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

[JamesH]

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.

He was too far ahead the cede the corner, by a LONG way. And in fact, he left enough room for NR's car between himself and the apex anyway. You seem to be arguing to banning overtaking at corners.

More I look at it, the more it was a deliberate act by NR to punt LH off the track.

And hey, the stewards agreed, and gave NR two points on his licence for his actions.

I'm not going to argue with the experts, just agree with them.

[chunterer]

Originally Posted by 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.

They will have to take each other out a lot more to lose the title!!

I can seen them hitting each other again though, really can.

[TrapezeArtist]

Apparently Toto is going to consult with senior Mercedes management before deciding how to handle it's drivers in future. That's OK then, because the Marketing and PR man is going to be demanding to leave things just as they are, including Toto having a meltdown if anything goes wrong. They get far more column-inches, television-seconds and whatever from a good controversy than from an easy 1-2 finish.

[bjohnsonsmith]

Originally Posted by TrapezeArtist

Apparently Toto is going to consult with senior Mercedes management before deciding how to handle it's drivers in future. That's OK then, because the Marketing and PR man is going to be demanding to leave things just as they are, including Toto having a meltdown if anything goes wrong. They get far more column-inches, television-seconds and whatever from a good controversy than from an easy 1-2 finish.

Is that what the Mercedes PR machine wants?

[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!

Originally Posted by JamesH

He was too far ahead the cede the corner, by a LONG way. And in fact, he left enough room for NR's car between himself and the apex anyway. You seem to be arguing to banning overtaking at corners.

More I look at it, the more it was a deliberate act by NR to punt LH off the track.

And hey, the stewards agreed, and gave NR two points on his licence for his actions.

I'm not going to argue with the experts, just agree with them.

Bobec- you are reaching too far! not trying to be mean, but please refer to post #120 - last line, as that's pertinent to this conversation.

[steve_r]

Nevermind all this collision talk. What on earth happened to Hulkenburg during the race? It was Button who I thought would sink like a stone in the race, not the Force India.

Also, do we think that Manor are going to be fighting it out for points at any other races this season?

[bauble]

I am fascinated by the penalty handed to Rosberg for 'driving an unsafe car'.

How many times have we seen drivers heading for the pits with a punctured tyre, shedding bodywork like confetti at a wedding, without any comment or sanction?

Is this a new rule that I missed or was it quickly made up for the occasion?

Who else besides Johnny Herbert was a steward in Austria? Anthony Hamilton?

[bauble]

Originally Posted by steve_r

Nevermind all this collision talk. What on earth happened to Hulkenburg during the race? It was Button who I thought would sink like a stone in the race, not the Force India.

Also, do we think that Manor are going to be fighting it out for points at any other races this season?

Two good questions, once the red lights went out the Hulk might just as well gone home for all of the impression he made, especially compared with Button.
Manor look as if they could score more points when there is a lot of attrition, or multiple tyre stops, but probably not on sheer pace, however, I hope they do add to there tally, as I do for Sauber. Both teams deserve some good luck and results.

[TrapezeArtist]

Originally Posted by bauble

I am fascinated by the penalty handed to Rosberg for 'driving an unsafe car'.

How many times have we seen drivers heading for the pits with a punctured tyre, shedding bodywork like confetti at a wedding, without any comment or sanction?

Is this a new rule that I missed or was it quickly made up for the occasion?

Who else besides Johnny Herbert was a steward in Austria? Anthony Hamilton?

In this respect, I don't think Rosberg did anything worse than every driver would do in similar circumstances. It's far from ideal, with the front wing jammed under the car and bits of carbon-fibre flying everywhere, but it's not too dangerous either as long a he drives sensibly. For me, the crucial questions in these circumstances are
Is the driver driving in a way to minimise the hazard?
Is there some useful purpose to driving on? (Finish the race, or pitstop and get back out. Unlike the notorious Villeneuve incident at Zandvoort where there was no possible way of the car continuing.)

Perhaps the stewards decided he really needed a good slap for the collision but couldn't find a way of applying a penalty for that so looked for something else. Then contrived the penalty in such a way that it didn't really mean anything. Not unless he starts accumulating lots of penalty points during the rest of the year, anyway.

[bobec]

Originally Posted by JamesH

He was too far ahead the cede the corner, by a LONG way. And in fact, he left enough room for NR's car between himself and the apex anyway. You seem to be arguing to banning overtaking at corners.

More I look at it, the more it was a deliberate act by NR to punt LH off the track.

And hey, the stewards agreed, and gave NR two points on his licence for his actions.

I'm not going to argue with the experts, just agree with them.

I'm not arguing Rosberg took the ideal line. He didn't. But is he supposed to?

What I'm saying is 1) he didn't push Hamilton off the track and 2) he didn't initiate a turn and it's not true he kept going on a straight line, as some claim.

Also, why should Hamilton have the advantage? To have the advantage, your car needs to be at least 50% past the defending car at the actual corner. It may not be a written rule, but it is a basic guideline.

I'm not going to claim I am an expert in the rules and regulations, but I believe I have some understanding. The experts' (stewards') decision is very vague and unclear. There is no reference to any regulations (except the right to investigate and the article that decides what the penalties are), and they don't explain why that incident is regarded as "causing a collision" and not a "racing incident". It remains subjective. Then they go further and claim Rosberg did not leave "enough racing room" Excuse me? What is that? It's not in the regulations and I have never heard of it. If they said Rosberg did not leave a full car's width then that would be objective and it would be a reference to the regulations. But it would not be true in this case, which is I believe they came up with this bogus "racing room".


No, I won't argue with the experts. I'm not even a Rosberg fan. I am a good and fair racing fan when it comes to F1, so I would question the experts' decision and ask for more detail. It's also for the sake of understanding the rules, personally for me.



2013 Hungarian GP. Grosjean forces Alonso wide and Alonso has to cede the corner and even struggles to stay on the track. But he does not crash into Grosjean:

(8:57-8:58) http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x2ofwcu



Then let's not forget the history between Hamilton and Rosberg:

"Case 1: Bahrain 2014

Several times during the Bahrain Grand Prix, Rosberg found himself on the outside against Hamilton. Each time he was aggressively closed out. The first event occurred on lap 1, shown below."

https://f1metrics.wordpress.com/2014...les-of-racing/



So no, I don't believe Rosberg took the ideal line, and I'm pretty sure he tried to keep Hamilton away by taking a wider line on purpose. But I don't think he tried to crash into Hamilton, or take him off the track, or go in a straight line. It is my personal belief that Hamilton will never cede a corner and he would instead crash into Rosberg when no car has the clear advantage. He has done it many times, and each time Rosberg ceded the corner and even went off the track in order to avoid a collision. And for the sake of good racing, I really wish he hadn't. Also, Hamilton seems to be doing this only to Rosberg. He has found a weakness in Rosberg and he is psychologically one-up on his teammate. I really hope this penalty does not negatively affect Rosberg, again for the sake of good racing.

[chillibowl]

in fairness the only person he is racing harder against is his only other title challenger so of course it is going to be different with his team mate then he would be against a non title challengers...which i think is true for both of them.

imo, they are both desperate to find any advantage over the other and i think most of this comes down to them trying to figure out which one of them has the bigger set of stones.

is it clean racing?...not by a long shot but it is entertaining! for me i like how it is happening on track and not in a board or debriefing room where none of us get to see it.

generally though i agree with you about the vagueness of the penalty and the lack of transparency in their explanation although this is an instance where i applaud the stewards for their vagueness.

they made a decision/penalty not necessarily based on any rules or prior precedence but with an eye on trying to keep both antagonists as even on points/reprimands as possible.

no doubt it will help with ticket sales and Tv numbers for the upcoming races. certainly it has me more interested.

[bobec]

Originally Posted by TrapezeArtist

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.

Hamilton is ahead, but not enough to claim the advantage . And yes, he is next to white line, but that's only on his entry before the turn, and Rosberg is more than half a car's width away from him. I think Hamilton is next to the line because he gets a better line, not because of Rosberg. If it was because of Rosberg, it should still be OK, since Rosberg would be required to leave a full car's width.

Then, going into the turn and into the collision, Hamilton is nowhere near the line.

I'm not saying Rosberg did not take a very wide line. I'm not saying he was on the ideal line. You can see my post #135.

[bobec]

Originally Posted by 2GRX7

Bobec- you are reaching too far! not trying to be mean, but please refer to post #120 - last line, as that's pertinent to this conversation.

You are not being mean, don't worry. But I'm not sure what your argument is. Post #120 - well, I have already shown the claim Rosberg did not turn in is not correct. Yes, he took a very wide line, but he did turn it. At COTA I remember Hamilton wasn't really turning in, at least as much as he could have and Rosberg had to go into the run-off. But it's ok, right? It was wet, and so on...

I do agree Rosberg is sometimes shaky under pressure, and I've said that.



Now, if this is what you mean....

Originally Posted by 2GRX7

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?

.... then please elaborate. I'm intrigued.

[bobec]

I agree it is very entertaining! But now there is a risk of team orders being enforced.

If I was in the stewards' position, I would make it very clear what a penalized driver has done wrong, so that they get feedback and change what they have to in their driving, instead of avoiding similar situations altogether in the future and discouraging hard, wheel-to-wheel racing.

You can get a little dirty, but it will be ok as long as you are following the regulations and the basic guidelines. Drivers need to know what is allowed and what isn't in order for them to feel confident enough to drive hard. And they all have to be treated the same. And it will be very entertaining!

[paddy]

I've just watched a replay of the race. With ten laps to go Rosberg attempts to take the lead from Verstappen at turn two. Verstappen takes the inside line and Rosberg takes the same outside line that Hamilton takes ten laps later. Verstappen gives Rosberg room on the outside but holds his line and maintains his lead only to lose it as Rosberg cuts back on the inside on the run to turn two with DRS. Verstappen clearly turns in to turn two without driving into Rosberg's line.
Ten laps later Rosberg makes no attempt to turn in with a car outside him and close to the white line on the edge of the track. He doesn't make any attempt to take a line through the corner. He just drives into the car outside. 100% culpable.

[bjohnsonsmith]

Originally Posted by bobec

I agree it is very entertaining! But now there is a risk of team orders being enforced.

If I was in the stewards' position, I would make it very clear what a penalized driver has done wrong, so that they get feedback and change what they have to in their driving, instead of avoiding similar situations altogether in the future and discouraging hard, wheel-to-wheel racing.

You can get a little dirty, but it will be ok as long as you are following the regulations and the basic guidelines. Drivers need to know what is allowed and what isn't in order for them to feel confident enough to drive hard. And they all have to be treated the same. And it will be very entertaining!

Consistency is the problem and one thing that would help, is defining track limits. It seems quite arbitrary.

[2GRX7]

Originally Posted by bobec

You are not being mean, don't worry. But I'm not sure what your argument is. Post #120 - well, I have already shown the claim Rosberg did not turn in is not correct. Yes, he took a very wide line, but he did turn it. At COTA I remember Hamilton wasn't really turning in, at least as much as he could have and Rosberg had to go into the run-off. But it's ok, right? It was wet, and so on...

I do agree Rosberg is sometimes shaky under pressure, and I've said that.



Now, if this is what you mean....



.... then please elaborate. I'm intrigued.

Yes that is exactly what I mean. You used the clip of Grosjean and Alonso at 8:57. RoGro is on the racing line-that is the fastest way around a corner/down a straight. Alonso ceded that corner by going off because even though Alonso was just SLIGHTLY ahead, RoGro was on the racing line, therefore, giving him the right to dictate where he goes.

Nico, on the other hand, controlled the racing line until Hamilton passed him by a 1/4 car length on the outside of the turn. Now Nico DID NOT turn in on Hamilton at all, but what he failed to do was follow the racing line to the "apex" thru the "track out" point on the track. But there's a reason why Nico did what he did and that was to protect himself from getting caught out on Ham performing an "over/under move on the next straight.

That move allows the driver performing it to generate more straight-line speed than the person that botched up the normal racing line. Hamilton was privy to Nico's brake problems and was going to capitalize on them.

Nico "read" this classic maneuver and was looking to force him off track so that Hammy's velocity would slow and he'd have to resort to the paved run-off area to get back on track, loosing precious time/distance to Nico on the final straight of the final lap. It would have been nearly impossible for Hamilton to pass at any other point on the track, save the final turn and if Hammy tried, it would have most likely resulted in a crash with Hamilton at fault.

So, that's why I place blame with Nico. This whole racing line understanding was really capitalized by Schumacher. Alonso watched and learned; did it/does it. Button did it alot when he was up front and Buemi did it BIG TIME in Valencia. This is a rule when you're racing up front and the stewards (former racers) follow it.

[bella]

Originally Posted by bjohnsonsmith

Consistency is the problem and one thing that would help, is defining track limits. It seems quite arbitrary.

oh, track limits are very well defined. the problem is that each circuit has different ways of policing them.

[bjohnsonsmith]

Originally Posted by bella

oh, track limits are very well defined. the problem is that each circuit has different ways of policing them.

Physically they are defined but that's it.

[S griffin]

Managed to watch the race this morning, bit tired so kept nodding off, but made sure I didn't miss the final lap. Dunno what Rosberg was doing, but then he doesn't seem to know how to be aggresive like Hamilton. As pointed out Hamilton hangs them out to dry on the exit of corners, Nico made no attempt to make, even though Lewis gave him plenty of room and didn't turn into the corner until the last moment. Rosberg's fault

Glad to see the work of McLaren is consistently paying off, last year is but a distant nightmare and Button seems to be enjoying racing a lot more

Another good result from Max and so glad to see Manor getting a point, weren't like it came from nowhere either, 12th on the grid. Shame Nasr dropped back after being in the points, best I've seen him drive this year. And I'm glad they enforced the weaving rule on Kevin, too often drivers have got away with that in the past. And it seems Ferrari may have been trying to stretch the tyre life again and it didn't work c'est la vie.

[TrapezeArtist]

Originally Posted by bobec

Hamilton is ahead, but not enough to claim the advantage . And yes, he is next to white line, but that's only on his entry before the turn, and Rosberg is more than half a car's width away from him. I think Hamilton is next to the line because he gets a better line, not because of Rosberg. If it was because of Rosberg, it should still be OK, since Rosberg would be required to leave a full car's width.

Then, going into the turn and into the collision, Hamilton is nowhere near the line.

I'm not saying Rosberg did not take a very wide line. I'm not saying he was on the ideal line. You can see my post #135.

Hamilton is ahead (nearly half a car length) but not enough to claim an advantage? So being nearly half a car length behind is enough to claim an advantage???????

[bobec]

Originally Posted by TrapezeArtist

Hamilton is ahead (nearly half a car length) but not enough to claim an advantage? So being nearly half a car length behind is enough to claim an advantage???????

Being half a car ahead makes the situation 50-50. And you say that Hamilton was less than half a car ahead even during braking. It's even less into the turn. The stewards found that Hamilton was "more than fully alongside".

[2GRX7]

Originally Posted by 2GRX7

Yes that is exactly what I mean. You used the clip of Grosjean and Alonso at 8:57. RoGro is on the racing line-that is the fastest way around a corner/down a straight. Alonso ceded that corner by going off because even though Alonso was just SLIGHTLY ahead, RoGro was on the racing line, therefore, giving him the right to dictate where he goes.

Nico, on the other hand, controlled the racing line until Hamilton passed him by a 1/4 car length on the outside of the turn. Now Nico DID NOT turn in on Hamilton at all, but what he failed to do was follow the racing line to the "apex" thru the "track out" point on the track. But there's a reason why Nico did what he did and that was to protect himself from getting caught out on Ham performing an "over/under move on the next straight.

That move allows the driver performing it to generate more straight-line speed than the person that botched up the normal racing line. Hamilton was privy to Nico's brake problems and was going to capitalize on them.

Nico "read" this classic maneuver and was looking to force him off track so that Hammy's velocity would slow and he'd have to resort to the paved run-off area to get back on track, loosing precious time/distance to Nico on the final straight of the final lap. It would have been nearly impossible for Hamilton to pass at any other point on the track, save the final turn and if Hammy tried, it would have most likely resulted in a crash with Hamilton at fault.

So, that's why I place blame with Nico. This whole racing line understanding was really capitalized by Schumacher. Alonso watched and learned; did it/does it. Button did it alot when he was up front and Buemi did it BIG TIME in Valencia. This is a rule when you're racing up front and the stewards (former racers) follow it.

Ah, SOOO....Thoughts Bobec?

[bobec]

Originally Posted by 2GRX7

Ah, SOOO....Thoughts Bobec?

Yes, thoughts. When it comes to your interpretation, where in the regulations do you find support for this "racing line" theory? I don't think Rosberg was defending an upcoming move from Hamilton. He was already defending at the corner. I don't know how Hamilton knew about his brake problems, this is weird if it's true.

I don't understand what makes you think Rosberg tried to force Hamilton off. Some people are just repeating this over and over, but the footage clearly shows Hamilton was allowed more than enough track. Rosberg gave him at least a full car's length, as it's in the rules (no racing lines there as far as I know), and in fact the stewards couldn't even claim Rosberg hadn't, so they came up with that bogus "racing room". Hamilton maybe would have had to go off on to the run-off only if he kept trying to pass Rosberg (and maybe even that would not have happened, but we don't get to see the #6 complete the turn before there is contact, so hard to tell). If Hamilton ceded, he wouldn't be forced off, that's for sure. And by your logic, then he could have done his move on the straight.

So when you elaborate, it would be nice to show how the regulations support your theory. In the Hungary 2013 GP, Gorsjean also followed a very wide line. It may seem like it's the racing line to you. But other drivers didn't do what he did. And please don't give me Schumacher as an example. I sincerely wish him all the best with his recovery, but I will not accept him as an example of fair wheel-to-wheel racing. Only driver in the history of the sport to get a DQ for a whole season.

But it remains unclear what "this racing line understanding" is. That you can do whatever you want as long as you think you are on the racing line, no matter what you have around you in terms of opponents? No, Alonso and Button don't race like that!

[2GRX7]

LOL, the "racing line" is not my theory-more like physics! That's why I asked if you are a racer, raced in the past, or studied up on racing. This sentence that you wrote in the 2nd paragraph, in particular, clearly shows that you don't understand: Rosberg gave him at least a full car's length, as it's in the rules (no racing lines there as far as I know)

You're saying he was given more than enough track? More than enough track for what? Go straight and turn right within track limits? If Hamilton is at the limit of the track and he wants to stay on the track, he would have needed to turn before the painted track lines to still be on the track, correct? Rosberg is on the inside of him severely limiting his ability to turn right within the TRACK LIMITS. In your second paragraph, you seem to concede that Hamilton would need to go off track to continue the battle, so that's one part of this argument out of the way.

Yes, Hamilton is not physically on the track limits white line making his turn (as a open wheel racer, you cannot SEE the white line due to low seating position, body panels, wheels, one can only guestimate.

Yeah um, RoGro was CLEARLY on the racing line compared to Alonso in Hungry, CLEARLY!

I'm not going to do research FOR YOU on what is understood by 90% of the viewing public, of which, are a mix of racers, fans, team bosses, etc, it's for YOU to do this research; it's up to YOU to gain an understanding of the "racing line"; it's up to YOU to realize that "epiphany" in your life. Go ask some racers at your local race track - people with no ties to this thread - to obtain an impartial understanding.

Having all the information while watching a race will make it way more enjoyable for you! No joking, or being mean here. :-)