This is pretty ridiculous. Very ridiculous actually. Cheers for summing this up so well man. 🙌

@democracysmith6060

Жыл бұрын

With rules like this, anyone who doesn't push off drivers in the outside as soon as they hit the apex should be considered idiotic. Not a good rule imo.

@democracysmith6060

Жыл бұрын

IMO, all of the drives who pushed someone else off in Silverstone deserved a penalty. And if the regulation says otherwise, then the regulation needs to be changed.

@LargeFry1

Жыл бұрын

@@democracysmith6060 Yeah, otherwise why are there track limits? Are they saying track limits don't exist anymore? Why do they need to even take corners anymore? Much faster to just drive straight through. So dumb.

@xingincool9672

Жыл бұрын

@@democracysmith6060 kzread.info/dash/bejne/d3x2ybOwZbLLk6Q.html

@xingincool9672

Жыл бұрын

@@democracysmith6060 right Hamilton pushing and leaving no space for albon was idiotic, mad respect to you SIR. for not being bias. I mean I hope you agree

I have been following F1 for not that long and it feels weird compared to other spots. It has many grey areas. Maybe the racing instructions issued to the racers is different each race and we don't get to see it. Particularly the faster cars should not force other cars to run off the track. It takes all the fun. That's just my opinion btw. They should leave some space like Alonso says "You always have to leave space."

@pleclerc1

Жыл бұрын

you might be a new fan but you are spot on my friend!

@b3at2

Жыл бұрын

its Saudi run… of-course there are a bunch of grey areas.

@LeongGunners

Жыл бұрын

Ironically, the new rookie Alonso doesn't seem to practice what he used to preach himself.

@lolpalolo

Жыл бұрын

That doesnt makes sense, how do you define which is the fastest car? That means you cant defend your position? Thats ridiculous. That is what takes all the fun, bc that's not racing.

@pleclerc1

Жыл бұрын

@@LeongGunners yeah, in Montréal he move left and right like crazy, that was not cool at all.

Hit the nail on the head with this one. It's so counterintuitive from what they tried to achieve with the new cars this year. New design for closer racing with more overtakes but lets adjust the overtaking rules so when it happens, drivers can essentially nullify any chance of racing and overtaking. It shouldn't be this difficult, just leave room, keep the tyres within the white lines. That is it.

Жыл бұрын

but if it's a tight chicane and esp wet it's not possible to leave the space, unlike ~Bahrain turn 3, or curva grande. In the Perez case he should've left the space (Ham split the braking into 2 zones released the brake in between - was on the outside kerb, Perez should've done that too), Max was well in front when forced Mick off and side by side on the apex so that's OKish, plus it's quite difficult ~180 turn

@davidperalta5280

Жыл бұрын

@Jeff Spicolli Bingo. The above example about the chicane is also non sense, and feeds into the concept of a racing line. In many instances and for certain cars the apex, or straightening out a corner is not always the fastest line. Summarily there is no racing line. So how about this... Any car alongside another is entitled to a consistent width of that track("lane"), as established at the beginning of the turn, and so long as that car's position remains overlapping the other car throughout the turn, they will be afforded their lane. So if you dive to the inside of a corner and any portion of your car is side by side with another you need to commit to that "lane" of the track. This would eliminate all of the chicane corner cutting bullshit, and claims of not being left any space.

@randygoodman6393

Жыл бұрын

This just in, the UFC is now going “no holds barred” for their fights. It was agreed upon that the only way to make fights completely fair was to give every fighter access to all of the dirty, dangerous, and previously illegal moves. This is likely going to lead to shorter, less exciting fights, not to mention adding additional risk of injury to a sport that has already seen more than it’s fair share of them

Can't help but think that there's a big old caveat to these silly rules: how will they be viewed in the event of a collision? Max's move was accepted only because Mick backed off?

@humanitysreject5233

Жыл бұрын

Huh...sounds a lot like what people were saying last season too.

@ashic

Жыл бұрын

it depends on whether or not you're driving a Red Bull.

@IAmSwordless-

Жыл бұрын

IKR max should be penalised

@END3RFY

Жыл бұрын

@@IAmSwordless- buts it's legal. And by that logic Charles should also be given a penalty

@dulago

Жыл бұрын

In reality it will depend on who pushed who out of the track (as we have seen in silverstone)

Even when I do sim racing, I always leave a car's width for my opponent, cutting them off seems deeply unsportsmanlike and as you noted, ruins the racing

I don’t understand how the pinnacle of motorsports can have rules that allow professional racers to gain position while not staying on track or can push people off track. This is the best of the best and you allow bullying over precision, smh.

@xingincool9672

Жыл бұрын

So everyone has a problem with this now? He's not even mentioning how Charles cut the line so bad that hit Perez 2 times, or Sainz pushing Verstappen far out. Bias bullshit channel

@runninginthe90s75

Жыл бұрын

maFIA, that's it. Whoever paid them, they will get priority to abuse the rules.

@MaartenKrijn

Жыл бұрын

I think it is to prevent dive bombs. If you need to leave space the driver behind can just put its nose there and push the leading car to the outside, possibly a worse line.

@xingincool9672

Жыл бұрын

@@runninginthe90s75 yup, Russell

Can we please show this video to the FIA.

@runninginthe90s75

Жыл бұрын

maFIA will denied it, unless if you give them ton of money.

3:50 The rules do NOT contradict each other. If the outside car is ahead by the apex, the inside car must leave him enough room / not run him off the track. If the inside car is "alongside" the outside car before the apex, the outside car must not "shut the door" on the inside car. No contradiction. If the inside car is ahead when starting the overtake (i.e. tires in front of the outside car), it can additionally choose to run the outside car off the track. No contradiction. If the outside car is fully ahead (i.e. rear tires in front of other car), it can shut the door. The inside car has no "right of way". No contradiction. The exact definition of the Apex is an actual issue, so that the rules don't really solve any issues.

find it interesting that you can force others of track legally, and FIA then places dangerous sausage kerbs right in the same path a forced off car would take.

@PbPomper

Жыл бұрын

They try to discourage drivers from sweeping around the outside form an impossible position and claim they are pushed off track. I agree that the sausage curbs are dangeours, we need more gravel traps.

