planetf1.com

It is currently Sun Nov 17, 2019 4:15 pm

All times are UTC


Forum rules


Please read the forum rules



Post new topic This topic is locked, you cannot edit posts or make further replies.
Author Message
PostPosted: Tue Oct 15, 2019 2:39 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat Jan 28, 2012 4:13 pm
Posts: 16249
pokerman wrote:
mikeyg123 wrote:
pokerman wrote:
mikeyg123 wrote:
pokerman wrote:
More downforce, more turbulence?


I don't know. Even at ultra low downforce Monza Bottas had a hell of a job getting within a second of Leclerc and Hamilton was losing 3-5 tenths every single lap just through the parabolica.

Wasn't Hamilton able to sit within DRS range of Leclerc at Monza?


He could stay in with the aid of two huge DRS zones but as I say was losing a bundle of time through the parabolica. He certainly wasn't able to follow like the midfield cars were through the essess in Suzuka.

But you have to get within a second to get the benefit of the DRS in the first place.

In respect to Mercedes traditionally they've had a poor car when following other cars, not sure about this year's car?


It's not just Mercedes. Look at the racing we have seen in the midfield in Singapore, Russia and Japan. Compare that to the front runners.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Oct 15, 2019 2:50 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun May 25, 2008 7:55 pm
Posts: 6949
mikeyg123 wrote:
pokerman wrote:
But you have to get within a second to get the benefit of the DRS in the first place.

In respect to Mercedes traditionally they've had a poor car when following other cars, not sure about this year's car?


It's not just Mercedes. Look at the racing we have seen in the midfield in Singapore, Russia and Japan. Compare that to the front runners.

A lot of it is down to tires. In the midfield you see drivers on different strategies and different tires at various points in the race. Due to the fact that the cars at the front have to start on their Q2 tires, you rarely see much variety at the front in terms of tires and strategy. For me, eliminating this rule where you start on qualifying tires is such low-hanging fruit if you want to make the sport more interesting. All that rule does is limit strategy.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Oct 15, 2019 3:16 pm 
Offline

Joined: Fri Mar 04, 2016 8:52 pm
Posts: 3493
pokerman wrote:
F1_Ernie wrote:
I dont know why Mercedes didn't go for the undercut with Hamilton on Vettel. Hamilton was taking alot of time out of Vettel who's tyres was going off and by lap 14 was a second behind, that's when you go for the undercut, even if Ferarri do react and pit Vettel instead then your making a Ferrari which isnt good on its tyres pit earlier than they want to. Then Mercedes reacted way to late to pit Hamilton letting him lose way too much time to Bottas and Vettel, going from being 7 tenths to 10 seconds behind, that is just not good enough. I just dont think Vowles can think outside the box with 2 cars.

In regards to Vowles I have a foreboding that he may cost Hamilton the title next year, his mistakes this year have been numerous.


I have now read Mercedes have admitted to the error of not taking the chance to undercut Vettel at the first stops, they said Vettel offered them the window to pit first but it seems they was so obsessed with taking the 1 stop at that point, this is the biggest problem I have with Mercedes, they dont always react to what's actually happening on track. 3 errors in 1 race for Hamilton, not going for the undercut on the 1st stops, leaving him out too long before Hamilton took his first stop then pitting Hamilton for the second stop.

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

2016: 24th place
2017: 4th place
2018: 12th place

Wins: Spain 2016, Canada 2017, Malaysia 2017
Podiums: 2nd Germany 2016, 3rd Mexico 2016, 3rd China 2018, 3rd Japan 2018, 2nd Mexico 2018


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Oct 15, 2019 4:57 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Jun 20, 2005 6:28 pm
Posts: 9
Can someone explain the Perez 9th place finish to me?

On his last lap, he tried to pass and crashed. He was passed by Hulk, Stroll and Gasley. Those 3 all crossed the line and took the checkered flag, and Perez's damaged car was still on the track, did not cross the finish line - but he is classified 9th in the GP - even though at least those other 3 cars passed and crossed the line ahead of him. I am really not understanding how the 9th place was handed to him even though he did not cross the line in 9th? This is not making sense - help please!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Oct 15, 2019 5:05 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat Jan 28, 2012 4:13 pm
Posts: 16249
Cypruss wrote:
Can someone explain the Perez 9th place finish to me?

On his last lap, he tried to pass and crashed. He was passed by Hulk, Stroll and Gasley. Those 3 all crossed the line and took the checkered flag, and Perez's damaged car was still on the track, did not cross the finish line - but he is classified 9th in the GP - even though at least those other 3 cars passed and crossed the line ahead of him. I am really not understanding how the 9th place was handed to him even though he did not cross the line in 9th? This is not making sense - help please!


The computer malfunctioned and the race actually ended a lap earlier.

No, I'm not joking. That is the actual reason.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Oct 15, 2019 5:06 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Jun 20, 2005 6:28 pm
Posts: 9
mikeyg123 wrote:
Cypruss wrote:
Can someone explain the Perez 9th place finish to me?

On his last lap, he tried to pass and crashed. He was passed by Hulk, Stroll and Gasley. Those 3 all crossed the line and took the checkered flag, and Perez's damaged car was still on the track, did not cross the finish line - but he is classified 9th in the GP - even though at least those other 3 cars passed and crossed the line ahead of him. I am really not understanding how the 9th place was handed to him even though he did not cross the line in 9th? This is not making sense - help please!


The computer malfunctioned and the race actually ended a lap earlier.

No, I'm not joking. That is the actual reason.



LOL wow. Interesting, thanks for the info....staggering how they could get that wrong? Good for Chico I guess at the end of the day :)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Oct 16, 2019 6:02 am 
Online
User avatar

Joined: Fri Oct 06, 2006 12:07 pm
Posts: 9927
pokerman wrote:
Covalent wrote:
mikeyg123 wrote:
pokerman wrote:
mikeyg123 wrote:

I think it was done for the same reason as Singapore rather than because of it. Bottas was not allowed a strategical advantage there and Hamilton wasn't here.

However in this case it cost Mercedes a 1-2 finish, I thought 1-2 finishes are more important than 1-3 finishes, this is what Ferrari sold to Leclerc in Singapore and is how Mercedes supposedly operate.


I'm not saying it was the correct decision.

That being said swap the drivers and I don't think you'd be complaining a bit and if you swap the drivers but Bottas does stay out you'd be the first to scream bloody murder about it.

Indeed and also with Hamilton two-stopping they were guaranteed the race victory with the second driver either second or third. Had Lewis been on a one stopper isn't it possible Vettel might have snatched the victory?

Besides, don't a team like Mercedes have 100+ guys in Brackley with sophisticated computer models running every scenario just for strategy calls like these? Doubtful personal emotions or favours come at play very often.

Vettel was slower and losing ground even to Hamilton whilst Bottas was that bit quicker again, I don't understand how Vettel wins the race.

Apparently quite unusually Wolf went on the radio asking Hamilton not to get upset because it's a day to celebrate for Mercedes winning the WCC, they didn't do the best for Hamilton but then again they don't always do the best for Bottas.

Personally I'm annoyed because of sleep lost in order to watch the race live and then not actually watching Hamilton able to compete fully in the race because of doing what's considered best for the team although I would question finishing 1-3 when 1-2 looked to be on the table.

You should try to embrace the race across the field instead of just focusing on Hamilton. Or record it and watch later.

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

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


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Oct 16, 2019 8:21 am 
Offline

Joined: Sat Jan 28, 2012 4:13 pm
Posts: 16249
So with the Vettel jump start thing.

That clearly distracted Leclerc. So in the future could drivers not game a little bit on this.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Oct 16, 2019 8:28 am 
Offline

Joined: Sun Aug 18, 2019 11:00 pm
Posts: 59
I was thinking about the silence that greeted Lewis when he asked what he needed to do to win the race.

Maybe Hamilton could have made the end on the mediums, maybe he couldn’t, I just felt it would have been better viewing, knowing that Ferrari had the straight line speed advantage. He could surely have made the end of the race on the hards and I felt that was the biggest mistake, failing to split the strategy. It just seemed that Merc had decided that the guy that started in front must win.

The commentators seemed to be saying that a lot of the drivers one stopped last year. I knew the teams were struggling more with the tyre temperatures this year but is the degradation so much higher that the one stop is off the table?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Oct 16, 2019 8:29 am 
Offline

Joined: Sun Aug 18, 2019 11:00 pm
Posts: 59
mikeyg123 wrote:
So with the Vettel jump start thing.

That clearly distracted Leclerc. So in the future could drivers not game a little bit on this.


It wouldn’t surprise me, hopefully the tolerance is removed if they do though.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Oct 16, 2019 11:41 am 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 33099
F1_Ernie wrote:
pokerman wrote:
F1_Ernie wrote:
I dont know why Mercedes didn't go for the undercut with Hamilton on Vettel. Hamilton was taking alot of time out of Vettel who's tyres was going off and by lap 14 was a second behind, that's when you go for the undercut, even if Ferarri do react and pit Vettel instead then your making a Ferrari which isnt good on its tyres pit earlier than they want to. Then Mercedes reacted way to late to pit Hamilton letting him lose way too much time to Bottas and Vettel, going from being 7 tenths to 10 seconds behind, that is just not good enough. I just dont think Vowles can think outside the box with 2 cars.

In regards to Vowles I have a foreboding that he may cost Hamilton the title next year, his mistakes this year have been numerous.


I have now read Mercedes have admitted to the error of not taking the chance to undercut Vettel at the first stops, they said Vettel offered them the window to pit first but it seems they was so obsessed with taking the 1 stop at that point, this is the biggest problem I have with Mercedes, they dont always react to what's actually happening on track. 3 errors in 1 race for Hamilton, not going for the undercut on the 1st stops, leaving him out too long before Hamilton took his first stop then pitting Hamilton for the second stop.

This is why Hamilton was repeatedly asking questions because they didn't know themselves what they were doing, I believe they even told Bottas at one stage that Hamilton was on a one stop and he would have to pass him to win the race.

Hamilton: "should I close the gap to Vettel"
RE: "yes close the gap"
later
Hamilton: "what do I need to do to win this race"
RE: silence

After the race Hamilton said that if he had been given clear instruction that he was on a one stop then he would have managed his race accordingly. At times Vowles just seems to be caught like a rabbit in the headlights, he just can't make a decision, then afterwards we hear things like this that Hamilton could have had the undercut on Vettel, they leave him out for the one stop but then change it for no real fathomable reason that basically leaves Hamilton high and dry, it's just not good enough.

_________________
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 Oct 16, 2019 11:47 am 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 33099
Covalent wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Covalent wrote:
mikeyg123 wrote:
pokerman wrote:
However in this case it cost Mercedes a 1-2 finish, I thought 1-2 finishes are more important than 1-3 finishes, this is what Ferrari sold to Leclerc in Singapore and is how Mercedes supposedly operate.


I'm not saying it was the correct decision.

That being said swap the drivers and I don't think you'd be complaining a bit and if you swap the drivers but Bottas does stay out you'd be the first to scream bloody murder about it.

Indeed and also with Hamilton two-stopping they were guaranteed the race victory with the second driver either second or third. Had Lewis been on a one stopper isn't it possible Vettel might have snatched the victory?

Besides, don't a team like Mercedes have 100+ guys in Brackley with sophisticated computer models running every scenario just for strategy calls like these? Doubtful personal emotions or favours come at play very often.

Vettel was slower and losing ground even to Hamilton whilst Bottas was that bit quicker again, I don't understand how Vettel wins the race.

Apparently quite unusually Wolf went on the radio asking Hamilton not to get upset because it's a day to celebrate for Mercedes winning the WCC, they didn't do the best for Hamilton but then again they don't always do the best for Bottas.

Personally I'm annoyed because of sleep lost in order to watch the race live and then not actually watching Hamilton able to compete fully in the race because of doing what's considered best for the team although I would question finishing 1-3 when 1-2 looked to be on the table.

You should try to embrace the race across the field instead of just focusing on Hamilton. Or record it and watch later.

If you are a fan of a driver then that's what you tend to focus on in particular if he's in a close race for position, if Hamilton was either leading comfortable or was out of the race then I would start looking more at other aspects of the race, in this instance the annoyance wasn't helped by the lack of sleep.

_________________
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 Oct 16, 2019 11:56 am 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 33099
mikeyg123 wrote:
So with the Vettel jump start thing.

That clearly distracted Leclerc. So in the future could drivers not game a little bit on this.

I've been reading some things about this and my impression is that the sensor doesn't record movement of the car itself but when the car leaves the start box so in theory it wouldn't pick up a rolling start, in MotoGP they have cameras to make sure no one moves early.

I believe that normal procedure for this is that when in the starting procedure the cars must remain stationary and I also believe it states this in the rules, however the stewards have decreed that the sensor has the last word on this even though I don't believe it actually is able to police the rules as written, and now we hear things like what Vettel did was inside the tolerance of the sensor.

_________________
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 Oct 16, 2019 12:09 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat Jan 28, 2012 4:13 pm
Posts: 16249
pokerman wrote:
mikeyg123 wrote:
So with the Vettel jump start thing.

That clearly distracted Leclerc. So in the future could drivers not game a little bit on this.

I've been reading some things about this and my impression is that the sensor doesn't record movement of the car itself but when the car leaves the start box so in theory it wouldn't pick up a rolling start, in MotoGP they have cameras to make sure no one moves early.

I believe that normal procedure for this is that when in the starting procedure the cars must remain stationary and I also believe it states this in the rules, however the stewards have decreed that the sensor has the last word on this even though I don't believe it actually is able to police the rules as written, and now we hear things like what Vettel did was inside the tolerance of the sensor.


No I mean could someone do exactly what Vettel did but with the intention of distracting those around him.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Oct 16, 2019 12:55 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat May 26, 2012 2:04 pm
Posts: 2293
mikeyg123 wrote:
So with the Vettel jump start thing.

That clearly distracted Leclerc. So in the future could drivers not game a little bit on this.


Well, any midfield driver would have received a penalty for the exact same thing - and no words or new concepts of a sudden " tolerance" would have been invented. But maybe Vettel can do it again, or Verstappen. :lol:


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Oct 16, 2019 1:22 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 33099
mikeyg123 wrote:
pokerman wrote:
mikeyg123 wrote:
So with the Vettel jump start thing.

That clearly distracted Leclerc. So in the future could drivers not game a little bit on this.

I've been reading some things about this and my impression is that the sensor doesn't record movement of the car itself but when the car leaves the start box so in theory it wouldn't pick up a rolling start, in MotoGP they have cameras to make sure no one moves early.

I believe that normal procedure for this is that when in the starting procedure the cars must remain stationary and I also believe it states this in the rules, however the stewards have decreed that the sensor has the last word on this even though I don't believe it actually is able to police the rules as written, and now we hear things like what Vettel did was inside the tolerance of the sensor.


No I mean could someone do exactly what Vettel did but with the intention of distracting those around him.

Yes and this is one reason why athletic sprinters get disqualified even if they themselves didn't leave their blocks, it often triggers the runners around them to false start, in Japan Bottas went as soon as he saw Vettel move and was very lucky not to false start.

With the sprinters they have pressure pads fitted to their blocks and any slight movement is detected so if they twitch during starting orders it's picked up, like I say normally under any other starting procedure you are not allowed to move but apparently it doesn't apply to F1.

_________________
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 Oct 16, 2019 1:24 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 33099
Paolo_Lasardi wrote:
mikeyg123 wrote:
So with the Vettel jump start thing.

That clearly distracted Leclerc. So in the future could drivers not game a little bit on this.


