3748 replies to this topic

[Squeed]

I just did.  Lol..  and you projecting like that...  give me your address I'll send you a Tomahawk steak.

 

That's kind of you Roger, you really know how to win a guy over. 

[ARTGP]

It took 74 pages to get a free steak offer.  That makes it all worth it in the end

Edited by ARTGP, 10 December 2021 - 03:15.

[MKSixer]

Indeed.  But you're guilty of polluting all threads with the same dumpster fire comments mate.  Pointing the finger at people and painting with a wide brush....  

I'm painting with data, accuracy and facts.  There is quite a bit of speculation, inferring and downright mind reading by people who have probably never driven on a race track speculating the motives of a 7X WDC with 28 years of motorsports experience and saying things judging his intelligence and worse.  That is where the dumpster fire exists.  

Edited by MKSixer, 10 December 2021 - 03:33.

[MKSixer]

It took 74 pages to get a free steak offer.  That makes it all worth it in the end

Dang.  Did I mess it up?  Do I need to offer free steak?

[Squeed]

It took 74 pages to get a free steak offer.  That makes it all worth it in the end

 

I'll need to check with my accountant to work out the ROI.

[absinthedude]

Oh, if things are clear for you, nobody is forcing you to continue the debate. Unless, of course, you think something might change your mind? I left a debate about motor oils a few weeks ago because I simply was not interested. It felt good. Try it. 

 

So...you actually have no useful information to post? Deflection of the highest order. 

 

The facts have been presented to you, and you seem to have no actual answer other than to mildly lash out in the hope that those not paying much attention think you've won. 

[gillesfan76]

It’s not the same thing at all, not unless you extrapolate it to a situation where Max offers to let Hamilton pass on everyone one of the other 47 opportunities on the track and Lewis refuses each one until he accepts the one that he chooses. Only then would it ring true that Lewis was deciding “when and where” the pass occurs.

 

Rather, what we actually had is Max deciding to let Lewis past in the single, one place where he has an overwhelming high ground and can take back the position that he gained illegally in the first place.

 

So no, Lewis not choosing that one part of the entire track is not tantamount to Lewis choosing where he can overtake, but it is tantamount to Max choosing where he can do it.

 

This is the whole irony in 70 something pages. The only reason Max was having to give the place back was that he shouldn’t have been ahead in the first place. Regarding the act of Max “trying” to give the place back, would be viewing it in the same way if instead Max started 2nd on the grid at the start of the race, and when lights went out he got into the lead because he did a jump start?

 

 

I think you're being perhaps a tad too literal here.  People have been saying that Lewis is under no obligation to overtake when Max offers, and in the resulting conversations it's clear that the implication is that the decision when it occurs is more Lewis's than Max's.  I don't think that needs over-analysis?

 

 

If I wipe my arse in front of you immediately before I offer you my hand to shake, I’m not really offering you my hand to shake.

 

 

what is the point of a post like this? Is it supposed to be funny?  Sarcastic?  Or are you deliberately going out of your way to be rude?  I don't get why you go straight into aggressive mode as soon as anyone disagrees with you. Don't really know what to say to that, tbh

 

Sigh. I’ve quoted the other relevant posts for context.

 

I’m not being funny, sarcastic or aggressive. I’m not going out of my way to be rude. First of all, I’m Australian. That’s not an excuse, but to give some context to maybe the crude language. Arse is pretty standard vernacular here.

 

I wanted to make a point that Max wasn’t offering anything with the slighted modicum of sincerity. In metaphorical terms, he had just slapped his rival in the face (cut across the corner to steal the position), then when told to apologise (instructed by FIA to give the position back), he wiped his arse first before offering his hand (attempted to give back the place in the one place where it means zero). That is a second slap in the face, this time with a dirty hand.

 

My point of using that analogy was simply so you can understand, in raw terms, what Max did and why Lewis didn’t take the bait. Would you have shaken hands if you were in Lewis’ position?

[gillesfan76]

I think you've written some top posts on this topic and I largely agree with the majority of your assessments on how the events unfolded.  But the point is it's all opinion, and just because some think it shouldn't be debated, doesn't mean that others shouldn't agree.

 

For instance, there's an argument to be made that Lewis's actions in driving so close and refusing to overtake contributed to Max's state of mind and caused him to act out of frustration and anger.  And making himself out to be the bewildered innocent afterwards adds fuel to that fire. Does that make it Lewis' fault?  Not in my book, but regardless it sheds light on the psychological battle that's raging alongside the physical one and that for me qualifies as an interesting topic.  Why should that not be allowed to be explored?  Incidents rarely happen in a vacuum and there's no reason to shut down debate just because of some misguided idea that only "approved" topics may be discussed.

