F1’s highly anticipated Las Vegas Grand Prix is back on track after a disastrous opening day had to be suspended to fix a loose manhole cover, as Charles Leclerc claimed pole in qualifying on Saturday. The first session of F1’s newest event had only been going for eight minutes before Carlos Sainz’s car stopped on the lengthy Vegas strip. Replays show his Ferrari car, at speeds of over 200mph, went over a loose drain cover before the Spaniard veered to the side and stopped the car due to substantial floor damage, and Ferrari were furious. F1 grid: Starting positions for the Las Vegas Grand Prix FP2 was delayed for more than two hours while the circuit was made safe, before the Ferrari pair of Charles Leclerc and Sainz topped the timings, with Max Verstappen only sixth. FP3 then saw Mercedes’ George Russell top the charts ahead of McLaren’s Oscar Pastri and Williams’ Logan Sargeant, with Ferrari way down the results after choosing to preserve their soft tyres. But their true pace was revealed in qualifying as Leclerc and Carlos Sainz – who has a 10-place grid penalty after that FP1 incident – finished first and second, ahead of Red Bull’s Max Verstappen and Mercedes’ George Russell. But their teammates Sergio Perez and Lewis Hamilton suffered shock exits in Q2 and will start in the middle of the pack. Follow live updates from the Las Vegas Grand Prix below and check the latest F1 odds and tips here. Read More F1 grid: Starting positions for Las Vegas Grand Prix What Charles Leclerc needs to finally claim victory from pole in first Las Vegas Grand Prix Shambles and incompetence: F1 enters new Las Vegas dawn with disaster on opening night

By Anthony Deutsch AMSTERDAM Ukrainians living in Russian-occupied territory are being forced to assume Russian citizenship or face

As federal student loan payments make a comeback in October 2023, managing them on top of credit card debt may become increasingly difficult

'Where's the male version? I was always playing to get a robot husband. Does all chores, never argue,' said a social media user

A 110-year-old English language question formerly used in Cambridge English exams is absolutely baffling people over a century later. Exams at school and university are typically not things people look back on with fond memories, but it’s something we do in order to progress academically. For those who sat the very long Cambridge exam wishing to become an English language teacher back in 1913, they may well have been haunted by a question that continues to confuse people in the year 2023. In celebration of 110 years of the Cambridge English exam, the question has been released, but can you solve it? The question comes from the June 1913 Certificate of Proficiency in English exam, which was sat by three people and cost £3 at the time. Sign up to our free Indy100 weekly newsletter It was a gruelling 12-hour long exam and included sections on dictation, translation, and phonetic transcription. Today, more than 6 million people each year take the C2 Proficiency test, as it is now known. Francesca Woodward, Managing Director for English at Cambridge, said in a statement: “From just three candidates, we now open doors for millions of people every year to learn and teach English. "The historical papers from our archives paint a fascinating picture of how much has changed when it comes to learning English with Cambridge.” The question asks the candidates to “correct or justify” four of six different statements and to explain their reasoning. The first statement said: “I hope you are determined to seriously improve.” The second read: “Comparing Shakespeare with Aeschylus, the former is by no means inferior to the latter.” The third says: “I admit I was willing to have made peace with you.” The fourth reads: “The statement was incorrect, as any one familiar with the spot, and who was acquainted with the facts, will admit.” The fifth said: “It has the largest circulation of any paper in England.” And the sixth said: “The lyrical gifts of Shakespeare are woven into the actual language of the characters.” Cambridge highlights that what was deemed the correct English over 100 years ago may be different from now. Here are the answers: 1) This is a split infinitive and should be avoided in formal writing. The correct wordage would be, “seriously to improve”. 2) This statement is incorrect because it is a hanging participle and unintentionally modifies the wrong noun in a sentence. Alternatives that would be correct include, “Shakespeare is by no means inferior to Aeschylus” or “Shakespeare is just as good as Aeschylus”. 3) This statement uses the wrong tense and should read, “to make peace”. 4) Again, this uses the incorrect tense. The words “will admit” should instead be “would admit”. 5) and 6) are correct but candidates would have to explain why no changes are necessary. Have your say in our news democracy. Click the upvote icon at the top of the page to help raise this article through the indy100 rankings.

As soon as the harmonica of Paul Kelly's 1987 classic "Dumb Things" blares through the

Tributes poured in on Thursday for Tina Turner, the trailblazing rocker whose powerful voice, electrifying stage presence, and personal story of triumph...

To prevent AI-written novels from flooding Amazon, the company is placing a cap on the

Spending our days on Zoom calls and nights on game-streaming services eats up a lot

DALLAS--(BUSINESS WIRE)--Sep 18, 2023--

You can’t spell ‘hearty’ without ‘heart,’ or ‘hardy’ without ‘hard.’

SOUTH BEND, Ind. (AP) — Chip Trayanum plunged across the goal line from a yard out with 1 second left and No. 6 Ohio State beat No. 9 Notre Dame 17-14 on Saturday night.