2021 Abu Dhabi Grand Prix - Yas Marina, Dec 10 - 12

[dans79]

This line literally comes from the sporting regulations. If the regulations mean nothing anyway, then what's the problem last weekend?

I see you're arguing in bad faith . i know it comes from the regulations but track limits has never been regulated for ages now as it should have , that's why i say you keep moving the goalpost to fit your narrative. The fact that you want to compare Bahrain to what happened last Sunday says it all.

What is bad faith about referring to an incident where the race director broke the sporting regulations, if the major argument this weekend has revolved around the racing director breaking the sporting regulations?

It seems quite outrageous to me to essentially say "well, that particular point is consistently broken anyway, so that regulation doesn't matter, the RD can do as they please. But the others are holy and may never be violated". Perhaps the problem with the track limit regulation being broken consistently is, well, that it is being broken consistently which should not happen in the first place.

I don't personally see Bahrain in the same light, as all the competitors knew well in advance what they could and couldn't get away with. By that I mean the RD release notes several times each weekend explaining where and how track limits will be enforced!

[Phil]

My argument was that in Bahrain the governing body violated their own rules by not acting at first, then changing their mind halfway the race. I don't blame LH for 'abusing' track limits as long as he was given a free pass to do so.

I have no idea why Bahrain is being discussed here. RedBull had every opportunity to review and take the necessary steps a competitor is required to take if they feel something worked against their favor - just as Mercedes is doing now.

RedBull didn't, they missed the time frame to do so (or maybe they did and accepted the outcome), but that race and the incident are long gone and can't be changed.

Again - the process is simple. Any competitor can make use of that. Mercedes is doing nothing that any other competitor in its position wouldn't consider and they are following the required procedures to do so. Where's the issue?

[Starkblood80]

This line literally comes from the sporting regulations. If the regulations mean nothing anyway, then what's the problem last weekend?

Lets for arguments sake agree that Max was hard done by in Bahrain and Hamilton got the run of the green. Can we also agree that max not being punished in Brazil for running Hamilton off the track was a decision that went in his favour?

I will need to review the particular incident, but generally speaking, yes, there were probably several incidents throughout the season where warnings or penalties were in order but not given, some of which (potentially) altered a race outcome and others not. If a 'fair' outcome which was not 'handed' in one way or the other by the stewards, all should be reviewed.

I’m not sure I agree with that, I view incidents such as max running Hamilton off in Brazil or Hamilton not giving up the place on Sunday as refereeing decisions, sometimes they’re right sometimes they’re wrong but effectively happen while the game is being played and shouldn’t be reviewed afterwards.
Changing the rules of engagement in Bahrain half way through the race most likely did assist Hamilton but by how much we don’t know beyond one ex drivers estimation, so what adjustment would you apply in that situation?
It is much easier to quantify what impact Masi’s on the fly rule changing had to the outcome on Sunday so I think it is only right it should be reviewed.

[Ryar]

[kenshi_blind]

What is bad faith about referring to an incident where the race director broke the sporting regulations, if the major argument this weekend has revolved around the racing director breaking the sporting regulations?

It seems quite outrageous to me to essentially say "well, that particular point is consistently broken anyway, so that regulation doesn't matter, the RD can do as they please. But the others are holy and may never be violated". Perhaps the problem with the track limit regulation being broken consistently is, well, that it is being broken consistently which should not happen in the first place.

Track limits during the Bahrain GP was never what you're trying to say it was . that is a bad faith argument and a load of whataboutism

It was, it is in the rules. That the RD didn't apply their own rules consistently is a problem, and it is exactly the problem the Abu Dhabi discussion centers around. It does not matter if the RD consistently misinterprets their own rules, it doesn't change what's in the book.

Again it was not, otherwise you can be sure as hell that they wouldn't have let Lewis doing it for what 30 odd laps ?
The notes release prior to the race did not mention that in the way you're suggesting they did.
We've seen races after that were track limits were enforce and how that went so again it was not as clear cut as you're pretending it was.
it is actually disingenuous to bring track limits into the discussion regarding what happened last Sunday

[CMSMJ1]

it is madness ^ slightly petulant isn't it?

Do you guys think that on either side, they are even thinking about this race now?

The toast has been dropped....and it landed (for some) butter side down - there's no picking it up without a mess.

The drivers and the teams are looking forwards = you cannot change the past and it is wasted time to try to do so.

for completeness - I have no cares who wins and I do agree that the end o f this last race as about as strange a race as I have seen in my 30+ years of following F1 (and all races I can get my eyeballs onto.. It is done though. Lessons will be learned. Ideally we won't be surprised by the actions next time - as the clarity of thought and rulemaking will be sorted

[DChemTech]

I see you're arguing in bad faith . i know it comes from the regulations but track limits has never been regulated for ages now as it should have , that's why i say you keep moving the goalpost to fit your narrative. The fact that you want to compare Bahrain to what happened last Sunday says it all.

