A questionable move in our league race tonights. Opinions wanted.

  • Thread starter Guffaluff
  • 118 comments
  • 4,304 views

Which car is at fault here?

  • Megane is at fault

    Votes: 59 56.2%
  • Audi is at fault

    Votes: 16 15.2%
  • Both equal, racing incident

    Votes: 30 28.6%

  • Total voters
    105
The only reason he didn’t run the other car off the road was because the Renault driver got out of his way! When you’re side by side, you’re equal. If the Audi driver has the right to squeeze his opponent then the Renault driver has the same right. So then your rules allow for cars to just barge each other?

The only reason why he didn’t run the Renault off the road was because he left sufficient space to the left.

When the cars are side by side they need to give each other sufficient racing room, approximately 3/4 of a car’s width (given that there is some space outside of the track edge, i.e. the white line). They do not need to share the road equally.

Both drivers have a responsibility to avoid contact, but side to side contact that is not the result of sudden direction changes is typically considered to be just a racing incident and are not penalised.

In this case there are no sudden direction changes and there is plenty of space left for the Renault.
 
Actually it's because there was still half a car width to the left and the Audi braked for the corner in the right place. It also looks like he straightened the wheel up, maintaining that space to the left.

The Audi driver started the manouevre five seconds before the Megane got even close to occupying any part of the space alongside him. The Megane chose to go into the gap that was narrowing to the left. You can literally see him decide, as the cars cross the line to start the next lap, which side to go...

Find where I advocate car-to-car contact and then come back to me with your "So...?" reinterpretation of it. This may help:

I'll also add that by my "rules" (which aren't rules; they're how I drive. GT Sport doesn't really have rules) you shouldn't move your car to where another car already is or is inevitably going to be - which the Audi doesn't do either.
The Renault was inevitably going to be there too, that's the entire point. Once there's overlap, the Renault would've been 100% justified in not continuing left and the ensuing collision would be the fault of the Audi.
 
The Megane actually still had space to move over when the contact was made. No force off track. The Megane got spooked and turned into the TT.

The TT set up his line the second he passed the kerb at the final turn. The Megane faile to read this correctly, albeit difficult to see that the TT would be able to move over so much given the cars angle was very small.

I say the Megane got spooked and turned in even though he had space left. I wouldn’t penalise. Just a racing Incident

Instead he refuses to choose a line, slowly serving across damn near the entire track and pushes the Megane to the point where there's basically contact.

That isn't racing guys, it's just not, that's blocking and will just lead to contact even if they manage to sort out that corner.

He set his driving line up as soon as he left the final turn, he made his intentions clear albeit difficult to read, very early on. That’s on the Megane driver to do his best to read.

It’s not blocking in any instance. He didn’t make any adjustments in any way and the Megane just couldnt read it. It was obvious what was happening halfway down the straight and the Megane just kept the nose in. The Megane had room on the left to continue the same line but rather than risk moving over any more he turned into the Audi.

In any discipline, would the Audi be penalised for keeping his line? I highly doubt it. You see this happen all the time. Especially in f1.
 
Last edited:
Reviewing that film i still cant tell what the h to the l either of the drivers were thinking. Braking earlier megane would have taken the lead - therefore were there no mistake by the megane audi would have already lost the place at that point so what is he doing staying at the left side when he could have moved to more favorable line and fly past the megane after the curve?

Theres weird things on both ends. No penalty thats true as audi didnt force megane out, but i really wouldnt give too much credit to either driver..:lol:
 
Hard to be definitive without knowing the league's specific rules. Even if I did, based on what I'm seeing here, different people have different interpretations. Therefore, this is more personal opinion intertwined with logic.

Technically, the Audi driver is making his change in line and they did give the other driver space. That said, it was quite telegraphed and putting himself in that position was making contact at the corner highly probable since the Megane would need to take a really sharp angle. Not the best defending there.

As with the Megane, I feel like the maneuvering made them lose focus just enough to cause a self-inflicted mistake. Audi provided not a lot of space but they weren't run into the tires or the grass. And let's be honest. What the are the odds of the complaint being made had the Megane driver braked earlier and completed the overtake?

Both drivers can take away lessons from this. Honestly, a rather tame scenario compared to the usual fare of incidents under investigation.
 
After a second look I've only just realized that there's two entirely separate incidents here.
First incident is 100% illegal by the Audi. He entered the straight and committed to the defensive diagonal length of the straight line (that I personally consider perfectly legal), then he made a district change of line to cover the outside by going right (still legal), then he changes line a second time to return to the original defensive line.
Blocking, yet so small and subtle that most people here are only focused on the drifting bit that followed.

Driving diagonally from the start to the end in an almost perfectly straight line? Well that's the "racing line" he chose, it's what they call a defensive line.
If he's in front then he can choose whatever line he likes. As long as it's a straight line then it can go through a McDonald's drive through for all I care, just so long as he's not one of those pricks who asks them to cook him a "fresh" burger while 10 other people are lined up behind him.

I don't get those of us that are claiming that a racing line must be either left or right and parallel to the tracks centre line or edge, or must be an optimal line for top speed into and out of corners?



Thanks all!
Thank you for generating a great thread that's resulted in some thought provoking discussion for me to ponder :)
I would have really liked to see the Audi telemetry for the steering and even more of his race to judge him by.
Too long, didn't read? I think the Audi drift across the straight was brilliant textbook defensive driving and the Megane stuffed up, however the Megane would have obviously been getting frustrated and agitated into making a poor choice by the Audis blocking (dirty) driving if it had been going on for the whole race.
The first part was definitely dirty by the Audi who is clearly very accomplished at stretching the rules, I'd suggest a limp slap on the wrist followed by an immediate cessation of chocolate rations for 1 week.
 
If the Megane had not attempted to go up in the inside in such a fashion that inevitably meant he would not have made the corner anyway there may be a case to answer and it rather makes the actions of the Audi academic in my view. The Audi is clearly blocking albeit quite covertly but I don't feel he forces the Megane off, the Megane does that all on his own, if he'd held his nerve and not tried to bluster through he may have achieved a better outcome.
 
The Renault was inevitably going to be there too, that's the entire point.
Nope. You misunderstand the concept.

A car will inevitably occupy a space if the driver of that car has no way of preventing it. An example would be a car divebombing a turn with all the wheels locked up - he has no way of preventing it taking a path which is a straight line, because no matter what input he gives, the car will continue straight forward. If a driver ahead of him takes his racing line into the corner, across this path, there will be a collision. Sure, the guy divebombing is to blame for the crash, but the driver ahead could have ensured that the crash didn't happen by not making the turn until the danger has passed. In these incidents there's usually a lot of pontificating from that driver about "right" to the corner, and to pick his line as the lead car, and all sorts of other stuff that GT Sport doesn't care about, but the fact is that being in the right is of no relevance when you're 30 yards off the track in gravel and nosed into a barrier. Your aim should be to finish the race - after all, to finish first, first you must finish - not to be in the right when there's a crash.

All that's even close to relevant here is the idea that all cars should have enough room on the track to actually exist without having that room removed by another car. Cars can lean on each other right up to the track limits so long as they don't touch (that would be having the room removed by another car) or run out of track limits. Here the Megane still has half a car width to his left, so he's still got room to actually exist - because he does. Had the Audi put the Megane into the pit wall, then we can start talking about running a car out of road. Had the Megane tried to push the Audi back to the right, then we can start talking about trying to occupy a space another car is already in. This "incident" is more akin to something we see every day at every corner, with one car on the extreme side of the straight (because racing line) and another right alongside it trying to making the pass on the brakes - the difference is that this is on the left for a left-hand bend and not on the right.


And even that's not relevant because unless GT Sport cares about it in a public lobby, or the race/lobby owner cares about it in a private one, there's no rules. And the race/lobby owner has already stated that there's no further action, so...
 
...manners dictate that he only has 1 move either left or right to choose his line into the next turn, this should be done early & slowly enough to give other drivers following behind a fair chance to react, lest there be an otherwise avoidable incident."

I interpret that as completing your defensive move early. Drifting across the straight is ill mannered.


Spot on mate. I take solace in the fact that at least some people can understand what's clearly written there.


👍
 
VBR
Spot on mate. I take solace in the fact that at least some people can understand what's clearly written there.
If it requires the "correct" interpretation, it's not clearly written...
 
6BK
something that the entire GTPlanet community cannot agree on.

If people are going to judge this type of incident, they need to remove their personal feelings and level of etiquette from conclusions and look for clear fault instead...

Everyone who voted the Audi or Megane being at fault failed to do that as all that happened is the Megane out braked themselves trying to complete the pass. Nothing more, nothing less.
 
Everyone who voted the Audi or Megane being at fault failed to do that as all that happened is the Megane out braked themselves trying to complete the pass.
But that's exactly the reason why people are voting for the Megane being at fault. Option 3 carries the implication that the Audi is half at blame, which simply isn't true. The lead car is entitled to defend their position in a reasonable manner, even if it's subjectively a poor decision that costs them time. I see no sudden direction change from the Audi, so that defence was okay.

Since both other options in the poll implicate the Audi as having done something wrong, I have to vote for the Megane being at full fault. However, since they immediately suffered the consequences of the mistake, it goes down as a racing incident in the stewards log.
 
Last edited:
The Megane made a tactical mistake going inside while the Audi was putting them in an ever more compromised position for choosing it. It (probably) wouldn't have happened if the Audi didn't squeeze so much or if the Megane had backed out of the horrible position. No clear blame for either so it has to be a racing incident.

I think I'm getting the definition of racing incident right. Happy to be corrected if I'm wrong.
 
Everyone who voted the Audi or Megane being at fault failed to do that as all that happened is the Megane out braked themselves trying to complete the pass. Nothing more, nothing less.

To be fair, the poll is flawed. "Incident" implies a potential penalty infraction. Missing your braking point and running off of the course isn't really an "incident", it's just an error. The only real incident is the light door to door collision at the edge of the track, which in of itself did not result in ay further incidents. However the OP is clearly referring to the blocking, the contact, and the late braking as one entire incident. Ultimately, I don't even know what either vote really means.
 
Let's say for a moment that the Audi was wrong to continue to move across. Here's the issue as I see it; the light contact that results does not explain why the Megane went straight on immediately afterwards. It might have unsettled the car a little bit, but nowhere near enough to miss the corner, much less by several lengths, had the Megane braked at a similar spot to the Audi.

I'm going to revise my statement and say that the Audi could have left more space than it did once it saw the Megane go inside. However, I still believe it is ultimately in the clear, as sometimes light contact is just going to happen when two drivers are each caught off guard by the behaviour of the other, and relatively speaking, missing your braking point by as much as the Megane did is more egregious.
 
If people are going to judge this type of incident, they need to remove their personal feelings and level of etiquette from conclusions and look for clear fault instead...

Everyone who voted the Audi or Megane being at fault failed to do that as all that happened is the Megane out braked themselves trying to complete the pass. Nothing more, nothing less.

The discussion was more about the Audi drifting across the straight and continuing their slow traversal while the Megane came alongside. What happened after is purely the Megane not braking in time. Whether the slow 'squeeze' is in good spirit is up for discussion.

I had one of those slow squeezers in the daily B, he was indicating with his right blinker, making it even more confusing which side he wanted me on. Nothing happened though, braking on time helps!
 
missing your braking point by as much as the Megane did is more egregious.

The complaint shows the Megane isn't used to squeezes that bad. I think he (or she) got emotional... They may have even yelled Jeronimo! :D

The discussion was more about the Audi drifting across the straight and continuing their slow traversal while the Megane came alongside.

Outside the braking zone. The car in front can do what they like as long as it's not weaving or changing line in the brake zone. They straightened up just before hitting the brakes so while I'd class it as cheeky and something I wouldn't do myself, as long as they leave me room, fair play to them. Luckily you don't see squeezes this excessive very often. I'm fine with straightening up and offering a bit of hip and shoulder to remind them I'm there anyway. If the Megane did that, the Audi would then need to deliberately hit him to keep squeezing. He won't do that so everyone lives happily ever after.

Whether the slow 'squeeze' is in good spirit is up for discussion.

It's not in "good spirit" for sure. Irritating even. Audi is irritated the Megane refused the side he was offering and an irritated Megane is wondering why he's being squeezed. It was just really hard racing up to a still contested corner though. A bit daft but it's made for an enjoyable discussion about it.👍
 
If it requires the "correct" interpretation, it's not clearly written...


Yes, I think we've already established that we both have differing opinions, & I'm ok with that. While I like a respectful exchange of opinion, & even on occasion a well thought out logical debate, I really don't appreciate being led round & round in circles by somebody who, through their own admission, doesn't understand my point of view. I was done with this conversation with you already a few pages back, go find someone else to goad Mr Evans, I'm not biting.
 
VBR
Yes, I think we've already established that we both have differing opinions, & I'm ok with that. While I like a respectful exchange of opinion, & even on occasion a well thought out logical debate, I really don't appreciate being led round & round in circles by somebody who, through their own admission, doesn't understand my point of view.
I understand your point of view - and very much don't agree - and it's bizarre you'd claim that I have admitted anywhere that I don't (quote me), but the point was reference source you relied on to convey it did not contain the information you were wanting to convey. And that's particularly odd, as it turns out that you wrote it - and that's even without mentioning the concept that you saying your guide says this so it's right is very much akin to the Bible being proof that the Bible is true...

What you're arguing - the TT driver should have finished his move sooner - is not stated in the material you want to use to support it. Your justification for that position as actually stated in your guide, that the driver behind must have time to react to a move, is negated by the fact that the TT's move took eight seconds to complete.

You don't seem to want to acknowledge that there is no clear provision in your guide for this move, thus your guide is not suitable for judging it. Perhaps you'd escape the circle if you stopped circling back to the guide?


As for things that aren't appreciated and goading, try "intimating that the person you don't agree with is stupid".

VBR
I've made this point several times, but you seem to not be able to grasp the basic concept
I've no idea what the need is to get personal on thoughts on an "incident" that's not even involving either of us, and think I've been quite polite despite that.
 
What you're arguing - the TT driver should have finished his move sooner - is not stated in the material you want to use to support it. Your justification for that position as actually stated in your guide, that the driver behind must have time to react to a move, is negated by the fact that the TT's move took eight seconds to complete.

that the driver behind must have time to react to a move, is negated by the fact that the TT's move took eight seconds to complete.

Leaving zero seconds to react to his final positioning. Perhaps the guide needs some clarification that the leading car needs to make up his mind early when a car is about to overtake and not drive diagonally over a straight. One move, choose a position, stick with it.

The move needs to be done slowly enough and completed early enough to give the driver behind time to react to the move before the braking zone. Moving around in the braking zone is not good practice, therefore the trailing car needs to have time to finish his positioning before the braking zone as well. It's not like there wasn't enough time or room on the straight to get the positioning done way before the upcoming turn.

When I get bullied on a straight like that I simply stop moving over when I have significant overlap, meaning any contact won't upset my rear and will simply result in 'harmless' contact, signalling to the other car I'm not moving any further.



Another thing I encounter a lot is that people take a defensive (straight) line leading up to a corner, positioning themselves in such a way to discourage any inside overtaking. That's perfectly fine. However a lot move back over to the outside while braking putting me in their slipstream compromising my own braking. I usually compensate for this kind of last second manoevers yet when they start braking a little early and move into my path i'm forced to wildly swing to the inside to avoid them, creating danger for the car behind me. Or sometimes I get forced to run myself off the road on the outside when there's nowhere else to go (another car beside me) or worst case scenario I can't avoid and hit them.

Choose a position and stick with it.
 
Leaving zero seconds to react to his final positioning.
He had five seconds of the Audi, at a relatively constant rate of half a car width a second, crossing the track from right to left, before he chose to go into the narrowing gap rather than the widening one. That was the reaction - and probably the right one.
Perhaps the guide needs some clarification that the leading car needs to make up his mind early when a car is about to overtake and not drive diagonally over a straight. One move, choose a position, stick with it.
Perhaps - but it's a question of relevance. What's the relevance of one person's guide to what he thinks is "gentlemanly" racing to any other person? What's the relevance of it to an online race in a private lobby run by someone else?

There's a lot of obsession over codifying rules and fairness and conduct and sportsmanship, and people quoting various real-life regulations from F1, or touring cars, or an FIA document, but there's no real need for it. A private lobby's rules are whatever the host wants, and a public lobby has none but what GT Sport's own penalty system judges it to be.
 
He had five seconds of the Audi, at a relatively constant rate of half a car width a second, crossing the track from right to left, before he chose to go into the narrowing gap rather than the widening one. That was the reaction - and probably the right one.

Perhaps - but it's a question of relevance. What's the relevance of one person's guide to what he thinks is "gentlemanly" racing to any other person? What's the relevance of it to an online race in a private lobby run by someone else?

There's a lot of obsession over codifying rules and fairness and conduct and sportsmanship, and people quoting various real-life regulations from F1, or touring cars, or an FIA document, but there's no real need for it. A private lobby's rules are whatever the host wants, and a public lobby has none but what GT Sport's own penalty system judges it to be.

True, PD not setting out any rules, beside a "don't look bad" and a broken penalty system does not help matters. The OP didn't have clear rules either, which led to this long discussion.

In the end, everyone has there own ideas about what respectful clean racing should look like. Which leads to problems in races where all these different rule sets clash. PD's guidelines in the form of the etiquette videos and penalty system are pretty much opposite. Etiquette video, drive yourself off the road to avoid contact, penalty system often gives you a penalty for leaving the road. Etiquette video, don't bump people, penalty system person getting bumped gets the SR Down, bumper gets the OK. Plus the penalty system is easily gamed and exploited, it's in no means a way to judge fair racing.

Hence road rage and 'street justice' still happen often on the track, next to a lot of cursing in the post race chat. PD needs to step up and set out some clear rules, which is what I expected from the driving school part of the game. Luckily most people in SR.S know how to drive safe, one thing that works is SR loss for any contact which keeps everyone wary of 'enforcing' their own rules. Avoid contact at all costs.
 
Man, some people have no peripheral vision either on track or in forums.

Guidelines and rules can only deconstruct and define to a point. It's unreasonable to expect a clear and calculated definition of all possible scenarios, thus comprehending the underlying principles through said examples are necessary. Traditionally, the simpler the guideline the better.

Be reasonable and be flexible, try not to get so binary and squeeze others' pov into black and white proposition...look around once in a while, loads of other interesting dimensions up for discussion, if you have some peripheral vision.
 
I have always been taught to "play the whistle". The reason why coaches teach this is because a player's opinion on a legal or illegal tactic may vary wildly from the official's opinion.

It happens all the time.

So, opinion one way of the other, if the Audi didn't get a penalty, it's a fair move.
 
Sport mode is all about hard racing and the knee jerk reactions to it. This thread definitely covers both sides...:lol:

It explains a lot of the over reactions you see in sport mode too. React first, question later. Sod the race.
 
The guy in the megane takes a lot of risk with making the move in the braking zone and brakes way to late, he would never made that turn let alone leaving space for the other car, he wanted to outbrake the other car and that failed, driver error so racing incident
 

Latest Posts

Back