Weaver of the race?

[donKey jote]

:laugh:

[Daniel]

:D That was comedy weaving at its best :D

[Daniel]

Hmmmm Petrov deserves a mention and IMHO what he did was dangerous

[ojciec dyrektor]

Hmmmm Petrov deserves a mention and IMHO what he did was dangerous
I must have been watching the other GP. Petrov was driving clean and fair.

[Daniel]

Yes you must have been. It was a little silly.

[donKey jote]

it looks like both German and Spanish TV were also covering a different race :)

[mattlamb]

Have to say that was appalli9ng weaving by Lewis Hamilton. He drove a great race but that was dreadful.
Weaving seems to be increasing a lot this season and the FIA need to clamp down on it

[Robinho]

it wasn't clever, marginal even, although i don't think it was dangerous. he was clearly trying to break the tow, not block Petrov, when petrov made a move he gave him room. probably deserved a warning and nothing more, which is what he got

[steveaki13]

I personally dont recall seeing anyone weave that much to defend their position in recent years.
I think it was marginal and probably deserving of a warning.

[jens]

Such weaving that Hamilton performed, shouldn't be allowed. But Petrov was fighting impressively against him - shame he later faded and retired after all.

[wedge]

Such weaving that Hamilton performed, shouldn't be allowed. But Petrov was fighting impressively against him - shame he later faded and retired after all.

Why not? Petrov didn't even try to overtake because he was not close enough.

The decision was correct, but the rule is stupid. It didn't even stop Schumi forcing Alonso onto the grass in Silverstone 2003 let alone cry baby Hakinen at Spa 2000 that gave us the silly rule in the first place.

Racing should not be for pussycats, let them race hard.

[Wasted Talent]

That was okay, not dangerous at all. The rules say you can only move once to block another driver - Hamilton was trying to break the tow not blocking into the corner.

Interesting that he had to try and break the tow from a RENAULT....

This was very different from, say, Kobi chopping Nakajima in Brazil last year - that should have been a race suspension

WT

[wedge]

That was okay, not dangerous at all. The rules say you can only move once to block another driver - Hamilton was trying to break the tow not blocking into the corner.

Interesting that he had to try and break the tow from a RENAULT....

This was very different from, say, Kobi chopping Nakajima in Brazil last year - that should have been a race suspension

WT

No need for excuses.

If he was trying to break the tow he would weave like a drunk driver just as he did in his first few races in his rookie year.

[Dzeidzei]

No need for excuses.

If he was trying to break the tow he would weave like a drunk driver just as he did in his first few races in his rookie year.

WTF is this I was braking the wind thing? The regs state that such bahaviour is not allowed. Period. Getting a warning is a joke. If it was the other way round what would have happened to Petrov?

[Saint Devote]

WTF is this I was braking the wind thing? The regs state that such bahaviour is not allowed. Period. Getting a warning is a joke. If it was the other way round what would have happened to Petrov?

Petrov is not a dirty driver , just look at his GP2 races - he is also teammate to Kubica. They are a class act.

In addition there was the running wide alongside Jenson who - and this reconciles with the data - had to back off significantly as Lewis ran deliberately wide and would have collided in the corner.

But Jenson is also a clean driver, but a strong driver mentally too, and said nothing about the incident afterwards.

The team however knows this, and maybe it will count one day.

Even the Speed commentors with that awful Australian Hamilton accolyte shrieker Duffey in place of Bob Varsha, made excuses - "but he is quick, so that excuses them.

If Hamilton had done what he did to Petrov to drivers like Alan Jones or Jody Scheckter, the little metrosexual Englishman would have been nursing a broken jaw tonight. Ahh well the good ole days!

[Dr. Krogshöj]

Weaving four times is better than blocking once. Hamilton didn't block Petrov even once. None of his moves was in reaction to Petrov's. It would have been ridiculous if he got a penalty while Webber always gets away with blocking, sometimes even chopping other people's front wings.

