Can you please quote the rules that confirms it? I have tried to find them but failed.
Nope.
Posted 04 January 2022 - 13:43
Can you please quote the rules that confirms it? I have tried to find them but failed.
Nope.
Advertisement
Posted 04 January 2022 - 13:44
..or he could´ve braked 50m earlier, or he could´ve parked his car momentarily.
LH was under no obligation to take a wider line (it´s not like he squeezed him) or opt for a cutback etc.
An overtaking car (espcially when making such a late lunge) still just isn´t allowed to leave no space whatsoever, when both car are basically side by sid
LH was under no obligation to take a wider line, but why would he suddenly try to take a shallower entry with a car alongside him already?
If he took his normal line, he wouldn't be alongside at the apex, but would be behind.
Posted 04 January 2022 - 13:48
Nope.
So you are upset over a violation of a rule that you don't even know exists? That's funny. A bit tragic as well.
Posted 04 January 2022 - 13:50
So you are upset over a violation of a rule that you don't even know exists? That's funny. A bit tragic as well.
That´s your conclusÃon. Maybe i just don´t care about you.
Posted 04 January 2022 - 13:56
LH was under no obligation to take a wider line, but why would he suddenly try to take a shallower entry with a car alongside him already?
If he took his normal line, he wouldn't be alongside at the apex, but would be behind.
Well assuming you´re right and LH would´ve been behind, then his approach gave him a better chance to take the outside line after the apex, whilst being side by side....but as Max basically still went straight after the apex, instead of turning in, there was no outside line.
Edited by LiJu914, 04 January 2022 - 13:57.
Posted 04 January 2022 - 13:57
That´s your conclusÃon. Maybe i just don´t care about you.
You do not seem to care much about the truth either.
Posted 04 January 2022 - 14:00
Well assuming you´re right and LH would´ve been behind, then his approach gave him a better chance to take the outside line after the apex, whilst being side by side....but as Max basically still went straight after the apex, instead of turning in, there was no outside line.
I don't see a difference with Hamilton running Max wide at the start in Austin then?
Posted 04 January 2022 - 14:07
Posted 04 January 2022 - 14:19
I don't see a difference with Hamilton running Max wide at the start in Austin then?
I do...as Max went a little bit wide by himself and also choose to run off-track quite deliberately in order to accelerate with minimal time loss (best angle is probably Perez´ onboard of the start).
Posted 04 January 2022 - 14:27
I do...as Max went a little bit wide by himself and also choose to run off-track quite deliberately in order to accelerate with minimal time loss (best angle is probably Perez´ onboard of the start).
That still from the clip above shows Hamilton also went very wide (the normal racing line into T1 is much more to the left, with the car already angled towards the apex.
In any case - Hamilton didn't leave any space as he ended up on the kerbs. So effectively there is no difference, just Max backing out of it earlier.
Posted 04 January 2022 - 14:44
I don't see a difference with Hamilton running Max wide at the start in Austin then?
They are basically side by side going into the braking zone in Austin. So i dont see how this compares since Ham has won the corner in this case and the preferred line
Posted 04 January 2022 - 14:45
That still from the clip above shows Hamilton also went very wide (the normal racing line into T1 is much more to the left, with the car already angled towards the apex.
In any case - Hamilton didn't leave any space as he ended up on the kerbs. So effectively there is no difference, just Max backing out of it earlier.
My point is: After pulling to the inside (minus one car width) and even braking a bit later than Lewis, Max wouldn´t have been able to turn the car in a tighter line after the apex even if there was no other car. So in that sense he wasn´t pushed wide.
btw. But in my book he also wouldn´t have gained an "unfair advantage", if he could´ve out-accelerated Lewis there, like in the Kimi/Alonso-situation.
Edited by LiJu914, 04 January 2022 - 14:48.
Posted 04 January 2022 - 14:48
They are basically side by side going into the braking zone in Austin. So i dont see how this compares since Ham has won the corner in this case and the preferred line
Max actually is ahead if you look closely, but still Hamilton apparently is allowed to push him wide (I think because once they are around the apex they are about level).
Posted 04 January 2022 - 14:56
I don't see a difference with Hamilton running Max wide at the start in Austin then?
Edited by mcjohnson, 04 January 2022 - 14:58.
Posted 04 January 2022 - 15:07
I don't see a difference with Hamilton running Max wide at the start in Austin then?
OT but those cars look super slow with full tanks.
Posted 04 January 2022 - 15:08
Max actually is ahead if you look closely, but still Hamilton apparently is allowed to push him wide (I think because once they are around the apex they are about level).
Posted 04 January 2022 - 15:12
Well it was the same at Imola. Lewis was slightly ahead for a brief moment.
But I dont think these cases are relevant to the lap 1 AD as Max was way behind Lewis going into the braking zone.
I just don't understand why being behind in the braking zone is of any relevance. It has never been mentioned in any of the rules to be of relevance and it has never been mentioned in any Stewards verdict as being of relevance.
Isn't it just a fan invention? If not, I'd be very interesting in seeing some sources which describe the relevance of being behind in the braking zone...
Posted 04 January 2022 - 15:17
A few mitigations;
- LH pulled alongside MV, after getting a better start. MV then 'pinned' LH to the very inside line of the track.
- Consequentially LH couldn't turn in until he hit the Apex of T1 - which is what he did. LH literally couldn't give MV anymore space, given the compromised line MV had already forced LH to take.
- At that point MV is level with LH, but about 1.5M to his right (the still actually shows this quite nicely; it's not like MV is bumping wheels with LH.
- In reality MV could have slotted in behind LH BUT because MV had carried too much speed into the corner he went outside of LH, and off the track.
- LH didn't force MV off the track at all; it was a consequence of MV carrying too much speed into the corner (recurring theme, anyone?!) and his refusal to cede track position (again, recurring theme, anyone?!)
Kudos to you for being able to judge that Max was carrying too much speed by just watching a Youtube clip. Perez actually gained a lot of time on Max with a much sharper entry. He actually almost passed Verstappen, despite Verstappen taking a much wider line on exit. No signs of him not being able to make the corner, but merely him reacting to Hamilton running him wide.
Posted 04 January 2022 - 15:27
This far into such threads is usually the preserve of what's left of the fanatics, but with this incident I'll just quote the great Mr. Rossi circa 2009:
"Dis is racing, Casey"
Advertisement
Posted 04 January 2022 - 15:31
Kudos to you for being able to judge that Max was carrying too much speed by just watching a Youtube clip. Perez actually gained a lot of time on Max with a much sharper entry. He actually almost passed Verstappen, despite Verstappen taking a much wider line on exit. No signs of him not being able to make the corner, but merely him reacting to Hamilton running him wide.
When they go past the last advertising hoarding before the braking zone, LH and MV are level (which was achieved my LH beating MV off the line). By the time they both start to turn in, MV has taken a 2M lead off LH.
It is worth noting that, at no point, does MV have to take avoiding action to avoid a collision with LH, or even change his steering angle; indeed, in the middle of the corner there's 1 - 1.5m between them, which carries all the way through the corner; hardly indicative of MV being 'forced' out wide - if so, why aren't they almost rubbing wheels?
The reason SP almost takes MV is because, although on near identical lines into the corner, SP can make the apex (which MV couldn't do, as LH was there) and get on the gas much quicker. Max's exit was purely compromised by Lewis having the inside line - but that isn't against the rules at all. After this MV does not appear impeded by the presence of LH at all (see note above above distance between them).
If you look at the following set of cars, although none are as close to the inside as LH, many of the cars that were on the inside subsequently run to the outside of the track on the exit; none are able to leave a cars width on the exit.
Edited by mcjohnson, 04 January 2022 - 15:48.
Posted 04 January 2022 - 15:46
I just don't understand why being behind in the braking zone is of any relevance. It has never been mentioned in any of the rules to be of relevance and it has never been mentioned in any Stewards verdict as being of relevance.
Isn't it just a fan invention? If not, I'd be very interesting in seeing some sources which describe the relevance of being behind in the braking zone...
Appendix L of the International Sporting Code entitles drivers attempting an overtake, or drivers being overtaken, to 'at least 1 car widths' worth of space if - when approaching a corner (one can assume this includes the braking zone) - the overtaking driver has a 'significant proportion of their car alongside their opponent'. Charlie Whiting later clarified a 'significant portion' as being the front wing at least level with the rear tyres.
Posted 04 January 2022 - 15:52
I just don't understand why being behind in the braking zone is of any relevance. It has never been mentioned in any of the rules to be of relevance and it has never been mentioned in any Stewards verdict as being of relevance.
Isn't it just a fan invention? If not, I'd be very interesting in seeing some sources which describe the relevance of being behind in the braking zone...
Its more of a guidline and the regulations regarding overtaking into corners are of course open to interpretation but a common ground on where to start is in the best interest of all involed in the sport. In the like of you are not suppose to move in the braking zone.
you do understand that simply saying whos ahead at the apex opens the possibility to all kinds of divebombs?
Edited by mclara, 04 January 2022 - 15:54.
Posted 04 January 2022 - 15:54
This, hence my call for sacking the stewards...they made a monumental mess* that may have "inspired" the late SC ****up.Agree with this. The right defence was the switch back. It was an aggressive, but legal, move and the off track excursion gained an advantage that wasn't handed back.
Ironically, had the penalty been given, Lewis would have stopped at the first VSC IMO and won the race
Posted 04 January 2022 - 16:01
Appendix L of the International Sporting Code entitles drivers attempting an overtake, or drivers being overtaken, to 'at least 1 car widths' worth of space if - when approaching a corner (one can assume this includes the braking zone) - the overtaking driver has a 'significant proportion of their car alongside their opponent'.
Posted 04 January 2022 - 16:04
Appendix L of the International Sporting Code entitles drivers attempting an overtake, or drivers being overtaken, to 'at least 1 car widths' worth of space if - when approaching a corner (one can assume this includes the braking zone) - the overtaking driver has a 'significant proportion of their car alongside their opponent'. Charlie Whiting later clarified a 'significant portion' as being the front wing at least level with the rear tyres.
On top of A3's remark above, you incorrectly reflect this article. The older article reads as follows:
b) Overtaking, according to the circumstances, may be carried out on either the right or the left. A driver may not deliberately leave the track without justifiable reason. More than one change of direction to defend a position is not permitted. Any driver moving back towards the racing line, having earlier defended his position offline, should leave at least one car width between his own car and the edge of the track on the approach to the corner. However, manoeuvres liable to hinder other drivers, such as deliberate crowding of a car beyond the edge of the track or any other abnormal change of direction, are strictly prohibited. Any driver who appears guilty of any of the above offences will be reported to the Stewards.
This rule is totally irrelevant for the situation in Abu Dhabi because:
1) It only relates to a defending driver
2) It relates to a driver moving back to the racing line
3) it relates to the approach to the corner
So your reference is incorrect I'm sorry to say...
Posted 04 January 2022 - 16:06
Its more of a guidline and the regulations regarding overtaking into corners are of course open to interpretation but a common ground on where to start is in the best interest of all involed in the sport. In the like of you are not suppose to move in the braking zone.
you do understand that simply saying whos ahead at the apex opens the possibility to all kinds of divebombs?
I'm just saying that being ahead in the breaking zone or not isn't a solid rule and has never been a relevant criterium (not even in the older article in Appendix L!). So why use it as some sort of substantiation now?
It's not something the Stewards will look into when determining who is at fault in an incident.....
Posted 04 January 2022 - 16:09
What I don't understand is that some are saying that they wanted Hamilton to let Max pass but then they stay silent on Brazil.
I don't get it. For me the move Max did was a divebomb from too far back where he pushed Hamilton off the track.
But am I correct that those that say that this was wrong from Hamilton that Max should have gotten a penalty in Brazil or should have got an instruction from the stewards immediately?
Posted 04 January 2022 - 16:13
On top of A3's remark above, you incorrectly reflect this article. The older article reads as follows:
This rule is totally irrelevant for the situation in Abu Dhabi because:
1) It only relates to a defending driver
2) It relates to a driver moving back to the racing line
3) it relates to the approach to the corner
So your reference is incorrect I'm sorry to say...
- You somewhat conveniently omitted to take note of the paragraph after the one you highlighted.
Edited by mcjohnson, 04 January 2022 - 16:14.
Posted 04 January 2022 - 16:15
I'm just saying that being ahead in the breaking zone or not isn't a solid rule and has never been a relevant criterium (not even in the older article in Appendix L!). So why use it as some sort of substantiation now?
It's not something the Stewards will look into when determining who is at fault in an incident.....
Posted 04 January 2022 - 16:18
Yes..but in Brazil Lewis rectified the situation pronto, so there were no oppurtunities to involve the stewards.What I don't understand is that some are saying that they wanted Hamilton to let Max pass but then they stay silent on Brazil.
I don't get it. For me the move Max did was a divebomb from too far back where he pushed Hamilton off the track.
But am I correct that those that say that this was wrong from Hamilton that Max should have gotten a penalty in Brazil or should have got an instruction from the stewards immediately?
Edited by Deeq, 04 January 2022 - 16:21.
Posted 04 January 2022 - 16:19
I've checked the 2020 and 2021 Appendix L of the FIA international sporting code and surprise surprise, those lines are not in there. That line has been taken out of the sporting code for a while now.
You'll need to drop the FIA a quick email and let them know their ISC regulations are out of date then...
Appendix L, chapter IV.
Edited by mcjohnson, 04 January 2022 - 16:19.
Posted 04 January 2022 - 16:20
What I don't understand is that some are saying that they wanted Hamilton to let Max pass but then they stay silent on Brazil.
I've not been silent about Brazil.
I have argued that Brazil was too optimistic of Max but not intentional. I've also argued that giving drivers the possibility to cut corners created mess. Without it, we would have seen a succesfull overtake in Brazil and a succesfull one in Abu Dhabi. Because both drivers would approach these corners differently had ther ebeen a gravel trap.
But I haven't done that in this thread as this one is about lap 1, Abu Dhabi.
Posted 04 January 2022 - 16:25
You'll need to drop the FIA a quick email and let them know their ISC regulations are out of date then...
Appendix L, chapter IV.
No offence, but all of latest published versions are on the FIA website. https://www.fia.com/...on/category/123 Versions 2019, 2020, 2021, 2022. It's not in there, not sure where you're looking?
Posted 04 January 2022 - 16:27
Yes..but in Brazil Lewis rectified the situation pronto, so there were no oppurtunities to involve the stewards.
Actually there were No doubt in my mind MV would have been asked to cede the lead there...
PS
Not speaking for anyone else.
Iirc the stewards had already decided, that no investigation is necessary, before Lewis overtook Max.
Posted 04 January 2022 - 16:31
What I don't understand is that some are saying that they wanted Hamilton to let Max pass but then they stay silent on Brazil.
I don't get it. For me the move Max did was a divebomb from too far back where he pushed Hamilton off the track.
But am I correct that those that say that this was wrong from Hamilton that Max should have gotten a penalty in Brazil or should have got an instruction from the stewards immediately?
Technically the stewards wouldn't give an instruction to give the place back, that would come from the RD. Giving places back isn't in the stewards remit of penalties.
...and you're entirely right. Those people outraged by LH taking to the outside in AD are those same people who were perfectly happy with the outcome in Brazil, calling for LH to get a ban after Silverstone, but perfectly happy with brake-checking in Brazil (apparently LH fault for having the audacity to be so close behind MV!)
