[M3WC]

Originally Posted by Top speed

https://youtube.com/shorts/E-0szkeL4TM?feature=share

Very similar incident with Max and ocon.

Max was half car length ahead of Lewis through turn one.

Never saw Ocon ahead in this video at any point.

I consider the Lewis/Max a racing incident. Don't put blame on either one.

[GuidoK]

Originally Posted by HeelToeShift

Ham left absolutely no room. Not even 1/2 car width...

Some pics that clarify:

This is how much room Max gave Lewis (turn 1):


Which is...1,5 maybe 2 carwidths to the curb.


This is how much room Lewis gave Max (turn 2):


That is maybe 1,5 tyrewidth to the curb?
Anyone can make up for themselves if that is enough room for a car and whether or not this is comparable or in ratio with the room given in corner 1.

You can also see that Max has his steeringwheel almost fully turned to the right, but as he was forced way to far on that curb, the car just slides in a straight line. It's probably the floor sliding on top of the curb lifting some of the wheels of the ground.

[GuidoK]

Originally Posted by Top speed

https://youtube.com/shorts/E-0szkeL4TM?feature=share

Very similar incident with Max and ocon.

I think here Max was a lap ahead?
There are very specific rules concerning unlapping oneself that don't apply when fighting for a position.
So not at all similar.
Unlapping is only allowed when it's non intrusive. So you're not allowed to force the car you're trying to unlap of the racing line, something Ocon obviously did.

[GuidoK]

Originally Posted by G99M5

I can actually easily reproduce that crash! I can be an f1 driver!

Interesting analysis. I also liked that they compared sound, in case the telemetry is off, lagging whatever.

Do Erik van Haren and Tom Coronel have a point? (I think they were the first with the monaco speculation)
Do I have to give them more credit?

This is Van Haren's story (dutch, but with automatic subs translatable to english.... or should I say dunglish...):

[M5Rick]

Originally Posted by Artemis

2002 Austria: official race-win for Schumacher in the history books after a controversial 'invert track position' team order by Ferrari to Barrichello. FIA handed Schumacher, Barrichello and Ferrari a $1 million fine for breaching the podium protocol, but not for the swap (Barrichello in 2012 about that incident: "It was eight laps of war. It’s very rare that I lose my temper, but I was screaming on the radio. I kept going right to the end, saying I would not let him [Schumacher] pass. That’s when they [Ferrari] said something about something much broader. It was not about the contract. I cannot tell you what they said, but it was a form of threat that made me think about re-thinking my life, because the great joy for me was driving."):
Attachment 3033019

What Barrichello said is the dark side behind the glamour of F1 that is either not known or ignored by F1 followers.

[MontyB1]

Originally Posted by Top speed

https://youtube.com/shorts/E-0szkeL4TM?feature=share

Very similar incident with Max and ocon.

Almost identical, you won't get the Max fanatics to agree he did anything wrong though, the rose tinted specs are very strong, very - very strong.

The fact that down the hill to turn 2 Lewis was half a car ahead and thus had the corner and the racing line won't even enter their list of things to comprehend. The fact that Max said that Ocon was an idiot for attempting that overtake and when Max does the same thing, well they can't fathom it.

Thanks for posting though I see the blind defence above has already been attempted, bless.

[M5Rick]

Originally Posted by GuidoK

Some pics that clarify:

This is how much room Max gave Lewis (turn 1):


Which is...1,5 maybe 2 carwidths to the curb.


This is how much room Lewis gave Max (turn 2):


That is maybe 1,5 tyrewidth to the curb?
Anyone can make up for themselves if that is enough room for a car and whether or not this is comparable or in ratio with the room given in corner 1.

You can also see that Max has his steeringwheel almost fully turned to the right, but as he was forced way to far on that curb, the car just slides in a straight line. It's probably the floor sliding on top of the curb lifting some of the wheels of the ground.

Clearly the entry speed of HAM increased so he would drift into Max on the outside.

[GuidoK]

Originally Posted by MontyB1

Almost identical, you won't get the Max fanatics to agree he did anything wrong though, the rose tinted specs are very strong, very - very strong.

