2024 Mclaren Formula 1 Team

[FittingMechanics]

I think Norris was just being emotional and trying to increase the "damage" that Verstappen did.

Worst part about this is that we will have more of this and corresponding heartbreak instead of good clean racing.

[mwillems]

I would like to point out a couple of things that are very important, but which were overlooked due to the collision between the two fastest drivers at the moment.

The top speed is still very much lacking. We need to continue to solve this problem. And also prepare an effective package for low downforce tracks.

With a higher top speed, Lando would have been able to catch up and pass the Red Bull earlier, making it easier to pass his rivals. In fact, this is now the main weak point of the car. If it had the efficiency on straights of the 2020 and 2021 cars, it would be priceless.

Do you have examples?

The tops speed across many laps between the two drivers when DRS is not in use was very similar when I looked.

But that's not the problem. The problem is the effectiveness of the DRS. Lando's top speed is at the bottom of the table. And that's with his constant attack with the inclusion of DRS and getting slipstream from Red Bull. If the top speed had been faster and higher, Lando would have easily passed Max long before the braking zone. This partly explains why Lando had to attack more aggressively in the braking zone, including divebombing.

As FittingMechanics says, I think the real problem was elsewhere. T3 was the main culprit and Max was dominant here, but also getting good exits elsewhere.

[trinidefender]

Do you have examples?

The tops speed across many laps between the two drivers when DRS is not in use was very similar when I looked.

But that's not the problem. The problem is the effectiveness of the DRS. Lando's top speed is at the bottom of the table. And that's with his constant attack with the inclusion of DRS and getting slipstream from Red Bull. If the top speed had been faster and higher, Lando would have easily passed Max long before the braking zone. This partly explains why Lando had to attack more aggressively in the braking zone, including divebombing.

As FittingMechanics says, I think the real problem was elsewhere. T3 was the main culprit and Max was dominant here, but also getting good exits elsewhere.

If you mean the main culprit in moving under braking then yes.

Norris wouldn't have had to make as big dive-bombs if the initial infraction of consistently moving under braking hadn't happened.

Makes me wish that Norris had done the same to Max in the sprint race and kept the lead there.

[venkyhere]

I think the critical problem in Austria was not top speed (or at least not with DRS), it was T3 where Lando was unable to out traction Verstappen to T4. This forced Norris to attack into T3 just like in the sprint (where he lost it at T4). I'm not confident we wouldn't get a massive lunge by Verstappen in T4 even if Lando made the overtake.

Sure, having better top speed and gain more on the straight would have helped even more but I think it's likely they went with more downforce to keep the tyres alive.

I can try to explain why it is easier to attack in T3 than in T4. The exit from T1 is easier than from T3, also the speed at the exit of the corner is higher. The long straight between T1 and T3. Hard braking before T3. Braking in T3 occurs on an uphill slope, which makes it a little easier to choose the point of the initial braking phase. All this helps in attacking.

The entry and exit to T3 is awkward, the turn is sharp, and the speed is the slowest. Here you can extrapolate Barcelona, ​​when there was a slow chicane in sector 3, and then the last high-speed turn. And the car behind is always a lot of meters behind the car in front. One of the reasons for this is the wide rear tires and a powerful engine, which allows for effective and quick acceleration. Look at the onboard of the Barcelona race in recent years, when there was a chicane. In the chicane itself, there can be a one-meter difference between the cars, then the car in front exits the chicane and quickly accelerates to the last turn and then onto the straight. By this point, the distance between the cars can be more than 50 meters. Therefore, it was difficult to overtake in Barcelona. Now it is much easier. And this is visible on the onboards. Without a chicane, the difference between the cars is on average 15-20 meters, which then allows for overtaking with DRS.

And here at the Red Bull Ring we have the same thing. Before T3 the gap between cars can be less than a metre, then exit T3 and the car in front can develop enough acceleration so that the car behind can’t overtake in time. Moreover, T4 goes downhill, which lengthens the braking zone, and therefore the point of the braking phase is a little more difficult to find, since even a small mistake can lead to a drive into the gravel.

aren't you describing "concertina effect" (sub optimal braking far before the ideal braking point to negotiate the corner, because the car in front is braking at the ideal point before corner entry) , which is amplified in narrow slow corners with only 1 racing line ? T3 in Austria is a "wide" slow corner with multiple lines for entry/exit, so that effect doesn't apply there.

NOR was in the DRS zone behind VER for more than 10 laps and after the first 3-4 attempts, realized that unless the two cars had matched top speeds, trying to get it done in T4 was impossible, because the exit from T3 is very slow and given his top speed deficit, a lot of the length of the straight from T3 to T4 is 'used up' to build up enough speed before DRS delta can actually make a difference, thus rendering him with insufficient distance before he has to brake for T4 - "Passing before braking" was impossible with his top speed deficit.

Why he chose T3 :
- exit from T1 is much faster, thus removing the limitation of needing lots of distance before corner braking zone
- if he manages to overtake 'in the corner' of T3 (which has multiple lines and is wide), then vide DRS detection just before T3, he gets a 'free' DRS from T3 to T4 when being the car ahead, forcing the overtaken car to follow without DRS.

What actually happened :
- VER understood this very well and used his battery to great effect, between T1 and T3, to ensure that the DRS advantage that NOR had, resulted in only a situation where the T3 overtake had to be a 'barely there with speed advantage' affair.

[LionsHeart]

I think the critical problem in Austria was not top speed (or at least not with DRS), it was T3 where Lando was unable to out traction Verstappen to T4. This forced Norris to attack into T3 just like in the sprint (where he lost it at T4). I'm not confident we wouldn't get a massive lunge by Verstappen in T4 even if Lando made the overtake.

Sure, having better top speed and gain more on the straight would have helped even more but I think it's likely they went with more downforce to keep the tyres alive.

I can try to explain why it is easier to attack in T3 than in T4. The exit from T1 is easier than from T3, also the speed at the exit of the corner is higher. The long straight between T1 and T3. Hard braking before T3. Braking in T3 occurs on an uphill slope, which makes it a little easier to choose the point of the initial braking phase. All this helps in attacking.

The entry and exit to T3 is awkward, the turn is sharp, and the speed is the slowest. Here you can extrapolate Barcelona, ​​when there was a slow chicane in sector 3, and then the last high-speed turn. And the car behind is always a lot of meters behind the car in front. One of the reasons for this is the wide rear tires and a powerful engine, which allows for effective and quick acceleration. Look at the onboard of the Barcelona race in recent years, when there was a chicane. In the chicane itself, there can be a one-meter difference between the cars, then the car in front exits the chicane and quickly accelerates to the last turn and then onto the straight. By this point, the distance between the cars can be more than 50 meters. Therefore, it was difficult to overtake in Barcelona. Now it is much easier. And this is visible on the onboards. Without a chicane, the difference between the cars is on average 15-20 meters, which then allows for overtaking with DRS.

And here at the Red Bull Ring we have the same thing. Before T3 the gap between cars can be less than a metre, then exit T3 and the car in front can develop enough acceleration so that the car behind can’t overtake in time. Moreover, T4 goes downhill, which lengthens the braking zone, and therefore the point of the braking phase is a little more difficult to find, since even a small mistake can lead to a drive into the gravel.

aren't you describing "concertina effect" (sub optimal braking far before the ideal braking point to negotiate the corner, because the car in front is braking at the ideal point before corner entry) , which is amplified in narrow slow corners with only 1 racing line ? T3 in Austria is a "wide" slow corner with multiple lines for entry/exit, so that effect doesn't apply there.

NOR was in the DRS zone behind VER for more than 10 laps and after the first 3-4 attempts, realized that unless the two cars had matched top speeds, trying to get it done in T4 was impossible, because the exit from T3 is very slow and given his top speed deficit, a lot of the length of the straight from T3 to T4 is 'used up' to build up enough speed before DRS delta can actually make a difference, thus rendering him with insufficient distance before he has to brake for T4 - "Passing before braking" was impossible with his top speed deficit.

Why he chose T3 :
- exit from T1 is much faster, thus removing the limitation of needing lots of distance before corner braking zone
- if he manages to overtake 'in the corner' of T3 (which has multiple lines and is wide), then vide DRS detection just before T3, he gets a 'free' DRS from T3 to T4 when being the car ahead, forcing the overtaken car to follow without DRS.

What actually happened :
- VER understood this very well and used his battery to great effect, between T1 and T3, to ensure that the DRS advantage that NOR had, resulted in only a situation where the T3 overtake had to be a 'barely there with speed advantage' affair.

You said the same thing, just in different words. I wrote a few posts above why Lando couldn't use a different entry and exit point. Max consistently moved in the direction Lando was trying to attack from. I even provided two videos to show that this is typical for Max. Lando, with Max's approach, simply couldn't make an alternative trajectory, which completely ruined his quick exit from T3.

I guess I should have added a third video where Anthony Davidson breaks down a few situations between Lando and Max, and then again between Max and Charles 2019. The braking point before T3 is always suboptimal for the one behind. That makes sense. That's not what I meant.

I explained why exiting T1 is more beneficial when attacking at T3 than exiting T3 and attacking at T4. I didn't see anything fundamentally different from you here. So I don't really understand why you disagree with me.

You correctly describe the situation when the car behind simply does not have time to catch up and overtake. You just describe this situation in more depth. I try to simplify everything for a general understanding of the situation.

I reread your message three times, I understood the meaning. Therefore, I will supplement the answer. First paragraph: I do not quite understand this concertina effect, I hear this term for the first time, but I got the gist. If you look at how others overtake there, you should also pay attention to the defense of other drivers.

Then look at how Max defends. He constantly uses a late shift at the braking point, which is completely prohibited by the rules. This Verstappen rule was introduced in the second half of 2016. Further: even after a late shift to the side, Max already in the braking phase shifts towards Lando, no matter from which side Lando tries to pass Max. Such maneuvers can be called squeezing, blocking, etc., which completely blocks an alternative trajectory for Lando, so your words about multiple entry and exit points do not work when Max is holding the defense.

It is also interesting that the Verstappen rule was introduced because of Verstappen's own actions in 2016, when he squeezed many drivers and moved them under braking. And most importantly, everyone obeys this rule except Max himself.

I completely agree with the following paragraphs, but I can add my comments to the last paragraph. Perhaps it is not even about the batteries, but that the Red Bull is a less drag car. This allows it to steadily gain speed. The McLaren chassis simply hits the air a little earlier and faster. Therefore, even using DRS does not allow you to easily pass your opponent. And the effectiveness of DRS itself is low. Lando's maximum speed is very low. All this and Max's actions on braking lead to the fact that Lando's only opportunity to overtake is in T3 and this must be done on late braking, which is what we mean by divebombing.

[venkyhere]

So I don't really understand why you disagree with me.

I am not sure what gave you the impression that I was in disagreement. I wasn't.

You correctly describe the situation when the car behind simply does not have time to catch up and overtake. You just describe this situation in more depth. I try to simplify everything for a general understanding of the situation.
I reread your message three times, I understood the meaning. Therefore, I will supplement the answer. First paragraph: I do not quite understand this concertina effect, I hear this term for the first time, but I got the gist.

That was my only purpose, to supplement with more details.

Then look at how Max defends. He constantly uses a late shift at the braking point, which is completely prohibited by the rules. This Verstappen rule was introduced in the second half of 2016. Further: even after a late shift to the side, Max already in the braking phase shifts towards Lando, no matter from which side Lando tries to pass Max. Such maneuvers can be called squeezing, blocking, etc., which completely blocks an alternative trajectory for Lando, so your words about multiple entry and exit points do not work when Max is holding the defense.

I don't know what made you think I thought Max wasn't at fault. He was, definitely. Squeezing and moving in braking happens in a lot of tracks, in a lot of corners, and 90% of the time, the driver behind is able to 'deal with it'. Despite the 'no moving under braking rule', people subtly move to the middle of the road not only as the 'first mover' but also in reaction to the guy behind. Again, it happens, despite the rule, and most skilled drivers who are behind, 'sell a dummy' to the guy in front, and force a reactive move, then switch over to the 'other side' and pass either at the corner entry by outbraking or at the corner exit by braking earlier and forcing the defender to late brake and compromise his exit. Haven't we seen this happen at the end of DRS straights in most corners across circuits ?

So why that became 'dangerous' here ?
Two reasons :
(i) over aggressive defence, the 'amount' of moving by Max.
(ii) The nature of the corner :
It's not even a 90 degree, it's not a 270 degree corner, it's more like a 300 degree corner. And over on top of this, there are sausage kerbs on the outside of the turn. Further exacerbated by the elevation change, making traction at the exit a big challenge. Very unique corner this, T3 in Austria. So it's a super-heavy-braking zone at the end of a DRS straight, with sausage kerbs at exit, and the upwards climb that challenges traction at exit => a perfect recipe for someone rear-ending the guy in front, if the guy in front does his 'dinking left or right' aggressively, in reaction to the guy behind who wants to overtake.

We saw this in the sprint race - NOR divebombed on the inside, somehow managed to brake and started his right turn before hitting the sausage kerbs, and VER, though he anticipated the divebomb and was ready to do an over-under move (the 'braking earlier than attacker' move) , he was barey a few cm from hitting NOR's rear (in fact, he braked a second time and almost came to a full stop, to avoid contact). The rear ending almost happened.

To me what was more dangerous than the lap64 contact between them, was the defensive moves he did in the laps before.

Verstappen moving in reaction to Norris in laps 58-63 (the laps before the touching) - People have been doing this "moving in reaction" to the attacker, at this corner for many years, this time Verstappen overdid it. Sainz did in 2023 to Max, this year we can see Ocon did it to Gasly - in both cases the attacking car was able to 'deal with' the maneuver by braking early. In the NOR vs VER battle that we just saw, VER wanted to cover the 'deal with' that NOR would be able to execute, and hence his overamplification of the defensive moves to outside or inside.

IMHO, they should just remove the DRS zone from T1 to T3 and only keep the other two DRS zones. This second DRS zone is leaving the opportunity for drivers to make super-aggressive defensive moves, purely because of the 300 degree corner, with it's elevation change.

It is also interesting that the Verstappen rule was introduced because of Verstappen's own actions in 2016, when he squeezed many drivers and moved them under braking. And most importantly, everyone obeys this rule except Max himself.

At no point am I claiming that VER wasn't to blame. He is to blame.

[LionsHeart]

So I don't really understand why you disagree with me.

I am not sure what gave you the impression that I was in disagreement. I wasn't.

You correctly describe the situation when the car behind simply does not have time to catch up and overtake. You just describe this situation in more depth. I try to simplify everything for a general understanding of the situation.
I reread your message three times, I understood the meaning. Therefore, I will supplement the answer. First paragraph: I do not quite understand this concertina effect, I hear this term for the first time, but I got the gist.

That was my only purpose, to supplement with more details.

Then look at how Max defends. He constantly uses a late shift at the braking point, which is completely prohibited by the rules. This Verstappen rule was introduced in the second half of 2016. Further: even after a late shift to the side, Max already in the braking phase shifts towards Lando, no matter from which side Lando tries to pass Max. Such maneuvers can be called squeezing, blocking, etc., which completely blocks an alternative trajectory for Lando, so your words about multiple entry and exit points do not work when Max is holding the defense.

I don't know what made you think I thought Max wasn't at fault. He was, definitely. Squeezing and moving in braking happens in a lot of tracks, in a lot of corners, and 90% of the time, the driver behind is able to 'deal with it'. Despite the 'no moving under braking rule', people subtly move to the middle of the road not only as the 'first mover' but also in reaction to the guy behind. Again, it happens, despite the rule, and most skilled drivers who are behind, 'sell a dummy' to the guy in front, and force a reactive move, then switch over to the 'other side' and pass either at the corner entry by outbraking or at the corner exit by braking earlier and forcing the defender to late brake and compromise his exit. Haven't we seen this happen at the end of DRS straights in most corners across circuits ?

So why that became 'dangerous' here ?
Two reasons :
(i) over aggressive defence, the 'amount' of moving by Max.
(ii) The nature of the corner :
It's not even a 90 degree, it's not a 270 degree corner, it's more like a 300 degree corner. And over on top of this, there are sausage kerbs on the outside of the turn. Further exacerbated by the elevation change, making traction at the exit a big challenge. Very unique corner this, T3 in Austria. So it's a super-heavy-braking zone at the end of a DRS straight, with sausage kerbs at exit, and the upwards climb that challenges traction at exit => a perfect recipe for someone rear-ending the guy in front, if the guy in front does his 'dinking left or right' aggressively, in reaction to the guy behind who wants to overtake.

We saw this in the sprint race - NOR divebombed on the inside, somehow managed to brake and started his right turn before hitting the sausage kerbs, and VER, though he anticipated the divebomb and was ready to do an over-under move (the 'braking earlier than attacker' move) , he was barey a few cm from hitting NOR's rear (in fact, he braked a second time and almost came to a full stop, to avoid contact). The rear ending almost happened.

To me what was more dangerous than the lap64 contact between them, was the defensive moves he did in the laps before.

Verstappen moving in reaction to Norris in laps 58-63 (the laps before the touching) - People have been doing this "moving in reaction" to the attacker, at this corner for many years, this time Verstappen overdid it. Sainz did in 2023 to Max, this year we can see Ocon did it to Gasly - in both cases the attacking car was able to 'deal with' the maneuver by braking early. In the NOR vs VER battle that we just saw, VER wanted to cover the 'deal with' that NOR would be able to execute, and hence his overamplification of the defensive moves to outside or inside.

IMHO, they should just remove the DRS zone from T1 to T3 and only keep the other two DRS zones. This second DRS zone is leaving the opportunity for drivers to make super-aggressive defensive moves, purely because of the 300 degree corner, with it's elevation change.

It is also interesting that the Verstappen rule was introduced because of Verstappen's own actions in 2016, when he squeezed many drivers and moved them under braking. And most importantly, everyone obeys this rule except Max himself.

At no point am I claiming that VER wasn't to blame. He is to blame.

I woke up early this morning and read it. Apparently, I didn't understand everything correctly. So I apologize for the misunderstandings.

Regarding the concertina effect: I meant the distance between the cars as an accordion effect or a compressed spring that then stretches. Well, when the distance between the outermost turns of the spring is either shortened or lengthened. This is just what I meant in the main message.

You described what I wrote above very well and in detail. Very succinctly and in detail. Emphasizing every aspect of both the characteristics of the turn itself and the general movements between Max and Lando.

Very good analysis. Perhaps, yes, it makes sense to remove the DRS zone between T1 and T3. But T3 is the most overtaking place. Therefore, I don't think that the FIA ​​will decide to remove this zone.
To be honest, I don't even have anything to add to your comment. I completely agree with your statement.

Thank you for answering my misunderstanding. It cleared things up.

[FittingMechanics]

They don't need to remove the DRS but they should start to enforce the rule that you can't force the driver off track.

If you divebomb into T3 you need to leave a cars width for the defending car, that would mean Norris lunge on Lap 63 where he divebombed but managed to stay on track would be an illegal move (in my opinion rightly so as if it is allowed, defending car can just stay on line and there is a collision). Starting to enforce this would force the drivers to leave more space for the other car and we would get more side to side action. I think this would be a positive overall and mean more close racing.

I can understand the idea that it would make the defending driver unable to defend in some corners but why is that a bad thing? We want more action, removing ability of a defending driver to force someone off (or attacking one to force the defender off) is a benefit, not a bad thing.

[AR3-GP]

Then look at how Max defends. He constantly uses a late shift at the braking point, which is completely prohibited by the rules. This Verstappen rule was introduced in the second half of 2016. Further: even after a late shift to the side, Max already in the braking phase shifts towards Lando, no matter from which side Lando tries to pass Max. Such maneuvers can be called squeezing, blocking, etc., which completely blocks an alternative trajectory for Lando, so your words about multiple entry and exit points do not work when Max is holding the defense.

It is also interesting that the Verstappen rule was introduced because of Verstappen's own actions in 2016, when he squeezed many drivers and moved them under braking. And most importantly, everyone obeys this rule except Max himself.

This rule was dropped by the end of 2016: https://www.autosport.com/f1/news/fia-d ... 8/5019118/

Many refer to a rule that doesn't exist.

[Aesop]

I think Norris was just being emotional and trying to increase the "damage" that Verstappen did.

Worst part about this is that we will have more of this and corresponding heartbreak instead of good clean racing.

