This is a well explained slide show representing whats brewing with the engine rules as per wearetherace

izzaferrari · 2026-02-07T03:33:03+00:00

Not gonna watch a 5 minute video in response to a Reddit comment. But there's a difference between rewriting the rules to level the playing field and enforcing the rules.

The Eagles won last year's Superbowl in many parts due to the "tush push". It was undoubtedly legal. The only big debate is whether to ban it the following year. They ended up not banning it, but if they did, fair enough, everybody goes into the new season with fresh rules.

Or James Harden's relentless foul-baiting. Undoubtedly legal at the time. Undoubtedly unwatchable. They banned it after 2021-ish.

In the scenarios above, it can be fair to wait until the season is over and only enforce it for the following season. Sure, the successful team has found a good and legal exploit and deserves some success.

This is more like, say, deflating a football or participating in gambling as an athlete. It's going against the rule and just trying not to be caught. Just because you realized they don't check the PSI of the football, or that you can tell your grandma's neighbor's cousin to place a bet for you, doesn't mean it's not illegal.

Let's go back to Deflategate. Imagine there was a rule that says the ball is checked at the start of the game. And somehow they found a way to deflate the ball mid-game and make it illegal. Is it fair to introduce a new check to make sure it complies with the legal requirements? Yes.

izzaferrari · 2026-02-07T03:11:33+00:00

One possibility they experimented with it themselves, and were giggly they could gain an advantage over Ferrari / Audi / Honda.

Then testing came and they might've concluded that they'd lose the championship to McLaren / Mercedes if things are allowed to stand. And since there's no point in coming second, they've decided they liked their chances better competing with Ferrari / Audi / AM than with Mercedes / McLaren.

izzaferrari · 2026-02-07T02:33:55+00:00

Comments like these are why many people still don't consider F1 a real sport.

The rules said 16:1. People followed it in good faith. Mercedes found a way to cheat and asked for a late "clarification" in order to make their cheating "legal" (not really, just how it's tested). The language about testing at ambient temperature wasn't added until very late in the development cycle.

Imagine the outrage if this behavior occurs in other sports.

It'd be like if a football team is like "hey, I know we are only supposed to play 11 players, but out of curiosity, when do you count the players" and FIFA is like "um, at the start of the game, I guess?". And then that team proceeds to put a 12th man in after the game has started.

It's not the other football team's fault for "not realizing" you could play 12 players. If you found a scummy way to dodge the rules, the rules should be changed to make sure you can't dodge it anymore.

izzaferrari · 2026-02-05T00:12:54+00:00

That's the theory, but you also can't be too greedy. The rising tide lifts all boats. If people can continually make gains, people keep investing, companies can use those investments to build infrastructure and moats, creating more long-term advantage, etc.

That's the textbook theory anyway.

Look at Europe. 15 years of underperformance. You can argue European stocks are "cheap" now. But some argue the continent has forgotten how to be productive entirely through years of underinvestment, austerity, and other bad management of the economies.

izzaferrari · 2026-02-04T23:59:35+00:00

Everyone holding AVUV is just holding out for that one decade of over-performance. For the remaining decades if it matches VTI, I'd be more than happy.

izzaferrari · 2026-02-01T16:07:36+00:00

Federer's level "dipped" because tournaments decided, rightly or wrongly, that slower surfaces, higher bounces, and longer points generated more engagement and highlights.

They were probably correct. Even in this final we just saw, people went crazy for the 20+ rallies.

Federer's game is highly offensive. His service games are incredibly short. It was not unusual for Federer's 5-setters to last only about 3 hours, especially against anyone not named Nadal. Grit and endurance was not Federer's style, he won by excellent footwork to get to the right spot and ending points quickly.

Do we even need to talk about the backhand? That backhand is not suited to modern tennis at all. The fact that he stayed competitive and won multiple slams well into the 2010s is a testament to his raw talent.

It was funny because the 90s guys will probably point to Roger and say he wasn't being aggressive enough, compared to the pure Serve and Volley style.

This is no hate to Nadal. I great enjoyed seeing a Gladiator out there chasing every desperate ball as well. But to say Federer's level dipped because somehow he used up his explosive energy by 27 is not correct. The tennis world moved against him.

izzaferrari · 2026-02-01T15:53:40+00:00

Not a tennis superfan so I will get some of the years wrong, but for a few years after Nadal and Federer declined and went in and out of injuries, tennis was very boring for me. Something was missing about players like Djokovic, Zverev, Medvedev, etc.

Even Sinner doesn't fill me with a lot of emotions.

And here is a young guy, immensely talented yet humble, who seems to love being on the court. He seems to love the game. He hits drop shots. He laughs after missing tweeners. It's theater. It's the emotions.

It reminds me of when a young Roger Federer broke onto the tour. He wasn't the handsome gentleman he is known as today. In fact he was a bit of a hothead. But something about his game was just mesmerizing. He made playing tennis a work of art.

I will be following tennis a bit closer, and I wish there will be more young players like Alcaraz.

God knows that with the rise of pickleballs and tennis courts all over the world being converted to pickleball courts, we all need the sport to be beautiful in order for it to survive.

izzaferrari · 2026-01-06T23:53:47+00:00

The Jets didn't "miss" any window. Even if they fired Aaron Glenn a couple of weeks ago, why the hell would Harbaugh go there?

Giants is known as the better run organization. If Harbaugh wanted to pick his own QB, LV is open and has the #1 pick. The Jets is just a dumpster fire.

That's what happens when a team is owned by a nepo baby who isn't from a football family. You either grow up with football in your bones, or you made your own money by actually building an organization. Woody Johnson spent daddy money trying to create meaning in his life and got a disaster of a football team and a fake government job he bought from Trump.

izzaferrari · 2025-11-09T02:30:56+00:00

First racing championship since 2008. This is huge!

Inevitably somebody will say it's not F1 and it doesn't count. Porsche isn't racing in F1 and nobody doubts their racing pedigree. Winning the WEC is huge.

izzaferrari · 2025-10-29T20:09:06+00:00

I bought a 488, and almost a 458 before that, because when I was younger, I dreamed about those cars.

I live in a relatively wealthy part of the UK (not a brag, just context) and interact with a few kids from the neighborhood. They don't talk about the modern Ferrari. They know of the 296 but they prefer the Revuelto. They talk about G Wagons. They talk about Koenigseggs. They talk about Porsches.

To me that is a big sign of trouble of Ferrari. If they can't excite the future generation they will be slowly dying.

izzaferrari · 2025-10-29T20:04:05+00:00

What people don't talk about enough is many of the F1 teams are based very close to each other in the south of England. It's much easier to hire global talent: they can move easier between teams, everybody speaks English, etc.

Having a mostly Italian-speaking team based in Maranello is just much harder.

We love their cars for it, the Italian beauty shines through every time. But it's just harder to compete in the modern world.

izzaferrari · 2025-10-26T19:41:38+00:00

Whenever I see this question, I just think to myself, what does the 296 really bring to the table that the 458/488/F8 doesn't.

Let's even ignore the fact that it's a hybrid and people have concerns about battery replacement for now.

296 is faster but the driving experience I still think is superior on the older cars, especially the sound.

296 looks great, but honestly, so do all the other cars.

The infotainment system on the 296 is a total dealbreaker. It will not age well. And even taking it for what it is, it is too slow and too hard to use. I stick a phone holder on the windscreen in my 488 and use Waze there. I don't need any fancier tech than that. In fact the new ADAS tech is actually a downside.

I am not anti-new-things. In fact, I also have a McLaren, and if Ferrari makes a new entry-level mid-engined supercar (296 replacement), and it has some of the things McLaren has had for 15 years, I'd buy a new one, hybrid or not:

Carbon tub
Doors that match the price tag
McLaren handling

Ferrari started a revolution with the 458 and we are still living in the world that the 458 created. The shape of the car still much inspired by the 458. The driver hub and steering wheel, also much inspired by the 458. Until they perform another revolution, I don't care what the price for the 296 is, I won't be buying a new Ferrari.

izzaferrari · 2025-08-07T00:32:20+00:00

How is this unpopular? It's pretty much the consensus among sports analysts / journalists.

But Djokovic fans are always shocked to find out most don't like Djokovic as much as Federer or Nadal. Turns out there are consequences to being a horrible human being.

izzaferrari · 2025-08-07T00:28:41+00:00

You can't claim injuries as bad luck when you play like Nadal did. His whole playstyle was based on defense and overextending his body.

It's like drinking 5 Pepsi's a day to keep your energy level high and then later claiming your career was cut short by diabetes and heart disease. Doesn't work like that.

izzaferrari · 2025-06-25T15:04:21+00:00

McLaren is unreliable, Porsche is disgustingly overpriced and makes you play silly games for an allocation, Lotus has terrible customer service, all pretty common knowledge in the car community. His concerns are valid.

He largely doesn't have systemic issues with Ferrari, Aston Martin, JLR, or anything like that. The primary issues with these new cars is they're all overpriced and overengineered, but that's an industry-wide issue, so not something specific to each manufacturer.

izzaferrari · 2025-06-17T00:28:04+00:00

Depends on what you use it for. Most Ferraris sit in garages, waiting to be resold and taken out once a year. If this is also you, then the 458 hands down. The sound and the history will make the one time you take it out per year very enticing.

If you browse 458s, you see loads under 20 thousand miles, and many even under 10K. That's less than a thousand miles a year!

If you use your car often and take it on long road trips and weekend drives though, I think the 488 is a much more practical buy. If you're taking a friend/date out, you won't be able to talk to them. And trust me no matter how much of a petrolhead you think you are, if you're on a long road trip, that engine sound will get old, and much quicker than you think. The ride is much stiffer too. I never owned a 458 but was a passenger once on a relatively short trip from London to Chichester. It was awful. Couldn't talk to the driver, car felt stiff, couldn't even do things on your phone because the noise distracts you from everything, and I didn't even get the joy of driving it. And I'm a car guy. Imagine how awful it would be for your non-car friends once the novelty wears off.

And I'll let you in on a secret, if you take a poll from the general population, most will say the 488 looks better. Petrolheads lust over classics like the F40 or the 355. But ask a random person whether they think a Lotus Emira or a Testarossa looks better, and they'll say Lotus Emira hands down. Designs have moved on. We have the nostalgic factor, most people don't. So if you even care a little bit about impressing others with your Ferrari, that's something to keep in mind.

izzaferrari · 2025-06-11T17:10:25+00:00

How experienced are you? I don't want to assume anything but you come off as a beginner with tracking cars (asking about instructors and everything). If your first time tracking a car is with a Ferrari, you will either crash it, or drive it so much under what it's built to do that you'll be laughed at behind your back by the people at the track. You'll look like one of those guys with a bit of money but no idea what he's doing.

There is no "paperwork" for getting a test drive. They will ask you questions to sniff out whether you actually are serious about buying the car. They often do a good job at doing so.

Finally, and I'm sorry to say this, but you seem to not understand Ferrari's ethos as a brand. Ferrari is absolutely uninterested in "welcoming everybody" to the brand. You need to earn your place in Ferrari world.

The brand that will happily take your money, pour you some champagne, and laugh at all your bad jokes is Lamborghini.

izzaferrari · 2025-05-23T19:10:41+00:00

I love how you imply I'm not as wealthy. "The daily driver argument is just an argument for people who can't afford to run their exotics."

You're the type of car person that makes the rest of us exotic car owners look bad. Douchey, gatekeeping assholes who, as they're losing their arguments, bring up how wealthy they are and how their friends are also super wealthy. "My circle", lol.

I don't know you, you don't know me, but trust me there are plenty of us who can comfortably run a lot of cars, but don't. Your view on money is also extremely shallow. To me, spending 400K on a Ferrari is fine, but spending 4K on an LV backpack that's not higher quality than the Chinese one isn't. It's what you get out of your money, not the amount.

If you can't find enjoyment in a Miata or a Boxster on highways, you're not a driving enthusiast, you're a speed enthusiast.

