2025 Scuderia Ferrari F1 Team

[FittingMechanics]

These rules are the reason we get these super annoying and frustrating overtakes where the driver on the inside has full control of pushing the other car off. It is a stupid rule.

For the driver to be given room, you need to be ahead at apex, so you get drivers letting off their brakes to reach the apex first thus ensuring that they can run the other car off. This is quite obvious in the way VER defended at T4, he let off the brakes and in the end went off track but because he was on the inside Hamilton couldn't follow him on the outside and took to the escape road (where he gained time). Similar "dive to the apex" was done in T3.

This rule (and most others) is where VER excels, he truly understand it and can utilize it to the maximum. It is super hard to attack him because of that so you get these situations where there are incidents between VER and other cars and it's always a mess.

[basti313]

He pushed Hamilton off

No, Ham was investigated correctly for causing a colission in T1. Verstappen was alongside on the apex, so had the right of room. Ham did not have right of room. Everything well explained in the stewarding document.

And this is the crux of the issue really. The drivers voted for this rule, and it generally makes for really shocking viewing and poor driver behaviour at the apex.

I think this is wrong. Or not the full story.
We had "you always need to leave a space", remember? And that is the rule in every racing series with good wheel to wheel racing.
The problem in F1 started in 2015 when Ham and Ros were running each other off the track and Merc started with rules, who has the right of way. Something that did not exist in racing before. This stupid ruling made it into the rules of engagement now, well evolved by some dive bombers.
That is simply not good, but took its beginning in 2015ff.

Max has effectively barreled into the corner, crashed into Lewis forcing him off track and is simply not penalised.

Well, this is a one sided view. Going heavily with late braking on the inside, pushing the other car wide was Ham's signature move over ten years. You also need to rediscuss Stone 21 again and again if you want or do not want to allow that someone dives on the inside. I think this is not that easy.

I dont get it.
Before Lewis cut and gained an advantage, a turn earlier Max did the same to Lewis, so they exchanged positions and everything fell into place, or shouldn't Max have regained his position after his cut?
Get 10 seconds for gaining an advantage over an offender who should have given you back your position? What?

Nice thinking, but it simply does not work like this. Even if Max has to give back the position, Ham can not just take it by going off track.

Even if that is the case hamilton gained multiple seconds with that excursion and it was the most egregious cut of them all tbh.

Let's assume that Ham hadn't gone on the attack and hadn't cut there and remained behind Max, should Max have given him back the place for his cut at the turn earlier?

From reading the stewarding document I do not think, that he would have needed to give back the position. They gave (only) blame to Ham and closed the case. So I would say they were happy with the outcome. But does not really matter, right?

[Wynters]

I think this is wrong. Or not the full story.
We had "you always need to leave a space", remember? And that is the rule in every racing series with good wheel to wheel racing.
The problem in F1 started in 2015 when Ham and Ros were running each other off the track and Merc started with rules, who has the right of way. Something that did not exist in racing before.

The problem started with RBR-era Vettel and Alonso (which is where the quote comes from). There was one incident with Hamilton and Rosberg (and plenty between other drivers). Then several seasons of Verstappen, culminating in the farce of 2021. And now the rules are what they are. You can tell it didn't happen a decade ago because the rule didn't change a decade ago. I wonder who has arrived on the scene in the last few years that might have led to a change...

Well, this is a one sided view. Going heavily with late braking on the inside, pushing the other car wide was Ham's signature move over ten years. You also need to rediscuss Stone 21 again and again if you want or do not want to allow that someone dives on the inside. I think this is not that easy.

Baseless. Other than one season with Massa, Hamilton had a reasonable reputation for clean racing and held the record for consecutive finishes (which suggests he wasn't constantly dive bombing into other cars). Bringing up Silverstone 2021 whilst ignoring Verstappen's entire career is an interesting take.

Fundamentally, the penalty isn't too different to Russell / Verstappen in Spain. At least Hamilton didn't try and ram Verstappen off the road in retaliation. The lesson is, don't let other cars up the inside.

What I find particularly interesting, is having run Hamilton off the road by missing the corner himself, Verstappen then rejoined level with Russell and just pushed him off at the next corner. No investigation. Turns out, if you're Verstappen, everyone needs to leave you space, but you don't need to leave anyone space. I'm sure that's somehow Hamilton's fault too. Plus ca change.

[SiLo]

No, Ham was investigated correctly for causing a colission in T1. Verstappen was alongside on the apex, so had the right of room. Ham did not have right of room. Everything well explained in the stewarding document.

And this is the crux of the issue really. The drivers voted for this rule, and it generally makes for really shocking viewing and poor driver behaviour at the apex.

Max has effectively barreled into the corner, crashed into Lewis forcing him off track and is simply not penalised.

We need to be punishing this behaviour, not rewarding it. The rules need to be re-written, but they won't because the show must go on.

The rules were written by the drivers themselves.

There is a technique called defending.

If there is enough room for a car to come down the inside and be ahead at the apex, than that is a defensive placement issue.

If you want to watch DRS overtakes all race, then that is up to you.

Except the car that came up the inside crashed into the side of you to remain on track, and forced you off.

Hence the rules need to be re-written. Whether the drivers voted for them doesn't matter at this point because the evidence is quite clear that we need some change. Dangerous driving is being rewarded.

[SiLo]

Well, this is a one sided view. Going heavily with late braking on the inside, pushing the other car wide was Ham's signature move over ten years. You also need to rediscuss Stone 21 again and again if you want or do not want to allow that someone dives on the inside. I think this is not that easy.

Maybe my memory is hazy, but I seem to remember a lot of that being Lewis defending the inside. By the current rules that would also be acceptable.

My contention is that the rules suck, and we can do better.

[venkyhere]

The rules are what they are. whether we the spectators like it or not. They have become the way they are, after multiple 'pre-race meetings' between the drivers and the stewards/FIA. So all the drivers are 'aware' what is what. Now, there is a difference between 'morally correct' and 'legally correct' ; and I have often seen in F1tech threads, that different members put forth their points from both categories. What ultimately counts is 'legally correct' because it is objective ; 'morally correct' is something subjective and varies from person to person, driver to driver.

[dialtone]

The rules are what they are. whether we the spectators like it or not. They have become the way they are, after multiple 'pre-race meetings' between the drivers and the stewards/FIA. So all the drivers are 'aware' what is what. Now, there is a difference between 'morally correct' and 'legally correct' ; and I have often seen in F1tech threads, that different members put forth their points from both categories. What ultimately counts is 'legally correct' because it is objective ; 'morally correct' is something subjective and varies from person to person, driver to driver.

Morally correct is a very poor choice of words.

During a corner you go from: it’s legal for the car behind to just lounge as hard as possible even if you don’t make a corner, and the car in front can’t do anything about it because moving under braking is illegal. Mid corner and exit we get to the car in front at the apex can virtually cut the tires of the car behind because they have the right of way.

This makes no sense, it’s not a moral discussion.