Hamilton Unlapping Controversy Thread

[dribbler 6]

Fortgive me, I have not read everyone's posts, but I think we're all agreeing with one another here; Hamilton was quite correct in unlapping himself. Backmarkers in conventional circumstances are cars which are slower than the leaders. For one of them to get into the mix (although visually quite hilarious) is a bit daft and would instantly be in a blue flag situation.

However, Hamilton was out of position with a fast car, faster than the Red Bull at that time. As such (and thank God that common sense prevailed with no showing of blue flags) he was quite right to unlap himself. I wonder what Sebastian would have done in the same situation, held back? Er, I don't think so.

As for the whole 'guys, we need to retire' situation. I think that's rather clear cut too; When Hamilton called it, he had a puncture and suspected further damage (but didn;t have any instant damage at that time). He went out and was able to set quick times. Then as a result of the puncture, damage developed.

Two other things; Hamilton does not give up. Whitmarsh mentioned that extra damage had occurred. I dont think he would have said that if he thought Lewis really had given up. He may be trying to schmooze him for 2013, but no one wants a quitter in the car. It's cardinal sin number one and Whitmarsh would have been visually p!ssed about it. He wasn't.

[Quiet One 15]

Fortgive me, I have not read everyone's posts, but I think we're all agreeing with one another here; Hamilton was quite correct in unlapping himself. Backmarkers in conventional circumstances are cars which are slower than the leaders. For one of them to get into the mix (although visually quite hilarious) is a bit daft and would instantly be in a blue flag situation.

However, Hamilton was out of position with a fast car, faster than the Red Bull at that time. As such (and thank God that common sense prevailed with no showing of blue flags) he was quite right to unlap himself. I wonder what Sebastian would have done in the same situation, held back? Er, I don't think so.

As for the whole 'guys, we need to retire' situation. I think that's rather clear cut too; When Hamilton called it, he had a puncture and suspected further damage (but didn;t have any instant damage at that time). He went out and was able to set quick times. Then as a result of the puncture, damage developed.

Two other things; Hamilton does not give up. Whitmarsh mentioned that extra damage had occurred. I dont think he would have said that if he thought Lewis really had given up. He may be trying to schmooze him for 2013, but no one wants a quitter in the car. It's cardinal sin number one and Whitmarsh would have been visually p!ssed about it. He wasn't.

Yes, nobody is questioning the legality of Hamilton's move. We were more discussing how it is regarded by other drivers as apparently there's a "gentleman's agreement" on these kind of manoeuvres. The total lack of reaction according to the news seems to point that this was not ill regarded among the paddock as well so that's basically it.

The other point I was making is that moves like this one are actually good as team tactics, and I think team tactics on track are great ways of spicing up the races but I do not know where to draw the line between moves like this, which look fun, and Austria 2002 or Hockenheim 2010 which look cheap. My gut feeling is that any attempt to draw a line by means of new rules will only make things worse and better to leave them at teams sense of good taste and discretion, letting public opinion help distinguish which ones are "good" and which ones are "bad"

Not sure if any of that made any sense.

[pabloh20 1]

Yes, nobody is questioning the legality of Hamilton's move. We were more discussing how it is regarded by other drivers as apparently there's a "gentleman's agreement" on these kind of manoeuvres. The total lack of reaction according to the news seems to point that this was not ill regarded among the paddock as well so that's basically it.

The other point I was making is that moves like this one are actually good as team tactics, and I think team tactics on track are great ways of spicing up the races but I do not know where to draw the line between moves like this, which look fun, and Austria 2002 or Hockenheim 2010 which look cheap. My gut feeling is that any attempt to draw a line by means of new rules will only make things worse and better to leave them at teams sense of good taste and discretion, letting public opinion help distinguish which ones are "good" and which ones are "bad"

Not sure if any of that made any sense.

More sense than you normally make, if that helps??

[Quiet One 15]

More sense than you normally make, if that helps??

Yes! Thank you! Very kind of you!

Wait...

[pabloh20 1]

Yes! Thank you! Very kind of you!

Wait...

[Argento Reloaded 1]

Hamilton was in fact trying to support his team-mate and was very lucky. Why? because he unlapped Seb and not Ayrton!!

Do any other bald and old remember Senna vs. Irvine? Talking about old men... do you remember "Cry baby" sung by Janis Joplin Seb? Nice song...

[pabloh20 1]

Hamilton was in fact trying to support his team-mate and was very lucky. Why? because he unlapped Seb and not Ayrton!!

Do any other bald and old remember Senna vs. Irvine? Talking about old men... do you remember "Cry baby" sung by Janis Joplin Seb? Nice song...

Yes, it has already been mentioned, though I doubt that would happen these days. I also remember Mansell grabbing Senna by the scruff of the neck, he seemed less interested in a conversation then

[dribbler 6]

Yes, nobody is questioning the legality of Hamilton's move. We were more discussing how it is regarded by other drivers as apparently there's a "gentleman's agreement" on these kind of manoeuvres.

Ah. That's why I should have read more posts, sorry!

Not sure if any of that made any sense.

It did.

Wow, I wasn't sarcastic. I may be ill....

[Quiet One 15]

Ah. That's why I should have read more posts, sorry!

It did.

Wow, I wasn't sarcastic. I may be ill....

You are growing soft. Is it parenthood? Too much "happy bubble"?

We need to change that!

Ok..let's see...

1) Schumacher was always as good as Yuji Ide. It's just t he car/cheating tactics/FIArrari that flattered him in the past. If you don't agree, please provide source and data to back your ridiculous claims.

2) Lewis unlapping from Vettel was something wrong and it relates to him being a loser for some random fact from 2007. Again, should you feel the need to disagree, I dare you to back whatever crap you are going to post with some source which I may or may not accept, and in any case it will not matter because I will merely say that it is irrelevant.

3) Salma Hayek is so ugly that...no, wait...I can't do this...

[JHS18 0]

Maybe Vettel should have the final word on this. This is what he said today.

Asked about his post-race comments on Lewis Hamilton’s unlapping move in Germany, when he said “it’s a bit stupid to disturb the leaders,” Vettel implied that he’d been misinterpreted.

“I think if I say after the race that I thought it was unnecessary, then it gets put and quoted that I said he’s stupid, it’s quite disappointing. Sometimes I have a mouth, I say a couple of words, you have ears, sometimes in that’s process it seems that mistakes happen.

“If you look at the rules I think it’s clear you are allowed to do that, I said it was unnecessary. Obviously I was hunting Fernando, it was a couple of laps to the stop. It didn’t help me, it probably helped Jenson. That’s racing. I’m not complaining, I said it was unnecessary from a racing point of view to distract the leaders, no matter who it was, and that’s it.”

[Massa 0]

I hope so badly to see Vettel a lap down in the fastest car right behind the leaders...so, so badly...

There, I get the last word now.

[Quiet One 15]

How to build a villain:

http://www.totalf1.com/full_story/view/424608/Vettel_in_rare_outburst/

Most of what he said rings true, most of the things he does not concede seem trivial, the fact that he is a sore loser has been firmly established but is not something unusual as the same could be said for 90% of the F1 racers of all ages (and yes, I am including Alonso among them) yet the whole article is written to transmit a perception that Vettel (and even Brawn's) words belie.

I don't like the kid, but I can't hate him either. I've never quite believe the hype around him but he is obviously more than able and even if he has been helped lots by his car he obviously has the potential to become a formidable driver.

He is a little crybaby, so what? How mature is to twist everything to make him seem worse than he is?

Now I'm p**sed off. VETTEL FTW!!! GIVE THEM THE FINGER, WUNDERKIND!

[JHS18 0]

F1 driver's quote taken out of context by media shocker.

[Massa 0]

Yeah, but it doesn't matter at all, does it? Taking his quote of context doesn't change the championship standings or anything he has done or will do. How many have thought much about "is it because I'm black?" since it's been said without being prompted or reminded? I don't think many people sit around thinking "Lewis shouldn't have said that" today or "Lewis' career would be so different if he hadn't said that" or "his career was positively changed because he said that." And that was a similar case. These things blow over so quickly. Vettel shouldn't care what they take out of context, and no one should really care that much what drivers say beyond entertainment value when someone has a fit or says something clever (both of which are rare, and both of which don't need to be anything other than rare). The media being hard to trust might be a problem, but people actually listening to the media is the bigger problem, and there's nothing the media can do about that. Predatory loan scams go away when people stop falling for them. Media accountability stops being a problem when people don't let the media tell them the story, and I'm more worried that people will let cable news tell the world to them than the I am that cable news exists (anyone with the misfortune of reading my posts in Outside F1 knows how I'd be a hypocrite if I said I didn't believe in making up my own stories...I have a near-monopoly on covering NASCAR and IndyCar on this forum and I abuse that power with my own twisted view of American racing that relies heavily on not actually watching and reading meaningless TV numbers ).

The drivers have a way of talking when they're racing and it's a lot more interesting than what they put together in words that get dissected and misinterpreted and mistranslated and overanalyzed and defended. And those races tell more stories than the media dare to cover...which is partially their fault, and partially the consumers of media's fault for wanting the softball stuff and having no interest in anything the hardcore would find interesting. But the hardcore would complain if the media covered the exciting stuff because then we'd lose the fun of figuring anything out for ourselves and feeling elite and intelligent for doing so. I have no idea if that post made any sense. I think I'm trying to say there should be no reporters interviewing drivers and no commentators on race broadcasts and if that was what I was trying to say I agree with it fully.

