moo wrote:

TheFlyingDisk wrote:

moo wrote:

If he was as clueless as you think he was, why did he move so far off the racing line to the inside of turn 1? Obviously he was blocking somebody, ergo he must have know a collision was a possibility. He's been in enough races to know that some drivers start better than others. The reality is that it was an unnecessary risk. He didn't need to move so far across the track, and as a result he has to bear some responsibility.

I've seen many drivers squeezing the next car to get a better position for the first corner. Schumacher did it, even Hamilton did it. In fact Vettel didn't even touch Verstappen - his car was already clear of the Red Bull & if Verstappen had not moved further to the left he would also have missed Raikkonen. Both Ferraris would have made the first corner.

Oh, this bull again.

Vettel get what he deserved - no points. Of his own making. Nuff said really.

If Vettel hadn't moved over, all three cars would have made the corner.

Moving on...

Didn't you read what I've written? Vettel was clear of Verstappen before Verstappen collided with Raikkonen. Had Verstappen not moved further left he would have missed both Vettel & Raikkonen. To blame Vettel totally for what happened in Singapore is foolish, and to say that Hamilton wasn't lucky in Singapore is also denying what had happened.

Plus, what Vettel did had been done by other drivers before, even Hamilton.

moo wrote:

TheFlyingDisk wrote:

Rosberg won the GP2 championship the year before Hamilton but had to slum it with Williams for four years before joining Mercedes and enduring the long development period before it became what it is today. Is he not good enough that he had to grow their talent to F1 level?

Same goes for Vettel - sure he made his debut with BMW Sauber & impressed everyone with his speed, but once BMW left he had to slum it with Toro Rosso for two seasons. Is he not as talented that he is required to grow his talent by driving for a midfield team?

If both were as talented as Hamilton, why didn't they get snapped up by a front row team straight from a lower championship?

Hamilton delivered 4 wins, 12 podiums and 2nd place in the Drivers Championship in his maiden F1 year - if Rosberg and Vettel were capable of that, any front row team would have jumped on them.

Because they didn't have godfather Ron Dennis, which is important in the age of only one or two truly competitive teams. Sure Nico has his F1 World Champion father to pull some strings but I guess Keke's pull wasn't as strong as he'd like. As for Vettel, when BMW pulled out he lost out because it was BMW who got him into F1. Without it, and with the top teams locked tight he had to settle for Toro Rosso. At least Vettel proved his worth by winning in a car that was never going to win a race.

But to you and the others, that makes Rosberg & Vettel lesser drivers than Hamilton. That's what annoys me to no end, the gushing over Hamilton as if he has no peer.

Besides, Jacques Villeneuve did the exact same thing as Hamilton in his rookie season 21 years ago - so is Jacques Villeneuve in the same league as Lewis Hamilton?

moo wrote:

TheFlyingDisk wrote:

There's no doubt that Hamilton's talented, but to say he's far ahead of the others just because he won more races or got more poles doesn't do justice to the other drivers, especially since he had the best machine that allowed him to notch all those wins while the others were only able to scrabble for the scraps. That was what zkojq meant when it's not the spirit of F1.

Your point is? F1 isn't a spec sport - the cars aren't bought off the rack and intended to be identical.

If a driver cannot attract a team willing to put a race winning car at their finger tips, then that driver isn't deserving of having a race winning car at their fingertips. There is a *reason* the top teams *pay* their drivers rather than employ drivers that bring sponsorship.

If you want to bitch and moan about how unfair it is that some drivers have to slum it in second rate teams, then go watch a spec sport - and take your nonsense about "spirit" with you, because thats where it belongs.

This is F1. You seem to want something else.

You totally missed the point completely.

Well go ahead & enjoy the death of F1 because such attitude is the very reason why the sport is dying a slow death.

TheFlyingDisk wrote:

Didn't you read what I've written? Vettel was clear of Verstappen before Verstappen collided with Raikkonen. Had Verstappen not moved further left he would have missed both Vettel & Raikkonen.

I read what you wrote - I just don't give it any value.

The onboards don't agree with you:



Vettel isn't clear of Verstappens front wing there - and Verstappen had been moving left well before that point to avoid Vettel.

TheFlyingDisk wrote:

To blame Vettel totally for what happened in Singapore is foolish, and to say that Hamilton wasn't lucky in Singapore is also denying what had happened.

Oh give it a rest. Vettel ended up with what he deserved.

TheFlyingDisk wrote:

Plus, what Vettel did had been done by other drivers before, even Hamilton.

I haven't seen Hamiltons version of that manoeuvre end up with three wiped out cars...

Plenty of other drivers made it down that straight without incident, but that fact doesn't validate Vettels move either.

moo wrote:

Because they didn't have godfather Ron Dennis, which is important in the age of only one or two truly competitive teams. Sure Nico has his F1 World Champion father to pull some strings but I guess Keke's pull wasn't as strong as he'd like. As for Vettel, when BMW pulled out he lost out because it was BMW who got him into F1. Without it, and with the top teams locked tight he had to settle for Toro Rosso. At least Vettel proved his worth by winning in a car that was never going to win a race.

I still don't see a point in there. Someone saw an up and coming driver worth investing in, and that investment paid off.

Hamilton in a second tier team would have been a waste. Rosberg and Vettel, not so much really.

TheFlyingDisk wrote:

But to you and the others, that makes Rosberg & Vettel lesser drivers than Hamilton. That's what annoys me to no end, the gushing over Hamilton as if he has no peer.

So we have a favourite - I'm not about to apologise for that, just because you are offended by it. Thats *your* problem.

TheFlyingDisk wrote:

Besides, Jacques Villeneuve did the exact same thing as Hamilton in his rookie season 21 years ago - so is Jacques Villeneuve in the same league as Lewis Hamilton?

Right off the back of winning the 1995 Indy Car World Series - *slightly* different to coming in from a lower tier. And Villeneuve is certainly a damn fine driver.

TheFlyingDisk wrote:

You totally missed the point completely.

Well go ahead & enjoy the death of F1 because such attitude is the very reason why the sport is dying a slow death.

Just because I don't agree with you doesn't mean I miss the point at all - I just don't agree with you. If you don't like that, then I echo my above sentiment - thats *your* problem, not mine.

I managed to go away, have a nice relaxing holiday without giving one thought to you and your views - and yet you jump straight back into the same old argument the moment I resurface.

Do you have a little problem, perhaps? Can't let things go maybe? Got some resentment issues? A little bitter about something?

Maybe thats something you need to dwell on, rather than this.

zckls04 wrote:

Hate to break it to you granddad, but Williams aren't a top team

They'd be on a similar level as Force India this year if they had a competent driver lineup. Instead they have a 36 year old who's well past his prime and an 18 year old pay driver. Williams is by no means a Sauber/Minadi/Manor/Caterham.

zckls04 wrote:

A racing incident which could have been avoided

Could have been avoided by Verstappen too. If the Vettel haters are saying that he could see Kimi, then Verstappen would have been able to see both of them and could have tapped the brake pedal to avoid disaster.

moo wrote:

These are the most ridiculous words in this thread.

Nope, that was another user above suggesting that winning a race every season is a relevant metric when comparing drivers.

TheFlyingDisk wrote:

There's no doubt that Hamilton's talented, but to say he's far ahead of the others just because he won more races or got more poles doesn't do justice to the other drivers, especially since he had the best machine that allowed him to notch all those wins while the others were only able to scrabble for the scraps. That was what zkojq meant when it's not the spirit of F1.

moo wrote:

If both were as talented as Hamilton, why didn't they get snapped up by a front row team straight from a lower championship?

The same reason that Hulkenberg, who had better junior results than Hamilton had to start from a non top tier team??

TheFlyingDisk wrote:

Didn't you read what I've written? Vettel was clear of Verstappen before Verstappen collided with Raikkonen. Had Verstappen not moved further left he would have missed both Vettel & Raikkonen. To blame Vettel totally for what happened in Singapore is foolish, and to say that Hamilton wasn't lucky in Singapore is also denying what had happened.

Yes, but the brits you're arguing with and they're never going to listen to reason when it comes to implicating one of Hamilton's championship contenders. I remember how strong the hate was for Rosberg on all the F1 forums this time last year.

Anyway, time to talk about more positive things; there's going to be a Kiwi in F1 for the first time in many years. Something to celebrate for sure.

TheFlyingDisk wrote:

As for Vettel, when BMW pulled out he lost out because it was BMW who got him into F1. Without it, and with the top teams locked tight he had to settle for Toro Rosso.

Erm, no. Vettel was a Red Bull driver since the age of 11. He was released from Sauber back to the Red Bull stable, he didn't "settle" for Toro Rosso.

zkojq wrote:

They'd be on a similar level as Force India this year

In other words, they're not a top team. And haven't been for nearly 15 years. Top teams win races. Williams don't.

zkojq wrote:

Could have been avoided by Verstappen too. If the Vettel haters are saying that he could see Kimi, then Verstappen would have been able to see both of them and could have tapped the brake pedal to avoid disaster.

In which case the car behind him would have gone straight into the back of him.

But in any case, for Verstappen it was a sensible risk to take because, and I'll stress this, he was not in the hunt for a WDC. Vettel was. You're still arguing about whose *fault* it was. Nobody except the stewards care about that, and they decided it did not merit further action. What I'm talking about is whether it was smart for Vettel to take the risk that he did. IMO the outcome shows pretty clearly that it was not.

TheFlyingDisk wrote:

Plus, what Vettel did had been done by other drivers before, even Hamilton.

I'm sure he has. But has he done it when in a close championship battle? That's what matters.

TheFlyingDisk wrote:

But to you and the others, that makes Rosberg & Vettel lesser drivers than Hamilton. That's what annoys me to no end, the gushing over Hamilton as if he has no peer.

I think you're hearing something that isn't there. People are allowed to have favorite drivers, and sometimes they aren't going to be your favorite driver. Why does that hurt you so much? Maybe, as moo suggests, the problem is on your end.

Well go ahead & enjoy the death of F1 because such attitude is the very reason why the sport is dying a slow death.

Explain why please. I am very skeptical that you can link the two.

zckls04 wrote:

TheFlyingDisk wrote:

Plus, what Vettel did had been done by other drivers before, even Hamilton.

I'm sure he has. But has he done it when in a close championship battle? That's what matters.

Hamilton moved across to his right at the start of the Japanese GP to cover off Vettel. However, there were several distinct differences:

1 - HAM made a good start (unlike VET's so-so start in Singapore)

2 - HAM was clearly ahead of VET before he moved across to cover him (unlike VET's situation in Singapore)

3 - There was nobody else gaining on HAM (unlike VET who had both VER & RAI gaining on him)

4 - HAM knew VET would not want to risk contact (unlike VET who should have known that VER had no reason to back down)

In all likelihood, had VET not felt the need to try and prevent VER beating him to the first corner, he could have gone into the first corner in third place, knowing full well that the worst he'd finish would be second. Mind you, it would have been interesting to see what Ferrari would have done if RAI was leading followed by VER, VET & HAM! I suspect they would have given VET the undercut to try and get him past VER. Of course, poor old RAI would then have been sacrificed and probably end up fourth.

scbriml wrote:

2 - HAM was clearly ahead of VET before he moved across to cover him (unlike VET's situation in Singapore)

The onboard shows just how much room for error he left:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N-wcYfebgWQ

zckls04 wrote:

The onboard shows just how much room for error he left:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N-wcYfebgWQ

Yes, VET didn't need to lift or change direction in the slightest. Perfect example of protecting your pole into the first corner.

Verstappen signed for a further three years at Red Bull.

https://www.telegraaf.nl/sport/872736/v ... medio-2020

petertenthije wrote:

Verstappen signed for a further three years at Red Bull.

https://www.telegraaf.nl/sport/872736/v ... medio-2020

Good for him, good for Red Bull, now let the Dutch grand-prix become a reality at Amsterdam West Race Circuit.

HAM dominates FP1 & FP2 in Austin. VET struggling in FP2 and only completed 11 laps complaining that the front end "felt like jelly".

First session in F1 for 30+ years that had a Kiwi in it and already beating the Aussies.


Sadly they got the flag wrong.

HAM "lucked" into another pole.
He did that 72 times already....
Interesting grid for tomorrow.

No Tax On Rotax

notaxonrotax wrote:

HAM "lucked" into another pole.
He did that 72 times already....
Interesting grid for tomorrow.

No Tax On Rotax

Yes, Japan Part 2. Let's hope it lasts longer than a couple of laps.

Congrats to HAM.

Not too bad from VER either.
Shame about his penalty.....a time penalty should be applied AFTER the podium.
Don`t embarrass 2 drivers in the process...and I bet half of the fans running on the track were surprised too.

Some on here claim RIC is better in racing than VER, so can`t wait what will happen next year!


No Tax On Rotax

Wow, Verstappen making it through the whole field to 3rd without crashing with someone!

Just kidding,he has been growing as a driver, and today it really showed. !

And for HAM, just another "lucky" day in the office

B747forever wrote:

Wow, Verstappen making it through the whole field to 3rd without crashing with someone!

He’s already a good driver. Now he needs to learn to suck up to race control so he won’t get these idiot time penalties. He was on the curbs, but not over the white lines.

petertenthije wrote:

B747forever wrote:

Wow, Verstappen making it through the whole field to 3rd without crashing with someone!

He’s already a good driver. Now he needs to learn to suck up to race control so he won’t get these idiot time penalties. He was on the curbs, but not over the white lines.

If he wasn't over the white lines, he was still on the track.

The penalty he received was for leaving the track and gaining an advantage.

So the stewards think he did leave the track, and the only way to do that is to go over the white lines at that point....

moo wrote:

So the stewards think he did leave the track, and the only way to do that is to go over the white lines at that point....

i have now seen a few reruns, he was over the lines. So the ruling is justified.

That having been said, while the penalty is justified, it is also inconsistent. Both during the race and qualifying several drivers went fully on the curbs.

Ooh well, Ferrari International Assistance strikes again.

Congrats to Hamilton, another masterclass drive. Lost out to Vettel at the start but later went past him like he was in reverse! He now just needs one 5th place from the last three races to become a four times WDC.

petertenthije wrote:

He was on the curbs, but not over the white lines.

Afraid not, he clearly had all four wheels off the track, cutting the corner to overtake Raikkonen. The only thing that shocked me was how quickly the stewards made the decision. Sadly, I think it was the correct one. That said, I wish the FIA would be consistent on the whole exceeding the track limits thing. Either it's a rule or it isn't.

petertenthije wrote:

i have now seen a few reruns, he was over the lines. So the ruling is justified.

That having been said, while the penalty is justified, it is also inconsistent. Both during the race and qualifying several drivers went fully on the curbs.

He was penalised because he completed an overtake by leaving the track and cutting the corner. If Raikkonen had taken the same line, Verstappen wouldn't have been able to pass him.


In the end Raikkonen nearly lost 3rd by easing up too much - he only finished 0.9 seconds ahead of Verstappen!

Post race Hamilton made a good point saying there should be grass inside the kerbs, then drivers would stick to track limits! In the picture above, replace the red concrete/tarmac with grass and Verstappen is not going there.

The problems with this decision of the stewards is:

-They messed up the whole pre-podium cool down and podium procedure...I bet a lot of fans didn't even know when RAI walked out there initially.
It made RAI & VET uncomfortable, I guess.

-They applied the penalty within minutes, which is unheard of so close to the end of a race.

-Other drivers left the track too. When do we apply the rules and when not?

No Tax On Rotax

As I said, after reruns I also saw the ruling is justified. Dutch tv has a major hard-on for Max and where immediately shouting foul.

I stand by my comment that, while justified, the penalty is inconsistent.

notaxonrotax wrote:

The problems with this decision of the stewards is:

-They messed up the whole pre-podium cool down and podium procedure...I bet a lot of fans didn't even know when RAI walked out there initially.
It made RAI & VET uncomfortable, I guess.

-They applied the penalty within minutes, which is unheard of so close to the end of a race.

-Other drivers left the track too. When do we apply the rules and when not?

No Tax On Rotax

I don't think they "messed up the podium". How many times have we watched a podium presentation, then hours later learned that the result was changed because of a stewards' decision? I'm glad it was resolved quickly, even given that it resulted in some possible confusion for the fans. At the end of the day, the correct three drivers were on the podium. Why should Raikkonen be denied that pleasure and recognition?

As above, Verstappen was penalised because he was only able to complete the pass by cutting the corner and leaving the track. I agree there's a long, inglorious history of inconsistent application of the rules, but IMHO in this case I think they got it right.

notaxonrotax wrote:

-They applied the penalty within minutes, which is unheard of so close to the end of a race.

Not really unheard of, it happened to Verstappen at last years Mexican GP - Verstappen was stripped of third while in the cool down room, replaced by Vettel who was stripped after the podium ceremony. Ricciardo eventually ended up with third place but no appearance on the podium.

moo wrote:

notaxonrotax wrote:

-They applied the penalty within minutes, which is unheard of so close to the end of a race.

Not really unheard of, it happened to Verstappen at last years Mexican GP - Verstappen was stripped of third while in the cool down room, replaced by Vettel who was stripped after the podium ceremony. Ricciardo eventually ended up with third place but no appearance on the podium.

A certain race steward isn't really a fan of Verstappen....

marcelh wrote:

moo wrote:

notaxonrotax wrote:

-They applied the penalty within minutes, which is unheard of so close to the end of a race.

Not really unheard of, it happened to Verstappen at last years Mexican GP - Verstappen was stripped of third while in the cool down room, replaced by Vettel who was stripped after the podium ceremony. Ricciardo eventually ended up with third place but no appearance on the podium.

A certain race steward isn't really a fan of Verstappen....

The stewards are typically different for each race, as they are provided by the track and not the FIA or anyone to do with F1. It's become standard to invite a former driver to be on the stewarding panel for a race but it's not compulsory.

marcelh wrote:

A certain race steward isn't really a fan of Verstappen....

Christian Horner hinted at the same. He'd have a point if the decision was down to just one steward, but it wasn't.

All those complaining about the decision need to answer one very simple question - did Verstappen break the rules in order to pass Raikkonen and gain an advantage?

Alternatively, if the positions had been reversed and Raikkonen had passed Verstappen to snatch 3rd, would you have been happy if the stewards had not punished Raikkonen?

If Verstappen's pass had happened in the middle of the race and not on the second last corner, he would have been told to give the place back to Raikkonen.

scbriml wrote:

marcelh wrote:

A certain race steward isn't really a fan of Verstappen....

All those complaining about the decision need to answer one very simple question - did Verstappen break the rules in order to pass Raikkonen and gain an advantage?

Scrbriml, I know you don`t like VER....and don`t count me as a particular fan either.
But you know very well that the problem is the inconsistency of the stewards that is being questioned.
Not just by me, I mean by Alexander Wurz; Niki Lauda etc.
Why does VER "break the rules", while others have not (supposedly).

What is VER to do?
He had to drive around BOT who had left the track completely while being overtaken.
No issues at all, no warning being issued by the stewards.
The guy finds the limits......and I bet he will be controversial his whole career.

scbriml wrote:

marcelh wrote:

A certain race steward isn't really a fan of Verstappen....

Alternatively, if the positions had been reversed and Raikkonen had passed Verstappen to snatch 3rd, would you have been happy if the stewards had not punished Raikkonen?

Yes, I would have been.
They should not take these decisions in such a rushed way.
Normally penalties take a few laps to be issued.

The decision of the stewards is controversial, to say the least; based on the number of cars leaving the track that race.
So it is surprising that they took the decision that quick and lightheartedly.
The normal way to go is to take the decision after the ceremony is said and done.

Yes, this swapping in the cooldown room has been done before but in the LARGE majority of the cases penalties were issued afterwards......
It was awkward in the cool down room and I bet a lot of people standing under the podium had no idea what was going on.
Not good.


No Tax On Rotax

notaxonrotax wrote:

Scrbriml, I know you don`t like VER....and don`t count me as a particular fan either.
But you know very well that the problem is the inconsistency of the stewards that is being questioned.

I really don't have any great issue with VER. But he reminds me of HAM in his first few seasons - lots of controversies and penalties. I've agreed that inconsistency in the application of the rules reflects badly on F1.

Track limits is a very frustrating area for the casual spectator. Maybe they really need to do something to discourage the drivers from cutting the corners? However, with so few teams & drivers in F1 these days, I don't want to return to the days were any driver who leaves the track for whatever reason ends up out of the race.

To the best of my knowledge, clearly cutting a corner to overtake another driver has always been punished by the stewards and is a different situation to most of the other 'off track' incidents in the race.

notaxonrotax wrote:

The guy finds the limits......and I bet he will be controversial his whole career.

I suspect he'll 'calm down' a bit and become a consistently fast driver.

IMHO, the stewards made the correct decision. Also IMHO better to make that decision quickly (given timing of the incident) and have the correct drivers on the podium.

scbriml wrote:

notaxonrotax wrote:

Scrbriml, I know you don`t like VER....and don`t count me as a particular fan either.
But you know very well that the problem is the inconsistency of the stewards that is being questioned.

I really don't have any great issue with VER. But he reminds me of HAM in his first few seasons - lots of controversies and penalties. I've agreed that inconsistency in the application of the rules reflects badly on F1.

Track limits is a very frustrating area for the casual spectator. Maybe they really need to do something to discourage the drivers from cutting the corners? However, with so few teams & drivers in F1 these days, I don't want to return to the days were any driver who leaves the track for whatever reason ends up out of the race.

To the best of my knowledge, clearly cutting a corner to overtake another driver has always been punished by the stewards and is a different situation to most of the other 'off track' incidents in the race.


IMHO, the stewards made the correct decision. Also IMHO better to make that decision quickly (given timing of the incident) and have the correct drivers on the podium.

Wise words, SCBRIML!

I hope you're right about VER.

I disagree with you on how quick this penalty was awarded. I saw that the decision was made like 30 seconds after the incident happened.
Ridiculously quick, and it does make it look like conspiracy behavior.
Sainz also left the track while overtaking Perez.
Other cars probably gained advantage by leaving the track too.
And yet within 30 seconds it was decided that this incident was punishable?

Mike Andretti was fuming too, this was very controversial; mate!

No Tax On Rotax

P.S:

Track limits should be discouraged by some stuff that will stick on your tires or something, haha!

scbriml wrote:

I suspect he'll 'calm down' a bit and become a consistently fast driver.

IMHO, the stewards made the correct decision. Also IMHO better to make that decision quickly (given timing of the incident) and have the correct drivers on the podium.

According to the rule - leaving the track and gaining an advantage - the stewards made the correct decision.
But why didn't receive Sainz also a 5 second penalty while he overtook Ocon in the same turn? He had also left the track completely, but din't received a penalty.

marcelh wrote:

scbriml wrote:

I suspect he'll 'calm down' a bit and become a consistently fast driver.

IMHO, the stewards made the correct decision. Also IMHO better to make that decision quickly (given timing of the incident) and have the correct drivers on the podium.

According to the rule - leaving the track and gaining an advantage - the stewards made the correct decision.
But why didn't receive Sainz also a 5 second penalty while he overtook Ocon in the same turn? He had also left the track completely, but din't received a penalty.

Why not, indeed?
And others that gained by leaving the track?

Apparently VER got into trouble due to his choice of words in Dutch, describing the FIA steward.
He then apologized......luckily.

No Tax On Rotax

notaxonrotax wrote:

Apparently VER got into trouble due to his choice of words in Dutch, describing the FIA steward.
He then apologized......luckily.

That would not surprise me at all, having heard the interview. Let’s put that down under frustration as he did the interview immediately after having been told of the penalty.

Frankly, I think more professional sporters should voice their opinion. Otherwise you might as well stop all interviews, because except for some banter between drivers they are all standardised “media training answers”.

If he feels screwed over by a “mongoloid” (his words), then i do not mind him saying so. He’s a human being prone to frustration, not a robot. Same for all other professional athletes, coaches etc regardless of the sport they practise.

Further to the Dutch interview, speaking the truth is what is expected in NL anyway. That’s just a cultural thing. Us Dutchies like it straight to the point instead of anxiously skirting around the subject as is more common in the English language (and particularly the USA). You’ll note that the English interview he did afterwards was a lot more diplomatic.

petertenthije wrote:

If he feels screwed over by a “mongoloid” (his words), then i do not mind him saying so.

Sure, because it will really help him the next time he's up in front of the stewards.

scbriml wrote:

petertenthije wrote:

If he feels screwed over by a “mongoloid” (his words), then i do not mind him saying so.

Sure, because it will really help him the next time he's up in front of the stewards.

Probably not. Nonetheless, bring the emotion back in the game.

petertenthije wrote:

scbriml wrote:

petertenthije wrote:

If he feels screwed over by a “mongoloid” (his words), then i do not mind him saying so.

Sure, because it will really help him the next time he's up in front of the stewards.

Probably not. Nonetheless, bring the emotion back in the game.

We can't deny that he has done that, our little Max.

moo wrote:

The stewards are typically different for each race, as they are provided by the track and not the FIA or anyone to do with F1. It's become standard to invite a former driver to be on the stewarding panel for a race but it's not compulsory.

Not according to the official F1 site:

https://www.formula1.com/en/championshi ... cials.html

Fact is that a certain steward isn't really a fan of Verstappen. Last race weekend every driver took the opportunity and left the track - you should take a look at the qualifications. But also in the race when drivers were defending their positions. Fact is that Verstappen was the only driver who received a penalty for leaving the track and gaining an advantage:

I love to see The young Verstappen racing, because he reminds me of my favorite driver Ayrton Senna. His quote “If you no longer go for a gap which exists you are no longer a racing driver” is spot on. Last Sunday I saw a young driver racing instead of being part of a very expensive parade of cars.

Damon Hill sticking up for VER too:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n3UJn2GNWog

Horner saying exactly what I was saying, why not hear the drivers first before calling it?

No Tax On Rotax

Aaaaaand this weekend the Gradnd Prix of Mexico. Will HAM succeed in winning the 2017 championship?

marcelh wrote:

Aaaaaand this weekend the Gradnd Prix of Mexico. Will HAM succeed in winning the 2017 championship?

As long as he doesn't have a mechanical and avoids a crash, it's difficult, given his current form, to see him finishing lower than 5th. So my answer is, yes!

Many experts are predicting a tough race for Mercedes - despite its layout making it a high-power circuit, the altitude makes it a high down-force race and that is where Mercedes has struggled this season. But even if both Ferraris and both Red Bulls are ahead, Hamilton should be able to cruise around in 5th place quite comfortably. It's probably not how he'd chose to win it, but it will do!

A malfunctioning fire extinguisher left VET´s butt a little white yesterday.
Another worrying mishap at Ferrari, that could have DNF´d him on Sunday.

Once again it was Grosjean to leave the track 1st, although many had an off yesterday.
Track conditions: "slippery".

Exciting qualifying ahead!

No Tax On Rotax

Cool Q3!

Controversy once again attached to VER's buttocks.
BOT claims his run in Q2 was ruined by a very slow VER.
Pretty avoidable, all in all.

Interesting grid tomorrow!

No Tax On Rotax

Hamilton should be able to cruise around in third place to take the title without taking any risks.

Plus there will be the chance of VET & VER not getting past the first corner again.

It was the weekend of Max.
It was the year of Lewis.

Congrats to both...

Wow, that was a very strange race. Congrats to Verstappen for a very comfortable win and many congrats to Hamilton for a well deserved 4th WDC.

Really not sure how Vettel managed to hit Hamilton when he was almost completely ahead. Oh well, in the end it didn't matter.

Another World Drivers Championship that Hamilton has lucked into...

Congratulations - now, on to next year.

As an aside, I wonder if Hamilton would have got the puncture had Vettel not already lost some elements of the left hand side of his front wing after hitting Verstappen moments earlier... When Vettel hit Hamilton with the same front wing, there would have been significantly more sharper parts exposed as a result of the earlier contact. If there had been no contact between Verstappen and Vettel, Hamilton might have got away with it just as Verstappen did with contacts on both rear wheels from Hamilton and Vettel!

What a messy GP!

Great recovery from VET and HAM.
Also congrats to HAM of course.

Controversial stuff at turn 3 in the 1st lap.
VET could have tried harder to avoid HAM´s rear tire.

Interesting how the luck is changing at Red Bull.
Now RIC suffers DNF´s and VER can strut his stuff.
It wasn`t long ago we heard this type of malarkey on here:

zkojq wrote:

Simple; Max is the better qualifier, Danny is the better racer.

Hoping for 2 more exciting races, will VET hold on to the vice World Champion spot?


No Tax On Rotax

notaxonrotax wrote:

Controversial stuff at turn 3 in the 1st lap.
VET could have tried harder to avoid HAM´s rear tire.

No Tax On Rotax

I've watched that a few times now and the on-board from VET's car suggests he's not a very good driver if he couldn't avoid contact with HAM.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ho7yHiioN-4

As they came along the start straight three abreast (but with HAM slightly behind), I thought "This is going to be messy!" I then thought HAM did well to take a very wide line through turn one while VER & VET had their contact, which then opened up turn two very nicely for HAM to shoot up the inside of VET.

IMHO, a 4 x WDC should be able to avoid contact with a car that's clearly ahead coming out of the turn. If the WDC fight had been a lot closer, there would have been a serious row about it.