Well, any midfield driver would have received a penalty for the exact same thing - and no words or new concepts of a sudden " tolerance" would have been invented. But maybe Vettel can do it again, or Verstappen. :lol:

No actually Sainz did similar earlier in the season and wasn't penalised so in this case it's not bias towards Ferrari, however the system seems to be seriously flawed.

_________________
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 Oct 16, 2019 2:15 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 33099
Proof that the system doesn't pick up rolling starts, Bottas got away with a rolling start, ridiculous, the stewarding is going down the pan. :thumbdown:

https://www.sportvideos.tv/video-valtte ... ump-start/

_________________
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 Oct 16, 2019 2:43 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu May 23, 2013 1:05 pm
Posts: 7947
Paolo_Lasardi wrote:
mikeyg123 wrote:
So with the Vettel jump start thing.

That clearly distracted Leclerc. So in the future could drivers not game a little bit on this.


Well, any midfield driver would have received a penalty for the exact same thing - and no words or new concepts of a sudden " tolerance" would have been invented. But maybe Vettel can do it again, or Verstappen. :lol:



As pokerman said, theres a good example from Sainz in Austria of a midfield runner having the same thing.

In terms of the point about people doing it deliberately for gain in the future apparently the tolerances are not known by the teams or drivers so they cant reliably do it without taking a huge risk, that said it does seem a little open to abuse.


Last edited by Black_Flag_11 on Wed Oct 16, 2019 2:49 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Oct 16, 2019 2:46 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat Jan 28, 2012 4:13 pm
Posts: 16249
pokerman wrote:
Proof that the system doesn't pick up rolling starts, Bottas got away with a rolling start, ridiculous, the stewarding is going down the pan. :thumbdown:

https://www.sportvideos.tv/video-valtte ... ump-start/


I don't think you can conclude that with the video. Bottas may have just gotten very lucky.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Oct 16, 2019 2:52 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu May 23, 2013 1:05 pm
Posts: 7947
mikeyg123 wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Proof that the system doesn't pick up rolling starts, Bottas got away with a rolling start, ridiculous, the stewarding is going down the pan. :thumbdown:

https://www.sportvideos.tv/video-valtte ... ump-start/


I don't think you can conclude that with the video. Bottas may have just gotten very lucky.

Yeah also remember we are using Leclerc and Hamilton as the measure but Leclerc said that he also had bad reactions because he was distracted by Vettel.

You can see Hamilton move at the same time as Leclerc so maybe Bottas didnt jump it, but all the others around him reacted slowly.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Oct 16, 2019 2:52 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun Jul 20, 2014 10:15 am
Posts: 2082
pokerman wrote:
Proof that the system doesn't pick up rolling starts, Bottas got away with a rolling start, ridiculous, the stewarding is going down the pan. :thumbdown:

https://www.sportvideos.tv/video-valtte ... ump-start/


This is rubbish though. What a site to trust. You can't even see the lights.... A non official video with barely any writing either.

Saying "It shows that" when you don't see the lights just can't be proven.

It is all focussed at the top. When they show replays of much further down the order which you often don't see, it is actually often the case that some cars get moving fractionally before others...


I just do not believe any driver would focus on starting when the others do. It would not be worth the risk. They surely always will look at their steering wheel or the lights above them. Some drivers have sometimes just been lucky with their choice of when to risk setting off. Which Bottas has been a couple of times. But I don't think it is anything to do with vettel.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Oct 16, 2019 2:56 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat Jan 28, 2012 4:13 pm
Posts: 16249
I have looked at it frame by frame and what I will say is this. If Vettel was truly stationery as the lights went out then Bottas is a very lucky boy because it looks to me that there is a very brief period where they are both moving.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Oct 16, 2019 3:03 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun Jul 20, 2014 10:15 am
Posts: 2082
Black_Flag_11 wrote:
mikeyg123 wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Proof that the system doesn't pick up rolling starts, Bottas got away with a rolling start, ridiculous, the stewarding is going down the pan. :thumbdown:

https://www.sportvideos.tv/video-valtte ... ump-start/


I don't think you can conclude that with the video. Bottas may have just gotten very lucky.

