Also it shows a fair amount of ignorance with regard to racecraft (and quite ironic considering you said it shows Rosberg's lack of racecraft) to suggest the cut back would have been the better choice. The track was still damp, therefore the grippiest part of the circuit was the outside line, making it the best chance for him to stay ahead, and if he had cut to the inside he would of had much less grip and very little traction, especially where it's a tighter line.
I'm repeating myself now...but you just clearly explained exactly why Lewis would make the move he did, and why Nico should have anticipated that Lewis would do what he did, and taken action accordingly. Nico put himself exactly where Lewis wanted him. That to me shows a lack of racecraft.
In order to make a move on the outside work, Nico should have brsked later and gone out way to the right, rotated the car quickly, and then straight line launched out of the corner. If you watch the replay, Kvyat did exactly that...and it got him into 3rd.
Like I said before, I'm coming at this in hindsight from my armchair, so it's easy to play the shoulda woulda coulda game. That said, playing the game, I think Nico should have tried the cutback, or gone deeper and farther right before turning, as opposed to what he did, which is place his car where it gave Lewis a chance to block him.
And you can get off your high horse with all that calling me ignorant BS.
It's also quite ignorant to say that a driver has the "racing line" simply because they're on the inside. It's not automatically the better line, especially in the wet, and it most definitely does not entitle you to use the entire circuit regardless of whos alongside you.
In that particular corner, at the angles at which they approached, Lewis had the racing the line and control of the corner. There is no rule which says a driver who controls the corner must yield to a driver who is not on the line.
Also, weather conditions in no way shape or form change the racing line. The racing line is the racing line. If a driver decides to venture off the line to search for grip, it is their choice. That's the whole trade-off in the wet. You sacrifice the line for grip...but the line itself does not move.
And if they updated the rules so that drivers had to give each other enough room to stay on track, it would make the racing cleaner and more exciting as it would open more possibilities. I'm glad to say that most of the time the drivers do give each other space, which is why we saw some really great overtakes around the outside of corners this race, it's just disappointing when the decide to lean on these technically legal, but dirty tactics to get ahead.
To me this sums up the awkwardness of your arguement.
You admit that the move was legal within today's rule set. I understand that you may not like the rules, and that you may want to see them changed, but that doesn't have any impact on the "legality" of the move. And it certainly doesn't give you the right to call me ignorant for sharing my opinion on what took place.
There is already so much precedent within F1 alone that should make this move a complete non issue. Check Schumacher vs Montoya at Imola in 05 or 06. Montoya was much farther along side and still got run off the road. JPM called Schumacher "blind or stupid" afterwards, but then immediatly shrugged it off, saying, "But hey, that's racing."
Here's a fun fact comparing the two situations. Both of the drivers who were run out wide (Nico and JPM) haven't won any world championships. Both of the guys who did the running out (Lewis and Michael) are multiple time WDC.
In the world we live in, at the top level of any form of competition (or business for that matter), it is human nature, and in the case of pro athletes, 100% expected that the athlete will do anything and everything, tip-toeing through the rulebook, to win. In any sport, all of the greatest champions excel at this. It's basically where the saying "nice guys never finish first" comes from.
To me it seems like you want all the drivers to approach overtaking from a sort of "moral high ground" position...and that's just not a reality in top level competion, of any kind. As long as it's within the rules, drivers will, and should, do whatever is necessary to secure the postion. If you don't like it, the sewing circle is that-a-way --->
Overtaking in F1 is ruthless. It always has been, and I hope it stays that way.
I won't get into all the nonsense about "gentleman racing", as I have no idea what series you're talking about that uses such a vague concept to dictate legal racing. At the end of the day, race series have rules, and the drivers race to the limit of the rules, so why you would think anyone would decide whether a move was legal based on anything other than the rules I have no idea.
Nonsense
Please. You're on a motorsport form and your going to act like you don't know the difference between competative and non-competative (ie gentleman's racing) is. Calling me ignorant
Actually I think you're just misunderstanding the point I was getting at. Lewis and Nico did race to the limit of the rules. I was implying that
some people on this forum, in my opinion, seem to lean more towards thinking that F1 overtaking is more in line with gentleman's rules when in fact it is not. I was not trying to say that Lewis and Nico were racing to some gentleman's rules outside of F1's rulebook.
![[Nor]MclarenF1](/forum/data/avatars/m/169/169289.jpg?1413287138){kind=avatar}
), I think the BBC handle that better overall though. Remember that Sky's team consist of Ted "Are You Gonna Go a-Way" Kravitz, Brundle (former-president-of-BRDC), Pinkney (landed gentry), Herbert (plucky Brit underdog) and the only-son-of-a-champion-to-be-champion Damon Hill. Most of those people have offices at Silverstone so their bias to the track and the home country are inevitable.
