Let's talk tyres!

[wedge]

There's a reason for double stinting on intermediates (inters) but I can't remember why.

Also the Bridgestone Inters used to be inferior to the Michelins in 2006. I'm wondering whether the BS still have a narrow operating window or is it because more of teams running with a dry set up at Silverstone?

[markabilly]

There's a reason for double stinting on intermediates (inters) but I can't remember why.

Also the Bridgestone Inters used to be inferior to the Michelins in 2006. I'm wondering whether the BS still have a narrow operating window or is it because more of teams running with a dry set up at Silverstone?
I think it depends on conditions and what is expected. If the rain is coming down just right, there would be some wear but not a great deal, and if the thought is that the track is going to change dramactically (like to full wet or to dry), then one might be back in very quickly to change tires.

And there is something to do with the heat factor and wear factor where in certain conditions the current tires will work better for a little longer.

But when Kimi came in on the first stop, those tires looked to me to be very worn already from seeing it on TV. (as in like, hey where is the tread?? Not much showing and it is still wet on the track....) And changing tires does not take as long as filling the tank, usually, so I thought well, maybe they want to get ahead of Hamilton with a very quick, short fill type stop, but whatever......they should have watched Ross to see what he was going to do....)

[yodasarmpit]

Basically if the track dried, the inters would have almost transformed into slicks.
However, the gamble is if the rain continues then you are driving on a wet track in slicks.

[markabilly]

Basically if the track dried, the inters would have almost transformed into slicks.
However, the gamble is if the rain continues then you are driving on a wet track in slicks.
Yes but if the track really dries, those slicks quickly become butter.....Lousy gamble

[gravity]

The inters start with a deep tread which allows both heating of the tyre and displacing the water. As the tyre wears out, it runs cooler but displaces less water. Ferrari were hoping/heard that the rain was going to stop, therefore keeping the old tyres on would mean that they wouldn't run thru the 'overheat' period on a drying track, and they would have more grip (as the tyres were almost slicks). The extra shower that followed the pitstop messed them around a little. As Ioan would prob say, "Ferrari made another error".

[markabilly]

The inters start with a deep tread which allows both heating of the tyre and displacing the water. As the tyre wears out, it runs cooler but displaces less water. Ferrari were hoping/heard that the rain was going to stop, therefore keeping the old tyres on would mean that they wouldn't run thru the 'overheat' period on a drying track, and they would have more grip (as the tyres were almost slicks). The extra shower that followed the pitstop messed them around a little. As Ioan would prob say, "Ferrari made another error".
Yes, but as it looked to me, the track was no where near to being close to the drying out stage, and as they left the pits together and made the first two or three corners, hamilton's advantage showed immediately. Indeed the acceleration leaving the pits showed his advantage. And I thought they would have been better off to bring him back in when the rain really started. RB was gaining something like 17 seconds a lap with full wets at one point. Such a gain would have made up for the pitstop (which at Silverstone is a short pit compared to others)

[wedge]

Ferrari were hoping/heard that the rain was going to stop, therefore keeping the old tyres on would mean that they wouldn't run thru the 'overheat' period on a drying track, and they would have more grip (as the tyres were almost slicks)

Wouldn't that be dependant on track conditions?

Didn't Ferrari try something similar in Hungary 2006 but Schumi was reluctant to change to slicks even though he worn his inters down to slicks and the car was a dog in the dry.

Didn't Kimi double stint last year in China?

[gravity]

Just before LH and KR went into pits (prob the same time that the tyre choice was brought up) the drivers were 'searching' for water to keep their tyres cool. The forecast was for rain in a few minutes and, I assume, Ferrari thought it was not going to.
BMW were also going to keep NH's tyres on (according to his initial communication with the team) to which he objected. They made a tyre change in the end which seemed to be a 'driver call' rather than from the team.

[markabilly]

Wouldn't that be dependant on track conditions?

Didn't Ferrari try something similar in Hungary 2006 but Schumi was reluctant to change to slicks even though he worn his inters down to slicks and the car was a dog in the dry.

Didn't Kimi double stint last year in China?
Yes I recall such a race where MS drove brilliantly, then stayed out on intermeds too long and clearly paid the price--

[BDunnell]

It may be an obvious thing to say, but it all goes to prove that tyre choice is an incredibly difficult thing in changeable conditions and that no team deserves to be castigated for making what turns out to be the wrong call in such circumstances.

[markabilly]

It may be an obvious thing to say, but it all goes to prove that tyre choice is an incredibly difficult thing in changeable conditions and that no team deserves to be castigated for making what turns out to be the wrong call in such circumstances.
True but the call should depend on an intent to gain an advantage, and I as a tv watcher only (without the special package that some cablers get) could not see it at all, except I thought that their intent was it was going to be a short fill, get in front of LH, control pace and return very quickly for another tire change, depending on how the weather went.

I certainly thought when Kimi imediately started losing time and then more rain, that they would have him right back in.....and roll on down the road with full wets.....but no, I was wrong.

If they had, he might have taken the lead and who knows? Not that much time would have been lost....

If they had changed their tires to intermed at stop one, they could have atleast stayed with LH (and matched him on pit stops) through the race instead of getting lapped before the end of the race.

As to stratgey, if you are not in front of your opponent, you ought to hang as close to him as possible.

[ioan]

True but the call should depend on an intent to gain an advantage, and I as a tv watcher only (without the special package that some cablers get) could not see it at all, except I thought that their intent was it was going to be a short fill, get in front of LH, control pace and return very quickly for another tire change, depending on how the weather went.

I certainly thought when Kimi imediately started losing time and then more rain, that they would have him right back in.....and roll on down the road with full wets.....but no, I was wrong.

If they had, he might have taken the lead and who knows? Not that much time would have been lost....

If they had changed their tires to intermed at stop one, they could have atleast stayed with LH (and matched him on pit stops) through the race instead of getting lapped before the end of the race.

As to stratgey, if you are not in front of your opponent, you ought to hang as close to him as possible.

I'd rather have you as Ferrari's strategist! :up: ;)

[BDunnell]

True but the call should depend on an intent to gain an advantage, and I as a tv watcher only (without the special package that some cablers get) could not see it at all, except I thought that their intent was it was going to be a short fill, get in front of LH, control pace and return very quickly for another tire change, depending on how the weather went.

I certainly thought when Kimi imediately started losing time and then more rain, that they would have him right back in.....and roll on down the road with full wets.....but no, I was wrong.

If they had, he might have taken the lead and who knows? Not that much time would have been lost....

If they had changed their tires to intermed at stop one, they could have atleast stayed with LH (and matched him on pit stops) through the race instead of getting lapped before the end of the race.

As to stratgey, if you are not in front of your opponent, you ought to hang as close to him as possible.

Know what you mean, and I see nothing to disagree with there, but it didn't seem as clear-cut to me while watching the race. The same was basically true of McLaren in China last year. In changeable conditions, with the choice between inters and full wets a not-entirely-obvious one as the track starts to dry but on a day when the risk of further rain remains and the track may well stay very wet in places even if it dries in others, waiting to see what might happen seems perfectly acceptable. The likelihood is that if you get it wrong on one occasion, you'll benefit from your rival making a mistake another time.

[Sleeper]

There's a reason for double stinting on intermediates (inters) but I can't remember why.

Also the Bridgestone Inters used to be inferior to the Michelins in 2006. I'm wondering whether the BS still have a narrow operating window or is it because more of teams running with a dry set up at Silverstone?
That used to change by the weekend, one race Michelin inters would be inferior to BS inters and it would swap for the nest race, the same was true of the full wets and dry tyres as well (BS tended to get it right more than Michelin with the wets, though).

As for the double stinting, in the tyre war the inters were so aggressive from both makes that both suffered bad graining in the early laps which could cost you as much as 5 seconds per lap (Alonso found this at China in 06). 08 compounds arent related to 06 compounds too much, infact they're closer to the 05 "long life" tyres from BS have said.

[MrJan]

Yes, but as it looked to me, the track was no where near to being close to the drying out stage, and as they left the pits together and made the first two or three corners, hamilton's advantage showed immediately. Indeed the acceleration leaving the pits showed his advantage. And I thought they would have been better off to bring him back in when the rain really started. RB was gaining something like 17 seconds a lap with full wets at one point. Such a gain would have made up for the pitstop (which at Silverstone is a short pit compared to others)

Martin Brundle was saying something about Lewis (I think) pitting while he was struggling in the very wet. Rubens was eating huge chunks of time out of everyone and it would pretty much have been possible to pit while it was very wet, do a 5/6 lap stint and then pit again if it dried up and have lost no time. Seems crazy that more people didn't take the gamble really.

[markabilly]

Know what you mean, and I see nothing to disagree with there, but it didn't seem as clear-cut to me while watching the race. The same was basically true of McLaren in China last year. In changeable conditions, with the choice between inters and full wets a not-entirely-obvious one as the track starts to dry but on a day when the risk of further rain remains and the track may well stay very wet in places even if it dries in others, waiting to see what might happen seems perfectly acceptable. The likelihood is that if you get it wrong on one occasion, you'll benefit from your rival making a mistake another time.


I would have at least changed tires even if to keep intermediates--pretty much said so in a post right after Kimi's first pit stop; thought maybe they were trying to get in front of LH with a short fill. On TV kimi's tires looked to already be pretty much slicks and smoked, and too often this "stay out on intermeds" just backfires, as to MS in Hungary (that race was a brilliant run by Ms until towards the end, but with all due respect to the then Ferrari management, they should have brung him in a much earlier and he would have won) and then there is China as you mention, well opps for LH/RD and a little less playing with fire and LH would been WDC (perhaps).

Staying out on intermeds when they are still have plenty of life in them and conditions appearing to be great for the tires and going to remain that way for a while is one thing (and on that Gravity does have a very good point) but at most that is about a ten lap deal, under great conditions with a track that does NOT dry out too fast and tires that were not already smoked.

In this case, he looked to be needing new tires much sooner than ten laps with the conditions remaining as they were at the time of the pit stop, so if you need the gas because you are about to run out, then short fill and get in front of LH, try to keep him stuffed behind and pray that conditions change to require LH and Kimi to be back in to change tires in a very few laps.

Instead it was clearly raining harder as they left the pits. The first lap was almost two seconds behind, two laps he was an easy five seconds behind and on the third lap, he dropped about 5 to 6 seconds, so whoopie!! he was 12 seconds behind in three laps.

So what does ferrari do? Do they bring in Kimi a lap or two later after his first stop with rain pouring down harder?

No they bring in Massa and do not change his tires either.

If they had just said whoops, needed to have some intermedes instead of slicks, he might have been still in a position to challenge for the lead, and certainly would not have been faced with getting lapped at the the three -quarter point.

When they brought him in finally, I think he was way down and battling for tenth or something like that.

Now on some tracks, where the in the pit lane seems to take 20 seconds plus plus before you can get close to your pit box, that is one thing, but at Silverstone, it is quick in and pretty quick out. Total time lost for a pit stop is not much compared to most other circuits

Did you notice where the ferrari box was? And where the Mac box was?

Of course the decison to go full wets or to dry tires is always a tough call, cause going dry too soon, is a potential nightmare as many have found out lately, but when the intermedes appear to be already be toasted and nearly slick, then the only point in not changing, is a quick fill, with the certain knowledge of a change in a few laps.

Otherwise, the clear rule would be change even if staying on the intermedes, if one is putting in 6-8 seconds of fuel. Let us assume that conditions were going to continue to get drier, those tires were NOT going to make anything close to 20 laps, whereas maybe Hamilton might make it that far on new intermedes (and having learned the lesson of China, was less likely to go slamming the pitwall when he came in, so Mac did much better today and Ferrari really blew it up on some easy basic strategy)

[ioan]

Instead it was clearly raining harder as they left the pits. The first lap was almost two seconds behind, two laps he was an easy five seconds behind and on the third lap, he dropped about 5 to 6 seconds, so whoopie!! he was 12 seconds behind in three laps.

So what does ferrari do? Do they bring in Kimi a lap or two later after his first stop with rain pouring down harder?

No they bring in Massa and do not change his tires either.

Exactly, they could have at least taken a gamble with Massa and changed his tires if not putting him on full wets, as he was almost a lap down and had nothing to lose and everything to gain.

But how many times did you see Ferrari this season make a gamble and on top of that the right one?! Never! They tend to stick to their previously decided strategy as if they were a bunch of idiots.

[BDunnell]

Exactly, they could have at least taken a gamble with Massa and changed his tires if not putting him on full wets, as he was almost a lap down and had nothing to lose and everything to gain.

But how many times did you see Ferrari this season make a gamble and on top of that the right one?! Never! They tend to stick to their previously decided strategy as if they were a bunch of idiots.

This doesn't just surprise me about Ferrari, but other teams too. There seems to be a reluctance to change strategy when it sometimes seems obvious that it's the best way to go. I wonder why.

[Ranger]

This doesn't just surprise me about Ferrari, but other teams too. There seems to be a reluctance to change strategy when it sometimes seems obvious that it's the best way to go. I wonder why.

Pride? I think that's a part of it.

The ramifications for making an error by sticking to a strategy would seem smaller than the ramifications for taking a gamble and undoing the many calculations the teams have done optimising strategy over the entirity of a GP weekend.

Of course, changing strategy becomes easier the lower down the field you are, because you would otherwise have nothing to lose anyway.

[gravity]

It could also have to do with FA not changing his tyres. It seems the other teams/drivers treat him as the mastermind on the track. If he calls for a tyre change, the rest change. He chose to stay out on worn inters... so many of the others did the same.

[wedge]

The ramifications for making an error by sticking to a strategy would seem smaller than the ramifications for taking a gamble and undoing the many calculations the teams have done optimising strategy over the entirity of a GP weekend.

Of course, changing strategy becomes easier the lower down the field you are, because you would otherwise have nothing to lose anyway.

The midfield is so tight today you only have to look at Q2 in qualy. Too much to lose.

[ShiftingGears]

The midfield is so tight today you only have to look at Q2 in qualy. Too much to lose.

None of this explains why Ferrari didn't bring Massa in for wets, considering he would've been the yardstick for when Kimi could've changed tyres.

[ioan]

None of this explains why Ferrari didn't bring Massa in for wets, considering he would've been the yardstick for when Kimi could've changed tyres.

Exactly, and he had nothing to lose and everything to gain! But hey, there is need for a brain for such a move to be even thought about.