FIA Race Discussion [Archive]

[dabz343]

I’ve only ever heard that one blocking move is allowed without any detail concerning whether or not it was reactionary or preemptive.

I hear you, good luck with that.

 

[HatMarris]

Wait sorry I'm confused 10:30 is in qualifying in my video ? In terms of the overtake and why I was a tad frustrated it is as outlaw mentioned

@Tidgney . The 10:30 I mentioned was in the clip from his channel that I also watched, where he (to me) just ran his car up the inside of one car and then straight into @GT_Alex74 (I wasn’t sure if I could name names from videos). My point was he then complains when he ends up off track even though to me it looked like he had just brakes far too late and caused it all.

Again, driver interpretation can be very different but to me, he spends a lot of he video saying “oops sorry mate”and looks a bit inconsistent. I find faster or slower drivers (than myself) simpler to predict but inconsistent drivers far harder. Almost like they aren’t sure what’s going to happen

 

[mclarenLB]

he spends a lot of he video saying “oops sorry mate”

This is literally a meme about him among British drivers, we picked up on this a while ago and have been making frequent jokes about it ever since

 

[Winnie847]

I hear you, good luck with that.

Well, I have had good luck with it, and no complaints received. I’ve also been blocked in the same way and didn’t complain. Good luck with finding anyone here to agree with you.

I watched the video you posted of a bunch of Indy drivers talking about their rules, and saw the multiple clips used as examples of people blocking, and they all made two movements. I think you’ve misunderstood the “reactionary” part of it. The first move is defending, the second move would be reacting to the overtaker’s adjustment.

No need to get snarky about it, it’s ok to be wrong. Like I said before, maybe try finding the F1 rules, since that is what most people here tend to follow.

 

[dabz343]

No need to get snarky about it, it’s ok to be wrong.[/QUOTE]


No need to take things personally.

My response was intended to communicate to you in a gentleman's manner that we may not see eye to eye on this issue and suggest moving on. It's not a straightforward subject as there are varying interpretations from professionals, and to discourse this matter on this forum doesn't strike me as a wise exercise.

Let's move on.

 

[Winnie847]

@dabz343

nobody is taking anything personally, I just recognize snark when I see it. "Good luck with that" is not necessarily a slap in the face, but to call it gentleman-like is kinda funny.

did you at least revisit the clips in the video you posted and see them making 2 movements?

I disagree, this forum is probably the best place to discuss the issue. I encourage you to find somebody who agrees with you, or better yet, post on the thread I provided and that would literally be the best place to discuss it.

If it turns out that I'm wrong and have been defending incorrectly all this time (among many others), I'll eat my foot, but I would like to know if I'm wrong here so I can adjust my driving accordingly.

However, as somebody else already pointed out, I think him making that block actually could have prevented a crash going into T1. Where was IOF going to go? Pit lane? The grass? The course narrows a bit immediately after that point. It wasn't a wise move unless he was planning on cutting back and taking the center line, which he didn't...but if he did and if Ant made a second move at that point, it would have been considered illegal.

 

[anthaliscious]

​

 

[vvise]

Qualified 3rd Lap 1, okay... we can still make this up. That was rude but accidents happen.

2 corners later... alright never mind. I guess this race is over now.

There's always the MFG, I qualified 3rd again!

Well, that's Monza, only 6s back from the leader, I still have the pace to make that up.

nvm, rip me. goodbye race weekend.

 

[GT_Alex74]

I've just watched 2 clips on his channel, awful driving... way to aggressive. Divebomb on lap 9 into the first chicane? What the heck is that about! I think that's a fantastic effort for the other drivers like @GT_Alex74 to have even give space on the inside. You'd be given all sorts of warnings for this driving in real life, it's not safe, clean, or remotely fair.

Just trying to survive here, no point turning in like usual and get wrecked. He would have easily fled past me in the following straight, but yeah, he's not the only one who turned into me on T2, I swear this happened to me every lap. I even got a 5 seconds penalty from that move, costing me 3 positions.

Also, I didn't get bluescreened, but got stuck on the post race animation (when you see your car and driver), had to kill the game.

