Ahead at the apex
Discussion
I'm unusual in these parts in that I quite like Max Verstappen and I like Lando Norris and I don't really mind who wins as long as there's some hard fair racing along the way.
But this ahead at the apex guideline is a bit of a joke in my opinion, the car on the inside can simply divebomb into the apex completely outbraking themselves and as long as they are ahead at the apex the corner is theirs no matter if they run wide or not on the exit.
On Sunday Max showed the flaw in this guideline and exploited it brilliantly and under the current guidelines the right decision was made to penalise Lando.
So my question is, are the guidelines fit for purpose? I think not, in fact I think trying to codify motor racing and it's infinite number of variable, lines, corner types, limits etc... is getting daft. I would like to see a return to stewards including an ex driver deciding whether something is just hard racing or something more and for God's sake put a strip of gravel at the corner exit and do away with track limits and tarmac run off anywhere we can that way the divebombing driver will run out of road and be penalised naturally and provided the driver on the outside had the sense to slot in behind rather than alongside they will gain the momentum on the corner exit and possibly pass.
So am I talking rubbish or do you agree?
But this ahead at the apex guideline is a bit of a joke in my opinion, the car on the inside can simply divebomb into the apex completely outbraking themselves and as long as they are ahead at the apex the corner is theirs no matter if they run wide or not on the exit.
On Sunday Max showed the flaw in this guideline and exploited it brilliantly and under the current guidelines the right decision was made to penalise Lando.
So my question is, are the guidelines fit for purpose? I think not, in fact I think trying to codify motor racing and it's infinite number of variable, lines, corner types, limits etc... is getting daft. I would like to see a return to stewards including an ex driver deciding whether something is just hard racing or something more and for God's sake put a strip of gravel at the corner exit and do away with track limits and tarmac run off anywhere we can that way the divebombing driver will run out of road and be penalised naturally and provided the driver on the outside had the sense to slot in behind rather than alongside they will gain the momentum on the corner exit and possibly pass.
So am I talking rubbish or do you agree?
Ahead at the apex is fine, but you should still have to give the car outside you racing room if he’s substantially alongside.
Divebombing the apex with no intention to make the exit of the corner should be an easy penalty, and going off the track yourself makes it clear that was the case. See Brazil 2021 for possibly the most egregious unpunished example, with no intention whatsoever of making the corner exit.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uhrAgoHCoyo
Divebombing the apex with no intention to make the exit of the corner should be an easy penalty, and going off the track yourself makes it clear that was the case. See Brazil 2021 for possibly the most egregious unpunished example, with no intention whatsoever of making the corner exit.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uhrAgoHCoyo
They need to look at the concept of 'failing to lose a place by gaining an advantage'. For me, they should stipulate that if you leave the track yourself while defending (as Max did) then any requirement to hand the place back is negated.
It is glaringly obvious that when a driver goes all 4 wheels off track and still makes the pass that he has clearly gained an advantage. But it should equally be applied the other way but this isn't the case. As a result it just encourages silly divebomb defences without consequence. If you have defended (or dive bombed) so hard that you fail to stay on the track yourself then you are gaining an advantage through failing to lose a place. That is what Max benefitted from in Austin, Brazil 21 and many other occasions, and they need to clamp down on it.
If the defending driver leaves track during the defence then any requirement to have place given back should be negated. It would be far more black and white as you are either in or out of play. This would take away the incentive of dive bombing to get to the apex first while knowing your opponent will be pushed wide. It will force them to brake earlier to actually make the corner while defending properly.
It is glaringly obvious that when a driver goes all 4 wheels off track and still makes the pass that he has clearly gained an advantage. But it should equally be applied the other way but this isn't the case. As a result it just encourages silly divebomb defences without consequence. If you have defended (or dive bombed) so hard that you fail to stay on the track yourself then you are gaining an advantage through failing to lose a place. That is what Max benefitted from in Austin, Brazil 21 and many other occasions, and they need to clamp down on it.
If the defending driver leaves track during the defence then any requirement to have place given back should be negated. It would be far more black and white as you are either in or out of play. This would take away the incentive of dive bombing to get to the apex first while knowing your opponent will be pushed wide. It will force them to brake earlier to actually make the corner while defending properly.
If the tracks weren’t bordered by acres of lovely smooth tarmac, the stewards would have a much easier time of it during race weekends.
I know it won’t solve every instance of questionable driving but if you remove the option to drive off the track without dirtying your tyres, it will force drivers to be a little more circumspect.
A large proportion of the investigations and penalties seem to revolve around track limit offences. Why is it so hard to build a track where exceeding the limits is impossible?
I know it won’t solve every instance of questionable driving but if you remove the option to drive off the track without dirtying your tyres, it will force drivers to be a little more circumspect.
A large proportion of the investigations and penalties seem to revolve around track limit offences. Why is it so hard to build a track where exceeding the limits is impossible?
patmahe said:
So my question is, are the guidelines fit for purpose? I think not, in fact I think trying to codify motor racing and it's infinite number of variable, lines, corner types, limits etc... is getting daft. I would like to see a return to stewards including an ex driver deciding whether something is just hard racing or something more and for God's sake put a strip of gravel at the corner exit and do away with track limits and tarmac run off anywhere we can that way the divebombing driver will run out of road and be penalised naturally and provided the driver on the outside had the sense to slot in behind rather than alongside they will gain the momentum on the corner exit and possibly pass.
So am I talking rubbish or do you agree?
The issue with that is one of consistency I think and the inevitable cries of bias whenever one's favoured driver is penalised (or not) compared to another. Especially if it's not going to be the same driving steward at all the races who might be more able to apply that consistently. Definitely agree with gravel/grass to stop people taking the mickey with track limits as they know they have little downside though. So am I talking rubbish or do you agree?
24lemons said:
If the tracks weren’t bordered by acres of lovely smooth tarmac, the stewards would have a much easier time of it during race weekends.
I know it won’t solve every instance of questionable driving but if you remove the option to drive off the track without dirtying your tyres, it will force drivers to be a little more circumspect.
A large proportion of the investigations and penalties seem to revolve around track limit offences. Why is it so hard to build a track where exceeding the limits is impossible?
What you're saying is max would push Lando onto gravel and ruin his whole championship rather than just blocking an overtake?I know it won’t solve every instance of questionable driving but if you remove the option to drive off the track without dirtying your tyres, it will force drivers to be a little more circumspect.
A large proportion of the investigations and penalties seem to revolve around track limit offences. Why is it so hard to build a track where exceeding the limits is impossible?
TwentyFive said:
They need to look at the concept of 'failing to lose a place by gaining an advantage'. For me, they should stipulate that if you leave the track yourself while defending (as Max did) then any requirement to hand the place back is negated.
It is glaringly obvious that when a driver goes all 4 wheels off track and still makes the pass that he has clearly gained an advantage. But it should equally be applied the other way but this isn't the case. As a result it just encourages silly divebomb defences without consequence. If you have defended (or dive bombed) so hard that you fail to stay on the track yourself then you are gaining an advantage through failing to lose a place. That is what Max benefitted from in Austin, Brazil 21 and many other occasions, and they need to clamp down on it.
If the defending driver leaves track during the defence then any requirement to have place given back should be negated. It would be far more black and white as you are either in or out of play. This would take away the incentive of dive bombing to get to the apex first while knowing your opponent will be pushed wide. It will force them to brake earlier to actually make the corner while defending properly.
agreedIt is glaringly obvious that when a driver goes all 4 wheels off track and still makes the pass that he has clearly gained an advantage. But it should equally be applied the other way but this isn't the case. As a result it just encourages silly divebomb defences without consequence. If you have defended (or dive bombed) so hard that you fail to stay on the track yourself then you are gaining an advantage through failing to lose a place. That is what Max benefitted from in Austin, Brazil 21 and many other occasions, and they need to clamp down on it.
If the defending driver leaves track during the defence then any requirement to have place given back should be negated. It would be far more black and white as you are either in or out of play. This would take away the incentive of dive bombing to get to the apex first while knowing your opponent will be pushed wide. It will force them to brake earlier to actually make the corner while defending properly.
i mean you'd still get the dive bomb block, but you do have to begrudgingly give credit where credit is due to a driver who is skilful enough on the brakes, to do it without going off track
Altrezia said:
What you're saying is max would push Lando onto gravel and ruin his whole championship rather than just blocking an overtake?
This. The driver who was ahead of the apex wouldn't "accidentally drift" off the circuit, they would drift just as far as it took to push the other driver off the circuit but would manage to have just enough grip themselves to stay just on the circuit.Altrezia said:
24lemons said:
If the tracks weren’t bordered by acres of lovely smooth tarmac, the stewards would have a much easier time of it during race weekends.
I know it won’t solve every instance of questionable driving but if you remove the option to drive off the track without dirtying your tyres, it will force drivers to be a little more circumspect.
A large proportion of the investigations and penalties seem to revolve around track limit offences. Why is it so hard to build a track where exceeding the limits is impossible?
What you're saying is max would push Lando onto gravel and ruin his whole championship rather than just blocking an overtake?I know it won’t solve every instance of questionable driving but if you remove the option to drive off the track without dirtying your tyres, it will force drivers to be a little more circumspect.
A large proportion of the investigations and penalties seem to revolve around track limit offences. Why is it so hard to build a track where exceeding the limits is impossible?
The risk works both ways. Just as a driver won’t want to damage his car/lose time by going across the gravel, he should be less inclined to put his rival onto the grass for fear of the consequences if he were to lose control. Right now there’s no jeopardy for drivers who don’t intend on using the defined race track.
24lemons said:
These type of moves don’t typically take place at corners there there is grass/gravel/walls on the track limit. What we have now are track layouts which allow for drivers to use them to their advantage and then argue the toss later.
The risk works both ways. Just as a driver won’t want to damage his car/lose time by going across the gravel, he should be less inclined to put his rival onto the grass for fear of the consequences if he were to lose control. Right now there’s no jeopardy for drivers who don’t intend on using the defined race track.
Disagree. The risk works both ways. Just as a driver won’t want to damage his car/lose time by going across the gravel, he should be less inclined to put his rival onto the grass for fear of the consequences if he were to lose control. Right now there’s no jeopardy for drivers who don’t intend on using the defined race track.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z7zhOW25rjA
lambosagogo said:
Altrezia said:
What you're saying is max would push Lando onto gravel and ruin his whole championship rather than just blocking an overtake?
This. The driver who was ahead of the apex wouldn't "accidentally drift" off the circuit, they would drift just as far as it took to push the other driver off the circuit but would manage to have just enough grip themselves to stay just on the circuit.John D. said:
No, he would push both himself and Lando into the gravel. He runs himself off the track by over shooting the corner often enough. It is a symptom of grass/gravel being replaced with tarmac run off. For the right reasons, but it allows tactics like this as well.
Why would max run off? He's not suddenly s
t. He'd run up to the kerbs.For this particular MV incident, no change to the rules is required as he went off the track. They should have applied the rules as written.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/formula1/60815007
If he had stayed on the track it's way more difficult. In my view who is overtaking who shouldn't be significant and the driver on the inside shouldn't push the driver on the outside off the track.
Whatever way the rules are written the main thing missing is consistency. It depends who the drivers are and how close to the end of the race it is what penalties are given out. If it was Albon and Bottas at that corner fighting for 16th in the middle of the race the stewards would have penalized both no problem and we wouldn't be posting to a forum about it. The political pressure on the stewards is massive from liberty media and fans/ media.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/formula1/60815007
If he had stayed on the track it's way more difficult. In my view who is overtaking who shouldn't be significant and the driver on the inside shouldn't push the driver on the outside off the track.
Whatever way the rules are written the main thing missing is consistency. It depends who the drivers are and how close to the end of the race it is what penalties are given out. If it was Albon and Bottas at that corner fighting for 16th in the middle of the race the stewards would have penalized both no problem and we wouldn't be posting to a forum about it. The political pressure on the stewards is massive from liberty media and fans/ media.
re33 said:
For this particular MV incident, no change to the rules is required as he went off the track. They should have applied the rules as written.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/formula1/60815007
If he had stayed on the track it's way more difficult. In my view who is overtaking who shouldn't be significant and the driver on the inside shouldn't push the driver on the outside off the track.
Whatever way the rules are written the main thing missing is consistency. It depends who the drivers are and how close to the end of the race it is what penalties are given out. If it was Albon and Bottas at that corner fighting for 16th in the middle of the race the stewards would have penalized both no problem and we wouldn't be posting to a forum about it. The political pressure on the stewards is massive from liberty media and fans/ media.
That is not the current version of the driving standards guide. The current one is significantly different and has not been published, but some of the media has seen it and quoted sections of it. https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/formula1/60815007
If he had stayed on the track it's way more difficult. In my view who is overtaking who shouldn't be significant and the driver on the inside shouldn't push the driver on the outside off the track.
Whatever way the rules are written the main thing missing is consistency. It depends who the drivers are and how close to the end of the race it is what penalties are given out. If it was Albon and Bottas at that corner fighting for 16th in the middle of the race the stewards would have penalized both no problem and we wouldn't be posting to a forum about it. The political pressure on the stewards is massive from liberty media and fans/ media.
Gassing Station | Formula 1 | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff