Hamilton Stripped of Win - Official

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tonieke

from what I read and learned about that "concertina effect" I have to say I makes not much sense to me either..this effect just is a theory that is based on ifs and whens....What I DO see is(there's enough footage to prove) a McL goin way faster than a Ferrari coming up to the chicane..and I see a McL goin slower than a Ferrari coming out of the chicane..those are facts...

---

Have you ever driven a car on the road? Have you never notice that even if you brake very late into a corner and catch up to the car in front the car in front will almost always pull away from you relative to where you were on entry into the corner? Basically Lewis would have still been turning and off the accelerator while Kimi's wheels were straight and he was on the fast pedal zooming away from Lewis. The concertina effect is very much real....

This should explain it for you also.
http://www.speedtv.com/forums/viewth...97321/#4992731

Anyway I'm off to the hospital for a blood test. So we'll see whether I'm the one who's crazy or whether it's just the rest of you :p

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tonieke

from what I read and learned about that "concertina effect" I have to say I makes not much sense to me either..this effect just is a theory that is based on ifs and whens....What I DO see is(there's enough footage to prove) a McL goin way faster than a Ferrari coming up to the chicane..and I see a McL goin slower than a Ferrari coming out of the chicane..those are facts...

---

Yes, the IF's and BUT's is a good comment.

Mark Hughes has written an article which is closest to how I feel about the incident:-

Lewis Hamilton was pushed out across the Spa chicane escape road by Kimi Raikkonen, rejoined ahead, backed off to allow Kimi to repass as required by the rules, went round the back of him and overtook him again. It seemed very clear-cut.

But if you were a lawyer tasked with pushing Ferrari’s case, looking for any bit of legal daylight in which to create doubt, you would question whether Lewis would have been close enough to do that move if he'd not missed the chicane, regardless of the reason why he missed it.

It’s actually a ‘what if’ question to which there can be no answer.

To compare the two scenarios – what happened, with what would have happened had Hamilton not missed the chicane – is impossible.

At this stage of the race the McLaren had vastly more grip than the Ferrari because of the way the red car loses dry tyre temperature far more quickly and totally than the McLaren in wet conditions.

So, had Lewis tucked in behind the Ferrari through the chicane, he’d have accelerated out of there far faster because of his vastly superior traction.

He would have crossed the start/finish line going faster than the Ferrari and therefore have been perfectly placed to have made full use of his vastly superior braking grip to make an outbraking move into La Source.

As it was, he crossed the start/finish line alongside the Ferrari but travelling 6km/h slower, as he was in the process of allowing Kimi by.

Which of those two scenarios would have made for a more advantageous situation for Lewis – alongside but going slower or partly behind but going faster – is impossible to judge.

Exactly how much more tyre grip did he have? Which way would it have led Kimi to move? Impossible to determine.

Which leaves us with the question: If it’s impossible to judge (which it was) then why the hell make a judgement?




The political question

Regardless of what the reasoning was as to why the stewards tasked themselves with trying to judge an impossible question, getting involved was always going to result in a widespread perception of championship manipulation – which is disastrous for the credibility of the sport.

This was not an argument over seventh place between a Renault and a Toyota, but a magnificent sporting scrap between two of the three contenders for the world championship.

It was a stunningly tense and exciting duel between two of the best drivers in the world in the two best cars, fighting out the destiny of a race – and possibly a world title – into the last couple of laps on perhaps the sport’s greatest circuit.

As an advertisement for F1 – after the tainted 2007 season, after the deadly dull Valencia race just two weeks ago – it came at a perfect moment too.

Those last three laps were among the greatest sporting moments in the sport’s history.

And with a quick bit of bureaucratic interference, all that goodwill was wiped away, turned instead into ridicule and distrust from the public.

At best it has made F1 look stupid. At worst it has triggered suspicion in some, deepened it in others.

Two weeks earlier Ferrari’s Felipe Massa, the third title contender, was released in the pit lane in what was adjudged to be a dangerous manner.

Personally I was relieved when he was not given a drive-through penalty, because that would have been interfering with the outcome of the world championship at a crucial stage over an arcane point of interpretation.

Yes, the decision played into the hands of those who believe there is Ferrari favouritism.

But to have interfered in the outcome of a crucial race just to prove that suspicion unfounded would have been wrong.

Given that backdrop, the Spa incident absolutely invited the race stewards not to get involved when the tables were turned.

And they failed to take that opportunity, thereby fuelling the perception – accurate or not – of the championship being rigged in Ferrari’s favour.

At best, it was an incredibly stupid time to come down in favour of one title contender over another.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ioan

Charlie didn't advise them anything, they asked if it's OK or not and his answer was "PROBABLY" it is OK.

When there is a probability involved you better not take it for a sure thing.

---

I think the rule book is at fault. Fact that 2 FIA officials, including Charlie Whiting said it was ok, and Stewards not, just highlights its way too open to interpretation.

To be fair, when 2 FIA officials said they thought it was within the rules, you can't blame McLaren for thinking they were right.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Daniel

Have you ever driven a car on the road? Have you never notice that even if you brake very late into a corner and catch up to the car in front the car in front will almost always pull away from you relative to where you were on entry into the corner? Basically Lewis would have still been turning and off the accelerator while Kimi's wheels were straight and he was on the fast pedal zooming away from Lewis. The concertina effect is very much real....

---

Even then, Kimi was accelerating faster than Lewis down the main straight. It was a split second decision on Lewis' part, and no racing driver would've stopped their car to take that chicane. In the past, conceding the entire position while not gaining momentum relative to the other car has always been enough to be considered as negating an advantage. It's a damn shame that the end of a brilliant race turned farcical due to a petty interpretation by the stewards.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ioan

That effect is pretty much real and it's based on physics (you know the classes you always hated and never understood)! :rolleyes:

---

and I am almost 100% sure..YOU..just like ME..hardly know what you are talking about when it goes about this so called effect...and the physics it's based on...

I only trust my eyes..and what I saw in the situation as it appeared..not what if Lewis staid behind Kimi and this "effect" eventualy could come in count...I saw a McL closing on a Ferrari very fast before the chicane..resulting in an attempt to pass...and I saw a McL goin slower than a ferrari on the straight after the chicane..still behind a Ferrari...but having..like before the chicane ..clearly more grip in the wet condition...resulting in yet again an attempt to outbrake the ferrari..this time succelfull..helped by the fact Kimi could have staid on the inside...defending his line like he did before the chicane..

http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/70457

Just reposting this.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ioan

Charlie didn't advise them anything, they asked if it's OK or not and his answer was "PROBABLY" it is OK.

When there is a probability involved you better not take it for a sure thing.

---

Which is another issue. Either he knows the rules and says 'YES' or 'NO'. If a F1A Race Director isn't sure, we are in trouble. I have seen reports were McLaren were supposed to have asked twice, probably to make sure. If you ask an official you would excpect them to know - and therefore trust what they say. Seems as if the F1A don't know what their right and left hands are doing. A shambles all round.
Can you imagine a cricket umpire when an appeal is lodged saying 'Probably' - either a batsmen is 'In' or 'Out'. Maybe a slightly OTT comparison, but just highlights how ridiculous the whole issue is. Surely an official knows the rules. Doesn't he??

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tonieke

and I am almost 100% sure..YOU..just like ME..hardly know what you are talking about when it goes about this so called effect...and the physics it's based on...

---

And I could hardly care about you not knowing squat about physics! :laugh:

As for me being in the same position with you in respect to physics! :rotflmao:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ioan

Actually MS and PDLR had a contact that sent MS over the 2nd part of the chicane.

Care to show me where was there contact between LH and KR?

Also, what should have MS done, if it would have been an unfair move? Give up his position to a driver who never earned it?

Stop comparing apples and bananas, try oranges or tomatoes, they look more alike.

---

yes, they had light contact. how was it an unfair move?

with more grip, pdlr outdrove MS and was completely up the inside of the ferrari and MS should have yielded. he didn't.

that he was forced off the road was his own fault and his own decision, just as hamilton's was, because the car on the inside of the corner, with track position, is in the right (but should allow the other car racing room). MS turned in when there was already a car on the apex, so MS didn't allow PDLR racing room and paid a price for it. simple.

if it's a leap year, ioan, do you take the blinkers off the the extra day?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AndyRAC

Which is another issue. Either he knows the rules and says 'YES' or 'NO'. If a F1A Race Director isn't sure, we are in trouble. I have seen reports were McLaren were supposed to have asked twice, probably to make sure. If you ask an official you would excpect them to know - and therefore trust what they say. Seems as if the F1A don't know what their right and left hands are doing. A shambles all round.
Can you imagine a cricket umpire when an appeal is lodged saying 'Probably' - either a batsmen is 'In' or 'Out'. Maybe a slightly OTT comparison, but just highlights how ridiculous the whole issue is. Surely an official knows the rules. Doesn't he??

---

Charlie isn't the umpire, it's the stewards who are. It's a confusion many people make.

Charlie Whiting is the Race Director = he decides if it's safe to have a race, if ihe race should be delayed, if the SC should be sent on the track, if there is need for any kind of flags to be waved, if the race should be stopped and other technical problems about the race, but not the sporting aspects of it.

You aren't asking a mechanic his opinion about a legal case either, are you?