2024 Austrian Grand Prix - Spielberg, June 28 - 30

[venkyhere]

For a change, not talking about the infamous lap64 contact at T3.


Driver A has inside corner
Driver B is slinging around the outside.
Driver A washes wide 'onto'' driver B in the middle of the corner, whether intentional or due to understeer from too much speed.
Driver B steps out of the track, goes wide around the corner, and gains position at the exit, also avoiding a clash with A.

What do FIA rules say, does driver B have to give the position back or incur a penalty ?
Does the answer to above Q depend upon who was the 'overtaker' and who was the 'defender' ?

Looking for a clear answer other than 'maybe' , 'depends' etc.

It’s always at least a bit subjective. If driver A under steered and driver B went off the track and passed, we’ve seen examples of needing to give the position back - that exact scenario happened in this same race.

However, if driver A purposely drove into driver B, or squeezed driver B until he hit him as was the case with Max, we already know the answer to who was to blame for that, per the stewards. It’s just another case of “either you back out, or we crash”.

please check the bold text
Specifically asking about the laps before the 'crash lap'.

[hollus]

If your Lando in the inside example is when he touched nobody, was impeded by nobody and still went all 4 wheels off the track, that nullifies any comparison option.

[SiLo]

Personally, Norris did the right thing in giving it back, he didn't make the corner at all.

I'm not so sure about the second attempt. Norris made the corner and Max DID have the option to not go off track, but he didn't take it.

Hulkenberg made the corner in the sprint race (passing Alonso) but they gave him a penalty for forcing Alonso off. What making a corner means doesn't seem to be well defined or consistently judged. I have no comment on whether Hulkenberg should have gotten a penalty or not, but only note that it's different to how they viewed incidents on Sunday.

Agreed. If it was me, BOTH drivers have to be able to make the corner.



That is a divebomb. Not doing it and shoving someone off the track at the same time.

[venkyhere]

If your Lando in the inside example is when he touched nobody, was impeded by nobody and still went all 4 wheels off the track, that nullifies any comparison option.

My bad. Big mistake I made in describing the scenarios. A vs B and the inside v outside. It's from poor memory of the flurry of events. I re-watched the laps around that time, and this is what i wanted to ask. Kindly delete my previous posts pertaining to the same.



Lap 58 or 59 : T3
Lando divebombs on the inside, tries to make the apex, can't brake quickly enough, overshoots the corner, runs wide beyond the track and gains advantage, Max on the outside of the corner almost comes to a standstill, allows Lando to shoot past, and stays within the track. Lando gives position back immediately before even reaching T4. No touching.

Lap 63 : T3
Lando again divebombs inside, but this time is determined to go all the way till the full width of the corner, no attempt to make the apex, wants to force Max wide, and does it, and is able to turn within the track himself. Max runs around the outside of the corner, is able to retain his position only because he swept outside the track. Doesn't give back position. No touching. Lando even radio-es his engineer "he went around outside, he has to give position back".

My Q is, what do the rules say, in terms of what happened in lap 63. Should Max have given the position back ? (because had he done so, what happened in lap 64 would've been entirely different). I saw posts which said "Lando gave back position after driving around outside the corner, but Max did not". Hence want to know whether the rules are different in each case since in one case it was the attacker who went outside and came out in the lead, in the other case it's the defender who went outside and came out in the lead.

[FW17]

Lap 63 T1 Lando goes off track, offence 5 but not investigated.

[cheeRS]

If your Lando in the inside example is when he touched nobody, was impeded by nobody and still went all 4 wheels off the track, that nullifies any comparison option.

<<Snip>> Hence want to know whether the rules are different in each case since in one case it was the attacker who went outside and came out in the lead, in the other case it's the defender who went outside and came out in the lead.

That's what it is. Attacker vs defender will always lead to different decisions from the stewards (can't remember if the rules explicitly say this but it's the de facto standard). See Canada 2014 (Ham attacking Rosb) for an extreme example.

Attacker vs defender also matters when a collision happens as well, although that is more nuanced.

[Just_a_fan]

Personally, Norris did the right thing in giving it back, he didn't make the corner at all.

I'm not so sure about the second attempt. Norris made the corner and Max DID have the option to not go off track, but he didn't take it.

Hulkenberg made the corner in the sprint race (passing Alonso) but they gave him a penalty for forcing Alonso off. What making a corner means doesn't seem to be well defined or consistently judged. I have no comment on whether Hulkenberg should have gotten a penalty or not, but only note that it's different to how they viewed incidents on Sunday.

Agreed. If it was me, BOTH drivers have to be able to make the corner.



That is a divebomb. Not doing it and shoving someone off the track at the same time.

Now that was a great overtaking move. Clean, no contact, both got through the corner with neither being forced off track. Perfect.

[hollus]

If your Lando in the inside example is when he touched nobody, was impeded by nobody and still went all 4 wheels off the track, that nullifies any comparison option.

My bad. Big mistake I made in describing the scenarios. A vs B and the inside v outside. It's from poor memory of the flurry of events. I re-watched the laps around that time, and this is what i wanted to ask. Kindly delete my previous posts pertaining to the same.



Lap 58 or 59 : T3
Lando divebombs on the inside, tries to make the apex, can't brake quickly enough, overshoots the corner, runs wide beyond the track and gains advantage, Max on the outside of the corner almost comes to a standstill, allows Lando to shoot past, and stays within the track. Lando gives position back immediately before even reaching T4. No touching.

Lap 63 : T3
Lando again divebombs inside, but this time is determined to go all the way till the full width of the corner, no attempt to make the apex, wants to force Max wide, and does it, and is able to turn within the track himself. Max runs around the outside of the corner, is able to retain his position only because he swept outside the track. Doesn't give back position. No touching. Lando even radio-es his engineer "he went around outside, he has to give position back".

My Q is, what do the rules say, in terms of what happened in lap 63. Should Max have given the position back ? (because had he done so, what happened in lap 64 would've been entirely different). I saw posts which said "Lando gave back position after driving around outside the corner, but Max did not". Hence want to know whether the rules are different in each case since in one case it was the attacker who went outside and came out in the lead, in the other case it's the defender who went outside and came out in the lead.

In Lap 63, T3, Norris dives inside, makes the corner but still puts his outside wheels in the white line, meaning that literally there is no space for Verstappen not to leave the track while not colliding. The only reason he is briefly ahead for a tenth of a second in the apex is by denying any track to his rival. What others call attacking vs defending, I guess.
So still no oranges to oranges comparison.

In my view, this is a 60-40 fault, but I will not tell you who I blame more and I am not sure that blame should even be appointed. Both were clearly ready to allow the touch to happen, at which point, continuing or not is a lottery.

That said, if Verstappen finds himself in "mild" race ending touches with Sainz one week, Lewis the next, then Oscar, then Charles, he has only himself to blame. He is reckless enough, but too adaptable to go that deep, though, IMO.

[browney]

Hulkenberg made the corner in the sprint race (passing Alonso) but they gave him a penalty for forcing Alonso off. What making a corner means doesn't seem to be well defined or consistently judged. I have no comment on whether Hulkenberg should have gotten a penalty or not, but only note that it's different to how they viewed incidents on Sunday.

Agreed. If it was me, BOTH drivers have to be able to make the corner.



That is a divebomb. Not doing it and shoving someone off the track at the same time.

Now that was a great overtaking move. Clean, no contact, both got through the corner with neither being forced off track. Perfect.

Cars were way smaller then though, I bet that helps being able to have cars go through without hitting.

[AR3-GP]

Cars were way smaller then though, I bet that helps being able to have cars go through without hitting.

This is a good observation. The turning circles of the current generation of cars are a lot bigger (you can see this as the preferred line through many of the tightest corners on the calendar right now have gotten wider and wider). It's a lot harder to fit two cars in a hairpin style corner. On the other hand, I think it makes the switch back more powerful. A defending driver on the inside line needs to slow more.

[Sevach]

Personally, Norris did the right thing in giving it back, he didn't make the corner at all.

I'm not so sure about the second attempt. Norris made the corner and Max DID have the option to not go off track, but he didn't take it.

Hulkenberg made the corner in the sprint race (passing Alonso) but they gave him a penalty for forcing Alonso off. What making a corner means doesn't seem to be well defined or consistently judged. I have no comment on whether Hulkenberg should have gotten a penalty or not, but only note that it's different to how they viewed incidents on Sunday.

Hulkenberg was a bit more out of control compared to Lando dive number 2 but pretty similar, as you said 10s for Hulk.

Another incident i saw compared to this second dive was Verstappen on Hamilton Abu Dhabi 21 lap 1(just lap 1), Verstappen dives and gets infront, doesn't leave the track but leaves no room for Hamilton on the outside of the corner, his options are to stop the car or take the exit road.
In both cases the driver that was ahead took the exit road and remained ahead.
No penalty for either driver, the one who took the exit road or the one who forced him into the exit road, both times.

[Tvetovnato]

If your Lando in the inside example is when he touched nobody, was impeded by nobody and still went all 4 wheels off the track, that nullifies any comparison option.

My bad. Big mistake I made in describing the scenarios. A vs B and the inside v outside. It's from poor memory of the flurry of events. I re-watched the laps around that time, and this is what i wanted to ask. Kindly delete my previous posts pertaining to the same.



Lap 58 or 59 : T3
Lando divebombs on the inside, tries to make the apex, can't brake quickly enough, overshoots the corner, runs wide beyond the track and gains advantage, Max on the outside of the corner almost comes to a standstill, allows Lando to shoot past, and stays within the track. Lando gives position back immediately before even reaching T4. No touching.

Lap 63 : T3
Lando again divebombs inside, but this time is determined to go all the way till the full width of the corner, no attempt to make the apex, wants to force Max wide, and does it, and is able to turn within the track himself. Max runs around the outside of the corner, is able to retain his position only because he swept outside the track. Doesn't give back position. No touching. Lando even radio-es his engineer "he went around outside, he has to give position back".

My Q is, what do the rules say, in terms of what happened in lap 63. Should Max have given the position back ? (because had he done so, what happened in lap 64 would've been entirely different). I saw posts which said "Lando gave back position after driving around outside the corner, but Max did not". Hence want to know whether the rules are different in each case since in one case it was the attacker who went outside and came out in the lead, in the other case it's the defender who went outside and came out in the lead.

I think it’s clear that Verstappen is right to stay ahead by driving off track. The divebomb move creates a problem here that seems to be hard even for drivers to understand fully. Yes, you are alongside at the apex, and when you are, you are normally allowed to dictate the corner. But the problem is how you got there in the first place and where you ended up. The divebomber is only alongside at the apex due to an abnormal entry speed which most often means he overshoots the apex and takes the defending driver with him/makes him take evasive action. The defending driver HAS the right to be able to stay on track all through the corner in this situation, since he is clearly ahead at the braking when the divebomber starts his move. Hence Verstappen did the right thing, just as Hamilton in AD21 and none of them were penalized.

A divebomb is not a beautiful move in my opinion, as it relies on the defending driver being kind and letting the bomber off the hook since he wants to save his car from being crashed into. No racing finesse at all there, unless the bomber can provide a clear space all through the corner for the defending driver, which seldom happens.

[AR3-GP]

Personally, Norris did the right thing in giving it back, he didn't make the corner at all.

I'm not so sure about the second attempt. Norris made the corner and Max DID have the option to not go off track, but he didn't take it.

Hulkenberg made the corner in the sprint race (passing Alonso) but they gave him a penalty for forcing Alonso off. What making a corner means doesn't seem to be well defined or consistently judged. I have no comment on whether Hulkenberg should have gotten a penalty or not, but only note that it's different to how they viewed incidents on Sunday.

Hulkenberg was a bit more out of control compared to Lando dive number 2 but pretty similar, as you said 10s for Hulk.

Another incident i saw compared to this second dive was Verstappen on Hamilton Abu Dhabi 21 lap 1(just lap 1), Verstappen dives and gets infront, doesn't leave the track but leaves no room for Hamilton on the outside of the corner, his options are to stop the car or take the exit road.
In both cases the driver that was ahead took the exit road and remained ahead.
No penalty for either driver, the one who took the exit road or the one who forced him into the exit road, both times.

I agree, it's similar. I could suggest a preferred way to handle it, but I think the most important thing would just be consistency, so all drivers know what they allowed to get away with. If it's judged differently every time, then some drivers are getting a benefit where others are getting screwed. Unfair.

[Sevach]

I agree, it's similar. I could suggest a preferred way to handle it, but I think the most important thing would just be consistency, so all drivers know what they allowed to get away with. If it's judged differently every time, then some drivers are getting a benefit where others are getting screwed. Unfair.

There's nothing that is judged more on results than what the driver actually did than "divebombs", divebomb happens defending driver takes exit road and stays ahead=not even an investigation(Lead change? Return the position or take a penalty).

Same move but with small touch=10s
Same move but with big touch=drive through

[FW17]

Separate to this debate, What happed to the DRS in Austria?

They had 3 at the track, one followed by the next but in none of them the cars were able to do regular over speed on the DRS zone and had to depend on lunges. I was surprised that the cars could not even get part of it side by side of the car in front before the braking zone that would have led to normal overtaking