SaintHacker
Journeyman Pro
That was more to do with the 8 pints you put down before starting ??I did that during a gokart race and got black flagged...
???
That was more to do with the 8 pints you put down before starting ??I did that during a gokart race and got black flagged...
???
In giving the fine, the FIA stewards said:I've just seen that Lewis was fined €5,000 and given a €20,000 suspended fine for undoing his seat belt on the slowing down lap of the Grand Prix.
The FIA are correct, what if someone had hit him, all is devices are useless…. Wasn’t very bright.In giving the fine, the FIA stewards said:
“Further, Formula 1 drivers set the example for junior categories. It is critical that junior category drivers learn the importance of using all the safety devices of the car at all times.”
Hilarious. I guess it is also important for junior drivers to learn the art of ramming cars off the track at high speed, and weaving all over the place when a car is following at over 200mph. Verstappen is the perfect role model for such behaviour
I do not disagree. My point was they are happy to correctly penalise Hamilton when it comes to safety, but when Verstappen makes manoeuvres that could potentially injure or kill the driver behind him, they are happy to turn a blind eye. As I said, after their non-decision at the weekend, it is going to be very difficult for stewards to penalise any driver for ramming someone else off the track as reference will always be made to Verstappen. "Let them race" is an awful argument, when it is clear Verstappen purposefully broke way too late to get back in the lead, and was miles away from ever making the corner. Had he taken Hamilton out of the race, he knew that it was to his advantage, by ensuring he doesn't close the gap in the championship.The FIA are correct, what if someone had hit him, all is devices are useless…. Wasn’t very bright.
Just read all the reports, the rear wing stuff was petty, 0.2mm extra deflection.. they should do the drag calculation and they would see that was little to nothing in advantage. The key point is Interlagos, is a traction circuit and you also get a benefit down the start finish straight with aero efficiency.
That Mercedes unit, is best in class, and regulations stop the others changing crucial geometry to even the playing field. I suspect the redbull is more efficient from an aero perspective, and the Honda unit is the right geometry but still behind the Mercedes.
But given the circuits nature, and requirements the red bull was always 2nd best. The point being if you can protect your tyre by generating enough downforce and still maintain a high straight line speed your going to be quick. The red bull had to sacrifice wing levels to get the down force and lost the straight line speed …
I did not see the Williams result but if it wasn’t top 5 , you can categorically state that they are a clueless engineering team ???
He is on the edge, and they have to give him the benefit of the doubt. You may disagree but the whole incident has to be really blatantly obvious.. like Schumacher Villeneuve at Jerez.I do not disagree. My point was they are happy to correctly penalise Hamilton when it comes to safety, but when Verstappen makes manoeuvres that could potentially injure or kill the driver behind him, they are happy to turn a blind eye. As I said, after their non-decision at the weekend, it is going to be very difficult for stewards to penalise any driver for ramming someone else off the track as reference will always be made to Verstappen. "Let them race" is an awful argument, when it is clear Verstappen purposefully broke way too late to get back in the lead, and was miles away from ever making the corner. Had he taken Hamilton out of the race, he knew that it was to his advantage, by ensuring he doesn't close the gap in the championship.
You may disagree but the whole incident has to be really blatantly obvious..
Not sure how more3 blatantly obvious it needs to be? Does Max need to go meet the stewards, slap one in the face and say "I meant that?". He clearly was overly aggressive going into the corner to regain the lead. He ended up going miles off the track himself, it was a very very different line he took from all the other times he took that corner. The other times, he was able to take the corner perfectly fine. If Hamilton was not there, he would have not had any trouble taking the corner. However, Hamilton put him under pressure, Verstappen was unable to stay in front unless he basically forced himself to break extremely late and take them both off the track.He is on the edge, and they have to give him the benefit of the doubt. You may disagree but the whole incident has to be really blatantly obvious.. like Schumacher Villeneuve at Jerez.
The stewards will have to be asked … but asking costs money and they also are fickle about their judgements as in you questioned it your abusing our authority etc …Not sure how more3 blatantly obvious it needs to be? Does Max need to go meet the stewards, slap one in the face and say "I meant that?". He clearly was overly aggressive going into the corner to regain the lead. He ended up going miles off the track himself, it was a very very different line he took from all the other times he took that corner. The other times, he was able to take the corner perfectly fine. If Hamilton was not there, he would have not had any trouble taking the corner. However, Hamilton put him under pressure, Verstappen was unable to stay in front unless he basically forced himself to break extremely late and take them both off the track.
What benefit of the doubt should he have been given? If a driver breaks extremely late and smashes into the back of the car in front, it is a clear and obvious driver error that is punished. Max broke extremely late and would have smashed straight into the side of Hamilton, had Hamilton continued to take the corner. Whether he aggravated this by turning towards Hamilton is simply another additional factor. If he hadn't, then it is still Max's error and he should be punished. If he DID actively push Hamilton off the track, then that would be deserving of an even bigger penalty. That is the only factor that may have been hard to tell without the cockpit footage.
Bottas will have been told not to jump out of Maxs way. Unfortunately he just doesn’t have the minerals to do that.Putting to one side the debate about Max's tactics, the FIA's penalty decision-making, and Lewis's amazing weekend, I'd like to discuss Bottas.
Valtteri has spent most of this season failing to do his job on numerous occasions. In the sprint race he finally did what was required, and I hoped he'd turned some sort of corner. But in the GP itself, once again he failed to do the one job required of him by chickening out and allowing Max past at turn 1. It's not like he had anything to lose. Why didn't he brave it out and effectively say to Max "if you're not prepared to stay behind, you'll have to crash into me". I think perhaps Bottas is out of his depth in the Merc team, who seem to be doing the gentlemanly thing and honouring his contract. If it had been any other team (especially Red Bull or Ferrari), he'd have been shown the door mid-season. He was only able to be a useful wingman in previous years because the superiority of the car masked his shortcomings.
All of the above is, of course, IMHO.
We need electric car racing to advance the state of the art--just as racing was intended to do.
Until they can make an electric car sound like a screaming V10 or 12 and with the smell of Castrol Ahhh, I'll stick with what we have. Sorry
They already have it, its called Formula E, and its, well, shite...We need electric car racing to advance the state of the art--just as racing was intended to do.
They already have it, its called Formula E, and its, well, shite...
It is indeed.
With a capital S.
An underlined, bold and italicized S
Like this S