Grand Prix 2024 Belgian Grand Prix Practice, Qualifying & Race Discussion

After a hectic 5 races in 6 weeks, we Finish the 1st half of the season at 1 of the great wonders of the F1 world: Spa Francorchamps. Liberty Media has done a good job, as we are in the Currently of 1 of the most unexpected classic seasons. However, the uncertainty of Spa's place beyond 2025 is a travesty. The mere consideration of removing Spa indicates that Liberty Media has much to learn. i Understand their profit-driven motives, but they also must understand it's essential to protect the classics; this would lead to a more graceful acceptance of new races. They wouldn't dare remove Monza from the calendar, and the same should apply to Spa, as well as Silverstone, Monaco, Suzuka, and Interlagos. As I often say in sports, tampering with history can be risky because it papers over the cracks very well, and a poor race is more easily forgiven at Spa than in Qatar.

i was thinking is their circuit in the world with more Iconic places than at Spa Francorchamps. La Source, Eau Rouge, Kemmel straight, Les Combes, Pouhon, Stavelot , Blanchimont & Bus Stop Chicane. thats Just the modern 4.5 mile circuit & not the historic 9.3 mile circuit & spa 1966 incredibly was a big part of F1 history because it was where Jackie Stewart started his relentless pursuit on safety

"I had a big shunt at Spa, because the race track was ridiculously unprotected, I knocked down a telegraph pole and went into a woodcutter's hut. I ended up trapped in a farmyard. Graham Hill and Bob Bondurant got me out of the car and it took them 30 minutes – there were no marshals at all. I was soaked in fuel. I got Graham to take all my clothes off because I was going in and out of consciousness and I was burning. It was a much higher octane fuel than today. Then, I was lying naked on the floor while they tried to get some marshals, ambulances and there was nothing. They had to get tools from spectators' cars to get me out, The medical centre was ridiculous, cigarette ends on the floor. After that, I had a specialist who was good at resuscitation as well as everything else. He came to every race I went to."

This weekend, we find ourselves in the midst of an incredibly tight season with seven different winners already, and I can guarantee nobody anticipated this. Ironically, I thought F11 was in danger & on the verge of decline with Verstappen's growing dominance. Yet here we are, witnessing this level of variety for the first time in 12 years, and it's only the 4th time weve seen this since 1986, following 2003, 2008, & 2012, all of which led to a title decider. So, perhaps there is still hope Moreover, only the seasons of 1975, 1977, 1982, 1983, 1985, 2003, & 2012 have seen more different winners in a season. therefore who knows what we will see, another race where the podium could any 1 of the big 7. Mclaren are the big favourites after their recent form but they are fragile, Mercedes had great Pace in Silverstone a similarly very high speed circuit & never count out Max Verstappen

also is this Perez's Final race for a while or ever. because its heavily rumoured by the summer Break he had to either be 100pts behind Verstappen or in the top 5 if verstappen was top. & with just 26pts to play for he is 142 behind Max & in 7th, 25pts behind Piastri in 5th. so to be safe Perez has to win his 1st race for 15 months & hope Piastri doesnt score

 

[Brogan]

this was the 1 in 100 where it worked

It didn't work.

He was disqualified.

 

[cider_and_toast]

Yep.

I'm the first person to champion ditching the sim and the data and going with the drivers bum but no trophy, no point.

 

[Dartman]

It didn't work.

He was disqualified.

No the car was disqualified, the driver drove a good race, it did work, there is a difference though the result is the same, nil point

 

[F1Brits_90]

It didn't work.

He was disqualified.

very true. on the track it worked & the stewards disqualified him

 

[Brogan]

it did work

It did not.

He was disqualified.

 

[Dartman]

It did not.

He was disqualified.

The car was disqualified for being underweight, therefore the driver can't win, there was no mention of the driver being disqualified. the term was the car was excluded from the results for being underweight. Pedantic I'm sure, but the one stop worked in terms of tactics, it was also said that had there been a cool down lap he would have collected enough spent rubber to be "legal", one wonders whether if the aero was advantaged part of bodywork allowed a trip into gravel trap after the flag to collect weight to be legal such are the vagaries of the rules

 

[Brogan]

"George's car was the only one that had the problem, and it is because things like the tyre wear was much higher. It looks like we lost more material on the plank.

The strategy didn't work.

 

[Wombat]

There was no disrespect to Lewis, if you watched the race, GR called the one stop and the team agreed, the explanation was if he stopped the 5th was the result, if he one stopped then he would move up, though he wasn't expected to win, when team mates race the the one behind has to overtake, the one in front is not obliged to make it easy. We don't do fan boy here we discuss the pros and cons and you haven't.

What’s with the “fan boy” garbage. I simply expressed my take on what I view as a horrendous offense in regard to team driver dynamics. And I most certainly did discuss the “pros and cons.” I spent about two pages worth using facts from this race and aspects from F1 in general and explaining my views. It’s a fact that Lewis had dominated the race; that the team made him follow a two stop strategy which turned out to be inferior to the one stop; that before his stops he told the team that his tires were still good but they called him in anyway; that Lewis is better at conserving his tires than George; that both drivers were to be on a two stop strategy; that this was Lewis’ understanding and so, with George mired in 5th place, as Lewis has stated, George wasn’t in his race and so he managed his race lead accordingly over the 2nd place car by managing his tires and pace, by going only as fast as needed to keep the 2nd place car out of DRS range; that Lewis had everybody covered and was on course for a certain win until his own team made an inequitable, unexpected move that placed his teammate in front of him; that after his second stop he was still left with the expectation that George would be dropping back to 4th or 5th when called in for his scheduled 2nd stop; that the only reason George ended up ahead of Lewis was because the team had changed him to a strategy that proved to be superior and favorable to him; that Lewis wasn’t immediately informed of the strategy change for George, something that would have allowed him the chance to quicken his pace and catch George more quickly and thus (since team orders were not invoked) have more time to try to make the pass; that a basically similar situation of unfairly placing the trailing driver ahead of the race leading driver occurred with the McLaren team the previous week and the situation was equitably and justly handled with team orders; that various media sources have cheapened Lewis’ win by just stating that he “inherited” the win while not qualifying it with the fact that he had dominated the race and thus was a deserving winner.

As is common knowledge among F1 people, I noted that drivers on a team who have been accorded equal status are expected to receive equal treatment and teams are expected to honor this, to not do anything that inequitably favors one driver over the other and to rectify any such situation that arises (and note that over the years, drivers under this arrangement have complained when they felt that the team had done something that favored his teammate). Perhaps you don’t believe in the fairness, honor and expected trust of adhering to this established and agreed upon “contract” among the drivers and team but I do. And Merc clearly violated the fairness and trust inherent in this arrangement. When the two drivers were still receiving equal treatment (as dictated by their equal status situation) Lewis was dominating the race while George was mired in 5th, out of contention for the win. However, when Merc gave George what turned out to be a superior one stop strategy that gave him an advantage (equally at least 20 secs. of track time) over Lewis this violated the equal treatment, non-favoritism aspect of the equal status pact. That this change from equal strategies occurred later in the race is irrelevant because it didn’t release Merc from justly honoring the equal status tenets—the salient point is that (whether or not it was the intended result) this unfairly favored George over Lewis and Merc should have acknowledged this inequity and taken the appropriate action to rectify the situation (i.e., issue team orders). You stated that “when team mates race the one behind has to overtake.” Well, one of the points I’m making about why this was so unfair is that George didn’t overtake Lewis. His position ahead of Lewis was gifted by way of the inequitable strategy change. This unfairly handed George a huge advantage because track position proved to be extremely important at this year’s race. [As a result of the DRS opening point having been moved farther up the Kemmel Straight, passing among closely matched cars was extremely difficult (hence the persistent DRS trains and the fact that Max couldn’t even get past Checo and RB finally had to give a team order to let Max by).] In all fairness and to honor the equal status situation, team orders should have been issued. Again, Lewis had dutifully complied with the two stop strategy that the team ordered him to follow. In accordance with what I’ve noted above, it was extremely unfair and disrespectful for Merc to take a hard-earned victory away from Lewis (especially given that he had dominated the race) and hand it to his teammate by giving George the inequitable advantage of a superior strategy (that Lewis had been denied). Merc should have had the integrity and sense of justice to do what the McLaren team did in a similar situation in which it had unfairly placed the trailing driver over the one who had been leading the race. Even aside from equal status considerations, it’s just plain wrong for a team to undermine the team driver who had dominated a race and was heading for a certain win by suddenly doing something that greatly favors his teammate (who had never been in contention for the win) and hands him the win instead. Who wouldn’t feel cheated and betrayed after such a circumstance!? So, my feeling is that the DSQ was a case of poetic justice and that the most deserving driver (the driver who had dominated the race) eventually got the win.

Once again (as in my previous post) I have presented the “pros and cons.” I have backed my points with facts and explained my views. If you can’t see that then it’s down to whatever you’re bringing to the table. I grew up in a family that instilled in me a strong sense of honor, fairness and justice and this why this situation struck me so strongly. If you don’t share my views regarding the sense of fairness, equity, justice and trust involved in an equal status driver arrangement and that Merc grievously violated this in respect to Lewis then we’ll just have to agree to disagree and so be it. It’s no big deal. But please, enough of this ridiculous “fan boy” drivel!