[Official] Austrian Grand Prix 2016: Grand Prix Weekend Thread

[bella]

i like rosberg. he's a good guy, he's smart, he gets rave reviews from those who work with him and he's damn quick as well. but he doesn't half make some dubious decisions on track.

it's not a lack of wheel to wheel experience, his career mirrors hamiltons. it's not a lack of a racing brain, he's good at thinking on his feet. imo it's because his emotional, racer reflexes clash with his intellectual ones (think schumacher and senna's flawed logic, as suggested earlier in the thread) and he ends up doing something daft.

i think f1 drivers are unfortunate because they almost always get grabbed for tv interviews during the paranoia phase post-collision. they see so little from the car that they only have their own memory and any previously held opinions and theories to go by. you get some properly brilliant conspiracy theories from the drivers themselves during that phase, then they see footage or hear witnesses and evolve their viewpoints

with that in mind, i'm inclined to expect toto wolff to have to have a long chat with nico, a bit of a chat with lewis, then bang their heads together a bit and establish some basic rules of racing. not team orders per se, but behaviours.

it's worth remembering that in the past few years, both drivers would have been provided with a lot more information about the other, particularly any issues that they themselves might have. they're now racing in the dark and it's clearly taking a bit of time for everyone to get used to. if nico was only vaguely aware of his car being flaky in the past few corners with regards to braking and handling, lewis following close behind (so relatively limited to his passing options) would have only had visual clues to go by.

[TrapezeArtist]

The choice of tyres for the final stint was dictated by availability. The timing of the last stop is a different matter. I think it's standard practice to give the leading driver the priority on choosing the moment to stop. But presumably if the leading driver (or his race engineer) doesn't exercise that right, the following driver's race engineer can call his man in (?). At least that would seem to be logical to me.

My only caveat on the above is that Mercedes seem to have a bit of an obsession with putting both drivers on the same strategy rather than just giving them equal rights to choose their strategy. Perhaps they've lightened up on this point.

[bobec]

Originally Posted by maximus

Er, his "mistake" at Mirabeau? I'm still not sure he intended to do it, but after yesterday he is throwing a few of his actions in to question. What I'm trying to say is that I think there was some intent to Nico's defense in to that corner yesterday

I really doubt it. He did the same mistake in 2015, which cost him his chance to win pole.

There probably was intent in Rosberg's defense yesterday, and it did look a little weird. But look how Hamilton deals with other drivers doing the same (both corners in the video look a lot like Turn 2):

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=11xnHP446zw


I would say both had intent. But I'm yet to understand the stewards' decision. Unlike the decision from Spain, there is no reference to a specific article from the regulations, and I don't think I have ever heard of "racing room". Neither is it in the regulations.

[bobec]

Originally Posted by Alan52

Senna hit that wall.He was the best qualifying driver in F1 history but his ego could never cope with being beaten in an equal or inferior car.He took out competitors as though it was his right.

People keep saying how Senna was taking out opponents, but he never did so when the situation was not at least 50/50.

[bobec]

Originally Posted by 2GRX7

Wow! Really need a bottle of HAT-OR-ADE for this thread! Rosberg was clearly WRONG! Everyone's comparing Hamilton's cutting off of Rosberg in other races but guess what? He was always ahead on the RACING LINE!

He was ahead by a front wing's length. That's not enough to claim advantage. There are rules that describe that. The reason there was no investigation is that Rosberg always went off track to avoid a collision.

[bobec]

Originally Posted by bjohnsonsmith

Here's the '89 version: https://youtu.be/uDAGmI6SH3k

Here's the '90 version: all be it a tad long winded: https://youtu.be/Wopi_kqW8Mk

1989: Prost took a line that would have ended up on the grass. Clearly he wanted to take Senna out of the race.

1990: Murray Walker says it: "Senna is trying to go through the inside". That's far from trying to push someone off the track. Sure, he caused a collision. But Prost could have avoided it too. I've said it many times - Senna did exactly what he said he would do before the race, and that's not brake for the first corner.

[bobec]

Originally Posted by TrapezeArtist

Did you mean 1989? Without a shadow of doubt, Senna took Prost out in 1990. Eventually he even admitted to it himself.

In 1989 Senna was making a bold move up the inside and Prost turned in on him. We didn't get multiple camera angles then so it's not so easy to analyse. It was my impression that Prost saw Senna coming and just drove into him to stop him. Then immediately got out of the car because he thought he had done all he needed to do. Senna on the other hand was determined to get going again.

Looking at the youtube video again today, I'm a bit less sure. It looks like a classic "Get out of my way or we crash" from Senna and a less typical "OK. We crash" reply from Prost.

I said he didn't take him off the track, not that he didn't take him out. There was no insistence on crashing. He said he won't lose the first corner at any price, and that's what he did. He went for the corner and refused to brake. You can clearly see in the footage that's actually Prost who moves towards the inside, while Senna is going for the inside from the very beginning. And Balestre didn't dare do anything. Must have been priceless


I don't know what you mean with "get out of my way" about 1989. Senna outbraked him and was way more than 50% past into the corner. Prost was playing games with Senna (as he has admitted) and Senna caught him off guard. Prost basically set himself up while he was thinking that he was setting Senna up. And then he just steered right into Senna. NOT INTO THE CORNER. He would have gone on the grass with the line he took.

[bobec]

Originally Posted by JamesH

This seems to be incorrect.

LH was ahead on the corner, and gave NR a LOT of Space. A very fair move indeed. He only started his turn when he was running out of track himself. LH could have avoided the collision, by driving off the track in a straight line, but why the hell should he. It's a race, as as racing drivers they are supposed to actually try and go round the track, inside the white lines. As drivers, they have to assume the people they are driving against will actually be following the same rule book.

And NR hit him, by the simple expedient of not bothering to actually try and go round the corner.

This incident is NOTHING like the ones where, on the EXIT from a corner the inside car goes wide. This incident is EXACTLY like someone who is ****ed they are being overtaking, trying to take out the other car.

http://www.formula1.com/en/video/201...tria_2016.html

Incident happens at 4:15.

- Rosberg can not do anything with the line "Lewis has left for him" when he is on the inside. Lewis has pretty much taken the best line for himself. But I don't think he is ahead enough to dictate the line.

- Rosberg starts steering at 4:15 right before they crash. Once he crashes, then the cars are interlocked and he goes straight

- Lewis did not have to go off-track to avoid the collision, but he would have ceded the corner. Something, which he is inclined on doing only against other drivers.

[TrapezeArtist]

Originally Posted by bobec

http://www.formula1.com/en/video/201...tria_2016.html

Incident happens at 4:15.

- Rosberg can not do anything with the line "Lewis has left for him" when he is on the inside. Lewis has pretty much taken the best line for himself. But I don't think he is ahead enough to dictate the line.

- Rosberg starts steering at 4:15 right before they crash. Once he crashes, then the cars are interlocked and he goes straight

- Lewis did not have to go off-track to avoid the collision, but he would have ceded the corner. Something, which he is inclined on doing only against other drivers.

That clip is not much good for analysis as you can't stop it on any frame you want. However at 4:15 Lewis is nearly touching the white line on the outside and has his nose and front wheels ahead of Nico's nose. His front wheels have turned or are beginning to turn and he is looking towards the apex. Nico has his wheels straight ahead and is looking straight ahead, The rubber marks under his car show that the normal line would have him turned 30 degrees by that point on the track and not still going straight ahead. What happens next is not visible in stop frame as the next one doesn't come until 4:20.

The Channel 4 clips are much better for analysing the incident in detail as you can get at least 4 or 5 stop frames per second.

[chillibowl]

Two drivers enjoying the same car advantage while fighting for a world title....if they didn't come together over the same piece of tarmac on the last lap then they should have both been penalized for wasting my time.

A very predictable racing incident imo. A portion more blame to Nico so the time penalty was great solution and the reprimand brings those totals more in line with one another. Championship battle to continue.

[gert]

Originally Posted by TrapezeArtist

My only caveat on the above is that Mercedes seem to have a bit of an obsession with putting both drivers on the same strategy rather than just giving them equal rights to choose their strategy.

Isn't that what's happening at most teams?

If you look at the tyre choices for every races, you can see there's sometimes much difference between what teams picks, but very little variation between the 2 drivers on the same team. Most of the times it is just 1 set that is different.
I think that's pretty strange, it's as if the team is guiding the choices rather than the drivers themselves?

Wouldn't there be much more difference if you let Hamilton and his engineer make their pick, while Rosberg and his engineer make their choice -- without the engineers getting instructions from Mercedes or without 'both camps' knowing the other choices?

Replace Hamilton by Vettel, Rosberg by Raikkonen, and so on...

[old man]

Originally Posted by gert

Isn't that what's happening at most teams

Wouldn't there be much more difference if you let Hamilton and his engineer make their pick, while Rosberg and his engineer make their choice -- without the engineers getting instructions from Mercedes or without 'both camps' knowing the other choices

As I listened to the paddock chat after the race I got the impression that was exactly what they did and so that was why the two drivers did not get the same tyres in that last stop, Lewis did not have any of the softer tyres left. If I get chance will watch again

[chris bailey]

There's no right or wrong in this, just a difference in the instinctive responses of the two drivers, as there was with Senna and Prost, and to some extent Schumacher and (insert name of any other driver at the time). Reverse the situation and Lewis would have crowded Nico, who would have driven off the track to avoid the collision (as demonstrated on numerous occasions in the past).

Two points to mention here. One is the obsessively biased stance taken by the C4 presenters, who consistently back Lewis in every situation, regardless of the merits. Second is Mercedes' lack of discipline with regard to team results. One lap from the end of a GP, running 1-2, there should be an understanding between drivers that whoever is leading has done enough and they bring both cars home. It's worked in the past for most teams. Let's face it, they could both have been out on the spot. How would that have played in the media?

Next weekend should be entertaining......

[TrapezeArtist]

Originally Posted by gert

Isn't that what's happening at most teams?

If you look at the tyre choices for every races, you can see there's sometimes much difference between what teams picks, but very little variation between the 2 drivers on the same team. Most of the times it is just 1 set that is different.
I think that's pretty strange, it's as if the team is guiding the choices rather than the drivers themselves?

Wouldn't there be much more difference if you let Hamilton and his engineer make their pick, while Rosberg and his engineer make their choice -- without the engineers getting instructions from Mercedes or without 'both camps' knowing the other choices?

Replace Hamilton by Vettel, Rosberg by Raikkonen, and so on...

Up to a point I understand the similarity between the strategy of two drivers in the same team: they've got the same chassis so it should behave in the same way for both drivers. But I think it's being taken further than that in several teams, most noticeably Mercedes.

I think we're agreeing with each other. It would be nice to see Hamilton + engineer and Rosberg + engineer each making their own decisions. The overall team management only need to get involved when they both want to pit at the same time.

[paddy]

I thought it was one of the best races I've seen for a while. Mercedes need to let them race and may the best man win. It looked to me like Rosberg knew his time was up and he took a chance and lost. I just wish he'd been more honest afterwards.

What disappoints me most are some of the mindless comments on this forum. It used to a place where there was a good level of debate, but seems to have become a bit of an insult fest. Some clearly anti Hamilton stuff whatever he says or does. I wonder what the motivation for that can be?

[Jimmy Magnusson]

I would have guessed that they are free to choose the strategy that gets them to the finish the fastest. But since there's only one pit crew I also would have guessed that you had to "book" your pitstop and that the guy in front had dibs if the plans clashed. That's how I would have done it, at least.

[TrapezeArtist]

Originally Posted by chris bailey

There's no right or wrong in this, just a difference in the instinctive responses of the two drivers, as there was with Senna and Prost, and to some extent Schumacher and (insert name of any other driver at the time). Reverse the situation and Lewis would have crowded Nico, who would have driven off the track to avoid the collision (as demonstrated on numerous occasions in the past).

Lewis is certainly "firm" at times in monopolising the racing line even when Nico is trying to get a slice of it. The difference in Austria was that Nico was nowhere near the racing line.

Originally Posted by chris bailey

Two points to mention here. One is the obsessively biased stance taken by the C4 presenters, who consistently back Lewis in every situation, regardless of the merits. Second is Mercedes' lack of discipline with regard to team results. One lap from the end of a GP, running 1-2, there should be an understanding between drivers that whoever is leading has done enough and they bring both cars home. It's worked in the past for most teams. Let's face it, they could both have been out on the spot. How would that have played in the media?

"Bias" is something that depends heavily on the bias of the person hearing it. If you agree with the C4 presenters, they're just talking sense. If you don't they're biased. But forget the presenters, just look at the images on C4. The video has no bias.

For sure Mercedes could apply team orders and say "hold position" after X laps (where X is any number you may like to pick). But if the cars are nose-to-tail at X-1 laps, you've still got the same situation and you'll get the same result. After years of Ferrari team orders (illegal at the time) it is refreshing that Mercedes have allowed their drivers to race and haven't invoked any team orders. They should be congratulated for that, not criticised. Toto might show annoyance when something goes wrong, and he's welcome to throw around all the teddies he likes, because it all adds to the entertainment. But hard racing and the occasional clash is the best possible thing for the sport, and when it gets us all talking about Mercedes-this and Mercedes-that, well that's just what the parent company is paying all those millions for.

[Jimmy Magnusson]

I think for Mercedes to use team orders would be dumb, since it would make the races boring. That doesn't seem like good PR for your brand to me. It may be worse to look foolish, but they'll only be that if they fail to win the championship.

[chillibowl]

Originally Posted by TrapezeArtist

...it is refreshing that Mercedes have allowed their drivers to race and haven't invoked any team orders. They should be congratulated for that, not criticised...

indeed. at the end of the day, thats my take away as well.

much credit to Merc for letting this battle play out on the race track...its been one of the few things keeping me watching during this current period of domination/rules freeze.

[2GRX7]

Originally Posted by maximus

Er, his "mistake" at Mirabeau? I'm still not sure he intended to do it, but after yesterday he is throwing a few of his actions in to question. What I'm trying to say is that I think there was some intent to Nico's defense in to that corner yesterday.

COTA? Yes it looked similar in a way, but it was wet and Lewis still turned in, Nico didn't do that yesterday.



So are you? Nico's lost it, he's proved once again he can't handle the pressure. I used to like Rosberg because I don't like Lewis that much either and used to root for him. That ended after his whining after China (I think?) last year, that Lewis was backing him in to Vettel and it was ruining his race. Well catch him and try to overtake then!

And I, like you, used to love Nico when he was racing for Williams-anyone who faced him would fall.

Also, Will Buxton of the U.S.-based, NBC Sports Formula 1 team interviewed Nico after the race. when Will asked him if he was struggling with the brakes, or if his intention was to push him (Hamilton) wider along a route on the outside, Nico said, "it was a bit of both". His words people!

Looking at some of the responses (and not trying to be a jerk!), I'm wondering if some, who are negatively responding to this, understand what the "racing line" is and how it dictates the actions of the stewards?

[old man]

Originally Posted by paddy

I thought it was one of the best races I've seen for a while. Mercedes need to let them race and may the best man win. It looked to me like Rosberg knew his time was up and he took a chance and lost. I just wish he'd been more honest afterwards.

What disappoints me most are some of the mindless comments on this forum. It used to a place where there was a good level of debate, but seems to have become a bit of an insult fest. Some clearly anti Hamilton stuff whatever he says or does. I wonder what the motivation for that can be?

A reason why I read the forum less and less

[paddy]

http://bbc.in/29hzxwM

A very good response from Hamilton and he's right as well. Toto wolf's over the top reaction totally ignored the great entertainment the race delivered as well as the fascinating battle between team mates. Just think back to the bore of Vettel in the Red Bull to remember what team orders mean.

[steve_r]

Originally Posted by paddy

http://bbc.in/29hzxwM

A very good response from Hamilton and he's right as well. Toto wolf's over the top reaction totally ignored the great entertainment the race delivered as well as the fascinating battle between team mates. Just think back to the bore of Vettel in the Red Bull to remember what team orders mean.

BOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO

Down with such reasoned argument.

[Akrapovic]

Originally Posted by paddy

Just think back to the bore of Vettel in the Red Bull to remember what team orders mean.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KryxP00vnmA

Aye, that was boring. Good thing everybody slammed Vettel for that one, we wouldn't want any sort of racing to break out!

Bonus Maldonado accident in there for good measure.

[bjohnsonsmith]

Multi 21