Indian GP 2011 - Buddh

[beelsebob]

Secondly, the speed changes everything. Would I attempt a pass into a single file corner in fourth at 160kmh, through a 1 second braking zone whilst at no point ahead and off the racing line(less grip)? Unless it was a back marker, or a championship deciding race(all or nothing).

No Ham/Vet china pass for you then?

[Richard]

Hamilton/Massa is a classic Nash equilibrium http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nash_equilibrium

They would both be better off if they collude because they could both finish higher up the field if they don't crash. However, collusion requires one too let the other finish ahead, and their egos won't allow that.

Furthermore, there is an incentive for Massa to be defensive to protect Alonso, but if Massa colluded with Hamilton, then Button would have less points which would help Alonso to 2nd in the WDC.

Just need to introduce Massa to Nash and we'll see no more crashes.

[JohnsonsEvilTwin]

Secondly, the speed changes everything. Would I attempt a pass into a single file corner in fourth at 160kmh, through a 1 second braking zone whilst at no point ahead and off the racing line(less grip)? Unless it was a back marker, or a championship deciding race(all or nothing).

No Ham/Vet china pass for you then?

Im not familiar with that. But then we arent discussing that move on a different corner of a different track on a different threads.
IM me to refresh my memory please bud.

[Richard]

A long time ago in a thread far, far away .....

This will be endless. So it's probably best we IM each other and save the thread from being completely taken over.

[JohnsonsEvilTwin]

Hamilton/Massa is a classic Nash equilibrium http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nash_equilibrium

They would both be better off if they collude because they could both finish higher up the field if they don't crash. However, collusion requires one too let the other finish ahead, and their egos won't allow that.

Furthermore, there is an incentive for Massa to be defensive to protect Alonso, but if Massa colluded with Hamilton, then Button would have less points which would help Alonso to 2nd in the WDC.

Just need to introduce Massa to Nash and we'll see no more crashes.

Brilliant post richard. =D>

But for total equality, wouldnt Hamilton need introducing to this theory too? I'm familiar with it due to my forays into online poker.

[Giblet]

I'm just glad that Herbert explains his actions and his reasons for making them. All the FIA can do is appoint the best people possible, and trust in most situations that they make the right decision. Just like any sporting referees there will be miscalls, but if there is consistency with the stewards, then all is good.

[JohnsonsEvilTwin]

I'm just glad that Herbert explains his actions and his reasons for making them. All the FIA can do is appoint the best people possible, and trust in most situations that they make the right decision. Just like any sporting referees there will be miscalls, but if there is consistency with the stewards, then all is good.

In fairness to Herbert he did explain it. But this doesn't mean it's right or wrong.

Why can they not have 1 specific steward for an entire season? As this will always boil down to interpretation, this way drivers will know what to expect.

[Giblet]

Right or wrong doesn't enter into it for this one incident IMO. No two incidents are ever exactly the same so its hard to play precedents. I think his reasons were sound but its a tough position, and any two people can have to two completely opinions.

In hockey, when they need to go to replays its not really a judgement call. Its just trying the best you can to see of the puck crossed the goal line. The don't go to instant replays for every questionable hard check and slash like they do in F1. Every incident is unique for the most part and needs to tell its own story.

I am not a fan of one steward, but I am a fan of knowing their decisions and the reasons for it just like any real judge in a court of law.

[JohnsonsEvilTwin]

Agree with the uniqueness of each situation. They need to be dealt with on their own merits/faults.

But, if consistency is what you are after, I would bet my bottom dollar that had if the steward had been different, so to may the outcome have been different.
Right or wrong is paramount if a driver is to know what they will be penalised for doing(or not).

The rule also seems to differ from etiquette, similar to when you drive on public roads its not legal to flash someone(lights guys!) and let them through(speaking of discrepancies between the law and etiquette)

Herbert explained his view, but I can quote many drivers and pundits who oppose his view. Should this exact set of circumstances occur again with a different steward, do you think the same penalty will be incurred? From my brief perusal on internet sites and the quotes I have read from former drivers(Steward material) They put forward equally valid arguments that suggest Massa was unlucky and Lewis quite fortunate.

Note: This does not make them Hater's...

