2017 FORMULA 1 AZERBAIJAN GRAND PRIX - Grand Prix Weekend Thread

[F1Guy]

Originally Posted by bauble

Many years ago when the safety car was first introduced into the regulations, I asked Michele Alboreto who was driving for Footwork at the time, if he thought it was a device to spice up the racing rather than a safety feature.

Michele gave wry smile and said; " I know my chickens."

I have never heard the expression before or since, but his opinion was plain, and it was not concerning safety issues.

Yep, agree.

They should allow the marshals to clear the track of parked cars and/or bits of bodywork when there's a gap in traffic. No need for a safety car at all.
After all, this is how they used to do it "many years ago."



/sarcasm.

[JamesH]

For all those people saying what SV did after the incident wasn't too bad, ie bumping wheel with LH, I suggest you take a good hard look at the horrendous crashes that happen in any open wheel class when you ride over wheels. These sorts of crashes even at low speed (and they may be low by F1 standards, but they are still high even behind the safety car) are really dangerous - the cars get launched in any random direction.

So letting SV getting away with this is a very bad signal that playing bumper cars is OK...

He should have been black flagged and banned, if for nothing else the utterly reprehensible influence it will have on younger drivers.

I used to race btw, and even in my slow class, Locost, I saw one particular nasty accident with wheels riding over at about 60-70mph where the car front went only about 5 feet in the air and landed very heavily. The guy had back pain for some time. I've seen two very nasty crashes recently in karting caused by wheel riding over. ANYTHING that makes people think that 'bumping' in to another kart/car is OK, should be stomped on from a great height.

[JamesH]

Originally Posted by bauble

Many years ago when the safety car was first introduced into the regulations, I asked Michele Alboreto who was driving for Footwork at the time, if he thought it was a device to spice up the racing rather than a safety feature.

Michele gave wry smile and said; " I know my chickens."

I have never heard the expression before or since, but his opinion was plain, and it was not concerning safety issues.

Well, it is now. Carbon fibre all over the track, greater risk of high speed punctures. They even had a red flag, which is very unusual, just to clear the track. Was that just to spice up the racing...oh...hold on, no, it wasn't.

It's 2017. Things change.

[wnut]

Originally Posted by JamesH

For all those people saying what SV did after the incident wasn't too bad, ie bumping wheel with LH, I suggest you take a good hard look at the horrendous crashes that happen in any open wheel class when you ride over wheels. These sorts of crashes even at low speed (and they may be low by F1 standards, but they are still high even behind the safety car) are really dangerous - the cars get launched in any random direction.

So letting SV getting away with this is a very bad signal that playing bumper cars is OK...

He should have been black flagged and banned, if for nothing else the utterly reprehensible influence it will have on younger drivers.

I used to race btw, and even in my slow class, Locost, I saw one particular nasty accident with wheels riding over at about 60-70mph where the car front went only about 5 feet in the air and landed very heavily. The guy had back pain for some time. I've seen two very nasty crashes recently in karting caused by wheel riding over. ANYTHING that makes people think that 'bumping' in to another kart/car is OK, should be stomped on from a great height.

Hamilton on the other hand brake tested Vettel, not at all dangerous!
I think that Ferrari should test the FIA decision in a court of law under oath. The visuals which we are told are based on the in car telemetry were quite clear as was Vettel's outrage, I think it is quite obvious he was brake tested. Vettel's reaction was poor, but Hamilton's was equally inexcusable.

As far as I can see, Hamilton's actions were not even referred to the stewards for their judgement.
This is the third straight flagrant on track incident involving Hamilton that has not been referred to the stewards. Short cut, not going around the bollard after leaving the track after "only one wheel had gone out of bounds", brake checking Vettel, all not referred to the stewards for their consideration.
Different set of rules for Lewis?

[VIVA GT]

Originally Posted by wnut

Hamilton on the other hand brake tested Vettel, not at all dangerous!
I think that Ferrari should test the FIA decision in a court of law under oath. The visuals which we are told are based on the in car telemetry were quite clear as was Vettel's outrage, I think it is quite obvious he was brake tested. Vettel's reaction was poor, but Hamilton's was equally inexcusable.

As far as I can see, Hamilton's actions were not even referred to the stewards for their judgement.
This is the third straight flagrant on track incident involving Hamilton that has not been referred to the stewards. Short cut, not going around the bollard after leaving the track after "only one wheel had gone out of bounds", brake checking Vettel, all not referred to the stewards for their consideration.
Different set of rules for Lewis?

I've not read the actual stewards judgement so can't comment on what they did say, but I have read it reported numerous times that it was confirmed that Lewis did nothing wrong, and nothing different (so presumably the speeds etc. were exactly the same) to that he did in the same place after the first safety car...

[crmalcolm]

Originally Posted by F1Guy

You're probably right. Thanks for letting me borrow it for a minute though.

You're making better use of it than I ever did.

[S griffin]

The stewards proved there was no brake test and he maintained a constant speed. Sp therefore Hamilton did nothing wrong and Vettel completely overreacted

Anyway Ricciardo's move on the third restart must be a candidate for overtake of the season. So is Hamilton's move around the outside of Ocon (?) at turn 1

[Matt]

let em race

[wolfhound]

Nigel Roebuck was not impressed with Vettel suggesting a black flag might have been called for rather than 10 seconds.

http://classicplus.autosport.com/pre...494.1448115426

[bella]

Originally Posted by S griffin

Anyway Ricciardo's move on the third restart must be a candidate for overtake of the season.

what about magnussens almost identical one a couple of laps later? not sure if drs or not...

[RWill2073]

Originally Posted by crmalcolm

I'd put the tin hat away.

I'll add that Hamilton was reminded by his team to watch the safety car on a previous restart and Hamilton gave a smart response back. So his behavior behind safety cars was a problem earlier too. It's debatable whether he brake checked vettel, and I do think he was at some degree of fault for vettel running into him. Vettels response was worse, however.

What I don't get is why vettel dodnt just say postrace that he got beside Hamilton to gesture to ask what was that of whatever, and upon taking his hands off the wheel it accidentally turned a little to the right. Or that his hand brushed the wheel on its way up. Seems like a plausible enough excuse to make it sound less sinister, though maybe that affects the mind games he's playing with Hamilton.

To the tin foil hat thing, with Hamilton's behavior behind the safety car not being stellar, perhaps a penalty (much lesser than vettels) would have been issued if not for his own problems. The timing was suspect, plus, no way it would have sat well with people if Hamilton had received a 5 second time penalty or something and finished further back than he did and vettel benefit more after his actions. Kind of his if a racing incident could possible be viewed as worthy of a penalty, but the offending car is knocked out of the race, it's left alone because it's already penalized naturally through the dnf. Hamilton got a "penalty" he maybe deserved, vettel as well, though vettel probably did deserve a bigger penalty than Hamilton. Maybe they thought the time lost to fix Hamilton's head rest would be less than it ended up being.

Overall, great race. Just totally different and unpredictable. Good for stroll. I feel sort of sorry for him, which is hard to do for a spoiled rich kid, but it seems like he's not as into this as his daddy is and is kind of under pressure to do what his daddy wants him to. May be way off, just looks like an overbearing dad living out his own fantasy to me. So congrats to him on some success. Bottas had a great race. Nice comeback. Alonso with another humorous radio message too. This track has a feel of a new Monaco. Ill-fitting at spots for f1 cars, but extravagant scenery, great spectacle, and even better racing. Please keep going here!

[Aysedasi]

Originally Posted by wnut

Hamilton on the other hand brake tested Vettel, not at all dangerous!

Nope.

Not unless you have evidence that none of us (or the FIA) have seen thus far.

[bauble]

Originally Posted by Aysedasi

Nope.

Not unless you have evidence that none of us (or the FIA) have seen thus far.

Come on Ace, Lewis is an experienced driver, he knew exactly what he was doing, sticking within the rules but way outside the spirit, and intention of them, He clearly hoped to cause as much chaos behind him as possible hoping that Vettel would get involved. Being the leader it was his RESPONSIBILITY to keep things orderly as required by the regulations, he was every bit as guilty as Seb in his behaviour, and now plays the 'Moral High Ground Card' hoping to cause as much trouble for the rival he fears most.