Those rose tinted specs dont prevent us to see that there was a lap difference, something you dont seem to realise.
Maybe do some research to refresh your memory and read what the late Charlie Whiting said about that:
"Wholly unacceptable"
And that reads the same with and without those specs

[MontyB1]

Originally Posted by GuidoK

Those rose tinted specs dont prevent us to see that there was a lap difference, something you dont seem to realise.
Maybe do some research to refresh your memory and read what the late Charlie Whiting said about that:
"Wholly unacceptable"
And that reads the same with and without those specs

I remember it well, but some here don't have ANY and I mean ANY ability to see any wrong in anything that Max does. I'd like to think you aren't one of them and the comments balanced.

But many others on here can see black as white when it comes to Max and it takes two to tango. Yes people can love him for going for every overtake and closing every gap and going for every move and LH was like that at the start. But the reason he started to win more as he learnt that sometimes, yes sometimes it was better to wait to go for it at the next corner.

Right now the two of them don't give each other room or respect, that will always lead to incidents as they both think they are the best. They are both up there lets face it regardless of what some might think. Its going to be fun and fireworks if Merc can get the car to the front and the same for Ferrari next year, fingers crossed.

[GuidoK]

So you're calling it 'almost identical' because there are die hard Verstappen fans here?
So you're altering your own better judgement here because you don't agee with other people's judgement?
That is what I make of your post.

[MontyB1]

Here is a good analysis of the incident - clear, nope and I'm sure they will hit each other again.

[TheBingoBalls]

Originally Posted by MontyB1

Here is a good analysis of the incident - clear, nope and I'm sure they will hit each other again.

Everyone is going to interpret the rules but to note, in the video, should have left room =/= needs to leave room.

I think the video breaks it down nicely. While HAM could've left room to encourage "clean racing" (I hate this term) he is not obligated to do so because he had the correct positioning. Add the telemetry and data that was used, it's why VER was deemed at fault. Again, I'm sure people are going to chime in and say this/that. And it doesn't help that VER said he was just going to send it in post-race interview - sometimes you just shouldn't say anything.

Again, I think it was a racing incident like many others but everyone seems to look for blame because it affects their favourite driver/team. HAM did nothing wrong and I thought the same for VER…until he came out and said what he said.

[minn19]

Originally Posted by TheBingoBalls

Everyone is going to interpret the rules but to note, in the video, should have left room =/= needs to leave room.

I think the video breaks it down nicely. While HAM could've left room to encourage "clean racing" (I hate this term) he is not obligated to do so because he had the correct positioning. Add the telemetry and data that was used, it's why VER was deemed at fault. Again, I'm sure people are going to chime in and say this/that. And it doesn't help that VER said he was just going to send it in post-race interview - sometimes you just shouldn't say anything.

Again, I think it was a racing incident like many others but everyone seems to look for blame because it affects their favourite driver/team. HAM did nothing wrong and I thought the same for VER…until he came out and said what he said.

^This, especially the last paragraph. Ocon was wrong but Max had much more to lose in that spot than Ocon so Max made a bad decision tangling with him instead of letting him go. I have the same opinion here with LH’s decision despite how things turned out. Both were actually very lucky they didn’t DNF.

The thing with the hardcore Max fans here is they still excoriate Ocon because of that incident and calling him names etc. Plus, IIRC , some of the really hardcore ones said he should’ve went further in his after race fight with Ocon. I guess Lewis should’ve attacked Max after the race? This is where a lot of us don’t like Max’s personality or his fans behavior. Max did the exact same thing Ocon did to him and obviously two very different reactions. One he physically attacked another driver and then in this incident he blames Lewis for not leaving him room/saying Lewis ruined his chance at a win. Max and his fans always want it both ways and it is indefensible.

[Artemis]

Originally Posted by Top speed

https://youtube.com/shorts/E-0szkeL4TM?feature=share
Very similar incident with Max and ocon.

Originally Posted by GuidoK

I think here Max was a lap ahead?
There are very specific rules concerning unlapping oneself that don't apply when fighting for a position.
So not at all similar.
Unlapping is only allowed when it's non intrusive. So you're not allowed to force the car you're trying to unlap of the racing line, something Ocon obviously did.

Originally Posted by MontyB1

Almost identical, you won't get the Max fanatics to agree he did anything wrong though, the rose tinted specs are very strong, very - very strong.

Originally Posted by GuidoK

Those rose tinted specs dont prevent us to see that there was a lap difference, something you dont seem to realise.
Maybe do some research to refresh your memory and read what the late Charlie Whiting said about that:
"Wholly unacceptable"
And that reads the same with and without those specs

Originally Posted by minn19

Ocon was wrong but Max had much more to lose in that spot than Ocon so Max made a bad decision tangling with him instead of letting him go.

Images and Race Stewards decision about the lap 44/71 incident during the 2018 Brazil race (race leader Verstappen was fighting for the race win, trailed by Hamilton - Ocon had been lapped):

[G30M]

Originally Posted by Artemis

2002 Austria: I kept going right to the end, saying I would not let him [Schumacher] pass. That’s when they [Ferrari] said something about something much broader. It was not about the contract. I cannot tell you what they said, but it was a form of threat that made me think about re-thinking my life, because the great joy for me was driving."[/I]):

"we will make your girlfriend drive you around in a Mercedes" ?

[GuidoK]

Originally Posted by minn19

I guess Lewis should’ve attacked Max after the race?

If Max would have been 1 lap behind, then maybe....yes.
Obviously Max actions after the race were wrong, but understandable. (and he got a penalty for it).
But Ocon's move was stupid and freakish. I mean, how many crashes in corners do you know between race leaders and backmarkers where the backmarker is trying to unlap himself?
And now compare that with the amount of crashes in corners between drivers that are fighting over an actual spot in the results.

That first one maybe happens once every 20 years? The 2nd example happens all the time, multiple times per race usually.

Yes, Ocon may unlap himself, but he may only do that unintrusively. Therefore as race leader you may expect the backmarker to abort his action.

I really don't understand why certain fans from a certain camp don't see the difference in situations between the 2018 VER-OCO crash and the 2022 VER-HAM crash.
These are factual differences in situations on which the rules are very clear..
Why is there a flag to alert a backmarkers that a race leader is about to overtake them, and there isn't a flag to alert a race leader that a backmarker is trying to overtake him. For some members here this is apparently food for thought.

Obviously Ocon knows all this so one even might question whether or not this was a willing move. Maybe setteling an old score or something (they have raced eachother for years since childhood).
Speculative, but who knows. They've never been friends.

[NYG]

Originally Posted by minn19

^This, especially the last paragraph. Ocon was wrong but Max had much more to lose in that spot than Ocon so Max made a bad decision tangling with him instead of letting him go. I have the same opinion here with LH’s decision despite how things turned out. Both were actually very lucky they didn’t DNF.

The thing with the hardcore Max fans here is they still excoriate Ocon because of that incident and calling him names etc. Plus, IIRC , some of the really hardcore ones said he should’ve went further in his after race fight with Ocon. I guess Lewis should’ve attacked Max after the race? This is where a lot of us don’t like Max’s personality or his fans behavior. Max did the exact same thing Ocon did to him and obviously two very different reactions. One he physically attacked another driver and then in this incident he blames Lewis for not leaving him room/saying Lewis ruined his chance at a win. Max and his fans always want it both ways and it is indefensible.

Ocon's season with Alonso should reinforce that no?

[M3WC]

Originally Posted by TheBingoBalls

Again, I think it was a racing incident like many others but everyone seems to look for blame because it affects their favourite driver/team. HAM did nothing wrong and I thought the same for VER…until he came out and said what he said.

I agree racing incident. Race control needs to let the two divas race. Max had to pit for new nose and Lewis went on to race, it sorted itself out.

[NYG]

It was 100% a racing incident. Arguing that Max deserved a time penalty is silly but arguing that Max deserved penalty points is just bias to the extreme.

[M5Rick]

So we're all in agreement a racing incident, so WTF made the panel decide on a 5 second penalty to Max.

[TheBingoBalls]

Originally Posted by M5Rick

So we're all in agreement a racing incident, so WTF made the panel decide on a 5 second penalty to Max.

They gave their reasons and it's straightforward and I'm ok with the decision. It's not like the stewards pulled the explanation out of their ass - it was a rational decision. Whether or not everyone else does is an entirely different discussion.

I thought Lando deserved a penalty for driving into LEC, but it was deemed a racing incident. That wasn't even close - LEC was way out on the left of the track and Lando drove into him. 🤷🏻*♂️

[Artemis]

Originally Posted by GuidoK

This is Van Haren's story (dutch, but with automatic subs translatable to english.... or should I say dunglish...):

Verstappen in his own words - post-race interview with Sky:

The allegation in the tweet posted by Dutch F1 reporter Erik van Haren was already bold (see here).

But his Telesport TV interview is a bomb shell: he unreservedly claims that Perez deliberately crashed in Q3 of the Monaco qualies of May 28, 2022. No cautious "maybe", "probably" or "possibly", but "100%", "fact" and "pure intent" (also explicitly denying that his claim is "suggestive").

Quick translation of a couple of things the Dutch F1 reporter said/claimed:

• when Verstappen was radioed to let Perez pass during the final lap of the 2022 Brazil race, the reporter "already knew for sure at that moment" that Verstappen would refuse "and that has everything to do with Monaco earlier this year";
• he claims that a couple of weeks ago, "I believe in Mexico" (the Mexico race weekend of Oct 28-30, 2022), Verstappen was internally asked whether under such (hypothetical) scenario he would let Perez pass, but Verstappen "re-iterated" that he would refuse to do so "because you know why"; Red Bull internally "knew" that Verstappen would definitely not change his mind on this subject and that "what happened in Monaco is not forgotten";
• he said that, after Max Verstappen secured the 2022 WDC title in Japan (Oct 9, 2022), Jos Verstappen told his newspaper that "also for him, Monaco was the turning point";
• he added that during the Azerbaijan race weekend (June 10-12, 2022; the next race after the Monaco race weekend of May 27-29, 2022) he was "by chance standing next to Red Bull" and he heard Helmut Marko ask where Perez was; after returning from the press conference, Perez was escorted upstairs where he was "summoned to explain" ("op het matje geroepen" is a Dutch expression for being ordered to explain alleged inappropriate behavior); the reporter added: "And apparently, there, Perez has internally admitted that he had deliberately spun during the final run of the qualifications. He had P3, so it was not about pole position. He saw on his steering wheel via the delta time that he was not faster underway. He thought « I park over there » and so Verstappen - who was faster underway - can no longer pass.";
• Perez went on to win the Monaco race and the reporter claims that "Verstappen has always remembered this";
• he added: "People can say: « Suggestive ». However, we know this already since months. It's internally already known." and "The onboard images of Perez, the data, and you clearly see that only in that moment he immediately floors the gas pedal in the middle of the turn ahead of the tunnel. Yeah, that was pure intent. And this has nothing to do with speculation, again, this is just a fact and he has also internally admitted this.";
• he also said: "Inside Verstappen's mind there is a difference between helping someone and truly deliberately screwing someone. And in his view that has happened in Monaco. And you can factually construe this. And he does not forget this.";
• futhermore: "Max Verstappen is not in F1 to make friends. He's a man of principles, a pure winner. And notwithstanding that it's only about P6, he has already internally told this, and he's not gonna change his mind in the final lap at Interlagos.";
• he concluded that "regardless of everything you may think about it, I do not understand why, given that he had internally already pointed this out a couple of times, to still think that via the onboard radio he would then [you could make him] agree.";
• and finally about his claim that the incident is related to Monaco, he concluded: "Was it Monaco? He [Verstappen] replied something along the lines « You can decide that. I'm not gonna say it ». Well, I just know for 100% that that's case. He's not saying it, but we are there to disclose it to the world.".

Critical moment:


Innuendo, conjecture or truth ? None of us over here has info to make sound statements about this matter. But if an FIA investigation would conclude the reporter's bold claim of alleged foul play by Perez during Q3 at 2022 Monaco race weekend to be established, Perez and Red Bull risk to be in hot water. Also, if the claim is false, Perez and Red Bull could take action because of slander and reputational damage. IMHO the FIA should look into this - it's about basic principles of fair play and sportsmanship.

2006 Monaco race weekend: Schumacher DSQ'd by Race Stewards regarding the controversial qualification incident at the Rascasse corner: