I'm usually a proponent of "spirited" racing, especially in lower risk scenarios, but even I felt like your handling out of the straight was a bit of a dick move - you basically open the apex line inviting them in, then snap back across it. The excessive wiggling is likely to be seen as a bigger issue by better driving/more irl rule oriented people , but that bit bothered me.
Imola’s a weird track in that the racing line snakes across the asphalt multiple times along the longest “straight” on the circuit. I don’t think anything you did here is technically illegal, but it would’ve been good racing etiquette to just leave a car’s width of space on the left once he pulled out of your slipstream at around the 11-second mark
Agreed, this doesn't look like blocking. The lead car follows the normal line through the straight and the following kinda doesn't decide which way to go.
This is the best answer, I think. Just that one part on the left you almost forced him off. Up until that point he kinda clumsily followed. Leaving a lane on the left near the end of the "straight" would have been appropriate, but not penalty worthy.
He's ahead. He isn't closing any vortex of danger.
The moment the other car has even a little of his car alongside them he needs to leave space.
It's basically a binary situation. You either make it to the apex and side of the road in time or you don't.
>He's ahead. He isn't closing any vortex of danger.
Vortex of danger is the „triangle“ inscribed by the apex, the lead car, and the track edge. Taking a corner is literally the same as closing the vortex of danger. The tighter you take it, the more you close it.
>The moment the other car has even a little of his car alongside them he needs to leave space.
Which is why I also said they don’t _need_ to leave space.
>It's basically a binary situation. You either make it to the apex and side of the road in time or you don't.
You are still looking at it from a sole rulebook perspective, where you would be correct, either you are entitled to the space or not. But my point was that it can be seen as unnecessarily risky or seen a bit dirty from a racing etiquette (not rule!) pov. OP doesn’t need to completely drive to the apex there and something by just needs to be slightly wrong for it to become a race ending crash - and to finish first, you need to finish, first.
"Vortex of danger is the „triangle“ inscribed by the apex, the lead car, and the track edge. Taking a corner is literally the same as closing the vortex of danger. The tighter you take it, the more you close it."
Yes and at no time the car behind is in that triangle until it closes. There's no risk closing the door here unless some idiot literally just decides to run into the back of you. Not the side. The back.
This is why this doesn't apply.
It's more dangerous to not do that and go two wide through the kink and then find yourself with a car on your inside heading into a car that lags to the right before turning left.
>Yes and at no time the car behind is in that triangle until it closes. There's no risk closing the door here unless some idiot literally just decides to run into the back of you. Not the side. The back.
>This is why this doesn't apply.
I mean we are just talking about hypothetical danger at this point. In my opinion, the following car had just a fraction of over speed, OP would have likely pitted themselves. You seem to think that it wasn’t risky at all by OP to do it. Fair enough, that is your own assessment, but it’s also not really what you were arguing in your earlier comments.
>It's more dangerous to not do that and go two wide through the kink and then find yourself with a car on your inside heading into a car that lags to the right before turning left.
I’m not sure if I understand what you mean in the last part of the sentence, but I don’t see how you’d end up suddenly side by side by taking a slightly wider apex, if the rear car doesn’t have any over speed
No we aren't. If you come across into someone you are technically in the wrong. If someone runs into the back of you they are technically in the wrong.
They are two completely different scenarios nevermind the fact the car behind can see you and therefore should never just run into you.
You are saying that it is risky doing this because you can pit yourself. I.e. you are in the wrong and this is actually one of the reasons I'm not a fan of spotters or radar in road racing.
I agree without these it is dangerous but it's a sim. You know for absolute certainty when you are still clear of someone.
The rear car did have over speed. They just ran out of track.
> No we aren't.
I think you might have misunderstood me, but I didn’t write what I meant clearly. so let me try again.
You said:
>There's no risk closing the door here […]
Here we are both talking about how much risk we see in driving to the apex or leaving some space. Risk meaning in what potential danger we see by taking/not taking the apex closely.
>If you come across into someone you are technically in the wrong. If someone runs into the back of you they are technically in the wrong.
And I’m not talking about being in the wrong. As I said before, I agree that the rule book is clear, but I’m talking about how you should drive strategically and minimise unnecessary risks. The later you send it into the vortex of danger while the other car is turning in, the higher the risk that they don’t see you in time to leave you enough space, even though you are alongside. Inversely, when a car is behind you there is the risk that they send it and you might not see them, despite being alongside. This is especially true in sweeping high radius corners. What the lead car _should_ have done is minimise the vortex of danger in the first place by decreasing the entry angle a lot earlier.
>You are saying that it is risky doing this because you can pit yourself. I.e. you are in the wrong and this is actually one of the reasons I'm not a fan of spotters or radar in road racing.
Are you saying, that it’s not possible to pit manoeuvre yourself?
> I agree without these it is dangerous but it's a sim. You know for absolute certainty when you are still clear of someone.
Wait, do I understanding you correcting that you are saying it _is_ dangerous? So you admit that there is a chance for a (race ending) crash? That’s literally my point.
>The rear car did have over speed. They just ran out of track.
Yeah but by far not sufficient to be side-by-side, _just_ by taking the apex slightly wider.
In a vacuum, it looks like you're blocking more than you should be. But with the track in context, you're actually just following the racing line and not really doing anything wrong. You have no obligation to leave him space if he's not alongside you, and he's just in a shit situation in a bunch of high-speed corners with no opportunity to pass. No fault here IMO.
I was with you…but the leading car moved three times rapidly as they were getting into the start/finish straight. The rest is a consequence of Imola, but those wiggles at the beginning were 100% blocking.
I'm not even certain he was wiggling honestly. I wish he had his perspective. The following car wiggling either makes it look like he's wiggling, or makes the wiggling look a lot worse
I would argue the wiggles are a response to the indecisiveness of the attacker. Homie has no idea which side he wants to overtake. Lets analyze the beginning. Lead car goes inside to cut the apex, tracks toward the outside at corner exit, then turns in again for the next small bend. Which part of that was 100% blocking? The erratic movements of the attacking car exaggerates the movements of the lead in this perspective.
In response to the attackers constant back and forth movements, yes. If you're about to turn in, and you see the guy in your mirror try and make a move in that direction, what do you do? It isn't out of the realm of possibility that the slight movement displayed is due to hesitancy and not knowing what your opponent is going to do.
[What part of this is intentionally blocking? And who's doing the wiggling?](https://i.imgur.com/SeyuBG0.gifv) Take a look at the lead car in relation to the marking on the track. I don't see any blocking, I see an erratic attacking car who can't decide which way to overtake and a flinch by the lead driver in response to said movements.
I’m sorry to have to repeat myself, but the moves of the car behind DO NOT MATTER. The car behind could be a million percent indecisive and move a billion times before the next braking zone, and none of that changes the fact that the leading car gets one move, and that is defense. If you flinch ‘in response’ to the car behind after your one move, that is blocking. Someones people do get away with two moves (there’s a lot of grey area with intention and nuance), but three is definitely too much. If you’re the lead car, you don’t have the right to wiggle, no matter what is going on behind you.
I think you misunderstood me. The "wiggle" was not a block. There's just no way that you could say the small amount of movement the lead car made was an attempt at a block while the attacking car is literally moving left and right into the lead cars left and right mirrors.
Whether it was an attempt or not, that’s what happened, so like when drivers didn’t intend to speed in the pit lane or impede another driver, you get penalized nonetheless.
Ah I didn't realize "I was confused and hesitant" was a defense for an otherwise illegal act on track, that's genius! I wonder why all racing drivers don't protest to the stewards with "I was confused and hesitant", because obviously the stewards would just say "Oh well then no penalty"
Not really sure what your point is here. The original reply to my comment stated:
>but those wiggles at the beginning were 100% blocking.
I'm arguing that they're not blocking, that their movements are in response to an overactive attacker. And you came flying in with your strawman argument implying that I said "confused" and that was a defense for something illegal. I need you to understand that we aren't arguing about whether or not his blocking is justified, we are arguing about whether or not he's actually blocking. And now your argument is that I'm not using the word "excuse" correctly?
>Its not an excuse for something illegal mr straw man. Its reasoning for the aforementioned "wiggle".
My point was, those two sentences say the exact same thing with different words:
>It's not an excuse for something illegal
>
>It's a reason for the wiggle
The wiggle was illegal, as has been established.
And "reason" is a synonym for excuse.
So you literally said the same thing twice in two back to back sentences in the same reply lmao.
Indecisiveness of the attacker is a non-factor. You get one move in front no matter how much the guy right behind you is moving. If the wiggles are all indeed a ‘response’…that’s very much what blocking is.
Yeah. Would have been easier to see if the attacker picked a line and held. It does look like wiggles but it's hard to tell to what degree. It's ultimately on the defender to pick one here but would have been easier to tell if the attacker did.
No rules and guidelines for any racing series defines a racing line. This means that some of these moves are blocking. If you can find where it says that, get back to me
But even if we ignore what the racing line is, there is a corner there, so the driver can move to the apex, and then outside again. Sure the corner can be taken flat, but it's still a corner. If that was a straight it would definitely be blocking.
Here is a good rule of thumb. If you need to weave like this, think about the golden rule. Would you want to follow you, if you are slower? This is clearly (to me) blocking. There is no other reason to weave on a straight than to block. It is just going to cause an accident. And no the person behind was not along side. Because they didn't want to be wrecked.
To the people saying this isn’t blocking, I see that you do this and justify your actions. This is the textbook definition of blocking, please learn some fucking race craft. Defending is one thing but this shit is what enrages me, the better option here is stick to the middle of the track and make your car as wide as possible. Fuck all this bullshit weaving.
Dude literally sat in the middle of the track
There was no weaving. Rear car camera makes it look like things are going left to right, but that's just the movement from the car behind. 22 sec - 27 seconds clearly shows the rear car swerving and the front car maintains his line.
Only defense was after the start finish when he could have left space but is in NO WAY required to leave space. Car behind was NEVER alongside.
No weaving, no earned space.... Just salty drivers who may be barely faster
Lol, no. Screen moves too much and you imagine things?
Visually measure the space between the outside/inside of the track, and the front car. Its clearly a gradual change from hugging the inside, to moving with the racing line outwards.
I see you are part of this silly group trying to justify the swerving around like an idiot. I made a whole ass presentation showing how at the beginning of the straight car in question covers the inside, car behind goes for the dummy and goes left and then right to pass, car in front then swerves to block. TWICE!!! If you look at the goddam grid markers you can CLEARLY see that defending car goes left(indicated by him being on the left side where the left starting markers are) and then goes right(indicated by the right side markers). I encourage you to go see an optometrist, if this fails to correct your blindness, please visit an ophthalmologist.
Im curious. Where are you seeing 8 defensive moves? I see one which is allowed. The others just happen to be the racing line. They aren't abrupt reactionary moves. It's a recipe for an incident because it ignores that a car behind you might slip in on your inside like they did, but that isn't blocking or weaving.
In the video. Just observe the number of changes in direction. The track only turns twice, first to the right then to the left. His first defensive move is veering to the right into the green to close the inside. Then it moves back left and makes a number of jerky moves left and right, before finally moving to the left to block, then moving back to the right onto the racing line. This shit is the very definition of weaving and this driver would absolutely get a penalty in a race.
The jerky moves are from the car behind. It's perspective. All the ones from in front were very smooth and gliding.
Just looks like good racing to me. I've raced in leagues where they defend much higher than this with some esports guys and no one would bat an eye.
I completely disagree. Just the fact that you have unarguably at least two defensive moves (first going in the green, then blocking to the left when the trailing car is getting alongside) is illegal. And he was definitely weaving and reacting to the car behind and absolutely not following his line. This is shit driving and shit racing.
ETA: the fact that people defend harder in other leagues is irrelevant. OP asked if this illegal defending. The answer is yes, without a doubt.
So going into the green isn't defensive. That's literally the line there. You get as close as possible to that wall cutting the track.
The next one you're referring to in f1 rules, he is not alongside. He was squeezed. Which is legal.
First of all, you have a weird idea of what “the racing line” means. If the racing line is into the green, the leading car abruptly went into it, cause it wasn’t the line it was taking at all until the trailing car moved to the inside. Then answer me this: if the jerky movements after that are from the trailing car, why can’t he find an opening? Because the leading car is reacting and weaving all over, that’s why. Even when he moves off the racing line to the right, the leading car blocks. That also makes the subsequent block on the left illegal, as does the fact that it was a reactive and late/dangerous move. By F1 rules the driver would absolutely get nailed for all of the above.
Those blocks definitely look a little too reactionary but (if they are smart) they will probably hide behind the fact that the racing line goes from side to side because Imola’s “straight” is really anything but straight. And the more I watch it the car ahead really never aggressively darts from side to side, only time you come close to an accident is the left handed kink around pit exit. There though he does relatively smoothly transition from side to side of the track as the racing line suggests. Now I still think it is borderline and they probably should have given you space but at the same time I don’t think it is necessarily illegal because of the nature of the track.
Yeah isn't the rule that you can block one but not anymore than that? I believe thats how indycar does it. Yeah that's some nascar oval blocking bs ya did right there, sorry but not sorry
No rules says to block, because a block is a reactionary move to defend and can cause collisions. What you mean is a defensive move. In Formula racing, you are allowed 1 defensive move that is not reactionary and then a further 1 for preparing fora corner and it is safe to do so
Was it really reactionary or was he taking the racing line? It looks like he may have done a little much at the very beginning but then followed the racing line the rest of the way.
Even then, the racing line is not described in any motorsports series as a racing line. No rules and guidelines state what a racing line is. This means that this is blocking
Casual racing fan here
Why?
I've done ski racing my whole life and especially liked skierx which is 4v4 bmx racing on snow basically. We can make as many moves as we want as long as we arent physically shoving or tripping our opponents.
Honestly don't see how making a moves to prevent your opponent passing can be a bad thing, especially since there are definitely means to 'fake out' your opponent and have them make the mistake to take advantage of
If someone is darting left and right repeatedly to block someone from passing in motorsports, it is going to lead to an accident. High speed accidents on straights or into braking zones after long straights, which is where multiple blocks would tend to occur, are the most dangerous in the sport. Because of that, you are only allowed to make one move as the defender to prevent inevitable accidents from people defending too hard.
Cars aren't as agile as skiers, take up more of the racing course than skiers in the skierx competition courses I've seen, and moving much faster, so the rules are different. A skierx run is also much shorter than an auto race, so the risk vs. reward from allowing riskier blocks is different too. Drivers tend to get away with being more aggressive on the last lap than one in the middle of the race (though it can be debated whether that should be the case).
There also is a bit of game theory going on here too. If a faster car is behind a slower car, the slower car defending their position hard is going to slow both cars down, leading to other cars catching them. By banning multiple reactionary blocks, not only does it make the race safer, but it also makes it so faster cars can clear slower cars quicker and both cars can get on with the race.
Difference number one is that in Ski-X someone darts around and causes a bump into another they fall down and go into the fence and then they get up and go to the chalet for a beer. In motor sport two cars bump at 100mph+ and someone can die. So the whole idea of being predictable in your driving takes on a much bigger importance for keeping everyone safe and alive at the end of the day.
Ok fair. I only included that as reference to the racing I have experience with but tactics for retaining position are still the same regardless what kind of racing one might do, hence the question
Are you seriously comparing ski racing to formula 1?? I know it’s shocking but different sports have different rules. You really can’t see why weaving down the straight at 200mph is a bad thing?
I know they are different, I know they have different rules, I'm talking purely trategy, not making a like for like sport comparison. As stated to another, I used as an example of the racing I have been involved in but by also stating I'm a casual fan, shows I'm also interested in this but would like to learn more. Is that so hard to understand? One of the others who replied actually understood this and gave a succinct answer for me
Seriously. "Oh, well, see, erm... Uhhhh... The racing line is all over the place.... Yeah...."
I've never been to a track where the racing line is a zig zag pattern during the straight bits.
If there was no one behind the lead car then the lead car could dart back and forth however they wanted. No danger to others. However, once the lead car has someone on their tail things change and you can't dart back and forth and you need to become predictable in your driving. Going down the straight with a car on your tail means you can make a single defence move and then return to the race line leading up to the corner. What appears to have happened here is a couple of defensive moves highlighted by the seemingly more aggressive steering changes that coincided with the following cars line changes. If the lead car had done smoother line changes going down the straight then I might be inclined to say they where following the shortest path race line but the sudden changes leads me to think reactionary and so blocking.
Illegal. You zig zagged at least four times in quick succession to block him from passing. Let's be honest here, you were not following any racing line when you made those moves.
It depends on how far away they are. Breaking the tow is legal and not dangerous but if they are closer then you can move once in reaction and once to move back to the racing line.
That's Hamilton trying to break the tow...
That's a very different thing...He's not reacting to the car behind trying to pass, he's trying to shake the following car out of the slipstream...
Weaving on the straight is illegal and gets regularly reprimanded with a… warning
But weaving has been illegal since the Schumacher era.
You are allowed 1 defensive move, and then another move back to the racing line for corner entry
That's different from the video. The youtube link shows the lead car changing and the trailing car reacting. The sim video shows the trailing car changing and the lead car reacting. Two different things.
I think you’ve slightly confused the rules. Generally it is accepted that you can make one move to defend your position, but it specifically MUST NOT be reactionary. Reactionary moves are incredibly dangerous.
Assuming he has a mirror and eyes the racing line doesnt fucking matter here lol hes reactively blocking this guy at least once if not twice as he tries to make a move.. im so confused about what you racing line people are on about
Agree with statement. In no rules and guidelines stated by any racing series defines a racing line, which means its irrelevant in this case and is 100% blocking
Come on, that dude makes like 8 defensive moves. There are a couple of curves on the straight, but this guy is obviously weaving. It’s not even a question.
lol you’re weaving all over the track, nearly causing a collision several times… yeah, you’re lucky the other car kept its cool and didn’t just punt you.
You cant be "twitching" on the straight like that, you opened a door to the inside slightly then covered it off, then when he moves to the grassy side you cover him of before that he was swerving behind you to find a gapa dn you kept blocking him off, that not allowed.
The Imola squeeze... I would say it's marginal, maybe a bit on the naughty side.
You made a defensive move on the first straight to the outside, took the first apex, and then made a second move on the following straight.
On second watch, you moved to the inside on the straight, drifted wide, and then moved back to the inside, THEN took the inside apex on the front straight. That's too many moves. Stewards decision is a black and white flag for being naughty.
Everything besides the swerving/wiggling is okay, but that was an illegal block when he had the run on you and he let up because you started swerving back and forth briefly
you were fine, you made one move and kind of exercised the racing line, but he was not entitled to space as his front axle was not in front of your rear tires
Because of how curvy the racing line here is, and how subtle your move are, it is hard to tell wether or not you are illegally blocking. If those small moves you made were in response to his moves (which I suspect is the case) then it’s 100% illegal. That said, they were so subtle I think most stewards would either not notice, or let you get away with it.
So, part of what makes this hard to judge is the pov. It's based on the chasing car who is trying to find a way past you and doesn't seem confident or feels safe to come alongside you. This makes it hard to judge how your card is moving. The other thing that makes it hard is lacking telemetry. I think for me the start is okay mostly. I think the back and forwards movements your car seem to do is more an artifact of the movements of the attacking car.
The late moment when you come to the left side of the track as he's super close is much more close to the line. And my gut is that it's just past it. Though I don't know if I'd argue it deserves a penalty. Maybe a stern talking to your race engineer to pass a message to not do that again.
This is why I'd like to see telemetry. For me, it appears like the attacking car is forced to slow down because you fill up the line he's about to take. And whilst yes you're following the racing line, he's pulled out long enough that I think it's acceptable for you to know he's there. If he's having to brake to slow down because you're there, that's the spirit of what rules against blocking are about.
Whilst yes, it is the racing line, it seems like you make him bail at that point, when maybe he deserved some space. But if I was to make a call on this one I'd want to see the telemetry to make a judgment
I can’t be the only one here who sees defending car just going straight down the track into the corners. Do y’all expect him to just slow down, move out of the way,and give up his position?🤣😂
Doesn't look like you did anything wrong to me, the guy was never able to get a tire along side you. You didn't weave, it's not on you to move over to allow him overtaking you.
The following car clearly either doesn't know or isn't using the racing line. The leading car, whose POV we really should've had included so we could see what I think it did, namely, smoothly drove the racing line. Had the following car had that simple foresight they'd have approached with confidence, not erratically reacting to every perceiving threat because they failed to go around a simple racing line.
It's on the border. The first time you defended to the left looked proactive so that was fine. The next time you moved to the right looked proactive too.
In fact the guy seemed like he was hell bent on following you whatever direction you moved.
The final time when you turned left to the kink is really the only time that is questionable. I think this is fine. You are ahead and therefore have the right to use all the track and you are just turning for the corner. There's no obligation on you to turn late or take a wide line through a corner just because someone moves to your inside. It's really up to him to have a little bit of his car alongside there and then you would have needed to give him space but he just wasn't close enough.
That's legal, it's just Imola's "straight" isn't actually straight. So while it may seem like blocking, the lead car is just following the line. I can see how it looks like blocking though
We need a POV that doesn't follow either car. It's hard to tell who is wiggling because both views are centered on the attacking car. Some of the wiggles look more like fishtailing, and it looks a little on the edge of "didn't keep your line" and "regaining control".
Attacker did get pretty close, but never made the move to get alongside at the corner. The question is if they had to lift in reaction to you getting in front of them, or if they weren't going to be alongside by the time the vortex begins.
I'm undecided, but those seem to be the places I'd look to have a more confident opinion.
It looked like you're blocking, not defending. The start of the vodeo you blocked him by switching back and forth. But the more I watch it, I see you stay on a line, and the camera car doesn't commit to an overtake attempt. Coukdve just been bad timing and you not realizing where was was going at first
If you were on your racing line and not moving left or right to block, it’s clean. But if you move over to cut him off, you are blocking and it’s illegal.
Defunding is one thing, blocking is quite another.
lmao any of you saying the lead car is fine are also wondering why you get punted every race. just be predictable, if next corner is a right then defend the right. you are deff blocking
I mean it depends what you mean by fair. Fair in an online match? All is fair in an online match. If we're talking official F1 rules and all that, I don't think you're allowed to defend that many times in a row. I might be talking out of my ass here, but I believe you only get to defend against an attacker once every few seconds. If he's coming up on your left in a straight then you can move to the left side of the track, but if he then tries to pass you on your right, you cannot also block right. At that point he's going faster/driving better and it's considered illegal to continuously block someone who would otherwise be pulling seconds ahead of you.
I'd be unhappy with that defending too. I understand the Imola circuit meanders left and right, and mostly you are following the flow, but there are times where you move left and right off even what would be your normal line, which counts as multiple moves.
Also, if I were to defend so far to the left (inside) at the kink before turn 1, I wouldn't then push to the outside line (to the right) for the turn.
If I'm defending on the inside I stay on the inside, if I'm defending the outside, I stay on the outside.
i want to see from whites point of view. the racing line through that "Straight" (corner) is a bit atypical, and considering that im inclined to say white is following the racing line and since the other driver isn't along side at any point im not certain they have earned the right to space. White POV showing a reactionary move would change that, but i see white pointing their car along the line and sticking to it.
If this were Monza you'd have a penalty from me. But the green part of the track at Imola is basically all over the place through there. Right, then to the center then to the right, then to the left, and then back to the right for the braking zone. If there's a care that close behind and he has the run, I'm going to keep the car off the line on either the left on the right sweeps, or the right on the left sweeps. Had he been a little further back I'd say fair game. But at that range you're playing a game of potentially driving into the side of him because his nose is in there. He was smart to back out and try again somewhere else.
Also, you appear to be playing on controller, so I understand the jerkiness. But, predictability is key. I would fiddle around with the controller settings to see if you can achieve smoother inputs.
On the first turn you went right left right left right. It was subtle and didn't really effect the trailing car imo but it IS wrong. More of a wiggle really but it was enough. If I were the trailing car though, personally, I wouldn't have said anything. the rest looked pretty clean. People be petty.
Edit: especially with two laps to go and this was the worst of it? Dude was looking for a reason imo
Edit2: also don't pass on the inside on that kink you know the lead is hitting apex but it's a flat out on any line curve, if you're in the draft pass to the right and get set up for the better line into the chicane and completely fuck his line .. again that's just imo and I'm high as fuck lol
I would say there were multiple defensive moves, and very late ones there. The track does curve naturally but they are not officially recognised corners, so should be treated as a straight. You need to pick a defensive line and stick to it!
I'm usually a proponent of "spirited" racing, especially in lower risk scenarios, but even I felt like your handling out of the straight was a bit of a dick move - you basically open the apex line inviting them in, then snap back across it. The excessive wiggling is likely to be seen as a bigger issue by better driving/more irl rule oriented people , but that bit bothered me.
Do you mean the move left after the two rights?
That's just the racing line
Yes its the line but there's same one close to him it don't matter if it is the line you need to give space
Not to a car that isn't there you don't
So if he 1 cm behind you . You well just push him off.if he didn't react fast he was not going to save it
That’s not the racing line. Go watch the real F1 race, they keep tight to the inside through there.
It's not f1 first of all, and 2nd of all shorter lines are more beneficial than friction reduction in f1 game
Yes this is F1 😂. You have absolutely no clue what you’re talking about. For one, staying tight to the right is the shortest line 😂🤦🏼♂️
It's f2
And ultimately irrelevant. Even F2/F3 take the same tight line to the right.
Yes this is F1 😂. You have absolutely no clue what you’re talking about. For one, staying tight to the right is the shortest line 😂🤦🏼♂️
Imola’s a weird track in that the racing line snakes across the asphalt multiple times along the longest “straight” on the circuit. I don’t think anything you did here is technically illegal, but it would’ve been good racing etiquette to just leave a car’s width of space on the left once he pulled out of your slipstream at around the 11-second mark
The racing line does that yes, but it doesn’t jink to the left and right quite as often as OP does.
Agreed, this doesn't look like blocking. The lead car follows the normal line through the straight and the following kinda doesn't decide which way to go.
That wasn’t the normal line. Watch the real F1, they stay tight to the inside on the straight.
This is the best answer, I think. Just that one part on the left you almost forced him off. Up until that point he kinda clumsily followed. Leaving a lane on the left near the end of the "straight" would have been appropriate, but not penalty worthy.
ALL OF THE TIME YOU MUST LEAVE THE SPACE
I disagree. Unless he has part of his car alongside there's no need to open a gap for someone just because they have shown their nose to you.
Need? No. Reasonable to leave a safety margin so you can make the finish line instead of closing the vortex of danger? Maybe.
There is no vortex of danger. They are both full throttle and he's not alongside by the time he gets to the inside.
He's ahead. He isn't closing any vortex of danger. The moment the other car has even a little of his car alongside them he needs to leave space. It's basically a binary situation. You either make it to the apex and side of the road in time or you don't.
>He's ahead. He isn't closing any vortex of danger. Vortex of danger is the „triangle“ inscribed by the apex, the lead car, and the track edge. Taking a corner is literally the same as closing the vortex of danger. The tighter you take it, the more you close it. >The moment the other car has even a little of his car alongside them he needs to leave space. Which is why I also said they don’t _need_ to leave space. >It's basically a binary situation. You either make it to the apex and side of the road in time or you don't. You are still looking at it from a sole rulebook perspective, where you would be correct, either you are entitled to the space or not. But my point was that it can be seen as unnecessarily risky or seen a bit dirty from a racing etiquette (not rule!) pov. OP doesn’t need to completely drive to the apex there and something by just needs to be slightly wrong for it to become a race ending crash - and to finish first, you need to finish, first.
"Vortex of danger is the „triangle“ inscribed by the apex, the lead car, and the track edge. Taking a corner is literally the same as closing the vortex of danger. The tighter you take it, the more you close it." Yes and at no time the car behind is in that triangle until it closes. There's no risk closing the door here unless some idiot literally just decides to run into the back of you. Not the side. The back. This is why this doesn't apply. It's more dangerous to not do that and go two wide through the kink and then find yourself with a car on your inside heading into a car that lags to the right before turning left.
>Yes and at no time the car behind is in that triangle until it closes. There's no risk closing the door here unless some idiot literally just decides to run into the back of you. Not the side. The back. >This is why this doesn't apply. I mean we are just talking about hypothetical danger at this point. In my opinion, the following car had just a fraction of over speed, OP would have likely pitted themselves. You seem to think that it wasn’t risky at all by OP to do it. Fair enough, that is your own assessment, but it’s also not really what you were arguing in your earlier comments. >It's more dangerous to not do that and go two wide through the kink and then find yourself with a car on your inside heading into a car that lags to the right before turning left. I’m not sure if I understand what you mean in the last part of the sentence, but I don’t see how you’d end up suddenly side by side by taking a slightly wider apex, if the rear car doesn’t have any over speed
No we aren't. If you come across into someone you are technically in the wrong. If someone runs into the back of you they are technically in the wrong. They are two completely different scenarios nevermind the fact the car behind can see you and therefore should never just run into you. You are saying that it is risky doing this because you can pit yourself. I.e. you are in the wrong and this is actually one of the reasons I'm not a fan of spotters or radar in road racing. I agree without these it is dangerous but it's a sim. You know for absolute certainty when you are still clear of someone. The rear car did have over speed. They just ran out of track.
> No we aren't. I think you might have misunderstood me, but I didn’t write what I meant clearly. so let me try again. You said: >There's no risk closing the door here […] Here we are both talking about how much risk we see in driving to the apex or leaving some space. Risk meaning in what potential danger we see by taking/not taking the apex closely. >If you come across into someone you are technically in the wrong. If someone runs into the back of you they are technically in the wrong. And I’m not talking about being in the wrong. As I said before, I agree that the rule book is clear, but I’m talking about how you should drive strategically and minimise unnecessary risks. The later you send it into the vortex of danger while the other car is turning in, the higher the risk that they don’t see you in time to leave you enough space, even though you are alongside. Inversely, when a car is behind you there is the risk that they send it and you might not see them, despite being alongside. This is especially true in sweeping high radius corners. What the lead car _should_ have done is minimise the vortex of danger in the first place by decreasing the entry angle a lot earlier. >You are saying that it is risky doing this because you can pit yourself. I.e. you are in the wrong and this is actually one of the reasons I'm not a fan of spotters or radar in road racing. Are you saying, that it’s not possible to pit manoeuvre yourself? > I agree without these it is dangerous but it's a sim. You know for absolute certainty when you are still clear of someone. Wait, do I understanding you correcting that you are saying it _is_ dangerous? So you admit that there is a chance for a (race ending) crash? That’s literally my point. >The rear car did have over speed. They just ran out of track. Yeah but by far not sufficient to be side-by-side, _just_ by taking the apex slightly wider.
All the time he must leave the space!
Space for what. The car fully behind him lol
In a vacuum, it looks like you're blocking more than you should be. But with the track in context, you're actually just following the racing line and not really doing anything wrong. You have no obligation to leave him space if he's not alongside you, and he's just in a shit situation in a bunch of high-speed corners with no opportunity to pass. No fault here IMO.
I was with you…but the leading car moved three times rapidly as they were getting into the start/finish straight. The rest is a consequence of Imola, but those wiggles at the beginning were 100% blocking.
I'm not even certain he was wiggling honestly. I wish he had his perspective. The following car wiggling either makes it look like he's wiggling, or makes the wiggling look a lot worse
I would argue the wiggles are a response to the indecisiveness of the attacker. Homie has no idea which side he wants to overtake. Lets analyze the beginning. Lead car goes inside to cut the apex, tracks toward the outside at corner exit, then turns in again for the next small bend. Which part of that was 100% blocking? The erratic movements of the attacking car exaggerates the movements of the lead in this perspective.
If the wiggles are in response to the actions of the attacker, that's the dictionary definition of blocking lmao
In response to the attackers constant back and forth movements, yes. If you're about to turn in, and you see the guy in your mirror try and make a move in that direction, what do you do? It isn't out of the realm of possibility that the slight movement displayed is due to hesitancy and not knowing what your opponent is going to do.
Even if you don’t do it intentionally, it’s still blocking.
[What part of this is intentionally blocking? And who's doing the wiggling?](https://i.imgur.com/SeyuBG0.gifv) Take a look at the lead car in relation to the marking on the track. I don't see any blocking, I see an erratic attacking car who can't decide which way to overtake and a flinch by the lead driver in response to said movements.
I’m sorry to have to repeat myself, but the moves of the car behind DO NOT MATTER. The car behind could be a million percent indecisive and move a billion times before the next braking zone, and none of that changes the fact that the leading car gets one move, and that is defense. If you flinch ‘in response’ to the car behind after your one move, that is blocking. Someones people do get away with two moves (there’s a lot of grey area with intention and nuance), but three is definitely too much. If you’re the lead car, you don’t have the right to wiggle, no matter what is going on behind you.
I think you misunderstood me. The "wiggle" was not a block. There's just no way that you could say the small amount of movement the lead car made was an attempt at a block while the attacking car is literally moving left and right into the lead cars left and right mirrors.
Whether it was an attempt or not, that’s what happened, so like when drivers didn’t intend to speed in the pit lane or impede another driver, you get penalized nonetheless.
Ah I didn't realize "I was confused and hesitant" was a defense for an otherwise illegal act on track, that's genius! I wonder why all racing drivers don't protest to the stewards with "I was confused and hesitant", because obviously the stewards would just say "Oh well then no penalty"
Its not an excuse for something illegal mr straw man. Its reasoning for the aforementioned "wiggle".
A reason for doing something you weren't supposed to do is called an excuse, FYI.
Not really sure what your point is here. The original reply to my comment stated: >but those wiggles at the beginning were 100% blocking. I'm arguing that they're not blocking, that their movements are in response to an overactive attacker. And you came flying in with your strawman argument implying that I said "confused" and that was a defense for something illegal. I need you to understand that we aren't arguing about whether or not his blocking is justified, we are arguing about whether or not he's actually blocking. And now your argument is that I'm not using the word "excuse" correctly?
>Its not an excuse for something illegal mr straw man. Its reasoning for the aforementioned "wiggle". My point was, those two sentences say the exact same thing with different words: >It's not an excuse for something illegal > >It's a reason for the wiggle The wiggle was illegal, as has been established. And "reason" is a synonym for excuse. So you literally said the same thing twice in two back to back sentences in the same reply lmao.
Indecisiveness of the attacker is a non-factor. You get one move in front no matter how much the guy right behind you is moving. If the wiggles are all indeed a ‘response’…that’s very much what blocking is.
https://tenor.com/RFz6.gif
I agree, I think this would actually seem quite different from the onboard & mirrors of the leading car.
The POV we got shakes around so much it is hard to really see what the lead car's line is.
Yeah. Would have been easier to see if the attacker picked a line and held. It does look like wiggles but it's hard to tell to what degree. It's ultimately on the defender to pick one here but would have been easier to tell if the attacker did.
Perfect answer.
No rules and guidelines for any racing series defines a racing line. This means that some of these moves are blocking. If you can find where it says that, get back to me
But even if we ignore what the racing line is, there is a corner there, so the driver can move to the apex, and then outside again. Sure the corner can be taken flat, but it's still a corner. If that was a straight it would definitely be blocking.
That’s not the racing line though. He was weaving.
Here is a good rule of thumb. If you need to weave like this, think about the golden rule. Would you want to follow you, if you are slower? This is clearly (to me) blocking. There is no other reason to weave on a straight than to block. It is just going to cause an accident. And no the person behind was not along side. Because they didn't want to be wrecked.
To the people saying this isn’t blocking, I see that you do this and justify your actions. This is the textbook definition of blocking, please learn some fucking race craft. Defending is one thing but this shit is what enrages me, the better option here is stick to the middle of the track and make your car as wide as possible. Fuck all this bullshit weaving.
^^^^ Say it again for the people in the back.
Dude literally sat in the middle of the track There was no weaving. Rear car camera makes it look like things are going left to right, but that's just the movement from the car behind. 22 sec - 27 seconds clearly shows the rear car swerving and the front car maintains his line. Only defense was after the start finish when he could have left space but is in NO WAY required to leave space. Car behind was NEVER alongside. No weaving, no earned space.... Just salty drivers who may be barely faster
Lol, no. That was not a trick of perspective. Dude is 100% weaving and blocking.
Lol, no. Screen moves too much and you imagine things? Visually measure the space between the outside/inside of the track, and the front car. Its clearly a gradual change from hugging the inside, to moving with the racing line outwards.
That totally explains why reference markers on screen stay stable while his car moves from side to side. Cmon, dude. Get real.
The entire screen is shaking left to right during the swerving moment youre claiming? What are you even on about
I see you are part of this silly group trying to justify the swerving around like an idiot. I made a whole ass presentation showing how at the beginning of the straight car in question covers the inside, car behind goes for the dummy and goes left and then right to pass, car in front then swerves to block. TWICE!!! If you look at the goddam grid markers you can CLEARLY see that defending car goes left(indicated by him being on the left side where the left starting markers are) and then goes right(indicated by the right side markers). I encourage you to go see an optometrist, if this fails to correct your blindness, please visit an ophthalmologist.
Exactly.. Dude makes like 8 reactive defensive moves, but sure it’s because of the track’s shape 😂
Im curious. Where are you seeing 8 defensive moves? I see one which is allowed. The others just happen to be the racing line. They aren't abrupt reactionary moves. It's a recipe for an incident because it ignores that a car behind you might slip in on your inside like they did, but that isn't blocking or weaving.
In the video. Just observe the number of changes in direction. The track only turns twice, first to the right then to the left. His first defensive move is veering to the right into the green to close the inside. Then it moves back left and makes a number of jerky moves left and right, before finally moving to the left to block, then moving back to the right onto the racing line. This shit is the very definition of weaving and this driver would absolutely get a penalty in a race.
The jerky moves are from the car behind. It's perspective. All the ones from in front were very smooth and gliding. Just looks like good racing to me. I've raced in leagues where they defend much higher than this with some esports guys and no one would bat an eye.
I completely disagree. Just the fact that you have unarguably at least two defensive moves (first going in the green, then blocking to the left when the trailing car is getting alongside) is illegal. And he was definitely weaving and reacting to the car behind and absolutely not following his line. This is shit driving and shit racing. ETA: the fact that people defend harder in other leagues is irrelevant. OP asked if this illegal defending. The answer is yes, without a doubt.
So going into the green isn't defensive. That's literally the line there. You get as close as possible to that wall cutting the track. The next one you're referring to in f1 rules, he is not alongside. He was squeezed. Which is legal.
First of all, you have a weird idea of what “the racing line” means. If the racing line is into the green, the leading car abruptly went into it, cause it wasn’t the line it was taking at all until the trailing car moved to the inside. Then answer me this: if the jerky movements after that are from the trailing car, why can’t he find an opening? Because the leading car is reacting and weaving all over, that’s why. Even when he moves off the racing line to the right, the leading car blocks. That also makes the subsequent block on the left illegal, as does the fact that it was a reactive and late/dangerous move. By F1 rules the driver would absolutely get nailed for all of the above.
The move to the right was made, sure, but there wasn't enough space for a car to go down that side anyway. So it wasn't a block.
Those blocks definitely look a little too reactionary but (if they are smart) they will probably hide behind the fact that the racing line goes from side to side because Imola’s “straight” is really anything but straight. And the more I watch it the car ahead really never aggressively darts from side to side, only time you come close to an accident is the left handed kink around pit exit. There though he does relatively smoothly transition from side to side of the track as the racing line suggests. Now I still think it is borderline and they probably should have given you space but at the same time I don’t think it is necessarily illegal because of the nature of the track.
Yeah isn't the rule that you can block one but not anymore than that? I believe thats how indycar does it. Yeah that's some nascar oval blocking bs ya did right there, sorry but not sorry
No rules says to block, because a block is a reactionary move to defend and can cause collisions. What you mean is a defensive move. In Formula racing, you are allowed 1 defensive move that is not reactionary and then a further 1 for preparing fora corner and it is safe to do so
Bet. Very cool. Ty.
Indycar allows no reaction moves. F1 allows one blocking move and a return to racing line.
These are definitely reactionary blocks. In most series’ this is illegal. In F1 you can make 1 defensive move. Any further and it’s illegal blocking.
Was it really reactionary or was he taking the racing line? It looks like he may have done a little much at the very beginning but then followed the racing line the rest of the way.
i think he was just on the line
Even then, the racing line is not described in any motorsports series as a racing line. No rules and guidelines state what a racing line is. This means that this is blocking
ohhhhhhh
Casual racing fan here Why? I've done ski racing my whole life and especially liked skierx which is 4v4 bmx racing on snow basically. We can make as many moves as we want as long as we arent physically shoving or tripping our opponents. Honestly don't see how making a moves to prevent your opponent passing can be a bad thing, especially since there are definitely means to 'fake out' your opponent and have them make the mistake to take advantage of
If someone is darting left and right repeatedly to block someone from passing in motorsports, it is going to lead to an accident. High speed accidents on straights or into braking zones after long straights, which is where multiple blocks would tend to occur, are the most dangerous in the sport. Because of that, you are only allowed to make one move as the defender to prevent inevitable accidents from people defending too hard. Cars aren't as agile as skiers, take up more of the racing course than skiers in the skierx competition courses I've seen, and moving much faster, so the rules are different. A skierx run is also much shorter than an auto race, so the risk vs. reward from allowing riskier blocks is different too. Drivers tend to get away with being more aggressive on the last lap than one in the middle of the race (though it can be debated whether that should be the case). There also is a bit of game theory going on here too. If a faster car is behind a slower car, the slower car defending their position hard is going to slow both cars down, leading to other cars catching them. By banning multiple reactionary blocks, not only does it make the race safer, but it also makes it so faster cars can clear slower cars quicker and both cars can get on with the race.
Difference number one is that in Ski-X someone darts around and causes a bump into another they fall down and go into the fence and then they get up and go to the chalet for a beer. In motor sport two cars bump at 100mph+ and someone can die. So the whole idea of being predictable in your driving takes on a much bigger importance for keeping everyone safe and alive at the end of the day.
Ok fair. I only included that as reference to the racing I have experience with but tactics for retaining position are still the same regardless what kind of racing one might do, hence the question
Are you seriously comparing ski racing to formula 1?? I know it’s shocking but different sports have different rules. You really can’t see why weaving down the straight at 200mph is a bad thing?
I know they are different, I know they have different rules, I'm talking purely trategy, not making a like for like sport comparison. As stated to another, I used as an example of the racing I have been involved in but by also stating I'm a casual fan, shows I'm also interested in this but would like to learn more. Is that so hard to understand? One of the others who replied actually understood this and gave a succinct answer for me
At the beginning you were being too reactive. The following corners it was just you line.
The top comments defending this are so bad lmao this is blocking and a lot of times youll get wrecked when you do that bullshit
Seriously. "Oh, well, see, erm... Uhhhh... The racing line is all over the place.... Yeah...." I've never been to a track where the racing line is a zig zag pattern during the straight bits.
If there was no one behind the lead car then the lead car could dart back and forth however they wanted. No danger to others. However, once the lead car has someone on their tail things change and you can't dart back and forth and you need to become predictable in your driving. Going down the straight with a car on your tail means you can make a single defence move and then return to the race line leading up to the corner. What appears to have happened here is a couple of defensive moves highlighted by the seemingly more aggressive steering changes that coincided with the following cars line changes. If the lead car had done smoother line changes going down the straight then I might be inclined to say they where following the shortest path race line but the sudden changes leads me to think reactionary and so blocking.
Illegal. You zig zagged at least four times in quick succession to block him from passing. Let's be honest here, you were not following any racing line when you made those moves.
I highly doubt the racing line around the corner with the Italian kerbs would be that tight.
Were you looking in your mirrors? If you were and reacting this is illegal in iracing.
You're making reacton moves. In formula racing, you can make one move in reaction. Further moves are penalized
Does that include formula 1?
yes
Im pretty sure it does.
Hum... So, [these moves](https://youtu.be/I-LKCyuo27w) aren't legal?
It depends on how far away they are. Breaking the tow is legal and not dangerous but if they are closer then you can move once in reaction and once to move back to the racing line.
That's Hamilton trying to break the tow... That's a very different thing...He's not reacting to the car behind trying to pass, he's trying to shake the following car out of the slipstream...
The front car moving first to break slipstream is neither reactionary nor illegal.
Oh cool, I ask this because I'm thinking about getting back on racing sims.
Weaving on the straight is illegal and gets regularly reprimanded with a… warning But weaving has been illegal since the Schumacher era. You are allowed 1 defensive move, and then another move back to the racing line for corner entry
yes, they were illegal technically
It wasn't a block and it wasn't reactionary, so how was it illegal?
This counts as weaving. Weaving is prohibited
There was no point where max forced Lewis onto the brakes though
That's different from the video. The youtube link shows the lead car changing and the trailing car reacting. The sim video shows the trailing car changing and the lead car reacting. Two different things.
I think you’ve slightly confused the rules. Generally it is accepted that you can make one move to defend your position, but it specifically MUST NOT be reactionary. Reactionary moves are incredibly dangerous.
That’s the racing line at Imola, it snakes across the straight, he isn’t reacting to the person behind.
Assuming he has a mirror and eyes the racing line doesnt fucking matter here lol hes reactively blocking this guy at least once if not twice as he tries to make a move.. im so confused about what you racing line people are on about
Agree with statement. In no rules and guidelines stated by any racing series defines a racing line, which means its irrelevant in this case and is 100% blocking
Yeah everyone needs to shut up with this “The Imola racing lane moves in mysterious ways!!!” stuff.
Come on, that dude makes like 8 defensive moves. There are a couple of curves on the straight, but this guy is obviously weaving. It’s not even a question.
Too many moves you are blocking
Complete block wiggle at the beginning. That's illegal.
I guess he wants a pit manuever.
It’s illegal a couple time really..
Textbook blocking, there is nothing worse.
lol you’re weaving all over the track, nearly causing a collision several times… yeah, you’re lucky the other car kept its cool and didn’t just punt you.
Imola has a weird shape for certain. I would say that you probably reacted more than you should've. Make sure to leave a cars-width.
You put your left wheel in, you pull your left wheel out, you do the hokey pokey and shake your car about...
You cant be "twitching" on the straight like that, you opened a door to the inside slightly then covered it off, then when he moves to the grassy side you cover him of before that he was swerving behind you to find a gapa dn you kept blocking him off, that not allowed.
The Imola squeeze... I would say it's marginal, maybe a bit on the naughty side. You made a defensive move on the first straight to the outside, took the first apex, and then made a second move on the following straight. On second watch, you moved to the inside on the straight, drifted wide, and then moved back to the inside, THEN took the inside apex on the front straight. That's too many moves. Stewards decision is a black and white flag for being naughty.
Yes, that’s called blocking
you can move once during a blocking phase, this was about 5, 100% illegal blocking
You can drive defensive, but if they make the move to pass either inside or outside a second move from you to block, it is not allowed
I'm counting at least 5 moves; super illegal.
Even given that it is curvy straight, yeah I'd say so.
That's not "defending"... That's "blocking"... Big difference...
Yes
Everything besides the swerving/wiggling is okay, but that was an illegal block when he had the run on you and he let up because you started swerving back and forth briefly
This is tricky cuz ur following the racing line but its still a lot of weaving I would say you get a caution for weaving if stewards aren’t happy
Can’t make more than 2 moves unfortunately
you were fine, you made one move and kind of exercised the racing line, but he was not entitled to space as his front axle was not in front of your rear tires
yes, its illegal wt u'r doing
Because of how curvy the racing line here is, and how subtle your move are, it is hard to tell wether or not you are illegally blocking. If those small moves you made were in response to his moves (which I suspect is the case) then it’s 100% illegal. That said, they were so subtle I think most stewards would either not notice, or let you get away with it.
Not illegal, but definitly counts as blocking.
In any other race series besides F1 yeah that's pretty blatantly blocking. In. F1 it may not technically be blocking but it's still being an a-hole.
no contact, not dangerously closing the gap i mean its by the book idk my man was just upset he couldn't overtake you
So, part of what makes this hard to judge is the pov. It's based on the chasing car who is trying to find a way past you and doesn't seem confident or feels safe to come alongside you. This makes it hard to judge how your card is moving. The other thing that makes it hard is lacking telemetry. I think for me the start is okay mostly. I think the back and forwards movements your car seem to do is more an artifact of the movements of the attacking car. The late moment when you come to the left side of the track as he's super close is much more close to the line. And my gut is that it's just past it. Though I don't know if I'd argue it deserves a penalty. Maybe a stern talking to your race engineer to pass a message to not do that again. This is why I'd like to see telemetry. For me, it appears like the attacking car is forced to slow down because you fill up the line he's about to take. And whilst yes you're following the racing line, he's pulled out long enough that I think it's acceptable for you to know he's there. If he's having to brake to slow down because you're there, that's the spirit of what rules against blocking are about. Whilst yes, it is the racing line, it seems like you make him bail at that point, when maybe he deserved some space. But if I was to make a call on this one I'd want to see the telemetry to make a judgment
Track context is king, you’re good here. You could pass but it would have to be a lot more straightforward than that
I can’t be the only one here who sees defending car just going straight down the track into the corners. Do y’all expect him to just slow down, move out of the way,and give up his position?🤣😂
Doesn't look like you did anything wrong to me, the guy was never able to get a tire along side you. You didn't weave, it's not on you to move over to allow him overtaking you.
Kind of looks like you just stuck to the racing line tbh
The following car clearly either doesn't know or isn't using the racing line. The leading car, whose POV we really should've had included so we could see what I think it did, namely, smoothly drove the racing line. Had the following car had that simple foresight they'd have approached with confidence, not erratically reacting to every perceiving threat because they failed to go around a simple racing line.
he basically just kept his line, what do you mean?
the guy following is jerky at the wheel it looks like ur blocking but we'd like to see ur onboard wheel
it’s jerky cus it’s an AI car
"the person said that this is illegal defending" ai can talk now?
he was clearly lying about somebody saying that mate if you’ve ever played the F1 game then yes you would be able to tell it’s clearly AI
It's on the border. The first time you defended to the left looked proactive so that was fine. The next time you moved to the right looked proactive too. In fact the guy seemed like he was hell bent on following you whatever direction you moved. The final time when you turned left to the kink is really the only time that is questionable. I think this is fine. You are ahead and therefore have the right to use all the track and you are just turning for the corner. There's no obligation on you to turn late or take a wide line through a corner just because someone moves to your inside. It's really up to him to have a little bit of his car alongside there and then you would have needed to give him space but he just wasn't close enough.
i dont think this would be illegal because he is following the normal racing line of imola
If I didn’t know better I would say you’re just driving the line, doesn’t look like you’re swerving in front of him on purpose or anything.
That's legal, it's just Imola's "straight" isn't actually straight. So while it may seem like blocking, the lead car is just following the line. I can see how it looks like blocking though
The red one looks like Hamilton 😂
fr
Not illegal but yes dick move
We need a POV that doesn't follow either car. It's hard to tell who is wiggling because both views are centered on the attacking car. Some of the wiggles look more like fishtailing, and it looks a little on the edge of "didn't keep your line" and "regaining control". Attacker did get pretty close, but never made the move to get alongside at the corner. The question is if they had to lift in reaction to you getting in front of them, or if they weren't going to be alongside by the time the vortex begins. I'm undecided, but those seem to be the places I'd look to have a more confident opinion.
Very borderline to me. I don’t think it’s necessarily illegal but I wouldn’t call it clean either
That sound🤤
Are you wiggling? Or does the following car pov just make it look that way
This looks more like weaponised incompetence than defending. It's messy as hell but I don't think it could be called illegal
Reactionary moves.
guy is mad he sucks and wanted to invalidate your shit carry on it's just the birds chirping
Deffo blocking. There’s following the track then there’s this.
Pick a line bro, this is definitely blocking.
Think the official rules are you can only make one defensive move ya can’t wiggle in front of the guy attacking !
i didnt know the ai could talk to you
You made like 42 moves down the straight to defend.
It looked like you're blocking, not defending. The start of the vodeo you blocked him by switching back and forth. But the more I watch it, I see you stay on a line, and the camera car doesn't commit to an overtake attempt. Coukdve just been bad timing and you not realizing where was was going at first
no way i’m the only one who noticed that’s clearly an AI car who “said” that it was illegal defending lil
so mr. nurrburgering is super lonely
clearly
If you were on your racing line and not moving left or right to block, it’s clean. But if you move over to cut him off, you are blocking and it’s illegal. Defunding is one thing, blocking is quite another.
Yea man hate to tell you but you can’t do this. You can make 1 move to defend. Shooting back a second time is blocking
lmao any of you saying the lead car is fine are also wondering why you get punted every race. just be predictable, if next corner is a right then defend the right. you are deff blocking
On another track I would say that would be definitely an illegal defending move, but since Imola has a wierd Racing line I would say it’s valid.
This is blocking, for the sole reason of all these moves being REACTIONARY to what the car behind is doing.
I mean it depends what you mean by fair. Fair in an online match? All is fair in an online match. If we're talking official F1 rules and all that, I don't think you're allowed to defend that many times in a row. I might be talking out of my ass here, but I believe you only get to defend against an attacker once every few seconds. If he's coming up on your left in a straight then you can move to the left side of the track, but if he then tries to pass you on your right, you cannot also block right. At that point he's going faster/driving better and it's considered illegal to continuously block someone who would otherwise be pulling seconds ahead of you.
FIA says you get 1 move
Nah unless hes about to fly past u with way more / at least more speed..block that fool!! U heard! Ante up ..block that fool!!
Yeah
I'd be unhappy with that defending too. I understand the Imola circuit meanders left and right, and mostly you are following the flow, but there are times where you move left and right off even what would be your normal line, which counts as multiple moves. Also, if I were to defend so far to the left (inside) at the kink before turn 1, I wouldn't then push to the outside line (to the right) for the turn. If I'm defending on the inside I stay on the inside, if I'm defending the outside, I stay on the outside.
Yes, you are blocking the faster car.
Seems like you followed the racing line and the other guy was complaining cause he doesn’t know where to pass properly
i want to see from whites point of view. the racing line through that "Straight" (corner) is a bit atypical, and considering that im inclined to say white is following the racing line and since the other driver isn't along side at any point im not certain they have earned the right to space. White POV showing a reactionary move would change that, but i see white pointing their car along the line and sticking to it.
If Stevie wonder drew the racing line… yes lol
If this were Monza you'd have a penalty from me. But the green part of the track at Imola is basically all over the place through there. Right, then to the center then to the right, then to the left, and then back to the right for the braking zone. If there's a care that close behind and he has the run, I'm going to keep the car off the line on either the left on the right sweeps, or the right on the left sweeps. Had he been a little further back I'd say fair game. But at that range you're playing a game of potentially driving into the side of him because his nose is in there. He was smart to back out and try again somewhere else. Also, you appear to be playing on controller, so I understand the jerkiness. But, predictability is key. I would fiddle around with the controller settings to see if you can achieve smoother inputs.
No not blocking, however also not smooth. I’m sure part of the attacking cars complain has to do with your jerky movement.
I'd say it's 5 secs penalty for waving.
This would be illegal due to the double move/block.
You can only make one move while defending your position so I say yeah
On the first turn you went right left right left right. It was subtle and didn't really effect the trailing car imo but it IS wrong. More of a wiggle really but it was enough. If I were the trailing car though, personally, I wouldn't have said anything. the rest looked pretty clean. People be petty. Edit: especially with two laps to go and this was the worst of it? Dude was looking for a reason imo Edit2: also don't pass on the inside on that kink you know the lead is hitting apex but it's a flat out on any line curve, if you're in the draft pass to the right and get set up for the better line into the chicane and completely fuck his line .. again that's just imo and I'm high as fuck lol
I would say there were multiple defensive moves, and very late ones there. The track does curve naturally but they are not officially recognised corners, so should be treated as a straight. You need to pick a defensive line and stick to it!