this post was submitted on 29 Oct 2023
55 points (98.2% liked)
Formula 1
9080 readers
61 users here now
Welcome to Formula1 @ Lemmy.world Lemmy's largest community for Formula 1 and related racing series
Rules
- Be respectful to everyone; drivers, lemmings, redditors etc
- No gambling, crypto or NFTs
- Spoilers are allowed
- Non English articles should include a translation in the comments by deepl.com or similar
- Paywalled articles should include at least a brief summary in the comments, the wording of the article should not be altered
- Social media posts should be posted as screenshots with a link for those who want to view it
- Memes are allowed on Monday only as we all do like a laugh or 2, but donβt want to become formuladank.
Up next
F1 Calendar
2024 Calendar
Location |
Date |
πΊπΈ United States |
21-23 Nov |
πΆπ¦ Qatar |
29 Nov-01 Dec |
π¦πͺ Abu Dhabi |
06-08 Dec |
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
This is such a load of bullshit. Respecting the maximum lap time is a requirement set by the director's race notes. Avoiding stopping and/or driving unnecessarily slowly at the pit exit is a requirement set by the rulebook. Creating a manageable gap to cars in front is NOT a requirement. It is a competitive advantage. And as such, drivers and teams are free to pursue an advantage as long as they are within the requirements. There aren't contrary requirements. You either set a lap earlier than everybody else when the track is not in optimal conditions, or you wait till the last moment and take the risk of traffic.
If I were Leclerc or Hamilton, I would use this ruling to challenge last week's DSQ. After all, there are two contrary requirements if we follow the stewards' logic: the requirement of the wear of the planck and the requirement of running low to maximize ground effect.
The requirement for running low isn't a rule tho, is it? Teams want to run as low as they can for the ground effect to be effective, but nothing's forcing them.
Same with creating manageable gaps to cars in front. That's their point.