2024 Oracle Red Bull Racing F1 Team

[rbirules]

Btw, I do think that Norris should have given back that position to Verstappen. He finished his overtake on the grass and that should not be allowed. Would Norris give back the position (and whether stewards would punish him for it) we will never know as seconds later Verstappen took matters in his own hands by barging into T7.

But at the same time, Verstappen deserved a penalty for pushing Norris wide in that corner (and he got it).

I don't want to speak for Vanja, but this is exactly the point I was bringing up. I'm fine with Max getting a penalty for forcing Lando off track, but Lando absolutely has to give the place back or be penalised as well.

Watching in real time, with less than ideal camera angles, I thought that Lando was giving Max the place into turn 8 . . . until I saw both go off track when they switched views on the feed.

[FittingMechanics]

So if Norris doesn't give back the position he gained off track because he didn't have an opportunity to do so (he did, but lets say he didn't) why do they give Max 10s for T8 when he was already ahead and Norris gained a place off track just before? There's no logical reasoning in their ruling in that case, they say he didn't complete his manoeuvre on track when he absolutely did.

Lando had 3 corners to give the position back. You can't punish someone for it.

You have to make the corner to complete the maneuver. Verstappen was not forced off in T8 by Norris (rather the opposite) so he didn't complete the maneuver.

It is obvious stewards think that T4 was different as Norris was ahead (same as VER in T8) but he was going to make the corner and he was forced off by VER.

Also, you can't use "NOR was illegally in front after T4" to justify Max overtaking off track in T8 after he was unable to make the corner.

You are right, I didn't know the real penalty decision, it would never, ever, cross my mind that such an blatant explanation is possible. Obviously I shouldn't make that assumption any more, stewards can give whatever decision they feel like and it doesn't have to be logical, my bad.

Shows how "seriously" you analyzed this.

As I showed before, Norris got on brakes about 50m earlier than usual and this gave an impression of a divebomb from Max. There was no divebomb in fact. I don't know why he didn't keep it on track, maybe he lost grip by going off the racing line so tight... As I also showed before, he can't push Norris off track if he was already ahead of Norris before they left the track. Pushing a driver ahead wide is not the same as pushing him off, pushing wide is an integral part of close racing and hard (but fair) overtaking.

Since you used F1-Tempo before, why didn't you share what was Max's speed in T7 on the lap he overtook Norris and on the next lap? Or the lap after that? The laps are comparable, in both Max is in the slipstream of the car ahead.

On Lap 10 Verstappen reached that corner with 13kph more than in subsequent laps and he was off throttle later than on the laps after that attack. As Horner was saying, Verstappen could have never finished that maneuver on track and in doing so pushed Norris wide and gained an advantage.

[AR3-GP]

---

---

The race thread is here: viewtopic.php?t=31933&start=330

The overtaking rules thread is here: viewtopic.php?t=31932

[FittingMechanics]

Stewards judged that Norris was ahead in T4 and would have completed the overtake if he was not force off. This is why they didn't consider Norris for gaining an advantage in T4. Not sure I agree with that, I think T5 would have been tough for Lando with a quite tight line (VER could legally keep his car tight as well).

It just seems stupid to have rules that can have such big consequences if you are slightly ahead or behind. Norris in Austin is slightly behind - penalty. Norris in Mexico slightly ahead - VER penalty.

Simplify the rules, always leave the space so any time someone forces the car off it is clear penalty or when someone overtakes off track.

My final post on this.

[Ben1980]

Having not read everything.

I would guess that the decision on Norris being penalised for gaining an advantage, would be based on if they deemed he was in a position but forced off.

If he was forced off, I can't imagine ge can be penalised for gaining a position.

It doesn't matter if you're forced off or not, you cannot overtake off-track under any circumstances whatsoever.

Which is then the grey area, that has been regularly exploited. Lando sneaked ahead, and I guess is classed as not having overtaken off the track.

[Vanja #66]

Lando had 3 corners to give the position back. You can't punish someone for it.

Sainz cut the track in T1 Lap 1, rejoined after T3 and gave position back to Max before T4

Since you used F1-Tempo before, why didn't you share what was Max's speed in T7 on the lap he overtook Norris and on the next lap? Or the lap after that? The laps are comparable, in both Max is in the slipstream of the car ahead.

On Lap 10 Verstappen reached that corner with 13kph more than in subsequent laps and he was off throttle later than on the laps after that attack. As Horner was saying, Verstappen could have never finished that maneuver on track and in doing so pushed Norris wide and gained an advantage.

Max also reached 240 kmh on Lap 7 and was earlier on brakes than Laps 7, 8, 9, 11 etc. He took an early apex at T6 in Lap 10, got early on throttle and got some slipstream into T7 braking zone. Overtaking with DRS gives 40-50kmh speed advantage and when they go for overtake they are almost always significantly later off throttle and later on brakes than normal laps and doing so at 350 vs 250 is not comparable. So 248 instead of 240 is nothing...

If I had to guess, I think Max was caught a bit with Norris braking significantly earlier, picked up a lot of dirt on the inside line and lost some grip. None of this changes the fact he was fully ahead of Norris before they both left the track, which is the opposite of "facts" in stewards' decision.

Horner is a very experienced TP and knows when to say something to cool things down and Max needs cooling down in any case. Horner saying something doesn't make it true by default.

[Emag]

But in this case A) both drivers went off track, so there's no relative advantage to be gained by leaving it, B) Max being fully ahead before they went off was a result of early braking from Norris and tight line from Max and C) Leclerc overtook both of them, so obviously Max did not gain an advantage. T8 10s penalty is beyond farcical, I honestly can't believe how bad this Austin overcompensation was

The other driver did not go off, he was forced to take evading action and ended up off-track. Leclerc overtaking them is an external factor. In this case you have to deal with Lando and Max in an isolated environment because the incident happened between them. Leclerc was just a beneficiary.

In that instance, there was plenty of relative advantage that was gained by Max going off the track, because he wouldn't have been able to complete the overtake attempt without going off-track at the exit. A comparable example would be for someone to attempt an overtake at Stowe in Silverstone by braking very late and hogging the inside line but going wide and off-track at the exit and not give back the position afterwards. It doesn't work like that, you have to keep it within track.

Lando opening up the steering and turning right immediately shows he doesn't want to lose more time and track position by slowing down and taking T5 from his position on track. That's fair since he was pushed wide. Still, he gained a position off track and that is a 10s penalty, is it not? Max got 10s without gaining any advantage in T8, so why didn't Norris?

Except that Max did the same in Austin, but he did not get a penalty there. Lando simply played dirty and turned Max's tactics against him. In Austin it was considered Max's position because he was ahead at the apex and he was not penalized for holding position (technically overtaking since he was already the car behind before the end of the straight), by going off the track.

Same thing here. Lando was ahead at the apex and beyond actually. He did not get a penalty because the position was technically his before he was pushed off the track.

It was Max who started this game of dirty racing while exploiting technicalities. Now that it was turned against him, he and the whole team knows it would be hypocritical to b*tch about it. That's why nobody from that team questioned the decision.

[basti313]

It was Max who started this game of dirty racing while exploiting technicalities.

Strange assumption with the many penalties in Austin...was Russel not earlier?

[venkyhere]

Switching back from endless discussion on Max v Lando in mexico (let's just accept that everyone has their own opinion, and that no amount of writing is going to convince anyone otherwise - even stewards are showing no consistency) , coming straight to the WDC :

26+8, 26, 26+8, 26 on the table.
Realistically, RB20 is a P5-P6 car, even then it needs to beat atleast one Mercedes.
Let's say, on average, Max finishes P5 in every race (behind both McLarens and behind both Ferraris) - that means he bags 10+4, 10, 10+4, 10 in the next four races. That's 48 points. Let's say probably 40, if he maximizes the ability of the car but still has some bad pitstops or with the engine penalty, finishes P8 in one of the races.

What Norris has to do, is to gain 40+47(the current deficit he has) = 87 points. Let's say 25+6, 19, 18+8, 15 , which add upto 91 points, even with only one race win and one sprint win. Even if he loses 5 points out of this possible string of scores, still he wins WDC.

So, contrary to popular opinion, the pressure is actually on Max, to retain the WDC, not the other way around. Max has to not only do really well with the sub-par car (which is terrible on H tyre, whatever is chosen by Pirelli - C1 or C2 or C3) ; he also has to pray that both Ferraris do really well. All Norris has to do is stay away from dogfights with Max, he can easily overtake on the straights (whichever is the ckt, MCL38 > RB20 in any setup, any track).

I have a feeling that the final AbuDhabi GP is going to be a nail biter, like 2021. If any of these two drivers suffers a DNF before that final race, they can write off their WDC chances.

[chrisc90]

Venky - I think you math might need some re-thought.


Points needed by Lando to be ahead of Max - 48points

IF we say Max finishes P5 in all his races (as you hinted) that would indeed by 48points. Add those 48 points to Max's current total of 362 and you get 410points.

Of course, Lando needs the extra point to win Max, as if he was level, it would go on win total - and Max has more than Lando, so Lando MUST beat on points.

411 points would be what you need to win the title.
Lando currently has 315points.

411 - 315 = 96 points needed from remaining races and sprints.

Even if Lando finishes 2nd in all remaining races, that will give him a total of 72points, and 14 points in the sprint .

That would give him enough to beat Max, without having to worry about fastest laps.

Even if Lando wins 2 races, and pulls 50 points, and finishes 2nd the last 2 races, that would be 86points, meaning he would have to finish 4th twice in the sprint races (excluding fastest laps)

If Lando finishes 3rd in all remaining races, that would bag him 60points - which would leave him short by 36points, which wouldn't be possible with the fastest laps and sprint wins.

3x 2nd place finishes and a 3rd place would bag Lando 69points, meaning there's 27points to be taken from the sprints and fastest laps - which is impossible.





Max finishing 6th place in the remaining races would net him 38 points, which would mean Lando needs 86points from the remaining races. A Max DNF and finishing 5th in every remaining race would still net him 38points.

Even if Lando wins every race going, and takes 116points. Max would only need to bag himself 68points.

So yeah, titles Max's to defend really, He just needs to keep scoring 10points minimum per race

[Vanja #66]

The other driver did not go off, he was forced to take evading action and ended up off-track. Leclerc overtaking them is an external factor. In this case you have to deal with Lando and Max in an isolated environment because the incident happened between them. Leclerc was just a beneficiary.

In that instance, there was plenty of relative advantage that was gained by Max going off the track, because he wouldn't have been able to complete the overtake attempt without going off-track at the exit. A comparable example would be for someone to attempt an overtake at Stowe in Silverstone by braking very late and hogging the inside line but going wide and off-track at the exit and not give back the position afterwards. It doesn't work like that, you have to keep it within track.

How was Norris forced off if Max was fully ahead when they left the track? What prevented Norris from braking further into the corner to stay within the limits? We cannot compare Austin T12 and/or Mexico T4 with T7 because cars had very different relative positions



He literally only had to tap the brake at this very point and he stays on track, probably would even have a decent chance to defend against Leclerc by being ahead and waving around, even if he'd be slower initially.

Norris getting off track here was entirely his choice, he chose to go alongside Max no matter what, my guess is to make it look like Max pushed him wide in that case as well. Legitimate attempt and it bore fruit in the end

Except that Max did the same in Austin, but he did not get a penalty there. Lando simply played dirty and turned Max's tactics against him. In Austin it was considered Max's position because he was ahead at the apex and he was not penalized for holding position (technically overtaking since he was already the car behind before the end of the straight), by going off the track.

Same thing here. Lando was ahead at the apex and beyond actually. He did not get a penalty because the position was technically his before he was pushed off the track.

So if Lando got to keep his place even by leaving the track in T5 (I agree with this explanation, I see now he was ahead in apex and good job on flipping the script), why did Max get a penalty for T8? He was also ahead at the apex there and got ahead fully while within track limits. There have been plenty examples before where both drivers leave track and the one ahead before they went off gets to keep it and the incident doesn't even get investigated

[CMSMJ1]

The other driver did not go off, he was forced to take evading action and ended up off-track. Leclerc overtaking them is an external factor. In this case you have to deal with Lando and Max in an isolated environment because the incident happened between them. Leclerc was just a beneficiary.

In that instance, there was plenty of relative advantage that was gained by Max going off the track, because he wouldn't have been able to complete the overtake attempt without going off-track at the exit. A comparable example would be for someone to attempt an overtake at Stowe in Silverstone by braking very late and hogging the inside line but going wide and off-track at the exit and not give back the position afterwards. It doesn't work like that, you have to keep it within track.

How was Norris forced off if Max was fully ahead when they left the track? What prevented Norris from braking further into the corner to stay within the limits? We cannot compare Austin T12 and/or Mexico T4 with T7 because cars had very different relative positions

https://i.ibb.co/pRjNGCb/max-nor-mex-24-1.jpg

He literally only had to tap the brake at this very point and he stays on track, probably would even have a decent chance to defend against Leclerc by being ahead and waving around, even if he'd be slower initially.

Norris getting off track here was entirely his choice, he chose to go alongside Max no matter what, my guess is to make it look like Max pushed him wide in that case as well. Legitimate attempt and it bore fruit in the end

Except that Max did the same in Austin, but he did not get a penalty there. Lando simply played dirty and turned Max's tactics against him. In Austin it was considered Max's position because he was ahead at the apex and he was not penalized for holding position (technically overtaking since he was already the car behind before the end of the straight), by going off the track.

Same thing here. Lando was ahead at the apex and beyond actually. He did not get a penalty because the position was technically his before he was pushed off the track.

So if Lando got to keep his place even by leaving the track in T5 (I agree with this explanation, I see now he was ahead in apex and good job on flipping the script), why did Max get a penalty for T8? He was also ahead at the apex there and got ahead fully while within track limits. There have been plenty examples before where both drivers leave track and the one ahead before they went off gets to keep it and the incident doesn't even get investigated

As much as that must have taken a few minutes, it's not relevant in this thread.

Can we keep all this track limits ahead penalty waffle in the thread created for that purpose please?

[avantman]

I studied the telemetry as well yesterday, and noticed Norris started to brake abnormally early into T7, compared with Sainz, Max and most importantly Norris himself on the following laps, whereas Max indeed braked at or near the same point he braked on the following laps. Which of course was later than needed given the inside dirtier line, but it wasn't like so horrible, like the media made it look like. like he wasn't braking at all, and divebombed from way back only thinking on crashing Lando out of the race. (which is particularly brain-dead take)

I was thinking about that trying to figure out what was the reason. I think I wasn't the only one who thought initially that Lando was letting him by (to give the position back), the moment we saw Max diving on the inside of T7 with such ridiculous speed. It looked like that on TV anyways.
I came to conclusions, it was a trap set by Lando. He threw Max the bait when he started to brake so early and Max took it, instinctively going for it, like he always does. There is no time to think in those moments, everything happens in milliseconds. But of course Lando braked only as hard to ensure he would place his car on the outside more or less side by side with Max, so Lando could drive off the track again and whine for another penalty. I just can't explain the other way why would he start braking so early. This kid isn't as simple as we probably thought before.

[Emag]

How was Norris forced off if Max was fully ahead when they left the track? What prevented Norris from braking further into the corner to stay within the limits? We cannot compare Austin T12 and/or Mexico T4 with T7 because cars had very different relative positions

He literally only had to tap the brake at this very point and he stays on track, probably would even have a decent chance to defend against Leclerc by being ahead and waving around, even if he'd be slower initially.

Norris getting off track here was entirely his choice, he chose to go alongside Max no matter what, my guess is to make it look like Max pushed him wide in that case as well. Legitimate attempt and it bore fruit in the end

It could have been tactics and it wouldn't surprise me, because after the theatricals at Austin I am sure he was pissed.

However, you're also underestimating how hard it is to make adjustments while turning when you have already committed to a corner. This is way past the apex and both drivers would normally be starting to think about when they should be getting on power at this point under normal circumstances.

It's not so easy to tap on the brakes to let Max go straight and then go back to the racing line in time to defend from Leclerc as well, just like that. You also can't sufficiently slow down if you ride the brakes while turning and you can't really mash on the brakes while you are turning because with no ABS you will lock up.

But all of that is not important, because he was put on a position where he either has to back off to let Max by, losing time and potentially another position. Or go off-track with Max and minimize the losses. He choose the latter and it wasn't enough to defend against Leclerc anyway. Nevertheless, Max was not punished for pushing Lando off so this is not very relevant in the context of the penalty imo. Just trying to paint the picture on what Max forces on their opponents.

So if Lando got to keep his place even by leaving the track in T5 (I agree with this explanation, I see now he was ahead in apex and good job on flipping the script), why did Max get a penalty for T8? He was also ahead at the apex there and got ahead fully while within track limits. There have been plenty examples before where both drivers leave track and the one ahead before they went off gets to keep it and the incident doesn't even get investigated

Again, it's semantics and technicalities. If you read the penalty reports they explain the reasoning behind their decision. Judging from telemetry data and onboard footage, the stewards deemed the overtaking attempt at T4 as safe and controlled by Lando. He was ahead of Max at the entry, apex and towards the exit of the corner and from the data they had, the stewards believed Lando would have kept it on track for T5 had he not been forced off the track by Max. Hence, no penalty for Lando because "technically" the position would have been his had the opponent not forced him off. So he didn't gain anything by going off-track and he let Carlos by (the only position he "technically" gained while going off-track).

The report on T8 again acknowledges that Max was ahead at the apex and was entitled to racing room, but he did not complete the maneuver on-track.

The difference is, one of the drivers would have pulled off the overtake if he hadn't been pushed off-track by the defender. Whereas the other couldn't pull off the overtake without going off-track (by himself), while pushing the defender off in the process (again, this is not so relevant, but I like to mention it ).
Two completely different scenarios.

[6 of 12]

Hi everyone,
can I way in on all the bickering about the two penalties by saying that they were fully deserved and that one can tell that people know they were by how much people here (and Chris Horner) try to invent interpretations of facts to support their opinion? It is a very high-quality version of alternative facts that are informed by opinion and not by reality. There is always going to be a way for intelligent people to build a case in favour of their view using facts in a slightly twisted way. If one employs one's maturity, too, and not just one's intelligence, there ought to be a recognition of which interpretation of facts is least twisted and thus has to be accepted that as the truth or at least as close as we can get.
On a different note: How is it that Perez has not been sacked immediately after the Mexican GP? I genuinely don't get it. Other than Stroll, Latifi and Sargeant, all available alternatives seem more promising than a struggling Perez. It is like Red Bull are not even trying to beat anyone in the constructors' championship...