2019 Japanese Grand Prix - Suzuka, Oct 11 - 13

[Mandrake]

Well it's pretty obvious now what Ferrari is doing. They can't beat Mercedes on race pace so they're heavily skewing their set up towards qualifying, hoping to be able to grab P1 and P2. If they do that they have a chance of using tactics to pull off a win.

Vettel I'm sure would have won Sochi on pace, so it's not that easy. Suzuka was said to be a hard track for Ferrari, yet they still beat Mercedes over one lap and could stand on track against a Merc on fresher, faster tires. So they definetly made leaps in performance compared to early in the season

[Sieper]

yes, in normal cars it is. when your drive through a puddle with hot brakes (just before stopping) the uneven cooldown (with brakepads apllied) might make them warp, in F1 I am unsure if it matters. Sometimes the brakes are bursting into flames (the housing) anyway (different beasts, all carbon) and they are replaced every race I think.

[izzy]

Well, PDR is well compensated by the rest of the team sitting head and shoulders up Hamilton's arse. Despite PDR the bias is still so much pro Hamilton

perhaps they just like him

[El Scorchio]

They are a British broadcaster. Is it really surprising they might favour/focus on a British driver? British broadcasters did it with Mansell, Hill, Button and all of them over the years.

Don't tell me Dutch TV doesn't massively favour Verstappen, or GermanTV Vettel, Aussie TV Ricciardo, or Italian TV Ferrari?

[Phil]

About the tolerances: it’s not necessarily about movement, but perhaps about the movement right around when the lights go off.

I.e. if the system only monitors the time frame right before the lights go off, or during the entire period between when the green flags are waved, or when all the lights are illuminated.

It could well be that Seb somehow lucked into being outside these parameters due to stopping in the right moment when the lights went out.

Either way, it’s utterly stupid to rely on the sensor if there is clear evidence on video of movement. The stewards should have simply overruled the sensor and called out a penalty and be done with it.

[RZS10]

It's really interesting how much Bottas benefitted from Vettel's totally not false start, he clearly just went when he saw Vettel move, just compare his start to that of Leclerc and Hamilton - he starts moving one frame after the lights go out
https://i.imgur.com/cpwg3be.gif

Is it my imagination or does Bottas get an amazing start also. Looks like he went with Vettel and effectively jumped the start without being out of the box either. Compare to LeClerc and Hamilton.

You essentially just rephrased what i wrote

Maybe I missed it, but if you watch the on-board start from Bottas. He doesn't react to the lights, he reacts to Vettel.


[you can embed videos with [media][/ media] ]

Watch how quick he reacts to the lights going out. Someone else slowed it down even more and went frame by frame from the broadcast, his reaction time was around 20-30ms. Essentially inhuman reactions and it's very likely what won him the race.

You can go frame by frame yourself on youtube: use , to go one frame back and . to go forward

The video is uploaded at 50fps, one frame is therefore 0.02s

His hand starts moving two frames before and his car starts moving two frames after the lights go out - that means 0.04s for both.

Ricciardo needed 8 frames / 0.16s to move his hand and a total of 12 frames / 0.24s to get going after 'green'.

Vettel in Russia 9 and 11 frames, Sainz 11 and 13.

So Bottas pre-empted the start or staying with the theme of counting frames: his start was 8 frames or 0.16s quicker than usual.

[KeiKo403]

On the Hamilton strategy, could it just be that if they would've left Hamilton on a 1-stop once Bottas was already committed to his 2 stop then it would've made it even more difficult for Bottas to win the Championship? (Could be seen as favoring Hamilton)

I think Bottas outscored Hamilton by 9 points this race, had they left Hamilton out on a 1 stop then it maybe that Hamilton outscored Bottas by 7 points and further narrowed the chances of the WDC for Bottas (which he isn't getting anyway, lets be honest)

Add to this that Hamilton and Bottas could've ended up fighting in the closing laps and any contact could've meant Merc not clinching the WCC (which they'd already got sewn up) that race and also bad PR about team orders, throwing away a race win, not clinching the WCC etc etc. Plus, given the result in Japan it's not a full-gone conclusion that Hamilton will take the title in Mexico.

I'm not saying Merc have engineered this but at least how things have played out it's more likely that Hamilton will win the WDC in COTA, a circuit he loves and dare I say it has a much better atmosphere there and no cringey spinning podium with a DJ. Even if we do get some good'ol cringe for Driver introductions haha

[NathanOlder]

They are a British broadcaster. Is it really surprising they might favour/focus on a British driver? British broadcasters did it with Mansell, Hill, Button and all of them over the years.

Don't tell me Dutch TV doesn't massively favour Verstappen, or GermanTV Vettel, Aussie TV Ricciardo, or Italian TV Ferrari?

Exactly mate. But some people get so pissed off that Hamilton gets some support from his own nation.

[KeiKo403]

As for the Vettel false start, I guess technically it wasn't a false start, the rules say a false start is determined by the on board sensor triggering, as the on-board sensor didn't trigger it technically wasn't a false start. If the stewards would've handed a penalty out for that Ferrari would've took that to court somewhere, and most likely won, what they'd gain from doing that who knows but the stewards can only:
a. Give a penalty for breaking a rule
b. Give NO penalty for breaking a rule

What they can't do is give a penalty for not technically breaking a rule (unfortunately common sense can't prevail).
To be clear though, I didn't know the exact wording of the rules so I called that a false start because I saw a car move while the lights were still on.

I can't really understand the outcome they gave though where they said because he stopped he didn't gain an advantage. Look back to Russia, different crime, admittedly, but did Magnussen gain an advantage for running wide at T2, I don't believe he was directly battling with anyone?

As for Leclerc vs Verstappen, for Race Control to initially say "No Investigation Required" is a total joke. If you're not going to penalise say nothing or say it's under investigation and then then say no action required. To then put it under investigation so far into the race and then to say it'll be investigated after the race, well it's a complete mockery. Maybe the FIA is just running out of money so if they make stupid decisions then Teams and Drivers can say stuff and then they get fined for it.

I don't think the stewards necessarily have it easy but this new 'let them race' motto plain goes against what the rules are and seems to give the stewards an excuse for an easy Sunday afternoon. If we want a 'let them race' attitude, that's fine, but change the rules first so that all of the drivers, commentators and fans know what to expect.

[cooken]

No investigation for Albon on Norris is also moronic. If the outcome of that investigation was racing incident, fine. I disagree, but fine. But no investigation of an incident involving massive contact is just irresponsible.

[NathanOlder]

No investigation for Albon on Norris is also moronic. If the outcome of that investigation was racing incident, fine. I disagree, but fine. But no investigation of an incident involving massive contact is just irresponsible.

Yeah , this was disgusting.

[Jester Maroc]

As for the Vettel false start, I guess technically it wasn't a false start, the rules say a false start is determined by the on board sensor triggering, as the on-board sensor didn't trigger it technically wasn't a false start. If the stewards would've handed a penalty out for that Ferrari would've took that to court somewhere, and most likely won, what they'd gain from doing that who knows but the stewards can only:
a. Give a penalty for breaking a rule
b. Give NO penalty for breaking a rule

What they can't do is give a penalty for not technically breaking a rule (unfortunately common sense can't prevail).
To be clear though, I didn't know the exact wording of the rules so I called that a false start because I saw a car move while the lights were still on.

I can't really understand the outcome they gave though where they said because he stopped he didn't gain an advantage. Look back to Russia, different crime, admittedly, but did Magnussen gain an advantage for running wide at T2, I don't believe he was directly battling with anyone?

You mean these, "Moved before the start signal is given, such judgement being made by an FIA approved
and supplied transponder fitted to each car" As others have pointed out according to the regulations Vettel could not be penalized, my issue is that this is a terrible precedent.

I don't understand why the results should be considered when reprimanding drivers for (visually) obvious penalties. Vettel not gaining an advantage does not change the fact that he intentionally moved prior to lights out.

[KeiKo403]

As for the Vettel false start, I guess technically it wasn't a false start, the rules say a false start is determined by the on board sensor triggering, as the on-board sensor didn't trigger it technically wasn't a false start. If the stewards would've handed a penalty out for that Ferrari would've took that to court somewhere, and most likely won, what they'd gain from doing that who knows but the stewards can only:
a. Give a penalty for breaking a rule
b. Give NO penalty for breaking a rule

What they can't do is give a penalty for not technically breaking a rule (unfortunately common sense can't prevail).
To be clear though, I didn't know the exact wording of the rules so I called that a false start because I saw a car move while the lights were still on.

I can't really understand the outcome they gave though where they said because he stopped he didn't gain an advantage. Look back to Russia, different crime, admittedly, but did Magnussen gain an advantage for running wide at T2, I don't believe he was directly battling with anyone?

You mean these, "Moved before the start signal is given, such judgement being made by an FIA approved
and supplied transponder fitted to each car" As others have pointed out according to the regulations Vettel could not be penalized, my issue is that this is a terrible precedent.

I don't understand why the results should be considered when reprimanding drivers for (visually) obvious penalties. Vettel not gaining an advantage does not change the fact that he intentionally moved prior to lights out.

well I was just venting my frustrations at this not being penalised because it couldn't be based on how the rules were written. Wasn't responding directly to anything you (or anyone else really) had already said.

I totally agree with you though about how the result of any incident seems to come into play. It shouldn't.

I'm gonna off on a wild tangent here but for the stewards to say no advantage was gained is as nonsensical as me saying if Vettel hadn't have jumped the start then he for sure would've crashed at T1 and left Japan with 0 points. As it is, what he did had a different affect and meant he ended up finishing second, ergo advantage gained.

It's through utterly stupid arguments like this that the 'result' of an incident shouldn't be taken into account as it's impossible to say what would've happened given a correct start.

For anyone wanting to respond to this argument, please note I'm not great at analogies or anything like that, it's more the meaning behind what I've tried to say instead of what I have actually said.

Also, it just so happens that this is about Vettel. I actually really quite like him so this isn't a personal attack on him. It's more the FIA/Stewards silly rules/decisions.

[Restomaniac]

It's really interesting how much Bottas benefitted from Vettel's totally not false start, he clearly just went when he saw Vettel move, just compare his start to that of Leclerc and Hamilton - he starts moving one frame after the lights go out
https://i.imgur.com/cpwg3be.gif

Is it my imagination or does Bottas get an amazing start also. Looks like he went with Vettel and effectively jumped the start without being out of the box either. Compare to LeClerc and Hamilton.

You essentially just rephrased what i wrote

Maybe I missed it, but if you watch the on-board start from Bottas. He doesn't react to the lights, he reacts to Vettel.

https://youtu.be/0mhzK786Qpk?t=39
[you can embed videos with [media][/ media] ]

Watch how quick he reacts to the lights going out. Someone else slowed it down even more and went frame by frame from the broadcast, his reaction time was around 20-30ms. Essentially inhuman reactions and it's very likely what won him the race.

You can go frame by frame yourself on youtube: use , to go one frame back and . to go forward

The video is uploaded at 50fps, one frame is therefore 0.02s

His hand starts moving two frames before and his car starts moving two frames after the lights go out - that means 0.04s for both.

Ricciardo needed 8 frames / 0.16s to move his hand and a total of 12 frames / 0.24s to get going after 'green'.

Vettel in Russia 9 and 11 frames, Sainz 11 and 13.

So Bottas pre-empted the start or staying with the theme of counting frames: his start was 8 frames or 0.16s quicker than usual.

But that is normal human behaviour. When a human is on a hair trigger like this any movement brings a subconscious reaction.

Like I said yesterday. It’s why in athletics only the first to go early gets penalised as any movement by anyone makes the whole field jump start.

[Restomaniac]

About the tolerances: it’s not necessarily about movement, but perhaps about the movement right around when the lights go off.

I.e. if the system only monitors the time frame right before the lights go off, or during the entire period between when the green flags are waved, or when all the lights are illuminated.

It could well be that Seb somehow lucked into being outside these parameters due to stopping in the right moment when the lights went out.

Either way, it’s utterly stupid to rely on the sensor if there is clear evidence on video of movement. The stewards should have simply overruled the sensor and called out a penalty and be done with it.

Exactly.

The Stewards used a sensor that was brought in to avoid missing a jump start when human error could as an excuse to not penalise a clear jump start. The sensor is from a bygone era in which F1 relied on the human eye. We now have HD cameras that miss pretty much naff all and in this case caught Vettel jump starting bang to rights.
What do the stewards do? ‘Sorry guys the sensors and their tolerances missed it so it didn’t happen’. Utterly idiotic.