Sentau

joined 2 years ago
[–] Sentau@discuss.tchncs.de 2 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (1 children)

~~Buddy you seem lost. This is a community for a Lemmy client called Voyager.~~

Irrespective of if you are lost, asking this on a gaming centric community like !gaming@lemmy.world or !gaming@lemmy.ml would be more appropriate and more likely to get you good recommendations/answers

[–] Sentau@discuss.tchncs.de 0 points 2 years ago (2 children)

Norris didn't get any advantage. On the contrary, he had to abandon the start and start again later than everyone around him.

This is not an excuse to ignore a case where there is clear visual evidence of a car moving before lights out. His movement could have spooked other cars into moving which could have ruined their starts. You can see people making jump starts in response to other jump starts often in athletics especially in short races like 100m, etc.

Also it was not a case where he drifted just a few mm. He moved nearly half a wheel rotation in that false start and somehow the transponder either didn't pick it or found it to be within limits. Either the way the transponder sensitivity has to be improved.

[–] Sentau@discuss.tchncs.de 1 points 2 years ago

Yeah, his bad start was punishment enough in this instance.

I was responding to this

[–] Sentau@discuss.tchncs.de 1 points 2 years ago (1 children)

I am not saying lando should be punished. I am saying that the rule should be reviewed and updated for the future to handle cases technology cannot/ fails to handle.

[–] Sentau@discuss.tchncs.de 1 points 2 years ago (3 children)

That the rule having no flexibility is stupid. It is obvious from the videos that Norris jumped the start but because the rules are based purely on the signals from the transponder, he has escaped punishment.

[–] Sentau@discuss.tchncs.de 1 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (5 children)

And that is what i am trying to highlight through my question. The rule is enforced completely based on the transponder but if its malfunctioning then drivers will not be penalized as the the transponder has not picked up their jump start.

[–] Sentau@discuss.tchncs.de 2 points 2 years ago (7 children)

No as in there won't be a penalty or no as in there will be a penalty¿?

[–] Sentau@discuss.tchncs.de 2 points 2 years ago (13 children)

So if the transponder is faulty(hypothetically) or just not sensitive enough, does that mean people will get away with false starts¿?

[–] Sentau@discuss.tchncs.de -5 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (2 children)

That is not how the sport works though. Magnussen also had floor damage from his collision with Albon which fucked his race but he still got a penalty for his transgression.

[–] Sentau@discuss.tchncs.de -1 points 2 years ago (5 children)

But now people can try and abuse this to start rolling just before the lights go out while staying within the box. If timed well or controlled well, this could give a massive advantage at the start.

[–] Sentau@discuss.tchncs.de 1 points 2 years ago

I am aware of this. He moved an awful in the race so I don't get how he didn't cross the sensor. He looked past the white line when the lights went out.

[–] Sentau@discuss.tchncs.de 1 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (1 children)

I think the rule of thumb is if you catch it and stop before starting again you're broadly OK.

This is not the rule. The rule as it currently exists is completely based on if the sensor detects movements which are greater than the amount specified by the regs. If Norris had started moving 0.05 seconds before lights out but moved a low enough distance as to not trigger the sensor, it is considered a legal start even if he made no attempt to 'catch it'.

view more: ‹ prev next ›