Reject of the Race - Belgium 2024

The place for speaking your mind on current goings-on in F1
Post Reply
User avatar
Londoner
Posts: 6467
Joined: 17 Jun 2010, 18:21
Location: Norwich, UK
Contact:

Reject of the Race - Belgium 2024

Post by Londoner »

Post your choices for Reject of the Race!
Fetzie on Ferrari wrote:How does a driver hurtling around a race track while they're sous-viding in their overalls have a better understanding of the race than a team of strategy engineers in an air-conditioned room?l
User avatar
You-Gee-Eee-Day
Posts: 190
Joined: 10 Jun 2018, 23:38
Location: Definitely not Japan

Re: Reject of the Race - Belgium 2024

Post by You-Gee-Eee-Day »

1. Perez - At this point he's just a joke.
2. Hamilton - Messing up the same corner over and over and losing a win to it.
:deletraz:

F1 2019 in a nutshell:
Roses are Red
Violets are Blue
"Ferrari is faster"
Mercedes 1-2
sswishbone
Posts: 1195
Joined: 25 Mar 2011, 06:23
Location: England

Re: Reject of the Race - Belgium 2024

Post by sswishbone »

1) Perez - lost seven places, Max gained six. 'Nuff said

2) Norris - bottling at turn one kept him stuck in DRS trains all day
"Hispania are a waste of talent and petrol!" Martin Brundle, Australia Qualifying 2011

Live streams and podcasts from yours truly at http://www.youtube.com/user/sswishbone
User avatar
mario
Posts: 8267
Joined: 31 Oct 2009, 17:13

Re: Reject of the Race - Belgium 2024

Post by mario »

sswishbone wrote: 28 Jul 2024, 14:35 1) Perez - lost seven places, Max gained six. 'Nuff said

2) Norris - bottling at turn one kept him stuck in DRS trains all day
Mind you, Red Bull do have to take a little bit of criticism for the strategy they gave Perez - the pit box call was clearly solely intended to move him out of Verstappen's way, but it also resulted in him having to run a sub-optimal strategy that compromised his race relative to Sainz.
Martin Brundle, on watching a replay of Grosjean spinning:
"The problem with Grosjean is that he want to take a look back at the corner he's just exited"
User avatar
takagi_for_the_win
Posts: 3061
Joined: 02 Oct 2011, 01:38
Location: The land of the little people.

Re: Reject of the Race - Belgium 2024

Post by takagi_for_the_win »

Not really sure there were any real standouts for me, fairly sensible race all in.

I think McLaren deserve some stick for contriving to finish 3rd and 6th with probably the fastest car; Norris in particular ruined his race with that small mistake at the start which condemned him to an afternoon of DRS trains. That said, handing out an ROTR for putting half a tyre wide at La Source on lap 1 seems harsh to me.

Perez would be my other stand-out. Fair enough he's the weakest of all the drivers of the top 4 teams, and fair enough I got the impression he was called in for his second stop simply to get him out of Verstappen's way. Even still, he was still miles off the pace and dropped down the order like a stone. The more that the others catch up with Red Bull, the more he looks like a liability.
TORA! TORA! TORA!
sswishbone
Posts: 1195
Joined: 25 Mar 2011, 06:23
Location: England

Re: Reject of the Race - Belgium 2024

Post by sswishbone »

mario wrote: 28 Jul 2024, 14:40
sswishbone wrote: 28 Jul 2024, 14:35 1) Perez - lost seven places, Max gained six. 'Nuff said

2) Norris - bottling at turn one kept him stuck in DRS trains all day
Mind you, Red Bull do have to take a little bit of criticism for the strategy they gave Perez - the pit box call was clearly solely intended to move him out of Verstappen's way, but it also resulted in him having to run a sub-optimal strategy that compromised his race relative to Sainz.
Mind you, that wouldn't have happened had he not been so poor in his first stint
"Hispania are a waste of talent and petrol!" Martin Brundle, Australia Qualifying 2011

Live streams and podcasts from yours truly at http://www.youtube.com/user/sswishbone
IceG
Posts: 761
Joined: 06 Oct 2011, 17:24
Location: London (the one in England)

Re: Reject of the Race - Belgium 2024

Post by IceG »

Nothing really rejectful - perhaps Sergio's application for redundancy?
User avatar
rachel1990
Posts: 1012
Joined: 29 Oct 2012, 20:21

Re: Reject of the Race - Belgium 2024

Post by rachel1990 »

1. Mercedes. Ruined an amazing drive from George by unfueliing the car leaving it underweight and getting him DNQ'd. Stupid job there.