I hear so many say "you have to leave room" but that is not racing. If you go through a corner as fast as possible you usually go from outside to inside to outside. Is someone tries to overtake you on the outside, should you then slow down so that you do not use the full width of the track? You can only do that if the overtake is a head of you so you see them and then you can be on the brakes longer and leave them space. Same goes for overtaking on the inside but the reversed.

@pedroedsos

Жыл бұрын

"full width" argument does not make sense, since the outside car being there did not allow the inside car to use the full width of the track on the entry. If you have the skill for a shorter entry, the same is expectable for the exit, just like if there was debry you had to avoid. There is some sense in being able to "see the car ahead", but if you are not sure to have the car alongside, you should leave the space or risk an accident and/or a penalty.

@GerarddeVries

Жыл бұрын

@@pedroedsos I have been in these situations were they other driver sticks half a car next to mine. If I then have to give him room I have to corner slower than I want or even can at that point. If you are not ahead of me at the start of the turn I will take all the road I need to be as fast as I can be. I think this is fair racing and it concurs with the FIA regulations

@pedroedsos

Жыл бұрын

@@GerarddeVries "slower than I want" & "as fast as I can be" it's not convincing at all because other drivers are there to challenge you (while keeping you at race) and deviding the track width will slow you down most of the time. Respecting alongside drivers will improve battles. You can and should slow down more and delay accelerating because you know / there is a good chance the other driver is there.

@MarkoLomovic

Жыл бұрын

You don't make any sense how is that not racing? Ok you are going as fast as possible you go outside and car gets right up to your door in inside are you going to crash because you want to take corner as fast as possible ? Appy this same logic on outside overtake, you can't drive as if you are doing time attack in racing condition. We already have well established rules for this and it is proven to work time and time again. If car on the outside gets to a point where it can no longer back out it, then you need to make space for it because up to that point it was overtaking cars responsiblitly to make sure he doesn't crash you but once he reaches that point you need to make sure you don't crash him as well. That is what drivers mean when they say they trust other drivers. Rule like this is like allowing dive bombing to be ok.

If there's a wall on the outside, can you just push the other car in the wall?

@Goron333

Жыл бұрын

I can't imagine a driver trying a move around the outside with a wall there. Even at Baku, which has run off straight ahead at T1 and a wall at corner exit, drivers will generally bail out of a move unless they're clearly ahead into the braking zone. It's generally better to back off and try and take a different line through the corner (which funnily enough, you do see at Baku).

@WindedPrawn

Жыл бұрын

Not if a drivers lunges down the inside into somewhere like Singapore T8, as long as they are ahead at the apex, the car outside doesn't warrant room anymore, and so you can just push the car on the outside into the wall.

@Goron333

Жыл бұрын

@@WindedPrawn I believe that would be a penalty under the current clarification, but we'll have to wait and see how it plays out. (That said, I wouldn't expect much overtaking at Singapore lol).

@torbinzix1

Жыл бұрын

@@Goron333 A driver has and this was the consequences... Note another RB car is involved: kzread.info/dash/bejne/hKuE0MGAc8SZnbg.html

Great analysis. Thank you. And for what it's worth, I totally agree. "Give the other driver space" seems like a much more sensible (and more easily enforceable) rule. Go too fast down the inside and even if you are ahead by the apex, if you understeer off the track, you should be at fault.

This is the most important F1 overtaking video that every fan needs to see, especially the DTS fans. I've been watching for 40 years and used to love the back-and-forth racing that would happen when two drivers were committed to getting the pass done on the track. The art of racing is that, in order to pass, there's an inherent tradeoff that happens in terms of your racing line and minimum corner speed. This makes you a little more vulnerable to being re-passed after completing the pass. The way driving standards are today, there's no art. It's a binary, win the corner, destroy the other driver's minimum speed and get away with a better exit without any threat of being passed. Makes for super boring racing. While this is legal, you'll notice many drivers won't race in that way. They're a bit more old-school. You'll see some back and forth among those drivers. They, however get punished when the new school drivers show up to pass. It's making the sport worse.

The FIA's 'Driving Standards Guidelines' don't say when a driver has "won" the corner, they state when a driver has to "give sufficient room" (literal quote). This means there is no contradiction at 3:36, you've just shown a scenario where both drivers need to give room to each other. The inside driver is alongside, so the outside driver needs to give room at the apex. While the outside driver is ahead, so the inside driver also needs to leave room on exit. No contradiction. I would also like emphasize that the rule for overtaking around the outside is not at all new. It has been the guiding principle for years, and has been communicated by the FIA as far back as 2013. (I intended to provide a link to this, but I think this caused my original comment to get filtered).

@beany1987

Жыл бұрын

So when Charles won the corner and perez went completely off track then forced Charles wide is that ok because a wheel over white line is dq qualy lap and a warning in the race but 4 wheels over the line and forcing someone wide along with gaining a position doesn't require action 🤔

@herrufebian5944

Жыл бұрын

@@beany1987 Leclerc went off the track at stowe and gain advantage, Perez went off the track at the chicane and gain advantage. An easy no further action

@noahgray5229

Жыл бұрын

@@beany1987 neither gained a place because of it, both overstepped the track limits and lost out, no reason to penalise

@vl3005

Жыл бұрын

Funny how he didn't like your comment specifically... says something about him and the British whiny fans.

Alongside means "close to the side of; next to." in the english language (when talking about positioning). So if they say "the front tires are alongside the overtaken car" they mean when the front tires are next to any portion of the car. This is evidenced by the fact the clarification of 'a significant portion of the car alongside' for overtaking on the outside means "ahead of", which logically means that 'being ahead' in the case of inside overtaking is not a consideration, otherwise they would just say 'ahead of'. They are not the same situations. One is for the 'overtakING car being on the outside of the overtakEN car', and the other is for the 'overtakING car being on the inside of the overtakEN car'. So when you say "you can't have both, when the inside car has its wheels alongside, and therefor has the corner, you cannot simultaneously have the outside car being in front and have the corner", that's factually correct, but also not what the guidelines say. So we're only looking at the car overtakING and its position relative to the overtakEN car, and not both. That's what the guidelines say, and then convoluting those guidelines by applying both guidelines to both cars is just a wrong application of the guidelines. You then draw the wrong conclusions based on the wrong application of the guidelines. While I agree that the apex can move around depending on the situation, the apex doesn't necessarily have to be on the inside of the track. An apex is simply the highest point on anything. It could be a mountain, or indeed a curve drawn on a piece of paper. In racing, the ideal apex is the point at which the car reaches the innermost part of the corner before going wide again. Nowhere does it say they mean the ideal apex though, and it could just as easily mean the point at which you stop decelerating and start accelerating. Every car, in every turn has an apex, and it's up to the stewards to determine where it is. Yes, that gives you a grey area, but since all decisions are always 'at the discretion of the stewards' arguing what the apex actually is won't change that. And yes, the rules are stupid, but at least they're there. I could also make an argument that the 'crowding a car off the track' is only for straights, as the regulations about overtaking in Appendix L of the ISC don't actually mention overtaking at all except that it is allowed on either side. The whole of the rest of the rules are about conduct on the straight approaching a corner. You can only change direction once, approaching a corner, you have to leave a car's width on the outside when moving back to the racing line after changing direction once, on the approach to the corner, and you're not allowed to crowd another car off the track, on the approach to the corner. These guidelines seem to suggest it is indeed only applied on straights rather than corner exits. Stupid, but not less true. Now for the reason why they chose these different approaches on overtaking on the inside or outside. It has to do with visibility of the drivers. A driver that's being overtaken on the inside looks towards the inside of the corner, towards the apex, and has his inside mirror in his field of view. Therefor he is able to spot any car on his inside in his mirror when the overtaking car has his front wheels alongside any part of the car. A driver that's being overtaken on the outside still looks towards the inside of the corner, and does not have his outside mirror in his field of view. The first indication they have that a car is alongside is when the nose of the outside car passes the nose of the inside car. Hence the difference in approach. Basically, the responsibility for avoiding contact lies with the driver that can see the other driver the easiest. And avoiding contact means backing out of situations where the other car takes a line that would result in contact if you do not back out or go off track.

@joebar52

Жыл бұрын

I said pretty much the same thing before reading your comment. It really is all about the language used for the overtaking portion of the regs

@simonb4757

Жыл бұрын

So how doea your logic work at a chicane or any 2 turns that run into one another, say I dunno, Monza turn 1 and 2 and for arguments sake let's say there were 2 driver a that collided there previously called Hewis Lamilton and Vax Merstappen, you know, just as an example. Vax is the overtakING driver at turn 1 and tries to go round the outside he is not ahead at the apex so he should back out as he is not entitled to racing room on the outside, except now the outside of turn 1 in a matter of a meter or two is now the inside of turn 2, Vax is still the overtakING driver as he has never been ahead in this sequence of corners so far, but Vax is now on the inside with his front wheels alongside Hewis, so Hewis now needs to give him a cars width at the apex of turn 2 despite mere meters earlier being allowed to run Vax off track on the exit of turn 1? So who's at fault for that collision? How can a driver knlw what to do there? The problem with this rule clarification is that you can't apply it to corners that quickly flow into one another. Also that it encourages drivers to intentionally miss their braking points to have a wishful thinking lunge down the inside just to get a wheel in so the other driver has to yield and give them space despite being nowhere near overtaking. Or to intentionally miss their braking point when defending the inside just to ensure the outside car won't be ahead at the apex even if it means missing the entire corner and running off track on exit themselves. Both of which are far more boring and require far less skill than making it through the corner side by side leaving room for each other.

@raymondsagius2730

Жыл бұрын

@@simonb4757 If you had taken 2 minutes to google the guidelines you'd have seen they say the guidelines are applied for each turn in the s-turn or chicane. *In reference to chicanes and S-bends* The above guidelines would apply similarly for each corner

@interceptor001

Жыл бұрын

I was thinking exactly the same thing. These are not the same situations, people just have to read.

Immediate alarm bells from the fact they have separate cases for inside and outside overtakes. Why does it matter which car is the overtaking car? Another grey area. If you defend the inside down the straight but I get my nose ahead before the corner, am I doing an outside overtake or are you doing an inside overtake? What a mess

@BradPhilpot

Жыл бұрын

Exactly

@pedroedsos

Жыл бұрын

In fact, desperate reckless dive bombs will be legal according to this.

You're making simple stuff rather complicated. Congrats, you get an award for that. Always look from the perspective of the overtaking car. "Significantly alongside" is right next to it, basically wheel to wheel. Maybe slightly behind if you want to be nice. No halfway alongside crap anymore. Leaving room every time on the outside when a car puts a wheel "halfway alongside" compromises the line and the exit of the car on the inside. Congrats, the outside car wins on the straight (if equal machinery)/the next corner automatically. When in doubt what the apex of a corner is, then it's always the one of the racing line. Even if you would shift the apex around 1 meter to the entry or the exit, the cars don't move around that much at the point of the apex anymore. Everything has been decided by the drivers at that point and you get a clear picture of whose corner it is. And where's the apex when fighting at the very outside of a corner? If you can't figure that out but need to draw lines in all sorts of angles, then you better just stay a viewer who enjoys the spectacle of vroom vroom... to say it in a nice way.

These rules are incredibly dumb and open to interpretation, which are the worst type of rule. In my opinion, drivers should be forced to leave space to the other driver if they have a wheel alongside. The whole idea of being ahead means it’s “your corner” baffles me, why on earth should one driver be more entitled to the track than another. The only time this should count is when a driver is being lapped 😊

The apex of the corner is determined by the driver's line around the corner, not by the corner itself. The apex is the point at which the perpendicular to the drivers line is closest to the inside of the track on the corner. As for the rule, it makes sense because a driver who is committed to the corner should be able to maximise their speed around the corner and use the full track on exit just as if the challenging driver were not present. If it was written any other way you would have to argue that a car being challenged (however inappropriately or badly) would always have to compromise their drive around the corner to leave a car width at the outside. That's not sensible. The rule basically says any challenging driver must be ahead by the time the line they take through the corner is at their apex. It may not be easy for the driver's to always decide this, but its a fair basis for the stewards to make a determination in the event of an incident.

