2020 Hungarian Grand Prix - Hungaroring, July 17-19

[sosic2121]

So jumpstart detection system doing jack --- again

I think it would have been extremelly unfair to punish Bottas. Common sense should always be applied, jump start detection is mean to avoid any driver taking advantage of a jump start, but going from 2nd to 6th none can argue he got any advantage

But that isn’t what they are saying. They are stating AGAIN that a sensor is the only way to judge and if it was to be faulty then they cannot anyway.

That’s what is so crazy. Even with modern 4K cameras looking from every possible angle they are still relying on a sensor that is a throwback to when it WAS the last line of defence to cheating.

This happened with Vettel last year and the FIA did nothing to fix it.

Yes! This system is really bad and it should be changed.

[Sieper]

He just passed Perez and Bottas, just Perez on merit (Bottas failed), both of them in the dirty side of the grid, and got passed by Max. I´d not call that a blistering fast start

He was quicker away on the first meters. It was not impossible to have traction on the right side of the grid. But they all got stuck on the inside behind eachother and especially behind Bottas who had a poor start followed up by a poor going into turn 1.

Perhaps very slightly, but Vettel is in no danger from him. Other than Leclerc, no driver on that side of the grid even managed an average start. By the time the field got to the first corner (which they could take three wide), they were already splitting into sections. Hamilton (clean side), then Stroll / Vettel / Verstappen (all clean side), then Leclerc / Bottas / Perez (all dirty side and have lost positions), then Sainz / Ricciardo (all clean side). The top six clean side of the grid starters make up six of the nine leading places and all of the leading four.*

Who is behind them? It's difficult to tell because of all the white liveried cars, but it's almost certainly Albon, Latifi and Kvyat. Why? Because they all started on the clean side of the grid. If I'm right (and the order FOM showed as Hamilton reaches turn 6 supports my supposition), then that's nine of the top twelve places already occupied by the time the field is rounding the first corner. There were only ten people starting on that side of the grid!

According to the leader board as Hamilton reached turn 6 (and bear in mind just how good his start was so how much of a lead he already had) this is the running order. I've coloured the people who started on the 'clean' side:-
Hamilton +0
Stroll +1
Verstappen +4
Vettel +1
Leclerc +1
Bottas -4
Perez -3
Sainz +1
Ricciardo +2
Latifi +5
Albon +2
Kvyat +5
Gasly -3
Norris -6
Raikkonen +5 (but really +3)
Russell -4
Ocon -3
Giovanizzi +1 (but really +0)
Magnussen
Grosjean

I'd rather have qualified 17th than 8th. Also, god only knows what Giovanizzi was doing.

*Pausing the overhead shot of Turn 1 with Stroll just exiting and Giovanizzi just entering, there's clear track around every car, no sign of any congestion or cars getting stuck. Even if there was, everyone other than Kimi and Max have already gained their positions.

thank you good post! When having a wet start you can almost call it "unfair" to not be on the racing line. Seen that happen last year as well.

[Phil]

If as is being suggested you have to actually roll out of the box to trigger then the drivers should just stop further back and start a slow roll forwards as the last light comes on. That’s as insane as the premise that if a drivers sensor isn’t working that he could get to turn 3 as the lights goes out and the current rules would allow it.

Relying on a sensor ONLY is living in the past. It’s a nice back up but shouldn’t be the only thing to use. The FIA’s rules in this are massively out of date. Current 4K cameras make them redundant.

Come to think of it, it would be really funny if a driver could exploit this and hit T1 before the lights go out, perhaps by setting off before the sensor activates or something and the stewards bound to do anything, highlighting the rules that they can only rely on the sensor that hasn't reported anything.

[Schuttelberg]

I don't get how Albon didn't get a penalty. The Bottas one is an absolute slam dunk as far as I am concerned. Weird.

[El Scorchio]

I don't get how Albon didn't get a penalty. The Bottas one is an absolute slam dunk as far as I am concerned. Weird.

The Albon one is completely inexplicable. The only defence seemed to be ‘oops but we didn’t do it on purpose’ despite the act being clearly against the rules, and somehow it stuck?

The Bottas one was a slam dunk- just like the Vettel one last season. At least if nothing else they were consistent in letting both drivers get away with it...

[nzjrs]

If as is being suggested you have to actually roll out of the box to trigger then the drivers should just stop further back and start a slow roll forwards as the last light comes on. That’s as insane as the premise that if a drivers sensor isn’t working that he could get to turn 3 as the lights goes out and the current rules would allow it.

Relying on a sensor ONLY is living in the past. It’s a nice back up but shouldn’t be the only thing to use. The FIA’s rules in this are massively out of date. Current 4K cameras make them redundant.

Come to think of it, it would be really funny if a driver could exploit this and hit T1 before the lights go out, perhaps by setting off before the sensor activates or something and the stewards bound to do anything, highlighting the rules that they can only rely on the sensor that hasn't reported anything.

That's why they don't publish the sensor tolerances.

[mertol]

Sure let's encourage them to guess start because that is so fair.

[Schuttelberg]

F1 is a joke! I am beginning to develop a real intolerance towards some of the pundits. They're actually paid fanboys these days.

[Restomaniac]

If as is being suggested you have to actually roll out of the box to trigger then the drivers should just stop further back and start a slow roll forwards as the last light comes on. That’s as insane as the premise that if a drivers sensor isn’t working that he could get to turn 3 as the lights goes out and the current rules would allow it.

