2017 Mexico Grand Prix - Autódromo Hermanos Rodríguez, 27-29 October

[Sieper]

Max offcourse, who else! Boooohhh. Also Max and Vettel crash, also Max, doublebooooh.

[jz11]

I think the people arguing that Vettel "steering panic" was intent to drive the FW into Lewises rear tyre have never ever driver a car on the edge of grip, because you do that sort of steering to get a feel of how much control you still have with your steering wheel and it lets you know how much acceleration is tolerable to not push the front into definite understeer - that is when you turn the steering and just wait for grip to return, you can also start to "feel" for the grip when you're about to regain some of it to catch it sooner, understand something - you can carry much more speed on the grip level than while having heavy understeer (basically no grip).
So Max just cut over VET front wing, he saw bits flying off, he hits curb, get oversteer, he sees his main rival going past and about to get a good exit of that 3rd corner, and you expect this world champion driver to just turn his steering wheel right, hope for grip and use gentle throttle inputs - which 110% would mean he would not be in position to fight for position, because Lewis would be 20m ahead by the next curve, so instead he used the skill - fished for maximum grip to be able to nail the throttle and get maximum exit speed, and at the same time Lewis had to back off because Max closed the door on him - hence the contact which led to puncture, it could have easily led to VET braking the front wing completely off and having his left front tyre contant Lewises rear, which would send Vettel flying, and it would be the case if Lewis backed off just a tiny tiny bit more...

you people make no sense to me whatsoever with this intentional puncture intent argument

edit: here are couple examples of quite accomplished drivers using this technique:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pdIa0NR9wnA&t=185s
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O6RUXJx2q28

[Sieper]

JZ, you do realise that one of the people making no sense here is then also a certain Lewis Hamilton as he thought it to be on purpose, and Yes he has driven racing cars on the limit I would say.

What I don't understand is how you can be so sure about Sebastians intentions that you feel such strong wording can be used. I feel it is very tough to make this call. Either way.

[TAG]

So as we are apparently agreeing on Vettel's innocence, by default that must then also mean that the same words used here in the argument, f.e. iotar calling it "nonsensical reasoning" apply to Hamilton as he had also asked about on team radio and later in interviews implied multiple times he thought Vettel did it on purpose.

Why is it that everytime a "dirty" action happens, almost nobody seems to want to confirm what actually went down? It has to be as clear as driving up next to somebody and then hitting him before (and even then) before it seems we can agree. About that incident I still feel Hamilton tricked Vettel in that corner. Either that or his reflexes are just as amiss as his quantum computer but then we are firmly in the bashing Vettel department are we not.

Also, I don't agree with people having the right to call others nonsensical, fanatical, fanboy etc. when they disagree.

According to the defenses put forth here and in Baku, Vettel is the most incompetent 4 time WDC ever to walk the face of the earth, he'd have to be because he never seems to have control of his car when he needs it most. We know that's not the case, so I think the crowd here just likes to have it both ways which is what happens when you're trying to justify the unjustifiable, maybe a part of the grieving process, who knows.

At some point the volume of suspicious incidences say you're either suspect or utterly incompetent, people insist on applying different rule sets given the situations and we're left arguing with people that aren't worth arguing with.

I could care less if there was intent, because the championship is won, clearly won by the better man, and that's according to the horse's mouth. If there was intent, it was desperation and I'm sure Lewis knows whether intent existed or not. Vettel knows as well but he's a willy one when it comes to apportioning blame. So why not move on, let people think what they will because it's obvious it's never going to change. I mean seriously when there were 60 pages of people questioning intent in Baku what else can the outcome be but lose all respect for someone's opinion, why would you expect anyone to have them think differently here?

I said a day or two ago, Vettel has never lost a WDC when he had a car that could win it, Hamilton has lost quite a few of them. I think what we saw in the second half of this season is Vettel's inexperience at losing did to him, and things got worse the further he got behind and desperation is as good an unraveler as there is.

This has been a public service announcement.

[PlatinumZealot]

I would slash Lewis' tyres too, if I were Vettel in that situation. It would be the golden opportunity to get the points difference that I need. So Why not? It is so obvious he did it on purpose. He could have let off the gas to avoid it.

[Mattchu]

Some things that we know for certain. Vettel hit both Max and Lewis with his front wing, whether he did the second on purpose is something only he knows, we can analyze/speculate till we`re blue in the face but we`ll never know for sure unless Vettel comes out and admits it [highly unlikely].

One thing from the start which I really did appreciate [and i`m not a fan of any driver, just an F1 fan] was the fact Lewis actually made the racing move that he did. With the state of play in the championship he really didn`t need to get involved, remember he only had to finish top 5 and the title was his. Many a driver would have just tucked in behind the squabbling Max and Seb, let his teamate come up behind him as a rear gunner and just drove the rest of the race in relative safety.
I just liked the fact that even when the title is on the line the racers instinct took over and he went for it. It`s a shame the wing/tyre shennanigans went on because this maybe robbed us of the top 3 going at it hammer and tongue. I say maybe because Lewis might have done just what i described above...
Ah well, hopefully the next couple of races will provide us with a no holes barred spectacle which we can all enjoy

[Sieper]

It is totally true he had the opportunity, and it was just so golden as nobody can say with 100% confidence that it was on purpose, that is what made it so golden. I also don't think it was premeditated, it just happened. Either that or it just my own bad character being mirrored on Vettel.

And mattchu, totally agree, good post

[jz11]

JZ, you do realise that one of the people making no sense here is then also a certain Lewis Hamilton as he thought it to be on purpose, and Yes he has driven racing cars on the limit I would say.

What I don't understand is how you can be so sure about Sebastians intentions that you feel such strong wording can be used. I feel it is very tough to make this call. Either way.

when did he say it? or do you mean the radio message him asking if Vettel did that on purpose, the message that was played for the sole purpose of stirring this nonsense up? - that is called media, that is what they do, imagine the stink if the tyre got slashed and Vettel would have driven away, pressuring Maxes renault into flames and Hamilton finishing somewhere around the 10th place, that would the jack pot for media

the only subject worth some discussion is why didn't Vettel get any penalty for the second contact (first one with Max is way too obvious - racing incident), and the answer why there was no penalty is the same reason the tyre got slashed in the first place - Max closed the door and Hamilton backed off (Baku style if you ask me), because he was not about to ruin his race fighting Max in first corners.

I take 2 things away from this - Hamilton is playing a mind game of - don't be too punchy right behind me coming out of a corner, and Max's crash or win attitude, if there is a gap, you can bet your ass I will use it, consequences don't matter to me - let's see how well it works out for him in the remainder of the season.

[Jolle]

JZ, you do realise that one of the people making no sense here is then also a certain Lewis Hamilton as he thought it to be on purpose, and Yes he has driven racing cars on the limit I would say.

What I don't understand is how you can be so sure about Sebastians intentions that you feel such strong wording can be used. I feel it is very tough to make this call. Either way.

when did he say it? or do you mean the radio message him asking if Vettel did that on purpose, the message that was played for the sole purpose of stirring this nonsense up? - that is called media, that is what they do, imagine the stink if the tyre got slashed and Vettel would have driven away, pressuring Maxes renault into flames and Hamilton finishing somewhere around the 10th place, that would the jack pot for media

the only subject worth some discussion is why didn't Vettel get any penalty for the second contact (first one with Max is way too obvious - racing incident), and the answer why there was no penalty is the same reason the tyre got slashed in the first place - Max closed the door and Hamilton backed off (Baku style if you ask me), because he was not about to ruin his race fighting Max in first corners.

I take 2 things away from this - Hamilton is playing a mind game of - don't be too punchy right behind me coming out of a corner, and Max's crash or win attitude, if there is a gap, you can bet your ass I will use it, consequences don't matter to me - let's see how well it works out for him in the remainder of the season.

??

Well... first, lets try to imagine what HAM experienced that corner to understand his question. He overtook both, then VER closed the door, HAM knew where VET was, left plenty of space and suddenly has a puncture. Of course he is slightly paranoid of VET, but he didn't had our view (or multiple frame by frame repeats)

Second, yes, VET is a guy who puts his legs out when you try to overtake him, but this was just being stupid and put too much pressure. It wasn't "a Schumacher", more "a rosberg"

Third, MAX, win or crash? Thats another thing that is floating on this forum, that VER is some kind of Maldanado, while in fact he makes daring overtake without even locking wheels.

[Sieper]

He also implied it in both the sky post race interview as well as at least the dutch (ziggo) interview (in the eaxact same wording, no coincedence, so I am sure It wasn't just awkward phrasing). Of course he is smart enough to not outright say anything. A skill Verstappen still has to learn. I do agree that Hamilton is the master of the mindgame (as well). Give him halve a chance and he will find a way to use it against you. However way you want to put it, Vettel gave him the chance to play this game, there can be at least doubt about his (Vettels) intentions. If not Hamilton would not have used it, Hamilton is no fool.

I don,t agree with Max having a crash or win attitude. 1st turn attack on Vettel was agressive but controlled, he did not force anyone, it was Vettel doing the forcing,but Max still made the move stuck.

Jolle, hungary! You know it is gonne come up now That was the one crash Verstappen caused this year. Monza was on the conto of Massa imho, just like Massa wanted to push Vettel of track here in Mexico. Still Verstappen should learn from situations like that.

[jz11]

??

Well... first, lets try to imagine what HAM experienced that corner to understand his question. He overtook both, then VER closed the door, HAM knew where VET was, left plenty of space and suddenly has a puncture. Of course he is slightly paranoid of VET, but he didn't had our view (or multiple frame by frame repeats)

Second, yes, VET is a guy who puts his legs out when you try to overtake him, but this was just being stupid and put too much pressure. It wasn't "a Schumacher", more "a rosberg"

Third, MAX, win or crash? Thats another thing that is floating on this forum, that VER is some kind of Maldanado, while in fact he makes daring overtake without even locking wheels.

since you put 2 question marks... allow me to elaborate:

I understand where Hamiltons question comes from, he didn't see 42 replays and slow motions of that thing, and as you say - Vettel could lift and make sure he didn't hit anyone, he also might have not stepped into the car that morning, or even got out of bed, so why did he? I know - he had a championship to win, and he needed 1st or 2nd place to do it, and he wasn't quite there after first couple of corners.

I'm not saying that Vettels moves were brilliant, they looked a bit clumsy, he was gambling, and didn't win, I wouldn't so far as to compare him to Rosberg, Rosberg was on another level when he "couldn't make the corner" while not trying to make it, since he tried to make it into Hamiltons car - that was obvious, and intentional, BUT, imagine no tyre damage on Hamiltons car, he delayed his acceleration because he keeping his distance to Max, Vettel would have had quite a launch out of the corner and would be side by side Hamilton mid straight already, and I bet Vettel wanted to be on the left of side of Hamiltons car, but because Baku v2.0 happened, he had his panic moment and tried to go right while still not backing off - hence the multiple corrections that looked like steering into Hamiltons tyre to some people. If everything would have worked out with no tyre damage, he would have had Hamilton behind him, and we might have had something resembling a race at the front for that matter.

This is why I will never ever believe that he thought that risking braking his fw and probably going flying was worth the chance of maybe slashing Hamiltons tyre, success rate of that plan working out well for him is in my opinion really REALLY small.

I also don't think the comparison between Maldonado and VER is correct, Maldonado had some speed when he was lucky, Max is just outright fast, there is no doubt about it, and he is crafting his Senna-if-don't-go-for-a-gap-that-exists-you're-no-racing-driver image by driving like he does now, and it works in his favor very well, but if you look past that, you just see risks that a championship contender wouldn't take - which makes me call that the crash or win attitude for the time being.

[ringo]

For the record, Vettel intentionally turning left into Hamilton already got debunked. Look for youtube channel driver61, an actual race driver, and load up the youtube video. He explained perfectly, with the video footage, that Vettel drove over the very bumpy part of the corner 3 kerb, causing a lot of oversteer. Infact, a mere moment before him counter steering into Hamilton, he already had to countersteer once.

It is obvious Vettel was fighting with the car. Another excellent point made by driver61: if Vettel was consciously thinking about driving into Hamilton, he would not have done so with the front wing. Chances are much higher you'll wreck your front wing and the defender gets away scot free. Infact, I very much believe Hamilton would have gone scot free if Vettel did not already hit Verstappen's tyre and created sharp edges. And please, do come up with something better than "oh but that was his master plan al along!".

This is what you get when people go blind in the red mist. I can certainly understand it as an initial reaction, but when we are having this discussion 2 days after, it is expected people examine the footage attentively instead of still having their emotions speak for themselves.

Why i disagree is Bottas is right behind, and did not go as wide as vettel. Vettel was not fighting with the car at all. He had enough traction to stay to the right of Verstappen. You mentioned the first counter steer.. That was all that was needed and vettel would have been on his way down the road. However there was a second deliberate action; which was to turn left and stab the throttle in an effort to cause damage because Hamilton would have been ahead taking away all posibility of Vettel winning having a chance of winning the wdc.
Vettel's intent was to send Hamilton more than 16 points behind him at that moment. He was not thinking of anything else but that.
That is how these drivers think. He had one chance and he took it. Unfortunately Hamilton did not suffer a DNF from vettel's actions. And i'm not mad at vettel nor a vettel hater. Just calling what i see from the commentary free video and listening the engine and watching his hands and the front wheels.

Also as much experience as that racer guy who made that video has, I think Hamilton knows exactly what happened, and i think his opinion carries more weight. He however will stay silent on this fact for some time. And being a racer doesn't take away bias. We have current past drivers who are biased and form blurred opinions.

[ringo]

Thanks for letting me disagreeing. It was a moral boost. lol..

You think/believe it was not intentional because it looked like he was out of control of his car. After he made the 1st correction right after the bump he was in control. 2nd steering input is not a correction it is targeting. Listen the engine sound he hits him before even applying the accelerator! He is not sliding because of early/too much power application he is steering with an intent. Listen again and try to hear the engine acceleration off the corner. It is after mission accomplished.

Also at that point Seb has nothing to lose, he is already behind Ham. So, perfect motive there.

Anyhow,

so as Alonso said "I am losing the race here!!@!@!@! "

what was that? so funny!! irony in that radio!

I very much agree with you. Turbo needs to watch the raw video and not watch a doctored video and form his own opinion.
Turbo please watch the video without commentating and listen to the engine and watch vettel's hands and also the front wheels. Tell me if the car isn't in control after the first correction. Also note the pedestrian speed of the car and that he had taken up enough throttle and got the car moving enough to prevent any kind of loss of control.
The car was very docile and pretty much guided by Vettel.
Turbo,
Watch again before you respond to this post and go step by step by what you observe and hear with an untouched video.

[Edax]

!

I very much agree with you. Turbo needs to watch the raw video and not watch a doctored video and form his own opinion.
Turbo please watch the video without commentating and listen to the engine and watch vettel's hands and also the front wheels. Tell me if the car isn't in control after the first correction. Also note the pedestrian speed of the car and that he had taken up enough throttle and got the car moving enough to prevent any kind of loss of control.
The car was very docile and pretty much guided by Vettel.
Turbo,
Watch again before you respond to this post and go step by step by what you observe and hear with an untouched video.

Agree it wasn’t oversteer. If you are oversteered and you hit another car on that corner, the impact will kick out the backend and possibly turn you around ( speaking from experience). That was certainly not the case. Maybe he was feeling for grip by wiggling the wheel but the cars seems to be relatively stable.

But isn’t there a more obvious reason? If you’re not out to take out your opponent, you would try to tuck under his rear wing and wait for the pass on the next left hander. Perhaps he was just trying to slot in behind Hamilton to get the tow and misjudged the distance / speed differential. I mean that is no more unlikely than Alonso running in the backend of a car on a straight and he has done that.

Also looking at the helmet he also seems to be distracted by Bottas who was mounting a pass in his right mirror. He only moves his head again towards Hamilton after he hit him. I mean these guys have to analyse in the cocpit in three seconds what we need three days, multiple cameras including a drone for.

mistakes happen.

[turbof1]

Thanks for letting me disagreeing. It was a moral boost. lol..

You think/believe it was not intentional because it looked like he was out of control of his car. After he made the 1st correction right after the bump he was in control. 2nd steering input is not a correction it is targeting. Listen the engine sound he hits him before even applying the accelerator! He is not sliding because of early/too much power application he is steering with an intent. Listen again and try to hear the engine acceleration off the corner. It is after mission accomplished.

Also at that point Seb has nothing to lose, he is already behind Ham. So, perfect motive there.

Anyhow,

so as Alonso said "I am losing the race here!!@!@!@! "

what was that? so funny!! irony in that radio!

I very much agree with you. Turbo needs to watch the raw video and not watch a doctored video and form his own opinion.
Turbo please watch the video without commentating and listen to the engine and watch vettel's hands and also the front wheels. Tell me if the car isn't in control after the first correction. Also note the pedestrian speed of the car and that he had taken up enough throttle and got the car moving enough to prevent any kind of loss of control.
The car was very docile and pretty much guided by Vettel.
Turbo,
Watch again before you respond to this post and go step by step by what you observe and hear with an untouched video.

Excuse me?

I have watched the unedited footage multiple times before finding that video. Lots of assumptions in your post, mate. I posted the video of driver61 because it mirrored my opinion and showed perfectly in slow motion what was going on with Vettel's steering input.

I have watched the video with better sound quality. There's nothing in the sound that makes me believe he was in control. The sequences of inputs of throttle and steering in a very short time, less than a second, makes me convinced all inputs were on reflex. Does that effectively mean he had oversteer? Well, I'm not entirely sure. I am sure however he was not in control and was fighting the car. Such situations snap from oversteer to understeer back into oversteer instantly. The quick sequence of inputs tell that.

For the record, you can perfectly have oversteer without throttle input.

It is also irrelevant what Bottas did. Bottas was in a different situation.

Also, why would you believe Hamilton? Or even assume what Hamilton thinks? A victim cannot tell the story from a neutral perspective. Somebody also raised the point he did not have any video footage to view.

Do not assume that Hamilton can give the best story and do not assume even what he thinks.

You also ignore the best point of all: why in earth would use your front wing to try to do damage? There's only a small chance you'll effectively cut someone's tyre and you always end up with damage on your own. If you want to do damage, here is a target for you: hit the bargeboards with the front wheel. The reason why Hamilton's tyre got cut is probably more down to Vettel's front wing already damaged in the clash with Verstappen and thus having sharp edges. All leading edges of the front wing are thick and there are actually little sharp edge anywhere on the outside. You'd need a lot of force to cut a tyre with that. Now you might argue that Vettel intentially hit Verstappen to get sharp edges, to which I say: pure bogus!