Lando Norris had the best of afternoons at Mexico City, leading the race from start to finish and ending with a big advantage over second placed Charles Leclerc. Max Verstappen recovered to third while Oliver Bearman earned Driver of the Day by finishing 4th for Haas.
They need to drop the "ahead at apex rule". This needs to go. The rule could be as simple as "if there is an overlap, both cars need to leave room for the other car to remain on track on their current trajectory/speed".
Then if you divebomb on the inside, sure, go ahead, but you have to stop your car in time and leave space on the outside.
If you defend the inside as is usually done today, you need to leave enough room for the car on the outside. It is all very simple and sensible.
If they really want to determine what amounts to "significant overlap" they can but I think it would be better if it is not well defined and allows stewards to use common sense. Not everything has to be super proscribed. By having the rule slightly vague it removes this gamesmanship they are using now because they can't be sure what will be determined as significant overlap. Today it is super clear so these best drivers in the world abuse the rule.
This change would promote overtaking, driving side by side and remove the stupid "let off brakes to reach the apex first" racing we have today.
Wait wait. There is an overtaking best practices image that used to float around some years ago. Most racers agree with it and FIA used to sorta go with similar judgement. With the "Verstappen rule" or whatever they call it, they have deviated from this somewhat. Basically how it is now, if you have the inside.. No matter what, it is your corner as long as you are side by side in braking and keep the car on track after the apex (in other word dive bombs are allowed even if you bang wheels and don't fully collide, and even if you "bric wall" the apex)
They should just make it the rule that if you go off track you have to rejoin at the location you went off at, if you fail to do that, you have to serve a drive through penalty, no ifs no butts. If your forced off, then the offending driver should get a stop and go penalty equal to the time it takes to do a full lap. Cars should always be left enough room
Drivers must be punished for mistakes. if it ruins a race for them, tough.
Being able to skip 3 corners because you failed to slow enough trying to go 4 into a 2 car max corner is just terrible driving and should have lasting consequences for such poor decision making.
LH 10 sec penalty was also just, the FIA failing to apply the same penalty to CL for the same offensive is just double standards, being team mates should have no influence in a decision.
At your first paragraph.. It's too rigid. Racing never had rules about where the track is until in recent times.. A track was just a track.. It had better grip and was faster than going off the track. The FIA needs to design better obstacles that pushish drivers for going off the track. This stupid policing the track lines is totally different "game" and is ruining the sport.
But tracks in the old days had mub walls, gravel, long grass, big bumps hidden in the grass and in the mud, cars would actually get stuck in the mud. Now Most run offs are concrete / tarmac, long long run offs, No gravel. no bumps, nice and smooth for " driver Safety ".
it should not be possible to go off miss a turn or 3 and rejoin the " race " with out losing a position.
Im not talking petty track limit infringments. But missing entire corners.
If Mexico had big gravel all around turns 1 - 4. then a lot of ppl fail to finish the race because they failed to remain on the track, sort of like at Monaco, If you smash it into the wall because you braked to late, Its all over.....
They should just make it the rule that if you go off track you have to rejoin at the location you went off at, if you fail to do that, you have to serve a drive through penalty, no ifs no butts. If your forced off, then the offending driver should get a stop and go penalty equal to the time it takes to do a full lap. Cars should always be left enough room
Drivers must be punished for mistakes. if it ruins a race for them, tough.
Being able to skip 3 corners because you failed to slow enough trying to go 4 into a 2 car max corner is just terrible driving and should have lasting consequences for such poor decision making.
LH 10 sec penalty was also just, the FIA failing to apply the same penalty to CL for the same offensive is just double standards, being team mates should have no influence in a decision.
At your first paragraph.. It's too rigid. Racing never had rules about where the track is until in recent times.. A track was just a track.. It had better grip and was faster than going off the track. The FIA needs to design better obstacles that pushish drivers for going off the track. This stupid policing the track lines is totally different "game" and is ruining the sport.
But tracks in the old days had mub walls, gravel, long grass, big bumps hidden in the grass and in the mud, cars would actually get stuck in the mud. Now Most run offs are concrete / tarmac, long long run offs, No gravel. no bumps, nice and smooth for " driver Safety ".
it should not be possible to go off miss a turn or 3 and rejoin the " race " with out losing a position.
Im not talking petty track limit infringments. But missing entire corners.
If Mexico had big gravel all around turns 1 - 4. then a lot of ppl fail to finish the race because they failed to remain on the track, sort of like at Monaco, If you smash it into the wall because you braked to late, Its all over.....
There's also an almost unparalleled distaste for "racing" in Monaco on this forum and out in general spectator-land. That's not in any way a competent target.
