2019 Canadian Grand Prix - Montreal June 7-9

[holeindalip]

I just want to add that Riccardo vs. Hamilton ‘16 is that Riccardo didn’t slam on his brakes, with the track being damp he tried to put the power down to go around Hamilton and lit the rears up and couldn’t get traction.....


Sorry for being off topic and bringing up old stuff but I just wanted to clear that up

[zibby43]

What Vettel should have done different is that he should have gone to the left as soon as he was in control again.

Agreed. I like to think of what VET would have done if this had happened in Quali. I think both his line and throttle management/application, etc. while rejoining would have been much different, which is telling.

This incident reminded me of how he kept his foot buried when being overtaken by HAM in Bahrain, I def. think VET was prioritizing keeping that place (I know I would’ve).

Here’s Marc Priestley’s take. Kind of refreshing to hear him contradict the Sky crew:

[TAG]

Autosport has a write up with a few very important details about why they came to the decision they came to.

• It was a unanimous decision by the stewards to penalize Vettel.

• They looked at Hamilton's telemetry, not just the video review to see how hard he had to brake to avoid hitting Vettel.

• They used CCTV video from cameras at the circuit to confirm Vettel checked his mirrors to see exactly where Hamilton was.

• The stewards all agreed that Vettel had regained control of the car then checked to see where Hamilton was, then used a second steering imput to block Hamilton from overtaking.

Vettel "I didn't know Hamilton was there"

While that's pretty damning, if that was their decision making process then he didn't violate the rule they say he did.

He should have gotten a penalty for leaving the track and gaining an advantage, as that basically sounds like the conclusion they game came to.

I think that their conclusion what that Vettel chose to make it unsafe. Hense the penalty. Whether Hamilton got by or not. Had Vettel stayed with the line as soon as he regained control they'd have no ground to call it unsafe because Hamilton wouldn't have had to slam on the brakes to avoid a collision.

[zac510]

This culture of micro-penalties for race-changing behavior may actually make F1 driving worse. NASCAR has a famously laissez-faire culture for driving standards, where anything (including simple retaliation) is fair game as long as it's on the track and under green. It's never perfectly equitable, but you largely get punched to the extent that you punch. I can think of one or two current F1 drivers that would quickly get their asses handed to them if they tried to race NASCAR in the same lawyered-up way they race F1.

I've watched NASCAR a little, but they seem to be able to do this because they have big bumpers front and rear. In F1 you'd lose a front wing or puncture a tyre. I'm often pleasantly surprised at how well self-policed the NASCAR guys are, however.

Oh, and does one of those F1 drivers drive for a team that already has a NASCAR team?

[langedweil]

Right ... anything else about this GP !?

[cooken]

Wtf (exactly) happened to Landos brake/suspension/wheel? Did something melt? If so why/how? Surely they would have got brake temp warning first before something else failed. Material defect?

[The Black Knight]

I remember a couple of years ago, a young Valentino Rossi in MotoGP got a ten second timed penalty while leading the race (I cannot remember year or track).

Instead of complaining over the radio about it, he drove an amazing final section of the race and built a gap of ten seconds to win anyway.

This is what Vettel should have at least tried to do on Sunday.

[roon]

Right ... anything else about this GP !?

Kimi does not know what marmots are called.

[saviour stivala]

Number 5 went onto the grass when in front of number 44 and came back on track in front of number 44. At that point number 44 starts crying on the radio that number 5 came back on track in front of him and in a dangerous way. But he didn’t done that in 2016 when he came back in front of the red bull.

[marvin78]

I remember a couple of years ago, a young Valentino Rossi in MotoGP got a ten second timed penalty while leading the race (I cannot remember year or track).

Instead of complaining over the radio about it, he drove an amazing final section of the race and built a gap of ten seconds to win anyway.

This is what Vettel should have at least tried to do on Sunday.

He did not have the car to Do that. That Was clearly visible. Vettel usually does that with the i
right car.

[UlleGulle]

IMHO neither Vettel or Hamilton would have pulled the moves they did in the age of Senna or Lauda. The risks would have been to great, and even racingdrivers seem to like to keep their limbs. The advancement of safety in racing has caused more of a TV-game-racing attitude to crashing, and this in turn has created the need for rules to regulate "fair racing". Eje Elgh, who raced Formula 2 in the seventies, commented the Perez- Ocon crash at Spa with the words that he wouldn't have positioned his car that way during his career, due to self preservation and will to survive.

What we see is an increasing amount of artifical racing, where drivers put themselves in positions to force the other driver to let them trough or back of or get a punishment.

My humble suggestion to return to "pure" racing would be to punish all drivers involved in causing a SC or VSC with DSQ from the next qulifying session, with the subsequent start from the pitlane. Then you can rejoin the track any way you like, and move in the break-zone at your pleasure, but if that causes a crash, that will really hurt your standings in the championship.

[NathanOlder]

Number 5 went onto the grass when in front of number 44 and came back on track in front of number 44. At that point number 44 starts crying on the radio that number 5 came back on track in front of him and in a dangerous way. But he didn’t done that in 2016 when he came back in front of the red bull.

Thanks for the laugh mate.

[turbof1]

IMHO neither Vettel or Hamilton would have pulled the moves they did in the age of Senna or Lauda. The risks would have been to great, and even racingdrivers seem to like to keep their limbs. The advancement of safety in racing has caused more of a TV-game-racing attitude to crashing, and this in turn has created the need for rules to regulate "fair racing". Eje Elgh, who raced Formula 2 in the seventies, commented the Perez- Ocon crash at Spa with the words that he wouldn't have positioned his car that way during his career, due to self preservation and will to survive.

What we see is an increasing amount of artifical racing, where drivers put themselves in positions to force the other driver to let them trough or back of or get a punishment.

My humble suggestion to return to "pure" racing would be to punish all drivers involved in causing a SC or VSC with DSQ from the next qulifying session, with the subsequent start from the pitlane. Then you can rejoin the track any way you like, and move in the break-zone at your pleasure, but if that causes a crash, that will really hurt your standings in the championship.

Interesting thoughts. I do have to say Hamilton was following the racing line. Don't know if that classifies as "putting yourself in position to force the other driver". And if it is, why that driver isn't allow to do that because he wasn't the one who made the mistake.
I do agree drivers take more risks. However, I neither would call this artificial. The decision making still happens with the drivers, and are free to do so as they ever were. They are just less risk-averse.

Also, I disagree with your suggestion. The reason why is because causing a SC/VSC is down on luck. You can make a tiny mistake, clip a barrier, spin out of control and hit every wall around you, spreading carbon fibre everywhere. Or, you can ram into one another on purpose and skid off into the run off area without pieces on the track, which would only amount for a yellow flag.

Maybe we should look at the run off areas and see how they can punish more. Now a grass runoff does punish quite hard. Vettel lost a lot of time cutting the corner there, and you can spin quite easily on it. But, the issue is also that in order to keep yourself from spinning, you need to carry a lot of momentum over the grass, so you aren't slowing down as much as you should be.

There are solutions to that: replace the grass with tarmac and add in high grip strips, like the ones you see at Paul Ricard. The blue stripes are made to slow you down, the red stripes are made to slow you down quite extremely but also shred your tyres. Arrange a pattern in the run off area where you either need to go a long way around on the blue area to avoid the red area, or cross the red area and having your tyres loose chunks of rubber. This is quite a safe but also punishing way to avoid excessive corner cutting.

[waynes]

They had him go long and have fresher tires for later on in case there was a SC. So they split their 2 cars to cover for both eventualities (sc vs no sc). Lec had fallen back sufficiently already before the leaders had their stops, so it was only logical to go for a different plan with him; I don't blame Ferrari here.

Wasn't he catching VET / HAM when the stops started happening? I fully understand what you say, and yes its logical to split strategies looking back.

[waynes]

also, after all the shenanigans in the lead Kevin Magnussen getting a verbal slap over team radio was quite something