|
|
On May 27 2019 01:12 Excludos wrote:Show nested quote +On May 27 2019 01:01 sneirac wrote:On May 27 2019 00:48 Excludos wrote:That's fair. As long as there were no one gaining or losing in the incident, then there's no point in penalising. It really isn't because the only reason there was no gaining or losing is sheer luck. Either he broke the rules and should be punished or he didn't and then he shouldn't be punished even if Hamiltons car was damaged. Arguing that breaking the rules is ok as long as there is no serious consequences means he will dive bomb time and time again, why not after all. It isn't the first time Max has affected the race of another driver with an unreasonable risk, wasn't even the first time today. If you punish drivers for every non consequential mistake they do, they'll be less likely to try anything in the future. This sport needs more racing, not less. The stewards have recognised this, and have gone on record saying they want drivers to race, and isn't going to penalize unless necessary. This is an incident with 0 casualities, 0 changes in positions, and 0 consequences. If they penalize here, next year Verstappen is going to sit back and not even try. How's that for exciting racing on an already snore fest of a track? This is completely in line with their stance on letting people race.
Because it is sheer luck that it resulted in no casualties, changes in positions or consequnces. And it could very well have ended with the leader of 76 laps of a 78 lap race eliminated due to a move that never had any chance to succeed whatsoever.
|
On May 27 2019 01:22 sneirac wrote:Show nested quote +On May 27 2019 01:12 Excludos wrote:On May 27 2019 01:01 sneirac wrote:On May 27 2019 00:48 Excludos wrote:That's fair. As long as there were no one gaining or losing in the incident, then there's no point in penalising. It really isn't because the only reason there was no gaining or losing is sheer luck. Either he broke the rules and should be punished or he didn't and then he shouldn't be punished even if Hamiltons car was damaged. Arguing that breaking the rules is ok as long as there is no serious consequences means he will dive bomb time and time again, why not after all. It isn't the first time Max has affected the race of another driver with an unreasonable risk, wasn't even the first time today. If you punish drivers for every non consequential mistake they do, they'll be less likely to try anything in the future. This sport needs more racing, not less. The stewards have recognised this, and have gone on record saying they want drivers to race, and isn't going to penalize unless necessary. This is an incident with 0 casualities, 0 changes in positions, and 0 consequences. If they penalize here, next year Verstappen is going to sit back and not even try. How's that for exciting racing on an already snore fest of a track? This is completely in line with their stance on letting people race. Because it is sheer luck that it resulted in no casualties, changes in positions or consequnces. And it could very well have ended with the leader of 76 laps of a 78 lap race eliminated due to a move that never had any chance to succeed whatsoever.
Well, luck is part of racing too.
|
On May 27 2019 00:44 Excludos wrote:Show nested quote +On May 27 2019 00:23 xM(Z wrote:
the decision to go for the overtake is arguable(still, i approve of it) but i don't think the gains if he was successful are.
Verstappen would have been on the podium. I don't see how that could possibly happen. Even in the absolute best case, your own words, he'd make up around 2 seconds. Then Vettel 1s behind Hamilton, and Bottas 1s behind there again. That's, as you might notice, 4 seconds. How that's "inarguable" is beyond me. first it needs to be said that Verstappen got the go ahead to try and overtake when there were 10 laps remaining.
if we're talking explicitly about those last 2 laps, i'll give you that it might've been wishful thinking, but Vettel, having 2nd secured, could've kept Bottas out of those 5 sec(Merc. being his primary concern).
|
On May 27 2019 02:07 xM(Z wrote:Show nested quote +On May 27 2019 00:44 Excludos wrote:On May 27 2019 00:23 xM(Z wrote:
the decision to go for the overtake is arguable(still, i approve of it) but i don't think the gains if he was successful are.
Verstappen would have been on the podium. I don't see how that could possibly happen. Even in the absolute best case, your own words, he'd make up around 2 seconds. Then Vettel 1s behind Hamilton, and Bottas 1s behind there again. That's, as you might notice, 4 seconds. How that's "inarguable" is beyond me. first it needs to be said that Verstappen got the go ahead to try and overtake when there were 10 laps remaining. if we're talking explicitly about those last 2 laps, i'll give you that it might've been wishful thinking, but Vettel, having 2nd secured, could've kept Bottas out of those 5 sec(Merc. being his primary concern).
Oh absolutely. If Ver had managed to overtake on lap 70 rather than the attempt at lap 76, He could absolutely have gotten away, perhaps even as far as to keep first place.
Tho I don't think Merc are Vettels primary concern any more. Verstappen is only 4 points behind Vettel, while Bottas is a whopping 38 points ahead. Vettel is not really in the championship fight any more, but he will have to fight for third with Verstappen.
|
This race certainly wasn't an advertisement for F1. Mercedes has an advantage in that their team has the first pit box. So that means they stop earlier and thus leave earlier. And apparently the rule is that you can only leave your pitstop spot if there is no one else in the pit lane. But then Bottas also had to screw over Verstappen and Vettel in trying to prevent losing a spot for pitting at the same time as Hamilton.
And then we had Verstappen, Vettel, and Bottas stuck behind Hamilton for the rest of the race. And Hamilton's radio conversations were so bad. He kept complaining and they actually told him to follow Perez and never let Verstappen pass.
It was absurdly stupid. And we will see the same stuff on Zandvoort? I understand there tracks are fun to drive. But why don't they create a circuit where there is more than one ideal line and cars can actually race parallel through several corners next to each other? I know there is a circuit where you have a corner like this.
|
On May 27 2019 10:15 Rasalased wrote:
This race certainly wasn't an advertisement for F1. Mercedes has an advantage in that their team has the first pit box. So that means they stop earlier and thus leave earlier. And apparently the rule is that you can only leave your pitstop spot if there is no one else in the pit lane. But then Bottas also had to screw over Verstappen and Vettel in trying to prevent losing a spot for pitting at the same time as Hamilton.
And then we had Verstappen, Vettel, and Bottas stuck behind Hamilton for the rest of the race. And Hamilton's radio conversations were so bad. He kept complaining and they actually told him to follow Perez and never let Verstappen pass.
It was absurdly stupid. And we will see the same stuff on Zandvoort? I understand there tracks are fun to drive. But why don't they create a circuit where there is more than one ideal line and cars can actually race parallel through several corners next to each other? I know there is a circuit where you have a corner like this.
So there's a couple of reasons for this.
Firstly there's the tradition factor. This is the only reason an awful track like Monaco is still in the calendar. It's historically the biggest/most prestigious event of the year, and it has a long and rich history in F1. If Monaco wasn't already in the F1 calendar, there would be no way it would ever be added. Old tracks are often the worst, because not only did they not have an equal amount of data to work from on what constitutes a good race track when they made it, but the cars from the period were also much different. Some tracks, like Silverstone, has updated their track layouts over the years to better suit modern racing, others have not.
Secondly, for newer tracks, F1 has rather strict rules on where F1 cars can race. It's not so much about whether it makes for good racing or not, but rather some extensive rules about track safety, spectator accessibility, etc. Keeping your track to F1 spec is incredibly expensive, let alone the work required to get there in the first place, so only the richest tracks are really able to do it. There's not that many of them in the world, so F1 pretty much takes whoever is willing to pay out (The only real exception is that only one track pr country is allowed pr season. Often this is resolved by swapping the track year by year, but keeping your track up to F1 standards while only getting income from the fans every other year isn't exactly a good deal).
Now on to Zandvoort: It fails spectacularly on the F1 spec front. They practically have to make large changes if they're to race there. This is costly, and takes time. So the speculations that F1 is going to race there next year is completely unfounded and wishful thinking. I wouldn't expect the track to ever be built at all, but if it is, it's going to be a few years from now, and look completely different.
|
wow, Ferrari + Vettel in pole.
gg
|
Some tracks I really miss are:
1. Imola
2. Nürburgring GP
3. Brands Hatch
If Interlagos goes out of the calender, it would be a sad day for F1. Such an awesome and unique track with a great history.
New tracks can be great. Malaysia, Bahrain and China are decent tracks.
