I just find it very weird how the ghost car moves. Sometimes making big jumps, moving abruptly. I think a real overlay of both video streams would show more accurately what really happened.
- Login or Register
No account yet? Sign up
While Max Verstappen took an easy back-to-back victory at the Red Bull Racing, battling behind him was quite intense. Valtteri Bottas finished second as Lando Norris completed the podium after another strong drive for McLaren.
I just find it very weird how the ghost car moves. Sometimes making big jumps, moving abruptly. I think a real overlay of both video streams would show more accurately what really happened.
Gotta agree with Andres125sx on this. Especially after RZS10's perfect analyis.Andres125sx wrote: ↑09 Jul 2021, 07:39I´ll read your absurd post (accusations of murder? Can you read Diesel?) as, "I will not agree with you because I´ve been defendind the contrary and now that you point to that obvious fact I feel myself embarrased, but I´m too proud to recon"Diesel wrote: ↑08 Jul 2021, 21:00To be honest, most of the debate here has been fairly civil. It's only you that's come raging in with accusations of murder, divebombs, dirty maneuvers, and other hysterics. I think we can all agree to remain civil and keep all the raging out of it no?Andres125sx wrote: ↑08 Jul 2021, 17:40Unfortunately I can´t upvote this post, but that´s a perfect explanation
We could even say it was Norris who did the dive bomb, Perez was a bit ahead before the braking point and it was Lando who braked later trying to keep position, but failed to do the normal line when two cars are in parallel (the one Kimi and Alonso took later). It does not matter if it was on purpose or because of understeer, voluntarily or not he pushed Perez out of track and that´s a penalty anycase
It was not in the past tough, and that´s causing a lot of debate. I guess that´s the reason there are lots of people defending such a dirty maneouver, because it was allowed by FIA in the past. But in the past FIA also punished many drivers for the same so, is that really an argument?
Ignoring previous decisions, I´d say when some cars are racing at a track, neither of them can push any other out of track consciously, at least when they´re paired and none has a clear advantage. Can we all agree on this?
It was a racing incident, one the stewards decided to punish with the lowest form of penalty they could give. And now we are debating if that was the right decision. Let's leave all the other stuff you mention out of it as I don't think it's constructive.
Sometimes things need to be simplified to be understood, no matter the name of the driver or team, no matter what FIA say or said in the past. Pushing your competitors out of track consciously should be banned and punished, always. It is this simple.
I 100% agree on this, especially on the last alineaAndres125sx wrote: ↑08 Jul 2021, 17:40Unfortunately I can´t upvote this post, but that´s a perfect explanationRZS10 wrote: ↑08 Jul 2021, 15:49The first sentence isn't really an argument, is it?
It is of course a factual statement, but if everyone would think that way then one could just as well stop discussing anything, so it is kinda weird, yet i see it being used, especially in conversations about sporting events.
You seem to believe that i disagree with any of the penalties, but as i've written somewhere here in this thread i don't, the license points however are maybe questionable and they might adjust that post season, as Masi said it's not something they would change during the season.
I initially quoted that sentence of yours because i thought it was amusing that you pointed out differences in maturity between Perez and Lando when, with roles reversed for Perez, said alleged maturity was suddenly gone. That was all.
What is outside the track seemed to play a role in the decisions they make so far (even if it shouldn't), just two corners back the situation was similar, only that Perez was further behind on apex but was able to floor it and even gain an advantage from running out of track - so they seemingly do take the outcome into consideration.
____
About the closer racing in WTCC, DTM and other similar series being discussed here - DTM used to be reliant on aero and they had to add DRS to allow cars to follow the others, but they still had closer battles simply because drivers knew that the cars could handle some rubbing, so they could throw it down the inside knowing that they could 'lean' on the other car without instantly ending their race, same as those who were defending who could just turn in knowing that their car could take the hit.
Many of those close battles simply wouldn't be possible in open wheelers.
____
In general i don't understand many of the points here about understeer and basically being a passenger who can't avoid going wide when there was a carbon copy of the situation in the very same race which had a different outcome.
Why? Because both drivers, Kimi and Nando chose different approach speeds/angles/lines which allowed for both of them to have the necessary space. Arguably Alonso was even ahead and potentially could have gotten away with 'claiming the corner' as some would call it.
Aligned them at various lines on the tarmac (so there's differences in timing):
https://i.imgur.com/Ds5OUOZ.png
They (N/P) just end up wider earlier.
If aligned at the beginning of the outside curb and not adjusting for speed into the corner it becomes quite obvious that Norris/Perez went into the corner faster than Kimi/Nando, it's similar at the 100 marker and then the pair Kimi/Alonso 'drop back' by going in slower and seemingly also turning in later:
https://i.imgur.com/JtQYY4U.png
No one could realistically expect any driver to suddenly make room on the outside, but if they go into the corner side by side they should be fully aware of it and thus choose their lines and cornering speeds accordingly - that is what Norris and Perez failed to do.
We could even say it was Norris who did the dive bomb, Perez was a bit ahead before the braking point and it was Lando who braked later trying to keep position, but failed to do the normal line when two cars are in parallel (the one Kimi and Alonso took later). It does not matter if it was on purpose or because of understeer, voluntarily or not he pushed Perez out of track and that´s a penalty anycase
It was not in the past tough, and that´s causing a lot of debate. I guess that´s the reason there are lots of people defending such a dirty maneouver, because it was allowed by FIA in the past. But in the past FIA also punished many drivers for the same so, is that really an argument?
Ignoring previous decisions, I´d say when some cars are racing at a track, neither of them can push any other out of track consciously, at least when they´re paired and none has a clear advantage. Can we all agree on this?
Not sure if it was because of Ricciardo or other driver, but someone at the spanish TV (Tony Cuquerella maybe?) defined that as the squid strategyaMessageToCharlie wrote: ↑16 Aug 2021, 15:27Anyone seen this yet?
RIC deliberately running over dirt patches to hamper the following car.
Love these little strategic plays and I dont think it's illegal per se. But done to this degree its not compliant with the "staying on track all the time" rule.
Not calling for a penalty or investigation - just interesting to see.
Yes, because of Ricciardo, for sure. Said by Antonio Lobato.Andres125sx wrote: ↑19 Aug 2021, 19:24Not sure if it was because of Ricciardo or other driver, but someone at the spanish TV (Tony Cuquerella maybe?) defined that as the squid strategyaMessageToCharlie wrote: ↑16 Aug 2021, 15:27Anyone seen this yet?
RIC deliberately running over dirt patches to hamper the following car.
Love these little strategic plays and I dont think it's illegal per se. But done to this degree its not compliant with the "staying on track all the time" rule.
Not calling for a penalty or investigation - just interesting to see.
