Lewis Hamilton has taken another massive step towards winning this year's World Championship by dominating the Japanese Grand Prix while Bottas completes the Mercedes 1-2. Max Verstappen finished a close third. Championship contender Sebastian Vettel was 6th at the finish line.
Summary:
1. Max was on the racing line and turning in to the corner as is required in order to get around the corner.
2. Seb sees "the gap" because the racing line at that point is over to the right.
3. Seb tries to get in to "the gap" but seems to forget that Max will be filling that gap very soon as he follows the line.
4. There is contact - no surprise there.
5. Internet forums fill up with people saying Seb's at fault or that Max should have left Seb room.
6. Point 5. carries on for far too long and doesn't change anything.
Summary:
1. Max was on the racing line and turning in to the corner as is required in order to get around the corner.
2. Seb sees "the gap" because the racing line at that point is over to the right.
3. Seb tries to get in to "the gap" but seems to forget that Max will be filling that gap very soon as he follows the line.
4. There is contact - no surprise there.
5. Internet forums fill up with people saying Seb's at fault or that Max should have left Seb room.
6. Point 5. carries on for far too long and doesn't change anything.
What about people like me who have explicitly stated none of the 2 are predominantly to blame ?
Summary:
1. Max was on the racing line and turning in to the corner as is required in order to get around the corner.
2. Seb sees "the gap" because the racing line at that point is over to the right.
3. Seb tries to get in to "the gap" but seems to forget that Max will be filling that gap very soon as he follows the line.
4. There is contact - no surprise there.
5. Internet forums fill up with people saying Seb's at fault or that Max should have left Seb room.
6. Point 5. carries on for far too long and doesn't change anything.
AAhhh
Those soundbites don't mean that much IMO. Racing line used above for example, when cars go side to side both can't be on racing line at the same time, or end up on some theoretical racing line, cars race through corners in relation to one another. It doesn't matter if one starts at the racing line (1 or 1+1 defensive rule is a starting point)
Let's cut te corner of this discussion just like Verstappen cut the corner in Japan and go back to racing line of sanity in a safely manner, unlike RB driver. I want anyone to give an example of:
- A. Vettel pulling off similar inside, left side of the car in front, quick, left hander, tight track overtake, or at least 90% of it
- B. Anyone's overtake in the same or similar corner, braking points, lines and speed
Honestly I can't recall, I remember plenty of outside (overtaker) moves, going well and not going well.
Check onboard, 2:40
Vettel was too quick and braked way too late. moved inside way too late considering speed and corner type. Come on, he would have had trouble keeping it on track on his own, overtaking a ghost car (same lines but empty air) .
Can we atleast agree the idea of "it's not an overtaking place" is quite bonkers? It's not the corner that presents an overtaking opportunity, but it's your distance, closing speed and a gap that determines that. Nobody is driving around with a list of none-overtake places around in his or her head. I have never seen one driver who neglected an overtaking opportunity because the reasoning is "this is not an usual overtaking spot".
This for the record completely aside the Vettel/Verstappen incident. Please don't take my words and let it resolve again around those 2, I've personally had enough of it as well. I would also personally encourage to stop discussing this. I think by now anybody has an opinion that they will stick to it.
I agree, every place is a potential overtaking place. There are certain parts of the track, where overtakes present bigger risks than others. How big this risk is, however, depends on the speed differential between cars.
I think everyone who has been arguing that that was not the place to overtake (me included) weren't arguing that it's a place where overtaking is impossible. Vettel overtook Grosjean into Spoon a few laps prior to the Verstappen incident, so obviously, overtakes can take place there. But overtaking the Haas is very different than overtaking the RedBull in the hands of Max.
The argument however was, if you are prepared to stick your nose into a gap that is going to close rather quickly and predictably as a result of the normal racing line, as an overtaker, you have some part of the responsibility to get your car adequately alongside before that happens. If a collision then results, I am of the opinion that the overtaker is predominantly responsible as his actions led to the accident. You can't expect the guy driving in front to have a perfect understanding on what is happening behind him. He has a very limited view through vibrating tiny mirrors and he is also focused on getting the corner right. Even if he realizes that someone behind him is coming in quick, he also needs time to react and anticipate. Obviously, the higher the closing speeds are, the more difficult it becomes for the guy ahead to react to every eventuality. If Vettel had been side by side before Max was turning in, the situation would have been very different.
He wasn't, it all happened rather quick and in the end, Vettel forced his car into a closing gap. We know Max can be very dirty in defending his position and I feel this is where most people are arguing in Vettel's defense (as in, we know Max will defend any position ruthlessly, even going beyond what is accepted), but I want to stress that it's not right for every driver coming in from behind to force is way through and expect that the car in front always has the perfect understanding on what is happening and should react accordingly, especially when that driver has a very limited few of things.
Not for nothing, Rosberg's Championship is the only thing that lends credibility to Hamilton's recent success. Otherwise, he'd just be the guy who's had the best car. — bhall II #Team44 supporter
This for the record completely aside the Vettel/Verstappen incident. Please don't take my words and let it resolve again around those 2, I've personally had enough of it as well. I would also personally encourage to stop discussing this. I think by now anybody has an opinion that they will stick to it.
For the record, I still disagree with you (about the incident). But this is not going to evolve further. Nobody is going to get something in there anymore that has not been discussed. Discussion at that point needs closure, especially the discussion is dominating a thread dedicate to the race. The whole race.
We can continue this debate in private if you want to. Let me know if you want that.
Turbo, have a loook at this (maybe this will progress the argument):
I have used my impressive photoshop skillz once again to draw up something, that in my opinion reflects the situation and it's problems quite well. Now, bare in mind, it's not exact science. I didn't draw these illustrations with accurate measurements. They may be inaccurate to a point, but I think they should be taken into account.
First of all, I came across this:
I have no idea how accurate it is, but assuming it is, it gives you a fair idea of what a human is able to see in his peripheral vision. But, I must stress that this does not necessarily apply to an F1 driver or any person wearing a full enclosed helmet and in the case of an F1 driver, has also rather restricted movement as a result of HANS and the enclosed area. I have raced my car (Lotus Exige) on the track, with a helmet and I know first hand that there is a huge difference in perception when wearing a helmet. My car has racing harness and that also restricts movement quite a bit (I'm literally strapped to my seat, so movement is restricted to the head).
There are various studies how wearing helmets restricts perception on what is going around you. I came across this study in my quest to figure out if there are actually numbers of actual FOV when wearing helmets. It's a PDF document, which I shall link here: https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q ... 9mTUnZrY2l
Bear in mind, this document goes further than just exploring the limits of FOV when wearing helmets, but also takes into account that motorcyclists have quite a bit of freedom in head movement. This obviously does not apply to F1 drivers strapped into their seat.
Anyway, moving on. Here is what happened on track. I didn't count the frames, but the frames cover approximately 2 seconds between the point when Vettel moves to the inside and the point of collision. Unfortunately, we can't really see how far up Sebs front wing is relative to Max, but we do know that at the point of impact, Seb's front tire was behind Max's front tire:
Now to my illustration: I took the Ferrari from-above-shot to illustrate the respective drivers position and their vision as well as what they are likely to see through their side mirrors. It's just an approximation. Bear in mind that the drivers FOV is very likely less than what I drew up because they are wearing a helmet and restricted movement. The side mirrors are also very limited too. They are not pointing outwards, but towards the back so that drivers see what is happening behind them, not to the side of them.
I have two positions. Seb decently up alongside and the position he was at his farthest, at the point of impact. As you can see, even when Seb is decently up alongside (front wing level with drivers position), due to the limited FOV, it is still quite unlikely that the driver will actually see him. Look at the first picture and take into account FOV in the vertical plane and imagine how tucked in a driver is into the car and the restriction the helmet imposes. Would he see the front wing? Also bear in mind, again, how quickly Seb went from behind Max to the inside and to point of impact (< 2 seconds). I actually tried to measure it on my phone and my conclusion is around ~1.5 seconds between the moment Vettel darts for the inside and the point of collision.
Come up with your own conclusions:
Now, again, I ask - to what point is Max Verstappen responsible to see all that what unfolds within <2 seconds and react to it?
Also, bear in mind that the racing line is the line with the most grip. Anything beyond the racing line offers less grip (less rubber). Verstappen was on the ideal line, with the most grip that offers the highest apex speed. At the point of turning in (Seb probably not in his FOV) he was committed to the corner at the speed he was doing and his turning angle. If he releases his steering lock at that point to go wide, he will not make the corner at the speed he is doing as his momentum will carry him out. Also moving beyond the racing line means less grip. Decelerating at that point means the balance of the car shifts, with potential oversteer, especially if you factor in if this happens beyond the racing line.
I'd be quite interested to hear your thoughts while considering all these points.
Not for nothing, Rosberg's Championship is the only thing that lends credibility to Hamilton's recent success. Otherwise, he'd just be the guy who's had the best car. — bhall II #Team44 supporter
Phil, would you care to stop this? It's not only my request, there are others. I politely ask you if you want to continue this, you can do so in private. I'm not going to ask again. And no, I did not read your post. Not when you are hell bent on pushing through on this subject in public. I was clear the first time I did want my words projected on the incident anymore in public. I made sure I was talking about the issue of labelling corners as none overtaking, not about the incident. Why is that so difficult to understand?
To be gentle in a debate, you first have to be sure not forcing others into a debate.
Considering I put about an hour of my time to attempt a half decent technical analysis (which is the ethos of this very board) and bring my point better across (which you have been ignoring and quoting out of context), I am quite disappointed you are unwilling to appreciate this and progress the discussion further on a technical level.
Not for nothing, Rosberg's Championship is the only thing that lends credibility to Hamilton's recent success. Otherwise, he'd just be the guy who's had the best car. — bhall II #Team44 supporter
We are considered to view each cm of asphalt as a point where you can overtake. Fair enough. Regardless of who is doing the overtaking and who is defending. Fair enough. I will refer to this in the future in hope it will then also be considered valid.
Considering I put about an hour of my time to attempt a half decent technical analysis (which is the ethos of this very board) and bring my point better across (which you have been ignoring and quoting out of context), I am quite disappointed you are unwilling to appreciate this and progress the discussion further on a technical level.
But you did that after I requested specifically not having my words used for the incident and after others have specifically expressed annoyance that this still revolves around the incident.I left the door open for a private discussion where this is not a nuisance for other members who wish to debate the other events of the race. I really cannot be held accountable for you trying to push the subject and wasting time on that, when I was clear that I did not wish to continue this. I want to, but not when it's becoming a nuisance for others.
For the record, this:
Can we atleast agree the idea of "it's not an overtaking place" is quite bonkers? It's not the corner that presents an overtaking opportunity, but it's your distance, closing speed and a gap that determines that. Nobody is driving around with a list of none-overtake places around in his or her head. I have never seen one driver who neglected an overtaking opportunity because the reasoning is "this is not an usual overtaking spot".
Was aimed at several who brought up the point, not specifically to you. I was not quoting you, I did not paraphrased anything from you there in particular. I was not adressing you in particular, so naturally I was not misinterpeting you there. You are taking something personal which really was not personal at all.
Sorry Turbo, but I have to disagree with you on this! the conversation shouldn't
be stoped just because a few people don't like it as long as it's not getting out of hand. As in rude behavior.
those that don't like it should just not participate or not read what others have to say!
Asking for the conversation to be stoped seems more like a concession for fans that are overly sensitive about their team and driver of choice not doing well.
Check onboard, 2:40 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LPag5qzGshc
Vettel was too quick and braked way too late. moved inside way too late considering speed and corner type. Come on, he would have had trouble keeping it on track on his own, overtaking a ghost car (same lines but empty air) .
?
and go back to racing line of sanity in a safely manner, unlike RB driver. I want anyone to give an example of:
.
