[Official] United States Grand Prix 2018: Grand Prix Weekend Thread

[Born Racer]

We're back in Austin.

[E.B]

Hmmmm a 5:10am Monday start time for me. Recording devices for this one.

[Greem]

Originally Posted by E.B

Hmmmm a 5:10am Monday start time for me. Recording devices for this one.

Should be starting just as I get back from the BRSCC Mazda finals at Donington. Overalls off, feet up, beer, F1!

[S griffin]

Looking forward to it, this is a circuit that overtaking does happen on

[bjohnsonsmith]

Great intro as ever, .

Like the late James Hunt would say, "It's all over bar the shouting", as Lulu pretty much has this in the bag. This is the 7th running of the race at COTA and he's won here 5 times, the only other winner being Vettee, who looks like being the bridesmaid in the WDC, again.

[Armco Bender]

Its raining....I thought Texas was all desert and tumbleweeds?...

[E.B]

You should be happy.... your man (Hartley) is currently P3!

[ascarracinguk]

Vettel with a 3 place grid drop and 20 lines.. “I must slow sufficiently under the red flag”....

[ascarracinguk]

Originally Posted by Armco Bender

Its raining....I thought Texas was all desert and tumbleweeds?...

No that’s just Sebs title shot

[E.B]

Sebastian Vettel has received a three-place grid penalty for failing to slow sufficiently for red flags during P1. So even if he qualifies fastest, the best he can do is start 4th.

Game even more over, but no one to blame but himself. Again.

[F1Guy]

Originally Posted by E.B

Game even more over, but no one to blame but himself. Again.

14 drivers on track at the time the red came out. Only one driver was penalised for exceeding the speed.

Same driver is now asking for a rule change. So is it the ruling that is an issue, or the incompetence of that one driver??

[ScotsBrutesFan]

I'd like to see a breakdown of where all the drivers were on the track and their individual speed traces. As was discussed by the SkyF1 guys, if you are in a slow section it's easy not to accelerate. When you are in a high speed section, and given track conditions ... Is jumping hard on the breaks to get below a delta time the safest option, or a more gradual controlled slowdown to that delta speed?

As PDR pointed out, there would or should be a yellow flag displayed in the incident sector as well as the Red flags around the circuit. Where Vettel was there was no additional yellow.

[F1Guy]

Originally Posted by ScotsBrutesFan

Is jumping hard on the breaks to get below a delta time the safest option

No, and it is not what the driver is required to do.

Originally Posted by ScotsBrutesFan

or a more gradual controlled slowdown to that delta speed?

Correct, and what the driver is required to do. This is what Vettel did not do. He did slow down, but not to the delta, and even increased his speed several times. To add to this, he was not aware what the red flag was for. He was thinking the red was for a stranded car at T9 or T10!

Vettel: "I saw the red flag, I slowed down, I had a look around to see where the car was, potentially stuck in the wall or if there was one around Turn 9 and 10 and then I slowed down significantly to comply with the rules."

No excuses. Slowing down only at a point where he believed there was an issue, but then speeding up at another part of the track that he believed there wasn't an issue. That is just plain dumb, and dangerous - particularly if a marshal was to be on the track to recover a car, debris or something other.

Ocon and Ricciardo were given the same penalty in Japan and Australia respectively. If anything, Ricciardo's penalty in particular was the most unjust of the three.

[Skam85]

Seems like some other drivers also agree with Vettel


https://www.motorsport.com/f1/news/v...sjean/3198458/

Apparently, inside the paddock, other drivers are not happy that Vettel got this penalty. .
There’s talk in the paddock of a change for next year’s red flag rules. Apparently

[Akrapovic]

Vettel is incompetent and has no excuses (despite the drivers backing him up), but Daniel Riccardos equal penalty was unjust.

Good to see another thread in the F1 forum get derailed right on time.

[S griffin]

I think it's a bit harsh. Anyway the ball is even more in Lewis' court now

[ascarracinguk]

Originally Posted by S griffin

I think it's a bit harsh. Anyway the ball is even more in Lewis' court now

Harsh?

It’s very clear to all racers from club level upwards. Red flag means slow down and be prepared go stop. Vettel was clearly going too fast and not adhering to the rule. Just another dumb mistake. Not that I think it will make much difference, he will qualify 4/5th and be up to 2/3rd within a couple of laps if the start remains clean

[S griffin]

I just think it is telling that most of the drivers seem to agree with him.

[ascarracinguk]

Originally Posted by S griffin

I just think it is telling that most of the drivers seem to agree with him.

And yet the people implementing the rule book don’t. Shock horror divers don’t like to slow down. I’m sorry, he had 27 seconds to slow down adequately and didn’t. As a marshal who has to work on the side of a live track under yellows and under red flags I have ZERO sympathy, especially under a red flag situation when there is absolutely no need to speed back to the pit lane. These are meant to be the best drivers in the world and yet he makes a mistake more akin to a club level racer

[Akrapovic]

The people implementing the rulebook did say he was penalised "due to consistency", which is a really weird statement. Is he not penalised because he did dangerously? Just being penalised because others were? And why are other drivers not happy with this? Is it a good rule badly written?

Once again, the FIA and stewards don't help the situation with how they worded it. Shouldn't have introduced that doubt with the consistency statement. If he's broken a rule then just say that - don't be all like "well, others got a penalty..so I guess he should!"

[ascarracinguk]

Originally Posted by Akrapovic

The people implementing the rulebook did say he was penalised "due to consistency", which is a really weird statement. Is he not penalised because he did dangerously? Just being penalised because others were? And why are other drivers not happy with this? Is it a good rule badly written?

Once again, the FIA and stewards don't help the situation with how they worded it. Shouldn't have introduced that doubt with the consistency statement. If he's broken a rule then just say that - don't be all like "well, others got a penalty..so I guess he should!"

The issue is that other drivers have been penilised for the same incident in the past. If they hadn’t penilised Vettel then what message would that send out??

If the drivers have an issue with the rules then they have the GPDA in which they can voice their opinions to make a change, and despite it occurif before non of them has done so (to my knowledge)

[EffectiveSprinkles]

Originally Posted by Akrapovic

The people implementing the rulebook did say he was penalised "due to consistency"

Isn't that on every steward's decision nowadays? They figured just putting it there would make people believe it's true

[ascarracinguk]

Originally Posted by EffectiveSprinkles

Isn't that on every steward's decision nowadays? They figured just putting it there would make people believe it's true

Well it’s either a rule or it isn’t. But since it is, has been applied before, what choice do the stewards have other than to apply it again?

If they didn’t apply it to Vettel, then it would create inconsistency which people would complain about!

Please explain to me what else the stewards could do in this situation?

(Hypothetical question as you probably still have me muted as you can’t form a discussion unless someone agrees with your POV)

[Akrapovic]

Originally Posted by ascarracinguk

The issue is that other drivers have been penilised for the same incident in the past. If they hadn’t penilised Vettel then what message would that send out??

If the drivers have an issue with the rules then they have the GPDA in which they can voice their opinions to make a change, and despite it occurif before non of them has done so (to my knowledge)

No I do agree with you, don't get me wrong - I just think it was a bizarre statement to put out. Yes, he should be penalised if he broke a rule. But if the justification is consistency and not the reason for the rule (danger), then it just reads really oddly. That suggests the priority is all wrong - we're penalising for consistency rather than the driver doing something dangerous.

GPDA sounds fine, but let's be honest - it was absolutely worthless. Mr Webber used to pretend he was some sort of hard man running it, like he was the local driver rep gangster, saying the hard things so somebody else didn't have to. But they'd frequently come to "agreements" with the FIA, and then Webber would whine about it afterwards anyway. So even with with the F1 driver equivalent of Danny Dyer pretending to be a mob boss, they still never achieved anything.

[ascarracinguk]

Originally Posted by Akrapovic

No I do agree with you, don't get me wrong - I just think it was a bizarre statement to put out. Yes, he should be penalised if he broke a rule. But if the justification is consistency and not the reason for the rule (danger), then it just reads really oddly. That suggests the priority is all wrong - we're penalising for consistency rather than the driver doing something dangerous.

GPDA sounds fine, but let's be honest - it was absolutely worthless. Mr Webber used to pretend he was some sort of hard man running it, like he was the local driver rep gangster, saying the hard things so somebody else didn't have to. But they'd frequently come to "agreements" with the FIA, and then Webber would whine about it afterwards anyway. So even with with the F1 driver equivalent of Danny Dyer pretending to be a mob boss, they still never achieved anything.

Well that’s true lol. But then to be fair I’ve been (and still am a driver/ steward/ marshal). A lot of the time, drivers only think of themselves and what either makes their lives easier or gives them a competitive advantage. I’m sure the FIA/ Charlie Whiting take notice of what drivers say, but then counter argue because drivers haven’t really thought things through from every angle