Far too many people are prepare to ignore his faults and failings, as they do Verstappen, because he is a 'racer'.


Oh! By the way, did I mention it was my birthday today?

[Aysedasi]

You did, and you already have my best wishes . We fundamentally disagree on this my friend, so further debate is probably otiose..... In any event, I was merely pointing out wnut's comment which has no evidence whatsoever to back it up.... As a lawyer, I like to see evidence and not manipulation of the facts with assumptions in order to justify something which someone would dearly love to be the case.... (which I also see plenty of!). TBH, I'm done with the issue and it's time to move on however I just couldn't resist drawing attention to factual inaccuracy.....

[bobec]

Originally Posted by Aysedasi

Nope.

Not unless you have evidence that none of us (or the FIA) have seen thus far.

Here's a new theory. It also explains why they denied Hamilton slowed down and put all blame on Vettel:


http://www.f1fanatic.co.uk/2017/06/2...ersial-restart


Here you can see Hamilton slowing down right at the apex instead of accelerating:

https://streamable.com/phz5p


Assuming the F1fanatic theory is correct, I still think Hamilton should have done it differently, such as slowing down more before the apex and using the stretch prior to the apex for increasing the distance from the SC - it would have been more predictable, and therefore, safer.

[chillibowl]

happy birthday bauble!

i hope these debates with you will continue on for many more years to come!

[Adam43]

Accelerating or slowing down at the apex is irrelevant here as it wasn't under racing conditions. He could pace it as much as he wanted (no sudden moves). In fact he is actively discouraged from accelerating too much in a straight line up till this point.

Spirit of the rules, I understand that concept, but I don't think it is really relevant here. I do, as I have said, think that Hamilton increased the risk of someone running into the back of him by his actions. He did this to reduce the risk of someone overtaking him at the restart. Arguably he risked too much, but I don't think he did anything wrong.

However Vettel cannot use this as an excuse. He pulled along side and swerved into Hamilton's car! Not the worst racing crime ever, but deserves a disqualification. I smiled when he finished ahead of Hamilton because I was thinking of the head shrapnel here. However it is a little unfair.

I haven't read Roebuck's column yet, but the headline looks spot on. He's described as petulant, which is a fair description, rather than evil murderer (although the sniff article is funny). It also says he should have been disqualified. Yep, he should. With many (more) points on his licence and suspended sentence of doom if he does anything like it again.

[RWill2073]

Originally Posted by Aysedasi

Nope.

Not unless you have evidence that none of us (or the FIA) have seen thus far.

Originally Posted by Akrapovic

I'm sure I see it during the race and someone screen capped it. There was a point where Lewis was on the brakes.

https://streamable.com/phz5p
.

[spider]

Originally Posted by bobec

Here's a new theory. It also explains why they denied Hamilton slowed down and put all blame on Vettel:


http://www.f1fanatic.co.uk/2017/06/2...ersial-restart


Here you can see Hamilton slowing down right at the apex instead of accelerating:

https://streamable.com/phz5p


Assuming the F1fanatic theory is correct, I still think Hamilton should have done it differently, such as slowing down more before the apex and using the stretch prior to the apex for increasing the distance from the SC - it would have been more predictable, and therefore, safer.

I definitely think that's what was going on. Who was in the pace car this weekend? Maylander? He was clearly a lot slower this weekend, for whatever reason (unpredictable on where the marshals would be?).

Noticed in the race when he almost caught the safety car - remembering what happened in the GP2 race the year before.

Just think it was extremely ill-thought out - not brake testing. Then it all kicked off, clearly...

[Adam43]

Originally Posted by RWill2073

https://streamable.com/phz5p
.

Originally Posted by ascarracinguk

not sure id trust a 1 frame screenshot from a TV broadcast over the vast amount of data that the stewards will have had. tv broadcast images are often wrong or behind what is happening on track

.

