The changing world order

The world order (if there ever was such a thing) is changing, and not in a good way. Of course what seemed stable when I was young was simply a function of not having lived through very much change. The 1970s saw Britain grappling and coming to terms with its diminished role in the world. There was the joining of the European Economic Community (EEC), the joining and departure from the European Monetary System (EMS), the decision not to adopt the single currency, and finally Britain's exit from Europe.  There was decimalization and the first supermarket to arrive in Steyning. There was the end of Franko's dictatorship in Spain, Solidarity in Poland, the collapse of the USSR and the fall of the Berlin Wall, German reunification.  More recent was the delegation of power to the central banks and the control of inflation.  So it hasn't really been all that stable. But there was a sense that in terms of international relations, we were moving towards greater economic integration and away from large scale military conflicts. There were the small "skirmishes"; the Falklands, Vietnam, Yugoslavia, then Iraq, Afghanistan, and Syria, but nothing on the scale of the two world wars, and since 1946, no use of nuclear weapons. So until the first early twenty-first century, things seemed to be moving in a generally in positive trajectory. There were hiccups like the 2008 financial crisis, but economies recovered.

Today that optimisms seems harder to sustain. Tension between China and the West over Tiwan, between Russia and the West over Ukraine, the resurgence of authoritarian regimes in Turkey, Hungary and Poland, not to mention the climate crisis, are beginning to cast a long shadow. The proliferation of a fragmented media landscape and the growth of social media is turning politics towards a toxic focus on identity devoid of a shared set of facts, let alone shared values. The collaboration of authoritarian regimes, swapping ideas on how best to stay in power and beat back pressure from the world's well meaning democracies is setting up a battle not between the ideologies of communism and capitalism, or between state run economies and market economies, but between competing systems of control, democratic representation or authoritarianism, between faith in institutions and faith in (or obedience to) personalities. And while democratic regimes believe they hold the moral high ground, their increasing inability to deliver, either economically or politically, will lead to more frustration and a further decline in trust in institutions, putting democracy itself at risk. It seems that for the twenty or so years I have left, the future looks pretty bleak.          

The 2022 F1 Season

Assuming the Red Bull and the Mercedes are as equally matched next year as they were this, Lewis Hamilton will have to find a way of dealing with Max Verstappen's driving. While I'm not a competitive racing driver, as a long-time follower of Formula 1 motor racing (and an unabashed Hamilton fan) I am worried that Verstappen has found an overtaking maneuver that is both risky and currently highly effective. While drivers generally move towards the apex from the outside of the track as they approach a corner, Verstappen, when executing an overtake, comes into the corner on the inside of the car ahead and breaks very late into the corner. While technically he may be abreast of the car he is trying to overtake on entry to the corner his excess speed and the fact that his car is now pointing less towards the apex than the car he is trying to pass means that the only way for the other driver to avoid a crash is to leave the track limits. That will either cost time or mean that if he is deemed to have gained an advantage, he will have to yield the place to Verstappen. In other words, Verstappen will make the overtake by forcing his opponent of the track in a risky, some (including me) would say reckless, move. Yet that kind of driving is often just called "highly competitive racing".  But in my view, as we saw at Monza this year then the two drivers did collide  (Verstappen was slightly behind Hamilton when the shunt happened), diving down the inside put both drivers at unnecessary risk. It forces the innocent party to accommodate the aggressor. 

Although this may be a slightly stylized representation, it makes the point that while technically in a fraction of a second, Verstappen will be ahead of Hamilton and the corner is "his", there is no way for Hamilton, who is turning into the apex, to avoid a collision unless he steers left meaning he will exceed track limits (assuming there is a runoff area). Unless the stewards begin to impose time penalties for diving down the inside and forcing the other driver out of track limits (as was the case in the first lap in Yas Marina) he will continue to use the maneuver to his advantage.

So were I in a position (which clearly I'm not) to give Hamilton some advice, it would be this; go into the simulator over the winter and try different approaches to the corner to  neutralize Verstappen's "inside lunge" overtake.

Otherwise he'll have to rely on being quicker and more reliable, which simply may not be enough for his eighth world championship.  

Verstappen wins in controversy

Verstappen's victory in the Yaz Marina Grand Prix will go down in history as one of the most controversial races ever in Formula 1. With the championship to play for, Hamilton drove a flawless race from the outset, gaining the lead before the first corner from second place on the grid. He led the entire race, but the race and his eight championship was stolen from him in the penultimate lap by a terrible decision from race control. 

Nicholas Latifi had crashed five laps from the end, bringing out the safety car. Hamilton had passed the back-markers while Verstappen had not. Verstappen used the safety car to come in for a fresh set of soft compound ties but Mercedes decided to leave Hamilton out on a worn set of hards. With the safety car having eliminated Hamilton's twelve second lead over Verstappen, he might yet have won had Verstappen had to pass the back markers, although the odds were now very much in Verstappen's favor. 

But race director Micheal Masi's inexplicable decision to let the back-markers past the safety car handed Verstappen his victory on a silver platter. With no gap between him and Hamilton and on a fresh set of softs to Hamilton's completely warn hards, it was a given that Verstappen would pass Hamilton on that last remaining lap. 

Was Red Bull's strategic decision making better than Mercedes' more cautious approach? Perhaps. But in the end, without the good fortune of allowing Verstappen to clear the back-markers under the safety car rather than under race conditions, that strategizing would have been moot.  Sadly, it was a bitter end to a great season or motor racing.

Verstappen or Hamilton?

Controversy surrounds the incident between Verstapen and Hamilton on the first lap of the final race of the 2021 Formula 1 championship in Yaz Marina. Did Hamilton gain an unfair advantage by leaving track limits at turn N?  Verstapen and Red Bull clearly think so. Mercedes, on the other hand, sees Hamilton leaving the tack not as a deliberate decision to gain an advantage, but as a necessary maneuver to avoid a collision that would have taken both cars out of the race.  The race stewards decided in Hamilton and Mercede's favor. 

While I may not be a completely impartial observer, I agree with the stewards' decision. Verstapen's move to take the position from Hamilton down the inside at the entrance to the corner was risky, some (including me) would say reckless. Coming from about two car lengths behind, he braked late into the corner bringing himself alongside Hamilton's car. Notably, he was not clipping the apex of the corner but was nearer to the middle of the track, leaving Hamilton nowhere to go.  At the apex, Verstapen was pointing his car towards the outside of the corner and Hamilton had no option but to leave the track or cause an accident that would have ended both their races. Which of course would have suited Verstapen nicely since he was leading the championship only by dint of having won more races since they were even on points. And there is little doubt that was in Verstapen mind. 

It's worth noting that this isn't the first time he'd pulled this kind of stunt. The incident at Monza in which he ended up colliding with Hamilton, bringing his car over the top of  the Mercedes and injuring Hamilton in the process looked remarkably similar. And there have been others. Verstapen seems ro have learned that there are few consequences for pushing the risk envelope with that maneuver. 

While it unclear whether Hamilton gave back all the advantage he gained from leaving the track, I think the stewards may have felt that it was about time Verstapen was sent the message that would not be allowed to take the lead by forcing another car off the track.  Whoever wins the race (still in progress) I think the stewards made the right call.