
driver.
I can excuse Max this one. These are supposedly the best drivers out there,
you'd expect the car in front to react to the green light in the same way
that you do.
Though perhaps it does point to a flaw in the VSC protocols - under a normal
SC you just react to what the guy in front has done, and on the grid you
react to the lights up ahead in your vision. VSC you're looking down at
your wheel to see when to hit the gas, so it's not utterly bonkers that you
are not watching to check that the car in front has accelerated too.
Like, when you are at the traffic lights, you only look at the signal
and take off as soon as they go green, irrespective of the vehicle(s) in
front of you ?

geoff
M2T
2018-05-14 23:45:33 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by geoff
Post by Bigbird
Post by M2T
Post by geoff
How come no penalty for MV driving up Stroll's arse ? (That should
give  texasserbater a semi at least ...).
geoff
They both received the green go lights on their dashboards at the
same time.  Stroll was in another world and missed it, he contiued to
tour not accellerate as all the other drivers did.
That can happen and does, it hardly mitigates accelerating into another
driver.
I can excuse Max this one.  These are supposedly the best drivers out
there,
you'd expect the car in front to react to the green light in the same way
that you do.
Though perhaps it does point to a flaw in the VSC protocols - under a normal
SC you just react to what the guy in front has done, and on the grid you
react to the lights up ahead in your vision.  VSC you're looking down at
your wheel to see when to hit the gas, so it's not utterly bonkers that you
are not watching to check that the car in front has accelerated too.
Like, when you are at the traffic lights, you only look at the signal
and take off as soon as they go green, irrespective of the vehicle(s) in
front of you ?
We are discussing a motor race, not a trip to Tesco.
~misfit~
2018-05-15 03:48:46 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by larkim
Post by Bigbird
Post by M2T
Post by geoff
How come no penalty for MV driving up Stroll's arse ? (That should
give texasserbater a semi at least ...).
geoff
They both received the green go lights on their dashboards at the
same time. Stroll was in another world and missed it, he contiued
to tour not accellerate as all the other drivers did.
That can happen and does, it hardly mitigates accelerating into
another driver.
I can excuse Max this one.
You and thousands of others. ;-)
Post by larkim
These are supposedly the best drivers out
there, you'd expect the car in front to react to the green light in
the same way that you do.
Surely not if you're Max Verstappen? He thinks he's the best driver ever to
sit in an F1 car so surely he can't believe that *and* expect Stroll to be
as good as he is?
Post by larkim
Though perhaps it does point to a flaw in the VSC protocols - under a
normal SC you just react to what the guy in front has done, and on
the grid you react to the lights up ahead in your vision. VSC you're
looking down at your wheel to see when to hit the gas, so it's not
utterly bonkers that you are not watching to check that the car in
front has accelerated too.
Yeah, I reckon it is. I believe in my the pre-season preditions post I said
that Max wasn't a 'complete driver' and that it would show more than ever
this year. A complete driver would take the tenth of a second to check that
he wasn't about to mangle his front wing when he floored the throttle.

Oh well at least he didn't get alongside Stroll and turn into him
immediately afterwards like the last hot-head Red Bull enabled might
have....
--
Shaun.

"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)
Calum
2018-05-15 13:08:39 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by larkim
Though perhaps it does point to a flaw in the VSC protocols - under a normal
SC you just react to what the guy in front has done, and on the grid you
react to the lights up ahead in your vision. VSC you're looking down at
your wheel to see when to hit the gas, so it's not utterly bonkers that you
are not watching to check that the car in front has accelerated too.
Seems odd that they don't also get some kind of audio signal like they
do for DRS, so they don't necessarily have to take their eyes off the
road. Unlike a regular SC restart, where there's a degree of skill
involved to gain an advantage, a VSC restart doesn't really feel like
something that ought to be a competition.
larkim
2018-05-15 16:01:08 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Calum
Post by larkim
Though perhaps it does point to a flaw in the VSC protocols - under a normal
SC you just react to what the guy in front has done, and on the grid you
react to the lights up ahead in your vision. VSC you're looking down at
your wheel to see when to hit the gas, so it's not utterly bonkers that you
are not watching to check that the car in front has accelerated too.
Seems odd that they don't also get some kind of audio signal like they
do for DRS, so they don't necessarily have to take their eyes off the
road. Unlike a regular SC restart, where there's a degree of skill
involved to gain an advantage, a VSC restart doesn't really feel like
something that ought to be a competition.
Maybe they do, perhaps MV just floored it whilst looking ahead and it was
simply the raw acceleration that put him into Stroll.

Reaction times to sounds are slower than reaction times to visual stimulus
so even if he is "the best" he can't overcome the human limitations.

In terms of the VSC restarts etc, every tenth still counts. I know its
better than a normal SC, but tenths incrementally gained by lapping at
race pace are lost very easily under a VSC (and gained too potentially)
so I would expect a driver to want to get everything they could from the
restart.
Sir Tim
2018-05-15 18:08:25 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by larkim
Reaction times to sounds are slower than reaction times to visual stimulus
Interesting. Is this a proven fact?
--
Sir Tim
Alan Baker
2018-05-15 18:11:01 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Sir Tim
Post by larkim
Reaction times to sounds are slower than reaction times to visual stimulus
Interesting. Is this a proven fact?
Actually, I believe it is the exact reverse of that...

<https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4456887/>
Heron
2018-05-15 20:25:38 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Alan Baker
Post by Sir Tim
Post by larkim
Reaction times to sounds are slower than reaction times to visual stimulus
Interesting. Is this a proven fact?
Actually, I believe it is the exact reverse of that...
<https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4456887/>
Conclusion
Our study concluded that the ART (Auditory Reaction
Time) is faster than the VRT (Visual Reaction Time)
in medical students.
bra
2018-05-15 23:37:55 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Heron
Our study concluded that the ART (Auditory Reaction
Time) is faster than the VRT (Visual Reaction Time)
in medical students.
Slightly away from the topic:

The NHRA and several drag-racing training schools have always known that if a driver reacts to the green light coming on, her total reaction time will be 1.03 seconds --- uncompetitive.

The green light comes on at .500 seconds after the third amber lights.

NHRA reaction timers come on at the same time as the third amber, thus 0.5 secs before the green GO.

A good driver's reaction to receiving a green light stimulus is about 0.21 secs.
A well set-up car can be moving off in 0.32 secs after that driver reaction.


Green Light: already .500 secs have passed
Driver RT: .210 secs
+ Vehicle RT: .320 secs
------------------
1.030

Yet good drivers, and I have seen them do this at local amateur races, record "impossible" reaction times of 0.5 secs.

This means that their car broke the beam at the same instant that the green light came on --- despite that seemingly 'inevitable' delay of 0.53 secs driver + vehicle reaction time.

They have schooled themselves to be on the gas well before the green --- if they are very brave, at the same instant the third amber lights --- playing with 3/100 second to avoid disqualification. Nerves of steel.

BTW, professional drag racers experienced an adjustment when in 2003 the NHRA installed LED lights for physical reliability (top fuel engine noise was destroying even industrial-strength filaments). There appears to be a small but significant difference in humanly-visible "light-up" times between incandescent bulbs and LED's. But drivers soon learned. and average RT's actually dropped.

And when you are pedalling a costly top fuel at, with sponsors watching, a red light is really not what you want.
~misfit~
2018-05-16 01:58:32 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by bra
Post by Heron
Our study concluded that the ART (Auditory Reaction
Time) is faster than the VRT (Visual Reaction Time)
in medical students.
The NHRA and several drag-racing training schools have always known
that if a driver reacts to the green light coming on, her total
reaction time will be 1.03 seconds --- uncompetitive.
The green light comes on at .500 seconds after the third amber lights.
NHRA reaction timers come on at the same time as the third amber,
thus 0.5 secs before the green GO.
A good driver's reaction to receiving a green light stimulus is about 0.21 secs.
A well set-up car can be moving off in 0.32 secs after that driver reaction.
Green Light: already .500 secs have passed
Driver RT: .210 secs
+ Vehicle RT: .320 secs
------------------
1.030
Yet good drivers, and I have seen them do this at local amateur
races, record "impossible" reaction times of 0.5 secs.
This means that their car broke the beam at the same instant that the
green light came on --- despite that seemingly 'inevitable' delay of
0.53 secs driver + vehicle reaction time.
They have schooled themselves to be on the gas well before the green
--- if they are very brave, at the same instant the third amber
lights --- playing with 3/100 second to avoid disqualification.
Nerves of steel.
BTW, professional drag racers experienced an adjustment when in 2003
the NHRA installed LED lights for physical reliability (top fuel
engine noise was destroying even industrial-strength filaments).
There appears to be a small but significant difference in
humanly-visible "light-up" times between incandescent bulbs and
LED's. But drivers soon learned. and average RT's actually dropped.
Yep. Well-known fact (at least in the electronics field). That's why I've
been running LED brake lights in my car ever since it was (reasonably)
possible to get them*. Most drivers seem to be multi-tasking most of the
time so having stop lamps that go from nothing to bright almost instantly
gives me a much better chance of avoiding an accident than having lamps
based on technology over a century old. Incandescant lamps are nowhere near
as eye-catching due to their innate light-up mode that is more of a slow
fade-in than an off/on cycle.

*I've been using an Hella Matrix 12x LED high-stop brake light stuck to the
rear window since 1990-ish (when they cost >$50 compared with an
incandescant version that was <$10). Also I replaced my offset-pin stop/tail
lamps (BAY15-D or 1157) with LED versions when they first became available
about 10 years ago. I was ordering them from overseas long before they were
available here and have replaced them regularly as better and brighter lamps
come to market.

I also use LED turn indicator lamps for the same reason. They catch the eye
better and can be quite a bit brighter for a fraction of the energy required
to get a metal wire to incandesce.
--
Shaun.

"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)
Post by bra
And when you are pedalling a costly top fuel at, with sponsors
watching, a red light is really not what you want.
bra
2018-05-16 02:49:27 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by ~misfit~
Post by bra
BTW, professional drag racers experienced an adjustment when in 2003
the NHRA installed LED lights for physical reliability (top fuel
engine noise was destroying even industrial-strength filaments).
There appears to be a small but significant difference in
humanly-visible "light-up" times between incandescent bulbs and
LED's. But drivers soon learned. and average RT's actually dropped.
Yep. Well-known fact (at least in the electronics field). That's why I've
been running LED brake lights in my car ever since it was (reasonably)
possible to get them*. Most drivers seem to be multi-tasking most of the
time so having stop lamps that go from nothing to bright almost instantly
gives me a much better chance of avoiding an accident than having lamps
based on technology over a century old. Incandescant lamps are nowhere near
as eye-catching due to their innate light-up mode that is more of a slow
fade-in than an off/on cycle.
I also use LED turn indicator lamps for the same reason. They catch the eye
better and can be quite a bit brighter for a fraction of the energy required
to get a metal wire to incandesce.
--
Shaun.
Thanks for that; nice to have some background.
t***@gmail.com
2018-05-16 03:50:21 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by bra
Thanks for that; nice to have some background.
From a pirating thief?
Ya, he's a stand up guy all right.
Give your head a shake.
~misfit~
2018-05-16 04:18:33 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by bra
Post by ~misfit~
Post by bra
BTW, professional drag racers experienced an adjustment when in 2003
the NHRA installed LED lights for physical reliability (top fuel
engine noise was destroying even industrial-strength filaments).
There appears to be a small but significant difference in
humanly-visible "light-up" times between incandescent bulbs and
LED's. But drivers soon learned. and average RT's actually dropped.
Yep. Well-known fact (at least in the electronics field). That's why
I've been running LED brake lights in my car ever since it was
(reasonably) possible to get them*. Most drivers seem to be
multi-tasking most of the time so having stop lamps that go from
nothing to bright almost instantly gives me a much better chance of
avoiding an accident than having lamps based on technology over a
century old. Incandescant lamps are nowhere near as eye-catching due
to their innate light-up mode that is more of a slow fade-in than an
off/on cycle.
I also use LED turn indicator lamps for the same reason. They catch
the eye better and can be quite a bit brighter for a fraction of the
energy required to get a metal wire to incandesce.
--
Shaun.
Thanks for that; nice to have some background.
You're welcome. One thing to note is that (on my car at least) when I
changed to LED indicator lamps I needed to change the indicator 'flasher
module' from the old bi-mettalic strip version to an electronic version.
That's because the LED lamps don't draw enough current to heat up the
bi-mettalic strip and put it into 'flash mode'.

There can be other issues changing to LED lamps with cars that use the
CANBUS system due to the system not 'seeing' the resistance expected from
incandescant lamps. However it's possible to buy lamps that have resistors
fitted to them so that they'll work on CANBUS vehicles.
--
Shaun.

"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)
t***@gmail.com
2018-05-16 04:54:49 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by ~misfit~
You're welcome.
Until you shit on him again.
You bi-polar asshole.
larkim
2018-05-16 06:36:07 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Aargh, I actually meant to post sound is faster than sight in terms of reactions, bit clearly typed the wrong thing!!!
larkim
2018-05-16 08:29:35 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Alan Baker
Post by Sir Tim
Post by larkim
Reaction times to sounds are slower than reaction times to visual stimulus
Interesting. Is this a proven fact?
Actually, I believe it is the exact reverse of that...
<https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4456887/>
Indeed it is, and I knew that despite what I typed. The fact that he would
react quicker to a beep in the ear than what he sees in front of him was to
be my point!
Sir Tim
2018-05-16 10:11:28 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by larkim
Post by Alan Baker
Post by Sir Tim
Post by larkim
Reaction times to sounds are slower than reaction times to visual stimulus
Interesting. Is this a proven fact?
Actually, I believe it is the exact reverse of that...
<https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4456887/>
Indeed it is, and I knew that despite what I typed. The fact that he would
react quicker to a beep in the ear than what he sees in front of him was to
be my point!
That makes sense to me.
--
Sir Tim
Bigbird
2018-05-16 11:23:35 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by larkim
Post by Alan Baker
Post by Sir Tim
Post by larkim
Reaction times to sounds are slower than reaction times to
visual stimulus >>>
Post by larkim
Post by Alan Baker
Post by Sir Tim
Interesting. Is this a proven fact?
Actually, I believe it is the exact reverse of that...
<https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4456887/>
Indeed it is, and I knew that despite what I typed. The fact that
he would react quicker to a beep in the ear than what he sees in
front of him was to be my point!
That makes sense to me.
I dunno, I still think I react quicker to visual stimuli... and the
older I get the more I need.
larkim
2018-05-16 14:35:35 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Bigbird
Post by larkim
Post by Alan Baker
Post by Sir Tim
Post by larkim
Reaction times to sounds are slower than reaction times to
visual stimulus >>>
Post by larkim
Post by Alan Baker
Post by Sir Tim
Interesting. Is this a proven fact?
Actually, I believe it is the exact reverse of that...
<https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4456887/>
Indeed it is, and I knew that despite what I typed. The fact that
he would react quicker to a beep in the ear than what he sees in
front of him was to be my point!
That makes sense to me.
I dunno, I still think I react quicker to visual stimuli... and the
older I get the more I need.
It's a common one at kids interactive museums - flash a light, hit a pad,
make a sound, hit a pad. Sound reactions are always quicker.

I did read something a while back that what we think of as being "real" as
contemporaneous is actually more like 5 seconds ago, so we process reality
a while after we have reacted and acted. I'm sure there's good science
behind that, but it is freaky.
DumbedDownUSA
2018-05-16 15:31:15 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by larkim
Post by Bigbird
Post by larkim
Post by Alan Baker
Post by Sir Tim
Post by larkim
Reaction times to sounds are slower than reaction times to
visual stimulus >>>
Post by larkim
Post by Alan Baker
Post by Sir Tim
Interesting. Is this a proven fact?
Actually, I believe it is the exact reverse of that...
<https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4456887/>
Indeed it is, and I knew that despite what I typed. The fact
that he would react quicker to a beep in the ear than what he
sees in front of him was to be my point!
That makes sense to me.
I dunno, I still think I react quicker to visual stimuli... and the
older I get the more I need.
It's a common one at kids interactive museums - flash a light, hit a
pad, make a sound, hit a pad. Sound reactions are always quicker.
I left off the smilie... it was intended as a tongue in cheek response.
:)
--
Trump averages six falsehoods a day; how you doin'?
Sir Tim
2018-05-16 21:55:04 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Bigbird
Post by larkim
Post by Alan Baker
Post by Sir Tim
Post by larkim
Reaction times to sounds are slower than reaction times to
visual stimulus >>>
Post by larkim
Post by Alan Baker
Post by Sir Tim
Interesting. Is this a proven fact?
Actually, I believe it is the exact reverse of that...
<https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4456887/>
Indeed it is, and I knew that despite what I typed. The fact that
he would react quicker to a beep in the ear than what he sees in
front of him was to be my point!
That makes sense to me.
I dunno, I still think I react quicker to visual stimuli... and the
older I get the more I need.
Well, that’s a different question :-)

larkim
2018-05-16 08:28:41 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Sir Tim
Post by larkim
Reaction times to sounds are slower than reaction times to visual stimulus
Interesting. Is this a proven fact?
--
Sir Tim
Mea maxima culpa, that was a mis-type.

My logic was to be that even if he had an audio indication (to which he
would react quicker than to a visual one, despite what I actually wrote!)
the visual reaction to the fact that Stroll hadn't pushed the go button
would always be slower and contrary to expectations.

But I messed that point up by not being able to type out my thoughts
accurately!
Bigbird
2018-05-16 09:09:00 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Sir Tim
Post by larkim
Reaction times to sounds are slower than reaction times to visual stimulus
Interesting. Is this a proven fact?
Depends how far away the event is. ;)
M2T
2018-05-14 23:47:03 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Bigbird
Post by M2T
Post by geoff
How come no penalty for MV driving up Stroll's arse ? (That should
give texasserbater a semi at least ...).
geoff
They both received the green go lights on their dashboards at the
same time. Stroll was in another world and missed it, he contiued to
tour not accellerate as all the other drivers did.
That can happen and does, it hardly mitigates accelerating into another
driver.
Stroll isn't the most attentive driver. Ask Seb for his opinion.
Edmund
2018-05-14 08:36:46 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by geoff
How come no penalty for MV driving up Stroll's arse ? (That should give
texasserbater a semi at least ...).
geoff
Some drivers are allowed a lot more then others.
I read RB considered max's race as a clean one.
Only one collision.

Edmund
Sir Tim
2018-05-14 11:02:01 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by geoff
How come no penalty for MV driving up Stroll's arse ? (That should give
texasserbater a semi at least ...).
geoff
Stroll was asleep.
geoff
2018-05-14 20:53:26 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Sir Tim
Post by geoff
How come no penalty for MV driving up Stroll's arse ? (That should give
texasserbater a semi at least ...).
geoff
Stroll was asleep.
Try that while you are driving and it isn't the sluggish dude who will
be prosecuted.

geoff
Loading...