Poll: Official 2024 United States Grand Prix Race Thread - Circuit of the Americas - Race 19/24

[Kenai]

But it wasn't clearly broken.

It was though

What advantage did Norris gain?

Track position

He was ahead of Max at the end of the straight.

He was in the middle of an overtake attempt at the end of the straight, nothing more.

Max only got the place back because he braked late, went off the track and drove Norris wide.

Max didn't get the place 'back', or even keep the place, he lost the place - that's why Norris was in front of him after the corner. Maybe this is why you are confused - you realise Norris was ahead of Max after this encounter yes?

Had he been sporting and not done that, Norris would have no doubt kept ahead after the corner.

Had any number of other hypothetical scenarios occurred, then any number of other hypothetical outcomes would no doubt be true, yes.

As it was, Norris attempted the overtake, Max pushed them both off as he likes to do and this meant when re-joining at least one of them was going to be (or at least should be) guilty of 'gaining a lasting advantage' from going off track as per regulation 33.3. Norris chose to complete the overtake and make it himself that was guilty. He could have re-joined behind Max and it would have been Max that was guilty of the infringement instead.

I don't like it, you don't like it, virtually nobody actually likes it but lets not deny the reality of what occurred so we can try and kid ourselves that Max should have received a penalty in this scenario. It would be nice if the rules meant that when the defending car barrels off the track trying to defend, then the attacking car is immune from being considered to take advantage of the combined excursion to the run off area but that's not what the rules currently are, so we are where we are - Norris is the only one of them to infringe on an actual regulation, so he's the only one that got pinged with a punishment.

 

[Fr0dders]

He still constantly gets away with his signature brake late, go off the track and force the other driver off as well.

He's as dirty a racer as they come. Very talented and supremely quick, but he can't defend fairly at all as he always resorts to what he did today and just gets away with it.

Sick of watching him do it and get away with to be honest.

Problem is, if you don't give way and you aren't the one to back out and let him do it, then you get Silverstone 2021 and everybody is blaming you and ranting and raving on social media.

Can't say I don't blame the other drivers for doing it. They know if they don't back out nobody will dare criticize him (unless he's swearing of course) and it'll be your fault.

 

[Jono8]

It was though

Track position

He was in the middle of an overtake attempt at the end of the straight, nothing more.

Max didn't get the place 'back', or even keep the place, he lost the place - that's why Norris was in front of him after the corner. Maybe this is why you are confused - you realise Norris was ahead of Max after this encounter yes?

Had any number of other hypothetical scenarios occurred, then any number of other hypothetical outcomes would no doubt be true, yes.

As it was, Norris attempted the overtake, Max pushed them both off as he likes to do and this meant when re-joining at least one of them was going to be (or at least should be) guilty of 'gaining a lasting advantage' from going off track as per regulation 33.3. Norris chose to complete the overtake and make it himself that was guilty. He could have re-joined behind Max and it would have been Max that was guilty of the infringement instead.

I don't like it, you don't like it, virtually nobody actually likes it but lets not deny the reality of what occurred so we can try and kid ourselves that Max should have received a penalty in this scenario. It would be nice if the rules meant that when the defending car barrels off the track trying to defend, then the attacking car is immune from being considered to take advantage of the combined excursion to the run off area but that's not what the rules currently are, so we are where we are - Norris is the only one of them to infringe on an actual regulation, so he's the only one that got pinged with a punishment.

Sorry, I've edited my post.

As stated, I actually fail to see what advantage Norris gained going off the track. He was ahead into the braking zone and he came out ahead out of the corner after BOTH drivers went off track due to Max's bad driving.

 

[Kenai]

Sorry, I've edited my post.

As stated, I actually fail to see what advantage Norris gained going off the track.

Well yes, it's quite apparent you're struggling with it all, hence going around in these odd circles.

The advantage Norris gained was completing his overtake and gaining track position over Max, rather than crashing or remaining behind Max.

It's no more complicated than that really.

 

[Steeps]

I don't have an issue with Norris getting a penalty, what I have an issue with is Max not getting a penalty for pushing Norris off the circuit. If Norris gained a lasting advantage for being forced wide, the person who forced him wide should also be penalised for forcing another competitor off the circuit, as neither were able to make the corner due to the actions of Max. If Max had kept the car on the circuit, then fair, but he was all 4 wheels off too with no intention of making the corner. He is going to continue to be a danger to other drivers if he is allowed to constantly repeat these actions. Give Max a 5s penalty for being in the wrong too.

 

[Kenai]

I don't have an issue with Norris getting a penalty, what I have an issue with is Max not getting a penalty for pushing Norris off the circuit. If Norris gained a lasting advantage for being forced wide, the person who forced him wide should also be penalised for forcing another competitor off the circuit, as neither were able to make the corner due to the actions of Max. If Max had kept the car on the circuit, then fair, but he was all 4 wheels off too with no intention of making the corner. He is going to continue to be a danger to other drivers if he is allowed to constantly repeat these actions. Give Max a 5s penalty for being in the wrong too.