To be honest, I think I just wrote off every form of media, forums included, as having no purpose, which is a wonderful thing for a moderator of a forum to say to an aspiring (or accomplished now, you with all your websites...it used to be so easy for me to keep up with reading your work back in the day ) journalist.

[Rainmaster 7]

Backmarker rule exists for slower cars. Lewis was a faster car. Everything else (e.g. politeness, gentlemen's agreement etc) is usually politics and bias. Most front running drivers would do exactly what Lewis did in that situation. Team argument? You don't even need it as a justification. Anyway, I think Lewis might have done it regardless of Button's position. Let's try this individual argument: Hammy intends to pass both Vettel and Alonso, in the hope his battle with Alonso ends in Vettel catching and passing Alonso. Therefore being preferable for Hamilton's championship chances.

To put the issue to bed for good, one of the most famous F1 races is the 1967 Italian GP, considered by some to be one of Jim Clark's finest performances and among the greatest F1 races ever. Clark unlapped himself during the race (clearly no unwritten rule has ever existed, among drivers or otherwise, for the circumstances of a faster car unlapping itself, even in the romantic era), read: http://www.grandprix.../gpe/rr159.html

As for the Vettel article. Awful. Mat Coch should try some real reporting instead of sticking words like "defensively" onto perfectly logical sentences. When he does that he is personally calling everybody who reads that an idiot. I wouldn't expect anything better from a website often barely above gutter level.

[pabloh20 1]

Backmarker rule exists for slower cars. Lewis was a faster car. Everything else (e.g. politeness, gentlemen's agreement etc) is usually politics and bias. Most front running drivers would do exactly what Lewis did in that situation. Team argument? You don't even need it as a justification. Anyway, I think Lewis might have done it regardless of Button's position. Let's try this individual argument: Hammy intends to pass both Vettel and Alonso, in the hope his battle with Alonso ends in Vettel catching and passing Alonso. Therefore being preferable for Hamilton's championship chances.

To put the issue to bed for good, one of the most famous F1 races is the 1967 Italian GP, considered by some to be one of Jim Clark's finest performances and among the greatest F1 races ever. Clark unlapped himself during the race (clearly no unwritten rule has ever existed, among drivers or otherwise, for the circumstances of a faster car unlapping itself, even in the romantic era), read: http://www.grandprix.../gpe/rr159.html

As for the Vettel article. Awful. Mat Coch should try some real reporting instead of sticking words like "defensively" onto perfectly logical sentences. When he does that he is personally calling everybody who reads that an idiot. I wouldn't expect anything better from a website often barely above gutter level.

Exsqueeze me?? I think you wil find anybody who uses the word circumspect is a literal genie literally genus literarary genious really good writer of stuff.

[AleHop 0]

Ok, I'll take Vettel's words out of context:

http://www.totalf1.com/full_story/view/424642/Vettel_Fernando_was_fastest_because_he_had_the_best_equipment/

[Quiet One 15]

Ok, I'll take Vettel's words out of context:

http://www.totalf1.c...best_equipment/

The guy doesn't take defeat too graciously. Well, maybe this year will let him get used to the flavor of some humble pie.

The "fastest car" argument this year reeks of desperation. And whoever disagrees will be repeatedly beaten on the head with a rubber chicken.

Come on, punks!!!!

[AleHop 0]

The guy doesn't take defeat too graciously. Well, maybe this year will let him get used to the flavor of some humble pie.

It's funny that last season we had to push down our throats comments about Vettel's great achievements as if his RB7 was a mere competitive car in the hands of a genius.

The F2012 has been so far a mere competitive car some times, a piece of junk some others. Alonso has made the difference in many circumstances. Can Vettel admit that?

There are a few drivers in 2012 with the equipment required to win races and even the championship, it's not that the F2012 isn't a good car now but it hasn't been the best one in Valencia, Silverstone or Hockenheim.

This week BBC placed Alonso as 10th greatest driver in History, Hamilton was 15th. Are they going to include Vettel in that list?

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/formula1/18957703

Advice: shut up and drive. For Vettel, Hamilton, Alonso... A good advice for all of them, the championship is on the table for any of them to grab it.

[Grabthaw the Hammerslayer 4]

Now you see, if they'd filled their car tyres with custard, this would have worked out completely differently....

[AleHop 0]

Now you see, if they'd filled their car tyres with custard, this would have worked out completely differently....

I read custard but I think you always meant mustard. It's greener, recyclable and the smell nearly as good as gasoline.

[Grabthaw the Hammerslayer 4]

I read custard but I think you always meant mustard. It's greener, recyclable and the smell nearly as good as gasoline.

Hmm, English, German or French??? Dijon Mustard would not work, the seeds would get stuck in the tyre valves....

[AleHop 0]