Pastor Maldonado has secured the first Venezuelan F1 victory ever and the first Williams win since Juan Pablo Montoya in 2004. Home driver Fernando Alonso finished in second place after a race long battle while Kimi Raikkonen finished a close third.
beelsebob wrote:
Agreed – I'm absolutely not saying hamilton should not be penalised... But... What I'm highlighting is, why is a driver who goes out, does an out, a quick, and an in lap, gets refueled for a second run; then decides "you know what, I'm not going out again" not also guilty of this infraction? I'm not questioning whether Hamilton is guilty of breaking the rules, I'm questioning whether the rule makes any sense at all.
I'm not trying to be difficult but I don't see the point. You have to have a certain amount of fuel for scrutineering. He didn't have it. I don't see how the two are the same.
beelsebob wrote:Random thought... Hamilton's first lap in Q3 would have been sufficient for P6 on the grid, clearly he didn't return to the pits and give the stewards their sample of fuel then... Was this lap invalid? Clearly the answer is no, as we've seen drivers qualify based on their first run in Q3 before. How is this situation any different from a driver doing 1 Q3 run, and then deciding that that's enough, and taking the car down to the stewards then?
that's a very good point.
I wanna know what the difference between hamilton and Kobayashi is.
Kobayashi didn't return to the pits after q2 so he just starts 10th (they use q2 time). hamilton doesn't return to the pits after q3 but he is dq'd....
whats the difference...
edit: i've just realised he had a fault. my bad.
what about senna? he didnt return to the pits in Q3. if lewis crashed on his in lap. would he still be considered pole? some things to think about
no, if Lewis crashed he wouldn't be on pole. Tbey would hae to work on car under Parc Ferme conditions.
“To be able to actually make something is awfully nice”
Bruce McLaren on building his first McLaren racecars, 1970
“I've got to be careful what I say, but possibly to probably Juan would have had a bigger go”
Sir Frank Williams after the 2003 Canadian GP, where Ralf hesitated to pass brother M. Schumacher
So conclusion... There's at least 3 ways around this rule:
1) Underfuel, do your lap, dump it in the gravel.
2) Underfuel, do your lap, come back in, put plenty of fuel in the car for a second run, go out, do another lap, return to parc-ferme.
3) Underfuel, do your lap, come back in, decide not to go out on track again.
bidong wrote:[what about senna? he didnt return to the pits in Q3. if lewis crashed on his in lap. would he still be considered pole? some things to think about
no, if Lewis crashed he wouldn't be on pole. Tbey would hae to work on car under Parc Ferme conditions.
Parc ferme has specific excemptions for repairing crash damage.
beelsebob wrote:So conclusion... There's at least 3 ways around this rule:
1) Underfuel, do your lap, dump it in the gravel.
2) Underfuel, do your lap, come back in, put plenty of fuel in the car for a second run, go out, do another lap, return to parc-ferme.
3) Underfuel, do your lap, come back in, decide not to go out on track again.
No mate.
Lewis couldn't have done number 2 or number 3. He couldn't get back into the pits. He can't refuel after time expires. Wrecking is different.
Last edited by Crucial_Xtreme on 12 May 2012, 20:40, edited 1 time in total.
beelsebob wrote:So conclusion... There's at least 3 ways around this rule:
1) Underfuel, do your lap, dump it in the gravel.
2) Underfuel, do your lap, come back in, put plenty of fuel in the car for a second run, go out, do another lap, return to parc-ferme.
3) Underfuel, do your lap, come back in, decide not to go out on track again.
No mate.
Lewis couldn't have done number 2 or number 3. He couldn't get back into the pits. He can't refuel after time expires. Wrecking is different.
Lewis couldn't – a hypothetical driver could. My point is that the rule is deeply flawed, not that Lewis is inocent.
Last edited by beelsebob on 12 May 2012, 20:40, edited 1 time in total.
If you can get back to pits you haven´t underfueled the car.
You can underfuel by 1 litre. As that would have given Lewis enough fuel to return to the pits, that is what he's been accused of gaining an advantage from.
beelsebob wrote:So conclusion... There's at least 3 ways around this rule:
1) Underfuel, do your lap, dump it in the gravel.
2) Underfuel, do your lap, come back in, put plenty of fuel in the car for a second run, go out, do another lap, return to parc-ferme.
3) Underfuel, do your lap, come back in, decide not to go out on track again.
nail on the head
Pierce89 wrote:
no, if Lewis crashed he wouldn't be on pole. Tbey would hae to work on car under Parc Ferme conditions.
gibells wrote:It's a dangerous precident they've set. Any future failure to return to Parc Furme will surely require the same level of punishment, be it qualifying or race.
I don't think so. macca LIED about the reason why they didn't return to parc ferme. that was the real problem.
So conclusion... There's at least 3 ways around this rule:
1) Underfuel, do your lap, dump it in the gravel.
2) Underfuel, do your lap, come back in, put plenty of fuel in the car for a second run, go out, do another lap, return to parc-ferme.
3) Underfuel, do your lap, come back in, decide not to go out on track again.[/quote]
I think the third option doing it late on Q3 with just time to get in pits and when the track has improved could be a great strategy
for those that doesn't have a great car in qualifying. Also they can save a set of tyres if Q2 and Q3 went well.
