There are different penalties for different bit of the power train, the ICE is worth 5 places, the gear box 5 places, the exhaust 5 places, the MGU H 5 places, etc.Originally Posted by mav112
When Max went to the back of the grid it was because he changed everything, Bottas only got 10 places because he changed 2 components. Hamilton only 5 places because he change one component.
No conspiracy.
Whoever does not know how to hit the nail on the head should be asked not to hit it at all.
Friedrich Nietzsche
I think Horner gave away a little too much in that off the cuff comment. He said that Honda only degrades 0.1s over its life. That sounds like gold dust to me as a metric for competitors.
This weekend is going to be very interesting. Lewis cannot afford a DNF but must also finish ahead of Max by an average 5 points. Max has been very strong and consistent, so realistically Hamilton needs P1. What are the odds of a significant Max and Lewis incident?
Well chaps the FIA have finally released Max’s onboard footage https://youtu.be/RJOczcJArTk
Unsurprisingly Mercedes have launched their Right to Review.
I will leave you own to make your own minds up, but it looks a bit iffy for Max to be honest.
Whoever does not know how to hit the nail on the head should be asked not to hit it at all.
Friedrich Nietzsche
What are Mercedes looking for? A grid penalty for Verstappen?
OK, it was a bit heavy handed, but no contact and Hamilton won the race - Just let it go, surely?
M
Breitling Cosmonaute 809 - What's not to like?
Looks ok to me its Racing ffs , even toto said let them Race
Sent from my iPhone using TZ-UK mobile app
How so ? He doesn't steer to the right ??
I'm not sure he needs to steer right to force someone off the track, it's a left hand bend so he just needs not to steer left as much as he did on other laps.....
That definitely looks a bit iffy to me there, max is a great driver and it does look like he could have steered left a bit harder but looks like he kinda deliberately forced Lewis further into the gravel by letting go and taking it wide . That was top driving by Lewis to avoid contact.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Steering to the right on a left hand corner?? He'd be in the wall.
The point is he doesn't steer enough to the left.
Let them race by letting one driver have his own set of rules to be allowed to run anyone who tries to overtake him off the track?
Why not just ban anyone from overtaking Max then and be done with it?
No idea to be honest, however either a 5 sec penalty (giving 2nd place to Bottas) or a 5 grid penalty in the next race.
However deep down I feel that Toto (like many fans are looking for consistency in the approach taken by the FIA/stewards), Hamilton was penalised for not hitting the Apex at Silverstone, he has been penalised for running cars out (although no where near as far as Max in Brazil) yet the only penalty Max has received this season was for taking Hamilton out in Monza. Imola and Portugal were deemed racing incidents as were the incidents in Spain and Brazil.
The other issue to be considered is safety. If a driver pulled the same stunt on any circuit without a massive run off then people could be seriously injured (or killed) and millions written off and prize money not being being awarded. The FIA have a set of rules which need to be applied, otherwise what’s the point in having them, and F1 turning in a joke/blood sport.
Whoever does not know how to hit the nail on the head should be asked not to hit it at all.
Friedrich Nietzsche
People seem to forget that LH won the race. MV’s job is not to make Lewis ‘ life easy. There was no contact (probably because LH knew he was the one with the most to lose) and the fastest man+ car combo won. The right result for the race so stop whining, it was a great show.
'Against stupidity, the gods themselves struggle in vain' - Schiller.
Very true he doesn’t turn right on a left hand corner, but he doesn’t really turn left either. Which is the point of a left hand corner.
He misses the braking point, he runs wide of the apex and doesn’t turn left until he is actually off the track. So he is either out of control when entering the corner (bad) or he knew exactly what he was doing and actually attempted to take Hamilton out (very bad).
Now, I don’t know about you, but I like my sport to be fair, within the rules, and these rules are applied to everyone in the same way, and this is why I imagine Toto wants the FIA to investigate whether Max has any mitigation. Because without mitigation then I have a feeling that Max tried to pull the old Schumy/Villeneuve move or that he simply isn’t that good a driver.
It’s interesting that Hamilton said he was able to avoid the accident because he suspected this was going to happen. Make of that what you like.
Whoever does not know how to hit the nail on the head should be asked not to hit it at all.
Friedrich Nietzsche
Everyone knows max is just Kobayashi in a Red Bull & to stay clear
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Normally I'd agree given it was the right result in the end but this isn't an isolated incident, it happens every time Lewis tries to overtake Max.
Mercedes absolutely have to take a stand here and put a stop to Max's antics otherwise they will lose the title in another incident like this.
There's a difference between making an overtake difficult for an opponent and deliberately running them off the road.
So basically go round the outside of Max and expect him to have low angles of steering lock and to miss the braking area . That's if you can get round him veering several times across the track of course. All with no consequences. I'm all for fair hard racing but there are rules in places especially regarding movement when defending an overtake. MV is dangerous and its only because he's a high profile driver he's gotten away with alot. There are more deserving, talented drivers that should have a world championship before him
Sent from my SM-G991B using Tapatalk
You hit the nail on the head except that Max had much more to gain taking Hamilton out, given he has a sizeable lead in the championship with one less race to go.
As for Hamilton winning and people whinging, you seem to have forgotten all the whinging that took place after Silverstone and how Hamilton having served his penalty, should be banned, given additional penalties for an accident which he was deemed to be “predominantly” responsible for. But I don’t hear the same voices calling for sanctions against Max for an incident that he was TOTALLY responsible for. I accept no one went to hospital, but that was only because one driver had the sense to bail out. Much like Max could have done in Silverstone.
You are however right, no driver should make it easy for another driver to overtake them, however they are supposed to operate with the Sporting Code and FIA rules. Over the weekend we watched Hamilton overtake at least 19 driver and about 35 cars. Very we’re easy, but all we’re clean.
But you think that what Max did was OK, then fine, I am happy for you, but please don’t be surprised if other don’t agree with you.
Whoever does not know how to hit the nail on the head should be asked not to hit it at all.
Friedrich Nietzsche
The problem is that Max makes it difficult to pass on the outside because he might understeer and if you attempt to overtake on the inside he might turn in. The best way is down the straight under DRS assuming he doesn’t weave (which he has lots of previous of), but that needs a very quick car.
I did hope that this year we would see a new confident Max grown and become a more mature driver, but his reaction at Monza and his snippy remark to getting Black/White flagged in Brazil would suggest not.
What I most sincerely hope is that the championship is settled fairly on track, alas I believe that ship has sailed.
Whoever does not know how to hit the nail on the head should be asked not to hit it at all.
Friedrich Nietzsche
Best give em both a tickling stick each then eh ?
I have to disagree with you there Marc; should MV only have been punished if LH hadn’t managed to pass him or should he be allowed to do what other drivers aren’t?
The line is fine. There wouldn’t be this furore if the shoe had been on the other foot. Amusingly the same people also curse Bottas for making MV’s life too easy. Funnily enough to benefit the same LH, as if using someone else to help you win a race was somewhat more sportsmanlike.
Both are part of modern racing. I played enough rugby in my life to know that, right or wrong, the ref is right.
The other amusing thing is that for once LH had a chance of demonstrating his talent against an opponent in a competitive car.
If they both go out, Lewis loses. So it was up to him to avoid it. And it served him well.
I do not condone the way MV behaves on track or off, but the fact that neither a race nor the championships results are a given makes a refreshing change in F1.
'Against stupidity, the gods themselves struggle in vain' - Schiller.
I certainly wouldn't have given a hoot about MVs running Hamilton off track if he'd actually made the corner, because that is simply holding his line, competetively. But he didn't, he ran totally off the outside.
In the directly comparable Silverstone incident, Hamilton did not leave the track. Let's not forget Horner wanted Hamilton banned for that.
I get it that they want racing.
But I am certain that the decision was entirely based on the lack of contact, rather than considering what MV actually did.
And that was due to Hamilton's evasion.
So the lack of penalty is probably due to LHs skill, which makes no sense. No wonder Mercedes are pursuing it
During the Silverstone fallout Masi was very clear that they review the incident, not the outcome. Any penalty is applied in line with the applicable regulation and infringement thereof. In the Brazilian incident, Max was either in contravention of a regulation clause, or he was not. The fact that there was no collision is of no consequence.
One might consider that Max understeering (cough) on the inside when the competitor is ahead, aligns somewhat with the Silverstone event. The panel of expert stewards at the track clearly thought otherwise.
Regardless, I foresee a Schumacher vs Hill, Adelaide 1994 reenactment before the season is done.
Bizarre that you think in a team sport the expectation that Bottas should (fairly & legally) defend his position against a driver from a rival team would be unsporting yet you have no issue with Max being allowed to force anyone who tries to overtake him off the track.
Do you think that if Hamilton was behind Perez Red Bull would be telling Perez to let him through without a fight??
This has nothing to do with races being a given, we already have a close championship battle with 2 great drivers. This behaviour from Max is threatening to turn this championship into a farce and has already robbed us of a few potentially race long battles in previous rounds.
If Hamilton was using the same tactics against Max, Red Bull / MV fans / Hamilton haters would be apoplectic.
Last edited by watchcollector1; 17th November 2021 at 11:26.
If LH would have done what MV did, he would have got a penalty.
For sure and that’s what makes it frustrating
Of course. You know so much better, don't you?
The notion of team sport is debatable. While there is a team element in the constructors' championship, there is none in the drivers', other than between the mechanics and engineers and the individual driver. Yet you are correct, constructors consider (legally) that it is perfectly acceptable to let Driver 1 go through at the expenses of Driver 2. And you use here a straw man argument: I would have issues if Max was allowed to force anyone off the track, in any circumstances. But is that the case? Obviously the stewards didn't think so. And whether you like it or not, unless Mercedes successfully challenges it, that will remain the decision.
No, and that is a whataboutism.
First you seem to have a very short memory because not so long ago Lewis also took Max out and it could have been lethal. But again, if there is an infraction the offender is penalised. If he isn't it is because the committee decided there was either no infraction, or it didn't warrant a penalty (race incident). The fact that YOU think there was is neither here nor there I am afraid (my opinion counts for nothing as well, this was not a personal attack).
And that is again a tu quoque argument. You are running the gamut of logical fallacies, aren't you?
'Against stupidity, the gods themselves struggle in vain' - Schiller.
The single most conspicuous example I can remember of someone attempting to turn a championship contest into a farce was when Hamilton deliberately slowed down to try to get Rosberg, his teammate, caught up in the traffic behind him five years ago. Absolute disgrace.
Whilst I agree with your first point I think Verstappen will probably benefit from his questionable driving and take the WDC this year.
It will be interesting to see the outcome of Mercedes request for review but don't believe the FIA will alter their stance.
This is beginning to look less like F1 and more like WWF.
Surely there’s a big difference between tactically allowing or not allowing a teammate or competitor through and endangering another driver, i reckon max was willing to take out LH there, perhaps reasoning I wouldn’t mind some contact here, if we both crash out it would have suited max more than Hamilton and that’s where I have an issue with this move, how that can be compared with some of the other scenarios is beyond me. In my eyes that’s not racing that’s simply dangerous
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Perfectly legitimate strategy in my opinion
I don’t have an issue with that either. It was smart driving although it ultimately failed.
Much less legitimate was NR driving LH onto the grass when alongside one an earlier race that season.
There seems to be a feeling that because there was no contact, there is no case to be heard but surely it’s more of a case of the intent?
If, as a lot of people have said, LH hadn’t made an attempt to avoid a collision, it would have resulted in contact and either or both of them would have crashed or retired?
It is absolutely a team sport, both cars are run by the same team and prize money is awarded on constructor points. No team should be expected to give up those constructor points easily to their main rivals, that's why Bottas received criticism for just "waving" Max by.
I don't care about tu quoque fallacies, your intention was to associate the lack of sportsmanship in the expectation that Bottas should hold up Max for Mercedes with that of Max running Lewis off the road.
I merely pointed out there is no comparison, the former is legal and all teams do it, whilst Max's action are illegal, dangerous and unique to him in the title battle.
The incidents at Silverstone and Interlagos hold some parallel in that Lewis received a penalty because he was marginally off the apex on the inside thus appearently not giving Max enough room (according to the stewards), yet on Sunday Max was way off the apex and no-one could argue that he left Lewis any room. It's a clear penalty and the stewarding is farcical to not award it.
The similarly in both incidents is also that Lewis had to yield because Max refused to leave any space. At Silverstone he was alongside Max (who had plenty of room IMO) but Max just took the apex as normal meaning Lewis had no way (or time) to avoid the accident. In Brazil Lewis had to go off the track to avoid an accident, and this scenario has occurred every time Lewis has attempted to overtake Max.
There seems to be a feeling that because there was no contact, there is no case to be heard but surely it’s more of a case of the intent?
If, as a lot of people have said, LH hasn’t made an attempt to avoid a collision, it would have resulted in contact and either or both of them would have crashed or retired?
Clearly we’ll never know what goes through MVs head at times like this but he does have history of making rash decisions regardless of the consequences.
This thread and the BP thread are very similar
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I shall just note that only if Mercs appeal succeeds will MVs actions be illegal. Your saying they are, and getting hot around the collar for it, is not necessary.
I shall happily accept they were illegal if the new evidence presented to the stewards make them revise their initial judgment. Likewise I am quite happy to accept that they were legal if they don’t, as they have access to a lot more info than you do and in any case theirs is the only opinion that matters.
'Against stupidity, the gods themselves struggle in vain' - Schiller.
I assume the Merc move is far less about Max receiving any sort of penalty and more holding the FIA to account to properly review these incidents. Less the outcome more the process which I agree seems to be very inconsistent.
If Red Bull want to really look at what's behind Merc's speed they should probably, instead, be looking at why they were so slow. They really didn't get the set up right.
I was thinking just the same. By making this move it might make Max think twice for the next race
There's too much tarmac run off, that's what leads to this sort of thing and the infuriating track limits decisions. If you want the drivers to stay on the track don't make what isn't the track out of the same stuff as the track. That should be grass or gravel there, then nobody would attempt to drive on it.
Sent from my SM-A217F using Tapatalk
Quality post, but not for the reason you intended.
But just to add a bit of perspective, Hamilton was determined to be “predominately” responsible for Silverstone, just as Max was considered “predominately” responsible for his potentially “lethal” incident with Hamilton. however this isn’t about either of these as both drivers have already served their penalties.
This is about Max’s detour at Brazil for which he was solely responsible and what happened at the FIA immediately after the incident. For example why did the FIA stewards decide than no investigation was necessary despite Masi claiming they did not have access to Max’s onboard camera (which I find frankly unbelievable), why did they not simply say it would be investigated after the race. Also why they didn’t, at least, look at the telemetry data (steering angles, speeds, braking forces, etc) which was available, why they didn’t apply their own rules regarding who owns a corner, cars leaving space, not leaving the track and not gaining/maintaining an advantage, all of which is clearly written in the Sporting Code.
Irrespective of the outcome, Max’s and the FIA have now created a bit of sh*t storm which someone needs to answer for. Plus action needs to be taken to ensure it doesn’t happen again, because currently we see drivers like Sainz, Stroll, LeClerc, Norris getting penalised for the same offence that others seem to be getting away with.
Whoever does not know how to hit the nail on the head should be asked not to hit it at all.
Friedrich Nietzsche
All valid points. This afternoon outcome will be interestingQuality post, but not for the reason you intended.
But just to add a bit of perspective, Hamilton was determined to be “predominately” responsible for Silverstone, just as Max was considered “predominately” responsible for his potentially “lethal” incident with Hamilton. however this isn’t about either of these as both drivers have already served their penalties.
This is about Max’s detour at Brazil for which he was solely responsible and what happened at the FIA immediately after the incident. For example why did the FIA stewards decide than no investigation was necessary despite Masi claiming they did not have access to Max’s onboard camera (which I find frankly unbelievable), why did they not simply say it would be investigated after the race. Also why they didn’t, at least, look at the telemetry data (steering angles, speeds, braking forces, etc) which was available, why they didn’t apply their own rules regarding who owns a corner, cars leaving space, not leaving the track and not gaining/maintaining an advantage, all of which is clearly written in the Sporting Code.
Irrespective of the outcome, Max’s and the FIA have now created a bit of sh*t storm which someone needs to answer for. Plus action needs to be taken to ensure it doesn’t happen again, because currently we see drivers like Sainz, Stroll, LeClerc, Norris getting penalised for the same offence that others seem to be getting away with.
Indeed - the easiest way to summarise is that had Max been driving both his car and Hamilton's, there would have been an almighty crash - he relies on others backing out all the time and we all know what happened the first time someone didn't
Yes spot on, Max leaves no space and then it's up to the overtaking driver to decide whether he wants to have an accident or not. This is what happened at Silverstone as well where Lewis did try to pull of the move as Max started to move across but it was too late.
So I find it really bizarre that some people say "let them race" in relation to these types of incidents, as Max's actions are the polar opposite of racing.
Agree with all of thisQuality post, but not for the reason you intended.
But just to add a bit of perspective, Hamilton was determined to be “predominately” responsible for Silverstone, just as Max was considered “predominately” responsible for his potentially “lethal” incident with Hamilton. however this isn’t about either of these as both drivers have already served their penalties.
This is about Max’s detour at Brazil for which he was solely responsible and what happened at the FIA immediately after the incident. For example why did the FIA stewards decide than no investigation was necessary despite Masi claiming they did not have access to Max’s onboard camera (which I find frankly unbelievable), why did they not simply say it would be investigated after the race. Also why they didn’t, at least, look at the telemetry data (steering angles, speeds, braking forces, etc) which was available, why they didn’t apply their own rules regarding who owns a corner, cars leaving space, not leaving the track and not gaining/maintaining an advantage, all of which is clearly written in the Sporting Code.
Irrespective of the outcome, Max’s and the FIA have now created a bit of sh*t storm which someone needs to answer for. Plus action needs to be taken to ensure it doesn’t happen again, because currently we see drivers like Sainz, Stroll, LeClerc, Norris getting penalised for the same offence that others seem to be getting away with.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Having just watched the Channel Four highlights, my only observation is that Channel Four need to hire some unbiased commentators!
I used to really enjoy their coverage buts it’s definitely gone down hill this season
Wow the Qatar circuit is a featureless dull place. Just watched a couiple of laps and couldn't tell you the difference between any of it except the main straight. Hope it doesn't make for dull racing. The pit entry looks lethal too especially if someone is on almost bald tyres.
Well chaps the verdict is in and Max is all good. A massive relief to his Orange Army of fans, but a massive disappointment to those who are actual fans of the sport.
So basically what the FIA have agreed (at least in precedence) is that a defender can brake as late as they like, park on the corner, can miss the apex, can leave the track and retain their position, because that’s what the FIA have accepted as “fair hard racing”. This means that attackers might still be able to undertake into corners, but only providing they have managed to get a clear advantage (and the defender doesn’t turn it), but overtaking on the outside needs the defender to be asleep to work. This of course assumes there is no contact between the cars. If contact does happen, then your guess is as good as mine as to what the FIA stewards will decide, but irrespective I am sure Max will be fine.
Its a shame, because some drivers have already suggested they are going to change their approach to racing. More accidents, more safety cars, more blocking and less overtakes - perfect.
Whoever does not know how to hit the nail on the head should be asked not to hit it at all.
Friedrich Nietzsche
Very poor call from the FIA
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote