2019 Canadian Grand Prix - Montreal June 7-9

[Midi]

So lets put the 5 second time penalty discussion to a rest, I don't think anyone will change their opinions anyway at this point.

This bit I do find interesting:
https://www.auto-motor-und-sport.de/for ... gp-kanada/

In short: After the race Mercedes had to explain why a certain hydraulic part they exchanged on Hamilton's car before the race was not the same spec as the previously installed part. Under parc ferme rules this would have meant he had to start from the pitlane. But after a 3 hour debate the FIA approved the state of events and Merc was cleared. All I can say is that the political influence of Mercedes is very strong indeed.

[SiLo]

Wtf (exactly) happened to Landos brake/suspension/wheel? Did something melt? If so why/how? Surely they would have got brake temp warning first before something else failed. Material defect?

I too want to know this, Brundle said the brakes melted the suspension but I saw no actual confirmation from anyone else after the race.

[Restomaniac]

Another thing.

Vettel pulls that trick on some of those people throwing hand grenades and THEY probably would have given him a ‘slap’ back in the day. So when I hear racers were racers and racing was racing it needs to be remembered that some drivers were just thugs, drunkards, womanisers,etc too.

[Restomaniac]

Wtf (exactly) happened to Landos brake/suspension/wheel? Did something melt? If so why/how? Surely they would have got brake temp warning first before something else failed. Material defect?

I too want to know this, Brundle said the brakes melted the suspension but I saw no actual confirmation from anyone else after the race.

Probably a Carbon Fiber failure.

[Jolle]

Another thing.

Vettel pulls that trick on some of those people throwing hand grenades and THEY probably would have given him a ‘slap’ back in the day. So when I hear racers were racers and racing was racing it needs to be remembered that some drivers were just thugs, drunkards, womanisers,etc too.

Plus, it would be rather unfair... Hamilton was quite the boxer in his younger years while Vettel plays badminton.....

[UlleGulle]

IMHO neither Vettel or Hamilton would have pulled the moves they did in the age of Senna or Lauda. The risks would have been to great, and even racingdrivers seem to like to keep their limbs. The advancement of safety in racing has caused more of a TV-game-racing attitude to crashing, and this in turn has created the need for rules to regulate "fair racing". Eje Elgh, who raced Formula 2 in the seventies, commented the Perez- Ocon crash at Spa with the words that he wouldn't have positioned his car that way during his career, due to self preservation and will to survive.

What we see is an increasing amount of artifical racing, where drivers put themselves in positions to force the other driver to let them trough or back of or get a punishment.

My humble suggestion to return to "pure" racing would be to punish all drivers involved in causing a SC or VSC with DSQ from the next qulifying session, with the subsequent start from the pitlane. Then you can rejoin the track any way you like, and move in the break-zone at your pleasure, but if that causes a crash, that will really hurt your standings in the championship.

Interesting thoughts. I do have to say Hamilton was following the racing line. Don't know if that classifies as "putting yourself in position to force the other driver". And if it is, why that driver isn't allow to do that because he wasn't the one who made the mistake.
I do agree drivers take more risks. However, I neither would call this artificial. The decision making still happens with the drivers, and are free to do so as they ever were. They are just less risk-averse.

Also, I disagree with your suggestion. The reason why is because causing a SC/VSC is down on luck. You can make a tiny mistake, clip a barrier, spin out of control and hit every wall around you, spreading carbon fibre everywhere. Or, you can ram into one another on purpose and skid off into the run off area without pieces on the track, which would only amount for a yellow flag.

Maybe we should look at the run off areas and see how they can punish more. Now a grass runoff does punish quite hard. Vettel lost a lot of time cutting the corner there, and you can spin quite easily on it. But, the issue is also that in order to keep yourself from spinning, you need to carry a lot of momentum over the grass, so you aren't slowing down as much as you should be.

There are solutions to that: replace the grass with tarmac and add in high grip strips, like the ones you see at Paul Ricard. The blue stripes are made to slow you down, the red stripes are made to slow you down quite extremely but also shred your tyres. Arrange a pattern in the run off area where you either need to go a long way around on the blue area to avoid the red area, or cross the red area and having your tyres loose chunks of rubber. This is quite a safe but also punishing way to avoid excessive corner cutting.

I appriciate your opinion, but respectfully I don't agree. I'm with Peter Windsor and Button on this, the interpretation of the rule is correct, the rule itself it not. IMHO Hamilton is forcing Vettel to either yield the racing line or get a punishment, and that was a great decision and a winning move, but not great driving. And what I am seeing in racing today, is somewhat of drivers, not in this instance, but in others, putting themselves in a position where the other driver are given the choice of either yealding or pushing you off. And this has to stop.

I do realize the SC/SVC is somewhat of a random punishment, but this randomness will somewhat reward courage. To clarify, if Vettel and Hamilton were to crash at that exit, both of them would be punished with a start from the pits at Paul Ricard, disregarding who did what. A driver would only be cleared if it is obvious that the did not contribute to the crash ie driven into without fault.

I do agree with the red paint being a good solution, and if I were running things, I would sprinkle every inch beyond track limits with it. But I have a hard time seeing the puncture-phobics at Pirelli agreeing with it.

[Just_a_fan]

I can think of one or two current F1 drivers that would quickly get their asses handed to them if they tried to race NASCAR in the same lawyered-up way they race F1.

To borrow a phrase from a different sport entirely: you play to the whistle. If drivers know they can punch then they'll punch. If they know they can't, most won't try to.

[Just_a_fan]

IMHO neither Vettel or Hamilton would have pulled the moves they did in the age of Senna or Lauda.

In fairness, Hamilton doesn't usually drive in to his competitors in the way that Vettel does or Schumacher did. Hamilton is a hard racer but he's pretty fair compared to most.

And let's not forget that Senna deliberately drove in to Prost believing, probably quite correctly, that Prost had done similar to him previously.

Lauda's day was much more dangerous than Senna's, on the whole.

[turbof1]

IMHO Hamilton is forcing Vettel to either yield the racing line or get a punishment, and that was a great decision and a winning move, but not great driving.

But Vettel did not have the racing line. He went off the track, therefore foregoing the right to claim the racing line. Hamilton was fully entitled to drive there, I think nobody can argue that! Most here, and that will include me, will say it was Vettel forcing Hamilton to yield. Completely aside if that warrants a penalty or not (I am personally taking a very neutral stance in that regard).

The only thing you can argue is that Hamilton should have seen it coming that Vettel would be exiting that wide (which is still Vettel's responsibility whether he can do anything about it or not as he went off the track in the first palce). Few things to say about that: one is that it was judged by the stewards Vettel went deliberately wider than he neccesarily needed to get the car back under control, and two is that Hamilton did see it coming and backed out of it.

And what I am seeing in racing today, is somewhat of drivers, not in this instance, but in others, putting themselves in a position where the other driver are given the choice of either yealding or pushing you off. And this has to stop.

And that might be true. We have seen many times where 2 drivers on the track -emphasis on that- fighting for the race line, usually with the one being on it pushing the other away from it. I just don't see it being applicable here. However, having drivers take risks is what most want to see. If you don't use their elbows, it's a dull race. If they do, it's not safe. People do have to make up their mind what they want.

I do lament Vettel did not suffer enough disadvantage from crossing the grass. If he did, a penalty would not have been necessary and we might still had a race on our hands.

[Phil]

Hamilton is forcing Vettel to either yield the racing line or get a punishment, and that was a great decision and a winning move, but not great driving.

Once Vettel left the track, he became an unknown entity, one that Hamilton could have impossibly predicted. He was so close to him, that his line into the chicane was already committed - not that you can take many different lines through there. Make a mistake and you're in the wall. Also, Canada is a very dirty circuit. Offline offers significantly less grip, so I'm not sure why Hamilton could/should have chose a different line there, especially with Vettels trajectory pointing diagonally across the track. He [Hamilton] was far too close to change direction and coming through the chicane, was dealing with body roll and shifting weight from the right-left motion of his car at high speed.

I'm also not sure why Hamilton should have driven differently. He wasn't the one who made the mistake and in control or not, the onus of returning safely onto the track was with Vettel alone.

[Restomaniac]

IMHO neither Vettel or Hamilton would have pulled the moves they did in the age of Senna or Lauda. The risks would have been to great, and even racingdrivers seem to like to keep their limbs. The advancement of safety in racing has caused more of a TV-game-racing attitude to crashing, and this in turn has created the need for rules to regulate "fair racing". Eje Elgh, who raced Formula 2 in the seventies, commented the Perez- Ocon crash at Spa with the words that he wouldn't have positioned his car that way during his career, due to self preservation and will to survive.

What we see is an increasing amount of artifical racing, where drivers put themselves in positions to force the other driver to let them trough or back of or get a punishment.

My humble suggestion to return to "pure" racing would be to punish all drivers involved in causing a SC or VSC with DSQ from the next qulifying session, with the subsequent start from the pitlane. Then you can rejoin the track any way you like, and move in the break-zone at your pleasure, but if that causes a crash, that will really hurt your standings in the championship.

Interesting thoughts. I do have to say Hamilton was following the racing line. Don't know if that classifies as "putting yourself in position to force the other driver". And if it is, why that driver isn't allow to do that because he wasn't the one who made the mistake.
I do agree drivers take more risks. However, I neither would call this artificial. The decision making still happens with the drivers, and are free to do so as they ever were. They are just less risk-averse.

Also, I disagree with your suggestion. The reason why is because causing a SC/VSC is down on luck. You can make a tiny mistake, clip a barrier, spin out of control and hit every wall around you, spreading carbon fibre everywhere. Or, you can ram into one another on purpose and skid off into the run off area without pieces on the track, which would only amount for a yellow flag.

Maybe we should look at the run off areas and see how they can punish more. Now a grass runoff does punish quite hard. Vettel lost a lot of time cutting the corner there, and you can spin quite easily on it. But, the issue is also that in order to keep yourself from spinning, you need to carry a lot of momentum over the grass, so you aren't slowing down as much as you should be.

There are solutions to that: replace the grass with tarmac and add in high grip strips, like the ones you see at Paul Ricard. The blue stripes are made to slow you down, the red stripes are made to slow you down quite extremely but also shred your tyres. Arrange a pattern in the run off area where you either need to go a long way around on the blue area to avoid the red area, or cross the red area and having your tyres loose chunks of rubber. This is quite a safe but also punishing way to avoid excessive corner cutting.

I appriciate your opinion, but respectfully I don't agree. I'm with Peter Windsor and Button on this, the interpretation of the rule is correct, the rule itself it not. IMHO Hamilton is forcing Vettel to either yield the racing line or get a punishment, and that was a great decision and a winning move, but not great driving. And what I am seeing in racing today, is somewhat of drivers, not in this instance, but in others, putting themselves in a position where the other driver are given the choice of either yealding or pushing you off. And this has to stop.

I do realize the SC/SVC is somewhat of a random punishment, but this randomness will somewhat reward courage. To clarify, if Vettel and Hamilton were to crash at that exit, both of them would be punished with a start from the pits at Paul Ricard, disregarding who did what. A driver would only be cleared if it is obvious that the did not contribute to the crash ie driven into without fault.

I do agree with the red paint being a good solution, and if I were running things, I would sprinkle every inch beyond track limits with it. But I have a hard time seeing the puncture-phobics at Pirelli agreeing with it.

I think you need to stop giving any blame to Hamilton. He saw Vettel make a mistake and did what any driver worth his salt would have done.

He wasn’t trying to ‘force’ Vettel to do anything he was looking to pass and win. That’s all.

I’ll once again go back to 2016 in Spain. If you see a driver with an issue (Rosberg) or a mistake (as in this case) and you DON’T try to pass then get out of the car and go play tiddlywinks as you have no place in a racing car.
Every driver on the grid on Sunday in Hamilton’s position would have done exactly the same (including Vettel) it’s just a good job that it was a driver with the skills to then get himself out of it when Vettel ended up in a position that got him his penalty.

[sAx]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_gykAh22nbM

A further perspective from Rosberg.

[DutchDopey]

IMHO neither Vettel or Hamilton would have pulled the moves they did in the age of Senna or Lauda.

In fairness, Hamilton doesn't usually drive in to his competitors in the way that Vettel does or Schumacher did. Hamilton is a hard racer but he's pretty fair compared to most.

If you have the fastest car, start on pole position for most of the races it is much easier to get a reputation of a non aggressive driver.

[DutchDopey]

So lets put the 5 second time penalty discussion to a rest, I don't think anyone will change their opinions anyway at this point.

This bit I do find interesting:
https://www.auto-motor-und-sport.de/for ... gp-kanada/

In short: After the race Mercedes had to explain why a certain hydraulic part they exchanged on Hamilton's car before the race was not the same spec as the previously installed part. Under parc ferme rules this would have meant he had to start from the pitlane. But after a 3 hour debate the FIA approved the state of events and Merc was cleared. All I can say is that the political influence of Mercedes is very strong indeed.

This is really weird. I remember Gasly in the Toro Rosso got a FIA approval for changing mappings during Parc ferme and that approval was turned back just before the race. This is the complete opposite.

[Schuttelberg]

https://www.planetf1.com/news/ricciardo ... in-monaco/

Racing perspective of someone who could actually race!