Has Button broken Hamilton?
Discussion
Scuffers said:
Sorry, that's total bulls
t.
The weaving as you put it was to break the aero toe, please explain in detail how this is dangerous? (its very much std practice in other classes of racing).
Are you trying to imply that he was blocking petrov? If yes then I suggest you look again, harder.
the weaving is allowed on the warm up lap and behind the safety car too. the key thing is the difference between weaving some side to side IN FRONT of somebody and weaving from side to side BESIDE somebody (i.e. in the braking zone like MSC).t.The weaving as you put it was to break the aero toe, please explain in detail how this is dangerous? (its very much std practice in other classes of racing).
Are you trying to imply that he was blocking petrov? If yes then I suggest you look again, harder.
davepoth said:
Scuffers said:
Sorry, that's total bullst.
The weaving as you put it was to break the aero toe, please explain in detail how this is dangerous? (its very much std practice in other classes of racing).
http://argent.fia.com/web/fia-public.nsf/81DF225EB...t.The weaving as you put it was to break the aero toe, please explain in detail how this is dangerous? (its very much std practice in other classes of racing).
Probably best to let the FIA explain it, eh?
The FIA said:
20.3 More than one change of direction to defend a position is not permitted. Any driver moving back towards the racing line, having earlier defended his position off‐line, should leave at least one car width between his own car and the edge of the track on the approach to the corner.
20.4 Manoeuvres liable to hinder other drivers, such as deliberate crowding of a car beyond the edge of the track or any other abnormal change of direction, are not permitted.
20.4 Manoeuvres liable to hinder other drivers, such as deliberate crowding of a car beyond the edge of the track or any other abnormal change of direction, are not permitted.
Gaz. said:
Have you forgotten Spa? A new rule dreamt up and applied retrospectively to hand Hamilton's win to Massa, and Fuji where locking a wheel earns a drive through while Massa colides with Bourdais yet it was Bourdais that was given a penalty. The stewarding of 2008 was such a farce that the FIA, FOM & FOTA overhalled the stewarding to what we have now and installed a former driver to advise/give perspective & insight to the race stewards.
Absolutley. Spa will rankle with me forever. One of the best races I have ever witnessed ruined by the worst stewarding in decades. Massa did nothing that day and was handed the most undeserving victory for years. Since the new stewarding format has been introduced things are 100% better. But I'm certain it's also tied in with Max Moseley not being involved anymore too....
flasher said:
Gaz. said:
Have you forgotten Spa? A new rule dreamt up and applied retrospectively to hand Hamilton's win to Ferrari, and Fuji where locking a wheel earns a drive through while Ferrari colides with Bourdais yet it was Bourdais that was given a penalty. The stewarding of 2008 was such a farce that the FIA, FOM & FOTA overhalled the stewarding to what we have now and installed a former driver to advise/give perspective & insight to the race stewards.
Absolutley. Spa will rankle with me forever. One of the best races I have ever witnessed ruined by the worst stewarding in decades. Ferrari did nothing that day and was handed the most undeserving victory for years. Since the new stewarding format has been introduced things are 100% better. But I'm certain it's also tied in with Max Moseley not being involved anymore too....
Scuffers said:
Sorry, that's total bullst.
The weaving as you put it was to break the aero toe, please explain in detail how this is dangerous? (its very much std practice in other classes of racing).
Are you trying to imply that he was blocking petrov? If yes then I suggest you look again, harder.
t.The weaving as you put it was to break the aero toe, please explain in detail how this is dangerous? (its very much std practice in other classes of racing).
Are you trying to imply that he was blocking petrov? If yes then I suggest you look again, harder.
I know what are you talking about. The problem is that Petrov (or any other driver) could(because of constant weaving) easily misjudge the distance between wall/grass and LH and the inevitable could happen. Remember the duel between msc and Rubens?! Only a big experience from Rubens helped both of them come through. Now if that was Petrov in his place..I'm not sure they would come out of that unharmed. Racing on the edge is OK, if you are doing it with respect to other drivers. Doing to other drivers(or people) what you wouldn't like to be done to yourself is not fair and is very disrespectful for them and for the whole sport spectators/fans included. That's why I will never respect LH and msc despite they are very very good drivers.
AreOut said:
I know what are you talking about. The problem is that Petrov (or any other driver) could(because of constant weaving) easily misjudge the distance between wall/grass and LH and the inevitable could happen. Remember the duel between msc and Rubens?! Only a big experience from Rubens helped both of them come through. Now if that was Petrov in his place..I'm not sure they would come out of that unharmed. Racing on the edge is OK, if you are doing it with respect to other drivers. Doing to other drivers(or people) what you wouldn't like to be done to yourself is not fair and is very disrespectful for them and for the whole sport spectators/fans included.
That's why I will never respect LH and MSC despite they are very very good drivers.
You Sir are a very fair judge. To your short list of two, my list would also include a third... with initials AS.That's why I will never respect LH and MSC despite they are very very good drivers.
.
MGJohn said:
You Sir are a very fair judge. To your short list of two, my list would also include a third... with initials AS.
.
.
if you are referring to his crash with Prost, it was "just" his revenge for what Prost did to him before, if Prost was punished for that and Senna took that title, Senna wouldn't have to take the revenge...I would NEVER accuse msc or LH for doing such stuff if those drivers did that to them before...remember how msc was angry when DC has let off the throttle for a bit?! His face was so red of anger. Senna had his own mistakes(you should take into account that cars back then were MUCH harder to control without all electronic nannies and having one hand on the shifter for half of the time) but he never went deliberately into someone (except that "revenge") or parked the car in the Rascasse curve etc. He was not Elio Angelis of F1 but comparing to these two he was the fair player of the century.
AreOut said:
I know what are you talking about. The problem is that Petrov (or any other driver) could(because of constant weaving) easily misjudge the distance between wall/grass and LH and the inevitable could happen. Remember the duel between msc and Rubens?! Only a big experience from Rubens helped both of them come through. Now if that was Petrov in his place..I'm not sure they would come out of that unharmed. Racing on the edge is OK, if you are doing it with respect to other drivers. Doing to other drivers(or people) what you wouldn't like to be done to yourself is not fair and is very disrespectful for them and for the whole sport spectators/fans included. That's why I will never respect LH and msc despite they are very very good drivers.
You didn't explain why Hamilton's weaving was dangerous at the time, nor recognised that what he did wasn't illegal at the time.Petrov was not and could not get alongside Hamilton without first picking up a draft from Hamilton's car. Petrov was not forced to follow Hamilton's every move. You seem to have failed to notice that Petrov was weaving too, and that he did that out of his own free will.
The Senna/Prost thing is/was ridiculous. AS brought a new, lower level of ethics into the sport. Right from karting and through the lower formulaes and into F1, Senna was renowned for his dirty driving.
Just once though, a driver gave him a bit back, ie Alain Prost. And so Senna decided he had to have justice and revenge against this driver who'd had the temerity to give him a slap back, and for some very strange reason many people have not forgiven Prost for being possibly the only driver who just the once played Senna at his own game.
These critics of Prost all choose to collectively ignore all the comments and reaction from Prost's fellow drivers who displayed great surprise at Prost doing this because he had always been such a clean driver on track. I think it was Rosberg who said that Prost couldn't do the dirty stuff well because he'd had no practice at it.
AreOut said:
I know what are you talking about. The problem is that Petrov (or any other driver) could(because of constant weaving) easily misjudge the distance between wall/grass and LH and the inevitable could happen. Remember the duel between msc and Rubens?! Only a big experience from Rubens helped both of them come through. Now if that was Petrov in his place..I'm not sure they would come out of that unharmed. Racing on the edge is OK, if you are doing it with respect to other drivers. Doing to other drivers(or people) what you wouldn't like to be done to yourself is not fair and is very disrespectful for them and for the whole sport spectators/fans included. That's why I will never respect LH and msc despite they are very very good drivers.
you are completely ignoring the fact that petrov was several car lengths BEHIND LH and therefore there was no risk of them hitting each other...
heebeegeetee said:
You didn't explain why Hamilton's weaving was dangerous at the time, nor recognised that what he did wasn't illegal at the time.
Petrov was not and could not get alongside Hamilton without first picking up a draft from Hamilton's car. Petrov was not forced to follow Hamilton's every move. You seem to have failed to notice that Petrov was weaving too, and that he did that out of his own free will.
The Senna/Prost thing is/was ridiculous. AS brought a new, lower level of ethics into the sport. Right from karting and through the lower formulaes and into F1, Senna was renowned for his dirty driving.
Just once though, a driver gave him a bit back, ie Alain Prost. And so Senna decided he had to have justice and revenge against this driver who'd had the temerity to give him a slap back, and for some very strange reason many people have not forgiven Prost for being possibly the only driver who just the once played Senna at his own game.
These critics of Prost all choose to collectively ignore all the comments and reaction from Prost's fellow drivers who displayed great surprise at Prost doing this because he had always been such a clean driver on track. I think it was Rosberg who said that Prost couldn't do the dirty stuff well because he'd had no practice at it.
Eddie Irvine also dared to unlap himself by overtaking Senna. He got a slap for that too in the pits afterwards!Petrov was not and could not get alongside Hamilton without first picking up a draft from Hamilton's car. Petrov was not forced to follow Hamilton's every move. You seem to have failed to notice that Petrov was weaving too, and that he did that out of his own free will.
The Senna/Prost thing is/was ridiculous. AS brought a new, lower level of ethics into the sport. Right from karting and through the lower formulaes and into F1, Senna was renowned for his dirty driving.
Just once though, a driver gave him a bit back, ie Alain Prost. And so Senna decided he had to have justice and revenge against this driver who'd had the temerity to give him a slap back, and for some very strange reason many people have not forgiven Prost for being possibly the only driver who just the once played Senna at his own game.
These critics of Prost all choose to collectively ignore all the comments and reaction from Prost's fellow drivers who displayed great surprise at Prost doing this because he had always been such a clean driver on track. I think it was Rosberg who said that Prost couldn't do the dirty stuff well because he'd had no practice at it.
davepoth said:
MGJohn said:
You Sir are a very fair judge. To your short list of two, my list would also include a third... with initials AS.
.
Aguri Suzuki? .
.
AreOut said:
if you are referring to his crash with Prost, it was "just" his revenge for what Prost did to him before, if Prost was punished for that and Senna took that title, Senna wouldn't have to take the revenge...I would NEVER accuse msc or LH for doing such stuff if those drivers did that to them before...remember how msc was angry when DC has let off the throttle for a bit?! His face was so red of anger. Senna had his own mistakes(you should take into account that cars back then were MUCH harder to control without all electronic nannies and having one hand on the shifter for half of the time) but he never went deliberately into someone (except that "revenge") or parked the car in the Rascasse curve etc. He was not Elio Angelis of F1 but comparing to these two he was the fair player of the century.
No, I did not have that specifically in mind. It was his attitude throughout most of his career which shaped my opinion of him. Before that final crash, I was concerned a few seconds before that his tyres were not ready for his 11/10ths focus mode which in my opinion, he deployed just once too often.AreOut said:
MGJohn said:
You Sir are a very fair judge. To your short list of two, my list would also include a third... with initials AS.
.
.
if you are referring to his crash with Prost, it was "just" his revenge for what Prost did to him before, if Prost was punished for that and Senna took that title, Senna wouldn't have to take the revenge...I would NEVER accuse msc or LH for doing such stuff if those drivers did that to them before...remember how msc was angry when DC has let off the throttle for a bit?! His face was so red of anger. Senna had his own mistakes(you should take into account that cars back then were MUCH harder to control without all electronic nannies and having one hand on the shifter for half of the time) but he never went deliberately into someone (except that "revenge") or parked the car in the Rascasse curve etc. He was not Elio Angelis of F1 but comparing to these two he was the fair player of the century.
