planetf1.com

It is currently Sat Dec 14, 2019 12:37 pm

All times are UTC


Forum rules


Please read the forum rules



Post new topic Reply to topic
Author Message
PostPosted: Tue Sep 03, 2019 10:06 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Nov 26, 2018 12:53 am
Posts: 773
pokerman wrote:
F1 Racer wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Again how were the two incidents the same for Kimi, at Silverstone he was the car behind when he hit Hamilton, at Spa he was the car in front when Verstappen hit him.


Well can you tell me what rule Vettel broke in Britain first, then I will get back to you? People seem to be very 'letter of the rules' oriented in this thread but no one is saying what rule Vettel broke in Britain to get a 20 second penalty.

Vettel rammed Verstappen from behind something that would have been impossible for Kimi to do to Verstappen.


Please can you tell me the rule that Vettel broke? Or was Vettel punished not for a rule break per se, but due to 'common sense' in that he ruined another driver's race due to careless and/or incompetent driving?

Because if it was the latter rationale, then the Vettel/Britain accident and the Kimi/Belgium accident are very similar in that sense.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Sep 03, 2019 10:18 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun Jan 25, 2004 8:26 pm
Posts: 144
F1 Racer wrote:
Todd wrote:
That aerial view shows more room on the outside of Kimi than I thought there was.


Exactly, and these are supposedly elite drivers so they should be able to race well. Just hold your line for one corner or so damn it. It's really not difficult. :D


Just to be clear, I think the available room moves this from being 95% Verstappen's fault to being a racing incident like the officials concluded.

_________________
Does anyone think that there has ever been a moment of frustration with his father when Max has pointed out to Jos that he was the Pierre Gasly of 1994?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Sep 03, 2019 10:19 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 33376
F1 Racer wrote:
pokerman wrote:
F1 Racer wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Again how were the two incidents the same for Kimi, at Silverstone he was the car behind when he hit Hamilton, at Spa he was the car in front when Verstappen hit him.


Well can you tell me what rule Vettel broke in Britain first, then I will get back to you? People seem to be very 'letter of the rules' oriented in this thread but no one is saying what rule Vettel broke in Britain to get a 20 second penalty.

Vettel rammed Verstappen from behind something that would have been impossible for Kimi to do to Verstappen.


Please can you tell me the rule that Vettel broke? Or was Vettel punished not for a rule break per se, but due to 'common sense' in that he ruined another driver's race due to careless and/or incompetent driving?

Because if it was the latter rationale, then the Vettel/Britain accident and the Kimi/Belgium accident are very similar in that sense.

I'm not one to quote rules like section 2d paragraph c or whatever, sometimes it's just common sense like Vettel crashed Verstappen out so it should be a penalty.

First corner incidents tend to be treated differently because there's a lot more for drivers to contend with but if you want an ultimate who should have been penalised then I wouldn't be looking at the driver that got hit whilst in front.

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

2013: 5th Place
2014: Champion
2015: 3rd Place
2016: 4th Place

2017: 9th Place
2018: 7th place

Wins: Canada 2018, Abu Dhabi 2017
Podiums: (8)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Sep 03, 2019 10:30 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Nov 26, 2018 12:53 am
Posts: 773
pokerman wrote:
F1 Racer wrote:

Please can you tell me the rule that Vettel broke? Or was Vettel punished not for a rule break per se, but due to 'common sense' in that he ruined another driver's race due to careless and/or incompetent driving?

Because if it was the latter rationale, then the Vettel/Britain accident and the Kimi/Belgium accident are very similar in that sense.

I'm not one to quote rules like section 2d paragraph c or whatever, sometimes it's just common sense like Vettel crashed Verstappen out so it should be a penalty.

First corner incidents tend to be treated differently because there's a lot more for drivers to contend with but if you want an ultimate who should have been penalised then I wouldn't be looking at the driver that got hit whilst in front.


I've presented a pretty simple solution to deal with the chaos of the first corner, and that is to simply hold your line and don't switch lines through turn 1 if you aren't clear of the pack. Kimi didn't do this even though it is common sense to do this and other drivers did this, so he is at fault. He changed his line through the corner, potentially cutting up other drivers in the process, which is exactly what happened.

If you hold your line, there really isn't much to contend with and you don't have to worry about your blindspots etc.. It's like in a 400m sprint, the runners hold their lanes and can just focus on sprinting ahead as fast as possible without having to worry about cutting up other runners in their blindspot as all runners are sticking to their path or 'lane' through the corners. So long as the runner stays in his predetermined lane, he is safe of blame for any contact that occurs between runners. Turn 1 in a motor race with cars bunched in your blindspots works the same, go through the corner in your 'lane' and then you will be fine. Your 'lane' will be determined by the physical position that you arrive into the corner at. It will be very hard for contact to occur if all drivers follow this, and we saw a perfect demonstration at turn 1 in Hungary 2019.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Sep 03, 2019 10:42 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun May 25, 2008 7:55 pm
Posts: 6977
F1 Racer wrote:
sandman1347 wrote:
F1 Racer wrote:
sandman1347 wrote:
No mate. I can't just let that slide when the video is right there. Max is NOT alongside Kimi until after the cars are on the brakes. He is behind him and he tries an extremely optimistic lunge. He was never making that corner unless Kimi backed off completely and just allowed Max to overtake him. The angle that Max took would have made it extremely difficult to get the car properly rotated without going all the way to the edge of the circuit on exit and probably running wide. Even having hit Kimi; Max's car still goes all the way to the edge of the circuit.

Like I said, the move was not on. Your argument seems to be that Kimi should have taken all precautions and been extremely careful while Max was 100% okay to just make a carefree lunge into the first corner. That's as imbalanced of a perspective as it gets.


I don't know what to say, that move is just so 'on' and Max was right to go for the gap, just like Senna always said. Max is braking firmly and making the inside of the corner, he is not sliding outwards by steaming in too hot, he is in complete control of his car.

Now if Max on corner exit, leaves the inside path and starts accelerating wide into Kimi then of course Max would be completely at fault if the crash happens that way, but Kimi never even gave Max a chance for it to be Max's fault as Kimi is already chopping across Max at an earlier part of the corner. So we unfortunately will never know what would have happened at corner exit but Max would have an obligation not to squeeze or laterally move into Kimi at that point, and as long as he waits a bit before flooring the throttle, he could easily have avoided squeezing Kimi on the exit.

The flaw in your reasoning is that you have yet to grasp the fact that Max made an error in judgement there and went into a gap that was always going to close up. Again, the angle that Max took was so aggressive and he was braking so hard that it was always going to lead to trouble at the first corner. The only way for it to work would be for everyone else to get out of his way and just let him through. Again, it's not always up to the other guy to move. This is something that it seemed Max had finally come to understand this year but yesterday was a blip on an otherwise excellent run of form for Max. He got it wrong there by taking an unnecessary risk.


No, the flaw in your reasoning is that if Kimi knew Max was there, then Kimi would be completely at fault, so why does the idea that Kimi not knowing Max was there, (but it being reasonable for him to assume someone was there when he has left the inside door open going into turn 1), suddenly make Kimi innocent?

You are trying to discourage the guy behind from racing the guy in front even though there is a clear gap there. You and your viewpoints are anti-racing in that if drivers followed your logic there would be even less racing happening.

No and no. Any driver can lunge like that and put the other guy in a position where he either has to let you through or crash. That is not good racecraft. It might work sometimes but there will be other times where it ends in tears (like this case). Kimi would not be at fault if he knew Max was there. It would be a racing incident because Max does not have some god given right to the corner and he was not in position to make a pass. The only way for him to make it is for others to let him by. That's not a solid overtaking strategy.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Sep 03, 2019 10:54 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 33376
F1 Racer wrote:
pokerman wrote:
F1 Racer wrote:

Please can you tell me the rule that Vettel broke? Or was Vettel punished not for a rule break per se, but due to 'common sense' in that he ruined another driver's race due to careless and/or incompetent driving?

