2019 Canadian Grand Prix - Montreal June 7-9

[AMG.Tzan]

I'm pretty sure if it was the other way around (Hamilton in front-penalty, Vettel winning) everyone would be happy! The whole thing about the race being turned into a farce, as so many write, has to do with Ferrari! If Ferrari is winning then Formula 1 is perfect!

I don't remember anyone saying these things the last time a driver was robbed of his win!
Oh yeah that happens to be Hamilton himself!! He lost the win at Spa 2008 when even Charlie Whiting said it was ok to keep the position and not give it back to Raikonen...but then he gave a 25 second penalty to Hamilton leaving him 3rd...! Wasn't that a farce?? But then Massa/Ferrari won...why should anyone be unhappy??

Get on with it Tifosi...it was a classic driver mistake (again) by Seb under huge pressure from behind! Had it not been for his mistake, nothing of these BS would have happened!

To be clear i'm not happy when someone loses his win afterwards with a penalty...whoever it is!! But...that's how rules are!

[GPR-A]

Ideally, Vettel should have got penalty for this incident too, which he got away as Hamilton could pass him immediately. While defending, Vettel made two moves, forcing Hamilton to break and take evasive action.

[turbof1]

I'm pretty sure if it was the other way around (Hamilton in front-penalty, Vettel winning) everyone would be happy!

There would be just as much as drama. You, know this is where things get funny: people always think the opposing side are noise makers and their side would remain calm, composed and classy in the same situation. Let me tell you, there would be as many people be screaming as loud "oh the injustice, the injustice!" if it was Hamilton being punished, regardless whether the penalty was correct or wrong.

Let's not take moral high grounds here that will contribute absolutely nothing. This has nothing to do with bias.

[turbof1]

Ideally, Vettel should have got penalty for this incident too, which he got away as Hamilton could pass him immediately. While defending, Vettel made two moves, forcing Hamilton to break and take evasive action.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qFkFBSZpABs

That has been explained by Whiting already. And it's the same deal: Vettel was not punished because he did not breach the rules. The 2 moves were considered as 1 move with a hesitation inbetween. Whiting afterwards send out a clarification where it would be considered 2 moves from that point on, but the rules were correctly applied in that case.

[izzy]

FYI, I heard that after Barcelona's crash with Nico, Lewis trashed his trailer home. But no one got to see it, so.

it turned out that was untrue, just Niki telling it as a joke on a TV show, about how Lewis would have to pay for the damage, but it was just told as fiction but then, with it being about Lewis, of course it was picked up and turned into the crime of the century. https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/laud ... -758pmqcmr

The Mercedes statement read: “Following his appearance on a television discussion show on Servus TV recorded prior to last weekend’s Austrian Grand Prix, Niki Lauda would like to set the record straight and state the following: Lewis Hamilton did not in any way damage a hotel room or his private driver room at the circuit during the race weekend in Baku and Lewis Hamilton did not lie about his relationship with team-mate Nico Rosberg.

“Niki regrets any misunderstanding caused by comments that have been blown wildly out of proportion compared with the casual context in which they were made.”

tho after Niki blamed Lewis for the crash without checking so he didn't know about Rosberg's mode error, i think there was a bit of a row

[GPR-A]

No it was fact. See that's the difference, opinions can be argued about. Facts? No so much, doing so tends to lead people into delusion.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=haqpopZyvwc

People are conveniently forgetting that, the space appeared for Ricciardo in Monaco, because there was puddle of water and no driver was taking that line. Lewis avoided that puddle, which Ricciardo chose to take on his own risk. Once his car was on the puddle, his car got handful and he had no choice but to back off, despite there being a car's width. If it was a dry track, that space wouldn't have existed. Simple common sense, but people do not want to apply.

That space might actually have existed in the dry. Remember, Hamilton was unable to navigate corner 11 in any normal way. He had little else choice than to navigate the car like that.

That outside the point. I'd still argue Hamilton's defending was morally on the edge, but not regulatory-wise.

Sorry, here are a couple of screenshots from earlier laps (Lap 35). Look at where the racing line was and Hamilton was taking exactly the same line, even when he got messed on the chicane when Ric tried the move.





Now look at the line that Ric was trying to take on Lap 37.

[turbof1]

People are conveniently forgetting that, the space appeared for Ricciardo in Monaco, because there was puddle of water and no driver was taking that line. Lewis avoided that puddle, which Ricciardo chose to take on his own risk. Once his car was on the puddle, his car got handful and he had no choice but to back off, despite there being a car's width. If it was a dry track, that space wouldn't have existed. Simple common sense, but people do not want to apply.

That space might actually have existed in the dry. Remember, Hamilton was unable to navigate corner 11 in any normal way. He had little else choice than to navigate the car like that.

That outside the point. I'd still argue Hamilton's defending was morally on the edge, but not regulatory-wise.

Sorry, here are a couple of screenshots from earlier laps. Look at where the racing line was and Hamilton was taking exactly the same line, even when he got messed on the chicane when Ric tried the move.

https://i.screenshot.net/3k0ymud

https://i.screenshot.net/358j1tv

You are ignoring where I said Hamilton had his turn 11 entry compromised and the hypothetical case it was dry. He was very slow out of turn 11, so that's not the same as those earlier laps. Ricciardo made a brilliant move in the wet when Hamilton made that mistake; he was afraid to keep it in there, but he was in control of the car. In the dry he would have had more grip and more confidence.

[GPR-A]

That space might actually have existed in the dry. Remember, Hamilton was unable to navigate corner 11 in any normal way. He had little else choice than to navigate the car like that.

That outside the point. I'd still argue Hamilton's defending was morally on the edge, but not regulatory-wise.

Sorry, here are a couple of screenshots from earlier laps. Look at where the racing line was and Hamilton was taking exactly the same line, even when he got messed on the chicane when Ric tried the move.

https://i.screenshot.net/3k0ymud

https://i.screenshot.net/358j1tv

You are ignoring where I said Hamilton had his turn 11 entry compromised and the hypothetical case it was dry. He was very slow out of turn 11, so that's not the same as those earlier laps.

The point I am making is, if it was dry, Lewis would have certainly moved right even further, even though he got compromised on entry to turn 11. Just like he kept the dry line on Lap 35 and Lap 37 despite the hiccup on turn 11.

The hypothetical situation you are quoting, happened last year between Max and Sainz at the same exact place in dry (at 2m49seconds). Despite having compromised entry, Max managed to stay on the racing line towards the right.

[turbof1]

Sorry, here are a couple of screenshots from earlier laps. Look at where the racing line was and Hamilton was taking exactly the same line, even when he got messed on the chicane when Ric tried the move.

https://i.screenshot.net/3k0ymud

https://i.screenshot.net/358j1tv

You are ignoring where I said Hamilton had his turn 11 entry compromised and the hypothetical case it was dry. He was very slow out of turn 11, so that's not the same as those earlier laps.

The point I am making is, if it was dry, Lewis would have certainly moved right even further, even though he got compromised on entry to turn 11. Just like he kept the dry line on Lap 35 and Lap 37 despite the hiccup on turn 11.

Just see what happened last year between Max and Sainz at 2m49seconds. Despite having compromised entry, Max managed to stay on the racing line towards the right.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0lj6Q9gN4RQ

If he moved even further right, he potentially would have left the left side open for Ricciardo to dive into.

I can't really compare this to the Sainz-Verstappen incident. Verstappen was able to get back on track a lot earlier before turn 11, giving him more more space to navigate that corner. Where Hamilton resurfaced on track, he was a lot closer to the turn and therefore had way less options to navigate it.

Anyway, this isn't about Monaco. It was only brought up to compare to the incident Vettel and Hamilton had now in Canada, which already got pointed out why Hamilton was not penalized and why Vettel was.

[GPR-A]

You are ignoring where I said Hamilton had his turn 11 entry compromised and the hypothetical case it was dry. He was very slow out of turn 11, so that's not the same as those earlier laps.

The point I am making is, if it was dry, Lewis would have certainly moved right even further, even though he got compromised on entry to turn 11. Just like he kept the dry line on Lap 35 and Lap 37 despite the hiccup on turn 11.

Just see what happened last year between Max and Sainz at 2m49seconds. Despite having compromised entry, Max managed to stay on the racing line towards the right.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0lj6Q9gN4RQ

If he moved even further right, he potentially would have left the left side open for Ricciardo to dive into.

I can't really compare this to the Sainz-Verstappen incident. Verstappen was able to get back on track a lot earlier before turn 11, giving him more more space to navigate that corner. Where Hamilton resurfaced on track, he was a lot closer to the turn and therefore had way less options to navigate it.

But in dry, the right most is the faster line! Just like Max, Hamilton could have gotten back earlier, IF it was dry!!!

[turbof1]

The point I am making is, if it was dry, Lewis would have certainly moved right even further, even though he got compromised on entry to turn 11. Just like he kept the dry line on Lap 35 and Lap 37 despite the hiccup on turn 11.

Just see what happened last year between Max and Sainz at 2m49seconds. Despite having compromised entry, Max managed to stay on the racing line towards the right.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0lj6Q9gN4RQ

If he moved even further right, he potentially would have left the left side open for Ricciardo to dive into.

I can't really compare this to the Sainz-Verstappen incident. Verstappen was able to get back on track a lot earlier before turn 11, giving him more more space to navigate that corner. Where Hamilton resurfaced on track, he was a lot closer to the turn and therefore had way less options to navigate it.

But in dry, the right most is the faster line! Just like Max, Hamilton could have gotten back earlier, IF it was dry!!!

Yes, but you are speaking about ordinary racing conditions. This is not that. This is one driver rejoining the track and being unable to navigate the following corner on normal racing speed. The driver behind isn't looking to take the corner the fastest way, he is looking for a way past the driver in front. Ricciardo would always exit that corner faster, he just needs to find where the opening is to dive into.

In a sense, Hamilton tried this with Vettel as well. Hamilton however had way less time to choose which side he should take. So he took the racing line. Would he have known and had time to react that Vettel was going to weave completely across the track (something we can't be sure about), Hamilton would have taken the left side as well. But he wasn't in a position to know that as Vettel came from across the completely other side with much higher closings speeds. Ricciardo actually was.

[GPR-A]

If he moved even further right, he potentially would have left the left side open for Ricciardo to dive into.

I can't really compare this to the Sainz-Verstappen incident. Verstappen was able to get back on track a lot earlier before turn 11, giving him more more space to navigate that corner. Where Hamilton resurfaced on track, he was a lot closer to the turn and therefore had way less options to navigate it.

But in dry, the right most is the faster line! Just like Max, Hamilton could have gotten back earlier, IF it was dry!!!

Yes, but you are speaking about ordinary racing conditions. This is not that. This is one driver rejoining the track and being unable to navigate the following corner on normal racing speed. The driver behind isn't looking to take the corner the fastest way, he is looking for a way past the driver in front. Ricciardo would always exit that corner faster, he just needs to find where the opening is to dive into.

He couldn't do it as it was wet and you don't get good traction! He could have definitely navigate it faster in dry. In the wet, the following driver could only go on the puddle and then had to back out. In dry, the following driver wouldn't get that space. That is my original point. Ric took the risk of going where a car can't go in wet as Lewis took the correct line in wet.

[turbof1]

But in dry, the right most is the faster line! Just like Max, Hamilton could have gotten back earlier, IF it was dry!!!

Yes, but you are speaking about ordinary racing conditions. This is not that. This is one driver rejoining the track and being unable to navigate the following corner on normal racing speed. The driver behind isn't looking to take the corner the fastest way, he is looking for a way past the driver in front. Ricciardo would always exit that corner faster, he just needs to find where the opening is to dive into.

He couldn't do it as it was wet! He could have definitely navigate it faster in dry. In the wet, the following driver could only go on the puddle and then had to back out. In dry, the following driver wouldn't get that space. That is my original point. Ric took the risk of going where a car can't go in wet as Lewis took the correct line in wet.

If the same happened in the dry, so the same point of rejoining the track that close to turn 11, then Ricciardo would have been in the same position. I'm assuming you assume Hamilton would have gotten a much better rejoining the track in the dry. Would he even have gone off the track if it was dry? At this point we are discussing how many permutations we are going to bring to the original event, and that's basically an endless and very off topic discussion.

[LM10]

But in dry, the right most is the faster line! Just like Max, Hamilton could have gotten back earlier, IF it was dry!!!

Yes, but you are speaking about ordinary racing conditions. This is not that. This is one driver rejoining the track and being unable to navigate the following corner on normal racing speed. The driver behind isn't looking to take the corner the fastest way, he is looking for a way past the driver in front. Ricciardo would always exit that corner faster, he just needs to find where the opening is to dive into.

He couldn't do it as it was wet and you don't get good traction! He could have definitely navigate it faster in dry. In the wet, the following driver could only go on the puddle and then had to back out. In dry, the following driver wouldn't get that space. That is my original point. Ric took the risk of going where a car can't go in wet as Lewis took the correct line in wet.

So a driver can have the luxury making a mistake in wet conditions, rejoin the track slowing down the driver behind and use the dry racing line as the other driver won’t have a realistic chance fighting on the wet side of the track anyway.
The thing is that in the case of the Monaco incident Hamilton took the same line as in the laps before. It was the dry racing line and there appeared to be a space of one car width between him and the wall. Can someone confirm that Ham’s intention was to give Ric a car width space or did he simply stay on the racing line?

Maybe the FIA needs to rethink and adjust some rules. It’s a bit weird that the rules in dry apply in the exact same way when it’s wet.

[cooken]

GPR you are also stating what a drivers actions would be in said hypotheticals as a certainty which is totally bogus. You are not Lewis nor Daniel, so you can only guess, and sorry to be blunt but the guesses of a random fan are worthless.

Even the drivers themselves cannot reliably predict what they would do in a given situation with any certainty. Their decisions are too heavily influenced by instinct and adrenaline in the heart of the moment.