 

[dabz343]

​

So from IOF's pov, your move looks reactionary. That is what my rational mind dictates. As to the question of whether your move was a block and deserving of a warning/penalty, you guys at the top 24 can sort that out.

 

[mthomas_95]

​

Ordinarily a reactive defensive move isn't on but in that situation there's no way he's completing a pass on the inside there before the grass starts. He'd either have to back out himself or likely cause a 3 car crash, so no harm done on your part. This sort of racing is why a lot of racing rules aren't set 100% in stone, context is vital.

 

[Tidgney]

@Tidgney . The 10:30 I mentioned was in the clip from his channel that I also watched, where he (to me) just ran his car up the inside of one car and then straight into @GT_Alex74 (I wasn’t sure if I could name names from videos). My point was he then complains when he ends up off track even though to me it looked like he had just brakes far too late and caused it all.

Again, driver interpretation can be very different but to me, he spends a lot of he video saying “oops sorry mate”and looks a bit inconsistent. I find faster or slower drivers (than myself) simpler to predict but inconsistent drivers far harder. Almost like they aren’t sure what’s going to happen

Yes that move was pure insanity, alright if it's a mistake but literally the clips I saw it was every chance it was done. I will say that racing smarter gets harder the lower the DR gets because of inconsistencies with the driving, it's also why it's harder to get your SR back up to 99 if you do drop a grade. Not because people want to drive inconsistent it's just the nature of the beast that is DR (I'm not trying to sound elitist with my words). At that point though you then have to try use new ways to get advantages! I've always wanted to start my Road to GT Academy 2013 series back up, might make a reboot .

I even got a 5 seconds penalty from that move, costing me 3 positions. Also, I didn't get bluescreened, but got stuck on the post race animation (when you see your car and driver), had to kill the game.

Ye I did feel bad when I saw that, was like "wow". I've raced you a few times now and it's been a pure pleasure ! Hmmm weird yours froze, something definitely went a miss in the end, lets be thankful it didn't kill the lobby before the race and only after!

 

[Winnie847]

So from IOF's pov, your move looks reactionary. That is what my rational mind dictates. As to the question of whether your move was a block and deserving of a warning/penalty, you guys at the top 24 can sort that out.

Ordinarily a reactive defensive move isn't on but in that situation there's no way he's completing a pass on the inside there before the grass starts. He'd either have to back out himself or likely cause a 3 car crash, so no harm done on your part. This sort of racing is why a lot of racing rules aren't set 100% in stone, context is vital.

Still haven’t found any real reference to reactionary moves vs anticipated. It seems that you’re basically saying that Ant can’t make any moves to defend at all, which seems silly. The thing is, Indy rules are different, and more vague than F1 rules. See for yourself.

“When one driver is completely ahead of another on a straight, they are permitted to make a move in one direction. This move can be of any size, within the track limits, and the move can be made as slowly or as quickly as the driver likes — they can jink suddenly to one side or they can spend an entire straight gradually shifting across the track. This rule is stated under sporting regulation 20.4

20.4 Any driver defending his position on a straight, and before any braking area, may use the full width of the track during his first move, provided no significant portion of the car attempting to pass is alongside his. Whilst defending in this way the driver may not leave the track without justifiable reason.”

https://f1metrics.wordpress.com/2014/08/28/the-rules-of-racing/

 

[Crazy Taylor]

That 'defending' move smacked of desperation to stay in front. That was one late move to move over to intercept.

 

[mthomas_95]

It seems that you’re basically saying that Ant can’t make any moves to defend at all, which seems silly.

Ordinarily if you need to react to a move from the guy behind you're not doing a very good job at defending well or safely. For example, down a straight and the car behind is in your slipstream you move to cover the inside before they move out. Perfectly possible to defend effectively without the need to 'block'.

This case is different because Ant is already basically as far inside as the track allows and there's a car immediately on his outside. I see his move as a fair way to put IOF off going for a gap that doesn't really exist, but it was reactionary which in more normal circumstances usually results in a crash. You see it all the time in lower lobbies and is part of the reason they tend to stay down in the lower DR/SR ranks thankfully

 

[Winnie847]

That 'defending' move smacked of desperation to stay in front. That was one late move to move over to intercept.

but the question is, was it illegal?

I think the attempted pass by IOF seems more like a desperation move than anything. Had Ant not defended the inside, what do you think would have happened? Did you see the wall and grass approaching quickly? They were already 2 wide going into it, and his next move through the chicane to aggressively cut off Lester was another desperate move...perhaps legal, but I think IOF was the only desperate driver here.

 

[Winnie847]

Ordinarily if you need to react to a move from the guy behind you're not doing a very good job at defending well or safely. For example, down a straight and the car behind is in your slipstream you move to cover the inside before they move out. Perfectly possible to defend effectively without the need to 'block'.

This case is different because Ant is already basically as far inside as the track allows and there's a car immediately on his outside. I see his move as a fair way to put IOF off going for a gap that doesn't really exist, but it was reactionary which in more normal circumstances usually results in a crash. You see it all the time in lower lobbies and is part of the reason they tend to stay down in the lower DR/SR ranks thankfully

and that's part of my point. there was nowhere for IOF to go, and Ant probably believed that he was already defending the inside (he was). Who would expect the guy to try and go further inside than the inside exists? So I think he's just defending. I still haven't been able to find anywhere in FIA regulations that references preemptive vs anticipated moves....but please direct me to the source if you know where it is. Regarding the indy drivers video talking about preemptive, so far that just seems like a bunch of opinions not really based on written regulation, which only states that you aren't supposed to move off the racing line to defend....again, Indy rules only, FIA doesn't state such things an only inhibits moving your line under braking, but defending with one move is perfectly fine it seems.

 

[dabz343]

Still haven’t found any real reference to reactionary moves vs anticipated. It seems that you’re basically saying that Ant can’t make any moves to defend at all, which seems silly. The thing is, Indy rules are different, and more vague than F1 rules. See for yourself.

“When one driver is completely ahead of another on a straight, they are permitted to make a move in one direction. This move can be of any size, within the track limits, and the move can be made as slowly or as quickly as the driver likes — they can jink suddenly to one side or they can spend an entire straight gradually shifting across the track. This rule is stated under sporting regulation 20.4

20.4 Any driver defending his position on a straight, and before any braking area, may use the full width of the track during his first move, provided no significant portion of the car attempting to pass is alongside his. Whilst defending in this way the driver may not leave the track without justifiable reason.”

https://f1metrics.wordpress.com/2014/08/28/the-rules-of-racing/

I'll make a last attempt with you, using your own reference article.

Whether you decide to incorporate this rule 20.5 is up to you and my final comment on this topic is, good luck with that.

I encourage you to find somebody who agrees with you

I'm not here to find people that agree with me. My motivations are elsewhere, so I leave you with these famous words from one of the most influential sportsmen from motorsports.

 

[mthomas_95]

and that's part of my point. there was nowhere for IOF to go, and Ant probably believed that he was already defending the inside (he was). Who would expect the guy to try and go further inside than the inside exists? So I think he's just defending. I still haven't been able to find anywhere in FIA regulations that references preemptive vs anticipated moves....but please direct me to the source if you know where it is. Regarding the indy drivers video talking about preemptive, so far that just seems like a bunch of opinions not really based on written regulation, which only states that you aren't supposed to move off the racing line to defend....again, Indy rules only, FIA doesn't state such things an only inhibits moving your line under braking, but defending with one move is perfectly fine it seems.

Like most things it's a grey area, but more often than not you will be held responsible in the event of a crash as it can be used under 'abnormal' change of direction. They let it slide more often than not in F1 for 'the show'

It definitely falls into less official 'etiquette', so whilst you can do it don't be surprised it rubs people up the wrong way and leads to more accidents. It's not even the best way to defend position in the long run.

 

[Winnie847]

I'll make a last attempt with you, using your own reference article.

View attachment 763423

Whether you decide to incorporate this rule 20.5 is up to you and my final comment on this topic is, good luck with that.




I'm not here to find people that agree with me. My motivations are elsewhere, so I leave you with these famous words from one of the most influential sportsmen from motorsports.

View attachment 763424

So basically you’re smugly condemning based on the grey area we call “steward’s discretion?”

I wonder if the steward would have had the same thought of “where was he intending to make the pass?” while determining fault.

As Ant stated, he made his move to defend with plenty of time for IOF to lift or brake, which he would have needed to do anyway had he got his nose in there before getting shut down.

“On a straight, a defending driver has the right to suddenly change direction, even using the entire track width if they are fully ahead of the attacking driver.”

 

[dabz343]

I've always wanted to start my Road to GT Academy 2013 series back up, might make a reboot .

I only scanned the list of topics you covered on your youtube site, but they seem very comprehensive...now only if there was a way for you to produce new content for GTS under PD's governance?

 

[anthaliscious]

So from IOF's pov, your move looks reactionary. That is what my rational mind dictates. As to the question of whether your move was a block and deserving of a warning/penalty, you guys at the top 24 can sort that out.

Explain reactionary thoroughly. Because you’ve yet to make any sense. Yes, it was a ‘reaction’ that doesn’t dictate if it was ‘good’ or ‘bad’. Stop trying to get all technical with your ‘reactionary’ and ‘preemptive’ terms and use some damn common sense. This isn’t open wheel racing.

 

[Winnie847]

Explain reactionary thoroughly. Because you’ve yet to make any sense. Yes, it was a ‘reaction’ that doesn’t dictate if it was ‘good’ or ‘bad’. Stop trying to get all technical with your ‘reactionary’ and ‘preemptive’ terms and use some damn common sense. This isn’t open wheel racing.

It’s funny too that he seems to not take into consideration or care that IOF was willing to leave the track to attempt the pass that would have likely resulted in a wreck anyway. The way I see it, you were already anticipating his pass on the inside, which is why you tucked all the way up to the white line. Why would you expect him to use pit lane and go off track to pass you right before the braking zone?

 

[anthaliscious]

It’s funny too that he seems to not take into consideration or care that IOF was willing to leave the track to attempt the pass that would have likely resulted in a wreck anyway. The way I see it, you were already anticipating his pass on the inside, which is why you tucked all the way up to the white line. Why would you expect him to use pit lane and go off track to pass you right before the braking zone?

Yeah I’m starting to realize he’s just another IOF fan and probably has some discretion towards FT.

 

[mclarenLB]

BREAKING NEWS: GTP blows another minor racing incident completely out of proportion, Police called to scene, More on this story as it develops... and it will...

 

[K32]

The Peugeot was never OP in the slightest at Le Mans, The 919/R18 will probably still be the best

Really? Please explain.

 

[dabz343]

Yeah I’m starting to realize he’s just another IOF fan and probably has some discretion towards FT.

I'm a fan of clean, fast, smart racing. And some of the FT drivers are exemplary.

For the third time, let's move on boys.

 

[OutlawQuadrnt]

BREAKING NEWS: GTP blows another minor racing incident completely out of proportion, Police called to scene, More on this story as it develops... and it will...

I was in that race and believe me, there were far more major incidents. Yet, this is the one with the most attention.

Now for a public service announcement regarding the upcoming Manufacturer's race that I'm sure will be ignored. The chicane's track limits are more strict which makes going through there even slower. The smart thing to do is to avoid overtaking into the chicane unless you can fully clear the other driver before the apex. Otherwise, it will be bottleneck city.

 

[Winnie847]

I too like to move on when I learn I’ve been wrong about something.

Interesting that a fan of such clean and smart racing wouldn’t have any issue whatsoever with IOF’s attempted pass that was basically off track, outside of the white lines.

 

[GT_Alex74]

Now for a public service announcement regarding the upcoming Manufacturer's race that I'm sure will be ignored. The chicane's track limits are more strict which makes going through there even slower. The smart thing to do is to avoid overtaking into the chicane unless you can fully clear the other driver before the apex. Otherwise, it will be bottleneck city.

Just like Monza basically. And just like Monza, people will try to dive from 300m away and turn into you as if you do not exist anymore on the second part of the chicane. I'm already pretty sure at one point in this race, one person will try that and push me on the grass and the game will give me a penalty for that.