FORUMula1.com - F1 Forum

[acosmichippo]

If others want to continue a discussion, what concern is it of yours?

Your discussions here have a detrimental effect on whatever discussions i may wish to have in future threads thats my concern.

Not to mention all youve done is argue your point, "listened" to other point, argued your point again, "listened" to other point again, it was just quite obvious that nobody is going to budge. The outcome is the same no matter what aswell.

Hmm... My discussions in the present ruin your future threads? I honestly don't understand how that's possible.

Anyway, I try not to be redundant. I may reiterate a point if I feel that it had not been read previously (which can often happen in these monstrous GP threads), or just not been addressed at all. I admit I may be a little vigorous in defending Jenson here because I really think he's taking too much heat for the Hamilton incident.

[spankyham]

Alonso was just out of the pits on a fresh set of inters
He never had the inside line
colder tire's than button, hadn't been on to the dryer part of the track
still a racing incident but not 50/50 in my opinion

I didn't really comment much on this, although I re-read this as well as Vaptin and Bud's posts, and looked at the incident again. My opinion hasn't changed, racing incident and, even though my guy lost out big time, if I was an official I would have let it go. But, then again, for me, as long as there's no clear/obvious malicious intent I would let most things go.

Having said that, we can all still come to our own conclusions as to who was mostly at fault. I don't want to come down hard on Jenson, he had a good opportunistic win in Canada and I really liked the additional aggression he showed. I think he'll be a better driver if he can keep that slightly higher level of aggression.

There's a pretty obvious rule when it comes to apportioning blame and that is that if your behind you have to find a safe way round. If you choose a side, you need to make it stick on that side. Below are some stills from the incident. Two things are abundantly clear. Firstly, Nando was a complete car ahead of Jenson. JB's front left hit Nando's rear right - a huge distance behind. Jenson had placed his car to the right of Nando and Nando left more that a car width on that side for Jenson to put his car. What I think actually happened was Jenson was too hot into the first turn (trying to get the pass) he just couldn't turn the McLaren into the space (too fast, under-steer, rain and longer wheelbase probably didn't help). He simply rammed a helpless Nando and, unfortunately it left the Ferrari stranded and out of the race.

I really like how Nando took it, he was obviously upset but he just let it go and moved his focus to Valencia. You win some and you loose some.

Here the incident:-

[bud]

Jenson didn't ram him Jenson hit the kerb slightly before the apex because he was on the inside line. Alonso was not in the prime track position and missed the apex all together. You can't say Alonso was ahead just because he braked later, you're not taking into account he lost out on track position. They were pretty much level before turn in, if anything it was Alonsos fault for turning in on Button.

[stonemonkey]

Moments before those pics they were alongside, button maybe even slightly ahead at one point. By the time of those stills button was the one yielding from being on the inside. Looks to me like Button was trying to get behind Alonso with the conditions making things tricky.

[spankyham]

Moments before those pics they were alongside, button maybe even slightly ahead at one point. By the time of those stills button was the one yielding from being on the inside. Looks to me like Button was trying to get behind Alonso with the conditions making things tricky.

I don't really think whether he was closer to Alonso earlier makes much difference to this incident. Before he made contact, he was a long way astern. Fact is his front tyre hit Nando's rear tyre. I tend to agree with SM that Jenson was trying to get behind and stick to the right side (where he'd placed his car - it was just too hard for him to manage it - one of those things).

On the track position thing Bud, I'm always dubious about terms like track position and racing line - I mean, what is a racing line or a track position - I guess they both had track position. For me, Nando left the right side (where Jenson had positioned his car) for Jenson. Nando was on a line (track position) for the next apex (which you can clearly see in the pics). Definitely there was room left my Nando on the right (the side Jenson had placed his car).

Still, for me, the overwhelming thing was that Nando was just so far ahead of Jenson, just before and when Jenson hit him.

I think we pretty much all agree there was no malice, so it was the right thing to let it go.

[bud]

On the track position thing Bud, I'm always dubious about terms like track position and racing line - I mean, what is a racing line or a track position - I guess they both had track position. For me, Nando left the right side (where Jenson had positioned his car) for Jenson. Nando was on a line (track position) for the next apex (which you can clearly see in the pics). Definitely there was room left my Nando on the right (the side Jenson had placed his car).

Still, for me, the overwhelming thing was that Nando was just so far ahead of Jenson, just before and when Jenson hit him.

Well track position is important, you can be ahead but have to yield because the other car has better track position. Look at Massa and Button in Australia, Jenson claimed he was ahead before he cut the chicane. This is true but he was only ahead because he braked later and thus missing the chicane because he didnt have track position. Massa had the better position and took the corner.

Alonso was on the outside, he gave up the first corner of the chicane in hope of having better position for the second part. He was no where near the Apex let alone the Kerb, He appeared ahead during the impact because he broke later than Jenson. This doesnt mean he was ahead or had right of way. Again track position comes into this. Jenson had the inside line, hit the kerb all in all he made the move stick. Alonso didnt want to yield though.

From Schui's car, Jenson is clearly made the Kerb and on his way to the second apex. Alonso because of his late brake had to turn in where he did or end up on the grass and cutting the chicane.

just before turn in Alonso has no advantage, he just braked late to try and get advantage for the next part of the chicane. This doesnt mean Jenson was in the wrong

[spankyham]

I think your pictures clearly show Jenson had taken the right hand side. Nando left the right side for him.

The corner is a right left. I'm still very dubious using terms like "track position" and racing line" simply because there are so many viable lines and lines change based on your purpose and the circumstances.

From the left side, Nando was clearly lined up to make the upcoming left hander. Yes, Nando braked better, mostly aided by his new inters, but there is absolutely no way you can change the fact that before impact and at the moment of impact, Nando was a full car length ahead. Jenson's front hit Nando's rear. For me, when you are that fa behind, the obligation is with you to avoid impact/find a safe way around.

Until Nando was hit, he left the complete right side of the track for Jenson (the side Jenson had chosen).

[bud]

Track position is very important, But look at it this way, Alonso was only ahead after Jenson turned in because he broke later, never said better. He turned in when he did because like i said if he didnt he would have done what Button did on Massa and skipped the chicane, he would have then had the same excuse of he was ahead when he crossed the chicane. Technically Fernando was in no mans land, hadnt made the first corner and would have been lucky to make the next, even if he did, he would have had a crappy exit because he had to brake so late to make the turn in.

And on leaving Jenson room, why is it he was as far over as he could go, as in he made the kerb, he had no where else he could go unless he went off track.

[deMuRe]

Brilliant debate guys, times like this the forum is fantastic!!!



I'm still undecided lol but crack on, it's a great read

[spankyham]

Track position is very important, But look at it this way, Alonso was only ahead after Jenson turned in because he broke later, never said better. He turned in when he did because like i said if he didnt he would have done what Button did on Massa and skipped the chicane, he would have then had the same excuse of he was ahead when he crossed the chicane. Technically Fernando was in no mans land, hadnt made the first corner and would have been lucky to make the next, even if he did, he would have had a crappy exit because he had to brake so late to make the turn in.

And on leaving Jenson room, why is it he was as far over as he could go, as in he made the kerb, he had no where else he could go unless he went off track.

Look closely at Nando and Shumi's rear wings in the first image in my series (which is the moment of first impact). Both pointing the exact same direction. Look at Nando's front wheels, pointing in the same direction. Both these cars have made the first corner, Nando made it leaving room for Jenson. Both Nando and Shumi are already pretty much lined up the the 2nd of the s (the left hand kink).

Something I hadn't noticed before, you can see in the second and third frame of my series both showing the impact continuing and the impact is now so firm that by the second frame Nando's rear right is starting to lift of the tarmac and by the 3rd, his rear right is way up in the air - Nando is braking (in the second frame) but Jenson is just letting his car continue into the Ferrari (the impact must have been pretty heavy by then. It's only after Jenson can see that Nando's Ferrari is turning (and will clearly end up not pointing in the right direction) does Jenson start to brake ...... interesting

In any case, for me, if you end up that far behind, it is your obligation to avoid impact.

Thanks deMuRe, glad you like it, and, one things for sure, I know Bud knows his stuff, so what he says is always well thought through.

[bud]

I guess we have just proven one thing, it is 50/50

[What's Burning?]

Which is the point that I'd made previously that if something can be argued 50/50 or 60/40 type of incident, there shouldn't be a penalty issued. Jenson had a very uncharacteristically Lewis Hamilton type drive, and he won the race, and there isn't anyone here criticizing him for it, no criticism for being reckless of endangering other driver's lives, the consensus was, damn that was one great race we got to watch. Would the consensus have been the same had it been Lewis with the same performance? Lewis taking out Button, and then Lewis taking out Alonso?

Let them race, and unless something is clearly avoidable contact or a kamikaze move with no chance to succeed, something that we look at and say yeah 100% or 90/10 or 80/20 stay out of it and give the drivers the benefit of the doubt. There are just as many passes gone wrong caused by the person being passed than the person doing the overtaking, that's just the nature of the sport, and in Canada, they were allowed to do just that, race.

[vaptin]

Which is the point that I'd made previously that if something can be argued 50/50 or 60/40 type of incident, there shouldn't be a penalty issued. Jenson had a very uncharacteristically Lewis Hamilton type drive, and he won the race, and there isn't anyone here criticizing him for it, no criticism for being reckless of endangering other driver's lives, the consensus was, damn that was one great race we got to watch. Would the consensus have been the same had it been Lewis with the same performance? Lewis taking out Button, and then Lewis taking out Alonso?

Let them race, and unless something is clearly avoidable contact or a kamikaze move with no chance to succeed, something that we look at and say yeah 100% or 90/10 or 80/20 stay out of it and give the drivers the benefit of the doubt. There are just as many passes gone wrong caused by the person being passed than the person doing the overtaking, that's just the nature of the sport, and in Canada, they were allowed to do just that, race.

Yeah, but thats the problem with the wording it isn't "accident could reasonably be avoided", but "avoidable accident", which pretty much applies to any accident where there isn't a mechanical fault.

[FRAFPDD]

Which is the point that I'd made previously that if something can be argued 50/50 or 60/40 type of incident, there shouldn't be a penalty issued. Jenson had a very uncharacteristically Lewis Hamilton type drive, and he won the race, and there isn't anyone here criticizing him for it, no criticism for being reckless of endangering other driver's lives, the consensus was, damn that was one great race we got to watch. Would the consensus have been the same had it been Lewis with the same performance? Lewis taking out Button, and then Lewis taking out Alonso?

Let them race, and unless something is clearly avoidable contact or a kamikaze move with no chance to succeed, something that we look at and say yeah 100% or 90/10 or 80/20 stay out of it and give the drivers the benefit of the doubt. There are just as many passes gone wrong caused by the person being passed than the person doing the overtaking, that's just the nature of the sport, and in Canada, they were allowed to do just that, race.

Your an idealist WB.

If Lewis Hamilton had won that day, after Jenson smashed into him going up the inside, after taking out Fernando Alonso, and serving what two? penalties already, then this forum would have been a nuclear wasteland. Theres really no point discussing matters Lewis Hamilton with some of the people you get on this forum. He will always be in the wrong.

[What's Burning?]

Guilty as charged... there IS a time and place for everything.