Because if it was the latter rationale, then the Vettel/Britain accident and the Kimi/Belgium accident are very similar in that sense.

I'm not one to quote rules like section 2d paragraph c or whatever, sometimes it's just common sense like Vettel crashed Verstappen out so it should be a penalty.

First corner incidents tend to be treated differently because there's a lot more for drivers to contend with but if you want an ultimate who should have been penalised then I wouldn't be looking at the driver that got hit whilst in front.


I've presented a pretty simple solution to deal with the chaos of the first corner, and that is to simply hold your line and don't switch lines through turn 1 if you aren't clear of the pack. Kimi didn't do this even though it is common sense to do this and other drivers did this, so he is at fault. He changed his line through the corner, potentially cutting up other drivers in the process, which is exactly what happened.

If you hold your line, there really isn't much to contend with and you don't have to worry about your blindspots etc.. It's like in a 400m sprint, the runners hold their lanes and can just focus on sprinting ahead as fast as possible without having to worry about cutting up other runners in their blindspot as all runners are sticking to their path or 'lane' through the corners. So long as the runner stays in his predetermined lane, he is safe of blame for any contact that occurs between runners. Turn 1 in a motor race with cars bunched in your blindspots works the same, go through the corner in your 'lane' and then you will be fine. Your 'lane' will be determined by the physical position that you arrive into the corner at. It will be very hard for contact to occur if all drivers follow this, and we saw a perfect demonstration at turn 1 in Hungary 2019.

It's not really normal for drivers not to take the apex going into the first corner that seems to be what your proposing?

Nominally drivers will leave room at the apex if they see a car on their inside, I believe Kimi didn't see Verstappen because Perez's car was between the two of them?

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

2013: 5th Place
2014: Champion
2015: 3rd Place
2016: 4th Place

2017: 9th Place
2018: 7th place

Wins: Canada 2018, Abu Dhabi 2017
Podiums: (8)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Sep 03, 2019 11:00 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Nov 26, 2018 12:53 am
Posts: 773
sandman1347 wrote:
F1 Racer wrote:

No, the flaw in your reasoning is that if Kimi knew Max was there, then Kimi would be completely at fault, so why does the idea that Kimi not knowing Max was there, (but it being reasonable for him to assume someone was there when he has left the inside door open going into turn 1), suddenly make Kimi innocent?

You are trying to discourage the guy behind from racing the guy in front even though there is a clear gap there. You and your viewpoints are anti-racing in that if drivers followed your logic there would be even less racing happening.

No and no. Any driver can lunge like that and put the other guy in a position where he either has to let you through or crash. That is not good racecraft. It might work sometimes but there will be other times where it ends in tears (like this case). Kimi would not be at fault if he knew Max was there. It would be a racing incident because Max does not have some god given right to the corner and he was not in position to make a pass. The only way for him to make it is for others to let him by. That's not a solid overtaking strategy.


You are describing a 'divebomb' move but a divebomb overtake has the overtaker braking too late and overshooting into the path of the car ahead. In this move Max is clearly glued to the inside lane of the corner so he is not braking too late and it is in fact Kimi moving into his lane.


Last edited by F1 Racer on Tue Sep 03, 2019 11:04 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Sep 03, 2019 11:03 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Nov 26, 2018 12:53 am
Posts: 773
pokerman wrote:
F1 Racer wrote:
pokerman wrote:
F1 Racer wrote:

Please can you tell me the rule that Vettel broke? Or was Vettel punished not for a rule break per se, but due to 'common sense' in that he ruined another driver's race due to careless and/or incompetent driving?

Because if it was the latter rationale, then the Vettel/Britain accident and the Kimi/Belgium accident are very similar in that sense.

I'm not one to quote rules like section 2d paragraph c or whatever, sometimes it's just common sense like Vettel crashed Verstappen out so it should be a penalty.

First corner incidents tend to be treated differently because there's a lot more for drivers to contend with but if you want an ultimate who should have been penalised then I wouldn't be looking at the driver that got hit whilst in front.


I've presented a pretty simple solution to deal with the chaos of the first corner, and that is to simply hold your line and don't switch lines through turn 1 if you aren't clear of the pack. Kimi didn't do this even though it is common sense to do this and other drivers did this, so he is at fault. He changed his line through the corner, potentially cutting up other drivers in the process, which is exactly what happened.

If you hold your line, there really isn't much to contend with and you don't have to worry about your blindspots etc.. It's like in a 400m sprint, the runners hold their lanes and can just focus on sprinting ahead as fast as possible without having to worry about cutting up other runners in their blindspot as all runners are sticking to their path or 'lane' through the corners. So long as the runner stays in his predetermined lane, he is safe of blame for any contact that occurs between runners. Turn 1 in a motor race with cars bunched in your blindspots works the same, go through the corner in your 'lane' and then you will be fine. Your 'lane' will be determined by the physical position that you arrive into the corner at. It will be very hard for contact to occur if all drivers follow this, and we saw a perfect demonstration at turn 1 in Hungary 2019.

It's not really normal for drivers not to take the apex going into the first corner that seems to be what your proposing?

Nominally drivers will leave room at the apex if they see a car on their inside, I believe Kimi didn't see Verstappen because Perez's car was between the two of them?


It is standard to not take the apex of turn 1 of lap 1. Not all cars can take turn 1 properly, in fact usually only the leader can take turn 1 optimally if he is well clear of the pack and has had a great start. Every other driver will have to make concessions in order to avoid contact. Kimi did not make enough concessions and started swerving his car into his blindspots.

We are talking about one corner of the race here where drivers should be making some concessions with the pathing and speed that they take through the corner, it is perfectly reasonable to expect them to do this and indeed most races don't have incidents at the first turn so the drivers are able to show that they can do this properly.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Sep 03, 2019 11:36 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Mar 09, 2010 6:31 am
Posts: 2190
F1 Racer wrote:
bourbon19 wrote:
Max seemed completely at fault to me. Kimi likely didn't see him, but certainly didn't expect him to brake late - he wasn't so much leaving no room as expecting no one to be there. Meanwhile, it is not okay for Max to drive with blinders on, failing to show as much insight as Perez in his decision-making. Impatience leads to taking greater risks, which means a greater risk of an incident. I suppose it is just a matter of weighing the possible advantage against a game-over scenario. Here, Max would easily pass the cars in front in the subsequent lap or two, so the advantage was not worth the risk.


How can you not expect someone to be there when he himself personally couldn't see that space, and there was indeed a car there?

Kimi can only get away with 'not expecting someone to be there' if there is only a very remote chance of someone being there. It's turn 1 of a grand prix and he is in the middle of the pack with cars all around, so the odds of someone being there in his blindspot is much less than remote, in fact it's actually very likely. Therefore he cannot just choose any line that he wants to take through the corner, he instead has to take a more cautious line through the corner, (like for example Bottas who went round the corner dodging the apex entirely and staying in the middle of the track with his pathing).


If he had known it was Max, perhaps he would have considered that Max would brake late and try to take the inside. So he didn't make any concession for that move, why would he?

Furthermore, what about Max? He was behind, he saw Kimi, what was his responsibility? Drive in any manner he wants? Other drivers are responsible for anticipating his moves or deal with the negative consequences? You didn't see others crashing in this manner at the start. It isn't because they are not capable of driving like Max, breaking late and trying for a disappearing inside line - they are just not taking the great risk Max is.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Sep 04, 2019 12:31 am 
Offline

Joined: Mon Aug 25, 2014 9:50 am
Posts: 1575
Location: UK
Just looking at the above video in more detail, even if Kimi had not inadvertently squeezed Max and he had a clear "lane" with his overspeed he would inevitably have crossed the track and ended up in contact with any one of 4-5 other cars.
Clearly the stewards felt they couldn't attach blame to either driver and so called it a 'racing incident'.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Sep 04, 2019 1:17 am 
Offline

Joined: Sun Nov 18, 2012 11:14 pm
Posts: 3872
To me it looks like Max simply missed his braking point, maybe due to him having a bad start, he miscalculated the braking, and the only place for him to go was on the inside of Raikonnen. I don't think that he was attempting to overtake Raikonnen, because frankly the move was not there. He was probably hoping dearly that Raikonnen would somehow see him and make room, but of course that didn't happen. Kimi had Perez next to him and his responsibility was to cover him off, not a dive bombing Max. Racing incident but Max is more at fault.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Sep 04, 2019 5:56 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Oct 06, 2006 12:07 pm
Posts: 9973
F1 Racer wrote:
Todd wrote:
That aerial view shows more room on the outside of Kimi than I thought there was.