@pedroedsos

Жыл бұрын

"If it was written any other way you would have to argue that a car being challenged (however inappropriately or badly) would always have to compromise their drive around the corner to leave a car width at the outside. That's not sensible." Of course it is sensible, it should be part of the driving skills to adapt to whatever is on track that does not allow you to make a qualifying lap type of trajectory. There is no such thing as the right to maximise their trajectory. Being able to dispute the trajectory is exaclty what a battle means. If one driver is not sure to have some other alongside, they should always leave enough space. You are defending reduced opportunity to challenge.

@ashleyfrancis5986

Жыл бұрын

@@pedroedsos "leave enough space" - Why not just paint lanes on the corners and reserve the inside and outside lanes? Driver on inside line cannot use the outside lane on exit. That sounds like it would meet your criteria. You know, like slot car racing. Scalextric Digital here we come...

@pedroedsos

Жыл бұрын

@@ashleyfrancis5986 Nice try with the classical move of making a cartoon out of others' opinion. I can say yours is bump cars and we have improved nothing in the debate. Try to address it properly and we might get somewhere.

@EricW6800

Жыл бұрын

@@pedroedsos It’s not a cartoon. He’s actually right on how the rules are intended. The Apex is defined by the driving line or trajectory of a car in front during a corner battle. And the editor of this channel is also right, the apex is not a predefined spot. The judgement will be made on both trajectories and positioning of the cars involved. Not easy for most fans to judge without being a bit prejudiced, but easier for the experienced stewards.

@pedroedsos

Жыл бұрын

@@EricW6800 It is a cartoon. Making it easier for the stweards but worse for the competition does not seem the right path. And I'm not so sure it makes it easier than always leaving the space.

1. Always leave enough space for your opponent. 2. Cant win the battle by forcing others off track, position must be handed back.

Maybe the stewards and FIA should just watch this video and take notes. Really well done and really great explanation of what we as FANS actually want, and also clearing the grey areas of the rules probably as racing drivers.

If you don't let yourself be crowded out the circuit will you be causing an accident? To me it looks worng and am surprised the drivers agreed to this?

This is the type of cornering I'd only use against Verstappen's AI in a no-car damage race in an F1 game because I want to relieve my stress and know nobody's hurt from my mad driving. But real-life isn't a video game, and these world-class professional drivers aren't gamers. Even if's a competition, they shouldn't be doing this.

@b3at2

Жыл бұрын

Redbull has always been a dirty over aggressive team.

@xingincool9672

Жыл бұрын

So everyone has a problem with this now? He's not even mentioning how Charles cut the line so bad that hit Perez 2 times, or Sainz pushing Verstappen far out. Bias bullshit channel, be more consistent, even more hilarious last YEAR HAMILTON PUSHED PEREZ INTO THE PIT LANE AND HE KEPT PUSHING HIM OUT SO HARD AND HE DIDNT GET A PENALTY, MASSI SAID "IS OKAY, IS HARD RACING", but forget that. In my opinion stop crying. I know most people don't like Redbull and that's fine, but everyone acts like Sainz didn't pushed Verstapen to the wall or Perez getting pushed to the side pretty hard by Charles.

@diemes5463

Жыл бұрын

Most people definitely like Red Bull

@gary5852

Жыл бұрын

@@xingincool9672 sainz never squeezed verstappen off the track though. He simply forced him to take a slower line into the corner. And if you want to bring up instances from other races, Verstappen has plenty of those. I don't hate verstappen but he is used as an example so often because he is normally the guy that squeezes people off the track

@loughieholt2737

Жыл бұрын

Funny how everyone fails to remember Hamilton forcing max off in usa, jeddah, Portugal and Silverstone or when he sent checo into the pitlane in Turkey

3:58 no, these two rules don't contradict each other. Remember they are for "being allowed racing space". If you want racing space on the inside, you have to be 'alongside' (which isn't a new wording, btw. 'significant alongside' has been the standard wording for motorsports for years, however usually referring to the braking zone, not the corner apex). If you want racing space on the outside, you need to be ahead. They're not contradictory at all. Aka: If you dive up the inside, the car on the outside can't force you off the road if you are alongside by the apex, but you can't force him off the road either because he is still ahead of you. If you dive up the inside and manage to get ahead, you can force him off the road. I don't agree with these rules myself either tho, but they seem to come about specifically for F1 because the cars are so wide and depend so much on downforce, that overtakes aren't all that easy to do in the first place. Basically this is F1 agreeing that "Divebombs are a valid way to overtake"

@JLneonhug

Жыл бұрын

It's come about because dive bomb max is exciting to watch and here to stay.

@Excludos

Жыл бұрын

@@JLneonhug I mean, you're not wrong. Max popularized it, and simultaneously showed how effective it is. And for a sport that has always had issues with a lack of overtaking due to the dirty air issue, I guess it became a nobrained to include rules that makes it ok

@JLneonhug

Жыл бұрын

@@Excludos it's come at an interesting time where safety is pretty good so if you crash out, you don't die. It's not about whoever got the biggest dangles will win. The penalty is the $$$ cap if you do crash. So it should become a bit more "tactical dive bomb" - determined overtake vs development/performance hit later on in season. It'll be interesting to see when they are closer in standings to see exactly how much drivers will dive for an overtake. It'll make end of season more interesting.

I think you're slightly confused, it seemd the first scenario is specifically about the car on the outside attacking and the car on the inside defending, and the second scenario is attacking on the inside and defending from the outside. Both cars can't be attacking at the same time, so there's no contradiction there.

@n__m

Жыл бұрын

The terminology used in the ruling is overtaking rather than attacking, but you are correct in that there is no contradiction as the inside and outside cars cannot both be "overtaking" at the same time. Even with more than two cars at a corner the same ruling can apply, it just has to be done for each pair of vehicles. Again, there is no contradiction.

Your channel has tons of potential, I hope you keep this going for a long time. I have no doubt this is gonna blow up! Irt the video, if the apex is always defined by ideal qualifying racing line does that solve the issue?

@BradPhilpot

Жыл бұрын

Thanks so much! I’m definitely trying to make it work - and it’s really nice to see the positive responses ❤️

@AndrewGeierMelons

Жыл бұрын

You're implying that there's a static point that is optimal on a dynamic race track. An ideal apex under which conditions? Perfectly dry, warm, smooth track with no debris on it? That's a lot of assumptions, and that doesn't even mention the fact that different drivers have different driving styles, and different cars have different levels of performance that will reward different apex points. The mere insinuation that there's a single, ideal, perfect apex is bonkers

@BradPhilpot

Жыл бұрын

@@AndrewGeierMelons I’m pretty sure that’s exactly what I say isn’t it?