What is bad faith about referring to an incident where the race director broke the sporting regulations, if the major argument this weekend has revolved around the racing director breaking the sporting regulations?

It seems quite outrageous to me to essentially say "well, that particular point is consistently broken anyway, so that regulation doesn't matter, the RD can do as they please. But the others are holy and may never be violated". Perhaps the problem with the track limit regulation being broken consistently is, well, that it is being broken consistently which should not happen in the first place.

I don't personally see Bahrain in the same light, as all the competitors knew well in advance what they could and couldn't get away with. By that I mean the RD release notes several times each weekend explaining where and how track limits will be enforced!

The RD highlights which corners will be explicitly monitored, that laptimes will be taken away if track limits are broken in that corner (even if only once), etc... But that does not imply in the slightest that it is allowed to gain time by consistently breaking track limits in other sections of the track - the rules forbid that, clearly. That drivers interpret it as 'track limits do not apply there' is a pretty strange interpretation, and well, the main issue I'd say is that the stewards let them. Even if all drivers interpret it that way, it introduces ambiguity - some drivers may exploit more than others, thus gaining a benefit. The only way around that is by making clear exactly what the extent is of the track that drivers can use. A useful quantifier for that might be the white line.
The second issue is that it is not clear what constitutes an advantage. Apparently, gaining 3s is not an advantage, but overtaking in the same location is. I'd say both are an advantage, but that was not how the rules were applied. There is one simple way in which to avoid such a discussion: clearly communicate that you can both drive and overtake within the white lines, and not outside of them. And well, that's essentially what is already written down.

[kenshi_blind]

What is bad faith about referring to an incident where the race director broke the sporting regulations, if the major argument this weekend has revolved around the racing director breaking the sporting regulations?

It seems quite outrageous to me to essentially say "well, that particular point is consistently broken anyway, so that regulation doesn't matter, the RD can do as they please. But the others are holy and may never be violated". Perhaps the problem with the track limit regulation being broken consistently is, well, that it is being broken consistently which should not happen in the first place.

I don't personally see Bahrain in the same light, as all the competitors knew well in advance what they could and couldn't get away with. By that I mean the RD release notes several times each weekend explaining where and how track limits will be enforced!

The RD highlights which corners will be explicitly monitored, that laptimes will be taken away if track limits are broken in that corner (even if only once), etc... But that does not imply in the slightest that it is allowed to gain time by consistently breaking track limits in other sections of the track - the rules forbid that, clearly. That drivers interpret it as 'track limits do not apply there' is a pretty strange interpretation, and well, the main issue I'd say is that the stewards let them. Even if all drivers interpret it that way, it introduces ambiguity - some drivers may exploit more than others, thus gaining a benefit. The only way around that is by making clear exactly what the extent is of the track that drivers can use. A useful quantifier for that might be the white line.
The second issue is that it is not clear what constitutes an advantage. Apparently, gaining 3s is not an advantage, but overtaking in the same location is. I'd say both are an advantage, but that was not how the rules were applied. There is one simple way in which to avoid such a discussion: clearly communicate that you can both drive and overtake within the white lines, and not outside of them. And well, that's essentially what is already written down.

3 seconds ? how did you come up with that ? 3 seconds a lap ? 3 seconds every 10 laps ?

[DChemTech]

Track limits during the Bahrain GP was never what you're trying to say it was . that is a bad faith argument and a load of whataboutism

It was, it is in the rules. That the RD didn't apply their own rules consistently is a problem, and it is exactly the problem the Abu Dhabi discussion centers around. It does not matter if the RD consistently misinterprets their own rules, it doesn't change what's in the book.

Again it was not, otherwise you can be sure as hell that they wouldn't have let Lewis doing it for what 30 odd laps ?
The notes release prior to the race did not mention that in the way you're suggesting they did.
We've seen races after that were track limits were enforce and how that went so again it was not as clear cut as you're pretending it was.
it is actually disingenuous to bring track limits into the discussion regarding what happened last Sunday

Because the RD did not follow the rules as they were written down, and that's the problem! How many times do I need to repeat that.
And 3s was calculated by Jolyon Palmer; ca. 0.1s per lap, 29 laps in total.

[Starkblood80]

It was, it is in the rules. That the RD didn't apply their own rules consistently is a problem, and it is exactly the problem the Abu Dhabi discussion centers around. It does not matter if the RD consistently misinterprets their own rules, it doesn't change what's in the book.

Again it was not, otherwise you can be sure as hell that they wouldn't have let Lewis doing it for what 30 odd laps ?
The notes release prior to the race did not mention that in the way you're suggesting they did.
We've seen races after that were track limits were enforce and how that went so again it was not as clear cut as you're pretending it was.
it is actually disingenuous to bring track limits into the discussion regarding what happened last Sunday

Because the RD did not follow the rules as they were written down, and that's the problem! How many times do I need to repeat that.
And 3s was calculated by Jolyon Palmer; ca. 0.1s per lap, 29 laps in total.