Relying on a sensor ONLY is living in the past. It’s a nice back up but shouldn’t be the only thing to use. The FIA’s rules in this are massively out of date. Current 4K cameras make them redundant.

Come to think of it, it would be really funny if a driver could exploit this and hit T1 before the lights go out, perhaps by setting off before the sensor activates or something and the stewards bound to do anything, highlighting the rules that they can only rely on the sensor that hasn't reported anything.

I said this the other day. Imagine Russell from the back of the grid just gunning it after the first light and being clear and gone before anybody else even moves and the FIA just saying ‘well the sensor didn’t spot it sorry’. It’s a totally idiotic argument but that’s what would happen. It’s nuts.

If you really want a thought to make you smile imagine him shouting ‘See ya suckers’ over team radio whilst giving the bird with his free (downshifting) hand.

[nzjrs]

This is a very entertaining conversation. If only I could measure its entertainment value and determine if it was too funny to be allowed. First I would need a funnyness sensor and then some sort of threshold, and then I would need some tolerance of that sensor relative to a threshold, and an enforcement body and punishment guidelines.

[Wynters]

I don't get how Albon didn't get a penalty. The Bottas one is an absolute slam dunk as far as I am concerned. Weird.

The Albon one is completely inexplicable. The only defence seemed to be ‘oops but we didn’t do it on purpose’ despite the act being clearly against the rules, and somehow it stuck?

The Bottas one was a slam dunk- just like the Vettel one last season. At least if nothing else they were consistent in letting both drivers get away with it...

I'm genuinely unsure what role the Stewards are meant to play. What are they for?

"The Stewards heard from the team representative, regarding a report from the FIA
Technical Delegate. The Stewards reviewed video evidence and came to the
conclusion that the competitor did not attempt to alter the grip of the track surface."

As long as you don't 'attempt' to cheat, then the outcome is fine. It's a ruling that now clears the way for the need to prove intent. Good luck with that, FIA.

Between that and Stroll...
"The driver of Car 18 made an attempt to overtake Car 3 on the inside on the approach
to turn 3, causing both cars to leave the track shortly after the apex of turn 3. After
reviewing the video evidence available, the Stewards determine that the incident is
considered a race incident."
...where they state that he caused both cars to leave the track but that it's totally fine.

Baffling.

[El Scorchio]

I don't get how Albon didn't get a penalty. The Bottas one is an absolute slam dunk as far as I am concerned. Weird.

The Albon one is completely inexplicable. The only defence seemed to be ‘oops but we didn’t do it on purpose’ despite the act being clearly against the rules, and somehow it stuck?

The Bottas one was a slam dunk- just like the Vettel one last season. At least if nothing else they were consistent in letting both drivers get away with it...

I'm genuinely unsure what role the Stewards are meant to play. What are they for?

"The Stewards heard from the team representative, regarding a report from the FIA
Technical Delegate. The Stewards reviewed video evidence and came to the
conclusion that the competitor did not attempt to alter the grip of the track surface."

As long as you don't 'attempt' to cheat, then the outcome is fine. It's a ruling that now clears the way for the need to prove intent. Good luck with that, FIA.

Between that and Stroll...
"The driver of Car 18 made an attempt to overtake Car 3 on the inside on the approach
to turn 3, causing both cars to leave the track shortly after the apex of turn 3. After
reviewing the video evidence available, the Stewards determine that the incident is
considered a race incident."
...where they state that he caused both cars to leave the track but that it's totally fine.

Baffling.

Extraordinary, really! So presumably every wet race now the mechanics from every team could just ‘accidentally’ leave a bunch of blowers on the track around the front of the car which just happen to be on. That’s what I’d do, and just claim it was an accident and they’d HAVE to accept that now they set a precedent.

And now it’s ok to run another car off the road, until it happens next race and all of a sudden it isn’t.

They must be able to see how silly they make themselves look with some of these decisions. It’s comparable in its insanity only to VAR in football as the reviewing system that still manages to get so much wrong or to be wildly inconsistent with applying or not applying the rules.

[Sieper]

Or, now that RBR was warned, none shall try as the next one up will surely get a right old spanking.

[nzjrs]

Extraordinary, really! So presumably every wet race now the mechanics from every team could just ‘accidentally’ leave a bunch of blowers on the track around the front of the car which just happen to be on. That’s what I’d do, and just claim it was an accident and they’d HAVE to accept that now they set a precedent.

And now it’s ok to run another car off the road, until it happens next race and all of a sudden it isn’t.

They must be able to see how silly they make themselves look with some of these decisions. It’s comparable in its insanity only to VAR in football as the reviewing system that still manages to get so much wrong or to be wildly inconsistent with applying or not applying the rules.

As your previous posts, and you in this post indeed highlighted, contradictions are common so the arguments about precedent are not as strong as they could be.

Personally I think people make too much of a big deal of things. They ask for common sense and then complain about inconsistency, they ask for zero-tolerance and then complain about idiocy. Its a hard job.

[Just_a_fan]

Personally I think people make too much of a big deal of things. They ask for common sense and then complain about inconsistency, they ask for zero-tolerance and then complain about idiocy. Its a hard job.

Common sense and consistency are not mutually exclusive. One can apply common sense in a consistent fashion.