Racing incident. Nothing more. What do we all expect to happen when drivers who are paid to win try to win? Regardless of how we apportion blame, someone made the point that Verstappen seems to be in the middle of the mess (too?) often. I haven't kept track of that, but I would tend to agree that this is true and, perhaps, a sign of his immaturity. Much is made of his young age, in terms of records, but the teenage mind is one that is still developing and maturing. I think his impetuousness is natural and, in time, maybe, will be rounded off and mellowed a bit. Too much, though, and perhaps he loses his drive, so it may be a fine line, but, as we all know, the adage is that to finish first, first you must finish. He may need to learn a bit more about protecting the car underneath him and not putting himself into tight spots. Maybe this is a lesson for him, but I kind of doubt it. What can you tell a 19-year-old? Don't get me wrong, by focusing on Verstappen, I don't absolve any of the three. I understand why the three of them pushed hard to be P1 after T1. But, the simple fact is that going three-wide into a turn does not often work out. So, is discretion the better part of valor? Survive T1, maybe, and race the rest of the race to find out. But, that goes for EACH of the three, right? The unfortunate thing is that Vettel's title hopes were harmed (and, the Scuderia's WCC hopes were, too) because of this mess. Hamilton is the beneficiary. Stuff happens. It's racing. CW
I don't know how much credence you guys put on James Allen...just thought I would post. Singapore F1 Start accident: Were Raikkonen, Verstappen and Vettel all entitled to go for it? News Posted By: James Allen | 18 Sep 2017 | 12:01 pm GMT | 5 comments There has been huge interest in the three way startline accident in Singapore which eliminated Sebastian Vettel, Kimi Raikkonen and Max Verstappen and handed victory and a handsome points lead to Lewis Hamilton. So was anyone to blame? What is the case for each driver? The FIA stewards heard from all three but decided that no single individual could be held responsible for the accident. That was a relief to Vettel, who has 7 penalty points on his licence and has had his fair share of warnings, especially after Baku. At 12 points a driver receives a one race ban? All three are entitled to race. Vettel is entitled to make one covering move and he did. Kimi is entitled to try to capitalise on one of his best ever starts and Max is entitled to stay on his line, having got a better launch. That’s why the stewards called it evens. The case against Raikkonen Of the three Raikkonen got the best start. He powered off the line and the onboard shot from Verstappen’s car clearly shows how much more momentum the Finn had as he came past on the left like a missile. Raikkonen had about a metre and a half to the pit wall to play with on the left. The problem was that as he came through, his right rear wheel hit Verstappen’s left front. There was nothing Verstappen could have done to avoid that. He moves very slightly to the left as he sees Vettel coming across. Had everyone stayed on their line and there was no contact, Raikkonen would certainly have got the ‘holeshot’ and although his angle into Turn 1 would have been tight, he would likely have been in the lead as the cars snaked right for Turn 2. The case against Verstappen Verstappen got the second best start. It was immediately clear from the head-on TV shot of the lights out that Verstappen’s launch was superior to Vettel’s ahead to his right on pole. That momentum continues through the acceleration phase and if no-one changes lines from this point, Verstappen will arrive at the braking point for Turn 1 ahead of Vettel. Drivers can always sense immediately if someone around them has got a better launch. Their senses are hyper-alert to it and Verstappen knew that he had a real chance to beat Vettel into Turn 1, especially as he would have the inside line. He may not have been aware of just how fast Raikkonen was travelling up to his left, as he was focussed on Vettel coming across on him from the right, knowing that he is compromised. Verstappen changes line slightly to the left in anticipation and that is enough to put him on a trajectory where Raikkonen’s right rear runs over Verstappen’s left front, which caused the accident. It broke Verstappen’s suspension and also sent Raikkonen into the side of Vettel. Some fans have suggested that Verstappen “should have lifted off”, but the trajectory would not have changed by doing that – he cannot simply disappear – and the critical first contact was that touch of Raikkonen’s rear wheel as he went past. That was all about the line. The case against Vettel Vettel had the most at risk as he was the one fighting for the world title. It seems he forgot that in the heat of the moment. His ‘sorry’ to the team on the radio as he parked his damaged car said it all and is the true verdict on the matter. However, he is racing and as the pole position man, he is entitled to move across once to defend his line. The head on shot and the on board from Verstappen’s car show that Vettel moved across a long way and kept on coming. Ultimately this is what caused the accident as there was nowhere for the three drivers to go on a converging trajectory. Seen from the outside it seems simple and inevitable. One could argue that with seven races to go and at the start of a two hour race where his title rival Hamilton is starting in fifth place, Vettel should have taken the long view. But his mindset will have been affected by the rain that was falling and the fact that in recent years Hamilton has won virtually all the wet or rain affected races. As Hamilton said afterwards, “As soon as it rained I knew where I was going to finish. I knew I had the pace when it rains. Unfortunately we just didn’t have the car in the dry. “But today, with it raining, those are my conditions.” In a dry race, with a start like that Vettel would have approached it differently, knowing that the threat from Hamilton was less significant. But in the wet he could not afford to give anything away at the start, hence the insistence on the move across. Vettel’s move was reminiscent of some similar moves that Michael Schumacher made off the startline in his Ferrari days, which was a talking point at the time in Drivers’ Briefings, as the rules on what was and wasn’t acceptable at the start were defined. Ultimately the price he has paid has been high. Not only is it a fourth win in five races for Hamilton and a 28 point lead, but it’s another moment which casts some doubt in the mind of Ferrari chairman Sergio Marchionne. He sees things in black and white and the objective here is for Ferrari to win the world championship. They have built a wonderful car this year, whereas the Mercedes is a bit tricky and temperamental. And yet Ferrari finds itself now out of control of the championship, not least due to valuable points dropped in Baku and Singapore. Ferrari’s long winless streak creates nervousness in the team and missing out this year will create greater nerviness next year. In that scenario one can imagine a leader like Marchionne deciding next summer that he needs another hot rod in his second car. That is the risk for Vettel. How JA on F1 readers call it JA on F1 readers have taken part in a snap poll with over 2000 voting in a few hours and clearly 75% call it Vettel’s fault.