Yeah also remember we are using Leclerc and Hamilton as the measure but Leclerc said that he also had bad reactions because he was distracted by Vettel.

You can see Hamilton move at the same time as Leclerc so maybe Bottas didnt jump it, but all the others around him reacted slowly.

Yea and i think we should also take note that verstappen got by hamilton and Sainz nearly fully did too. Now i have looked at the channel 4 highlights which shows Bottas's onboard, his car certainly doesn't start moving until the lights go out fully. I watched it at 10% speed and the lights slowly fade out as they get switched off, and it isn't until they are fully out that Bottas moves. So I think it is pretty obvious from this that Vettel has nothing to do with it.

I think Vettel, leclerc and Hamilton just got bad starts. Verstappen and Bottas both looked to react much quicker or at least did not get distracted.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Oct 16, 2019 3:15 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun Jul 20, 2014 10:15 am
Posts: 2082
mikeyg123 wrote:
I have looked at it frame by frame and what I will say is this. If Vettel was truly stationery as the lights went out then Bottas is a very lucky boy because it looks to me that there is a very brief period where they are both moving.

From the look of what I have watched on Channel 4 with bottas's onboard, Vettel's car was not 100% stationary when Bottas moved, or at least Vettel hitting the brakes had made it wobble a bit. But Bottas didn't move until the lights were out. I can call it a lucky reaction time, but i don't think it is to do with vettel. He looked to be one of the few drivers near the front that didn't get distracted by it.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Oct 16, 2019 3:35 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat Jan 28, 2012 4:13 pm
Posts: 16249
TheGiantHogweed wrote:
mikeyg123 wrote:
I have looked at it frame by frame and what I will say is this. If Vettel was truly stationery as the lights went out then Bottas is a very lucky boy because it looks to me that there is a very brief period where they are both moving.

From the look of what I have watched on Channel 4 with bottas's onboard, Vettel's car was not 100% stationary when Bottas moved, or at least Vettel hitting the brakes had made it wobble a bit. But Bottas didn't move until the lights were out. I can call it a lucky reaction time, but i don't think it is to do with vettel. He looked to be one of the few drivers near the front that didn't get distracted by it.


It's more that the defence of Vettel was that he was stationery when the lights went out. Clearly not the case which means a driver could actually get a rolling start but not actually get penalised.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Oct 16, 2019 3:36 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 04, 2013 4:42 pm
Posts: 2183
That footage proves absolutely nothing.

Vettel got away with it because he started further back in his box than he is allowed. If he'd have been exactly on his marks, his transponder would have hit the detection point and he'd have been given a penalty.

That's what needs to be remembered in these cases (as with Bottas a couple of years ago)- it's not when you start moving that matters, it is when the transponder system detects the movement.

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


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Oct 16, 2019 3:46 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat Jan 28, 2012 4:13 pm
Posts: 16249
Herb wrote:
That footage proves absolutely nothing.

Vettel got away with it because he started further back in his box than he is allowed. If he'd have been exactly on his marks, his transponder would have hit the detection point and he'd have been given a penalty.

That's what needs to be remembered in these cases (as with Bottas a couple of years ago)- it's not when you start moving that matters, it is when the transponder system detects the movement.


In that case are you able to start say two meters back and try and get yourself a nice rolling start?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Oct 16, 2019 3:48 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue May 05, 2009 11:31 am
Posts: 7736
mikeyg123 wrote:
Herb wrote:
That footage proves absolutely nothing.

Vettel got away with it because he started further back in his box than he is allowed. If he'd have been exactly on his marks, his transponder would have hit the detection point and he'd have been given a penalty.

That's what needs to be remembered in these cases (as with Bottas a couple of years ago)- it's not when you start moving that matters, it is when the transponder system detects the movement.


In that case are you able to start say two meters back and try and get yourself a nice rolling start?

I don't think so, you'd need to be within the box


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Oct 16, 2019 3:50 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat Jan 28, 2012 4:13 pm
Posts: 16249
Siao7 wrote:
mikeyg123 wrote:
Herb wrote:
That footage proves absolutely nothing.

Vettel got away with it because he started further back in his box than he is allowed. If he'd have been exactly on his marks, his transponder would have hit the detection point and he'd have been given a penalty.

That's what needs to be remembered in these cases (as with Bottas a couple of years ago)- it's not when you start moving that matters, it is when the transponder system detects the movement.


In that case are you able to start say two meters back and try and get yourself a nice rolling start?

I don't think so, you'd need to be within the box


But you get my point though. If you can get yourself a rolling start legally it would give you a big edge


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Oct 16, 2019 3:59 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 33099
mikeyg123 wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Proof that the system doesn't pick up rolling starts, Bottas got away with a rolling start, ridiculous, the stewarding is going down the pan. :thumbdown:

https://www.sportvideos.tv/video-valtte ... ump-start/


I don't think you can conclude that with the video. Bottas may have just gotten very lucky.

When you watch starts in athletics such starts are clear jump starts both to the eye and to the timing system, in comparison the system used in F1 is clearly not very accurate.

In MotoGP they also use cameras, in MotoGP both Vettel and Bottas would have been given jump starts, they both moved faster than is humanly possible, they both moved before they could see the red lights go out.

_________________
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 Oct 16, 2019 4:01 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue May 05, 2009 11:31 am
Posts: 7736
mikeyg123 wrote:
Siao7 wrote:
mikeyg123 wrote:
Herb wrote:
That footage proves absolutely nothing.

Vettel got away with it because he started further back in his box than he is allowed. If he'd have been exactly on his marks, his transponder would have hit the detection point and he'd have been given a penalty.

That's what needs to be remembered in these cases (as with Bottas a couple of years ago)- it's not when you start moving that matters, it is when the transponder system detects the movement.


In that case are you able to start say two meters back and try and get yourself a nice rolling start?

I don't think so, you'd need to be within the box


But you get my point though. If you can get yourself a rolling start legally it would give you a big edge

I do get it indeed, it's just that I am not sure it will be enough. I will not pretend to know exactly where the transponder is situated and how it detects the signal, but I'm not sure how much of an advantage it would give a driver either.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Oct 16, 2019 4:03 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 33099
mikeyg123 wrote:
TheGiantHogweed wrote:
mikeyg123 wrote:
I have looked at it frame by frame and what I will say is this. If Vettel was truly stationery as the lights went out then Bottas is a very lucky boy because it looks to me that there is a very brief period where they are both moving.

From the look of what I have watched on Channel 4 with bottas's onboard, Vettel's car was not 100% stationary when Bottas moved, or at least Vettel hitting the brakes had made it wobble a bit. But Bottas didn't move until the lights were out. I can call it a lucky reaction time, but i don't think it is to do with vettel. He looked to be one of the few drivers near the front that didn't get distracted by it.


It's more that the defence of Vettel was that he was stationery when the lights went out. Clearly not the case which means a driver could actually get a rolling start but not actually get penalised.

I think this could be very much the case.

_________________
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 Oct 16, 2019 4:05 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 33099
Herb wrote:
That footage proves absolutely nothing.

Vettel got away with it because he started further back in his box than he is allowed. If he'd have been exactly on his marks, his transponder would have hit the detection point and he'd have been given a penalty.

That's what needs to be remembered in these cases (as with Bottas a couple of years ago)- it's not when you start moving that matters, it is when the transponder system detects the movement.

If he sat further back then he was allowed then why wasn't he penalised?

Such an action could be seen to attempt a rolling start?

_________________
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 Oct 16, 2019 4:06 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 33099
mikeyg123 wrote:
Herb wrote:
That footage proves absolutely nothing.

Vettel got away with it because he started further back in his box than he is allowed. If he'd have been exactly on his marks, his transponder would have hit the detection point and he'd have been given a penalty.

That's what needs to be remembered in these cases (as with Bottas a couple of years ago)- it's not when you start moving that matters, it is when the transponder system detects the movement.