[ell66]

I don't think anyone should have gotten a penalty for this incident. In my opinion (attempted) intimidation is part of racing, meaning that if my front wheel is only up to your rear wheel and I'm on the inside, you should be able to slam the door on me. I don't think you are required to leave room for someone who does not hold a legitimate position (perhaps defined as having your front wheel halfway along the car in front, ergo in peripheral vision). If I do not hold a legitimate position as just defined then it's my job to back out to avoid an accident. If I choose not to back down ala Hamilton then we collide and it's a racing incident. Hamilton knew what was best for him against Schumacher in Curva Grande, however as has been made clear his grasp of accident avoidance is tenuous at best, so continues to punish himself and at times others.

And this stuff from Ringo about Hamilton as the overtaking genius is absurd. Doesn't anyone realize that the success rate is more important than the highlight reels? Hamilton is incredibly overrated as an overtaker because no one remembers to include the failures in the overall assessment. Choosing to roll the dice more is not proof of a superior overtaker. All it means is that you will have more spectacular successes and boneheaded failures. Hamilton is probably on the low end of the top five overtakers in F1. If you succumb to the confirmation bias then you will think he is the wizard of overtaking that everyone else can only dream of being.

.........................

yeah brb slamming the door on someone when his front wheel is level with my rear wheel, you cant be serious??

Also id LOVE to hear who you think at the 5 guys better at overtaking, vettel is poor and has only been made to look ok this year due to the DRS, alonso for all his talent has never been a prolific overtake. You need to watch some video's, china 2010 &2011, germany this year, monza 08 & 07, germany 08, this list goes on and on. Lewis only seems to make contact with the huys who have no race craft, massa and maldanado for example.

[ell66]

Again, at no point was Hamilton ever ahead.
So Herbert took his view, it's all done an dusted. But, the penalty was imposed 5 mins after the incident. How quick was that?!

Secondly, the speed changes everything. Would I attempt a pass into a single file corner in fourth at 160kmh, through a 1 second braking zone whilst at no point ahead and off the racing line(less grip)? Unless it was a back marker, or a championship deciding race(all or nothing).

Thirdly time spent in the braking zone matters hugely. As both drivers have more time to make decisions.

.........................................................................................

Lewis was up the inside and massa KNEW he was there the whole time, but he turned in as if he wasnt there, thus creating an avoidable incident. You DONT have to be technically ahead to to win the corner just like with webber and alonso at spa or hamilton and button at china, iv seen it time and time again, and id put serious money on it, that if it were alonso in that situation he'd of gave room.

[JohnsonsEvilTwin]

............................................................................................

I'm sorry you feel that way, but it just means there are a ton of people who lack basic common sense, including Coulthard, Brundle et al.
Can we keep it Technical and forget the personal stuff? I'd appreciate that as I too value others opinions.

As for comparing China and Spa to India, I have already posted my opinion as to why they cannot be comparable. We all agree 2 cars cannot fit into the corner.

From Hamiltons point of view what is the general expectation? He went on the inside line which provided less grip into a corner that realistically only 1 car can take. He had better speed than Massa, but still would have to negotiate the inside of a corner that wouldn't have been rubbered in. Did he expect to have the pace to match Massa(on the grippier racing line) through the corner?
Secondly the next corner was a long right hander so he would have to have doubled back to make the move stick assuming he miraculously had the grip to still be side by side with Massa coming out of the turn.

No, for me it was always going to end in tears through that corner which still mean 6 of one and half dozen of the other. Nothing personal, just my opinion I feel compelled to once again reiterate.

[ringo]

Different scenario. Lewis had room to make the corner in spa but instead chose to go back onto the racing line once he completed the overtake, Kobayashi maintained his line and Lewis turned in on him.
Lewis admitted it was his error 100 %.

I agree with Coulthards view and I hope that doesn't get me labelled a "hater" again.

Well coulthard disagrees with you about spa. He change his mind later when he saw kobayashi turning into lewis at spa. I posted a pic in the spa thread. Clarely kob was steering right. He isntigated the incident as COulthard agreed to.

[JohnsonsEvilTwin]

Everyone's entitled to their opinion on that one too.
That Coulthard disagrees with the Koba incident is his right. But that isn't part of this topic.

[Richard]

I saw Hamilton on TV a few days after Spa admitting it was his fault because he hadn't realised Kobayashi was there. Also Whtmarsh said that Hamilton should have left room for Kobayshi.

So when a driver and his TP both admit something is his fault there are still people saying that it wasn't?

Back to India, oddly enough we had the same denial of reality in this thread about yellow flags for Button and Hamilton, as if certain posters have a telepathic link to the car ECU that gives more reliable telemetry than the teams and FIA.

Get over it.