planetf1.com

It is currently Mon Jul 23, 2018 9:34 am

All times are UTC


Forum rules


Please read the forum rules



Post new topic Reply to topic

Whose fault is it anyway?
Vettel 60%  60%  [ 90 ]
Verstappen 11%  11%  [ 16 ]
Raikkonen 4%  4%  [ 6 ]
Racing Incident 25%  25%  [ 37 ]
Total votes : 149
Author Message
PostPosted: Mon Sep 25, 2017 5:35 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Nov 05, 2010 6:33 pm
Posts: 9828
Location: Travelling around the world
Zoue wrote:
mcdo wrote:
Ryu28 wrote:
Vettel and Ferrari are battling for the world drivers and constructors championships. Max is not, so he has no right interfering with battles which do not concern him. He should know his place and should have backed off. Sadly his antics handed Lewis an undeserved victory and probably a fourth title too.

Max only had one goal in Singapore - to win the race. Vettel should have taken more care than to go dicing with someone who literally has nothing to lose

Not sure how Lewis' victory was undeserved. My belief is that with or without the start crash he would have been hassling whoever was leading for the race win

To be fair Vettel pretty much had to win that one, too, so he had everything to play for. It was his best opportunity to put daylight between him and Hamilton and he couldn't afford to drop any points if he could help it.

I don't think it was a "must win". But I do think it was a "must not DNF"

_________________
I don't rely entirely on God
ImageImage
I rely on Prost



FA#14


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Sep 25, 2017 8:36 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Feb 23, 2014 3:53 am
Posts: 5424
Location: Michigan, USA
mcdo wrote:
Zoue wrote:
To be fair Vettel pretty much had to win that one, too, so he had everything to play for. It was his best opportunity to put daylight between him and Hamilton and he couldn't afford to drop any points if he could help it.

I don't think it was a "must win". But I do think it was a "must not DNF"

It was a 'must beat Hamilton'. But if you look at the tracks ahead, 4 of the 6 are expected to favor Mercedes (according to Lewis himself, at least). If we assume Hamilton and Vettel will finish 1-2 in some order in all of them (not a guarantee, but quite possible) Vettel really needed to emerge from Singapore with a lead of at least 15 points. That was only achievable with either a second place and Hamilton not scoring, or a win and Hamilton outside the top six.

Neither was very likely to happen, but to have any real likelihood of taking the title without misfortune for his main rival, Vettel really did need a win.

_________________
PF1 PICK 10 COMPETITION (3 wins, 12 podiums): 2017: 19th| 2016: 3rd| 2015: 4th
PF1 TOP THREE TEAM CHAMPIONSHIP (No Limit Excedrin Racing): 2017: 2nd| 2015: 1st
AUTOSPORT GP PREDICTOR: 2017 United States Champion! (world #2)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Sep 26, 2017 12:43 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Nov 05, 2010 6:33 pm
Posts: 9828
Location: Travelling around the world
Exediron wrote:
mcdo wrote:
Zoue wrote:
To be fair Vettel pretty much had to win that one, too, so he had everything to play for. It was his best opportunity to put daylight between him and Hamilton and he couldn't afford to drop any points if he could help it.

I don't think it was a "must win". But I do think it was a "must not DNF"

It was a 'must beat Hamilton'. But if you look at the tracks ahead, 4 of the 6 are expected to favor Mercedes (according to Lewis himself, at least). If we assume Hamilton and Vettel will finish 1-2 in some order in all of them (not a guarantee, but quite possible) Vettel really needed to emerge from Singapore with a lead of at least 15 points. That was only achievable with either a second place and Hamilton not scoring, or a win and Hamilton outside the top six.

Neither was very likely to happen, but to have any real likelihood of taking the title without misfortune for his main rival, Vettel really did need a win.

Losing the race to Max wouldn't have been a big deal for Seb provided he beat Hamilton

A couple races ago Marchionne said the analysis showed that the remaining tracks should suit Ferrari. Kimi is also saying it's wrong to assume Ferrari will struggle. Both sides have been talking their chances up

_________________
I don't rely entirely on God
ImageImage
I rely on Prost



FA#14


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Sep 26, 2017 6:57 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Oct 06, 2006 12:07 pm
Posts: 9220
lamo wrote:
Option or Prime wrote:
There have been several posts saying the respective drivers had minimal knowledge of the location of the other drivers involved because the mirrors are both small and poorly located.
Is there any reason why with the size and resolution of camera technology why the drivers cant have practically 360 vision via camera. The clip above gives footage for consumption on youtube, why on earth can't the guys who might be involved in a high speed collision be given sight of the cars around them.
At least that eliminates the excuse...."I didn't see him."

I have always wondered why this hasn't been implemented or at least some kind of laser/radar and beeps in the ear if a car approaches either side of you. I guess weight is key.

Working my way through the topic so my apologies if this has already been discussed but I think that while mirrors are allowed (and required even) this kind of camera system could be classed as a (currently forbidden) driver aid? That's not to say I couldn't be a good idea to allow in the next set of regulations.

_________________
Räikkönen - Vettel - Bottas
Thank you Nico - You´re the champ!

PF1 Pick 10 Competition 2016: CHAMPION (2 wins, 8 podiums)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Sep 26, 2017 8:25 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2012 7:07 am
Posts: 11411
mcdo wrote:
Exediron wrote:
mcdo wrote:
Zoue wrote:
To be fair Vettel pretty much had to win that one, too, so he had everything to play for. It was his best opportunity to put daylight between him and Hamilton and he couldn't afford to drop any points if he could help it.

I don't think it was a "must win". But I do think it was a "must not DNF"

It was a 'must beat Hamilton'. But if you look at the tracks ahead, 4 of the 6 are expected to favor Mercedes (according to Lewis himself, at least). If we assume Hamilton and Vettel will finish 1-2 in some order in all of them (not a guarantee, but quite possible) Vettel really needed to emerge from Singapore with a lead of at least 15 points. That was only achievable with either a second place and Hamilton not scoring, or a win and Hamilton outside the top six.

Neither was very likely to happen, but to have any real likelihood of taking the title without misfortune for his main rival, Vettel really did need a win.

Losing the race to Max wouldn't have been a big deal for Seb provided he beat Hamilton

A couple races ago Marchionne said the analysis showed that the remaining tracks should suit Ferrari. Kimi is also saying it's wrong to assume Ferrari will struggle. Both sides have been talking their chances up


McLaren also said they were confident they were going to achieve X within Y period.
That's called morale-boosting, and it is not necessarily the (whole) truth. We'll see on track what will happen but given the past months chances were higher that Ferrari would indeed struggle for the remainder of the season.

_________________
Go Vandoorne - Verstappen - Vettel!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Sep 26, 2017 8:27 am 
Online

Joined: Tue May 05, 2009 11:31 am
Posts: 6130
Covalent wrote:
lamo wrote:
Option or Prime wrote:
There have been several posts saying the respective drivers had minimal knowledge of the location of the other drivers involved because the mirrors are both small and poorly located.
Is there any reason why with the size and resolution of camera technology why the drivers cant have practically 360 vision via camera. The clip above gives footage for consumption on youtube, why on earth can't the guys who might be involved in a high speed collision be given sight of the cars around them.
At least that eliminates the excuse...."I didn't see him."

I have always wondered why this hasn't been implemented or at least some kind of laser/radar and beeps in the ear if a car approaches either side of you. I guess weight is key.

Working my way through the topic so my apologies if this has already been discussed but I think that while mirrors are allowed (and required even) this kind of camera system could be classed as a (currently forbidden) driver aid? That's not to say I couldn't be a good idea to allow in the next set of regulations.


True, I am also not sure how much of a help they would be. It all happens so fast at the start line that it may not be a help at all. On a long straight yes, but at tracks with a short run to T1 then I'm not convinced that it would help.

And where do we stop? Why not installing the steering correction system that takes over if it detects collision? We've heard far worse ideas over the years, what with sprinklers, double points or medal systems.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Sep 26, 2017 8:49 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Nov 05, 2010 6:33 pm
Posts: 9828
Location: Travelling around the world
mds wrote:
mcdo wrote:
Exediron wrote:
mcdo wrote:
Zoue wrote:
To be fair Vettel pretty much had to win that one, too, so he had everything to play for. It was his best opportunity to put daylight between him and Hamilton and he couldn't afford to drop any points if he could help it.

