[Race] US Grand Prix

[Richard C]

Originally Posted by Purist

With paved run-offs, and even paved verges, CAN they run a race and properly officiate track limits without every race becoming something that is decided by the stewards? That is, are races then decided by who gets how many penalties, and when?

Furthermore, if pressed, do the stewards feel that they even humanly CAN adjudicate these things adequately and consistently?

Just Google this... "cota track limits"

You can find all kind of discussion about the difficulty in doing this (your point above) as well as how different series polices it to different levels. To do it to the letter of the rule would be a monumental nightmare. Especially in circuits (such as COTA) in which there are a number of places in which it can be a problem. So they (race official) give in and allow it within reason. Of course this leads to cries of inconsistency.

Originally Posted by Sodemo

Personally, I think Charlie Whiting made a rod for his own back when he said that they werent going to be policing track limits at this venue (and the same for last year).

Not saying he didn't say something, but can anyone provide more details on what Charlie has said in the past. It is obvious that it can't be as simple as "we will not be policing track limits at this venue" because that it too open ended. If so, then I would just do donuts over the start/finish timing loop and crank out the laps as I skip the entire circuit! The race will be over within minutes!

I generally believe that loose track limits at COTA is typically on how wide you can run on the 'outside' of a turn. Something like this...



(Note: Those are cars running wide after T19. And it was typical behavior at COTA IMSA race in 2015)

Richard

[crmalcolm]

Originally Posted by Richard Casto

Not saying he didn't say something, but can anyone provide more details on what Charlie has said in the past. It is obvious that it can't be as simple as "we will not be policing track limits at this venue" because that it too open ended.

Lauda's version of what was agreed can be found here https://www.autosport.com/f1/news/132578/verstappen-decision-the-worst-ever--lauda

[Richard C]

Originally Posted by crmalcolm

Lauda's version of what was agreed can be found here https://www.autosport.com/f1/news/13...st-ever--lauda

I read that earlier. That article (and the quotes attributed to Lauda) makes zero logical sense. It's like a number of pertinent words and phrases strung together randomly... stewards, white lines, interfere, normal, overtaking, etc. I respect the man, but honestly I can't understand what he is trying to say.

Richard

[Matt]

Originally Posted by Richard Casto

Just Google this... "cota track limits"

You can find all kind of discussion about the difficulty in doing this (your point above) as well as how different series polices it to different levels. To do it to the letter of the rule would be a monumental nightmare. Especially in circuits (such as COTA) in which there are a number of places in which it can be a problem. So they (race official) give in and allow it within reason. Of course this leads to cries of inconsistency.


Not saying he didn't say something, but can anyone provide more details on what Charlie has said in the past. It is obvious that it can't be as simple as "we will not be policing track limits at this venue" because that it too open ended. If so, then I would just do donuts over the start/finish timing loop and crank out the laps as I skip the entire circuit! The race will be over within minutes!

I generally believe that loose track limits at COTA is typically on how wide you can run on the 'outside' of a turn. Something like this...



(Note: Those are cars running wide after T19. And it was typical behavior at COTA IMSA race in 2015)

Richard

I enjoyed that IMSA race tbh.

It was like they turned the track into a high-speed ski race.

[Graz]

Originally Posted by Richard Casto

I read that earlier. That article (and the quotes attributed to Lauda) makes zero logical sense. It's like a number of pertinent words and phrases strung together randomly... stewards, white lines, interfere, normal, overtaking, etc. I respect the man, but honestly I can't understand what he is trying to say.

Richard

Yeah he's a loose cannon. Good fun though, he's like the mad uncle at Christmas.

[Purist]

I think you know that the problem there is the "within reason" part. There's a very large portion of the population that really, at some level, needs a more solid, tangible standard than that, and this applies to sports and games well beyond car or bike racing.

It's a practically endless can of worms if they have the ability to use the surface that is "out of bounds" essentially at will. And I didn't even touch in the other post on what this all does to driving standards. And deteriorating driving standards has a definite negative impact on safety, unquestionably, regardless of the track. The ability to get away with something at one track has ripples elsewhere, too.

And yes, things like what was allowed at that IMSA race take away from my ability to take the series seriously as a venue for proper competition.

Grass and gravel still seem like, by far, the best options. And, occasionally, someone will get a miraculous start, even when using the grass, like one fellow did at a DTM race at Mugello.

There's plenty of NASCAR superspeedway races, and most every Cleveland GP from 1990-2007, to show that vast swathes of tarmac being available is hardly a guarantee of anything.

[Purist]

Had to rush off for a bite earlier.

Anyway, the other main thing that comes to my mind is, simply, punishments MUST be as consistent and unconditional as possible to actually work.

There is practically no doubt in my mind that, to the drivers, what Max did, and what any number of others did, both on the inside and outside of corners, was fundamentally the same act. As was pointed out, you gain speed/time by going wide and being able to run faster that way. Plus, again, there's the "getting into DRS range" issue. The basic form of the rule doesn't say "leaving the track to overtake"; it says, "leaving te track to gain an advantage". Reduced lap times/increased speed, are bloody advantages.

Okay, so, some examples of corner-cutting and overtakes facilitated by leaving the track.

Ricciardo cut Turn 6 on Lap 4. Shouldn't Magnussen have gotten a penalty for hitting Wehrlein, passing him, and running off the track while doing so? And of course, if Ricciardo's move on Bottas at Turns 1-3 had worked, when he went off the outside of Turn 1, would he have been penalized for it? Sainz had to run off the track to go through Turn 19 fast enough on Lap 34 to make his move on Perez. Sainz cut Turn 6 on Lap 45. Sainz cut Turn 14 on Lap 49. Max cut Turn 8 on Lap 56.

First and foremost, is there actually a standard in practice? Second, if so, what IS that standard?

[littleman]

It's only the newer, ultra safe circuits where track limits are a real issue.

Maybe they could have the absolute limit defined with 600mm high polystyrene blocks.......or something similar.

If you brush a block without damaging it then fine, if you smash one or more to pieces then you're out......ie: The "safe" version of a real shunt.

Can't see how anyone could argue with the evidence then.

[TrapezeArtist]

I've come late to this thread, but followed most of it. All of this aggro over track limits is just a natural consequence of making a race track by painting it onto a car park. So the solution is to go back to real tracks with a real edge defining them.

Without trying to second guess the detail at this stage, by objective would be a zero tolerance of deviating from the track. The method of defining the track should be something that ideally creates a time penalty, but probably not car damage and definitely not a safety issue.

Although I think the exact solution should be a subject to a lot of consideration, I feel favourably disposed towards the bolt-down sausage kerbs that someone proposed a few pages back. They could be removed for bike races. They could be made available in different heights to suit the circumstances. Of course they have occasionally be used in the past and drivers usually complain about them and get them removed after the first day of practice because driving over them damages the car. ("Then don't drive over them!!!")

The situation has deteriorated so much that you can't recover the situation by small measures. It would require a new way of thinking about track limits (and resultant track alterations) for a new season. There would be all sorts of issues at the first one or two races, and then the drivers would start driving on the track all the time and everything would be well.

[JamesH]

Originally Posted by Articus

People are too focused on the track limits during an actual overtake maneuver to note that it's an advantage regardless of overtaking or not.

If you get a better exit, launch, or carry more momentum away to defend from behind you, or if it's during an overtake, or if you abuse track limits so that you can get within the DRS zone of the driver ahead, it's all the same!!

It's not all the same. During an overtake, the advantage goes to the overtaking driver. In general driving (i.e. not during an overtake), the advantage is taken by all, so is not an advantage as everyone is doing it.

Two rules in play, the rule about leaving the circuit, and the rule about leaving the circuit and gaining an advantage which you have to give back. It happen often enough - someone goes off the circuit and overtakes, then have to give the place back.

[GTRMagic]

Originally Posted by GTRMagic

Should Mr Verstappen get a smack on the wrist for all the nice names he is calling Mr Connelly?

Bringing The Sport Into Disrepute...

[GTRMagic]

Originally Posted by Matt

Hey, wanna know how to make sure this situation never happens again?

See that big, dumb, fat bit of red paint that lines the circuit that all the cars are using?

Rip that up and replace it with grass.

Move the fence to the edge of the track... they won’t do it twice...

[marcel82]

just put some real curb-stones on the side of the track instead of those rumble strips that don't do anything but "be coloured pretty"
back in the day where I wasn't an old fart, you tried a move like that, and you ended up taking out both cars, and everyone branded you the idiot.

[VIVA GT]

Originally Posted by GTRMagic

Bringing The Sport Into Disrepute...

In my (humble) opinion, branding someone (un-named) as an 'idiot' is far less severe than telling your team over the radio to tell the Race Director (and naming him specifically) to Foxtrot Oscar...

[Kempi]

In the meaning what was said, yes. In terms of timing: complete difference. While in the cockpit you are still under immediate race stress, in the press zone afterwards you are not.

They should let it rest, regardless.

[crmalcolm]

Originally Posted by Richard Casto

Not saying he didn't say something, but can anyone provide more details on what Charlie has said in the past. It is obvious that it can't be as simple as "we will not be policing track limits at this venue" because that it too open ended.

I think I may have found where Charlie's comments were referred to - by Lewis Hamilton here.

However, it is a bit difficult to decipher quotes within quotes and understand exactly what Charlie was saying is the stance. I think they are saying that the enforcing of track limits is based on whether there is an agreement that advantage is gained....

'During drivers’ briefings we always discuss it. Here you can take an advantage, and there’s an argument and Charlie [Whiting, FIA race director] would say ‘You don’t gain an advantage here’ and you can keep the power earlier and go wide,” he said. “It’s strange here because exit of turn nine you used to be not able to go wide, and now you can just go off track. Last corner you can go over the big kerb.
“There is a really fine line. I think the FIA are doing a good job. But when it comes to new tracks, they can’t build all these run-off areas.'

[Lancsbreaker]

Originally Posted by Armco Bender

Max not impressed either....

When I saw that quote I really did remember that he's only just ceased being a teenager! Was he stamping his foot at the same time? If nobody turns up to races who does he think will pay his "reassuringly expensive" salary?

[old man]

When I raced all those many years ago some of the circuits had track limits defined by straw bales, they tended to vary a bit between races!!!

[marcel82]

Originally Posted by old man

When I raced all those many years ago some of the circuits had track limits defined by straw bales, they tended to vary a bit between races!!!

they probably varied a bit between laps as well

[GregUK]

I remember when the chicane at Thruxton was neatly lined with Armco - no track limit issues then!

But when did it all change? Was it Dr Palmer? Or was it the advent of the mahoosive run-offs at FIA Grade 1 circuits? Either way, not only must a victim be found (for Ko-Ko!) but a solution too.

Many modern cars have lane-departure warning systems. Without much work, the technology could be adapted - perhaps with a minor rule tweak to say that the centre-line of the car should not cross the white line that demarks the track limit.

[Richard C]

Originally Posted by crmalcolm

I think I may have found where Charlie's comments were referred to - by Lewis Hamilton here.

However, it is a bit difficult to decipher quotes within quotes and understand exactly what Charlie was saying is the stance. I think they are saying that the enforcing of track limits is based on whether there is an agreement that advantage is gained....

'During drivers’ briefings we always discuss it. Here you can take an advantage, and there’s an argument and Charlie [Whiting, FIA race director] would say ‘You don’t gain an advantage here’ and you can keep the power earlier and go wide,” he said. “It’s strange here because exit of turn nine you used to be not able to go wide, and now you can just go off track. Last corner you can go over the big kerb.
“There is a really fine line. I think the FIA are doing a good job. But when it comes to new tracks, they can’t build all these run-off areas.'

Thanks. Reading between the lines, it seems to focus purely on when you can run wide on the outside and it probably "mostly" applies to tracking out on exit. I would be shocked if anyone is able to dredge up a statement from Charlie or anyone else who says they allow cutting of corners on the inside (four wheels off with the apex now on the "outside" of your direction of travel).

As much as I made fun of Lauda's rambling quotes (which might be misquotes, or selective quotes to be fair), I think Lauda was talking primarily about stewards not getting deeply involved on trying to resolve on track collisions, plus maybe some about the ability to run wide on exit. I still can't believe Lauda somehow thinks Charlie said you can now cut corners. Maybe that is what he actually thinks!?

But... people tend to hear what they want in those types of meetings. Especially if the explanation is not... clear. At the end, they are probably asked if everyone understands. They all nod their head in agreement and walk away with slightly different versions in their head of what is and is not allowed. Its not until there is conflict that someone says "That is not what I was told!"

Richard

[Lancsbreaker]

Originally Posted by littleman

It's only the newer, ultra safe circuits where track limits are a real issue.

Maybe they could have the absolute limit defined with 600mm high polystyrene blocks.......or something similar.

If you brush a block without damaging it then fine, if you smash one or more to pieces then you're out......ie: The "safe" version of a real shunt.

Can't see how anyone could argue with the evidence then.

I think the problem with that is once someone has taken one out, it leaves the way clear for everone else..........same for the straw bales mentioned above - they take more nudging out of the way, but once they are gone they are gone.

The stewards have plenty of evidence, the drivers just have to accept that once they "cross the line" they may get caught......tho I accept that more consistency would be good. In club racing we get penalised for "exceeding track limits", not sure why the "best drivers in the world" should be any different.

Wonder if there would have been such vociferous protests if the pass (and the penalty) had been a few laps earlier, rather than on the last lap?

[JeremySmith]

Max’s remarks post race shows that he is still only 20 years of age therefore in the heat of the moment I can cut him some slack ..

[chillibowl]

a little late to the party but a couple of additional thoughts...

-like most, i am in favour of enforcing track limits although i am not a fan of requiring tracks to change their layouts to accommodate this...particularly given this new suggestion from Malaysia that Haas may sue the organizers.

there needs to be a system that doesnt result in damage caused by the track itself. such is the litigious world we live in now.

-F1 is a technology driven sport and between the multiple camera positions and number of staff in race control, most if not all infractions are no doubt recorded and penalties can be issued. in addition to that, there should be a sensor system in place at troublesome corners (provided and monitored by the FIA/FOM and perhaps regulated with something like the ECU).

combined with track side telemetry, like the DRS activation system, any car going off track should experience a loss of power.

for cars that are forced off track, a traditional review from race control can offer out a time penalty to the violator and place restored for the victim.

but even then there is a subjective element and we wont always have the right call but such is sports. the point is that they start moving towards a more elegant and efficient system.

-also i think respect should be given and credit is due towards the Stewards for coming to a decision so quickly. maybe its wasnt the right call (although i think it was), i really appreciated how quickly they made the call and that they got it done in time for the podium.

in years seasons past, the main complaint would have been how we all had to read about the change in results the day after the event.

-i also have no problem with Max's or Horner's comments. they have a right to be upset. again this is nothing new in sports and certainly not a case of 'bringing the sport into disrepute' imo.

[Greem]

Originally Posted by chillibowl

-F1 is a technology driven sport and between the multiple camera positions and number of staff in race control, most if not all infractions are no doubt recorded and penalties can be issued. in addition to that, there should be a sensor system in place at troublesome corners (provided and monitored by the FIA/FOM and perhaps regulated with something like the ECU).

MSV have had trackside sensors in place at Brands Hatch (and Oulton Park, if memory serves) for some time. They're very simple: a camera on a stick and a robust pressure sensor off the track, with a camera feed direct to the clerk of the course in race control. All subjectivity is removed in terms of the when/where, but the why is still reported by trackside observers or on the CCTV.

They work extremely well. So much so that one of the UK's well-respected clerks who was racing at last weekend's Formula Ford Festival got pinged and had their evidential photo put on Facebook by that race's C-o-C so we could all have a chuckle