The Racing Line and avoidable accidents

[Chad Stewarthill]

On the general topic of the 'racing' line, It is clear (as I have said in other threads) that for an overtake to happen, by definition at least one car has to move off the racing line. I do agree with Road of Bones that generally it is incumbent on the car behind to avoid contact and to make the pass safely, but if too much emphasis is placed on any contact always being the fault of the overtaker, then pretty soon the only place drivers will feel safe attempting to pass will be on the DRS straight.

I do also think that the supreme efficiency of modern brakes, and the resulting reduction in braking distances, has had an effect (maybe as much as or even more than aerodynamics) on the ability to overtake cleanly by getting sufficiently ahead of the other car before the turn-in point, by outbraking them. I have long thought that the brakes were an area that the OWG for instance should have been looking at.

 

[RevMaxPower]

Chad that's why I'm not exactly enamoured ofr DRS - at the moment the "DRS Straight" IS about the only place for a relatively easy pass in my opinion. Scumacher being a sitting duck made this only too obvious.

Artificial racing.

To avoid processions I agree with you - other areas of design which affect the performance and handling need investigating as well.

DRS is a cop out, in my book...

 

[Sarinaide]

I really don't think race line is the massive issue, sure you have to pass someone generally off the race line, but also one has to factor that in attempting a pass a driver would have to be aware of whether he can keep the car on track after making the pass, if the other driver is neck on neck with you, and he has the better drive into a corner or chicane, hairpin be what it may, he can take that particular obsticle at greater speed than the other car due to traction and other forces.

I don't say "thy shalt not pass here or there" but it comes down to common sense when a move is a risk/gamble or whether it is calculated......the later is tolerated, the former is something I don't condone by any driver.

 

[Hamberg]

Really good point out the out braking Chad and this is also where the argument "he turned in on me" often comes from especially if it's an inside line overtake.

 

[The Pits]

You cannot make an omlette without breaking a few eggs.

Personally, I think that if you want drivers to attempt overtakes, then some contact is inevitable. I do not believe that any driver seeks to create contact, with a couple of notable exceptions, as there is a high risk to both drivers and cars involved.

Nor do I feel that any driver has the right to the racing line, however, it would seem that in many situations, the defending driver is given the benefit of the doubt.

As RoB has stated, and I fully agree, that the following driver has the best view of what is going on, what ever anyone thinks, even on a road car, establishing what is going on behind is far more difficult that in front. However, recent precedents seem to punish the following driver (Hamilton, in Monaco for example) which can encourage more robust defence, with the knowledge that it is likely that the driver behind will back out to prevent a penalty.

If the benefit of the doubt was given to the attacker, I would wager that there would be a notable change in on track behaviour. Link this to a "Strike" or "Yellow/Red card" penalty (WITH appeals process) and You could end up with a balance. Races should not be decided in the stewards office.

Not to go over old ground again, but reading through the report from the incidents at the weekend, it would seem that there is not a great deal of consistency in terms of what is looked at when investigating an incident. personally, I would suggest that there was a working group or a comittee made up of team personell, which could change, whos job it would be to review any incidents, and decide whether any penalty was warranted, sort of Jury by peers.

At the end of the day, racing line can be subjective, different drivers follow different lines, weather conditions can lead to adjustments, and certain sections of track being avoided, so a comparison of like with like would be needed.

Whether I agree with the outcome of the car 3/4 incident investigation or not, I would say that the report at least showed that the details were reviewed, and this is what is needed to instill confidence in the body reviewing.

I noted before that I thought the stewards panel was different at every race, and was informed that they are the same. So could there be inconsistencies in the driver consultants??? Peer review by those who have a vested interest to be fair and equitable is the only way to go.

 

[Quintessentially]

My point was this:
Other than when Hamilton tried to pass him, Button never went as far across to that side of the track. Added to which, the dry line that developed later seemed to corroborate the idea that the 'racing' line wasn't that far over either. It was a much straighter diagonal line from the 'Wall of Champions' across towards but not as close to the pit wall side further up the straight, beyond the finish line. So why did Button go that far to the right so early, on that one occasion?

Edit:
Brogan/Speshal; that's my last point specifically on Button / Hamilton I promise, but I felt I needed to explaing my thinking to Quintessentially.

Ok agreed and thanks for the explanation.

 

[RevMaxPower]

I hate to say this, being F1 and all, but surely the object of the exercise should be to put more emphasis on driver input. At the moment it seems all you have to do (providing you're in the right car of course, because if you're not you're dead in the water before you even start) is to wait for a certain stretch of track and then simply PUSH A BUTTON OR TWO (no pun intended this time) and, hey presto, you've overtaken somebody. Can't be right...

 

[Sarinaide]

There was a thread "FIA rules creating anti-racing", I do agree with this a lot. For me if your v8 can produce better output and stability that the others well that is just tough takkie, if you can produce more downforce by means within the rules (which should be redone and formulated) well again tough takkie.

Now F1's flavour of the month is DRS and KERS, which really just creates gung ho passing, and nothing to do with driving up the other drivers manifold and passing him on bing in the slipstream and having such a good drive of the other car, now it is a case of Button and Webber with superior cars pushing buttons and making a vastly inferior car look such.

It is "aghh well you can get 100m away but I will catch you with my yellow button:

 

[Hamberg]

I hate to say this, being F1 and all, but surely the object of the exercise should be to put more emphasis on driver input. At the moment it seems all you have to do (providing you're in the right car of course, because if you're not you're dead in the water before you even start) is to wait for a certain stretch of track and then simply PUSH A BUTTON OR TWO (no pun intended this time) and, hey presto, you've overtaken somebody. Can't be right...

Valid point Axle but probably one for the DRS threads

 

[Hamberg]

I really don't think race line is the massive issue, sure you have to pass someone generally off the race line, but also one has to factor that in attempting a pass a driver would have to be aware of whether he can keep the car on track after making the pass, if the other driver is neck on neck with you, and he has the better drive into a corner or chicane, hairpin be what it may, he can take that particular obsticle at greater speed than the other car due to traction and other forces.

I agree with that sarinaide, which is why in my original question I've asked

should a driver only be penalised for causing an avoidable accident when they have clearly made a move that they would be unable to complete cleanly either
a) because they cannot complete the corner/move due to factors such as carrying too much speed/missing the apex
b) because the other driver has absolutely no chance of avoiding the overtaking car (racing line or not) within the white lines

The other factor is as Chad has rightly pointed out the braking points and outbraking another driver - there will be the preferred points however in an attack/defend position these have to change and often he who brakes last (unless has entered into scenario a) will prosper and there is some responsibility, in my opinion, on the driver ahead to factor this into his move also.

 

[Road of Bones]

Another thought - perhaps a lot of the drivers are still in "Bridgestone mode"? i.e. that once a pass has been made then that's it, you've lost/gained that position for the rest of the race (barring mishaps). It would explain why certain drivers still seem to think they have to get by or defend at all costs, where a more pragmatic approach and a willingness to trust that the tyre strategy may play out later would probably serve them better.

(yes - I realise I'm making a thinly-veiled allusion to Lewis here, but since he seemed to have grasped this idea fully in China, one wonders why he hasn't continued to apply the same lessons in subsequent races?)

 

[RevMaxPower]

Valid point Axle but probably one for the DRS threads

True H , - was really just following on from Chad's point about brakes etc, ...

 

[Hamberg]

Another thought - perhaps a lot of the drivers are still in "Bridgestone mode"? i.e. that once a pass has been made then that's it, you've lost/gained that position for the rest of the race (barring mishaps). It would explain why certain drivers still seem to think they have to get by or defend at all costs, where a more pragmatic approach and a willingness to trust that the tyre strategy may play out later would probably serve them better.

(yes - I realise I'm making a thinly-veiled allusion to Lewis here, but since he seemed to have grapsed this idea fully in China, one wonders why he hasn't continued to apply the same lessons in subsequent races?)

Uh oh, Brogan will be displeased at the suggestion that they should rely on tyre strategy

Of course you make a good point (even the scaredy small writing in Italics )

 

[teabagyokel]

One thing I keep reading on F1 Rejects is that 2011 is about where you want to be in the last stint of the race. Look at Kobayashi's performance in Malaysia. He was overtaken 7 times, many of which he just gave up, but he got on with his race and picked up points. So, I agree with Road of Bones on "Bridgestone mode"!

 

[riskitall]

On the general topic of the 'racing' line, It is clear (as I have said in other threads) that for an overtake to happen, by definition at least one car has to move off the racing line. I do agree with Road of Bones that generally it is incumbent on the car behind to avoid contact and to make the pass safely, but if too much emphasis is placed on any contact always being the fault of the overtaker, then pretty soon the only place drivers will feel safe attempting to pass will be on the DRS straight.

I do also think that the supreme efficiency of modern brakes, and the resulting reduction in braking distances, has had an effect (maybe as much as or even more than aerodynamics) on the ability to overtake cleanly by getting sufficiently ahead of the other car before the turn-in point, by outbraking them. I have long thought that the brakes were an area that the OWG for instance should have been looking at.

it all depends on the circumstances.it shouldnt always be the fault of the driver behind if he makes contact with the car he's trying to overtake.
otherwise the driver infront has the freedom to take the piss.

 

[riskitall]

Uh oh, Brogan will be displeased at the suggestion that they should rely on tyre strategy

Of course you make a good point (even the scaredy small writing in Italics )

Another thought - perhaps a lot of the drivers are still in "Bridgestone mode"? i.e. that once a pass has been made then that's it, you've lost/gained that position for the rest of the race (barring mishaps). It would explain why certain drivers still seem to think they have to get by or defend at all costs, where a more pragmatic approach and a willingness to trust that the tyre strategy may play out later would probably serve them better.

(yes - I realise I'm making a thinly-veiled allusion to Lewis here, but since he seemed to have grapsed this idea fully in China, one wonders why he hasn't continued to apply the same lessons in subsequent races?)

noone knew the safety car would be out so many times.the result would have been different otherwise,and vettel probably would have won again.
lewis was very quick and wanted to make the most of it because he didnt know if it would rain again,or how many times the safety car would be involved in the race.this is why wet races are a lottery.wernt both of buttons wins in the wet or changing conditions last year?

 

[RevMaxPower]

noone knew the safety car would be out so many times.the result would have been different otherwise,and vettel probably would have won again.
lewis was very quick and wanted to make the most of it because he didnt know if it would rain again,or how many times the safety car would be involved in the race.this is why wet races are a lottery.wernt both of buttons wins in the wet last year?

If you ask me ALL the races are a lottery! (Large slice of luck required.)

 

[VanChallis]

it all depends on the circumstances.it shouldnt always be the fault of the driver behind if he makes contact with the car he's trying to overtake.
otherwise the driver infront has the freedom to take the piss.

This is something I've been thinking lately. Look how early Massa turned into Hamilton in the Monaco incident. Sure, Lewis was taking a bit of a punt to get past him, but Massa saw him, turned straight in, and Lewis, being behind, (and black, hehe!) gets penalised

 

[Chad Stewarthill]

One thing's for sure; if a driver in a quick car were to get stuck behind another in a slower one for lap after lap, thus compromising his race, wouldn't he get roundly criticised for not being aggressive / adventurous enough?

So, is attempting an early overtake, catching your target off-guard perhaps, necessarily always symptomatic of a lack of patience or maturity? Can't it sometimes be the right thing to do?

 

[Sarinaide]

I agree with that sarinaide, which is why in my original question I've asked

should a driver only be penalised for causing an avoidable accident when they have clearly made a move that they would be unable to complete cleanly either
a) because they cannot complete the corner/move due to factors such as carrying too much speed/missing the apex
b) because the other driver has absolutely no chance of avoiding the overtaking car (racing line or not) within the white lines

The other factor is as Chad has rightly pointed out the braking points and outbraking another driver - there will be the preferred points however in an attack/defend position these have to change and often he who brakes last (unless has entered into scenario a) will prosper and there is some responsibility, in my opinion, on the driver ahead to factor this into his move also.

a) yes
b) Is sketchy, it comes down to a quantum assesment of circumstances and events.

I think if the rules are aptly and without prejudice applied then yes the driver should be penalised.

On braking and duelling I would say that it really just comes down to common sense, which is hard at 200+ mph.