2019 Canadian Grand Prix - Montreal June 7-9

[dans79]

These rules have simply got out of hand. They are straightjacketed by them even when they make no sense whatsoever.

You have been watching f1 for very long have you.

Yes, I have been watching F1 for very long.

Then you should know there have been many many controversies in the past regarding the rules, or lack of them.

[Shrieker]

Vettel made a mistake on the spur of the moment, while Hamilton made a great split second decision (basically read him like a book) to jam on the brakes and avoid disaster there. That's what separates the very goods from the greats.

The greats anticipate, react and capitalise, as Mansell did with Senna at Hungary in 89. Hamilton didn't manage to do it.

Yeah, you're saying Lewis should've anticipated Vettel coming back to the right to cover the racing line and go left instead, and that's what I thought initially as well. But you're overlooking the fact that Vettel was STARING IN HIS MIRROR the whole time while coming back onto the track to see what Hamilton was doing. Had Ham gone to the left in anticipation, Vettel wouldn't have gone right and Ham would've made a fool of himself, because then there would absolutely be no reason to penalize Vettel since he didn't go immediately back onto the racing line when rejoining

[roon]

As this incident shows, having telemetry on hand is helpful and allows a proper assessment of the situation which can't be made from video alone. Which may be why the Baku incident played out the way it did--someone did tap their brake pedaI and it was apparent in the telemetry.

[timbo]

That was just after the pitstop, he was pulling 2 fastest laps and few personal bests after the incident and stretched it to 3.5 sec...but lost all of it after he was informed about the penalty

Again, from the same article:

The stewards were looking at the incident, it was announced. Eight laps later, it was confirmed that Vettel would be subject to a five-second penalty. Which essentially secured Hamilton the win. All he needed to do now was stay a close second.

Vettel tried for a time to sprint clear, but he was never going to get the gap out to five seconds – especially after having to back off once more to save the fuel.

[dans79]

As this incident shows, having telemetry on hand is helpful and allows a proper assessment of the situation which can't be made from video alone. Which may be why the Baku incident played out the way it did--someone did tap their brake pedaI and it was apparent in the telemetry.

the only rule that applies to drivers in the front braking is if they are deemed to have braked excessively which Hamilton was deemed not to have done, end of story.

[Bill_Kar]

As this incident shows, having telemetry on hand is helpful and allows a proper assessment of the situation which can't be made from video alone. Which may be why the Baku incident played out the way it did--someone did tap their brake pedaI and it was apparent in the telemetry.

the only rule that applies to drivers in the front braking is if they are deemed to have braked excessively which Hamilton was deemed not to have done, end of story.

How can you really discuss properly about the incident yesterday when there are still people that dare to say that HAM was somewhat responsible for what happened in Baku 2017?

[munudeges]

Yeah, you're saying Lewis should've anticipated Vettel coming back to the right to cover the racing line and go left instead

Yes. If he gets to the inside he gets past.

....the fact that Vettel was STARING IN HIS MIRROR the whole time while coming back onto the track to see what Hamilton was doing.

Quite frankly, tough. It's difficult to know exactly what Vettel was looking at in a moment of panic, even for the stewards, and you're nitpicking a few tenths of a second of split second decision making.

I can't really believe I'm defending a Ferrari driver after Michael Schumacher, and I'm not defending Vettel's behaviour, but racing is getting lost in the minutia of all this. Analysing exactly what a driver should do in any given set of circumstances, short of an actual collision, is not going to end well for the sport.

[Shrieker]

Yeah, you're saying Lewis should've anticipated Vettel coming back to the right to cover the racing line and go left instead

Yes. If he gets to the inside he gets past.

No, he wouldn't have. And Vettel wouldn't have gotten a penalty for rejoining the track in an unsafe manner, and would've won the race. So I'd say you're plain wrong in your judgement of Hamilton, but to each his own I guess.

[dans79]

but racing is getting lost in the minutia of all this. Analysing exactly what a driver should do in any given set of circumstances, short of an actual collision, is not going to end well for the sport.

And I have to say I can't disagree with this statement more. the rules are the rules, whether people like them or not. If we have no rules, then F1 will simply a substantially more expensive version of demolition derby.

Rules come first, then racing, and the "spectacle" a distant third. The problem is the vast majority of fans today want it the other way around, unless it affects their driver or team in a negative fashion.

[roon]

"He just came back onto the track so dangerous."

-Ayrton Senna

[munudeges]

And I have to say I can't disagree with this statement more. the rules are the rules, whether people like them or not. If we have no rules, then F1 will simply a substantially more expensive version of demolition derby.

That's not an answer. The FIA could come up with a rule specifying that every car had to be coloured in a specified percentage of pink, but that would not make it good for the sport.

Rules come first, then racing, and the "spectacle" a distant third. The problem is the vast majority of fans today want it the other way around, unless it affects their driver or team in a negative fashion.

I don't know where you get that rather strange idea sweetie. We'll see how that one works out.

The 'rules are rules' answer is an excuse for not actually engaging the brain into first gear. Specifying what a driver should do in any given situation has never been a part of motor racing. We're now in a position where if the guy behind didn't manage to capitalise on a particular situation he and his team can make an argument via 'rules' and legalese that they were blocked from doing so. Any problems there are are just being made substantially worse elsewhere. Put simply, this is not racing.

[munudeges]

No, he wouldn't have.

Yes he would, pretty clearly. He simply picked the wrong side. Such is racing.

So I'd say you're plain wrong in your judgement of Hamilton, but to each his own I guess.

I'm not 'judging' Hamilton at all.

[TAG]

As this incident shows, having telemetry on hand is helpful and allows a proper assessment of the situation which can't be made from video alone. Which may be why the Baku incident played out the way it did--someone did tap their brake pedaI and it was apparent in the telemetry.

Except the telemetry was shared and it was clear that there was no brake tapping just the normal throttle lift. Keep digging. Vettel was as sure of things back then as he was yesterday, it's what he does. I'm thinking based on past events we'll get a 1/4 hearted apology by the next driver's conference.

[Shrieker]

No, he wouldn't have.

Yes he would, pretty clearly. He simply picked the wrong side. Such is racing.

Ham picked the right side. There are multiple shots in this sequence clearly displaying Vettel looking in his mirror and positioning his car in response to where Hamilton was. He simply wouldn't have gone right had he not seen Hamilton there. The rest is in what I said in my previous post.

[hollus]

"He just came back onto the track so dangerous."

-Ayrton Senna

Nice find, if it is real. Source? Race? Context?