13th September 2021, 21:39 #1
- Join Date
- Aug 2005
- Liked 201 Times in 138 Posts
The 'rules' of overtaking in light of Monza
In light of the Stewards decision after the Hamilton/Verstappen crash in Monza it might be worth discussing what general rules, both written and unwritten might be applied... where... and why... but if we all agreed to go by a general set of rules we would probably argue less and get on a bit better?
I know its a very grey area and incidents are often seen only through the eyes of our preferred drivers. I dont think any of us are immune to that, myself included.
The official FIA guidelines are essentially far too vague and open to individual Stewards interpretation which means there is often no consistancy with decisions which results in the constant bickering here.
Let's at least try and have a calm and respectful discussion about this and that way we can all try and see these things from others perspectives.
The guide that makes a lot of sense to me and what I've always gone by is collated and generalised from previous Stewards rulings but remains unofficial and so are generally unwritten rules or precedents.
If we go to Section 5..
5. 'Disputes over the apex'
"Consider the textbook method for overtaking in a corner: the attacker takes an inside line, gets alongside the defender in the braking zone, and beats the defender to the apex. If the attacker is ahead at the apex, there is no dispute over ownership of the racing line. The defender must yield. But what if the attacker is only partially alongside? Who owns the apex then?
Different racing series have their own criteria for how far alongside an attacker must be to have a claim to the apex. In Formula 1, the norms have been explored and refined over the years as a result of drivers like Ayrton Senna and Michael Schumacher pushing the boundaries and exploiting any gray areas. Today, it is generally accepted that the attacker must be at least halfway alongside the defender when they reach the apex to have a reasonable claim to this piece of track. Moreover, the attacker should not have achieved this position by carrying too much speed to make the corner — this method is called dive-bombing."
If Max is at least halfway alongside Lewis then surely Lewis has to leave the space?
I fully accept that Max did not earlier in the race and so should probably have received a warning for that regardless of the fact that there was no collision (because Lewis yielded)
If Max is not entitled to the space despite clearly being alongside, then why not?The emergence of the new 'Rainmaster' - Mad Max at Interlagos 2016!
13th September 2021, 21:45 #2
- Join Date
- Jun 2021
- Liked 13 Times in 4 Posts
I honestly think FIA/F1 decide things based on money.
No, wait. But not like that.... I mean.... they decide things based on "whatever generates more headlines during the week". So, 'whatever' to the rulebook, just head to the drama cuz drama means CLICKS and Clicks means money... Ah, you got the point =P
13th September 2021, 22:06 #3
- Join Date
- Aug 2005
- Liked 201 Times in 138 Posts
Yeah, I see it pretty much that way too, sadly it is really a circus reality TV show, intentionally vague to allow for non consistent verdicts to keep discussions/ debate raging and the title/s running as close to the wire as possible simply as revenue generators. I guess the saying, there is no such thing as bad publicity, is very true in that regard.
My aim with this thread is to try and have a calmer more considered discussion, more agreements on precedents for the future and for the FIA rulings to be scoffed at rather than each incident becoming a personal slagging match between each other here.
14th September 2021, 00:03 #4
The problem started a long time ago when the FIA started accepting the lead car squeezing the over-taking car at the second apex of a chicane is a norm.
As stated in the OP, most series and racing drivers do not agree with this. However, F1 has set strange rulings and precedents and are trying to be consistent with their previous poor decisions.
Personally, I feel the ruling ought to be that if you are the lead car, and you squeeze another car over-taking alongside into a sausage kerb then you are doing something wrong.
However, turn two at Monza is very tight and they also should remove the kerbs that send cars into the air and loosen track limits and let cars over-take each-other illegally and give positions back in order to prevent crashes or put gravel at parts of a track if it is too high speed and dangerous and too many cars are bouncing back off track boundaries.
14th September 2021, 02:49 #5
- Join Date
- Aug 2001
- Liked 358 Times in 265 Posts
Personally I think F1 has moved towards what they consider "ownership" of the racing line, but have been extremely vague as to when it happens. IMHO it should never happen. You can use the preferred racing line when it isn't occupied by another car, or at least substantial parts of that car. Once someone else is alongside, it should be the responsibility of both drivers to negotiate the corner on their compromised lines, with the driver closer to the preferred line having "right of way" as it may be, to expect the other driver to push to track limits.
Why? Because once they are side by side to any extent, until a pass is complete with no overlap, both drivers are already on compromised racing lines, and neither is on the preferred line. And depending on corner contour and speed, when we see side by side racing it often ends with one or the other having the faster exit that sets them up for the next corner or straight. If they are going to enforce it the way they are now, they might as well paint a line on the preferred apex and say whatever car touches that line first can move however they want after that point.
With Monza as the example, Max pushed Lewis off at turn 4. But Lewis steered off and "blinked" so no contact was made, and no penalty was given. Had Lewis driven to track limits and stayed, any contact would be on Max, even though he was on the inside. Because both of them were on compromised lines.
The same applies to T1/T2. On entry Max was on the far left, the preferred entry. But he couldn't turn in and fully commit, as the Merc was there. On the flip side, Lewis was out of position on turn in, thus had to take a tighter radius turn. But when he opened up, there was no room on the inside. If you go back to race start, Lewis and Lando go through that very section of corner side by side with no issues. Lewis on the outside gets the faster exit and moves ahead.
There are really only one or two corners in F1 that can't be taken side by side with relative ease. It's just that they have promoted a mentality of racing line/apex/nose ahead/whatever to say that in some vague circumstances one of the drivers completely owns the racing line and can push someone off without any consequences. In reality it has turned into an unknown, and usually since one driver blinks and backs off, they don't have to make the calls often. But when they do, they still often don't seem to have any uniform guidelines.
Max vs Leclerc Austria 2019... Max just keeps driving as if the Ferrari isn't there, and it's ok? It should never be ok to force another car off track when both can easily negotiate a corner. If the off line car is there, it should always be given a car width and be expected to be driving it to the track limits. The way the current rules are, they aren't quite sure when ownership happens other than a case by case basis, and what they are encouraging is a high speed wheel to wheel game of chicken.... see who backs out first.
They should watch Supercross or tight circuit Motocross where lines change at the drop of a hat. Ownership of any line is temporary, and takes place only when you are there and can make the line stick. Since it's usually the following rider that goes down when back to front wheel contact happens, it doesn't happen all that often at speed.
- Likes: lmmjvss (14th September 2021)
14th September 2021, 05:13 #6
- Join Date
- Jun 2020
- Liked 62 Times in 35 Posts
- Driver when in P1: "oh, you are trying to pass me on the inside? Well... Im just gonna do the racing line so you should brake and stop trying to pass me"
- Same driver when in P2: "Well, Im trying to pass you on the inside. You cant just keep the racing line cuz Im on the inside!"
Same BS everytime. Racing drivers are becoming to sissy IMO (talking from the confort of my couch, of course haha) Put them in a Pro4 Truck (amsoil championship off road) or in an Outlaw's Sprintcar and they would start to cry in a heart beat!
14th September 2021, 05:27 #7
I'm not sure if they are becoming sissy as Senna and Schumi used to do things that were illegal and immoral to be number one. That said, there is a classlessness that I dislike. Senna sometimes did it because poor decisions went against him in the past.
But I do feel there is a blatant narcissism in the two at the front right now. For example, the likes of Webber and Alonso would give each other room. Perhaps even Button as well. Point being, there is a gentleman element that is missing if you do not leave each-other space.
FIA aren't penalising that element enough.
14th September 2021, 09:31 #8
- Join Date
- Aug 2011
- Liked 781 Times in 431 Posts
The rules could be made simple by having the requirement to always leave a car width space when someone is next to you. No squeezing whatsoever.
That would also solve a lot of the overtaking issues and reduce dangerous moments.
Yesterday, 19:09 #9
I'd agree with that ruling. I don't think one can ignore the fact that Hamilton pushed Verstappen into the sausage kerb and therefore deserved a warning. If Max makes the corner and pushes Hamilton off track then it ought to be the same ruling. Unless one admits the stewards got the Leclerc-Hamilton Monza punishment wrong, which they did. Then one just has to say the FIA have been inconsistent in all of their decisions regarding what is fair racing and what is the basic punishment for any squeezing beyond a warning.