I want to see all of the interesting protagonists survive these events generally. Here to watch the racing, disappointed if interesting drivers are removed.
Part of the problem, possibly unsolvable, is the severity of braking phase, it's truncated distance too.
With automation of PU deployment strategy, nil gearshift failure/compromise etc, the overwhelming product has been to push competition directly into braking phase, that of course asking the drivers (actually making them) to always risk most in that part of track.
They are simply driving the product of current design and deployment. Anachronistic it is in asking them to race like in ye olde days.
At your first paragraph.. It's too rigid. Racing never had rules about where the track is until in recent times.. A track was just a track.. It had better grip and was faster than going off the track. The FIA needs to design better obstacles that pushish drivers for going off the track. This stupid policing the track lines is totally different "game" and is ruining the sport.
But tracks in the old days had mub walls, gravel, long grass, big bumps hidden in the grass and in the mud, cars would actually get stuck in the mud. Now Most run offs are concrete / tarmac, long long run offs, No gravel. no bumps, nice and smooth for " driver Safety ".
it should not be possible to go off miss a turn or 3 and rejoin the " race " with out losing a position.
Im not talking petty track limit infringments. But missing entire corners.
If Mexico had big gravel all around turns 1 - 4. then a lot of ppl fail to finish the race because they failed to remain on the track, sort of like at Monaco, If you smash it into the wall because you braked to late, Its all over.....
There's also an almost unparalleled distaste for "racing" in Monaco on this forum and out in general spectator-land. That's not in any way a competent target.
I want to see all of the interesting protagonists survive these events generally. Here to watch the racing, disappointed if interesting drivers are removed.
Part of the problem, possibly unsolvable, is the severity of braking phase, it's truncated distance too.
With automation of PU deployment strategy, nil gearshift failure/compromise etc, the overwhelming product has been to push competition directly into braking phase, that of course asking the drivers (actually making them) to always risk most in that part of track.
They are simply driving the product of current design and deployment. Anachronistic it is in asking them to race like in ye olde days.
Racing maybe, only cause the cars are to big to race each other around Monaco, Qualy at Monaco is the most exciting session on the calander.
I dont see how drivers skipping 3 corners is not ruining a race.
Lando, Its Mohammed Ahmad Sultan Ben Sulayem, Max broke his wing playing bumper cars with you, slow down so he can catch you back up, it ruined the race.......
If going around a corner is becoming a challange for drivers, send them down to the drag racing track.
They need to drop the "ahead at apex rule". This needs to go. The rule could be as simple as "if there is an overlap, both cars need to leave room for the other car to remain on track on their current trajectory/speed".
Then if you divebomb on the inside, sure, go ahead, but you have to stop your car in time and leave space on the outside.
If you defend the inside as is usually done today, you need to leave enough room for the car on the outside. It is all very simple and sensible.
If they really want to determine what amounts to "significant overlap" they can but I think it would be better if it is not well defined and allows stewards to use common sense. Not everything has to be super proscribed. By having the rule slightly vague it removes this gamesmanship they are using now because they can't be sure what will be determined as significant overlap. Today it is super clear so these best drivers in the world abuse the rule.
This change would promote overtaking, driving side by side and remove the stupid "let off brakes to reach the apex first" racing we have today.
Significantly, all of the most vocal in complaint (the drivers in Mexico) have all of them done exactly this before.
GR being very open about taking the 5 sec penalty a number occasion prior to this. It was part of his race strategy.
They all discuss it in driver briefing, redefining after Cota in 24 I believe ? They need to shut up whingeing and race.
Micro analysis will ALWAYS show up something, racing will die if we adhered to that sustained need to correct every eventuality.
It was a brilliant race start, the drivers corrected their errors in accordance with agreement .... by themselves ..... any residual concern should ultimately be forwarded to their next briefing for discussion.
Anyone constantly whingeing, after they also partook in this historically should get a one race ban, for being hypocritically pathetic
Axle overlap = must leave space. This would be my rule. It will make for more w2w racing and fighting, less one and done overtakes. The drivers play both sides. They want the best of both worlds and the rule conversation over the past few seasons was sort of settled. It really is their fault as much as anyone else. Fans could probably change it if we were loud enough.
They should just make it the rule that if you go off track you have to rejoin at the location you went off at, if you fail to do that, you have to serve a drive through penalty, no ifs no butts. If your forced off, then the offending driver should get a stop and go penalty equal to the time it takes to do a full lap. Cars should always be left enough room
Drivers must be punished for mistakes. if it ruins a race for them, tough.
Being able to skip 3 corners because you failed to slow enough trying to go 4 into a 2 car max corner is just terrible driving and should have lasting consequences for such poor decision making.
LH 10 sec penalty was also just, the FIA failing to apply the same penalty to CL for the same offensive is just double standards, being team mates should have no influence in a decision.
At your first paragraph.. It's too rigid. Racing never had rules about where the track is until in recent times.. A track was just a track.. It had better grip and was faster than going off the track. The FIA needs to design better obstacles that pushish drivers for going off the track. This stupid policing the track lines is totally different "game" and is ruining the sport.
But tracks in the old days had mub walls, gravel, long grass, big bumps hidden in the grass and in the mud, cars would actually get stuck in the mud. Now Most run offs are concrete / tarmac, long long run offs, No gravel. no bumps, nice and smooth for " driver Safety ".
it should not be possible to go off miss a turn or 3 and rejoin the " race " with out losing a position.
Im not talking petty track limit infringments. But missing entire corners.
If Mexico had big gravel all around turns 1 - 4. then a lot of ppl fail to finish the race because they failed to remain on the track, sort of like at Monaco, If you smash it into the wall because you braked to late, Its all over.....
This seems like a sensible solution. Join the track where you left it. No advantage gained.
Deep gravel traps work but they can also beach a car easily leading to safety cars.
The problem is the risk reward is too high at the moment. A driver can risk it all and make up many spots by braking late and going around the outside. If it works they benefit significantly. If it fails they join the track further down pretty much in the same position at the same speed or faster than the other cars. Every driver will take this option because there is no real risk
Having to stop, turn around and re-enter the track where you left it guarantees you will end up at the back of the pack. The risk is too big, unless there is a good chance you can pull off the move. Enforce it immediately (on the same lap) and punish those who do not comply with a 10 sec stop go, as if they had broken their front with in a risky move.
This way we don’t have situations where 10 laps have passed before a decision is made by the stewards and the driver in question has also made a number of subsequent moves.
What is going off track then? If you get a track limit warning, should you put the car in reverse?
Part of the issue is that teams are no longer instructed on how to "mend" the situation, but need to assess themselves.
Teams will make sure they get the most out of it, but not enough for a penalty.
If you go off 2 seconds behind and rejoin 1 second behind, yiu gained one second, but it is unlikely to get a penalty.
The rule should be that you need to rejoint with at least more than the delta you had before the last braking zone, even if that means giving up another position. Alternatively, the delta at the start of the lap can be used, mitigating divebombs into T1
Applied to this first run through T1, either option, it would give same result / outcome as we witnessed.
Braking point status, or lacking a complete lap, startline separation 5mtr ? It all came out as we saw.
GR already lost out in run down to T1. What's more he took a bite out of Verstappen position (watch MV pov) off the start line, then loosing decent position within slipstream from then onward. He doesn't figure in the sort out ..... just complains about everything, as usual.
For reference, I thought it a good and very racy start, with the positions after "giveback" moves to be fair.
In case anyone is curious about why that late VSC was called:
From the onboard of Sainz's car we can see him stop half in / half our of the circuit. In the main feed it is obvious that his left rear tire is "in the curcuit" even if maybe Carlos himself is "out of".
So he stops the car, removes the foam protections, and as he is removing the steering wheel, smoke starts coming out of both front wheels. By the time he is climbing out of the car, there is significant smoke coming from both front brakes, but mostly the front left. And... we cannot se the rear.
Marshalls (in orange) start to approach the car with hin standing, but still in the car, and crucially, all have fire extinguishers. But a "main?" marshal in yellow clothes stops them from aproaching the car. Of course, there is a race going on.
Carlos leaves the car, and the scene, and most marshalls also leave, but 1-2 stay, still with the extinguishers. The front left still smokes, but perhaps a bit less.
Only then, one marshal approaches the car, extinguiser in hand. I guess race control called the VSC at that point? A second marshall follows him. But they are not going to the front left, still smoking, but to the rear left corner of the car.
So, one can conclude that it was either on fire, or producing alermingly much smoke, but worse than the front left. About 10 secdonds later, all marshals aproach the car and start removing it. Likely the guys in the rear left did what they had to do.
Onboard, from Carlos crashing on the wall to those marshalls walking to the car's rear left, 1 min 30 seconds elapse.
In the main feed, from the yellow flag signal to the VSC signal, 1 min 3 seconds elapse.
So it more or less fits?
Crash, 10 seconds until he stops "on/off track", 5 seconds to call the yellow, 63 seconds to call the VSC, 10 seconds to tell the guys in orange to go for the car with the extinguishers.
So... did they need to call the VSC? I don't know, but there were marshalls going "in" the track with fire extinguishers to prevent or stop a fire. So maybe? One can briefly see marshals in the main feed "on track", if away from any reasonable trajectory, during the VSC period.
Anyways, it was not completely without reason, by the look of it.
