[Official] Brazilian Grand Prix: Grand Prix Weekend Thread - Round 20 of 21

[Taxi645]

Another point, if we compared the respetive speed difference between the RB and FI both in free air (comparing perez and verstappen on the same strategy between lap 17 and 29) we see about a 0.9s speed difference. If we hand Ocon a generous 0.25s per lap bonus for having 6 (short) Sao Paulo laps we have about 0.65s of difference. The bonus of the ss over the soft over that short lap is probably equal or a bit smaller than 0.65s. So repeat Ocon did not have a speed advantage. He just had DRS, his ego and a lack of common sense.

[Peter Mallett]

Everywhere except F1 the blue flag rules is; a blue flag is waved if a faster car is approaching you from behind. It matters not whether the car is lapping you or un-lapping itself or is simply overtaking because it can at that time.

[Akrapovic]

Originally Posted by Taxi645

Another point, if we compared the respetive speed difference between the RB and FI both in free air (comparing perez and verstappen on the same strategy between lap 17 and 29) we see about a 0.9s speed difference. If we hand Ocon a generous 0.25s per lap bonus for having 6 (short) Sao Paulo laps we have about 0.65s of difference. The bonus of the ss over the soft over that short lap is probably equal or a bit smaller than 0.65s. So repeat Ocon did not have a speed advantage. He just had DRS, his ego and a lack of common sense.

This isn't wrong. I don't think you'll find anyone who thinks that Ocon was right. That's not what people are saying. People are saying Ocon was an idiot, but Max chose to fight the idiot. If Max had the speed advantage you claimed then he'd blow by him and clear off again within a couple of corners, so why bother combating someone who is acting like a muppet?

[Adam43]

While the blue flag rule is not relevant here (in its F1 use), I feel it does prompt a considerrrion and discussion of it. I’m with Peter let’s make it simpler, it tells you there is a faster car approaching (always useful in my experience). Drop the have to get out of the way within three rule.

However, then we’d be back to whinge whinge whinge from drovers and fans when it isn’t “fair”, because the circumstance meant they or their favourite lost out. However it is a skill and, of course, places some responsibility back on the overtaker unlike now. And is potentially more exciting. Perhaps to counteract that blatant blocking could be looked at, but it’s tricky as it’s subjective.

[Taxi645]

Originally Posted by Akrapovic

This isn't wrong. I don't think you'll find anyone who thinks that Ocon was right. That's not what people are saying. People are saying Ocon was an idiot, but Max chose to fight the idiot. If Max had the speed advantage you claimed then he'd blow by him and clear off again within a couple of corners, so why bother combating someone who is acting like a muppet?

Actually there are a few that think he was right and my post was directed at those. I have already conceded that Verstappen could've avoided the contact a few pages back (in a my usual somewhat unreadabily rushed post fashion).

Also I didn't claim Verstappen would've been much faster. Per the above calculation 0-0.2s given the same level of tire nursing (as explained earlier). That is too little to clear off if the other party is willing to ruin their tires to proove a point against the race leader. They would've been in each others hair the whole time. Something Verstappen could not afford especially not knowing the extend of Lewis' engine problems.

[chillibowl]

another side point to all of this...i have to say im a little impressed by Brawn/FOM for taking the line they have here. honestly i expected they would have played it up in WWE fashion for the sake of ratings and 'growing' the sport....anything it takes to get people watching the a not so relevant finale right?

but i suppose the media has handled that for them.

anyways, i imagine BE would have handled it differently but all be it in a much funnier way.

[S griffin]

Well as I said you rarely see pushing and shoving in F1 these days

[Taxi645]

In order to prevent backmarkers from messing up the leaders race without having a significant speed advantage, but to still allow them a swift passing if they to do, I would propose the following easy to implement fix:


If someone wants to unlap himself the required DRS delta is reduced from 1s to 0.5s.


This will have the following advantages:

1 The backmarker is able to unlap himself if he has sufficient speed advantage. Thus after passing his speed advantage will be thus that he will be able to clear off and not be in the way of the car he just overtook.

2 If the markers then has DRS, chances are the overtaking will be relatively swift and without drama (because he will have DRS AND an actual pace advantage (otherwise he wouldn't be able to get within 0.5s).

3 The backmarkers will still have a chance to unlap themselves, in stead of removing DRS for them all together.

4 If the speed advantage of the backmarkers is too small or even non-existent (only there because of DRS for instance), the integrity of the race won't be heavily compromised for no real benefit of the backmarker (as was the case with Ocon/Verstappen).



I think this would be a sensible compromise that is easy to implement and takes a balanced approach to the interest of backmarkers on the one hand and the integrity of the race on the other.

[Armco Bender]

The backmarker could toot his horn and flash his lights to pass.

[Kempi]

Originally Posted by Taxi645

In order to prevent backmarkers from messing up the leaders race without having a significant speed advantage, but to still allow them a swift passing if they to do, I would propose the following easy to implement fix:


If someone wants to unlap himself the required DRS delta is reduced from 1s to 0.5s.


This will have the following advantages:

1 The backmarker is able to unlap himself if he has sufficient speed advantage. Thus after passing his speed advantage will be thus that he will be able to clear off and not be in the way of the car he just overtook.

2 If the markers then has DRS, chances are the overtaking will be relatively swift and without drama (because he will have DRS AND an actual pace advantage (otherwise he wouldn't be able to get within 0.5s).

3 The backmarkers will still have a chance to unlap themselves, in stead of removing DRS for them all together.

4 If the speed advantage of the backmarkers is too small or even non-existent (only there because of DRS for instance), the integrity of the race won't be heavily compromised for no real benefit of the backmarker (as was the case with Ocon/Verstappen).



I think this would be a sensible compromise that is easy to implement and takes a balanced approach to the interest of backmarkers on the one hand and the integrity of the race on the other.

Overengineering a solution for a problem that occurs once in every what, 200 races?, is not a thing that leads to easier application of rules, rather the opposite with more awkward situations and ruls discussion to follow.

If both drivers had used common sense nothing would have happened.

[Akrapovic]

Ocon could just not have pushed too hard to pass the leader. Max could’ve just not turned into the guy doing stupid stuff. You don’t need rules for this stuff.

[S griffin]

I agree. Let's not overregulate something that hasn't happened that often. Let's hope more common sense is used in future

[Taxi645]

I have to say I agree with above comments. I prefer the common sense approach as indeed it is not something which occurs often. It would be fairly easy to implement though.

[crmalcolm]

Originally Posted by Akrapovic

Ocon could just not have pushed too hard to pass the leader. Max could’ve just not turned into the guy doing stupid stuff. You don’t need rules for this stuff.

True - although I would also say there is already a rule for this stuff.

Ocon transgressed that rule, and got penalised. Max acted rashly, and suffered.

[Aysedasi]

I'm struggling to get used to all the good sense and reasonable (and reasoned) debate in this thread now. Long may it continue!

[jimclark]

[bjohnsonsmith]

Originally Posted by Aysedasi

I'm struggling to get used to all the good sense and reasonable (and reasoned) debate in this thread now. Long may it continue!

It makes a welcome change. I'll drink to that.

[bella]

i'm trying to think of something stupid to say to liven things up a bit

actually, one thing that's come out over the past few days is just how close hamilton's engine... sorry, PU was to failing during the race. someone must have made the right animal sacrifice at brixworth...!

[Greem]

Don't be ridiculous Bella. That's just stupid. You're wrong.

It was a human sacrifice!

[bella]

omg, you're right, human sacrifice ceremonies *are* listed under the benefits section on the hpp website... explains the high turnover of work placement students i guess

[Skam85]

Originally Posted by Greem

Don't be ridiculous Bella. That's just stupid. You're wrong.

It was a human sacrifice!

was it Bottas?

[Peter Mallett]

Originally Posted by bella

omg, you're right, human sacrifice ceremonies *are* listed under the benefits section on the hpp website... explains the high turnover of work placement students i guess

Can you be a bit more specific as to which God you are referring to? It makes a difference as to what grade of personnel is in fact sacrificed.

[bella]

ah, a common misconception. all gods demand the same sacrifice, but you have to be careful which day you do it on...

[Aysedasi]

Now this really is reasoned debate! Love it......

[wnut]

Originally Posted by Aysedasi

Now this really is reasoned debate! Love it......

It was really good on the whole, congratulations to all involved in the thread!

On board of "the incident" for those who haven't seen it.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zF7_ckspkSY