Overall, Tilke tracks are kinda boring, though. (Fuck Sochi and Yas Marina, seriously.)
|
On June 09 2019 13:01 virpi wrote:
Some tracks I really miss are:
1. Imola
2. Nürburgring GP
3. Brands Hatch
If Interlagos goes out of the calender, it would be a sad day for F1. Such an awesome and unique track with a great history.
New tracks can be great. Malaysia, Bahrain and China are decent tracks.
Overall, Tilke tracks are kinda boring, though. (Fuck Sochi and Yas Marina, seriously.)
Problem with Imola, BH and Interlagos is that they make for exceptionally bad racing. Tilke tracks might be samy and feel a little soulless, but they are generally are good tracks that makes for good racing (barring one or two exceptions).
edit: Bad racing for F1. They're fine for other sports of course
|
On June 09 2019 20:28 Excludos wrote:Show nested quote +On June 09 2019 13:01 virpi wrote:
Some tracks I really miss are:
1. Imola
2. Nürburgring GP
3. Brands Hatch
If Interlagos goes out of the calender, it would be a sad day for F1. Such an awesome and unique track with a great history.
New tracks can be great. Malaysia, Bahrain and China are decent tracks.
Overall, Tilke tracks are kinda boring, though. (Fuck Sochi and Yas Marina, seriously.) Problem with Imola, BH and Interlagos is that they make for exceptionally bad racing. Tilke tracks might be samy and feel a little soulless, but they are generally are good tracks that makes for good racing (barring one or two exceptions). edit: Bad racing for F1. They're fine for other sports of course
Bahrain is fine now has been good since 2014, China has had some good races from 2010-2013 but not so good in this era.
|
Tilke has done some great tracks and some poor tacks imo, Austin and Turkey are the best ones that stand out for me. That said my favourite ones are the old school tracks like Spa, Silverstone, Monza and Interlagos. Perhaps F1 should take on the promotion of these classics to keep them in F1.
I think today should be a good race, Canada is another very good track and it usually kicks up some good races. Max will be all out attack and hopefully the top two will have a good fight. Danny Ricc did a great job yesterday so it will be nice if he can get a result and I hope McLaren can score some good points.
|
Great. F1TV crapped out. Looks like I won't get to watch this race. They've had years to fix their issues. How can they still be this bad?!
|
Stream is unwatchable today argh. Sleep would be better
|
On June 09 2019 20:28 Excludos wrote:Show nested quote +On June 09 2019 13:01 virpi wrote:
Some tracks I really miss are:
1. Imola
2. Nürburgring GP
3. Brands Hatch
If Interlagos goes out of the calender, it would be a sad day for F1. Such an awesome and unique track with a great history.
New tracks can be great. Malaysia, Bahrain and China are decent tracks.
Overall, Tilke tracks are kinda boring, though. (Fuck Sochi and Yas Marina, seriously.) Problem with Imola, BH and Interlagos is that they make for exceptionally bad racing. Tilke tracks might be samy and feel a little soulless, but they are generally are good tracks that makes for good racing (barring one or two exceptions). edit: Bad racing for F1. They're fine for other sports of course
True. F1 cars have become too sensitive aerodynamically, as long as there's no valid solution for the dirty air problem, we won't see the F1 of ye olde days. But F1 also has never been better when it comes to overall competitiveness.
The new Imola just isn't made for modern F1 anymore. No real possibilities to overtake, no hyper modern facilities.
|
|
|
Lol, 5 seconds for Vettel. If it was Mercedes, it was going to be a "racing accident". The same penalty Verstappen received for racing in the pit lane... FIA knowingly just decided the winner of the race.
|
Feels harsh. He did certainly impede him, but think he just went to hard on accelerator and lost control in the path of hamilton again/didn't get away fast enough again instead of consciously blocking him
|
Fuck this. Such a decent race. Where could Seb possibly have gone? He had just caught the car, trying to keep it on the left side increases the chance for a spin.
It definitely was close. But come on, it's racing.
|
delete please, double post
|
The moment he lost control there's nowhere for him to go.
He's on grass, can't turn, can't stop, and then the back steps out when he gets on the track again.
Fucking bullshit penalty.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
![[image loading]](https://pbs.twimg.com/media/D7gOWPbX4AUAaGB.jpg:large)
