Jump to content


Photo
* * * * - 2 votes

2022 British GP - Race Day!


  • Please log in to reply
3281 replies to this topic

#3251 Bliman

Bliman
  • Member

  • 10,072 posts
  • Joined: April 16

Posted 06 July 2022 - 12:54

No it isn't enough to stick your nose in to be entitled to be given space, the guidelines are quite clear about that, no? You don't agree, but it doesn't make much sense going on about it, I think you have made your point (more than once).

Ok. And yeah I know that it is not enough under the current rules :rolleyes:.  Ok I answered to Nemo1965. Ok I will not talk about it anymore. I guess we can stop talking about many things than if that is the philosophy.



Advertisement

#3252 FortiFord

FortiFord
  • Member

  • 2,212 posts
  • Joined: December 19

Posted 06 July 2022 - 12:55

The question how to determine whether "a sufficient portion of the car is alongside" will always be arbitrary and debatable. The good thing is we have clear guidance on it now. 

 

Do we though?

 

According to the interpretation that some have gone with here, we've decided that significant portion of the car is defined as all of the car. That is akin to an oxymoron. 



#3253 Ivanhoe

Ivanhoe
  • RC Forum Host

  • 17,659 posts
  • Joined: November 15

Posted 06 July 2022 - 13:00

Who cares about oxymorons if it is perfectly clear what is meant:

 

When considering what is a ‘significant portion’, for an overtaking on the outside of a corner, among the various factors that will be looked at by the stewards when exercising their discretion, the stewards will consider if the overtaking car is ahead of the other car from the apex of the corner

 

Also, the "significant portion" bit is not from the regulations, but from the guidelines itself, I think the writers of that piece have the liberty on how to define it, oxymoron or not.

 

So yeah, the guidlines are crystal clear and easy to apply for the stewards.



#3254 FortiFord

FortiFord
  • Member

  • 2,212 posts
  • Joined: December 19

Posted 06 July 2022 - 13:22

Who cares about oxymorons if it is perfectly clear what is meant:

 

 

Also, the "significant portion" bit is not from the regulations, but from the guidelines itself, I think the writers of that piece have the liberty on how to define it, oxymoron or not.

 

So yeah, the guidlines are crystal clear and easy to apply for the stewards.

 

How is it perfectly clear? It is absolutely not clear. 

 

We first of all have this paragraph

 

“In order for a car being overtaken to be required to give sufficient room to an overtaking car, the overtaking car needs to have a significant portion of the car alongside the car being overtaken and the overtaking manoeuvre must be done in a safe and controlled manner, while enabling the car to clearly remain within the limits of the track.

 

So significant portion of the car alongside means you don't have to have all of your car alongside. Only a significant portion (which is not defined). 

 

"When considering what is a 'significant portion', for an overtaking on the outside of a corner, among the various factors that will be looked at by the stewards when exercising their discretion, the stewards will consider if the overtaking car is ahead of the other car from the apex of the corner.

 

It doesn't explicitly define what a significant portion is, nor does it mention the other factors. 

 

Besides, how can a significant portion of the car be all of the car? It doesn't make sense. 



#3255 Ivanhoe

Ivanhoe
  • RC Forum Host

  • 17,659 posts
  • Joined: November 15

Posted 06 July 2022 - 13:36

I think you're getting way too semantic FortiFord and I know you can do better than that. It's perfectly clear that the intention of the guidelines is that if the outside car is not ahead at the apex, he is not entitled to space and has to back out. Doesn't get clearer than that. Significant portion is an open definition and is filled in differently depending on the situation (inside or outside overtake), don't see why it can't be the whole car, that's up to the writers of the guidelines. I'll give you that it's poorly drafted but it's absolutely clear what they mean with it.



#3256 FortiFord

FortiFord
  • Member

  • 2,212 posts
  • Joined: December 19

Posted 06 July 2022 - 14:07

I think you're getting way too semantic FortiFord and I know you can do better than that. It's perfectly clear that the intention of the guidelines is that if the outside car is not ahead at the apex, he is not entitled to space and has to back out. Doesn't get clearer than that. Significant portion is an open definition and is filled in differently depending on the situation (inside or outside overtake), don't see why it can't be the whole car, that's up to the writers of the guidelines. I'll give you that it's poorly drafted but it's absolutely clear what they mean with it.

 

Well i still maintain my view that it's not clear since we have 2 paragraphs which contradict each other, as well as a term which is not clearly defined. It can't be a whole car since that is not what portion means. 

 

You might see it as semantics, but after the Abu Dhabi debacle (and a lesser extent, Monaco) it's quite clear that we do need crystal clear rules. The other rules of engagement regarding defending positions and leaving a car's width on the straight are clearly defined in the sporting regulations and not open to interpretation, nor are they contradictory. I don't see why the FIA can't make these just as clear. 

 

If the FIA want to create a rule/guideline that says "the overtaking car must be ahead at the apex of the corner in order to be given at least a car's width on exit" then they should write exactly that, instead of these vague and contradictory guidelines that we've been given. 


Edited by FortiFord, 06 July 2022 - 14:08.


#3257 Ivanhoe

Ivanhoe
  • RC Forum Host

  • 17,659 posts
  • Joined: November 15

Posted 06 July 2022 - 14:16

I really don't see how you can read it in any other way. If the term 'substantial portion' were from the regulations and these guidelines an attempt to give meaning it to it, you might have a point. But this is from the guidelines itself, so despite maybe poorly worded (although I think they are free to define 'suffient portion' as they see fit), it's crystal clear what they wanted to achieve.



#3258 monolulu

monolulu
  • Member

  • 3,099 posts
  • Joined: March 10

Posted 06 July 2022 - 15:09

This video tries to explain the new overtaking rules

 

 

https://youtu.be/p4JCTPfFx-s
 

 



#3259 FullOppositeLock

FullOppositeLock
  • Member

  • 10,960 posts
  • Joined: September 15

Posted 06 July 2022 - 17:18

This video tries to explain the new overtaking rules


https://youtu.be/p4JCTPfFx-s

Watching it with interest, but the bloke clearly has a reading problem, because around the 3:50 mark he suddenly switches the defending driver to the attacking one. The clarification speaks of “overtaking” and “overtaken” driver. In one corner a driver cannot suddenly switch from being overtaken to being the overtaker and assume the privileges of the latter. Since he comes across as intelligent enough it puts into question his willingness to present the case fairly.

Also, this notion of running another driver off the track is wrong to begin with. The onus is simply on one driver to back out of a move in order to avoid a collision. A race car can lose speed. Keeping your foot in and taking to the scenery is not your only option.

The apex argument is valid, but there is clearly subjectivity in how the clarification is worded, so it’s basically up to the stewards to use some discretion and consider the specifics of each situation whilst making a decision.

The final part is just opinion and beyond the remit of the title/objective of the video. I saw plenty of really good racing in Silverstone and also in earlier races this year, so clearly the new rules as a whole are doing something right.

The rule clarification also did not come out today and this shows how out of touch the bloke is. It’s been around since the start of the season and any avid F1 follower would surely have known this. The drivers certainly were.

3/10 for effort.

Edited by FullOppositeLock, 06 July 2022 - 17:30.


Advertisement

#3260 prty

prty
  • Member

  • 8,418 posts
  • Joined: April 05

Posted 06 July 2022 - 19:05

pic-f1.jpg



#3261 ARTGP

ARTGP
  • Member

  • 29,421 posts
  • Joined: March 19

Posted 07 July 2022 - 02:11

Hamilton vs Leclerc lap 1:

Race-Highlights-2022-British-Grand-Prix.

 

 

Perez vs Hamilton lap 46:

 

Race-Highlights-2022-British-Grand-Prix-


Edited by ARTGP, 07 July 2022 - 02:26.


#3262 Tenmantaylor

Tenmantaylor
  • Member

  • 18,050 posts
  • Joined: July 01

Posted 07 July 2022 - 08:49

“And then I overtook Hamilton around the outside at Copse"

289978637_10159224815028759_426681730574


Edited by Tenmantaylor, 07 July 2022 - 08:50.


#3263 Kao18

Kao18
  • Member

  • 5,617 posts
  • Joined: March 15

Posted 07 July 2022 - 09:15

Hamilton vs Leclerc lap 1:

Race-Highlights-2022-British-Grand-Prix.

 

 

Perez vs Hamilton lap 46:

 

Race-Highlights-2022-British-Grand-Prix-

 

Thats some dirty driving by Max.....ehm....correction, some of the best racing I have ever witnessed!



#3264 geralt

geralt
  • Member

  • 1,586 posts
  • Joined: January 17

Posted 07 July 2022 - 09:23

Leclerc comes from much further back relative to Hamilton's position vs Perez, even at the apex. Isn't that the point of the rules people have been discussing for the last x amount of pages?

I personally didn't think there was too much wrong with Perez's move either, but to say those 2 are similar is amusing. Shows why stewarding f1 battles is hard, people see different incidents very differently.

Like for example those who still act Hamiltons move at copse last year was attempted murder haha

#3265 MikeTekRacing

MikeTekRacing
  • Member

  • 12,029 posts
  • Joined: October 04

Posted 07 July 2022 - 14:55

“And then I overtook Hamilton around the outside at Copse"

289978637_10159224815028759_426681730574

And Hamilton kept his line and didn't hit me even if I gave him way less room than you did, sucker :D



#3266 P123

P123
  • Member

  • 23,879 posts
  • Joined: February 09

Posted 07 July 2022 - 15:21

I see Fernando is looking for some clarifications from race control regarding racing etiquette.  I agree with him re. Perez cutting the chicane and keeping the foot down.  It proved advantageous for him by turning what would have been a compromised/ defensive situation had he backed off and stuck to the actual track, into one that put him on the front foot to attack and lose nothing. 

 

Aside form cutting the track, in the whole 'he was forced wide' debate, it's the grey area of whether they actually are, or whether they in fact just keep the attempt going beyond what is reasonable, because they know there is an acre of tarmac on the outside to allow them to keep attacking without backing off.  I think we saw similar in some instances with Schumacher vs Max, where Mick kept coming even though he had no hope of passing, but it worked to use the run off.



#3267 smitten

smitten
  • Member

  • 4,982 posts
  • Joined: October 10

Posted 07 July 2022 - 15:27

Aside form cutting the track, in the whole 'he was forced wide' debate, it's the grey area of whether they actually are, or whether they in fact just keep the attempt going beyond what is reasonable, because they know there is an acre of tarmac on the outside to allow them to keep attacking without backing off.  I think we saw similar in some instances with Schumacher vs Max, where Mick kept coming even though he had no hope of passing, but it worked to use the run off.

If drivers are allowed to force others off the track (as the guidance allows for), then it seems particularly harsh to not allow that other driver to keep his foot down just because he's been forced off track.  But then the circle perpetuates.....



#3268 P123

P123
  • Member

  • 23,879 posts
  • Joined: February 09

Posted 07 July 2022 - 15:52

If drivers are allowed to force others off the track (as the guidance allows for), then it seems particularly harsh to not allow that other driver to keep his foot down just because he's been forced off track.  But then the circle perpetuates.....

But was he forced or....  :D  Yep, not always obvious.  Track design lends itself to that sort of attacking /defending.



#3269 GentlemanDriver091

GentlemanDriver091
  • Member

  • 1,639 posts
  • Joined: June 21

Posted 07 July 2022 - 16:34

If drivers are allowed to force others off the track (as the guidance allows for), then it seems particularly harsh to not allow that other driver to keep his foot down just because he's been forced off track. But then the circle perpetuates.....

If you have the chance watch Jolyon Palmer’s analysis, Perez and Hamilton vs Leclerc.

Drivers keep their foot down, even if they lost the corner, because there is no gravel trap, wall or grass next to the track, they are not forced off track, they choose to go off track.

Edited by GentlemanDriver091, 07 July 2022 - 16:35.


#3270 smitten

smitten
  • Member

  • 4,982 posts
  • Joined: October 10

Posted 07 July 2022 - 16:59

Drivers keep their foot down, even if they lost the corner, because there is no gravel trap, wall or grass next to the track, they are not forced off track, they choose to go off track.

It's chicken and egg.  They only "lose the corner" because the guidelines allow them to be run off the track.  If all the time they had to be left the space then it wouldn't matter if it was gravel, a wall, or sharks on the outside because they could stay on track.

(and yes, I'm only talking about the times a driver can get round the outside and stay on track themselves)



#3271 BoDarvelle

BoDarvelle
  • Member

  • 1,357 posts
  • Joined: March 22

Posted 07 July 2022 - 18:48

He probably learned he can’t trust Hamilton in wheel-to-wheel battles.

 

KMag needs to learn this.



#3272 MikeTekRacing

MikeTekRacing
  • Member

  • 12,029 posts
  • Joined: October 04

Posted 07 July 2022 - 18:51

i think that's unfair. Over the course of his career Lewis has been super clean. 
of course there were incidents, with Rosberg, Massa and Max - but it always takes 2 to tango.

He's one of the cleanest out there. It doesn't make him a saint of course, but saying you can't trust him is fantasy



#3273 FullOppositeLock

FullOppositeLock
  • Member

  • 10,960 posts
  • Joined: September 15

Posted 07 July 2022 - 21:06

It's chicken and egg. They only "lose the corner" because the guidelines allow them to be run off the track. If all the time they had to be left the space then it wouldn't matter if it was gravel, a wall, or sharks on the outside because they could stay on track.
(and yes, I'm only talking about the times a driver can get round the outside and stay on track themselves)


But that is not the rule in place, so why do drivers keep their foot in? I don’t think Perez’ pass on Leclerc should have stood; he should have conceded the corner and had no business being on the inside of the next corner after going off track. Possibly the stewards considered that Leclerc went off track defending the earlier corner, but with that kind of tit for tat it gets very confusing for us spectators to understand how the rules are applied.

#3274 BillBald

BillBald
  • Member

  • 5,818 posts
  • Joined: April 09

Posted 07 July 2022 - 21:19

KMag needs to learn this.

 

Kmag needs to learn to give enough space.



#3275 Arundo

Arundo
  • Member

  • 2,712 posts
  • Joined: July 13

Posted 08 July 2022 - 11:01

“And then I overtook Hamilton around the outside at Copse"

289978637_10159224815028759_426681730574

 

image0.jpg?width=487&height=609



#3276 Augurk

Augurk
  • Member

  • 5,512 posts
  • Joined: December 09

Posted 08 July 2022 - 11:55

“And then I overtook Hamilton around the outside at Copse"

289978637_10159224815028759_426681730574

One of the few captions that I have no trouble believing is what was actually said. :lol:



#3277 mclara

mclara
  • Member

  • 2,255 posts
  • Joined: July 11

Posted 08 July 2022 - 12:55

image0.jpg?width=487&height=609

Max isnt the fastest learner after he tried the same stupid move on Ham in monza T1-2 as he did on Massa a few years earlier that didnt work  :rotfl:



#3278 Arundo

Arundo
  • Member

  • 2,712 posts
  • Joined: July 13

Posted 08 July 2022 - 14:08

Max isnt the fastest learner after he tried the same stupid move on Ham in monza T1-2 as he did on Massa a few years earlier that didnt work  :rotfl:

 

He's still young  :rotfl:



#3279 EauBleu

EauBleu
  • Member

  • 89 posts
  • Joined: April 17

Posted 08 July 2022 - 14:53

Max isnt the fastest learner after he tried the same stupid move on Ham in monza T1-2 as he did on Massa a few years earlier that didnt work  :rotfl:

Or maybe he is, as the end result was in his favor with Lewis in Monza!

Anyway, he was joking here and made a pretty good counter to an unnecessary dig.



Advertisement

#3280 FirstnameLastname

FirstnameLastname
  • Member

  • 7,745 posts
  • Joined: April 18

Posted 08 July 2022 - 20:07

I think there’s no finer way to end this thread than this:

https://www.facebook...&s=na&fs=e&s=cl

Fan gets drivers and f1 personnel to sign his Quiche

#3281 w1Y

w1Y
  • Member

  • 10,606 posts
  • Joined: March 16

Posted 09 July 2022 - 06:09

i think that's unfair. Over the course of his career Lewis has been super clean.
of course there were incidents, with Rosberg, Massa and Max - but it always takes 2 to tango.
He's one of the cleanest out there. It doesn't make him a saint of course, but saying you can't trust him is fantasy

I think its becoming clear he maybe to clean but actually it is him being fair which is preventing a lot of crashes. As soon as Lewis gets his elbows how and starts racing like some of the others there will likely be more crashes because of the way they drive.

This is the perfect year for Lewis to do to others what they are doing. You will also see alonso start doing this. I think Lewis ends up with a potentially better result last week if he is more aggressive against perez. But I also Lewis fairness is something I admire and want him to lead by example.

IMO le clerc will never beat max unless he proves he can't be bullied in a fight.

Edited by w1Y, 09 July 2022 - 06:11.


#3282 TheAviator

TheAviator
  • Member

  • 2,865 posts
  • Joined: October 20

Posted 09 July 2022 - 10:32

IMO le clerc will never beat max unless he proves he can't be bullied in a fight.


Bullying is least of Leclercs problems currently in Ferrari team. In fact, he is mostly bullied by the team, never on track.