 | |
Hamilton's approach to the first corner
Formula 1 Formula 1 motor racing discusions (rec.autos.sport.f1)
 |
| | Thread Tools | Search this Thread | Display Modes |
#21
 
| |||
| |||
|
Re: Hamilton's approach to the first corner -
04-19-2007
, 06:41 PM
|
Ian Dalziel wrote: On 19 Apr 2007 09:14:29 GMT, "Bigbird" <bigbird.usenet (AT) gmail (DOT) com wrote: Ian Dalziel wrote: On 18 Apr 2007 23:47:55 GMT, "Bigbird" <bigbird.usenet (AT) gmail (DOT) com wrote: CatharticF1 wrote: "Frank....H" <askme (AT) for (DOT) it> wrote in news:f05qa1$ne4$1 (AT) uwm (DOT) edu: CatharticF1 wrote: Is that number of changes to your line not a little excessive? I >> >> >> expect he was trying to cover Alonso and Kimi and mainly >> hindered >> >> Fred I expect. But it was unusual, no? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OThOR4JP6oQ I don't think they're going to enforce any blocking rules at the >> >> > start. Nor should they. Blocking rules are not appropriate in F1. Well I agree with you insofar as it shouldn't be necessary but I can >> certainly conceive driver actions that would force their hand. >> >> Hamilton's movements on Sunday were heading towards that even if >> you >> may argue they weren't quite there yet. Unless you were looking to make an example I suspect most people wouldn't want to see a driver take a penalty during the race unless >> > the move were either dangerous or had a clear impact on the race. I >> > wouldn't be surprised if the race director looks at it in a similar >> > way. Hamiltons wiggle was neither of these. I suspect most people wouldn't want to see a driver break the rules? Did I say anything to the contrary? I don't think I did and didn't intend to. Just a suggestion that penalties should be applied in accordance with the rules rather than in accordance with what most people would want to see. Are you trying to twist my words? |
(We're not _all_ out to get you..)
;-p
--
CatharticF1
"What you thought was Freedom is just Greed."
#22
| |||
| |||
|
|
On Apr 19, 6:28 am, CatharticF1 <eferr... (AT) heaven (DOT) net> wrote: Yes.. Back in my day drivers just moved once - not this dancing about 'keep away from me' new-fangled thing. -- CatharticF1 Doesn't some of that have something to do with the fact that the current cars are incredibly stable and responsive even during a hamilton wiggle? "Back in your days" the lack of grip that would arise from such rapid movements would have likely caused a fundamental lack of grip that wouldn't have allowed for the car to brake into the first corner with any degree of precision or safety. Now the cars are so glued to the track and so stable that these wiggles are do-able without much risk. |
Moving quickly but predictably to one side of the track drew condemnation
and resulted in the rule that you should only move once. Surely jinking
left and right to intimidate people behind you into not attempting a pass
can't be considered acceptable?
--
CatharticF1
"What you thought was Freedom is just Greed."
#23
| |||
| |||
|
|
It was tongue in cheek - I was referring to last year (when Schu retired). Moving quickly but predictably to one side of the track drew condemnation and resulted in the rule that you should only move once. Surely jinking left and right to intimidate people behind you into not attempting a pass can't be considered acceptable? |
I would have thought that if you put safety aside, then any amount of
jinking around *should* be acceptable; its only the safety aspects
which create a position where swerving becomes unacceptable.
Matt
#24
| |||
| |||
|
|
Phil Newnham wrote: Bigbird wrote: I am not even aware of what form the "rule" under discussion here takes. Are you? Is it contradictory to this? Art 16 of the sporting regs appears to be the only candidate: Thanks I followed that trail to the FIA "International Sporting Code & Appendices" "Appendix L to the Int. Sporting Code - document update: 28.03.2007" http://www.fia.com/resources/documen...pendix_L_a.pdf From Chapter IV overtaking. 2.c) "However, manoeuvres liable to hinder other drivers such as premature changes of direction, more than one change of direction, deliberate crowding of cars towards the inside or the outside of the curve or any other abnormal change of direction, are strictly prohibited and shall be penalised, according to the importance and repetition of the offences, by penalties ranging from a fi ne to the exclusion from the race. The repetition of dangerous driving, even involuntary, may result in the exclusion from the race." If this applies then on the face of it there appears to be plenty of room for discretion without being inconsistent. Having said that reading that chapter may result in more questions and confusion than answers. |
towards the outside of the curve and forcing them to decide between
crashing, driving off the track and braking, I would suggest that the
above rules have not been enforced in F1 for a long time.
--
Phil
http://www.flickr.com/photos/tmc1979/
#25
| |||
| |||
|
|
larkim wrote: On Apr 20, 6:46 am, CatharticF1 <eferr... (AT) heaven (DOT) net> wrote: It was tongue in cheek - I was referring to last year (when Schu retired). Moving quickly but predictably to one side of the track drew condemnation and resulted in the rule that you should only move once. Surely jinking left and right to intimidate people behind you into not attempting a pass can't be considered acceptable? Sorry, sounds like I got whooshed! I would have thought that if you put safety aside, then any amount of jinking around should be acceptable; its only the safety aspects which create a position where swerving becomes unacceptable. I just looked this up...it may help. the FIA "International Sporting Code & Appendices" "Appendix L to the Int. Sporting Code - document update: 28.03.2007"http://www.fia.com/resources/documents/1797101136__Appendix_L_a.pdf From Chapter IV overtaking. 2.c) [Detailed regs snipped] |
in some aspects, but it is only illegal surely because of the danger
involved; otherwise it would be tactical positioning to enable you to
stay ahead, which would be acceptable.
Matt
#26
| |||
| |||
|
|
I've no doubt that it is the sort of thing that is considered illegal in some aspects, but it is only illegal surely because of the danger involved; otherwise it would be tactical positioning to enable you to stay ahead, which would be acceptable. No I don't think so. The intention is to prevent blocking from ruining the race. Safety is an additional consideration. If you were to strictly apply the International Sporting Code to F1 then Hamilton should have been blue flagged in Sepang for impeding a faster cars. Clearly this part of the code is not applied in F1 but that is the roots. --- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - |
track running where the intention is simply to get round as quickly as
possible - actions taken deliberately to impede another runner would
not be considered acceptable, so I'm wondering why I think it is
acceptable in motor sport.
The difference I guess is that the concept of taking "defensive" lines
is allowed, so the standard in F1 / motorsport is generally "less
sporting" than in track running where if you take the inside line
around a bend you are merely taking the shortest (and undoubtedly
fastest) route to the end. In F1 taking an inside line to a corner
isn't the fastest way to get around, so a driver is allowed to take a
deliberately slower route around a corner simply to interfere with the
driver behind.
Anyway, I take your point and its given me a fresh insight into
things; thanks!
Matt
|
« Previous Thread
|
Next Thread »
| Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
| Display Modes | |
Linear Mode
| |
Powered by vBulletin Version 3.5.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2000 - 2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.