[Race] US Grand Prix

[Kempi]

Gert: rather all of them have. The white line in question is the one inside the curb, not outside...

The pictures here do not really help though: the context is mostly unclear, they do not show which one was the passing car (I only remember the Bottas/Ricciardo situation and there Ricciardo was trying to pass) and they do not show whether an advantage was gained.

For Verstappen it was clear that he was the passing car and an advantage was gained.

Or in other words: as evidence they are inconclusive. Also, see above concerning rules infractions and whether it matters whether others have or have not been punished before.

[Adam43]

Of course, what it does demonstrate is that each situation is different.

steve shouldn't be worried, it does not show that his baby is a bad driver. He still has a cracking race.

[gert]

On Belgian TV, Bas Leinders told the white-red curbstones are considered part of the track.
Mind you, I just went with what he said and didn't bother to look it up.
Does anyone know?

Like you pointed out, Hamilton and Vettel are not overtaking.
So, I agree - inconclusive as evidence.

[Greem]

Just leaving this very clearly worded rule here, for the avoidance of doubt:

Originally Posted by FIA Formula One Sporting Regulations 2017, section 27.3, 9th Mar 2017

Drivers must make every reasonable effort to use the track at all times and may not deliberately leave the track without a justifiable reason.
Drivers will be judged to have left the track if no part of the car remains in contact with it and, for the avoidance of doubt, any white lines defining the track edges are considered to be part of the track but the kerbs are not.
Should a car leave the track the driver may re-join, however, this may only be done when it is safe to do so and without gaining any lasting advantage. At the absolute discretion of the race director a driver may be given the opportunity to give back the whole of any advantage he gained by leaving the track.

[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.

[Greem]

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.

Speak to Dorna and the WSB folks first though. Don't forget it's not only 4 wheeled things that run on these tracks, and some of the circuit design compromises are driven very strongly from the 2 wheel side.

[Matt]

The guys on the bikes shouldn't be using it either. Wouldn't be removing any of the actual runoff, just that few meters of painted tarmac before it.

[Greem]

Originally Posted by Matt

The guys on the bikes shouldn't be using it either. Wouldn't be removing any of the actual runoff, just that few meters of painted tarmac before it.

Indeed, but in several cases bringing the painted concrete/tarmac to the back of the kerb along with lowering the sawtooth on the kerb has been a compromise to permit both 4 and 2 wheeled drivers/riders to recover from mistakes more easily.

I'm not saying it's right (anything but!), just that there are competing pressures on modern circuit design.

[Kempi]

They should not be using it but might need to from time to time. And then grass tends to be very unfriendly to bikes. Or imagine sliding of, hitting the gras and then the bump when grass turns to asphalt again. Even more unfriendly to the rider...

It is not as easy as some might think this is.

[bjohnsonsmith]

I missed most of the race except for the last lap and all the talk is obviously on Verstappen's overtake and track limits.

Why not have a physical barrier, that defines the track limit but which can be removed for bike races, then this couldn't happen?

[Kempi]

Physical barriers tend to have quite physical consequences when someone does not deliberately ran across the limits but for instance simply has a spin.

Basically they would make every race into a street circuit race with all the dangers it has in terms of hitting barriers and safety cars. This would also mean more chicances on existing courses as half a mile long straigths would mean to high speeds (like the long straing at COTA) for them being able to end in a turn without run off being available.

[bjohnsonsmith]

Originally Posted by Kempi

Physical barriers tend to have quite physical consequences when someone does not deliberately ran across the limits but for instance simply has a spin.

Basically they would make every race into a street circuit race with all the dangers it has in terms of hitting barriers and safety cars. This would also mean more chicances on existing courses as half a mile long straigths would mean to high speeds (like the long straing at COTA) for them being able to end in a turn without run off being available.

I'm not suggesting they line the track with SAFER barrier but something more like this, or even a series of cones. Something that won't damage the car in case of a spin.

[Sodemo]

In my view there needs to be at least 4 metres of grass or dirt after the kerbing. Then after that if they want to have 30 acres of tarmac then so be it.

[Mike Harte]

Originally Posted by bjohnsonsmith

I'm not suggesting they line the track with SAFER barrier but something more like this, or even a series of cones. Something that won't damage the car in case of a spin.

As quoted by Greem overleaf:

Drivers will be judged to have left the track if no part of the car remains in contact with it and, for the avoidance of doubt, any white lines defining the track edges are considered to be part of the track but the kerbs are not.

why are those orange "bumps" so far from the white line that delineates the true edge of the track. To actually reach them you must be virtually, if not completely, off the circuit.

I really have a hard time understanding race directors and CoCs tolerance of track limit abuses. It is one of admittedly a large number of reasons why I no longer have any interest, after 50 years of following F1, of watching it on the TV.

I really, really wish that the FIA would have the collective cojones to actually stop pussy-footing around, and just tell all drivers - no matter in which discipline - that track limit abuses on all and every corner will be firmly penalised, not just a select few as at present.

[/And breathe again]

[gert]

Originally Posted by Mike Harte

why are those orange "bumps" so far from the white line that delineates the true edge of the track. To actually reach them you must be virtually, if not completely, off the circuit.

Right now, probably because there needs to be almost a car;'s width between the white line and the bump thing since a car with just a tiny bit of tire on the white line (and all the rest over it) is consider to be ON the track.

Not that I agree with it, but that is how I understand the current reality.

[JamesH]

Originally Posted by AndrewCherry

Mainly Club100 these days, although I'm finding myself tempted by X30 for 2019... (Literally where = UK, various places in England and Wales...)

TKM is having a bit of a resurgence at the moment, cheaper than X30, not quite as fast though - although all faster than Club100 which has massively detuned engines for obvious reasons.

I used to kart (then Locost), and now both my son's kart. In Locost we were always being told to keep in the white lines or be penalised. The kart track we race at it's just not possible to go completely off circuit without being slowed down - or breaking ribs.

This was the right decision IMO, despite it being horrible for the driver. All four wheels outside the track limits.

[crmalcolm]

Did Max leave the circuit? Yes.
Did he gain an advantage? Yes.
Has the advantage been negated? Yes.

So the stewards did the right thing.
Should the regulations be looked at? Possibly.

There seems to be two issues here. Is the regulation right? And is it enforced consistently?

If enforced consistently, then there would be no need to change the regulation and no controversy.

If it is currently being enforced as intended, then it needs rewording at the very least.

[Richard C]

Originally Posted by bjohnsonsmith

I'm not suggesting they line the track with SAFER barrier but something more like this, or even a series of cones. Something that won't damage the car in case of a spin.

I pretty much agree.

I think the problem is finding a solution that acts as as deterrent but has little risk of doing damage to the car. I think that is a tall order. To act as a deterrent, there has to be a negative side, otherwise it will not work.

But, we as fans complain about just any solution even if effective. If there is wide runoffs that doesn't punish the driver/car... we complain. If there is a physical deterrent and it does damage to someone's car... we complain.

Circuits that have more natural limitations (such as barriers at Monaco) get a pass in the mind of fans because they are not particularly artificial. It's just an unavoidable fact of the circuit But artificial measures such as suggested above, even if fully successful in their goal, will always generate complaints by those who's favorite driver/team are negatively impacted by them. Basically... if those "devices" were not in place, my favorite team/driver would have done better. Fans feel irrationally "robbed" or "wronged" in those scenarios.

Originally Posted by Sodemo

In my view there needs to be at least 4 metres of grass or dirt after the kerbing. Then after that if they want to have 30 acres of tarmac then so be it.

This generally assumes that having grass/dirt on the edge of the circuit will stop drivers from driving outside of the marked circuit. Someone, somewhere will make it work for them and survive the risk of the non-paved surface.

To my point above, it's good to have a deterrent, but stewards will always need to be able to call out and punish violations.

Richard

[Purist]

On the face of it, I can't tell for sure that he doesn't have two wheels on the curb, which seems to be what they get away with every lap at Turns 6 and 8, at least. If Ricciardo had made one of his attempts stick on Bottas in one of those places, would they have penalized him?

To say nothing of guys gaining an advantage by running wide and totally outside the track and curbing, thus allowing them to carry more speed through and off the corner.

So, there's the consistency issue, and on top of that, the white line delineating the edge of the track has NOT been treated as such when it comes to exit curbs, for years.

The bigger issues, however, are these.

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?

As for the motorbikes, there are plenty of circuits that MotoGP or WSBK run that are withOUT vast amounts of paved run-off everywhere, and certainly that are without paved verges. Look at Phillip Island just this past weekend.

If you've done your grading properly, there simply sholdn't be big bumps at your surface transitions. If you've done something poorly, or dumb, there's a fair chance it'll launch a car anyway.

The overall profile of that corner doesn't look like Turn 8 at Istanbul, where it seems like Tilke was trying to get around the stipulation about decreasing-radius corners. And anyway, having apexes protruding into the corner arc is just "stupid" (my father's word for describing it).

Those types of hard, angular apexes are doing more to hurt the racing in F1, and whatever other categories use these circuits, than anything to do with the aero. It's not just that they narrow the usable racing line; it's that, at slow corners, they make them slower, and thus make the accordion effect onto the following straight worse, so you NEED a longer straight to make up the added distance to have a chance of having a go at an overtake.

And while I don't always like it, I can't recall having myself complained about a gravel trap or whatever "robbing" my favorite. It's fairer and more consistent than anything else we're going to get.

[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).

It doesn't need rulings or further penalties etc, it needs to have a physical deterrant with an obvious consequence if you go out of the track boundries. For me, that either needs to be gravel or grass / dirt.

[Articus]

Originally Posted by gert

I think the rules currently say you have to keep at least 1 tire on the track: i.e. you can't cross the white line with all 4 wheels.

None of the cars in your image are doing that while overtaking another car.

I may be mistaken on the Mercedes vs Red Bull, but I think that is Bottas being overtaken instead of him overtaking?

I think this opinion that is shared with others, not just you, is rather short sighted.

Going off track in certain areas is an advantage period. No matter if you happen to be overtaking another car or not. If Charlie is not clear on this, that IS a problem....and a loophole that drivers like Vettel exploited on the first lap T1 exit where he used a tight inside dive, and a wide out of the track limits exit to get the run he needed to keep ahead of Hamilton.


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!!

So if Vettel and anyone else went off track to gain an advantage via a better exit, or better line, they should have received the SAME penalty that Max did. If they did not receive a penalty, then Max should NOT have received a penalty.

Charlie was not consistent this weekend and that's NOT fair in the sport where there is so much at stake. Charlie has manipulated the race result by penalizing Max and not others. That is wrong on so many levels...

[Articus]

And on to Hamilton's comment about putting grass everywhere, that's just stupid...

The tracks are done the way they are for Safety. If you go putting grass on the inside and outside of every corner. Drivers risk spinning out, in front of the entire field in T1 in the DRY let alone the WET....How many times have we seen a driver get it way wrong as the outside wheel clips the grass under braking or acceleration. Canada (Kubica's massive accident) and Monza come to mind.


You absolutely need to make sure the drivers do not spin out in front of each other due to changes in the friction of the track surface. That it why it is good to have asphalt everywhere. Safety first, even if a spoiled driver cannot understand.

[Purist]

(Someone, please, come up with a sarcasm emoji, FAST.)

[FIRE]

Handing out the penalty is correct but the inconsistently is annoying.

[Adam43]

Originally Posted by Purist

(Someone, please, come up with a sarcasm emoji, FAST.)

I cover this off by having the characters Adam43 to the left of my posts.