Grand Prix 2013 Brazilian Grand Prix Practice, Qualifying & Race Discussion

It all comes down to the final race, sort of. There is no ‘versus’ this year, in terms of the WDC or the WCC – RBR have them both in the bag.

Alonso is safely second in the driver’s championship and, realistically, third place will go to either Hamilton or Webber – with Rosberg as a long shot if Hamilton and Webber fail to finish. Mark Webber usually excels here, and as this is his last race in F1, he may decide to go out in a blaze of glory and capitalise on Hamilton’s lack of luck in Brazil.

Second place in the WCC is as equally exciting, with Mercedes and Ferrari contending for the honour and cash. On paper, it should be Mercedes with two strong drivers; however, Massa sometimes does well at his home track, winning in 2006 and 2008, and may yet be inclined to pull his finger out again for his home fans!

Rumour has that the circuit is one of the most demanding for the drivers, and that it is loved by teams and fans alike but is that enough to create an exciting race when there is sod all at stake except for individual drivers who are still looking for next year’s seat?

Interlagos has been part of the F1 circus for 40 years, becoming a permanent fixture in 1990 and has been the venue for many deciding battles – sadly, not so this year – but it could yet throw up a stonking race.

 

[Plutus]

The regulation has everything to do with the incident since it governs the legitimate maneouvres the drivers are allowed to make. The charge that Hamilton caused the collision implies that his maneouvre was not legitimate. Our argument is that it was and that the stewards were wrong to see it as anything other than a racing incident.

Of course it wasn't legitimate. He drove into another car. Where is the problem in understanding that?

20.4.
Any driver defending his position on a straight, and before any braking area, may use the full
width of the track during his first move, provided no significant portion of the car attempting
to pass is alongside his.

The consequences of that was Bottas' retirement and damage to his own car.

Can we end this now, do you understand the reason why the FIA ruled it was Hamilton who caused the collision?

 

[Titch]

He was ahead, and moved sideways into the driver behind him in order to take the corner. I have seen similar incidents where the lead driver has squeezed the guy behind, without actually touching him. Brilliant driving. Today Hamilton got it wrong.

 

[Lewywo4]

Plutus.....you are making a fool of yourself, by making such a comment.

 

[Plutus]

Plutus.....you are making a fool of yourself, by making such a comment.

You are fully right about that.

 

[FB]

Can we keep it all CTA and not resort to name calling please

Cheers

FB

 

[Fenderman]

I have no worries about making a fool of myself Plutus but I fear your lack of knowledge with regard to race-craft and apparently non-existent desire to learn anything from anyone else is somewhat more foolish. After all I'm an old duffer who likes to learn something new every day and if that makes me a fool then I am proud to be one.

Re-read my posts and watch the race again. Pay particular attention to all of the attempted and successful overtakes in that sector and you may see who made mistakes and who didn't. There was plenty of race-craft to show what is what.

For the record I have stated in the past that I believe Bottas is one of, if not the best of the new drivers in F1 so don't go away thinking that my position is one of favouritism toward Hamilton. Bottas's race-craft was disappointing to me in the first stint of the race regardless of his clash with Hamilton.

 

[GeoffP]

Hamilton got penalised by the stewards - that makes him guilty.

I can see why he was, however a couple of point to take into account:

At the point of contact Hamilton's lateral motion seemed to have stopped and he was positioning for the corner;

Bottas had space outside of his vehicle that would have enabled him to avoid Hamilton;

Bottas' speed and position did not give confidence he could make the corner;

If Bottas had passed Hamilton he would have spent a maximum of four corners being blue flagged to let Hamilton back past again - so why should Hamilton have thought he would try such a numpty move?

But.... the regs penalised Hamilton according to their letter - hopefully Bottas will go away and do some thinking about why he was there in the first place

 

[Fenderman]

Beautifully put GeoffP

 

[landogeorgelewis1]

Massa's Penalty was shocking though

 

[Hamberg]

Of course it wasn't legitimate. He drove into another car. Where is the problem in understanding that?

20.4.
Any driver defending his position on a straight, and before any braking area, may use the full
width of the track during his first move, provided no significant portion of the car attempting
to pass is alongside his.

The consequences of that was Bottas' retirement and damage to his own car.

Can we end this now, do you understand the reason why the FIA ruled it was Hamilton who caused the collision?

Doesn't apply, 20.4 applies to the first move off of the racing line. As I've said.
20.4 Any driver defending his position on a straight, and before any braking area, may use the full
width of the track during his first move, provided no significant portion of the car attempting
to pass is alongside his.

20.3 is the one that counts, when
Any driver moving back towards the racing line, having earlier defended his position off-line, should leave at least one car width between his own car and the edge of the track on the approach to the corner.

 

[F1ang-o]

Bottas.... in his stupidity/ignorance robbed LH of a higher place in the WDC....& though LH has said he is not bothered about this & luckily it has not altered the Constructers Championship & Merc are second...it bloody well aggravates me....

 

[Mephistopheles]

What I found really infuriating about the incident... was that yet again, and just as we saw with Perez's delamination in Korea, was the extreme frailty of the Pirelli whenever it receives any kind of lateral impact anywhere near the rim.

We saw plenty of instances of rear wheel contact down the years. Now the mildest touch causes instant delamination.

I think it wouldn't even have been a race incident if that tyre hadn't delaminated.

Hang on a minute this wasn't just a mild touch the collision caused by Lewis was hard enough to rip the wheel rim off the hub of Bottas's car it's hardly surprising Lewis's tyre didn't hold up is it? No bloody tyre would have under those conditions....

 

[Plutus]

I have no worries about making a fool of myself Plutus but I fear your lack of knowledge with regard to race-craft and apparently non-existent desire to learn anything from anyone else is somewhat more foolish. After all I'm an old duffer who likes to learn something new every day and if that makes me a fool then I am proud to be one.

Re-read my posts and watch the race again. Pay particular attention to all of the attempted and successful overtakes in that sector and you may see who made mistakes and who didn't. There was plenty of race-craft to show what is what.

For the record I have stated in the past that I believe Bottas is one of, if not the best of the new drivers in F1 so don't go away thinking that my position is one of favouritism toward Hamilton. Bottas's race-craft was disappointing to me in the first stint of the race regardless of his clash with Hamilton.

I hereby apologise to you, I was in the wrong to call you names. I was relating to the "looking into the mirror part" which is necessary to avoid accidents in every day life on the roads as well as the racing track.

You have stated that you are not biased towards Bottas or Hamilton and I believe you in that regard.

However, I am not ignorant, I am happy to learn new things and look at things from a different perspective. That is what I have done. I have re-read the section in the regulations and once again looked at footage from the race.

It does't change. Yes, Bottas did have space to avoid the collision but as I have stated above section 20.4 requires the FIA to give Hamilton a penalty. He was the defending driver in this situation, he did not leave enough space between his car and Bottas' car, dis regardless of the space he left himon the track.

It is Bottas' right to unlap himself, so there was no reason not to do so, whether or not he would receive blue flags in the following corners.

 

[Bill Boddy]

I think that Hamilton moved over into Bottas not realising that having been overtaken did not just give way but tried to gat past Hamilton. There are, of course, precedents for a driver to attempt to unlap himself but it is fraught with danger. To me it was a racing incident and should have been left as such ; after all Hamilton served a penalty in the form of a lap on a shredding tyre.

The stewards thought differently but there are times when they should publish their reasoning ; this was one of those. Justice is only done if it can be seen to be done.

 

[RasputinLives]

I see the Lewis can do no wrong mob are out with their pitch forks and lynching rope for Bottas.

Lewis didn't see the car alongside of him and made an error by not giving him room. He didn't know he was there. Simple as that. These things happen, every driver makes a mistake.

I know what I saw but I'm sure we'll have the whole winter for people to tell me I didn't but just so you all know I don't think this makes Lewis any less of an amazing driver.

 

[Mephistopheles]

Hamberg he got the drive through for causing a collision not for weaving so none of those rules apply Lewis had loads of room to his left he did not need to move to the right he did the same thing at Spa to Koby one year and ended up taking himself out, he caused a collision and he got punished for it end of, why do we always have the same old tired arguments and excuses when it is Lewis that is involved....?

 

[Mephistopheles]

There are, of course, precedents for a driver to attempt to unlap himself but it is fraught with danger.

Like when Lewis unlapped himself against Vettel one year at Hockenheim? Oh yes he was being praised for doing that wasn't he. But when someone tries to unlap themselves against Hamilton he just says I didn't expect it man...

 

[Fenderman]

My argument is with the stewards for feeling the need to apportion blame for a racing incident. I am also disappointed with Bottas who I bigged up on his driver thread only a few days ago. He should not have been a lap down on Vettel let alone Hamilton, even in the lack-lustre Williams. His drive was pitiful and I only hope he redeems himself next season,

 

[GeoffP]

His drive was pitiful and I only hope he redeems himself next season,

At least he'll have a better teammate

 

[Hamberg]

This is all they've shown which is in relation to .FIA Stewards Decision - Document No. 50

Hamberg he got the drive through for causing a collision not for weaving so none of those rules apply Lewis had loads of room to his left he did not need to move to the right he did the same thing at Spa to Koby one year and ended up taking himself out, he caused a collision and he got punished for it end of, why do we always have the same old tired arguments and excuses when it is Lewis that is involved....?

Of course the rules under article 20 are applied! The only headline in that one is 'Driving' all the subsequent incremental points are to do with driving.

He was guilty of 16.1, a subsidiary of 16: Incidents
He drove according to everything under 20: Driving

The stewards made a decision and seemingly didn't read article 20 or decided he was guilty of one of them. As Bill Boddy has said, an explanation would be nice because I can't see it other than causing a collision but can't find anything in the regs to suggest he didn't drive according to the rules that govern 'Driving'

And can I request that those of you pulling out the Hamilton fanclub card to politely **** off.