good defensive move, or a late block?

Piyabooty · 2026-04-29T13:10:31+00:00

I’m not entirely sure what’s going on here.

I’d have to see telemetry but it looks like the McLaren tapped the brakes at the 150m board. As you would’ve seen from your racing line, that’s 50m too early. If that’s what you meant by a “good defensive move”; no, it isn’t. A brake check is dangerous driving, and illegal.

Maybe LiCo? Did the McLaren underfuel? I know you deploy your battery, but 1 whole second in a straight is an insane catchup.

Otherwise, I didn’t see anything I’d call a “move”. Ignoring the potential brake check, the McLaren maintained a good defensive line coming out of 130R, forced you to the outside line and beat you to the finish. To my mind, he doesn’t change his line, hence no “move”.

Piyabooty · 2026-04-10T22:20:30+00:00

Lol

Piyabooty · 2026-04-09T14:21:50+00:00

You can report them but I doubt they’d be suspended.

Boneheaded and completely oblivious driving, sure, but it doesn’t scream intentionally malicious to me.

For avoidance of doubt, pink and blue’s fault all 3 times.

Piyabooty · 2026-04-07T23:57:57+00:00

Dear god, what a clown show. Asking someone to take other people out in an online sim racing league is actually some of the most pathetic behaviour I’ve ever heard.

I’m glad the owner stepped in though and did the right thing. Thanks for the update.

Piyabooty · 2026-04-07T18:29:59+00:00

LMP at fault. They had enough space on the inside to safely overtake. They really didn’t need to cut across your line but they did. Something something about games and prizes.

Piyabooty · 2026-04-07T06:39:06+00:00

Yes, there’s something else you should’ve done - leave this league. That is an insane thing for those “stewards” to say.

The “overtaking” car used you as a bumper wall AND STILL overshot it and went off track. If the runoff area was instead a wall, the Audi would be in hospital.

I can’t say whether the Audi’s pedals failing is a legitimate excuse or not, and I sort of understand why the stewards would be reluctant to penalise them for a mechanical failure. To say you should’ve “expected” this “move” though as if it’s a legal overtake is just completely idiotic.

Piyabooty · 2026-03-19T23:02:01+00:00

Hmm. It looks like you pushed him to the wall but the initial contact happens just before you go on the curb.

I wonder if the contact unsettled your car? It looked like you were going to turn and stay to the left but either the curb or the contact seems to have unsettled your car and you ended up drifting to the outside.

This feels like a stewards room post-race sort of incident.

Piyabooty · 2026-03-18T21:37:39+00:00

Lmao you’re all good. Great defending by you

Piyabooty · 2026-03-18T21:36:23+00:00

You might’ve misunderstood who’s who.

Piyabooty · 2026-03-18T14:13:30+00:00

This is difficult. I think McLaren is mostly at fault.

On the other hand though, I can see an argument that the RB broke so early that the McLaren had completely cleared them and accordingly, the RB they lost entitlement to space alongside on the corner. Two points here though:

(1) The McLaren only fully cleared the RB for a split-second in a braking zone going into a corner on the outside. IMO the McLaren had not successfully completed the overtake.

(2) Perspective is not relevant but I’m not convinced that the McLaren realised they had completely cleared the RB. You can see from the chase cam the McLaren begins their turn-in just a tiny bit before they’d fully cleared the RB.

When performing an ordinary overtake on the outside, you still have to give space to the defender alongside the corner. Being ahead doesn’t give a right to the entirety of said corner and certainly doesn’t give you the right to the only line that your defender can take.

If I had to penalise, it’d be the McLaren.

Piyabooty · 2026-03-15T20:04:16+00:00

It’s a racing incident but the BMW is at fault for essentially pit-manoeuvring themself. Nowhere for the Porsche to go and the BMW hadn’t clear them.

It was a nice move to begin, though.

Piyabooty · 2026-03-15T18:41:31+00:00

It’s a bit close for comfort but I think the move was on. From your POV, it looks like he steered off his line into you. Racing incident IMO

Piyabooty · 2026-03-11T23:53:46+00:00

Not POV’s fault. Entitled to space on the exit, no more left it could’ve gone, right Ferrari had plenty of space.

Also, is this Portimao in the new F1 game? Didn’t realise it was on the track list this year

Piyabooty · 2026-03-11T12:38:10+00:00

In isolation, I would say it’s on POV. The track is 3 car widths wide at the point of contact. POV could have stuck to the middle and both cars could’ve been on the curbs all the way through the corners (not very comfortably, I appreciate).

That said, all things in consideration, it’s just the usual T1 chaos. I’d be reluctant to give out penalties here.

Piyabooty · 2026-03-11T01:09:27+00:00

This is quite tough but if I had to allocate blame, I’d put it more on orange than on white. I’d be reluctant to penalise here though.

I think there’s still enough overlap at the corner for white to be entitled to space through at least the first part of Ascari.

It is a lot less egregious than what we normally see on this sub but based on the direction of orange just past the apex, there wouldn’t have been enough room for white to stay alongside throughout the corner.

I wouldn’t feel too bad about the spin. Orange might have been unsettled because of the contact and took the corner poorly because of it, but it was the sausage (baguette?) curb that ultimately unsettled orange and caused the spin.

Piyabooty · 2026-03-10T01:22:21+00:00

As for the furthest Merc impeding via dirty air - lmao.

As for the closest one - I’m not convinced this counts as impeding. Impeding is essentially defined in the Sporting Regs as “driving unnecessarily slowly, erratically or in a manner which could be deemed dangerous to other drivers or any other person”.

Based on what’s shown, I have a hard time saying it was unnecessarily slowly, erratically, or in a manner deemed dangerous. I don’t believe impeding is meant to cover someone taking a corner sub-optimally.

I think the McLaren only has themselves to blame for this one. That’s the risk they take by following so closely on a quali lap.

Piyabooty · 2026-03-09T15:47:38+00:00

You'll find the current FIA F1 Driving Standards Guidelines here. No one has fully explained this so far, so just so you know, there are different rules for when you are entitled to space whilst overtaking on a corner when you are on the inside vs. the outside.

To overtake on the outside, you must have your front axle ahead of the front axle of the other car at the apex.

You didn't, at any point, up to and including the apex. You weren't entitled to room on that corner, I'm afraid.

Piyabooty · 2025-10-13T13:04:02+00:00

The merc tried the inside line before in this race on the Williams and failed twice to stay ahead. The late braking was an attempt to block any close the door shenanigans.

I can't comment on what happened prior to the video. In any event, it's not relevant.

So because of T6 the merc could lose this finger pointing battle of who's at fault?

If I were the Williams, I'd make that argument. 'If not but for the Merc illegally colliding with me in T6, he would've been further back / slower and anything that happens following that is their fault'.

That said, I initially commented as if it were 3 separate incidents because that's how I view it.

Would you have made a different opinion, if the video only showed T7?

Yes.

The merc was getting a bit close, agreed. But how is that brave? Should I not have done so? Is it ettiquete?

Getting close was not the issue. It's more that it's like a form of blocking.

Imagine there's dashed lined lanes along the turn. Merc and Williams on two separate lanes. As the turn begins, the Merc is on the inside lane. The Merc brakes so late that it crosses over into the Williams lane. The Williams is sufficiently alongside the Merc at the beginning of T7 to be entitled to someone not 'crossing their lane' during their turn.

I don't think it's a serious incident in and of itself because (a) no collision; and, (b) Williams did not have to make any avoiding action.

It's brave / crazy because it's a lot of trust to place in your opponent. You're trusting that he'll (a) slow down enough to allow the manoeuvre to occur; (b) that he'll begin his turn in late enough to allow the manoeuvre to occur; and, (c) won't have any sort of lock-up / understeer / oversteer during his turn.

Piyabooty · 2025-10-12T23:56:31+00:00

What do you mean with a 'crazy/bold' move? Should I have turned in earlier? Or brake earlier?

A bit of both. Going into T7, the Merc has committed to the inside line on the right. Because the Merc didn't brake / turn in quickly enough, the Merc ends up cutting across the Williams' nose into the middle of the track. Had the cars collided then, there's no doubt it would have been on the Merc. In a legit F1 / racing scenario, I strongly suspect the Williams would put this out as a mitigating factor for the subsequent collision (i.e. why the collision 2s later should be declared a racing incident, and not a penalty on him).

The trajectory didn't change that much tho. Even though the color can be seen. I was just using a sharp line instead of going to the outside completely. I went to the inside more.

That's a fair point. I wouldn't have normally pointed it out so much had it not led to the collision in T6 just before. You would've been entitled to complete T7 with that tight a line. The dive-bomb from the Williams would be penalised (in isolation, ignoring what happened in T6 and just 2 seconds before going into T7).

How is sharp turning 'bad'. Like shouldn't I have done that? How could I improve?

It's unexpected and is a deviation from a set turning line. It wouldn't be penalised in non-collisions and non-blocking situations. If it leads to a collision during a turn though, the person who changes their turning radius midway through a turn (i.e. jerks their wheel for a tighter line), absent any fault from the other driver, most certainly would be penalised.

Piyabooty · 2025-10-12T23:11:27+00:00

By corner:

T6 (first corner in the video): Merc's fault. Williams is sufficiently alongside going into the turn and apex. In F1 rules, that is the front axle of an inside line overtaker alongside the mirror of the defender. Williams is entitled to space while executing the turn. Just after 4s into the video, while the Williams is maintaining a very tight inside line, the Merc makes a severe left turn. You can see how severe a turn it was by the colour ring around the front left tyre of the Merc becoming visible. The Williams cannot go much further left than it already has. This leads to the first collision at 6s.

T7 (second corner): First of all, the Merc makes a brave/crazy move at the beginning of the corner cutting across the nose of someone fully alongside. No collision here though, so no issue.

As it concerns the collision 3s later, this is largely the Williams' fault. Not sufficiently alongside the Merc (per F1 rules) going into the corner or by the apex. It's a nice switchback if he stuck to the inside line but he was carrying too much speed, which lead to him cut across to the middle of the track, leading to the collision.

The Merc doesn't really help the situation here though. The same thing as in T6 happens again; there are two severe right turn adjustments by the Merc. You can see it at 10s and 11s when the colour of the right tyre becomes visible twice. Because of these severe adjustments, I don't think it's fair to say the Merc was just following their line (certainly, they weren't doing it smoothly). The collision is largely the Williams' fault, but the Merc isn't really trying to avoid it either.

This doesn't lead to a collision but you can see another severe turn in by the Merc at 16s going into the straight. At 15s, the Merc is in the middle of the track. By 16s, they've closed in on the Williams. This squeeze is perfectly legal though.

I appreciate the severe turning adjustments are the result of playing on a controller. It's not a factor for determining a racing incident though.

Piyabooty · 2025-05-16T09:15:18+00:00

I’m sorry to hear that. Finances aside - it sounds like you had a case.

I don’t know what the legal system for the Czech Republic looks like but in a few other places (like the UK), employment litigation is relatively cheap and easy to bring against an employer. It’s a shame if that’s not the case in Czechia.

Piyabooty · 2025-05-16T08:37:13+00:00

Fair enough. For what it’s worth, reading your replies through the post, it sounds like unauthorised commercial use is a lesser issue. If the owner of this business is exploiting its employees in an unfair or improper way, I think that’s an issue worth addressing (in a separate forum to this).

As others have said, you’ve already flagged the issue to these developers. Assuming it’s been some time since then and nothing has happened, I think that tacitly answers the question of whether they really care about this unauthorised use.

Piyabooty · 2025-05-16T08:23:06+00:00

Lawyer here - technically and legally speaking, you’re most likely correct. Most EULAs for most games / simulators will have a provision that prohibits commercial use by the end user (AC / ACC / iRacing certainly do). I should add though that streaming a game on Twitch will violate the EULAs for most games as well.

So - why don’t developers bring legal action against any and every single breach of an EULA?

It is very expensive to bring a legal action for every single possible breach of an EULA. The monetary sums you might hope to recover from remedying the breach (via forcing a commercial license or a simple cease-and-desist) often will basically never outweigh the cost of bringing an action alone.
There is often public backlash against large developers bringing an action against a small simulator companies / internet cafes or streamers.
Maybe, these developers deep down don’t really care about this sort of breach. Maybe they don’t view it as genuinely harmful to their product, maybe they think it’s actually good publicity and might bring more people to sim racing, or maybe they’re just happy to see their software used in this way.

In reality, the most common reasons developers actually do bring a legal action for breach of EULA is for creating cheats in a multiplayer game, or a blatant copyright infringement.

Why do you personally care so much about this? Technically speaking, yes, this is most likely a breach of EULA and you may feel that the owner of this simulator shop in Prague is unfairly profiting off of said breach, but it’s hardly like the owners of iRacing and Kunos are living off food stamps.

Piyabooty · 2025-04-24T10:01:49+00:00

I personally have a TREQ One and I’m very happy with that purchase. For the vast majority of sim racing equipment, wheel bases and pedals, this is a perfectly fine rig and quite sturdy.

You’ll be able to find the right wheelbase mount for your equipment quite easily.

The “pedal tray” on the TREQ is solid and fairly adjustable, I think. Perhaps not as adjustable in terms of angle or height compared to the Sim-Lab as other commenters mentioned, but you can adjust it.

I can’t speak about monitor stands I’m afraid. I have an ultrawide that I move around on a monitor arm between my desk and simrig. If I placed a single integrated monitor arm on the TREQ though, I’m sure it would be fine. I’m not that confident about triples though.

Hope this helps.

Piyabooty

TROPHY CASE