Penalties are rarely (though I'm sure not never) given to the car that ends up losing a position in these sort of squabbles.

The problem stems from not punishing this behaviour when it successfully results in keeping the place, like Brazil 21 as the most blatant example, as nobody has the confidence the stewards will pull defending drivers up on it should they rejoin behind.

If you're nowhere near the end of the race, it's almost certainly better to complete your overtake, risk a punishment and get on far enough down the road to make the 5s/10s irrelevant if it comes.

Norris would have been fine had there been another lap or two to extend the gap beyond 5s.

 

[petridish]

I've no desire to get into an argument either way about who was right or wrong but from reading the FIA statement that was posted in here a few pages back, it sounds to me like Norris received a reduced penalty due to Verstappen forcing him off the track. It would have been 10s if he was the only one at fault but as Verstappen was also at fault it was reduced*.

Would it not have been better (from an "encouraging clean racing" point of view) to instead give Norris the full 10s penalty and Verstappen a 5s penalty for forcing another driver off the track?

We'd all still be here arguing whether it was fair or not but if both drivers end up with something to lose relative to others in the race as well as relative to eachother then surely that'll mean they take on track racing a little more seriously. The net outcome between the two drivers remains the same, penalising the one who gains the lasting advantage, but they both have skin in the game to force a measured attack/defence.

*The Verstappen also at fault bit is what I've inferred from the wording and reduction, but accept that is again open to interpretation.

 

[Steeps]

I agree that a couple more laps a 5s penalty wouldn't have been an issue, but the mentality from a driver who has a lead in the championship to think it's acceptable to force another driver off because if there's a crash, he's still better off is dirty racing and dangerous. The fact other drivers are speaking out that they've been done for pushing wide and why should they be penalised when Max wasn't shows there is some inconsistency with the stewarding. The usual "if there was a wall there, Max wouldn't have done that" comes to mind, he'd have braked earlier and made the corner. The intention was to cause a crash.

 

[Jono8]

Aside from the Norris penalty drama, I just wanted to add:

How shockingly awful is Perez still! Russell beat him after starting in the pit lane! He's just so.....slow.

Surely Red Bull aren't going to have him in that seat next year!?

 

[Scam]

PlanetF1 have an interesting take on the Max/Lando controversy. I still havent watched the whole highlights but they appear to have a point that Lando had already completed the overtake down the straight, therefore Verstappen was actually the car attempting and overtake into the corner; https://www.planetf1.com/features/verstappen-norris-telemetry-data-adds-controversy-fia-decision

However, in my opinion, this approach was wrong because Norris completes an overtake on Verstappen on the straight between T11 and T12, exceeding the margin of a car length by just a few centimetres before closing the DRS – indicating he had done it before reaching the braking zone into T12 – and therefore, the roles chosen to make the decision to penalise a driver is wrong and the manoeuvre should have been settled without a time penalty.

The fact that Verstappen is ahead at the apex is because he delays his braking to do just that and in consequence, forces Norris to run wide making him to exceed the track limits as he then had nowhere to go.

Can anyone find the overhead? Best I can do is this which definitely shows Lando ahead by quite a margin but unclear if there's clear air at any point as the article above states;

 

[MassiveJim]

guys after 2 pages of going round in circles are you not getting the picture that you aren't going to change each others mind. JESUS!!
and to add to this even if you did change this random internet persons mind, it won't change the outcome, the penalty has been given and accepted by McLaren regardless of your opinion.

decent enough race, that corner seems particularly problematic.
Lando fluffs the start at T1 yet again and loses pole.
great drives from Russell, Colapinto and Lawson.

Wouldn't want to really see Lawson in the 2nd Red Bull next season if I am honest as he will have to play 2nd fiddle to Max and the team as a whole is fairly brutal to drives (particularly new ones) and Lawson seems to be a talent and a nice guy.

What has happened to Aston ?
They were on podiums at the start of last season and have now completely fallen off a cliff. not helped by the fact that they have stroll as a driver.

 

[AlphariusOmegan]

Their whole premise hinges on the definition of overtaken to mean when a part of the car is ahead of the other, this in my opinion is tenuous at best. When you drive and decide to overtake a car on a normal road consider honestly at what point do you consider that you have overtaken the car?

 

[cuke2u]

guys after 2 pages of going round in circles are you not getting the picture that you aren't going to change each others mind. JESUS!!
and to add to this even if you did change this random internet persons mind, it won't change the outcome, the penalty has been given and accepted by McLaren regardless of your opinion.

They just need to find a room, however many arguments made on either side the decision of the stewards stands and will not be changed.
It's also like those who keep harping on about Perez's performance every race weekend thread. Yes we know, we've got eyes - move on and wait for a decision to be made or start your own thread on it.

 

[Jimbeam3678]

What has happened to Aston ?
They were on podiums at the start of last season and have now completely fallen off a cliff. not helped by the fact that they have stroll as a driver.

An educated guess, they recruited Red Bull aero people and gained the initial Red Bull design. Then they didn't fully understand why it worked and the thinking behind it, then hit a deadend with the data or lack of it for the design they acquired?

That's my theory anyway

 

[Mr Jack]

Wouldn't want to really see Lawson in the 2nd Red Bull next season if I am honest as he will have to play 2nd fiddle to Max and the team as a whole is fairly brutal to drives (particularly new ones) and Lawson seems to be a talent and a nice guy.

If they throw Lawson straight into the seat, it would seem they learned nothing from Gasly and Albon.

What has happened to Aston ?
They were on podiums at the start of last season and have now completely fallen off a cliff. not helped by the fact that they have stroll as a driver.

I think the main issue is that Aston has been undergoing a lot of changes, those will take time to bed in and pay off. Staff need to learn the ropes and learn to work together. Another big factor is that they were hugely flattered last season by the weakness of other teams. McLaren brought a potato to the first half of the season, Merc stuck with the zeropod design and then abandoned it a handful of races into the season when it turned out to be a complete albatross, and Ferrari? Who knows why they were so weak at the start of '23. Without all three of those teams dropping the ball, Aston would never have landed that string of podiums. Meanwhile, Haas and Williams have taken a real step forward meaning they're better able to take low-end points positions off Aston - and especially off Lance.

 

[Scam]

guys after 2 pages of going round in circles are you not getting the picture that you aren't going to change each others mind. JESUS!!
and to add to this even if you did change this random internet persons mind, it won't change the outcome, the penalty has been given and accepted by McLaren regardless of your opinion.

Arguing on the internet is fun when you have a slow day at work McLaren did their usual bend-over act at the time, but now they've reflected they are pushing back and calling out the poor decision. Maybe Zak had a word with Toto afterall Personally I think McLaren should appeal if only to make the point, but hey.

Their whole premise hinges on the definition of overtaken to mean when a part of the car is ahead of the other, this in my opinion is tenuous at best. When you drive and decide to overtake a car on a normal road consider honestly at what point do you consider that you have overtaken the car?

Well no PF1 are actually saying Norris was entirely ahead before the corner, hence me asking if anyone has a pic of the overhead;

However, in my opinion, this approach was wrong because Norris completes an overtake on Verstappen on the straight between T11 and T12, exceeding the margin of a car length by just a few centimetres before closing the DRS – indicating he had done it before reaching the braking zone into T12

I read that as saying there was a few cm of clear air between them, the video I posted above is a funny angle but it does appear so.

 

[Jono8]

PlanetF1 have an interesting take on the Max/Lando controversy. I still havent watched the whole highlights but they appear to have a point that Lando had already completed the overtake down the straight, therefore Verstappen was actually the car attempting and overtake into the corner; https://www.planetf1.com/features/verstappen-norris-telemetry-data-adds-controversy-fia-decision



Can anyone find the overhead? Best I can do is this which definitely shows Lando ahead by quite a margin but unclear if there's clear air at any point as the article above states;

This is what I was saying. It does appear from the footage we have that Norris was ahead of Max as they entered the braking zone.

It does introduce the supposed grey area of when an overtake is "done", but that argument is an odd one too, with little clarification offered up by rules/guidelines.

I mean it's kind of common sense to say that if Norris was in front of Max at the start of a braking zone, then he is ahead (IE Norris was 3rd and Max was 4th). Max was therefore trying to get back in front (IE get back into 3rd).

 

[Jono8]

Their whole premise hinges on the definition of overtaken to mean when a part of the car is ahead of the other, this in my opinion is tenuous at best. When you drive and decide to overtake a car on a normal road consider honestly at what point do you consider that you have overtaken the car?

I'm not sure comparing it to driving on public roads is the best comparison. On public roads you have lanes. You don't have lanes on a racing track.

 

[413x]

Personally I think they both should have had a penalty. If max had stayed in lines then yes this was the right result.

Its for sure an open door for everyone to do this.

Norris did fluff the start. That was frustrating.

Perez is garbage and will cost RBR 2 WCC places... That's on RBR. Vast majority of fans wanted him out.

Russell did well. I like him. But damn he makes some mistakes.

Lawson and Colipinto did well.

Ferrari were impressive too.

 

[SKILL]

I'm beginning to think RBR are deliberately keeping Perez to lose those positions in WCC, gives them the wind tunnel/cfd boost for next year when they'll be developing the 2026 cars...

Otherwise the management are completely incompetent. It was clear months ago that he was a liability and they were likely to lose the WCC, basically since they suddenly lost pace around the time FIA were thinking about asynchronous braking in completely unrelated events, but yet they kept him on rather than replacing him with literally anybody else. Marko could've stepped in and done a better job