2010 Formula 1 British Grand Prix

[gtracedriver]

It was good race. Vettel lost it in the first lap. Good race by Nico. Ferrari had a nightmare again lol. RBR is really fast and especially in qualifying. Button also did good job with little luck. Vettel really need to do well in next race. I do not like RBR too much but there is some tension in that team

There were some nice overtaking and battles. Alonso was trying too hard I think with Kubica and then with Luizzi

I would love to see Kimi back in F1 hope it will happen some how. It is shame he is not in F1
http://www.planetf1.com/news/18227/6257136/Whitmarsh-Raikkonen-should-be-in-F1

 

[NapoleonMikey]

Sorry i should have quoted exactly what Road_Dogg quoted from InvincibleM5 about mature drivers giving back positions for contact. It just seemed that people take the racing rules from GTP and think that they should apply to real world racing.

hope that clears that up and ill be sure to add that quote to the original to helps fix confusion.

 

[Ardius]

And that right there is what is wrong with the racing rules for GTP. It's racing not hot lapping and letting people by if they are faster. I think that GTP should adopt a sporting code closer to iRacing's just so that this whole NO TOUCHING rule gets thrown out, and people can race and if there is an actual incident with a pass then it can be dealt with but not for that. If you take the car out or knock him off into the dirt. But if you can point to me in any single professional series where if there is contact during a pass the driver gives the spot up? Mature race drivers know that that happens in racing and they get on with the race at hand.

Vettle tried passing Sutil cleanly for quite a few laps and nearing the end of the race. Vettle finally put the car in a very small hole, but he made the pass with out taking anyone out. It was the end of the race where you start seeing more desperate passes like dive bombs down the inside. You see it in every series of racing.

Erm, the reason we have a "wait for and give the place back" rule for GTP is because we are here to have fun. It is not serious business and it helps encourage more intelligent racing. Sure, you are going to eventually make a move you regret or slight contact which unfortunately means one driver loses out. But you'd have to really think of some complicated rules to cover specific instances where one driver drove himself off the track or whatever. I'd say 90% of incidents online where drivers are running close and one goes off are usually someone's fault. So to make things easy and to get the point across to newer drivers, its easier to have a simple rule which means if you take someone out of the race, you give the place back. Eventually people learn to avoid contact at all costs, you shouldn't need contact to take a position.

Reality is different, reality has actual championships, money, fame and so on at stake. But for an online community playing a video game? The two naturally have different rules.

I agree with what you're saying though that reality is different. 👍 But I don't agree GTP should be like reality.

 

[NapoleonMikey]

Erm, the reason we have a "wait for and give the place back" rule for GTP is because we are here to have fun. It is not serious business and it helps encourage more intelligent racing. Sure, you are going to eventually make a move you regret or slight contact which unfortunately means one driver loses out. But you'd have to really think of some complicated rules to cover specific instances where one driver drove himself off the track or whatever. I'd say 90% of incidents online where drivers are running close and one goes off are usually someone's fault. So to make things easy and to get the point across to newer drivers, its easier to have a simple rule which means if you take someone out of the race, you give the place back. Eventually people learn to avoid contact at all costs, you shouldn't need contact to take a position.

Reality is different, reality has actual championships, money, fame and so on at stake. But for an online community playing a video game? The two naturally have different rules.

I agree with what you're saying though that reality is different. 👍 But I don't agree GTP should be like reality.

I can agree with where you are coming from and it does make sense to teach the new guys. But i still belive there are better ways to go about it but sadly none that can be incorporated here at GTP. So I guess that would be the best way to go about things for the series run here.

But that is obviously off topic so back on topic.

I'm thinking the media is probably making a bigger deal out of the Red Bull affair then it really is or at least making certain people look worse then they should. Vettle being one of them. It is not Vettle's fault that he got the new wing he just drives. It also wasnt Horner's, he is just following orders from above. But sadly with the way the media is im sure these 2 are going to come out looking like bad guys in the whole mess. Hopefully Red Bull will be able to get a hold of the situation ad push on instead of letting this ruin the rest of there season.

 

[Prince.M5]

Which F1 are you watching?

And that right there is what is wrong with the racing rules for GTP. It's racing not hot lapping and letting people by if they are faster. I think that GTP should adopt a sporting code closer to iRacing's just so that this whole NO TOUCHING rule gets thrown out, and people can race and if there is an actual incident with a pass then it can be dealt with but not for that. If you take the car out or knock him off into the dirt. But if you can point to me in any single professional series where if there is contact during a pass the driver gives the spot up? Mature race drivers know that that happens in racing and they get on with the race at hand.

Vettle tried passing Sutil cleanly for quite a few laps and nearing the end of the race. Vettle finally put the car in a very small hole, but he made the pass with out taking anyone out. It was the end of the race where you start seeing more desperate passes like dive bombs down the inside. You see it in every series of racing.

Owkey this is not kiddish online racing game where you hit each other and make someone spun around then you take his place. From what I meant by mature racing driver was that Vettel shouldn't have done that in my opinion. Indeed this isn't qualifying as you said but I know they were racing but making contact such that is just not fair. I believe if let's say Hamilton did that in desperate to him and he must have been angry right? If that happen to you than you also must be angry.

He just need to play with neat passing. It'd still be fine if they made a little brush like Alonso and Massa did in Nurburgring 2007. These are just my opinion and I'm sorry if you guys are not agreeing with me... That contact did pushed Sutil wide through the corner and nearly lost it to Hulkenberg too. I'm very sorry to Sutil but Vettel needs to fix his racecraft.

EDIT: Owkey I changed my mind a bit. If Vettel slowed down he should've lost 2 more place to Hulkenberg and Schumacher and that will be worst but I still keep holding on my feeling which it wasn't a fair move by Vettel. It doesn't say in the regulations that you have to back off if you hit someone except for gaining advantage by going off track (like Alonso did to Kubica)... Probably it was just my ego feeling after what he did. Sorry

 

[waggles]

In a completely irrelevant tack to the previous discussion, what was the music used in the end credits for the BBC coverage? It's used a hell of a lot, but I can never work out the name of the song.

 

[Stevisiov]

In a completely irrelevant tack to the previous discussion, what was the music used in the end credits for the BBC coverage? It's used a hell of a lot, but I can never work out the name of the song.

I think it is Bruce Hornsby's - The way it is.

 

[Alex.]

One of my favorite photos from the weekend

 

[Roo]

Ferrari was advised to let Kubica through

By Michele Lostia and Pablo Elizalde Tuesday, July 13th 2010, 12:06 GMT

Ferrari was told three times that Fernando Alonso should have let Robert Kubica through during the British Grand Prix, according to the FIA race director Charlie Whiting.

Alonso was given a drive-through at Silverstone after overtaking Renault's Kubica by going off track.

The penalty, which Ferrari felt was too harsh, ruined Alonso's chances of a good result, the Spaniard finishing down in 14th position.

Although the penalty was given nine laps after Alonso passed Kubica, Whiting said Ferrari was advised to let Kubica through immediately, but that the team decided against it.

"We told Ferrari three times that in my opinion they should give the position back to Kubica," Whiting was quoted as saying by Autosprint magazine.

"And we told them that immediately, right after the overtaking manoeuvre. On the radio, I suggested to them that if they exchange position again, there would be no need for the stewards to intervene.

"But they didn't do that and on the third communication they said that Kubica was by then too far back to let him regain the position.

"It's not true at all that the stewards took too long to decide. For us the facts were clear immediately: Alonso had gained an advantage by cutting the track."

Ferrari team principal Stefano Domenicali said the team did not ask Alonso to let Kubica through because it did not feel the Spaniard has gained an advantage.

"He tried to be aggressive to overtake, and we complained the drivers not to be aggressive and we complain about the lack of overtaking, and so at that stage, we felt as we normally do at that moment that we need to go on the radio with race control to check what is the position," Domenicali said.

