What's your definition of "give the position back cleanly"?Quote:
Originally Posted by Daniel
Printable View
What's your definition of "give the position back cleanly"?Quote:
Originally Posted by Daniel
Braking at a mere 100 kph in a F1 car isn't dangerous.Quote:
Originally Posted by Tonieke
Of course I'm not saying Lewis shouldn't have cut the chicane. It was the only sensible option. It's Lewis' driving after the cut that is being debated here.Quote:
Originally Posted by wedge
Definitely not this.Quote:
Originally Posted by ArrowsFA1
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-5UnPeyzcHM
Incidentally, no penalty was handed out.
Didn't it used to be the case that going over a white line just outside the outside kerbing at Paddock Hill Bend too many times at Brands Hatch was deemed worthy of a penalty?Quote:
Originally Posted by wedge
it was geting wet and they where still on slicks..so to me it would have been a dangerous move...but again...each his own opinion !Quote:
Originally Posted by ioan
And if I remember rightly, he did it 2 or 3 times.Quote:
Originally Posted by theugsquirrel
For the people that think the FIA are fair to McLaren, can you tell me why Ferrari was not penalised for this and yet Lewis, who only crossed the chicane to avoid Kimi, backed off, gave about a clear cars length advantage to Kimi and then done him on braking, should be penalised.
If it were the other way around, how would you react?
Shifter has it right .
He said basically the same as I , way back in the early pages of this thread , but did a much better (or , at least longer winded) job of explaining it .
He should have left his passing for the hillside .
Forogt about this. There shouldn't have been a penalty, even though I can see why people are arguing for it.Quote:
Originally Posted by theugsquirrel
its all VERY simple.
LH got a good exit out of cutting the chicane so yes, let Kimi go. But had the perfect run to overtake again. If he followed him on circuit Kimi would have got the power down before LH and got away a bit. Basically LH cheated.
And the fact he said 'thats what im talking about' after the 'win' means he should be disqualified from monza!
So if PDLR has a go at you and touches your car in the process you will have to yield your position?Quote:
Originally Posted by theugsquirrel
Can you show me where did PDLR get the position ? he managed to get up to MS height, but was on the wrong line for the next turn, so he ran into the Ferrari.
Pedro might consider himself lucky he didn't get a penalty for that barging! :D
Quote:
Originally Posted by ArrowsFA1
Depends who is asking.Quote:
Originally Posted by ArrowsFA1
If it's Knock On then I don't think a McLaren can ever give position back cleanly and the driver should be shot because I'm biased like that :)
For anyone else who wants to listen I'd say it depends on the situation. If Lewis had braked and followed Kimi through the corner he would have been significantly further behind than he ended up after he cut the chicane. But of course the difficulty is in quantifying that sort of thing. but Lewis wasn't going to be getting the power down nearly as well as Kimi considering the entry he would have had to the corner.
Good one!Quote:
Originally Posted by BDunnell
The officials were saying they were going to come down hard on drivers crossing the white line. Nearly everyone was doing and the officials gave up!
Rather like the marker posts on the chicanes at Donington and Knockhill!Quote:
Originally Posted by wedge
But we digress...
Or cresting at Knockhill by Railway :laugh:Quote:
Originally Posted by BDunnell
Couple of years ago, the Marshalls were getting really pi$$ed with the Seats :D
No doubt about it, they were doing it on purpose. I could practically see them aiming at them as they were replaced.
Anyway, back to the disgraceful way that F1 is governed.
ok ok...But how can the stuwards justify there decision if it's only based on if's and when's ? when they say he took advantage ? what's it based on ?Quote:
Originally Posted by Daniel
and I still don't understand there's people on here saying he had a better momentum by cutting the chicane..when there's Kimi...coming from behind Lewis and passing him on the straight line ! But than I have been told I know nadah about motorsport ! *rolls eyes*
Yes he let Kimi through. There's no doubt about that. But IF he had gone through the corner on the line he was on he would not have got the same amount of drive out of the corner. Unless you want to argue with the laws of physics you must surely agree with that.Quote:
Originally Posted by Tonieke
Based on the data submitted by the teams.Quote:
Originally Posted by Tonieke
Or did you think that the stewards decided it by watching the same images that we saw?
So if Lewis had more momentum by cutting the chicane, what happened to that momentum when he slowed to let Kimi back through?Quote:
Originally Posted by Daniel
how can you be so sure about that when one could clearly see for a couple of laps already Lewis had a way better grip on a track that was getting wet...Closing the gap in no time !Quote:
Originally Posted by Daniel
so my question still stands..what exactly is the stewards decission based on when they say he took advantage ?
Momentum isn't the issue. Track position is. If Lewis had gone through the corner there is no way he would have been that close to Kimi. Lewis' car may have been hooked up in those conditions but it wasn't that hooked up.Quote:
Originally Posted by ArrowsFA1
Quote:
Originally Posted by ioan
well ya that's what I think...And I saw Kimi accelerating better out of the chicane than Lewis did....Passing him on the straight...they not even had to check data for that..if they already did !
Really? I thought Hamilton received a penalty because he "cut the chicane and gained an advantage" (link). Why would that help? Because of the shortcut and better momentum.Quote:
Originally Posted by Daniel
Had he not slowed and given back the position then he would have gained an advantage.
:up:Quote:
Originally Posted by Daniel
Very good point there!!
Yet again you seem to be on a completely different page.....Quote:
Originally Posted by Tonieke
You shouldn't be comaring Lewis with Kimi because they drove a different line and Lewis cut the corner. You should compare where Lewis ended up compared to where Lewis should have been had he braked and taken the bad line through the corner rather than what he did which gave im good momentum and therefore good track position.
who knows what would have happend if and when...Maybe Lewis would even came out better getting back behind Kimi instead of cutting the corner...seeing his car had a way better grip than Kimi's on a wetter track..But we will never know...Quote:
Originally Posted by Daniel
And I keep repeating myself..what's the decission of the stewards based on ? just these what and if's ?
Thing is slightly better grip doesn't compensate for being on the totally wrong line.Quote:
Originally Posted by Tonieke
Perhaps Lewis would have done that but there is no evidence to say so.
Thing is he didn't do it and he went of the track and when you go off the track you should be disadvantaged and not gain from it as Lewis did.
2009 Formula One Sporting Regulations, section 16.3, 16.4:Quote:
Originally Posted by AndyRAC
"16.3 The stewards may impose any one of three penalties on any driver involved in an Incident:
a) A drive-through penalty. The driver must enter the pit lane and re-join the race without stopping ;
b) A ten second time penalty. The driver must enter the pit lane, stop at his pit for at least ten seconds and then re-join the race.
c) a drop of ten grid positions at the driver’s next Event.
However, should either of the penalties under a) and b) above be imposed during the last five laps, or after the end of a race, Article 16.4b) below will not apply and 25 seconds will be added to the elapsed race time of the driver concerned.
16.4 Should the stewards decide to impose either of the penalties under Article 16.3a) or b), the following procedure will be followed:
a) The stewards will give written notification of the penalty which has been imposed to the competitor concerned and will ensure that this information is also displayed on the timing monitors.
b) From the time the stewards’ decision is notified on the timing monitors the relevant driver may cover no more than three complete laps before entering the pit lane and, in the case of a penalty under Article 16.3b), proceeding to his garage where he shall remain for the period of the time penalty. ..."
From what Schmenke has shown the penalty applied is perfectly correct and suitable. I'm sure the stewards will show that Lewis gained and then there can be no more aguing :)
Big news. I've just watched the final few laps......Nick Heidfeld should win the Belgian GP. As lewis and Massa go on to the final lap, Massa obviously cuts the chicane (You can tell this from the line he takes in the background out of the final chicane!!) This means he got an advantage by cutting the chicane instead of hitting the wall even if it was a mistake. I mean if he had hit the wall or spun he could have been out so thats gaining an advantage is it not???
Quote:
Originally Posted by Daniel
yep also look forward to see what evidence they come up with that justifies this penalty ! ;-)
Do not forget that the stewards have tv feeds from paytv (race cams)and a lot of other in car telemetry
kimi has a camera facing backwards remember the shots of the loose muffler.
ya also something I still wonder about why they not called him in...to have it removed from the car...Quote:
Originally Posted by thunderbolt
Well, what I basically was trying to get at was that I have never seen a driver follow another closely through a corner get any kind of 'run' on the driver they want to overtake (save for long straights like on Monza). When I drive simulators or listen to the pro's talk, they talk about dropping back to create a distance gap, and through the use of good timing go through a corner faster than the driver in front and use the speed advantage to overtake. There can be no speed advantage when a driver is following closely, because any speed advantage would result in contact between the two cars (nee Raikkonen rear-ending Lewis in La Source). When a driver cuts the corner for whatever reason, the 'speed/distance' effect is negated.Quote:
Originally Posted by cosmicpanda
I'm disgusted by this decision. Sadly I wasn't all that suprised either... I wasn't suprised to see it taken to the stewards and I wasn't suprised that yet again they made a clearly wrong decision.
It's getting boring and frustrating and they'll lose both fans and sponsors if they're not careful. The FIA are making a joke out of the whole system and I'm sorry that Hamilton's been caught up in this yet again. He WAS at fault but he conceded as is in keeping with the rules.
I'm disgusted.
hamilton makes a foolish attempt to overtake when it was clear there wasn't enough room... cuts the chicane (according to some a move that disadvantages him :laugh: .. that's why he got in front of kimi! :laugh :) then slows down a bit, goes side by side with kimi... pretends to give the place back, kimi falls for it and goes to the left while "mister fair play" overtakes him again on the right... oh no no no... he didn't gain any advantage from cutting the chicane.. had he stayed behind Kimi he would have been able to drive around Kimi in circles anyway...
he tried to deceive everybody and got caught.
Thats how the rules are played to advantages though. Everyone does it
OK, lets start with the definition of “an incident”.Quote:
Originally Posted by schmenke
Was a driver forced off track? Y/NQuote:
16) INCIDENTS
16.1 "Incident" means any occurrence or series of occurrences involving one or more drivers, or any action by any driver, which is reported to the stewards by the race director (or noted by the stewards and referred to the race director for investigation) which :
- necessitated the suspension of a race under Article 41 ;
- constituted a breach of these Sporting Regulations or the Code ;
- caused a false start by one or more cars ;
- caused a collision ;
- forced a driver off the track ;
- illegitimately prevented a legitimate overtaking manoeuvre by a driver ;
- illegitimately impeded another driver during overtaking.
Unless it was completely clear that a driver was in breach of any of the above, any incidents involving more than one car will normally be investigated after the race.
Was a driver prevented from a legitimate overtaking maneuver Y/N
Was a driver impeded during overtaking Y/N
Were 2 drivers involved Y/N
I would say that turning into a driver on the inside of a corner when you know he is there thereby forcing him to either crash or go off track is strictly prohibited.Quote:
c) Curves, as well as the approach and exit zones thereof, may be
negotiated by the drivers in any way they wish, within the limits
of the track. Overtaking, according to the circumstances, may be
done either on the right or on the left.
However, manoeuvres liable to hinder other drivers such as
premature changes of direction, more than one change of
direction, deliberate crowding of cars towards the inside or the
outside of the curve or any other abnormal change of direction,
are strictly prohibited and shall be penalised, according to the
importance and repetition of the offences, by penalties ranging
from a fi ne to the exclusion from the race. The repetition of
dangerous driving, even involuntary, may result in the exclusion
from the race.
As such, Lewis shouldn’t have had to give the place up BUT HE DID and consequently, relinquished his advantage and momentum to the Ferrari.
He then proceeded to do what he had been threatening and passed him at the next corner by outbreaking Kimi.
So, I ask again. When it’s all stacking up against Kimi, what advantage did Lewis gain.
Momentum?
Last time I checked, slowing down to give the momentum to the car behind was to give up your speed advantage. Unless the rules of physics are re-written by the FIA, then a car needs to be going faster to overtake and therefore have greater momentum.
Or are they pi$$ed because Lewis was driving better in the conditions and outbroke Kimi.
How can outbreaking someone constitute having a speed advantage. Surely we are penalizing him because he was better on the brakes.
Kimi had no answer for Lewis. He was catching him hand over fist and would have nailed him at the chicane if Kimi hadn’t of forced him off track.
He let him past and then outbraked him.
Perhaps the FIA think he just shouldn’t overtake Kimi at all?
What a load of rubbish. Lewis wasn't forced off the road. he went for a gap where that closed up. Simple as that. If Lewis was forced off the track I'm sure he would have said so but he didn't.......Quote:
Originally Posted by Knock-on
Almost every race has an incident where one car cuts a chicane, but nothing comes of it because the driver concedes the position gained, as Lewis did. How do we know the track position a driver would have been in if they had not cut the corner? We don't. But are you saying that every time a driver cuts a chicane then concedes their gained position they haven't gained a little bit of time?Quote:
Originally Posted by Daniel
How about at the first few laps of the race when drivers were using the run-off at La Source. They were gaining an advantage by not slowing sufficiently for the hairpin. Yet no one was punished for this. How is this consistent? Even if Lewis gained 0.5 of a second by cutting the chicane, Kimi and Massa would have gained more than this by using the run-off on the opening laps.
The only reason it would seem that Lewis has been punished this time is because he re-passed Kimi at La source. But was this due to what Lewis did at the chicane or because the McLaren is better on the hard tyre, better in the wet and because Lewis is good on the brakes in the wet?
I just think that this is incredibly embarrassing for the sport. Even if the stewards have followed the rules to the word (in which case they chose to ignore half the incidents in the race) the punishment does not fit the crime. How on earth is a 25 second fair? Was 25 seconds gained? Of course not. :down: