2017 Austrian Grand Prix, Spielberg 7-9 Jul

[foxmulder_ms]

Once again, GPR-A is right on the money.

Hamilton's outlap was faster than the gap between him and Kimi. Not sure how Kimi could have jumped him by pitting the next lap. Some just see things they wish. Ferrari must hope that the engine upgrade must work as intended. Mercs are faster when it matters. Can't overtake with so little to choose from.

You're not seeing the big picture. No one is suggesting that Ferrari should have pitted Kimi right away. The overall point is that Hamilton optimum strategy would have been to go long on the SS, much longer than they did, to get maximum effectiveness on the US for the last stint. They ended up pitting him early because he was being held up by Kimi and couldn't find a way past. So they compromised his strategy early on to go for the undercut.

This then meant that within that one lap, Hamilton was virtually ahead of Kimi. Done deal. But not quite. Because Hamilton now was facing of having to go much longer than intended on the softer tire, where as Kimi was going to end up on the more durable and harder tire. Then another interesting thing happened: Hamilton was quicker than Kimi, but not substantially and he was also very vocal about not having a lot of rear stability ("too much front wing"). If they had pitted Kimi earlier or at that point, they could have put more pressure on Hamilton by keeping Kimi close. The longer the race would have gone on, the more pressure this would have meant for Hamilton because he was on the softer, less durable tire. Also, when Kimi was finally pitted for SS, he had very very good pace. He was doing fastest lap times at that point. So the argument falls flat that Kimi was just off the pace. He may have been on the first stint, but he had track position over Hamilton and by forcing Mercedes to compromise Lewis's strategy, they could have competed better for that 4th position with Kimis car.

Now, I perfectly get the logic behind keeping Kimi out. It made perfect sense for Ferrari to do that in light of the championship. The only point that IMO made it a stretch to beginn with, is that Bottas on his first stint demonstrated a very distinct performance advantage. I didn't think he'd be held up by Kimi long and that proved to be correct. I also mislike how they were playing mind games with Kimi about him racing Lewis. At that point, he was far off - a pit stop would have put him around 8 seconds behind. With every lap they were keeping him out, they were compromising Kimi's race more relative to Hamiltons.

In the end, I was surprised how close Vettel got to Bottas. Not sure what went on there and why Bottas didn't have the pace anymore, but I do find it a pity that Ferrari are so publicly asking more from Kimi, yet at the same time it seems that at every opportunity, they are willing to play him as a pawn in order to maximise their chances with Vettel. It is what it is.

Best post ever! =D>

[Chene_Mostert]

So Martin Suggests that the "head games" from Baku negatively impacted Lewis for this race.
As for the Botas start, this is so touch and go that there is no option but to let the benefit of the doubt go in favour of the Driver. Having three drivers battle for the championship is going to be great!

[SiLo]

So Martin Suggests that the "head games" from Baku negatively impacted Lewis for this race.
As for the Botas start, this is so touch and go that there is no option but to let the benefit of the doubt go in favour of the Driver. Having three drivers battle for the championship is going to be great!

It kind of seems that way, but I think the grid penalty hurt him a lot. Different strategy in Quali and then maybe a slightly different race setup as well. Looks like they should have gone with a traditional setup really.

[foxmulder_ms]

By the way, that youtube video has smt wrong with it OR sky stream had smt wrong with it. Sky stream shows the opposite.

[DarkSurferZA]

As a Ferrari fan, I hope there is no appeal and the result is put to bed with focus on British GP already.

That being said, a clarification may be in order as it was clearly a jump start already.

Sent from my SM-T815 using Tapatalk

[Hammerfist]

The youtube video actually was made by nbcsports and was shown on the US broadcast of the race.

[Phil]

Honestly, I think it's pretty clear. A jumpstart should have been punished.

I'm fairly certain Ericsson received a drive-through in 2015 (Austria) for a jump start. It's a failure of the stewards to properly analyse the data during the race (if they have indeed), but on the premise of fair being fair, it should be penalised with the necessary penalty, as little as I may like it. If it isn't, then how can they move forward and punish other drivers for gambling on the lights in the future under the premise of equality?

In other sports, like sprints, I am fairly certain if a start is deemed to be below a certain threshold (meaning the starter has gone beating what constitutes a "normal" reaction time), it is deemed to be failed start. I think the same applies to F1.

E.g. a driver going 0.1 seconds after the lights gone out would be a jump start even if he starts moving after the lights have gone out because such a reaction time would not be humanly possible (also consider that there is latency between awareness, brain, muscle and then the latency within the car of kicking the throttle, releasing clutch and getting the car moving).

I also want to add that Ferrari may want to check their options, given I think Mercedes has been pretty much on-top of things since at least Canada. It's a scary outlook, even if Vettel is still leading the WDC by 20 points. Having said that, if Bottas is penalized by something like a post-race drive through (18seconds or something), it will not help his WDC ambitions this year, as I feel Mercedes will put more weight behind Hamilton, if they haven't done so already.

[nacho]

With digital cameras you have to take into account the rolling shutter effect and what effect the encoders might have.

[ChrisM40]

With digital cameras you have to take into account the rolling shutter effect and what effect the encoders might have.

Pretty sure these sort of camera dont even have shutters, but the encoder might make a difference. A change in a few pixels in an otherwise near enough static image is likely to be ignored for several frames by a high compression codec, making it look like the lights stayed on longer than they did.

There is no way to know though because we don't get unprocessed data from the onboard cams, everything is recoded by the broadcast codec which is much higher bitrate.

[fiohaa]

With digital cameras you have to take into account the rolling shutter effect and what effect the encoders might have.

Pretty sure these sort of camera dont even have shutters, but the encoder might make a difference. A change in a few pixels in an otherwise near enough static image is likely to be ignored for several frames by a high compression codec, making it look like the lights stayed on longer than they did.

There is no way to know though because we don't get unprocessed data from the onboard cams, everything is recoded by the broadcast codec which is much higher bitrate.

really interesting point.
would that account for over a tenth of a second though? I do'nt know either way.
we're looking for a margin of error here from 0.04s-0.2xx.

EDIT: don't get how that would change anything though, as its the same source capturing both things - the lights and the car rolling.

[ChrisM40]

Car moving is a much bigger change.

The other point is that the lights are not 'instant out', they will fade over the course of a number of milliseconds, something else the compression would ignore. To make it even worse, all the video data sent by the cams would then be re-encoded by whatever codec the world feed is, and then again by the codec the broadcaster chooses to use.

[fiohaa]

The youtube video actually was made by nbcsports and was shown on the US broadcast of the race.

that video does not match sky's own - which is why i thought it was doctored.
http://www.skysports.com/f1/news/29987/ ... ustrian-gp

[nacho]

Most CMOS cameras refresh from top to down, that's why you get skewed vertical lines like trees and posts when panning fast and jello effect when the camera is shaking. But I don't think it's what's happening here. FIA clarified that some movement is allowed before the lights go out because clutch adjustement might cause the car to move.

[ema00]

The youtube video actually was made by nbcsports and was shown on the US broadcast of the race.

that video does not match sky's own - which is why i thought it was doctored.
http://www.skysports.com/f1/news/29987/ ... ustrian-gp

this is a slowmotion from sky italy
http://video.sky.it/sport/formula1/bott ... ysportf1hd

and it is clear that bottas moves before lights goes out.

[santos]

Please let's not spent all week talking about 0.2s of the race.
It was a nice race... it's a shame that the rain didn't came at the end of the race. It could bring some fun.
People made fun of Maldonado, but let me tell you, Kvyat it's been making to many mistakes. And again he ruins a race of others. Really hope that Marko is loving is performance. After all he choose Kvyat instead of Felix Da Costa.