"And normally, we take the right time to discuss with race control to make the judgement, and the moment when race control give us the instruction to give back the position to Robert, it was clear that Robert had already lost a lot of time - effectively he had a problem and he came back. That is the situation we analysed.

"You can have a situation where immediately there is a possibility to give back the position to a driver if you feel that there is really an advantage that you gain. On our side we felt that was not the case otherwise we would have done it."

Domenicali said that by the time the stewards told them Alonso should let Kubica by, the Pole was already too far behind.

Kubica retired from the race moments later with mechanical problems.

"As soon as we received the information that in the opinion of the stewards, Fernando should have given back the position to Robert, Robert was already very far behind and Robert was really slowing down because he had a problem."

http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/85258

 

[homeforsummer]

What's that? Ferrari deciding the rules apply the others and not to them? Surely not?

 

[Radracing]

I'm not really sure of what sort of penalty you are suggesting? What else can they do during the race other than give him a drive through? Time added on after the race? A fine?

The penalty was harsh, but only in the sense that the timing was downright unlucky, if I am not mistaken, he was handed the penalty before the safety car was announced? Somehow, I can't see half as many people claiming it was harsh if the safety car had not come out and he only lost one or two places. This detail for me is of vital importance in this discussion, its not that the stewards where intentionally vindictive and cruel towards Alonso, its just the timing of the penalty was unlucky. To compound things for Alonso fans, Hamiltons penalty 2 weeks ago was lucky (in the sense he didn't loose any positions), although funnily enough they both served equally harsh penalties (drive through) according to the book.

The fact that Kubica's car broke, has absolutely no relevance to the stewards as far as I can tell. As Scaff pointed out, an illegal overtake doesn't become legal because a car breaks down later in the race. Again, Alonso was sodding unlucky that Kubica's car did break down as he couldn't return a place to a car that is now parked in the garage, as such the stewards had no choice but to penalise him.

So really, Alonso fans have every right to be upset, things really conspired against him this race with regard to luck, what didn't conspire against him was the stewards, they did everything by the book and to be honest, I don't think it was an unfair punishment. Afterall, Alonso should have given the place back straight away, he should have known this, Ferrari should have known this. Okay, they were asking the stewards if they should and unfortunately for them, Kubica's car died during that conversation. I don't even see why there was a conversation to be had though, Ferrari can argue he was forced off track, but he hadn't completed the overtake, he was no more than side-by-side, the only reason he ended up ahead by the end of that corner, was because he cut the corner, and that, is an advantage gained by going off-track which ever way you cut it.

Not quite sure but it seemed Alonso did make the pass since he was ahead past the apex but Kubica did manage to go side by side before the next apex and sqeeze Alonso off track. I think that was the only reason why they went side by side was because Alonso was trying to make it in on track, not off but was clearly not given room by Kubica. Now my question would be does the passing car have to be completely ahead of the other car or could it just be the nose of the car be ahead of the car being passed for a pass to be considered legal?

 

[Stevisiov]

Alonso paid the price for Ferrari's arrogance. For me, that pretty much concludes the 'harsh penalty' argument.

Not quite sure but it seemed Alonso did make the pass since he was ahead past the apex but Kubica did manage to go side by side before the next apex and sqeeze Alonso off track. I think that was the only reason why they went side by side was because Alonso was trying to make it in on track, not off but was clearly not given room by Kubica. Now my question would be thus the passing car have to be completely ahead of the other car or could it just be the nose of the car be ahead of the car being passed for a pass to be considered legal?

I screen capped the moment before Alonso crossed the white line, he appears to be side-by-side, or perhaps even behind.

For reference, this is where he appeared when he re-joined the track.

It's quite clear from the two screens, Alonso gained a significant advantage in terms of track position over Kubica.

As for your question, the rule states that 'a driver cannot gain advantage by going off-track', with this in mind, if a driver gains distance on another car by cutting the track, it is considered an illegal move. So, its largely irrelevant on what people consider a full and complete overtake in this instance, as it is visibly obvious that Alonso has gained around a full car length in track position by cutting the corner.

 

[ROAD_DOGG33J]

These are just my opinion and I'm sorry if you guys are not agreeing with me...

My point is that according to what you said there are no mature drivers in F1.

http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/85258

I think I'm starting to hate Domenicali. Him and Alonso are possibly the worst partnership in F1. Instead of someone with good strategy that can calm Alonso down, they have Domenicali that pours barrels of gasoline on Alonso's fire.

 

[The Outlaw]

Not quite sure but it seemed Alonso did make the pass since he was ahead past the apex but Kubica did manage to go side by side before the next apex and sqeeze Alonso off track. I think that was the only reason why they went side by side was because Alonso was trying to make it in on track, not off but was clearly not given room by Kubica. Now my question would be does the passing car have to be completely ahead of the other car or could it just be the nose of the car be ahead of the car being passed for a pass to be considered legal?

That's a good question and something I was wondering about as well, since Alonso was a good half car to car length ahead of Kubica before corner entry, and by the time they hit the apex they were pretty much wheel to wheel (or dead even).

Considering how pathetic the FIA rulebook is I wouldn't be all that suprised if they happen to not have a clear rule regarding this either. I'll have to do some research later to find the answer to this.

 

[Radracing]

Alonso paid the price for Ferrari's arrogance. For me, that pretty much concludes the 'harsh penalty' argument.




I screen capped the moment before Alonso crossed the white line, he appears to be side-by-side, or perhaps even behind.

For reference, this is where he appeared when he re-joined the track.

It's quite clear from the two screens, Alonso gained a significant advantage in terms of track position over Kubica.

As for your question, the rule states that 'a driver cannot gain advantage by going off-track', with this in mind, if a driver gains distance on another car by cutting the track, it is considered an illegal move. So, its largely irrelevant on what people consider a full and complete overtake in this instance, as it is visibly obvious that Alonso has gained around a full car length in track position by cutting the corner.

Those two photos are only showing the second corner not the first corner where Alonso made the pass. The two photos again is only showing Kubica forcing Alonso off track by not giving him room. So my question was in refference to the prior corner to you photos. Because if the prior pass was legal technically the second corner (The two photos in this thread) Kubica was making the pass back not Alonso and they were side by side and forced Alonso off track so he couldn't have gained advantage if he is considered ahead of Kubica from the first pass before. That's the million dollar question.

 

[ROAD_DOGG33J]

The first shot shows the conclusion of the attempted pass and Alonso is not ahead.

 

[Seismica]

Those two photos are only showing the second corner not the first corner where Alonso made the pass. The two photos again is only showing Kubica forcing Alonso off track by not giving him room. So my question was in refference to the prior corner to you photos. Because if the prior pass was legal technically the second corner (The two photos in this thread) Kubica was making the pass back not Alonso and they were side by side and forced Alonso off track so he couldn't have gained advantage if he is considered ahead of Kubica from the first pass before. That's the million dollar question.

If it had been Monaco, Alonso would have braked too late and slammed into the wall.

He used the run-off to complete the overtaking move, which is against the rules of the sport, and he incurred a penalty for it.

And to those who say he didn't gain an advantage; after the pass Alonso was in clean air without a slower car holding him up. How is that not an advantage?

 

[Stevisiov]

Those two photos are only showing the second corner not the first corner where Alonso made the pass. The two photos again is only showing Kubica forcing Alonso off track by not giving him room. So my question was in refference to the prior corner to you photos. Because if the prior pass was legal technically the second corner (The two photos in this thread) Kubica was making the pass back not Alonso and they were side by side and forced Alonso off track so he couldn't have gained advantage if he is considered ahead of Kubica from the first pass before. That's the million dollar question.

The first corner is irrelevant, who was a ahead of who is also irrelevant. The rule specifically looks for an advantage gain from going off-track. The advantage on Kubica is very clear, a whole car length was gained from the point he left to the track to the point he re-emerged.

The reason people talk about overtakes is because if you overtake someone by going off-track, you have gained an advantage in track position (even if you lost time overall).

The fact that Kubica squeezed him is also irrelevant as far as the stewards are concerned. What is also worth mentioning, if Kubica was in a position to squeeze Alonso off the road, Alonso had not fully over taken him, as such, Alonso only successfully completed the overtake after going off-track.

With the pictorial evidence above, I am amazed that you can interpret things any differently.

[edit]

It is also considered gaining an advantage if you fail to loose a place by cutting a corner. With this in mind, your - 'he couldn't have gained advantage if he is considered ahead of Kubica from the first pass before' - argument falls on its face.

 

[Radracing]

Well to me the prior corner was where the complete pass occured. The following corner where they went side by side is just another moved by two drivers. A similar incident that calls to mind for me is the Alex Zanardi pass which was considered legal to the rules but then again it's a different series so I'll leave it to F1. I was just making a comment not arguing the penalty and asking a question to clarify.

If it had been Monaco, Alonso would have braked too late and slammed into the wall.

He used the run-off to complete the overtaking move, which is against the rules of the sport, and he incurred a penalty for it.

And to those who say he didn't gain an advantage; after the pass Alonso was in clean air without a slower car holding him up. How is that not an advantage?

After the pass??? meaning he did pass Kubica now from that point and before. Was it a legal pass from there? From the second point where they went side by side would Kubica be making the pass back or not? is the next question?

Also if it was Monaco and Kubica tried to pass Alonso back they would be both taken out. With that in mind would Kubica just given in and just let Alonso pass. But then again this is not Monaco but Silverstone so it wouldn't apply. So I would leave the Monaco comparison out.

The first shot shows the conclusion of the attempted pass and Alonso is not ahead.

The first shows Kubica trying to get the position back after the pass.

 

[ROAD_DOGG33J]

What is also worth mentioning, if Kubica was in a position to squeeze Alonso off the road, Alonso had not fully over taken him, as such, Alonso only successfully completed the overtake after going off-track.

That's not true. If Alonso's wing was ahead of Kubica's, Kubica still could have driven him off the track.

Well to me the prior corner was where the complete pass occured.

A pass doesn't end at the apex. It ends when the driver making the pass is in front legally.

 

[Ardius]

A pass is complete when one driver has fully passed his entire car in front of the other. As long as the other driver is alongside, the pass isn't complete and its both driver's responsibility to ensure there isn't contact.
It alters from situation to situation, the responsibility switches depending on the corner(s), speeds, etc.

Kubica, as the driver in front initially and with the inside line, is the one who controls the corner and effecitvely makes Alonso the one to choose the line afterwards. As long as there is no "chopping", i.e. no sudden moves that Alonso can't react to, Kubica is well within his right to pressure Alonso into slowing down or otherwise going off the circuit.

I wish someone would write a book which covers every corner possible to fully explain this to everyone, its hard to really describe what is fair and what is not as the circumstances always change it.

 

[Stevisiov]

That's not true. If Alonso's wing was ahead of Kubica's, Kubica still could have driven him off the track.
.

----

The fact that Kubica squeezed him is also irrelevant as far as the stewards are concerned. What is also worth mentioning, if Kubica was in a position to squeeze Alonso off the road, Alonso had not fully over taken him, as such, Alonso only successfully completed the overtake after going off-track.
.

I should have highlighted the 'fully' part of my post.

 

[Seismica]

Well to me the prior corner was where the complete pass occured. The following corner where they went side by side is just another moved by two drivers. A similar incident that calls to mind for me is the Alex Zanardi pass which was considered legal to the rules but then again it's a different series so I'll leave it to F1. I was just making a comment not arguing the penalty and asking a question to clarify.

*video*

Alonso never completed the pass, he was alongside Kubica on the outside. That video you posted is completely different, he was fully ahead at the apex at the corner entry so the pass was complete. Alonso was not completely ahead and he was on the outside, Kubica had the line. The pass was made between the point Alonso moved off the track onto the run-off and the point when he re-entered the race track. That makes it an illegal move and an advantage gained from taking a shortcut.

After the pass??? meaning he did pass Kubica now from that point and before. Was it a legal pass from there? From the second point where they went side by side would Kubica be making the pass back or not? is the next question?

It was not a legal pass full stop. The pass was not completed until after Alonso went into the run-off area.

 

[Radracing]

A pass is complete when one driver has fully passed his entire car in front of the other. As long as the other driver is alongside, the pass isn't complete and its both driver's responsibility to ensure there isn't contact.
It alters from situation to situation, the responsibility switches depending on the corner(s), speeds, etc.

Kubica, as the driver in front initially and with the inside line, is the one who controls the corner and effecitvely makes Alonso the one to choose the line afterwards. As long as there is no "chopping", i.e. no sudden moves that Alonso can't react to, Kubica is well within his right to pressure Alonso into slowing down or otherwise going off the circuit.

I wish someone would write a book which covers every corner possible to fully explain this to everyone, its hard to really describe what is fair and what is not as the circumstances always change it.

Actually that clarifies things a bit, now all we need is Kubicas onboard camera to see if Alonsos car totally passed Kubicas on the first corner. Then we can see if their is really an argument if it was a complete pass or not. At least on the first corner of the incident.

 

[Ardius]

Actually that clarifies things a bit, now all we need is Kubicas onboard camera to see if Alonsos car totally passed Kubicas on the first corner. Then we can see if their is really an argument if it was a complete pass or not. At least on the first corner of the incident.

Erm, I can tell you without an onboard that Alonso isn't. Can't you tell? If Alonso was fully ahead before the corner, he wouldn't have had to give so much room to Kubica.
And, as I also said, circumstances change things a bit. If a car overtook going into a braking zone, obviously the overtaken driver is going to still be right there in the corner, even if momentarily the overtaking driver is ahead.

 

[Radracing]

Erm, I can tell you without an onboard that Alonso isn't. Can't you tell?

No, most of the you tube videos start at the apex of the first corner so I can't tell. I need to see it way before mybe at the aproach of the first corner. I think from what I remember of the replays from Speed Channel I could only see Alonsos onboard so I can't tell how much he did pass Kubica. Did he pass him completely before the apex and then Kubica just breaked deeper to be side by side again at the apex or did Alonso just pass him half a car length?

 

[Ardius]

No, most of the you tube videos start at the apex of the first corner so I can't tell. I need to see it way before mybe at the aproach of the first corner. I think from what I remember of the replays from Speed Channel I could only see Alonsos onboard so I can't tell how much he did pass Kubica. Did he pass him completely before the apex and then Kubica just breaked less to be side by side again at the apex or did he just pass him half a car length?

For them to be side by side in the corner, its not possible that Alonso was fully in front, and like I say even if he was momentarily in the braking zone, this doesn't mean Kubica has to let him though. The overlap would not have been big enough for Alonso to take the corner properly without hitting Kubica.

 

[Radracing]

For them to be side by side in the corner, its not possible that Alonso was fully in front, and like I say even if he was momentarily in the braking zone, this doesn't mean Kubica has to let him though. The overlap would not have been big enough for Alonso to take the corner properly without hitting Kubica.

Yes, but even for that breif moment in the braking zone that Alonso was completely ahead that would make him the lead car and Kubica the passing car for the next corner.

 

[Ardius]

Technically yes, but you cannot in mere split seconds decide one driver has the line like that. Remember that if Alonso did get ahead for a brief moment, it was just that a brief moment. Not nearly enough time to make his intentions clear for the corner and make a move on Kubica. He had to continue his outside line and give Kubica the room because Kubica was already on a trajectory on the inside.
If Alonso had moved on Kubica and tried to take the line for the 2nd part of the chicane he would have been the party at fault, not Kubica. This is because Kubica had already committed to the inside line and was already carrying the speed which would cause him to go the best line around the chicane. It was Alonso's choice to keep on the outside when the door was inevitably shut.
Also, while Alonso may have been ahead into the 1st part of the chicane, he was out of position for the 2nd part. This is what gives Kubica the right to go where he likes.

 

[ROAD_DOGG33J]

I should have highlighted the 'fully' part of my post.

Uhuh...but Alonso didn't even "partially" overtake him, since he was cut off.