Poll: Official 2024 Belgian Grand Prix Race Thread - Circuit de Spa-Francorchamps - Race 14/24

Rate the Spa race out of ten

  • Total voters
    109
  • Poll closed .
Status
Not open for further replies.
Greboth said:
And?

Let’s break this down. What is a double standsrd? a set of standards (a policy or code) that apply differently to one person or a group.

On the face of it, then yes it’s a double standard. But remembering they are different teams it isn’t. McLaren’s ‘policy or code’ is/was to race to the 2nd stop. Mercedes is, as has almost always been the case, to let them race.

Or a more inane version, if Zak Brown buys his staff cake on their birthdays. Should Toto have to also? or, if he doesn’t, wouldn’t that be double standards?

Your basically arguing that all teams should always follow the same strategy, should always pit their drivers in order and that drivers can’t have any autonomy over their strategy.
Click to expand...

I understand that, but I'm saying I think it was a ****** thing for Merc to do to Hamilton. Apparently Hamilton said the tyres were fine and he was happy to stay out, and also they didn't tell Lewis what George was doing until very near the end when it was too late.
 
chrismscotland said:
It’s hard on George but the other teams and drivers weren’t underweight and managed to stick to the rules; doesn’t feel like something that we should change because of a single race.
Click to expand...
But it limits strategy. It means you can't run long at spa on the fly.
Its not a major thing. But it just (in this case) punished ingenuity
 
Jono8 said:
I understand that, but I'm saying I think it was a ****** thing for Merc to do to Hamilton. Apparently Hamilton said the tyres were fine and he was happy to stay out, and also they didn't tell Lewis what George was doing until very near the end when it was too late.
Click to expand...
But that's the sport of it. Your driver might think the tyres are fine on that particular lap, and that they might do another 15-25 (I dunno). But the team has more data, might suggest at best they'd last 5-10 which could put you in no mans land as far as strategy goes. It's not as simple as ragging a tyre out until you want to pit.

And do we know that they didn't tell Lewis of George's one-stop strategy?
 
t2na said:
I like Russell and think he gets a pretty tough reception considering he was a rookie alongside Albon and Norris who are both much more 'naturally' charismatic - but I'm not sure he can deserve a win if the car was found to be illegal.

It's unfortunate but who's to say that 1.5kg didn't make the difference each lap to make that strategy work for the one stop? Would that additional weight across 33 laps (essentially 50kg in total across that duration) be the difference?

At least we've got the next half of this season and then all of next season too! It'd be worst if the rules were changing after this year just as we get to a really close playing field between the top 4 teams!
Click to expand...

I've never liked norris. But sure why. But I never have. There's just something about him.

I like Oscar. He's been my favourite driver since learning about what unfolded at alpine with him. I like his level head. He seems well grounded. But not like kimi. Who I wasn't a fan of. Despite the love he got
 
Jono8 said:
I understand that, but I'm saying I think it was a ****** thing for Merc to do to Hamilton. Apparently Hamilton said the tyres were fine and he was happy to stay out, and also they didn't tell Lewis what George was doing until very near the end when it was too late.
Click to expand...

Lewis was leading the race, George was 5th. George gambled on strategy but you don't gamble from the lead.
 
GravyMonster said:
IIRC from the last time this idea was floated around, there's a couple of reasons they don't do this.

Firstly, the additional demand on the scrutineers. The weight of the tyres obviously changes as they wear, so you can't just subtract 4x fresh tyre's weight from the car's total weight at the end of the race. They would need to remove all the tyres from the car and then weigh the car. This will take a lot more time and effort and slow the post-race scrutineering process down even further. The teams can't do it as the cars are still in parc ferme until released by scrutineers, and the scrutineers don't have the manpower or facilities to do this for 20 cars in a timely enough manner to allow the teams to get the car back and packup and leave.

An alternative would be to just take the cars weight minus tyres *and* wheels, but this will then begin an arms race to produce the lightest possible wheels, and the fear was that it would lead to a lot more wheel failures as manufacturers were forced to push the envelope of using the least amount of material possible, with even less margin than they currently have. 'So make the wheels a minimum weight' - that just adds another item for the scrutineers to check, and means they have to remove all the tyres and wheels and we're back to problem #1
Click to expand...
Its a difficult one I agree. It's just a shame as means at spa you can't do this strategy really.
 
Mr Jack said:
I don't know what the numbers are, but they always remind drivers to do it, and the tyres always look absolutely plastered in rubbish they've picked up so I imagine that it's significant; ESPN report that it's as much as 2kg which would have been enough here.



Yeah, I agree he earned the win and I'm sad he lost it, although it didn't spoil things for me. I thought Lewis also deserved a win, so I'm not too sad with the eventual result. Ultimately though, I think that one race in.... however long I've been watching F1, I think? I don't ever recall this happening before?... is a good basis for changing long standing rules.
Click to expand...

Yeah thank goodness it was Hamilton who inherited it. And George took it well. He knew he won it. And it was a great strategy. He has a drive next year and it's not like he's challenging for a WDC.

Hamilton also deserved it.

So yeah. Not the end of the world. Just a shame
 
AndyCr15 said:
Opening apology. Sorry, I've not read all the thread.

I've always thought it odd when teams make a decision to cover someone off, that could impact their overall race time. I mean, I do get it. If it's only a matter of a lap or two's difference and someone right behind you comes in, yeah, I get it, cover it. It doesn't really impact your race. I also get it if it's a really hard track to pass on. But, I think I've mentioned it before, sometimes they'll go long to create the fresher tyre advantage, then throw that advantage away pitting the second time cover off someone else. Was it Ferrari that did it yesterday? As well, perhaps, as Mercedes with Hamilton. Catching some of his comments after he was clearly annoyed George was allowed to do a one-stop making comments about how good his tyres felt when they called him in.

At the same time, should he not have just said 'No, these tyres are good, let me see what I can get from them'. As someone else said, how did so many judge tyre deg so badly? I know quali was wet, was practice wet too?
Click to expand...
I think the main issue with not covering someone off is that if a safety car then hits, the driver in front that didn’t pit is massively compromised and on old rubber. (Unless they get lucky and manage to pit just as it happens.) it’s just the luck of the draw really. Many times a driver will take the tyre whisper gamble and fail abysmally and then pit anyway by which time they are a minute back on where they would’ve been.
 
Last edited:
George saying "I take pride in crossing the line first" comes across as a bit arrogant to me. I would understand if he was disqualified on some technicality, but 1.5kg over a race distance is not an insignificant advantage. In reality it was a bit more than a 1.5kg advantage because the other cars had to be slightly over the weight limit to have a margin of safety.

On reflection he probably didn't really deserve the win anyway, he was mediocre all weekend. You could say it was a good strategy call, but he was the only one of the front running cars who could try it as he had nothing to lose.
 
Eddie99 said:
George saying "I take pride in crossing the line first" comes across as a bit arrogant to me. I would understand if he was disqualified on some technicality, but 1.5kg over a race distance is not an insignificant advantage. In reality it was a bit more than a 1.5kg advantage because the other cars had to be slightly over the weight limit to have a margin of safety.

On reflection he probably didn't really deserve the win anyway, he was mediocre all weekend. You could say it was a good strategy call, but he was the only one of the front running cars who could try it as he had nothing to lose.
Click to expand...

Disagree.

He was only 1.5kg towards end of that tyre (if tyre weight is issue)

Aren't the cars 700kg is? I so that's way under 1 percent in weight.

It was a great strategy call. Whoever made it deserves credit.
 
Last edited:
413x said:
Disagree.

He was only 1.5kg towards end of that tyre (if tyre weight is issue)

Aren't the cars 700kg is? I so that's way under 1 percent in weight.

It was a great strategy call. Whoever made it deserves credit.
Click to expand...
I guess the counter argument is that 19 other drivers and cars weren't under the weight limit.
 
t2na said:
Is it a moral win if you won by driving an illegal car though?
Click to expand...
I'd say so. It's not like it was 5kg under. And it was only under for part of the race (last x laps).

Qualifying, yeah more of an issue. Race? No.

I assume if it was tyre wear.. 50pc of the race was legal. It was only the last part of the last stint.
 
Eddie99 said:
It's not like Hamilton was far behind either. 1.5kg would've surely been enough for Hamilton to have got past.


Why are you assuming it was tyre wear? This theory sounds a bit ridiculous to me.
Click to expand...

That's what's been reported.

I don't know I don't think 1.5kg is enough. But happy to see data saying otherwise
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom