Skip to main content

F1: Verstappen Monaco Penalty A Nonsense


Max Verstappen had quite a weekend in Monaco, fast and fluid through free practice, sensible in qualifying and tactically astute during the race, where he pulled off some tidy passes. 

He also directly influenced the result of the race, when he caused the sport's first Virtual Safety Car period and then the Safety Car which flummoxed Mercedes and Lewis Hamilton to the extent that they managed to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory.

Perhaps driver steward Tom Kristensen is a big Lewis Hamilton fan and wanted to punish Max for Lewis losing the race, because the penalty for the accident - a five place grid penalty for the Canadian Grand Prix in two weeks time - has no other explanation.

It's a complete nonsense.

Verstappen's accident with Roman Grosjean was just that - a racing accident, an attempt to overtake that didn't go as planned. Verstappen tried to dummy the Lotus driver into Ste. Devote, the tight first corner at the bottom of the hill. As he switched from left to right he misjudged his speed, Grosjean's braking point or the gap between the cars, tagging Grosjean's right rear with his left front and barrelling into the safety barrier at some speed.

This was no crazy, suicidal move guaranteed to end in carnage, this was a legitimate passing attempt being made at one of the few places at Monaco where that is possible. To penalise Verstappen for this move sends completely the wrong message to the drivers (and fans).

We want overtaking. We want more of it. We even want overtaking which doesn't come off occasionally.

Because the Monaco race was pretty tedious even with the efforts of the Toro Rosso driver. Without them it would have been a complete snooze-fest.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

F1: Robert Kubica Impresses In Renault Test Run

The car may be old but its the performance of the driver that's the story here. Robert Kubica returned to F1, after a fashion, earlier this week with an extensive test run in a 2012 Lotus Renault F1 car at Valencia.
The age of the car and the circuit were likely determined by F1's current rules which ban testing, but the reason for Kubica being in the car is far more interesting. Considered by many to be a potential World Champion and certainly one of the fastest drivers of his generation, Kubica's F1 career seemed to be over after a 2011 crash whilst driving in the Rally of Andora. His Skoda Fabia was penetrated by a guardrail in the high speed accident partially severing his right arm.
Up until last year Kubica has been competing in rallying, with the expectation that the limited movement in his repaired arm would prohibit a return to single seater racing.
So this week's test is both interesting and confusing. Interesting because Kubica completed 115 laps of the ret…

F1: Robert Kubica's Williams Test Asks More Questions Than It Answers

Comparing driver's times at a tyre evaluation test like last week's Abu Dhabi event is difficult at the best of times, but when trying to assess the performance of a driver who has been out of the sport for six years, that difficulty level is raised even higher.
On the face of it Robert Kubica's test for Williams was a success. Fastest of the three Williams drivers present the headlines look promising. However, taking into consideration the different tyres used to set those times muddies the water considerably.
Kubica ran a three lap qualifying simulation on the new 'hyper-soft' tyre - which should have given him a two-second advantage. Correcting for tyres it would appear that Kubica was significantly slower than Sergei Sorotkin - who was on the harder 'soft' tyre - and marginally quicker than Lance Stroll, the team's only contracted driver.

Stroll's family fortune currently funds Williams, so there' no chance that he will be anywhere but in a…

Panos Panay's Defence Of Microsoft Surface Hardware Sounds Eerily Familiar

This weekend I went out with my ten year old daughter to select a laptop for her school year beginning in January. The schools requirements are quite specific, requiring a Windows 10 device, with a preference for a touchscreen and a stylus. She chose a Surface Pro, after trying a large number of different options. Having seen the way I use my own Surface Pro - and tried it herself there was only ever going to be two options - and the other was a Surface Laptop.
I tell you this so that you understand I am a buyer of Microsoft's products through choice, not compulsion. I'm on my third Surface device now. 
So when Panos Panay dismissed reports of the death of the Surface hardware line, I was very interested to see exactly how strong these denials were. Especially how they reflect what has gone before. To whit: Windows 10 Mobile.
Panay claimed that Microsoft is in hardware for the long haul. Almost exactly mirroring the words of Terry Myerson, when he claimed Windows Mobile was g…