• There has been a recent cluster of spammers accessing BARFer accounts and posting spam. To safeguard your account, please consider changing your password. It would be even better to take the additional step of enabling 2 Factor Authentication (2FA) on your BARF account. Read more here.

2024 Formula 1 thread ***spoilers***

I think Max is driving like that on purpose. The stewards have led him to think he’s untouchable. Anything he can do to disrupt Norris is good for his (Max’s) ship. Even with these penalties, losing 2 spots is still fewer points lost than Norris winning.

I’m rooting for Lawson so hard. Checo needs the boot, especially after all the whining he did after the race.
 
Climber said:
We know it won't be 'everybody', but I suspect that certainly Verstappen won't agree with what the other drivers want, possibly Perez will have to go along with Max and maybe even the RB satellite team drivers will have to side with Max. Then there are the people who might hope to take Perez's position. Outside of that, I think they will all agree.
Click to expand...
It looks like (according to Russell) that 19 of 20 drivers agree on a rule change to be implemented as soon as possible.


I wonder who the 1 driver is....duh!!!!
 
That last rule update for driving standards removed any mention of the defender going off-track, which is partly why Max was penalized under "leaving the track and gaining an advantage" in the T7 incident. That needs to be added back in.

Other than that, Im failing to imagine how the passing rules could be codified any better. I think the "who's ahead at the apex" part is dumb. But the rules need to define WHEN a car is required to be given space and when not. The apex is probably as good as it gets for that. I hope any reg changes are small and don't go overboard, so that this same situation doesn't come up in a few months. The drivers and teams will always try to game the system. Theyve figured out how to do that with these regs, so close the loophole and move on. Don't change too much and cause more loopholes.

I think one part that needs changing - that may not be coming up - is getting pushed off and getting dinged for track limits. I think any off-track that was either caused by another driver or resulted in noticeable time loss should not count against someone's track limits count.
 
stangmx13 said:
I think Max is driving like that on purpose. The stewards have led him to think he’s untouchable. Anything he can do to disrupt Norris is good for his (Max’s) ship. Even with these penalties, losing 2 spots is still fewer points lost than Norris winning.

I’m rooting for Lawson so hard. Checo needs the boot, especially after all the whining he did after the race.
Click to expand...
Which then leads to the final possibility....what if we come down to the final race and Norris can overtake Max for WDC, what is to prevent Max from pulling a Schumacher and just crashing them both out of the race? Is there anything in the rules that would penalize him and stop him from winning the WDC through that means? He's obviously studied the rules for loopholes that he can exploit and he has proven that he won't hesitate to exploit those loopholes.
 
IMHO Max got away with dangerous driving for far too long, it was great to see him finally see some consequences, but 2 points and 20 seconds should just be the start of a behavior modification program. In many ways it's a real shame that Max never got to race against the likes of Mansell or Hunt. He would have had some quick and consequential lessons in driving manners, much earlier in his career.
 
Climber said:
Which then leads to the final possibility....what if we come down to the final race and Norris can overtake Max for WDC, what is to prevent Max from pulling a Schumacher and just crashing them both out of the race? Is there anything in the rules that would penalize him and stop him from winning the WDC through that means? He's obviously studied the rules for loopholes that he can exploit and he has proven that he won't hesitate to exploit those loopholes.
Click to expand...
Absent of some real consequences, he probably will.
 
stangmx13 said:
That last rule update for driving standards removed any mention of the defender going off-track, which is partly why Max was penalized under "leaving the track and gaining an advantage" in the T7 incident. That needs to be added back in.

Other than that, Im failing to imagine how the passing rules could be codified any better. I think the "who's ahead at the apex" part is dumb. But the rules need to define WHEN a car is required to be given space and when not. The apex is probably as good as it gets for that. I hope any reg changes are small and don't go overboard, so that this same situation doesn't come up in a few months. The drivers and teams will always try to game the system. Theyve figured out how to do that with these regs, so close the loophole and move on. Don't change too much and cause more loopholes.

I think one part that needs changing - that may not be coming up - is getting pushed off and getting dinged for track limits. I think any off-track that was either caused by another driver or resulted in noticeable time loss should not count against someone's track limits count.
Click to expand...
I read somewhere that had a better definition of who is ahead and when the other needs to give racing room.. This person said if you are at least front tire to front tire at turn in (not at the apex) that racing room needs to be given through to corner.

I like this definition as the apex thing gives the advantage to the person on the inside. The inside car will naturally get to the apex faster. Also, how do you determine the apex (apex is where the vehicle is closest to the berm through the corner from my understanding)? Also, how does the apex "line" extend across the track? IMHO there are too many variables to determine who is ahead at the apex. If they use the "turn-in point", then that line is straight across the track and a lot easier to determine who is ahead. Again, just my opinion.
 
IMO, the 20 second shit is typical of the toothlessness of the FIA. Once again, NASCAR has the better answer; sit in the pits for 1 lap, etc.
 
^^^
Yeah, but in NASCAR one can make up a lap if they are the first one a lap down. So, it is easier to make up a lap. I think a 1 lap penalty in F1 might be a little harsh in most cases. In Max's case (in this particular one) he should have been DQ'd.
 
Agree....but then maybe F1 should go to full course cautions too to pack the field back up again. I struggle to find excitement in mathematical calcs if rider B is going to catch rider A with 2 laps to go, etc...that being said, there has been some unusually good racing this season.
 
F1 isn't NASCAR where you have to be willing to take out an opponent and perhaps a dozen more.

Max got what he deserved and, oddly, was unable to make up ground even on under performing Mercedes once relegated to near the back.

Hamilton's move to Ferrari might work out for him after all.

Oddly it's Haas showing some life not Aston Martin.

Hopefully Norris can catch the chosen one in the four remaining races, unlikely, but then again I didn't think Ferrari would pass RB for second in the constructors.



1Max VerstappenNEDRed Bull Racing Honda RBPT362
2Lando NorrisGBRMcLaren Mercedes315
3Charles LeclercMONFerrari291

1McLaren Mercedes566
2Ferrari537
3Red Bull Racing Honda RBPT512
 
Climber said:
Which then leads to the final possibility....what if we come down to the final race and Norris can overtake Max for WDC, what is to prevent Max from pulling a Schumacher and just crashing them both out of the race? Is there anything in the rules that would penalize him and stop him from winning the WDC through that means? He's obviously studied the rules for loopholes that he can exploit and he has proven that he won't hesitate to exploit those loopholes.
Click to expand...
Ya there are regs in place that would penalize him, maybe even disqualify him from the race. At a minimum, it falls under one of the catch-all rules. However, you can't gift Norris points that he didn't score. So Max would probably still win the 'ship. I doubt the FIA would be willing to exclude Max from the entire championship. They'd have a hard time proving "intentional crash" and would be unlikely to give such a severe penalty IMO.

McLaren would absolutely take it to court and might win... a few years from now.
 
Note that two of the four remaining races have additional points up for grabs in sprint races.
 
Racinfrk said:
I read somewhere that had a better definition of who is ahead and when the other needs to give racing room.. This person said if you are at least front tire to front tire at turn in (not at the apex) that racing room needs to be given through to corner.

I like this definition as the apex thing gives the advantage to the person on the inside. The inside car will naturally get to the apex faster. Also, how do you determine the apex (apex is where the vehicle is closest to the berm through the corner from my understanding)? Also, how does the apex "line" extend across the track? IMHO there are too many variables to determine who is ahead at the apex. If they use the "turn-in point", then that line is straight across the track and a lot easier to determine who is ahead. Again, just my opinion.
Click to expand...
Using turn-in might reduce dive-bombs as well, or at least reduce the strength of the position of a dive-bombing driver. A driver that dive-bombs is generally behind at the normal turn-in and may never turn-in themselves :laughing

It's funny though - the difference btw turn-in and apex is small with modern F1 in the corners that allow passing. They brake so late and need to keep the front tires straight for so long. The difference between the two points is what, 2-3 car lengths, 10-15m? Being inches ahead or behind at two points separated by 0.5-1s is pretty close to splitting hairs.
 
An easy fix for much of the "pushed off track" complaints are to allow the rider pushed off to take escape routes and retain the position, if legit pushed off. The incentives line up well and the arbiter of "pushed off" will be the stewards, if challenged by the pushing riders team. If requested for review by the pushing riders team, the pushing rider may also face additional time penalties when their actions are reviewed. This would keep "always review" actions by the Stewards down to "only reviewed by request".

Teams and drivers know when what they did was shitty...they'd be remiss to ask for the spot back if they figured they may be facing time penalties.

GAJ said:
F1 isn't NASCAR where you have to be willing to take out an opponent and perhaps a dozen more.
Click to expand...
Oh, I wouldn't say that....F1 has been full of disasters on track to win races.
 
Drivers already can retain position if pushed off track, under select circumstances. The rule isn't black and white and shouldn't be. The rule is extra gray when the driver that is pushed off track is not ahead or inches ahead. The stewards need to decide "pushed off" and "ahead", which is what they are having so much trouble with right now.

The stewards don't review incidents because a team complains. They review incidents if race control thinks they should. IIRC, teams are no longer allowed to influence the stewards directly. Teams do get to notify race control.

The teams seem to be trying to self-police more often. But Norris at COTA showed they still get it wrong. Norris should have given back the position and re-passed Max. Instead, Norris and the team thought the pass was legal because they thought he was ahead at the apex. Maybe this is a consequence of the rules being insufficient, maybe they'll be correct more often after the change. Or maybe McLaren just got it wrong.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top