 

Why is Max frustrated and angry though? I thought he cut the corner and ended up in a position he didn’t deserve, and was simply asked (by the FIA) and forced (by Lewis moving directly behind him) to give back what was not rightly his. Is it usual for a thief to become frustrated and angry when they’re not even punished but simply asked to give back what they stole? Sounds all a bit entitled tbh.

 

I personally, wholly agree with you that Lewis wasn’t bewildered or at least not more than for a tiny fraction of a second. But is it really surprising and warranting discussion? I’m not telling you not to discuss it. Discuss away if that’s what makes some people happy. But I’m simply asking, is it actually worthy of discussion that Lewis feigned confusion? There has just been contact and carbon fibre pieces flying. Max braked hard, Lewis was behind, both playing DRS games. Neither wants to risk a penalty. So they both blurt what they think reduces risk of being looked at unfavourably. While Lewis may feel perfectly justified in not taking Max’s unfair redress, the problem is no one knows how the stewards will view it now that there’s been contact. It’s perfectly understandable for a driver to downplay it.

 

Yeah I too don’t get it why some Lewis fans here are defending his feigning of confusion. Only because I think there is zero to defend. It was the angry frustrated thief in front that hit the brakes. Some feigned bewilderment, from both Max and Lewis afterwards pales into significance. One child just burned the house down. Who cares if the other child didn’t admit to taking some lollies on the way out?

 

To be fair dude I haven't seen someone in top-level motorsports reject a redress in such a determined way either. 

 

To be fair I didn’t see a redress in that race. A few people imagined one though.

[Ultraviolet]

Tbh, I don't know how anyone cam say there's nothing to discuss when even pundits like Jolyon Palmer and Marc Priestly, who are reasonably well respected, criticise Hamilton for going unnecessarily slowly - Priestly even thinks he should have attracted a penalty, make of that what you will.  Whether you agree with that or not, it does suggest quite strongly that at least it's worthy of discussion.  It's not just people trying to give Hamilton some blame by the back door and I have to say I think the protests on that score are getting pretty OTT.  It's getting to the point where people are almost obligated to preface every post with "Max is 100% to blame for the accident, but..."  It's silly

I've reflected a bit further on this. "Going unnecessarily slowly" wasn't one of the things you included in your previous comment that I responded to. I would agree that the whole issue of them both trying not to cross the DRS line is something worthy of discussion. I would agree they were both doing it, and that it is an undesirable aspect of the sport. But I wouldn't ascribe blame, because it is a consequential part of the sport given the rules the authorities have chosen to set, and does not break any of those rules (leaving aside the issue that Max was supposedly giving up an illegally gained advantage.)

 

As for your last comment, now you know how many of us felt after Silverstone when trying to make the point that Max had perfectly viable options open to him, that many drivers have chosen to take in similar situations, but that he chose not to take, that would have resulted in Lewis not understeering into him. The big difference is that Lewis made a mistake, whereas Max did something that is universally banned and condemned throughout motorsport.

[GentlemanDriver091]

As for your last comment, now you know how many of us felt after Silverstone when trying to make the point that Max had perfectly viable options open to him, that many drivers have chosen to take in similar situations, but that he chose not to take, that would have resulted in Lewis not understeering into him. The big difference is that Lewis made a mistake, whereas Max did something that is universally banned and condemned throughout motorsport.

The big difference is the outcome, Lewis never lost anything after Max’ brake test (except for a part of his wing), Max probably lost a championship by Lewis his ‘mistake’.

[gillesfan76]

While the brake test per se is something new we’ve seen from Max, in principle it’s nothing new from him. We’ve already seen him, while in the braking zone, suddenly jump in front of drivers who are about to pass him. Did it several times to Kimi in one race. Did it to his own team mate which resulted in collision. Move in front of a rival in the braking zone and hit the picks. All thoughts of the impending overtake are instantly aborted by the rival as they go into full panic mode to try and not smash into him as the beautiful clean air that was flowing over their front wing generating expected downforce is instantly replaced by dirty air reducing downforce and increasing their braking distance. Panic. We can hear it even in Kimi’s voice, the normally unflappable iceman’s voice jumping up several octaves. Incidentally, that one too resulting in damage to Kimi’s front wing https://www.youtube....h?v=FGaCcTzpgD0

 

Max’s playbook isn’t all that complicated with the pushing other drivers off track and forcing them to jump on the brakes to avoid hitting him https://www.youtube....h?v=G-Li5w5BqIU or cutting corners to keep his place https://www.youtube....h?v=xCvyhkyinQs

It’s a shame really because he’s a superb racer with great car control and wheel to wheel skills and doesn’t need to resort to these dirty tactics. It’s already a stain on his burgeoning reputation as a top driver.

 

I’m guessing at some point he was given advice “Do whatever it takes” but took it all a bit too literally.

”Otherwise I should’ve gotten a penalty if it was not correct, so everything was fair again today”.

 

Righto, carry on Max.

Edited by gillesfan76, 10 December 2021 - 09:06.

[Singularity]

So...you actually have no useful information to post? Deflection of the highest order. 

 

The facts have been presented to you, and you seem to have no actual answer other than to mildly lash out in the hope that those not paying much attention think you've won. 

In fact(!), I think I am the one who has presented most "facts". I posted the video with the telemetry and later the telemetry trace. I am not arguing against the facts. I have numerous times said that I do not agree with what Max did because, well because that is really all you fans of Lewis want to hear and admission of guilt is all you want to read. I'm arguing against the people who think racing is only about guilt and telemetry traces. There was a lot going on in that race, all of it plays a part in this particular incident. FYI I don't care who wins the championship. I started the season just hoping Toto would not get another triumph but "my driver" would own his deeds and while Lewis dropped out of contention with his "He turned in on me" at Silverstone, Max fell from my grace when he started his new mantra "I'm treated differently". They are both stretching the rules, as they should, but one pretends to be a saint, "I want to be the purest driver" and the other is whining, pretending to be a victim. Eff them both.

[Brackets]

To be fair dude I haven't seen someone in top-level motorsports reject a redress in such a determined way either. 

I'll be generous to you and ask for a mere 5 examples of a redress being offered in such a, ehr, determined way.

[Konsta]

While the brake test per se is something new we’ve seen from Max, in principle it’s nothing new from him. We’ve already seen him, while in the braking zone, suddenly jump in front of drivers who are about to pass him. Did it several times to Kimi in one race. Did it to his own team mate which resulted in collision. Move in front of a rival in the braking zone and hit the picks. All thoughts of the impending overtake are instantly aborted by the rival as they go into full panic mode to try and not smash into him as the beautiful clean air that was flowing over their front wing generating expected downforce is instantly replaced by dirty air reducing downforce and increasing their braking distance. Panic. We can hear it even in Kimi’s voice, the normally unflappable iceman’s voice jumping up several octaves. Incidentally, that one too resulting in damage to Kimi’s front wing https://www.youtube....h?v=FGaCcTzpgD0

 

Max’s playbook isn’t all that complicated with the pushing other drivers off track and forcing them to jump on the brakes to avoid hitting him https://www.youtube....h?v=G-Li5w5BqIU or cutting corners to keep his place https://www.youtube....h?v=xCvyhkyinQs

It’s a shame really because he’s a superb racer with great car control and wheel to wheel skills and doesn’t need to resort to these dirty tactics. It’s already a stain on his burgeoning reputation as a top driver.

 

I’m guessing at some point he was given advice “Do whatever it takes” but took it all a bit too literally.

”Otherwise I should’ve gotten a penalty if it was not correct, so everything was fair again today”.

 

Righto, carry on Max.

I had almost forgotten Belgium 2016 but that was just atrocious. No excuses - Max should´ve been kicked out of the series because of that alone - 2016 Hungary was also just bad. These examples show precisely why I really cannot root for Max. He has gotten way better since then but still - the same traits re-surface.

[shure]

I've reflected a bit further on this. "Going unnecessarily slowly" wasn't one of the things you included in your previous comment that I responded to. I would agree that the whole issue of them both trying not to cross the DRS line is something worthy of discussion. I would agree they were both doing it, and that it is an undesirable aspect of the sport. But I wouldn't ascribe blame, because it is a consequential part of the sport given the rules the authorities have chosen to set, and does not break any of those rules (leaving aside the issue that Max was supposedly giving up an illegally gained advantage.)

 

As for your last comment, now you know how many of us felt after Silverstone when trying to make the point that Max had perfectly viable options open to him, that many drivers have chosen to take in similar situations, but that he chose not to take, that would have resulted in Lewis not understeering into him. The big difference is that Lewis made a mistake, whereas Max did something that is universally banned and condemned throughout motorsport.

I think that's the point, really.  The blame aspect is largely imagined and seems to be used by some as an excuse to shut down any discussion on the matter.  It's part of the build up to the incident and is relevant to the whole picture, which is not the same as saying that it's his fault Max hit him.  No problem with disagreement on it, but the attempts by some to try to dismiss any such points as "victim blaming" are wearing, that's all.  

[thefinalapex]

https://twitter.com/...233424997171201

 

this must be fake shurely?

Edited by thefinalapex, 10 December 2021 - 10:55.

[geralt]

https://twitter.com/...233424997171201

 

this must be fake shurely?

That is disgraceful (if real)

[New Britain]

Tbh, I don't know how anyone cam say there's nothing to discuss when even pundits like Jolyon Palmer and Marc Priestly, who are reasonably well respected, criticise Hamilton for going unnecessarily slowly - Priestly even thinks he should have attracted a penalty, make of that what you will.  Whether you agree with that or not, it does suggest quite strongly that at least it's worthy of discussion.  It's not just people trying to give Hamilton some blame by the back door and I have to say I think the protests on that score are getting pretty OTT.  It's getting to the point where people are almost obligated to preface every post with "Max is 100% to blame for the accident, but..."  It's silly

Both drivers are capable of getting cute and trying to exploit and bend the rules when they think they can get away with it. In that regard it's hard to know exactly where they fall in relation to the rest of the grid because the cameras and our attention have been mainly on them in recent seasons.

 

As between these two non-saints, however, it is my distinct impression that Verstappen takes the piss more often, and especially when it comes to threatening other cars with contact. Yes, Hamilton has done it many times himself, but Verstappen even more often (and I say that as someone who for the past several seasons had been hoping that anyone but Mercedes and Hamilton would win the titles).

 

Even if the above were not correct, in racing when someone is immediately behind you, never should you abruptly slow or brake for no good reason. Never. That is an ironclad rule not only because it might be taking the piss, trying to wrong-foot or fake out the other guy, or bending the rules the way all the drivers will normally do to varying degrees, but because it is undeniably, unnecessarily, and always dangerous to someone else.

 

We can debate the guilt of Hamilton or Verstappen for all sorts of other infractions, unsporting acts, and generally dubious behaviour. One could make the argument (and I would) that both Hamilton and Verstappen should have accrued many more reprimands and penalties this season than they did.

 

Brake testing, however, stands out on another level. Unlike all the other games the drivers play, it is not debatable or in a grey area.

 

As Lando Norris said this morning, 'I think Max will risk more to try and win'.

[Spyker]

https://twitter.com/...233424997171201

 

this must be fake shurely?

Hadn't seen that. 

 

Poor from Sky. Feeding off the hype train at all costs.

Edited by Spyker, 10 December 2021 - 11:59.

[Maustinsj]

The Christmas transition has been there for a few weeks with all backgrounds.

[P123]

Hadn't seen that. 

 

Poor from Sky. Feeding off the hype train at all costs.

 

There are others.  I think any reaction to that is people on the hype train getting a bit leery!

[Spyker]

There are others.  I think any reaction to that is people on the hype train getting a bit leery!

Fair play, that was the first I had seen it.

 

Guessing there are clips from all the big talking points then.

[prty]

https://twitter.com/...233424997171201

this must be fake shurely?

And then people talk about Lobato or Netherlands TV

[gillesfan76]

And then people talk about Lobato or Netherlands TV

 

Though we really need to wait for Hamilton to brake test Verstappen before we can compare apples to fruit.

[aljaxon]

Conviniently, this cutts off quite a bit of time before the actual contact.

of course it cuts off before the contact. it cuts off at the EXACT point hamilton starts to decellerate obviously choosing not to overtake a moving verstappen.

the point i was making was which side would you overtake?

i made another gif carrying in from this exact point to the point of contact and it shows max weaving side to side.

but we knew that. we know what happens. 

i wanted to demonstrate that hamilton did not know which way to overtake and was asking which way vertsappen fans would have overtook?

 

my question and still is which way would you overtake? right or left?

[aljaxon]

Yet you are stating what is allowed and not. 
I do not agree with Max's actions, but I also do not agree that Lewis is the poor innocent victim that he, Mercedes and many forumers makes him out to be. He had many options to choose from there, running into the back of Max was only one of them. There was enough time to make decisions.

by other options i assume you mean overtake. look at my gif and tell me which side you wanted him to overtake?

i cant believe you expected him to attempt to overtake with max moving from the left to the right. look at my gif and tell me what his other options were.

[gillesfan76]

As an example, let’s say driver A and driver B are fighting for a corner. Driver A is on the inside, driver B is on the outside with both side by side through a corner. Driver A opens up his steering suddenly and significantly and runs into driver B, colliding.

 

This is the result. There is an investigation. The stewards rule “both driver A and driver B wanted to be ahead at corner exit”. Driver A states “I didn’t want driver B to pass”. These just explain why they were fighting and led to an incident. It doesn’t explain the full motive and thinking behind why driver A suddenly and significantly opened up his steering and collided with driver B.

 

The two examples are analogous to each other, as long as we understand in one example neither wanted to be ahead and the second example, both wanted to be ahead.

 

Jeddah: Neither driver wanted to be ahead at DRS line.

Example: Both drivers wanted to be ahead at corner exit.

 

Jeddah: Max hits the brakes suddenly and significantly with Lewis directly behind him resulting in collision.

Example: Driver A on the inside suddenly and significantly opens his steering and collides with Driver B alongside him and on the outside of the corner.

 

Jeddah: FIA rule that neither driver wanted to be ahead at DRS line. That Max hit the brakes suddenly and significantly. Impose a 10 sec penalty.

Example: FIA rule that both drivers wanted to be ahead at corner exit. That Driver A opened up the steering suddenly and significantly. Impose a 10 sec penalty. Fair penalty?

 

Jeddah: As an explanation of why he hit the brakes suddenly and significantly, Max offers up that he was simply trying to let Lewis past.

Example: As an explanation of why he opened up the steering suddenly and significantly, Driver A offers up that he was simply trying to prevent Driver B from passing. Fair explanation?

 

So in both examples, we have an act by Max/Driver A that is not a simple error such as understeering or losing control or misjudging the space. In Jeddah Max had a car directly behind him when he decided to brake suddenly and significantly. In the example we have Driver A that had a car directly alongside him when he decided to open up the steering suddenly and significantly.

 

The two cases are analogous to each other. In Jeddah, Max wanted Lewis first over DRS line and Lewis wanted Max first over DRS line. In the example, Driver A wanted to be ahead at corner exit and Driver B wanted to be ahead at corner exit. These are not the cause of the incidents. These merely create a potential scenario. It’s how the respective drivers act in such a scenario. In Jeddah, Max tried to force his wish to be behind at DRS line by stomping on the brakes. In the example, Driver A tried to force his wish to be ahead at corner exit by opening up the steering suddenly towards the other driver.

 

In both cases it may well be that neither Max or Driver A was trying to cause a collision. But in both cases, at the very best, both Max and Driver A were trying to force an instinctual collision avoiding reaction by the other driver or otherwise face a collision. Given that “at best” intent, is a 10 second penalty fair for the drivers in each case? Did the stewards get it right?

[racerbaz]

Mercedes and Toto should be banned from the sport.

Thought it was Jack in the Corner who has caused all the aggro, and it's Masi who should go.

[Singularity]

 In Jeddah Max had a car directly behind him when he decided to brake suddenly and significantly. 

For me, that is Max's dark spot of the season. I don't really mind his aggressive driving in general, although I would've had a sit down with him if I was his team boss, but the braking there did not fall into the category 'aggressive', it is sorted into 'stupid'. Telemetry traces has been a reality all through his career, so there's no mitigating circumstances. Of course, had Hamilton anticipated the brake, or reacted faster than any human ever before, maybe there had not been a collision and there would have been no stewards looking at the telemetry, it might have worked, but Hamilton was always so close that a sudden step on the brake from Max could not have ended any differently (apart from the actual damages as a result of the touch of course). It was stupid.

[A3]

For me, that is Max's dark spot of the season. I don't really mind his aggressive driving in general, although I would've had a sit down with him if I was his team boss, but the braking there did not fall into the category 'aggressive', it is sorted into 'stupid'. Telemetry traces has been a reality all through his career, so there's no mitigating circumstances. Of course, had Hamilton anticipated the brake, or reacted faster than any human ever before, maybe there had not been a collision and there would have been no stewards looking at the telemetry, it might have worked, but Hamilton was always so close that a sudden step on the brake from Max could not have ended any differently (apart from the actual damages as a result of the touch of course). It was stupid.

It was equally stupid of Lewis to stay under Max's rear wing so close and so long, but hey, that's just my opinion. Max is the dirty driver and Lewis is  for many.

[SpatialTech]

I don’t think it was one of the worst brake tests in the history of Motorsport, but it was a brake test, I think the telemetry shows that, more borne, imo, of 33 not wanting to cede DRS to 44.

However, I do think if this was 2020 and 33 wasn’t in the lead of the WDC, he’d have received a 5 place, or more, grid penalty. It wasn’t just worthy of a post race, and pointless, 10 second penalty. The absurdity of it stopping him falling behind Ocon and thus losing 3 points in the title race, not sending this to AD on equal points reinforced that opinion to me.

For me, it’s part and parcel of the colossal failure of the RD and Stewards this year; it’s led to a drop in driver standards that could lead to even further drops in driver standards. Didn’t LeClerc himself say he’d be doing this next season.

Edited by SpatialTech, 03 January 2022 - 12:50.

[Heyli]

I don’t think it was one of the worst brake tests in the history of Motorsport, but it was a brake test, I think the telemetry shows that, more borne, imo, of 33 not wanting to cede DRS to 44.

However, I do think if this was 2020 and 33 wasn’t in the lead of the WDC, he’d have received a 5 place, or more, grid penalty. It wasn’t just worthy of a post race, and pointless, 10 second penalty. The absurdity of it stopping him falling behind Ocon and thus losing 3 points in the title race, not sending this to AD on equal points reinforced that opinion to me.

For me, it’s part and parcel of the colossal failure of the RD and Stewards this year; it’s led to a drop in driver standards that could lead to even further drops in driver standards. Didn’t LeClerc himself say he’d be doing this next season.

How often have there been grid penalties for the next race when the driver continued and the Steward ruling was completed during the race?

[SpatialTech]

How often have there been grid penalties for the next race when the driver continued and the Steward ruling was completed during the race?

It wasn’t though, so it’s comparing apples to pears; it was given post race.

I think any driving like that, and remember, we’re not talking about crowding someone off the track, it was quite literally brake testing (which of all the Driver on Driver ‘crimes’ I think is one of the worst) was worthy of more sanction. Yes, it wasn’t as bad as it could have been, but I’ve seen black flags given for that kind of driving before.

I think he was a lucky boy, is all. Another season, unlike this one, and he could have been benched, given a grid penalty at best.

Edited by SpatialTech, 03 January 2022 - 12:58.

[gillesfan76]

It was equally stupid of Lewis to stay under Max's rear wing so close and so long, but hey, that's just my opinion. Max is the dirty driver and Lewis is  for many.

 

Well it’s only stupid if one expects Max to brake test. Had Max not had a mental breakdown and stomped on the brakes, then his whole ploy of trying to fake redress wouldn’t have worked, Lewis would have passed him with DRS on the following straight, and everyone would’ve said that was brilliant by Lewis to force Max to stay ahead.

 

But basically any driver daring to be anywhere near Max is now seen to be stupid. Before it used to only be a risk to be close side by side with Max. Now it’s a risk to even be close behind him.

[Singularity]

It was equally stupid of Lewis to stay under Max's rear wing so close and so long, but hey, that's just my opinion. Max is the dirty driver and Lewis is  for many.

I agree with you, at least partly, but that is another issue

I think Lewis learned a lot this season and while it is easy to blame Masi for the missed title, I am fairly certain he also puts a lot of blame on himself. He should, because he made mistakes. 

[Heyli]

It wasn’t though, so it’s comparing apples to pears; it was given post race.

I think any driving like that, and remember, we’re not talking about crowding someone off the track, it was quite literally brake testing (which of all the Driver on Driver ‘crimes’ I think is one of the worst) was worthy of more sanction. Yes, it wasn’t as bad as it could have been, but I’ve seen black flags given for that kind of driving before.

I think he was a lucky boy, is all. Another season, unlike this one, and he could have been benched, given a grid penalty at best.

My bad. Foggy memory and all, it is from last year. That being said, the slightly adopted question still stands. I dont like time penalties in general either, but from my (admittingly occasionally foggy) memory, penalties applied when a car finished the race were pretty much always time penalties? In many cases this sadly doesnt change much of the result and that is definitely something worth looking into. But that is a seperate discussion. 

[SpatialTech]

Well it’s only stupid if one expects Max to brake test. Had Max not had a mental breakdown and stomped on the brakes, then his whole ploy of trying to fake redress wouldn’t have worked, Lewis would have passed him with DRS on the following straight, and everyone would’ve said that was brilliant by Lewis to force Max to stay ahead.

But basically any driver daring to be anywhere near Max is now seen to be stupid. Before it used to only be a risk to be close side by side with Max. Now it’s a risk to even be close behind him.

It’s an interesting point, as through most of this season, if 44 hasn’t ceded to 33, he’s tried desperately to avoid him, knowing that to challenge is to crash. It’s the first time they’ve been together like this for a season. Given the rules of engagement are now known, I think 44 might act different from very early into the season in 22, to set the tone: “Ok, if you’re putting it like that, we’ll both go out”, and leaving it with the stewards. LeClerc, as I said somewhere else, has stated from now on he’ll adjust his driving, so if Ferrari have a good enough car, could be bad next year. I actually feel for the stewards as this ‘let them race’ policy is, imo, going to come back and bite them. I’d not be surprised with a Qualifying position of sub 3, 4 winning the first few races.

Edited by SpatialTech, 03 January 2022 - 13:09.

[SpatialTech]

My bad. Foggy memory and all, it is from last year. That being said, the slightly adopted question still stands. I dont like time penalties in general either, but from my (admittingly occasionally foggy) memory, penalties applied when a car finished the race were pretty much always time penalties? In many cases this sadly doesnt change much of the result and that is definitely something worth looking into. But that is a seperate discussion.

That’s not a problem, I’ve had issues with this as well; I’ve forgotten stuff from races this year, no biggie. I think it’s based on the severity of the action deemed intervention required from the Stewards. I think this was a particularly egregious action on 33’s part, not seen it for a long, long time in high level motorsport. 5 received a 10s stop and go for a bad driving incident in 2018, Baku, which is a 30s penalty when it’s all done and dusted. That’s all the precedence I can think of in relatively modern times. If something similar was applied to 33 at SA, then he falls to 4th, from memory. However, as it was done post race, I think those stop and goes are grid drops. 33 at Imola got a 3 car drop for a 5 second stop and go, as he wasn’t able to stop and complete his penalty, so it had to be served in the next race. So yeah, very surprised at the leniency, or not, given the circumstances of ‘the show’.

[Singularity]

Have you got any evidence for a break test?

The stewards had telemetric evidence. There is also a telemetry trace (accuracy can, as always, be doubted) posted in this thread.

[Heyli]

That’s not a problem, I’ve had issues with this as well; I’ve forgotten stuff from races this year, no biggie. I think it’s based on the severity of the action deemed intervention required from the Stewards. I think this was a particularly egregious action on 33’s part, not seen it for a long, long time in high level motorsport. 5 received a 10s stop and go for a bad driving incident in 2018, Baku, which is a 30s penalty when it’s all done and dusted. That’s all the precedence I can think of in relatively modern times. If something similar was applied to 33 at SA, then he falls to 4th, from memory. However, as it was done post race, I think those stop and goes are grid drops. 33 at Imola got a 3 car drop for a 5 second stop and go, as he wasn’t able to stop and complete his penalty, so it had to be served in the next race. So yeah, very surprised at the leniency, or not, given the circumstances of ‘the show’.

That is a different argument though. That would not be replacing the 10 seconds per se with a grid drop, but arguing that the 10 seconds should have been more harsh, something I can definitely agree with. The 10 seconds were lenient, because it was only 10 seconds, but because it was a time penalty instead of a grid drop. 

[Ivanhoe]

It wasn’t though, so it’s comparing apples to pears; it was given post race.

I think any driving like that, and remember, we’re not talking about crowding someone off the track, it was quite literally brake testing (which of all the Driver on Driver ‘crimes’ I think is one of the worst) was worthy of more sanction. Yes, it wasn’t as bad as it could have been, but I’ve seen black flags given for that kind of driving before.

I think he was a lucky boy, is all. Another season, unlike this one, and he could have been benched, given a grid penalty at best.

It's still highly unusual to impose a grid penalty to a driver who finished the race. There's a transposing system in the sporting regulations for drive through (20 second time penalty) and stop and go penalties (30 second time penalty) when the penalty can't be served because it was imposed during the last 3 laps or after the end of the race. Can't recall grid penalties handed out to drivers who finished the race, but my memory may be foggy to.

[shure]

Well it’s only stupid if one expects Max to brake test. Had Max not had a mental breakdown and stomped on the brakes, then his whole ploy of trying to fake redress wouldn’t have worked, Lewis would have passed him with DRS on the following straight, and everyone would’ve said that was brilliant by Lewis to force Max to stay ahead.

 

But basically any driver daring to be anywhere near Max is now seen to be stupid. Before it used to only be a risk to be close side by side with Max. Now it’s a risk to even be close behind him.

well, the fact that the stewards found Max to be predominantly to blame suggests they thought both of them were being a bit silly at least.  They were both going much slower than conditions warranted, which is not exactly normal racing behavior.  At least Max had the excuse that he was going slower to give the position back, but agree that his brain fade on the brakes was stupid.

 

Surprised this thread hasn't been closed down yet.  Seems the mods have a new year's resolution to shut everything down that hasn't had any new info over the Christmas break, and this one certainly hasn't

[SpatialTech]

It's still highly unsual to give a grid penalty to a driver who finished the race. There's a transposing system in the sporting regulations for drive through (20 second time penalty) and stop and go penalties (30 second time penalty) when the penalty can't be served because it was imposed during the last 3 laps or after the end of the race. Can't recall grid penalties handed out to drivers who finished the race, but my memory may be foggy to.

