I think it would be a bad idea to race for the following reasons
- Anders Ekman is indeed the specialist and has been working with these kind of issues for a very long time. Therefore his opinion should be trusted.
- It is also a safety issue, not only for the drivers of Eagle Racing but also for the other drivers in the field who could be harmed in case the Eagle Racing cars are not functioning the way they are supposed to. In such an already very dangerous sport, the focus should be on minimizing the risk of harming the people involved.
-The issue is obviously related to the temperature that is very low that day. Clearly the temperature will not change, so Eagle Racing should not participate.
-Furthermore, as for the Goodbridge team coming to have a look that day, it would be a very bad idea to have them witness a possible engine failure of an Eagle Racing car on the track. They have not yet signed the contract with Eagle Racing and therefore this race is crucial.
- The owner of Goodbridge, Sir Ralph Winfield,is of course a lover of the racing sport, however I cannot imagine he will support additional risk of harming people involved in the racing. He loves the sport but is not as focused on success and money as the Bauer people. Therefore Eagle Racing should take this into account.
Why we should not race: -sponsorship deal is not closed yet. Sir Ralph seems to hold back, which heightens uncertainty about the deal and therefore it is no good argument for continuing the race.
Why it is bad to race: -In case of an accident, the sponsorship might no through at all. By not racing we’ll still have a chance to convince him.
Why we should not race: - it will show to our investor that our team is not capable in the race by allowing defect machine to compete. - somebody gonna injury or die.
Why should: - have fun, man! its racing, machine blows up is one of the attractive and memorable events (for me, actually) - if Sir Ralph is a fan of racing, he should understand my point above, and any accident will not affect the investment decision. - if we are not racing, we lose before compete. lets show that we have the mental of champion, fight till the end, on any circumstances... :D
I would like to present all my arguments about not to race and why it would be bad to race.
-Chief Engineer Anders has proven his worth, so we can trust him.
-Engine Engineer is too young and has little experience.
-The temperature theory has strong basis (many gasket failures in low temperatures like Sunday's)
-There was an engine failure during the testing rounds the day before. Most probably will happen during the race when the engine will under more pressure.
-Sir Ralf prefers to wait and sign after the race. That means that his decision will depend of the outcome. Engine blow means no contract.
-Driver's safety.
-If there is this option, we could postponed the meeting for the next race under less risky conditions.
Hi! these are my arguments why not to race, and why racing could have negative consequences: - There seems to be a correlation between the engine failures and the temperature, since today the temperature is low, it is more likely that there will be an engine problem. - The problems with the engine could have serious consequences, for the driver of our car and for other drivers and bystanders. - Based on this potential bad performance, Sir Ralph could decide he doesnt want to sponsor ER anymore. So the sponsorship could be lost.
I have one more point: the decision not to race is based on the experience and knowledge of the chief engineer, he has proved in the past that his decisions are right and reasonable, so why doubt now...
- In case of engine blowing at a bad moment, the driver's safety is put at risk. - The technical costs for engines are already over budget. - There has been an incident in the test round the day before, hence it is likely to happen also during the race. - The last time they blew an engine, the temperature was the same as the one forecasted for the race. - In case of engine failure, probably Goodbridge will not sponsor the team, and also other potential sponsors would not be willing to sponsor the team in the near future.
hey,
ReplyDeletei came up with the following arguments to race/not race:
Race: yes
-Risk of losing sponsorship
-No hard evidence of engine failure due to temperature
-Akman is too carefull and afraid to take risks, while in sports and business taking risks is the only way to win
Race: No
-Based on professional decision from specialist Akman, even though it is impopular
-Drivers safety
-Responsible attitude towards racing
best,
Jordi
I think it would be a bad idea to race for the following reasons
ReplyDelete- Anders Ekman is indeed the specialist and has been working with these kind of issues for a very long time. Therefore his opinion should be trusted.
- It is also a safety issue, not only for the drivers of Eagle Racing but also for the other drivers in the field who could be harmed in case the Eagle Racing cars are not functioning the way they are supposed to. In such an already very dangerous sport, the focus should be on minimizing the risk of harming the people involved.
-The issue is obviously related to the temperature that is very low that day. Clearly the temperature will not change, so Eagle Racing should not participate.
-Furthermore, as for the Goodbridge team coming to have a look that day, it would be a very bad idea to have them witness a possible engine failure of an Eagle Racing car on the track. They have not yet signed the contract with Eagle Racing and therefore this race is crucial.
- The owner of Goodbridge, Sir Ralph Winfield,is of course a lover of the racing sport, however I cannot imagine he will support additional risk of harming people involved in the racing. He loves the sport but is not as focused on success and money as the Bauer people. Therefore Eagle Racing should take this into account.
Cheers,
Adriane
Why we should not race:
ReplyDelete-sponsorship deal is not closed yet. Sir Ralph seems to hold back, which heightens uncertainty about the deal and therefore it is no good argument for continuing the race.
Why it is bad to race:
-In case of an accident, the sponsorship might no through at all. By not racing we’ll still have a chance to convince him.
Tim
Why we should not race:
ReplyDelete- it will show to our investor that our team is not capable in the race by allowing defect machine to compete.
- somebody gonna injury or die.
Why should:
- have fun, man! its racing, machine blows up is one of the attractive and memorable events (for me, actually)
- if Sir Ralph is a fan of racing, he should understand my point above, and any accident will not affect the investment decision.
- if we are not racing, we lose before compete. lets show that we have the mental of champion, fight till the end, on any circumstances... :D
I would like to present all my arguments about not to race and why it would be bad to race.
ReplyDelete-Chief Engineer Anders has proven his worth, so we can trust him.
-Engine Engineer is too young and has little experience.
-The temperature theory has strong basis (many gasket failures in low temperatures like Sunday's)
-There was an engine failure during the testing rounds the day before. Most probably will happen during the race when the engine will under more pressure.
-Sir Ralf prefers to wait and sign after the race. That means that his decision will depend of the outcome. Engine blow means no contract.
-Driver's safety.
-If there is this option, we could postponed the meeting for the next race under less risky conditions.
Hi!
ReplyDeletethese are my arguments why not to race, and why racing could have negative consequences:
- There seems to be a correlation between the engine failures and the temperature, since today the temperature is low, it is more likely that there will be an engine problem.
- The problems with the engine could have serious consequences, for the driver of our car and for other drivers and bystanders.
- Based on this potential bad performance, Sir Ralph could decide he doesnt want to sponsor ER anymore. So the sponsorship could be lost.
Maaike
I have one more point:
ReplyDeletethe decision not to race is based on the experience and knowledge of the chief engineer, he has proved in the past that his decisions are right and reasonable, so why doubt now...
These are my arguments supporting not racing:
ReplyDelete- In case of engine blowing at a bad moment, the driver's safety is put at risk.
- The technical costs for engines are already over budget.
- There has been an incident in the test round the day before, hence it is likely to happen also during the race.
- The last time they blew an engine, the temperature was the same as the one forecasted for the race.
- In case of engine failure, probably Goodbridge will not sponsor the team, and also other potential sponsors would not be willing to sponsor the team in the near future.
Francesco