[RWill2073]

I mean, we generally trust the TV broadcast telemetry we are given and quote it and rely on it, so not sure why we would not in this instance. I get it's not perfect, but why are we using this instance to stop believing it?

[Adam43]

Originally Posted by RWill2073

I mean, we generally trust the TV broadcast telemetry we are given and quote it and rely on it, so not sure why we would not in this instance. I get it's not perfect, but why are we using this instance to stop believing it?

Do we? I wouldn't trust it as anything other than an indication, especially with things like top speed.

Well the data the FIA has is likely to be more reliable, otherwise they would not use it!

I'm interested in how the data on screen is generated? Is it a direct measurement from the throttle, brake, etc... sensors? Or is it implied from other data. I can add brake and acceleration lights to my in car videos, but I have no sensor on the pedal, it is simply inferred from acceleration data. I don't know, but I'd like to.

In fact as this goes on I'm much more interested in this than what happened in Baku!

Still, the FIA had the data direct from the car and it showed he didn't brake, what is the alternative? Mercedes edited the data before submission? The FIA are covering for Hamilton. If so they need to tell the people!

[RWill2073]

Originally Posted by Adam43

Do we? I wouldn't trust it as anything other than an indication, especially with things like top speed.

Well the data the FIA has is likely to be more reliable, otherwise they would not use it!

I'm interested in how the data on screen is generated? Is it a direct measurement from the throttle, brake, etc... sensors? Or is it implied from other data. I can add brake and acceleration lights to my in car videos, but I have no sensor on the pedal, it is simply inferred from acceleration data. I don't know, but I'd like to.

In fact as this goes on I'm much more interested in this than what happened in Baku!

Still, the FIA had the data direct from the car and it showed he didn't brake, what is the alternative? Mercedes edited the data before submission? The FIA are covering for Hamilton. If so they need to tell the people!

I'd like to know how the on screen data is generated as well. I just can't remember ever reading any questioning or caveats to the on screen data before, so seeing it all of a sudden to try to pick a side seems suspicious.

As for the FIA having better data and not penalizing Hamilton, I touched on that earlier. Considering the timing of their decision coinciding with Hamilton being called in for the head rest, it looked like a "self penalty" type of thing. Like when a car makes a borderline move that could go either way in warranting a penalty, but because they knocked themselves out of the race, it sorted itself out and no further action is taken. Based on Vettel's infraction being more severe, it would have been unfair for Hamilton to come out further behind with a penalty he may have deserved, because of his head rest, so it sort of sorted itself out. I would even wonder if they thought his coming in to fix the head rest may have only taken 5 or so seconds, which should have been less of a "penalty" than Vettel's 10 seconds.

Bottom line, if Hamilton had gotten an added 5 second hold for his actions, and fallen further behind Vettel, this whole incident looks even worse with the more severe offender effectively getting a lesser "penalty".

[Akrapovic]

It's not unknown for teams to flat out lie to the FIA. Lewis has been involved in that before with McLaren. Not saying that's what's happened in this case, but that clearly shows he's doing around 66kmh on the apex, slows further in an acceleration zone to around 52kmh before he's hit.

You don't need the brake icon to be accurate, you can actually see he's slowed down. It's pretty obvious on the screen that the car is slower than it was on entry, despite the circuit going downhill. I don't think it's unreasonable to expect the car in front to speeding up on the exit of a corner.

Again, it by no means excuses Vettels actions, which were far worse than Lewis, and Lewis is not the only driver on the grid who does it. But if you slow down on corner exits, what exactly do you think will happen? It's just inviting this sort of incident.

[Adam43]

I guess there has been no major reason to question it.

As for Hamilton doing anything wrong. I just don't see that he did. Even if he did touch the brake. Assuming it wasn't dramatic braking, which it didn't appear to be on the screen, he can slow or ease off there.

And the evidence shows he didn't. Apart from your theory that they are covering something up. Which is fanciful, IMO. There is no evidence of that at all.

Hamilton played it risk, but not illegally.

And then there is the real issue. Vettel drove into the side of him!