Kimi Raikkonen can thank his KERS device for winning the Belgian Grand Prix at Spa-Francorchamps this year. He had trouble fending off Fisichella all through the race but managed to get past him with KERS power. Vettel meanwhile is third, both here as well as in the championship.
What is wrong with the content? What would you like it to be?donskar wrote:It is the content of threads like this one that has caused me to discontinue my participation in this forum. No, I do not consider this post "participating."
Welcome to the open nature of the internet. You will not find solace by leaving here. Every forum on the planet has good members, and fodder.donskar wrote:It is the content of threads like this one that has caused me to discontinue my participation in this forum. No, I do not consider this post "participating."
Not to belabour the argument, but what Hamilton did was virtually the same as Kimi if not less severe. He had little choice. Kimi chose to come off the track, and did not concede the position unlike hamilton.ds.raikkonen wrote:I dont understand why people are still crying over that move by Kimi. Even DC said that they sometimes have to go wide at La Source to avoid a pile up or any accident, Kimi did exactly that. Actually, it was a clever move, but fair...
The stewards are not blind as you guys are imagining them to be, they ve got n no. of camera angles and much more experience than all of us put together.
Last year, Hamilton cut the chicane and gained a place when he could ve braked easily before the chicane, although I admit it was due to Kimi's early braking into the corner that caught him by surprise, so, it was also sort of bad luck for LH to be dropped 3 places after winning, but it was a foul nonetheless.
So it ll be better if we start looking towards Monza rather than banging our heads in this thread.
And if there wasn't this precedent, I don't think there was any material to discuss about Raikkonen's manouver. However, the exact same marshalls that screwed up like that last year, amazingly seem to have different criteriae now and that leaves some wondering...ringo wrote:Not to belabour the argument, but what Hamilton did was virtually the same as Kimi if not less severe. He had little choice. Kimi chose to come off the track, and did not concede the position unlike hamilton.
You say the stewards are not blind, but you seem to be seeing through the same lens. Both incidents are the same.
Can you see the difference between going the shorter way and going the longer way? This shouldn't be hard.dumrick wrote:However, the exact same marshalls that screwed up like that last year, amazingly seem to have different criteriae now and that leaves some wondering...
Sure I can, my friend but inmodbaraban wrote:Can you see the difference between going the shorter way and going the longer way? This shouldn't be hard.
I see no mention to the relative diffrence between the path taken and the nominal length of the racetrack, but I can see a mention to gaining advantage of leaving the track, which Raikkonen did this year and Hamilton last year didn't.c) The race track alone shall be used by the drivers during the
race. Drivers must use the track at all times. For the avoidance of
doubt:
- the white lines defining the track edges are considered to be
part of the track but the kerbs are not, and ;
- a driver will be judged to have left the track if no part of the car
remains in contact with the track.
Should a car leave the track for any reason, and without
prejudice to 2(d) below, the driver may rejoin. However, this may
only be done when it is safe to do so and without gaining any
advantage.
So, if you go off the track, gain one position and give the position back, you have an advantage, but if you go off-track, gain two positions and don't give the positions back, you have none?modbaraban wrote:I saw a clear advantage in LH cutting that chicane, no so here.
Exactly the reason Hamilton was forced to go off-track last year, or not? You either overtake, within the limits of the track, or avoid a car by going off-track and, if there is a gain on position, you must give it back (I'm just following literally what's written in the rules, marshalls used to be permissive, until penalties started going off control some two to three years ago).modbaraban wrote:It's just that the cars on track weren't fast
This could be a potential attack on the intelligence of your fellow forumers, I consider that a good contributor like yourself should avoid it.modbaraban wrote:Simple question here. What if there was a pile up in T1 and both Ferraris and Button who ran wide overtook the carnage ending up 1-2-3? Disqualify them all for not joining the crash?
15 years ago, people like us who are all in the same thing used to get together at bars and pubs to knock back a few brews and talk about this garbage all we like.donskar wrote:It is the content of threads like this one that has caused me to discontinue my participation in this forum. No, I do not consider this post "participating."