I’ll have a look, as I can’t recall it as well and it’s an interesting point. But post race, a 30s sanction should have been imposed, or something, not an inconsequential 10s penalty. That’s obviously just my opinion.

To be frank, 2 things came out of that for me; if he had damaged 44’s car, and caused him to pit for a new wing, I am sure he’d have been given a stop-go. I am quite convinced the penalty was given in order to keep things in order for AD.

Just my 10 pence, but it’s hard to shake that off.

Edited by SpatialTech, 03 January 2022 - 13:31.

[SpatialTech]

well, the fact that the stewards found Max to be predominantly to blame suggests they thought both of them were being a bit silly at least. They were both going much slower than conditions warranted, which is not exactly normal racing behavior. At least Max had the excuse that he was going slower to give the position back, but agree that his brain fade on the brakes was stupid.

Surprised this thread hasn't been closed down yet. Seems the mods have a new year's resolution to shut everything down that hasn't had any new info over the Christmas break, and this one certainly hasn't

They did at Silverstone too, exchange 44 for 33.

I’ve also only just joined, so am just putting my perspective to it is all. I was going to add to the “Perez: interstellar super team best best champion driver of the world” thread too, but knew I’d not add anything constructive so didn’t lol.

Edited by SpatialTech, 03 January 2022 - 13:33.

[A3]

Well it’s only stupid if one expects Max to brake test. Had Max not had a mental breakdown and stomped on the brakes, then his whole ploy of trying to fake redress wouldn’t have worked, Lewis would have passed him with DRS on the following straight, and everyone would’ve said that was brilliant by Lewis to force Max to stay ahead.

 

But basically any driver daring to be anywhere near Max is now seen to be stupid. Before it used to only be a risk to be close side by side with Max. Now it’s a risk to even be close behind him.

 

Let me first get out of the way that I disliked what Max did, he should have never touched the brakes. And I'm very aware of your Lewis worship and dislike for Max. But Lewis could have stayed half to the left of him if he wanted too. It was not very smart of him to tuck behind. Lewis knew what he did to Max at the restart and like Spa 2016, it looked like a "tit for tat" moment from Max and nothing like a mental breakdown. But again, I hate it when Max does that.

Edited by A3, 03 January 2022 - 13:35.

[BillBald]

It took 10 years for my prediction to come true!

 

https://forums.autos...wing/?p=4839219

 

"It's always been a recognised tactic to allow another car past on the inside, then cut under him and retake him on acceleration.

 

One difference today is that the car which allows itself to be overtaken would then have the advantage of the ARW.

 

The other main difference, is that if the driver who is supposed to be the victim of this move refuses to play ball, we could have a truly ridiculous and dangerous situation with 2 cars almost stopped in the middle of a straight."

 

ARW was the original acronum for DRS

Edited by BillBald, 03 January 2022 - 15:10.

[mcjohnson]

Let me first get out of the way that I disliked what Max did, he should have never touched the brakes. And I'm very aware of your Lewis worship and dislike for Max. But Lewis could have stayed half to the left of him if he wanted too. It was not very smart of him to tuck behind. Lewis knew what he did to Max at the restart and like Spa 2016, it looked like a "tit for tat" moment from Max and nothing like a mental breakdown. But again, I hate it when Max does that.

.

By going half-left, or half right, would significantly limit Lewis’s strategic options when they do go racing again as he’s fundamentally either telling Max which side he’s going down, or creating a significant disadvantage if he wants to go down the other side. Tucking in behind keeps Max guessing and forces Max to pick a line, rather than Lewis picking it for him.

It only goes wrong when Max does something monumentally stupid, like stamp on the brakes - oh, wait…

Edited by mcjohnson, 03 January 2022 - 15:18.

[A3]

 

It took 10 years for my prediction to come true!

 

https://forums.autos...wing/?p=4839219

 

"It's always been a recognised tactic to allow another car past on the inside, then cut under him and retake him on acceleration.

 

One difference today is that the car which allows itself to be overtaken would then have the advantage of the ARW.

 

The other main difference, is that if the driver who is supposed to be the victim of this move refuses to play ball, we could have a truly ridiculous and dangerous situation with 2 cars almost stopped in the middle of a straight."

 

ARW was the original acronum for DRS

 

This was not really dangerous, but it happened before: 

[BillBald]

This was not really dangerous, but it happened before: 

 

Yes, but this was just a quick dab of the brakes, hardly noticeable to most people.

 

Now we've experienced peak silliness, I hope that the FIA will keep working on making DRS unnecessary (although without it, I think we might have endured a very dull decade).