Formula 1

[wadman]

53 minutes ago, jerry said:

Think Lewis did get off a bit lightly there . Able to replace his tires under the red flag and start from second again . The 10 seconds time penalty was nothing compared to the damage done . He was way off the apex and than claims Max turns in on him ... well there was a corner Lewis , what you think he was going to do ... ?   

There are some comments (not here) to suggest that the 2 were side by side when contact occured.  That's nonsense.  Hamilton's left front tire hit Verstappen's right rear tire, so clearly Hamilton was behind him.

Look at Hamilton's follow through from an overhead camera.  After the contact, look at the line with which he ended up taking the corner.  He went well wide on the turn.  For Verstappen to avoid contact, he would have had to swing so wide on the outside that he would have 2 wheels in the gravel.

The race stewards ruled against Hamilton, they judged him to be at fault and penalized him.  Problem is, it was only a 10 second (non stop and go) penalty which hardly fit the crime. 

[kane666]

I don't understand why it wasn't a stop and go. They adjudged Hamilton to be at fault for an accident that took out another driver on one of the fastest corners on any track. A non stop and go is a slap on the wrist which ultimately made no difference to the outcome.

Hamilton: "So I dummied him, moved to the left and then moved to the right for that gap. I was pretty far alongside him but I could see he wasn't going to back out."

Could see he wasn't going to back out but kept going anyway. All class.

 

[PepeLePew]

There are partisan opinions and there are knowledgeable ones.

Same move on LeClerc. Leclerc realised he'd lost the corner and conceded it thereby avoiding a 51G penalty. Max never concedes and elects to cut across the attacking car. This sometimes ends in collision which is technically the attackers fault but the stewards are racers and understand these things, hence just a 10 second add on.

If you are going to race in a certain style that works for you most of the time you shouldn't moan too loud when it occasionally bites you, same can be said for Marquez. Constantly pushing until he crashes it was only a matter of time before he got a serious injury. 

As for Lewis's line and hitting Max in the rear tyre, he was backing off slightly to avoid a bigger accident so at impact he was further back than he had been a fraction of a second before, additionally the line you intend to take is no longer available when you've been hit by a car coming across it. 

[chunky123]

IMHO it was 50/50 and Verstappen needs to wind back on the aggression. Very similar mentality to Senna. Hope the outcomes are not the same.

[PepeLePew]

23 hours ago, chunky123 said:

Very similar mentality to Senna. Hope the outcomes are not the same.

I don't know. The Senna\Prost rivalry produced such great drama and racing I'm hoping the Sir Hamilton/Verstappen one will be very similar 

[Tatanka]

[keepitfun]

On 20/07/2021 at 03:35, PepeLePew said:

There are partisan opinions and there are knowledgeable ones.

Same move on LeClerc. Leclerc realised he'd lost the corner and conceded it thereby avoiding a 51G penalty. Max never concedes and elects to cut across the attacking car.

What? All you have to do is drive at a car and everyone else should bow down and concede?  Absolute bollocks.  And as for the partisan knowledgeable comment…I suppose the stewards are both….knowledgeable …it was Hamilton’s fault, partisan,….just a wrist slap.

 

blokes going to wreck his legacy even further as he scrambles to stay on top 

[PepeLePew]

18 minutes ago, keepitfun said:

What? All you have to do is drive at a car and everyone else should bow down and concede?  Absolute bollocks.  And as for the partisan knowledgeable comment…I suppose the stewards are both….knowledgeable …it was Hamilton’s fault, partisan,….just a wrist slap.

 

blokes going to wreck his legacy even further as he scrambles to stay on top 

Well you proved both points there . Keep watching F1 though, I've no doubt you enjoy it in your own way.

Attacking a corner on the inside is the most standard overtake you can attempt, it's not 'drive at a car' 

Perhaps you should read the FIA verdict on the incident to gain a bit of knowledge as to how they saw it. I'll give you a head start. If you look up the word 'predominantly' it means 'for the most part' which implies there was fault on both sides. 

 

[wadman]

29 minutes ago, keepitfun said:

What? All you have to do is drive at a car and everyone else should bow down and concede?  Absolute bollocks.  And as for the partisan knowledgeable comment…I suppose the stewards are both….knowledgeable …it was Hamilton’s fault, partisan,….just a wrist slap.

 

blokes going to wreck his legacy even further as he scrambles to stay on top 

 

I agree about the partisan part.  So far, I haven't come across a single Brit who didn't think that it was at least part Verstappen's fauilt, or it's just a "racing incident".  Non-Brits generally think Lewis is to blame, although not unanimous.  That's partisan alright.

[keepitfun]

10 minutes ago, PepeLePew said:

Attacking a corner on the inside is the most standard overtake you can attempt, it's not 'drive at a car' 

Yes it is in the most part unless you just drive at a car as Hamilton did in a desperate attempt to remain relevant this season.   
 

and if us plebs know so little that we need to be demeaned then perhaps you need to go play with some F 1 hammo fanboys on another forum.  See   We can all play the man….ntbn.  Go report yourself to a moderator….oh shit!

 

 

[wadman]

35 minutes ago, PepeLePew said:

Perhaps you should read the FIA verdict on the incident to gain a bit of knowledge as to how they saw it. I'll give you a head start. If you look up the word 'predominantly' it means 'for the most part' which implies there was fault on both sides. 

 

That "predominantly" can also mean that part of the fault lies with Lewis, the rest is just part of racing.  It doesn't necessarily mean that Verstappen is at fault too.  In fault, nowhere have I read/heard explicitly from the FIA that Verstappen is (partially) at fault too.

From the BBC:

British Grand Prix: Max Verstappen labels Lewis Hamilton 'disrespectful' and 'unsportsmanlike' - BBC Sport

The British Grand Prix stewards judged Hamilton to be "predominantly at fault". They said Hamilton went into the corner "slightly behind and on the inside", saying that he was "on a line that did not reach the apex of the corner, with room available to the inside".

That's a very clear verdict from the stewards: Lewis didn't drive the line he should have.  He had room to do so.  He just didn't want to.

[eXplosief]

And now RBR is also looking into legal action. Not sure if that is the best way to go on.

[PepeLePew]

22 hours ago, wadman said:

That "predominantly" can also mean that part of the fault lies with Lewis,

No 'can' about it. It means they were both at fault but Lewis was more at fault. 

23 hours ago, keepitfun said:

Yes it is in the most part unless you just drive at a car as Hamilton did in a desperate attempt to remain relevant this season.   
 

and if us plebs know so little that we need to be demeaned then perhaps you need to go play with some F 1 hammo fanboys on another forum.  See   We can all play the man….ntbn.  Go report yourself to a moderator….oh shit!

 

 

Well if you feel demeaned that's on you. You probably have a good reason for it. 

[PepeLePew]

23 hours ago, wadman said:

 

I agree about the partisan part.  So far, I haven't come across a single Brit who didn't think that it was at least part Verstappen's fauilt, or it's just a "racing incident".  Non-Brits generally think Lewis is to blame, although not unanimous.  That's partisan alright.

Yep, the majority of watchers are just casual fans so they'll take a partisan attitude. It's all good fun and part of the show. It's just got nothing to do with the facts of the incident. If those people wish to delve a bit deeper into the sport great, if they are happy just cheering on their hero regardless of reality, also great. The sports needs all it's fans to prosper and I want it to prosper.

If anyone wants to be educated on the reality just listen to most ex racer pundits. Regardless of their loyalty they pretty much all call it a racing incident caused by both drivers refusing to concede the corner. As for Horner and RB getting all irate that's just silly. Horner as an ex racer knows full well you can go into Copse 2 abreast and both come out the other side, happens all the time.

[simon46]

51 minutes ago, PepeLePew said:

Yep, the majority of watchers are just casual fans so they'll take a partisan attitude. It's all good fun and part of the show. It's just got nothing to do with the facts of the incident. If those people wish to delve a bit deeper into the sport great, if they are happy just cheering on their hero regardless of reality, also great. The sports needs all it's fans to prosper and I want it to prosper.

I'm Brit and a long time fan and have watched similar crashes for years the difference here is that Verstappen and Hamilton are "greats" and not entitled to make the mistake of lesser or touring car racers.

The last 2 greats having similar crashes were Senna driving up the inside of Prost (both in McLaren) at the chicane Japan, as Prost could not disappear, he turned in trapping Senna.

The McLaren was so superior that Senna was still able to win and was then disqualified.

Very similar was Senna driving up the inside of Prost (then Ferrari) at a very similar fast right sweeper, both cars were out instantly.  General view was it was a deliberate ram, it ensured Senna the championship.

Horner may rant but the stewards made the correct decision, may not be justice, but that is motor racing.  Verstappen is not without history, ask his teammates, similar rams, Schumacher/Hill ,Schumacher/ Vielneuve did not mean that MS is not one of the greats.

[wadman]

2 hours ago, PepeLePew said:

No 'can' about it. It means they were both at fault but Lewis was more at fault. 

FIA has not explicitly assigned fault to Verstappen.  In fact, the way they have crafted their statements, they were very careful to avoid doing so.  They were very blunt in calling it as Lewis being "predominantly at fault".

[kane666]

5 hours ago, PepeLePew said:

No 'can' about it. It means they were both at fault but Lewis was more at fault. 

Well if you feel demeaned that's on you. You probably have a good reason for it. 

3) The Forum promotes a “Nice To Be Nice” (N2BN) ethos. This is to promote discussion as well as to protect the integrity of Pattaya-Addicts.com. Members posting outside this ethos may be sanctioned, restricted or banned.

Your default poition is basically to call anyone who disagrees with you an imbicile who knows nothing about F1.

 

[kane666]

This is Mercedes defence:

'It requires you are substantially alongside and it requires that you must be able to make the corner. By make the corner it means go round the corner and not leave the track or lose control of the car. Those are the things you need to satisfy.

'If you can go round the corner, if you are substantially alongside the other car then the corner is yours.

'What that means is not that you have to emerge in the lead, what it means is that you do not have to cede your position, you do not have to back off and the other car has a duty to avoid hitting you.

'So, if you follow the notes that are provided to the FIA stewards and you look frame by frame at what happened with Lewis, he was substantially alongside, he absolutely would have made the corner and indeed did make the corner and therefore there was no need for him to cede any ground.

I would argue there was no way possible Hamilton was ever going to make the corner. He has backed off just before hitting Max, he has hit another car (more likely to slow you down a bit than make you go faster) and he slowed down so much that he was passed by a Ferrari that was a substantial distance behind him. Even then he barely makes the corner.

Leclerc far behind:

After backing off, hitting someone, then slowing down enough to be overtaken by a car a substantial distance behind, this is apparently Hamilton always going to make the corner:

Slowed down so much that past goes the Ferrari.

 

 

 

[OKAY]

F1 is a partisan sport. There iare only 20 cars, 10 teams, fewer builders of engines/bodies and even fewer tire makers. The whole sport is built on TV nowadays, it has to get fans excited and people get excited about drivers. It has to be partisan.

[Edge]

Factoids?

I've read lots of opinion from people qualified to give it......most/all all were also partisan, only some drivers tactfully resisted.

F1 is in trouble and it seems Sprints were just pissing in the wind.

Some think Hamilton's knee campaign turned more people off F1.

Most seem to agree Hamilton lost more support than he gained with his cheat move.

He wants to talk a lot about drivers having respect........for him.

[PepeLePew]

On 22/07/2021 at 15:02, OKAY said:

F1 is a partisan sport. There iare only 20 cars, 10 teams, fewer builders of engines/bodies and even fewer tire makers. The whole sport is built on TV nowadays, it has to get fans excited and people get excited about drivers. It has to be partisan.

Sadly I think you may be right, but it never used to be. Football was always partisan with fans declaring their team as the best regardless of results or performances. F1 used to be a lot more difficult to follow. It's only since the late 80's early 90's that all the races where even shown on TV. Fans had to do some work to follow their sport and I guess that weeded out people who only had a casual interest.

So quite possibly the majority of viewers are casual and therefore partisan. So what. It doesn't make them right when they say "it was his fault because I don't like him' nor does it give them the right to throw their toys out of the pram and chuck abuse about when it's pointed out how wrong they are in that instance.

 

 

[PepeLePew]

On 21/07/2021 at 22:30, wadman said:

FIA has not explicitly assigned fault to Verstappen.  In fact, the way they have crafted their statements, they were very careful to avoid doing so.  They were very blunt in calling it as Lewis being "predominantly at fault".

Already explained the predominantly thing, but maybe this one will make a mark 

https://www.autosport.com/f1/news/the-details-at-the-heart-of-the-hamilton-verstappen-debate/6634406/?_bta_tid=32382229001401966044213345354365118996629029291312131712728959625927218536367319858794759045951295078957057

[PepeLePew]

On 22/07/2021 at 02:12, kane666 said:

3) The Forum promotes a “Nice To Be Nice” (N2BN) ethos. This is to promote discussion as well as to protect the integrity of Pattaya-Addicts.com. Members posting outside this ethos may be sanctioned, restricted or banned.

Your default poition is basically to call anyone who disagrees with you an imbicile who knows nothing about F1.

 

Your default position is to misread what was said and fly into huff rather than try a cogent argument. I was being nice by pointing out the fallacy in some of the comments. If people choose to take offence then that's on them, not me.

Get back to F1 now please.

[PepeLePew]

Lets try this one from Joe Saward, very well respected independent F1 journalist who calls it how it is. His integrity and objectivity is well known in F1 circles.

https://joesaward.wordpress.com/2021/07/20/green-notebook-from-the-fog/

[mikeyboy]

Excellent action packed race at the Hungaroring on Sunday .

Alpine's  Esteban Ocon  won his , and the teams first ever  F1  race .

A pile up on the first lap took out four cars with two others retiring soon after .    Max was shunted to near the back of the pack and Lewis avoided the pile up .   Amazing that the entire field pitted soon after , excluding Hamilton who was leading at the time !

Seb Vettel  finished 2nd although disqualified after the race due to less than required fuel left in his tank to sample , Aston Martin have appealed .

More races like this one please .

Mikeyboy

 

Edited August 2, 2021 by mikeyboy
add