2019 Canadian Grand Prix - Montreal June 7-9

[NathanOlder]

TAG.

[roon]

[ringo]

The track is defined by the white line per the rules.

I also think that the stewards at Monaco 2016 took into account that Ricciardo would not have passed Hamilton on the right side in that spot even if there had been more space because of the wet patches, the fact that Ricciardo demonstratably “had a moment” in which he lost traction and the next corner/chicane being a left hander (Lewis would have been on the inside) and the natural line he took was the one with the best grip. I’d argue circumstance just didnt work out and despite Lewis cutting the chicane (whilst in full control), Ricciardo and the circumstance never made passing a realistic opportunity.

At Canada however, if there had been room, Hamilton would have easily been through.

Did the stewards also take in account that the space Hamilton gave Ricciardo was absolutely meaningless because it was wet and Ricciardo had no chance passing anyway? If it was dry he probably would have been able to pass, since he had the speed advantage, but needed to brake eventually due to the slippery condition.

Like I told already, it's just stupid applying the same rules in different track conditions.

The rules have nothing to do with track conditions. You are making it seem like Hamilton is obliged to allow a car to overtake. He left a car's width and that's all the rules require. Wet or dry doesn't change that fact. Do you want 1.5 car widths when it's wet? It seems like that is what you are saying.
Apply your logic to football (soccer) for a rainy match and a dry match, in the case of a foul in the penalty box and you will see why the rules cannot take into account conditions that make it easier or harder to perform.

[roon]

...it's been shared.

The binary braking display doesn't describe brake pedal pressure. Seb has triggered the brake sensor during the part of that graph marked as 'leaves track.' There is modulation occuring considering the grass and seemingly unlocked wheels over the grass and upon immediate reentry. All caps 'hard' isnt a quantifiable value.

I'm not commenting on the penalty here, rather upon assumptions about measurable events. Similarly we dont have yaw values on Seb's car, and the camera panning & rotating during the reentry obscures visual analysis.

There you go, I kept it free of words in all caps so you wouldn't get confused.

It's a move in the right direction. Also recommend dropping emotional outbursts, emoticons, ad hominem; potiential use of the number pad as a long term goal.

[NathanOlder]

We dont need any telemetry to see Vettel push Hamilton off the track. That is a penalty in itself. Let it go rooney.


Here are the 2 cars in a position where the red car must leave a cars width to its right hand side to the solid white line.




And here with the 2 cars still in the same position, the red car has now run the silver car completely off the track. Illegal move.

[roon]

Not commenting on the penalty--as I said in the post you're replying to. I'm asking if the braking event was especially heavy. Lew fell back afterward and maybe this was due to compromised tires.

[dans79]

Not commenting on the penalty--as I said in the post you're replying to. I'm asking if the braking event was especially heavy. Lew fell back afterward and maybe this was due to compromised tires.

Mercedes said they were willing to share Lewis's telemetry so it most likely wasn't a minor event.

[komninosm]

Hamilton was committed to the corner when Vettel was off track. If, at any point, Hamilton was required to act to avoid a collision during Vettel's rejoin, it's a penalty to Vettel. That's the rule. Argue the rule, not the penalty.

...

Now, one might argue the rule is wrong, but the penalty is in line with the rule and thus entirely justified.

I agree. Earlier I referenced how Button had a similar view regarding the writing of the rules being the real issue here, if any. The real culprit might be fate. The situation, its timing, its location, its context, who it involved, created a perfect storm. Seems like the most contentious/dramatic event in recent seasons.

No that would have been Baku 2017, as a matter of fact, there a good chance there wouldn't have been Canada 2019 incident if the proper sanctions/penalties had been issued against Vettel then. The stewards then decided not to "ruin the show", sound familiar? The right decision was made this time at least, maybe it will prevent some other bone headed driver incident in the future?

This, so much this.
That lack of proper punishment for Vettel and Ferrari has ruined Formula 1 and has made a lot of the fans even more fanatic and behave like spoiled brats. It has made it cool to promote toxic masculinity and unsportsmanlike behavior (drive like a man). That was a truly dark day for Formula 1, not this laughable circus we've had for the last 2 weeks.
Even the great Schumacher was black flagged, he was also removed from an entire championship losing all his points and he was forced to give an interview where he apologized. And for LESS than what Vettel has done.
Pathetic...

[etusch]

[Tubas]

The regulation is not hard to understand. What’s hard to understand is why the regulations are how they are.

What you're saying is that you don't accept the results due to the regulations. Start a thread and argue that.

I was referring to the fact that the regulations for dry conditions are the exactly same for wet conditions. Utterly stupid.

What is "utterly stupid" is you simple assertion that "wet" is easy to define. Bone dry is easy. One inch of water on the track is easy. But is damp wet? How damp does it have to be to become wet? Where on the track is wetness measured? How is it measured... on the racing line that can be dry when all around is wet? How damp is a track to be before before it is wet? What do we mean by damp? How do you measure that?