Yep, Lando needs to up his game if he wants to play with the big boys.

[CjC]

I think Norris was just being emotional and trying to increase the "damage" that Verstappen did.

Worst part about this is that we will have more of this and corresponding heartbreak instead of good clean racing.

Yep, Lando needs to up his game if he wants to play with the big boys.

He does.
And all round he needs to be a bit more savvy, no matter how ‘pally’ the media are with the drivers, the journalists we’ll ultimately prey on their emotions so Lando just need to skiff over their questions even if it results in a ‘bad’ interview.

[FittingMechanics]

Then look at how Max defends. He constantly uses a late shift at the braking point, which is completely prohibited by the rules. This Verstappen rule was introduced in the second half of 2016. Further: even after a late shift to the side, Max already in the braking phase shifts towards Lando, no matter from which side Lando tries to pass Max. Such maneuvers can be called squeezing, blocking, etc., which completely blocks an alternative trajectory for Lando, so your words about multiple entry and exit points do not work when Max is holding the defense.

It is also interesting that the Verstappen rule was introduced because of Verstappen's own actions in 2016, when he squeezed many drivers and moved them under braking. And most importantly, everyone obeys this rule except Max himself.

This rule was dropped by the end of 2016: https://www.autosport.com/f1/news/fia-d ... 8/5019118/

Many including yourself refer to a rule that doesn't exist. Why?

Because the rule wasn't dropped, it was brought under an umbrella rule so that they have more freedom to ignore inconsequential moves and still penalize problematic ones.

As it clearly says in the article you linked:

"Before, we said any move under braking will be investigated.

"Now we have a simple rule which says effectively that if a driver moves erratically or goes unnecessarily slowly or behaves in a manner that could endanger another driver, then he will be investigated.

"So there's a very broad rule now."

"The way we interpreted the regulations last year was to simply use the rules that we had to say that moving under braking was potentially dangerous, and hence would be reported to the stewards every time.

"[Now] each incident will be dealt with only on the basis of whether or not it was a dangerous manoeuvre, not necessarily because he moved under braking."

[AR3-GP]

Then look at how Max defends. He constantly uses a late shift at the braking point, which is completely prohibited by the rules. This Verstappen rule was introduced in the second half of 2016. Further: even after a late shift to the side, Max already in the braking phase shifts towards Lando, no matter from which side Lando tries to pass Max. Such maneuvers can be called squeezing, blocking, etc., which completely blocks an alternative trajectory for Lando, so your words about multiple entry and exit points do not work when Max is holding the defense.

It is also interesting that the Verstappen rule was introduced because of Verstappen's own actions in 2016, when he squeezed many drivers and moved them under braking. And most importantly, everyone obeys this rule except Max himself.

This rule was dropped by the end of 2016: https://www.autosport.com/f1/news/fia-d ... 8/5019118/

Many including yourself refer to a rule that doesn't exist. Why?

Because the rule wasn't dropped, it was brought under an umbrella rule so that they have more freedom to ignore inconsequential moves and still penalize problematic ones.

As it clearly says in the article you linked:

"Before, we said any move under braking will be investigated.

"Now we have a simple rule which says effectively that if a driver moves erratically or goes unnecessarily slowly or behaves in a manner that could endanger another driver, then he will be investigated.

"So there's a very broad rule now."

There was no investigation by the stewards or protest from Mclaren regarding this.

[FittingMechanics]

There was no investigation by the stewards or protest from Mclaren regarding this.

Yes, but it was definitely reported by McLaren as Lando was complaining about it. I am puzzled there wasn't at least an investigation but I guess they have set the precedent by allowing Ocon to do the same.

About the protest - we will see. Not everything is made public immediately but as we all know, these protests never amount to anything. It may be smart of McLaren to make pressure but not formally lodge a protest.

I am sure if someone wants to play hard ball, we can see how that works out in the future. McLaren has two drivers with decent pace and if Verstappen tangles with one each race, that will become a problem for Red Bull very soon.

BTW please stop moving the goalposts.

[DDopey]

Silverstone will be the test if Norris is really WDC material. There will be so much pressure on him to perform, not only Norris & McLaren fans, but also the LH cult wil be cheering for him. I am really curious if he can handle this.