Romain Grosjean, Coyne, IndyCar, Barber Motorsport Park, 2021

Strain on injured hand “a bit painful” during IndyCar test – Grosjean

RaceFans Round-up

Posted on

| Written by

In the round-up: Romain Grosjean says he was still experiencing pain from his injured hand during his first IndyCar test yesterday.

Social media

Notable posts from Twitter, Instagram and more:

Advert | Become a RaceFans supporter and go ad-free

Advert | Become a RaceFans supporter and go ad-free

Comment of the day

The Circuit de Catalunya needs improvement at places besides turn 10, says @Stefmeister:

I’ve never liked the tighter turn 10 introduced in 2004 so it’s nice to see them revert to something closer to the original layout. Just a shame they couldn’t just go back to using the original corner as it was.

I just wish they could do something about that awful chicane a few corners later. I think that is one of the worst corners of the entire season. It totally ruins the flow of the track. Cars always look slow and clunky through it so it’s horrid to watch the cars drive through. It’s awful to drive on the games and worst of all it robs us of two fantastic corners.

Happy birthday!

Happy birthday to Georgedaviesf1!

If you want a birthday shout-out tell us when yours is via the contact form or adding to the list here.

Author information

Keith Collantine
Lifelong motor sport fan Keith set up RaceFans in 2005 - when it was originally called F1 Fanatic. Having previously worked as a motoring...

Got a potential story, tip or enquiry? Find out more about RaceFans and contact us here.

27 comments on “Strain on injured hand “a bit painful” during IndyCar test – Grosjean”

  1. Gran turismo delayed? That never happened before. How things change.

  2. “To me, it’s really killed what Formula 1’s all about. More power to Mercedes for being able to dominate so much of the thing, but who wants to go to a race when you know who’s going to win every friggin’ race that’s out there? That just gets boring.”

    What a stupid comment. Mercedes dominance is F1 and what it’s about. I’ve probably seen 500 races and I’m guessing I could have probably called the winner on 95% of them.

    1. @darryn And you don’t think that is a problem? You like predictability?

      1. Predictability is probably what F1 fans really like.
        Most comment on this site are very predictable.
        But of course you already expected me to write this.

      2. Personally I would prefer for F1 to be more unpredictable, but I prefer it like this to artificially created unpredictability. That is why 2012 was such a great session; because it was totally unpredictable, but that came naturally and was not artificial. Hopefully the 2022 rules will do the same thing, because there is nothing unfair about those rules, so it will not be artificial unpredictability.

    2. Agree.

      But Gene also said:

      “From a business standpoint, being in Formula 1 has been extremely successful as far as promoting our brand name,” he says. “It’s a great sport to be in, because there’s no other sport like Formula 1, and there’s a lot of excitement.

      Gene is complex… he’s both bored and excited. He’d be more excited if Ferrari hadn’t dragged his car down the order with their engine ‘issues’.

      I don’t consider Haas a F1 constructor. Haas F1 is just another advertising platform using all 3rd party designs and parts. That is far more boring than a team with actual technical expertise and leadership.

      1. Yes, it was boring when it was lotus, boring when it was McLaren, boring when it was Williams, boring when it was Ferrari, boring when it was Red Bull. Ahh but remember when it was Mercedes,Maserati, Ferrari, Vanwall, Cooper, Brabham, March and Renault, those were the days.

        1. @hohum I know you’re being sarcastic but it was less ‘boring’ at Mac when it was Senna/Prost and at Mercedes when it was LH/NR.

          1. petebaldwin (@)
            24th February 2021, 17:52

            That sums it up for me – I don’t mind one team winning all of the time. It happens in F1 that a team creates a better car and they then have a good platform for the following seasons.

            What I don’t like is when a team pick a slow driver to sit in the 2nd car to make things easy for their number 1 driver. I get why they do it as it removes a lot of stress from things but it also makes those seasons forgettable. There’s a reason why we still talk about Prost and Senna or even Nico and Hamilton. In 20 years time, no-one will be talking about the last few seasons because there’s nothing to talk about.

          2. @petebaldwin I admired TW (still do) for letting LH and NR settle it on the track. He spoke directly about it. He said that without him doing that, and with the dominant cars they had, there would have been little to watch that would have been enthralling. At least at the top end of the grid which is where the titles are won. Ya then Nico retired suddenly and it left them scrambling and settling, and at the same time Ferrari added a bit at the top at least for a couple of half-seasons, which would have relieved TW of some of that responsibility he had been feeling from 2014 through 2016, but still, too bad about VB. I think part of the strategy for TW to have talked up the ‘threat’ from Ferrari (and now RBR) was so he could promote the idea that, even subliminally, team turmoil, of which he wanted more, would not be desirable. But ohh if VB steps it up the gloves will have to come off, lol.

            In general it is far better to have top drivers on top teams able to duke it out, in a perfect world of course, and I will always feel like some discomfort in managing a couple of heady top drivers on a team should be far outweighed by the throngs of paying fans who are robbed when a team leans towards a 1 and 2 status on the team, especially when that is from race one. And I know TW gets that, and I don’t even blame him for VB, although it is too bad he hasn’t been replaced already, but I think it is important to appreciate that as much as TW/LH/Mercedes made it sound like the peace and quiet on the team was so much better post-NR, TW had re-signed Nico for two more years and he would have been there through 2018 at least. So how much headache was it actually? Not too much that a bunch of front row lockouts didn’t cure.

            But alas their dominance has been so strong that even a weaker driver than NR can still provide the front row lockouts (less exclusively though) without the tension and drama…to our loss. We had some of that with Max and DR, which left them scrambling too, them really wanting to retain DR.

          3. @petebaldwin Just wanted to add another element to this. As an example of what I am about to speak, when JV and associates started BAR, they wanted one car painted in Lucky Strike colours, and the other car in 555 colours. They were denied this, and thus ended up with the zipper car, half and half paint scheme. Others know their F1 history better than I, but it had not been unprecedented to have differently painted cars on a team. However, BAR’s request was denied as it would have been ‘too confusing’ for the audience.

            The point being, the beauty of having two major sponsors on a team, each with their ‘own car’ or livery, would mean that a team would be far less likely to designate a 1 and 2, and therefore hang the one sponsor out to dry unfairly. There would be a far greater tendency for a team to hire two roosters if cars could be painted and sponsored separately.

      2. Haas F1 is just another advertising platform using all 3rd party designs and parts

        But, isn’t that is one of F1’s biggest USPs compared to other sports / business. Over the years (pre-Ecclestone, Ecclestone, Liberty eras), Formula One has attracted brands looking to quickly expand their global awareness, charge pricing premium for their real products / services (on account of improved brand image due to association with F1), test out global markets for expansion. Formula One / sponsorship with an F1 team provides the easiest way to achieve all of these aims as F1 is the only sport that travels across the world every year and one where only a single contract (either with F1 / team) has to be executed. (To get the same coverage across soccer, cricket, tennis would mean contracts with the multiple tournament organizers, multiple teams and athletes).

        And this very nature of F1’s USP means that it will always be a short term option for most brands / car companies. Because these objectives get fulfilled in a 2-3 years after which F1 becomes a cost rather than an investment. Hence, a constant cycle of different names in F1 is I guess guaranteed and will continue going forward as well.

      3. Hm @jimmi-cynic isn’t what Haas is doing more or less exactly what many teams in the 1960s-70s did? Get themselves a chassis, an engine (often the Cosworth) and a gearbox, bolt the thing together and have a go at setting it up and running it in a way that made them achieve results?

        I am sure @hohum can tell us if I am wildly amiss there, but in essense, the job of the team is to put a car together and then get on track and race with it.
        Sure, the teams who build the whole thing themselves are mostly a step ahead of the rest, when they do a good job. But Ferrari shows us time and again, that you can have all the money in the world, all the renown and engineering to build your whole car yourselve – and at times even have one of the fastest cars – but then you can throw things away by bad strategy, by driver mistakes, by putting the wrong pressure on the team which makes teamwork fail.
        Or the other way round, one does not have to have the best car, nor the best drivers all the time, but good stragegy, teamwork and a dose of luck can get you a Gasly win, a 3rd in the championship for McLaren last year etc.
        Which is exactly what does make it worthwhile in my view.

        1. Sure… there’s vague similarities to the ‘garagistas’ of the 70s, @bascb. But those independent teams were in it ‘to have a go’. For fun and glory – Hesketh style.

          Not the bland corporate branding exercise that infuses the current pretend garagistas of the current corporate era, like Haas.

          Different eras. Even Ferrari had to morph into a corporate shareholder-driven team. Enzo started selling road cars to support his racing efforts. Today, Ferrari uses F1 to promote its road cars and rich merchandising heritage.

          1. Sure @jimmi-cynic, since he is the boss of a big company, he has to be reasonable, responsible towards the other stakeholders and show that the company gets somethign out of it (more than “just” the fun of going for it).

            But despite the bland colour scheme and the cold logic Haas’ expresses about the subject here, you only have to look at how much Haas is invested in motorsports to understand that just like most of us, he is foremost a motorsport enthusiast who is able to use his company to fullfil his racing dreams.

    3. All the people who love their unprecedented era of Mercedes complete dominance probably booed Vettel for having one truly dominant year in 2011 (which in reality was no more dominant than Mercedes in 2017)

  3. Oh boohoo! Go build a better faster car to those that say F1 is boring. F1 was never Wrestling (although thats more of a soap opera these days) there was alway periods of domination. The occasional upset is what is exciting the occasional super pass. But more often than not it was always a procession. Well atleast as far as i can remember. No offense to others

  4. As said above, Haas comment is silly. Even more when the sentence just before that quote is:

    Mercedes built an extremely high performance, high fuel efficiency, durable engine that no other team’s been able to come close to.

    If I did a bad job I don’t complain, either I close my mouth either I try better.

    1. petebaldwin (@)
      24th February 2021, 17:53

      Haas didn’t make their engine so they didn’t do a good or bad job…

  5. Agree with Gene. Mercedes sucks.

    1. Time to de-throne Mercedes.

    2. Except for Gene stating the opposite :P

  6. Why are there four numbers after the dot? 1:07.8768
    Tenths, hundreds, and thousands of a second, but what about the last one?

    COTD: I couldn’t agree more with it, especially on the chicane. It indeed kills the lap flow and is awful to drive.

    1. In motor racing 1/1000th is not good enough anymore I guess.
      We already had three drivers (Frentzen, Schumacher, Villeneuve) with exactly the same pole quali time (to the 1000th). A fourth decimal would have significantly reduced that risk. @jerejj

      The alternative (don’t let Liberty read this) is to go for no decimals at all, with the first to get a time to be ranked higher.
      Just imagine how busy quali will be from the get go, and we will get some upset grids.

    2. Those are naturally ten thousands of a second. Useful in ovals where gaps might be smaller than just three decimals.

  7. Ferrari are going back to LeMans ! And in the right, proper category LMH as well.
    WEC Ferrari commitment

  8. Only three more years to go. Then and only then will something be done about the engine disparity. They must get the big ten. Then see ya. Were Mercedes champions before the new engine (excluding the 50,s)? No. Then all of a sudden. Ten years later Braun says ok that’s enough. They only care about the big ten. Nothing will stop them. Not allowed to just yet. Enjoy. :-)

Comments are closed.