The Official 2017 US Grand Prix Thread **Spoilers**
Discussion
NAS said:
Some Gump said:
troc said:
Here on Dutch tv, in an official interview for the broadcaster, Max just called the steward ‘een mongool’ i.e. someone with Down syndrome.
He might be angry, he might be young and the Dutch tolerate bad language more than most but he had better be careful, the FIA might take exception to his language there.........
Ooh, lots of people will not like that.He might be angry, he might be young and the Dutch tolerate bad language more than most but he had better be careful, the FIA might take exception to his language there.........
jm doc said:
ClockworkCupcake said:
jm doc said:
Vettel overtook Hamilton on the first bend clearly outside track limits.
And clearly gained an advantage.
The stewards are always much more lenient on the first few corners at the start of a race.And clearly gained an advantage.
Explains all. After the contention last year there was broad agreement that unless there was a safety issue, the stewards would not get involved.
Their decision last night waved two fingers at that agreement.
Max and Horner are right to be outraged at their stupid decision.
troc said:
I know it is I was a Dutch teenager too, that's not the point. I was merely pointing out that he needs to realise his words are (or could be) heard internationally and he needs to learn to moderate what he says to (at least somewhat) acceptable, international, standards. Like it or not, he's an ambassador for Dutch sport and needs to behave as such. It doesn't help that the Ziggo commentary team worship him and the ground he walks on.
True.At least drivers don't get out of their cars and start hitting each other. I recall a few in the past... I don't think any less of that country's sport for the individuals behaviour.
Max using that term is poor, but there are other sports that need cleaning up much more.
Vaud said:
StevieBee said:
The issue is that the tracks have become too benign. As many ex-drivers mentioned, bring the grass to the other side of the kerbs and you effectively self-govern the matter as the consequences of exceeding track limits is more stark.
Many tracks rely on multi use - cars, bikes, etc. One reason they don't want gravel or grass is that it has a tendency to flip bikes.Unfortunately for the bikers, the tarmac run off isn't quite as forgiving to bounce along.
I'm not happy about the way young Brendon's race was run. It ran like some kind of stupid test session. Every decision they made kind of went against my own instincts watching the race in real time. It was a bit weird they started him on the ultra softs, you can see the logic in that, he was following Vandoorne through in the early stages of the race, but then got stuck behind somebody while Vandoorne continued to pass people in the 1st stint. Got pitted so early (presumably he felt the grip was going) and put on bloody super softs and promptly got stuck behind Stroll. His race pretty much unravelled at that point. Running plumb last, didn't seem to make much of an impression on Stroll all race, who was running on the Softs and was slow.
My annoyance is, why not give him a set of tyres he can lean on a bit from the start? That would have ensured he could do his own race and pick more people off during the pit window. The early pit really wrecked his race. Should have given him a set of tyres he can go flat out on from the get go, as he is used to in the racing discipline he's familiar with. Sorry, that's a big error from the TR strategy team. If they run it like this they're going to look a bunch of blundering idiots next year if Honda don't get their reliability sorted.
Really did want Hartley to make an impression. There were rumours that when Gasly returns, Kvyat was going to get the boot permanently, with Hartley seeing through to the end of this year and perhaps signed for the next year, dependent on how he performs this race. Yes, he didn't wreck the car during the weekend, didn't make mistakes and kept it on the black stuff in the race, but I fear RBR is looking for more theatrics and somebody who can make a bit of a splash...
My annoyance is, why not give him a set of tyres he can lean on a bit from the start? That would have ensured he could do his own race and pick more people off during the pit window. The early pit really wrecked his race. Should have given him a set of tyres he can go flat out on from the get go, as he is used to in the racing discipline he's familiar with. Sorry, that's a big error from the TR strategy team. If they run it like this they're going to look a bunch of blundering idiots next year if Honda don't get their reliability sorted.
Really did want Hartley to make an impression. There were rumours that when Gasly returns, Kvyat was going to get the boot permanently, with Hartley seeing through to the end of this year and perhaps signed for the next year, dependent on how he performs this race. Yes, he didn't wreck the car during the weekend, didn't make mistakes and kept it on the black stuff in the race, but I fear RBR is looking for more theatrics and somebody who can make a bit of a splash...
I have to say the worst thing about the Max penalty is how the Driver of the day gets a penalty point on his super licence for a move that the stewards have been inconsistent with policing.
Clearly a 5 second penalty/yield the place would have been enough. Especially when others have received no points for causing a collision this season.
Clearly a 5 second penalty/yield the place would have been enough. Especially when others have received no points for causing a collision this season.
troc said:
I know it is I was a Dutch teenager too, that's not the point. I was merely pointing out that he needs to realise his words are (or could be) heard internationally and he needs to learn to moderate what he says to (at least somewhat) acceptable, international, standards. Like it or not, he's an ambassador for Dutch sport and needs to behave as such. It doesn't help that the Ziggo commentary team worship him and the ground he walks on.
I know, but a (swear)word and its' weight in one language will most likely not be integrated as it was meant in another language. As we see here. (It doesn't help that Dutchies speak directly, openly and without much PC compared to just about any other language in the world at the best of times...)
And I think for a (just turned) 20 year old, he behaves rather well. Better than I did at 20, that's for sure.
LaurasOtherHalf said:
Actually I think the opposite is true, gravel traps slow a bike accident considerably. It's the cars they don't work too well with, where as long as you don't have brake failure a tarmac run off will provide much more room to avoid an accident.
Unfortunately for the bikers, the tarmac run off isn't quite as forgiving to bounce along.
I'll dig out the podcast.Unfortunately for the bikers, the tarmac run off isn't quite as forgiving to bounce along.
I also believe that the last time this happened (last minute podium changing - conveniently also involving Max...) that the stewards agreed they would not make an immediate decision that involved an immediate podium change again, but rather assess the information and hear drivers statements afterwards and adjust the result well after the race. This way you weren't pissing off the fans there and then but able to make a fully judged decision, with full reasoning after post race passion has died down. Now the next time it has happened, they've done exactly the same thing again.
Consistency is all we want as fans. If there's no consistency, there will be perceived favouritism.
Whether it's a successful defence or a successful offence, there were plenty of other drivers who abused the track limits this weekend. It should be irrelevant which side of fight you are on - if any sort of advantage/minimised loss is gained by being outside of the track limits then the position should be forfeited or a penalty applied. The Bottas/Ric battles had examples of this both ways, but what great racing that was. Lewis was also 4 wheels off during his pole position lap.
IMO, tracks should just have appropriate kerbs or physical limits where required. No need for policing then - use the track that is available freely and pay the price where it isn't. No need for steward intervention.
Consistency is all we want as fans. If there's no consistency, there will be perceived favouritism.
Whether it's a successful defence or a successful offence, there were plenty of other drivers who abused the track limits this weekend. It should be irrelevant which side of fight you are on - if any sort of advantage/minimised loss is gained by being outside of the track limits then the position should be forfeited or a penalty applied. The Bottas/Ric battles had examples of this both ways, but what great racing that was. Lewis was also 4 wheels off during his pole position lap.
IMO, tracks should just have appropriate kerbs or physical limits where required. No need for policing then - use the track that is available freely and pay the price where it isn't. No need for steward intervention.
Jordan210 said:
I have to say the worst thing about the Max penalty is how the Driver of the day gets a penalty point on his super licence for a move that the stewards have been inconsistent with policing.
Clearly a 5 second penalty/yield the place would have been enough. Especially when others have received no points for causing a collision this season.
Agree 100%. A real shame it wasn’t a lap or two earlier and he would have given the place back and gone again... Penalty point was pointless in my eyes.Clearly a 5 second penalty/yield the place would have been enough. Especially when others have received no points for causing a collision this season.
I thought Max handled himself VERY well in the room of awkwardness (I can’t work out what the expression on Kimi’s face was). The comments afterwards were a bit short sighted. I’d have loved him to have laughed the decision off and make his point about people wanting to see hard racing and that it was a boarderline decision that (he thinks) was wrong, but so be it.... Could have really made sure he had the moral high ground but of course emotions run very high.
Dr Z said:
I'm not happy about the way young Brendon's race was run.
Brendon's biggest problem was Kvyat who was on incredible form. I reckon both the Williams and the McLaren were better than the Toro Rosso.You aren't going to try to one-stop a debutant F1 driver in a race which is borderline on tyres and you aren't going to pit him for a second time right at the end for ultra softs because you'll give up track position and as we saw in qualifying Brendon is not yet able to fully exploit the potential of new Ultras on low fuel. They gave him tyres to keep in touch with the drivers around him and he was able to pick up the pieces at the end with Magnussen / Ericsson and then pass Grosjean too. I think they maximised his potential TBH.
Andy S15 said:
Whether it's a successful defence or a successful offence, there were plenty of other drivers who abused the track limits this weekend. It should be irrelevant which side of fight you are on - if any sort of advantage/minimised loss is gained by being outside of the track limits then the position should be forfeited or a penalty applied. The Bottas/Ric battles had examples of this both ways, but what great racing that was. Lewis was also 4 wheels off during his pole position lap.
IMO, tracks should just have appropriate kerbs or physical limits where required. No need for policing then - use the track that is available freely and pay the price where it isn't. No need for steward intervention.
I think on both DR / Bottas incidents, DR created it by diving in on a very shallow line - he went off track in both, running Bottas out in the first. They were both marginal attempts that didn’t work.... fine ?IMO, tracks should just have appropriate kerbs or physical limits where required. No need for policing then - use the track that is available freely and pay the price where it isn't. No need for steward intervention.
On the face of it, harsher kerbs seem the answer but they need to not be so severe that they risk firing a car into the air (Harsh kerbs are also problem for Motogp). We also then have to balance how much penalty do you want a driver to pay when he’s 6 inches off line. There is a reason they really attack circuits like COTA. The wall of champions is great, but I don’t want every circuit to be driven like Monaco.
Finally, more severe kerbs could create more stewarding decisions, every squeeze, every time a car is ran to the outside kerb, there will be at least significant lost time and possibly damage (so cars won’t yield as readily and they’ll take the contact if they’re going to be damaged / put into a wall anyway). The incidents being more severe could lead to more investigations?
I don’t think there is an easy / perfect answer, and I get that the level of advantage / reduced disadvantage is ambiguous. But they do have to draw a line somewhere and I guess it’s not unreasonable to draw it where a pass is made with a significant cut of a corner.
HustleRussell said:
Dr Z said:
I'm not happy about the way young Brendon's race was run.
Brendon's biggest problem was Kvyat who was on incredible form. I reckon both the Williams and the McLaren were better than the Toro Rosso.You aren't going to try to one-stop a debutant F1 driver in a race which is borderline on tyres and you aren't going to pit him for a second time right at the end for ultra softs because you'll give up track position and as we saw in qualifying Brendon is not yet able to fully exploit the potential of new Ultras on low fuel. They gave him tyres to keep in touch with the drivers around him and he was able to pick up the pieces at the end with Magnussen / Ericsson and then pass Grosjean too. I think they maximised his potential TBH.
No I don't really get it. Oh well, they've got more data for Mexico.
Gassing Station | Formula 1 | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff