Man, Everytime I view the incident, I don't see how Max couldn't have gotten a Penalty. He was going to get pass anyway so if that is what they're going with then sure, but nah -- that's not by the book.
-
Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
-
We have made minor adjustments to how the search bar works on ResetEra. You can read about the changes here.
- Status
I don't think Sainz is long for that seat come next year, McLaren have been making progress all season in a tangible way; Alonso will be in that car next season.
LOL Alonso ain't coming back. Too old for this shit. And Sainz is pretty good, he was very close to Max when they were racing for TR.
Alonso ego is extremely huge. He would come back in a top team. He thinks he is the best ever and F1 is the only "real" way to prove it.
My glasses are probably tinted red, white and blue but i couldn't see it any other way than Leclerc bumping into Verstappen while he should have let him go to try and take him back later on (wouldn't have worked but that's racing). Leclerc should have known he was beaten. Verstappen followed a clear path and didn't steer his wheel into Leclerc. He was ahead of Leclerc in the corner.
Last edited:
Thing is, that overtake was a carbon copy of the previous lap in with max left enough room. Charles was literally side by side so why should he concede?
This.
I don't think he has been hanging around with McLaren for any other reason; he's Fernando Alonso, he could drive wherever he wanted to; someone would take him. I think he will call in his favour and have one more year.
Yup, this is the thing. Max did the correct thing just one lap earlier by leaving enough room. Then he did the exact same manouver, Leclerc tried his exact same defense, except he was forced off the track. We've seen penalties even in cases where there wasn't even contact but the driver defending on the outside had no room left and had to go off (see Verstappen himself in Germany 2016 I think, where Rosberg got a penalty for that move). It's a move that Max only pulled off because he forced his opponent off the track, in order to leave room he would have had to brake earlier/harder thus leaving Charles better chances of defense, if not else on the next straight. It's inconsequential that this didn't get a penalty, and the biggest problem is that come next time they will once again ignore how they judged these situations in the past and decide on the spot how to proceed, contradicting either this decision or older ones in the process.
And I said it yesterday but it's ironic that Ferrari first lost a win because FIA applied the rules too hard, now they lose one because they don't apply them. Oh well.
Similar or carbon copy? Same speed, distance, etc? I've seen too many examples of other people that wouldn't qualify as carbon copy.
His idea was to repeat the previous lap, use a wider line to get out of the corner with more speed and take his place back. Max closed the door. Truth is nowadays drivers always talk about giving space but as many veterans pointed on the twitter, back in the old days it was accepted that drivers would use their car to close you out and deny you a chance to attack back. And let's be honest, this is how e all overtake in video games.
That's how I saw it as well. Max was thinking I'm going to try it differently and take the line and Charles was thinking I'm going to repeat last lap and regain my position. Max's adaptive thinking got him the win.
And yes, in most sims I play, I definitely squeeze the fuck out of my opponent lol
The keyword in the official statement is 'apex'; when fighting for the apex and the overtaker takes the inside, when both wheels touch, the overtaker has won the raceline. It's literally a rule book example.
My glasses are probably tinted red, white and blue but i couldn't see it any other way than Leclerc bumping into Verstappen while he should have let him go to try and take him back later on (wouldn't have worked but that's racing). Leclerc should have known he was beaten. Verstappen followed a clear path and didn't steer his wheel into Leclerc. He was ahead of Leclerc in the corner.
No way that the first picture is from the lap Verstappen passed him, they were literally wheel to wheel throughout the whole turn. He was never really more than one wheel in front.
I'm curious... so who did you replace? Stroll? Imagine that, being dropped by your own father for some random (sorry), driver. ;)
My bad. I'm at work and have images set to hidden. I only saw one image link which is the second image. I didn't spot the first screenshot.
Your glasses need a bit of checking then because that photo is not from the pass, it's from Verstappen's prior (failed) attempt to pass Leclerc. Ironically, on that one he had the apex but he still left enough room, when he was far more behind he pushed Leclerc off. For reference, this is a screenshot from the actual pass:
Use the yellow part of the kerb as reference, see how Verstappen's rear is exactly aligned to that compared to the first photo. In the actual pass, Max wasn't even ahead, if he ever was it was by inches. Let's not confuse the conversation by bringing elements that are unrelated to the actual pass.
Yep. Last year, you got a choice on who you replaced, now you just take over for the second driver, apparently. I'd much rather be against Stroll, though, as I'm certain to be getting smoked for a few races while I learn to drive the car and find some setups that work for me. Also, I'm not some rando, I bring a lucrative resetera sponsorship with me!
Given it's Red Bull, I'd be entirely unsurprised it that mode is named such for a very specific reason.
fair enough. but right after that point in the youtube vid image he is ahead as well.Your glasses need a bit of checking then because that photo is not from the pass, it's from Verstappen's prior (failed) attempt to pass Leclerc. Ironically, on that one he had the apex but he still left enough room, when he was far more behind he pushed Leclerc off. For reference, this is a screenshot from the actual pass:
Use the yellow part of the kerb as reference, see how Verstappen's rear is exactly aligned to that compared to the first photo. In the actual pass, Max wasn't even ahead, if he ever was it was by inches. Let's not confuse the conversation by bringing elements that are unrelated to the actual pass.
It's never ever a carbon copy of the previous attempt. Different speed, braking, etc.
Last edited:
By waiting, Daniel actually made his bargaining position with Red Bull stronger: he had a huge offer from Renault, and Red Bull could either match it, or suffer Gasly. They did match it, but Daniel decided to leave anyway.
His rationale was pretty clear: Red Bull had made it clear that Max was the golden boy, and if screwing Daniel meant they could keep Max happy and at the team, then they always would. So with no Ferrari or Mercedes offer, Daniel was being chased by McLaren and Renault. McLaren at that stage were woeful, and Renault was a factory team that had huge resources. I'm sure Daniel saw it as akin to Lewis's move to Mercedes: a team that wasn't doing particularly well, but had the potential to be great.
I don't think they ran full power for over 30 laps, it would've blown up as Honda were also on the edge with cooling. Tanabe said they gave it everything when the gap to Leclerc was irresistible:
I'm glad that result was not changed. I think whatever you're view of the incident surely you realise it was a racing incident, a very fluid, split second kind of event that happened so fast, that to analyse it down to the last frame and try to adjudicate on it, is just mind numbingly depressing. This is racing and it's not always inch perfect to the letter of the law, and like this event can be viewed by all sorts of people in totally different ways, and all depending on what your personal take is on the letter of the law or even just the spirit of motor racing. To me it was well within the spirit of motor racing. That's the sort of tight, instantaneous decision making (make or breaking) that is what we watch the sport for.
I'm very glad that wasn't taken away. Just a shame we can't get a quicker decision. I see no reason why they actually speak to the drivers first, I'm not sure what arguments you're gonna get from them that aren't super biased towards their reasoning. Just make a call within a lap or two and be done with it.
I'm very glad that wasn't taken away. Just a shame we can't get a quicker decision. I see no reason why they actually speak to the drivers first, I'm not sure what arguments you're gonna get from them that aren't super biased towards their reasoning. Just make a call within a lap or two and be done with it.
Okay, that's what one of the reporters said. Maybe it was a bit hyperbolic :P. But they are extremely happy with the amount of power it can deliver over long stretches of time.
It wouldn't surprise me if we later find out that they sacrificed the longevity of this engine just to be able to push it to the limit for the entire race and give themselves the best chance of winning a race this year (ie. he'll be taking an engine change penalty at some point because of this). It was definitely worth it if that is the case.
In the famous words of Alonso "You have to leave a space". Stills kind of show Max as being in the right but the videos show otherwise. This corner is also one where drivers don't use the inside Apex as well as most others. Max exited the corner as if there was no one there.
Not having to leave space for the driver on the outside on corner exit is a pretty big change. I think it's a positive one, since it will make drivers pursue more overtaking opportunities.
I do worry that defenders will just always take the inside line now, and run the other driver off the track on exit. Either way it should make for more exciting racing though, and probably a lot more collisions. I don't really care which variant they go with, as long as it's the same for everyone.
Tbh that's pretty much the how it is in the majority of cases now anyway.
I think it'll go from majority to all, with the 'running the other driver off the track' bit now appended.
Don't think this changes things for the better. You can also bet this won't be the norm procedure. The next guy to do what Max did will get a penalty.
I have to side with Chandhok here on Twitter:
"Here's my view... Back in the day, the driver on the outside would have to back out and realise when he's been beaten. Now, they can keep going, knowing that they can use the asphalt run off and then hope that the argument about "being squeezed off" wins in the stewards room.... "
"Here's my view... Back in the day, the driver on the outside would have to back out and realise when he's been beaten. Now, they can keep going, knowing that they can use the asphalt run off and then hope that the argument about "being squeezed off" wins in the stewards room.... "
Stewards should only make calls when an action is truly dangerous. Dictating the outcome of a race from something that is ultimately subjective and 100% biased by the drivers involved status, is a detriment for the sport. I think the more lax the rules, the better the spectacle will be, and we need that in F1. Attrition is incredibly low and top of the grid and result shakeup is so rare.
Sure some drivers will be done dirty, but hopefully the regression to the mean will result in some questionable passes, some brilliant passes being unencumbered, and just some wild shit that results in unexpected results. Consistency is the ultimate goal and I feel the more strict the rules, the more difficult it becomes to be consistent. I never want to see a podium celebration nullified by a post race decision regardless of who I support and how fucked they were by stewards.
Modern F1 car fragility is so unpredictable you can never be certain your bold pass or defense is going to benefit you or fuck you. Let it play out on the track and just deal with it. I was very disappointed by Canada, but I want the sport to move forward with less penalties. We already have too many things working against us in terms of entertainments value. Safety maters, but bureaucracy is always close behind and it ruins racing.
Sure some drivers will be done dirty, but hopefully the regression to the mean will result in some questionable passes, some brilliant passes being unencumbered, and just some wild shit that results in unexpected results. Consistency is the ultimate goal and I feel the more strict the rules, the more difficult it becomes to be consistent. I never want to see a podium celebration nullified by a post race decision regardless of who I support and how fucked they were by stewards.
Modern F1 car fragility is so unpredictable you can never be certain your bold pass or defense is going to benefit you or fuck you. Let it play out on the track and just deal with it. I was very disappointed by Canada, but I want the sport to move forward with less penalties. We already have too many things working against us in terms of entertainments value. Safety maters, but bureaucracy is always close behind and it ruins racing.
I wish they'd just pick some rules and stick with them. As a driver, how the hell are you supposed to know what's not allowed, and what's fine? Do you have to leave the outside car room on corner exit, or not? Can you make two direction changes in a braking zone, or not? If they don't want to enforce the current rules, or find them too restrictive, then just remove them and put in something that gives the stewards more room to apply common sense.
I think that the incidents at the last two GP should both have been fine. You have to feel for Leclerc though, because the rules say he was in the right, and as a driver he should've been allowed to rely on that, especially after how particular the stewards had been the race before.
I think that the incidents at the last two GP should both have been fine. You have to feel for Leclerc though, because the rules say he was in the right, and as a driver he should've been allowed to rely on that, especially after how particular the stewards had been the race before.
Every form of motorsports is the same in regards to that move. If two cars are even, the vehicle that's on the racing line gets to stay on the racing line. Always. If you're outside and even at the apex, you've lost. You can argue that Max is supposed to leave room on the outside there, but only a fool would expect to get it. I don't understand why there's still any discussion going on. The shitty state of F1 stewarding has made everyone second guess everything, I guess.
Also, I've finished all the practice programs for my first F1 2019 race in Australia. I'm just a little bit behind Kubica! Tempted to turn down the difficulty, but no, I must persevere.
Also, I've finished all the practice programs for my first F1 2019 race in Australia. I'm just a little bit behind Kubica! Tempted to turn down the difficulty, but no, I must persevere.
The thing is, one of the reasons Vettel was penalized in Canada was because, if he acted "correctly" (what the stewards define as such anyway), Hamilton would have been able to pass him, or at least the very least get side-by-side with him. Since Vettel denied this chance by allegedly blocking the road and nearly causing a contact, he got a penalty.
One of the reasons Ricciardo got a penalty (two, even) in France is because the moves he pulled off became possible because he left the track. It's possible he could have outbraked his opponent in the first case anyway, and it's possible that he could have just passed on the inside on the second scenario, but the way he did both passes he benefited by going off, creating himself a much bigger chance of overtaking with an illegal set of manouvers.
With the Max vs Leclerc situation, the stewards used the exact opposing reasoning. Just one lap earlier, Leclerc defended on the outside of the exact same turn, knowing fully well his Ferrari's acceleration and top speed allows him to take the position back, and indeed he seemed beaten by the end of the turn but by the next one he was ahead again. Max dived in even later on the next lap, Leclerc tried and pull off the exact same defense, except Max banged him off the road, denying Leclerc any chance of defending. Max was in a situation to do this because he braked really late, the only way for him to leave more room would have been to brake earlier, which in turn would have made his attack less dangerous (not necessarily unsuccessful), giving Leclerc again a fighting chance on the outside like it happened about 70 seconds earlier. The move would not have happened had Max not forced Leclerc off the track, not in this way anyway. He benefited immensely from pushing off an opponent who had nowhere to go at that point, who had no reason to expect that when the cars are completely side-by-side (hence the fact both the front and the rear tyres collided), the driver on the inside would not leave any room for him to stay.
This kind of move is usually penalized by the FIA and the reasoning in recent years seems simple: if the pass or the defense was pulled off because of an irregularity (leaving the track, blocking, pushing off, etc.) and would have not gone down the same way without said infraction, that's a penalty. That was part of the reasoning when Rosberg squeezed Verstappen himself off the track in Germany 2016 as well, and in that case there wasn't even a contact, just the room for Max to drive on the road simply finished. That was another case where the driver on the outside could have backed off and concede the position, but it's not the defender's fault that he expects the attacker to leave a car's width when side-by-side: it's literally what the rules enforce them to do.
One of the reasons Ricciardo got a penalty (two, even) in France is because the moves he pulled off became possible because he left the track. It's possible he could have outbraked his opponent in the first case anyway, and it's possible that he could have just passed on the inside on the second scenario, but the way he did both passes he benefited by going off, creating himself a much bigger chance of overtaking with an illegal set of manouvers.
With the Max vs Leclerc situation, the stewards used the exact opposing reasoning. Just one lap earlier, Leclerc defended on the outside of the exact same turn, knowing fully well his Ferrari's acceleration and top speed allows him to take the position back, and indeed he seemed beaten by the end of the turn but by the next one he was ahead again. Max dived in even later on the next lap, Leclerc tried and pull off the exact same defense, except Max banged him off the road, denying Leclerc any chance of defending. Max was in a situation to do this because he braked really late, the only way for him to leave more room would have been to brake earlier, which in turn would have made his attack less dangerous (not necessarily unsuccessful), giving Leclerc again a fighting chance on the outside like it happened about 70 seconds earlier. The move would not have happened had Max not forced Leclerc off the track, not in this way anyway. He benefited immensely from pushing off an opponent who had nowhere to go at that point, who had no reason to expect that when the cars are completely side-by-side (hence the fact both the front and the rear tyres collided), the driver on the inside would not leave any room for him to stay.
This kind of move is usually penalized by the FIA and the reasoning in recent years seems simple: if the pass or the defense was pulled off because of an irregularity (leaving the track, blocking, pushing off, etc.) and would have not gone down the same way without said infraction, that's a penalty. That was part of the reasoning when Rosberg squeezed Verstappen himself off the track in Germany 2016 as well, and in that case there wasn't even a contact, just the room for Max to drive on the road simply finished. That was another case where the driver on the outside could have backed off and concede the position, but it's not the defender's fault that he expects the attacker to leave a car's width when side-by-side: it's literally what the rules enforce them to do.
These situations really should stop being compared, as they are not nearly identical.
It doesn't matter if you are in a corner or not - if you have a car alongside you have to leave space for it on the track. Leclerc clearly showed that he hadn't lost the position by staying on the outside on the previous lap.
They finally had a good race and didn't want to "spoil it" by changing the result after the finish.
They basically award penalties based on consequences and not actions. If Leclerc had suffered a broken suspension or gotten stuck in a gravel trap Verstappen would have gotten a penalty.
Last edited:
Again, if you drive around the outside and think the car attempting to pass you is going to leave you space, you are a fool. 'Well, it happened last time.' Last time, you got lucky. Your only recourse is to cry to the stewards. That shit happens way to much. The paddock is full of Grosjeans. Either defend the inside or go for an over/under. Don't just sit out there and expect the person on the racing line to hit the brakes and play nice. Nut the fuck up and race. Every time there's an incident, both drivers are immediately on the radio pleading their case. It's stupid. In fact, it should be an automatic 5 second penalty if you whine on the radio.
I didn't say the situations were identical, I'm pointing out the logic behind the stewards' decisions: those moves would not have been possible without the infraction according to them, so penalties were applied. Max would have not passed Leclerc in that moment because Charles showed he's very well capable of defending on the outside and then get back ahead on the straight. Max could only find himself in such a deep line because be braked too late to leave the Ferrari any room to begin with. He took advantage of the fact he left no room for Leclerc on track, and he completed thanks to the push. In a vacuum, can this pass work? Maybe. In touring cars and such these passes are everyday stuff, then again there's a lot less risks in banging your sides compared to open wheel series. But this has not been FIA's direction this year, as they seem hellbent on punishing every slightly questionable pass or defense. So why leave this one be? Again, it's all just down to consistency. Ferrari lost a race because FIA wanted to enforce "laws" to the letter, then lost one because they didn't. It'd be nice if they took a position on the spectrum and stuck with it.
A large portion of the problem, maybe the whole portion, is that F1 has celebrity stewards rather than a regular crew. Hence, the inconsistency. If you're going to place so much importance on the stewarding, then get some people to do it full time. I know JPM came out and said he'd like to do it. He'd be perfect; no more penalties, ever.
- Status