Of course, it could be argued that HAM should have just followed VET & VER and cruised round in 3rd place anyway, but that's not really in his nature. He lives to race.

That moment when more than half the Renault's die, but both Hondas finish the race!

The real driver of today was Magnussen; that Haas had no place whatsoever anywhere near the points (heck, you know its really bad when both Saubers were ahead in quali) yet he managed to somehow get into seventh place and then hold eighth, even despite the onslaught of Hamilton and Alonso from behind. Actually, Alonso's defending against Hamilton was a very good show to watch also.

Congratulations to Lewis on finally equalling Seb. Shame he had to make the very petty comment towards Rosberg in the post-race press conference, especially after Rosberg congratulated him on youtube. Really spoiled the celebration - clearly Nico is still in his head, a year after retirement.

Does anyone know what happened to Sainz? He seemed to pit quite early on, never to be seen (by the FOM feed) again. I've been very impressed with him in the past few races.

notaxonrotax wrote:

Shame about his penalty.....a time penalty should be applied AFTER the podium.

Don`t embarrass 2 drivers in the process...

What about the fans? The deserve to see the rightful driver on the podium. I'd be pissed if I missed out on seeing Kimi on the podium, just because the FIA wanted to be politically correct and not to hurt Max's feelings.

petertenthije wrote:

moo wrote:

That having been said, while the penalty is justified, it is also inconsistent. Both during the race and qualifying several drivers went fully on the curbs.

Ooh well, Ferrari International Assistance strikes again.

Can we please not pretend that running wide and cutting the corner aren't the same thing.

marcelh wrote:

A certain race steward isn't really a fan of Verstappen....

Yes, the dutch are trying to perpetuate myths about how one of the stewards has it in for Verstappen. Mika Salo received many death threats, which is unacceptable. Particularly stupid considering that the stewards decision was unanimous.

scbriml wrote:

Afraid not, he clearly had all four wheels off the track, cutting the corner to overtake Raikkonen.

scbriml wrote:

Either it's a rule or it isn't.

This reminds me of last year when Magnussen randomly got a penalty for track limits at a corner where everyone was abusing them throughout the race. Selectively enforcing them on only one lap is crazy. I agree with what Lewis said on the issue; track design plays a large part in this as drivers shouldn't be able to go off track and gain an advantage. Off track should = in the grass/gravel.

scbriml wrote:

Post race Hamilton made a good point saying there should be grass inside the kerbs, then drivers would stick to track limits! In the picture above, replace the red concrete/tarmac with grass and Verstappen is not going there.

notaxonrotax wrote:

-They messed up the whole pre-podium cool down and podium procedure...I bet a lot of fans didn't even know when RAI walked out there initially.
It made RAI & VET uncomfortable, I guess.

Why did Raikkonen feel uncomfortable? He was the rightful podium holder and looked pleased to see the champagne.

scbriml wrote:

I don't think they "messed up the podium". How many times have we watched a podium presentation, then hours later learned that the result was changed because of a stewards' decision? I'm glad it was resolved quickly, even given that it resulted in some possible confusion for the fans. At the end of the day, the correct three drivers were on the podium. Why should Raikkonen be denied that pleasure and recognition?

Exactly. Dan Ricciardo was cheated out of a podium at Mexico last year because the Stewards took their time applying the penalty to Vettel. Unacceptable; imagine if that had been someone like Sainz, Hulkenberg or Ocon and they had been denied their first podium. Similarly, one remembers back to Australia 2014 when Kevin Magnussen was denied his spot at the number two slot on the podium because it took scrutineering a while to work out that Dan Ricciardo's car was illegally cheating.

notaxonrotax wrote:

Why does VER "break the rules", while others have not (supposedly).

Because cutting a corner to make an overtake is not the same as running wide.

moo wrote:

As an aside, I wonder if Hamilton would have got the puncture had Vettel not already lost some elements of the left hand side of his front wing after hitting Verstappen moments earlier... When Vettel hit Hamilton with the same front wing, there would have been significantly more sharper parts exposed as a result of the earlier contact. If there had been no contact between Verstappen and Vettel, Hamilton might have got away with it just as Verstappen did with contacts on both rear wheels from Hamilton and Vettel!

Oh please, stop with the conspiracies.