zkojq wrote:

I am literally the smugest person on the planet right now. Esteban more than deserved that win - had Seb in his DRS Zone for the whole race and didn't make a single mistake.

Lots of people are overdue a hearty serving of humble pie about now. Esteban has for a long time been overhated.

You didn't spell smuggest correctly.

StarAC17 wrote:

TheFlyingDisk wrote:

scbriml wrote:

Except they didn't for two reasons.

One - the team is not allowed to make that communication on the formation lap.
Two - Mercedes is the first pit, so even if Hamilton came in, he wouldn't get released until all the other cars had passed. He might not have been dead last, but he'd have run a high risk of a collision in the pit lane with the whole field scrambling to change tyres at the same time.

Excuses.

They could have discussed it before the restart and told Hamilton to come in at the end of the formation lap. How do you think every other driver managed to get into the pit? They too have to face the same rule.

Also, is the Mercedes-Benz pit crew so incompetent that they can't release him safely?

Toto doesn't believe he made a mistake because of the pit placement of the Mercedes garages and the reshuffling that would have taken place after the restart.

Hamilton's strategy was sound and he was able to get up to P3 and had a very good undercut of Riccardo and Verstappen on his first stop after switching the intermediates out.

If it wasn't for an outstanding defensive performance by Alonso, Hamilton could very well have won this has he was basically in DRS range of Vettel when the race ended.

HAM stayed out at the restart because his team told him there was some rain coming.

Vettel disqualified, Hamilton now second place:
https://www.bbc.com/sport/formula1/58050375

marcelh wrote:

Vettel disqualified, Hamilton now second place:
https://www.bbc.com/sport/formula1/58050375

Rules are rules I guess, but that feels really harsh after such an exciting race, and so much effort to bring his car across the line second.

wingman wrote:

zkojq wrote:

I am literally the smugest person on the planet right now. Esteban more than deserved that win - had Seb in his DRS Zone for the whole race and didn't make a single mistake.

Lots of people are overdue a hearty serving of humble pie about now. Esteban has for a long time been overhated.

You didn't spell smuggest correctly.

Oops.


Oh and time to update my profile picture I guess.

TheFlyingDisk wrote:

scbriml wrote:

Except they didn't for two reasons.

One - the team is not allowed to make that communication on the formation lap.
Two - Mercedes is the first pit, so even if Hamilton came in, he wouldn't get released until all the other cars had passed. He might not have been dead last, but he'd have run a high risk of a collision in the pit lane with the whole field scrambling to change tyres at the same time.

Excuses.

They could have discussed it before the restart and told Hamilton to come in at the end of the formation lap. How do you think every other driver managed to get into the pit? They too have to face the same rule.

Also, is the Mercedes-Benz pit crew so incompetent that they can't release him safely?

Not excuses, just simple facts. If the call was so obvious, one wonders why not one single team put their drivers on slicks for the restart?

The concern about being the first garage is perfectly valid and that pit lane was chaos. Regardless of a safe release for Hamilton, there was still a significant chance of a collision with other driver jumping in and out of pits. There were incidents in that chaos Mazepin's race was ended when he was hit in the melee.

marcelh wrote:

Vettel disqualified, Hamilton now second place:
https://www.bbc.com/sport/formula1/58050375

You missed all the other promotions if Vettel's disqualification stands...

Sainz 3rd
Alonso 4th
Gasly 5th
Tsunoda 6th
Latifi 7th
Russell 8th
Verstappen 9th
Raikkonen 10th

But Vettel is still provisionally 2nd after Aston Martin gave notice they intend to appeal. They claim the fuel is in the car but a lifting pump failure means they can't get it out. Will be interesting to see how that pans out, but a real shame if he loses that place.

astuteman wrote:

marcelh wrote:

Vettel disqualified, Hamilton now second place:
https://www.bbc.com/sport/formula1/58050375

Rules are rules I guess, but that feels really harsh after such an exciting race, and so much effort to bring his car across the line second.

It is tough, but not unreasonably, the penalties for infringement of the technical regulations are harsh and disqualification is normally guaranteed. Will be interesting to see if Aston Martin's appeal goes anywhere.

StarAC17 wrote:

Virtual737 wrote:

Oops... A Mercedes took out BOTH Red Bulls.....

Except to see the memes explode on this.

Here is one from Battery Voltas.

https://twitter.com/BatteryVoltas/statu ... 23845?s=20

Silverstone: Let's have some lap one controversy.
Hungaroring: Hold my beer!

Late to the party but my goodness what a race! Ocon getting his first win with Alpine, Alonso showing no mercy, Hamilton taking back the championship lead, that massive turn 1 lap 1 incident. I do wonder if Hamilton's ok? He didn't look well during the podiums. Also a big bummer for Vettel getting stripped from his podium. Gutted for Bottas as well.

scbriml wrote:

Not excuses, just simple facts. If the call was so obvious, one wonders why not one single team put their drivers on slicks for the restart?

It's irrelevant. What's relevant is that everyone bar Hamilton got in to change and that it was a screw up on Mercedes-Benz's part given that:

a) They could have discussed & arranged their plans prior to taking the formation lap
b) Hamilton could also make the decision for the team given that car to pit radio was allowed (only pit to car radio wasn't allowed during the formation lap).

scbriml wrote:

The concern about being the first garage is perfectly valid and that pit lane was chaos. Regardless of a safe release for Hamilton, there was still a significant chance of a collision with other driver jumping in and out of pits. There were incidents in that chaos Mazepin's race was ended when he was hit in the melee.

Given that there was only one pitlane incident out of the many, it just goes to show that the collision chances wasn't exactly higher.

As for Vettel's DSQ, it's a bit of joke that you only get a 5 place grid penalty for taking out two cars & damaging a third but get disqualified for not being able to pull 700 ml of fuel for sampling. I do recall Benetton getting away with a fine rather than a disqualification for fuel irregularities at the 1995 Brazilian GP. Why can't they do that instead?

TheFlyingDisk wrote:

and that it was a screw up on Mercedes-Benz's part:

It was, although it was also somewhat mitigated by their decision afterwards to pit Lewis early. From last to 3rd (possibly second) on a track that is almost Monaco hard to overtake on.

TheFlyingDisk wrote:

Given that there was only one pitlane incident out of the many, it just goes to show that the collision chances wasn't exactly higher.

Yes, one incident that left one car out of the race and ruined the other car's race (that's over 13% of the cars left in the race at that point). Binotto was also very unhappy with the chaos in the pit lane. I would not be surprised to see a rule change where the pit lane entry is closed on the formation lap until the start lights go out.

TheFlyingDisk wrote:

As for Vettel's DSQ, it's a bit of joke that you only get a 5 place grid penalty for taking out two cars & damaging a third but get disqualified for not being able to pull 700 ml of fuel for sampling. I do recall Benetton getting away with a fine rather than a disqualification for fuel irregularities at the 1995 Brazilian GP. Why can't they do that instead?

The grid drop for Bottas is standard penalty for causing a collision when unable to continue (otherwise a time penalty). Likewise a 10s penalty for Raikkonen despite the fact his unsafe release ended Mazepin's race. In both examples, as in Silverstone, the consequences are not taken into account, just the incident itself.

Racing incidents are not in any way comparable to technical rule infringements. A DQ is almost compulsory for technical infringements to stop teams cheating. The rule is clear, teams have to be able to get 1L of fuel out of the car at any time during the event. Vettel was in fuel saving mode for the last few laps and his team told him to stop on track and not return to the pits - they knew it was touch and go. It's very unfortunate for Vettel and I was pretty happy to see him up there, but we'll have to see if Aston Martin's appeal comes to anything (I suspect it won't).

The joke is not Vettel's provisional DQ, but that Benetton managed to have their DQ overturned in 1995 after they'd already been found to be cheating on refuelling the season before. There's cheating, then there's Briatore!

Narfish641 wrote:

Late to the party but my goodness what a race! Ocon getting his first win with Alpine, Alonso showing no mercy, Hamilton taking back the championship lead, that massive turn 1 lap 1 incident.

Indeed great drive by the Alpine drivers. Unfortunately this kind of surprises only happen when there is mayhem at the front of the grid.

I do wonder if Hamilton's ok? He didn't look well during the podiums.

Rumors about long Covid. Only strange we haven’t heard about it earlier.

marcelh wrote:

Rumors about long Covid. Only strange we haven’t heard about it earlier.

There have been several races this year where the Sky TV commentators observed that Hamilton sounded short of breath on team radio. He certainly look pretty rough after the race on Sunday. The summer break has probably arrived at just the right time for him.

More fallouts from the first lap crash at Hungary. Now Ferrari are saying Charles Leclerc's engine is a write-off as a result and that Verstappen and Perez's Honda engines are probably write-offs as well: -

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/formula1/58075145

These will mean grid penalties for replacing engines at some point later in the season, which in Red Bull's case could be decisive as far as the championship is concerned.

How long before teams whose drivers are found responsible for causing crashes are fined or responsible for covering the costs from their own budget caps, or at the very least make those costs fall outside the budget cap? It's a fair debate to have given the last two races Mercedes drivers have caused crashes that have led to a lot of expense incurred by the teams involved. I know crashes happen as part of motor racing and I'll admit it makes a race interesting, but with budget caps in place after years of talk and attempts at bringing in various forms of cost control, I don't think the teams whose drivers are the victims as it were should have to cover the cost of it and nor should it count towards the budget cap.

scbriml wrote:

marcelh wrote:

Rumors about long Covid. Only strange we haven’t heard about it earlier.

There have been several races this year where the Sky TV commentators observed that Hamilton sounded short of breath on team radio. He certainly look pretty rough after the race on Sunday. The summer break has probably arrived at just the right time for him.

The effects of long COVID are still unknown and everyone is different. I wonder if the effects of long COVID has affected his form at some races and this is the first high-profile incidence of it happening?

I wish Hamilton all the best in his recovery. It's also a reminder of the high fitness levels required to compete in F1. This was something Michael Schumacher understood early on and was a lot fitter than other drivers who he competed against in the 1990s, and now I think all teams demand their drivers maintain high standards of fitness.

Verstappen drove a whole GP at normal speed (only hampered by his aero issues) but now the engine is a write off ? I don't believe this. Maybe they figured they couldn't last the whole season with the parts they have and Spa is a good place to use a new engine and take that penalty while still being able to overtake and get to the podium places.

astuteman wrote:

marcelh wrote:

Vettel disqualified, Hamilton now second place:
https://www.bbc.com/sport/formula1/58050375

Rules are rules I guess, but that feels really harsh after such an exciting race, and so much effort to bring his car across the line second.

Yeah it's not nice but this is a very old rule that has been applied consistently for decades. I think it happened to Hamilton once.

Aesma wrote:

Verstappen drove a whole GP at normal speed (only hampered by his aero issues) but now the engine is a write off ? I don't believe this. Maybe they figured they couldn't last the whole season with the parts they have and Spa is a good place to use a new engine and take that penalty while still being able to overtake and get to the podium places.

astuteman wrote:

marcelh wrote:

Vettel disqualified, Hamilton now second place:
https://www.bbc.com/sport/formula1/58050375

Rules are rules I guess, but that feels really harsh after such an exciting race, and so much effort to bring his car across the line second.

Yeah it's not nice but this is a very old rule that has been applied consistently for decades. I think it happened to Hamilton once.

IIRC he is on his 3rd power unit which was switched out after Silverstone. Honda said the one in the car at Silverstone was cracked and they are trying to salvage it.
If they have to swap out another he faces a grid penalty at some point.

Aesma wrote:

Verstappen drove a whole GP at normal speed (only hampered by his aero issues) but now the engine is a write off ? I don't believe this. Maybe they figured they couldn't last the whole season with the parts they have and Spa is a good place to use a new engine and take that penalty while still being able to overtake and get to the podium places.

VER had an engine swap after qualifying at the Hungarian GP because RBR discovered a crack in the repaired engine. So he is already using his third engine of this season. That’s a bit early, so he has to use a fourth engine (and take the 10 positions grid penalty) and Hope for the best with La Source hairpin as the first corner. Add in some typical Francorchamps August wether (rain/thunderstorms) and it will be a walk in the park for HAM.

Boeing74741R wrote:

These will mean grid penalties for replacing engines at some point later in the season, which in Red Bull's case could be decisive as far as the championship is concerned.

Marko was reported on a German website as saying that Red Bull were considering taking new engines for both drivers at Spa because it's easier to overtake there.
https://racingnews365.com/marko-expects ... salvagable

I'm of the view that it's unlikely that any team will escape engine penalties with 23 race scheduled plus three sprint races.

Aesma wrote:

Verstappen drove a whole GP at normal speed (only hampered by his aero issues) but now the engine is a write off ? I don't believe this.

No, the race engine was his third, and last, free one of the season. Verstappen used his Silverstone engine for three practice sessions and qualifying at Hungary after Honda examined the engine at their factory and said it was OK to use. However, before the race, Honda discovered a crack between the engine and gearbox, so replaced it with a new engine of the same spec. It's very unlikely either Red Bull driver will manage to run the last scheduled 12 races and two sprints without needing a 4th engine (and the associated 10-place grid drop).

As above, I'll be surprised if any team manages to avoid engine penalties this season.

marcelh wrote:

and Hope for the best with La Source hairpin as the first corner.

It's pretty rare to have no incidents at La Source on lap one even in the dry, so yes, starting in the middle of the pack (P11 at best) may not be too smart. While Monza also features a significant pinch point at Variante del Rettifilo, at least the run down to it is much longer and allows more time to make it through unscathed. Personally I'd take one at Monza rather than Spa, but we shall see what Red Bull decide.

Actually thinking about it, another option for Red Bull would be to take the penalty at Spa, break Parc Ferme rules and start from the pit lane - at least they'd be guaranteed of avoiding any carnage at La Source. With a clean start from the pit lane, I'd expect Verstappen to be pushing for P3 or even P2 by the end of the race.

I've said before, I'll be surprised if any team can avoid engine penalties this season, so in the end I don't think this will hurt Red Bull as much as they'd like us to believe.

marcelh wrote:

and it will be a walk in the park for HAM

Ah, getting it in early!

scbriml wrote:

Actually thinking about it, another option for Red Bull would be to take the penalty at Spa, break Parc Ferme rules and start from the pit lane - at least they'd be guaranteed of avoiding any carnage at La Source. With a clean start from the pit lane, I'd expect Verstappen to be pushing for P3 or even P2 by the end of the race.

It all depends when the pit lane exit is getting the green light. Do they have to wait until the last car has passed, even after an incident at La Source? I mean, if they have to wait after Mazespin has put his car in the right direction at La Source and is trying to gain some speed to Eau Rouge, the first cars have already passed Rivage….

marcelh wrote:

scbriml wrote:

Actually thinking about it, another option for Red Bull would be to take the penalty at Spa, break Parc Ferme rules and start from the pit lane - at least they'd be guaranteed of avoiding any carnage at La Source. With a clean start from the pit lane, I'd expect Verstappen to be pushing for P3 or even P2 by the end of the race.

It all depends when the pit lane exit is getting the green light. Do they have to wait until the last car has passed, even after an incident at La Source? I mean, if they have to wait after Mazespin has put his car in the right direction at La Source and is trying to gain some speed to Eau Rouge, the first cars have already passed Rivage….

The pit exit is normally opened as soon as the last car in the pack has passed. If there's carnage at La Source with two or three cars wrecked, I'm honestly not sure when the pit lane would open, but presumably as soon as the last running car has passed. The only reason for suggesting it as an option is the fact that the pit lane avoids La Source on lap one. I believe if the Red Bulls started from the pit lane, they'd be up and running on track before the last car has got to Eau Rouge. I still think it's reasonable to expect Verstappen to get a podium even if he starts from the pit lane.

It's an interesting conundrum, but I can't help feeling that starting in the middle of the pack at Spa is a very high risk strategy for Red Bull. Less so at Monza IMHO, because of the long run before the first chicane.

scbriml wrote:

marcelh wrote:

scbriml wrote:

Actually thinking about it, another option for Red Bull would be to take the penalty at Spa, break Parc Ferme rules and start from the pit lane - at least they'd be guaranteed of avoiding any carnage at La Source. With a clean start from the pit lane, I'd expect Verstappen to be pushing for P3 or even P2 by the end of the race.

It all depends when the pit lane exit is getting the green light. Do they have to wait until the last car has passed, even after an incident at La Source? I mean, if they have to wait after Mazespin has put his car in the right direction at La Source and is trying to gain some speed to Eau Rouge, the first cars have already passed Rivage….

The pit exit is normally opened as soon as the last car in the pack has passed. If there's carnage at La Source with two or three cars wrecked, I'm honestly not sure when the pit lane would open, but presumably as soon as the last running car has passed. The only reason for suggesting it as an option is the fact that the pit lane avoids La Source on lap one. I believe if the Red Bulls started from the pit lane, they'd be up and running on track before the last car has got to Eau Rouge. I still think it's reasonable to expect Verstappen to get a podium even if he starts from the pit lane.

It's an interesting conundrum, but I can't help feeling that starting in the middle of the pack at Spa is a very high risk strategy for Red Bull. Less so at Monza IMHO, because of the long run before the first chicane.