Exactly, and these are supposedly elite drivers so they should be able to race well. Just hold your line for one corner or so damn it. It's really not difficult. :D

So you have first hand experience on the matter do you?

_________________
Räikkönen - Vettel - Bottas
Thank you Nico - You´re the champ!

PF1 Pick 10 Competition 2016: CHAMPION (2 wins, 8 podiums)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Sep 04, 2019 7:52 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Mar 02, 2012 10:29 am
Posts: 1919
Covalent wrote:
F1 Racer wrote:
Todd wrote:
That aerial view shows more room on the outside of Kimi than I thought there was.


Exactly, and these are supposedly elite drivers so they should be able to race well. Just hold your line for one corner or so damn it. It's really not difficult. :D

So you have first hand experience on the matter do you?

I wouldn't bother arguing too much; they got into the same frenzy after the Verstappen/Leclerc incident in Austria.

_________________
#KeepFightingMichael


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Sep 04, 2019 9:53 am 
Offline

Joined: Mon Nov 26, 2018 12:53 am
Posts: 773
bourbon19 wrote:
F1 Racer wrote:
bourbon19 wrote:
Max seemed completely at fault to me. Kimi likely didn't see him, but certainly didn't expect him to brake late - he wasn't so much leaving no room as expecting no one to be there. Meanwhile, it is not okay for Max to drive with blinders on, failing to show as much insight as Perez in his decision-making. Impatience leads to taking greater risks, which means a greater risk of an incident. I suppose it is just a matter of weighing the possible advantage against a game-over scenario. Here, Max would easily pass the cars in front in the subsequent lap or two, so the advantage was not worth the risk.


How can you not expect someone to be there when he himself personally couldn't see that space, and there was indeed a car there?

Kimi can only get away with 'not expecting someone to be there' if there is only a very remote chance of someone being there. It's turn 1 of a grand prix and he is in the middle of the pack with cars all around, so the odds of someone being there in his blindspot is much less than remote, in fact it's actually very likely. Therefore he cannot just choose any line that he wants to take through the corner, he instead has to take a more cautious line through the corner, (like for example Bottas who went round the corner dodging the apex entirely and staying in the middle of the track with his pathing).


If he had known it was Max, perhaps he would have considered that Max would brake late and try to take the inside. So he didn't make any concession for that move, why would he?

Furthermore, what about Max? He was behind, he saw Kimi, what was his responsibility? Drive in any manner he wants? Other drivers are responsible for anticipating his moves or deal with the negative consequences? You didn't see others crashing in this manner at the start. It isn't because they are not capable of driving like Max, breaking late and trying for a disappearing inside line - they are just not taking the great risk Max is.


Max didn't take much of a risk, there was space there, pure and simple.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Sep 04, 2019 9:57 am 
Offline

Joined: Mon Nov 26, 2018 12:53 am
Posts: 773
Option or Prime wrote:
Just looking at the above video in more detail, even if Kimi had not inadvertently squeezed Max and he had a clear "lane" with his overspeed he would inevitably have crossed the track and ended up in contact with any one of 4-5 other cars.
Clearly the stewards felt they couldn't attach blame to either driver and so called it a 'racing incident'.


Then Kimi needs to just stay in his lane and let Max slide into him to show that Max had braked too late, instead of steering into him prior to that.

Apparently Villeneuve would have overshot in Jerez 1997, so Michael should have left him space to show this instead of steering into JV. It's the same principle from a car physics and 'who was to blame' point of view. You can't just say ''Well the other guy would have hit into me a second later anyhow, so it doesn't matter that I crashed into him first''. It's the same logic some people apply with ''Oh, I stole something from him because he seems untrustworthy and would likely steal from me anyway, so it's ok''.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Sep 04, 2019 10:01 am 
Offline

Joined: Mon Nov 26, 2018 12:53 am
Posts: 773
Covalent wrote:
F1 Racer wrote:
Todd wrote:
That aerial view shows more room on the outside of Kimi than I thought there was.


Exactly, and these are supposedly elite drivers so they should be able to race well. Just hold your line for one corner or so damn it. It's really not difficult. :D

So you have first hand experience on the matter do you?


It's not easy to perfectly stay in the lane that you entered turn 1 in, but it is fairly easy to approximately stay in lane without huge movements inwards or outwards into other lanes. Kimi deviates massively, moving from like lane 3 into lane 1 with his sharp steering motion towards the apex, (assuming there are about 6 lanes through La Source with lane 1 being on the inside and lane 6 being the far outer path round the hairpin).


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Sep 04, 2019 10:24 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Oct 06, 2006 12:07 pm
Posts: 9973
F1 Racer wrote:
Covalent wrote:
F1 Racer wrote:
Todd wrote:
That aerial view shows more room on the outside of Kimi than I thought there was.


Exactly, and these are supposedly elite drivers so they should be able to race well. Just hold your line for one corner or so damn it. It's really not difficult. :D

So you have first hand experience on the matter do you?


It's not easy to perfectly stay in the lane that you entered turn 1 in, but it is fairly easy to approximately stay in lane without huge movements inwards or outwards into other lanes. Kimi deviates massively, moving from like lane 3 into lane 1 with his sharp steering motion towards the apex, (assuming there are about 6 lanes through La Source with lane 1 being on the inside and lane 6 being the far outer path round the hairpin).

This isn't some sunday cruise on the motorway.

_________________
Räikkönen - Vettel - Bottas
Thank you Nico - You´re the champ!

PF1 Pick 10 Competition 2016: CHAMPION (2 wins, 8 podiums)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Sep 04, 2019 11:46 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue Oct 21, 2003 11:06 am
Posts: 7858
Location: Belgium
F1 Racer wrote:
pokerman wrote:
F1 Racer wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Again how were the two incidents the same for Kimi, at Silverstone he was the car behind when he hit Hamilton, at Spa he was the car in front when Verstappen hit him.


Well can you tell me what rule Vettel broke in Britain first, then I will get back to you? People seem to be very 'letter of the rules' oriented in this thread but no one is saying what rule Vettel broke in Britain to get a 20 second penalty.

Vettel rammed Verstappen from behind something that would have been impossible for Kimi to do to Verstappen.


Please can you tell me the rule that Vettel broke? Or was Vettel punished not for a rule break per se, but due to 'common sense' in that he ruined another driver's race due to careless and/or incompetent driving?

Because if it was the latter rationale, then the Vettel/Britain accident and the Kimi/Belgium accident are very similar in that sense.
:lol: F1 Racer, you're quite something else! I asked you, in discussing your views of something Mikeyg posted, to quote the two rules you seemed to be getting rather spectacularly wrong.
You fail to produce the rules you meant, and now you're asking somebody else? Well, well, well... :lol:

Fiki wrote:
F1 Racer wrote:
No, I am saying that it was likely deliberate. Kimi moved his car across deliberately. If he takes another car out in the process then Kimi is taking them out deliberately. In the slight chance it was just incompetence, punishments can still be handed out for incompetent driving as we know. So I am in no way letting Kimi off the hook, I am damning him even further.

The car's width of space we know is a 'thing', just look at Hamilton vs Ricciardo at Monaco, but even regardless of this, you cannot deliberately crowd another driver off the track and Kimi did this.

