FORUMula1.com - F1 Forum

[FRAFPDD]

^Didn't Lewis try a similar stunt in Monza? (though I don't know if he was deliberately trying to chicken Massa, or just didn't work out Massa's line would be across him). Didn't work then, although I really doubt Massa noticed him there.

He didnt try scare Massa in Monza, Massa easily had the line on him and Massas job is to keep everyone away from Alonso since Germany, so no. Monza was trying to take a race start place, which Hamilton tries with every race start on any driver, not a last lap do or die to scare Massa off.

[myownalias]

I appreciate Lewis' aggressive driving nature; it makes F1 more exciting, the problem is that many drivers that Lewis passes tend to give in too easily allowing the McLaren driver to breeze past, Mark Webber on the other hand is a hard racer; he'll hold his line and make the overtaker driver around him. Which used to be common place before the FIA started punishing racing incidents, now drivers, especially the newer drivers in the last 4 - 5 years are almost afraid to take a lung down the inside for fear of recriminations. This is why I like Kamui Kobayashi, he's an old fashioned racer who will make an overtake attempt and to hell with the consequences; this is motor racing!

You can only appreciate Hamilton doing it, but you like Kobayashi doing it, you do realse Lewis had to somewhere along the line forge this fear of challenging him dont you? His very first race start he came under pressure from Kubica before taking him and Alonso in the first corner. Soon enough if KK keeps going (i hope he does hes pretty much my joint favourite driver with Lewis) people will be scared to challenge him( Alonso broke pretty damn early in Valencia), correct me if im wrong didnt Martin Brundle say: " With Senna he would put you in a position that if you didnt concede position, yuo were both going to crash, the moment you let him have it, you were finished, for he (senna) would now that every time he tries it in the future, youd back off." Thats exactly what Lewis is and has done his whoel F1 career. gotta give kudos to MW for making the stand though. Half the battle is psychological and Mark will not be frightened of anyone.

My issue is with Hamilton squarely putting the blame on Webber; Hamilton should not have have assumed that Webber was going to yield; I bet if the roles were reversed; I'd bet that Hamilton would have done the same as Webber. Basically Hamilton put the "Senna Move" on Webber and the Aussie basically said ""we are going to have any accident then". But the coming together was avoidable; there was plenty of track for Hamilton to drive around the outside of Webber but he chose not to. The thing that really bugs me these days is the stewards; every damn incident is investigated; 10 years ago; no-one would have even taken a second look at a clear racing incident like that between Hamilton and Webber! These FIA stewards are the reason why drivers like Hamilton, Webber and Kobayashi are a dying breed!

[Herbs]

I appreciate Lewis' aggressive driving nature; it makes F1 more exciting, the problem is that many drivers that Lewis passes tend to give in too easily allowing the McLaren driver to breeze past, Mark Webber on the other hand is a hard racer; he'll hold his line and make the overtaker driver around him. Which used to be common place before the FIA started punishing racing incidents, now drivers, especially the newer drivers in the last 4 - 5 years are almost afraid to take a lung down the inside for fear of recriminations. This is why I like Kamui Kobayashi, he's an old fashioned racer who will make an overtake attempt and to hell with the consequences; this is motor racing!

You can only appreciate Hamilton doing it, but you like Kobayashi doing it, you do realse Lewis had to somewhere along the line forge this fear of challenging him dont you? His very first race start he came under pressure from Kubica before taking him and Alonso in the first corner. Soon enough if KK keeps going (i hope he does hes pretty much my joint favourite driver with Lewis) people will be scared to challenge him( Alonso broke pretty damn early in Valencia), correct me if im wrong didnt Martin Brundle say: " With Senna he would put you in a position that if you didnt concede position, yuo were both going to crash, the moment you let him have it, you were finished, for he (senna) would now that every time he tries it in the future, youd back off." Thats exactly what Lewis is and has done his whoel F1 career. gotta give kudos to MW for making the stand though. Half the battle is psychological and Mark will not be frightened of anyone.

My issue is with Hamilton squarely putting the blame on Webber; Hamilton should not have have assumed that Webber was going to yield; I bet if the roles were reversed; I'd bet that Hamilton would have done the same as Webber. Basically Hamilton put the "Senna Move" on Webber and the Aussie basically said ""we are going to have any accident then". But the coming together was avoidable; there was plenty of track for Hamilton to drive around the outside of Webber but he chose not to. The thing that really bugs me these days is the stewards; every damn incident is investigated; 10 years ago; no-one would have even taken a second look at a clear racing incident like that between Hamilton and Webber! These FIA stewards are the reason why drivers like Hamilton, Webber and Kobayashi are a dying breed!

