Formula 1, the multi-billion dollar pinnacle of motorsport, versus a flat perforated slab of metal — who wins this fight?
It seems comical that the sport has faced so many issues with drain and manhole covers in recent years when public interest and revenue figures are rocketing.
While there's some solace for the sport that the incidents happened outside of competitive action and the wider media spotlight, that's down to luck rather than planning.
Had the Circuit de Barcelona-Catalunya, for example, hosted testing, the problematic covers would've come loose during next weekend's grand prix, potentially during qualifying or the race itself.
This seemingly minor issue poses far more significant risks than red flag stoppages.
Seeing the incidents happening as often as they do raises questions about their recurrences, especially in light of the enormous revenue F1 generates and the high costs for fans attending the races.
While each circuit is responsible for its track surface, Formula 1 chooses where to race, and the FIA must check each ahead of the cars hitting the track.
After the Las Vegas disruptions coming so close to the season's end, you might think the off-season break would've been the opportune time to assess whatever is going wrong to prevent repetitions.
Perhaps had the Nevada drain cover injured a driver, marshal, or fan, the increased spotlight would've prompted more stringent checks or a calendar-wide call for all circuits to improve their facilities ahead of F1's visit.
Accidents happen, and the FIA's safety standards constantly improve every year to reduce the danger of crashes and car failures.
However, one must wonder how frequent once-in-a-blue-moon occurrences, like drain covers once were, must become to stop being classified as accidents and start to become an annual expectation.
The reintroduction of ground effect aerodynamics to cars in 2022, designed to enhance racing by allowing cars to follow each other more closely, is often where the finger gets pointed.
Modern-era cars generate far greater levels of aero thanks to the Venturi effect, increasing the likelihood of dislodging poorly secured covers.
However, it's paramount to understand that this problem predates the ground effect era, and a disproportionate percentage of circuit types have had this problem recently occur: street circuits.
The increasing expansion of the F1 calendar to include more street circuits, while numerous purpose-built alternatives exist, further exacerbates the situation.
Thankfully, Monaco hasn't had any repeat of its problems from that same year, when Jenson Button's McLaren hit a drain cover on the run to Beau Rivage, but all of these circuits remain on the calendar.
You cannot overstate the safety implications should a car flick up one of these covers when fans are nearby.
While F1's primary concern often revolves around the safety of the drivers and team personnel, the risk to spectators in close proximity to the track is immense.
Even if you're of the mindset that danger is part of Formula 1's thrill, the potential consequences of loose drain covers extend beyond the safety concerns.
There's the real possibility of the significant damage we've seen from incidents like this affecting a championship fight.
An unexpected retirement due to driver error, poor wet weather grip, or a mechanical failure are things the teams and their pilots can mitigate.
Picking up DNF thanks to a loose cover that skews the championship standings, though, in a sport of skill, strategy, and engineering excellence? That's damaging in another way.
Such incidents can detract from the professionalism of the sport, making it seem amateur to casual fans, not to mention undermining the hard work of teams and drivers.
It's imperative that the pre-season testing problems we saw remain in pre-season and don't continue blighting the sport's reputation — as we've seen in the off-season, Formula 1 doesn't need any help there.