Closewatt:CGX car nut:Typical current Ferrari - bad strategic and tactical decisions. I wonder how the diehard Hamilton fans booing at Verstappen feel now. Crass little piggies.
Imagine their polite, rules comprehending response if lil lewee had "won" with his illegal car
Lovely watching the duet between you two, please by all means continue
Anyways the race was fun to watch, wasn’t as hot as Saturday, I would love to come back to Austin again in the future to watch again. This is a great circuit.
A bit of coincidence, my driver booked Perry’s for a thank you dinner for his sponsors this season, and that seems to be the spot for dinner, as Aston Martin is there and also Lando with McLaren. George also walked in with his gf late. After dinner we took a stroll on 6th St and we ran into George again. He seems lost however, keep looking at his phone’s GPS and ended up asking direction from the police.
Still reeling from poor Nicky having to pay $16 usd for a beer
I just noticed Lance finished 7th! If we check every plank, Maybe he'd be podium
. And Sarge, will he ever score again?
| s. | Driver | Team | Time |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 |
|
Red Bull | |
| 2 |
|
McLaren | + 10.730 |
| 3 |
|
Ferrari | + 15.134 |
| 4 |
|
Red Bull | + 18.460 |
| 5 |
|
Mercedes | + 24.999 |
| 6 |
|
Alpine | + 47.996 |
| 7 |
|
Aston Martin | + 48.696 |
| 8 |
|
AlphaTauri | + 74.385 |
| 9 |
|
Williams | + 86.714 |
| 10 |
|
Williams | + 87.998 |
Oct 23, 2023 3:07:04 PM
Cars selected were picked because of vertical acceleration telemetry showed signs of irregularities with a couple of cars. The FIA teams selected those cars with drivers who podiumed as well as the pole sitter. Also notice the Mercedes accepted the outcome of the inspection because it is according to a very specific set of regulations and specifications. There is no ambiguity.
Oct 25, 2023 2:34:58 PM
This is precious coming from the man who spent part of last season pitching the story that the flexible floor TD was directed at Red Bull.
It doesn't take a genius to comprehend that running a car too low for the conditions including fuel load and overall track bumpiness are the contributing factors to a wear component being worn beyond regulatory specifications.
Oct 25, 2023 6:20:01 PM
Oct 26, 2023 5:16:29 PM
CGX car nut:Cars selected were picked because of vertical acceleration telemetry showed signs of irregularities with a couple of cars. The FIA teams selected those cars with drivers who podiumed as well as the pole sitter. Also notice the Mercedes accepted the outcome of the inspection because it is according to a very specific set of regulations and specifications. There is no ambiguity.
Is this statement correct? That examinations were targeted and not random? The FIA released clarification today that would lead one to believe the selections were random and not targeted.
thuggy:CGX car nut:Cars selected were picked because of vertical acceleration telemetry showed signs of irregularities with a couple of cars. The FIA teams selected those cars with drivers who podiumed as well as the pole sitter. Also notice the Mercedes accepted the outcome of the inspection because it is according to a very specific set of regulations and specifications. There is no ambiguity.
Is this statement correct? That examinations were targeted and not random? The FIA released clarification today that would lead one to believe the selections were random and not targeted.
Of course his statement is misinformation, it's what he thinks happened. He (and the other dude) love to shades Hamilton and Mercedes after all 
With cars going into parc ferme right after Q1, there is no time for teams to readjust the car if anything is not right. The video I attached earlier gave you all the information you needed.
Oct 26, 2023 6:31:13 PM
thuggy:CGX car nut:Cars selected were picked because of vertical acceleration telemetry showed signs of irregularities with a couple of cars. The FIA teams selected those cars with drivers who podiumed as well as the pole sitter. Also notice the Mercedes accepted the outcome of the inspection because it is according to a very specific set of regulations and specifications. There is no ambiguity.
Is this statement correct? That examinations were targeted and not random? The FIA released clarification today that would lead one to believe the selections were random and not targeted.
That is what was reported on Sunday evening. According to that report the selections were not random but based on telemetry. That’s the same telemetry used to address the porpoising issue and the health ramifications. The vertical acceleration traces for when a car strikes the track is different from when the car settles into steady state conditions. A random selection, in high probability, would not be the podium finishers and the car that had pole.
Oct 26, 2023 8:32:48 PM
That's funny. The official FIA statements completely contradict what you are trying to convey.
https://www.planetf1.com/news/fia-lewis-hamilton-conspiracy-theory
The FIA acknowledged that their post-race scrutineering process had been ‘under the spotlight’ following the DSQs of Hamilton and Leclerc, but made it clear from the outset that random post-race checks have been part of their procedure for ‘many decades’ and ‘exists to ensure compliance with the regulations by virtue of the fact that the teams do not know before the race which specific areas of which cars might be examined beyond the standard checks carried out on every car each weekend.
Instead, it says its long-standing protocol of randomly checking various parts from cars has long worked because teams never know what components are being looked at each race - so they can't risk trying to get around the rules.
In a note detailing the scrutineering process, the FIA has explained that this random element is enough of a deterrent to ensure that teams comply with the regulations.
“This means that, from their perspective, any part of the car could be checked at any time, and the consequences for non-compliance with the technical regulations can be severe,” said the FIA.
Oct 26, 2023 11:12:40 PM
Oct 27, 2023 1:25:55 AM
Exactly, nothing more to read into that. All you wrote earlier carried zero weight as they are simply not true.
An FIA bulletin read: “During the hearing the team(s) acknowledged that the measurement performed by the FIA Technical Team was correct and stated that the high wear on the skid pads was probably a result of the unique combination of the bumpy track and the sprint race schedule that minimised the time to set up and check the car before the race.
“The Stewards note that the onus is on the competitor to ensure that the car is in compliance with the regulations at all times during an event. In this particular case, the rear skid in the area defined in the Technical Delegate’s report was outside of the thresholds… which includes a tolerance for wear.
“Therefore, the standard penalty for a breach of the Technical Regulations is imposed.”
As the stewards note, this illegality is the result of the sprint race format combining with bumpy track surface at the Circuit of The Americas, despite Turns 12 and 14-16 having been resurfaced.
For the sprint weekend, parc ferme rules come into effect after the single hour of free practice running on Friday afternoon.
Teams can break the set-up lockdown to adjust the car, but this requires a pitlane start – as chosen by both Haas and Aston Martin cars.
The team(s) and the Stewards came to the exact conclusion about the wear.
Oct 28, 2023 12:36:19 PM
In the linked article found below, Martin Brundle states,
“I would also like to say I think the FIA do a tremendous job of policing the technical aspects of Formula One. And there are reasons we understand why they chose those two cars in the beginning to check because of data they’d seen. Then they checked some others.“
The data checked was the vertical accelerometer data collected to help eliminate the porpoising issue from last year. However, another poster here doesn’t want to accept this fact.
https://www.planetf1.com/news/lewis-hamilton-accused-of-trying-to-save-face-with-dsq-comments
Oct 28, 2023 3:54:16 PM
Ah, another pure speculation with no confirmation from the FIA itself. It's just what they wrote about what Brundle think happened which he doesn't have proof of. 🤷🏻♂️ But somehow some weirdo wanted to expand that into fitting what he invented.
Meanwhile, on the same website, here is one article about Max speaking out on the issue.
https://www.planetf1.com/news/max-verstappen-lewis-hamilton-disqualification-us-gp
“Of course, I don’t think anyone does that on purpose, but it’s just even more because of this Sprint format where you only have one practice session where you try to nail everything,” Verstappen told the media in Mexico City.
“Once you are in the wrong, there’s nothing you can do. The only thing you can do is bump up the tyre pressures, but then you’re driving around on balloon tyres.
“Of course, it’s not what we want to see. We know that dropping the car gives you performance.
“But it’s just because of this whole format that you put yourself in this position because I don’t think anyone over a normal weekend would run like that.
“So I think we should just get rid of the Sprint weekend and then everyone can just set up their cars normally. It wouldn’t have happened if we’d had a normal race weekend.
“These things only happen when you have a Sprint weekend where everything is so rushed in between FP1 and qualifying and you think ‘We might be okay’ (in terms of set-up).
“From our side, I think we went a bit too conservative, but, of course, that’s still better than the other way.”
Oct 29, 2023 9:57:54 AM
Oct 29, 2023 3:21:38 PM
looks like It wasn't random after all, which struck me odd that it wouldn't be since only those at the top after the race were checked which would be too much of a coincidence, and rightly so since they Mercedes and Ferrari where both caught
Oct 29, 2023 4:07:42 PM
Oct 29, 2023 4:32:11 PM
Carlos from Spain:looks like It wasn't random after all, which struck me odd that it wouldn't be since only those at the top after the race were checked which would be too much of a coincidence, and rightly so since they Mercedes and Ferrari where both caught
Oh boy, FIA will need to get their story straight soon. First they insists it's random but now it's targeted.
Mr Nut was right after all.
Never a dull moment with these clowns saying one thing and doing another.
Oct 29, 2023 4:36:35 PM
Whoopsy:Carlos from Spain:looks like It wasn't random after all, which struck me odd that it wouldn't be since only those at the top after the race were checked which would be too much of a coincidence, and rightly so since they Mercedes and Ferrari where both caught
Oh boy, FIA will need to get their story straight soon. First they insists it's random but now it's targeted.
Mr Nut was right after all.
Never a dull moment with these clowns saying one thing and doing another.
Indeed, it's like if they are winging it all the time, and this just another example, so half the time nobody knows what is really going on...
Oct 29, 2023 4:48:12 PM
https://www.planetf1.com/news/f1-drivers-fia-meeting-stewards
Drivers and teams revolting against the FIA soon? They can't even be bothered to attend a meeting to address issues at hand.
About Rennteam | Help | Terms of use | Privacy Policy | Support | Contact | Imprint | Archive
Powered by
Community
and
Max VERSTAPPEN
Lando NORRIS
Carlos SAINZ
Sergio PÉREZ
Pierre GASLY
Lance STROLL
Yuki TSUNODA 
Alexander ALBON
Logan SARGEANT
some people think the Earth is flat too.
