myWorld Großer Preis von Österreich 2019Formula 1 

  • Thread starter Thread starter TenEightyOne
  • 511 comments
  • 28,221 views
Famine
Which would penalise Magnussen before Hamilton, so Norris should be fourth...

However, it seems that it's actually dumber than that, and it's actually an accumulated positions system. So... (prepare for longpost)

Q1/2/3 Result
1 LEC
2 HAM
3 VER
4 BOT
5 MAG
6 NOR
7 RAI
8 GIO
9 GAS
10 VET
11 GRO
12 HUL
13 ALB
14 RIC
15 SAI
16 PER
17 STR
18 KVY
19 RUS
20 KUB

Penalties
SAI - Back of grid
ALB - Back of grid
HUL +5
MAG +5
RUS +3
HAM +3

After penalties, with new grid positions
1 LEC = 1
3 VER = 2
4 BOT = 3
5 HAM = 4
6 NOR = 5
7 RAI = 6
8 GIO = 7
9 GAS = 8
10 VET* = 9
10 MAG* = 10
11 GRO = 11
14 RIC = 12
16 PER = 13
17 STR* = 14
17 HUL* = 15
18 KVY = 16
20 KUB = 17
22 RUS = 18
(Shadow realm - SAI, ALB)

It looks like a driver who achieved their position total naturally is ranked ahead of a driver whose position total includes a penalty where they are equal.

No-one seems to know how the FIA is ranking Sainz and Albon, least of all the FIA itself which has published two provisional grids with the two drivers in different orders (and to be honest I'm a bit confused over Sainz's Q2 time, but I haven't watched qualifying yet). At the moment it seems Albon will start 19th and Sainz 20th...

... and amusingly George Russell's three-place penalty is a one-place boost. Without the penalty he'd have had a two-place boost, so it's a one-place penalty in the end.
Click to expand...

or a simplified version of this long winding post, which highlights how stupid the rules are and have been for quite some time. Like giving drivers a 50 place grid penalty in a race
 
Famine
Which would penalise Magnussen before Hamilton, so Norris should be fourth...

However, it seems that it's actually dumber than that, and it's actually an accumulated positions system. So... (prepare for longpost)
Click to expand...

Yep, doesn't work with the penalties simply applied in the order they were issued, or in reverse for that matter.

With the penalties applied one at a time in numerical order:

q_pen_a.JPG


...and with them applied one at a time in reverse order. It's closer to being correct but it still puts HUL/KVY the wrong way around:

q_pen_b.JPG


EDIT: Tree'd by @LMSCorvetteGT2 , that makes a lot more sense! I mean... in how they do it, not why :D

EDIT EDIT: So that means Hamilton's penalty was always 2 places... that seems wrong on every level of number-things imaginable.
 
FutureF1
Calling my GTPlaney history buffs!

Is this the youngest front row in F1 history???
Click to expand...
Monza in 2008 Heikki and Vettel
TenEightyOne
EDIT: Tree'd by @LMSCorvetteGT2 , that makes a lot more sense! I mean... in how they do it, not why :D

EDIT EDIT: So that means Hamilton's penalty was always 2 places... that seems wrong on every level of number-things imaginable.
Click to expand...

Yes it means it was always 2 spots so long as K Mag had his penalty, had Kevin not had one, then Hamilton would truly be starting fifth.
 
Famine
However, it seems that it's actually dumber than that, and it's actually an accumulated positions system.
Click to expand...

LMSCorvetteGT2
or a simplified version of this long winding post, which highlights how stupid the rules are and have been for quite some time. Like giving drivers a 50 place grid penalty in a race
Click to expand...

TenEightyOne
Yep, doesn't work with the penalties simply applied in the order they were issued, or in reverse for that matter.

With the penalties applied one at a time in numerical order:

View attachment 832171

...and with them applied one at a time in reverse order. It's closer to being correct but it still puts HUL/KVY the wrong way around:

View attachment 832173

EDIT: Tree'd by @LMSCorvetteGT2 , that makes a lot more sense! I mean... in how they do it, not why :D

EDIT EDIT: So that means Hamilton's penalty was always 2 places... that seems wrong on every level of number-things imaginable.
Click to expand...

It turns out that this has come up before and - back then at least, but it still seems to work now - it really was just a ranked list of driver qualifying position plus penalty.

https://www.gtplanet.net/forum/thre...eken-ditalia-2017.358608/page-7#post-11931918

(some hilarious grid penalties in there)

That works throughout the grid, not just the top ten; on this occasion we've got two drivers who don't slot into gaps, and they both seem to use the same tie breaker - the driver who got no penalty qualifies ahead of a driver with the same score via a larger penalty - as the Magnussen/Perez tie-breaker in Italy 2017. That race also appeared to rank two tied drivers according to when they got the penalty, although it may also have just been their Q-time that decided it (but not magnitude of penalty).


But this all still doesn't explain Sainz/Albon :lol:

Edit: Actually, that'll just be Q2 time won't it? 1'04 vs 1'13...
 
Last edited:
LMSCorvetteGT2
Monza in 2008 Heikki and Vettel
Click to expand...

That average age was over 23 years old [Vettel was 21 and a bit, Heikki was almost 27]. This is 21 years old. Pretty sure that's a new record! Not sure if it'll count though as they didn't qualify 1st and second
 
FutureF1
That average age was over 23 years old [Vettel was 21 and a bit, Heikki was almost 27]. This is 21 years old. Pretty sure that's a new record! Not sure if it'll count though as they didn't qualify 1st and second
Click to expand...

You asked for the last time F1 saw the youngest starting row, which is what I gave. I wouldn't doubt this is the youngest starting row that is starting tomorrow.
 
LMSCorvetteGT2
or a simplified version of this long winding post, which highlights how stupid the rules are and have been for quite some time. Like giving drivers a 50 place grid penalty in a race
Click to expand...

What a load of absolute rubbish.
 
CLowndes888
What a load of absolute rubbish.
Click to expand...

How is it rubbish, @TenEightyOne gives a better demonstration of this, it makes sense to me but only in the context of K Mag having the penalty. Had Magnussen not been the "driver" to take over fourth if he hadn't had a penatly himself then Lewis would be fifth tomorrow and now fourth. Again just astonishing luck, considering now he gets to start next to the only person that eat into the point deficit, which now allows LH to win off the line and minimize it without even worrying about winning. And the other guy who could challenge him for the points lead had his car break in Q3. Like when one stacks up the amount of luck Lewis has had at times, one couldn't possibly come up with the narrative on their own.
 
LMSCorvetteGT2
How is it rubbish, @TenEightyOne gives a better demonstration of this, it makes sense to me but only in the context of K Mag having the penalty
Click to expand...
Because a three spot grid penalty is not a two spot penalty. Magnussen gets his 5 place penalty and everyone above him moves up a place. Norris would sit in 5th place as a result. Hamilton sits in second. He drops three places to 5th and Norris gets promoted to 4th. That's how it should work. Any other method is stupid so what the FIA have done lessens the severity of both Hamilton and Magnussen's penalties. That's why it's rubbish.
 
Eh, who cares? All I care about is the fact that we're going to have a really interesting race tomorrow. It's a fast track, shorter than some of the others and has good chances of overtaking.

I don't want to over-hype this race, but I feel like it's going to be the best of this season, at least based on the qualifying.
 
CLowndes888
Because a three spot grid penalty is not a two spot penalty. Magnussen gets his 5 place penalty and everyone above him moves up a place. Norris would sit in 5th place as a result. Hamilton sits in second. He drops three places to 5th and Norris gets promoted to 4th. That's how it should work. Any other method is stupid so what the FIA have done lessens the severity of both Hamilton and Magnussen's penalties. That's why it's rubbish.
Click to expand...

It was a 3 grid spot penalty, the person that was suppose to occupy the third spot had a penalty himself. The voids then get filled in and Hamilton gains a spot back due to someone else having a penalty, again as shown by @TenEightyOne with greater clarity, he wasn't the only one to gain spots back after penalty. Norris shouldn't get 4th he should get the spot he was given, he would not have been the benefactor of any gain had Kevin not had his penalty. What you want is a chronological progression of penalties and filling of voids. Basically K Mag takes his penalty because he got it first and thus everyone between fifth and tenth moves up, then Lewis takes his and those between second and fifth move up. However the penalties are given simultaneously and only the order is moved in succession of chronology (based on when penalty was given) and then the voids are filled simultaneously. Thus as shown a void was made when K Mag was moved, that void just happened to be where Lewis would be placed once considering his penalty, that meant a void was left where he once was. Once all the voids are filled he got a spot back.

I find it stupid because it's convoluted (as seen by the posts many of us have made explaining and demonstrating the rules) and easily a cause for controversy. Simply because people will get mad that a certain driver they want to see be penalized isn't getting the full penalty, or that full punishment isn't being handed out. Even though clearly it is, and it isn't LH's fault or the FIA's for the penalty Kevin incurred due to gearbox change.
 
What an absolute ****! Penalties that have been issued first should be applied first then the grid moves up accordingly in response, then you go to the next penalty and so on.....There shouldn't be gaps left to get sorted at the end! The FIA looks very messed up since Charlie Whiting died, and their explanations are terrible.
 
Anyway, we all know they gave Hamilton the penalty to "apologize" to Ferrari for Canada's controversial (and yet fair) call.
 
FutureF1
Lol dw about it
Click to expand...

I'm lost, what does this and "RIP" mean? You asked and got an answer, I didn't see any snarkiness in the replies?

Anyway... not sure if this has been covered but Turn 1 is now called "Niki Lauda Curve".
 
TenEightyOne
I'm lost, what does this and "RIP" mean? You asked and got an answer, I didn't see any snarkiness in the replies?
Click to expand...

There is no where in his post that states anything remotely close to asking what the previous record was. "Is this the youngest front row in F1 history?" in the context of being asked within the Austria 2019 race weekend thread, is pretty blatantly asking if Austria 2019's front row is the youngest in history.

RIP was in referral to Corvette being shown he was blatantly wrong (despite defending himself), and 'dw' is 'don't worry', as people missed it twice... somehow :boggled:
 
TenEightyOne
I disagree, and the way we've actually got a good grid at a good track backs me up. In my opinion, as is surely obvious.
Click to expand...
We have a good grid? More or less it's the same top 4 in spirit. A Ferrari, a Red Bull and 2 Mercs. Norris in there does make it interesting, but we all know he has no shot at a podium barring a wreck. And for the record, it's not obvious... you just see it differently than I do- so I suppose we'll agree to disagree.
Peter.
It's specific to the nature of this track. It's not only one of the shortest, but it provides ample opportunity to gain time from a slipstream of a car ahead. It cost a few guys, and penalties were handed out accordingly.

Of all the things wrong with F1, qualifying is close to the bottom of that list. The sport already made the mistake of thinking otherwise
Click to expand...
Not just this track, to name another track with a totally different makeup, this happened at Bahrain when the Haas played the part if the moving chicane in the last corner.

You're right though, this isn't the most pressing issue... but it is low hanging fruit. Making the tyres better is more important but far more complex. Why not work on both? It's not an either/or situation. However we also have this garbage:
Betty blue
What an absolute ****! Penalties that have been issued first should be applied first then the grid moves up accordingly in response, then you go to the next penalty and so on.....There shouldn't be gaps left to get sorted at the end! The FIA looks very messed up since Charlie Whiting died, and their explanations are terrible.
Click to expand...
This situation makes no sense, realistically... but to be fair it's not a post-Whiting issue, this existed before. Maybe Charlie did a better job covering it up or making it seem better with communication?
 
phillkillv2
All I care about is the fact that we're going to have a really interesting race tomorrow. It's a fast track, shorter than some of the others and has good chances of overtaking.

I don't want to over-hype this race, but I feel like it's going to be the best of this season, at least based on the qualifying.
Click to expand...

The weather seems like it may be extreme enough to affect tires, engines, even drivers. Woebetide the guy who's drinks system fails.
 
Famine
After penalties, with new grid positions
1 LEC = 1
3 VER = 2
4 BOT = 3
5 HAM = 4
6 NOR = 5
7 RAI = 6
8 GIO = 7
9 GAS = 8
10 VET* = 9
10 MAG* = 10
11 GRO = 11
14 RIC = 12
16 PER = 13
17 STR* = 14
17 HUL* = 15
18 KVY = 16
20 KUB = 17
22 RUS = 18
(Shadow realm - SAI, ALB)
Click to expand...
Russell's taking a pitlane start after Williams had to work on the car, so it's now Albon in 18th, Sainz in 19th and Russell in the pits.
 
I don't have any faith in Ferrari to not mess this up. Hoping for Verstappen win or a 'Get in there Lewis!" Merc 1-2 for the lolz.
 
Great to see all the Lauda tributes around the track
 
Max totally Choked at the start.
 
Gasly overtakes Max.
 
What was that for kind of start for Max, so sad..
 
These opening laps look promising for McLaren's future
 
Back