Formula 1 Rolex Grande Prêmio De São Paulo 2023Formula 1

[-Fred-]

Or as they say in WRC
' we pay you a ****-ton of money so quit your bitchin, get in the car and drive'
Yeah yeah I know . Different cars , different skill set.

Some of the grandstands got wiped out by the winds, it's not just about the drivers.

 

[MagpieRacer]

Crash between Ocon and Alonso, Alonso going slow and Ocon on a flying lap. Lots of damage to the Alpine.

 

[ROAD_DOGG33J]

That was odd. Ocon torpedo-ed Alonso. I'm not sure what was going on.

 

[PaMu1337]

Looks like Ocon just hit the kerb too hard and lost control, sending him into Alonso

 

[PaMu1337]

Russel, Norris, Piastri and Ocon under investigation for driving too slowly

 

[ROAD_DOGG33J]

Looks like Ocon just hit the kerb too hard and lost control, sending him into Alonso

and subsequently called Alonso a ****in idiot

 

[PaMu1337]

and subsequently called Alonso a ****in idiot

F1 drivers will always find a way to blame someone else

 

[ROAD_DOGG33J]

F1 drivers will always find a way to blame someone else

Concur with the commentators, Alonso should've been further off the line. But Ocon lost it in advance.

 

[MagpieRacer]

If Alonso was properly out of the way, the crash doesn’t happen, he had some left lock on as Ocon comes past. Yes Ocon lost it a bit on the kerb but he had it under control if Alonso wasn’t there.

It’ll go down as a racing incident because there’s blame that can be apportioned to both. However I also wouldn’t be surprised to see Alonso take a grid drop for effectively impending.

 

[PaMu1337]

Concur with the commentators, Alonso should've been further off the line. But Ocon lost it in advance.

If Alonso was properly out of the way, the crash doesn’t happen, he had some left lock on as Ocon comes past. Yes Ocon lost it a bit on the kerb but he had it under control if Alonso wasn’t there.

It’ll go down as a racing incident because there’s blame that can be apportioned to both. However I also wouldn’t be surprised to see Alonso take a grid drop for effectively impending.

Sure, he could have left more space. But there still was more than enough space for Ocon to pass by without being impeded.

Edit: Nice shot of Alonso's mechanic hanging upside down over the halo into the cockpit 😂

 

[MagpieRacer]

Sure, he could have left more space. But there still was more than enough space for Ocon to pass by without being impeded.

Edit: Nice shot of Alonso's mechanic hanging upside down over the halo into the cockpit 😂

There was but with zero margin for error. Yes there’s an error but Alonso wasn’t holding a consistent line and had oodles of room to the right.

 

[PaMu1337]

There was but with zero margin for error. Yes there’s an error but Alonso wasn’t holding a consistent line and had oodles of room to the right.

I'd say he has some blame in the fact he got damaged, but not for impeding or causing the crash. So no reason for a penalty

 

[Adam41]

That draggy Merc losing more than 3 tenths to Mclaren in the last sector. Jesus Christ.

 

[Famine]

Sooooo... bearing in mind the general approach to the "letter" of the regs rather than the spirit over recent seasons, I have a regulation query.

Appendix L of the ISC, Chapter IV Article 4-6 deals with the pit lane. While it's 6c) I'm interested in, for completeness, it says:

4. Entrance to the pit lane
a) The section of track leading to the pit lane is designated the “pit entry road”.

b) During competition, unless otherwise defined in the regulations, access to the pit lane from thetrack is permitted through the pit entry road only.

c) Any driver intending to exit the track and enter the pit lane must make sure that it is safe to do so.

d) Except in cases of force majeure (accepted as such by the Stewards), or unless otherwise defined by the Race Director, if appointed, or Clerk of the Course, any part of a tyre of a car entering the pit lane must not cross, in any direction, any line painted on the track for the purpose of separating cars entering the pit lane from those on the track. For the avoidance of doubt, crossing means that the outside of any tyre should not go beyond the outside, with respect to the pit lane, of the relevant line painted on the track.

5. Pit Lane
a) The pit lane is demarcated such that the lane closest to the pit wall is designated the “fast lane” and the lane closest to the garages (or in some cases the “working wall”) is designated the “inner lane” (or “working lane”).

b) Cars in the fast lane have priority over those re-joining from the working lane. Once a car has left its garage or pit stop position it should blend into the fast lane as soon as it is safe to do so, and without unnecessarily impeding cars which are already in the fast lane.

c) A speed limit will be imposed in the pit lane and must be respected at all times.

d) Cars in either the fast lane or working lane may not overtake other cars in the fast lane except in exceptional circumstances e.g., a slow car with an obvious mechanical problem, a stopped car, an obstacle.

e) A car will be deemed to have been released either when it has been driven out of its designated garage or after it has moved from its pit stop position.

f) Cars must not be released from a garage or pit stop position in a way that could endanger or unnecessarily impede pit lane personnel or another driver. Equipment or tyres may not be left in the pit lane in a manner that would endanger or unnecessarily impede pit lane personnel or another car.

g) Cars may not be released from a garage or pit stop position in an unsafe condition.

h) Any contact between cars in the pit lane may be referred to the Stewards.

6. Exit from the pit lane
a) The section of track from the end of the pit lane leading to the track is designated the “pit exit road”.

b) There will be a green light and a red light (or similar signs) at the pit lane exit. Cars may only leave the pit lane when the green light is on (or sign is displayed).

c) Except in cases of force majeure (accepted as such by the Stewards), or unless otherwise defined by the Race Director, if appointed, or Clerk of the Course, any part of a tyre of a car exiting the pit lane must not cross any line painted on the track for the purpose of separating cars leaving the pit lane from those on the track. For the avoidance of doubt, crossing means that the outside of any tyre should not go beyond the outside, with respect to the pit lane, of the relevant line painted on the track

Now, at Interlagos, the pit lane entry and exit line is one constant line. It starts here:

And it continues on an unbroken run to here:

I should also note that the "Pit Exit" is defined as the area after the end of the pit lane and the second safety car line by the Sporting Regulations, in Article 34:

34.2 The section of track between the end of the pit lane and the second safety car line will be designated the “pit exit”.

At Interlagos that's here:

Which means that this is the "Pit Exit":

Backed up by the FIA's own document showing a diagram of the pit area for the race:

Now... the regulations state that a car in Pit Exit cannot "cross any line painted on the track for the purpose of separating cars leaving the pit lane from those on the track. For the avoidance of doubt, crossing means that the outside of any tyre should not go beyond the outside, with respect to the pit lane, of the relevant line painted on the track".

By the letter of the law, that means cars cannot put any part of any tyre beyond that right-hand line in the "Pit Exit" area. One should note that it's not possible for cars to cross that and get onto the track because there's a physical barrier, but that's the spirit of the law; the fact is that the right-hand line is drawn - all the way from pit entry (which has the same rule) to pit exit - in one unbroken line and therefore it is a "line painted on the track for the purpose of separating cars leaving the pit lane from those on the track", as well as a "line painted on the track for the purpose of separating cars entering the pit lane from those on the track". It's one line.

The letter of the law states that you cannot cross that line. It gives no margin for interpretation as to a location where you may cross it; it's absolute.

So with that all in mind, why are these not slam-dunk breaches of that regulation, by the letter of the law?

 

[Saidur_Ali]

They would probably only penalise if Max doesn't do it and someone else does it. Hopefully Haas are successful with the US GP review as it could help close the gap for Lewis to Sergio and make it at least a contest for P2 although looking unlikely given Sergio seems to have finally found the setup direction and pace since last race and next two tracks should be strong for Red Bull especially.

Anyway good to see Lando get first for the Sprint, hopefully he can keep the Red Bull's behind. Encouraging pace from Mercedes as they seem to be able to multiple laps on the tyres with improvements, Ferrari seem to drop off a lot more in comparison. Mercedes also look very strong in the middle sector and maybe with DRS, they will benefit more if they are running more downforce as they should be able to stay close on exit before the long straight and benefit more from slipstream and DRS effect, however others might just breeze by if they get close to them. Looks like the strongest race pace they've had relative to Red Bull since Singapore so if they can somehow get in front, they might be able to stay there but looks like it will be difficult.

