2021 Belgian Grand Prix - Spa-Francorchamps, Aug 27 - 29

[Zynerji]

I feel sorry for all the fans that attended the “race”. I spent $75 to watch it on TV without success, but that does not compare to standing in the rain for hours and get nothing.

WOW!

Why so much money to watch? The app is only $80/yr!

[Restomaniac]

Let's be honest here, with all the bashing, we're forgetting a simple truth.

Today would go down as a memorable race whatever would happen. The decision to 'cancel' the race and just fulfill some bureaucratic rule by doing some 4 laps may go down obviously as a memorable and 'dubious' race - the other side of the coin is that if they DID have a race, then we could have had a serious accident, perhaps even a fatal one.

Fact is, decisions made by the stewards mean drivers kept their lives, teams kept their cars in one piece, and for their 'effort' points were given.
the crowd being disappointed is a form of acceptable 'damage' in my opinion.

Either way, let's hope this also helps to have people forget their nonsense of the past weeks/months.
Hamilton got lucky and 'served' win dinner on a plate by the FIA according to many, and perhaps with a bit of reason.
However, let's be fair - despite him doing his work on saturday, Max was given the win today, he needed do nothing.
He has come back close to Hamilton without any real effort.

This is just how the sport goes, but that - imo - goes for what happened in Silverstone too.
So let's just take this weekend as one that goes down as one of the most confusing races in history,
and let it be what it is - a race result.

It was no ‘race’ a race involves a chance of wining, losing, overtakes and being overtaken. None of that is true.

By this logic, Monaco isn't a race !

So you can point me to a Monaco race when nobody was overtaken and the winner was decided with no chance of anybody else winning before the race even started? It’s either that or you’re lying. Which is it?

[Restomaniac]

There's a difference between being happy with something, and accepting something.
Noone is happy with how things went, but some accept this is the way it is.

What way is that? That we now accept our sport being diminished? That actual racing isn’t important anymore? That fulfilling contracts is more important than sporting endeavour? That race fixing is ok? That ripping fans off is fine?

[PlatinumZealot]

Sorry for the bold, wanted to be clear not offensive. But can you imagine me tellingly that it is raining in you place while you looking outside your window and see a blue sky.

Of course that is metaphorical. The sky wasn’t blue, but I saw zero fog. The drivers also did’t complain of fog or rain or of darkness but of spray. So while I am not able to measure tyre displacement and all that sort of stuff it is not that big a leap to assume that the current cars have a an issue there.

You didn't say anything offensive at all, so no worries there. You said in bold that the poor visibilty was likely caused by the cars/technical regs and I replied that is hard to prove; it likely wouldn't have been much better even with different technical regulations. (better tyres, taller seating position).

[PlatinumZealot]

You guys are hilarious, so yesterday it was Lewis getting lucky? He lost 5 points to his rival without any racing. If you see that as luck falling Hamiltons way then I totally understand why you see Lewis as the luckiest driver on the grid.

Come on, I did not say that. I said that yesterday was mostly luck falling in Max's direction for once - and that there are certain perspectives in which Lewis is lucky too. The world isn't completely black-and-white.

Seriously, if you factor how lucky Lewis has been to benefit from Imola red flag, taking out Max, Valterri causing Lando to destroy half of Max's car, Max's getting 5pts closing the gap in championship shouldn't even be called luck. He earned pole position and as pole sitter of the race was entitled to a clear track ahead and everyone behind had to suffer poor visibility, the same as they would dirty air. Lewis complained about visibility, well, tough luck.

May I agree with you, Ispano6?

[Gettingonabit]

Well, I have to say the differences of opinion on here have been more entertaining than the GP.

[langedweil]

There was 2 days of practice and qualifying very complicated. It is part of the whole race WE

And yeah, it's mostly Hamilton fans that complain now, whereas Verstappen fans are largely silent. Logically, they benefitted. I have no doubts it would be the other way around had their positions been swapped.

As one in Max's camp I sincerely doubt that .. this is a typical act-of-God situation that I would just simply respect, as it somewhat fairly affects everyone equally.
And because there was no racing, it feels sensible to just handout halve points for the practise/qualy efforts. To me it wouldn't have made a difference if the order was the other way around .. in the end it's only 5pts.

And 5pts feels like a hell of a difference to the 50pts ripoff in only 2 races (aside from the necessary PU penalty).

So, no .. we do not really agree on that one DChem.

Let's hope next time it's just known upfront that that's how it will be.

But it just was clear by the regulations and common sense (extreme liability); that it might be undesirable, soit.

[langedweil]

Exactly. The rules could, and should have been more clear on what happens procedurally when there is no opportunity to race. But let's be honest, this was a rather unique situation - and rules are often written in hindsight.

That there was no race, doesn't mean no points should be awarded. There still was a team effort in the days prior in which some drivers/teams stood out, for which they deserve to be rewarded. Now it feels unsatisfactory that the procedure was made up on the fly and the whole thing was a big mess, sure, but still, points are in place. Russell/Williams in particular took a gamble and won, for which they should be credited.

And yeah, it's mostly Hamilton fans that complain now, whereas Verstappen fans are largely silent. Logically, they benefitted. I have no doubts it would be the other way around had their positions been swapped. But for once, luck (and Stewards decisions) fell in Verstappen's favor rather than Hamilton's. Soit.

No points to the FIA/stewards for execution, but in the end the decision to essentially give points on qualifying merits is, in my view, the right one (even though in this case there were even some mutations to that, as Sieper pointed out). Let's hope next time it's just known upfront that that's how it will be.

Was it Verstappen that benefitted, he was the one out in front, with no spray. The rest was in even more danger. He could have gained 25 points also.

Really??? come on man. I don't recall anyone winning and scoring points without racing at all. The guy who took the most points was the luckiest. None of them raced. Max did the same job as Mazepin, yet Max got 12.5 more points than Mazepin.

Except he gained pole the day before ?
If luck feels annoying, how come it didn't in Imola?

[ispano6]

Come on, I did not say that. I said that yesterday was mostly luck falling in Max's direction for once - and that there are certain perspectives in which Lewis is lucky too. The world isn't completely black-and-white.

Seriously, if you factor how lucky Lewis has been to benefit from Imola red flag, taking out Max, Valterri causing Lando to destroy half of Max's car, Max's getting 5pts closing the gap in championship shouldn't even be called luck. He earned pole position and as pole sitter of the race was entitled to a clear track ahead and everyone behind had to suffer poor visibility, the same as they would dirty air. Lewis complained about visibility, well, tough luck.

May I agree with you, Ispano6?

I suppose? Max making ground on Hamilton's lead is not luck. Since there were only laps behind the safety car, the grid order determining the race outcome is a given. What triggered me is the comment that alluded to Lewis being unlucky to losing 5pts in his lead to Max in the championship without having a chance to race Max to defend it. I was simply highlighting that Max didn't have a chance to race Lewis in Silverstone or Hungary and lost WAY more points and the lead relative to Hamilton.

[Edax]

Sorry for the bold, wanted to be clear not offensive. But can you imagine me tellingly that it is raining in you place while you looking outside your window and see a blue sky.

Of course that is metaphorical. The sky wasn’t blue, but I saw zero fog. The drivers also did’t complain of fog or rain or of darkness but of spray. So while I am not able to measure tyre displacement and all that sort of stuff it is not that big a leap to assume that the current cars have a an issue there.

You didn't say anything offensive at all, so no worries there. You said in bold that the poor visibilty was likely caused by the cars/technical regs and I replied that is hard to prove; it likely wouldn't have been much better even with different technical regulations. (better tyres, taller seating position).

Thanks, I don’t think you can solve this with tires or seating position. But do think aero plays a mayor role. Say the “plume” at a certain distance behind the car is 4 meters wide and 4 meters high, if you increase that to 10x10 meters then the density lowers by a factor 6 which should have a significant effect on forward visibility. Plus the higher the water gets the easier it is blown of track.

My guess is that F1 has been doing the exact opposite by chasing low drag downforce. The floor allows them to use skinny rear wings that gives less upkick. Also they are feeding the rear with air they get around the front tires. Then there are little bits and pieces like reducing tire squirt.

Assuming the water displacement of the tires is the same I would assume that this all leads to a smaller but denser spray plume.

[basti313]

Sorry for the bold, wanted to be clear not offensive. But can you imagine me tellingly that it is raining in you place while you looking outside your window and see a blue sky.

Of course that is metaphorical. The sky wasn’t blue, but I saw zero fog. The drivers also did’t complain of fog or rain or of darkness but of spray. So while I am not able to measure tyre displacement and all that sort of stuff it is not that big a leap to assume that the current cars have a an issue there.

You didn't say anything offensive at all, so no worries there. You said in bold that the poor visibilty was likely caused by the cars/technical regs and I replied that is hard to prove; it likely wouldn't have been much better even with different technical regulations. (better tyres, taller seating position).

Thanks, I don’t think you can solve this with tires or seating position. But do think aero plays a mayor role. Say the “plume” at a certain distance behind the car is 4 meters wide and 4 meters high, if you increase that to 10x10 meters then the density lowers by a factor 6 which should have a significant effect on forward visibility. Plus the higher the water gets the easier it is blown of track.

My guess is that F1 has been doing the exact opposite by chasing low drag downforce. The floor allows them to use skinny rear wings that gives less upkick. Also they are feeding the rear with air they get around the front tires. Then there are little bits and pieces like reducing tire squirt.

Assuming the water displacement of the tires is the same I would assume that this all leads to a smaller but denser spray plume.

I think this is a good explanation. But the issue is:
- Next year the floor plays a much bigger role.They will have more spray from the floor in the future.
- They did not cover the wheels like in FE. This reduces strongly the spray from the wheels. But I do not know if this would do a big difference...if you look at the spray pattern it is more centered on a F1 car, I think already today the floor generates much more small drop spray than the wheels.

[Manoah2u]

I honestly don't see why people keep blowing this out of proportions.

F1 has raced on several wet, very wet even, racetracks. Including Spa.
There can however be situations that simply are 'too much'. This was a clear example of this.

To be honest, i'm gonna be bold here and anybody that keeps complaining on not racing on Spa due to the weather and trying to convince why they should are ***holes.

There was a high, very very high probability that racing in these conditions would have resulted in SEVERE crashes. The same people complaining that they did not get entertained (because that egoism is what this really is all about) were complaining that the FIA didn't red-flag the session before Norris had a huge crash, and only follow Vettel's and Norris' comments.

The truth is, again, SEVERE crashes would have happened which not only would have been financially extremely costly, it is very likely to result in actual harm and perhaps even loss of life.
Somebody sitting under an umbrella or a few miles away from the track is NO MEASURE for deciding a race fcol. what a bunch of baloney. The reason wasn't just that the track was wet, the reason was excessive wetness, 'rivers' flowing on the track due to the way the track is constructed (elevation), puddles, and that combined by having NO VIEW beyond 5 meters.

Taking the opinion from somebody in the grandstands under an umbrella on one part of the track is like thinking somebody sitting on the shore of a wild flowing river claiming it's safe to go fishing VS somebody actually in that wild flowing river, or somebody from Europe claiming Afghanistan is safe to be in.

The weather conditions of SPA on sunday were reminiscent of the weather conditions @ Suzuka a few years back where we lost Jules Bianchi. Even though that 'freak accident' happened by contact with a recovery tractor - the truth of the matter remains that that race should have been red flagged far before. And that race too was postponed for long due to the weather conditions. What did it result in? death.

Spa is by nature a far more dangerous track, Eau rouge is 'dangerous' in perfect conditions even, and with heavy rain far worse. We saw that on saturday with Norris. They tried to prepare the track, they tried driving around to see whether it could. But even a few slow laps resulted in Perez going into the wall with no effort whatsoever on a moment that wasn't even conciderable as an 'error'.

Again - racing on Spa on sunday 29th of August would have been a CRIME.
The FIA did the absolute right thing by cancelling the race.

Any other opinion on the matter is that of egoistic selfish, blind people.

The ONLY, and ONLY matter that is of reasonable discussion is awarding drivers with points for the race.
And then first thing that needed to be taken into account is that they weren't awarded full points - they were awarded HALF points.
Something too that has to be taken into concideration is this: If you are present on your job, and you are unable to do your job due to rain leaking into the building,
or extreme circumstances, but you have been present at your job from early morning till the evening - should you get paid for it? yes offcourse you did, especially since you tried
but it is too dangerous.

So then why would the F1 pack not be awarded some sort of 'payment' for their efforts, in this case, in the form of points?

We have had many rain races, no problem at all. Standing starts, rolling starts, restarts etc.
There is no discussion at all about aero of F1 cars and so on, it has nothing do with anything at all.
Spa had EXCESSIVE rain/weather circumstances, itls THAT simple. Nothing more, nothing less.

And above all, due to Corona AND the mandated 'summer stop', planning in races has been a difficult issue and unfortunately CAN result in circumstances beyond normal control.

now let's stop complaining about the weather and focus on Zandvoort.......geesh

[NathanOlder]

Seriously, if you factor how lucky Lewis has been to benefit from Imola red flag, taking out Max, Valterri causing Lando to destroy half of Max's car, Max's getting 5pts closing the gap in championship shouldn't even be called luck. He earned pole position and as pole sitter of the race was entitled to a clear track ahead and everyone behind had to suffer poor visibility, the same as they would dirty air. Lewis complained about visibility, well, tough luck.

May I agree with you, Ispano6?

I suppose? Max making ground on Hamilton's lead is not luck. Since there were only laps behind the safety car, the grid order determining the race outcome is a given. What triggered me is NathanOlder's unintelligible comment that alluded to Lewis being unlucky to losing 5pts in his lead to Max in the championship without having a chance to race Max to defend it. I was simply highlighting that Max didn't have a chance to race Lewis in Silverstone or Hungary and lost WAY more points and the lead relative to Hamilton. NathanOlder shouldn't even be complaining given the farce those two races were. I meant absolute no offense to DChemTech at all.

I'm not complaining, I was pointing out DChemTech wrote that some will say Lewis was lucky again on sunday.

and for the record , Max did get chance to race Lewis at Silverstone or did you miss that part ?

[NL_Fer]

It was very obvious to see from the grandstands, that a cloud of mist was emerging right after a pack of cars ran through Eau rouge. Kept in the floating in Raidillon after the cars went through.

[mzso]

The safety ratchet only turns one way, and it just clicked past 'rain races'

Seems like we're heading that way...