I'm inclined to agree with you, nicely put.

[nish2280]

^Didn't Lewis try a similar stunt in Monza? (though I don't know if he was deliberately trying to chicken Massa, or just didn't work out Massa's line would be across him). Didn't work then, although I really doubt Massa noticed him there.

He didnt try scare Massa in Monza, Massa easily had the line on him and Massas job is to keep everyone away from Alonso since Germany, so no. Monza was trying to take a race start place, which Hamilton tries with every race start on any driver, not a last lap do or die to scare Massa off.

I agree with you completely except for the bit i put in bold. Of course there is no point arguing that because it will start a 10 page discussion. So we can agree to disagree. So i really dont think Lewis was trying to scare Massa, just going for an overtake (as you should do when your racing) which ended badly for Lewis because there was not enough space for Lewis in the corner.

PS. Also i dont know why everyone is complaining about this crash, i mean isnt racing more interesting like this? I'm sure most of us would not have found it entertaining if Webber just saw Hamilton and was like "Oh no! Someone is going faster than me. Better pull over!".

[FRAFPDD]

I appreciate Lewis' aggressive driving nature; it makes F1 more exciting, the problem is that many drivers that Lewis passes tend to give in too easily allowing the McLaren driver to breeze past, Mark Webber on the other hand is a hard racer; he'll hold his line and make the overtaker driver around him. Which used to be common place before the FIA started punishing racing incidents, now drivers, especially the newer drivers in the last 4 - 5 years are almost afraid to take a lung down the inside for fear of recriminations. This is why I like Kamui Kobayashi, he's an old fashioned racer who will make an overtake attempt and to hell with the consequences; this is motor racing!

You can only appreciate Hamilton doing it, but you like Kobayashi doing it, you do realse Lewis had to somewhere along the line forge this fear of challenging him dont you? His very first race start he came under pressure from Kubica before taking him and Alonso in the first corner. Soon enough if KK keeps going (i hope he does hes pretty much my joint favourite driver with Lewis) people will be scared to challenge him( Alonso broke pretty damn early in Valencia), correct me if im wrong didnt Martin Brundle say: " With Senna he would put you in a position that if you didnt concede position, yuo were both going to crash, the moment you let him have it, you were finished, for he (senna) would now that every time he tries it in the future, youd back off." Thats exactly what Lewis is and has done his whoel F1 career. gotta give kudos to MW for making the stand though. Half the battle is psychological and Mark will not be frightened of anyone.

My issue is with Hamilton squarely putting the blame on Webber; Hamilton should not have have assumed that Webber was going to yield; I bet if the roles were reversed; I'd bet that Hamilton would have done the same as Webber. Basically Hamilton put the "Senna Move" on Webber and the Aussie basically said ""we are going to have any accident then". But the coming together was avoidable; there was plenty of track for Hamilton to drive around the outside of Webber but he chose not to. The thing that really bugs me these days is the stewards; every damn incident is investigated; 10 years ago; no-one would have even taken a second look at a clear racing incident like that between Hamilton and Webber! These FIA stewards are the reason why drivers like Hamilton, Webber and Kobayashi are a dying breed!

I thought " i havent seen the incident myself so i really dont know what happened" was far from blaming it on webber, by all means post a link though, i havent seen that much news about the actual incident so i may of missed something else, but i think it would be a VERY hot topic on here if Hamilton had been quoted as saying it was webbers fault. Other then that totally agree with your post,dont see the harm in investigating it though and not penalising, thats only a tad nuisance. The stewards do have to make it look like they are worthy of a paycheck!

[FRAFPDD]

^Didn't Lewis try a similar stunt in Monza? (though I don't know if he was deliberately trying to chicken Massa, or just didn't work out Massa's line would be across him). Didn't work then, although I really doubt Massa noticed him there.

He didnt try scare Massa in Monza, Massa easily had the line on him and Massas job is to keep everyone away from Alonso since Germany, so no. Monza was trying to take a race start place, which Hamilton tries with every race start on any driver, not a last lap do or die to scare Massa off.

I agree with you completely except for the bit i put in bold. Of course there is no point arguing that because it will start a 10 page discussion. So we can agree to disagree. So i really dont think Lewis was trying to scare Massa, just going for an overtake (as you should do when your racing) which ended badly for Lewis because there was not enough space for Lewis in the corner.

PS. Also i dont know why everyone is complaining about this crash, i mean isnt racing more interesting like this? I'm sure most of us would not have found it entertaining if Webber just saw Hamilton and was like "Oh no! Someone is going faster than me. Better pull over!".

I thought the F1 world as we know it is now publicly aware that Massa is a support driver to Alonso.... surely that includes keeping threats off Alonso aka the news topic that said Massa needs to keep up with the front in qualifying to nab points off the others.