You are trying to argue technicalities to cover for Kimi, but this is a bad stance to take when what Kimi did was just plain bad driving no matter how you look at it.
Oh dear... You said that Kimi crowded Max off. The rule states that only deliberate crowding is forbidden. That is not a technicality I'm trying to argue, it is a matter of fact. You would have known this, if you had looked for the rule as I asked you in my first reaction to your claim.

The same goes for the car's width of space, which you may know to be a 'thing', but which you will find is not applicable in this case, because the rule clearly states it isn't. Do please look it up.

_________________
Use every man after his desert, and who should scape whipping? Use them after your own honour and dignity.

Maria de Villota - Jules Bianchi


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Sep 04, 2019 12:09 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Nov 26, 2018 12:53 am
Posts: 773
Fiki wrote:
:lol: F1 Racer, you're quite something else! I asked you, in discussing your views of something Mikeyg posted, to quote the two rules you seemed to be getting rather spectacularly wrong.
You fail to produce the rules you meant, and now you're asking somebody else? Well, well, well... :lol:



No, it was specifically because of you asking for me to quote rules that I wanted to establish what specific rule Vettel broke in Britain. Everyone just accepted it as a 'common sense' 20 second penalty without requiring rules to be quoted for Vettel's transgression, however for the potential Kimi one you are asking me to quote specific rules that are broken. So ironically you believed I was being inconsistent by asking for a specific rule, but it was actually your inconsistency, (not requiring rules to be quoted in Britain, but are requiring it here), which prompted me to change my tact and angle with pokerman.

So it is you that is quite something else, not me. :D

What rule did Vettel break exactly? Why was he penalised? If it was down to 'common sense', then that same 'common sense' is the rule that I am 'quoting' for this Kimi situation, so I am using that situation to cover your initial questions about quoting rules.

What's even more funny is that in your quote above, you underline the first bit, but also include the sentence below it where I explain my rationale for wanting a rules quotation for Vettel/Britain so clearly you didn't read that part and just jumped at the chance to try and catch me out on the underlined first part, without looking at the context of the sentence below. Because I liken the two situations, (Vettel/Britain and Kimi/Belgium), as they both involve a driver having his race ruined by careless driving from the other driver. I am saying that IF Kimi is at fault for Belgium, then the rule he would have broken is the same one that Vettel broke.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Sep 04, 2019 1:21 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 04, 2013 4:42 pm
Posts: 2189
F1 Racer wrote:
Fiki wrote:
:lol: F1 Racer, you're quite something else! I asked you, in discussing your views of something Mikeyg posted, to quote the two rules you seemed to be getting rather spectacularly wrong.
You fail to produce the rules you meant, and now you're asking somebody else? Well, well, well... :lol:



No, it was specifically because of you asking for me to quote rules that I wanted to establish what specific rule Vettel broke in Britain. Everyone just accepted it as a 'common sense' 20 second penalty without requiring rules to be quoted for Vettel's transgression, however for the potential Kimi one you are asking me to quote specific rules that are broken. So ironically you believed I was being inconsistent by asking for a specific rule, but it was actually your inconsistency, (not requiring rules to be quoted in Britain, but are requiring it here), which prompted me to change my tact and angle with pokerman.

So it is you that is quite something else, not me. :D

What rule did Vettel break exactly? Why was he penalised? If it was down to 'common sense', then that same 'common sense' is the rule that I am 'quoting' for this Kimi situation, so I am using that situation to cover your initial questions about quoting rules.

What's even more funny is that in your quote above, you underline the first bit, but also include the sentence below it where I explain my rationale for wanting a rules quotation for Vettel/Britain so clearly you didn't read that part and just jumped at the chance to try and catch me out on the underlined first part, without looking at the context of the sentence below. Because I liken the two situations, (Vettel/Britain and Kimi/Belgium), as they both involve a driver having his race ruined by careless driving from the other driver. I am saying that IF Kimi is at fault for Belgium, then the rule he would have broken is the same one that Vettel broke.



Firstly, Vettel didn't get a 20 second time penalty.

Secondly, he broke FIA International Sporting Code Appendix L Chapter IV Article 2(d), according to the stewards.

I'm pleased that's cleared up.

_________________
Top Three Team Champions 2017 (With Jezza13)
Group Pick 'Em 2016 Champion


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Sep 04, 2019 1:27 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 33376
F1 Racer wrote:
pokerman wrote:
F1 Racer wrote:
pokerman wrote:
F1 Racer wrote:

Please can you tell me the rule that Vettel broke? Or was Vettel punished not for a rule break per se, but due to 'common sense' in that he ruined another driver's race due to careless and/or incompetent driving?

Because if it was the latter rationale, then the Vettel/Britain accident and the Kimi/Belgium accident are very similar in that sense.

I'm not one to quote rules like section 2d paragraph c or whatever, sometimes it's just common sense like Vettel crashed Verstappen out so it should be a penalty.

First corner incidents tend to be treated differently because there's a lot more for drivers to contend with but if you want an ultimate who should have been penalised then I wouldn't be looking at the driver that got hit whilst in front.


I've presented a pretty simple solution to deal with the chaos of the first corner, and that is to simply hold your line and don't switch lines through turn 1 if you aren't clear of the pack. Kimi didn't do this even though it is common sense to do this and other drivers did this, so he is at fault. He changed his line through the corner, potentially cutting up other drivers in the process, which is exactly what happened.

If you hold your line, there really isn't much to contend with and you don't have to worry about your blindspots etc.. It's like in a 400m sprint, the runners hold their lanes and can just focus on sprinting ahead as fast as possible without having to worry about cutting up other runners in their blindspot as all runners are sticking to their path or 'lane' through the corners. So long as the runner stays in his predetermined lane, he is safe of blame for any contact that occurs between runners. Turn 1 in a motor race with cars bunched in your blindspots works the same, go through the corner in your 'lane' and then you will be fine. Your 'lane' will be determined by the physical position that you arrive into the corner at. It will be very hard for contact to occur if all drivers follow this, and we saw a perfect demonstration at turn 1 in Hungary 2019.

It's not really normal for drivers not to take the apex going into the first corner that seems to be what your proposing?

Nominally drivers will leave room at the apex if they see a car on their inside, I believe Kimi didn't see Verstappen because Perez's car was between the two of them?


It is standard to not take the apex of turn 1 of lap 1. Not all cars can take turn 1 properly, in fact usually only the leader can take turn 1 optimally if he is well clear of the pack and has had a great start. Every other driver will have to make concessions in order to avoid contact. Kimi did not make enough concessions and started swerving his car into his blindspots.

We are talking about one corner of the race here where drivers should be making some concessions with the pathing and speed that they take through the corner, it is perfectly reasonable to expect them to do this and indeed most races don't have incidents at the first turn so the drivers are able to show that they can do this properly.

Kimi thought he was clear so in his mind he was alright to take the apex, it's such a slow corner that a late breaking car is always going to make up a vast amount of ground in a short time, that doesn't always give the driver in front time to react especially in Kimi's case were he was unsighted by Perez's car.

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

2013: 5th Place
2014: Champion
2015: 3rd Place
2016: 4th Place

2017: 9th Place
2018: 7th place

Wins: Canada 2018, Abu Dhabi 2017
Podiums: (8)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Sep 04, 2019 1:29 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 33376
MistaVega23 wrote:
Covalent wrote:
F1 Racer wrote:
Todd wrote:
That aerial view shows more room on the outside of Kimi than I thought there was.


Exactly, and these are supposedly elite drivers so they should be able to race well. Just hold your line for one corner or so damn it. It's really not difficult. :D

So you have first hand experience on the matter do you?

I wouldn't bother arguing too much; they got into the same frenzy after the Verstappen/Leclerc incident in Austria.

Did he blame Leclerc?