I don't think it was a "must win". But I do think it was a "must not DNF"

It was a 'must beat Hamilton'. But if you look at the tracks ahead, 4 of the 6 are expected to favor Mercedes (according to Lewis himself, at least). If we assume Hamilton and Vettel will finish 1-2 in some order in all of them (not a guarantee, but quite possible) Vettel really needed to emerge from Singapore with a lead of at least 15 points. That was only achievable with either a second place and Hamilton not scoring, or a win and Hamilton outside the top six.

Neither was very likely to happen, but to have any real likelihood of taking the title without misfortune for his main rival, Vettel really did need a win.

Losing the race to Max wouldn't have been a big deal for Seb provided he beat Hamilton

A couple races ago Marchionne said the analysis showed that the remaining tracks should suit Ferrari. Kimi is also saying it's wrong to assume Ferrari will struggle. Both sides have been talking their chances up


McLaren also said they were confident they were going to achieve X within Y period.
That's called morale-boosting, and it is not necessarily the (whole) truth. We'll see on track what will happen but given the past months chances were higher that Ferrari would indeed struggle for the remainder of the season.

Yes but rather than go with The Gospel According to Lewis I think I'll wait and see what happens on track

Pat Symonds did a prediction for Sky that put Ferrari ahead on the remaining tracks. Part of me suspects he threw it together over breakfast. Who knows? Ferrari have already surprised people with their competitiveness this year e.g. Spa

_________________
I don't rely entirely on God
ImageImage
I rely on Prost



FA#14


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Sep 26, 2017 9:12 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue Oct 21, 2003 11:06 am
Posts: 7144
Location: Belgium
Zoue wrote:
To be fair Vettel pretty much had to win that one, too, so he had everything to play for. It was his best opportunity to put daylight between him and Hamilton and he couldn't afford to drop any points if he could help it.
That's pretty much also how the race was seen in the days leading up to it. And I also remember reading after qualifying that Verstappen said he wanted to jump Vettel before turn 1. Which is what he tries every race anyway.

Edit: I just read a comment by Verstappen in Dutch, made after the race.
Quote:
Zelf, zo concludeert Verstappen, kon hij geen kant op. "Als Seb (Vettel, red.) niet rechts had gezeten, had ik Kimi ruimte kunnen geven. Nu kon ik niks. Ook niet van het gas gaan, want dan waren we met de wielen tegen elkaar geknald."
Source: http://www.limburger.nl/cnt/dmf20170918 ... te-van-max

My translation:
Quote:
He himself, concludes Verstappen, had nowhere to go. "If Seb hadn't been to my right, I would have been able to give Kimi room. Now I could do nothing. Not even lift off the throttle, because then we would have banged wheels."

I find the underlined part intriguing, because of what I wrote in this thread yesterday. In this interview, Max says he couldn't lift off, and in another he said that he saw the accident coming. If he is sincere in both statements, it means he didn't understand that he was indeed the person who could have prevented the accident, but didn't. Because he misunderstood what was happening? Or, as a Dutch commentator said afterwards, because he would never lift?

_________________
Use every man after his desert, and who should scape whipping? Use them after your own honour and dignity.

Maria de Villota - Jules Bianchi


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Sep 26, 2017 10:17 am 
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2012 10:39 am
Posts: 23042
Fiki wrote:
Zoue wrote:
To be fair Vettel pretty much had to win that one, too, so he had everything to play for. It was his best opportunity to put daylight between him and Hamilton and he couldn't afford to drop any points if he could help it.
That's pretty much also how the race was seen in the days leading up to it. And I also remember reading after qualifying that Verstappen said he wanted to jump Vettel before turn 1. Which is what he tries every race anyway.

Edit: I just read a comment by Verstappen in Dutch, made after the race.
Quote:
Zelf, zo concludeert Verstappen, kon hij geen kant op. "Als Seb (Vettel, red.) niet rechts had gezeten, had ik Kimi ruimte kunnen geven. Nu kon ik niks. Ook niet van het gas gaan, want dan waren we met de wielen tegen elkaar geknald."
Source: http://www.limburger.nl/cnt/dmf20170918 ... te-van-max

My translation:
Quote:
He himself, concludes Verstappen, had nowhere to go. "If Seb hadn't been to my right, I would have been able to give Kimi room. Now I could do nothing. Not even lift off the throttle, because then we would have banged wheels."

I find the underlined part intriguing, because of what I wrote in this thread yesterday. In this interview, Max says he couldn't lift off, and in another he said that he saw the accident coming. If he is sincere in both statements, it means he didn't understand that he was indeed the person who could have prevented the accident, but didn't. Because he misunderstood what was happening? Or, as a Dutch commentator said afterwards, because he would never lift?

I think I read that interview and IIRC he added that the reason he couldn't lift was that his front wheel was directly ahead of Kimi's rears. So if he'd lifted, Kimi's rear would have hit his fronts. So the only way out would have been to jink right (from his perspective), which would have risked hitting Vettel.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Sep 26, 2017 10:19 am 
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2012 10:39 am
Posts: 23042
Covalent wrote:
lamo wrote:
Option or Prime wrote:
There have been several posts saying the respective drivers had minimal knowledge of the location of the other drivers involved because the mirrors are both small and poorly located.
Is there any reason why with the size and resolution of camera technology why the drivers cant have practically 360 vision via camera. The clip above gives footage for consumption on youtube, why on earth can't the guys who might be involved in a high speed collision be given sight of the cars around them.
At least that eliminates the excuse...."I didn't see him."

I have always wondered why this hasn't been implemented or at least some kind of laser/radar and beeps in the ear if a car approaches either side of you. I guess weight is key.

Working my way through the topic so my apologies if this has already been discussed but I think that while mirrors are allowed (and required even) this kind of camera system could be classed as a (currently forbidden) driver aid? That's not to say I couldn't be a good idea to allow in the next set of regulations.

I'm also wondering just how much time people think these drivers have that they could look at a monitor to judge their position? These incident all tend to happen in the blink of an eye and much of it is instinct anyway


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Sep 26, 2017 12:41 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 24, 2003 1:36 pm
Posts: 2314
F1 MERCENARY wrote:
But that's just it, these guys are racing one another and they will always do so in ultra-tight quarters at the beginning of races, and as such, "IF" they cannot see anything in their mirrors, they need to put a stop to drivers veering over so aggressively on those behind if the purpose is solely to keep from losing position, because if they can't see anything in their mirrors, they could very well be moving over right into someone.

As for Raikkonen's position in this scenario, he couldn't have placed himself any better but unfortunately his teammates over aggression saw to it that his exquisite launch was thwarted.

In regards to Verstappen, IDK what else anyone expected him to do in that scenario. He's driving a car that is not the fastest yet he started on the front row and lifting abruptly while everyone else behind him is accelerating would have possibly seen others pass him. He tried to give Raikkonen room the moment he realized he shot past but in veering right he left less room between himself and Vettel and the squeeze move was on him so harshly he re-corrected to the left and boom!


That's all well and good but how many races are won at the first corner. Lots of races. The problem here was you had a guy with nothing to lose (not that Max did anything wrong) and that was probably on Seb's mind. What Seb did seems pretty normal, it's just that Max couldn't move over because Kimi was there. Common sense suggests that Max should have backed out (since he had cars on either side - and both of them in front of him) but he was the one with nothing to lose, so that wasn't going to happen... and besides, he's racing. Not to mention that by his actions Max continues to solidify his reputation as a hard racer and not someone to be trifled with - which is all good for his future.

I can't criticise Max, because he didn't do anything wrong and Kimi made a great start (albeit whether he was ever going to get around the corner I don't know), but similarly Seb did the basic start, drift to the left and then back to the right to take the corner line that you would expect.

Racing accident.

_________________
Shoot999: "And anyone who puts a Y on the end of his name as a nickname should be punched in the face repeatedly."


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Sep 26, 2017 12:52 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2012 10:39 am
Posts: 23042
ALESI wrote:
F1 MERCENARY wrote:
But that's just it, these guys are racing one another and they will always do so in ultra-tight quarters at the beginning of races, and as such, "IF" they cannot see anything in their mirrors, they need to put a stop to drivers veering over so aggressively on those behind if the purpose is solely to keep from losing position, because if they can't see anything in their mirrors, they could very well be moving over right into someone.

As for Raikkonen's position in this scenario, he couldn't have placed himself any better but unfortunately his teammates over aggression saw to it that his exquisite launch was thwarted.

In regards to Verstappen, IDK what else anyone expected him to do in that scenario. He's driving a car that is not the fastest yet he started on the front row and lifting abruptly while everyone else behind him is accelerating would have possibly seen others pass him. He tried to give Raikkonen room the moment he realized he shot past but in veering right he left less room between himself and Vettel and the squeeze move was on him so harshly he re-corrected to the left and boom!


That's all well and good but how many races are won at the first corner. Lots of races. The problem here was you had a guy with nothing to lose (not that Max did anything wrong) and that was probably on Seb's mind. What Seb did seems pretty normal, it's just that Max couldn't move over because Kimi was there. Common sense suggests that Max should have backed out (since he had cars on either side - and both of them in front of him) but he was the one with nothing to lose, so that wasn't going to happen... and besides, he's racing. Not to mention that by his actions Max continues to solidify his reputation as a hard racer and not someone to be trifled with - which is all good for his future.

I can't criticise Max, because he didn't do anything wrong and Kimi made a great start (albeit whether he was ever going to get around the corner I don't know), but similarly Seb did the basic start, drift to the left and then back to the right to take the corner line that you would expect.

Racing accident.

:thumbup:


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Sep 26, 2017 1:12 pm 
Online

Joined: Tue May 05, 2009 11:31 am
Posts: 6130
Zoue wrote:
ALESI wrote:
F1 MERCENARY wrote:
But that's just it, these guys are racing one another and they will always do so in ultra-tight quarters at the beginning of races, and as such, "IF" they cannot see anything in their mirrors, they need to put a stop to drivers veering over so aggressively on those behind if the purpose is solely to keep from losing position, because if they can't see anything in their mirrors, they could very well be moving over right into someone.

As for Raikkonen's position in this scenario, he couldn't have placed himself any better but unfortunately his teammates over aggression saw to it that his exquisite launch was thwarted.

In regards to Verstappen, IDK what else anyone expected him to do in that scenario. He's driving a car that is not the fastest yet he started on the front row and lifting abruptly while everyone else behind him is accelerating would have possibly seen others pass him. He tried to give Raikkonen room the moment he realized he shot past but in veering right he left less room between himself and Vettel and the squeeze move was on him so harshly he re-corrected to the left and boom!


That's all well and good but how many races are won at the first corner. Lots of races. The problem here was you had a guy with nothing to lose (not that Max did anything wrong) and that was probably on Seb's mind. What Seb did seems pretty normal, it's just that Max couldn't move over because Kimi was there. Common sense suggests that Max should have backed out (since he had cars on either side - and both of them in front of him) but he was the one with nothing to lose, so that wasn't going to happen... and besides, he's racing. Not to mention that by his actions Max continues to solidify his reputation as a hard racer and not someone to be trifled with - which is all good for his future.

I can't criticise Max, because he didn't do anything wrong and Kimi made a great start (albeit whether he was ever going to get around the corner I don't know), but similarly Seb did the basic start, drift to the left and then back to the right to take the corner line that you would expect.

Racing accident.

:thumbup:

:thumbup:


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Sep 26, 2017 1:32 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Oct 21, 2003 11:06 am
Posts: 7144
Location: Belgium
Zoue wrote:
Fiki wrote:
Zoue wrote:
To be fair Vettel pretty much had to win that one, too, so he had everything to play for. It was his best opportunity to put daylight between him and Hamilton and he couldn't afford to drop any points if he could help it.
That's pretty much also how the race was seen in the days leading up to it. And I also remember reading after qualifying that Verstappen said he wanted to jump Vettel before turn 1. Which is what he tries every race anyway.

Edit: I just read a comment by Verstappen in Dutch, made after the race.
Quote:
Zelf, zo concludeert Verstappen, kon hij geen kant op. "Als Seb (Vettel, red.) niet rechts had gezeten, had ik Kimi ruimte kunnen geven. Nu kon ik niks. Ook niet van het gas gaan, want dan waren we met de wielen tegen elkaar geknald."
Source: http://www.limburger.nl/cnt/dmf20170918 ... te-van-max

My translation:
Quote:
He himself, concludes Verstappen, had nowhere to go. "If Seb hadn't been to my right, I would have been able to give Kimi room. Now I could do nothing. Not even lift off the throttle, because then we would have banged wheels."

I find the underlined part intriguing, because of what I wrote in this thread yesterday. In this interview, Max says he couldn't lift off, and in another he said that he saw the accident coming. If he is sincere in both statements, it means he didn't understand that he was indeed the person who could have prevented the accident, but didn't. Because he misunderstood what was happening? Or, as a Dutch commentator said afterwards, because he would never lift?

I think I read that interview and IIRC he added that the reason he couldn't lift was that his front wheel was directly ahead of Kimi's rears. So if he'd lifted, Kimi's rear would have hit his fronts. So the only way out would have been to jink right (from his perspective), which would have risked hitting Vettel.
I read the same claim (in this thread or in the race thread?) and remember pointing out that this doesn't make sense. In fact the very opposite would have been true. Verstappen lifing earlier would have meant Räikkönen's rear wheel clearing Verstappen's front wheel.
I don't know whether Max claimed this to try to make him appear to be the victim, or whether he genuinely misinterpreted the situation (at the time or on seeing the accident on video), but the fact is that what he said is wrong. :?

_________________
Use every man after his desert, and who should scape whipping? Use them after your own honour and dignity.

Maria de Villota - Jules Bianchi


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Sep 26, 2017 1:38 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Oct 21, 2003 11:06 am
Posts: 7144
Location: Belgium
ALESI wrote:
it's just that Max couldn't move over because Kimi was there. Common sense suggests that Max should have backed out (since he had cars on either side - and both of them in front of him) but he was the one with nothing to lose, so that wasn't going to happen... and besides, he's racing. Not to mention that by his actions Max continues to solidify his reputation as a hard racer and not someone to be trifled with - which is all good for his future.
It makes for interesting speculation, to say the least; is Max doing this on purpose? Or is it just that he is in fact far more talented than he is intelligent?

If he is doing this on purpose, then not following the common sense way out of an accident, makes him guilty of causing an avoidable accident, doesn't it?

_________________
Use every man after his desert, and who should scape whipping? Use them after your own honour and dignity.

Maria de Villota - Jules Bianchi


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Sep 26, 2017 4:43 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jul 28, 2013 3:36 pm
Posts: 4653
He did back out, he lifted slightly when it became clear he was getting sandwiched. He can't brake heavily on a straight in the wet at the start or he really would be a dangerous idiot.

Not his fault Seb's start wasn't good and hadn't cleared him but still tried the chop and he couldn't go right like Seb did in the Alonso-Seb chop example posted from 2010. Also not his fault Kimi got a great start and cut off any escape left.

The Ferrari drivers left him nowhere to go and anyone seriously suggesting going backwards in those conditions was the right call and he should've lifted heavily or braked needs to go and have a nice quiet lie down for a while and think about it.

_________________
"Clark came through at the end of the first lap so far ahead that we in the pits were convinced that the rest of the field must have been wiped out in an accident."
-Eddie Dennis, describing the dominance of Jim Clark in the Lotus 49 at Spa 1967


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Sep 26, 2017 5:21 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 21, 2002 4:12 pm
Posts: 6242
Location: Nebraska, USA
Zoue wrote:
Covalent wrote:
lamo wrote:
Option or Prime wrote:
There have been several posts saying the respective drivers had minimal knowledge of the location of the other drivers involved because the mirrors are both small and poorly located.
Is there any reason why with the size and resolution of camera technology why the drivers cant have practically 360 vision via camera. The clip above gives footage for consumption on youtube, why on earth can't the guys who might be involved in a high speed collision be given sight of the cars around them.
At least that eliminates the excuse...."I didn't see him."

I have always wondered why this hasn't been implemented or at least some kind of laser/radar and beeps in the ear if a car approaches either side of you. I guess weight is key.

Working my way through the topic so my apologies if this has already been discussed but I think that while mirrors are allowed (and required even) this kind of camera system could be classed as a (currently forbidden) driver aid? That's not to say I couldn't be a good idea to allow in the next set of regulations.

I'm also wondering just how much time people think these drivers have that they could look at a monitor to judge their position? These incident all tend to happen in the blink of an eye and much of it is instinct anyway


I agree. At the start things are do hectic thst larger mirrors or in car monitors would seldom help. Certainly not with two cars side by side "hiding" one of them

_________________
Forza Ferrari
WCCs = 16
WDCs = 15


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Sep 26, 2017 9:19 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Oct 21, 2003 11:06 am
Posts: 7144
Location: Belgium
Lotus49 wrote:
He did back out, he lifted slightly when it became clear he was getting sandwiched. He can't brake heavily on a straight in the wet at the start or he really would be a dangerous idiot.
He tried to, possibly only once he became aware of the driver on his left. (I wonder whether HD footage would help, but I don't have it, so...)

Lotus49 wrote:
Not his fault Seb's start wasn't good and hadn't cleared him but still tried the chop and he couldn't go right like Seb did in the Alonso-Seb chop example posted from 2010. Also not his fault Kimi got a great start and cut off any escape left.
Correct, it wasn't his fault Seb had a poor start. His own poor start was hardly better, which of course was his fault. I would argue that the chop is precisely used when a driver hasn't cleared his attacker. The intention there is intimidation, which is why I loathe it.
It was indeed not his fault that Räikkönen had the perfect start, but it was his fault that he opened the door so wide that he made Räikkönen's job so much easier. His intention to go right towards Vettel was his fault, of course.

Lotus49 wrote:
The Ferrari drivers left him nowhere to go and anyone seriously suggesting going backwards in those conditions was the right call and he should've lifted heavily or braked needs to go and have a nice quiet lie down for a while and think about it.
Did you think it through? How much better was it to have the accident?

_________________
Use every man after his desert, and who should scape whipping? Use them after your own honour and dignity.

Maria de Villota - Jules Bianchi


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Sep 27, 2017 1:17 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue May 10, 2011 11:47 pm
Posts: 1149
Siao7 wrote:
Zoue wrote:
ALESI wrote:
F1 MERCENARY wrote:
But that's just it, these guys are racing one another and they will always do so in ultra-tight quarters at the beginning of races, and as such, "IF" they cannot see anything in their mirrors, they need to put a stop to drivers veering over so aggressively on those behind if the purpose is solely to keep from losing position, because if they can't see anything in their mirrors, they could very well be moving over right into someone.

As for Raikkonen's position in this scenario, he couldn't have placed himself any better but unfortunately his teammates over aggression saw to it that his exquisite launch was thwarted.

In regards to Verstappen, IDK what else anyone expected him to do in that scenario. He's driving a car that is not the fastest yet he started on the front row and lifting abruptly while everyone else behind him is accelerating would have possibly seen others pass him. He tried to give Raikkonen room the moment he realized he shot past but in veering right he left less room between himself and Vettel and the squeeze move was on him so harshly he re-corrected to the left and boom!


That's all well and good but how many races are won at the first corner. Lots of races. The problem here was you had a guy with nothing to lose (not that Max did anything wrong) and that was probably on Seb's mind. What Seb did seems pretty normal, it's just that Max couldn't move over because Kimi was there. Common sense suggests that Max should have backed out (since he had cars on either side - and both of them in front of him) but he was the one with nothing to lose, so that wasn't going to happen... and besides, he's racing. Not to mention that by his actions Max continues to solidify his reputation as a hard racer and not someone to be trifled with - which is all good for his future.

I can't criticise Max, because he didn't do anything wrong and Kimi made a great start (albeit whether he was ever going to get around the corner I don't know), but similarly Seb did the basic start, drift to the left and then back to the right to take the corner line that you would expect.

Racing accident.

:thumbup:

:thumbup:




Image

_________________
Champions are made from something they have deep inside of them - a desire, a dream, a vision. They have last-minute stamina, they have to be a little faster, they have the skill & the will but the will must be stronger than the skill. Muhammad Ali


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Sep 27, 2017 7:17 am 
Offline

Joined: Mon Aug 25, 2014 9:50 am
Posts: 756
Location: UK
ALESI wrote:
F1 MERCENARY wrote:
But that's just it, these guys are racing one another and they will always do so in ultra-tight quarters at the beginning of races, and as such, "IF" they cannot see anything in their mirrors, they need to put a stop to drivers veering over so aggressively on those behind if the purpose is solely to keep from losing position, because if they can't see anything in their mirrors, they could very well be moving over right into someone.

As for Raikkonen's position in this scenario, he couldn't have placed himself any better but unfortunately his teammates over aggression saw to it that his exquisite launch was thwarted.

In regards to Verstappen, IDK what else anyone expected him to do in that scenario. He's driving a car that is not the fastest yet he started on the front row and lifting abruptly while everyone else behind him is accelerating would have possibly seen others pass him. He tried to give Raikkonen room the moment he realized he shot past but in veering right he left less room between himself and Vettel and the squeeze move was on him so harshly he re-corrected to the left and boom!


That's all well and good but how many races are won at the first corner. Lots of races. The problem here was you had a guy with nothing to lose (not that Max did anything wrong) and that was probably on Seb's mind. What Seb did seems pretty normal, it's just that Max couldn't move over because Kimi was there. Common sense suggests that Max should have backed out (since he had cars on either side - and both of them in front of him) but he was the one with nothing to lose, so that wasn't going to happen... and besides, he's racing. Not to mention that by his actions Max continues to solidify his reputation as a hard racer and not someone to be trifled with - which is all good for his future.

I can't criticise Max, because he didn't do anything wrong and Kimi made a great start (albeit whether he was ever going to get around the corner I don't know), but similarly Seb did the basic start, drift to the left and then back to the right to take the corner line that you would expect.

Racing accident.


A decent summary of the events but I don't agree with the 2 word conclusion, but its time to move on.
So my point is what will Vettel do in future? I personally feel Vettel was complacent and that in drifting left in what has been described as a 'standard start' he simply opened the door to his championship rival Lewis Hamilton and blew it. Dumb in my view.

So roll forward to Malaysia, obviously the grid won't be the same but the chances are he will have Hamilton. Verstappen, Ricciardo, Bottas and his team mate Kimi all around him will he still do a standard start to defend his position? Because if not then Verstappen has achieved exactly what he wanted, an investment in the future, He has warned Vettel off and for that matter most of his peers.
Time will tell whether this incident has gifted Hamilton the title, but I do think driving behaviour will change.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Sep 27, 2017 7:24 am 
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2012 10:39 am
Posts: 23042
Option or Prime wrote:
ALESI wrote:
F1 MERCENARY wrote:
But that's just it, these guys are racing one another and they will always do so in ultra-tight quarters at the beginning of races, and as such, "IF" they cannot see anything in their mirrors, they need to put a stop to drivers veering over so aggressively on those behind if the purpose is solely to keep from losing position, because if they can't see anything in their mirrors, they could very well be moving over right into someone.

As for Raikkonen's position in this scenario, he couldn't have placed himself any better but unfortunately his teammates over aggression saw to it that his exquisite launch was thwarted.

In regards to Verstappen, IDK what else anyone expected him to do in that scenario. He's driving a car that is not the fastest yet he started on the front row and lifting abruptly while everyone else behind him is accelerating would have possibly seen others pass him. He tried to give Raikkonen room the moment he realized he shot past but in veering right he left less room between himself and Vettel and the squeeze move was on him so harshly he re-corrected to the left and boom!


That's all well and good but how many races are won at the first corner. Lots of races. The problem here was you had a guy with nothing to lose (not that Max did anything wrong) and that was probably on Seb's mind. What Seb did seems pretty normal, it's just that Max couldn't move over because Kimi was there. Common sense suggests that Max should have backed out (since he had cars on either side - and both of them in front of him) but he was the one with nothing to lose, so that wasn't going to happen... and besides, he's racing. Not to mention that by his actions Max continues to solidify his reputation as a hard racer and not someone to be trifled with - which is all good for his future.

I can't criticise Max, because he didn't do anything wrong and Kimi made a great start (albeit whether he was ever going to get around the corner I don't know), but similarly Seb did the basic start, drift to the left and then back to the right to take the corner line that you would expect.

Racing accident.


A decent summary of the events but I don't agree with the 2 word conclusion, but its time to move on.
So my point is what will Vettel do in future? I personally feel Vettel was complacent and that in drifting left in what has been described as a 'standard start' he simply opened the door to his championship rival Lewis Hamilton and blew it. Dumb in my view.

So roll forward to Malaysia, obviously the grid won't be the same but the chances are he will have Hamilton. Verstappen, Ricciardo, Bottas and his team mate Kimi all around him will he still do a standard start to defend his position? Because if not then Verstappen has achieved exactly what he wanted, an investment in the future, He has warned Vettel off and for that matter most of his peers.
Time will tell whether this incident has gifted Hamilton the title, but I do think driving behaviour will change.

I'm not so sure of that. Max did back off. More importantly, he didn't come together with Vettel. It was Kimi and Max who hit and subsequently collected Vettel. Fairly specific set of circumstances that weren't solely the result of Vettel moving over, so the "standard start" is not necessarily a poisoned chalice now


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Sep 27, 2017 8:25 am 
Offline

Joined: Fri Nov 09, 2012 2:54 pm
Posts: 988
Ryu28 wrote:
Vettel and Ferrari are battling for the world drivers and constructors championships. Max is not, so he has no right interfering with battles which do not concern him. He should know his place and should have backed off. Sadly his antics handed Lewis an undeserved victory and probably a fourth title too.


I'm trying to work out if you actually believe that comment. Max is doing the same things that every F1 driver does - wants to compete at the front, fighting for their career and win.

If you don't fight for those things you are not an F1 driver and shouldn't be in the car. These are some of the best racing drivers in the world. Max should know his place? yes - Max does which is competing at the front for being still a young lad but giving the more experienced drivers a fight.

Your post is beyond believable. Have you been watching F1 for 5 minutes and have no understand how the sport is? Every sport no matter what the player wants to win regardless of who they are fighting. Should a football team not aim for a draw or a win if it gives them valuable points? So what if it's against those fighting for the title.

Telling me that if Ferrari are not title contenders that they should know their place and back off? If they have a sniff of winning they will go for it and rightly so.

You can be a Ferrari lover or not but Max had every right to be there. If you really believe what you said.. you are not a fan of F1.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Sep 27, 2017 8:39 am 
Online

Joined: Tue May 05, 2009 11:31 am
Posts: 6130
Zoue wrote:
Option or Prime wrote:
ALESI wrote:
F1 MERCENARY wrote:
But that's just it, these guys are racing one another and they will always do so in ultra-tight quarters at the beginning of races, and as such, "IF" they cannot see anything in their mirrors, they need to put a stop to drivers veering over so aggressively on those behind if the purpose is solely to keep from losing position, because if they can't see anything in their mirrors, they could very well be moving over right into someone.

As for Raikkonen's position in this scenario, he couldn't have placed himself any better but unfortunately his teammates over aggression saw to it that his exquisite launch was thwarted.

In regards to Verstappen, IDK what else anyone expected him to do in that scenario. He's driving a car that is not the fastest yet he started on the front row and lifting abruptly while everyone else behind him is accelerating would have possibly seen others pass him. He tried to give Raikkonen room the moment he realized he shot past but in veering right he left less room between himself and Vettel and the squeeze move was on him so harshly he re-corrected to the left and boom!


That's all well and good but how many races are won at the first corner. Lots of races. The problem here was you had a guy with nothing to lose (not that Max did anything wrong) and that was probably on Seb's mind. What Seb did seems pretty normal, it's just that Max couldn't move over because Kimi was there. Common sense suggests that Max should have backed out (since he had cars on either side - and both of them in front of him) but he was the one with nothing to lose, so that wasn't going to happen... and besides, he's racing. Not to mention that by his actions Max continues to solidify his reputation as a hard racer and not someone to be trifled with - which is all good for his future.

I can't criticise Max, because he didn't do anything wrong and Kimi made a great start (albeit whether he was ever going to get around the corner I don't know), but similarly Seb did the basic start, drift to the left and then back to the right to take the corner line that you would expect.

Racing accident.


A decent summary of the events but I don't agree with the 2 word conclusion, but its time to move on.
So my point is what will Vettel do in future? I personally feel Vettel was complacent and that in drifting left in what has been described as a 'standard start' he simply opened the door to his championship rival Lewis Hamilton and blew it. Dumb in my view.

So roll forward to Malaysia, obviously the grid won't be the same but the chances are he will have Hamilton. Verstappen, Ricciardo, Bottas and his team mate Kimi all around him will he still do a standard start to defend his position? Because if not then Verstappen has achieved exactly what he wanted, an investment in the future, He has warned Vettel off and for that matter most of his peers.
Time will tell whether this incident has gifted Hamilton the title, but I do think driving behaviour will change.

I'm not so sure of that. Max did back off. More importantly, he didn't come together with Vettel. It was Kimi and Max who hit and subsequently collected Vettel. Fairly specific set of circumstances that weren't solely the result of Vettel moving over, so the "standard start" is not necessarily a poisoned chalice now


You see people fail to understand this. They only see "Vettel chop" and get red eyes. Vettel didn't crowd anyone and wasn't the one who had the contact, rather was collected.

The biggest portion of the blame is on the other two drivers in my opinion; Kimi had a fantastic start, but where was he going from there? There would be no room to take the turn and he had two cars to his right. As for Max, he got in the unfortunate position of being sandwiched; I think he should have lifted earlier, but this is in hindsight.

Racing incident is the fairest decision in my opinion


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Sep 27, 2017 9:37 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Oct 06, 2006 12:07 pm
Posts: 9220
Blake wrote:
Zoue wrote:
Covalent wrote:
lamo wrote:
Option or Prime wrote:
There have been several posts saying the respective drivers had minimal knowledge of the location of the other drivers involved because the mirrors are both small and poorly located.
Is there any reason why with the size and resolution of camera technology why the drivers cant have practically 360 vision via camera. The clip above gives footage for consumption on youtube, why on earth can't the guys who might be involved in a high speed collision be given sight of the cars around them.
At least that eliminates the excuse...."I didn't see him."

I have always wondered why this hasn't been implemented or at least some kind of laser/radar and beeps in the ear if a car approaches either side of you. I guess weight is key.

Working my way through the topic so my apologies if this has already been discussed but I think that while mirrors are allowed (and required even) this kind of camera system could be classed as a (currently forbidden) driver aid? That's not to say I couldn't be a good idea to allow in the next set of regulations.

I'm also wondering just how much time people think these drivers have that they could look at a monitor to judge their position? These incident all tend to happen in the blink of an eye and much of it is instinct anyway


I agree. At the start things are do hectic thst larger mirrors or in car monitors would seldom help. Certainly not with two cars side by side "hiding" one of them

Not sure I agree with this TBH. Mostly it´s down to the UI design. It doesn´t have to be a camera and display, but instead e.g. ultrasonic or laser sensors giving optical, audio or haptic feedback of the surroundings. Make the system logical, intuitive and trustworthy and the drivers could soon be using it as a sixth sense requiring little thought.

_________________
Räikkönen - Vettel - Bottas
Thank you Nico - You´re the champ!

PF1 Pick 10 Competition 2016: CHAMPION (2 wins, 8 podiums)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Sep 27, 2017 10:08 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue Oct 21, 2003 11:06 am
Posts: 7144
Location: Belgium
Zoue wrote:
Option or Prime wrote:
ALESI wrote:
F1 MERCENARY wrote:
But that's just it, these guys are racing one another and they will always do so in ultra-tight quarters at the beginning of races, and as such, "IF" they cannot see anything in their mirrors, they need to put a stop to drivers veering over so aggressively on those behind if the purpose is solely to keep from losing position, because if they can't see anything in their mirrors, they could very well be moving over right into someone.

As for Raikkonen's position in this scenario, he couldn't have placed himself any better but unfortunately his teammates over aggression saw to it that his exquisite launch was thwarted.

In regards to Verstappen, IDK what else anyone expected him to do in that scenario. He's driving a car that is not the fastest yet he started on the front row and lifting abruptly while everyone else behind him is accelerating would have possibly seen others pass him. He tried to give Raikkonen room the moment he realized he shot past but in veering right he left less room between himself and Vettel and the squeeze move was on him so harshly he re-corrected to the left and boom!


That's all well and good but how many races are won at the first corner. Lots of races. The problem here was you had a guy with nothing to lose (not that Max did anything wrong) and that was probably on Seb's mind. What Seb did seems pretty normal, it's just that Max couldn't move over because Kimi was there. Common sense suggests that Max should have backed out (since he had cars on either side - and both of them in front of him) but he was the one with nothing to lose, so that wasn't going to happen... and besides, he's racing. Not to mention that by his actions Max continues to solidify his reputation as a hard racer and not someone to be trifled with - which is all good for his future.

I can't criticise Max, because he didn't do anything wrong and Kimi made a great start (albeit whether he was ever going to get around the corner I don't know), but similarly Seb did the basic start, drift to the left and then back to the right to take the corner line that you would expect.

Racing accident.


A decent summary of the events but I don't agree with the 2 word conclusion, but its time to move on.
So my point is what will Vettel do in future? I personally feel Vettel was complacent and that in drifting left in what has been described as a 'standard start' he simply opened the door to his championship rival Lewis Hamilton and blew it. Dumb in my view.

So roll forward to Malaysia, obviously the grid won't be the same but the chances are he will have Hamilton. Verstappen, Ricciardo, Bottas and his team mate Kimi all around him will he still do a standard start to defend his position? Because if not then Verstappen has achieved exactly what he wanted, an investment in the future, He has warned Vettel off and for that matter most of his peers.
Time will tell whether this incident has gifted Hamilton the title, but I do think driving behaviour will change.

I'm not so sure of that. Max did back off. More importantly, he didn't come together with Vettel. It was Kimi and Max who hit and subsequently collected Vettel. Fairly specific set of circumstances that weren't solely the result of Vettel moving over, so the "standard start" is not necessarily a poisoned chalice now
Having looked at the footage of the start again, I think it's worth pointing out that the absence of LEDs atop the steering wheel doesn't indicate lifting off per se. These only come up at a certain amount of revs, including between gear shifts. So I don't really know whether he lifted before the accident, or because of the hit itself.
Did anybody see footage including telemetry?

_________________
Use every man after his desert, and who should scape whipping? Use them after your own honour and dignity.

Maria de Villota - Jules Bianchi


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Sep 27, 2017 11:17 am 
Offline

Joined: Mon Aug 25, 2014 9:50 am
Posts: 756
Location: UK
Siao7 wrote:

You see people fail to understand this. They only see "Vettel chop" and get red eyes. Vettel didn't crowd anyone and wasn't the one who had the contact, rather was collected.

The biggest portion of the blame is on the other two drivers in my opinion; Kimi had a fantastic start, but where was he going from there? There would be no room to take the turn and he had two cars to his right. As for Max, he got in the unfortunate position of being sandwiched; I think he should have lifted earlier, but this is in hindsight.

Racing incident is the fairest decision in my opinion


Sorry, but thats not what I was commenting on, I wasn't discussing the contentious blame allocation, but more how it would affect Vettel in the future, in interview after the race he was deflated. I wondered if the crash will affect his future driving behaviour.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Sep 27, 2017 11:28 am 
Offline

Joined: Fri Nov 09, 2012 2:54 pm
Posts: 988
Siao7 wrote:

You see people fail to understand this. They only see "Vettel chop" and get red eyes. Vettel didn't crowd anyone and wasn't the one who had the contact, rather was collected.

The biggest portion of the blame is on the other two drivers in my opinion; Kimi had a fantastic start, but where was he going from there? There would be no room to take the turn and he had two cars to his right. As for Max, he got in the unfortunate position of being sandwiched; I think he should have lifted earlier, but this is in hindsight.

Racing incident is the fairest decision in my opinion


People also fail to see that Kimi too saw red and instantly blamed Max. Ferrari also saw red and guess what publicly blamed Max. Vettel was more sheepish because 1, he didn't know how it all happened and how his team mate got involved. 2, he was also fully aware that he aggressively tried to stop Max (which is absolutely his right to do which every driver on pole tend to react).

The fact that Vettel was sheepish, Kimi changed his approach to slightly sheepish and understandable is what really sums it all up. Regardless of opinions and facts. We've seen all 3 of these drivers react to being collided with. When they are the victim - maximum reaction. When they feel they were innocent - maximum reaction. When they feel some one has made a boo boo - sheep mode is activated.

Absolutely racing incident. We can talk about the IFs but fact is the result of Vettels rightly so move it created a crash which also took him out. Penalty for him would be totally silly because a win was lost. His team got nothing. The only poor victim was Max who only had one other option - slam on his breaks. Which just simply can't happen on that straight or risk some one slamming in to his rear.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Sep 27, 2017 1:01 pm 
Online

Joined: Tue May 05, 2009 11:31 am
Posts: 6130
Option or Prime wrote:
Siao7 wrote:

You see people fail to understand this. They only see "Vettel chop" and get red eyes. Vettel didn't crowd anyone and wasn't the one who had the contact, rather was collected.

The biggest portion of the blame is on the other two drivers in my opinion; Kimi had a fantastic start, but where was he going from there? There would be no room to take the turn and he had two cars to his right. As for Max, he got in the unfortunate position of being sandwiched; I think he should have lifted earlier, but this is in hindsight.

Racing incident is the fairest decision in my opinion


Sorry, but thats not what I was commenting on, I wasn't discussing the contentious blame allocation, but more how it would affect Vettel in the future, in interview after the race he was deflated. I wondered if the crash will affect his future driving behaviour.

I'm sorry OoP, my comment wasn't aimed at you. If nothing else I agree that this can prove a good thing for him, showing his teeth in a way


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Sep 27, 2017 1:04 pm 
Online

Joined: Tue May 05, 2009 11:31 am
Posts: 6130
Teddy007 wrote:
Siao7 wrote:

You see people fail to understand this. They only see "Vettel chop" and get red eyes. Vettel didn't crowd anyone and wasn't the one who had the contact, rather was collected.

The biggest portion of the blame is on the other two drivers in my opinion; Kimi had a fantastic start, but where was he going from there? There would be no room to take the turn and he had two cars to his right. As for Max, he got in the unfortunate position of being sandwiched; I think he should have lifted earlier, but this is in hindsight.

Racing incident is the fairest decision in my opinion


People also fail to see that Kimi too saw red and instantly blamed Max. Ferrari also saw red and guess what publicly blamed Max. Vettel was more sheepish because 1, he didn't know how it all happened and how his team mate got involved. 2, he was also fully aware that he aggressively tried to stop Max (which is absolutely his right to do which every driver on pole tend to react).

The fact that Vettel was sheepish, Kimi changed his approach to slightly sheepish and understandable is what really sums it all up. Regardless of opinions and facts. We've seen all 3 of these drivers react to being collided with. When they are the victim - maximum reaction. When they feel they were innocent - maximum reaction. When they feel some one has made a boo boo - sheep mode is activated.

Absolutely racing incident. We can talk about the IFs but fact is the result of Vettels rightly so move it created a crash which also took him out. Penalty for him would be totally silly because a win was lost. His team got nothing. The only poor victim was Max who only had one other option - slam on his breaks. Which just simply can't happen on that straight or risk some one slamming in to his rear.


Well, Kimi had a dream start and was just moving on a straight line when Max came towards him, I can understand why he would be peeved off from his point of view. Agreed with everything else


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Sep 27, 2017 2:19 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jul 28, 2013 3:36 pm
Posts: 4653
Fiki wrote:
He tried to, possibly only once he became aware of the driver on his left. (I wonder whether HD footage would help, but I don't have it, so...)


Why would he lift before?.


Quote:
Correct, it wasn't his fault Seb had a poor start. His own poor start was hardly better, which of course was his fault. I would argue that the chop is precisely used when a driver hasn't cleared his attacker. The intention there is intimidation, which is why I loathe it.
It was indeed not his fault that Räikkönen had the perfect start, but it was his fault that he opened the door so wide that he made Räikkönen's job so much easier. His intention to go right towards Vettel was his fault, of course.


It's used with an increased risk if you haven't cleared the car though and Max's own start wasn't that poor, he wouldn't have had his front wheels alongside Seb's rear if it was and there's no need to cover his lefthand side. Unfortunately Seb had the going right route blocked off but continued to move across and squeeze him anyway and Kimi's sudden presence on the left blocked that route which left him squarely stuck in the middle of an ever closing gap thanks to the Ferrari drivers. Slamming on your brakes isn't an option, lifting completely also is more dangerous in those conditions with the retardation of the cars so he lifted as much as he could and tried to avoid Seb who was still closing. What did Kimi and Seb do to avoid the contact?.

Quote:
Did you think it through? How much better was it to have the accident?


Well seeing as he's got the least options of all involved to avoid it, I find it strange to pin any blame on him. He wasn't trying to put himself into an ever closing gap, he was already there and he can't turn into a ghost car but the Ferrari drivers were still closing it. I can't see what else Kimi can do really, he has to go right eventually to take the corner but Seb could have done something obviously different so while I don't think it was a ridiculously dangerous move that needed a penalty, it's a pretty common tactic after all whether you like it or not, I think his actions caused the incident so I have to blame him.

Max and Kimi don't seem to do much wrong at all.

_________________
"Clark came through at the end of the first lap so far ahead that we in the pits were convinced that the rest of the field must have been wiped out in an accident."
-Eddie Dennis, describing the dominance of Jim Clark in the Lotus 49 at Spa 1967


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Sep 27, 2017 4:44 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Feb 18, 2015 5:38 pm
Posts: 1754
Location: Miami, Florida
Siao7 wrote:
Zoue wrote:
Option or Prime wrote:
ALESI wrote:
F1 MERCENARY wrote:
But that's just it, these guys are racing one another and they will always do so in ultra-tight quarters at the beginning of races, and as such, "IF" they cannot see anything in their mirrors, they need to put a stop to drivers veering over so aggressively on those behind if the purpose is solely to keep from losing position, because if they can't see anything in their mirrors, they could very well be moving over right into someone.

As for Raikkonen's position in this scenario, he couldn't have placed himself any better but unfortunately his teammates over aggression saw to it that his exquisite launch was thwarted.

In regards to Verstappen, IDK what else anyone expected him to do in that scenario. He's driving a car that is not the fastest yet he started on the front row and lifting abruptly while everyone else behind him is accelerating would have possibly seen others pass him. He tried to give Raikkonen room the moment he realized he shot past but in veering right he left less room between himself and Vettel and the squeeze move was on him so harshly he re-corrected to the left and boom!


That's all well and good but how many races are won at the first corner. Lots of races. The problem here was you had a guy with nothing to lose (not that Max did anything wrong) and that was probably on Seb's mind. What Seb did seems pretty normal, it's just that Max couldn't move over because Kimi was there. Common sense suggests that Max should have backed out (since he had cars on either side - and both of them in front of him) but he was the one with nothing to lose, so that wasn't going to happen... and besides, he's racing. Not to mention that by his actions Max continues to solidify his reputation as a hard racer and not someone to be trifled with - which is all good for his future.

I can't criticise Max, because he didn't do anything wrong and Kimi made a great start (albeit whether he was ever going to get around the corner I don't know), but similarly Seb did the basic start, drift to the left and then back to the right to take the corner line that you would expect.

Racing accident.


A decent summary of the events but I don't agree with the 2 word conclusion, but its time to move on.
So my point is what will Vettel do in future? I personally feel Vettel was complacent and that in drifting left in what has been described as a 'standard start' he simply opened the door to his championship rival Lewis Hamilton and blew it. Dumb in my view.

So roll forward to Malaysia, obviously the grid won't be the same but the chances are he will have Hamilton. Verstappen, Ricciardo, Bottas and his team mate Kimi all around him will he still do a standard start to defend his position? Because if not then Verstappen has achieved exactly what he wanted, an investment in the future, He has warned Vettel off and for that matter most of his peers.
Time will tell whether this incident has gifted Hamilton the title, but I do think driving behaviour will change.

I'm not so sure of that. Max did back off. More importantly, he didn't come together with Vettel. It was Kimi and Max who hit and subsequently collected Vettel. Fairly specific set of circumstances that weren't solely the result of Vettel moving over, so the "standard start" is not necessarily a poisoned chalice now


You see people fail to understand this. They only see "Vettel chop" and get red eyes. Vettel didn't crowd anyone and wasn't the one who had the contact, rather was collected.

The biggest portion of the blame is on the other two drivers in my opinion; Kimi had a fantastic start, but where was he going from there? There would be no room to take the turn and he had two cars to his right. As for Max, he got in the unfortunate position of being sandwiched; I think he should have lifted earlier, but this is in hindsight.

Racing incident is the fairest decision in my opinion

Vettel was only collected due to his own actions which forced max to try and give him room. Room he didn't have to spare because Vettel's squeeze forced him into Kimi. Had Vettel not moved as much and left a bit more room, A. There probably would not have been contact between any of them, and B. He very well could have exited that corner first.

I don't understand the arbitrary view on accountability from many posters calling it a racing incident. And by accountability I mean spacial awareness, particularly from Vettel, because it's not the first time he loses track of everything around him and it leads to contact. How many times were other guys crucified for miscalculating things by a mere few inches rather than feet, yet depending on whom it is committing the offense, accountability doesn't apply quite in the same manor??!?

Let's say for argument's sake it was Maldonado in a Williams moving over exactly the way Vettel did, it would be called an ill-advised, dangerous and possibly a stupid move and people would be wanting to burn him at the stake.

_________________
HAMILTON :: ALONSO :: VETTEL :: RAIKKONEN :: RICCIARDO :: VERSTAPPEN
BOTTAS :: MAGNUSSEN :: OCON :: SAINZ :: PEREZ :: VANDOORNE :: HULKENBERG
GROSJEAN :: GASLY :: ERICSON :: LECLERC :: STROLL :: SEROTKIN :: HARTLEY


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Sep 27, 2017 5:15 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2012 10:39 am
Posts: 23042
F1 MERCENARY wrote:
Siao7 wrote:
Zoue wrote:
Option or Prime wrote:
ALESI wrote:

That's all well and good but how many races are won at the first corner. Lots of races. The problem here was you had a guy with nothing to lose (not that Max did anything wrong) and that was probably on Seb's mind. What Seb did seems pretty normal, it's just that Max couldn't move over because Kimi was there. Common sense suggests that Max should have backed out (since he had cars on either side - and both of them in front of him) but he was the one with nothing to lose, so that wasn't going to happen... and besides, he's racing. Not to mention that by his actions Max continues to solidify his reputation as a hard racer and not someone to be trifled with - which is all good for his future.

I can't criticise Max, because he didn't do anything wrong and Kimi made a great start (albeit whether he was ever going to get around the corner I don't know), but similarly Seb did the basic start, drift to the left and then back to the right to take the corner line that you would expect.

Racing accident.


A decent summary of the events but I don't agree with the 2 word conclusion, but its time to move on.
So my point is what will Vettel do in future? I personally feel Vettel was complacent and that in drifting left in what has been described as a 'standard start' he simply opened the door to his championship rival Lewis Hamilton and blew it. Dumb in my view.

So roll forward to Malaysia, obviously the grid won't be the same but the chances are he will have Hamilton. Verstappen, Ricciardo, Bottas and his team mate Kimi all around him will he still do a standard start to defend his position? Because if not then Verstappen has achieved exactly what he wanted, an investment in the future, He has warned Vettel off and for that matter most of his peers.
Time will tell whether this incident has gifted Hamilton the title, but I do think driving behaviour will change.

I'm not so sure of that. Max did back off. More importantly, he didn't come together with Vettel. It was Kimi and Max who hit and subsequently collected Vettel. Fairly specific set of circumstances that weren't solely the result of Vettel moving over, so the "standard start" is not necessarily a poisoned chalice now


You see people fail to understand this. They only see "Vettel chop" and get red eyes. Vettel didn't crowd anyone and wasn't the one who had the contact, rather was collected.

The biggest portion of the blame is on the other two drivers in my opinion; Kimi had a fantastic start, but where was he going from there? There would be no room to take the turn and he had two cars to his right. As for Max, he got in the unfortunate position of being sandwiched; I think he should have lifted earlier, but this is in hindsight.

Racing incident is the fairest decision in my opinion

Vettel was only collected due to his own actions which forced max to try and give him room. Room he didn't have to spare because Vettel's squeeze forced him into Kimi. Had Vettel not moved as much and left a bit more room, A. There probably would not have been contact between any of them, and B. He very well could have exited that corner first.

I don't understand the arbitrary view on accountability from many posters calling it a racing incident. And by accountability I mean spacial awareness, particularly from Vettel, because it's not the first time he loses track of everything around him and it leads to contact. How many times were other guys crucified for miscalculating things by a mere few inches rather than feet, yet depending on whom it is committing the offense, accountability doesn't apply quite in the same manor??!?

Let's say for argument's sake it was Maldonado in a Williams moving over exactly the way Vettel did, it would be called an ill-advised, dangerous and possibly a stupid move and people would be wanting to burn him at the stake.

Its not arbitrary. It just happens to be a different view to yours.

I have equal trouble understanding why anyone could possibly call it anything other than a racing incident. Vettel left Max room. In fact, he even left Max enough room with Kimi being there. . Kimi still had a decent amount of room on his inside, so to my mind he shares some culpability for crowding Max unnecessarily. If he had used the full width of the track, it's likely there would have been no coming together. It's unclear to me why that should be Vettel's responsibility.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Sep 27, 2017 5:33 pm 
Online

Joined: Sat Jan 28, 2012 4:13 pm
Posts: 13596
If You swap Vettel and Verstappen almost everybody would be ripping into Verstappen's reckless driving.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Sep 27, 2017 5:49 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2012 10:39 am
Posts: 23042
mikeyg123 wrote:
If You swap Vettel and Verstappen almost everybody would be ripping into Verstappen's reckless driving.

it's a claim that can never be substantiated, I'm afraid. I'm equally adamant that if Kimi hadn't been there no one would have a single negative thing to say about Vettel's move


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Sep 27, 2017 5:57 pm 
Online

Joined: Sat Jan 28, 2012 4:13 pm
Posts: 13596
Zoue wrote:
mikeyg123 wrote:
If You swap Vettel and Verstappen almost everybody would be ripping into Verstappen's reckless driving.

it's a claim that can never be substantiated, I'm afraid. I'm equally adamant that if Kimi hadn't been there no one would have a single negative thing to say about Vettel's move


I agree but Kimi was there so I don't see why it's relevant.

A driver gets a reputation for recklessness and it becomes very hard for them to shake because they get blamed for every single thing that happens around them. I've even seen someone try to blame Verstappen for the first corner crash in Spain where he was effectively slid into as he was minding his own business. Verstappen's not the first driver this has happened to. Maldanado got the same treatment in his last season.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Sep 27, 2017 7:22 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2012 10:39 am
Posts: 23042
mikeyg123 wrote:
Zoue wrote:
mikeyg123 wrote:
If You swap Vettel and Verstappen almost everybody would be ripping into Verstappen's reckless driving.

it's a claim that can never be substantiated, I'm afraid. I'm equally adamant that if Kimi hadn't been there no one would have a single negative thing to say about Vettel's move


I agree but Kimi was there so I don't see why it's relevant.

A driver gets a reputation for recklessness and it becomes very hard for them to shake because they get blamed for every single thing that happens around them. I've even seen someone try to blame Verstappen for the first corner crash in Spain where he was effectively slid into as he was minding his own business. Verstappen's not the first driver this has happened to. Maldanado got the same treatment in his last season.

It's as relevant as swapping Vettel and Verstappen, surely?

I agree about reputations. I just don't see how it could be claimed that in this instance Vettel was reckless


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Sep 27, 2017 7:45 pm 
Online

Joined: Sat Jan 28, 2012 4:13 pm
Posts: 13596
Zoue wrote:
mikeyg123 wrote:
Zoue wrote:
mikeyg123 wrote:
If You swap Vettel and Verstappen almost everybody would be ripping into Verstappen's reckless driving.

it's a claim that can never be substantiated, I'm afraid. I'm equally adamant that if Kimi hadn't been there no one would have a single negative thing to say about Vettel's move


I agree but Kimi was there so I don't see why it's relevant.

A driver gets a reputation for recklessness and it becomes very hard for them to shake because they get blamed for every single thing that happens around them. I've even seen someone try to blame Verstappen for the first corner crash in Spain where he was effectively slid into as he was minding his own business. Verstappen's not the first driver this has happened to. Maldanado got the same treatment in his last season.

It's as relevant as swapping Vettel and Verstappen, surely?

I agree about reputations. I just don't see how it could be claimed that in this instance Vettel was reckless


Well don't ask me. I wouldn't. I just said people would be calling Verstappen all names under the sun if he did the same thing.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Sep 27, 2017 9:06 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Oct 09, 2005 2:06 pm
Posts: 2406
Location: England
I don't think Vettel was reckless, but I think he should have hedged his bets a bit better, and i'm sure if he could do it all over he would think twice about that lurch to the left. Not because of the outcome... sometimes you make the right move, and s*** happens, but in this case, the risk surely far outweighed the potential gain?

I think that maybe the little Silverstone battle had put Vettel in the mindset that he was going to put the manners on Verstappen, and perhaps that clouded his judgement a bit....

..that said, in his shoes, i'd probably have done the same thing, really no legislating for Kimi steaming up the inside from 3rd at such a rate.

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition 2018: {Rookie Year}
Current positon: 1st | 2 Podiums | 1 Win


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Sep 27, 2017 9:25 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Aug 25, 2014 9:50 am
Posts: 756
Location: UK
Zoue wrote:
mikeyg123 wrote:
If You swap Vettel and Verstappen almost everybody would be ripping into Verstappen's reckless driving.

it's a claim that can never be substantiated, I'm afraid. I'm equally adamant that if Kimi hadn't been there no one would have a single negative thing to say about Vettel's move


The only thing I don't understand is why he left Hamilton with such a clean run at the corner when it was clear he needed to finish in front of Hamilton.

This was based on the discussion at the time which was because this was the last circuit on the fixture list at which Ferrari would have the upper hand. This seems to have changed now as I've read elsewhere that Ferrari now have the better run in to the end of the season. Have to say I can't wait for Malaysia.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Sep 27, 2017 9:36 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Feb 18, 2015 5:38 pm
Posts: 1754
Location: Miami, Florida
Zoue wrote:
mikeyg123 wrote:
If You swap Vettel and Verstappen almost everybody would be ripping into Verstappen's reckless driving.

it's a claim that can never be substantiated, I'm afraid. I'm equally adamant that if Kimi hadn't been there no one would have a single negative thing to say about Vettel's move

Nonsense because I'm one who has shunned these squeeze tactics off the line and or going into and out of turns because IT'S NOT racing. It's on-track bullying, and I've had an issue with it since I could remember and with one driver in particular it didn't even matter if he was in front or behind you, he was going to bully you and everyone knew it and did their best not to occupy the piece of track they expected him to zip through. It's plain dirty and as far as I can remember Racing is a competition of outdoing one another via your ability to best zip through a track at maximum speed and efficiency, NOT how much more a driver can intimidate one another. In my book, Rubbin' most definitely IS NOT RACING.

So Vettel leaving him just enough room to barely SQUEEZE through is a gherkin poor position with which to apportion blame on Verstappen. It's already going to be close enough through the first series of turns, no need to intentionally make things tighter because the guy behind got a better launch and is threatening to overtake you.

_________________
HAMILTON :: ALONSO :: VETTEL :: RAIKKONEN :: RICCIARDO :: VERSTAPPEN
BOTTAS :: MAGNUSSEN :: OCON :: SAINZ :: PEREZ :: VANDOORNE :: HULKENBERG
GROSJEAN :: GASLY :: ERICSON :: LECLERC :: STROLL :: SEROTKIN :: HARTLEY


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic

All times are UTC


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Alienturnedhuman, angrypirate, Google Adsense [Bot], mikeyg123, owenmahamilton, Paolo_Lasardi, purchville, Sappher, Siao7 and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group