As for the PS, as a Hamilton fan i cant truly say its more interesting when your driver goes out lol, and if there was a 100 percent chance of Lewis making an easy pass or a great pass, youd choose great pass, but theres not a 100 percent chance, so actually id probably like it more (looking at the relative risk) if drivers were like oh dear, out the way i get Although moves like the Hammy-Rosberg australia wouldnt go a miss

[stonemonkey]

My issue is with Hamilton squarely putting the blame on Webber; Hamilton should not have have assumed that Webber was going to yield; I bet if the roles were reversed; I'd bet that Hamilton would have done the same as Webber. Basically Hamilton put the "Senna Move" on Webber and the Aussie basically said ""we are going to have any accident then". But the coming together was avoidable; there was plenty of track for Hamilton to drive around the outside of Webber but he chose not to. The thing that really bugs me these days is the stewards; every damn incident is investigated; 10 years ago; no-one would have even taken a second look at a clear racing incident like that between Hamilton and Webber! These FIA stewards are the reason why drivers like Hamilton, Webber and Kobayashi are a dying breed!

I don't entirely agree with this, and I still think this comes down to the interpretation of what the racing line means and no one has answered my previous question on that yet.

Hamilton (by his own admission) feels he should be safe being the one on the racing line and going from that if the roles were reversed then not yeilding would be overstepping the boundary in his opinion although I'm not going to claim he wouldn't do it but probably not quite what Webber did. Webber on the other hand and quite rightly does not think the racing line gives any special priviledges and he is the one that pulled the 'Senna' thinking that if Hamilton sticks to the racing line (Webber must've known there was a good chance he would) then there's going to be contact.

With Hamiltons opinion on the racing line he could not anticipate what Webber did and the only way he'll be able to deal with such a situation is if he changes his opinion on what he thinks the racing line means.

In my opinion one thing that's wrong currently in F1 is that the driver on the racing line expects the driver off the line to yield out of self preservation which is what most do and it's become the norm, except Webber it would seem which is why I like what he's doing.

These guys understood this and although I know this is exceptional it is what let them race in this way. If either had been concerned with 'who's got the racing line' this would never have played out like it did (probably would've ended up a procession or a collision with one saying 'but I had the line') but as it was neither of them did anything wrong.

[youtube]kre35Pct0yA[/youtube]

[f1ea]

Today's F1s simply CAN NOT race like that.
They are too light, too fragile, and are not able to stuff their front noses up the other's diffuser without losing grip/control.

I wouldnt blame the stewards in particular, except they take FOREVER to conlcude an investigation , but rather the lack of close racing in the past seasons... now that we're almost all equal, these things are going to happen more often.

Anyway... this incident has been dragged on and on because the Lewis support group keep on professing the inequivocality of their hero. The same group that said webber was in the right to keep his place in Turkey now claim he should have yielded to Lewis. Bah....

[stonemonkey]

Today's F1s simply CAN NOT race like that.
They are too light, too fragile, and are not able to stuff their front noses up the other's diffuser without losing grip/control.

That is NOT what I'm commenting on, watch how they behave around each other.

Anyway... this incident has been dragged on and on because the Lewis support group keep on professing the inequivocality of their hero. The same group that said webber was in the right to keep his place in Turkey now claim he should have yielded to Lewis. Bah....

I am one of those Lewis supporters and while I concede that by the sporting rules he was at fault, it was not from being reckless or over aggressive but from not knowing where Webber (in his blind spot) was and his flawed understanding (seems quite common) of the racing line prevented him from anticipating where Webber would be.

[f1ea]

Today's F1s simply CAN NOT race like that.
They are too light, too fragile, and are not able to stuff their front noses up the other's diffuser without losing grip/control.

That is NOT what I'm commenting on.

Well, bringing such an example to compare it to an event with recent cars... its kinda misleading, because we would expect stewards and drivers to follow a racing mentaility, when the cars of today simply do not allow it.

Anyway... this incident has been dragged on and on because the Lewis support group keep on professing the inequivocality of their hero. The same group that said webber was in the right to keep his place in Turkey now claim he should have yielded to Lewis. Bah....

I am one of those Lewis supporters and while I concede that by the sporting rules he was at fault, it was not from being reckless or over aggressive but from not knowing where Webber (in his blind spot) was and his flawed understanding (seems quite common) of the racing line prevented him from anticipating where Webber would be.

That's what i mean. He was not necesarilly being reckless or aggressive. He simply had no way to see the other car, and didnt expect the other car to be there. So when he turned in, bam.

Lewis was not at fault... he was simply caught by a move he didnt expect (or maybe didnt hope for). The same goes for Mark, he is not to blame, because he simply did not give his position away. He didnt cause an unnecessary crash, because he had everyright to be in the position he was.

In other words... no one is to blame. But Lewis was the one who had the misconception and Webber was the one who forced it. That's perfectly normal.

[What's Burning?]

I'm one of those Lewis supporters but I don't think anyone was at fault here, I don't think anyone was at fault in Turkey either, Why blame one driver or the other, they both choose a means when executing a pass and they both gamble on what they're doing sometimes the gamble isn't by choice but by what the situation is dictating.

Two drivers gambling and only one driver wins, but there is no fault in a racing incident, they are both risking it all.

What is clear is that Webber finds himself this year with possibly his only chance to win a WDC and he's willing to risk it all to get it so anyone that attempts to pass him will understand that they are also risking it all to try and pass him.

[stonemonkey]

Well, bringing such an example to compare it to an event with recent cars... its kinda misleading, because we would expect stewards and drivers to follow a racing mentaility, when the cars of today simply do not allow it.

Again I'll try to explain, do you see them following the racing line into a collision course? No, if there is something blocking them from staying on the racing line they don't go there and the car not on the racing line is not at fault for standing it's ground. They also don't expect the other car to yield just because it's not on the racing line so they can anticipate where it will go even if they can't see it (this is where the flawed opinion of the racing line suffers it's failure as it prevents this anticipation). Lewis's 'I had the racing line' is not uncommon across the grid and beyond but is flawed thinking in current F1.

[f1ea]

Well, bringing such an example to compare it to an event with recent cars... its kinda misleading, because we would expect stewards and drivers to follow a racing mentaility, when the cars of today simply do not allow it.

Again I'll try to explain, do you see them following the racing line into a collision course? No, if there is something blocking them from staying on the racing line they don't go there and the car not on the racing line is not at fault for standing it's ground. They also don't expect the other car to yield just because it's not on the racing line so they can anticipate where it will go even if they can't see it (this is where the flawed opinion of the racing line suffers it's failure as it prevents this anticipation). Lewis's 'I had the racing line' is not uncommon across the grid and beyond but is flawed thinking in current F1.

yes, I get it.
But what i'm saying is that the drivers have a different mentality becasue of today's cars. And this mentalitiy is what has put some people into thinking 'having the racing line' is the approach to go by.

[stonemonkey]

Well, bringing such an example to compare it to an event with recent cars... its kinda misleading, because we would expect stewards and drivers to follow a racing mentaility, when the cars of today simply do not allow it.

Again I'll try to explain, do you see them following the racing line into a collision course? No, if there is something blocking them from staying on the racing line they don't go there and the car not on the racing line is not at fault for standing it's ground. They also don't expect the other car to yield just because it's not on the racing line so they can anticipate where it will go even if they can't see it (this is where the flawed opinion of the racing line suffers it's failure as it prevents this anticipation). Lewis's 'I had the racing line' is not uncommon across the grid and beyond but is flawed thinking in current F1.

yes, I get it.
But what i'm saying is that the drivers have a different mentality becasue of today's cars. And this mentalitiy is what has put some people into thinking 'having the racing line' is the approach to go by.

ok, and the point I've been trying to make is that I think it's the wrong approach and that Webber is going some way to proving that. The mentality is only there because it's shared and I feel it's stifling F1 so it's good to see Webber mixing things up and hopefully others will learn from him.

[What's Burning?]

Well, bringing such an example to compare it to an event with recent cars... its kinda misleading, because we would expect stewards and drivers to follow a racing mentaility, when the cars of today simply do not allow it.

Again I'll try to explain, do you see them following the racing line into a collision course? No, if there is something blocking them from staying on the racing line they don't go there and the car not on the racing line is not at fault for standing it's ground. They also don't expect the other car to yield just because it's not on the racing line so they can anticipate where it will go even if they can't see it (this is where the flawed opinion of the racing line suffers it's failure as it prevents this anticipation). Lewis's 'I had the racing line' is not uncommon across the grid and beyond but is flawed thinking in current F1.

yes, I get it.
But what i'm saying is that the drivers have a different mentality becasue of today's cars. And this mentalitiy is what has put some people into thinking 'having the racing line' is the approach to go by.

ok, and the point I've been trying to make is that I think it's the wrong approach and that Webber is going some way to proving that. The mentality is only there because it's shared and I feel it's stifling F1 so it's good to see Webber mixing things up and hopefully others will learn from him.

So far it's led to more crashes not necessarily better racing. Webber can attest what it feels like when another driver does something he didn't expect them to do, REDBULL GIVES YOU WINGS!