Go and have a look at how a runway is measured for wet and dry. How braking coefficient is used, but that requires a special truck and the closing of the runway. Or is that slippery, but not wet? Or is it wet but not slippery?

If you want to open a bottomless can of worms, then we go with your suggestion of varying rules by some arbitrary definition of wet. Can you imagine the arguments after the race about whether the spot the incident happened was wet or dry. Ferrari says it is wet. Mercedes says damp, but traction normal.. so dry. And round and round and round....

[sosic2121]

We dont need any telemetry to see Vettel push Hamilton off the track. That is a penalty in itself. Let it go rooney.


Here are the 2 cars in a position where the red car must leave a cars width to its right hand side to the solid white line.

http://pasteall.org/pic/show.php?id=e37 ... b804caa051


And here with the 2 cars still in the same position, the red car has now run the silver car completely off the track. Illegal move.

http://pasteall.org/pic/show.php?id=9af ... b2ef62f483

As I see it, silver car is still within track. It has 2 wheels on white line.

[Jolle]

We dont need any telemetry to see Vettel push Hamilton off the track. That is a penalty in itself. Let it go rooney.


Here are the 2 cars in a position where the red car must leave a cars width to its right hand side to the solid white line.

http://pasteall.org/pic/show.php?id=e37 ... b804caa051


And here with the 2 cars still in the same position, the red car has now run the silver car completely off the track. Illegal move.

http://pasteall.org/pic/show.php?id=9af ... b2ef62f483

As I see it, silver car is still within track. It has 2 wheels on white line.

Don’t confuse “running off track” and “leaving a car’s space”

[komninosm]

What you're saying is that you don't accept the results due to the regulations. Start a thread and argue that.

I was referring to the fact that the regulations for dry conditions are the exactly same for wet conditions. Utterly stupid.

What is "utterly stupid" is you simple assertion that "wet" is easy to define. Bone dry is easy. One inch of water on the track is easy. But is damp wet? How damp does it have to be to become wet? Where on the track is wetness measured? How is it measured... on the racing line that can be dry when all around is wet? How damp is a track to be before before it is wet? What do we mean by damp? How do you measure that?

Go and have a look at how a runway is measured for wet and dry. How braking coefficient is used, but that requires a special truck and the closing of the runway. Or is that slippery, but not wet? Or is it wet but not slippery?

If you want to open a bottomless can of worms, then we go with your suggestion of varying rules by some arbitrary definition of wet. Can you imagine the arguments after the race about whether the spot the incident happened was wet or dry. Ferrari says it is wet. Mercedes says damp, but traction normal.. so dry. And round and round and round....

Do we seriously have to entertain this level of sophistry when the rules do not go our way, when we run out of all other petty arguments, just because we cannot see past our bias?
Is this why Ferrari brought in the very important new information of Karoun's video for FIA case ?
What's next? You have to leave a car width on the racing line if the car following you is a Ferrari? Because they can't be made to drive on the tarmac part without the tire laid in?
They are seriously scraping the bottom of the barrel.

[komninosm]

We dont need any telemetry to see Vettel push Hamilton off the track. That is a penalty in itself. Let it go rooney.


Here are the 2 cars in a position where the red car must leave a cars width to its right hand side to the solid white line.

http://pasteall.org/pic/show.php?id=e37 ... b804caa051


And here with the 2 cars still in the same position, the red car has now run the silver car completely off the track. Illegal move.

http://pasteall.org/pic/show.php?id=9af ... b2ef62f483

As I see it, silver car is still within track. It has 2 wheels on white line.

Don’t confuse “running off track” and “leaving a car’s space”

Not only that, but in their attempts to hide the facts they do not show the pic where Vettel's tires are stepping over the white line which prove that even if Hamilton had kept just his tiniest bit of his left tire on the inside of the track there would be a collision.
Never mind that Vettel should have given much more space than an inch of white too.
They just change their arguments around from one place to another (no push, no unsafe entry, no it was spin, no Monaco 2018-9, no Monaco 2016, no Germany , no Mexico, no control ,etc.) so they do not have to admit defeat after it unceremoniously happens in every single of their arguments.
The only way to save the Formula 1 community now would be to go in the past and black flag Vettel in Baku and punish him and Ferrari even further for all their behavior and lies back then and not allow the fan(atic)s to become toxic like they are not and entitled. The --- you see in other forums and youtube comments is unbelievably biased and naive. This forum really just sees the tip of the iceberg.

[NathanOlder]

Agreed, its time to close this thread, The FIA have looked a million times at it and have come to the same decision, Vettel needed a penalty, even with all the evidence thats been posted here , a couple of users still argue despite being 100% wrong. Its going round in circles now because people cant accept they are/were wrong.

Just close it down now please Mods.