The blame can be equal possibly but a level headed strategic thinker was needed on pole. He appears to lack that quality in an amount that matter this year for Vettel. Again the level headed champion among champions appears to be LH not Vettel. That bothers me a great deal as a fan of Ferrari. The team response on twitter is pure stupidity. Ferrari very much wasted an opportunity rain or not. The race became one for dry tires and the pace inherent in the Ferrari, to me would give victory.
Completely agree. Lewis drove very much like Prost: Cool and collected, managing risk, avoiding contact and not doing anything stupid. Vettel's start was so insanely stupid. All Ferrari had to do was drive the race home. They could have even let Max go for the win. Doesn't matter all that. What does matter is not to have a DNF. Singapore was Ferrari's chance to shine and get the points and they squandered it. I said it before: I don't understand how the Ferrari drivers didn't discuss all the scenarios of various starts and what plan to follow then. I bet they did discuss that but somehow forgot all about it. At least Seb seems to have forgotten. IMHO Seb is one of the smartest F1 drivers out there and I doubt Lewis is all that smart. But on track all that IQ doesn't seem to help Seb who suffers from severe cases of the Red Mist (cue in Baku) and lacks some race craft when fighting for positions (Spa in the RB comes to mind). He is super fast and wins when out in front but he gets into trouble when truly challenged. Also the start crash is what I feared would happen at Monza with Hamilton and Stroll and Ocon (?) yet they all kept it clean. How can two super experienced team mates with 5 titles between them get it so wrong?
It is all Monday morning quarterbacking now! Thinks happen so fast in racing, should of, could of, is mute. I hope it is not over for Ferrari, but doesn't look good!
"It doesn't change much," Vettel said. "I'm sure there will be more opportunities." This is worrying to me ,he just dropped 28 pts behind Lewis,its as if he is in denial again that he screwed up.
And it's nice to read a level headed post from a non Hamilton fan, yes as the track got drier, we can possibly assume we missed some Ham v Vet racing action. However I'll cut Vettel some slack, as I tend to agree with this from the above James Allen post. "But his mindset will have been affected by the rain that was falling and the fact that in recent years Hamilton has won virtually all the wet or rain affected races. As Hamilton said afterwards, “As soon as it rained I knew where I was going to finish. I knew I had the pace when it rains. Unfortunately we just didn’t have the car in the dry. “But today, with it raining, those are my conditions.” In a dry race, with a start like that Vettel would have approached it differently, knowing that the threat from Hamilton was less significant. But in the wet he could not afford to give anything away at the start, hence the insistence on the move across."
I think it all comes down to the fact that Vettel couldn't admit defeat at the start line, he wanted to be first in turn 1 no matter what...he knew he had a poor start and knew Verstappen had a better one, Kimi had an exceptional one. I understand why Vettel was so aggressive as he didn't expect Kimi to have such a good start but someone of his experience should have. This is pre 2011 Vettel we're seeing...he learned from those costly mistakes he made but this year seems to have forgotten them as you point out...Baku being point in that! We've seen him lose his head in the RBR days (pre 2011) a few times and those mistakes where extremely costly. Vettel needs a sit down, get his head straight...and win the title. I think with his action this weekend he severly hurt his chances of winning it and he knows he takes a big share of the blame. Had Baku not happened I could forgive yesterday. But Baku happened.
Yes It's not over till the fat lady sings. With 150 more points to make anything is possible. But Seb needs to do some serious soul searching and be honest with himself. There are more Ferrari tracks to come (Suzuka, Abu Dhabi), so he can turn this around. But only with a clear head.
I think it dried out enough / early to make a real race for Ferrari and Mercedes. Vettel decided to win at the first corner surely something they tell others not to do LOL.
I didnt break out the super computer yet...so can LH win 1 more and place P2 or P3 and gain another title ?? I dont feel like doing the maths as Im depressed LOL
You´re aware of the fact that the biggest political party in the NL's currently (and for some years now by the way) is right wing and that we have a right wing Prime Minister ?
Let's say VET wins them all where HAM is second: 6 wins x 25 = 150 6 2nds x 18 = 108 VET ends up with: 235 + 150 = 385 HAM ends up with: 263 + 108 = 371 so mathematically, VET can still win WDC and all of us will be rejoicing.. now, VET winning 5 and being 2nd to 1 race, while HAM winning 1 and being 2nd to 5 races, they'll both end up with 378. the drivers with most wins then wins WDC.. difficult, YES but it's not totally impossible.. we don't even need to wish for a HAM DNF but it would certainly make it easier if it happens..
I think seeing Seb win all races is unrealistic. There are some serious MB power tracks left. E.g. a win in the US for Ham seems likely to me. Also lets not forget the grid penalties will eventually come into play. Way too many factors to call it either way.
Accelerating in a strait line is not going for gaps, it was was Kimi who went for a gap which his teammate shut, ending in a Ferrari sandwich. It must have occured to you how subdued Vettel was after the race. Vettel knows full well by blocking Verstappen into Kimi, whom he did not see comming from the inside, he's the one who messed up the race. Vettel wanted to make up for his bad start.
I ended up fast warding the rest of the race. I watched the remaining of it in less than 10 minutes just hoping for a huge accident involving Mercedes cars.
