Formula One Bahrain Grand Prix | Driver of the Day: Vote Now

435
608
F1 by FOM/Liberty Media in a nutshell
- Racing in questionable countries
- Stewards favoring a team for years
- everything stupidly expensive, cars, engineering, tickets, t-shirts
- ridiculous rule that a new team has to pay 200 mil to the other teams to be allowed to join
 
19
25
Not for 38 laps. Max did it six times after Horner told him to do so. Only then did the stewards step in and tell them to stop. So when LH does it, it's fine. If anyone else does it, it's bad.
Based on his 2020 record and the first race of 2021, Michael Masi is entirely in Mercedes pocket.
While you are entitled to your own opinion, you are not free to create your own facts.
At the driver meeting before the race, the drivers were told that corner 4 would not be monitored. Leclerc and others attest to that.
Red Bull realized that Hamilton (and others) were taking advantage of the lack of monitoring and going wide, Max was then asked to do the same (note that they did not complain but instead did the same, the radio evidence is very clear)
Red Bull decided to contact the race director about Turn 4 and only then did the race director change corner 4 from “unmonitored“ to “monitored” with warnings and penalties .
This was a rule change during the race which was not initiated by Merc but by RedBull.
While it is fair to blast Masi for not being consistent, the lack of consistency was not intended to please Merc but instead to appease those who complained (Red Bull). Listen to Hamilton’s reaction when told he needed to stop, he certainly did not sound pleased by Masi’s decision.
So much for Masi being ”entirely in Merc‘s pocket“.
The rules were the same for all drivers, some were smart enough to take advantage of them, others did not for whatever reason. Interesting that No driver has complained about what was happening at turn 4 before the change of rules, only fans who do not know the rules are complaining.
 
Last edited:
1,365
1,179
rules at the halfway point of the race is a problem, then they are not real rules, right? any way Max just makes it stronger Lewis will get the same in return
 

BertramRaven

Premium
147
204
Salty Max fanboy???
Don't be silly. Just examining the data. Jumping to the "fanboy" insult says more about you than about me! Your comment is akin to saying the police can't investigate a crime because the accused is liked by too many people or is of a specific "identity-group."
I do not and will not subscribe to that kind of stupidity,
 
Last edited:

BertramRaven

Premium
147
204
While you are entitled to your own opinion, you are not free to create your own facts.
At the driver meeting before the race, the drivers were told that corner 4 would not be monitored. Leclerc and others attest to that.
Red Bull realized that Hamilton (and others) were taking advantage of the lack of monitoring and going wide, Max was then asked to do the same (note that they did not complain but instead did the same, the radio evidence is very clear)
Red Bull decided to contact the race director about Turn 4 and only then did the race director change corner 4 from “unmonitored“ to “monitored” with warnings and penalties .
This was a rule change during the race which was not initiated by Merc but by RedBull.
While it is fair to blast Masi for not being consistent, the lack of consistency was not intended to please Merc but instead to appease those who complained (Red Bull). Listen to Hamilton’s reaction when told he needed to stop, he certainly did not sound pleased by Masi’s decision.
So much for Masi being ”entirely in Merc‘s pocket“.
The rules were the same for all drivers, some were smart enough to take advantage of them, others did not for whatever reason. Interesting that No driver has complained about what was happening at turn 4 before the change of rules, only fans who do not know the rules are complaining.
There was no rule change in the race. The details of the drivers meeting are available on the FIA website. They were originally told the track limits would not be enforced for Sunday but that was retracted on Sunday morning and an update issued, but the rule was not enforced until an outcry on social media! That smacks of collusion at best or ineptitude at worst.
 
Last edited:

Fat-Alfie

Premium
2,850
6,832
Masi - “It was mentioned very clearly in the drivers meeting and in the notes that [track limits] would not be monitored with regards to setting the lap time [during the race], so to speak, however it will always be monitored in accordance with the sporting regulations, being that a lasting advantage overall must not be gained.”

When Verstappen strayed beyond the track limits while overtaking Hamilton, this was considered gaining a lasting advantage, and Masi was quick to advise the team to hand the position back.

“What was mentioned and discussed with the drivers at the drivers meeting is that if an overtake takes place with a car off-track, and gains a lasting advantage, I will go on the radio and suggest to the team that they immediately relinquish that position. And that was made very clear.”

“Red Bull were actually given an instruction immediately by myself,” he added. “I suggested that they relinquish that position as listed in the sporting regulations, which they did.”

“It wasn’t for exceeding the track limits,” Masi clarified. “It was for gaining a lasting advantage by overtaking another car off the racetrack.”


It seems to me that race control accepted that cars running wide at T4 was inevitable, from time to time, and would not be actioned. Verstappen overtaking outside the track limits, regardless of where on (off) the track it happened was always going to be illegal.

It's the same old story as any area of F1 when it comes to rules - sail as close to the wind as possible, right up to the rule and as far beyond as you think you can get away with, until someone tells you to stop. Same as flexible front wings, burning oil for extra power, F-ducts, traction control...
 
435
608
Masi - “It was mentioned very clearly in the drivers meeting and in the notes that [track limits] would not be monitored with regards to setting the lap time [during the race], so to speak, however it will always be monitored in accordance with the sporting regulations, being that a lasting advantage overall must not be gained.”

When Verstappen strayed beyond the track limits while overtaking Hamilton, this was considered gaining a lasting advantage, and Masi was quick to advise the team to hand the position back.

“What was mentioned and discussed with the drivers at the drivers meeting is that if an overtake takes place with a car off-track, and gains a lasting advantage, I will go on the radio and suggest to the team that they immediately relinquish that position. And that was made very clear.”

“Red Bull were actually given an instruction immediately by myself,” he added. “I suggested that they relinquish that position as listed in the sporting regulations, which they did.”

“It wasn’t for exceeding the track limits,” Masi clarified. “It was for gaining a lasting advantage by overtaking another car off the racetrack.”


It seems to me that race control accepted that cars running wide at T4 was inevitable, from time to time, and would not be actioned. Verstappen overtaking outside the track limits, regardless of where on (off) the track it happened was always going to be illegal.

It's the same old story as any area of F1 when it comes to rules - sail as close to the wind as possible, right up to the rule and as far beyond as you think you can get away with, until someone tells you to stop. Same as flexible front wings, burning oil for extra power, F-ducts, traction control...

How can improving your lap times not count as a lasting advantage?
 

Fat-Alfie

Premium
2,850
6,832
How can improving your lap times not count as a lasting advantage?

All I can assume is that the FIA mean 'an instant and lasting advantage', rather than a cumulative one, as in this case.

If they brought back grass and gravel run-offs, they could let the drivers cut as much as they wanted, but they'd just be slower.

I am certainly not a Hamilton fan, but in this case I think it was the FIA who were guilty more than onyone else.
 
435
608
All I can assume is that the FIA mean 'an instant and lasting advantage', rather than a cumulative one, as in this case.

It still doesn't make sense. The moment you cut the the track you gain the advantage and then keep it for each lap over those who don't cut the track. The lap time improvment does never vanish into thin air at any point. It like a jump start but for each lap.
 
Top