2016 Belgian Grand Prix - Fri 26 – Sun 28 Aug 2016

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.
User avatar
dans79
267
Joined: 03 Mar 2013, 19:33
Location: USA

Re: 2016 Belgian Grand Prix - Fri 26 – Sun 28 Aug 2016

Post

bhall II wrote:
turbof1 wrote:However, he was afterwards way too dangerous, and given his comments he was dangerous on purpose...
There was a time in the sport's history when other drivers would take a guy like Verstappen behind the paddock and beat the --- out of him for pulling stunts like that.

Sometimes a corporal attitude adjustment is the best medicine.
If I was Kimi, I definitely would have done it today. Since the FIA doesn't have the bal** to enforce the rules someone has to.
202 105 104 9 9 7

Fulcrum
Fulcrum
15
Joined: 25 Aug 2014, 18:05

Re: 2016 Belgian Grand Prix - Fri 26 – Sun 28 Aug 2016

Post

GPR-A wrote:
f1316 wrote:Here...
Just_a_fan wrote:
GPR-A wrote:Isn't that's what was said even in Austria? The ultrasoft was going off in just one lap? But what happened in race? Lewis did a 21 lap first stint on them, with full race load, being chased by the two Ferraris on SuperSofts. And that too, after Saturday rain had washed off the rubber from the track.
What happened at another track on another day is basically irrelevant to today's race at Spa. The particular combination of circuit length and configuration, tarmac, temperature and tyres loads determine which tyre will work best. At this track on this weekend the super soft wasn't happy with one or more of those characteristics. Had it been much cooler then the decision might have been different.

The teams left super soft tyres on the racks. That tells you that they weren't working here, today.
Same response to you too, that I gave turbof1.
Palmer and Kvyat did 11 and 10 laps on SuperSoft today. Here is Palmer's stint.
36 1:53.722
37 1:54.387
38 1:54.355
39 1:54.417
40 1:53.758
41 1:53.251
42 1:53.451
43 1:54.079
44 1:53.459

Before that stop, here are the times that he was doing on Mediums.
24 1:55.548
25 1:55.212
26 1:55.219
27 1:55.766
28 1:55.685
29 1:55.858
30 1:56.451
31 1:56.734
32 1:55.797
33 1:56.144

He was clearly, 3 seconds a lap faster. If he was 3 seconds faster with that car, you can imagine what that Mercedes could have done.

Now prove me, how was that rubber bad.
FIA - Lap Times
The first stint you posted averages to 1:53.875 over 9 laps. The second stint averages to 1:55.841 over 10 laps. Notwithstanding the likely difference in fuel loads, that's 1.966 seconds faster. Or, in mathematical terms, not 3 seconds faster.

Edax
Edax
47
Joined: 08 Apr 2014, 22:47

Re: 2016 Belgian Grand Prix - Fri 26 – Sun 28 Aug 2016

Post

siskue2005 wrote: the specific term blocking is what i was trying to explain through the video above! Nothing to do with Indycar

6 years before Schumacher was penalised for blocking Rubens,....the stewards specified how late he tried to block his place.
and he was given 10 place grid drop.....that was clearly blocking a driver
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/motors ... laces.html
http://www.dailymotion.com/video/xed87l ... gary_sport
That was because Schumacher did not leave a cars width on the edge of the track.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ih3hRAOfuwI

these are the 2016 rules of F1 on defending:
7.6 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.
27.7 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’.
27.8 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
Note that the regulations are only concerned with driving someone of the track or unfair blocking.

This is the relevant Indycar rule:
9.3.3 Blocking - A Driver must not alter his/her racing line to pursuing Drivers
Notice the difference?

VES does everything by the book:
- He moves only once and in a single fluent move.
- He does not move in the braking zone ( but just before it)
- He leaves space on the edge of the track.

What makes this move dangerous is that he waits untill the other driver is committed to a side ( and past the point of a crossover) before he puts his car in front.

User avatar
Schuttelberg
3
Joined: 27 Jul 2015, 12:02

Re: 2016 Belgian Grand Prix - Fri 26 – Sun 28 Aug 2016

Post

turbof1 wrote: Personally. I don't mind a bit of controversy around the track. That was partly which made f1 so much fun in the Senna Prost years. Actually this reminds me of some of the Senna interviews.

