2025 Saudi Arabian Grand Prix - Jeddah, April 18-20

[chrisc90]

Interesting points above. What it doesn’t take into account though is what room that each driver has to give.

If a car is alongside, then is it ok to use the full track and not allow the other car any room on track?

At what point does the overtaking car become the defending car? Especially in this instance given Oscar had a blinder of a start and both cars were level well before the braking zone. Could argue that Oscar even got ahead of Max before Max had his car infront.


I mean going ahead… what happens when there’s 2 cars side by side out of the previous corner, along a straight side by side and then come the next corner. Who’s the car which is ‘favoured’?


I’m still with Guenther on this one.

[f1isgood]

The fact that there's so much nuance involved for this specific case and the stewards making up a five second penalty is telling. They didn't actually know who was at fault, so they just made up something on the spot and that's all there is to this.

[venkyhere]

https://www.the-race.com/formula-1/reve ... h-penalty/

The new guidelines demand that the overtaking car.

i) Have its front axle AT LEAST ALONGSIDE THE MIRROR of the other car PRIOR TO AND AT THE APEX

ii) Be driven in a fully controlled manner particularly from entry to apex, and not have ‘dived in’.

iii) In the stewards’ estimation, have taken a reasonable racing line and been able to complete the move whilst remaining within track limits.

The two phrases (bold) above is exactly similar to how 'civil/criminal' laws are formed by legislature/govt of nations, before these laws fall into the hands of courts for interpretation. A good lawyer/solicitor and a vested interest judge is all it takes to 'bend' such laws anyway they want, through 'subjective interpretation'. It's the same that's happening with race stewarding. The laws are intentionally composed with inbuilt loopholes which can be exploited to suit "narratives" at the time of interpretation w.r.t a situation,

[hollus]

Alongside in which reference system?
That of the previous straight?
That or the next straight?
Halfway between the two?
As rotated as the average of the two cars?
As rotated as your Q lap?


Because “alongside” changes during the corner.
If we use the car’s reference system as alongside, which of the two cars? And is under-rotating initially gaming that system?

Defining “alongside” turns out to be as difficult as defining “the apex”. No wonder they are having trouble.

[Chuckjr]

swap the two drivers and the stewards would have still given the +5s to Max citing that he pushed off Piastri 'who had no option but to take the ecape route'. Thats how inconsistent and 'subjectively judgemental' the stewarding is.

100%

[search]

it's how Wittich read the rules, at least - but he is not in charge anymore. And I guess even if, it played a part that Russell got alongside to not crash into Piastri, and backed up right after.

Was this a wittich issue? It was discussed in 2021 when Masi was the race director.

As for Russell, he wasn't keeping a safe distance to the car ahead. I get it, they want to get close before the restart but if that means you then come alongside another car for any reason, that's the risk you take. That risk shouldn't then become the excuse. Enforcing that rule will only encourage safer restart behaviour. Several cars could have been wiped out there, as in China last year.

sorry for the late reply, didn't check the forum for a couple of days.

What I was referring to was a clarification sent out by Wittich in 2022, according to a.o. a Racefans article:

"FIA F1 race director Niels Wittich reminded drivers this morning they must stay behind the car ahead of them during restarts.

He did so by highlighting part of article 55.14 of the sporting regulations, which states: “In order to avoid the likelihood of accidents before the safety car returns to the pits, from the point at which the lights on the car are turned out drivers must proceed at a pace which involves no erratic acceleration or braking nor any manoeuvre which is likely to endanger other drivers or impede the restart.”

In a document sent to all teams ahead of final practice on Saturday, Wittich indicated how the rule will be interpreted. Drivers will be considered in violation of the rule if any part of their car is alongside the car ahead. They do not have to follow the same line as the car ahead, but they may not begin to move alongside it."

https://www.racefans.net/2022/04/09/f1- ... -restarts/

This may very well go back to an interpretation issued by Masi, of course, but my main point was supposed to be that the rule itself is vague, and internal interpretation may change. Sometimes we get informed about those documents, sometimes not.

[chrisc90]

@search

The procedure is noted o the race directors instructions for each event.

[search]

@search

The procedure is noted o the race directors instructions for each event.

ah, I didn't know, thanks. That's pretty clear then indeed - unless they somehow decided that Piastri caused it

[Seanspeed]

https://www.the-race.com/formula-1/reve ... h-penalty/

The new guidelines demand that the overtaking car.

i) Have its front axle AT LEAST ALONGSIDE THE MIRROR of the other car PRIOR TO AND AT THE APEX

ii) Be driven in a fully controlled manner particularly from entry to apex, and not have ‘dived in’.

iii) In the stewards’ estimation, have taken a reasonable racing line and been able to complete the move whilst remaining within track limits.

In combination with what others have commented on with this, this ruling does not address a hugely important part of this - what does the DEFENDING car have to do? What are its obligations? Cuz the defending car cannot have the kind of omniscience to know whether the car trying to overtake is in perfect control or whatever.

I still maintain that the rule should be that if a car is alongside you on the outside after you've turned into the corner, then you need to give it space, full stop. Give the benefit of the doubt on whether they're 'taking a reasonable racing line' and leave the space. If that other driver doesn't make the corner within track bounds and you've demonstrated that you gave them space, then it's a smack and done clear violation of overtaking off-track, since they cannot say they were forced off. It's that simple.

Overtaking on the outside should be not be hampered so much by the car in front being able to just run them off the track. It deprives us of good racing, especially in F1 where we complain about how hard overtaking is(plus passes on the outside often allow for a fun back and forth battle to take place). And in a dangerous sport like racing, there should NEVER be a situation where it's legal to run another car off the track, full stop. I dont understand why it should be treated differently than driving another car off the track on a straight. Even if a car is remotely alongside, it would be monstrous to think you're allowed to just shove them off simply because they weren't alongside enough.

All of this makes the situation much clearer for everybody involved, both the defending driver and overtaking driver, but also the stewards in having to 'interpret' these rules on some subjective case-by-case basis. While also making the racing fairer and more entertaining.

[Ferry]

From the linked article:

"In a separate note that FIA stewards sent to teams ahead of the season, a copy of which has been seen by The Race, there were extra comments made about the significance of certain changes to the guidelines.

In particular, it was emphasised that there is no longer the need for drivers to leave room on the exit for a rival if they have won the corner.

“When overtaking on the inside, you no longer are required to give room to the overtaken car from the apex all the way to the exit, PROVIDED you are in control and within track limits,” said the note."

And Russell says:
“A lot of drivers are aligned that if you are the overtaking car on the inside, rule number one is you have to be able to stay on the circuit,” he said.

“If you're able to stay on the circuit, you are in your right to run the driver wide, as it has been for all of us since go-karting.

“If you're overtaking somebody on the inside, you've got the right to run them wide.”

[Seanspeed]

From the linked article:

"In a separate note that FIA stewards sent to teams ahead of the season, a copy of which has been seen by The Race, there were extra comments made about the significance of certain changes to the guidelines.

In particular, it was emphasised that there is no longer the need for drivers to leave room on the exit for a rival if they have won the corner.

“When overtaking on the inside, you no longer are required to give room to the overtaken car from the apex all the way to the exit, PROVIDED you are in control and within track limits,” said the note."

And Russell says:
“A lot of drivers are aligned that if you are the overtaking car on the inside, rule number one is you have to be able to stay on the circuit,” he said.

“If you're able to stay on the circuit, you are in your right to run the driver wide, as it has been for all of us since go-karting.

“If you're overtaking somebody on the inside, you've got the right to run them wide.”

They're literally making the problem worse. Absolutely unbelievable.

There should be no such thing as 'winning' a corner that legally allows you to run another driver off-track. It's just such an absurd premise that almost nobody questions for some absolutely bizarre reason. All in a dangerous sport, and in one where we complain that overtaking is already too difficult. smh

[bluechris]

From the linked article:

"In a separate note that FIA stewards sent to teams ahead of the season, a copy of which has been seen by The Race, there were extra comments made about the significance of certain changes to the guidelines.

In particular, it was emphasised that there is no longer the need for drivers to leave room on the exit for a rival if they have won the corner.

“When overtaking on the inside, you no longer are required to give room to the overtaken car from the apex all the way to the exit, PROVIDED you are in control and within track limits,” said the note."

And Russell says:
“A lot of drivers are aligned that if you are the overtaking car on the inside, rule number one is you have to be able to stay on the circuit,” he said.

“If you're able to stay on the circuit, you are in your right to run the driver wide, as it has been for all of us since go-karting.

“If you're overtaking somebody on the inside, you've got the right to run them wide.”

They're literally making the problem worse. Absolutely unbelievable.

There should be no such thing as 'winning' a corner that legally allows you to run another driver off-track. It's just such an absurd premise that almost nobody questions for some absolutely bizarre reason. All in a dangerous sport, and in one where we complain that overtaking is already too difficult. smh

Well you only need to keep the inside line, why you think noone can pass Max?

[AR3-GP]

They're literally making the problem worse. Absolutely unbelievable.

There should be no such thing as 'winning' a corner that legally allows you to run another driver off-track. It's just such an absurd premise that almost nobody questions for some absolutely bizarre reason. All in a dangerous sport, and in one where we complain that overtaking is already too difficult. smh

The drivers are saying that there is no problem. There's no sense defending those who do not seek to be defended.

[Tvetovnato]

From the linked article:

"In a separate note that FIA stewards sent to teams ahead of the season, a copy of which has been seen by The Race, there were extra comments made about the significance of certain changes to the guidelines.

In particular, it was emphasised that there is no longer the need for drivers to leave room on the exit for a rival if they have won the corner.

“When overtaking on the inside, you no longer are required to give room to the overtaken car from the apex all the way to the exit, PROVIDED you are in control and within track limits,” said the note."

And Russell says:
“A lot of drivers are aligned that if you are the overtaking car on the inside, rule number one is you have to be able to stay on the circuit,” he said.

“If you're able to stay on the circuit, you are in your right to run the driver wide, as it has been for all of us since go-karting.

“If you're overtaking somebody on the inside, you've got the right to run them wide.”

They're literally making the problem worse. Absolutely unbelievable.

There should be no such thing as 'winning' a corner that legally allows you to run another driver off-track. It's just such an absurd premise that almost nobody questions for some absolutely bizarre reason. All in a dangerous sport, and in one where we complain that overtaking is already too difficult. smh

Winning a corner has been a thing forever in racing. If you are well enough on the inside without sending a divebomb, the corner is yours as long as you stay on track, just as Russell says. It’s on the outside driver to realize that they are beaten and try again. It’s not dangerous in any way. If you see the car on the inside, you just expect that you may need to ceede the corner, and then you don’t need to drive off track. What is bizarre is that they tried to change this rule with the ahead at the apex nonsense which invites for divebombs right and left, making real racing impossible.

[Ferry]

The-race.com has also made a video about it, worth a watch.