Equality of opportunity is an aim of ordinary people.
But the aim of those at the top is almost always to retain their own inbuilt advantage, at the expense of everyone else.

Society is controlled by those at the top, which is largely why it is unfair.

I would say Hamilton's chance of winning the drivers title can be influenced a lot by Bottas in the next race. It's expected that Mercedes will dominate in Saudi Arabia. If Bottas can somehow finish second behind Hamilton, it would put Hamilton ahead going into the final race. Whereas if Max finishes second, Hamilton is still behind.

This could prove crucial in the event of an "accidental" collision in the final race.

8. Take the Covid-19 vaccine.



That depends on the person, and the choices they make.
A good diet, regular exercise, not smoking, low alcohol intake, etc are great and will get you a long way. But they don't make you invincible and immortal. Science can help, and if you don't want to look at vaccines, consider anything else - how about antibiotics?

Yes, definitely. Hamilton and Verstappen are the best two drivers out there, and it's been a great season. The one thing that could make it better - but which is unlikely to ever happen - is to have them as team-mates, racing each other in the same car. This season has been great, but often when Hamilton beats Verstappen you wonder how much is because it's a Merc track, and if Verstappen beats Hamilton you wonder how much is beacuse it's a Red Bull track. To see them fighting in perfectly equal cars would be amazing... but I don't think either would ever accept the other as a team-mate. And Mercedes certainly wouldn't do it after the chaos of the Rosberg years.

I think the reasoning was that there just weren't enough long straights in Qatar, and they would get more advantage from it in Saudi Arabia. It's kind of counterintuitive, because the engine gives Mercedes an advantage, so you might think they're more likely to use it at a circuit that is thought to favour Red Bull, like Qatar... but it turns out they're less likely to use it there, because the benefit is less. This is why I think Mercedes are looking very strong for Saudi Arabia, it's a track that is supposed to suit them, plus Hamilton's nearly new engine should give an additional speed advantage.

Qatar surprised me, particularly that huge 0.4s gap in qualifying. That's Hamilton with an old engine at a supposed Red Bull track. I would think Red Bull are panicking a bit, hence the antics of Horner, for which he was reprimanded.

But it's unlikely Hamilton would come away from Saudi with the championship lead, unless Bottas can somehow finish ahead of Verstappen... which is stretching credibility a bit. Verstappen in a go-kart would beat Bottas in a Merc.

I'd imagine the state United are in, no established manager will want to risk their reputation by going there. It's a huge club, with huge expectations... but the squad is in a bad state, and just appointing a new manager solves nothing. They have fundamental problems which will not be quick or simple to resolve.

I've said it before, but the biggest problem is Ronaldo. He's a goal-machine, and one of the biggest stars in the game... you absolutely have to play him, you can't leave him on the bench. But this brings problems. Ronaldo goes missing a lot, he won't press or do anything when his team doesn't have the ball.

Each team has ten outfield players, and the differences between teams at the top are often quite small. If you have one player in your team who plays like Ronaldo, you will never be the best team. Yes he scores goals, but this is outweighed by the negative impact he has on the team. It's no coincidence that Juventus struggled when he was there, despite his huge goals total.

Wonder how often the name 'Prince Andrew' will come up in this trial? Not after an exact figure, just to the nearest hundred.  

I would expect it to be stronger.
Saudi Arabia is widely considered to be a track that would favour Mercedes. Qatar is not.
Hamilton has his new Brazil engine back for Saudi Arabia. In Qatar he used an old one. Whilst in Saudi it won't be 100% new, it has still only done one race, so will be new-ish, which always gives a performance advantage.

Of course Max being Max, and supremely fast, he always has a chance. Even if Hamilton takes pole by half a second again, if Max can start second and beat Hamilton off the line at the start, he won't relinquish the place easily.

Nothing is certain of course, but if I had to pick a most likely outcome, I'd expect a Hamilton win with Max second, then a winner-takes-all final race of the season. I just hope it isn't decided by a DNF or grid penalties.

I think the strategy was a consequence of his poor position, which was his own fault. He was stuck behind a lot of cars, has a fast car, but isn't any good at overtaking. Best strategy is probably a one-stop, so that he can overtake everyone as they pit... but of course it didn't work here.



I think that extra fastest lap point could prove crucial, especially given what has happened so far this season. Mercedes are expected to dominate on the next track, and Hamilton will also bring his new Brazil engine back for this race. Bottas is useless, so we might expect Hamilton first and Verstappen second. There is almost zero chance of Hamilton getting fastest lap, as Perez would just pit and take it back off him... in which case we might expect to see Verstappen leading by a single point, going into the final race... in which case, what's the chance of an "I was just racing hard!" incident where Verstappen 'accidentally' crashes into Hamilton, and forces them both to DNF... giving Max the title by one point.

Not saying it will happen this way, but it's not particularly unlikely, either. Championships have been decided this way before, back in the Schumacher era, so it's hardly unprecedented.

What I hope for is just fair racing from everyone.

There are some people who always want to cause trouble, riot, loot, etc. A public protest of sufficient size will always attract these people, irrespective of the reason for protest (and irrespective of whether it's 'right' or 'left'). This fact doesn't invalidate all mass protests, does it? Perhaps some people out there are peacefully protesting against racial injustice? I've had discussions with you before, and I know you're not stupid, so you must realise this. In which case, why do you equate BLM with terrorism? What's the real reason? Those blacks have been uppity since the '60s, haven't they? They should know their place and get back on the plantation, amirite? [/s]




Yeah, same for me.

Yes, he recovered well, as expected, he's a good driver, like Hamilton.