How did Palmer come to that conclusion though and how under review would you be able to prove he gained 0.1s per lap specifically from running wide at that corner?
Lastly up until lap 29 there was nothing stopping Verstappen from running wide at the same corner so it can’t be argued that Hamilton was given an advantage that Verstappen wasn’t himself Allowed to exploit.

[kenshi_blind]

lol , i give up .. this is truly fascinating, guess it is signs of this century , alternative realities and whatnot

[101FlyingDutchman]

lol , i give up .. this is truly fascinating, guess it is signs of this century , alternative realities and whatnot

Nope you’re just looking at it from the “enormity” of the rule bending/ignoring perspective as your favourite driver has been slighted. Chemtech isn’t COMPARING the two things in “severity” but merely pointing it out that there have been infractions of the rule set this season. It’s irrelevant what the severity is, the fact is it’s happened on numerous occasions

And this is why sorting the glaring inconsistencies out that have happened time and time again HAS TO BE priority No1. So everyone knows exactly where they stand (from race director to stewards to teams and to driving’s and to the larger public)

[KeiKo403]

Again it was not, otherwise you can be sure as hell that they wouldn't have let Lewis doing it for what 30 odd laps ?
The notes release prior to the race did not mention that in the way you're suggesting they did.
We've seen races after that were track limits were enforce and how that went so again it was not as clear cut as you're pretending it was.
it is actually disingenuous to bring track limits into the discussion regarding what happened last Sunday

Because the RD did not follow the rules as they were written down, and that's the problem! How many times do I need to repeat that.
And 3s was calculated by Jolyon Palmer; ca. 0.1s per lap, 29 laps in total.

How did Palmer come to that conclusion though and how under review would you be able to prove he gained 0.1s per lap specifically from running wide at that corner?
Lastly up until lap 29 there was nothing stopping Verstappen from running wide at the same corner so it can’t be argued that Hamilton was given an advantage that Verstappen wasn’t himself Allowed to exploit.

It doesn't matter. Hamilton was likely gaining some form of advantage otherwise he wouldn't be consistently running wide. Whether that's a lap time advantage or a tyre preservation advantage or both, an advantage was likely gained.

0.5s or 3.0s, doesn't matter. I agree with DChemTech on this. So that's a Ham fan and a Max fan agreeing on something

However, in Masi's defence (again, I'm a Hamilton defending him here) at least he took a bold step with trying to tackle track limits. Charlie never did except in extreme circumstances.
And, I'll also add Masi can't be the only person held responsible for track limit infringements, the stewards are empowered to investigate off their own backs without the RD raining something to them.

With regards to track limits Masi isn't wholly to blame, in fact I think he's brave for trying to enforce it at all, however inconsistent it may be.

[DChemTech]

Again it was not, otherwise you can be sure as hell that they wouldn't have let Lewis doing it for what 30 odd laps ?
The notes release prior to the race did not mention that in the way you're suggesting they did.
We've seen races after that were track limits were enforce and how that went so again it was not as clear cut as you're pretending it was.
it is actually disingenuous to bring track limits into the discussion regarding what happened last Sunday

Because the RD did not follow the rules as they were written down, and that's the problem! How many times do I need to repeat that.
And 3s was calculated by Jolyon Palmer; ca. 0.1s per lap, 29 laps in total.

How did Palmer come to that conclusion though and how under review would you be able to prove he gained 0.1s per lap specifically from running wide at that corner?

As he mentions in the video on formula1.com, 'going through the data, the gain is circa 0.1s, give or take a bit'. Comparison of sector times between situations where it did and didn't happen, I guess.
https://www.formula1.com/en/latest/vide ... 18218.html

And no, there was noting stopping Max from doing it (well, other than the RD clamping down on everyone once he started doing it). But still, it was, technically, Max following the letter of the rules (almost feels ironic ) and essentially being stupid for doing so. Surely that is not how things should be.

[holeindalip]

lol , i give up .. this is truly fascinating, guess it is signs of this century , alternative realities and whatnot

Nope you’re just looking at it from the “enormity” of the rule bending/ignoring perspective as your favourite driver has been slighted. Chemtech isn’t COMPARING the two things in “severity” but merely pointing it out that there have been infractions of the rule set this season. It’s irrelevant what the severity is, the fact is it’s happened on numerous occasions

And this is why sorting the glaring inconsistencies out that have happened time and time again HAS TO BE priority No1. So everyone knows exactly where they stand (from race director to stewards to teams and to driving’s and to the larger public)

wasn’t it stated in the drivers meeting that track limits wouldn’t be monitored there during the race and verstappen didn’t take advantage and was just complaining on the radio until the RD changed it mid race?