[Official] Brazilian Grand Prix 2021: Grand Prix Weekend Thread - Round 19 of 22

[2 litre Touring Car Star]

Yep.

The problem with the penalty Hamilton got (However harsh it supposedly was) is that it doesn't select on the points standings. That is a weakness of the procedure and system.

Had Hamilton finished around 8th for instance, the Monza clash doesn't occur.

[Greem]

The way penalties are defined does not depend on the outcome of an incident, nor the relative positions of the drivers involved.

If Mazepin is found to have caused a collision with Latifi, the same penalty would be levied as with Hamilton and Verstappen.

A sliding scale based on the driver's points tally would be as ridiculously biased as one which penalises them based on the colour of their car (although that's also been an accusation in the past, obviously!). There's a single set of rules which applies equally to all entrants, and that is as it should be.

Honestly, 2LTC, I find it really hard to understand why you bother with F1 because it seems you genuinely don't like it at all. I'd love to know what you *do* like about it!

[ascarracinguk]

Originally Posted by 2 litre Touring Car Star

Yep.

The problem with the penalty Hamilton got (However harsh it supposedly was) is that it doesn't select on the points standings. That is a weakness of the procedure and system.

Had Hamilton finished around 8th for instance, the Monza clash doesn't occur.

Again, you’re confusing reality with your own opinion.

The penalty points system isn’t there to level up any championship points lost, it’s there to deter drivers from bad driving.

You cannot have a sliding scale depending on the outcome of an incident, just the incident itself….we’ve been over this many times before, but you seem to have the inability to listen.

[ascarracinguk]

Originally Posted by 2 litre Touring Car Star

You can focus on some words in an attempt to diminish me, but I'm saying it is to your weakness that you won't consider the "sliding doors" scenario I gave.

Moments like Monza and Interlagos (Monza particularly) are connected to Silverstone.

The season's not over yet. Don't be surprised if there's more to come from Verstappen, and that he gets away with it. Don't be surprised if a scenario occurs where Hamilton is innocent and still gets pinged.

Idk about Qatar and Suadi Arabia. But there are a few corners in Abu Dhabi where an "innocent mistake" can happen. I won't be shocked if something occurs.


What are you going to ping him on?

I’m not trying to diminish you, you’re doing that to yourself old chap.

Once you start talking alternate realities and fantasy, to try and justify why you think hamilton should have had a harsher penalty for an incident that happened months ago, completely blanking out anything that happened prior to Silverstone to try and justify your view, your view is already diminished.


Now…if you want to talk hypotheticals….let’s say your sliding scale system is reality.

Hamilton and max go into the final race with max 1 point ahead….there is contact made, Max spins…all he has to do is sit there in the run off, not move and Hamilton gets a massive penalty because Max can easily play the system….

Max had the ability to move, continue, but now he’s increased Hamiltons penalty by playing the system. That’s why your idea won’t work. You have to punish the contact and not the outcome, there are too many variables with physics and action of the other driver to do the latter.

Your system falls apart straight away. The same used to happen in NASCAR….drivers would spin to bring out a yellow and get their lap back intentionally….they played the system

[ascarracinguk]

Originally Posted by Greem

I'd love to know what you *do* like about it!

Max Verstappens Luscious Lips

[crmalcolm]

Originally Posted by 2 litre Touring Car Star

The problem with the penalty Hamilton got (However harsh it supposedly was) is that it doesn't select on the points standings. That is a weakness of the procedure and system.

The problem with that approach:

You are effectively saying that both the points tally of the driver and the other driver in any incident should be considered when deciding a penalty.

So - if I follow your argument:
If an identical incident occurred where Russell was at fault for an accident involving Mazepin. Both drivers had zero points at the time, so Russell gets a .01 second penalty? But - you would then argue that the Stewards should also have known that Russell would go on to get 16 points (and counting) and be in a top level car next season. So Mazpein thinks he can get away with such actions because the penalty at Silverstone was minimal. And the Stewards caused it all by not penalising Russell hard enough.

[ascarracinguk]

Originally Posted by crmalcolm

The problem with that approach:

You are effectively saying that both the points tally of the driver and the other driver in any incident should be considered when deciding a penalty.

So - if I follow your argument:
If an identical incident occurred where Russell was at fault for an accident involving Mazepin. Both drivers had zero points at the time, so Russell gets a .01 second penalty? But - you would then argue that the Stewards should also have known that Russell would go on to get 16 points (and counting) and be in a top level car next season. So Mazpein thinks he can get away with such actions because the penalty at Silverstone was minimal. And the Stewards caused it all by not penalising Russell hard enough.

Be careful now…..

…you haven’t considered a mid race safety car either….new rule 107.2.56, because Russell managed to catch up the 0.1 second gap under safety car, it’s unfair so he must retrospectively serve a 0.2 second stop go penalty.

Again, the whole system falls flat on its face.

Say for instance, Lewis hits max, max loses 20 seconds….to be fair, Lewis gets a 20 second penalty, but on the same lap the safety car comes out, max now gains all that time back and sits behind Lewis on the road. to be fair, does he now have to drop back so when Lewis takes his penalty, the 20 second gap is maintained, or does Lewis’s penalty now get reduced to a 0.5 second penalty to take this into account?

This is the problem with trying to be ‘fair’ and apply penalties on the outcome, not the contact.

[2 litre Touring Car Star]

Originally Posted by ascarracinguk

Again, you’re confusing reality with your own opinion.

The penalty points system isn’t there to level up any championship points lost, it’s there to deter drivers from bad driving.

You cannot have a sliding scale depending on the outcome of an incident, just the incident itself….we’ve been over this many times before, but you seem to have the inability to listen.

Except it hasn't deterred Verstappen from forcing his car on Hamilton at Monza when he shouldn't have, and supposedly corralling him off track at Interlagos.

I'll say again. Unless he gets a clean run to the championship, don't be surprised if you see more of it from Verstappen, and gets away with it.

Originally Posted by ascarracinguk

I’m not trying to diminish you, you’re doing that to yourself old chap.

Once you start talking alternate realities and fantasy, to try and justify why you think hamilton should have had a harsher penalty for an incident that happened months ago, completely blanking out anything that happened prior to Silverstone to try and justify your view, your view is already diminished.


Now…if you want to talk hypotheticals….let’s say your sliding scale system is reality.

Hamilton and max go into the final race with max 1 point ahead….there is contact made, Max spins…all he has to do is sit there in the run off, not move and Hamilton gets a massive penalty because Max can easily play the system….

Max had the ability to move, continue, but now he’s increased Hamiltons penalty by playing the system. That’s why your idea won’t work. You have to punish the contact and not the outcome, there are too many variables with physics and action of the other driver to do the latter.

Your system falls apart straight away. The same used to happen in NASCAR….drivers would spin to bring out a yellow and get their lap back intentionally….they played the system

Phwoar! You're inventing stuff. My posts about this have stuck within what's occurred.

How does the championship get down to 1pt? There's two races between now and then.

Originally Posted by ascarracinguk

Max Verstappens Luscious Lips

And I get critical pm from Adam and Pete?

Gee whiz. Maybe I should post this way more often?

[2 litre Touring Car Star]

Originally Posted by crmalcolm

The problem with that approach:

You are effectively saying that both the points tally of the driver and the other driver in any incident should be considered when deciding a penalty.

I would say it's time to bring something like that in. The races are all connected to the championship, and drivers adjust their driving to championship situations.

Originally Posted by crmalcolm

So - if I follow your argument:
If an identical incident occurred where Russell was at fault for an accident involving Mazepin. Both drivers had zero points at the time, so Russell gets a .01 second penalty? But - you would then argue that the Stewards should also have known that Russell would go on to get 16 points (and counting) and be in a top level car next season. So Mazpein thinks he can get away with such actions because the penalty at Silverstone was minimal. And the Stewards caused it all by not penalising Russell hard enough.

This is made up. I would not know the context of such an incident. It's best to pick something that happened.

[crmalcolm]

Originally Posted by 2 litre Touring Car Star

This is made up. I would not know the context of such an incident. It's best to pick something that happened.

Yes, it is a hypothetical incident, demonstrating the flaw in your argument.

At the time of the Silverstone incident, everything that followed was hypothetical. You are arguing that penalties should be issued based on hypothetical future events.

[crmalcolm]

Originally Posted by 2 litre Touring Car Star

How does the championship get down to 1pt? There's two races between now and then.

Hamilton gets third, Verstappen 9th today. Both drivers DNF next race.....

[ascarracinguk]

Originally Posted by crmalcolm

Hamilton gets third, Verstappen 9th today. Both drivers DNF next race.....

Best leave 2LTC to it…he clearly can’t read so what makes you think he can do maths?

[VIVA GT]

Note to self: "The Brazilian GP was held a week ago. Stop wasting you time coming onto this thread expecting to read some interesting information that has surfaced about that event..."

[Aysedasi]

Originally Posted by 2 litre Touring Car Star

Except it hasn't deterred Verstappen from forcing his car on Hamilton at Monza when he shouldn't have, and supposedly corralling him off track at Interlagos.

That was a 'supposedly'? Seriously?

Originally Posted by 2 litre Touring Car Star

I would say it's time to bring something like that in. The races are all connected to the championship, and drivers adjust their driving to championship situations.

What size can would you like your worms in sir....?

[2 litre Touring Car Star]

Alright, I'll give it another go.

Originally Posted by crmalcolm

Yes, it is a hypothetical incident, demonstrating the flaw in your argument.

At the time of the Silverstone incident, everything that followed was hypothetical. You are arguing that penalties should be issued based on hypothetical future events.

ascarracinguk is saying the actions of Verstappen at Moza and Brazil are not linked to Silverstone. I'm saying that it is.

ascarracinguk is saying that Hamilton's penalty at Silverstone is sufficient because Hamilton hasn't committed an error or anything cynical since. I'm saying that Hamilton's penalty at Silverstone is insufficient because it hasn't prevented Verstappen from doing anything cynical, like avoiding the clash at Monza and corralling at Brazil.

The penalty is not just to deter Hamilton, it's to deter everyone, and particularly Verstappen.

ascarracinguk doesn't appear to think that the possibility of more controversial moments are to come. I'm saying that it is possible.

You just brought up a scenario that didn;t happen, and with no context.

[Greem]

ignore, wrong thread

[ascarracinguk]

Originally Posted by Greem

ignore, wrong thread

Or just ignore full stop. It’s probably best

[ascarracinguk]

Originally Posted by 2 litre Touring Car Star

Alright, I'll give it another go.


ascarracinguk is saying the actions of Verstappen at Moza and Brazil are not linked to Silverstone. I'm saying that it is.

ascarracinguk is saying that Hamilton's penalty at Silverstone is sufficient because Hamilton hasn't committed an error or anything cynical since. I'm saying that Hamilton's penalty at Silverstone is insufficient because it hasn't prevented Verstappen from doing anything cynical, like avoiding the clash at Monza and corralling at Brazil.

The penalty is not just to deter Hamilton, it's to deter everyone, and particularly Verstappen.

ascarracinguk doesn't appear to think that the possibility of more controversial moments are to come. I'm saying that it is possible.

You just brought up a scenario that didn;t happen, and with no context.

Say what!

So now Hamilton’s penalty must be harsher to stop Max from doing something

You’ve officially lost the plot only max is in control of what max does.

The penalty is sufficient and has deterred Hamilton from doing anything already…,if max does something, that’s his fault.

In that case. Surely Max should have been disqualified from the championship today, you know, to deter Lewis from not slowing down under yellow flags…

[crmalcolm]

Originally Posted by 2 litre Touring Car Star

ascarracinguk is saying the actions of Verstappen at Moza and Brazil are not linked to Silverstone. I'm saying that it is.

They might be - but that is with hindsight. Something the stewards could not have had at the time they made the Silverstone decision.

So when they made the decision, they could not have known (for certain) what would follow. The same with any hypothetical scenario.

[ascarracinguk]

Originally Posted by crmalcolm

They might be - but that is with hindsight. Something the stewards could not have had at the time they made the Silverstone decision.

So when they made the decision, they could not have known (for certain) what would follow. The same with any hypothetical scenario.

Yeh I mean, I’m sure 2LTC would love to have 6 penalty points applied to his licence ‘just in case’ he speeds in the future.

I am starting to worry about his mental state. Fantasy and reality do seem to becoming merged

[crmalcolm]

So here's (another reason) why I am struggling to follow your argument.

You say that the penalties issued should be a deterrent to all drivers:

Originally Posted by 2 litre Touring Car Star

I'm saying that Hamilton's penalty at Silverstone is insufficient because it hasn't prevented Verstappen from doing anything cynical, like avoiding the clash at Monza and corralling at Brazil. The penalty is not just to deter Hamilton, it's to deter everyone

But you also say that the penalty should consider the future consequences:

Originally Posted by 2 litre Touring Car Star

The problem with the penalty Hamilton got (However harsh it supposedly was) is that it doesn't select on the points standings.

So if I am Latifi for example, I'm going to look at a penalty that considers the points standings and think that I can get away with more because I have less points.

Originally Posted by 2 litre Touring Car Star

Had Hamilton finished around 8th for instance, the Monza clash doesn't occur.

And this is really at the heart of it - it is not the severity of the penalty, but how well Hamilton drove to overcome it. The subsequent 'determination' with which Max has fought for the title has resulted from how close the contest is, not how harsh a penalty was 4 months ago....

[E.B]

Originally Posted by crmalcolm

For the same incident? The same penalty.

That sounds like consistency..... is that even allowed?

[Tourer]

Originally Posted by VIVA GT

Note to self: "The Brazilian GP was held a week ago. Stop wasting you time coming onto this thread expecting to read some interesting information that has surfaced about that event..."

Doing a note to myself as well - handbags and feather boas flying everywhere in this thread now - best avoided.

[2 litre Touring Car Star]

Originally Posted by ascarracinguk

Say what!

So now Hamilton’s penalty must be harsher to stop Max from doing something

You’ve officially lost the plot only max is in control of what max does.

The penalty is sufficient and has deterred Hamilton from doing anything already…,if max does something, that’s his fault.

In that case. Surely Max should have been disqualified from the championship today, you know, to deter Lewis from not slowing down under yellow flags…

Usually, on a forum you tend to trust that readers may get the point of a comment, or get the inference, even if they disagree. But not with ol' mate ascarracinguk, You have to be so literal and specific and denote everything as if you're a lawyer for a bank drawing up their terms and conditions.

"Verstappen" means -

1) Max Verstappen
2) Any driver in reasonable contention to win the championship
3) Any driver in reasonable contention to win a race.
4) Any driver in close proximity on the track to drivers stated in 2&3, but don't fulfil the criteria of 2&3, and can negatively impact the race result of drivers that do fulfil the criteria of 2&3.

Since I'm here, and if you want to bring up Imola. Then Verstappen gets away with any punishment since his actions are almost exact to Hamilton's on Rosberg at Canada in 2016.

[2 litre Touring Car Star]

Originally Posted by crmalcolm

They might be - but that is with hindsight. Something the stewards could not have had at the time they made the Silverstone decision.

So when they made the decision, they could not have known (for certain) what would follow. The same with any hypothetical scenario.

No, it's not with hindsight. If nothing else, there's the last 32 years of F1 history to recognise the possibility of Verstappen/RB giving Hamilton his "comeuppance".

Originally Posted by crmalcolm

So here's (another reason) why I am struggling to follow your argument.

You say that the penalties issued should be a deterrent to all drivers:

Yes

Originally Posted by crmalcolm

But you also say that the penalty should consider the future consequences:

Yes, and?

Originally Posted by crmalcolm

So if I am Latifi for example, I'm going to look at a penalty that considers the points standings and think that I can get away with more because I have less points.

You're going to have to clarify your point?

Originally Posted by crmalcolm

And this is really at the heart of it - it is not the severity of the penalty, but how well Hamilton drove to overcome it. The subsequent 'determination' with which Max has fought for the title has resulted from how close the contest is, not how harsh a penalty was 4 months ago....

Tell that to Verstappen and RB. They were stung out of the race by Hamilton with no opportunity for damage limitation. That is unsatisfactory.

What are you going to do for them? Say "Too bad, so sad. You'll get 'em next time"?

In other forms of racing (cycling/running) victims of clashes receive benefits