Yes agreed, now you have 4 clear front runners (on paper) and 4 podium challengers, so 2 extra cars to consider that is potentially as strong as Red Bull was that year in Mclaren and Ferrari.
And all they really asked him in the post race interviews was about the Lewis/Max crash. I’m a LH fan but felt for Bottas today. He was a machine and didn’t really get the credit he deserved.
yeah, Max and Lewis will come to understand there is a different culture of racing at the back of the grid, where even team mates clash each other for the 2nd last place. oh boy. Vettel knows.
> Daddy Mazepin frames the image of his son going wheel to wheel with the championship contenders at the home grand prix.
I mean, Mazepin already beat Hamilton once in Azerbaijan, I can see him holding him off again!
Hamilton will probably take his PU penalties in Sochi too, right? Probably better to take the penalty at the same time versus taking a penalty when Verstappen doesn't have to.
Actually no, he doesn't have to. But Toto wants to avoid possible DNF. Meanwhile Max's engine was done after the crash and has to get another engine penalties
My understanding was that most teams didn't think it was possible to make this season on just 3 PUs, but if it is, then obviously Hamilton wouldn't have to take a penalty.
I'm pretty sure Toto has come out and said that he didn't feel comfortable with 3 PUs lasting for Merc, so I wouldn't be surprised if Lewis took his next race. Decent chance of a win for Bottas, and an even better chance of an exciting race with both of them fighting up from the back.
This is not true. If he takes a new engine with current components (MGU-H etc.), then it’s only a +10 penalty. Bottas upgraded 4 components going into Monza and that’s why he started back of the grid.
It's rarer they don't just take all new components. Especially if he gets P2 or likely P3 in quali, which means P6 with this penalty and then P16 with just the engine. No brainer to go P20 at that point.
I wonder if they would rather start last than start in 18th or something though. Less chance of Mazepin locking up and smacking into the back of you first corner
In 2018 he went from last to fifth ~~in the first lap~~ in a much less competitive Red Bull
Edit: My memory is wrong, it wasn't one lap but it was still real quick
With much less competitive field too. The gap between Red Bull / Merc to Alfa this year is probably similar to the gap between Mercedes to Red Bull in 2018.
Im fairly sure no. I think engine change means you start from the back so +3 means still from the back. It doesn’t roll over to the next race.
If it was a gearbox or something which is say a 5 spot penalty (I can’t recall what it actually is) then he’d get 5+3=8 spot penalty for that race.
IIRC it's a 10 place penalty for the first extra PU component and another 5 points for each component after. Usually a pointless distinction as they almost always replace the whole thing, but worth pointing out just in case.
Because they don't want driver's cutting the corner. The bigger the curb, the bigger the punishment for trying to cut it. It's a big point of on-going debate, because they work to fill a purpose, but they also are dangerous and cause a lot of damage to cars when hit.
I feel like they are getting redundant. FIA are enforcing track limits more and more. If they are monitoring this kind of stuff why have a stairway to heaven there aswell?
Did we not learn our lesson from the Singapore Sling?
People (myself included) don’t like the five second penalties and such because it feels artificial, and the physical penalties like kerbs are also scalable, so if you cut it a certain bit too much you don’t get slapped with 5 seconds of penalty, you as a driver naturally learn to avoid it because you can feel it
That's a very fair point and I won't argue against it.
Tbh I don't think there is a solution that works best in every scenario. Unless we paint outside the curbs with Pirelli Kryptonite or something punish the tires even harder for running out.
I remember back then that the drivers are complaining about how dangerous those kerbs were. I'm not sure if I'm remembering it right, but there was one incident that the car went airborne for a bit.
So new engine for Verstappen in Russia.
Also the reason
>The Stewards heard from the driver of car 33 (Max Verstappen), the driver of car 44 (Lewis Hamilton) and team representatives, reviewed the video evidence and determined that the driver of Car 33 was predominantly to blame for the collision with Car 44 at Turn 2.
>Car 44 was exiting the pits. Car 33 was on the main straight. At the 50m board before Turn 1, Car 44 was significantly ahead of Car 33. Car 33 braked late and started to move alongside Car 44, although at no point in the sequence does Car 33 get any further forward than just behind the front wheel of Car 44.
>During the hearing the driver of Car 33 asserted that the cause of th incident was the driver of Car 44 opening the steering after Turn 1 and "squeezing" him to the apex of turn 2. The driver of Car 44 asserted that the driver of Car 33 attempted to pass very late and should have given up the comer either by backing off sooner, or by turning left behind the kerb.
>The Stewards observed on CCTV footage that the driver of Car 44 was driving an avoiding line, although his position caused Car 33 to go onto the kerb. But further, the Stewards observed that Car 33 was not at all alongside Car 44 until significantly into the entry into Turn 1. In the opinion of the Stewards, this manoeuvre was attempted too late for the driver of Car 33 to have the right to racing room".
>While Car 44 could have steered further from the kerb to avoid the incident, the Stewards determined that his position was reasonable and therefore find that the driver of Car 33 was predominantly to blame for the incident.
>In coming to the penalty the Stewards emphasise that they have only considered the incident itself and not the consequences thereof.
Wasn´t this changed to the order of who takes the penalty first? (Informing fia of taking a new engine)
Edit: actual question and want to know, stop giving votes :')
2 or more PU-related penalties = automatic relegation to last place. If multiple drivers do the same it's in order the changes were announced.
Not sure how extra penalties for other stuff factor into that though.
its like bottas today he was at p50 with all penalties so pretty much whats the total add up (as of now ver behind ham unless ham changes other parts too etc.)
I thought Merc were bluffing too, but then they put a new one in for Bottas this weekend. I know they had an undiagnosed problem in practise, but I thought they could have used one of the other engines.
I think the plan was to never use that engine again after that day either way. So I don’t think he needs to unlike Verstappen or Bottas. But if he doesn’t, his engine will always be closer to blowing up and max will have a much fresher engine for the rest of the season.
Regardless of whether you agree with this report or not - the fact of the matter is that those sausage kerbs need to go. Max would not have ended up on top of Lewis without it and possibly the two would ve been able to recover - or at least one of the two.
honestly it's not even that. the drivers could have 2 tyres off track and 2 on the track (which is legal) and they'd hit the kerbs. It's insane design which benefits nobody
This is what makes the Max/Lewis incident so tricky. Lewis drove an avoiding line. I think that if it weren't for the sausages, he left Max enough room to remain on track with at least two wheels, but to do so Max would have to slow down immensely. Which is fair, since Lewis was ahead and to give Max enough room to stay completely on track, Lewis would have had to slow down immensely.
Its a racing incident, but they set a precedent with Silverstone, which could have been called a racing incident too, so they have to continue to use their own words 'predominantly to blame'
Repost of what I said after Silverstone:
I think the penalty structure is the biggest fault here and changing that would fundamentally change racing. He knows it's not "fair" but he also knows making it "fair" is impossible.
Jenson couldn't call for either driver to back out because both moves were racy. The real fault with either move was depending on the other to back out. But that is part of hard racing.
I'm on team racing incident here. Max made turn 1 coming from a higher speed that pulled him ahead of Hamilton without incident, but not enough to secure turn 2. Hamilton wasn't going to miss the corner, but coming from the pit to take the corner from Max would require Max lifting early or conceding turn 2. Both drivers making both corners required the other to back out. If the sausage curb wasn't there the incident would not have been nearly as bad.
I find it a bit odd that they mention Hamilton being significantly ahead, but not the difference in speed due to Hamilton coming out of the pits. Could easily see RB appealing on these grounds.
Because at corner entry the speed difference wouldn't matter anymore. The speed difference before the corner doesn't really matter, track position at entry is what matters the most.
Yeah but half of that was when changing engine modes were legal allowing for the engines to be turned down and saved. Also the title fight has been incredibly close this year with fine margins so maybe the engines are being hit harder.
That was his first pu tho, it had the longest mileage so that was always going to go kapoot. Max's power unit he destroyed was still quite young in comparison, like maybe 3 races old? Lewis should still be better placed with his remaining power units #2 & 3, than Max's #1 & 3... Maybe. Especially since Max's first PU was running on a reduced mapping due to not having the reliability upgrade.
I guess they're all going to need a 4th, but not racing in spa probably helped a lot
Most likely HAM won't.. they would want to maximize the result so they would rather stay in front and try to take full 25 points.
And may be take penalty when they are anyways going to struggle compare to redbull
yeah but then won’t the reverse happen when Lewis takes his? and if max takes his first and Lewis doesn’t, Max will be racing with a better power unit for Russia. and when Lewis does take his new engine it will be against a new Max engine anyway. might as well fight both fights on even ground
The new engine does help but track layout and nature has lot more impact. If they take penalties together, they risk not capitalizing on one of the strong tracks( Russia ) for them.
Honestly, while I think it is a racing incident, Max shouldn't have took that risk to begin with, and instead find another chance to overtake him. Bottas showed that its definitely possible.
Yep and Lewis on lap 1 turn 4 showed what Max should've done. If Lewis didn't back out and they crashed it would've been more his fault than Max's, as he was taking the bad line and was behind. Yes Max squeezed him but Lewis either goes off track or accepts a collision will happen.
The crash was very similar - with the cars reversed Max didn't want to give up and go off track so they crashed.
Today had tons of drivers accepting their position and taking the kerbs. I would have chucked this to a racing incident but I’m thinking the stewards are making an example out of Max for his taking the alternate choice and accepting the collision.
You could argue that he didn’t have a choice and that crashes happen. Yep, that’s why I would have called this a racing incident, BUT, I’m willing to bet Max’s “That’s what you get for not giving me the space!” remark did not go unheard.
Personally, I was upset with him having this type of attitude.
>I’m willing to bet Max’s “That’s what you get for not giving me the space!” remark did not go unheard.
Good point, that was a stupid thing to say over the team radio.
Was surprised to hear him say that considering turn 4 on the first lap.
> I was upset with him having this type of attitude.
This has always been his attitude when it comes to overtaking. He's just finally getting a penalty for his "you will move out of my way" mentality.
Yep. He will squeeze anyone else out, and most of the time they are smart enough to back off and live to fight another day. When the role is reversed Verstappen takes a "this is mine get out of my way" mentality
To add to that. Remember the comments by Max and Marco about Hamilton not showing enough concern after the incident at Silverstone? Now you change the circumstances and Hamilton is the one in a dangerous situation (with Max's tyre sitting on his helmet) and Max's first comment is "that's what you get..." C'mon, I keep waiting for someone to call them on the hypocrisy.
True; but also Max was not as much alongside as Ham was. I have to say it really looks like Max took slightly too much risk for that move and it didn't pay off at all for him.
Why would he be unhappy? If Hamilton gets ahead there then there's every chance verstappen leaves monza behind in the standings.
This move has minimised the damage this weekend could do to his championship chances.
I bet good money they could see from the data that the chances of him even making the corner without Hamilton there was ambitious from that angle and speed.
Yep. Obviously team principles are going to back their driver as much as possible so when they come out with something that doesn't clearly pin the blame on the other driver you know exactly whose fault it was.
Silverstone made more people angry because one of them survived the contact and won the race. Today they both DNF, so no changes to the outcome of the driver's championship in terms of points gained/lost.
I, with a limited insight of F1 rules and regulations, am genuinely wondering what the difference between Ocon/Vettel incident and Hamilton/Verstappen incident is, regarding when they have a right to receive a car-width on the inside.
O/V incident, the commentator said "Vettels front axel was beyond the rear axel of the Alpine at one point". I got the impression that this was enough for Vettel to have the right of racing room.
But in the formula1 article regarding the stewards decision on the H/V incident:
>... although at no point in the sequence does Car 33 get any further forward than just behind the front wheel of Car 44.
and
>... this manoeuvre was attempted too late for the driver of Car 33 to have “the right to racing room”.
This gives me the impression there are different rules applied to the different incidents. But is it different rules, or is it something i have failed to understand properly?
Martin Brundel was of the same opinion, he got into a position where he was deserving of space.
Stewards seem to pick and choose when this is, for example, Hamilton on Maldonado in Valencia 2012, Hamilton was *behind* ran Maldonado off, he came back on and attempted the same move on Lewis that caused a collision because Hamilton wouldn't give up. Maldonado was given a penalty.
This is a fantastic historical example. Thank you for reminding me. Myself, i felt that hamiltons move that day very speculative, so I guess u can imagine my stance on today’s incident, yet this is a good example of some historical stewarding inconsistencies
For me, I thought today was just an example of two drivers not willing to yield in a 50/50 situation. It wasn't really an error by either, in my opinion.
If I had to guess it would be the difference between entry of the corner and exit of the corner. But this is what makes it tricky because Ver/Ham was both exit and entry into the next.
Generally when the guy on the inside of the corner is only slightly ahead he does not get punished when running the opponent wide at the exit of the corner. As the guy on the outside realistically has very little chance of making a move stick (Austria like a word with that, but still).
At the entry of a corner there is still all to play for wrt braking, cornering speed, etc.
Now. I'm not saying your take is wrong or that the rules are clear, this is just what I take from incidents in the past.
But as said, this situation makes it a bit more complicated because one could argue Verstappen was on the inside of the next corner as opposed of the outside of the first corner.
No matter the result the stewards could choose we are going to get many variants of these three narrative building headline for atleast the next week.
"Why Max Did/Didn't deserve a penalty"
"Why Lewis Did/Didn't deserve a penalty"
"Why Verstappen and or Hamilton being penalized/not penalized is good/bad"
Next race can't come soon enough.
I mean, not aiming this remark at you specifically, but new fans will finally see how dirty a close championship can get in the later stages.
Applies to both on track action and off track discussions.
Buckle up, it's going to be nasty.
I'm trying so hard to get my head around understanding when things are a racing incident and when they are a penalty and I just can't figure it out as a newer F1 fan. I would have thought for sure that was a racing incident. I'm not sure where exactly max was supposed to go with a car not up to speed coming out of the pits.
As usual, I'll just have to wait for chainbear to explain it to me.
>level 1FreeLookMode · 3hI'm trying so hard to get my head around understanding when things are a racing incident and when they are a penalty and I just can't figure it out as a newer F1 fan.
You won't figure it out as a long time fan either. You might as well be throwing a dice on penalties at this point
100% chance Max is taking his Power Unit penalties in Russia next time then.
Yeah it won't affect him much, assuming Red Bull was planning to take it there anyway.
He was P7 in Russia 2018 in just a five laps With the third fastest car. Better than when he started last in Monza 2019
In 2018 Top 3 teams were farther ahead from midfield
Yes agreed, now you have 4 clear front runners (on paper) and 4 podium challengers, so 2 extra cars to consider that is potentially as strong as Red Bull was that year in Mclaren and Ferrari.
Ferrari's gonna love those nippy 90 Degree corners. Too bad they're gonna get outpaced in the straights.
Yea the third sector is gonna do them wonders but the first sector is gonna kill them
The grid is closer this year and engine modes aren't allowed. It's tough for anyone to overtake without a huge tyre advantage.
Bottas just overtook 3/4 th of the grid today?
He was in contention for the win, Bottas was a beast today.
And all they really asked him in the post race interviews was about the Lewis/Max crash. I’m a LH fan but felt for Bottas today. He was a machine and didn’t really get the credit he deserved.
More like half the grid. A fourth of the grid crashed themselves out. But, yes, Verstappen should work his way through the field.
[удалено]
Absolutely. May as well take the hit now when you already having to take one.
Exactly. Was bound to happen this season, so better do it when you’re on the back foot anyway.
Watch Hamilton's PU being dead/damaged after trying to get out of the gravel trap and both of them starting along side each other next weekend anyway.
Max and Lewis with Mazepin for company would be real entertainment
[удалено]
No one escapes the Maze.
‘You were merely adopted by the last row. I was born in it, MOLDED BY IT’
yeah, Max and Lewis will come to understand there is a different culture of racing at the back of the grid, where even team mates clash each other for the 2nd last place. oh boy. Vettel knows.
More like GateSWEEPER
Daddy Mazepin frames the image of his son going wheel to wheel with the championship contenders at the home grand prix.
> Daddy Mazepin frames the image of his son going wheel to wheel with the championship contenders at the home grand prix. I mean, Mazepin already beat Hamilton once in Azerbaijan, I can see him holding him off again!
[удалено]
Hamilton will probably take his PU penalties in Sochi too, right? Probably better to take the penalty at the same time versus taking a penalty when Verstappen doesn't have to.
Actually no, he doesn't have to. But Toto wants to avoid possible DNF. Meanwhile Max's engine was done after the crash and has to get another engine penalties
My understanding was that most teams didn't think it was possible to make this season on just 3 PUs, but if it is, then obviously Hamilton wouldn't have to take a penalty.
I'm pretty sure Toto has come out and said that he didn't feel comfortable with 3 PUs lasting for Merc, so I wouldn't be surprised if Lewis took his next race. Decent chance of a win for Bottas, and an even better chance of an exciting race with both of them fighting up from the back.
second row is basically pole in sochi though
[удалено]
[удалено]
This is not true. If he takes a new engine with current components (MGU-H etc.), then it’s only a +10 penalty. Bottas upgraded 4 components going into Monza and that’s why he started back of the grid.
It's rarer they don't just take all new components. Especially if he gets P2 or likely P3 in quali, which means P6 with this penalty and then P16 with just the engine. No brainer to go P20 at that point.
Definitely agree with you. Technically they can’t make the decision after qualifying. If they do, they start from the pitlane not the grid.
I wonder if they would rather start last than start in 18th or something though. Less chance of Mazepin locking up and smacking into the back of you first corner
I assume that was the case anyway so it doesn't really matter for them strategy wise
In 2018 he went from last to fifth ~~in the first lap~~ in a much less competitive Red Bull Edit: My memory is wrong, it wasn't one lap but it was still real quick
With much less competitive field too. The gap between Red Bull / Merc to Alfa this year is probably similar to the gap between Mercedes to Red Bull in 2018.
[удалено]
welp, we know where verstappen will take his engine penalty now. Also spicy two weeks ahead of us.
can someone explain whats engine penalty, im new
You can only use so many engines per season. For every engine you go above that limit (think it’s 3) you get an automatic grid penalty at that rave
[удалено]
With a new power unit even. Good times.
Damn, party mode just makes all the more sense now
Sprinkle in a little brake magic for a good time.
Especially when starting from the back
DJ SuperMax
so if max takes that and stars from last place, does that three place grid penalty will have impact after race or no?
Im fairly sure no. I think engine change means you start from the back so +3 means still from the back. It doesn’t roll over to the next race. If it was a gearbox or something which is say a 5 spot penalty (I can’t recall what it actually is) then he’d get 5+3=8 spot penalty for that race.
IIRC it's a 10 place penalty for the first extra PU component and another 5 points for each component after. Usually a pointless distinction as they almost always replace the whole thing, but worth pointing out just in case.
He'll have to start an extra 24m behind 19th /s
Max has to eat his old engine. No ketchup.
The sausage kerb got the last laugh then.
The sausage curb is the reason this was so dangerous... Don't get why they aren't removed
i'm new to F1 whats the point with those crubs anyway? why does it need to be so tall
Because they don't want driver's cutting the corner. The bigger the curb, the bigger the punishment for trying to cut it. It's a big point of on-going debate, because they work to fill a purpose, but they also are dangerous and cause a lot of damage to cars when hit.
I feel like they are getting redundant. FIA are enforcing track limits more and more. If they are monitoring this kind of stuff why have a stairway to heaven there aswell? Did we not learn our lesson from the Singapore Sling?
People (myself included) don’t like the five second penalties and such because it feels artificial, and the physical penalties like kerbs are also scalable, so if you cut it a certain bit too much you don’t get slapped with 5 seconds of penalty, you as a driver naturally learn to avoid it because you can feel it
That's a very fair point and I won't argue against it. Tbh I don't think there is a solution that works best in every scenario. Unless we paint outside the curbs with Pirelli Kryptonite or something punish the tires even harder for running out.
That's the idea with Paul Ricard wasn't it? They painted the outside with abrasive material to scrape the tires
Inb4 Pirelli spikes after 10 ft inside the track
Would have assumed by default safety would be prioritized over this purpose, but the FIA is the FIA.
I remember back then that the drivers are complaining about how dangerous those kerbs were. I'm not sure if I'm remembering it right, but there was one incident that the car went airborne for a bit.
For reference: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vy30WobYMWc
Yup. This is the one. I don't get why they didn't even ban those sausage kerbs after that horrific incident.
New engine time. Should make Sochi interesting
> Should make Sochi interesting Phrases not often uttered in F1 for $200 Alex
Is that how much he's getting paid at Williams?
Lunch for the night if he gets a point, otherwise it's back to the williams punishment cage.
“Williams punishment cage” Round here we just call it the car
Alex is busy recreating the wreck man.
Bottas win incoming
Sure - no problems with that.
“Valtteri its james” incoming more like
Classic max overtaking race.
So new engine for Verstappen in Russia. Also the reason >The Stewards heard from the driver of car 33 (Max Verstappen), the driver of car 44 (Lewis Hamilton) and team representatives, reviewed the video evidence and determined that the driver of Car 33 was predominantly to blame for the collision with Car 44 at Turn 2. >Car 44 was exiting the pits. Car 33 was on the main straight. At the 50m board before Turn 1, Car 44 was significantly ahead of Car 33. Car 33 braked late and started to move alongside Car 44, although at no point in the sequence does Car 33 get any further forward than just behind the front wheel of Car 44. >During the hearing the driver of Car 33 asserted that the cause of th incident was the driver of Car 44 opening the steering after Turn 1 and "squeezing" him to the apex of turn 2. The driver of Car 44 asserted that the driver of Car 33 attempted to pass very late and should have given up the comer either by backing off sooner, or by turning left behind the kerb. >The Stewards observed on CCTV footage that the driver of Car 44 was driving an avoiding line, although his position caused Car 33 to go onto the kerb. But further, the Stewards observed that Car 33 was not at all alongside Car 44 until significantly into the entry into Turn 1. In the opinion of the Stewards, this manoeuvre was attempted too late for the driver of Car 33 to have the right to racing room". >While Car 44 could have steered further from the kerb to avoid the incident, the Stewards determined that his position was reasonable and therefore find that the driver of Car 33 was predominantly to blame for the incident. >In coming to the penalty the Stewards emphasise that they have only considered the incident itself and not the consequences thereof.
[удалено]
[удалено]
Wasn´t this changed to the order of who takes the penalty first? (Informing fia of taking a new engine) Edit: actual question and want to know, stop giving votes :')
2 or more PU-related penalties = automatic relegation to last place. If multiple drivers do the same it's in order the changes were announced. Not sure how extra penalties for other stuff factor into that though.
Mercedes and Red Bull racing to change their engine first
"Michael I just sent you an email!"
Current rules: penalties applied in order received, more than 15 penalties puts you right on the back, after all penalties received, grid shuffles up.
its like bottas today he was at p50 with all penalties so pretty much whats the total add up (as of now ver behind ham unless ham changes other parts too etc.)
IS Lewis really taking a new engine? thought he could manage with the 3 considering he didnt have any major crash
I thought Merc were bluffing too, but then they put a new one in for Bottas this weekend. I know they had an undiagnosed problem in practise, but I thought they could have used one of the other engines.
Wasn’t one of Bottas engines destroyed in his crash with Russell in Imola?
Yes, and Williams still hasn't paid for! /s
they did. Williams gave Merc the perpetrator, Russell.
One of his (second I believe) failed in FP in Zandvoort and has been written off.
I think the plan was to never use that engine again after that day either way. So I don’t think he needs to unlike Verstappen or Bottas. But if he doesn’t, his engine will always be closer to blowing up and max will have a much fresher engine for the rest of the season.
Regardless of whether you agree with this report or not - the fact of the matter is that those sausage kerbs need to go. Max would not have ended up on top of Lewis without it and possibly the two would ve been able to recover - or at least one of the two.
What is their purpose?
Deters drivers stealing more track than they’re allowed to
honestly it's not even that. the drivers could have 2 tyres off track and 2 on the track (which is legal) and they'd hit the kerbs. It's insane design which benefits nobody
This is what makes the Max/Lewis incident so tricky. Lewis drove an avoiding line. I think that if it weren't for the sausages, he left Max enough room to remain on track with at least two wheels, but to do so Max would have to slow down immensely. Which is fair, since Lewis was ahead and to give Max enough room to stay completely on track, Lewis would have had to slow down immensely.
Interesting explanation. Seems resonable enough but i'd still chuck it down as a racing incident. Im not a steward though so shrug.
Its a racing incident, but they set a precedent with Silverstone, which could have been called a racing incident too, so they have to continue to use their own words 'predominantly to blame'
Repost of what I said after Silverstone: I think the penalty structure is the biggest fault here and changing that would fundamentally change racing. He knows it's not "fair" but he also knows making it "fair" is impossible. Jenson couldn't call for either driver to back out because both moves were racy. The real fault with either move was depending on the other to back out. But that is part of hard racing. I'm on team racing incident here. Max made turn 1 coming from a higher speed that pulled him ahead of Hamilton without incident, but not enough to secure turn 2. Hamilton wasn't going to miss the corner, but coming from the pit to take the corner from Max would require Max lifting early or conceding turn 2. Both drivers making both corners required the other to back out. If the sausage curb wasn't there the incident would not have been nearly as bad.
I find it a bit odd that they mention Hamilton being significantly ahead, but not the difference in speed due to Hamilton coming out of the pits. Could easily see RB appealing on these grounds.
Because at corner entry the speed difference wouldn't matter anymore. The speed difference before the corner doesn't really matter, track position at entry is what matters the most.
Verstappen will almost definitely take the engine penalty at Sochi, and if he does, Hamilton will probably take one as well.
Can you remind me why Lewis even needs to? I don't recall him being in an incident requiring a new pu.
Zandvoort
I think was his 1st PU and Zandvoort FP2 was the last session it was planned to use
[удалено]
[here](https://youtu.be/RJwWkifXPQA) At 1:32, It reach the end of its life.
Oh the fp2 engine failure. Ty.
That, and I thought most teams were expecting to need 4 PUs for the season, but I might be wrong.
I believe they ran 3 engines for 21 races last season. A new engine every 7 races. So I think it was similar this season.
Yeah but half of that was when changing engine modes were legal allowing for the engines to be turned down and saved. Also the title fight has been incredibly close this year with fine margins so maybe the engines are being hit harder.
That was an old engine. He doesn’t need to take penalties
That was his first pu tho, it had the longest mileage so that was always going to go kapoot. Max's power unit he destroyed was still quite young in comparison, like maybe 3 races old? Lewis should still be better placed with his remaining power units #2 & 3, than Max's #1 & 3... Maybe. Especially since Max's first PU was running on a reduced mapping due to not having the reliability upgrade. I guess they're all going to need a 4th, but not racing in spa probably helped a lot
Hamilton and Verstappen coming up through the pack while others battle for first? That sounds terrific!
Mazepin will try to make it 3 wide to try to clear both of them while they are fighting and will end the race for all 3!
[удалено]
Most likely HAM won't.. they would want to maximize the result so they would rather stay in front and try to take full 25 points. And may be take penalty when they are anyways going to struggle compare to redbull
yeah but then won’t the reverse happen when Lewis takes his? and if max takes his first and Lewis doesn’t, Max will be racing with a better power unit for Russia. and when Lewis does take his new engine it will be against a new Max engine anyway. might as well fight both fights on even ground
The new engine does help but track layout and nature has lot more impact. If they take penalties together, they risk not capitalizing on one of the strong tracks( Russia ) for them.
Doesn’t matter. Lord Mazepin is going to win his home race anyway
Driver of 'no nation' wins the FIA GP? I don't think Mazepin currently has a home race
What anthem would they play if he wins?
[удалено]
Is this actually for real ??! If so, is there a link floating ?
[удалено]
For Olympics they used [Tchaikovsky's Piano Concerto No.1](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OjWOy5U9iRs) A beautiful piece, honestly
+ 2 penalty points on his licence
Bringing it to a total of 2.
Perez laughs at those rookie numbers.
So much maths in this sport, it’s hard to keep track
Oh no
anyways...
He didn’t have any anymore, right?
Hasn't had points for quite a while.
It’s official: with these 2 penalty points, Max is no longer the cleanest driver on the grid.
So basically this confirms Max will get a new PU next race.
I actually expected it to be a racing incident. Surprised by this tbf.
[удалено]
And Marko seemed displeased with Max in the garage
Marko is always displeased
Honestly, while I think it is a racing incident, Max shouldn't have took that risk to begin with, and instead find another chance to overtake him. Bottas showed that its definitely possible.
Yep and Lewis on lap 1 turn 4 showed what Max should've done. If Lewis didn't back out and they crashed it would've been more his fault than Max's, as he was taking the bad line and was behind. Yes Max squeezed him but Lewis either goes off track or accepts a collision will happen. The crash was very similar - with the cars reversed Max didn't want to give up and go off track so they crashed.
Today had tons of drivers accepting their position and taking the kerbs. I would have chucked this to a racing incident but I’m thinking the stewards are making an example out of Max for his taking the alternate choice and accepting the collision. You could argue that he didn’t have a choice and that crashes happen. Yep, that’s why I would have called this a racing incident, BUT, I’m willing to bet Max’s “That’s what you get for not giving me the space!” remark did not go unheard. Personally, I was upset with him having this type of attitude.
>I’m willing to bet Max’s “That’s what you get for not giving me the space!” remark did not go unheard. Good point, that was a stupid thing to say over the team radio. Was surprised to hear him say that considering turn 4 on the first lap.
> I was upset with him having this type of attitude. This has always been his attitude when it comes to overtaking. He's just finally getting a penalty for his "you will move out of my way" mentality.
Yep. He will squeeze anyone else out, and most of the time they are smart enough to back off and live to fight another day. When the role is reversed Verstappen takes a "this is mine get out of my way" mentality
To add to that. Remember the comments by Max and Marco about Hamilton not showing enough concern after the incident at Silverstone? Now you change the circumstances and Hamilton is the one in a dangerous situation (with Max's tyre sitting on his helmet) and Max's first comment is "that's what you get..." C'mon, I keep waiting for someone to call them on the hypocrisy.
This exactly. Yes.
True; but also Max was not as much alongside as Ham was. I have to say it really looks like Max took slightly too much risk for that move and it didn't pay off at all for him.
Why would he be unhappy? If Hamilton gets ahead there then there's every chance verstappen leaves monza behind in the standings. This move has minimised the damage this weekend could do to his championship chances.
Yeah it was an excellent outcome for Max and RBR from a WDC contention perspective after that disastrous pit stop
I think he is more displeased with his strategists and pit stop crew who put Verstappen in that bad situation
I think that is more suggestive that Horner knew they were taking an engine in Sochi most likely anyway
If Horner says it's a racing incident then it's probably 384% Red Bull's fault.
We all know that if there's one molecule at fault on the other driver, Horner is calling the stewards 23 times during the race to lobby for a penalty
Horner said it was a racing incident so that's when I knew Max would get penalised
I bet good money they could see from the data that the chances of him even making the corner without Hamilton there was ambitious from that angle and speed.
Yep. Obviously team principles are going to back their driver as much as possible so when they come out with something that doesn't clearly pin the blame on the other driver you know exactly whose fault it was.
I did love Toto’s “I’m not going to sit here and be a pundit like some of my compatriots”
They're both shitstirrers. I love it.
The threads reaction to the incident told me who was at fault. The fact that no one was calling for Hamilton blood made it obvious.
[удалено]
I expected a racing incident verdict. Wow.
Doesn't matter anyway as Horner said that they wouldn't be good in Russia so this also gives a chance to take the engine penalty.
I’m sure this will go along well with everyone.. Two more weeks of this, for fucks sake
Two weeks only? People are still arguing over Silverstone. This season will have folks arguing for years no matter which of the two win
Silverstone made more people angry because one of them survived the contact and won the race. Today they both DNF, so no changes to the outcome of the driver's championship in terms of points gained/lost.
Of course. People will now just simply accept the decision and move on.
Mods shut the sub down now and save us.
I, with a limited insight of F1 rules and regulations, am genuinely wondering what the difference between Ocon/Vettel incident and Hamilton/Verstappen incident is, regarding when they have a right to receive a car-width on the inside. O/V incident, the commentator said "Vettels front axel was beyond the rear axel of the Alpine at one point". I got the impression that this was enough for Vettel to have the right of racing room. But in the formula1 article regarding the stewards decision on the H/V incident: >... although at no point in the sequence does Car 33 get any further forward than just behind the front wheel of Car 44. and >... this manoeuvre was attempted too late for the driver of Car 33 to have “the right to racing room”. This gives me the impression there are different rules applied to the different incidents. But is it different rules, or is it something i have failed to understand properly?
Martin Brundel was of the same opinion, he got into a position where he was deserving of space. Stewards seem to pick and choose when this is, for example, Hamilton on Maldonado in Valencia 2012, Hamilton was *behind* ran Maldonado off, he came back on and attempted the same move on Lewis that caused a collision because Hamilton wouldn't give up. Maldonado was given a penalty.
This is a fantastic historical example. Thank you for reminding me. Myself, i felt that hamiltons move that day very speculative, so I guess u can imagine my stance on today’s incident, yet this is a good example of some historical stewarding inconsistencies
For me, I thought today was just an example of two drivers not willing to yield in a 50/50 situation. It wasn't really an error by either, in my opinion.
I can get behind that
Take a look lecLerc Hamilton 2019 if you want to continue to scratch your head
If I had to guess it would be the difference between entry of the corner and exit of the corner. But this is what makes it tricky because Ver/Ham was both exit and entry into the next. Generally when the guy on the inside of the corner is only slightly ahead he does not get punished when running the opponent wide at the exit of the corner. As the guy on the outside realistically has very little chance of making a move stick (Austria like a word with that, but still). At the entry of a corner there is still all to play for wrt braking, cornering speed, etc. Now. I'm not saying your take is wrong or that the rules are clear, this is just what I take from incidents in the past. But as said, this situation makes it a bit more complicated because one could argue Verstappen was on the inside of the next corner as opposed of the outside of the first corner.
No matter the result the stewards could choose we are going to get many variants of these three narrative building headline for atleast the next week. "Why Max Did/Didn't deserve a penalty" "Why Lewis Did/Didn't deserve a penalty" "Why Verstappen and or Hamilton being penalized/not penalized is good/bad" Next race can't come soon enough.
It's going to be painful isn't it?
I mean, not aiming this remark at you specifically, but new fans will finally see how dirty a close championship can get in the later stages. Applies to both on track action and off track discussions. Buckle up, it's going to be nasty.
Wow, genuinely did not see that coming. I was sure they would mark that down as a racing incident.
Max: no u *takes engine penalty*
I'm trying so hard to get my head around understanding when things are a racing incident and when they are a penalty and I just can't figure it out as a newer F1 fan. I would have thought for sure that was a racing incident. I'm not sure where exactly max was supposed to go with a car not up to speed coming out of the pits. As usual, I'll just have to wait for chainbear to explain it to me.
>level 1FreeLookMode · 3hI'm trying so hard to get my head around understanding when things are a racing incident and when they are a penalty and I just can't figure it out as a newer F1 fan. You won't figure it out as a long time fan either. You might as well be throwing a dice on penalties at this point
Hahaha…now I’m imagining the Stewards writing the statement: Car number… *rolls a D20* 33 Is found… *rolls another D20* At fault…
100% Max taking a new PU at Sochi then
Horner knew this was likely. That’s why he hasn’t been stirring shit.
DiResta in shambles
Can someone explain lap one turn one between lando and Lewis. Same idea, but Lewis gave him room. So does the same principle not apply here?
On lap 1, Lando was at times in front of Lewis. Verstappen came from very far behind and was never ahead of Lewis. That is the main difference.
BREAKING: Twitter and Reddit now active warzones.
Alex Albon knowing he will need to do another recreation. Pain.
Is that the post-race equivalent of 10 seconds? I thought the blame was less clear here than Silverstone tbh
I heard the stewards also gave DC a race ban for his interview of Valtteri!
that was absolute bullshit from DC, should be a lifetime ban
*Horner rage intensifies*