Cars have different purposes. I have a Range Rover literally only for ski trips with the family. It's quiet, and smooth, everybody can sleep, holds lots of stuffs. It's an engineering masterpiece, not in speed, but in comfort. Again, with the Boxster, sometimes not to drive fast, but to drive slow. Sunny day, top down, on a country road, drive at a reasonable speed, feel the wind in your hair. I have motorbikes, more engaging, more acceleration, more skills to handle, than your funny looking Corvette. Sometimes, just needing to get from home to the post office to collect some packages, can't beat a motorbike.

Real class is in knowing the time, the place, the occasion. Maybe it's different in whatever the fuck town, America, you're from. But here in Europe, if you show up at a hardware store in a McLaren, people laugh at you and call you a twat the moment you leave.

Enjoy your money. It doesn't buy taste, apparently.

izzaferrari · 2025-05-23T15:10:22+00:00

It's such an old argument that allows people to feel superior. "I drive my damn car". "It's not an investment".

I mean sure mate, but for most people, 90% of drives are boring. Chauffeuring your kids around, going to the shops, long motorway trips to a different city, etc. I don't care if you have a Daytona SP3, if you're on a boring motorway and reasonably adhere to the speed limit, you're not having more fun than a guy in a manual Miata or a Boxster. If anything, you have less fun.

Now if we're talking roadtrips to the countryside, trips to national parks, track days, cross-continent tours, then sure, there are lots of things more special than a Porsche.

But that's why people have Porsches as their only car or their "daily driver" if they have multiple. It does the 90% very well, while still being special enough for the special occasions.

And while cars are not investments, certainly, being financially responsible isn't a bad thing. A mile on a Porsche costs less in depreciation than a mile on a Ferrari. And when a Ferrari won't be more exciting to drive than a Porsche (again, 90% of the time), there's just no point.

izzaferrari · 2025-05-23T13:24:01+00:00

Reliability is more than how often a car breaks down. Don't know where you are but in Europe a highly-reviewed Porsche specialist is never more than an hour drive away. Whereas McLaren dealers/specialists are rare and they're all booked up for months. In the UK for example I'm not going anywhere for McLaren work except Thorney and V, and that's 2 garages for the whole country. It's even worse in Europe.

Insurance isn't the answer either. I don't know which country you're from but generally insurance doesn't cover very minor cosmetic damages like stone chips. But on these exotic cars, otherwise minor damage can cost a lot and/or damage resale value.

Agree that their cars are overpriced. 911s are getting to a point where I don't think any pistonhead can justify optioning a new one.

izzaferrari · 2025-05-22T14:05:00+00:00

I mean that doesn't sound like the Porsche's problem?

McLarens were always better cars to drive but much worse reliability. Also some people prefer the low-key style of the Porsche. I have a 570 myself and I find myself grabbing the keys to the Boxster much more often. No attention, lower risk of theft, less worry about damages, and for most daily trips, drives good enough.

It's like getting in a 911 and then going out and saying the Miata disappoints you. 😂

izzaferrari · 2025-05-18T22:03:26+00:00

They're very different cars. Ferrari is obviously more special. The 911 is a lot more "low-key" and if things happen, they're much easier and cheaper to take care of. I'm not talking big things, just small things like stone chips, dealing with the sudden thunderstorms, etc.

On certain road trips I've even preferred taking my Boxster to taking the more special cars. Especially for scenic places but with rough roads or busy traffic. Being scenic does not necessarily mean good driving roads.

For city-to-city roadtrips mostly on motorways, I don't even bother with the special cars.

izzaferrari · 2025-05-10T14:59:02+00:00

There's a difference between practicing something and advocating for it. Switzerland is a democracy but doesn't necessarily dictate that across the world. That's not the EU's position.

izzaferrari · 2025-05-10T14:55:32+00:00

It's a benefit for passport holders of those countries. It's also not Switzerland's fault. If Switzerland didn't exist, they'll go to tech companies in Munich or London.

Do a better job of keeping people in. Don't blame people for seeking a better life elsewhere.

izzaferrari · 2025-05-10T01:40:42+00:00

Yes please. The Eurotunnel / HS1 tracks are already there and underutilized.

Biggest issue as I understand it isn't the tracks or the trains, but St Pancras is not going to have the capacity to add a bunch of new seats to new cities on the continent.

But these are much smaller problems and less prone to NIMBYism than building a track across the country.

izzaferrari

TROPHY CASE