2016 Grand Prix of Mexico - Autódromo Hermanos Rodríguez, 28-30 October

[WaikeCU]

How much performance do you lose when you go through the grass? How long does it take for the tires to be back in optimal shape? I think it does give a performance hit, especially with a flat spot.

[GPR-A duplicate2]

I dont remember anyone calling for Rosberg to get a penalty when he did the same thing at T2 (proper T1) in Russia in 2014. He locked up, went wide, rejoined well ahead of where he was at the point of lock up and continued with a decent lead.
That was all while overtaking Lewis and not just going into the corner on his own.
He didnt get a penalty because he flat spotted his tyres (was punished for his mistake)

Lewis flat spotted his tyre in Mexico, but not as bad because he was quick enough to release the brake and run on.
As everyone knows (or should know) Lap 1 , T1 is always commotion. The only thing the drivers get penalised for is, avoidable contact and over taking while off the track. Lewis did neither of these.

Or maybe Charlie and the Stewards let him off to piss you haters off. Yeah must be that, and judging by your reactions you guys really have been pissed off so its worked a treat. (thanks charlie )

In Canada 2014, while under attack from Lewis, Nico braked late, locked up the wheels and went straight to cut the chicane and gain an advantage. He wasn't punished back then !

[Just_a_fan]

I really don't know why stewards decisions are not communicated publicly at the time. It's kind of annoying to find out this information days after the event.

They've been doing this for years though, that's the problem. I can certainly remember this sort of "after the event" stuff 20 years ago. It needs a proper root and branch review of their processes to sort it out. Can't see the FIA doing that.

[Stradivarius]

But instead of rewarding drivers for their skills in controlling their cars in difficult situations, drivers are now excused for loosing the control, while those who remain in control loose out.

To simplify further, there are two separate phases to each incident. Let's ignore 27.4 (which would be the rule they would be penalised under).

Phase 1 - Hamilton: Hamilton locks up and leaves the track.
Phase 1 - Rosberg: Rosberg can not stay on the track due to Verstappen pushing him off.
End result: Both cars are off track.

Phase 2 - Hamilton: Could rejoin earlier than he does, chooses not to. At the point that he rejoins he has gained an advantage.
Phase 2 - Rosberg: Could rejoin earlier than he does, chooses not to. At the point that he rejoins he has gained an advantage.
End result: Both cars have gained an advantage by staying off track and cutting the corner.

Hamilton gained an obvious advantage when looking at the whole picture. Rosberg didnt. Had Verstappen respected Rosberg and made sure he left him enough room, Verstappen would also have had to go slower and Rosberg would have been able to respect the limits of the track and stay in second place. Rosberg's advantage is an illusion caused by the fact that you compare his position to Verstappen. If you compare him to Hulkenberg, there is no advantage to see. Rosberg has about one car-length between himself and Hulkenberg with Verstappen in between in the middle of turn 1. When exiting turn 3, the gap down to Hulkenberg is not greater than what it could have expected to be if Rosberg had been allowed to follow the track. The gap between Rosberg, Verstappen and Hulkenberg couldn't possibly be much smaller at turn 3 than what was the case.

This is exactly my point, you keep referring to intentions and what is deliberate, which is really impossible to know for sure, it is pure speculation.

On the other hand, I have no problem admiting that Hamilton did the only reasonable thing from his own point of view. He kept the lead and the way the rules are currently enforced there was obviously a good chance for him to escape penalty, which he did.

It's impossible to know if Rosberg was making deliberate decisions but it's obvious that this was all a plan by Hamilton? Really?

I am not claiming that this was all a plan by Hamilton. All I am saying is that it shouldn't matter whether it was a plan or not. The rules and the enforcement should make sure that cutting the corner doesn't pay off. Currently that is not the case. I am not blaming the players, I am blaming the game. In Rosbergs case, it couldn't have been planned because he was pushed off the track by another driver. That is impossible to plan. Your argument that Rosberg could have chosen to slot in behind Verstappen is not a good one. Sainz was penalized for pushing Alonso off track in a situation where it would be much easier for Alonso to slot in behind. The point is that this is not how racing is done. If you don't see the difference between being pushed off the track by another driver and driving off the track through nobodys fault but your own, I have nothing more to say to you.

[Mandrake]

This is getting more and more ridiculous.....

Not really, trying swearing at the ref's in any football code and see how hard the book gets thrown at you!

One thing to bear in mind in the cold light of day, is that this is a radio communication between driver and team.

If Vettel goes back to his garage and tells his engineer to tell Charlie to F off, does he get a punishment? Of course not, because the engineer wouldn't convey the message - certainly not verbatim.

f1316 summarises this quite well: you can swear at any referee as much as you like as long as you are in the cabin with your mates.

[basti313]

It's weird that people are now saying that if the driver behind tucks his nose into the driver in front, at the beginning or middle of a corner, then the driver behind owns the corner and the driver in front has to do what ever he can in order to avoid contact and/or give up the place...

In my time racing, the car in front owns that corner and it's the overtaking drivers responsibility to overtake safely and if you can't do it, or the door starts to shut in the corner, then the overtaking driver has to back off.

I read these comments on this forum and it seems that people opinion are less about the rules of Motorsport and more about "well my favorite driver was involved so whatever he did was the right way and the other guy should give way"

This isn't PlayStation racing rules...

I think you are on the right point. But I think it came to us by another thing: It all started from Ros and Ham pushing each other off the track. The stewards did not put penalties there because they were in the same team and the team was expected to handle it. The team did not handle it at all and we had the precedents of the inside car being allowed to push the outside car off the track.
At the moment the stewards just have lost it. Judging/ruling in F1 has nothing to do with usual racing rules anymore.

[ChrisDanger]

I really don't know why stewards decisions are not communicated publicly at the time. It's kind of annoying to find out this information days after the event.

They've been doing this for years though, that's the problem. I can certainly remember this sort of "after the event" stuff 20 years ago. It needs a proper root and branch review of their processes to sort it out. Can't see the FIA doing that.

Vettel's penalty was published on the FIA website the same day, in an article (Stewards Decision Doc38 - S.Vettel) with the time stated at 14:41 (race was at 13:00 local time). I went to bed immediately after the race and saw the news on the first F1 site I visited the next morning. I assume the amended results and the full story were also timeously posted to f1.com. So I'm not sure that the problem you're experiencing is widespread, and it seems to be less to do with the FIA than the general manner in which news is disseminated, and perhaps just the nature of transgressions that occur late in the race.

[Wynters]

If you don't see the difference between being pushed off the track by another driver and driving off the track through nobodys fault but your own, I have nothing more to say to you.

Where, exactly, have I said that this is the difference? I thought I made it as clear as possible in my previous post that I don't really care how either driver came to be off track (phase 1). What I care about is what each driver chose to do afterwards (phase 2).

Hamilton, once off the track, chose to take a short cut that gained him car lengths of road that he would not have had if he had decided to rejoin the track earlier.

Rosberg, once off the track, chose to take a short cut that gained him car lengths of road that he would not have had if he had decided to rejoin the track earlier.

Are you saying that, once you are off the track, you should be able to do whatever you want? Because, if so, it would've been easier if you had stated that at the start. Let's agree to disagree. If not, what are you saying?

You also seem to be saying that Rosberg not only didn't gain an advantage on the car that had overtaken him

Rosberg's advantage is an illusion caused by the fact that you compare his position to Verstappen.

but he didn't gain an advantage over Hulkenberg.

If you compare him to Hulkenberg, there is no advantage to see.

Entering turn 1, the gap between Hulk and Rosberg is one-to-two car lengths of space (0:42, 1:33). After the exit of Turn 3, Hulk is several car lengths behind Rosberg and Rosberg is accelerating away from him (0:53, 1:46).

You'll note that, oddly, Verstappen hasn't gained the same several car lengths on Hulkenberg. How could Rosberg have gained such a lead on the Force India? What did Rosberg do differently to Verstappen? It can't have anything to do with Rosberg being off-road because he, apparently, gained no advantage from that.

http://www.skysports.com/watch/video/sp ... -lap-drama

[Just_a_fan]

Vettel's penalty was published on the FIA website the same day, in an article (Stewards Decision Doc38 - S.Vettel) with the time stated at 14:41 (race was at 13:00 local time).

14.41 is the moment in time when the incident occurred. The judgement was timed at 17.53, that's 3+ hours later and most of the TV audience would have been in bed by then because of time differences in to Europe and Asia etc.

The problem, in part, is that the stewards only look at issues reported to them by the race director, i.e. Charlie. Immediately after the race Charlie is quite busy. It's likely this adds a significant time lag to some of these decisions. That's a process problem that should be possible to sort out.

[iotar__]

It's weird that people are now saying that if the driver behind tucks his nose into the driver in front, at the beginning or middle of a corner, then the driver behind owns the corner and the driver in front has to do what ever he can in order to avoid contact and/or give up the place...

In my time racing, the car in front owns that corner and it's the overtaking drivers responsibility to overtake safely and if you can't do it, or the door starts to shut in the corner, then the overtaking driver has to back off.

I read these comments on this forum and it seems that people opinion are less about the rules of Motorsport and more about "well my favorite driver was involved so whatever he did was the right way and the other guy should give way"

Are you saying that robotic clarification like the one about braking zone moves covering lack of action against M.V. are wrong? All this shouting about "not closing the door" is stupid too? Vettel closed the door .

Re bold text: I disagree but it is often accepted, and not by "people saying" but officially like ridiculous FIA's explanation for Ricc - Raikk Monaco '15 move that fits above description, that's extreme. On the other hand just being in front does not allow you to make any move, another robotic rule. Examples:

- Verstappen Raikkonen - Hun - Raikkonen didn't even get to "tucking nose" part, two def. moves both too late, in combination with slowing down illegal and causing collision, one sided
- Verstappen - Raikkonen - Spa - same two moves, one direction, way too late, high speed and (important) in relation to driver behind, you can't change speed/direction like that just because someone is in the slipstream. That was Playstation driving .

- Vettel - Ricciardo: Ricciardo had the right to move along, he had the space and judging by avoiding contact part enough control but he moved too towards the middle (important), he goes to the left = he's not making the corner. Vettel's side: block was way too late but it wasn't a strong move (plenty of space), slow pace. Not clean driving but IMO borderline - more like Ham - Ricc Monaco. They used 'clarification', not essential to cheating but it helps.

[ChrisDanger]

14.41 is the moment in time when the incident occurred. The judgement was timed at 17.53, that's 3+ hours later and most of the TV audience would have been in bed by then because of time differences in to Europe and Asia etc.

The problem, in part, is that the stewards only look at issues reported to them by the race director, i.e. Charlie. Immediately after the race Charlie is quite busy. It's likely this adds a significant time lag to some of these decisions. That's a process problem that should be possible to sort out.

I see what you're saying. Once the decision to investigate is made, surely it's over to the stewards, who then inform the race director of their decision. So there's not much for Charlie to do except perhaps to review it and sign it off to make it official.

In this example though, half an hour or three and a half hours would make no practical difference, and neither is two days, like what was being suggested.

I would be interested to know the cause of the delay and if the process could be expedited, so I'm with you there. I don't see it as a major problem though.

[Andres125sx]

In my time racing, the car in front owns that corner and it's the overtaking drivers responsibility to overtake safely and if you can't do it, or the door starts to shut in the corner, then the overtaking driver has to back off.

How is that posible after braking and before releasing the brake pedal?

Once the overtaking driver brake later because driver in front left a gap at the inside, the overtaking driver can´t back off, as that would imply braking faster, but he´s already applying full brakes, so that´s simply not possible. That´s the reason for the new rule about direction changes under braking.

If he went too far (hit the brakes too late) driver in front must let him pass and go long/off racing line, then recover position. But if driver in front close the door after hitting the brakes, a crash is guaranteed.


That´s the reason most drivers close the door before braking, but Seb left the door open, and tried to close it too late when Ricciardo had no options to back off, read, after braking.

[strad]

that's just crazy.
As said, the guy in front owns the corner and it's up to the following car to get it done safely ,,, period.

[AMG.Tzan]

For me the story of the race was Vettel being penalised! He did nothing wrong there with Ricciardo...he left enough space for the other guy and just squeezed Ric a bit! But that was nothing compared to what Verstappen did all season long under braking (moving just at the moment the guy behind him goes for a move under braking ) and what Rosberg does when squeezing someone (leaves no space for the other pushing him off track or forgeting to turn). So i find it somewhat silly not punishing Verstappen in almost all his fights with Raikkonen (especially Spa and Hungary) or Rosberg for Spain and Austria!! After all i really was hoping for a Ves-Vet-Ric battle and it turned out just awesome! And had it not been for Verstappen locking up it would have been even better! But that's drama...and that's what Formula 1 needs right now!!

[sosic2121]

In an ideal world, Rosberg would have made it back on the track before turn 2, knowing that Verstappen would pay the price for pushing him off. But instead of rewarding drivers for their skills in controlling their cars in difficult situations, drivers are now excused for loosing the control, while those who remain in control loose out.

Couldn't agree more.
It's incredible that we are debating penalty for Rosberg and not for Verstappen.

IMO this corrupt F1 world is the reason for Vettels move against ricciardo.

We had incredible amount dirty moves this season that went unpunished.
Skill became unimportant, you just have to be crazy and push your opponent off road.
This season there has been at least 20 super dirty situations that went unpunished, for example Alonso(my favourite driver) on Massa.

My personal opinion is there should be 2 lines on the track 2 meters from each end of the road. if you cross the line, while other car is there, you get penalty...