Formula 1 2019 - General Discussion Thread

El_Duderino 09

Red bull might be in the market for a no.2 driver because they certainty have a no 1 driver in max. There aren't many pure no.2s around at the moment. Hulk might be willing to take a no2 role if it gets him in a top car and in with a decent shout of wins and podiums for the first (and probably only) time in his career.

Just speculating BTW.

skipper_G

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

Red bull might be in the market for a no.2 driver because they certainty have a no 1 driver in max. There aren't many pure no.2s around at the moment. Hulk might be willing to take a no2 role if it gets him in a top car and in with a decent shout of wins and podiums for the first (and probably only) time in his career.

Just speculating BTW.

I think it can be argued that they have a number 2 already, Gasly has had a shaky start to his Red Bull tenure but in 3 of the last 4 races he's qualified and finished the races exactly where I'd expect him to, China qualy P6 & race P6, Spain qualy P6 & race P6, Monaco qualy P8 & race P5. As long as he delivers consistent points scoring Red Bull will be happy, they won't be expecting him to beat Verstappen

Adamocovic

When looking at the records stumbled upon one to do with Button's crazy win in Canada in 2011.

6 pit stops and still winning. From last to first at one point. Only posting the short video but you can get an hour long video of the race online and well worth a watch for those who missed it or can't remember it. (Full thing would take most of your day to watch :P)

Jordan 199

^That was an epic race.

AMKC

That Canada race has to be one of the best of the last decade. I doubt we will see a race like that again anytime soon.

weekaizer

OSI wrote: »

I went absolutely nuts when he passed Vettel on that last lap. That was a one in a million race.

I hardly ever scream at the tv...but I certainly screamed at top of my voice when vettel ran wide and nearly spun!. Schumi could have been on the podium if vettel spun fully!.

Vic_08

Adamocovic wrote: »

When looking at the records stumbled upon one to do with Button's crazy win in Canada in 2011.

6 pit stops and still winning. From last to first at one point. Only posting the short video but you can get an hour long video of the race online and well worth a watch for those who missed it or can't remember it. (Full thing would take most of your day to watch :P)

The full race is showing on Sky F1 Thursday 7-11pm, it's definitely worth watching the whole thing if you can,even better record it to skip the ads.

Harika

Vic_08 wrote: »

The full race is showing on Sky F1 Thursday 7-11pm, it's definitely worth watching the whole thing if you can,even better record it to skip the ads.

And the two hour breaks

flazio

Heads up for an interesting looking documentary about Mondello Park tomorrow (Monday 3rd of June) at 6.30pm on RTÉ One.
From the trailers it looks like they might dig out some of their archive F1 coverage.

Jordan 199

Montreal up next. I'm a fan of Circuit Gilles Villeneuve as Jordan did well there. Had a double podium finish there in 1995 with Barrichello finishing second there and Irvine third:

Sheeps

Heading over on Thursday to Montreal. I've general admission tickets, but the it looks pretty poor for GA to be honest. Anyone ever been before, and got any tips for good vantage points around the track?

recyclebin

Was there in 2006 with GA on a bank at the hairpin. Had a good view of a big screen and had commentary on FM radio.

Anjobe

Silly season starting already - https://www.express.co.uk/sport/f1-autosport/1135436/Sebastian-Vettel-retirement-Ferrari-Fernando-Alonso-Charles-Leclerc-F1-news

El_Duderino 09

Anjobe wrote: »

Silly season starting already - https://www.express.co.uk/sport/f1-autosport/1135436/Sebastian-Vettel-retirement-Ferrari-Fernando-Alonso-Charles-Leclerc-F1-news

Saw this. The Express is a complete made up paper for fantasists. Not a day passes without a story about world war 3 and how the EU is on the brink of collapse because of the latest zinger by Jacob Rees Mogg or borris Johnson.

It's like an alternative reality news source. If you can imagine it, they can write a story about it. It doesn't have to be based on reality.

Joeface

I can never remember , Is Canada one of the GP's where the teams say the can race , or the other statement " it's very difficult to over take here "

I enjoyed Monaco , but i need a race this weekend .......even half a race would do .

pjohnson

Joeface wrote: »

I can never remember , Is Canada one of the GP's where the teams say the can race , or the other statement " it's very difficult to over take here "

I enjoyed Monaco , but i need a race this weekend .......even half a race would do .

Well Toto has said he fears the track will suit Ferrari more than Mercedes.

Joeface

pjohnson wrote: »

Well Toto has said he fears the track will suit Ferrari more than Mercedes.

he said that about the whole season at the start ........I no longer trust what he says

El_Duderino 09

Anjobe wrote: »

Silly season starting already - https://www.express.co.uk/sport/f1-autosport/1135436/Sebastian-Vettel-retirement-Ferrari-Fernando-Alonso-Charles-Leclerc-F1-news

Just a further note on the Express. It carried a headline today "Vettel issues retirement statement". And you read down the article to see that Vettel mentioned he has no intention to retire.

As much as the term fake news is throw around, The Express is actually fake news. Total BS paper.

flazio

At this stage I'm just resigned to the fact that every track this year is suited to the Mercedes-Benz and to just ignore the top 2 places.

Jordan 199

I hope it rains at Circuit Gilles Villeneuve this weekend like it did back in 2011.

Adamocovic

Jordan 199 wrote: »

I hope it rains at Circuit Gilles Villeneuve this weekend like it did back in 2011.

Afraid forecasts have dry and sunny until Monday I think.

Why is the rain always coming too late this year.

Frank Bullitt

flazio wrote: »

At this stage I'm just resigned to the fact that every track this year is suited to the Mercedes-Benz and to just ignore the top 2 places.

More of the car being suited to pretty much every track on earth. You could put in on a gravel road rally and it would win.

Frank Bullitt

Great watch!

d8491prj5boyvg

Is it just me or is race coverage nowadays more focussed on the battles at the front than in the past. I remember the tv cameras would follow battles down the field as they happened. Now i seem to miss them and hear about them after.

Same with qualifying. At Canada we were on board with a crappy lap from botttas when both leclerc and vettel were on great laps. The current qualifying format doesn't build the tension like the old one hour straight format.

flazio

Payton Low Corkscrew wrote: »

Is it just me or is race coverage nowadays more focussed on the battles at the front than in the past. I remember the tv cameras would follow battles down the field as they happened. Now i seem to miss them and hear about them after.

Same with qualifying. At Canada we were on board with a crappy lap from botttas when both leclerc and vettel were on great laps. The current qualifying format doesn't build the tension like the old one hour straight format.

The problem with the old one hour format is free to air stations don't know when it's safe to take an ad break. How annoyed would anyone be if they missed the pole lap.

d8491prj5boyvg

flazio wrote: »

The problem with the old one hour format is free to air stations don't know when it's safe to take an ad break. How annoyed would anyone be if they missed the pole lap.

That is an advantage alright but we still missed the pole lap on saturday.

Nic_Col

Time penalties should be done away with.

Farcical to have a driver cross the line in first not actually winning. Happened in Monaco too, driver crosses the line in second and doesn't make the podium because of a time penalty.

There needs to be a way to penalise the driver in the race itself. Only post race penalties should be disqualification if merited or grid penalties for the next race.

If a time penalty is applied it should be served in a pit stop. If a drive through is deemed too severe and a driver has no further scheduled pit stops then add a penalty section with a chicane or something to a track that the driver must drive through that will lose them time, shouldn't be a problem on most circuits given how they have so much tarmacked run off areas now.

Yesterday just looked terrible.

Very harsh on Seb, there wasn't too much he could do, he can't slam on the brakes on the grass and once he rejoined the track he still had to bring it under control. I know it impeded Hamilton but it wasn't deliberate. Accidental obstruction should be categorised as racing incident, if a deliberate obstruction; punish away.

jv2000

I feel like yesterday's incident is very polarising. I am not a big Vettel fan but the time penalty was harsh, he did not have control and he did not gain an advantage (ie his laptime was slower because of the incident). Okay he blocked Hamilton but his control of the situation was not 100%. Also on a side note, Grojean's re-entry at the start of the race was not safe, Kimi had to take avoiding action.

Regardless of this perhaps the best solution moving forward is to introduce a MotoGP-esque penalty loop? This way the drivers take their penalty on track within a certain number of laps of the decision and also they then have the opportunity to fight for their place back in the race. This of course will not allow for last lap incidents which are very possible. It should however mean that the majority of races will finish in the order the drivers cross the line.

muckwarrior

I think Mario Andretti summed it up very succinctly. Should not have been a penalty, just like Hamilton's similar incident in Monaco wasn't. If it happens repeatedly, then a stewards investigation is warranted.

https://twitter.com/MarioAndretti/status/1137819492631928832

AMKC

So Ferrari are appealing the decision at least that is what Sky News have said anyway.

tigerboon

The thing about the whole Vettel penalty is it was Hamilton who had full control but chose to go for a gap that was always closing. He could have backed off a fraction and gone left or settled for Vettel staying in front for a while knowing he had a faster car at that stage of the race. He would have got him up the straight with DRS. Vettel was already on the grass as Hamilton came into the chicane. The Ferrari was always going to have poor grip after leaving the grass and was always going to head for the right of the track. Was the overtake ever on or did Hamilton play the situation? He was very quick on the radio after it happening.
Leaving the circuit and should have consequences normally, such as the penalty loop mentioned above or maybe a penalty mode on the car which reduces power long enough to suffer the penalty but not be a slow moving hazard. Vettel left the track onto grass however, and managed to hold the car. That shouldn't be punished.

El_Duderino 09

Nic_Col wrote: »

Time penalties should be done away with.

Farcical to have a driver cross the line in first not actually winning. Happened in Monaco too, driver crosses the line in second and doesn't make the podium because of a time penalty.

There needs to be a way to penalise the driver in the race itself. Only post race penalties should be disqualification if merited or grid penalties for the next race.

Disagree. The time penalty is the least harsh penalty possible. Seb got a massive advantage -he maintained the lead of the race.

If he had been able to get 5 seconds ahead of Lewis, then it would he irrelevant.

I don't think Seb's move was deliberate or malicious. But that's not really the point. He lost Control of his car and blocked Lewis. Simple as that.

A 3 place grid penalty in the next race would have been way out of proportion and wouldn't have addressed the rule break in Canada. 5 second penalty is the most proportionate penalty.

eagle eye

El_Duderino 09 wrote:

I don't think Seb's move was deliberate or malicious. But that's not really the point. He lost Control of his car and blocked Lewis. Simple as that.

It is the point, he was driving a race car at high speed. **** happens. It's not penalty when a driver tries to save his car from crashing.

d8491prj5boyvg

tigerboon wrote: »

The thing about the whole Vettel penalty is it was Hamilton who had full control but chose to go for a gap that was always closing. He could have backed off a fraction and gone left or settled for Vettel staying in front for a while knowing he had a faster car at that stage of the race. He would have got him up the straight with DRS. Vettel was already on the grass as Hamilton came into the chicane. The Ferrari was always going to have poor grip after leaving the grass and was always going to head for the right of the track. Was the overtake ever on or did Hamilton play the situation? He was very quick on the radio after it happening.
Leaving the circuit and should have consequences normally, such as the penalty loop mentioned above or maybe a penalty mode on the car which reduces power long enough to suffer the penalty but not be a slow moving hazard. Vettel left the track onto grass however, and managed to hold the car. That shouldn't be punished.

A penalty mode is an excellent idea! Not as harsh and leaves the decision to what happens on track.. The only problem is it starts to look a bit like mario kart

PopePalpatine

Payton Low Corkscrew wrote: »

A penalty mode is an excellent idea! Not as harsh and leaves the decision to what happens on track.. The only problem is it starts to look a bit like mario kart

Or Gran Turismo Sport.

Burkie1203

Hamilton avoided a penalty in Mexico 2016 but Max got one for cutting a corner and going across the grass when they locked up a wheel.

It's the arbitrary way they are applied I think which rankles.

BikeRacer

Rich Energy have completely lost it. "Total parasites"...jaysus.


https://twitter.com/rich_energy/status/1138109173722484736

tigerboon

Payton Low Corkscrew wrote: »

A penalty mode is an excellent idea! Not as harsh and leaves the decision to what happens on track.. The only problem is it starts to look a bit like mario kart

Not if it's over a full lap. A good driver might be able to avoid being overtaken. Bit like getting sin binned in rugby but not conceding a try.
I don't get the issue with Vettel regaining control and preventing an overtake. It's racing. There's a very good chance Hamilton knew the overtake was never on. He's not a rookie

d8491prj5boyvg

tigerboon wrote: »

Not if it's over a full lap. A good driver might be able to avoid being overtaken. Bit like getting sin binned in rugby but not conceding a try.
I don't get the issue with Vettel regaining control and preventing an overtake. It's racing. There's a very good chance Hamilton knew the overtake was never on. He's not a rookie

I think that's exactly the point. Give the advantage to the driver behind but leave the outcome to be settled between the drivers. The five seconds decided the race, which was very unfair if deserved or not.

AMKC

Payton Low Corkscrew wrote: »

A penalty mode is an excellent idea! Not as harsh and leaves the decision to what happens on track.. The only problem is it starts to look a bit like mario kart

Also who would have control of that power mood? I doubt the teams are going to hand it over to the FIA or stewards are they?

Would they have to tell the team that so so has a power penalty reduce power for 1 lap and if so would the team do it before or after telling the driver?

d8491prj5boyvg

AMKC wrote: »

Also who would have control of that power mood? I doubt the teams are going to hand it over to the FIA or stewards are they?

Would they have to tell the team that so so has a power penalty reduce power for 1 lap and if so would the team do it before or after telling the driver?

The order would come from FIA I suppose. At the end of the day, i doubt it would happen and the optics wouldn't be great. We're so far removed from the gladiatorial battles of the past and this would be the final nail in the coffin. But it is a nice elegant solution as it penalises wrong doing but keeps the drivers in charge.

El_Duderino 09

Payton Low Corkscrew wrote: »

I think that's exactly the point. Give the advantage to the driver behind but leave the outcome to be settled between the drivers. The five seconds decided the race, which was very unfair if deserved or not.

The 5 seconds decided the order of the top 2 drivers. But so did Vettel, losing control of his car, going off the track, cutting the corner while our of control, re-entering the track while out of control and maintaining the lead only because he blocked Lewis.

That decided the order of the top 2 drivers too.

Robbo

BikeRacer wrote: »

Rich Energy have completely lost it. "Total parasites"...jaysus.


https://twitter.com/rich_energy/status/1138109173722484736

Jesus, the doubling down.

Some choice quotes from the judgment in ATB Sales v. Rich Energy Ltd [2019] EWHC 1207 (IPEC).

32 Conversely, I found both Mr Storey and Mr Kelly to be poor witnesses.

33 Mr Storey provided different and inconsistent accounts of the development of D1's Device, which also conflicted to a large extent with the evidence of Mr Kelly. He often did not answer questions directly, preferring to make speeches about his vision for his business or alternatively seeking to evade questions by speaking in generalities or in the third person plural. He only answered several questions when I intervened. He had a tendency to make impressive statements, which on further investigation or consideration were not quite what they seemed. For example, when Mr Wyand in cross-examination tried to understand his evidence about the sales figures of Rich Energy drinks, and put to him that he had been quoted in the press in February 2019 as saying that the First Defendant had produced 90 million cans, Mr Storey explained that it had produced 90 million cans, but had not yet filled and sold them. He said he would have to check the figures, but in 2018 he thought the First Defendant had filled and sold "circa 3 million cans" of Rich Energy drink. In another example, he stated in an impassioned fashion that he was " not in the business of trying to create a world-class business by taking any inspiration from anybody else whatsoever", but his own written evidence was that his starting point when thinking about developing a logo was to carry out logo research on what other drinks companies were doing, and to carrying out internet searches on stag head logos used by other companies. For reasons which I set out below, I am satisfied that some of Mr Storey's evidence was incorrect or misleading and that he was involved in the manufacture of documents during the course of litigation to provide additional support for the Defendants' case.

119 In relation to motive, I do not accept Mr St Quintin's submissions that the Defendants can have had no motive for copying C's Device and that copying it is inconsistent with the care he gave to clearing it for trade mark purposes. It is clear from Mr Storey's oral evidence in relation to the Rich Energy can design, as acknowledged by Mr St Quintin in closing, that he has very little idea of what copyright is and no idea of the difference between copyright and trade marks, even after going through this litigation process.

Rich Energy's solicitors didn't exactly come out of this looking too professional either..

63 I do not believe I should let that pass without comment. I do not consider that there are any circumstances in which one solicitor in the course of his professional duties should accuse another in writing of making imbecilic requests. That language is far removed from the professional courtesy which solicitors are expected to show each other and those they deal with. If a trainee solicitor sent the letter, as the reference suggests, the fact that it was sent in this form suggests a failure by the supervising solicitor properly to supervise.

vectra

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

The 5 seconds decided the order of the top 2 drivers. But so did Vettel, losing control of his car, going off the track, cutting the corner while our of control, re-entering the track while out of control and maintaining the lead only because he blocked Lewis.

That decided the order of the top 2 drivers too.

I don't buy that for a couple of reasons.

1)
Lewis was a good bit behind and saw Vettels car going off track and somewhat out of control, Lewis should have had the experience to lift at that point and not charge for a gap that could have put both drivers in a dangerous situation.
But no, He was in the mindset of grabbing that position at all costs, even by putting all four wheels off track.

2)
Why should Vettel get a penalty when Lewis got none and went on to win the race in Monaco 2016 when he all but put Dani Ric, in the barrier in Monaco?

El_Duderino 09

vectra wrote: »

I don't buy that for a couple of reasons.

1)
Lewis was a good bit behind and saw Vettels car going off track and somewhat out of control, Lewis should have had the experience to lift at that point and not charge for a gap that could have put both drivers in a dangerous situation.
But no, He was in the mindset of grabbing that position at all costs, even by putting all four wheels off track.

2)
Why should Vettel get a penalty when Lewis got none and went on to win the race in Monaco 2016 when he all but put Dani Ric, in the barrier in Monaco?

Ah, the first point needs us to assume we can accurately read Hamilton's mind. I can't read his mind.

But I was watching the race on the F1 app because I don't have sky. I was following the gap between them in real time. Hamilton had consistently been within a second of Vettel for the few laps leading up to the incident. He was within half a second when Vettel went off track.

Vettel was under pernicious pressure when the incident happened.

d8491prj5boyvg

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

The 5 seconds decided the order of the top 2 drivers. But so did Vettel, losing control of his car, going off the track, cutting the corner while our of control, re-entering the track while out of control and maintaining the lead only because he blocked Lewis.

That decided the order of the top 2 drivers too.

I agree that Vettel had a hand in the issue. I would argue that this is best rectified in a way that lets him fight back. The 5 second penalty was a bit too harsh in that respect. It's like offering a penalty try or a scrum on the line in rugby. Sometimes the penalty try is warranted, sometimes it's too harsh. 5 seconds was a penalty try, given the circumstances. I'd argue that was too harsh.

vectra

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

Ah, the first point needs us to assume we can accurately read Hamilton's mind. I can't read his mind.

But I was watching the race on the F1 app because I don't have sky. I was following the gap between them in real time. Hamilton had consistently been within a second of Vettel for the few laps leading up to the incident. He was within half a second when Vettel went off track.

Vettel was under pernicious pressure when the incident happened.

Hamilton was approaching the chicane when Vettel went off so had had plenty of time to react.

Vettel - Hamilton Canada 2019

How does it differ to this??

Hamilton - Ricardo Monaco 2016

If it is a different scenario then I am either confused/blind or am on another planet

d8491prj5boyvg

vectra wrote: »

Hamilton was approaching the chicane when Vettel went off so had had plenty of time to react.

Vettel - Hamilton Canada 2019

How does it differ to this??

Hamilton - Ricardo Monaco 2016

If it is a different scenario then I am either confused/blind or am on another planet

I never saw this before. Maybe it could be argued that Vettel was less in control. But he blocked in the same way from what I can see so with this precedent the Vettel penalty was a disgrace.

BikeRacer

vectra wrote: »

Lewis should have had the experience to lift at that point and not charge for a gap that could have put both drivers in a dangerous situation.
But no, He was in the mindset of grabbing that position at all costs, even by putting all four wheels off track.

If Lewis, or indeed Seb, had that mentality of not going for a gap they'd have exactly 0 world championships between them. What you're describing is less motorsport and more 'Driving Miss Daisy'.

Santan

vectra wrote: »

Hamilton was approaching the chicane when Vettel went off so had had plenty of time to react.

Vettel - Hamilton Canada 2019

How does it differ to this??

Hamilton - Ricardo Monaco 2016

If it is a different scenario then I am either confused/blind or am on another planet

this is a perfect example of just how bad the race controllers are, at this point it seems like different rules race after race, and also team by team, driver by driver, for F1, where they have so much footage to clearly view from replays of multiple cameras and angles, these guys make a huge amount of bad decisions that have a dreadful effect on the outcome of races, and is something thats going on for years now, not just a one off here and there. It is i feel, just another aspect of bad management that just pushes more and more fans away.