In that case are you able to start say two meters back and try and get yourself a nice rolling start?

It looks like it.

_________________
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 Oct 16, 2019 4:08 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 33099
Siao7 wrote:
mikeyg123 wrote:
Siao7 wrote:
mikeyg123 wrote:
Herb wrote:
That footage proves absolutely nothing.

Vettel got away with it because he started further back in his box than he is allowed. If he'd have been exactly on his marks, his transponder would have hit the detection point and he'd have been given a penalty.

That's what needs to be remembered in these cases (as with Bottas a couple of years ago)- it's not when you start moving that matters, it is when the transponder system detects the movement.


In that case are you able to start say two meters back and try and get yourself a nice rolling start?

I don't think so, you'd need to be within the box


But you get my point though. If you can get yourself a rolling start legally it would give you a big edge

I do get it indeed, it's just that I am not sure it will be enough. I will not pretend to know exactly where the transponder is situated and how it detects the signal, but I'm not sure how much of an advantage it would give a driver either.

A rolling start is faster than a standing start.

_________________
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 Oct 16, 2019 4:15 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue May 05, 2009 11:31 am
Posts: 7736
pokerman wrote:
Siao7 wrote:
mikeyg123 wrote:
Siao7 wrote:
mikeyg123 wrote:

In that case are you able to start say two meters back and try and get yourself a nice rolling start?

I don't think so, you'd need to be within the box


But you get my point though. If you can get yourself a rolling start legally it would give you a big edge

I do get it indeed, it's just that I am not sure it will be enough. I will not pretend to know exactly where the transponder is situated and how it detects the signal, but I'm not sure how much of an advantage it would give a driver either.

A rolling start is faster than a standing start.

Is it though? Vettel had a rolling start and had to brake to stop the car, which meant that he didn't have the best getaway after that. He did ok in the end, but it wasn't the perfect start. So if they nail it yes, otherwise it isn't the best strategy, quite risky, plus unsporting.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Oct 16, 2019 4:43 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 33099
Siao7 wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Siao7 wrote:
mikeyg123 wrote:
Siao7 wrote:
I don't think so, you'd need to be within the box


But you get my point though. If you can get yourself a rolling start legally it would give you a big edge

I do get it indeed, it's just that I am not sure it will be enough. I will not pretend to know exactly where the transponder is situated and how it detects the signal, but I'm not sure how much of an advantage it would give a driver either.

A rolling start is faster than a standing start.

Is it though? Vettel had a rolling start and had to brake to stop the car, which meant that he didn't have the best getaway after that. He did ok in the end, but it wasn't the perfect start. So if they nail it yes, otherwise it isn't the best strategy, quite risky, plus unsporting.

The system shouldn't allow a driver to attempt a rolling start in the first place though.

_________________
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 Oct 16, 2019 6:11 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun Jul 20, 2014 10:15 am
Posts: 2082
Herb wrote:
That footage proves absolutely nothing.

Vettel got away with it because he started further back in his box than he is allowed. If he'd have been exactly on his marks, his transponder would have hit the detection point and he'd have been given a penalty.

That's what needs to be remembered in these cases (as with Bottas a couple of years ago)- it's not when you start moving that matters, it is when the transponder system detects the movement.

I wouldn't say Vettel started further back than he is allowed, as otherwise, he would not have got away with that either. But most drivers usually do park neatly in their box, and infact not quite as far forward as they likely can go without triggering the sensors. This is why i think vettel got away with it. He did not move enough. I often notice Verstappen park in some of the most bizarre positions that must be right on the limit. But if he gets away with that, then Vettel starting then stopping in time and not going over the limit is understandable.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Oct 16, 2019 7:54 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 04, 2013 4:42 pm
Posts: 2183
Sorry, I misphrased that.

What I meant was he wasn't as far forward as he could go.

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


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic This topic is locked, you cannot edit posts or make further replies.

All times are UTC


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Covalent, F1nut, UnlikeUday 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