Hamilton vs Button

[Ciro Pabón]

To bad enkidu doesn't know that on the road you have to look into your mirrors before you change lane. Basics of the road code.

Except when Ham is behind you.

In that case, why would I lose time by looking into the mirrors?

You are sure the guy will try to out brake you through the apex, knocking you in the rear inner wheel, so you better start to counter steer in advance before the whammy, instead of distracting yourself watching the mirrors...

I've seen that maneuver in "Cops" thousand of times.

In NASCAR it brings you a penalty and that's it, because it happens every Sunday.

In F1 it brings you one million posts and theories about how that infraction could be.

[beelsebob]

The stewards not only examined who drove where, but also what they were doing the previous laps. In fact, Button drove further to the left on the preceding lap, which really raises serious questions. Hamilton was following, must have observed his teammate's lines, yet drove into a space he should have known had closed the lap before, on the hope his teammate would see him through the haze of rain and spray and avoid him.

So let's see, a comprehensive and much more complete examination of the facts led the stewards to decide it was a racing accident, Hamilton has himself personally admitted guilt, and yet some still maintain that Hamilton was entirely guilt-free when the facts indicate otherwise.

Except that this analysis ignores the idea that almost every overtake in formula 1 involves driving into a gap that wasn't there on the previous lap. Every driver attempts to hit the apices (is that the plural of apex?) perfectly every time round the track, yet overtaking typically involves driving your car inside the other driver. If the other driver turns in as normal, you collide.

Conclusion – putting yourself in a gap that hasn't existed on previous laps is not in and of itself something that causes an accident. Note that the FIA state that Hamilton had a legitimate overtaking opportunity. That is, he legitimately positioned himself somewhere in order to overtake. The only time it would be unreasonable to position yourself there is if you believed that the other driver would have no idea of your presence. Again, the FIA state that this is not the case - instead, hamilton had reasonable belief that button knew exactly where he was.

[Ciro Pabón]

Well, that would be nice.

Do you have seen the text of the actual judgement by FIA? I would be thankful if someone post it here, so we see exactly what he did wrong (apparently, nothing).

[beelsebob]

Well, that would be nice.

Do you have seen the text of the actual judgement by FIA? I would be thankful if someone post it here, so we see exactly what he did wrong (apparently, nothing).

The text of the judgement is pasted by dave killens above.

Edited to remove embarrassing typo.

[andrew]

Who's Dave Kittens?

[Shrieker]

Are some people still dragging the old "Button drove Hamilton into the wall" argument when the steward's report tells it all?

The only thing that prevented Button from getting penalised was the car that he happened to come into contact with was his team mate. Had that not been the case, a protest was sure to be placed resulting in a penalty for Button. Simply because he drove another car into a wall, knowingly or not does not matter.

[hecti]

I think button thought that hamilton did a fake out and would come back up the inside, i took a screen grab of button looking to his left:



I know that the accident isnt either of their faults but at least jenson was trying to see where hamilton was on the track

[Traction]

Are some people still dragging the old "Button drove Hamilton into the wall" argument when the steward's report tells it all?

After reviewing the data from the accident the stewards gave a three-point explanation of why the collision was neither drivers' fault.

"1) Exiting Turn 13 there was a legitimate overtaking opportunity for Lewis Hamilton as his speed was greater than Jensen Button's.

"2) Both drivers took lines substantially similar to many of the other drivers, and did not move as far to the left as the preceding driver, Michael Schumacher. At the moment after Hamilton moved to the left to pass, Button looked into his mirror. It appears from the position of Hamilton at that moment [and is confirmed by the drivers] that Button was unlikely to have seen Hamilton.

"3) At the point of contact Button had not yet moved as far to the left of the track as he had on the previous lap, or that Schumacher had on that lap. The Stewards have concluded that it was reasonable for Hamilton to believe that Button would have seen him and that he could have made the passing manoeuvre. Further, the Stewards have concluded that it is reasonable to believe that Button was not aware of Hamilton's position to his left. Therefore, the Stewards decide that this was a "racing incident" and have taken no further action."

The stewards not only examined who drove where, but also what they were doing the previous laps. In fact, Button drove further to the left on the preceding lap, which really raises serious questions. Hamilton was following, must have observed his teammate's lines, yet drove into a space he should have known had closed the lap before, on the hope his teammate would see him through the haze of rain and spray and avoid him.

So let's see, a comprehensive and much more complete examination of the facts led the stewards to decide it was a racing accident, Hamilton has himself personally admitted guilt, and yet some still maintain that Hamilton was entirely guilt-free when the facts indicate otherwise.

Maybe that's why "fan" is the beginning of the word "fanaticism"

Fanaticism is a belief or behavior involving uncritical zeal, particularly for an extreme religious or political cause or in some cases sports, or with an obsessive enthusiasm for a pastime or hobby. Philosopher George Santayana defines fanaticism as "redoubling your effort when you have forgotten your aim"; according to Winston Churchill, "A fanatic is one who can't change his mind and won't change the subject". By either description the fanatic displays very strict standards and little tolerance for contrary ideas or opinions.

In his book Crazy Talk, Stupid Talk, Neil Postman states that "the key to all fanatical beliefs is that they are self-confirming....(some beliefs are) fanatical not because they are 'false', but because they are expressed in such a way that they can never be shown to be false."

The behavior of a fan with overwhelming enthusiasm for a given subject is differentiated from the behavior of a fanatic by the fanatic's violation of prevailing social norms. Though the fan's behavior may be judged as odd or eccentric, it does not violate such norms. A fanatic differs from a crank, in that a crank is defined as a person who holds a position or opinion which is so far from the norm as to appear ludicrous and/or probably wrong, such as a belief in a Flat Earth. In contrast, the subject of the fanatic's obsession may be "normal", such as an interest in religion or politics, except that the scale of the person's involvement, devotion, or obsession with the activity or cause is abnormal or disproportionate.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fanaticism

Wow..... =D>

[Ciro Pabón]

Thanks, beelsebob and Traction, you're very kind.

I think it's settled: FIA saw no bad intentions (whew, I thought I have lost my eye for incidents, after all the blah, blah, blah I saw posted) and Ham knows he made something stupid. Period.

You can't win with those fans, Dave. You know: they post and post for years and years on such a trivial subject as Formula One. Like ourselves. Except we're right and they're wrong.

They complain about racing incidents. Like ourselves. Except we complain justly, they don't.

They insist on "their" driver being right, while we insist on him being wrong. Except we are mature, reasonable people, condescending and good humoured who have a true understanding of drivers... and they're not.

So, to summarize, what distinguishes a fanatic from a regular person, like us, is that they don't agree with me.

[PlatinumZealot]

That is why I like Ferrari...

One message should have been sent to Button...

"Jenson, Hamilton is.
Faster.
Than.
You.

Can you confirm you understand this message?"

* Button pulls to the inside and allows Hamilton way.

[HampusA]

Is team orders open now?`
If not, then it should in my opinion.

[beelsebob]

Team orders are allowed in F1 now, but McLaren have stated categorically that they don't believe in them and won't be using them.

This is one of many reasons I like McLaren as a team.

[andrew]

They all say the same but I don't believe any of them. When it comes to the end of the season a call will go out telling one of the drivers to pull over.

[beelsebob]

They all say the same but I don't believe any of them. When it comes to the end of the season a call will go out telling one of the drivers to pull over.

Well, other than Ferrari who wear their colours on their sleeve.

Re McLaren and team orders though - the end of the '10 season showed that they were committed to the principle. The result of the season for RBR shows exactly why I think it's a great principal to stand by.

[toshinden]

wow, the battle is still raging on

When Button look to his mirror, we can't be sure what reflection was appeared on his mirror. Not to mention what his visor condition look like.

Someone posted a video from Hamilton's car from 2008, from that video I assume that the line that Button took is the racing line and Hamilton should be aware of that and took the gap on the right instead pushing to go for a closing gap.

Just my two cent though