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

2013: 5th Place
2014: Champion
2015: 3rd Place
2016: 4th Place

2017: 9th Place
2018: 7th place

Wins: Canada 2018, Abu Dhabi 2017
Podiums: (8)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Sep 04, 2019 1:35 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon May 17, 2010 3:23 pm
Posts: 81
Kimi was responsible for about 50% of the harm to Verstappen.
Verstappen was responsible for about 50% of the harm to Verstappen.
They share the blame for what they did to each other. Racing incident.

However, objectively Kimi is only very slightly responsible for the harm inflicted on himself.
Verstappen on the other hand, had more choices to avoid inflicting harm on himself. Not to say his choice was 100% wrong. There's a lot of mitigation. But a lot less that Kimi had for his decisions. Put it this way, you'd reckon Kimi would been a little more circumspect than bombing down the inside. But I can also understand Verstappen deciding to go for it, damn the consequences, as he was pinned down the inside.

Again. Racing incident. Anyone trying to argue Kimi is more to blame should study the principle of mutually assured destruction.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Sep 04, 2019 1:45 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Mar 02, 2012 10:29 am
Posts: 1919
pokerman wrote:
MistaVega23 wrote:
Covalent wrote:
F1 Racer wrote:
Todd wrote:
That aerial view shows more room on the outside of Kimi than I thought there was.


Exactly, and these are supposedly elite drivers so they should be able to race well. Just hold your line for one corner or so damn it. It's really not difficult. :D

So you have first hand experience on the matter do you?

I wouldn't bother arguing too much; they got into the same frenzy after the Verstappen/Leclerc incident in Austria.

Did he blame Leclerc?

Strangely, no - Verstappen got the blame for that one.

_________________
#KeepFightingMichael


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Sep 04, 2019 1:47 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Nov 26, 2018 12:53 am
Posts: 773
Herb wrote:
F1 Racer wrote:
Fiki wrote:
:lol: F1 Racer, you're quite something else! I asked you, in discussing your views of something Mikeyg posted, to quote the two rules you seemed to be getting rather spectacularly wrong.
You fail to produce the rules you meant, and now you're asking somebody else? Well, well, well... :lol:



No, it was specifically because of you asking for me to quote rules that I wanted to establish what specific rule Vettel broke in Britain. Everyone just accepted it as a 'common sense' 20 second penalty without requiring rules to be quoted for Vettel's transgression, however for the potential Kimi one you are asking me to quote specific rules that are broken. So ironically you believed I was being inconsistent by asking for a specific rule, but it was actually your inconsistency, (not requiring rules to be quoted in Britain, but are requiring it here), which prompted me to change my tact and angle with pokerman.

So it is you that is quite something else, not me. :D

What rule did Vettel break exactly? Why was he penalised? If it was down to 'common sense', then that same 'common sense' is the rule that I am 'quoting' for this Kimi situation, so I am using that situation to cover your initial questions about quoting rules.

What's even more funny is that in your quote above, you underline the first bit, but also include the sentence bel

ow it where I explain my rationale for wanting a rules quotation for Vettel/Britain so clearly you didn't read that part and just jumped at the chance to try and catch me out on the underlined first part, without looking at the context of the sentence below. Because I liken the two situations, (Vettel/Britain and Kimi/Belgium), as they both involve a driver having his race ruined by careless driving from the other driver. I am saying that IF Kimi is at fault for Belgium, then the rule he would have broken is the same one that Vettel broke.



Firstly, Vettel didn't get a 20 second time penalty.

Secondly, he broke FIA International Sporting Code Appendix L Chapter IV Article 2(d), according to the stewards.

I'm pleased that's cleared up.


Thank you.

Here we go, Kimi's situation applies to 2(c):

c) curves, as well as the approach and exit zones thereof, may be negotiated by the drivers in any way they wish, within the limits of the track. Overtaking, according to the circumstances, may be done either on the right or on the left. However, manoeuvres liable to hinder other drivers such as premature changes of direction, more than one change of direction, deliberate crowding of cars towards the inside or the outside of the curve or any other abnormal change of direction, are strictly prohibited and shall be penalised, according to the importance and repetition of the offences, by penalties ranging from a fine to the exclusion from the race. The repetition of dangerous driving, even involuntary, may result in the exclusion from the race

Now the move Kimi made was deliberate in that he intended to move across into his blindspot which was careless but nevertheless deliberate.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Sep 04, 2019 1:49 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Nov 26, 2018 12:53 am
Posts: 773
pokerman wrote:
F1 Racer wrote:
pokerman wrote:
F1 Racer wrote:

I've presented a pretty simple solution to deal with the chaos of the first corner, and that is to simply hold your line and don't switch lines through turn 1 if you aren't clear of the pack. Kimi didn't do this even though it is common sense to do this and other drivers did this, so he is at fault. He changed his line through the corner, potentially cutting up other drivers in the process, which is exactly what happened.

If you hold your line, there really isn't much to contend with and you don't have to worry about your blindspots etc.. It's like in a 400m sprint, the runners hold their lanes and can just focus on sprinting ahead as fast as possible without having to worry about cutting up other runners in their blindspot as all runners are sticking to their path or 'lane' through the corners. So long as the runner stays in his predetermined lane, he is safe of blame for any contact that occurs between runners. Turn 1 in a motor race with cars bunched in your blindspots works the same, go through the corner in your 'lane' and then you will be fine. Your 'lane' will be determined by the physical position that you arrive into the corner at. It will be very hard for contact to occur if all drivers follow this, and we saw a perfect demonstration at turn 1 in Hungary 2019.

It's not really normal for drivers not to take the apex going into the first corner that seems to be what your proposing?

Nominally drivers will leave room at the apex if they see a car on their inside, I believe Kimi didn't see Verstappen because Perez's car was between the two of them?


It is standard to not take the apex of turn 1 of lap 1. Not all cars can take turn 1 properly, in fact usually only the leader can take turn 1 optimally if he is well clear of the pack and has had a great start. Every other driver will have to make concessions in order to avoid contact. Kimi did not make enough concessions and started swerving his car into his blindspots.

We are talking about one corner of the race here where drivers should be making some concessions with the pathing and speed that they take through the corner, it is perfectly reasonable to expect them to do this and indeed most races don't have incidents at the first turn so the drivers are able to show that they can do this properly.

Kimi thought he was clear so in his mind he was alright to take the apex, it's such a slow corner that a late breaking car is always going to make up a vast amount of ground in a short time, that doesn't always give the driver in front time to react especially in Kimi's case were he was unsighted by Perez's car.


Kimi thought he was clear, but he was wrong about that as he wouldn't have hit another car by changing into the inside lane like that. It was careless and it cost another driver their participation in the race.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Sep 04, 2019 1:51 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Nov 26, 2018 12:53 am
Posts: 773
MistaVega23 wrote:
pokerman wrote:
MistaVega23 wrote:
Covalent wrote:
So you have first hand experience on the matter do you?

I wouldn't bother arguing too much; they got into the same frenzy after the Verstappen/Leclerc incident in Austria.

Did he blame Leclerc?

Strangely, no - Verstappen got the blame for that one.


Why 'strangely' when that incident involved Verstappen driving into Leclerc's lane in much the same way as Kimi driving into Max's lane in Belgium?

So don't you mean consistently Verstappen got the blame for that one?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Sep 04, 2019 1:53 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Nov 26, 2018 12:53 am
Posts: 773
da4an1qu1 wrote:
Kimi was responsible for about 50% of the harm to Verstappen.
Verstappen was responsible for about 50% of the harm to Verstappen.
They share the blame for what they did to each other. Racing incident.

However, objectively Kimi is only very slightly responsible for the harm inflicted on himself.
Verstappen on the other hand, had more choices to avoid inflicting harm on himself. Not to say his choice was 100% wrong. There's a lot of mitigation. But a lot less that Kimi had for his decisions. Put it this way, you'd reckon Kimi would been a little more circumspect than bombing down the inside. But I can also understand Verstappen deciding to go for it, damn the consequences, as he was pinned down the inside.

Again. Racing incident. Anyone trying to argue Kimi is more to blame should study the principle of mutually assured destruction.


Verstappen went racing and is not responsible, he is just doing his job, (trying to overtake someone). Kimi in effect tries to block Verstappen but he tries to block him too late with Max having a decent chunk of his car already alongside.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Sep 04, 2019 1:54 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 33376
MistaVega23 wrote:
pokerman wrote:
MistaVega23 wrote:
Covalent wrote:
F1 Racer wrote:
Exactly, and these are supposedly elite drivers so they should be able to race well. Just hold your line for one corner or so damn it. It's really not difficult. :D

So you have first hand experience on the matter do you?

I wouldn't bother arguing too much; they got into the same frenzy after the Verstappen/Leclerc incident in Austria.

Did he blame Leclerc?

Strangely, no - Verstappen got the blame for that one.

Oh right so there's no bias being involved here then.

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

2013: 5th Place
2014: Champion
2015: 3rd Place
2016: 4th Place

2017: 9th Place
2018: 7th place

Wins: Canada 2018, Abu Dhabi 2017
Podiums: (8)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Sep 04, 2019 1:56 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 33376
F1 Racer wrote:
pokerman wrote:
F1 Racer wrote:
pokerman wrote:
F1 Racer wrote:

I've presented a pretty simple solution to deal with the chaos of the first corner, and that is to simply hold your line and don't switch lines through turn 1 if you aren't clear of the pack. Kimi didn't do this even though it is common sense to do this and other drivers did this, so he is at fault. He changed his line through the corner, potentially cutting up other drivers in the process, which is exactly what happened.

If you hold your line, there really isn't much to contend with and you don't have to worry about your blindspots etc.. It's like in a 400m sprint, the runners hold their lanes and can just focus on sprinting ahead as fast as possible without having to worry about cutting up other runners in their blindspot as all runners are sticking to their path or 'lane' through the corners. So long as the runner stays in his predetermined lane, he is safe of blame for any contact that occurs between runners. Turn 1 in a motor race with cars bunched in your blindspots works the same, go through the corner in your 'lane' and then you will be fine. Your 'lane' will be determined by the physical position that you arrive into the corner at. It will be very hard for contact to occur if all drivers follow this, and we saw a perfect demonstration at turn 1 in Hungary 2019.

It's not really normal for drivers not to take the apex going into the first corner that seems to be what your proposing?

Nominally drivers will leave room at the apex if they see a car on their inside, I believe Kimi didn't see Verstappen because Perez's car was between the two of them?


It is standard to not take the apex of turn 1 of lap 1. Not all cars can take turn 1 properly, in fact usually only the leader can take turn 1 optimally if he is well clear of the pack and has had a great start. Every other driver will have to make concessions in order to avoid contact. Kimi did not make enough concessions and started swerving his car into his blindspots.

We are talking about one corner of the race here where drivers should be making some concessions with the pathing and speed that they take through the corner, it is perfectly reasonable to expect them to do this and indeed most races don't have incidents at the first turn so the drivers are able to show that they can do this properly.

Kimi thought he was clear so in his mind he was alright to take the apex, it's such a slow corner that a late breaking car is always going to make up a vast amount of ground in a short time, that doesn't always give the driver in front time to react especially in Kimi's case were he was unsighted by Perez's car.


Kimi thought he was clear, but he was wrong about that as he wouldn't have hit another car by changing into the inside lane like that. It was careless and it cost another driver their participation in the race.

Well anyway the stewards saw it as a racing incident, sometimes it takes 2 people to be responsible for a crash.

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

2013: 5th Place
2014: Champion
2015: 3rd Place
2016: 4th Place

2017: 9th Place
2018: 7th place

Wins: Canada 2018, Abu Dhabi 2017
Podiums: (8)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Sep 04, 2019 1:59 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 33376
F1 Racer wrote:
MistaVega23 wrote:
pokerman wrote:
MistaVega23 wrote:
Covalent wrote:
So you have first hand experience on the matter do you?

I wouldn't bother arguing too much; they got into the same frenzy after the Verstappen/Leclerc incident in Austria.

Did he blame Leclerc?

Strangely, no - Verstappen got the blame for that one.


Why 'strangely' when that incident involved Verstappen driving into Leclerc's lane in much the same way as Kimi driving into Max's lane in Belgium?

So don't you mean consistently Verstappen got the blame for that one?

This lane driving is something that Bradley Philpotts of Missed Apex Podcast advocates when apportioning blame with crashes, shame he didn't appear on the latest podcast.

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

2013: 5th Place
2014: Champion
2015: 3rd Place
2016: 4th Place

2017: 9th Place
2018: 7th place

Wins: Canada 2018, Abu Dhabi 2017
Podiums: (8)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Sep 04, 2019 2:15 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Nov 26, 2018 12:53 am
Posts: 773
pokerman wrote:
This lane driving is something that Bradley Philpotts of Missed Apex Podcast advocates when apportioning blame with crashes, shame he didn't appear on the latest podcast.


Lane theory is a great way for discussing fair racing and apportioning blame when there is contact.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Sep 04, 2019 2:45 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat Jan 28, 2012 4:13 pm
Posts: 16445
pokerman wrote:
F1 Racer wrote:
MistaVega23 wrote:
pokerman wrote:
MistaVega23 wrote:
I wouldn't bother arguing too much; they got into the same frenzy after the Verstappen/Leclerc incident in Austria.

Did he blame Leclerc?

Strangely, no - Verstappen got the blame for that one.


Why 'strangely' when that incident involved Verstappen driving into Leclerc's lane in much the same way as Kimi driving into Max's lane in Belgium?

So don't you mean consistently Verstappen got the blame for that one?

This lane driving is something that Bradley Philpotts of Missed Apex Podcast advocates when apportioning blame with crashes, shame he didn't appear on the latest podcast.


All the missed Apex panellists blamed Kimi didn't they?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Sep 04, 2019 2:55 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Mar 02, 2012 10:29 am
Posts: 1919
F1 Racer wrote:
da4an1qu1 wrote:
Kimi was responsible for about 50% of the harm to Verstappen.
Verstappen was responsible for about 50% of the harm to Verstappen.
They share the blame for what they did to each other. Racing incident.

However, objectively Kimi is only very slightly responsible for the harm inflicted on himself.
Verstappen on the other hand, had more choices to avoid inflicting harm on himself. Not to say his choice was 100% wrong. There's a lot of mitigation. But a lot less that Kimi had for his decisions. Put it this way, you'd reckon Kimi would been a little more circumspect than bombing down the inside. But I can also understand Verstappen deciding to go for it, damn the consequences, as he was pinned down the inside.

Again. Racing incident. Anyone trying to argue Kimi is more to blame should study the principle of mutually assured destruction.


Verstappen went racing and is not responsible, he is just doing his job, (trying to overtake someone). Kimi in effect tries to block Verstappen but he tries to block him too late with Max having a decent chunk of his car already alongside.

As mentioned previously in this thread, Max came from a long way back and was out of Kimi's vision (only Perez was visible in his mirrors at that point). Max chose to make up for his poor start by doing a divebomb into La Source which, as we all know, nine times out of ten, isn't going to work.

It's also worth noting how far back he was from the front four from the point of braking to corner apex; even Perez does the sensible thing and backed out, switching to the left to avoid the Red Bull squeezing him.

_________________
#KeepFightingMichael


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Sep 04, 2019 3:21 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Nov 26, 2018 12:53 am
Posts: 773
MistaVega23 wrote:
F1 Racer wrote:

Verstappen went racing and is not responsible, he is just doing his job, (trying to overtake someone). Kimi in effect tries to block Verstappen but he tries to block him too late with Max having a decent chunk of his car already alongside.

As mentioned previously in this thread, Max came from a long way back and was out of Kimi's vision (only Perez was visible in his mirrors at that point). Max chose to make up for his poor start by doing a divebomb into La Source which, as we all know, nine times out of ten, isn't going to work.

It's also worth noting how far back he was from the front four from the point of braking to corner apex; even Perez does the sensible thing and backed out, switching to the left to avoid the Red Bull squeezing him.


It wasn't a divebomb because when they touch Max's car is all over the green area of run-off surface that is further inside than the inside curbs themselves. A divebomb means the overtaker is struggling to make the corner and is braking way too late. If Max was braking too late his car would be flying towards lane 6 and the outside section of the corner. Instead his car is turning tighter than lane 1, he is off the track up the inside of the corner and he would be able to turn even tighter if it wasn't for the wall.

So Max's outbraking move was well timed and correct and he can easily pass and make the corner using entirely lane 1, (the tightest inside path that hugs the apex and inside curbs).

Max has to go onto the green area because Kimi is moving from lane 3 to lane 1, (without looking), after Max is already occupying lane 1. He tries to avoid contact from a wayward Kimi but the inside wall prevents him from moving even further away and so they touch. If Kimi stays in lane 3 or lane 2 then they get to continue racing and there is no contact because Max can easily make the corner remaining in lane 1 himself.

Max gets into lane 1 before Kimi gets into lane 1, so Max has a right to be there and Kimi doesn't. Yes Kimi probably can't see Max, but then that just means Kimi should not be steering his car into a lane that is in his blindspot and has a high chance of already being occupied since it is turn 1 on lap 1. A completely avoidable accident if Kimi just stays in the middle of the track in lane 3. If he takes the corner like Bottas ahead of him does, (who drives in lane 3 and lane 4), then all is fine.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Sep 04, 2019 3:51 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Mar 02, 2012 10:29 am
Posts: 1919
F1 Racer wrote:
MistaVega23 wrote:
F1 Racer wrote:

Verstappen went racing and is not responsible, he is just doing his job, (trying to overtake someone). Kimi in effect tries to block Verstappen but he tries to block him too late with Max having a decent chunk of his car already alongside.

As mentioned previously in this thread, Max came from a long way back and was out of Kimi's vision (only Perez was visible in his mirrors at that point). Max chose to make up for his poor start by doing a divebomb into La Source which, as we all know, nine times out of ten, isn't going to work.

It's also worth noting how far back he was from the front four from the point of braking to corner apex; even Perez does the sensible thing and backed out, switching to the left to avoid the Red Bull squeezing him.


It wasn't a divebomb because when they touch Max's car is all over the green area of run-off surface that is further inside than the inside curbs themselves. A divebomb means the overtaker is struggling to make the corner and is braking way too late. If Max was braking too late his car would be flying towards lane 6 and the outside section of the corner. Instead his car is turning tighter than lane 1, he is off the track up the inside of the corner and he would be able to turn even tighter if it wasn't for the wall.

So Max's outbraking move was well timed and correct and he can easily pass and make the corner using entirely lane 1, (the tightest inside path that hugs the apex and inside curbs).

Max has to go onto the green area because Kimi is moving from lane 3 to lane 1, (without looking), after Max is already occupying lane 1. He tries to avoid contact from a wayward Kimi but the inside wall prevents him from moving even further away and so they touch. If Kimi stays in lane 3 or lane 2 then they get to continue racing and there is no contact because Max can easily make the corner remaining in lane 1 himself.

Max gets into lane 1 before Kimi gets into lane 1, so Max has a right to be there and Kimi doesn't. Yes Kimi probably can't see Max, but then that just means Kimi should not be steering his car into a lane that is in his blindspot and has a high chance of already being occupied since it is turn 1 on lap 1. A completely avoidable accident if Kimi just stays in the middle of the track in lane 3. If he takes the corner like Bottas ahead of him does, (who drives in lane 3 and lane 4), then all is fine.

If it was lap 3 or 4 and just between Kimi and Max then fine. But it wasn't. It was the start, and all drivers need to be careful going into the hairpin.

Kimi was ahead and by some distance when Max started braking. You can say Kimi 'changed lanes' all you want, but he's simply taking the racing line. By seeing Perez back off and move to the left Kimi thought it was safe to take the corner. Max should have backed off at the same time as Perez. Just look at how close the Red Bull and RP came to touching (Max squeezed Perez so much that Sergio even brushed Kimi's right rear tyre).

_________________
#KeepFightingMichael


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Sep 04, 2019 4:13 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Nov 26, 2018 12:53 am
Posts: 773
MistaVega23 wrote:
F1 Racer wrote:
MistaVega23 wrote:
As mentioned previously in this thread, Max came from a long way back and was out of Kimi's vision (only Perez was visible in his mirrors at that point). Max chose to make up for his poor start by doing a divebomb into La Source which, as we all know, nine times out of ten, isn't going to work.

It's also worth noting how far back he was from the front four from the point of braking to corner apex; even Perez does the sensible thing and backed out, switching to the left to avoid the Red Bull squeezing him.


It wasn't a divebomb because when they touch Max's car is all over the green area of run-off surface that is further inside than the inside curbs themselves. A divebomb means the overtaker is struggling to make the corner and is braking way too late. If Max was braking too late his car would be flying towards lane 6 and the outside section of the corner. Instead his car is turning tighter than lane 1, he is off the track up the inside of the corner and he would be able to turn even tighter if it wasn't for the wall.

So Max's outbraking move was well timed and correct and he can easily pass and make the corner using entirely lane 1, (the tightest inside path that hugs the apex and inside curbs).

Max has to go onto the green area because Kimi is moving from lane 3 to lane 1, (without looking), after Max is already occupying lane 1. He tries to avoid contact from a wayward Kimi but the inside wall prevents him from moving even further away and so they touch. If Kimi stays in lane 3 or lane 2 then they get to continue racing and there is no contact because Max can easily make the corner remaining in lane 1 himself.

Max gets into lane 1 before Kimi gets into lane 1, so Max has a right to be there and Kimi doesn't. Yes Kimi probably can't see Max, but then that just means Kimi should not be steering his car into a lane that is in his blindspot and has a high chance of already being occupied since it is turn 1 on lap 1. A completely avoidable accident if Kimi just stays in the middle of the track in lane 3. If he takes the corner like Bottas ahead of him does, (who drives in lane 3 and lane 4), then all is fine.

If it was lap 3 or 4 and just between Kimi and Max then fine. But it wasn't. It was the start, and all drivers need to be careful going into the hairpin.

Kimi was ahead and by some distance when Max started braking. You can say Kimi 'changed lanes' all you want, but he's simply taking the racing line. By seeing Perez back off and move to the left Kimi thought it was safe to take the corner. Max should have backed off at the same time as Perez. Just look at how close the Red Bull and RP came to touching (Max squeezed Perez so much that Sergio even brushed Kimi's right rear tyre).


Kimi was taking the racing line when Max was already on the racing line, and at turn 1 of lap 1 it is poor driving to just 'take the racing line no matter what' when you have no clue what is around you but you know that it is likely plenty of cars are around you.

Max moved into lane 1 as he saw it was clear, and it was clear. Kimi moved into lane 1 after Max and when he couldn't see if it was clear. This is slam dunk poor driving for Kimi. Max is making a perfectly legitimate move if Kimi doesn't turn in on him.

You say that all drivers need to be careful going into the hairpin, well Max only ever puts his car into lanes that he can easily see are clear in front of his field of view, so surely Kimi moving into lanes that are in his blindspot is not being careful at all because another car could be there, (and indeed was in this case), and so is actually careless and poor driving? In many ways this is similar to Singapore 2017 where Vettel foolishly moves laterally across into his blindspot on the straight on the first lap and takes out Max and Kimi and they all retire. Sharply changing lanes in a significant way on the run down to turn 1 and turn 1 itself is risky business as you can easily be collecting one or more cars in your blindspots so it is always poor driving when someone does this.


Last edited by F1 Racer on Wed Sep 04, 2019 4:22 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Sep 04, 2019 4:18 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun May 25, 2008 7:55 pm
Posts: 6977
F1 Racer wrote:
MistaVega23 wrote:
F1 Racer wrote:
MistaVega23 wrote:
As mentioned previously in this thread, Max came from a long way back and was out of Kimi's vision (only Perez was visible in his mirrors at that point). Max chose to make up for his poor start by doing a divebomb into La Source which, as we all know, nine times out of ten, isn't going to work.

