Formula Sim Racing Sepang World Championship Article

David O'Reilly · Apr 13, 2015

Round Two - Its on!

The big question on the minds of many Formula Sim Racing fans coming into round two at Sepang was: what impact Morgan Morand would have on the front runners?

Was their time in the sun at Melbourne's Albert Park by default or was it earned?

So what happened?

In Qualifying the Twister Racing teams locked out the top three spots with Petar Brljak first, Jim Parisis second and Muhammed Patel third. Morgan Morand was sixth! What was going on? However the keen eyed would have seen that Morand qualified on the prime tyre, the harder of the two compounds. This meant that he would be starting and running his first stint on the prime.
At that point in time he was, on paper at least, looking very dangerous. If Morand could hold the leaders until they pitted he would then run longer and rejoin to fight on the faster options from then on.

It could have worked. What actually happened was that Brljak and Parisis poured on the pace with clear air and options. Morand found that there is traffic and then there is traffic, and that in the World Championships the top half dozen guys are not easy to pass. He ran deep into the race on primes and a contact and spin virtually at the pit entry cost him possibly 5-7 seconds and several places.

Meanwhile Patel was building a tidy gap to fourth place himself and starting to look very strong for the final podium spot.

World Championship rookie Kuba Brzezinski proved that Melbourne was no fluke with fourth on the grid and the fastest non twister qualifier. He found himself in a straight fight in stint two for the first time ever with Morand after the French drivers earlier slight delays at pit entry. We knew Brzezinski was fast but as he closed onto Morand we asked can he race wheel to wheel with this guy? The audience were treated to a superb piece of driving as these two fought it out. Brzezinski made the pass after some excellent attacking and defending from both drivers.

However it was far from over for fourth place. Somehow, in a piece of wizardry after the next stops Morand was once again of the Pole! How did he do that?
The podium was tied up by this stage but the fight for fourth was enthralling.

Morand from in front pitted with about 12 laps to go. It bluffed the commentators who figured Brzezinski had blown it when he didn't respond for two whole laps. Surely Morand was just walking away on fresh tyres?
Brzezinski's crew had other ideas, they wanted their guy on the best possible rubber for the final two laps. After his stop he caught and engaged the 2014 WDC runner up and prevailed. The gap at the finish line after 54 laps and 91 minutes of racing-.501 sec. The chase gave the Polish driver the fastest lap of the race.

Meanwhile the fight had enlivened at the front too and after Brljak had led for about 40 of 54 laps Parisis switched it on and made the pass to be leading when it mattered. Muhammed Patel must be complimented on the kind of fast and uneventful race that we all would like to drive. Third place with a gap of 9 seconds to Brzezinski.

So in summary, we must return to our original questions. The leaders and winners at Albert Park won with pace and on merit. Its exciting to think about it because after several seasons where it was a bit of a two horse race we have in 2015 at least five drivers with the pace to win. It bodes for a fantastic season.

To the second question? Morand will definitely have a huge impact now on the championship. We have to remember that the reason he missed Melbourne was equipment failure, his wheel broke. This means over the last two weeks he would not have driven. The new equipment has only just arrived and the Morand we saw was race rusty. Still, were it not for the spin he would have been fighting with Patel for third.

What will happen in China in two weeks at round three? Tune in and check it out. We cant wait.

Round Two results in brief.
1. Jim Parisis Twister Racing Team (Greece)
2. Petar Brljak Twister 2Fast4You (Croatia) +0.591s
3. Muhammed Patel Twister 2Fast4You (England) +13.526
4. Kuba Brzezinski Origin Front Row Racing (Poland) +22.746 (Fastest lap 1m33.777)
5. Morgan Morand. Trines NetRex (France) +23.247

The Standings after round Two.

1. Petar Brljak 33

2. Kuba Brzezinski 30

3. Muhammed Patel 27

4. Jim Parisis 25

. Daniel Kiss 25

6. David Greco 12

7. Morgan Morand 10

8. John-Eric Saxén 9

9. Patrick De Wit 8

. Dian Kostadinov 8

11. Blair Disley 6

12. Enrico Di Loreto 4

. Eros Masciulli 4

14. Danny van der Niet 1

For full results go to HERE

For the live-stream recording go to HERE
If you enjoy reading these articles please click like

Dian Kostadinov · Apr 14, 2015

I disliked the article and will tell you why. The article is well written, but in my opinion it shows disrespect to the drivers outside of top 5. If this suppose to be an official World Championship article I guess you should tell to the public some words and for the rest. I'm not pretending that I want to see my name somewhere, just feel like we, after top 5 are on lower level or not racing here.

Dmitry Zaharov · Apr 14, 2015

If you wanna be up there then you gotta find some speed.

Dian Kostadinov · Apr 14, 2015

Who were you, sorry?

David O'Reilly · Apr 14, 2015

Dian Kostadinov said:
I disliked the article and will tell you why. The article is well written, but in my opinion it shows disrespect to the drivers outside of top 5. If this suppose to be an official World Championship article I guess you should tell to the public some words and for the rest. I'm not pretending that I want to see my name somewhere, just feel like we, after top 5 are on lower level or not racing here.

Well thank you for taking the time to explain your "dislike" decision. It makes it easier to have a discussion.
I will try to explain.

It has been my habit in the past to write quite lengthy and detailed post race reports. It's not hard for me to do, as I generally do 500 laps practice, do the pro race, and watch the full Ace and WDC race and I like to write.

However time and time again the people who position themselves as "experts" in the field of on line editing tell me its now the Youtube and Twitter generation and people suffer from a kind of ADD (attention defecit disorder) and that my articles need to be much shorter and more punchy and in essence point the reader to where they can find out more information. They tell me that if people want more detail they will watch the video. I dont fully agree and think some people still enjoy an entertaining report. Like the recent article on Minardi History. However this feedback from some people has influenced my style.

The second point is that I have been told to reconsider my audience. If I want the drivers to enjoy it, yes I can include everyones performance but If I want to get the sim racing public and or public at large to enjoy it and become engaged with "the story" it needs to be a little more focussed.
Part of this consideration is that after weeks of chasing I now have agreement that The Simpit (article 1 already front page)will run my articles and I actually have contributor status for Inside Sim Racing, this allows me to create and edit my own stories. Pashalis also publishes them on Facebook and Twitter. So these articles are written in a style to engage a wider audience. If I was writing just for "the current FSR crew" *it's a different dynamic.We could indeed have a closer friendlier "get everyone's name in there" style. So I have to continually stop and ask myself Is this really the story? Is it exciting to a wider audience? Is it newsworthy?

So for the WC article I made the decision that the big news was Morgans return and its impact on the dynamic of the Melbourne Podium (and Jim who led in Melb) and the championship.
It's a hard nosed call but I apply the same rules to my own team mates (John Eric scored a points finish and it didn't get a mention) and I apply it to myself (I scored points in Pro in Melb and it didnt get a mention as I made the editorial decision to cut it off at the top 10, BTW I nearly cut it off at the lead lap).

I write these and have made the contacts to disseminate them as wide as possible to increase the fame of FSR and by association its drivers. By spreading the word far and wide I hope we get more viewers, more sponsors, more fun. (Edit: It also connotes and confers respect to all who race in the World Championship level that I will spend so much energy and time on this project)
It ws also BTW myself who prompted to get the streams on RD front page.

There is also a time component. So far in general terms I try to write a warmup aricle pre race, then three race reports, having raced in one and watched the other two. The powers that be want them ASAP.

So in short, it was about what was news-worthy. Rather than a complete dissertation about every driver who raced. (see edit #2)

So you may still not like it but I hope it explains it a little to you.
BTW there is nothing stopping anyone else from doing articles, I dont have exclusive rights you know.
So there is the opportunity to do what people like Jeroen Kweekel does and start to build his own audience. Don't rely on me to meet all your needs.

Anyway at least you are reading them. With 75 drivers on the three grids maybe we will get 75 responses one day.
David
edit #2 Full results are linked for this very reason.

patrickdewit · Apr 14, 2015

i agree with both dian and david
not beining mentioned dnf or not in WC could be a debate
Also what Dian means is he was 6th and i was 7th but totally ignored while we had great racing
i try to make video too yes mijn lack info on other drivers which position i am racing in
So same goes for daid we evolve
And it is something we do in spare time
Maybe we could work together on some things

i think david is doing really great although some things can be improved/altered same goes for my video,s
actually i want to do some highlights in WC but that will take a lot of time
And i am no true videomaker/editor trying the best i can

Cheers,

Thomas Mundy · Apr 14, 2015

Great stuff Patrick. Unfortunately its impossible to cover all the action sometimes as the review would have to very long to do that but I have asked if full results can be included in the future. If anyone wants to help David and the other members of the media team you still can, just contact me via a private conversation on here. Thanks.

Decenten · Apr 20, 2015

I would like know of the misfortunes in the events... Make it like an F1 report. They report the podium finishes, the surprises and the hard luck stories.