2013 Hungarian GP - Hungaroring

[GrizzleBoy]

Its hardly desperate and its probably the most obvious answer to the question.

What is the difference between what Lewis did vs Mark and what Vettel did vs Alonso?

Mark was squeezed onto road.

Alonso was squeezed into crash enducing, potentially race ending dirt and grass.

One driver created a dangerous situation for another driver. The other didn't.

One was part of an exciting/committed overtaking move, the other was aggressively shutting the door on what could have been an exciting/committed overtaking move with more dangerous consequences.

The stewards take racing discretion as well as a rule book into their booths come race day and they use them both to make their judgements.

If your actions create a more dangerous situation than anothers, then yes, it is more likely that you will get the penalty over the person who didn't. If Lewis squeezed Mark into grass/gravel and he crashed/beached the car, you can bet there would be a penalty of some sort.

[lebesset]

vettel says that he lost 1.5 seconds on his first pit stop due to the tyres going away faster than they expected

suggests he would have done better to come in on lap 10 instead of 11

as hamilton still had good tyres to come in on lap 9 sounds like there isn't a great difference on tyre life between the two teams ...hopeful for hamilton

[beelsebob]

vettel says that he lost 1.5 seconds on his first pit stop due to the tyres going away faster than they expected

suggests he would have done better to come in on lap 10 instead of 11

as hamilton still had good tyres to come in on lap 9 sounds like there isn't a great difference on tyre life between the two teams ...hopeful for hamilton

Hamilton stated he lost about a second on his in lap, because his tyres were going away, and that if he'd stayed out another he would have lost 5-10 seconds.

[iotar__]

I just dropped in, BUT,,At frame 3 above Hamilton is clearly alongside and by 5 has an overlap and at 7 is ahead

This is so annoying , one last time, different angle. This is where Ham STARTS to be in front and not ALONGSIDE, the same time Webb STARTS to leave the track (next one he's OFF). How is that even debatable?



When you think about it it's not that different to Rosberg-Massa had Webber stayed on the track and aimed straight in front. Was he "in front", was it "his corner", does it mean anything? No.

Discussion started with Coulthard pretending it didn't happen and Ham left "some" space. No, they were driving the corner alongside/slightly in front until one cuts and there's no space. Webber is OK with that, so what? I'm OK too, Massa was OK too, it doesn't change reality. Argument that he would have overtaken anyway? Tell that to Button. If it was Maldonado we'd be hearing "he's know as a dirty driver"

[Phil]

Secondly,if you look at the pictures Iotar provided and the progression (just look at the cars in the first few frames) they could have easily taken the corner together had Hamilton permitted it. A little bit right steer adjustment from Lewis. But he chose to run wide and his trajectory meant either Webber take measure to avoid or he was going to be hit by Lewis car from side.

The rules are there to ensure fair competition at all times and in this case preventing drivers pushing others out of the track and gain an advantage.

If only it were that simple. When you're going full at it at through a corner, the angle at which you can turn through the corner is limited by the amount of grip your car has at that speed. The faster you go through it, the less tight you can corner, hence why the *racing line* / being able to take your line is so important in getting the maximum out of a lap.

Now I'm not arguing that Lewis *could have* left more room had he wanted (I actually don't think he could have though), but my point is more about what a difficult challenge the stewards face when being confronted with situations like these. If it was always the case of "leaving enough room" and applying the rules black on white, then everyone would have to be driving with some tolerance in order to be able to yield some space if need to be. But once you're commited to a corner at the speed you're going, you're most likely a passanger to a certain degree because you can't magically create more grip or start braking mid corner to increase your turn-in ability.

Taking this into account, every racer knows that they are putting themselves at risk when they follow a car on the outside into a corner. That gap they're driving alongside is usually bound to get smaller, and I suspect a driver with the experience Webber has he knew that too. Lewis was the one doing the overtake AND on the inside of that corner.

[SiLo]

It's all moot, Webber said it was a fine move and for me, that's enough. Same for Massa, even the drivers seem to be getting behind the notion that fans want to see some racing, not penalties every 5 minutes.

[Kiril Varbanov]

Summation of the tech updates in Hungary from AMuS.

[turbof1]

Strangely, when the option tyre shows extreme wear and/or degredation, mercedes doesn't look to have much of a disadvantage, if any. The same was true for melbourne and other circuits.

It certainly helped in hungary: red bull was basing their first stint strategy on the assumption mercedes would have to pit much earlier then red bull. Because mercedes hold it out that long, red bull's timeline was pushed to the cliff.

In retrospect, mercedes aced their homework. Red bull geared their car for max qualy performance, forgetting or ignoring the high chance of getting stuck behind the 2 stoppers. Mercedes sacrificed some qualy performance for more top speed. It wasn't luck that vettel got stuck behind Button, but bad judgement on the part of red bull.

Red bull should stop aiming for pole. Mercedes has the better ultimate pace even with a slightly compromised car. If red bull wants to beat mercedes, they need to do that during the race.

[SectorOne]

Just an illustration on how Webber first had the line but then lost it.

[bonjon1979]

Just an illustration on how Webber first had the line but then lost it.

http://i.imgur.com/rhrPdLA.jpg

It's got nothing to do with racing lines or who won the corner, the regulations are quite clear:

Article 20.3 reads: More than one change of direction to defend a position is not permitted. Any driver moving back towards the racing line, having earlier defended his position off‐line, should leave at least one car width between his own car and the edge of the track on the approach to the corner.

Hamilton was under no obligation to leave Webber anything as he wasn't defending. He overtook him on the inside and once he had that line there was nothing Webber could've done apart from turning into him but then he would've been penalised for causing an avoidable collision. So strange that people see any reason here for Hamilton to be penalised. Bizarre.

[bonjon1979]

http://i.imgur.com/LgsK0wU.jpg

But as this photo clearly shows, Lewis' line was compromised due to webber being there (clearly shown by the difference in lines between Lewis and the Sauber.

We ALL know that if your car has atlease 2 wheels touching a white line, your classed as on the track (Grosjean's incident with Massa clarifies this)

Lewis left enough room for Mark to keep 2 wheels on the track, let alone the white line.

Webber just chose not to run over the kerb, (his problem)

Webbers choices were, Stay on the circuit (2 wheels , as stated by the rules), Back off and concede the place, Or swing out wider than the kerb and tuck back in behind Lewis.

But leaving enough room means leaving at least a "car's width".

You can not squeeze your competitor out of track then say look he still did not leave the circuit completely.

Btw this is Alonso/Vettel Monza 2012:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mcskv1FeaRM

This is completely different! Vettel is the car defending, not overtaking. Look at the rules. It's really quite clear, Hamilton had the inside line, Webber had plenty of room at the apex, he decided not to give up the corner and ran wide. Using the Vettel/Alonso incident as an example shows a complete lack of understanding of both situations and to consider them even remotely similar is laughable.

[SectorOne]

It's got nothing to do with racing lines or who won the corner, the regulations are quite clear:

Article 20.3 reads: More than one change of direction to defend a position is not permitted. Any driver moving back towards the racing line, having earlier defended his position off‐line, should leave at least one car width between his own car and the edge of the track on the approach to the corner.

Hamilton was under no obligation to leave Webber anything as he wasn't defending. He overtook him on the inside and once he had that line there was nothing Webber could've done apart from turning into him but then he would've been penalised for causing an avoidable collision. So strange that people see any reason here for Hamilton to be penalised. Bizarre.

Actually it has everything to do with the racing line. It is the line that Hamilton has claimed and this is why Webber bailed out.
there was no line for him to take

Article 20.3 is irrelevant to the subject because it´s about defending into a corner.
The HAM/WEB incident is about the exit.

This one is more appropiate.

20.5 Manoeuvres liable to hinder other drivers, such as deliberate crowding of a car beyond the
edge of the track or any other abnormal change of direction, are not permitted.

And this is where my image comes in. Like every year in F1 history, the driver only needs to say it was his line and he simply tracked out of the corner like you normally would.

This is why there´s never a penalty for this type of push where you force a driver to go wide.

And it should be known this is mostly F1 specific. If you crowd out someone in GT cars you can expect to get a penalty instantly.

[turbof1]

I think the key word here is "manuevre". Because Hamilton was on the racing line, it isn't considered a manuevre. Webber just happened to be on the wrong place at the wrong time.

It's the same with the "one car space" rule: when you go off the racing line to defend, and then go back to it, you need to leave a one car space between the outer edge of the car and the line. But because Hamilton was on the racing line already, that doesn't go up.

Contrary to what for example Grosjean did: he made an overtake and moved back to the racing line. That is a manuevre. He crowded Button off the racing line for no normal reason, so he got punished.

The biggest issue and the cause of that incident is that isn't an usual overtaking place. The circuit is too cramped at that place.

[beelsebob]

I think the key word here is "manuevre". Because Hamilton was on the racing line, it isn't considered a manuevre. Webber just happened to be on the wrong place at the wrong time.

Heh, that's actually a lovely analysis of it, I had never thought of it like that before. You have to actually deliberately move away from your norm to have made a manoeuvre. Good work that man, shame I can't +1 you in this thread.

[turbof1]

Yeah, just hold that in check for me misspelling "manoeuvre" .