Hilarious to watch; serious ramifications.. it's the unfettered ruthlessness of Senna, at a time we have supposedly moved on from that (having realised the safety issues with such behaviour).
Posted 04 January 2022 - 16:32
Must have missremembered then, oops ðŸ¤Iirc the stewards had already decided, that no investigation is necessary, before Lewis overtook Max.
Posted 04 January 2022 - 16:33
No offence, but all of latest published versions are on the FIA website. https://www.fia.com/...on/category/123 Versions 2019, 2020, 2021, 2022. It's not in there, not sure where you're looking?
Followed your link, and it's in there. No offence taken, or intended.
Appendix L; Chapter 4, para (b) (page 47 of the PDF)
Edited by mcjohnson, 04 January 2022 - 16:35.
Posted 04 January 2022 - 16:38
I've not been silent about Brazil.
I have argued that Brazil was too optimistic of Max but not intentional. I've also argued that giving drivers the possibility to cut corners created mess. Without it, we would have seen a succesfull overtake in Brazil and a succesfull one in Abu Dhabi. Because both drivers would approach these corners differently had ther ebeen a gravel trap.
But I haven't done that in this thread as this one is about lap 1, Abu Dhabi.
So Max should have got a penalty or have to give up the place to Hamilton immediately? And to me they are very much related. In Brazil they did nothing and the same was the case here. Although imo here the blame lies with Max imo.
Posted 04 January 2022 - 16:38
Iirc the stewards had already decided, that no investigation is necessary, before Lewis overtook Max.
And that was half the problem because, when Max defended similarly in Saudi Arabia and got a penalty he (and Red Bull) then cited that the Stewards had deemed that fair racing in Brazil, so why shouldn't it be fair in Saudi Arabia... Although, following the outcry from Brazil (from other teams, the media etc..) Masi had already clarified that it had not set a precedent, and other stewards at other races might view it differently... in other words; zero consistency, which is exactly not what the teams, or drivers, need.
Advertisement
Posted 04 January 2022 - 16:39
Followed your link, and it's in there. No offence taken, or intended.
Appendix L; Chapter 4, para (b) (page 47 of the PDF)
The part you quoted isn't in there.
Posted 04 January 2022 - 16:43
So Max should have got a penalty or have to give up the place to Hamilton immediately? And to me they are very much related. In Brazil they did nothing and the same was the case here. Although imo here the blame lies with Max imo.
I have said I was glad they let them race as in my opinion it was just Max outbraking himself, resulting in pushing Hamilton off the track. I expected a penalty and was surprised he wasn't given one.
This time, Max was in full control and never left the track. As most people agree, it was a legal overtake.
But again, F1 is in a big mess with all these asphalt runoffs and lousy stewarding.
Posted 04 January 2022 - 16:54
I have said I was glad they let them race as in my opinion it was just Max outbraking himself, resulting in pushing Hamilton off the track. I expected a penalty and was surprised he wasn't given one.
This time, Max was in full control and never left the track. As most people agree, it was a legal overtake.
But again, F1 is in a big mess with all these asphalt runoffs and lousy stewarding.
Unbelievable. I would argue if Max would have gotten a penalty in Brazil then Hamilton maybe and I say maybe would also need to expect one here or give the place back. Although I would disagree with it.
Posted 04 January 2022 - 17:19
Why is this thread still open??
I thought we had discussed everything about Abu Dhabi '21 to death ..... or does that only apply to some topics??
Posted 04 January 2022 - 17:30
Unbelievable. I would argue if Max would have gotten a penalty in Brazil then Hamilton maybe and I say maybe would also need to expect one here or give the place back. Although I would disagree with it.
Why is it unbelievable? Because it's a different opinion than yours?
This all started because you claimed people were silent about Brazil, which wasn't true. But you think it's relevant so people should of course know that and talk about Brazil in a topic about Abu Dhabi.
Edited by A3, 04 January 2022 - 17:32.