Monza is going to have sprint qualifying.
I wonder if they can take the grid penalty for the sprint race and see what RB can do in the sprint race to gain position. I'm guessing not but it would be an interesting strategy to see them take the penalty in that race and attempt to gain the position back before the actual GP.

StarAC17 wrote:

Monza is going to have sprint qualifying.

Oh yes, good point, I'd forgotten about that.

StarAC17 wrote:

I wonder if they can take the grid penalty for the sprint race and see what RB can do in the sprint race to gain position.

I imagine the grid penalty would only apply to a GP start and not the sprint, but the Sporting Regs (23.3b) are not clear on that:

Should a driver use more than the numbers set in a) above of any one of the elements during a Championship, a grid place penalty will be imposed upon him at the first Event during which each additional element is used.

Penalties will be applied according to the following table and will be cumulative:
The first time an additional element is used: Ten (10) grid place penalty.
The next times an additional element of the same type is used: Five (5) grid place penalty.
If a driver incurs a penalty exceeding fifteen (15) grid places he will be required to start the race from the back of the starting grid.
Any of the seven elements will be deemed to have been used once the car’s timing transponder has shown that it has left the pit lane.

During any single Event, if a driver introduces more than one of the same power unit element which is subject to penalties, only the last element fitted may be used at subsequent Events without further penalty.

scbriml wrote:

StarAC17 wrote:

Monza is going to have sprint qualifying.

Oh yes, good point, I'd forgotten about that.

StarAC17 wrote:

I wonder if they can take the grid penalty for the sprint race and see what RB can do in the sprint race to gain position.

I imagine the grid penalty would only apply to a GP start and not the sprint, but the Sporting Regs (23.3b) are not clear on that:

Should a driver use more than the numbers set in a) above of any one of the elements during a Championship, a grid place penalty will be imposed upon him at the first Event during which each additional element is used.

Penalties will be applied according to the following table and will be cumulative:
The first time an additional element is used: Ten (10) grid place penalty.
The next times an additional element of the same type is used: Five (5) grid place penalty.
If a driver incurs a penalty exceeding fifteen (15) grid places he will be required to start the race from the back of the starting grid.
Any of the seven elements will be deemed to have been used once the car’s timing transponder has shown that it has left the pit lane.

During any single Event, if a driver introduces more than one of the same power unit element which is subject to penalties, only the last element fitted may be used at subsequent Events without further penalty.

So… could red bull swap out an engine twice at the same GP getting to 5 engines total with a 10 place penalty for the sprint and 10 place for the main event giving two new engines and one ruined points haul? Is a sprint a separate ‘event’ from the main race?

Fred


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I was responding to the post saying the crash Bottas caused ruined both RBR engines (and Leclerc's one). I checked the article and indeed it doesn't say that. Verstappen's broken engine is the Silverstone one.

flipdewaf wrote:

So… could red bull swap out an engine twice at the same GP getting to 5 engines total with a 10 place penalty for the sprint and 10 place for the main event giving two new engines and one ruined points haul? Is a sprint a separate ‘event’ from the main race?

Fred


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

The rules were changed so that teams can't take multiple engine components to "stock up" for the rest of the season. See the last sentence from the reg I quoted:
During any single Event, if a driver introduces more than one of the same power unit element which is subject to penalties, only the last element fitted may be used at subsequent Events without further penalty.

So yes, while they could take multiple ICE, MGU-H, MGU-K etc, they'd only be able to use the last one fitted at future races without further penalty. So it's pretty pointless now.

The topic of whether a team can take an engine penalty for sprint qualifying is an interesting one. I imagine not because all the references that I can see in the sporting regulations mention the starting grid in relation to the race and F1 has been very careful about referring to "sprint qualifying" rather than a "sprint race". But then I can't see any reference to "sprint qualifying" in the regulations, so maybe there's an update that I haven't seen.

flipdewaf wrote:

scbriml wrote:

StarAC17 wrote:

Monza is going to have sprint qualifying.

Oh yes, good point, I'd forgotten about that.

StarAC17 wrote:

I wonder if they can take the grid penalty for the sprint race and see what RB can do in the sprint race to gain position.

I imagine the grid penalty would only apply to a GP start and not the sprint, but the Sporting Regs (23.3b) are not clear on that:

Should a driver use more than the numbers set in a) above of any one of the elements during a Championship, a grid place penalty will be imposed upon him at the first Event during which each additional element is used.

Penalties will be applied according to the following table and will be cumulative:
The first time an additional element is used: Ten (10) grid place penalty.
The next times an additional element of the same type is used: Five (5) grid place penalty.
If a driver incurs a penalty exceeding fifteen (15) grid places he will be required to start the race from the back of the starting grid.
Any of the seven elements will be deemed to have been used once the car’s timing transponder has shown that it has left the pit lane.

During any single Event, if a driver introduces more than one of the same power unit element which is subject to penalties, only the last element fitted may be used at subsequent Events without further penalty.

So… could red bull swap out an engine twice at the same GP getting to 5 engines total with a 10 place penalty for the sprint and 10 place for the main event giving two new engines and one ruined points haul? Is a sprint a separate ‘event’ from the main race?

Fred


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

That would be a question for debate and if I was Horner I would be asking this question to the FIA. Granted perhaps not a Monza as its only in 3 races but perhaps the last sprint race which I predict to be COTA.

Say Verstappen qualifies on poll on the Friday qualifying and then drops to 10th for the sprint race from his penalty. He has 17 or so laps to try and gain position for the GP minimizing the points damage to Redbull.

StarAC17 wrote:

flipdewaf wrote:

scbriml wrote:

Oh yes, good point, I'd forgotten about that.



I imagine the grid penalty would only apply to a GP start and not the sprint, but the Sporting Regs (23.3b) are not clear on that:

So… could red bull swap out an engine twice at the same GP getting to 5 engines total with a 10 place penalty for the sprint and 10 place for the main event giving two new engines and one ruined points haul? Is a sprint a separate ‘event’ from the main race?

Fred


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

That would be a question for debate and if I was Horner I would be asking this question to the FIA. Granted perhaps not a Monza as its only in 3 races but perhaps the last sprint race which I predict to be COTA.

Say Verstappen qualifies on poll on the Friday qualifying and then drops to 10th for the sprint race from his penalty. He has 17 or so laps to try and gain position for the GP minimizing the points damage to Redbull.

The more I think about this, the more I'm convinced any grid drop penalty is intended to be taken on the grid for the GP. This is on the basis that all references to 'grid' in the sporting regulations are referring to the race grid. Whether the regulations are clear enough on that or unless the rules around sprint qualifying specifically exclude taking grid penalties, we could be in for a legal argument.

Here's a direct quote from Masi on the topic of sprint qualifying. The article doesn't mention engine related grid penalties, but at least gives some sense that some of these things haven't necessarily been thought through completely:
https://www.grandprix247.com/2021/07/15 ... asi%20said.

“The set of rules traditionally refers to a very specific format that normally does not provide for sprint qualifying. So everyone is very open and has promised to work together and see if something comes up that we have not yet considered.”

What could go wrong?

Aston Martin are going ahead with a formal review and appeal of Vettel's disqualification from the Hungarian GP after the team were unable to provide the required 1L fuel sample.
https://www.planetf1.com/news/aston-mar ... vettel-dq/

The review hearing will take place at 14:00BST on Monday 9th August. Aston Martin claim to have discovered significant new evidence relevant to the disqualification. It remains to be seen if the race stewards agree with them!
https://www.planetf1.com/news/aston-mar ... view-date/

In an unsurprising move, the race stewards rejected Aston Martin's request for a review of Vettel's disqualification from the Hungarian GP. While the stewards agreed that AM submitted new evidence (that fuel had been 'ejected' from the car because of a faulty fuel system), they said the new evidence was not relevant because the rules clearly state that no excuse is acceptable for not being able to provide 1L of fuel after the race.

AM also admitted that there was less than 1L of fuel in the car. The team still has the option to appeal the penalty, but I really can't see them getting anywhere.

Revised standings, based on Vettel's DQ:

WDC:


WCC:


Source: https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/formula1/co ... /standings

So that was 'fun'. Was it indeed the first time a race was abandoned before it began?

I think it's fair some points are given, but half points for this ?

Aesma wrote:

I think it's fair some points are given, but half points for this ?

No rules for awarding quarter points. It's either half points or full points.

TheFlyingDisk wrote:

Aesma wrote:

I think it's fair some points are given, but half points for this ?

No rules for awarding quarter points. It's either half points or full points.

Exactly.

Well, they could have had the two laps behind the SC right at 3pm to get it over with. Bit of indecisiveness to wait until its half dark in those conditions with a weather forecast not promising any kind of bettering. I mean, low clouds and rain outside of frontal weather and with no wind really is not suddenly going to disappear.

After all the right decision, though.

That was a complete and utter farce. Frankly a disgrace that points were awarded for following the SC for two laps. It’s an insult to any driver that actually raced and won F1 points.

How can two laps behind the SC constitute “racing”? Even drivers are saying this is a nonsense. There has to be a rule change to spell out that a minimum number of laps of green flag racing has to happen in order to award points.

scbriml wrote:

That was a complete and utter farce. Frankly a disgrace that points were awarded for following the SC for two laps. It’s an insult to any driver that actually raced and won F1 points.

How can two laps behind the SC constitute “racing”? Even drivers are saying this is a nonsense. There has to be a rule change to spell out that a minimum number of laps of green flag racing has to happen in order to award points.

Imagine had you paid to go see it! Sorry no refund the race was put on and the results posted…
Worse then the usa gp and the tyre issues…well just as bad anyway

scbriml wrote:

That was a complete and utter farce. Frankly a disgrace that points were awarded for following the SC for two laps. It’s an insult to any driver that actually raced and won F1 points.

How can two laps behind the SC constitute “racing”? Even drivers are saying this is a nonsense. There has to be a rule change to spell out that a minimum number of laps of green flag racing has to happen in order to award points.

Good point, change the rules. I am sure that all those drivers would have rather raced if they would have given the choice.

Next stop: Zandvoort

mad99 wrote:

scbriml wrote:

That was a complete and utter farce. Frankly a disgrace that points were awarded for following the SC for two laps. It’s an insult to any driver that actually raced and won F1 points.

How can two laps behind the SC constitute “racing”? Even drivers are saying this is a nonsense. There has to be a rule change to spell out that a minimum number of laps of green flag racing has to happen in order to award points.

Imagine had you paid to go see it! Sorry no refund the race was put on and the results posted…
Worse then the usa gp and the tyre issues…well just as bad anyway

paid and all you had to show for it were wet cloth.

On another forum a member often goes to this GP. He detailed his budget, he didn't go for the cheapest everything, but for example was in the "Gold 1 Pit" tribune, tickets were 650€. With the airbnb 30Km away, food out of the circuit (very expensive on the venue), he spent 1000€, for one guy alone.

You can go cheaper sitting on mud, sleeping in mud and bathing in mud.

Aesma wrote:

On another forum a member often goes to this GP. He detailed his budget, he didn't go for the cheapest everything, but for example was in the "Gold 1 Pit" tribune, tickets were 650€. With the airbnb 30Km away, food out of the circuit (very expensive on the venue), he spent 1000€, for one guy alone.

You can go cheaper sitting on mud, sleeping in mud and bathing in mud.

Watch out world (and yes, a.net in particular) I've recently binge watched three seasons of 'Drive to Survive' on Netflix so now I feel "read in" on F1.

Price of participation is a real thing. US GP in Austin would presumably cost me double that due to airfare and needed accommodation. Canadian GP in MTL would be a lot more viable, a five hour drive away, but also a significant financial commitment. Had a friend who went to MTL a few years ago and said he didn't enjoy it. Very expensive, very loud, long lines everywhere. Nothing surprising, but still. I may go once just to know what the live experience is like, but it seems the home experience with wide screen TV is pretty darn compelling. I've been a fan of NFL football for decades, and have gone to a game exactly once, just to say I know what the experience is like. Other than that, I prefer my wide screen and my couch.

So far I haven't even coughed up the $80 for F1 Pro straming, and might not this season. There is so much F1 content on YouTube, you get all the highlights and countless commentaries. At this point that's about all I need. The US GP will be on free over-the-air TV here in the US, as will the MX GP. I have a similar relationship with NBA basketball. I follow the sport mainly thought podcasts and u2b highlights and the occasional free over-the-air game.

Speaking of which, anyone have any F1 podcast they recommend, especially for newbies?

So it seems the Merc driver situation is sorted yet not announced. It seems clear to me Bottas's time with the team is soon to end. The king is dead, long live the king. Stuff I read said Russell is willing to do what a second driver has to do. Good for him!

Sorry for any brain farts, like I said, I'm a newbie..

Aesma wrote:

On another forum a member often goes to this GP. He detailed his budget, he didn't go for the cheapest everything, but for example was in the "Gold 1 Pit" tribune, tickets were 650€. With the airbnb 30Km away, food out of the circuit (very expensive on the venue), he spent 1000€, for one guy alone.

You can go cheaper sitting on mud, sleeping in mud and bathing in mud.

Concur with Aesma and Revelation on the cost, it's not cheap to attend F1!

Attended the US GP the last two years with two friends. General admission tickets + parking, shared a moderate hotel, reasonable meals, a few drinks, and drive from Fort Worth to Austin. We figured it cost us about $800 each for the weekend.

And then we watched the televised version to see what we missed!

scbriml wrote:

That was a complete and utter farce. Frankly a disgrace that points were awarded for following the SC for two laps. It’s an insult to any driver that actually raced and won F1 points.

How can two laps behind the SC constitute “racing”? Even drivers are saying this is a nonsense. There has to be a rule change to spell out that a minimum number of laps of green flag racing has to happen in order to award points.

So true, no racing = no points !

Ross Brawn thinks awarding point was fair for the quali effort but I find this argument very weak and it seems the only one he have to express officialy.
IMO they needed to award point, and for this run the 2 laps behind SC, purely for contractual reason (btw, aren't team paid in function of the point scored?).

From sport point of view, if they think the quali should be rewarded more than a grid position why don't attribute point for each quali session ? After all it's far from uncommon that pole position holder doesn't finish the race....

Not disputing not racing under these conditions, it was definitely the right call, but the managment of the situation is absolutely shameful. I really feel for all the fans around the track, I'd be furious in their position.

scbriml wrote:

That was a complete and utter farce. Frankly a disgrace that points were awarded for following the SC for two laps. It’s an insult to any driver that actually raced and won F1 points.

How can two laps behind the SC constitute “racing”? Even drivers are saying this is a nonsense. There has to be a rule change to spell out that a minimum number of laps of green flag racing has to happen in order to award points.

If they change the rules to reflect that, fine with me. For the time being I see it as reward for a strong performance in demanding P and Q sessions especially for Misters Russell and Latifi.

They simply had their cars configured for the rain and everyone else for the dry, knowing F1 doesn't have races under the rain anyway, at most on drying conditions.

If the race had happened with drying conditions, the Williams would have been last.

Aesma wrote:

They simply had their cars configured for the rain and everyone else for the dry, knowing F1 doesn't have races under the rain anyway, at most on drying conditions.

If the race had happened with drying conditions, the Williams would have been last.

Clairvoyants at Williams. Interesting theory. Apparently all the others that had nothing to lose were not equipped with such vision.

They didn't have nothing to lose, except Haas.

Grizzly410 wrote:

So true, no racing = no points !

Ross Brawn thinks awarding point was fair for the quali effort but I find this argument very weak and it seems the only one he have to express officialy.
IMO they needed to award point, and for this run the 2 laps behind SC, purely for contractual reason (btw, aren't team paid in function of the point scored?).

From sport point of view, if they think the quali should be rewarded more than a grid position why don't attribute point for each quali session ? After all it's far from uncommon that pole position holder doesn't finish the race....

Not disputing not racing under these conditions, it was definitely the right call, but the managment of the situation is absolutely shameful. I really feel for all the fans around the track, I'd be furious in their position.

At least one of the highlights programs showed they had a podium celebration complete with champagne being sprayed. It was pretty unsightly to me, even as a F1 newbie. Why are they celebrating following around the safety car for three laps?

TangoandCash wrote:

Aesma wrote:

On another forum a member often goes to this GP. He detailed his budget, he didn't go for the cheapest everything, but for example was in the "Gold 1 Pit" tribune, tickets were 650€. With the airbnb 30Km away, food out of the circuit (very expensive on the venue), he spent 1000€, for one guy alone.

You can go cheaper sitting on mud, sleeping in mud and bathing in mud.

Concur with Aesma and Revelation on the cost, it's not cheap to attend F1!

Attended the US GP the last two years with two friends. General admission tickets + parking, shared a moderate hotel, reasonable meals, a few drinks, and drive from Fort Worth to Austin. We figured it cost us about $800 each for the weekend.

And then we watched the televised version to see what we missed!

Was that the whole weekend or just the race?

That wouldn't be too bad if that was even qualifying and the race. I would pay that to go to Montreal easily (from Toronto). I don't know if I would necessarily do it every year though.

Furthermore Miami is being added to 2022 to be in April or May. This will be a street circuit around Hard-Rock stadium (where the Dolphins play). The track looks decent but there are no real grade changes as it's Florida.