#Was Verstappen playing the long game with his penalised moves on Lando? (Explana...

1 messages · Page 1 of 1 (latest)

deep patio
#

'He' in the 'yes' option refers to Lando.

Basically, some people think that had Verstappen defended Lando as little as he had defended Sainz, Norris would have driven off into the distance past Sainz and won, likely leaving Verstappen at the mercy of Leclerc, leaving Max P4 with a 13 point swing to Lando.

So Max may have decided to race Lando as hard as he did to ensure he kept the position and also drop Lando behind Leclerc, meaning despite the penalties for Max, Lando wouldn't win, resulting in a smaller points swing (ending up only being 10 points) for Lando. However, you might argue Max couldn't have predicted this, but by putting somebody out of the lead fight you are removing 7 possible points... (P1 = 25, P2 = 18)

split ember
#

That's are really nice explanation

novel ember
#

absolutely

#

you could just tell once Norris got close to Verstappen

#

Verstappen was going to do something like what he did

#

he sees Norris as a threat so wrecks his race and takes the penalty because finishing 3 or 4 places behind P2 or P3 is much better than p1 just because of how the points are spread

#

it's a more prolonged less dramatic version of Schumacher vs hill for example

#

or senna v prost

#

instead of crashing Norris he just pushes him off or costs him time

#

clear driving like that needs to be punished severely otherwise its worth it for drivers like max to take

#

otherwise this championship and further championships could very well come down to dirty tricks where the rules are broken but the punishment isn't harsh enough to deter drivers, which defeats the purpose of rules

real oyster
real oyster
novel ember
#

the FIA have to think about either changing the rules or stricter punishments

#

and if it gets a bit more dangerous, that's cause to consider points penalties imo

real oyster
#

agreed