Compare with Bottas who actually started ahead of Verstappen. In theory he could have acted as a travelling roadblock and kept Verstappen behind him and in the low points. But obviously in reality it's different. Bottas again did Hamilton zero favours in his battle for the title, he's not so much a second driver as a nothing driver, may as well not even be there.



One point to note is that out of the final three tracks of the season, Qatar was the one that was supposed to suit Red Bull. The Merc pace here was ominous... but it keeps the title battle alive.

Hilariously inept start from Bottas, losing five places in about five seconds. Verstappen seven places clear of Bottas already! I know he's going to a lesser team next year, but really is he good enough for any drive in F1?

Alonso is the only real obstacle for Verstappen now, so you'd expect him to finish in second, with Hamilton racing away out front.

Yes, it's confirmed for both. Could it prove important that Bottas is ahead of Verstappen now? In theory yes, but you'd expect Bottas won't prove any obstacle for Max.
It's all in Hamilton's hands now, really. This looks like a Hamilton win with Verstappen second, barring any crashes or other unpredictable events... but of course there is a lot of unpredictability!

Yes I'd love it if the stewards stopped handing out grid penalties to the title rivals. But will be nice I suppose to see Max carving through the field, after Lewis did it last time.

It has nothing to do with Trump, yet. I'm considering a future scenario, in which this ruling and the current machinations of elements of the Republican party intersect.

I'm not sure whether or not you personally believe the election was stolen. But of course you're aware that Trump wasn't happy about losing, and has done everything he can to try to reverse the decision, and to subvert the democratic process. Even Mitch McConnell has been clear on the consequences of this, during Biden's certification.

But Trump is charismatic, and knows how to rile up his base. And he has plenty of allies. And a large proportion of the population believe his claims, including 68% of Republican voters. Also, 30% of Republicans believe that "true American patriots may have to resort to violence in order to save our country". Can you see how the Rittenhouse verdict may have consequences here?


https://www.prri.org/research/competing-visions-of-america-an-evolving-identity-or-a-culture-under-attack/

Ultimately Trump wasn't able to reverse the election result, because he didn't have his people in the right places. This is a mistake he is working hard to address for '24. It's no coincidence that Trump allies are running for secretary of state in certain locations... and not even just against Democrat incumbents, they're also fighting against those Republicans who opposed 'stop the steal'.

If you don't get enough votes to win an election, and the officials refuse to reverse the decision in your favour, then you have two options. You can get more votes, or you can put more compliant officials in place. One is somewhat easier than the other.

So, consider the four points below, and ask yourself whether these might not intersect if Trump loses in '24.

1) 30% of Republican voters believe that "true American patriots may have to resort to violence in order to save our country".
2) Trump is putting the 'correct' officials in place, who will certify the results in his favour regardless of the vote count.
3) If the votes say the Democrats won, but the 'impartial' officials say that Trump won, then a lot of Democrat voters will head out onto the streets to complain.
4) The Rittenhouse verdict means that "true American patriots" can kill protesters with impunity, and the dead won't even be called victims.

Hamilton does look very strong here, nearly half a second clear in qualifying. Even if Verstappen gets the jump on him at the start, you'd expect Hamilton to reel him in quite easily.
On paper, with Bottas third and Perez nowhere, Mercedes should have a clear tactical advantage. In practice though I think it's meaningless, as Bottas won't be good enough to hinder Verstappen at all. Even if he undercuts him with an early stop, Verstappen will just cruise past him on the track.




Yes, agreed, I think he's demonstrated that enough times this season. The big issue here is how the rules will be interpreted after the weird decision last weekend. The message is that it's now okay to defend a corner on the inside by forcing an outside attacker off the track... I expect we'll see that tested a few times during the race. It was just Verstappen last weekend, but now everyone can do it.

It's also now reasonable for far-right vigilantes to roam around the country, travelling from state to state, killing whoever they please, so long as they can provide (or have a lawyer who can provide) some flimsy pretext.
The verdict does appear to have set an alarming precedent. Anyone who protests against anything is now fair game for any extremist with a gun.

The aftermath of 2020 was bad enough. Imagine what might happen if Trump loses again in '24.

Yes, Mercedes are looking a bit stronger, especially after third practice... although Verstappen did run fewer laps. The issue with his DRS flap is a bit of a concern, hopefully for him they get it fixed and it won't impact his qualifying.

But yes we head into qualifying now, and it appears that Mercedes have the upper hand. If (it's a big 'if') they can get a front-row lockout, then it bodes well for Hamilton, and for keeping the title race open.

This is the BADecker argument of 'you didn't gather the data yourself, first-hand, therefore it's all false'. Are there any data you trust? What is the source? I would argue that ourworldindata are quite transparent in their funding and their sources. You imply that the data are from a single source, when that is clearly not the case. Sources for the Covid-19 data are listed here. You can then go back to each country and check the multiple sources of their own data. It's stretching credibility somewhat to suggest that all of these people, from countries all around the world, are working together in some vast conspiracy.




I do struggle to tell you and tvbcof apart, but here I think we have a distinction. I had no idea what you meant by 'PUREBLOODS', until I looked it up...


I am not remotely surprised that you believe you are a wizard. It is no coincidence that tin-foil hats are pointy.

Or even if he didn't have a rifle.

Whereas in this case, he just happened to be in that place at that time, waving a gun around? No premeditated intent to kill anyone... probably even forgot he had a gun.  


He gets to live. The people he murdered don't. Wonder if the verdict would have been the same if he'd been black and on the other side? Of course, I don't really wonder... that suggests some degree of uncertainty.




Appreciate I'm not from the US, just an outsider from a nation with no gun culture... but I think many outside the US will see this the same way I do, innocent until proven guilty... if you're white. This can't be separated from its context.