Indian GP 2011 - Buddh

[komninosm]

I thought LH had a miserable race, no? First he was slower than the Ferraris and he could attack Massa only because he made a mistake. In the same time Button was flying, pulling away of Webber. Then he could not pass a Toro Rosso with DRS, then I expected him to easily catch the Mercs, but he could not.

I think Hamilton was saving tires at first and went to attack Massa later, when opportunity arose. Then he was nursing a damaged car and eventually he did pass the Torro Rosso, didn't he? It had very high top speed didn't it? Alosno couldn't pass Petrov for a championship and you're here complaining about Hamilton having less trouble passing a fast top speed car for an already compromised race?
......................

Ok, so was Hamilton along side?

I read that the stewards gave the penalty due to Hamilton being in Massa's peripheral vision. However, the racing line belonged to the car in front, and at no point did hamiltons front tyre go ahead of Massa's.

So if massa is on the racing line, and ahead of Hamilton, why should he yield? The BBC commentary team alluded to this too and where equally surprised as myself as to massa getting the penalty. I share their view that in this case, no blame should be apportioned to either driver.

The racing line doesn't belong to the car in front if the other car comes half way along side you.
When Hamilton was almost entirely ahead of Kobayashi and then went for the racing line you blamed Hamilton for the contact, even though Kobayashi was the one who turned in early.
...............

In these situations where someone tries to dive down the inside of someone (without being fully alongside the other driver) into a high speed corner, someone has to yield. With Alonso vs Webber at Spa this year, Alonso yielded. With Button vs Hamilton at China this year, Button yielded. With Alonso vs Massa at Hockenheim last year, Alonso yielded, etc. In this case neither did and unsurprisingly it resulted in a collision. That's racing, hence i thought it was harsh to give Massa the penalty.

Sure the collision could have been avoided, but you can say that about any collision in F1. They are racing for position, so collisions will sometimes happen when 2 drivers fight over the same piece of track. I think penalties should only be handed out for a clear breach of rules (so things like intentionally taking another driver out, intetionally forcing someone off the track).

Hamilton didn't dive for it this time. He started breaking first. It's another story if you're behind and try to overtake in the breaking zone alone. Then the front driver has no time to react and it's usually your fault if you crash. This was no dive however.
100% Massa's fault. It was probably intentional too, but how are you going to prove that? ..............................................

Well If that's the precedent set, then anyone can stick there nose into a shrinking gap and hope for the best.

Because that's what will happen and more collisions will take place.

.........................................
Hamilton didn't stick his nose in a shrinking gap. He was almost side by side on the straight and then started breaking first! FFS this was no dive at the breaking point. ......................................

[Mandrake]

By the crucial time just before the braking zone, the two cars were travelling at much the same speed. Knowing he was going to be able to brake later, why should Massa have been surrendering the corner? It makes perfect sense that he was still fighting it.

Of course Massa knew Hamilton was there - he had been fully alongside him just a second or so earlier. But that does not necessarily mean that, with Hamilton no longer fully alongside, Massa was not entitled to claim the corner.

There is then a distinction between that and turning in knowing you were likely to collide.

Perfectly sums up my point of view.

I agree with much of what Mark says, but for me there is a crucial element missing. By the time Massa made his move to the right and then applied the brakes, Hamilton was already braking as much as he could in order to make the corner - he didn't have the option to bail out of it. So Massa turned in on him knowing that he was there and knowing that he wouldn't be able to avoid the accident.

Some call that hard racing, I call it causing an avoidable collision. Overtaking is hard enough in F1 without having to worry about drivers being able to brake half a car length later and then turn in on you. They were side by side entering the braking zone, Massa was only half a car length ahead at the turn in point, and therefore he had no right (in my view) to turn into the corner knowing there was another car there that couldn't do anything to avoid him.

P.S. That quote is also from Mark Hughes blog not Andrew Benson's. Andrew's blog actually mirrors my opinion more closely.

myurr - Did Hamilton really brake as much as he could? In the build up to the overtake I thought that Massa made a mistake while defending allowing Hamilton to go by on the inside. Hamilton was fully alongside then only to yield before the corner. He braked and to me it looked like he was cruising into the turn, waiting for Massa to leave space for him. From Massa's point of view it *could* have looked like complete yielding from Hamilton.

For the record, I think this time it was probably 70/30 Massa's fault....but Hamilton could have been more aggressive there.

To all those not seeing a difference between Monaco and this: Just listen to the sound of the engine, he's off the throttle, coasting into the corner at a speed allowing both drivers to go side by side as with Webber in Korea. It was a Hamilton driving with his mind switched on. In Monaco he was just overly aggressive sticking his nose everywhere it fitted - or did not fit

[komninosm]

Hamilton Massa Crash India 2011.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M6RS5lch ... re=related

Replay of Hamilton vs Webber - Singapore 2010
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9p9rBiUhOEg

[raymondu999]

Fair point komni - They're quite similar after a fashion

[Richard]

Moving on from the overtaking bickering ....

I liked those high orange kerbs. I guess they are there so the driver is unable to cut the corner, an extra hazard to make the left/right sequence a little more demanding.

[beelsebob]

Moving on from the overtaking bickering ....

I liked those high orange kerbs. I guess they are there so the driver is unable to cut the corner, an extra hazard to make the left/right sequence a little more demanding.

Agreed, super-harsh kerbs to stop over-kutting the corner are great. Only possible better thing – a chunk of armco there.

[myurr]

myurr - Did Hamilton really brake as much as he could? In the build up to the overtake I thought that Massa made a mistake while defending allowing Hamilton to go by on the inside. Hamilton was fully alongside then only to yield before the corner. He braked and to me it looked like he was cruising into the turn, waiting for Massa to leave space for him. From Massa's point of view it *could* have looked like complete yielding from Hamilton.

For the record, I think this time it was probably 70/30 Massa's fault....but Hamilton could have been more aggressive there.

To all those not seeing a difference between Monaco and this: Just listen to the sound of the engine, he's off the throttle, coasting into the corner at a speed allowing both drivers to go side by side as with Webber in Korea. It was a Hamilton driving with his mind switched on. In Monaco he was just overly aggressive sticking his nose everywhere it fitted - or did not fit

Yes he did brake as much as he could. Remember he was on the dusty part of the circuit, had dirty tyres, and the stewards said it was clear to them that he had tried to back out of the move which can only mean braking as hard as he could. Any more and he would have locked up and been guaranteed a collision.

[myurr]

Fair point komni - They're quite similar after a fashion

There is one very important difference though. In Singapore the crash happened after the apex, which to me shows that Webber was struggling to make the corner and that Hamilton had left enough room (at least to begin with). Perhaps Hamilton should have taken a wider exit to guarantee Webber had enough room.

In India the crash happened before the apex showing that Massa had not left enough room for the two cars to go through the corner.

[Gerhard Berger]

In India the crash happened before the apex showing that Massa had not left enough room for the two cars to go through the corner.

To be fair, i don't think 2 cars can really go through that corner side by side. One has to yield. As Brundle said, it's single file through that section.

Anyway Coulthard gives his view:

Racer turned commentator David Coulthard has waded in to the debate over Lewis Hamilton and Felipe Massa's coming together during last weekend's Indian Grand Prix. The pair collided on lap 24 when Hamilton attempted to pass the Ferrari driver, the stewards subsequently penalising Massa for the incident.

Johnny Herbert, the driver steward at the weekend, has given his explanation of the thinking behind Massa's penalty, stating that; "after looking at it from different camera angles and studying all the data available to us, it was clear that Massa knew where Hamilton was before he chose to turn across him."

Coulthard however, doesn't share Herbert's opinion. "I simply can't understand how Felipe could have been deemed the guilty party," writes Coulthard in the Telegraph. "As drivers we are always taught that the car behind is responsible so to my mind the stewards misinterpreted what happened.

"If Lewis had got that far up alongside Felipe into a tight hairpin, where the braking zone is maybe 100 metres and lasts for a few seconds, then I think Massa would have been right to give way. But heading into a fourth gear left-hander at maybe 150-160km/h? Where the braking zone lasts for one second? I don't think Massa can be held responsible," said the Scot, an ambassador for the Red Bull brand.

The former Williams and McLaren race winner went on to suggest that the stewards have been inconsistent in their rulings. "Making these types of calls is one of the real difficulties with a complex sport like Formula One, but it was almost as if they felt that - with Lewis receiving so many decisions against him this year - they were trying to redress the balance. A bit like in football when a referee sends someone off in controversial circumstances and the crowd is on his back, he is more disposed to send a player from the opposition off."

Previous criticism of the stewards has led to a former driver being appointed as an advisor to provide the FIA appointed staff a drivers eye view. The general consensus is the application of the rules and the penalties delivered are far more consistent and balanced than ever before. Former Lotus and Benetton driver Herbert was the appointed driver advisor last weekend.

[beelsebob]

Racer turned commentator David Coulthard has waded in to the debate over Lewis Hamilton and Felipe Massa's coming together during last weekend's Indian Grand Prix. The pair collided on lap 24 when Hamilton attempted to pass the Ferrari driver, the stewards subsequently penalising Massa for the incident.

Johnny Herbert, the driver steward at the weekend, has given his explanation of the thinking behind Massa's penalty, stating that; "after looking at it from different camera angles and studying all the data available to us, it was clear that Massa knew where Hamilton was before he chose to turn across him."

Coulthard however, doesn't share Herbert's opinion. "I simply can't understand how Felipe could have been deemed the guilty party," writes Coulthard in the Telegraph. "As drivers we are always taught that the car behind is responsible so to my mind the stewards misinterpreted what happened.

"If Lewis had got that far up alongside Felipe into a tight hairpin, where the braking zone is maybe 100 metres and lasts for a few seconds, then I think Massa would have been right to give way. But heading into a fourth gear left-hander at maybe 150-160km/h? Where the braking zone lasts for one second? I don't think Massa can be held responsible," said the Scot, an ambassador for the Red Bull brand.

The former Williams and McLaren race winner went on to suggest that the stewards have been inconsistent in their rulings. "Making these types of calls is one of the real difficulties with a complex sport like Formula One, but it was almost as if they felt that - with Lewis receiving so many decisions against him this year - they were trying to redress the balance. A bit like in football when a referee sends someone off in controversial circumstances and the crowd is on his back, he is more disposed to send a player from the opposition off."

Previous criticism of the stewards has led to a former driver being appointed as an advisor to provide the FIA appointed staff a drivers eye view. The general consensus is the application of the rules and the penalties delivered are far more consistent and balanced than ever before. Former Lotus and Benetton driver Herbert was the appointed driver advisor last weekend.

Sorry, but it's simply not possible to judge collisions based on "they were ahead, therefore they were not at fault". Otherwise we judge Kobayashi to be at fault at Spa and we judge webber to be at fault in Singapore last year. Neither would really be fair judgements, would they?

[JohnsonsEvilTwin]

Different scenario. Lewis had room to make the corner in spa but instead chose to go back onto the racing line once he completed the overtake, Kobayashi maintained his line and Lewis turned in on him.
Lewis admitted it was his error 100 %.

I agree with Coulthards view and I hope that doesn't get me labelled a "hater" again.

[beelsebob]

Different scenario. Lewis had room to make the corner in spa but instead chose to go back onto the racing line once he completed the overtake, Kobayashi maintained his line and Lewis turned in on him.
Lewis admitted it was his error 100 %.

I agree with Coulthards view and I hope that doesn't get me labelled a "hater" again.

I don't see the difference. Massa had room to make the corner in India, but chose instead to go back onto the racing line once he completed the pass-back, Hamilton maintained his line and Massa turned in on him.

Aside – complications like this is exactly why it's not as simple as "he was ahead, the racing line was therefore his".

[JohnsonsEvilTwin]

Look at Coulthards reasoning.

It's a 160kmh 4th gear left hander with a 1 second braking zone leading into a single file corner.
2 cars will not fit through there.

So the guy doing the overtaking has to be aware that he needs to be fully ahead for the pass to be completed safely. It's like overtaking at copse/becketts... Near impossible without losing a wing or punting the guy off the track.

Run this by Spa, which is a different and slower corner altogether. And the braking zone is far longer giving more time to both drivers.
What happened in India is unique as it is complex.

I remain staunchly opposed to this being solely massa culpa.

[beelsebob]

Look at Coulthards reasoning.

It's a 160kmh 4th gear left hander with a 1 second braking zone leading into a single file corner.
2 cars will not fit through there.

So the guy doing the overtaking has to be aware that he needs to be fully ahead for the pass to be completed safely.

1) I disagree with fully ahead – only barely ahead is enough for me to think the guy being passed is the one who has to lift off to make it through the corner. In fact... more so, somewhat behind and on the inside is enough for me. Hamilton was there.
2) I disagree that the speed changes anything. All that's required is that the defender has reasonable time to see the attack happening and react. In fast corners that isn't always the case; in slow corners it generally is because of the length of the breaking zone. Here, Massa clearly could and did see where Hamilton was.

[JohnsonsEvilTwin]

Again, at no point was Hamilton ever ahead.
So Herbert took his view, it's all done an dusted. But, the penalty was imposed 5 mins after the incident. How quick was that?!

Secondly, the speed changes everything. Would I attempt a pass into a single file corner in fourth at 160kmh, through a 1 second braking zone whilst at no point ahead and off the racing line(less grip)? Unless it was a back marker, or a championship deciding race(all or nothing).

Thirdly time spent in the braking zone matters hugely. As both drivers have more time to make decisions.