Prost's crash into Senna in 1989 was provoked by Senna's driving pretty much since the two first met at the Nurburgring. I'm not surprised he did it. You might also want to ask Martin Brundle what he thought about Senna parking his car on Brundle's head, or ask Mansell why he had Senna pinned by the throat to the Lotus garage wall and needed to be pulled off him.
I also think you might well be wrong about Senna deliberately obstructing qualifying to protect his pole time too.
Senna was nasty. Fast, but nasty.
That famous interview with Jackie Stewart keeps getting trotted out as a reminder that Senna was a racer, but Stewart was right. Senna caused lots of crashes, more than anyone else in memory, and quite possibly more than MSC, who seemed more canny at picking his moments, but less canny at hiding the intent.
heebeegeetee said:
You didn't explain why Hamilton's weaving was dangerous at the time, nor recognised that what he did wasn't illegal at the time.
Petrov was not and could not get alongside Hamilton without first picking up a draft from Hamilton's car. Petrov was not forced to follow Hamilton's every move. You seem to have failed to notice that Petrov was weaving too, and that he did that out of his own free will.
Petrov was not and could not get alongside Hamilton without first picking up a draft from Hamilton's car. Petrov was not forced to follow Hamilton's every move. You seem to have failed to notice that Petrov was weaving too, and that he did that out of his own free will.
Umh I do not even want to try to explain that. If you don't understand why is weaving in front of another driver very dangerous at those speeds there is hardly any explanation that could help. It's illegal for a good reason, if the defending driver had the right to constantly weave nobody could overtake him, especially in a today F1. Petrov was not forced to follow his moves, but that was the only way for him to catch the draft. The "tiny" difference here is that Petrov was allowed to weave, LH was not.
heebeegeetee said:
The Senna/Prost thing is/was ridiculous. AS brought a new, lower level of ethics into the sport. Right from karting and through the lower formulaes and into F1, Senna was renowned for his dirty driving.
Just once though, a driver gave him a bit back, ie Alain Prost. And so Senna decided he had to have justice and revenge against this driver who'd had the temerity to give him a slap back, and for some very strange reason many people have not forgiven Prost for being possibly the only driver who just the once played Senna at his own game.
Just once though, a driver gave him a bit back, ie Alain Prost. And so Senna decided he had to have justice and revenge against this driver who'd had the temerity to give him a slap back, and for some very strange reason many people have not forgiven Prost for being possibly the only driver who just the once played Senna at his own game.
Senna went for a gap, there was an empty space and he went for it. Nothing wrong or dirty there. Prost went into his car and later apologised that he "didn't see him". Yeah right. Remind me what was that "revenge" for? I have watched many old races and never seen Senna deliberately crash into Prost or anyone else.
Use Psychology said:
you are completely ignoring the fact that petrov was several car lengths BEHIND LH and therefore there was no risk of them hitting each other...
that doesn't matter at all, LH doesn't have the device in his car to measure the distance, and the rule doesn't mention the distance at all, if he was close enough to catch the draft that means he was close
The Pits said:
Eddie Irvine also dared to unlap himself by overtaking Senna. He got a slap for that too in the pits afterwards!
Senna acted wrong there. He was pissed off for some reason that's sure but still not an excuse. MGJohn said:
No, I did not have that specifically in mind. It was his attitude throughout most of his career which shaped my opinion of him. Before that final crash, I was concerned a few seconds before that his tyres were not ready for his 11/10ths focus mode which in my opinion, he deployed just once too often.
it was not tyres but steering column that caused the crash, FW was and still is directly responsible for that, if that was a mistake from his engineer he still bears responsibility as he is the one who employed him
Alfanatic said:
You might also want to ask Martin Brundle what he thought about Senna parking his car on Brundle's head, or ask Mansell why he had Senna pinned by the throat to the Lotus garage wall and needed to be pulled off him.
I also think you might well be wrong about Senna deliberately obstructing qualifying to protect his pole time too.
I also think you might well be wrong about Senna deliberately obstructing qualifying to protect his pole time too.
could you elaborate on those 3 cases? I can't remember them and I am curious to know. What I know is that Senna was usually so faster in qualifying that he simply didn't have to obstruct things.
AreOut said:
Umh I do not even want to try to explain that. If you don't understand why is weaving in front of another driver very dangerous at those speeds there is hardly any explanation that could help. It's illegal for a good reason, if the defending driver had the right to constantly weave nobody could overtake him, especially in a today F1. Petrov was not forced to follow his moves, but that was the only way for him to catch the draft. The "tiny" difference here is that Petrov was allowed to weave, LH was not.
sorry, but yes, you are going to have to explain this one...as somebody with a race licence, I am struggling to understand how it's so dangerous and yet is done in just about all forms of racing where a toe can be picked up.
AreOut said:
heebeegeetee said:
You didn't explain why Hamilton's weaving was dangerous at the time, nor recognised that what he did wasn't illegal at the time.
Petrov was not and could not get alongside Hamilton without first picking up a draft from Hamilton's car. Petrov was not forced to follow Hamilton's every move. You seem to have failed to notice that Petrov was weaving too, and that he did that out of his own free will.
Petrov was not and could not get alongside Hamilton without first picking up a draft from Hamilton's car. Petrov was not forced to follow Hamilton's every move. You seem to have failed to notice that Petrov was weaving too, and that he did that out of his own free will.
Umh I do not even want to try to explain that. If you don't understand why is weaving in front of another driver very dangerous at those speeds there is hardly any explanation that could help. It's illegal for a good reason, if the defending driver had the right to constantly weave nobody could overtake him, especially in a today F1. Petrov was not forced to follow his moves, but that was the only way for him to catch the draft. The "tiny" difference here is that Petrov was allowed to weave, LH was not.
heebeegeetee said:
The Senna/Prost thing is/was ridiculous. AS brought a new, lower level of ethics into the sport. Right from karting and through the lower formulaes and into F1, Senna was renowned for his dirty driving.
Just once though, a driver gave him a bit back, ie Alain Prost. And so Senna decided he had to have justice and revenge against this driver who'd had the temerity to give him a slap back, and for some very strange reason many people have not forgiven Prost for being possibly the only driver who just the once played Senna at his own game.
Just once though, a driver gave him a bit back, ie Alain Prost. And so Senna decided he had to have justice and revenge against this driver who'd had the temerity to give him a slap back, and for some very strange reason many people have not forgiven Prost for being possibly the only driver who just the once played Senna at his own game.
Senna went for a gap, there was an empty space and he went for it. Nothing wrong or dirty there. Prost went into his car and later apologised that he "didn't see him". Yeah right. Remind me what was that "revenge" for? I have watched many old races and never seen Senna deliberately crash into Prost or anyone else.
Use Psychology said:
you are completely ignoring the fact that petrov was several car lengths BEHIND LH and therefore there was no risk of them hitting each other...
that doesn't matter at all, LH doesn't have the device in his car to measure the distance, and the rule doesn't mention the distance at all, if he was close enough to catch the draft that means he was close
The Pits said:
Eddie Irvine also dared to unlap himself by overtaking Senna. He got a slap for that too in the pits afterwards!
Senna acted wrong there. He was pissed off for some reason that's sure but still not an excuse. MGJohn said:
No, I did not have that specifically in mind. It was his attitude throughout most of his career which shaped my opinion of him. Before that final crash, I was concerned a few seconds before that his tyres were not ready for his 11/10ths focus mode which in my opinion, he deployed just once too often.
it was not tyres but steering column that caused the crash, FW was and still is directly responsible for that, if that was a mistake from his engineer he still bears responsibility as he is the one who employed him
Alfanatic said:
You might also want to ask Martin Brundle what he thought about Senna parking his car on Brundle's head, or ask Mansell why he had Senna pinned by the throat to the Lotus garage wall and needed to be pulled off him.
I also think you might well be wrong about Senna deliberately obstructing qualifying to protect his pole time too.
I also think you might well be wrong about Senna deliberately obstructing qualifying to protect his pole time too.
could you elaborate on those 3 cases? I can't remember them and I am curious to know. What I know is that Senna was usually so faster in qualifying that he simply didn't have to obstruct things.
I'm speechless.
heebeegeetee said:
AreOut said:
heebeegeetee said:
You didn't explain why Hamilton's weaving was dangerous at the time, nor recognised that what he did wasn't illegal at the time.
Petrov was not and could not get alongside Hamilton without first picking up a draft from Hamilton's car. Petrov was not forced to follow Hamilton's every move. You seem to have failed to notice that Petrov was weaving too, and that he did that out of his own free will.
Petrov was not and could not get alongside Hamilton without first picking up a draft from Hamilton's car. Petrov was not forced to follow Hamilton's every move. You seem to have failed to notice that Petrov was weaving too, and that he did that out of his own free will.
Umh I do not even want to try to explain that. If you don't understand why is weaving in front of another driver very dangerous at those speeds there is hardly any explanation that could help. It's illegal for a good reason, if the defending driver had the right to constantly weave nobody could overtake him, especially in a today F1. Petrov was not forced to follow his moves, but that was the only way for him to catch the draft. The "tiny" difference here is that Petrov was allowed to weave, LH was not.
heebeegeetee said:
The Senna/Prost thing is/was ridiculous. AS brought a new, lower level of ethics into the sport. Right from karting and through the lower formulaes and into F1, Senna was renowned for his dirty driving.
Just once though, a driver gave him a bit back, ie Alain Prost. And so Senna decided he had to have justice and revenge against this driver who'd had the temerity to give him a slap back, and for some very strange reason many people have not forgiven Prost for being possibly the only driver who just the once played Senna at his own game.
Just once though, a driver gave him a bit back, ie Alain Prost. And so Senna decided he had to have justice and revenge against this driver who'd had the temerity to give him a slap back, and for some very strange reason many people have not forgiven Prost for being possibly the only driver who just the once played Senna at his own game.
Senna went for a gap, there was an empty space and he went for it. Nothing wrong or dirty there. Prost went into his car and later apologised that he "didn't see him". Yeah right. Remind me what was that "revenge" for? I have watched many old races and never seen Senna deliberately crash into Prost or anyone else.
Use Psychology said:
you are completely ignoring the fact that petrov was several car lengths BEHIND LH and therefore there was no risk of them hitting each other...
that doesn't matter at all, LH doesn't have the device in his car to measure the distance, and the rule doesn't mention the distance at all, if he was close enough to catch the draft that means he was close
The Pits said:
Eddie Irvine also dared to unlap himself by overtaking Senna. He got a slap for that too in the pits afterwards!
Senna acted wrong there. He was pissed off for some reason that's sure but still not an excuse. MGJohn said:
No, I did not have that specifically in mind. It was his attitude throughout most of his career which shaped my opinion of him. Before that final crash, I was concerned a few seconds before that his tyres were not ready for his 11/10ths focus mode which in my opinion, he deployed just once too often.
it was not tyres but steering column that caused the crash, FW was and still is directly responsible for that, if that was a mistake from his engineer he still bears responsibility as he is the one who employed him
Alfanatic said:
You might also want to ask Martin Brundle what he thought about Senna parking his car on Brundle's head, or ask Mansell why he had Senna pinned by the throat to the Lotus garage wall and needed to be pulled off him.
I also think you might well be wrong about Senna deliberately obstructing qualifying to protect his pole time too.
I also think you might well be wrong about Senna deliberately obstructing qualifying to protect his pole time too.
could you elaborate on those 3 cases? I can't remember them and I am curious to know. What I know is that Senna was usually so faster in qualifying that he simply didn't have to obstruct things.
I'm speechless.
Gassing Station | General Motorsport | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff