2018 Pirelli Grand Prix de FranceFormula 1 

In fact looking at the video again I'm not sure Vettel was going to even make the corner had Bottas not been there.
If Bottas wasnt there he wouldn't be behind Hamilton, he would be where Bottas would be.

Vettel was boxed into a situation where he would have no downforce for the corner he has to mind behind him as well so he knows he simply cant just lift early and have the same happen to him, it's a sort of victim of circumstance. Braking lines are extremely critical at this level and it's not that simple.

You can see how dangerious it can be if you see the Webber Caterham crash at Valencia.
 
Last edited:
If Bottas wasnt there he wouldn't be behind Hamilton, he would be where Bottas would be.

Vettel was boxed into a situation where he would have no downforce for the corner he has to mind behind him as well so he knows he simply cant just lift early and have the same happen to him, it's a sort of victim of circumstance. Braking lines are extremely critical at this level and it's not that simple.

You can see how dangerious it can be if you see the Webber Caterham crash at Valencia.
It is simple. Vettel got is so badly wrong that it looked like he wouldn't even have made the corner if he hadn't crashed into Bottas. That's not just a small mistake, or being a victim of circumstance. It's getting it badly wrong. A less experienced driver would be getting huge amounts of grief for it and there's no reason a very experienced driver like Vettel shouldn't get as much grief.
 
In fact looking at the video again I'm not sure Vettel was going to even make the corner had Bottas not been there.

That's how it looks to me too.

I get that Vettel was boxed in, and he braked early. Not early enough it seems — though that would've caused more of an issue behind him. Bottas gave him room though. It was the very first corner; considering the sheer pace Vettel showed when he climbed back up the ranks after the pace car, he probably should've reigned things in at T1 IMO.

I felt bad for Ocon. Grosjean's bizarre swipe at the start damaged his car once, and then Gasly's lunge sealed the deal. I see both Gasly and Ocon received reprimands for that one, which strikes me as a little odd.
 
It is simple. Vettel got is so badly wrong that it looked like he wouldn't even have made the corner if he hadn't crashed into Bottas. That's not just a small mistake, or being a victim of circumstance. It's getting it badly wrong. A less experienced driver would be getting huge amounts of grief for it and there's no reason a very experienced driver like Vettel shouldn't get as much grief.

To be more specific: If it was Max the Internetz would explode. Greetz from Dutch Calimero :dopey::D
 
That's how it looks to me too.

I get that Vettel was boxed in, and he braked early. Not early enough it seems — though that would've caused more of an issue behind him. Bottas gave him room though. It was the very first corner; considering the sheer pace Vettel showed when he climbed back up the ranks after the pace car, he probably should've reigned things in at T1 IMO.

I felt bad for Ocon. Grosjean's bizarre swipe at the start damaged his car once, and then Gasly's lunge sealed the deal. I see both Gasly and Ocon received reprimands for that one, which strikes me as a little odd.
I think it was because how far he moved over, he perhaps should have seen Gasley? But I’m not sure that’s even a place you can over take at...

I wonder if the drivers where a bit more gun-hoe(?) on lap 1 because of how, in theory it was hard to overtake?
 
I cant blame Vettel for that crash any more then a racing incident, he was boxed in and even broke before Bottas but the loss of downforce would of doomed him into the corner, like with Ricciardo at Baku.

Sure he finished ahead of Bottas but it wasn't as bad as what happened after Verstappens move in China.
Vettel drove himself into that box. He should know better. Screwed up first corner rookie Verstappenesque mistake.
 
Said it before, I’ll say it again...Paul Ricard would be a decent circuit without the chicane, and with some grass and gravel.

I know the chicane “created overtaking”, but it ruins the main character of the circuit - the Mistral Straight into Signe corner. It would be awesome to see these cars go into that corner at full beans with the drs open. Hopefully they change this for next year.

It was really disappointing to see how willingly many driver’s bailed out of situations and just cut across the runoff. Max in T1 was the worst. If that was grass and gravel, he wouldn’t have come out of that mess in P2.

After the first few laps, the only driver I cared to follow was Leclerc. Glad he hung on for another point.
 
Said it before, I’ll say it again...Paul Ricard would be a decent circuit without the chicane, and with some grass and gravel.

I know the chicane “created overtaking”, but it ruins the main character of the circuit - the Mistral Straight into Signe corner. It would be awesome to see these cars go into that corner at full beans with the drs open. Hopefully they change this for next year.

It was really disappointing to see how willingly many driver’s bailed out of situations and just cut across the runoff. Max in T1 was the worst. If that was grass and gravel, he wouldn’t have come out of that mess in P2.

After the first few laps, the only driver I cared to follow was Leclerc. Glad he hung on for another point.
Martin Brundle made a good point about gravel at PR. Back in the day when they had gravel traps, due to the heat and the general weather the gravel traps would just bake solid, so you’d just fly over them making the track far more dangerous
 
Said it before, I’ll say it again...Paul Ricard would be a decent circuit without the chicane, and with some grass and gravel.
Nooo! I just bought shares in blue paint. In all seriousness though, a bit less concrete (and fit-inducing paintwork) might work, but on the other hand it must be one of the most variable circuits on the calendar - they could hold a GP there next week and use a completely different route, though the man with the paintbrush would have his work cut out for him.

I was pleasantly surprised by the circuit - a decent track for passing, even though the race itself was another snoozefest - the highlight of the race for me was Japan's equaliser against Senegal.
 
Grass, yes. Gravel, no. Gravel rolls cars.
Grass doesn't arrest momentum like gravel or sand. Which occasionally rolls cars. Not there is anything wrong with rolling the car most of the time. It sheds energy. It's the stopping suddenly that is to be avoided.
 
Grass doesn't arrest momentum like gravel or sand. Which occasionally rolls cars. Not there is anything wrong with rolling the car most of the time. It sheds energy. It's the stopping suddenly that is to be avoided.

However, a car rolling in gravel onto its pointy-top-bits can dig in to the (inverted) level of the drivers head. If you look at Alonso's accident in Melbourne last year it was greatly exacerbated by the car being airborne (skipping over the gravel and therefore far less restricted) and the final crash not being perpendicular to the car's designed crash axes.
 
However, a car rolling in gravel onto its pointy-top-bits can dig in to the (inverted) level of the drivers head. If you look at Alonso's accident in Melbourne last year it was greatly exacerbated by the car being airborne (skipping over the gravel and therefore far less restricted) and the final crash not being perpendicular to the car's designed crash axes.
You don’t think you could make the argument that if there was gravel, Ericsson wouldn’t have made the fence when he crashed - gravel could have prevented a fire.

I think we both know neither solution is perfect....but c’mon, there’s no way you enjoyed seeing all those cars cut across the tarmac in T1, and again at T3/4/5. The drivers were bailing out to the runoff if they saw an ant on the track, it was pretty lame.

Martin Brundle made a good point about gravel at PR. Back in the day when they had gravel traps, due to the heat and the general weather the gravel traps would just bake solid, so you’d just fly over them making the track far more dangerous
I’m sure some geological expert could find a strain of gravel that would work better in those conditions. If people can get golf courses to grow in Arizona, I’m sure they can figure out how to make gravel a little softer in southern France.
 
I’m sure some geological expert could find a strain of gravel that would work better in those conditions. If people can get golf courses to grow in Arizona, I’m sure they can figure out how to make gravel a little softer in southern France.

Why would they do that? Tarmac is generally a far safer way to slow the cars down, especially with there super-duper go-slower stripes!
It also means more cars are able to continue, the race would have been far duller (and maybe the championship too) if both Vettel and Bottas had just been ditched in a gravel trap after turn one...
 
Why would they do that? Tarmac is generally a far safer way to slow the cars down, especially with there super-duper go-slower stripes!
It also means more cars are able to continue, the race would have been far duller (and maybe the championship too) if both Vettel and Bottas had just been ditched in a gravel trap after turn one...
The super duper grippy tarmac doesn’t do jack squat, it’s a hoax. Grosjean and Ericsson both made the Fence, there was a heavy accident there when TCR Euro was there where a car shot across the runoff straight to the Fence.

The pavement is there because it’s a test track, and testers want to be able to make mistakes with zero punishment.

For a race track, and furthermore one hosting F1 with the “best drivers in the world”, it’s a terrible idea. The made a laughing stock of the white painted lines on lap 1, with close to 10 drivers cutting significant potions of the track to “avoid debris”.

Damn it man....HIT THE DEBRIS!! Or slow down enough to drive around it. I think it’s pathetic that in an online race, max would never have been allowed to cut the circuit like that, the AI policing track limits would never allow it. Yet in the real, the “best drivers in the world” are allowed to do it.

A little bit of pavement where Vettel and Bottas ended up would be ok, but at least break it up so that cars can’t just go through at high speed. Even a wall of poly stirene blocks that the drivers had to drive around would have been better than nothing. Max didn’t even lift :lol:

Watch a replay of the start, and look how many cars are off the road going into T5.

I see a lot of people complain a lot of predictable running order in F1.....but when drivers make significant errors which would/should cause a major shuffle of the running order, many times, the paved runnoff makes the mistake negligible - or drivers who would have otherwise been caught behind someone else’s mess (and therefor be vulnerable to being overtaken) just cut across the runoff with barely a lift, and the running order doesn’t really change much at all.

I get the upsides of the paved runoff, but I just don’t think anyone in the sport takes it seriously. It’s a joke. To me, if you’re going to have paved runoff, fine, but track limits need to be policed in a way that maintains the “spirit of a gravel trap”. That is to say, if you have to put all 4 wheels into the paved runoff, for ANY reason, then it’s an automatic drive through penalty, maybe even a stop and go. People would say it’s unrealistically harsh, but in my view, the alternative is being stuck in a gravel trap, being caught in someone else’s accident, being in the wall, or at the very least having your radiator ducts full of grass and gravel. So, the paved runoff allows the race to keep running if there’s a spin, keeps cars in the race, but there is still serious consequences for making a mistake, and the desire to “bail out” of any situation and cut across the runoff is eliminated.
 
The super duper grippy tarmac doesn’t do jack squat, it’s a hoax.
Bold claim, if you want to make statements like this you should back them up with data. While I agree with Ericsson's crash it didn't prevent him from having a decent impact, I'm not sure that they literally did nothing.

The super duper grippy tarmac doesn’t do jack squat, it’s a hoax. Grosjean and Ericsson both made the Fence, there was a heavy accident there when TCR Euro was there where a car shot across the runoff straight to the Fence.

The pavement is there because it’s a test track, and testers want to be able to make mistakes with zero punishment.

For a race track, and furthermore one hosting F1 with the “best drivers in the world”, it’s a terrible idea. The made a laughing stock of the white painted lines on lap 1, with close to 10 drivers cutting significant potions of the track to “avoid debris”.

Damn it man....HIT THE DEBRIS!! Or slow down enough to drive around it. I think it’s pathetic that in an online race, max would never have been allowed to cut the circuit like that, the AI policing track limits would never allow it. Yet in the real, the “best drivers in the world” are allowed to do it.

A little bit of pavement where Vettel and Bottas ended up would be ok, but at least break it up so that cars can’t just go through at high speed. Even a wall of poly stirene blocks that the drivers had to drive around would have been better than nothing. Max didn’t even lift :lol:

Watch a replay of the start, and look how many cars are off the road going into T5.

I see a lot of people complain a lot of predictable running order in F1.....but when drivers make significant errors which would/should cause a major shuffle of the running order, many times, the paved runnoff makes the mistake negligible - or drivers who would have otherwise been caught behind someone else’s mess (and therefor be vulnerable to being overtaken) just cut across the runoff with barely a lift, and the running order doesn’t really change much at all.

I get the upsides of the paved runoff, but I just don’t think anyone in the sport takes it seriously. It’s a joke. To me, if you’re going to have paved runoff, fine, but track limits need to be policed in a way that maintains the “spirit of a gravel trap”. That is to say, if you have to put all 4 wheels into the paved runoff, for ANY reason, then it’s an automatic drive through penalty, maybe even a stop and go. People would say it’s unrealistically harsh, but in my view, the alternative is being stuck in a gravel trap, being caught in someone else’s accident, being in the wall, or at the very least having your radiator ducts full of grass and gravel. So, the paved runoff allows the race to keep running if there’s a spin, keeps cars in the race, but there is still serious consequences for making a mistake, and the desire to “bail out” of any situation and cut across the runoff is eliminated.

So your issue is that drivers cut the track to avoid collisions/debris?
I don't like Paul much at all, personally, but even if they changed the run-off areas... it wouldn't have changed anything.
Look at turn 1, off the top of my head, comparable turn 1 corners would be; Hockenheim and Singapore.. both of which feature pretty large tarmac run off areas. Then think about the rest of the track, it's mostly slow chicanes/continuous corners or high speed ones, neither of which would have made much of a difference to the out come because of where the gravel would have to be (I'm thinking tracks like Silverstone).

I mean, look at Mexico, turn one, covered in grass, both Lewis and Max cut that bad boy with minimum penalties (in terms of time it took)... so I'm not sure really that they can change much.
 
Bold claim, if you want to make statements like this you should back them up with data. While I agree with Ericsson's crash it didn't prevent him from having a decent impact, I'm not sure that they literally did nothing.



So your issue is that drivers cut the track to avoid collisions/debris?
I don't like Paul much at all, personally, but even if they changed the run-off areas... it wouldn't have changed anything.
Look at turn 1, off the top of my head, comparable turn 1 corners would be; Hockenheim and Singapore.. both of which feature pretty large tarmac run off areas. Then think about the rest of the track, it's mostly slow chicanes/continuous corners or high speed ones, neither of which would have made much of a difference to the out come because of where the gravel would have to be (I'm thinking tracks like Silverstone).

I mean, look at Mexico, turn one, covered in grass, both Lewis and Max cut that bad boy with minimum penalties (in terms of time it took)... so I'm not sure really that they can change much.
I don’t need data. I watched 2 cars hit the wall this weekend, one very heavily on a different weekend. You realize the tarmac only slows the cars down when they slide across it...when they roll across it, it doesn’t magically apply he brakes. Furthermore, Davidson said that when the circuit is wet, the grippy tarmac doesn’t do anything at all.

As for track limits in general, grass, gravel, tarmac, it doesn’t really matter. What matters is the whites lines, and right now they’re a joke. They’re barely a suggestion at this point. It’s like is soccer, the line is out, when you cross it fully, you’re out of bounds. There’s no debating “oh I was avoiding a collision so I dribbled out of bounds”. Nope. Out is out. For me, it should be the same in F1. Supposed to be the pinnacle, so the drivers should be held to the absolute highest standards, I don’t want to see drivers getting hurt, so I get why tracks have huge runoff instead of walls right there, but the white line on the edge of the track needs to be treated as if it were a wall; and therefor fully crossing the white line needs to be punished severely.

I’m open to ideas on what the punishment should be, I just think a drive through is the easiest to administer in a way that fans can see it. I’m not a fan of timed penalties added after the race (of course, if an incident happens on the final lap, a time penalty is probably the only solution).

I just think F1 really needs to step up its enforcement of track limits with very hard and fast rules.
 
I don’t need data. I watched 2 cars hit the wall this weekend, one very heavily on a different weekend. You realize the tarmac only slows the cars down when they slide across it...when they roll across it, it doesn’t magically apply he brakes. Furthermore, Davidson said that when the circuit is wet, the grippy tarmac doesn’t do anything at all.

As for track limits in general, grass, gravel, tarmac, it doesn’t really matter. What matters is the whites lines, and right now they’re a joke. They’re barely a suggestion at this point. It’s like is soccer, the line is out, when you cross it fully, you’re out of bounds. There’s no debating “oh I was avoiding a collision so I dribbled out of bounds”. Nope. Out is out. For me, it should be the same in F1. Supposed to be the pinnacle, so the drivers should be held to the absolute highest standards, I don’t want to see drivers getting hurt, so I get why tracks have huge runoff instead of walls right there, but the white line on the edge of the track needs to be treated as if it were a wall; and therefor fully crossing the white line needs to be punished severely.

I’m open to ideas on what the punishment should be, I just think a drive through is the easiest to administer in a way that fans can see it. I’m not a fan of timed penalties added after the race (of course, if an incident happens on the final lap, a time penalty is probably the only solution).

I just think F1 really needs to step up its enforcement of track limits with very hard and fast rules.
Your comments about track limits are fine and all, but not sure how they relate to Paul... I agree with you but track limits are better enforced than most GT racing. Le Mans being a good example of a very high level race with pretty generous limits.

And if you don’t need data why did you feel the need to quote a driver?
Personally I don’t want cars flipping around (which is what gravel can do) because it can create a far more dangerous impact (that’s harder to control and thus make safe). The tarmac runoffs allow the cars space to slowly decelerate before hitting the barriers and if they do hit the barriers do so while being on the ground and under as much control as possible.
 
Has anyone considered the idea of removing the chicane, but also removing the DRS zone on the back Straight? It would be interesting to see if, on a Straight that long, these cars could slipstream past one another without the aid of DRS.

I’m all for the removal of the chicane, but I wonder if the drs would be over powered.
 
Back