DChemTech wrote: ↑
Mon Mar 29, 2021 5:06 pm
El Scorchio wrote: ↑
Mon Mar 29, 2021 4:50 pm
DChemTech wrote: ↑
Mon Mar 29, 2021 4:35 pm
But then the question is again, how to quantify - where to draw the line. Any exceptions invite subjectivity.
This is 100% the crux of it. There are always exceptions that need the human eye to judge it given the myriad of situations that occur in a race.
Any sort of sensor will just register a car too wide, but offer no context for why it's there. At the end of the day, flashing light or no flashing light and all the technology in the world, it will always have to come down to steward/race director's judgement.
well, yes, but that's why I would go for 'take the sensor unless there is a reason not to' (such as avoiding an accident). That would remove more controversy than the other way around - most of the discussions are "driver X was going consistently wide in turn Y" - and there the sensor data should be just fine.
The race director or whoever still has to look every time the sensor goes off to deduce why it went off. All this does is alert them that someone has. They still need to make a call on every case, so in effect it changes nothing aside from it may flag a few close ones that the naked eye could miss.
And, as you're obviously referring to yesterday, there is no controversy about anyone going 'wide' constantly at a corner- I think we both know what you're talking about- seen as it was not against any rule to do so at that corner.
So it's a totally different issue with setting the rules and track limits in general, rather than a specific driver or car supposedly flouting a non existent one. The other more bothersome issue is them changing the rule halfway through the race, after allowing it for practice but then not qualifying, but then allowing it again for the race. But that's the sort of brainless thing I've come to expect from them over the years.