US GP Austin

[hondafan37]

https://m.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=1044429354145988

[Born Racer]

From watching it again, I wonder if Verstappen was actually innocent in the sense that he locked up and went off. Despite the fact that I think he does take full advantage of this 'right to the corner' concept, this time he definitely locked up and therefore at the point at which he locked up, he could no longer give Norris any more room. It does beg the question whether if you lock up, you have protected the right to your corner because you no longer had the opportunity to give the other driver more space.

Likewise, though, if Norris no longer had space because of that and he had to take to the run off, does that mean he no longer has a right to overtake because Verstappen has covered himself by locking up? There's a lot of Devil's Advocate here, but Verstappen has made life very easy for himself with this level of robustness.

Wonderful discussion above regarding the stewards' verdict - I will just say that they are trying to latch on to a few key points of driving ethics such as claiming a corner and coming up short because it's far more complex than that and drivers like Verstappen are absolutely exploiting the rule book.

[AndrewCherry]

Originally Posted by Born Racer

It does beg the question whether if you lock up, you have protected the right to your corner because you no longer had the opportunity to give the other driver more space.

In my experience as a very low-level racer, I'd say that as soon as you lock up you've lost the right to claim/defend that corner (unless you can get it back under control again in time to make the corner safely and within racing limits). So if you lock up and go wide, no - that corner is no longer yours by right.


Reading that stewards decision it does seem very shallow as an analysis - Lando should be punished for going off, but we'll reduce it because he didn't have a choice? If someone didn't have a choice you either don't punish them or you say "tough" and leave the punishment as is. The half punishment makes it a lot stranger, you've muddied the waters about intent. The other aspect also implies that only Lando gained an advantage by going off, but we know that's not how this is always interpreted - you can be considered to gain an advantage by keeping a place you would otherwise have lost.


As any driver knows, if you're taking a tighter line into a corner (e.g. because there's someone outside you) you'll have to brake earlier than you usually would, you're going to have to turn harder and therefore scrub off more speed to do so. If you're braking later than the person on the outside and therefore getting to the apex first (assuming that they're on what would be considered the "regular" racing line) then one of two things has happened: they've braked earlier than they needed to (and you could compare this with previous lap telemetry presumably if he's close to the racing line) or you've braked too late to make the corner (and again, you should be able to compare this - if you're not braking before the usual racing line braking point, you're too late). I'm surprised that this isn't a fairly obvious case from brake telemetry and steering inputs, the only thing that seems like a question mark is whether Max braked too late intentionally or not. I'd personally like to see his brake and steering inputs - when did he roll off the brake, and was the steering input consistent with trying to take a tighter line? If not, he should be carrying the can.

[Mike Harte]

I don't know if mentioned earlier in this thread, but McLaren have instigated a review of the Stewards' findings. This will take place later this afternoon in Mexico via video with the US GP Stewards, and this would indicate that McLaren have "new" evidence, as that is all that can be considered, that was not available at the time of the original Stewards' decision.

[NaBUru38]

Originally Posted by Born Racer

I wonder if Verstappen was actually innocent in the sense that he locked up and went off.

I'm convinced that he didn't. He braked perfectly, and squeezed Norris off track intentionally.

[NaBUru38]

Originally Posted by AndrewCherry

In my experience as a very low-level racer, I'd say that as soon as you lock up you've lost the right to claim/defend that corner (unless you can get it back under control again in time to make the corner safely and within racing limits). So if you lock up and go wide, no - that corner is no longer yours by right.

I have never raced for real except indoor karts, so I'm no expert. But I disagree with the concept of "owning a corner". As I wrote earlier, I think that cars side by side have the right to remain on track. An overtake isn't complete until one of the drivers is sufficiently in front of the other.

[chillibowl]

Originally Posted by Mike Harte

I don't know if mentioned earlier in this thread, but McLaren have instigated a review of the Stewards' findings. This will take place later this afternoon in Mexico via video with the US GP Stewards, and this would indicate that McLaren have "new" evidence, as that is all that can be considered, that was not available at the time of the original Stewards' decision.

so fully admit that at this point i might be so backwards/entrenched on this that im forcing things to fit my narrative...

but out of two cars going for a corner, how can the one with DRS enabled be considered as anything other than the attacking driver?

no idea what the stewards will do but regardless, im very curious what their new evidence is, im assuming its telemetry based, and hopefully that will let me open my eyes to what everyone else clearly sees?

[Gerard C]

Originally Posted by Mike Harte

This will take place later this afternoon in Mexico via video with the US GP Stewards, and this would indicate that McLaren have "new" evidence, as that is all that can be considered, that was not available at the time of the original Stewards' decision.

Are you referring to this, >Mike? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_bhmfAp4jKU

[Mike Harte]

Originally Posted by Gerard C

Are you referring to this, >Mike? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_bhmfAp4jKU

Yes, but that YT is merely speculating about what McLaren are going to be bringing to the Stewards. Whatever, Gérard, we should know in a couple of hours after the initial video call with the Stewards; if there is a second one scheduled, it will mean that the appeal has not been dismissed, and that the Stewards are going to reconsider the incident in light of evidence that wasn't available at the time they made their original decision.

[Gerard C]

OK I see, thank you Mike. I dunno what they'll bring as new evidence but I find that Max has been pushy.

[Aysedasi]

Originally Posted by Gerard C

......Max has been pushy.

Goodness. Well, I suppose there's a first time for everything....

[Mike Harte]

Wild guess here, but as the video call with the Austin Stewards was supposed to have taken place a little while ago, and there has not been an official announcement that the appeal has been dismissed, then maybe something new has been presented and the Stewards are considering the merits or not of the matter.

[Gerard C]

Another storm in a tea cup.

[Tourer]

McLaren request for review rejected.

Guess that'll be it for now - at least officially.

[FFSM]

It seems from the interviews I've seen that the drivers are fairly unanimous in their assessment of the incident, therefore it is down to them to push for a change in the way the stewards consider incidents such as this - if that's what they want to happen. McLaren are flogging a dead horse pursuing it themselves.

It's obvious that Max deliberately ran off the circuit. He knew that if Lando took the position he would be very likely to incur a penalty. But them's the rules, as it stands. Exploiting them may not be in the spirit of sport, but that's down to the mentality of the individual(s) involved.

On the flip side, few will remember that incident in 20 years - but the number of championships Max wins will be certainly be remembered.

[S griffin]

Originally Posted by FFSM

It seems from the interviews I've seen that the drivers are fairly unanimous in their assessment of the incident, therefore it is down to them to push for a change in the way the stewards consider incidents such as this - if that's what they want to happen. McLaren are flogging a dead horse pursuing it themselves.

It's obvious that Max deliberately ran off the circuit. He knew that if Lando took the position he would be very likely to incur a penalty. But them's the rules, as it stands. Exploiting them may not be in the spirit of sport, but that's down to the mentality of the individual(s) involved.

On the flip side, few will remember that incident in 20 years - but the number of championships Max wins will be certainly be remembered.

I’m sorry, but anyone who deliberately pushes another driver off the track legal or not, is not a great sportsman and is just basically a bad loser. Basically Max can’t accept people getting past fairly and really should be punished for his actions. He’s got away with far too much now

[FFSM]

Originally Posted by S griffin

I’m sorry, but anyone who deliberately pushes another driver off the track legal or not, is not a great sportsman and is just basically a bad loser. Basically Max can’t accept people getting past fairly and really should be punished for his actions. He’s got away with far too much now

History is littered with examples of great drivers that were bad losers, and took questionable actions to protect a position that their machinery couldn't sustain fairly. In that respect, Verstappen is no different.

It's down to the people who regulate the sport to take action to ensure that there's no wiggle room within the rules - and that those who break them are penalised.

[Richard C]

So as much as we as fans can complain and call out how we would do it (and I do that all the time), in the end, it only matters if those in charge actually do something. And it seems they are looking to address the issue.

https://www.motorsport.com/f1/news/f...eted/10667114/

I know some drivers have said that they should race with the rulebook in their pocket, or that when they are racing they are focusing on that vs. the rules. I generally think that's a deflection tactic. Yes, rules can be made to be overly complex. But I also think these guys know exactly what they are doing. Yes, sometimes the heat of the moment gets the better of them, but they pretty much know where they stand with regards to the rules.

Richard

[Akrapovic]

Originally Posted by FFSM

It seems from the interviews I've seen that the drivers are fairly unanimous in their assessment of the incident, therefore it is down to them to push for a change in the way the stewards consider incidents such as this - if that's what they want to happen. McLaren are flogging a dead horse pursuing it themselves.

https://www.motorsport.com/f1/news/f...eted/10667114/

Edit: Beaten by Richard, lol.

[S griffin]

Originally Posted by FFSM

History is littered with examples of great drivers that were bad losers, and took questionable actions to protect a position that their machinery couldn't sustain fairly. In that respect, Verstappen is no different.

It's down to the people who regulate the sport to take action to ensure that there's no wiggle room within the rules - and that those who break them are penalised.

Only really Senna, Schumacher and maybe Vettel could you really claim are drivers who kept on using questionable actions or my view plain dirty driving.

In an ideal world we wouldn't need the authorities to take action. Drivers should know what is fair and what is not. Let's not forget it's a dangerous sport too, so that is another reason why I can't forgive drivers who resort to these kind of moves

[Mike Harte]

Originally Posted by S griffin

Only really Senna, Schumacher and maybe Vettel could you really claim are drivers who kept on using questionable actions or my view plain dirty driving.

In an ideal world we wouldn't need the authorities to take action. Drivers should know what is fair and what is not. Let's not forget it's a dangerous sport too, so that is another reason why I can't forgive drivers who resort to these kind of moves

And I would possibly add Hamilton to that list earlier in his career; something that he brought from his childhood at school.

[Tourer]

Originally Posted by Mike Harte

And I would possibly add Hamilton to that list earlier in his career; something that he brought from his childhood at school.

Agree - as recently as Silverstone 2021 for Hamilton. He doesn't resort to the "hard" tactics as often, but he DOES do it - I've lost track of what year he took a couple of others off at Austria and was penalised for it - was it 2021 or 2020 - around there.

You'd have to say that Mansell was pretty good at the hard driving too - in reality they all have their moments - just some do it more often (or arguably better) than others.

[Sodemo]

I don't recall ever seeing Mansell run another car off the road or Senna for that matter. Sure Senna intentionally crashed into Prost in order to settle a score from the year previous (which isnt great kudos for his legacy), but I don't recall him continuously running cars off the track during battling.

[Tourer]

Originally Posted by Sodemo

I don't recall ever seeing Mansell run another car off the road or Senna for that matter. Sure Senna intentionally crashed into Prost in order to settle a score from the year previous (which isnt great kudos for his legacy), but I don't recall him continuously running cars off the track during battling.

The suggestion was that other drivers had been bad losers and sometimes use questionable tactics. Running another car off the road may have happened for some, maybe not for all but that wasn't specifically what was being discussed.

[S griffin]

It wasn't always the case, drivers back in the day knew their limits