It's also worth noting how far back he was from the front four from the point of braking to corner apex; even Perez does the sensible thing and backed out, switching to the left to avoid the Red Bull squeezing him.


It wasn't a divebomb because when they touch Max's car is all over the green area of run-off surface that is further inside than the inside curbs themselves. A divebomb means the overtaker is struggling to make the corner and is braking way too late. If Max was braking too late his car would be flying towards lane 6 and the outside section of the corner. Instead his car is turning tighter than lane 1, he is off the track up the inside of the corner and he would be able to turn even tighter if it wasn't for the wall.

So Max's outbraking move was well timed and correct and he can easily pass and make the corner using entirely lane 1, (the tightest inside path that hugs the apex and inside curbs).

Max has to go onto the green area because Kimi is moving from lane 3 to lane 1, (without looking), after Max is already occupying lane 1. He tries to avoid contact from a wayward Kimi but the inside wall prevents him from moving even further away and so they touch. If Kimi stays in lane 3 or lane 2 then they get to continue racing and there is no contact because Max can easily make the corner remaining in lane 1 himself.

Max gets into lane 1 before Kimi gets into lane 1, so Max has a right to be there and Kimi doesn't. Yes Kimi probably can't see Max, but then that just means Kimi should not be steering his car into a lane that is in his blindspot and has a high chance of already being occupied since it is turn 1 on lap 1. A completely avoidable accident if Kimi just stays in the middle of the track in lane 3. If he takes the corner like Bottas ahead of him does, (who drives in lane 3 and lane 4), then all is fine.

If it was lap 3 or 4 and just between Kimi and Max then fine. But it wasn't. It was the start, and all drivers need to be careful going into the hairpin.

Kimi was ahead and by some distance when Max started braking. You can say Kimi 'changed lanes' all you want, but he's simply taking the racing line. By seeing Perez back off and move to the left Kimi thought it was safe to take the corner. Max should have backed off at the same time as Perez. Just look at how close the Red Bull and RP came to touching (Max squeezed Perez so much that Sergio even brushed Kimi's right rear tyre).


Kimi was taking the racing line when Max was already on the racing line, and at turn 1 of lap 1 it is poor driving to just 'take the racing line no matter what' when you have no clue what is around you but you know that it is likely plenty of cars are around you.

Max moved into lane 1 as he saw it was clear, and it was clear. Kimi moved into lane 1 after Max and when he couldn't see if it was clear. This is slam dunk poor driving for Kimi. Max is making a perfectly legitimate move if Kimi doesn't turn in on him.

No Max was actually never on the racing line. That is a tight corner and Max was well inside of the racing line. Kimi was actually inside of the racing line as well. Normally you would take a wider entry than Kimi took and a FAR wider entry than Max took. Basically Max came steaming up the inside at a careless angle and was very late on the brakes. As I've said many times; there was no way for Max to make that work without all of the other drivers backing off to let him through. Why is it that you believe that is the way things should have played out? With Max being extremely aggressive but everyone else around him being extremely passive?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Sep 04, 2019 4:25 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Nov 26, 2018 12:53 am
Posts: 773
sandman1347 wrote:
F1 Racer wrote:
MistaVega23 wrote:
F1 Racer wrote:
MistaVega23 wrote:
As mentioned previously in this thread, Max came from a long way back and was out of Kimi's vision (only Perez was visible in his mirrors at that point). Max chose to make up for his poor start by doing a divebomb into La Source which, as we all know, nine times out of ten, isn't going to work.

It's also worth noting how far back he was from the front four from the point of braking to corner apex; even Perez does the sensible thing and backed out, switching to the left to avoid the Red Bull squeezing him.


It wasn't a divebomb because when they touch Max's car is all over the green area of run-off surface that is further inside than the inside curbs themselves. A divebomb means the overtaker is struggling to make the corner and is braking way too late. If Max was braking too late his car would be flying towards lane 6 and the outside section of the corner. Instead his car is turning tighter than lane 1, he is off the track up the inside of the corner and he would be able to turn even tighter if it wasn't for the wall.

So Max's outbraking move was well timed and correct and he can easily pass and make the corner using entirely lane 1, (the tightest inside path that hugs the apex and inside curbs).

Max has to go onto the green area because Kimi is moving from lane 3 to lane 1, (without looking), after Max is already occupying lane 1. He tries to avoid contact from a wayward Kimi but the inside wall prevents him from moving even further away and so they touch. If Kimi stays in lane 3 or lane 2 then they get to continue racing and there is no contact because Max can easily make the corner remaining in lane 1 himself.

Max gets into lane 1 before Kimi gets into lane 1, so Max has a right to be there and Kimi doesn't. Yes Kimi probably can't see Max, but then that just means Kimi should not be steering his car into a lane that is in his blindspot and has a high chance of already being occupied since it is turn 1 on lap 1. A completely avoidable accident if Kimi just stays in the middle of the track in lane 3. If he takes the corner like Bottas ahead of him does, (who drives in lane 3 and lane 4), then all is fine.

If it was lap 3 or 4 and just between Kimi and Max then fine. But it wasn't. It was the start, and all drivers need to be careful going into the hairpin.

Kimi was ahead and by some distance when Max started braking. You can say Kimi 'changed lanes' all you want, but he's simply taking the racing line. By seeing Perez back off and move to the left Kimi thought it was safe to take the corner. Max should have backed off at the same time as Perez. Just look at how close the Red Bull and RP came to touching (Max squeezed Perez so much that Sergio even brushed Kimi's right rear tyre).


Kimi was taking the racing line when Max was already on the racing line, and at turn 1 of lap 1 it is poor driving to just 'take the racing line no matter what' when you have no clue what is around you but you know that it is likely plenty of cars are around you.

Max moved into lane 1 as he saw it was clear, and it was clear. Kimi moved into lane 1 after Max and when he couldn't see if it was clear. This is slam dunk poor driving for Kimi. Max is making a perfectly legitimate move if Kimi doesn't turn in on him.

No Max was actually never on the racing line. That is a tight corner and Max was well inside of the racing line. Kimi was actually inside of the racing line as well. Normally you would take a wider entry than Kimi took and a FAR wider entry than Max took. Basically Max came steaming up the inside at a careless angle and was very late on the brakes. As I've said many times; there was no way for Max to make that work without all of the other drivers backing off to let him through. Why is it that you believe that is the way things should have played out? With Max being extremely aggressive but everyone else around him being extremely passive?



Yes, the true racing line would be something like lane 5 sweeping into lane 1, (through small pieces of lane 4, 3 and 2), and then back out to lane 6 on the corner exit, (again through small pieces of lane 2, 3, 4 and 5), but therefore this means that lane 1 is indeed part of the true racing line for part of the corner, (the apex), and so Max is already in lane 1 once lane 1 gets it's moment as being part of the true racing line was basically what I meant, but I wasn't super clear. Then Kimi joins lane 1 late and forces Max off the track and still hits him.

At the point they touch, they are both already on the racing line but it is Kimi that is the one moving laterally and so is the one at fault as Max is already 'there' in that lane travelling forwards and Kimi is essentially cutting him up and sweeping across into that lane when it isn't clear to do so. Just like on the motorway, even on the race track drivers should only move into lanes that are clear when they are racing one another.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Sep 04, 2019 4:39 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Mar 04, 2012 8:02 am
Posts: 1041
Location: India
This was the first blunder from Max after a long time. Pretty stupid mistake, he was never going to make it and ruined his race as well. If it was a Ferrari or Mercedes then may be you could justify it otherwise he should have played it safe and wait for the chance to overtake.

_________________
Sir Stirling Moss "Quite frankly, Kimi Raikkonen is the fastest driver in the world"


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic

All times are UTC


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: P-F1 Mod and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group