@joefitzpatrick1215

Жыл бұрын

@@BradPhilpot My interpretation of how it's worded is that it is not "THE" apex but whatever the lead car's apex is on any given corner?

@ashleyfrancis5986

Жыл бұрын

@@joefitzpatrick1215Agree. There is no "apex" defined for the corner itself, it is defined for the line taken by the driver through that corner. A perfectly circular constant radius corner demonstrates this - clearly the apex is undefined. But a driver taking a line through that corner will have a moment when they are positioned most closely to the inside of the radius. That is the apex for the line they have taken through the corner. Luffield at Silverstone is a great example - some drivers take a wide early part of the corner, tightening in to a late apex (for them), others take a tighter radius line. In the wet the wider line entry is generally favoured to give an early straightening to allow earlier power on when traction is lower.

FIA: safety is the #1 priority Also FIA: let’s see if we can recreate a car landing on top of a driver again

It depends on how you look at it. Because on the other hand, there's even more to win if you get to that apex earlier, you basically get protected during that time if you learn how to play with the rule.

I’d rather have some clarity even if it means we lose something but this is, imo, purposefully written to leave a grey area. The fia wants to be able to choose when to and more importantly when not to give penalties. This way they can do what they feel would be the most popular decision, they won’t penalize a top driver at their home circuit or if they have a situation where a penalty would possibly influence a championship decision they now have a way out. The fia has to grow some balls already. I am absolutely not one of those people who constantly says I’m not going to watch F1 anymore but I hate how disgusted I keep finding myself with the way they are handling the sport. The worst part about this is it takes away from on track battles, just block the inside then go deep on the brakes and you can run the overtaking car off the track.

@Continental_Champ

Жыл бұрын

Totally agree

@runninginthe90s75

Жыл бұрын

You misspelled maFIA.

Your opinion and input makes so much sense. I really hope the FIA hear you and listen to this and actually do something about their grey areas

So many great points here. Thanks for doing this so quickly. I'm hopeful these rules are reconsidered and we go back to what we thought we were getting after the end of last season.

Thank you for this amazing video. When I point out the new rules people go straight to calling me stupid. I'm just telling people the FIA is being ambiguous with their language so they can change the rule when they want. The f1 rule book reads like a law book. At least they were consistent for silverstone. Can't believe the drivers agreed to this. Subscribed

I think each driver needs to be allowed to defend. Two cars can interchange position numerous times thoughout one corner or section of corners, but what needs to be understood is that each time they interchange positions, car that's holding more optimal line in a specific moment is the one that can control the situation and influence other car's forward momentum. You cannot totally disallow blocking, when blocking (i.e. holding position) is what happens in traffic among numerous cars.

So... They've made car regulations that enable side by side racing... Then made rules that kill side by side racing?? That's the FIA in a nutshell, detached from what the fans want

The downside of your suggestion is that it becomes less a matter of actually being able to overtake and more a matter of getting your car in between so your opponent has to yield a car's width & let go of the ideal line and / or throttle. That surely is not the kind of racing we want.

Yeah, the rules are deliberately vague to accommodate max’s incredible driving technique. 🙄

Nice presentation again Brad, myself im totally against aggressive driving in any shape or form Let the nutball nascar guys shove each other off or into the wall. This is Formula 1 the pinnacle of motorsport there is no need to be driving like this pushing other drivers off the track. At some point we are asking for disaster

@BradPhilpot

Жыл бұрын

Yeah - I actually didn’t have time to go into the other problems - junior series copying this behaviour, putting people into the wall or spinning them dangerously through the gravel - desperate late lunges. There’s no need for these rules. We can do better.

@EricW6800

Жыл бұрын

It’s called racing...it’s not a new invention.

@stuartballantyne3690

Жыл бұрын

@@EricW6800 Wow thats a new one. Wait wait. Was that same sentence not coined during the last race of the 2022 season. It is NOT racing. Deliberately pushing a fellow driver into danger is attempted murder its just lucky most of the tracks are more sterile with hard run offs which affords this behavior any credence If the only way a driver can pass is by barging another driver off track. They should go to Nascar. The fans love that kind of kill of be killed racing

@EricW6800

Жыл бұрын

@@stuartballantyne3690 Well it’s really clear you have a very coloured opinion on what is fair or not on a racetrack, depending on who wins. Racing goes by written and gentleman rules, but fellow racers really do not exist when you are racing. It’s not like ballroom dancing, where you respect each others space to manoeuvre... Did you ever watched or raced competition karts, watched BTTC, GT3, Endurance or any other categories? F1 fans created fantasies based on 10 years of boring parade racing. Racing is back, and that’s great!

@petertoluolushuyi7311

Жыл бұрын

@@EricW6800 it could cause accidents

Great rules. Race superkarts for many years, and without mirrors (useless and banned) these were the effective rules. Especially for overtaking round the outside - if you're not ahead, the other driver won't even know you are there, and you will crash every time as they drive to the outside of the track. You have to be level or ahead, so you are in their vision, ( remember they are looking away from you towards the apex), or they will drive you off the track. F1 drivers all (?) came up through karting,so they will be very familiar and comfortable with these rules. To understand these rules, imagine where a driver is looking, I.e. in towards the apex. So on the outside, they will not see you until you are 100% alongside, but if you are on the inside, they will see you even when you are not quite alongside.

If a car's front wheel is ahead of your rear wheel, you must leave a space at all corners (one wheel width is the bare minimum you must leave as space for the other car). You cannot block anyone's line on a straight, let alone turn into them. Thats what i know, what i apply

@BradPhilpot

Жыл бұрын

I wish that’s what the rules said

Brad these videos showing us how the rules actually look on track are brilliant! Please keep doing these demonstration videos as they really help In understanding the rules 👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻

I generally think the car at the inside of the corner should give space, away or close to the apex.

I never realized how task saturation would affect me until I got on track in my car and had to focus on what I was doing. Pay attention to what the car infront of me was doing, check my mirror to see where the car behind me is and then remember to look at the flag stations for any flags.

Awesome work! This makes it clear that it's been a rule book based on suggestions. Ones that they can interpret differently each weekend.just depends what you want to achieve as stewards. Great for scripting.

This video needs to go to F1 and the FIA! Clear, detailed, and Sooooooo true! I have lived and died by the rule that you need to be half way along side to be considered to receive "racing room" regardless of being on the inside or outside... it's simple to understand and no track references are really needed nor considered. If you don't get halfway then its up to you to make the necessary adjustments based on your opponents positioning/angle/speed.

It was already legal when Lewis did this to Russell in Miami.

absolutely great video, like others, just one question where can you find the new documentation of those rules, that as you said , has been changed for 2022 ? i really couldn't find it, if it will not take that much time can you paste a link to the document please? thanks in advance.

2 factors should determine who has the corner. 1. The car ahead should be defined as any car who’s nose is ahead of the nose of the opposing car at the 50 meter mark in the braking zone. 2. At all times, all cars must leave a car’s width of space when any part of another car is along side of another car. Scenario: 2 cars at the 50 meter mark. Car on the outside has the nose ahead of the nose of the car on the inside. Car on the inside has 2 meters of space between himself and the inside line of the track. The car on the outside has left more than a car’s width between himself and the inside line. The car on the outside turns in to make his apex and at all times leaves a car’s width between himself and the inside line of the track but makes contact with the car on the inside. In this scenario the car on the inside is at fault. Adversely, the car on the outside turns in to make his apex but this time, doesn’t leave a car’s width when turning in and makes contact. Even though he was ahead at the 50 meter mark, he still violated the second part of the rule which was not leaving enough space and would be at fault in the incident. The way the rules are currently constructed, I agree, it’s very contradicting.

you said it perfectly. its so unsafe to run someone off the track. it should never be allowed

Thanks for explaining the rules so clearly and concisely, as a fairly new F1 fan I really appreciate it. I can’t imagine these rules going over well in a street circuit :/

Man iv been saying this exact thing wourd for word about the battles being prolonged if space if left for ages! First time iv seen one of ya vids 👍

So basically to win 2022 racing, just always defend your inside line, then divebomb the corner so you remain ahead of the attacking car at the "apex", driving straight to the edge of the track, then turn sharply right, making sure to not leave any space for the other driver.

It's not the right to run your opponent off the track! That's not even true. You have the right take the corner as you would normally have done with nobody else there. It requires the inside driver to compromise his own cornering ability to leave room, that's why you wont see it unless the guy on the outside has gotten his nose ahead soon enough that the inside guy has no choice, anything else is people misinterpreting the "rules" to their own favour.

@pedroedsos

Жыл бұрын

How are you taking the corner like if nobody else is there if you have a challenge on the outside at the corner entry? Why can the inside driver compromise his corner entry and not the exit? Why can the inside driver compromise his exit if the other driver is ahead and not if is alongside? Rethorical questions. Nothing you stated makes sense.

If only we had someone as switched on as you writing the sporting code. Great content, subbed!

Thank you for explaining rules that are no longer making any sense and are full of contradictions. Your so right about the apex, it completely subjective to your position entering a corner, driving style and intention on corner exit.

Ok - I’ve got a lot of viewing to go through - definitely some of the best analysis I’ve seen on F1 in a long time - intelligent and thoughtful - bravo

@4:00 - I think you are thinking about this backwards. Take the outside overtake. The car on the outside has to be ahead to get racing room. So now, apply it to an inside overtake. Simply put, the car on the outside has to be ahead at the apex go get racing room. What this stops is keeping the inside car from being able to get a small amount of the nose in front and then using that to bully the other car out of the way. Example @4:01, the white car would still have to leave the car on the outside a full racing line at the exit of the corner. If the white car was ahead at the apex, the car on the outside would have no particular right. All that said, the rules are crap. It should never be acceptable to just plain drive people off the track. If any part of the car on the outside is beside the car on the inside, the car on the inside should be obliged to leave 1 car width at the exit of the corner. Further, and this is key for many, the car on the inside should be obliged to maintain the "inside groove" of the corner and not drift way up mid corner. Failure to make the apex of the corner as a defensive move (looking at you Lewis) should be an offense by itself.

The irony. Max Verstappen spearheaded this direction in F1 in the recent years. He actually accused the FIA of 'killing racing' in 2018. Now that they bowed to him once Masi was in position, 'let max race' has destroyed any side by side racing. We've said good bye to close side by side racing that lasts for multiple corners. Seeing cars close keeps us sat up on our chairs but if they want spectators on the edge of their seats they need to allow cars to race side by side through corners. Allowing drivers to run each other off the track means the attacking driver has a very narrow window to achieve an overtake in.

If the rule is simply you must always leave a cars width of space if another car is 'alongside' we have proper racing. A simple metric for what could be considered 'alongside' would be if the front tyres of the attacking car is at least level with or ahead of the rear tyres of defending car that is considered alongside enough to afforded room.

Yes this is great quality content Bradley, keep them coming. As others have said it’s pretty crazy, we thought the rules were being clarified, but it’s just a mess. Can’t believe it’s like this after last season.

Fastest way to fix this is for "forced off" drivers to deliberately turn into the other car, ruining both their races. Drivers will stop running cars off pretty quick if they are forced to retire as a result. Teams might not like it, but then it's on them to rein in their drivers' behavior.

Thanks for explaining this to a broader audience, this needs to be spread. I'm really worried why they only apply this for @f1 and never really communicated deeply about it. And why we're hearing about this now, or this is being acted on now... Strange, and I'm not a conspiracy theorist. But why did then others this year get the penalty? Not here?

What F1 should do about their passing rules. 1 - The car that is not ahead is deemed to alongside once the front wheel makes it past the rear wheel of the lead car. The leading car going into a corner must give a car width from the end point of the corner, or is considered at fault. The width applies to both the inside and outside of an apex, meaning once the rear car is ahead of the front cars rear wheel, the rear car also must apply to the same width when driving off the apex out of the corner. Once the car that is not ahead is in this position, the lead car must not take that width away until safety past the car in back. 2. The car in the rear must be ahead prior to the apex in order for that vehicle to now be able to switch as the lead car. Same rules as above now apply with apex car widths. If the car in the rear does not get past prior to the apex, then rule 1 still applies to them and they are the lead car only needs to give a car width. This way, if you want to make a dive on the inside, you better know you will have to lead as well as be able to be at a slow enough speed as to not push the other off the track. Same with overtaking vehicles making dangerous maneuvers. Have all these be penalties and drivers will be much safer.

I'm not sure this is a good analysis. I don't feel comfortable with these rules, but there isn't a contradiction about which car has the corner because the rules clearly refer to the passing car. Similarly an apex of a corner is the apex of a corner - not the apex of your racing line.

I will have to disagree on a couple points here. I assume that the point treated as the apex would be the apex on the regular racing line. Also angleing the line that extends the apex across the circuit any different than in the position where it intersects the inner circuit edge tangent in a 90° angle is obviously nonsense. (I am a bit baffled that anyone would consider any of those unintuitive options.) In my opinion this is actually a pretty clear ruling and one of the less self-contradictory rules among the other segments of the sporting regulations.

@v1n3ss

Жыл бұрын

I agree. There is also an error in the interpretation when talking about overtaking on the inside. He claims that having the front wheels alongside on the inside contradicts being fully ahaed on the outside, eventhough both rules only apply to the overtaking car and not the leading one.

As an F1 fans I don't want to get show the w2w battle between two drivers is won by one being aggressive in both defending and attacking to another one. However, I love to see a battle is won by the fastest driver and the smartest one to trick his opponent by let's say throwing a dummy move.

The FIA's attempts to clarify overtaking rules for F1 are doomed to fail. There's no reason why F1 should have different or more specific rules than other forms of road racing. The main reason why it's doomed to fail is the same rules cannot apply to a long versus a short corner. There are many tight but short corners (e.g. Tabac at Monaco) where if you're going to overtake somebody you simply have to commit to your line when you turn in. It's far too late to wait and see if the other car is there on your outside once you're in the corner or at what the FIA considers to be the apex - you have already committed to running your car to the outside wall on corner exit and you cannot get out of it once you've reached the braking point. This is because a tighter line that gives racing room to another car would require much earlier braking, so you have to make that decision well before the normal braking point. If two cars tangle in Tabac the sensible question is not whether they should have left room for each other and gone through side-by-side, it is whether one of the cars (and if so, which one) should have realised they'd lost the corner, braked earlier and followed the other car through. In practice, however, cars tend not to tangle at Tabac, but they will tangle at corners with similar geometry on purpose-built tracks where there is tarmac run-off available. That's where the stewards have to judge if the car on the inside is taking advantage of being able to run the other car off the track (which you can't do at Tabac because there's a wall there), or if the car on the outside is the one who should yield but chooses to stay on the outside and drive off the circuit in the hope of losing less time and/or getting the other driver in trouble. In longer and wider corners where drivers have more options in terms of line after the braking point, then yes, I agree the rule should probably just be that you have to leave space for any car that is significantly alongside you. In fact, you don't need to write a rule clarification for that because it's already in the regulations: no crowding other cars beyond the edge of the track.

Brad you are so spot on in your analysis. so many variables and the FIA is wrong. Drivers just need to attempt to leave room when possible, and if no driver gets wreaked in the process than maybe its just a racing incident.

Good video with an interesting topic. Only one thing I want to mention. Deciding the line after we decided where the apex is is not that subjective. It goes similar to how you would find the centerpoint of an arc. You choose two points on the inside edge of the track equal distance from the apex. Then you connect these two lines and make a mid perpendicular. This will be (roughly) the line connecting the apex point with the centerpoint of the curvature of the track at the apex.

Ok, you got me. New sub. Damn your even-tempered well thought out arguments. This is KZread, my man.

Running cars off the track may seem entertaining on tracks with asphalted runoffs such as most newer (though mostly boring) circuits (as well as the newer corners in Silverstone). But for a "normal" corner with grass or gravel on the sides (lets imagine Spielberg or Suzuka i.e) it's just complete rubbish. It just leads to "waiting for DRS to overtake without any risk" and forces drivers to defend in a way, that in every other series would be considered unsportive... And I don't even want to think about Singapore and other street circuits. Is it now really literally allowed, to squeze somebody on the outside into a damn wall, if they are an inch behind you? Sounds like bumper cars, not F1...

My idea: as long as the front tyres are next to or ahead of the front cars rear tyres both cars have to respect each other. The inside car has to leave space on the outside, and the outside car has to leave space on the inside. And space means one car width inside the track limits. No one should "own" a corner if there is another car.

I feel like reference to any “apex” is left vague so that it can be inquired about at any connor on any track plus the variables from the drivers themselves it’s a lot to think about

"I'm just going to always keep the inside line and run you off at the exit because I can" this is pretty much it. But don't worry, give it 2-3 races and everything will change

@simonb4757

Жыл бұрын

Exactly inside is king and not because its the easier option but now because its the only option. Whoever is on the inside whether defending or attacking just needs to intentionally miss their braking point carry so much speed they can't make the corner properly and they will always come out on top or be in a crash where your opponent is always the one at fault for being on the outside.

Really great commentary and analysis

the overtaking rules do not overlap. the overtaking car is subject to the rules based on where they overtake. you wouldnt have both car winning the same corner because only one is the overtaking car

@BradPhilpot

8 ай бұрын

What about the moment after the attacker has nosed ahead - the person who was previously defending is now the attacker surely?

@BackroadBender

8 ай бұрын

@@BradPhilpot but this is after the apex

The overtaking inside/outside is not a contradiction. The key is that the rules apply to the CAR OVERTAKING. If the inside car is the car overtaking, they have to be significantly alongside. If the outside car is the car overtaking, they have to be ahead. Those are two different situations. In the first scenario you showed, the white car was ahead, and the red car was passing to the OUTSIDE. In the second scenario, the red car was ahead, and the white car was passing the the INSIDE.

They changed the regulations to allow the cars to race closer only for them to change the rules so that car can't race as close as they could. 10/10 FIA thinking

Thx for bringing this to our attention this doesn’t seam like it’s helping the racing but helping the car in front who already has the advantage force the car on the outside off track as you said this will not improve on track action but help the bullies keep there position…make’s me think of VER & SCH in those last lap’s if it had been SCH in front of VER who was been forced off track it could be a different story how many rule’s can the FIA change to help red bull & VER?! Great vid’s mate thx

@raybeezs

Жыл бұрын

It still hurts, last year's championship win of Red Bull? 😄

@loughieholt2737

Жыл бұрын

Lewis forced max off in usa, jeddah, Portugal and Silverstone and checo in Turkey. Conveniently you don't mention that

This! Can't agree more. Great video

I assume the Apex would be the one taken by the drivers in a given scenario, there and then... The stewards can look back on the replay, see where the apex was to see who was ahead and make a judgement...

I sort of see it as the inner car cannot exit squeeze the outer if the outer is ahead through the middle of the corner and that the outer cannot apex squeeze the inner if there is at least partial overlap ie. both must leave room if there is an overlap and the outer driver is ahead throught the middle. The apex here being either the midpoint in distance or the tightest point in the curve and the line being defined specifically as nromal to the apex at that point with the deifined point being the first car to break thIs line.

A car width like you said I think is the best way to resolve this, the clarification don’t make sense each rule just contradicts another rule

The apex could be easily identified by the start & end of the turn ("curving") and def should be the ideal-quali lap line - it can't change position, otherwise it's not possible to define.

@NitroGhost124

Жыл бұрын

this doesn't work for all corners. depending on the driving style, a long corner such as at zandvoort T1/T3, you can either apex at the very centre of the corner or do a double apex where you apex earlier entering the corner, then apex again exiting the corner in a V shape. in this instance there's no correct way to apex this corner whether you attack it as a single apex or a double apex, it's whatever your preference is. if you force it as a single apex then this handicaps the drivers that prefer to double apex

Very good explanation. Greetings from Argentina

For me overtaking should be determined before the corner. Because if you are say making a late dive down the inside and unlikely to stay on the track on the exit due to braking too late, but then the car on the outside plans to take a regular braking point.. the car on the outside will be taken out of the race due to the car on the inside not controlling their car coming into the corner. IE: Max's approach. (Move or crash)

Always leaving a car's width of track to the overtaking car will kill defensive driving for good and the cars with a tyre offset or just outright better pace will almost always make the overtake work. If you want overtaking sure if you want drivers fighting for position no.

My personal view is if car 1 has their front wheels entirely ahead of Car 2's rear wheels they are entitled to enough space to make the corner. The only variation is on street circuits where that gap has to be a full car's width, while on circuits with run off it only needs half a car width as the car on the outside can still be within the track with only two of their wheels.

Well, maybe just use the geometric apex of the actual curve with no driving line apex. But I sometimes think F1 wants these grey areas to drive controversy in the sport.

Great points made 😊

Very nice explanation Brad. It’s cleared up the rules for me because they are needlessly convoluted and seem to contradict themselves. As you say at least we know what we are now judging the racing against for the remainder of the season, expect more drivers shoved off into the gravel at the ring due to these rules 😂

Maybe "ahead", "alongside" and "apex" are defined somewhere in the document? Anyway, I agree with the need to promote more battling and I defend that any portion of any wheels alongside any portion of the other car's any wheels or further ahead is enough to grant the right to keep the lane. It is strange that after 1 century of motorsport this is not yet solved.

Excellent piece of work. Well-structured and paced. Clear and considered. The facts well-laid out, and your opinions articulate and pertinent. Agree completely that if you just leave a car's width it solves the majority of this. What started out as drivers cheekily squeezing on exit has become full-on forcing off-track, and it's mandated. I feel like modern racing has gone back on rules that didn't need amending, and it's creating inconsistencies and ruining the racing. Also, did I imagine there was once a rule that if you're on the outside, as long as the front of your car was ahead of the halfway point of their car, you are entitled to the space, otherwise you could be squeezed out? Or have I just made that up entirely? 😂

A lot of this would kind of make sense if they were in addition to the current rule set vs being independent rules of their own replacing the old rule set. Essentially working as a setup to say that the passing driver, once entitled to racing room when the defending driver turns in for the corner, must do X in order to still be entitled to racing room through the exit of the corner and when they should back down. On the inside they must remain along side by the time a vehicle hits the apex while in the outside they must be ahead by the time the vehicle hits the apex. I feel like this is more of a rule specification for when an attacking driver must pull back. The ambiguity of the apex still exists, however, the situation where we have an inside and outside driver where they both earned the line, only one of them is the initial passing or attacking driver so you’d use that rule set that applies to the attacking driver to determine if they are entitled to racing room on exit. This does kind of assume that the attacking driver on corner entry is still the attacking driver on corner exit (the drives don’t switch attack/defend labels) if the attacker is ahead of the defending driver (as is a requirement for the attacker to be entitled to racing room if taking the outside line).

How hard is it to simply say “if a car is alongside enough that it’s front and/or rear wheels are level with the other car, both cars need to leave the other room on that side of the corner”. The car who was initially in front obviously has the advantage of getting to better pick their line into the corner, but it’s then on both drivers to leave the relevant gap.

At least there is some clarity now, though it's not what I'd like to see. Much better might be that you must allow space on track (within the track limits) for any driver along side unless you were fully ahead with no overlap at the 50m Board.

To be honest, the apex of the corner is static. If the driver decides to take a different line, it doesn't mean the apex of the corner has changed.

I don’t like the idea of guaranteed space on the corner exit. Drivers need to know that on occasion they need to back out of the throttle and concede the corner. The consequences of their decisions are being eroded into rules.

The apex should be based around fastest lap times set. Any track, any corner. These circuits are designed to have pro drivers move as fast as possible. So, most (if not all) corners have a predetermined apex. Two, if the tires of the inside car are alongside of the outside car (but not ahead,) that has to be negotiated between the two drivers as to who owns the corner, creating a natural battle. The outside car, however, has leverage because they have more room to maneuver. The inside car has to keep pace and fight against understeer.

The apex of a corner is a mathematically defined point on a corner, as is the angle of the line that is drawn from that point. This line is defined as the perpendicular line to the tangent of the inner corner, at the point where the inner corner and the largest possible circle we can draw on the corner meet. The drivers apex might differ from a mathematical apex but that's irrelevant when trying to define the centre of a corner. ...

All well and good, but the difference is which car is attempting the overtake. Not just if it is on the inside or outside. Also, although the point of the apex is debatable the line judging where that would be further to the outside would be at a tangent to the apex.