I do think he was 100% a victim at the first corner incident, with Vettel being quite oblivious. Verstappen had that right to be there; it was no dive bombing action, but a hole that was open.
Okay, first of all, I'm a bit of a Verstappen fan, but having a personality like some of the legends of F1 doesn't validate 'dangerous driving.' It wasn't valid then and it isn't valid now. Why are the likes of a Maldonado and Schumacher/Senna so separated when we speak of them? It's because the latter have a whole heap of achievements compared to the small list of 'incidents' they were involved in, in their career. I don't think any of us remember them for Suzuka or Jerez. They're remembered for Donnington and Spain.

Secondly, Verstappen hasn't got a god given right to own every corner. He had a poor start and when he went for the gap (it's valid for him to have a go) he must also accept the risk that goes with it. Just like you feel Vettel should have had more spatial awareness of being 3 wide into La Source, so should Verstappen. You seriously can't allocate blame on Vettel for Turn 1. He wrecked his own race by touching Raikkonen because he simply could not have seen Verstappen on Raikkonen's inside. It's impossible. It's a risk he took and he paid for it, rightly so. Similarly, if Verstappen was SO worried, he could have held back and chosen a better spot to make his move.

What is clear, is that later in the race, Vettel had a moment with Massa and gave him space to race. He accepted his mistake and gave up the corner while still resisting as best he could. Verstappen had an agenda with Ferrari, which is quite ludicrous if you ask me, but he also drove Perez off, which has no explanation.

As talented as Verstappen is, he simply hasn't learnt to lose. While part of that attitude is to be appreciated, you can't win every corner and there's no good in jeopardising your own life and your peers for the matter of a racing position. Ask Bianchi's parents that! Raikkonen may be a lot of things, but he's a world champion and very well respected when it comes to wheel to wheel racing. He commands a respect among his peers which Versappen is aeons away from.

What I saw today was a very very talented racing driver with abundance of arrogance and disrespect for his peers!
"Sebastian there's very, you're a member of a very select few.. Stewart, Lauda, Piquet, Senna, Prost, Schumacher, Fangio.. VETTEL!"

Just_a_fan
Just_a_fan
593
Joined: 31 Jan 2010, 20:37

Re: 2016 Belgian Grand Prix - Fri 26 – Sun 28 Aug 2016

Post

dans79 wrote:
bhall II wrote:
turbof1 wrote:However, he was afterwards way too dangerous, and given his comments he was dangerous on purpose...
There was a time in the sport's history when other drivers would take a guy like Verstappen behind the paddock and beat the --- out of him for pulling stunts like that.

Sometimes a corporal attitude adjustment is the best medicine.
If I was Kimi, I definitely would have done it today. Since the FIA doesn't have the bal** to enforce the rules someone has to.
Sadly, the police would tend to want to enforce the rules about smacking people about. The rules are that only they are allowed to do it ("he fell down the stairs, honest") and they guard that privilege extremely keenly... :twisted:

Kimi should just invite Max out for a drink and give him the world's worst hangover. And then play loud music with lots of bass. :lol:
If you are more fortunate than others, build a larger table not a taller fence.

Fulcrum
Fulcrum
15
Joined: 25 Aug 2014, 18:05

Re: 2016 Belgian Grand Prix - Fri 26 – Sun 28 Aug 2016

Post

I posted this in the Hungarian thread after the run-in between Verstappen and Raikkonen.
I think a lot of us are getting hung up with the rules of engagement as opposed to the outcomes.

At worst, Verstappen's moves were borderline, and extremely subtle. A committee wouldn't be able to unanimously decide one way or the other, so I'm not going to suggest a penalty was the appropriate response.

However, I don't think this is clever driving on Verstappen's part. Not in the sense that it is overtly stupid, but because I believe the potential outcomes of defending in this way are expectationally worse than 'normal' defensive driving.

I.e. if Verstappen were to do this repeatedly, I'd expect several instances of collisions, racing incidents or otherwise, that result in his average outcome being worse than 6th place. Defending 5th in this manner for 2 extra points could easily expose him to a 10 point loss.

It's obviously his style, and his results currently reinforce his opinions, but somewhere down the line he's going to be leading a race, there will be a collision, and he will honestly believe he has nothing to do with it.
To a large extent, I believe most of what I said still applies, except now it's been taken to the next level.

Verstappen's defence on this occasion was more than just borderline, and not very subtle either. As others have already stated, there is only one logical outcome to this type of driving - a huge accident.

The FIA need to get involved sooner rather than later and shut this down before it becomes the new normal.

Is F1 so desperate for attention they would tacitly condone this sort of behaviour at the expense of driver safety?

User avatar
turbof1
Moderator
Joined: 19 Jul 2012, 21:36
Location: MountDoom CFD Matrix

Re: 2016 Belgian Grand Prix - Fri 26 – Sun 28 Aug 2016

Post

Schuttelberg wrote:
turbof1 wrote: Personally. I don't mind a bit of controversy around the track. That was partly which made f1 so much fun in the Senna Prost years. Actually this reminds me of some of the Senna interviews.

I do think he was 100% a victim at the first corner incident, with Vettel being quite oblivious. Verstappen had that right to be there; it was no dive bombing action, but a hole that was open.
Okay, first of all, I'm a bit of a Verstappen fan, but having a personality like some of the legends of F1 doesn't validate 'dangerous driving.' It wasn't valid then and it isn't valid now. Why are the likes of a Maldonado and Schumacher/Senna so separated when we speak of them? It's because the latter have a whole heap of achievements compared to the small list of 'incidents' they were involved in, in their career. I don't think any of us remember them for Suzuka or Jerez. They're remembered for Donnington and Spain.

Secondly, Verstappen hasn't got a god given right to own every corner. He had a poor start and when he went for the gap (it's valid for him to have a go) he must also accept the risk that goes with it. Just like you feel Vettel should have had more spatial awareness of being 3 wide into La Source, so should Verstappen. You seriously can't allocate blame on Vettel for Turn 1. He wrecked his own race by touching Raikkonen because he simply could not have seen Verstappen on Raikkonen's inside. It's impossible. It's a risk he took and he paid for it, rightly so. Similarly, if Verstappen was SO worried, he could have held back and chosen a better spot to make his move.

What is clear, is that later in the race, Vettel had a moment with Massa and gave him space to race. He accepted his mistake and gave up the corner while still resisting as best he could. Verstappen had an agenda with Ferrari, which is quite ludicrous if you ask me, but he also drove Perez off, which has no explanation.

As talented as Verstappen is, he simply hasn't learnt to lose. While part of that attitude is to be appreciated, you can't win every corner and there's no good in jeopardising your own life and your peers for the matter of a racing position. Ask Bianchi's parents that! Raikkonen may be a lot of things, but he's a world champion and very well respected when it comes to wheel to wheel racing. He commands a respect among his peers which Versappen is aeons away from.

What I saw today was a very very talented racing driver with abundance of arrogance and disrespect for his peers!
Ok, I hear the argument that he had a bad start pass a lot in this debate. I really don't see how this relevant at all to the first corner incident. It's unrelated to the incident.

Second, Verstappen had a rightful claim on his line into the corner. Argueing that it held a risk is the same as argueing racing holds a risk and the alternative is to not participate. Technically true, but irrelevant as he really did not take any big risks. He was alongside Raikkonen for a significant part of his car, 30m before the corner!
Image

The image also shows Vettel could potentially have seen Verstappen being on the inside of Raikkonen. But assuming he did not: he should not have squeezed Raikkonen like that. You can't blame Vettel for the crash with Verstappen, but you can for his crash with Raikkonen which led to the crash with Verstappen.

Verstappen made a move which originally was relative risk free. It was not a tight hole he dive-bombed into. There was initially a huge lot of space there, more then one car width on the right of Verstappen!

Does that justify taking revenge later in the race? Absolutely not. You can't behave that emotional at 300km/h. I simply do think Verstappen made absolutely the correct call in that first corner.
#AeroFrodo

dr.chaos
dr.chaos
0
Joined: 05 Feb 2013, 16:10

Re: 2016 Belgian Grand Prix - Fri 26 – Sun 28 Aug 2016

Post

Verstappen's defence on this occasion was more than just borderline, and not very subtle either. As others have already stated, there is only one logical outcome to this type of driving - a huge accident.
Kudos to Kimi indeed. Remember how Wehrlein bumped into Button at a much lower speed?

User avatar
Schuttelberg
3
Joined: 27 Jul 2015, 12:02

Re: 2016 Belgian Grand Prix - Fri 26 – Sun 28 Aug 2016

Post

turbof1 wrote: Ok, I hear the argument that he had a bad start pass a lot in this debate. I really don't see how this relevant at all to the first corner incident. It's unrelated to the incident.

Second, Verstappen had a rightful claim on his line into the corner. Argueing that it held a risk is the same as argueing racing holds a risk and the alternative is to not participate. Technically true, but irrelevant as he really did not take any big risks. He was alongside Raikkonen for a significant part of his car, 30m before the corner!
http://u.cubeupload.com/turbof1/Scherma ... 160828.png

The image also shows Vettel could potentially have seen Verstappen being on the inside of Raikkonen. But assuming he did not: he should not have squeezed Raikkonen like that. You can't blame Vettel for the crash with Verstappen, but you can for his crash with Raikkonen which led to the crash with Verstappen.

Verstappen made a move which originally was relative risk free. It was not a tight hole he dive-bombed into. There was initially a huge lot of space there, more then one car width on the right of Verstappen!

Does that justify taking revenge later in the race? Absolutely not. You can't behave that emotional at 300km/h. I simply do think Verstappen made absolutely the correct call in that first corner.
It's absolutely relevant mate. You can't look at an incident in one frame. It's racing so there will be acceleration and deceleration. To add to this, there's the human mind and the games it plays. VES had a poor start, lost momentum, was on the faster but less durable tyre and he saw it as imperative to get both Ferrari's at the first corner itself. If he falls back there, his only hope is a fifth with a fast charging Hamilton behind. So he makes the dive bomb (perfectly legit) but it's not 'risk free.' By putting the car there, he risks being swiped by not one, but two Ferrari's. Just like you say VET 'could have' seen VES, I can also state that VES already knew he would be on the inside of both Ferrari's and carrying lesser speed on the exit of La Source because all his momentum was on entry to the corner.

In my opinion, it was a simple racing incident which VES took to a whole new level with the block on RAI. VET leaving RAI space? I'm in agreement with you there, although VET was clueless about VES being there 3 wide. If you get into his head, VET is thinking RAI has enough space on the inside and can squeeze him a tad to make position. Common practice if you ask me, just look at HAM and ROS for the same.

What I find a complete JOKE is the Rosberg penalty at Germany (which I felt was correctly given) in light of the Verstappen antics today. Verstappen has been moving under braking and pushing people off the track regularly. F1 only learns when there is an incident. Honestly, I think post Schumacher (and this comes from a hardcore Schumacher fan) there has been a huge surge in FAIR but HARD racing over the past decade, but this chap is making Michael look tame! I'm not saying the likes of BUT/ALO/RAI/HAM/VET and RIC are saints, but they're generally on edge and do come across as guys on the limit, yet not over.
"Sebastian there's very, you're a member of a very select few.. Stewart, Lauda, Piquet, Senna, Prost, Schumacher, Fangio.. VETTEL!"

User avatar
turbof1
Moderator
Joined: 19 Jul 2012, 21:36
Location: MountDoom CFD Matrix

Re: 2016 Belgian Grand Prix - Fri 26 – Sun 28 Aug 2016

Post

Schuttelberg wrote:It's absolutely relevant mate.
As relative as his first carting race more then a decade ago. I mean it did start there right? Or maybe we can argue it started at Jos Verstappen's first race?

Looking for reasons why he made his decisions to take the inside line, directly implies you feel he made an incorrect decision. He did not, so any reason why is not relevant. For all I care the reason was to pick up a pizza order passing the pit wall. Did he tried to make up places? Yes, the same as just about everyone else around him with the exception of Rosberg (who actually is trying to make up places in the WDC standing, so kind of a half exception). Would he have done the same thing if he start 10th and had a great start? Yes, he would.
So he makes the dive bomb (perfectly legit)
It's kind of rude to completely ignore my point that he did NOT divebomb into the corner:
Image

If that is divebombing, I'm president Barack Obama.
Just like you say VET 'could have' seen VES, I can also state that VES already knew he would be on the inside of both Ferrari's and carrying lesser speed on the exit of La Source because all his momentum was on entry to the corner.
Except Verstappen did not have to consider that. He kept the line he was entitled to. He even moved further to the inside, completely on the kerb to give Raikkonen space. Ultimately it was Vettel trying to squeeze Raikkonen which makes it Vettel's responsibility.
In my opinion, it was a simple racing incident which VES took to a whole new level with the block on RAI. VET leaving RAI space? I'm in agreement with you there, although VET was clueless about VES being there 3 wide. If you get into his head, VET is thinking RAI has enough space on the inside and can squeeze him a tad to make position. Common practice if you ask me, just look at HAM and ROS for the same.
I really like to refrain from going into somebody his head at high speed. It's guessing at best. Vettel could just as well be thinking about that delicious pepperoni pizza Verstappen picked up a moment earlier at the pit wall.

The only thing we are sure of what Verstappen got into his head (later in the race), was he'd "rather run them off the track" as he stated that himself. That's utterly wrong from Verstappen; feelings of retaliation are a bad thing 300km/h. That's where I agree with you.
What I find a complete JOKE is the Rosberg penalty at Germany (which I felt was correctly given) in light of the Verstappen antics today. Verstappen has been moving under braking and pushing people off the track regularly. F1 only learns when there is an incident. Honestly, I think post Schumacher (and this comes from a hardcore Schumacher fan) there has been a huge surge in FAIR but HARD racing over the past decade, but this chap is making Michael look tame! I'm not saying the likes of BUT/ALO/RAI/HAM/VET and RIC are saints, but they're generally on edge and do come across as guys on the limit, yet not over.
Please do not open that can of worms. We had to deal with that the last few race weekends here, it was utterly horrible and I was really glad yesterday the chances that Hamilton and Rosberg got to tango were unexisting. So let's keep ourselves from drawing parallels.
#AeroFrodo

LionKing
LionKing
4
Joined: 26 Jun 2010, 22:03

Re: 2016 Belgian Grand Prix - Fri 26 – Sun 28 Aug 2016

Post

Look at the orientation of Verstappen's RBR. He was always going to hit Kimi.
Image
Last edited by turbof1 on 28 Aug 2016, 22:31, edited 1 time in total.
Reason: fixed image link

User avatar
NathanOlder
48
Joined: 02 Mar 2012, 10:05
Location: Kent

Re: 2016 Belgian Grand Prix - Fri 26 – Sun 28 Aug 2016

Post

Hi guys, does anyone know of any onboard video footage from the start onboard Hamilton or Alonso today.
GoLandoGo
Lewis v2.0
King George has arrived.

New found love for GT racing with Assetto Corsa Competizione on PS5 & PC

User avatar
turbof1
Moderator
Joined: 19 Jul 2012, 21:36
Location: MountDoom CFD Matrix

Re: 2016 Belgian Grand Prix - Fri 26 – Sun 28 Aug 2016

Post

LionKing wrote:Look at the orientation of Verstappen's RBR. He was always going to hit Kimi.
https://s21.postimg.io/qykeszogn/Spa_Fi ... er2016.jpg
This is past the collision I believe (correct me if I am wrong). The collision with Vettel changed the vector and orientation of Raikkonen's car. These are my screenshots:

A couple of frames right before the collision:

Image

And a couple of frames right after:

Image

Some more screenshots, with the last frame the moment of collision between Raikkonen and Vettel:

Image
Image
Image
Image
Image
#AeroFrodo

LionKing
LionKing
4
Joined: 26 Jun 2010, 22:03

Re: 2016 Belgian Grand Prix - Fri 26 – Sun 28 Aug 2016

Post

By looking of your images, one would conclude that Vettel's car very close to the curb. But from the image above. there seems be to be a car and a half space underneath Vettel's car. The far shot images does not provide the depth perspective.

I think the close up image is just after Vettel and Kimi touched (Vettel's car has started the rotation) and just before Kimi and Verstappen touched. Even at that point it looks like Verstappen car is headed towards Kimi's, not the other way around.

komninosm
komninosm
0
Joined: 05 Apr 2009, 18:41
Location: Macedonia

Re: 2016 Belgian Grand Prix - Fri 26 – Sun 28 Aug 2016

Post

turbof1 wrote:@GPR-A (something about waking up and a question about when Hamilton had used medium tyres on; post got removed by the user): in his final stint. After Q yesterday he had 1 fresh set of mediums and 1 used. He started on mediums and his final stint was on mediums. I'm guessing, but I think he started on the fresh set, and ended on the used set.

In all probability, he could have done 1:50s on fresh softs. He had 3 fresh softs when he started the GP, beats me why they preferred a used medium set over a fresh soft set.
It makes no sense does it?

Also why use Med Soft Soft Med instead of Med Soft Med? They should have gone Soft Med Med anyway, but still...