Collisions at apex: when must a leader surrender?

As a driving instructor, I would absolutely be teaching a different set of rules for the circumstance of being in front in a slower car. I would be teaching to forget the racing line, the student would be taught to position his car to take away the inside line, manage apex speeds to prevent the outside/inside pass, etc. I would not be teaching the student to judge how far alongside the faster car trying to overtake would need to be before he should not crash into him.

First step, make it very difficult for the faster, following car to get alongside - the old make your car wider technique that is time-honoured and tested and respected! (That doesn't mean swerving around with multiple moves, by the way).

How come Arnoux and Villeneuve could battle for two laps without complex rules, rights to the "racing line", and collisions taking one or the other out of the race? Sorry, I think your goal is not achievable.

 

I can hold my tongue no longer. Your description of the line and the mechanics of passing are wrong, just wrong.

The racing line is not the fastest way around a turn. It's the path that leads to the shortest lap time; the path that leads to the highest exit speed. There is almost always an equivalent line which has the same time in the turn, but has a lower exit speed.

It is the rare pass that is achieved by out-braking your opponent. Most passes are actually started in the prior corner. By getting through the prior corner better than your opponent, and/or by virtue of having a better car on the straights (combined with a long enough straight, specific gear choices, etc.) you arrive at the next corner at roughly equal time as your opponent, even though you were behind him (or perhaps side-by-side) in the previous corner.

Out-braking is a low percentage, high skill move, that when attempted most often leads to the exciting over-under (failed pass) that spectators love so much.

I won't go over other issues in your descriptions because your thesis is generally correct.

It is the obligation of the leader to be predictable; to take the racing line when not threatened.

If the passing car is only at the rear wheels of the leading car at the turn-in point, he cannot expect the leader to know this, and must expect to be chopped. In this case, the accident is the fault of the passer.

If the passing car is only at the rear wheels of the leading car at the braking point, he cannot expect the leader to know this, but still has a chance to beat him to the turn-in point. What happens next is very subjective and leads to heated arguments.

In the incident that really started this debate, even though Hamilton backed out of the pass attempt, Massa knew he was there (Hamilton was well ahead) and knew that Hamilton aborted the pass attempt, so he was probably justified in taking the racing line. IMHO this was just a racing incident, but it's one of those situations that there isn't a single correct answer. In amateur racing, you absolutely leave room on the inside in that situation. In pro racing, well you win some you lose some. Had Hamilton slowed enough, by leaving the apex line Massa would ultimately have unnecessarily given up the corner (which would have been realized at the next corner). Also, Massa would have been chumped by Hamilton. Sorry, you just can't allow that. OTOH, many times discretion is the better part of valor.

 

Far enough for the leader to know he is there. There's a point where you can't expect to be seen, which is front wing to rear wheel; a point where you can expect to be seen, which is basically front wheel at mirror; and a grey area in between.

uh, I watched it many times, also in slo-mo, and he was well ahead. I mean by pro racing standards. Obviously (as in, there is clear video evidence) he wasn't actually AHEAD of Massa. By ahead, and most other racers use this terminology, I mean far enough alongside that Massa "probably" knows he is there. By "well ahead", I mean he is CLEARLY in Massa's vision. I'd love to watch again if you can give a link to a video clip.

As further example of what I mean by "ahead", you can really only be "ahead" on the inside, because the driver is looking inside the turn. Outside passes are very difficult because, besides the obvious difficulty of being the long way around, you have to force the leading driver to take the inside line ... you cannot be ahead even if your nose is actually physically ahead (as opposed to the racer's definition of ahead: which is just in sight) because the leading driver is not looking that way. You can expect him to move to the outside unless he has already started braking, or if he has already MOVED to the inside line, and not just maintained the inside line. He has to MOVE because you're generally allowed one move. If he just maintained an inside line (from the previous corner), and didn't move there, you have to expect him to move outside to take the racing line.

 

Great post

+1 and again

+1 And this is pretty much my view as well.

 

Massa knew Hamilton was along side him that is obvious.
Image Unavailable, Please Login
Image Unavailable, Please Login
Image Unavailable, Please Login

 

And LH admitted his move was a failure in the end as well or is that whining excuses as well. They both made mistakes and hence the PROFESSIONAL opinion of actual F1 drivers(active) is it was a racing incident. Massa really did nothing wrong nor did LH. So whats your point other than bias against Massa. I openly defended LH against a penalty he got in Singapore the same way. Racing incident.

Oh and Schumi would block LH then move to the classic racing line to make the corner. LH had the same problem with Schumi as he did with Massa, not enough top end to make a DRS pass and was forced to make a pass elsewhere - AT RISK!

 

Agreed racing incident.

However I think the problem is a little bit more deep rooted with Massa and Hamilton, both need to bury the hatchet and move on, but my worry is Massa still feels he still has a axe to grind, or bury in Hamiltons head.

MS got a couple of warnings, about over blocking, I think he made his point there and then.

 

I agree the incident with Hamilton and Massa was a racing incident, and both shared fault.

My point is that I don't agree with the premise of this thread that there is one true holy racing line, and that the leading driver is entitled to drive the racing line unchallenged if he's in front, or that the leading driver has to "surrender" the line if he's got the following car alongside by X amount, etc.

 

Agree'd they should be better than this. I think actually LH has moved on. Massa not so much yet. Im a Massa fan and can readily admit this with no problem. Being a fan does have limits!

 

+1 Yes and if drivers should be held to account then something published and firm should be in place. I surmise it its not yet. I think it could even help the stewards adjudicate such incidents. In the end I guess its just racing!

 

And got called out for it. You are allowed one move, not one move and back. Being allowed one move is a benefit in that you can block, but a penalty in that you MUST now take a compromised line. Besides being unpredictable and dangerous, being allowed to move back is unfair.

Probably just a terminology thing, due to the word "racing". The racing line is what should really be called the optimal line. There is not one true holy racing line because every car is different and has its own best line, not to mention driver style. But for a given car, with a given tire, a given weight and tire wear, there is generally one true racing line (sometimes not but for our purposes we can stop there).

When cars are "racing" and deviate from the one true optimal line, even though they make take a different line because they are "racing" doesn't make the different line the "racing line".

There's [very] generally only two lines we talk about, the racing line and the passing or inside line.

The leading driver MUST surrender the racing line if the passing car is "in front", ie in the leading driver's field of vision, because the leading driver KNOWS the passing car is there. That's the whole point of taking the inside line; the leading driver cannot physically turn in while the passing driver "owns" the corner at that point (two objects cannot occupy the same space).

The point in time at which it matters where the passing car is, is at the turn-in point. In some lower levels of amateur racing, we use the braking point instead, for safety reasons.

 

By "well ahead", I meant even more than in Massa's mirror. The mirror rule/guideline/test is always ambiguous because we don't really know what field of vision is offered or how bad vibration is, etc. I meant what you said earlier, in Massa's [forward] peripheral vision.

 

Correct, and that line is known as the one true absolute and constant racing line.

Correct again, but that line is not known as the racing line, even though said defensive line was influenced because cars were racing.