[call_me_andrew]

it wasn't clever, marginal even, although i don't think it was dangerous. he was clearly trying to break the tow, not block Petrov, when petrov made a move he gave him room. probably deserved a warning and nothing more, which is what he got

This!


Weaving four times is better than blocking once. Hamilton didn't block Petrov even once. None of his moves was in reaction to Petrov's. It would have been ridiculous if he got a penalty while Webber always gets away with blocking, sometimes even chopping other people's front wings.

And that!

The rules in place are intended to prevent blocking, not to prevent breaking up a draft. Enforcing rules to the letter rather than the spirit leads to things like double-deck diffusers.

[Robinho]

Petrov is not a dirty driver , just look at his GP2 races - he is also teammate to Kubica. They are a class act.

In addition there was the running wide alongside Jenson who - and this reconciles with the data - had to back off significantly as Lewis ran deliberately wide and would have collided in the corner.

But Jenson is also a clean driver, but a strong driver mentally too, and said nothing about the incident afterwards.

The team however knows this, and maybe it will count one day.

Even the Speed commentors with that awful Australian Hamilton accolyte shrieker Duffey in place of Bob Varsha, made excuses - "but he is quick, so that excuses them.

If Hamilton had done what he did to Petrov to drivers like Alan Jones or Jody Scheckter, the little metrosexual Englishman would have been nursing a broken jaw tonight. Ahh well the good ole days!

should i have to remond you that several of Jensons (IMO fantastic) passing moves last year involved running the other driver wide on the exit leaving no choice but to back out of it? Standard overtaking practice.

[wedge]

If Hamilton had done what he did to Petrov to drivers like Alan Jones or Jody Scheckter, the little metrosexual Englishman would have been nursing a broken jaw tonight. Ahh well the good ole days!

Senna & Schumi were involved in a punch up at a Hockeheim test session, Senna tried to spook Schumi but it only made the German stronger in years to come.

The same would happen with Hamilton.

[Saint Devote]

Senna & Schumi were involved in a punch up at a Hockeheim test session, Senna tried to spook Schumi but it only made the German stronger in years to come.

The same would happen with Hamilton.

I think Petrov would have made his point better. The little Brit would have hidden behind some burly Mclaren mechanics no doubt :D

[wedge]

I think Petrov would have made his point better. The little Brit would have hidden behind some burly Mclaren mechanics no doubt :D

Ridiculous.

Petrov didn't even manoeuvre his for an overtaking oppurtunity. He followed Hamilton because he was not close enough.

Hate to say this but what Massa did to Webber into the hi-speed left-right was far worse and I don't remember anyone making a fuss over Massa's blocking tactics - links appreciated

[airshifter]

I think Lewis would have been passed if not for the multiple swerve weaving. If you weave and/or swerve enough nobody will get to the point of being able to make a move.

After all, how could you say anyone made more than one move if they are back and forth all over the track?

[Hawkmoon]

I think people are playing a game of semantics trying to suggest that weaving is OK but blocking isn't. Both moves are designed to prevent a passing attempt and both can be dangerous. If Petrov goes right when Hamilton goes left, then Hamilton's subsequent move to the right puts the cars on a collision course.

Having said that, I have no problem with Hamilton receiving a warning just as I would have had no problem if he was warned for blocking. We don't need penalties screwing up races.

The interesting thing will be what happens if Hamilton does it again? Do the stewards pullout the penalty stick?

[Easy Drifter]

If Petrov had not followed Hamilton's every move but gone in a staight line then you could call it blocking and Hamilton would have received more than a warning.
As it was he just followed the weaving with no attempt to pass.
Probably just as well there was a former F1 driver as a steward though! :D

[call_me_andrew]

I think people are playing a game of semantics trying to suggest that weaving is OK but blocking isn't. Both moves are designed to prevent a passing attempt and both can be dangerous. If Petrov goes right when Hamilton goes left, then Hamilton's subsequent move to the right puts the cars on a collision course.

Let me explain the difference between weaving and blocking.

Blocking is when you try to stay in someone's way.

Weaving is when you try to stay out of someone's way.

[Hawkmoon]

Let me explain the difference between weaving and blocking.

Blocking is when you try to stay in someone's way.

Weaving is when you try to stay out of someone's way.

Both of which are intended to stop a successful pass and both of which can be dangerous. In terms of driving etiquette there's little difference in my opinion.

[maximilian]

Racing is dangerous. I don't really see what the fuss is about, I always thought penalizing blocking and/or weaving is nonsense, unless it results in a clearly avoidable accident. It's just too arbitrary otherwise who gets penalized, and who doesn't (a lot of which has to do of who happens to be on camera, and who wasn't when it happens).

Drivers are supposed to fight for position, else what's the point of having a race? People like to complain about races being boring, and they'll also complain about drivers fighting for position :D

[airshifter]

Racing is dangerous. I don't really see what the fuss is about, I always thought penalizing blocking and/or weaving is nonsense, unless it results in a clearly avoidable accident. It's just too arbitrary otherwise who gets penalized, and who doesn't (a lot of which has to do of who happens to be on camera, and who wasn't when it happens).

Drivers are supposed to fight for position, else what's the point of having a race? People like to complain about races being boring, and they'll also complain about drivers fighting for position :D

I don't think most posters here have a problem with letting racers race, and I'm sure I don't. But when you blur the lines on blocking in F1 the car behind will always be the one to suffer the most via wing damage. Once you start allowing multiple blocking moves it's really easy for a car in front to stay in front.

[call_me_andrew]

Both of which are intended to stop a successful pass and both of which can be dangerous. In terms of driving etiquette there's little difference in my opinion.

Blocking is an attempt to stop a pass by putting a carbon fiber missle in someone's way.

Weaving is an attempt to stop a pass by manipulating the air behind you.

[Jag_Warrior]

If Petrov had not followed Hamilton's every move but gone in a staight line then you could call it blocking and Hamilton would have received more than a warning.
As it was he just followed the weaving with no attempt to pass.
Probably just as well there was a former F1 driver as a steward though! :D

^^^This^^^ +1
Petrov could have held a line and Hamilton would have probably gotten a penalty. But he was such a sucker that if Hamilton had pointed his car toward the wall, Petrov would have probably followed him in.

As for the poster who suggested that Petrov is some kind of pitlane tough guy, the only one that should be of concern is that bleach blonde "creation" of a mother of his. Anyone who watched GP2 last year knows she'll sucker punch someone when they're not looking. :D

[Hawkmoon]

Blocking is an attempt to stop a pass by putting a carbon fiber missle in someone's way.

Weaving is an attempt to stop a pass by manipulating the air behind you.

I know the difference between the two, you don't need to quote definitions to me.

My point remains, that in my opinion it's a case of to-may-to or to-mar-to. Weaving is not simply "manipulating the air behind you", it's driving in an erratic manner to prevent someone from passing you and can be just as, if not more, dangerous than blocking.

With more experience Petrov may have followed Hamilton to the inside and stayed there when Hamilton swerved back to the outside, then thrown one up the inside under brakes.

If Hamilton had collided with Petrov what would you have thought of his "air manipulation"? The fact that he didn't got him a warning, which is appropriate. It doesn't make Hamilton's driving in this instance any less dodgy.

[Daniel]

He wasn't moving erratically though, his movements were fairly smooth. It wasn't like one moment he was on the left side of the track then the next moment he was on the right side.

[Hawkmoon]

He wasn't moving erratically though, his movements were fairly smooth. It wasn't like one moment he was on the left side of the track then the next moment he was on the right side.

When you consider that normally they drive in a straight line down the straight and Hamilton moved from one side to the other 4 times, I'd say that's erratic in that it differred greatly from the norm. Petrov also had no way of knowing how may times he was going to swerve which could have been a problem he hadn't followed Hamilton all over the track.

What saved Hamilton I think was that he didn't do it in the breaking zone which may have seen him get more than a warning. I don't think he'll do it again anytime soon.

[Ent]

Petrov could have held a line and Hamilton would have probably gotten a penalty. But he was such a sucker that if Hamilton had pointed his car toward the wall, Petrov would have probably followed him in.

He was trying to follow Hamilton to pick up the drag to get into a position to pass, hardly the actions of a "sucker". There really are some silly statements being made here.

I agree with the comments before about Massa in Australia, though. If the likes of Hamilton and Massa have to resort to these types of tactics on the track, rather than rely on speed and skill, then perhaps a post-race fine or some other penalty should be given to remind them that that style of driving is not only dangerous to both themselves and the driver behind, but also to marshals who often volunteer their time to help make the races possible.

[Mia 01]

Next time Lewis is attemting an overtake I would like that driver to weav multiple times.

Lewis is a bit arrogant on and off track.

The same rules (social and not) applies to him as well as other humans.

[Dr. Krogshöj]

Both of which are intended to stop a successful pass and both of which can be dangerous. In terms of driving etiquette there's little difference in my opinion.

What on Earth is wrong with intending to stop a successful pass? I thought we wanted to see RACING and not people letting others by.

[BeansBeansBeans]

I think Hamilton was in the wrong. He deserved his warning and it is very clear that if he does it again he'll receive due punishment.

[AJP]

I think it was frickin awesome to watch...

put a big smile on my face seeing Hamilton trying to break Petrov off his tail..

I want to see more of it...Hamilton didn't do anything dangerous...so get over it if you think he did.

Both Hamilton and Petrov drove great and entertaining races...

good on em'

[Daniel]

I think Hamilton was in the wrong. He deserved his warning and it is very clear that if he does it again he'll receive due punishment.
Was it actually dangerous though? IMHO his movements were fairly gentle and he didn't move around in the braking zone.

[pino]

I think it was frickin awesome to watch...

put a big smile on my face seeing Hamilton trying to break Petrov off his tail..

I want to see more of it...Hamilton didn't do anything dangerous...so get over it if you think he did.

Both Hamilton and Petrov drove great and entertaining races...

good on em'

I totally agree with that :up:

[Ent]

What on Earth is wrong with intending to stop a successful pass? I thought we wanted to see RACING and not people letting others by.

Another silly argument. No one is saying Hamilton (or Massa in Australia) should not have tried "to stop a successful pass". They're just saying they should do it by showing their skills in RACING rather than driving erratically. And no one said that stopping multiple weaves across the track equates to "people letting others by". There are other ways to defend a position that actually rely on the skill of the driver. I want to see RACING, not erratic driving. I can see erratic driving anytime on want out on the public roads. A better argument would be...


Was it actually dangerous though?

[call_me_andrew]

If Hamilton had collided with Petrov what would you have thought of his "air manipulation"? The fact that he didn't got him a warning, which is appropriate. It doesn't make Hamilton's driving in this instance any less dodgy.

If ifs and buts were candy and nuts, we'd all have a merry Christmas.

But really, I'd think, "Gee, I've never seen two drivers make contact while the lead driver was breaking the draft. I hope someone is recording this."

For the sake of argument, even if Petrov didn't follow Hamilton, then Petrov never would have pulled up along side of Hamilton because he didn't have a draft to help him.

[Garry Walker]

Was it actually dangerous though? IMHO his movements were fairly gentle and he didn't move around in the braking zone.

Racing is supposed to be dangerous. I have no problems with what LH did.

[Retro Formula 1]

Racing is supposed to be dangerous. I have no problems with what LH did.

But was it dangerous? Can someone point out to me where the danger is on this.

We had some good hard racing with one driver trying to break the tow and one driver determined to stay in it.

Hamilton moved, Petrov shadowed. Hamilton moved again, Petrov shadowed etc.

The idea of racing is to RACE. You should not let another driver past to "improve" the spectacle but should try to legally keep everyone behind you. Breaking the tow is one way to do this and I'm a little confused as to what rule he broke to earn a warning and hope the FIA clarify the situation.

If Petrov was to move to the side and Hamilton shadow him several times, then he should have earned a penalty but I can't see the issue here. It was just good hard racing from both of them.

I suppose I would see it differently if I was more militant?

[ST205GT4]

Totally agree skc.

Used to see this sort of thing all the time in the Senna, Prost, Mansell etc era. I think it's great.

[MrJan]

What did Petrov have to say on the matter?

I personally thought that it was borderline but a penalty would have been harsh, a stern word from the stewards was the right decision. Petrov was never in any danger from the moves, they were thrown to try and stop him getting the tow rather than getting in the way of an attack. If Petrov hadn't followed then it could be a different story but seeing as he stayed glued to the bumper I think it was fair enough.

[wedge]

What did Petrov have to say on the matter?

Nothing, because he tried to 'block' Hamilton into the final hairpin

[MrJan]

Nothing, because he tried to 'block' Hamilton into the final hairpin

In my book that's defining. If the 'sinned' against driver has no complaints then a bunch of t**ts on an internet forum may as well shut up :p :

[wedge]

There are other ways to defend a position that actually rely on the skill of the driver.

And how does one defend their position when you're a sitting duck on long straight?

Damon Hill weaved back and forth, back and forth on the back straight during the last part of the 1997 Canadian GP, ironically against Schumi!

Gerhard Berger chopped infront of Mansell and forced Mansell on the grass during the 1990 San Marino GP

And those examples were the polite drivers!

[jens]

http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/82932

It seems like drivers consider such weaving unacceptable too. Hopefully Hamilton will reconsider his activities on track.

[ArrowsFA1]

And those examples were the polite drivers!
Different times! Now, it seems, more and more rules are required for drivers to know what they can and cannot do. Whether that's the fault of the rulemakers or the drivers themselves I don't know.

[MrJan]

http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/82932

It seems like drivers consider such weaving unacceptable too. Hopefully Hamilton will reconsider his activities on track.

Now it's been clarified we all know where the drivers stand. Too many rules in F1 can be twisted and turned so it's nice to see something a bit clearer.

[Ranger]

Racing is supposed to be dangerous. I have no problems with what LH did.

I'll second that.

[Retro Formula 1]

I'll second that.

There should be an element of Risk but I don't know about dangerous. I don't think anyone wants to see anyone hurt but there should be penalty for mistakes such as sliding off track. Too often these days, drivers can go careering off the black stuff and rejoin with no loss of time which cant be right.

[PSfan]

I am of two minds on this subject:

We've had seen this type of weaving to break the tow before, and nothing really came of of it then, so I can't help but feel that had it been a Ferrari or Red Bull Hamilton would have been weaving in front of, then this would have been largely ignored as well. So whether its because it was an "underdog team" or because they just make hamilton an example, I still find it rather silly...

However, while the so called "one move" unwritten rule's was intended to stop drivers from blocking, I have also read/heard it referred to as "a driver is allowed one move to defend his position" which is not limited to just blocking procedures., so by that definition, Hamilton is guilty.

So at the end of the day, my opinion is: There should be no "unwritten rules" if its important enough to have a rule, it should be in writing. (Of course, that probably wouldn't have helped in this situation based on how vague the FIA likes to have their rules written...)

[ioan]

So at the end of the day, my opinion is: There should be no "unwritten rules" if its important enough to have a rule, it should be in writing. (Of course, that probably wouldn't have helped in this situation based on how vague the FIA likes to have their rules written...)

Agreed.

[Jag_Warrior]

The FIA Sporting Code states that "manoeuvres liable to hinder other drivers, such as more than one chance of direction to defend a position, deliberate crowding of a car beyond the edge of the track or any other abnormal change of direction, are strictly prohibited."

Yeah, goodness knows we haven't seen anyone shove another car off the track without getting a penalty,
have we? :rolleyes:

I love watching Formula One. But the FIA is such a joke of an organization.

[inimitablestoo]

If weaving is banned all of a sudden, they should all be thrown out of today's race. I distinctly saw them all weaving all over the track when the Safety Car was out... :rolleyes: