Indian GP 2011 - Buddh

[nae]

a rather good article that is

<my opinion>
I dont understand what massa was racing so agressivly for, if he had a faster top speed (as pointed out in the above article) then he would have been able to have a go back, you know that lap after lap racing we all crave but no it was a very agressive defence (of what?) he is 6th in the WDC with no threat from below and no change of more.

it takes a great driver to keep a faster car behind (see alonso and schumy at imola) and an even greater one to realise he has lost the corner but to then set it up for a pass back later.

true he is entitled to defend but thats not the issue, Massa would not be 104 points behind lewis if he drove for the points, as a 2nd driver in the 3rd fastest car 6th is all he can realiticly hope for anyway.

if he had engadged in racing then he would also have slowed Hamiltons progress

maybe he still smarts from loosing the WDC to hamilton, who knows

</opinion>

[Crucial_Xtreme]

There's a good analysis of Massa/Hamilton move on the BBC http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/formula ... 524661.stm

It looks at the previous lap and explains how DRS and KERs led to the move taking place on that corner. I found that the most interesting part because it is technical just like this forum

Yes very good link. Thanks Richard.

[JohnsonsEvilTwin]

By the crucial time just before the braking zone, the two cars were travelling at much the same speed. Knowing he was going to be able to brake later, why should Massa have been surrendering the corner? It makes perfect sense that he was still fighting it.

Of course Massa knew Hamilton was there - he had been fully alongside him just a second or so earlier. But that does not necessarily mean that, with Hamilton no longer fully alongside, Massa was not entitled to claim the corner.

There is then a distinction between that and turning in knowing you were likely to collide.

Perfectly sums up my point of view.

[auto saibot]

massa -hamilton incident occurred at turn 6, that was again right in front of me, and i was like-damn, hamilton did it again!! but thankfully it was not hamilton this time aound

[myurr]

By the crucial time just before the braking zone, the two cars were travelling at much the same speed. Knowing he was going to be able to brake later, why should Massa have been surrendering the corner? It makes perfect sense that he was still fighting it.

Of course Massa knew Hamilton was there - he had been fully alongside him just a second or so earlier. But that does not necessarily mean that, with Hamilton no longer fully alongside, Massa was not entitled to claim the corner.

There is then a distinction between that and turning in knowing you were likely to collide.

Perfectly sums up my point of view.

I agree with much of what Mark says, but for me there is a crucial element missing. By the time Massa made his move to the right and then applied the brakes, Hamilton was already braking as much as he could in order to make the corner - he didn't have the option to bail out of it. So Massa turned in on him knowing that he was there and knowing that he wouldn't be able to avoid the accident.

Some call that hard racing, I call it causing an avoidable collision. Overtaking is hard enough in F1 without having to worry about drivers being able to brake half a car length later and then turn in on you. They were side by side entering the braking zone, Massa was only half a car length ahead at the turn in point, and therefore he had no right (in my view) to turn into the corner knowing there was another car there that couldn't do anything to avoid him.

P.S. That quote is also from Mark Hughes blog not Andrew Benson's. Andrew's blog actually mirrors my opinion more closely.

[JohnsonsEvilTwin]

Thanks for the spot there Myurr.

I will amend it.

[i70q7m7ghw]

Lewis to wear a helmet in Abu Dhabi in dedication to Massa

[beelsebob]

Lewis to wear a helmet in Abu Dhabi in dedication to Massa

[myurr]

love it!

[dave34m]

Surely when Hamilton claimed the inside line and came along side Massa should have given up the corner. Even thou Massa could brake later the corner had been lost due to Massa's error in allowing Hamilton the inside line.

[chepoi]

see how Lewis giving a space for Massa at turn 4, Sepang 2010. he (Lewis) also gives a racing line to him before he overtake again at the later turn

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FaikJkREgcI[/youtube]


both turn to left... and see how Lewis overtake..... the question is.. Massa knows that his car can't!!!

[chepoi]

The first and ever rivalry Lewis-Massa starts here at Sepang GP 2007. Also at the turn 4 situations.....

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=of8GgtKxU3I[/youtube]

[ringo]

There's a good analysis of Massa/Hamilton move on the BBC http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/formula ... 524661.stm

It looks at the previous lap and explains how DRS and KERs led to the move taking place on that corner. I found that the most interesting part because it is technical just like this forum

All who think hamilton is drving by instict or whatever they call it, need to recognize how well thought out his overtakes are.

One thing i disagree with though is massa's thought process. This article makes him seem sensible.

What really happened is he made the wrong move when he went wide. And upon knowing that he tried to take back the move and get back on the inside to block.
He was indecisive and that's what caused the colision.
He moved to put himself in an inevitable 2 move check mate, starting all the way from using all his kers on the straight. You can't reverse those, unless you're going to flip over the chess board and mash up the game.

Can't blame massa for fighting though, but he should at least realized when he'd lost. If Hamilton have you in his sights, he's going to study you and figure out soon enough how to get past, almost destiny for massa to be overtaken.

[lgmars]

The first and ever rivalry Lewis-Massa starts here at Sepang GP 2007. Also at the turn 4 situations.....

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=of8GgtKxU3I[/youtube]

yeah, definitely this. I remember in a post race interview or something LH said he deliberately tricked Massa into running wide. I also vaguely remember a following controversy over this supposedly inappropriate comment. I don't seem to have heard of him saying anything like that ever since.

[komninosm]

@ komninosm I don't see why there is any surprise.

Labelling a driver a weasel or acting as one has to be deemed inflammatory. I see no mileage in labelling anyone because it antagonises others and leads to fanboy ying yang.
Note, I wasn't calling anyone a fanboy, rather I was pointing to the rhetoric used. So apologies if your sensibilities were harmed in the creation of my post, but I'm afraid it stands so long as the "weasel" comment stands.

It was a racing incident and personally I think both drivers need to end this or someone will get hurt. No blame apportioning, just end the bickering and learn to be racing drivers.
As an aside, I think Hamilton's actions pre race with putting his arm round Massa and wishing him a good race was fantastic. May he have more opportunities to show us this humble and gentlemanly conduct.

No, you're trying to weasel out of it too now mate. You said there is fanboy stuff infection in this thread. Ergo someone must have posted that stuff and be a fanboy, so you are indeed calling someone or more fanboys.
I could say I didn't call Massa a weasel. All I said was how is he going to weasel out of this sticky situation. He had said Hamilton gets penalties from FIA because he's a "bad boy and an idiot" (I paraphrase) so now that he got a penalty how can he possibly spin this without weaselling out? e could take the high road and admit his mistake, or he could try and weasel out. And guess what, he did weasel out.
No it wasn't a racing incident per your loved FIA. It was an error by Massa that they penalized. Most people agree it was Massa's fault.

Finally you drew the fanboy card (for no reason) and then I got "attacked" by 2 posters who mistakenly thought I had done it. I merely had accosted you for using it and my sentence wasn't clear so they got confused and I would like an apology from those two (thank you very much Mr Berger, I salute you). Clearly they shouldn't have jumped on me and not on you. You used it first and clearly. Even if they confused my sentence they should have reprimanded you first and then me. But they chose only me and gave you praise (unbiased poster they called you, nice guy). I wonder why? Food for thought.

PS: I fixed some of your spelling mistakes before noticing it wasn't my part of the text >.<