 

[PaMu1337]

Now... the regulations state that a car in Pit Exit cannot "cross any line painted on the track for the purpose of separating cars leaving the pit lane from those on the track. For the avoidance of doubt, crossing means that the outside of any tyre should not go beyond the outside, with respect to the pit lane, of the relevant line painted on the track".

By the letter of the law, that means cars cannot put any part of any tyre beyond that right-hand line in the "Pit Exit" area. One should note that it's not possible for cars to cross that and get onto the track because there's a physical barrier, but that's the spirit of the law; the fact is that the right-hand line is drawn - all the way from pit entry (which has the same rule) to pit exit - in one unbroken line and therefore it is a "line painted on the track for the purpose of separating cars leaving the pit lane from those on the track", as well as a "line painted on the track for the purpose of separating cars entering the pit lane from those on the track". It's one line.

I disagree with you, because it being one continuous line does not mean the entire line was drawn with the purpose of separating the pit exit cars from the track.

It may be one line, but only the last part of it was drawn for that purpose.

But in all honesty, this rule can only properly be enforced if they clearly state the purpose of each bit of line drawn on the track.

 

[MagpieRacer]

I disagree with you, on the fact that it being one line does not mean the entire line was drawn with the purpose of separating the pit exit cars from the track.

It may be one line, but only the last part of it was drawn for that purpose

It’s absolutely right. Max should be getting penalised for this and isn’t because he’s Max. Anyone else and it would have been a penalty.

 

[PaMu1337]

It’s absolutely right. Max should be getting penalised for this and isn’t because he’s Max. Anyone else and it would have been a penalty.

There's enough precedent of cases where other drivers did this without penalty in the past

 

[Famine]

I disagree with you, because it being one continuous line does not mean the entire line was drawn with the purpose of separating the pit exit cars from the track.

That's the spirit of the law though. The letter of it does not distinguish, and it's the letter we've been seeing applied recently.

Additionally, that's the only location in the Interlagos "Pit Exit" (from the end of the pit lane to the second SC line, as defined by the FIA) where that line is drawn thus it can only be referring to that line. It's a line not to be crossed, from the moment it starts exiting the last corner (where it is the Pit Entry line) to the moment it ends after T3.

I don't see how, by the letter it's not at least an investigation. In addition to the drivers going slowly but not keeping to the left, per the letter of this race's instruction (the spirit would be "but how far left is 'to' the left?").

 

[PaMu1337]

That's the spirit of the law though. The letter of it does not distinguish, and it's the letter we've been seeing applied recently.

Additionally, that's the only location in the Interlagos "Pit Exit" (from the end of the pit lane to the second SC line, as defined by the FIA) where that line is drawn thus it can only be referring to that line. It's a line not to be crossed, from the moment it starts exiting the last corner (where it is the Pit Entry line) to the moment it ends after T3.

I don't see how, by the letter it's not at least an investigation. In addition to the drivers going slowly but not keeping to the left, per the letter of this race's instruction (the spirit would be "but how far left is 'to' the left?").

You have to consider separate parts of the line as being separate. If you don't, you get a ton of other issues. The second SC line is also connected continuously to that line. Does that mean it's also part of the same line separating cars on pit exit from the rest of the track? Because if so, it's literally impossible to leave the pit lane. If not, how is that any different from considering only the last part of the line as being applicable to that rule?

Without a clear definition of what constitutes one separate line (which they don't have) it will always be up to interpretation. You can always consider them separate lines, which just happen to touch each other in a continuous way.

There's a decent argument to be made that the moment it stops being on the side of the asphalt and starts being on the middle of the asphalt, that it becomes a new line.

 

[Famine]

You have to consider separate parts of the line as being separate.

That's the spirit, not the letter. Again, it's the letter that has been used to penalise (and get out of penalties) for the last few years.

The second SC line is also connected continuously to that line. Does that mean it's also part of the same line separating cars on pit exit from the rest of the track?

No. Its purpose is a marker for timing and (as the name suggests) safety car regulations. It's not a "line painted on the track for the purpose of separating cars leaving the pit lane from those on the track". It's also perpendicular to the various other reference lines, which does not meet the definition of being part any of those other lines (the definition or perpendicular being "two lines that meet or intersect").

The letter of the law holds that this one, continuous line from pit entry to pit exit is a line that may not be crossed with the exception of "force majeure".

There's several arguments referencing the spirit of the law (and overtaking in the pit exit is actually just fine) to okay this, but by the letter, these should be investigations at the bare minimum.


I'm not interested in whether they should or shouldn't be penalised, and I wasn't aware that it was Verstappen doing it in both cases (I thought the first shot was from Verstappen of Perez going past), just that the FIA has been rigidly applying the letter to penalise and then changing it to penalise in future - but doesn't appear to be doing so here.

 

[PaMu1337]

That's the spirit, not the letter. Again, it's the letter that has been used to penalise (and get out of penalties) for the last few years.

It isn't the spirit, it's a grey area due to lack of definitions

No. Its purpose is a marker for timing and (as the name suggests) safety car regulations. It's not a "line painted on the track for the purpose of separating cars leaving the pit lane from those on the track". It's also perpendicular to the various other reference lines, which does not meet the definition of being part any of those other lines (the definition or perpendicular being "two lines that meet or intersect").

Where is the definition that makes that a separate line, but the rest of what you are claiming the same line? There is no definition of what demarcates the ends of a line. If you bring perpendicularity into it, what defines that that makes it a separate line? Is there a limit of angle? The line you are referring to also has curvature in it. By mathematical definition of a line, a line has no curvature at all (and is in fact infinite in both directions). So should I consider it a separate line every time it curves by the slightest amount? What are the limits? This is all undefined, so there is just room for interpretation in these regulations.

The letter of the law holds that this one, continuous line from pit entry to pit exit is a line that may not be crossed with the exception of "force majeure".

There's several arguments referencing the spirit of the law (and overtaking in the pit exit is actually just fine) to okay this, but by the letter, these should be investigations at the bare minimum.

It does not define what the limits of that line are. You are choosing to interpret it as one single line


Edit: Man, splitting up a quote which has formatting is a pain

 

[Famine]

It isn't the spirit, it's a grey area due to lack of definitions

That's what the spirit is: the intention but not the letter.

Where is the definition that makes that a separate line

It's literally the definition of "line" and indeed "perpendicular".

Additionally, the SC lines have their own names - the "SC lines" - because they are indeed different lines.

but the rest of what you are claiming the same line?

It's not a claim; the line starts at pit entry and continues through to the second safety car line at pit exit without interruption. It's a single line.

It does not define what the limits of that line are.

Very much correct. The letter of the regulations does not make any distinction whatsoever about any single location along that entire line (other than "pit entry", "pit lane", and "pit exit") and it cannot therefore be considered to be demarcated as such.

You are choosing to interpret it as one single line

Not at all. That's what the letter of the regulations say it is.


Again, I'm not really interested in whether it should be a penalty, only that the FIA has been rigidly adhering to the letter of the law - and, recently, changing that to make things that should have been punished under the spirit but weren't because they didn't breach the letter into punishable things - and it is clearly not doing so here.

I've not seen a single explanation why that doesn't invoke the spirit, the intent, or an interpretation of why any driver can cross this line without even an investigation. And I'm fine with it not being penalised because it's not against the spirit (and because three other drivers were being dicks in the first case), but that's not what the FIA has been doing for at least the last three years.

 

[TumeK5]

Ocon blaming Alonso for losing control of his car

I apologize if I come across as discriminating, but French people are something else.

 

[PaMu1337]

Excuse the very crude drawing.

I marked 5 lines on this image, which all meet at very shallow angles, making it impossible to say which line continues into which.

You are choosing to interpret blue, red and purple as one line. Why is that any more valid than e.g. green and purple forming one line, or yellow red and purple, or them all being separate lines?

The letter of the law doesn't say anything about this at all, so it also doesn't say that blue, red, purple is one line. You are the one interpreting it as such, because it's an undefined grey area. Therefore you cannot say that by the letter of the law it is one line and the rules should be considered for the entire line.

The letter of the law here is not "It's one line", it's "it's undefined and therefore up to interpretation"

Edit: I'm not saying that your interpretation is wrong (it's a valid interpretation according to the rules), I'm just saying that it's not the only valid interpretation according to the exact letter of the rules

 

[AshenGraey]

That draggy Merc losing more than 3 tenths to Mclaren in the last sector. Jesus Christ.

With all the long straights expected in Las Vegas, they are just going to be sitting ducks.

 

[Famine]

View attachment 1300743
Excuse the very crude drawing.

I marked 5 lines on this image, which all meet at very shallow angles, making it impossible to say which line continues into which.

You are choosing to interpret blue, red and purple as one line. Why is that any more valid than e.g. green and purple forming one line, or yellow red and purple, or them all being separate lines?

The letter of the law doesn't say anything about this at all, so it also doesn't say that blue, red, purple is one line. You are the one interpreting it as such, because it's an undefined grey area. Therefore you cannot say that by the letter of the law it is one line and the rules should be considered for the entire line.

The letter of the law here is not "It's one line", it's "it's undefined and therefore up to interpretation"

Edit: I'm not saying that your interpretation is wrong (it's a valid interpretation according to the rules), I'm just saying that it's not the only valid interpretation according to the exact letter of the rules

I can't tell where your lines are, but at least two are not in the FIA's "Pit Exit" as defined in the regs, so not under consideration at all.

I don't know why you're cutting up a continuous line into different colour zones either.

Again, it's one, unbroken line from the first SC line to the second SC line. It doesn't split, deviate, or join other lines.

 

[PaMu1337]

I can't tell where your lines are, but at least two are not in the FIA's "Pit Exit" as defined in the regs.

I don't know why you're cutting up a continuous line into different colour zones either.

The lines I marked out are actual white lines in that area. There are places in this are where these lines branch out into multiple directions. The colours mark segments without branches. The branches happen at such shallow angles that you just cannot say that one specifc branch is the continuous line. You choose to take one specific branch here as being THE continuous line, but it just isn't that simple.

In fact, the last part of the line (purple) is pretty much straight with the trackside line (green). I'd argue it's more reasonable to say that that is a continuous line, and say that the line coming from the pitlane (blue, red) is a separate line which happens to meet up with it.

Again, it's one, unbroken line from the first SC line to the second SC line. It doesn't split, deviate, or join other lines.

It literally does split and join multiple times, which is what the colors represent

 

[Famine]

The lines I marked out are actual white lines in that area. There are places in this are where these lines branch out into multiple directions. The colours mark segments without branches. The branches happen at such shallow angles that you just cannot say that one specifc branch is the continuous line. You choose to take one specific branch here as being THE continuous line, but it just isn't that simple.

In fact, the last part of the line (purple) is pretty much straight with the trackside line (green). I'd argue it's more reasonable to say that that is a continuous line, and say that the line coming from the pitlane (blue, red) is a separate line which happens to meet up with it.

I really don't know what you're going for here.

You can follow the line from the first SC line (as I showed in the picture in my post) right through to the second SC line (also in my post). It doesn't stop, break, deviate, or join any other line in that whole run. It is a continuous line, and the cars shown crossing it in the "Pit Exit" zone crossed it - which is not allowed.

That's the letter of the regs. But they're not being followed this time. Every other time the stewards have tied themselves in knots to adhere to the letter rather than the spirit - even changing the letter, such as for the whole pit lane stopping in Mexico and now here - but not this time...

 

[PaMu1337]

It doesn't stop, break, deviate, or join any other line in that whole run.

It literally does deviate and join other lines, multiple times. This is exactly what I was drawing out there