Formula 1/F1/Formula One

[Jeff Scott]

Thank you for your insight, I'm definitely a novice when it comes to the sport. Is this done purposefully for a specific effect or because they slam on the brakes so hard they just lock?

Locking up the brakes is definitely not desired. It can, and usually does, cause a flat spot on the tire, creating vibrations and does not help at all with producing better lap times. Usually the drivers do this when overcooking a corner, or when not realizing how much faster they are than the guy in front of them, or to avoid a collision for any number of reasons.

Sample image - Singapore 2017, first corner "incident".

I understand the heat of the battle thing. I don't know the F1 etiquette at all. Is that kind of lunge frowned upon, widely accepted? The announcers seemed to have no serious issue with the maneuver, or really the response from Hamilton either. It didn't seem to me like Hamilton came out of that turn with any more or less advantage than he had going into the turn.

Not frowned upon, it's just racing, real racing.

Here is Lewis at the 2016 Spanish GP, where he and his teammate Nico Rosberg got into a small "incident" in the first lap of the race.

 

[3bc]

It's a fair enough observation/question. Still pictures dont show the speed involved. But to lunge from that far back and come up even (ahead) indicates tha he us moving faster. The second photo supports this (of course Lewis is now offline).
When the stewards make their calls (and when pundits analyze) they always pause the video at just before the apex like I did to judge the alignment of the two cars. Max is ahead (though...the stewards didn't agree!).

Edit ( last one I promise and with due respect) where you begin your braking has nothing, absolutely nothing to do with it. Try that argument with Daniel Riccardio or Valentino Rossi!

Again Martin Brundle doesn't often go out on a limb but he reaffirmed and said he was standing by his disagreement with the stewards. It's all a moot point though because Hamilton would have repressed anyways.

In my first post after the race I said
and that was because this was payback for many bad calls over the season (and for many other "Hamilton/Merc" things going back many seasons) objective no, subjective yes. I admit.

I'm not necessarily a Max fan. I loathed his ultra dangerous move on Raikkonen on the straight at Spa hiscforst year with Red Bull (but of course Kimi brushed it off as not very nice).

It's not very nice how the race ended but in F1 the race ain't overv till it's over, you need to be ready for anything take every opportunity and Red Bull did.

I blabbed enough now and apologize to Frank Tuesday for being prickly.

But the fastest way to take a turn is to break before you reach the apex of the turn and be able to accelerate through the turn, not floor it into the middle of the apex, then slam on the brakes, then turn, then accelerate, which appears to be what max basically did. His going into the turn faster than Lewis only adds more weight to my argument that Lewis was going to come out of that turn with a big advantage either way.

 

[Frank Tuesday]

Here is a good example of what can happen with a flatspot.

 

[roller]

+1

3bc, we're glad you're here and interested in participating... but, as you've written a few times yourself, you appear to be somewhat new to F1. I, too, encourage you to watch a few more races in order to understand how the sport works and recognize what's frowned upon on the track.

Golf, hockey and baseball aren't my strong suits whatsoever. As a result, I wouldn't even consider chiming in on threads pertaining to those topics until I felt like I had gained a solid knowledge. Watching F1 on TV is the best way to learn -- Sky's coverage is fantastic.

Feel free to do whatcha like as YMMV.

You have a lot of homework ahead of you. To start, watch every race from just this past season, alone, to learn a bit about F1 brakes.

 

[Frank Tuesday]

But the fastest way to take a turn is to break before you reach the apex of the turn and be able to accelerate through the turn, not floor it into the middle of the apex, then slam on the brakes, then turn, then accelerate, which appears to be what max basically did. His going into the turn faster than Lewis only adds more weight to my argument that Lewis was going to come out of that turn with a big advantage either way.

Positioning your car to limit the options of the other driver is part of racing. I'm not a fan of the "Pass or Crash" style of racing that is rather en vogue at the moment. But no matter what my opinion of it is, the FIA has decided to allow it. Expect more and more drivers to attempt to pass in this way. Not all drivers are as mature as Lewis, so it will lead to many crashes.

Max fans like to whinge about Silverstone, but what Lewis did there was the exact same as what Max does: brake late, miss the apex and force the other driver to give way or crash. The big difference is that Max chose crash where Lewis chooses avoidance. I didn't like it when Lewis did it, and I didn't like it when Max did it.

And don't worry about getting in and asking questions. It's how you learn. People who have been watching racing for 40 years may find your question obvious, but don't let that stop you.

 

[roller]

+1

So very true. If it wasn't for Lewis being such a cool customer with many years of experience, he wouldn't have been tied with Max heading into the finalé. I can think of many situations this season in which Max wasn't driving like a gentleman that would've easily caused an accident with other drivers. Lewis backing out saved both of them a BUNCH of times.

If Max had been going against someone that drove like Max in those situations, there would be shards of carbon fiber strewn all over tracks all season long.

It would be great for everyone if Max matured. I'm still irked at him walking off the podium at Jeddah.

Not all drivers are as mature as Lewis, so it will lead to many crashes.

 

[Wood and Wire]

Well, this season's outcome aside; the important thing is that Niki Temazepam will still be driving for Haas next season, on the basis that he has the best name for Hair Metal.

 

[12BitSlab]

Well, this season's outcome aside; the important thing is that Niki Temazepam will still be driving for Haas next season, on the basis that he has the best name for Hair Metal.

Temazepam - to me that sounds like the name of one those very expensive, miracle medicines one sees advertised on TV where everyone is smiling no matter how bad the side effects are.

 

[Frank Tuesday]

Temazepam - to me that sounds like the name of one those very expensive, miracle medicines one sees advertised on TV where everyone is smiling no matter how bad the side effects are.

It's a benzodiazapine, same family as Xanax and Valium. So yeah, they're smiling.

 

[Corigan]

So much dislike for NASCAR. Even with all their poor decisions (too many to list here but restrictor plate, competition cautions, stage points, the chase, lucky dogs and let's not even get into Frances politics / sjw push) and late race debris caution flags to mess with the outcome, I still find it a more entertaining series with better / more competitive racing than F1.

Different strokes for different folks. I think both series are good for various reasons. I also would like to make a laundry list of changes in both series as I think there is heavy room for improvements in both.

I like Supercross, indy, Rolex, les mans, world of outlaws, my local dirt track late models, whatever. I just love racing. I think if they televised guys who somehow rigged a motor to a bath tub and raced it, I would watch it.

NASCAR is headed in the wrong direction though imho, and I don't know if they can correct the course as this point. Everything they seem to do makes it worse from what I can tell.

 

[revd]

Less talk about NASCAR in this thread and its perceived politics (which says more about the biases of the poster of the comments than it does anything else) would suit me just fine.

 

[Corigan]

Less talk about NASCAR in this thread and its perceived politics (which says more about the biases of the poster of the comments than it does anything else) would suit me just fine.

Fair enough. I see it mentioned alot in this thread and just normally bypass commenting on NASCAR, but thought I would throw my 2 cents out there.

As for F1 - I'm not a fan of Max's lunge. Lewis had to wreck or go off course due to max not being able to hold a line through the corner. With that said Lewis came off that corner flying with a huge advantage. He was way out front with a head a steam. He got on the gas way earlier as he could almost straight line it at that point.

Interesting race indeed, look at all the chatter its produced. That's racing.

 

[revd]

Fair enough. I see it mentioned alot in this thread and just normally bypass commenting on NASCAR, but thought I would throw my 2 cents out there.

As for F1 - I'm not a fan of Max's lunge. Lewis had to wreck or go off course due to max not being able to hold a line through the corner. With that said Lewis came off that corner flying with a huge advantage. He was way out front with a head a steam. He got on the gas way earlier as he could almost straight line it at that point.

Interesting race indeed, look at all the chatter its produced. That's racing.

It's more the unnecessary political dig than the discusson of the sport that I was referring to.

But we're both just stating opinions in the end, I guess (and I was a good boy for not directly taking the bait and replying to your specific comment).

 

[Jeff Scott]

...due to max not being able to hold a line through the corner.

I dunno. There didn't seem to be much drama on his part; he went through the corner cleanly from all the video I watched. Neither car touched each other. No big deal, really.

 

[roller]

Well, you get many agreements from me. I can't think of an active racing series that couldn't use a few tweaks, especially today when there are so many who have seen better days.

Sure, F1 is on a good high at the moment thanks to an exceptional season and the Netflix show... but geez, can you imagine if they had IndyCar's parity and truly had 4 or 5 teams that could realistically win each outing? But how does one whip Ferrari, McLaren, Alpine and say Alfa Romeo into serious shape so they not only chase Mercedes and Red Bull but beat them? Bigger sponsors? More prize money? It's a good question... I'm working on it.

NBC's IndyCar's crew could learn soooooooo many things from Sky Sports. Quit dumbing down your broadcasts and making your shows goofy. Sky's F1 coverage is for the regular watcher and they care very little about the newbie viewer... but guess what -- they continue to do smart broadcasts with sharp commentators and as a result, viewers of all types get everything they need and are able to keep up. Sky's shows are fun, their feature pieces are cool and their talent pool doesn't have a single dud. Fire Leigh Diffey tomorrow and never bring Dale Jr. or Rutledge to an IndyCar race ever again.

NASCAR needs to abandon stage racing ASAP. If they simply announced, "Hey, folks... no one likes this stuff... we were wrong... so we're taking the rules back to how they were before we went off the rails... oh, and we killed the lucky dog," the current fans of the sport would love it. 40 cars in a starting field might be too much for today's audience. NASCAR should tell their broadcast partners to quit airing races that look like 1997 and lift a few things from Sky's F1 coverage or MotoGP's world feed. Yes, this means they'll need to can a bunch of stiffs like Mike Joy and Rick Allen, but it will be worth it. NASCAR needs to whip their TV shows into finely tuned, fat-free cheetahs. If they were smart, they'd give a completely new group of TV partners access behind the curtain and do their own Drive To Survive and show the honest dealings teams, drivers and sponsors go through every year... but the folks running NASCAR are old-school and will never allow this to be shown... ever... and that's why they'll continue to shrivel away. Additionally, I'd stop trying to broadcast the Xfiniti and Truck Series on regular cable channels and move them to on-demand or streaming methods. NASCAR, you've got way too much product airing on cable, so slim down your offerings... try to make people hungry for your top show.

I like what Supercross is doing from the show standpoint. They're in big sports stadiums and arenas and try to tantalize the spectators even when the bikes aren't running. It's like Barnum & Bailey -- the entertainment never stops. Sure, their races are shorter, so they can move the acts on and off... but [gasp] maybe the other racing series could learn from shorter races? A 90-minute to two-hour show feels right to a lotta folks these days. People don't want to invest the time on a four-hour 500-mile race.

Folks that run racing series should realize that a field full of squeaky clean competitors is a ratings killer. Quit trying to mimic the Jeff Gordon "good guy" approach. Find villains to put on the track -- bad guys make for a fun show.

Enough out of me for tonight.

So much dislike for NASCAR. Even with all their poor decisions (too many to list here but restrictor plate, competition cautions, stage points, the chase, lucky dogs and let's not even get into Frances politics / sjw push) and late race debris caution flags to mess with the outcome, I still find it a more entertaining series with better / more competitive racing than F1.

Different strokes for different folks. I think both series are good for various reasons. I also would like to make a laundry list of changes in both series as I think there is heavy room for improvements in both.

I like Supercross, indy, Rolex, les mans, world of outlaws, my local dirt track late models, whatever. I just love racing. I think if they televised guys who somehow rigged a motor to a bath tub and raced it, I would watch it.

NASCAR is headed in the wrong direction though imho, and I don't know if they can correct the course as this point. Everything they seem to do makes it worse from what I can tell.

 

[Corigan]

It's more the unnecessary political dig than the discusson of the sport that I was referring to.

But we're both just stating opinions in the end, I guess (and I was a good boy for not directly taking the bait and replying to your specific comment).

Not really unnecessary if you ask me as its exactly the point. We actually seem to almost be on the same page here I think. I dont want politics injected into a racing series because I feel its unnecessary. Its about racing and not politics after all. I dont care what the message is or what side of the aisle it comes from either. If I want politics, plenty of places to get that.

I can see where you feel that me interjecting a political opinion in the middle of a racing thread mid not be the best venue for said conversation. You are making my point. I dont like it when NASCAR interjects their political opinion in the middle of a race either. I will refrain from doing so in the future, however it is a cause of lose of viewership / Fandom and therefore is a valid mention here imho.

Oh well, I've said too much probably as it is anyways. Cheers. I just wanted to be clear that my problem isn't with what politics are pushed, its that they are being pushed at all.

Im going to bow out of any future conversation on this as its already taking up more time than it should. Back to debating if you can just blow the apex and run someone off the road..

 

[revd]

Not really unnecessary if you ask me as its exactly the point. We actually seem to almost be on the same page here I think. I dont want politics injected into a racing series because I feel its unnecessary. Its about racing and not politics after all. I dont care what the message is or what side of the aisle it comes from either. If I want politics, plenty of places to get that.

I can see where you feel that me interjecting a political opinion in the middle of a racing thread mid not be the best venue for said conversation. You are making my point. I dont like it when NASCAR interjects their political opinion in the middle of a race either. I will refrain from doing so in the future, however it is a cause of lose of viewership / Fandom and therefore is a valid mention here imho.

Oh well, I've said too much probably as it is anyways. Cheers. I just wanted to be clear that my problem isn't with what politics are pushed, its that they are being pushed at all.

Im going to bow out of any future conversation on this as its already taking up more time than it should. Back to debating if you can just blow the apex and run someone off the road..

I've got no problems with racers or whoever making a social point.

My problem is that if you use the term SJW, I so dearly want to respond but won't as I respect the rules here. Hence my small request that you refrain, as per the rules.

You weren't being neutral, as you of course you know.

(I'm not American so don't have a single clue about NASCAR).

 

[Corigan]

I've got no problems with racers or whoever making a social point.

My problem is that if you use the term SJW, I so dearly want to respond but won't as I respect the rules here. Hence my small request that you refrain, as per the rules.

You weren't being neutral, as you of course you know.

(I'm not American so don't have a single clue about NASCAR).

That is actually an unobjective description of the politics they are pushing. if it had been far right policies that comment would have read differently and reflected the politics pushed. Sorry if it bothered you. I really didn't mean for it to cause any issues. I was just trying to be descriptive and accurate without really going into it as its a sore spot with some of the nascar fanbase.

Once again apologies, there was no ill intent. I tried to gloss over it as much as possible without completely ignoring a piece of the puzzle when talking able nascar losing marketshare.

 

[revd]

That is actually an unobjective description of the politics they are pushing. if it had been far right policies that comment would have read differently and reflected the politics pushed. Sorry if it bothered you. I really didn't mean for it to cause any issues. I was just trying to be descriptive and accurate without really going into it as its a sore spot with some of the nascar fanbase.

Once again apologies, there was no ill intent. I tried to gloss over it as much as possible without completely ignoring a piece of the puzzle when talking able nascar losing marketshare.

Didn't bother me at all, no harm done. The opposite really, I just strain at the leash to give my 2 cents and find it hard to resist engaging.

 

[roller]

Aston Martin finishing so low in the constructors championship makes me smile and feel warm inside.

Lawrence Stroll thought he could buy performance. Larry was wrong.