2019 [R09] Austrian Grand Prix, Spielberg, 28-30 June

[DutchDopey]

Agree, but that´s mandated by the point driver decided to hit the brakes, so it´s not that he can do nothing to close the trajectory, he can, he just need to hit the brakes a bit earlier if he´s parallel with another car as in that situation no driver should go from edge to edge as if he´s alone in the track, he should leave some space. If he he don´t hit the brakes at the necessary point and then is forced to open up the trajectory and invade the other car´s line, then it´s still his fault, even if after hitting the brakes he can do nothing to prevent it, he should have prevent it earlier, before hitting the brakes that late.

Agree, once he´s hit the brakes he can do nothing to prevent invanding other´s car´s line, but that does not change the fact he´s still responsible for the braking point he chose. If that point forced him to invade other´s car line, then he simply went too long hitting the brakes too late. Still his fault Phil.

But if braking later gives a better racing line with a faster exit , isn't he allowed then to take that racing line?

[NL_Fer]

They can follow very close in turns these days

Sent from my Redmi Note 4 using Tapatalk

Look at turn 1 onboards in Austria. Close on the start/finish, but 10-20 meters away after turn 1. Then they get DRS+Tow to close in, but the extra speed from the attacker will result in a blunt agressive overtake.

[Edax]

I watched the video again and honestly the only offence I saw was perhaps Arnoux running outside the white line a bit and even then he didn't really gain a lasting advantage.
The driving was much fairer than some incidents we've had in modern times, leaving car widths at all times, cars within the lines, etc.

I feel like you've evoked F1's version of Godwin's Law though, posting up this video.

Well then at least I am in good company. Arnoux himself referenced to this incident when asked after the gp of Austria.

."Ce genre de courses n’aurait pas sa place évidemment aujourd’hui, ce ne serait plus possible. On vous aurait mis en prison pour ce genre de comportement. Aujourd’hui, on se touche à peine, et on vous met sous investigation. Alors, revoyez la scène, on s’est touché sept fois... C’est la prison qui nous attendrait aujourd’hui ."
https://motorsport.nextgen-auto.com/fr/ ... 39259.html

Freely translated: this kind of racing has no place anymore. Nowadays when you barely touch someone you are investigated. Now look back at this scene, we touched seven times. We would have been thrown in prison today.

[sosic2121]

Steering lock is dependant on speed. More speed = more force = wider radius = wider line.

Which just confirms the same thing further.

The thing some don't seem to understand is that once you are committed to a certain speed around a corner [under racing conditions], your trajectory is more or less given, as you will be at the limit of turning force and grip. Turning in tighter (i.e. to avoid hitting the kerbs on the outside and crowding an opponent) will either induce under, oversteer or both. Lifting will shift the weight of the car, again, inducing under or oversteer. At corner exit, the car on the inside could accelerate less hard to change the trajectory to not hit the kerbs, but would he be obliged to do that? I think there's a very fine line here and the onus should go to the car on the inside for the above reasons, not least because the defending driver can choose to defend that position by covering it (which Leclerc didn't on two occasions).

In the sporting regulations, it states that "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."

I believe the keyword "deliberate" is very important here. Being committed to a certain trajectory isn't being deliberate. However, the case between i.e. Rosberg and Hamilton in I think 2016 when Rosberg simply didn't turn into the corner and forced Hamilton off would be deliberate. Same applies to blocking moves in which the driver purposely pushes another driver wide or off track while being under full control of his car would be a deliberate crowding.

Basically, you are saying that accelerating out of corner is unavoidable once driver decides it's the moment to step on it,
while breaking is optional and driver can decide when to abort or postpone breaking.

Interesting point of view

[NathanOlder]

Yeah, can't disagree more with Phils verdict on not being able to change his line once he starts braking in the braking zone.

What you are missing Phil is the point in which the braking stops. On such a slow corner, virtually everyone will have their braking finished by the time they hit the apex on the right hand side. After that point they will then get the car turned and start to apply the power again. If you want a tighter exit, you simply don't apply the power as hard, or even still, apply more brakes to get the car over to the right.

So Max did not have to run the car to the outside white line! He chose to do that. And that would then mean he deliberately pushed another car off the track.

[bluechris]

I had read many discussions here and in other forums and people say this or that. I will not say if it is penalty or not, in my eyes every driver needs to respect the other. Max had several ways to avoid this and leclerc if he was smart he could had avoid that move also. They are young and they will learn.
I just wanted this fight to last till the end and that didn't happened. We had at least a good race after many GPs and im thankful for this.

[NathanOlder]

Not sure Max will learn, certainly not as fast as Charles. Max has been doing this kind of thing since he entered in to F1. Ask Kimi about Max, he would tell you. And Kimi is as safe and laid back as they come.

[sosic2121]

Not sure Max will learn, certainly not as fast as Charles. Max has been doing this kind of thing since he entered in to F1. Ask Kimi about Max, he would tell you. And Kimi is as safe and laid back as they come.

Even before f1 he was making dirty moves.

I just can't understand why stewards keep letting him.

For example, Kimi passed Max(with entire car) before Les Combes and braked normally.
Max divebombed Kimi, and both went off track.
Kimi returned to the track before Max and stewards forced Kimi to give back the place! I can't understand that.
https://youtu.be/aZi7gJAXnKI

[zac510]

I watched the video again and honestly the only offence I saw was perhaps Arnoux running outside the white line a bit and even then he didn't really gain a lasting advantage.
The driving was much fairer than some incidents we've had in modern times, leaving car widths at all times, cars within the lines, etc.

I feel like you've evoked F1's version of Godwin's Law though, posting up this video.

Well then at least I am in good company. Arnoux himself referenced to this incident when asked after the gp of Austria.

."Ce genre de courses n’aurait pas sa place évidemment aujourd’hui, ce ne serait plus possible. On vous aurait mis en prison pour ce genre de comportement. Aujourd’hui, on se touche à peine, et on vous met sous investigation. Alors, revoyez la scène, on s’est touché sept fois... C’est la prison qui nous attendrait aujourd’hui ."
https://motorsport.nextgen-auto.com/fr/ ... 39259.html

Freely translated: this kind of racing has no place anymore. Nowadays when you barely touch someone you are investigated. Now look back at this scene, we touched seven times. We would have been thrown in prison today.

You and Arnoux are both being overly dramatic. Many times drivers touch and there is no investigation. Many times there are investigations and no punishment. Of course they would not be thrown in prison.

[roon]

Not sure Max will learn, certainly not as fast as Charles. Max has been doing this kind of thing since he entered in to F1. Ask Kimi about Max, he would tell you. And Kimi is as safe and laid back as they come.

Even before f1 he was making dirty moves.

I just can't understand why stewards keep letting him.

For example, Kimi passed Max(with entire car) before Les Combes and braked normally.
Max divebombed Kimi, and both went off track.
Kimi returned to the track before Max and stewards forced Kimi to give back the place! I can't understand that.
https://youtu.be/aZi7gJAXnKI

Logic may have been: cars alongside during passing will each be establishing their own driving line. Both will be choose a line, one will be faster, and those lines may intersect. Both are commiting to the their line so both have intent in terms of the collision. Both also have the option to deviate in order to avoid contact. So long as the line chosen fits within track limits, and ignoring how impacts can cause deviations from lines, fair game. Which may have been Max's logic in Austria--distribute the responsibility for collisions while minimizing the physical effects of collisions for one's self.

In the video you provided, both drivers could have fit their lines within the track limits. Only the collision caused them to deviate. Both are to blame, so a double penalty would be redundant. Since no blame was assigned, Kimi had to yield because he gained an advantage when off track. Had he rejoined alongside perhaps no penalty and the battle would have continued. Had Verstappen gained off track perhaps he would have been similarly told to yield. Had they both re-entered the track alongside, perhaps no penalty.

[Scorpaguy]

Max's signature move has been, is, and likely will continue to be the "inside dive bomb". He continues to get by with it because, as the inside car, the inevitable contact/touching of wheels forces the outside car to run wide/go off track...and currently he is the FIA's "golden boy" who seldom gets penalized. The only times I remember him losing out was with the 2017 Austin (I think)"cut corner" incident with Kimi and his "racing incident" with Ocon (Max won that particular "post race" incident).

I suspect Max will continue this move for the foreseeable future as his present (and past) engines just do not have the grunt to do the job on the straights...thus the super late brake dive bomb...pretty darn effective...legal is another debate. Like it or not, the "victim's of Max's dives/passes need to stop whining and position their car to remove the inside option...let Max see if he can make it stick on the outside. Personally, I am in awe of Horner's and RB's ability to have a car/tyre strategy that allows such great late race closing speeds in these cases.

[Maritimer]

The FIA/Stewards need to decide if holding the racing line or leaving space for another driver takes precedence in instances like this and just stick with it. Either you are obligated to leave a cars width, or you're obligated to back out if the pinch is inevitable. Obviously saying a driver must do both is too complicated these days.

[NathanOlder]

yeah, the FIA should have addressed this issue fully after canada. The FIA really are a bunch of clowns.

[z.topoln]

They can follow very close in turns these days

Sent from my Redmi Note 4 using Tapatalk

Look at turn 1 onboards in Austria. Close on the start/finish, but 10-20 meters away after turn 1. Then they get DRS+Tow to close in, but the extra speed from the attacker will result in a blunt agressive overtake.

Turn 1 exits are mandated by the time you can press throttle. If you are 10 meters behind (2x f1 car length) you stamp the throttle 10 meters later, and that means the distance between 2 cars will inevitably increase as the speed of those 2 cars increases. Time difference between them is the same, distance isnt.

I was at the track. F1 was able to follow just as close as rest of cars were. F1 had more overtakes than porsche cup. What more do we (as fans) want.

Sent from my Redmi Note 4 using Tapatalk

[bluechris]

The FIA/Stewards need to decide if holding the racing line or leaving space for another driver takes precedence in instances like this and just stick with it. Either you are obligated to leave a cars width, or you're obligated to back out if the pinch is inevitable. Obviously saying a driver must do both is too complicated these days.

Which one of the 2 produce better racing? In my mind to always take care of the other car is a logic and the better option.
Its also a respectful thing to do which i don't except any spoiled brat to do easily.
Don't know, am i mistaken? You really like cars to be bumped off track? What you say?