2. Perez. Yes Red Bull pitted him to get out of Max's way but here is the thing. He shouldn't be holding up Max considering he started 2nd and Max started 11th!!!!! Red Bull gave Perez the task of stopping Mclaren and he didn't. Quite frankly seeing what Pace Max had before Sunday, I think Red Bull were expecting him to win this race or at least be on the poduim. He hasn't finished in the top 6 since Miami. Enough is enough now.

Hm Lando Norris. Seemed to keep going off and lost time doing this. Should have got a better result.

Hm Sauber. Zhou's car failed.
Last edited by rachel1990 on 28 Jul 2024, 17:01, edited 1 time in total.
Benetton of 1992. Never a reject
User avatar
Ducktanian
Posts: 346
Joined: 28 Mar 2010, 14:45

Re: Reject of the Race - Belgium 2024

Post by Ducktanian »

When was the last time that there was no real clear contenders for ROTR?

McLaren are probably the closest I can think of due to Lando's odd strategy to go long in the first stint and then do nothing with that and willingly stay stuck behind Verstappen, along with Norris making a couple of mistakes. The start wasn't the only mistake he made. Then you had Piastri lose time in the pit stop.

Actually no, I have one.

Everyone who thought that Max was going to win this race by miles
Murray Walker: "A lot of people here are really debating whether Ricardo Rosset is Formula 1 material"
Martin Brundle: "Well, it's a fairly short debate, Murray".
User avatar
Row Man Gross-Gene
Posts: 877
Joined: 03 Jan 2010, 18:48
Location: Minnesota, USA
Contact:

Re: Reject of the Race - Belgium 2024

Post by Row Man Gross-Gene »

Even with the caveats, I have to go with Perez.
It's just unbelievable...that Formula 1 could be such a ridiculous melange of idiots.

-Jamie McGregor

Check out my colo(u)ring pages website: http://sites.google.com/site/carcoloringpages/
User avatar
Londoner
Posts: 6467
Joined: 17 Jun 2010, 18:21
Location: Norwich, UK
Contact:

Re: Reject of the Race - Belgium 2024

Post by Londoner »

With the news breaking that Russell is likely to be disqualified for an underweight car, the ROTR can only be Mercedes, the absolute morons. Way to wreck one of the greatest drives of the 2020s. :facepalm:
Fetzie on Ferrari wrote:How does a driver hurtling around a race track while they're sous-viding in their overalls have a better understanding of the race than a team of strategy engineers in an air-conditioned room?l
User avatar
Hermann95
Site Donor
Site Donor
Posts: 1365
Joined: 20 Jul 2013, 14:17

Re: Reject of the Race - Belgium 2024

Post by Hermann95 »

Mercedes, for getting Russell dsq'd with an underweight car
User avatar
Meatwad
Posts: 1102
Joined: 20 Jul 2012, 17:33
Location: Finland

Re: Reject of the Race - Belgium 2024

Post by Meatwad »

Russell's car for being underweight.
User avatar
mario
Posts: 8267
Joined: 31 Oct 2009, 17:13

Re: Reject of the Race - Belgium 2024

Post by mario »

Londoner wrote: 28 Jul 2024, 16:31 With the news breaking that Russell is likely to be disqualified for an underweight car, the ROTR can only be Mercedes, the absolute morons. Way to wreck one of the greatest drives of the 2020s. :facepalm:
Mind you, there will be those wondering how much of a benefit being slightly under the weight limit had on Russell's performance, which is going to put that little bit of doubt in some minds about that achievement.
Martin Brundle, on watching a replay of Grosjean spinning:
"The problem with Grosjean is that he want to take a look back at the corner he's just exited"
User avatar
Jarvis
Posts: 100
Joined: 10 Dec 2023, 11:41
Location: US
Contact:

Re: Reject of the Race - Belgium 2024

Post by Jarvis »

Sergio Perez and Mercedes.
My F1 Favorites: Fav Track | Fav Driver | Fav App
User avatar
James1978
Posts: 3104
Joined: 26 Jul 2010, 18:46
Location: Darlington, NE England

Re: Reject of the Race - Belgium 2024

Post by James1978 »

Its between Mercedes - 1.5 kg is a massive amount, seriously? And Checo - goodbye Red Bull contract. Front row to last of the top 4 teams on the road.
"Poor old Warwick takes it from behind all throughout this season". :) (Tony Jardine, 1988)
User avatar
Wallio
Site Donor
Site Donor
Posts: 2696
Joined: 22 Feb 2012, 22:54
Location: The Wyoming Valley, PA

Re: Reject of the Race - Belgium 2024

Post by Wallio »

Mercedes - What a bunch of wankers. 1.5 kilos is a fairly large amount (BAR in 2005 was 5.x kilos and was considered "extreme" by the stewards.) If it happened to any other driver, you'd feel bad for them.

Red Bull - Going to lose the WCC for sure, and may very well lose the WDC too. All the internal chaos is killing the team.

Alpine - Should they stay or should they go? No one cares. Pretty shite Deadpool livery too.
Professional Historian/Semi-Retired Drag Racer/Whiskey Enthusiast

"When I was still racing, I never once thought 'Oh, I can't damage the car here'." - Jolyn Palmer
Me either Jolyn, maybe that's why we're both out, eh?
User avatar
mario
Posts: 8267
Joined: 31 Oct 2009, 17:13

Re: Reject of the Race - Belgium 2024

Post by mario »

James1978 wrote: 28 Jul 2024, 20:02 Its between Mercedes - 1.5 kg is a massive amount, seriously? And Checo - goodbye Red Bull contract. Front row to last of the top 4 teams on the road.
What's interesting is it's now being suggested that Russell's strategy of one stopping might have contributed towards him falling below the weight limit in the first place.

It's been suggested that Mercedes, like most of the other teams, had expected the race to require two stops due to the wear rate they'd seen in the limited running in the practice sessions. Russell's decision to switch to a one stop strategy meant that his tyres were much more heavily worn than they'd originally expected, and it's been suggested the extra wear on his tyres might have been enough to drop him below the minimum weight limit.
Martin Brundle, on watching a replay of Grosjean spinning:
"The problem with Grosjean is that he want to take a look back at the corner he's just exited"
User avatar
Forti
Posts: 196
Joined: 03 Sep 2022, 04:24
Location: The Pacific time zone, the most rejectful time zone of them all

Re: Reject of the Race - Belgium 2024

Post by Forti »

mario wrote: 29 Jul 2024, 05:39 It's been suggested that Mercedes, like most of the other teams, had expected the race to require two stops due to the wear rate they'd seen in the limited running in the practice sessions. Russell's decision to switch to a one stop strategy meant that his tyres were much more heavily worn than they'd originally expected, and it's been suggested the extra wear on his tyres might have been enough to drop him below the minimum weight limit.
Seeing as Robert Kubica's significant tyre wear was viewed as the primarily cause for his car being underweight and getting disqualified from the 2006 Hungarian Grand Prix, that makes full sense to me.

Mercedes for my ROTR.
JUDD POWER, YEAH!
Aislabie c. 2024 Las Vegas Grand Prix wrote: Bottas is what, 23rd in a 20 car championship? Man's more washed than Mr Clean's best pants
It would be funny if FortiWinks resurfaced only to find out that I'm the Forti in town now.
User avatar
Row Man Gross-Gene
Posts: 877
Joined: 03 Jan 2010, 18:48
Location: Minnesota, USA
Contact:

Re: Reject of the Race - Belgium 2024

Post by Row Man Gross-Gene »

Mercedes for me too. If Russell had retained his position, I would have correctly predicted 7 out of the top 10 in the predicament predictions, now I don't even want to know!
It's just unbelievable...that Formula 1 could be such a ridiculous melange of idiots.

-Jamie McGregor

Check out my colo(u)ring pages website: http://sites.google.com/site/carcoloringpages/
User avatar
mario
Posts: 8267
Joined: 31 Oct 2009, 17:13

Re: Reject of the Race - Belgium 2024

Post by mario »

Forti wrote: 29 Jul 2024, 07:25
mario wrote: 29 Jul 2024, 05:39 It's been suggested that Mercedes, like most of the other teams, had expected the race to require two stops due to the wear rate they'd seen in the limited running in the practice sessions. Russell's decision to switch to a one stop strategy meant that his tyres were much more heavily worn than they'd originally expected, and it's been suggested the extra wear on his tyres might have been enough to drop him below the minimum weight limit.
Seeing as Robert Kubica's significant tyre wear was viewed as the primarily cause for his car being underweight and getting disqualified from the 2006 Hungarian Grand Prix, that makes full sense to me.

Mercedes for my ROTR.
As an idle exercise, I thought I'd roughly try to ballpark how much additional wear might have been required for Russell to drop below the minimum weight limit.

The surface area of the front tyres would be about 1.38 square metres, whilst the rear tyres is about 1.83 square metres, which means the total surface area is roughly 3.21 square metres, or roughly 32,100 square centimetres.

The rubber used in a car tyre seems to have a unit mass of about 1.1 grams per cubic centimetre, so 1500g (1.5kg) of rubber would have a volume of approximately 1363.6 cubic centimetres. Dividing that volume by the approximate surface area of the tyres gives a thickness of tyre rubber of about 0.04cm, or an average additional wear rate of roughly 0.4mm.

Now, I have made some rather rough approximations there, but I think it's roughly in the right ballpark. That amount of wear doesn't seem that wildly high, so it could be within the margin of error that Mercedes would have worked to following the curtailed free practice sessions - add to that the possibility that Mercedes might have been pushing a bit closer to the limits to close the gap to the front, and it does seem like a plausible potential explanation.
Martin Brundle, on watching a replay of Grosjean spinning:
"The problem with Grosjean is that he want to take a look back at the corner he's just exited"
Har1MAS1415
Posts: 756
Joined: 12 Sep 2021, 15:36

Re: Reject of the Race - Belgium 2024

Post by Har1MAS1415 »

1) Russell's underweight car - This is the first time the on-the-road winner has been DSQ'd since Schumacher in 1994 if memory serves me correct. (Since Irvine was reinstated at Malaysia in 1999)

2) Red Bull - They still insist on retaining Perez, at least until the end of this season, HE'S USELESS, GUYS! HOW MUCH LONGER IS IT GOING TO TAKE YOU TO REALISE THAT? Sorry Sergio but Dietrich Mateschitz must be turning in his grave by now.
Last edited by Har1MAS1415 on 07 Aug 2024, 13:12, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
Wallio
Site Donor
Site Donor
Posts: 2696
Joined: 22 Feb 2012, 22:54
Location: The Wyoming Valley, PA

Re: Reject of the Race - Belgium 2024

Post by Wallio »

mario wrote: 29 Jul 2024, 19:35
As an idle exercise, I thought I'd roughly try to ballpark how much additional wear might have been required for Russell to drop below the minimum weight limit.

The surface area of the front tyres would be about 1.38 square metres, whilst the rear tyres is about 1.83 square metres, which means the total surface area is roughly 3.21 square metres, or roughly 32,100 square centimetres.

The rubber used in a car tyre seems to have a unit mass of about 1.1 grams per cubic centimetre, so 1500g (1.5kg) of rubber would have a volume of approximately 1363.6 cubic centimetres. Dividing that volume by the approximate surface area of the tyres gives a thickness of tyre rubber of about 0.04cm, or an average additional wear rate of roughly 0.4mm.

Now, I have made some rather rough approximations there, but I think it's roughly in the right ballpark. That amount of wear doesn't seem that wildly high, so it could be within the margin of error that Mercedes would have worked to following the curtailed free practice sessions - add to that the possibility that Mercedes might have been pushing a bit closer to the limits to close the gap to the front, and it does seem like a plausible potential explanation.
While this is almost certainly the reason, the only thing that gives me pause is that Alosno was able to score points one stopping and be ok. He almost assuredly is driving a heavier car, but it still is something to consider.
Professional Historian/Semi-Retired Drag Racer/Whiskey Enthusiast

"When I was still racing, I never once thought 'Oh, I can't damage the car here'." - Jolyn Palmer
Me either Jolyn, maybe that's why we're both out, eh?
User avatar
noiceinmydrink
Posts: 349
Joined: 30 Sep 2012, 15:40
Location: ziggurat

Re: Reject of the Race - Belgium 2024

Post by noiceinmydrink »

Was Alonso always on a one-stopper though or did they change from a two stop mid-race? I think that's the critical point more than anything.

Takes a lot for me to feel sympathy for Russell but this certainly is that lot. Terrible shame for him.
User avatar
mario
Posts: 8267
Joined: 31 Oct 2009, 17:13

Re: Reject of the Race - Belgium 2024

Post by mario »

Wallio wrote: 30 Jul 2024, 15:57
mario wrote: 29 Jul 2024, 19:35
As an idle exercise, I thought I'd roughly try to ballpark how much additional wear might have been required for Russell to drop below the minimum weight limit.

The surface area of the front tyres would be about 1.38 square metres, whilst the rear tyres is about 1.83 square metres, which means the total surface area is roughly 3.21 square metres, or roughly 32,100 square centimetres.

The rubber used in a car tyre seems to have a unit mass of about 1.1 grams per cubic centimetre, so 1500g (1.5kg) of rubber would have a volume of approximately 1363.6 cubic centimetres. Dividing that volume by the approximate surface area of the tyres gives a thickness of tyre rubber of about 0.04cm, or an average additional wear rate of roughly 0.4mm.

Now, I have made some rather rough approximations there, but I think it's roughly in the right ballpark. That amount of wear doesn't seem that wildly high, so it could be within the margin of error that Mercedes would have worked to following the curtailed free practice sessions - add to that the possibility that Mercedes might have been pushing a bit closer to the limits to close the gap to the front, and it does seem like a plausible potential explanation.
While this is almost certainly the reason, the only thing that gives me pause is that Alosno was able to score points one stopping and be ok. He almost assuredly is driving a heavier car, but it still is something to consider.
It probably isn't the only reason, as there are other potential factors in play there too - for example, it's been indicated that Russell was running a lower ride height than Hamilton, so some of the lost weight also comes from higher floor wear. It's also been pointed out that Mercedes reverted some parts back to an earlier specification between FP2 and FP3, and it's possible that some components might have had a slightly different weight that was mistakenly not accounted for when re-ballasting the car.

That said, as some have noted previously, there is a precedent for tyre wear being cited as a reason for a driver failing the minimum weight limit (Kubica in the 2006 Hungarian GP). Given that case, it was more of a thought exercise to see how plausible it might be as a contributing factor, and it does seem that it could have been enough that, combined with a few other aspects, it might have helped tip the balance in the wrong direction.

It is also fair to point out that some other teams did also run one stop strategies, particularly Aston Martin, so it's not entirely unexpected. That said, it has been pointed out that, at least in their case, Aston Martin did send their drivers out on long runs on the hard tyres during the practice sessions, so they probably would have had better data on wear rates for the harder tyres.

It therefore sounds like Aston Martin's original plan was for a two stop strategy, but they had also factored in the option of switching to a one stop strategy into their pre-race plans.
Martin Brundle, on watching a replay of Grosjean spinning:
"The problem with Grosjean is that he want to take a look back at the corner he's just exited"
Post Reply