Defending Max

Lately, the powers that be came as close as it dared to demonizing it's wonder kid, Max Verstappen. I'm not going to yap a lot about corner one in the 2016 Belgian GP other than to note that this is the same dart for the inside as Daniil Kvyat pursued in Sochi but the consequences for the Red Bulls were very different this time around. Max had a poor start and in an attempt to get ahead, clearly off-track, refused to pull out of cutting in to corner one. Sebastian Vettel had a better start and in his attempt to get ahead, refused to pull out of cutting in to corner one also. The distinction for Vettel is that he was clearly ahead and that left the sandwiched Kimi Raikkonen to take the hit. Surprisingly the first sign of immaturity we've seen from fresh Verstappen ... that is up until the Kemmel straight. 

Anyone worth their weight in Formula One learns the rules well enough to bend and exploit them to their half second advantage. We're seeing it this year in the completely random clamp down of track limits. Verstappen knows that holding track position until a corner allows himself to move back into the racing line towards the apex, thusly legally cutting off and blocking the car behind. In many instances this season, that battle has been Max vs Kimi and the Kimmel straight occurence is where the shit hit the safety fan.

You'll hear Max defend his driving style as giving (in this case Kimi) a side of the track to work with, wait until Kimi makes his decision, (meaning taking the only available space that Max has provided), and Max will make his "one direction" movement to shut the door on that car. Totally within the rules. The problem in this case is that Kimi is forced into a holy-shit-last-minute reaction to (hopefully) brake and avoid a full throttle collision through Max's car. Is Max's strategy legal? According to the 2016 FIA Sporting Regulations for Formula One it clearly falls within the rules. Is it smart at full throttle? Probably not and that's Kimi's point, maintaining track position is probably not worth dying over. Is Max's style wise? The "all or nothing" sure was for Senna but Max is playing the odds of a style we haven't seen lately in the sport.

Take a look at the sea of orange in this picture. In many ways, Formula One is struggling in maintaining it's public image as a successful global brand in motor sport. Max defended his style saying he didn't intend to change. A clear message to the FIA saying it's how he has arrived to this point, it works and he's not going to change it. It's exciting for the often bored fans (remember Baku?) to see this attack and defend technique so the result is a slap on Max's wrist with a pretty soft warning of a possible unsportsmanlike conduct penalty in the future. Not much sleep is going to be lost there.

So, there is now a subconcious message to the rest of the F1 field saying "Look, I'm not backing down, I'm going to defend hard, so you have no choice but to back off." This message was repeated in the media when the unapologetic Max insisted that Kimi/Ferrari were lying in his statements of the events. Then Verstappen came out and told Jacques Villeneuve that he should "watch what he says." Pretty bold words for a young gun to a legend in Formula One. 

Most drivers say they like Max as a person but fear, like Kimi implied and Villeneuve spat out, that he's eventually going to kill someone with his aggressive driving style. Hopefully that won't happen. Like it or hate it, we're going to be left watching some good hard racing from Max and that's a good thing for F1 as he forces the competition to adapt to him. That is if you're behind him!

Share this post:

goodbye 2017 and halo 2018

You may not like it and I'm pretty sure, deep down, Lewis doesn't like it. Purists hate it as yet another soul destroying aspect of current Formula 1. The ever so polite Red Bull, think it's "aesthetically not elegant" (read: looks like crap,) but love it or hate it, the Halo is a'coming.

Of all the strong reasons for the postponing of the 2017 debut of the Halo, none can be greater than the fact that so little drivers have actually driven with the frikken thing. In fact, that amount is ... wait for it... three drivers. To make matters worse I believe the combined laps the trio did with the safety (a definition currently up for debate) "gadget" (and I'm not sure if that's fair) was the unbelievable number of just four laps and that would be four practise laps, you know, as in, zero race laps.

It would look like one of the test problems right now is the blockage of the air intake. Red Bull came out and said that in the current configuration of the Halo (which by the way, isn't the real deal. It's a mock up used to initially test visibility) they couldn't run any more than two laps before the invention created over-heating problems for both their engine and gearbox. I imagine the triangular shape of the device itself is redirecting or disturbing airflow into the 2016 airbox configuration. 

It means that instead of the current bolt on, test device we currently see, team aerodynamicists would have to get to work engineering the Halo element into the structure of the car. Think of the weight the true Halo will have in order to provide adequate head protection, essentially acting as a frontal roll bar. Contemplate how high that weight is above the centre of gravity of the car and you have a whole new set of problems. That's only one of many complications to add more sleepless nights back in the factories. More coffee?

It would appear that the drivers, rightfully, are worried about the issue of a driver egress in an emergency. This was made all the more real as this season we saw Alonso violently rip through the air. For such an immediate, common concern it would appear that the FIA look to the stewards for the solution to that situation. That is, a bunch of excited, fat dudes flipping your car right-side up to free you. Hmmmmmmmm, tell that to Niki Lauda. Methinks not going to go over well.

I don't see how there cannot be a fundamental visibility issue either. I remember Kimi being asked about how visibility was once; he managed to whisper out a diplomatic "it's okay." I know he doesn't like to waste words but his opinion was hardly reassuring as truth. Two laps tested by Pierre Gasly and his opinion was "weird" and claustrophobic with an ugly view. Huh, Pierre don't mix words. It'll be interesting when all the drivers have a look. This is a solid point to make because the action plan looks like the FIA is proceeding with the safety testing and obviously (I mean hopefully) they believe it's beneficial enough to bring it in, which in itself is hardly a ringing endorsement either. If the drivers want to shit on it, how about the fact that the Halo is primarily being tested for a tire impact. A scary 20kg impact at a scarier 225kmh. Seen in Nascar for specific reasons like tie rod destroying fencing, and an object unavoidable high speed oval, amongst other factors and the ill-fated death of Henry Surtees, a tire strike is right up there in worry. (The FIA in 2017 will also beef up the very successful Zylon wheel tether.) So if there is a criticism to be raised about the effectiveness of the Halo, how about the stat that in a small item test, the Halo will deflect small item debris, get this, 17% of the time. Seems slightly better than plain old luck but the FIA's opinion is that without the Halo, a driver will get hit 100% of the time. Who's gonna argue that?

Look, Formula One is a high speed, high risk sport. Driver's know it each time they get in the car. Shit, as a former paraglider, I can tell you that you can't focus on fear when you're running off a cliff. For a lot of fans, the ability to deal with that risk, to achieve what the average fan can't do, is part of the awe towards a driver and the sport. Managing that risk through training, split timing decisions, etc. is what makes them exceptional athletes and commands our admiration to which we feel is deserved. They know it's high risk, we know it's high risk. And an argument can be made that all we'll be left with in the sport, is (more) boredom if we remove all that risk. Equally, technology and ongoing safety are a big part of this sport too and any dispute to the Halo's use is simply made moot by stating that the Halo could save one life.

So, if the Halo will protect a driver's life (and the FIA from getting sued) after head impacts from a wall, from another car, from tire barriers, "all those things." For those reasons, the Halo will be here in 2018 ....  Blech.

Share this post: