New video compares Hamilton, Rosberg and Verstappen’s corner-cutting

2016 Mexican Grand Prix

Posted on

| Written by

This video filmed by a Formula One fan at the Autodromo Hermanos Rodriguez gives the most revealing view yet of how three drivers cut the first corner in the Mexican Grand Prix.

Lewis Hamilton, Nico Rosberg and Max Verstappen each cut the corner during the race, prompting claims from their rivals they had gained an advantage by leaving the track.

Why gravel traps aren’t the easy answer to corner cutting
Hamilton straight-lined the corner after locking up a glazed brake at the start of the race. An unhappy Daniel Ricciardo described Hamilton’s driving as “kindergarten stuff” and Nico Hulkenberg alleged the race winner gained a “massive advantage”.

Meanwhile Rosberg tangled with Verstappen and also went across the grass. Neither Mercedes driver was penalised for their actions.

However Verstappen was given a post-race five-second time penalty for cutting the corner while he was battling Sebastian Vettel later in the race, which can also be seen in the video above.

Verstappen disputed the penalty, pointing out his driving had been little different to Hamilton’s had been at the start of the race.

“When I went off the track towards the end I think it was pretty similar to Lewis on lap one, corner one,” said Verstappen.

“He went off and I felt he gained an advantage, I didn’t even gain an advantage, I was ahead going into braking and when I came back on the track I was the same distance in front so I don’t understand the penalty.”

2016 Mexican Grand Prix

    Browse all Mexican Grand Prix articles

    Author information

    Keith Collantine
    Lifelong motor sport fan Keith set up RaceFans in 2005 - when it was originally called F1 Fanatic. Having previously worked as a motoring...

    Got a potential story, tip or enquiry? Find out more about RaceFans and contact us here.

    155 comments on “New video compares Hamilton, Rosberg and Verstappen’s corner-cutting”

    1. I agree with Max, the only one should be penalize is Hamilton, both Rosberg and Max went off track while battling with others, Lewis went out on his own by locking up on his own.

      1. The only person who can be excused is Rosberg as Verstappen pushed him off the track.

        1. ColdFly F1 (@)
          2nd November 2016, 16:02

          The only person who has no blame is Perez; he came back before T2 (and by doing so lost the position/failed in his overtake).

          Rosberg can be excused because he was pushed off. But it remains interesting that he decided to cut through and stay ahead rather do what Perez (probably because Rosberg saw Hamilton in front of him doing the same).

          Comparing Hamilton and Verstappen it seems from this angle that Verstappen was further ahead of Vettel, than Hamilton ahead of Rosberg.
          Based on what you can see here I think Hamilton should have received the same penalty as Verstappen (thus 5sec at his first pit stop).

          1. +1. Perez coming back for turn 2 was the right thing. The only one excused otherwise is Rosberg, as you say. Although I feel that was borderline

          2. I have to disagree @coldfly verstappen does look a little more ahead but he outbrakes himself much worse than Hamilton. You can see the line Hamilton took across the grass and Verstappen is much deeper in the corner. Cutting the corner was probably the wisest choice from Hamilton. Rosberg can complain as much as he wants but when he got shoved wide he’d have had no where to go had Hamilton slowed right down and tried to make turn 2. His choice would have been hit Hamilton or stop behind him dropping him down the pack and probably causing carnage.

          3. @coldfly @xtwl I disagree about Rosberg. Whilst he was given no option but to leave the circuit after making contact with Verstappen, he drove along the edge of the circuit towards T2 and could have easily rejoined the circuit after Verstappen. He obviously made a calculated choice to instead cut out T2 and rejoin ahead of Verstappen into T3. IMO that is a more clear cut case of gaining an advantage as he gained a position if not two when compared to if he rejoined the track for T2. If the collision between Verstappen and Rosberg was deemed to be worthy of a penalty then Verstappen would have got one but that shouldn’t give Rosberg the excuse to cut out T2 when he had the opportunity to rejoin before T2.

            1. It is easy to say rosberg could have just backed off and come back o the track after verstappen. But this was T1 of the race with lots of cars around him. Coming back on the track could have caused a collision with some other car. Probably with the force india. And rosberg has worse vision out from his car than we have from the trackside cameras. Rosberg could not know if there was a car in his blind spot so coming back on the track from his point of view was a far bigger risk for him than going through the grass.

              The point is though there was no room behind verstappen to come back on the track safely. There were lots of cars there where rosberg would have needed to place his car to make the next left hander. Going straight was not only better for rosberg in terms of keping his position but it was also better for everybody in terms of safety. Rosberg made the right move.

          4. Perez was asked in the post race interview why he didn’t went straight to turn three if Hamilton had done it without receiving a penalty, his answer: “I didn’t know Hamilton had done it without a penalty, I only knew it wasn’t right”.

            1. I meant “why he didn’t go”.

          5. If NR goes back to take turn 2 he takes out 1/2 the field, or he sits there to let everyone go by. Well worth any possible penalty.

        2. Correct. Rosberg was nerfed and didn’t gain an advantage; Hamilton and Verstappen simply outbraked themselves and then decided to take a shortcut to erase their disadvantage, which was cheating.

        3. Compare Rosberg versus Verstappen in Mexico with Button versus Verstappen in Abu Dhabi 2015.
          Verstappen recieved a penalty in Abu Dhabi, things where quite similar.

      2. Missing turn 1 of lap 1 while battling for the championship is called choking.

        Lewis choked, like in Japan, but was aided by the FIA this time.

        Staying neutral on Lewis was a political move not one based on right or wrong.

        1. petebaldwin (@)
          2nd November 2016, 16:11

          Absolutely. If they gave Hamilton a penalty, it could have meant that Abu Dhabi didn’t get the title battle they paid all that money to Bernie for.

          1. Rosberg is the worst in these clips. He just made the corner..even though it was wide..but he decided to cut the corner instead because otherwise he would have fallen back to fifth or sixth position. Unbelievable action from Rosberg…he should have got the penalty

            1. Let’s summarize. One driver cuts the corner to keep from losing positions only because he was rammed in the side by another driver, i.e. through no fault of his own. Two other drivers, (one of which did the ramming mentioned above), cut the corner to keep from losing positions simply because they misjudged the braking zone, i.e. completely and solely their fault. And you think the first driver is the worst? I have no words…..

            2. Jonathan, if turns 1 and 2 in Austin were laid out the same way, and in 2015, if Rosberg had cut turn 2 to remain in the lead after Hamilton forced him wide in turn 1, would that have been be okay? And if not, should Hamilton’s move—deliberately running a competitor wide—be allowed?

            3. Absolutely!

              The video shows it very clearly.
              It is true that Verstappen and Rosberg hit each other, but Nico was still well on the tarmac. aiming for the second corner in the chicane.
              Only when he realised Verstappen was ahead, well after their coming together, did he steer off through the grass to cut the chicane and get ahead of Max.

              Oh boy, what a mess.

          2. @petebaldwin One of the reasons I hope he wins in Interlagos. So there is nothing left to celebrate in oil country.

      3. Actually penalizing Hamilton would be quite difficult. Decisions like this take at least a couple of minutes, thus are not “automatic”. Lewis did gain an advantage but who was suppose to benefit from his action? Nico ? He cut the corner himself, so what would stewards do? Ask Lewis to let Nico pass or tell Nico to let Max past and then ask Lewis to let Max pass?

        Stewards probably didn’t have time enough to construct any proper punishment to any front runners one the VSC was deployed halfway through the lap and the SC not much later and once they could not determine the proper benefactor of Lewis possible punishment they probably thought that any gain was immediately neutralized by SC…

        Good call for me.

        1. VSC and SC should not be part of the equation at all. They are in no way related to HAM outbraking himself and thus breaking the rules. It doesn’t matter if the field bunched together under the SC. The punishement should be applied for clear rule breaking and it wasn’t in this case. As the accident happened on lap one, a five second penalty would work.

          1. From the 2016 sporting regulations:

            27.4 Drivers must make every reasonable effort to use the track at all times and may not
            deliberately leave the track without a justifiable reason.
            Drivers will be judged to have left the track if no part of the car remains in contact with it and,
            for the avoidance of doubt, any white lines defining the track edges are considered to be part
            of the track but the kerbs are not.
            Should a car leave the track the driver may re-join, however, this may only be done when it is
            safe to do so and without gaining any lasting advantage. At the absolute discretion of the race
            director a driver may be given the opportunity to give back the whole of any advantage he
            gained by leaving the track.

            Hamilton did not gain a lasting advantage.

            If he did gain such an advantage, he gave it back during the VSC/SC periods.

            This isn’t rocket science.

            1. I agree with everything in Mexico and this thread. But it sure doesn’t feel nice.

              I’ll add: What if Hamilton had tried to make corner 2 (or anyone else on lap one in a similar scenario)? I can’t conceive of that being anything but a multi-car pile-up.

      4. Ok, let’s give Hamilton the same 5 second penalty that Verstappen got. That means Lewis only won the race by 3 seconds intstead of 8. Will that make everyone happy?

        1. You don’t know that. Since the violation happened on lap one, HAM would have to serve the penalty during his first stop. God knows how that would affect the race – he could have end up behind other podium contenders or in traffic.

          1. Also, all this talk about NOT actually gaining any advantage is a bit silly. Just imagine what would happen if there was gravel instead of asphalt. HAM (as he was first violator) would definitely lose time AND positions there, and that would shape the race pretty differently.

            1. Imagine there was a brick wall– or land mines! Any hypothetical obstacle is irrelevant, because there wasn’t one. The rule is simple– if the driver gains a lasting advantage (and Hamilton slowed down immediately afterwards), and don’t give the position back, there’s a penalty.

              Max got a lasting advantage. Hamilton didn’t. Why is this so difficult for people to wrap their minds around?

          2. Yes, you have a point here.

            Giving Lewis a 5 second penalty after the race he has won with a 8 second gap would be a mockery. Not that it hasn’t happened before; when he overtook the SC at Valencia 2010 -which should have meant an instant black flag- the stewards waited to serve the penalty (drive thru) until his advantage was such it was no longer meaningful.

            But giving the penalty straight away would have changed every thing. Lewis would have had to push very hard to open a gap large enough to keep his position after the first pitstop, and Nico also would push hard to close the gap and get the undercut. So al possibilities were open: errors for driving on the limits, mech failures, you name it.

            As it was, there was no pressure whatsoever. Nico didn’t push, he had nothing to win, being second was enough for him and overtaking Lewis on track was too long a shot – AFAICR he has never been able to do that except in the starts. Keeping ahead of the Ferrari and RBR guys was enough for him. And Lewis was able to coast along all race long while snapchatting or whatever.

        2. Nope.
          He would have gotten what he deserves. Because of the VSC the field was more compact and thus if he’d gotten 5 sec. added to his pitstop, he’d probably would have ended up somewhere behind VES or even RIC.
          And thus losing his DWC title.

      5. Verstappen is a liar. He clearly was further ahead of Vettel after cutting the corner. Anything he says that comes out of that lying mouth after that is moot.

        1. verstappen is also talking nonsense when he says he didn’t gain an advantage. if he’d tried to make the corner he would have spun, therefore he gained a huge advantage by straightlining it.

    2. Manohar Shekhawat
      2nd November 2016, 15:14

      Max corner cutting was proved unfair to vettel, he was told as well but he still didn’t give the place back. Clearly if max decided to not to cut the corner then he would have lost atleast 1 place. I feel sorry for vettel as being fair racer he expected that place and went over the radio as he didn’t get it. He spoke bad words only after he understood there was nothing stewards did to penalize max. Sure Daniel got that offer created by max but clearly max should have given that place back!

      1. He did not need to give the position back. It was a choise to either give the position back OR wait and see what the stewards say. The latter being usually something like a 5s penalty IF penalty is given. The team can always ask you to do anything they want and not doing it is not against the rules. Against your contract maybe but not against the rules.

        And there is no indication at all that rbr was asking verstappen to let vettel pass because fia/stewards was asking them to do so. It was the team itself that was asking. It was even said during the race that the incident will be investigated after the race. So there could not have been any kind of message from fia to max because fia had not yet even decided whether he should even get a penalty or not.

        1. RB said VES might have to give the position back, immediately followed by a ‘keep position’. Can be checked on the FIA site, 2 or 3 rounds later they told VES to push hard the remaining laps.

          Giving the penalty only to VES seems a bit strange.
          Seems like HAM hold back after cutting the corner, and with the VSC coming in all gained advantage was lost anyway. But ROS could easily have made the turn after colliding with VES, but choose to cut off the turn and staying in front of VES.
          Take a look back at the collision between BUT and VES in Abi Dhabi 2015; VES was also given a penalty there for leaving the track, and he was clearly in front.
          Or look back at HAM – RIC at Monaco 2016, where HAM cut the chicane, and when that wasn’t enough tried to run RIC in the wall, but wasn’t given a penalty.
          FIA is very inconsistent with its penalty’s to me!

          And, with this inconsistently from the FIA they should make the tracks unforgiving! In Monaco this year VES couldn’t cut the corners, though he sure tried… :)

    3. I think cutting corner while battling makes it worse, forcing others to mistakes is what racing is about. If the driver in front can get away from his mistake by cutting the corner in the place where overtaking is possible and then back off later where you can’t overtake any more what’s the point?

      1. +1000

      2. Luis de la garza
        3rd November 2016, 17:30

        Yep. Absolutely right. X 10000

    4. “He went off and I felt he gained an advantage, I didn’t even gain an advantage, I was ahead going into braking and when I came back on the track I was the same distance in front so I don’t understand the penalty.”

      He is joking, isn’t?

      1. He isn’t. He actually makes a valid point. And the footage presented here doesn’t even show the gaps before the braking points, where Verstappen was further ahead of his closest competitor (Vettel) than Hamilton was (in his case ahead of Rosberg).
        So, yes, something definitely went wrong on Sunday.

        1. VES is talking about Rossberg, not Hamilton

          1. No, he isn’t. He’s clearly talking about his incident with Vettel, otherwise his word wouldn’t make any sense.

        2. Luis de la garza
          2nd November 2016, 17:50

          Getting out of the road by your own miscalculation is a mistake. I think it should be penalized by 2 or 3 seconds. Most of the times there is a car behind putting some pressure. You make a mistake, you pay.

          1. @ Luis de la garza
            I don’t disagree. I don’t necessarily agree, either, but the problem is that Verstappen was penalised while Hamilton wasn’t. And both incidents were nearly identical, Hamilton’s was actually worse in any aspect I can think of.
            And I think it’s horrible stewarding if you let one driver do it early in the race without any consequences, but a different driver is measured by a different standard later in the same race.
            I realise I must sound like a Verstappen fanatic, which I’m definitely not.

            1. I believe you are right but there are 3 things to consider:

              1) The Lewis incident was in lap 1 turn 1, where offroad excursions seldom or never get penalties. Really Lewis should have tried to get back on track before T2 even though it would have ruined his RF tyre and would have cost him four or five positions. But he would have had to enter into massive traffic, with the risk of a multiple shunt.

              2) This late in the season, with the WDC so near to be decided, steward are understandable wary of interfering. A (meaningful) penalty to Lewis would have pretty much given the WDC straight to Nico. Nobody (well, almost nobody) wants the WDC to be decided by the stewards, even if their decision is right.

              3) The guy’s name is Lewis Hamilton, the only guy in the story of F1 who can summon a crane to put him back on track and get away with it. Real drivers don’t need cranes. Shortcuts on the grass, neither.

            2. why doesn’t everyone just cut the corners at the start? it seems like the logical thing to do next year!!

            3. @frood19

              yes everybody should do that, would be a good exposé

              If a gravel trap or a tyre wall is not safe or practical, the best thing to do would be to straighten the T2 kink, turning Hamiulton’s route into the real circuit. This way there wouldn’t be a shortcut, any route on the grass would be longer. Drivers would still be able to use it to avoid a collision, but wouldn’t get an advantage.

        3. Sorry nase but judging the gap into the corner is pointless. Look at how much deeper in the corner Verstappen is than Hamilton ( you can see Hamiltons tyre marks on the grass) by that logic if someone just didn’t brake for the corner they’d be miles ahead and therefore be less at fault

          1. @ Tom
            I’m not quite sure I understand what you’re referring to, but what I’m talking about is the gap *before* any of the drivers applied their brakes.
            I made screencaps (because the videos keep being deleted) where the difference becomes clear:
            Hamilton vs. Rosberg at the start: – the gap is rather small, Nico almost gets alongside Lewis before anyone starts applying the brakes.
            Verstappen vs. Rosberg: – Vettel never gets closer to Verstappen than that, there’s always a car’s length or more between them.
            If you do find a video that stays online long enough, you can look at the footage again, I’m not talking about gaps that can be influenced by braking too late, I’m talking about the smallest gaps that were observable while both drivers in question were flooring it.

            1. You should add one more pic to your collection, the gap between rosberg and Hamilton during the vsc, the reason given for no penalty is that he let off the throttle on the straight, thus not only giving all time he gained back but penalising himself. I would like to see that in picture form to judge that for myself, although given the data race control have, I feel like releasing the actual data could just put this to bed.

            2. @ Will Jones
              That hardly changes anything, does it? We all know Lewis backed off significantly – after cutting the first 3 corners and going down the next long straight at full speed, with a gap in the vicinity of 2 seconds, and therefore completely unchallenged.
              In other words: His closest competitors were right on his tail when he made a big error. He leaves out the tricky corners and waits until after the next overtaking spot before giving back the time he lost. But the question at hand is, does this really mean he gained no advantage at all? I don’t think so.
              Also, the comparison with Verstappen: Before he outbraked himself, he actually had a somewhat larger gap to Vettel than when he rejoined the track. No penalty for the driver who gets himself out of a potentially troublesome situation by waiting half a lap before slowing down – a penalty for the driver whose situation didn’t improve at all when he missed the corner.

    5. i don’t understand why it can’t be a gravel trap here?

    6. you can hear a guy shouting “tramposo!” (cheater) to Verstappen

      1. Luis de la garza
        2nd November 2016, 17:52

        Agreed. Vettel was working him out and forced the Ves mistake. He should’ve been placed immediately behind Vettel. That would be the fair thing to do

      2. He, more like “¡pinche tramposo!”.

        1. lol that’s right

      3. @monosodico Ah is that what’s being said? Thanks for that.

        1. you’re welcome

    7. I’m sick and tired of hearing the excuse that Hamilton didn’t gain an advantage, either
      1) because he was in the lead, and stayed in the lead; or
      2) the safety car came out immediately and nullified his gain.

      The fact is that Hamilton gained an advantage by not losing his position to Rosberg, and maybe even one of the Red Bulls. He went in too fast, and wouldn’t have been able to make the corner. If he had stayed on track he would have had to slow his car down significantly, and be passed in the process. He avoided that by running off. End of story.

      1. Exactly. It should have been a penalty.

        He missed his braking zone and just decided to go straight on.

        1. It’s what I do in formula one, the game.. 😁

          1. Maybe a fun tryout, set the rules to realistic and see if a penalty follows , probably more consistent then the real thing.

        2. The trouble is: what penalty? 5 seconds before pit service? 5 additional seconds to his final time? Let Nico pass (who could also be demanded to let Max pass)?

          While they were investigating VSC was deployed and few seconds later SC was deployed any gained time was nullified in the very same lap, no penalties in that situation is fine for me.

          1. The time he gained is not the issue. The issue is that he would have lost position had he not cut the corner. The whole time gain is irrelevant.

            1. You actually don’t know that, as him trying slow down more to take the second corner to cut back across a sliding a skidding Rosburg and Verstappen may have ended at worst in a huge first corner pile up. Then the rest of the field taking to the grass to miss the carnage.
              Or more likely Verstappen and Rosburg would have had to to change their line, slowed them more and Ham may still have come out in front.

              As it was Rosburg and Verstappen were also going to hard into the corner too. They had to slow down much more than normal, they would have got though the corner at their normal pace.

      2. If you look at the video, you can time that Hamilton gains +2secs by cutting the corner and is able to keep the speed after the second corner gaining additional time. Only difference between him and Max was that Hamilton’s mistake happens in first lap. Both should have gotten the same penalty.

    8. Keith, if Lewis was penalized for his off track excursion what would be the result?

      Grid position penalty correct?

      If so, Lewis fans heads would explode.

      1. Probably a 5 second penalty which would have had no impact on the end result so no heads would even wobble.

        1. Isn’t Lewis in the penalty danger zone though? 1 more reprimand and he’ll have a grid penalty as well…

          First lap and all… he still came out a few car lengths ahead.

          1. A reprimand and a penalty are different things.

            3 reprimands = 10 place grid drop.
            10 penalty *points* = 1 race ban.

            The amount of penalty points issued for a penalty varies, but doesn’t count towards the amount of reprimands.

            Penalty points last for 12 months, reprimands are only for the current season.

        2. I am not sosure it wouldn’t have made a difference. If Lewis had gotten the penalty, he would have had his first pitstop lasting 5 seconds longer than it was now. I don’t know for sure what the gap between Lewis and Nico was when they went in for their stops but maybe it was below 5 seconds?

      2. I guess it would have been the same as Verstappen – a five-second time penalty. Which in Hamilton’s case he would have had to serve during his pit stop. He had Rosberg easily handled last weekend so I suspect he could have managed that.

        Verstappen got penalty points as well, no reprimand, as assuming that would have been consistent then no third reprimand for Hamilton. But this is all just conjecture.

        1. ColdFly F1 (@)
          2nd November 2016, 22:22

          He had Rosberg easily handled last weekend so I suspect he could have managed that.

          Not so sure, @keithcollantine.

          Hamilton had a 5.7sec advantage before his pit stop and they were 5-6sec apart after both pitted.
          Thus a 5sec penalty would have taken him straight into the danger zone. Especially, since the 5sec penalty is a ‘manual count’ and is the bare theoretical minimum.

          But then again we don’t know who would have pushed harder knowing Hamilton had a 5sec penalty.

          1. Hamilton cruised and still had around 10sec gap… imagine if he asked to push a hammer time? anyone remember he flied pass 20+ sec gap in a short time… dont under estimate the men on the edge…

    9. As a Hamilton fan I must say, he should have been penalised.

      1. -4

        As a Hamilton fan, it is a payback! Remember the bloody Spa? He did give place back and his opponent crashed on his own, yet ham was penalized with 30sec, with a penalty that didnt exist until after the race….

    10. I think the discussion of whether there should have been penalties has been done to death by now, by and large everyone agrees. The question is now whether the stewarding will improve now after the fact? Or will it be business as usual…

      Good fan footage as always though, appreciate seeing these alternate angles.

      1. Oh and putting my tin-foil sports-entertainment hat on for a second, whether Hamilton wasn’t penalised to keep the WDC fight interesting.

        1. The was a higher power at play.

    11. Verstappen: “He went off and I felt he gained an advantage, I didn’t even gain an advantage, I was ahead going into braking and when I came back on the track I was the same distance in front so I don’t understand the penalty.”

      it’s not NOT gaining an advantage that’s the problem, its not being punished for leaving the track in a sport that doesn’t seem to reward precision anymore, Monaco being the exception. Pitiful really.

      1. Exactly. The same mistake from Verstappen or Hamiton at certain other tracks could have meant they hit a wall, went over a speed bump etc but this track and many others provide no deterrent to braking too late and paying the price for the mistake. Again, no consistency from the FIA.

    12. There has been many reports also stating that Hamilton was not penalised because data showed he significantly dropped his pace to drop back towards to pack once he got his car back on track. Max didn’t.

      1. Still a stupid argument that you only need to return roughly to where you were before you got the advantage. The problem is with the interpretation of “no lasting advantage” rather than simply “a disadvantage”…

        1. “Advantage” is a stupid basis for a rule, no matter how interpreted.

          Lets change tennis too then. Ball goes outside of the line, lets stewards decide if you gained an advantage as to whether you lose point. Or basketball…its now ok to dribble out of bounds if you don’t gain an advantage.

          It doesn’t need to be “fair and just per case”, like in court. It is a sport. In American Football, holding is a ten yard penalty. Small hold. Long hold. Giving advantage. Or not. Hold? Ten yard penalty.

          For racing, this could be “cede 1 position” or whatever. Even if you already lost a position. Whatever. Hard rule. Concrete penalty. This is how sports work.

          Is racing a sport or not? Just have concrete enforcable rules and enforce them.

          1. Tennis has plenty of grey area rules which wind fans up – as does every sport in existence. F1’s is track limits. I would say that a sport with no grey areas is not in fact a sport at all but a game

            1. Sure, but most of those gray areas are unavoidable, are not related to “out fo bounds”. And even then those gray areas undermine the sport (NBA’s foul discretion is pretty bad).

              But for “out of bounds”, almost every sport is very clear on the rule. The gray is usually just deciding if a foot or ball landed inside or outside of a line. But once that is decided, the result is black and white. So F1’s justifiable gray area would just be if the car was out of bounds or not. Not what to do after that decision is made.

            2. Put it this way. I am done with F1 this year. No longer sporting enough. I have at least two other friends who gave up on F1 recently too. One due to Verstappen golden boyism, and the other just because DRS is making it not really racing.

              I agree with those things, but swallowed it due to there being a decent race at the front, on paper. But this ridiculous rule, when it can be concrete, and the consequences to my spectator value, broke me too. I’m done for this year. Maybe I’ll catch a race or two next year.

      2. didn’t you notice Vettel was much closer after Verstappen overshot the corner

        1. Yeah I agree vettel was, but vettel was also in a position to pass verstappen on that corner where as I think Lewis was unchallenged as nico was too far back bumping wheels with max. It’s a fine line but fine enough to divide many opinions..

    13. Well done to Sergio Perez for not cutting the track, and following the rules.

      1. @tim-m Absolutely, props to Pérez, particularly as his battle with Massa was a race-long one, he didn’t succumb to temptation.

      2. Nice guys finish last, they say

    14. What’s wrong with mid chicane/corner signage that will damage wings and must be driven around? If that simple change was in place it would not alter safety (low height signage that was foam, a base that’s thicker that would damage front wings but not generally hurt the car/drivers). Build a path to drive around (similar to tire walls where a left right turn would be in place to not hit them). Then this path would provide zero advantage, not damage a car (but slow them if they were truly out of control) and still impede the blatant cheat path they all took.

    15. WOW. I was really expecting Verstappen’s excursion off the track to be milder than what Hamilton did. Especially after his comments and the comments from his bosses that it wasn’t nearly as bad. But it was no different. He went out at pretty much the same place and the car behind him was pretty much as far away as it was in the other case.
      This is BAD. This should not be allowed AT ALL.

      1. Did you even watch the video? Hamilton was one car length in front of Rosberg before the corner. When he missed his breaking zone he made a very early decision to cut both corners and choose the fastest line to the exit of turn 3. He came out turn 3 with a massive 100m or more advantage and a much higher speed then Rosberg.
        Verstappen was more then a car length in front of Vettel when he missed his breaking zone. He drove first a complete different line then Hamilton, 20 meters strait and then only after breaking he went to the right with a much lower speed then Hamilton. After that he drove the same line as Hamilton but because of the different line and the slower speed he came out at corner 3 with only 1 to 2 car lengths advantage on Vettel.
        In my opinion both were wrong but the way Hamilton drove this corner it almost looked that he had planned this even before the start. He gained a massive advantage and could stay out of first lap trouble in corners 1, 2 and 3 by driving this complete off road line.

    16. Both Hamilton and Verstappen would have lost places if they’d played fair and rejoined the track before the next bend. Neither did, both cheated.

      1. First of all, I am a Max Verstappen fan, and I do think he should have made an attempt to rejoin the track at an earlier point than where he did.

        The footage however does show that Hamilton breaked. He saw he couldn’t make it, and even before steering into the first corner, decided to go and cut straight through to the 3rd. Verstappen completely outbreaked himself, and only started aiming for turn 3 when he was already well outside the track.

        I would say Hamilton’s excursion was more severe. Rosbergs sidestep was just a racing tussle nobody lost or gained much there.

        All in all, I think the penalties were decent, also the one for Vettel, but I think Hamilton should have had one at least equal to Verstappen’s too.

      2. My above comment was meant for the other comment by the way. The kanan comment.

    17. One significant difference is that it’s stated practice by the stewards that they will be significantly more forgiving as regards track excursions during the first few corners of a Grand Prix.

      1. Perhaps the stewards could be a little more specific about this “forgiveness” in the first couple of laps.
        If you go on an excursion off track to avoid a collision, no problem, but if you just simply out brake yourself with no one near you, glazed brake or not, there will be penalty.

        1. It can’t be both ways, only in very specific circumstances is there a penalty in a race for exceeding track limits when no one is near you – think Monaco swimming pool, or Canada champions wall chicane: you get three warnings for cutting the two corners which nets you a significant advantage, even with the bollard in canada which is for safely not punishment.

          So if no car was close enough to him to be relevant, and no specific instructions about track limits there, no penalty – you can argue that there should be, but there is not in the current formula and therefore Hamilton was perfectly correct to do what he did.

          The only argument that holds weight is that Rosberg was in fact close enough to him that he kept his place after the mistake by the cut

    18. Seriously, how can you say that Rosberg cut the corner? Verstappen hit him and forced him off the track, he was lucky not to suffer damage, and then rejoined the track as quick as possible. How is that corner cutting?

      1. Abu Dahbi 2015, Button versus Verstappen…. exact the same, Rosberg should have got the penalty if there was one to give. Verstappen had the righ to the racing line.

        1. Sorry I don’t agree, racing incident, both at fault. Rosberg for slightly overshooting the corner but still trying to make the corner and Verstappen for locking up because of an over ambitious attempt to over take and also overshooting the corner but crucially forcing Rosberg off the track and the line he was trying to take. If Max didn’t make contact you could almost contemplate a penalty to Rosberg, almost.

          1. “If” and “almost” are rather weak foundations for a penalty, especially when other drivers never even bothered about trying to take the first corner. (Just like in Russia earlier this year, when Hamilton cut the second corner whithout even trying to turn in, gaining five places in the process with no penalty given. And his fans are moaning about that race as one of the unjust cases when he was compromised by technical problems!)

    19. If you go off track, there MUST be a penalty – either a natural one (losing time, or places, or bits of the car) or an imposed one. And when in tight racing situations, as in the above video, the penalty should be severe, as it would be at Monaco if a driver made the same kind of error. Bring back the gravel traps! Failing that, perhaps when a driver goes off track, he can rejoin right away, but race control could electronically knock off 50 horsepower for a lap.

      1. Wouldn’t say there’s an immediate need for gravel traps. Why not have more sorts of foam advert boards in the ‘shortcuts’. Ones that nicely break apart to provide the sidepods and whatnot with some extra coating that only a good old fashioned pit stop can straighten out.

        Sounds like a relatively safe, non harmful kind of solution that already provides a nice penalty.

        For other sections of the track where cars like to go wide… Maybe a bit less grippy asphalt? Or some added bumps that mess with the floorboards or balance, but doesn’t immediately destroy the car. Enough to be a disturbance, not enough to be destructive.

    20. My Mexican friend said it all “tramposso” / cheater is SO perfect . One sees the biggest cheater of the season ,Verstappen doing what he usually does ,cheat, and then he states that it was not cheating because if it were cheating the stewards would have said say but, what the race was such a good example of is that f1 is a culture of cheating .We see, as in Mexico that the one time the stewards do something they punish the other driver more than they punish Verstappen so the net result is that of no penalty. Give verstappen 5 seconds because everyone saw him cheat out in clear sight but, then give Vettel 10 seconds so verstappens still come out ahead of Vettel. Excuse me will I vomit .
      The stewards usually, as was the case in Mexico,do the bidding of the powers that be. That is why Hamilton,the English driver was not penalized while Vettel ,the German driver was penalized and why Verstappen ,the season long cheater was able to move in the braking zone race after race with impunity while vVttel had his podium take away for the same conduct when he only had to defend in the first place because of the off track driving which was forced by Vettel driving better than Verstappen. Verstappen could not stay on track so he clearly gained an advantage by driving off the track and coming back on still ahead of Vettel . To say otherwise is to fly in the face of logic.
      Anyway, as sad as it is it is clear that the mostly British stewards clearly favor the British drivers and punish the German drivers and those drivers whose country of origin attaches to the England to Germany dichotomy.
      It is terrible that such a thing still exits especially in sport but it is clear : Hamilton and verstappen do anything they want and always come out with favorable rulings while Vettle and Rosberg are always punished even where the conduct is the same or the former group’s conduct is more deserving of penalty.

      Sad but true.

      1. The guy says “pinche tramposo”. Wich sounds a lot worse btw.

      2. OMG you’re frustrated. The guy isn’t cheating at all. He uses the open gaps in regulation. Just like BrawnGP did with their double-diffuser. Unwritten rules are no rules and of course it makes sense to challenge them. VES did challenge them with the result that in the end there was a new “formalized unwritten rule” and what happens? Vettel brakes the rule for which his has been begging for formalization. Verstappen didn’t.

        And how about that Aussie-Steward who went behind everybody’s back and persuaded Mercedes to file charges against VES? Yeah right… “mostly British Stewards” huh.
        But indeed, I agree with you: F1 is not without politics.

    21. I was ahead going into braking and when I came back on the track I was the same distance in front

      Is Verstappen serious? That statement makes no sense whatsoever. It’s as if he thinks that his actions shouldn’t have any consequences. He made a mistake and went off the track. He made no attempt to get back on to the track and instead accelerated ahead through the grass so that his mistake will not result in losing a position.
      If that is the way he sees things, why even bother to stay on track at all? Take the shortest route everywhere. And if someone asks, he could always say-“But I was still inside Mexico. So that’s okay”.

      1. He is serious. He is always serious about taking virtually no responsibility for his actions, particularly the actions that result in an accident or contact, he is almost never at fault. I can’t recall one occasion when Verstappen admitted any error. Perhaps someone can point one out to me and for every one he admits to I will show several for which he takes no responsibility. It’s almost always someone else’s error. I like the fact Max is there and its obvious he is a great talent and it’s ok to make a defence for your actions, but be reasonable.

    22. Both Hamilton and Verstappen should have been penalized. Both of them made mistakes all by themselves and decided to cut the corner deliberately so that they can stay ahead of the following cars. IMO, that warrants a penalty.
      Rosberg was not entirely a saint either, but he was bumped off, so he has an excuse.

    23. The crucial parts are where they each start braking, where the other car is at that time, and what they do afterwards, and this video doesn’t show any of that. We already knew who went across the grass and where, that two episodes were on Lap 1, and that it’s a foolish bit of track design. So I don’t see how this is ‘revealing’ or even ‘new’.

    24. OmarRoncal - Go Seb!!! (@)
      2nd November 2016, 19:21

      @keithcollantine what situations (penalties) can be appealed after one race and before the following one? I mean, would it be possible for Force India (for Hulkenberg’s complaints) or Ferrari (to make a parallel with Verstappen penalty) to ask for Hamilton’s penalty BEFORE the Brazilian Grand Prix? Or it’s case closed already.

      1. OmarRoncal - Go Seb!!! (@)
        2nd November 2016, 19:22

        I mean, appealing a penalty, or the lack of a penalty in this case, @keithcollantine

      2. @omarr-pepper I believe once the race result is formalised, that’s it.

        A team has to have raised a protest and the race result marked ‘provisional’ before any offending parties have left the circuit, else the stewards deem the matter ‘no case to answer’.

    25. christianedward (@)
      2nd November 2016, 19:30

      Has the video been removed?
      I can’t find it anywhere.

      1. @christianedward It’s loading and playing fine at the moment.

        1. @keithcollantine it doesn’t load on mobile for me (and in fact videos never have done on this site), but it is working on desktop.

    26. The difference between Hamilton and Verstappen there was that Verstappen could have made the corner, if you look on the onboard footage you can see Verstappen first turning towards the apex but then quickly straightens to drive over the grass instead

      1. And Hamiltons breaks were not up to right temperature, had to sit for a long time on the grid

    27. Hamilton sure needed penalty and would have lost the race there.
      Max also took an advantage later.
      Rosberg had no way to get back on track like Perez, because of all the traffic, so was forced to cut through the grass: questionable.
      Max pushing him off was just racing if you look at how Alonso pushed off Massa(?) last race and was not punished. I guess they ruled that racing.

    28. My understanding is the fact the race was neutralised by the accident 2 corners later, coupled with the extenuating circumstances (Hamilton’s glazed brake disc and Rosberg’s fight with Verstappen) meant the stewards wrote it off with no further investigation.

      Hamilton likely didn’t mean to outbreak himself and the speed metrics probably showed this – he just clearly went for the brakes and one of the discs snatched, – fact born out by the telemetry which showed the differences in brake temps.

      If the safety car hadn’t come out and/or Verstappen hadn’t punted Rosberg off in the same corner, then the decision may have been different.

      1. The stewards said they examined the telemetry @optimaximal, which they get transmitted each lap, and saw he lifted, not to gain a lasting advantage. Plus it was Turn 1 of course, and Rosberg wasn’t really challenging, and the situation behind meant he couldn’t realistically give a place back as you say. Tho naturally it’s a massive trigger for anyone who dreams about punishing him :)

    29. I’m told the stewards treat a race start differently from the rest of a race. The key factor in the race start is whether a driver has impacted another car or impeded it unfairly. This is why Ham got penalised in Japan 2008 when he didn’t in Sundays race, in Japan he crossed directly in front of a competitor and therefore impeded him, on Sunday he didn’t.

      I’m given to understand that the stewards would prefer a driver who has made a mistake to get out of the way of other cars rather than try and rejoin the track unsafely and cause a multiple pile-up. That course of action was taken by Nico Rosberg in his less dramatic corner T2 cut, he kept clear of Max, having already been clouted by him once. The fact that it was the leader who made the mistake simply highlights the incident, there are many others you could point at in the past where no action has been taken when a car in the midfield mele has left the track and re-joined.

      Whilst Ham had a huge advantage after T3, he slowed down and before the VSC notice came up the pack were back with him and hence no advantage gained, repeat, in the context of a race start.

      All those who are complaining, lets see the evidence of drivers in the past doing the same and getting penalised, only at the start of course.

    30. I wonder if HAM had his “route” across the grass as a backup plan before the race started.
      In other words, if he determined ROS had a chance of passing him, he would brake as if he was trying to make the turn but take the short cut. It looks like he made less than a “half hearted” effort to make the turn.
      It’s hard for me to believe he could misjudge the bend that poorly.

      1. Exactly what I was thinking. After “missing” his breaking zone he immediately choose his line to the exit of turn 3 and gained two advantages: a massive lead of 100 meters with a higher exit speed at turn 3. But most of all: he could stay out of any trouble in corner 1, 2 and 3 so the most risky part of the whole race.

      2. yep, last year HAM couldn’t pass ROS during the race so knew he had to stay ahead at all costs…

        I appreciate the current ‘no lasting advantage’ rule by the stewards, but quite clearly HAM oversteps the mark massively making a mockery of it !
        Lap 1 is supposed to be more lax, but the stewards still investigated the Wehrlein incident which was quite clearly a ‘racing incident’

        1. Yes, as long as it goes unpunished we will see more of this in the future – if the leading driver is threatened in first corner, he “outbrakes” himself, cut the corner and keep the lead.

      3. Agree, I’ve noticed this in other races this year. As if Hamilton had already pre-planned to cut the corner should anything happen, as this move has been done several times this year already. In Russia it looked like it was planned to happen regardless. This is of course after the start of the season where he got whacked in the first corners a couple of times. Very close to cheating, if not outright.

    31. Due to the fact that I’m an avid Hamilton fan, and that I can’t stand Rosberg or Verstappen, it’s obvious to me – as it should be to any other intelligent F1 fans – that Hamilton’s move was 100% correct, and Rosberg and Verstappen’s moves were 100% wrong.

      It’s the only logical and totally unbiased conclusion.

    32. There was a lot said by the TV commentary team about the stewards being a bit more lenient on the first lap.

      That makes sense for cars that are bumped/forced off track in the melee that always occurs at the first corner.

      What I don’t believe though is that the person in the lead should be allowed to out brake themselves (as he’s been prone to doing quite a bit this year), run off the track and continue over the grass to rejoin in the lead.

      He wasn’t pushed off the track, he made a mistake. Vestappen did exactly the same, locked up while in front of Vettel and was penalised.

      First lap or last, should’ve been treated the same.

    33. To me the issue of who should and should not have got a penalty is a little immaterial now as the race is over and done with, what concerns me more is the inconsistency of the FIA throughout the season, some drivers being penalised for instances during a race that other drivers get away with, the enforcing of track limits (where were the track limits in Austin), no action against Seb for his unacceptable rant at Charlie, their protection of Verstappen for so long before doing anything about some of his questionable race moves.

      There will never be any consistency in enforcing the rules as long as the FIA continue to have different stewards at each race, they need a dedicated team of 3 stewards to officiate at every event for a minimum of 1 season and the choice of the driver steward needs to be better thought out, the likes of Mark Blundell were never up to it as F1 drivers and don’t seem to be up the responsibility of being a steward either.

      1. It’s not about a driver steward being ‘up-to-it’ as F1 drivers – they’ve had plenty of successful drivers from other series like endurance racing – the general rules of racing are applied across the entire racing spectrum. The driver steward is there for the other stewards to consult on a racing driver mentality, to explain why a driver would make a specific move etc – I don’t think they can even actually cast a judgement.

        Also, having 3 fixed stewards is similarly problematic as stewards can quite legitimately develop bias due to nationality/person reasons/etc. By rotating the stewards, everything is reset every race.

    34. If you slow down the video and look at both Hamilton and Verstappen you will see that Verstappen before going off track has slowed enough and has steering angle to make the corner , just.
      He made a conscious decision to leave the track knowing he would passed by Vettel if he stayed within the track limit .
      Hamilton on the other hand has locked up flat spotted and is travelling considerably quicker with no steering angle to make the corner and leaves the track as a last resort.

    35. Hamilton and Verstappen both deserved penalties, or atleast should have given 1 position back, Rosberg showed them what you are supposed to do (after Verstappen whacked him), you try to get back on the track, not short cut the track. Verstappen should have got a penalty for pushing another driver off the road, it was far worse then Rosberg’s pass in Hockenheim where he got a penalty.

    36. They all deserved penalties and that should have been done since the next lap.

      Just back off and not cross the corners – that is the massive advantages. Othewise they would get stuck and probably won’t overtake them. And they would be not further chains like Vettel & Ricardo.

    37. A clear case. All or none should receive a penalty.

    38. Was Lewis drunk?!…

    39. Why not implement a more well defined rule than the current ‘gaining an advantage’ wording which has to be interpreted depending on the situation? How about a specific rule for a driver defending a position, such as ‘If a car leaves the track (without being forced to by another car) while a trailing car is less than 2 seconds behind, the leading car must give up that position to the trailing car.’

      This way we don’t have to debate whether the trailing driver was going to make the overtake stick and thus whether the defending driver gained a ‘lasting advantage’. Then the only interpretation to be made would be whether the driver was ‘forced’ to cut the corner (something similar to the Rosberg/Verstappen incident in Mexico).

      It would be very strict definately but would ensure drivers always made best efforts to remain on track when defending and didn’t use corner cutting as a free defence.

    40. After watching that video, I’ve changed my mind. Hamilton and Rosberg should have BOTH gotten a penalty on lap 1. And Max should have gotten one too.

    41. Why am i not able to see the video? I’m on mobile, using Chrome browser.

    42. The Nouvelle Chicane at Monaco is been cut so many times and if you are in the lead and go over the chicane does not give back any position, The first corner is been cut by 3 or more drivers during the first lap, the same with Monaco, or Russia NO PUNISHMENT… but because its Lewis people are demanding for the electric chair, Rosberg cut the last corner at Canada just to stay off Lewis, he only lifted off, Vettel passed Hulkenberg off the track in Canada, it wasn’t mentioned, Alonso flew across two CORNERS in Singapore, nothing happened but because its Lewis Hamilton people want him to face all sorts of punishment. Lewis went off…ok he gained an advantage over another driver who went off, people will say he was pushed off, well Lewis was pushed off in 2008 at Spa, gave back his advantage but was still punished.

    43. The video hasn’t changed my mind: In the cases where crossing corners, without being forced to do so because another driver pushes the driver of – and gets a penalty for that – the driver cutting the corner should be put at least 1 position back in the race, no matter how far in front he is. The reason for this is that the ideal, the gravel trap, where they end their race, is too dangerous. The 5 sec penalty is way too lenient as it hardly puts them back to where they were, before they made the mistake and then cut the corner. Under the current rules VES should have been ordered to give his position to VET on the lap it happened. It was a clear case. The first lap incidents are a problem, because they have been lenient towards first lap incidents. But they could sharpen this for future races.

      1. @palle
        I’m not sure if there is a rule which says that you should allow the car behind you to pass when you leave the track. I think this is one of those “unwritten rules” to which someone tends to refer to when it comes of handy. Being penalized for leaving the track with a 5 seconds punishment “by default” is clear to everyone. It is clear also that the 5 secs have to be “cashed” on the next pittstop and if none will be added to the total racing time. And let’s face it: VET wasn’t 5 secs behind VES at the time when the latter left the track. VES got what he deserved so end of discussion. The fact that VET lost control caused the VET-RIC incident and (besides VET being stressed a lot lately) the Ferrari staff on the wall should be held responsible for that.

    44. Great interview with Stefan, great point below:

      “I don’t remember when this whole open-radio policy began where the public can hear conversations between the drivers and teams. I guess that’s part of the entertainment now but if you allow and promote that then you’re going to have to expect that drivers are going to show their frustration now and then. Why should that surprise anyone? At least you’re hearing a live, breathing human being showing real emotion instead of drivers thanking the team, sponsors, their parents, etc – all that stuff you normally hear on the slowing down lap has become almost meaningless.

      What Vettel said shows what’s actually going on in the car and I can relate to it 100 percent. Normally when you get on the radio like that, you just want to blow off some steam. Yes of course, you have to try to control yourself but I’ve certainly been guilty of using far worse language than Vettel did.”

    Comments are closed.