2013 Chinese GP - Shanghai

For ease of use, there is one thread per grand prix where you can discuss everything during that specific GP weekend. You can find these threads here.
beelsebob
179
Joined: Wed Mar 23, 2011 2:49 pm
Location: Cupertino, California

Re: 2013 Chinese GP - Shanghai

Post by beelsebob » Sun Apr 14, 2013 3:23 pm

myurr wrote:@NathanOlder - I have to agree. This does smack of an FIA cover up, at least to a degree.

Also why was Webber penalised for colliding with the Torro Rosso, but Perez escaped punishment for crowding Raikkonen off the track and causing an incident?
Simple – because Webber was 100% at fault – he plain and simple drove into the side of Vergne. Perez meanwhile probably never even knew Raikonnen was there, he attacked from so far back, and went to a side where he stood no chance of getting past at all.
I know several people on here have blamed Kimi for that incident but the letter of the law is clear. If a competitor has any part of their car alongside your own, you have to leave them at least a cars width to the edge of the track. This was a new rule introduced last year (I believe). Kimi clearly had at least his front wing and part of his wheel alongside Perez's car, and yet Perez then moved over to the edge of the circuit forcing Kimi off the track. It shouldn't matter whether or not Perez saw him and knew he was there, the rule is clear and he is clearly in breach of it. Did the stewards even look into it? Chandhok's analysis of it on sky said that Perez was clearly in the wrong and he was surprised that he didn't get a penalty.
The rule comes into effect when you're defending, Perez wasn't defending – he was simply driving his normal racing line.

MuseF1
5
Joined: Mon Aug 08, 2005 12:33 am
Location: Birmingham, England

Re: 2013 Chinese GP - Shanghai

Post by MuseF1 » Sun Apr 14, 2013 4:02 pm

What do people think of Perez's little weave on the straight?

The driver behind wasn't really effected but I think Perez should have a little talking to about it

Jackuar
0
User avatar
Joined: Mon Jun 18, 2012 3:50 pm

Re: 2013 Chinese GP - Shanghai

Post by Jackuar » Sun Apr 14, 2013 4:07 pm

SilverArrow10 wrote:Does China change there trophies to match the team that wins there? This years trophy is Ferrari red and last years looked very much PETRONAS green. Probably just a coincidence but I like little things like that.
Don't know what the trophies are made of but how easy is that to get it done in short notice? Whether metal or even if it just the color work over it and considering that they would 'anticipate' who would be winner, still its a bit quick and yes, its nice that they do these little things.
Finishing second is being the first one of losers....

myurr
30
Joined: Thu Mar 20, 2008 8:58 pm

Re: 2013 Chinese GP - Shanghai

Post by myurr » Sun Apr 14, 2013 4:21 pm

beelsebob wrote:
myurr wrote:@NathanOlder - I have to agree. This does smack of an FIA cover up, at least to a degree.

Also why was Webber penalised for colliding with the Torro Rosso, but Perez escaped punishment for crowding Raikkonen off the track and causing an incident?
Simple – because Webber was 100% at fault – he plain and simple drove into the side of Vergne. Perez meanwhile probably never even knew Raikonnen was there, he attacked from so far back, and went to a side where he stood no chance of getting past at all.
I agree that Webber should have been punished, but I believe that by the letter of the law that Perez should have been punished as well. The rules are there for a reason and should be applied evenly.
beelsebob wrote:
I know several people on here have blamed Kimi for that incident but the letter of the law is clear. If a competitor has any part of their car alongside your own, you have to leave them at least a cars width to the edge of the track. This was a new rule introduced last year (I believe). Kimi clearly had at least his front wing and part of his wheel alongside Perez's car, and yet Perez then moved over to the edge of the circuit forcing Kimi off the track. It shouldn't matter whether or not Perez saw him and knew he was there, the rule is clear and he is clearly in breach of it. Did the stewards even look into it? Chandhok's analysis of it on sky said that Perez was clearly in the wrong and he was surprised that he didn't get a penalty.
The rule comes into effect when you're defending, Perez wasn't defending – he was simply driving his normal racing line.
That's not true - it's always in effect. Not knowing someone is there isn't an excuse in that rule, it's explicit. If you have a part of your car alongside another you are entitled to space. If it was in part of the corner where the car was sliding, I could understand if he slid a bit wide, but it was on corner entry where he just moved over to take his chosen line. Unfortunately according to the rules he's not entitled to just choose a line when another car is partly alongside.

beelsebob
179
Joined: Wed Mar 23, 2011 2:49 pm
Location: Cupertino, California

Re: 2013 Chinese GP - Shanghai

Post by beelsebob » Sun Apr 14, 2013 4:33 pm

myurr wrote:
beelsebob wrote:
I know several people on here have blamed Kimi for that incident but the letter of the law is clear. If a competitor has any part of their car alongside your own, you have to leave them at least a cars width to the edge of the track. This was a new rule introduced last year (I believe). Kimi clearly had at least his front wing and part of his wheel alongside Perez's car, and yet Perez then moved over to the edge of the circuit forcing Kimi off the track. It shouldn't matter whether or not Perez saw him and knew he was there, the rule is clear and he is clearly in breach of it. Did the stewards even look into it? Chandhok's analysis of it on sky said that Perez was clearly in the wrong and he was surprised that he didn't get a penalty.
The rule comes into effect when you're defending, Perez wasn't defending – he was simply driving his normal racing line.
That's not true - it's always in effect. Not knowing someone is there isn't an excuse in that rule, it's explicit. If you have a part of your car alongside another you are entitled to space. If it was in part of the corner where the car was sliding, I could understand if he slid a bit wide, but it was on corner entry where he just moved over to take his chosen line. Unfortunately according to the rules he's not entitled to just choose a line when another car is partly alongside.
Nope, it's only when defending:
20.4 Any driver defending his position on a straight, and before any braking area, may use the full width of the track during his first move, provided no significant portion of the car attempting to pass is alongside his. Whilst defending in this way the driver may not leave the track without justifiable reason.
For the avoidance of doubt, if any part of the front wing of the car attempting to pass is alongside the rear wheel of the car in front this will be deemed to be a 'significant portion'.
This is the only place where the "significant portion" is used in the rules.

myurr
30
Joined: Thu Mar 20, 2008 8:58 pm

Re: 2013 Chinese GP - Shanghai

Post by myurr » Sun Apr 14, 2013 4:38 pm

Is there a definition of defending somewhere? Surely that just means the car in front.

beelsebob
179
Joined: Wed Mar 23, 2011 2:49 pm
Location: Cupertino, California

Re: 2013 Chinese GP - Shanghai

Post by beelsebob » Sun Apr 14, 2013 4:43 pm

myurr wrote:Is there a definition of defending somewhere? Surely that just means the car in front.
I'm pretty sure there isn't, no, but I'd bet that the stewards will have roughly thought "well, it probably involves being aware that they're there" (that certainly was the argument when button put hamilton in the wall in canada), as well as "well, it probably involves the attack being something that has some reasonable chance of paying off to be an attack".

NathanOlder
115
User avatar
Joined: Fri Mar 02, 2012 9:05 am
Location: Kent

Re: 2013 Chinese GP - Shanghai

Post by NathanOlder » Sun Apr 14, 2013 5:03 pm

Jackuar wrote:
SilverArrow10 wrote:Does China change there trophies to match the team that wins there? This years trophy is Ferrari red and last years looked very much PETRONAS green. Probably just a coincidence but I like little things like that.
Don't know what the trophies are made of but how easy is that to get it done in short notice? Whether metal or even if it just the color work over it and considering that they would 'anticipate' who would be winner, still its a bit quick and yes, its nice that they do these little things.

If it was coloured to give out for the winners colours, Id imagine they have about 5 or 6 diffent sets of trophies. For F1 they would only need Red (Ferrari , Marussia), Blue (Red Bull, toro Rosso, Williams), Silver (Mclaren), Turquoise (Mercedes), White (Force India), Black (Lotus & Sauber). Then they just hope Caterham dont win :P
GoLandoGo
Lewis v2.0

Does anyone play F1 2019 on Ps4, Now setting up a league at

https://rapidpixelracing.com

Jonnycraig
55
Joined: Fri Apr 12, 2013 7:48 pm

Re: 2013 Chinese GP - Shanghai

Post by Jonnycraig » Sun Apr 14, 2013 5:25 pm

NathanOlder wrote:So with all these drivers under investigation, I would imagine the car number that were shown 1,2,7..... and more, WERE spotted using DRS down the back straight where yellow flags should be visable for drivers to see. Correct?

Yet, while the event was unfolding, did we not hear Vettel on team radio saying "he is using DRS" against another driver, to get him penalised possibly?

If this was the case, Vettel knew that DRS should'nt have been used yet he is 1 of many under investigation for using it. So I think it's clear that the drivers knew that DRS was unavailable.

If this is all correct, every driver spotted using it should be handed the standard 20-25 second penalty.
All the drivers spoken to used DRS on the start straight with green flags flying so couldn't have known DRS was disabled, hence no punishment.

Entirely possible Vettel saw Hulkenberg using DRS down the back straight towards the yellow flags for Gutierrez and wanted to known he'd used them in the yellow zone.

myurr
30
Joined: Thu Mar 20, 2008 8:58 pm

Re: 2013 Chinese GP - Shanghai

Post by myurr » Sun Apr 14, 2013 5:54 pm

beelsebob wrote:
myurr wrote:Is there a definition of defending somewhere? Surely that just means the car in front.
I'm pretty sure there isn't, no, but I'd bet that the stewards will have roughly thought "well, it probably involves being aware that they're there" (that certainly was the argument when button put hamilton in the wall in canada), as well as "well, it probably involves the attack being something that has some reasonable chance of paying off to be an attack".
Fair enough, I'll shut up then.

reallydumb
-2
Joined: Sun Mar 03, 2013 5:57 pm
Location: San Francisco Ca. USA

Re: 2013 Chinese GP - Shanghai

Post by reallydumb » Sun Apr 14, 2013 5:56 pm

Lorenzo_Bandini wrote:Gutierrez 5 places penalty
Webber 3 places
It keeps getting worse for Webber! ](*,)
Last edited by reallydumb on Sun Apr 14, 2013 6:00 pm, edited 1 time in total.

reallydumb
-2
Joined: Sun Mar 03, 2013 5:57 pm
Location: San Francisco Ca. USA

Re: 2013 Chinese GP - Shanghai

Post by reallydumb » Sun Apr 14, 2013 5:58 pm

SO KUEWL! =D> =D> =D> =D>

SilverArrow
3
Joined: Tue Nov 27, 2012 2:07 am

Re: 2013 Chinese GP - Shanghai

Post by SilverArrow » Sun Apr 14, 2013 6:29 pm

reallydumb wrote:
Lorenzo_Bandini wrote:Gutierrez 5 places penalty
Webber 3 places
It keeps getting worse for Webber! ](*,)
Yeah poor Mark... Harsh penalty in my opinion.

stefan_
815
Joined: Sat Feb 04, 2012 11:43 am
Location: Bucharest, Romania

Re: 2013 Chinese GP - Shanghai

Post by stefan_ » Sun Apr 14, 2013 6:58 pm

Image
via F1 Fanatic

Image
via F1 Fanatic
"...and there, very much in flames, is Jacques Laffite's Ligier. That's obviously a turbo blaze, and of course, Laffite will be able to see that conflagration in his mirrors... he is coolly parking the car somewhere safe." Murray Walker, San Marino 1985

strad
259
User avatar
Joined: Sat Jan 02, 2010 12:57 am

Re: 2013 Chinese GP - Shanghai

Post by strad » Sun Apr 14, 2013 7:55 pm

there is nothing new about it,,,It's just been codified..Whenever an opponent has his front wheel up to your cockpit you must leave room. It's called an overlap.
Motorsport without danger is like cooking without salt
Sir Stirling Moss