Did Pirelli go too far?

[N4D13]

Here's something I wanted to share with you.

In the first three races of 2012, from what we've seen so far, it looks like having the fastest car isn't enough to win. It looks like rather than being outright fast, the most important thing seems to be getting the tyres to work, and a small change in temperature can have huge consequences on a car's handling and performance. Is this really what the sport should be about, and is it what we'd like to see? Personally, I'm a bit disappointed to see how these three first races have become sort of a lottery in which the car which can get its tyres into the optimal temperature window will win, even if it's not really fast. This was specially obvious in the Malaysian GP, with Ferrari and Sauber going faster just because they made the tyres work better on wet conditions, yet were basically nowhere in China. I wonder if, in Pirelli's intentions to make the championship more exciting, they went a step too far and made tyres which were simply unpredictable.

Of course, time will tell whether the teams will get on top of the tyres or not, but what we've seen so far from the 2012 Pirellis is a bit absurd, isn't it?

[steveaki13]

I don't know about that.

You raise an interesting point.

I just think circumstances of races have had some impact.

In Australia you always get a unpredictable race and Mclaren were the fastest and duely finished 3rd and 1st.
In Malaysia it was wet and stop start, so hard to judge.
In China Surely Mercedes and Mclaren were fastest and came back to the front, albeit with some struggles.

So I think we need to wait and see really.

[jens]

In the first three races of 2012, from what we've seen so far, it looks like having the fastest car isn't enough to win.

IMO this is a good thing. Otherwise the so-called fastest car would qualify at the front and run away with the race without competition. And most likely the fastest car would belong to the same team on most circuits.

I have to say Pirelli has done an impressive job, because they have outsmarted the teams for now and created them headaches. :) Last year the tyres were deteriorating fast, but perhaps the tyre structure was not so complicated, so this is indeed, what we saw - fastest cars running away from others.

Chances are though that during the season top teams will figure out, how to get the best out of the tyres. And we would see more predictable races than now. A bit like in 2005, when early in the season all kinds of teams could be seen challenging for podiums (Toyota, Williams, RBR), but in the end McLaren and Renault comfortably dominated. So we have to enjoy the current situation, while it lasts. :)

[steveaki13]

I have to say Pirelli has done an impressive job,


Don't let Ioan hear you say that. :p
;)

[donKey jote]

Tyres, what can I say ? ... I lurve that smell of burning rubber in the morgens :D :bandit:

[fandango]

This is a very interesting point. But more and more F1 is about how quickly and efficiently a team can solve the problems during a race weekend, during a timed session, or even during a single lap! This is a good thing, I think, but then again some drivers probably suffer as a result of this. The one I would say most suffers, though, is Hamilton, as he is possibly the fastest over a single lap in ideal conditions, and he's leading the championship through three consistent third place finishes, so I think I'll have to wait and see (and not type before I've fully thought things out...!)

[djparky]

nope I think Pirelli are doing a fabulous job- they're providing tyres that force the drivers/teams to think on their feet and is impacting on the races- long may it continue. The alternative is the tedious boring processions we saw during the Bridgestone era

[i_max2k2]

I think Pirelli has stirred it up quite well, the fact is that, in the last decade it has all been about making the Tyres work, it became much easier in the last few years, and this year its a challenge for any one team to make it work in all conditions and this is very good, we get to see drivers true potential when the car does start working for them. I'd like to see this more often, then any one team running away with it :)

[ioan]

Don't get me started about this rubber manufacturer.
Durex could make better race tires if they weren't already into another rubber business.

[wedge]

First of all it should be unpredictable. Why watch a predictable race? Gary Anderson has pointed out that there is greater onus on the drivers to make the difference.

It's too early to raise this criticism. There are various reasons for the races and it's not like Massa has been in contention then something is wrong. The drivers who've won earned it.

We've only had 3 races and three totally different conditions, not to mention that we're still early in the car development cycle. A trend of some sort is likely to occur, IMO.

[BDunnell]

First of all it should be unpredictable. Why watch a predictable race? Gary Anderson has pointed out that there is greater onus on the drivers to make the difference.

It's too early to raise this criticism. There are various reasons for the races and it's not like Massa has been in contention then something is wrong. The drivers who've won earned it.

We've only had 3 races and three totally different conditions, not to mention that we're still early in the car development cycle. A trend of some sort is likely to occur, IMO.

I agree completely. The drivers simply have to deal with the circumstances pertaining at the time.

[gloomyDAY]

Stop complaining.

[The Black Knight]

IMO this is a good thing. Otherwise the so-called fastest car would qualify at the front and run away with the race without competition. And most likely the fastest car would belong to the same team on most circuits.

I have to say Pirelli has done an impressive job, because they have outsmarted the teams for now and created them headaches. :) Last year the tyres were deteriorating fast, but perhaps the tyre structure was not so complicated, so this is indeed, what we saw - fastest cars running away from others.

Chances are though that during the season top teams will figure out, how to get the best out of the tyres. And we would see more predictable races than now. A bit like in 2005, when early in the season all kinds of teams could be seen challenging for podiums (Toyota, Williams, RBR), but in the end McLaren and Renault comfortably dominated. So we have to enjoy the current situation, while it lasts. :)

I disagree completely. Motor racing should not be a lottery. It is a race they are driving i.e. The fastest driver in the fastet car should get to the finish first. While there is certainly room for tactics in F1 there is no longer room for a driver to showcase his skills as much. Do you honestly think Jenson Button would be as close as he is to Lewis Hamilton were they both able to drive flat out lap after lap? Not on your nelly and this is particularly evident in qualifying. The Pirelli's do a good job of bunching the cars up but they also do a good job of making lesser drivers look better than they are in a good car. If a team has done a great job and produced a great car, do you not think they deserve to be out front and win the WCC and one of their drivers the WDC? I think most will agree here that McLaren appear to have the fastest car this year overall but take for example Lewis in Australia, unable to switch the tyres on. Ferraris unable to switch their tyres on etc. It's a bit ridiculous.

For the average sunshine supporter on the street to just come in and see cars racing each other closely it looks great but, to me, whom is an avid F1 fan since I was a kid, the Pirelli tyres coupled with meddling by the officials and DRS continues to leave a worse and worse taste in my mouth.

[A FONDO]

We can't speak for lottery in 20 event season. No matter how rules change, the best drivers and engineers will always be on the top at the end of the year, but I want to see them struggling for that and proving they really deserve that.

[SGWilko]

Don't get me started about this rubber manufacturer.
Durex could make better race tires if they weren't already into another rubber business.

Latex dear boy, latex. Not used rubber since Geronimo was in use....... :laugh:

[SGWilko]

I disagree completely. Motor racing should not be a lottery.

I don't see it as a lottery TBH. The tyres are the same for all competitors, it is the cars that differ. The onus is on the teams to build a quick car that does not chew up tyres. What we have seen in the last couple of seasons is the guy out front, who does not have to overcook the tyres and set the pace can make them last. Back through the field, it is the defencive driving and trying to find a way past in dirty air that takes the life out of the tyres.

The drivers now have to be conscious of how they use the tyres. Compare Vettel to Kimi. Kimi has no experience of the Pirelli cliff edge, and suffered more that Vettel did when the tyres went....

For me, it spices up the show. DRS was not an overtake-easy tool in China, and I think that it was well implemented - it allowed the pass to be set up. Just look at some of the overtakes not in the DRS zone.

Nope - I think Pirelli have got it just about right.

[52Paddy]

For the average sunshine supporter on the street to just come in and see cars racing each other closely it looks great but, to me, whom is an avid F1 fan since I was a kid, the Pirelli tyres coupled with meddling by the officials and DRS continues to leave a worse and worse taste in my mouth.

I'm an avid F1 fan too and have been for 11 years. But our viewpoints differ. I like to see 'racing'. If unpredictable tyres provide good racing then I see it only as a positive move. Being fast is not the only ingredient in winning a race and, especially nowadays, I don't think it should be. Drivers have to deal with issues of strategy and many other variables and whoever manages these variables best on a given day is the deserved winner - not the fastest driver in the fastest car. Although tyres have not been this unpredictable in the past, there have been decades of F1 where slower cars have had an advantage in the overall scheme of things and you just have to get used to a new era (compare the turbo/NA battles during the 80s).


I don't see it as a lottery TBH. The tyres are the same for all competitors, it is the cars that differ. The onus is on the teams to build a quick car that does not chew up tyres. What we have seen in the last couple of seasons is the guy out front, who does not have to overcook the tyres and set the pace can make them last.

Agree. This is what I'm saying above.

[52Paddy]

So :up: to Pirelli.

[airshifter]

So far I think Pirelli have been doing exactly what the sport wanted them to do. It does seem to me that at some races the choices for tires made by the FIA seem on the softer side and that leads to a lot of rubber off line very early in the race. But the tires themselves are doing what they are supposed to do IMO.

[wedge]

I disagree completely. Motor racing should not be a lottery. It is a race they are driving i.e. The fastest driver in the fastet car should get to the finish first. While there is certainly room for tactics in F1 there is no longer room for a driver to showcase his skills as much. Do you honestly think Jenson Button would be as close as he is to Lewis Hamilton were they both able to drive flat out lap after lap? Not on your nelly and this is particularly evident in qualifying. The Pirelli's do a good job of bunching the cars up but they also do a good job of making lesser drivers look better than they are in a good car. If a team has done a great job and produced a great car, do you not think they deserve to be out front and win the WCC and one of their drivers the WDC?

I think most will agree here that McLaren appear to have the fastest car this year overall but take for example Lewis in Australia, unable to switch the tyres on. Ferraris unable to switch their tyres on etc. It's a bit ridiculous.

Australia - JB, IMHO, is not a great driver but there or thereabouts and on his day can beat anyone and on that day he drove the perfect race. LH had bad start, bad luck with SC and his tyre management was marginally inferior.

Malaysia - yes, it arguably was a lottery but Alonso's drive was hallmark of a great driver. We've seen him fend off Schumi in an inferior Renault at the 2005 San Marino GP.
Gary Anderson & Mark Hughes both point the finger at chassis/set up, not to mention Perez being arguably a class driver:


The main one will be over the torsional stiffness of the car, because in the wet a more flexible structure is a more compliant car, which can be a benefit.

BBC Sport - Gary Anderson?s review of the F1 teams after two races (http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/formula1/17544326)


The mystery is why both the Ferrari and Sauber were faster than McLaren, Red Bull and Lotus - and that is almost certainly due to how each car was using its tyres in the crucial intermediate tyres phase (between laps 14-40). A feasible theory espoused by at least one prominent engineer was that the faster cars all had stiffer set-ups, with spring rates appropriate to downforce in excess of those generated by the Sauber and Ferrari (stiff springing will work the tyres less in the wet) - and that prevented them from reaching the particular threshold temperature needed to get the intermediate rubber working on the day.

Why Perez's Star Is In The Making | Features & Experts | Sky Sports Formula 1 (http://www1.skysports.com/formula-1/news/22058/7632638/Why-Perez-s-Star-Is-In-The-Making)

China - Since winter testing MGP was predicted to be quick car certainly in quali trim but hard usage of tyres has traditionally been the achilles heel but they found the sweet spot.

Yes, the tyres have a sweet spot but its the same for everyone, its down to the teams and drivers, more so on the drivers to extract the best. This is why I err to dislike tyre wars because the tyre manufacturers will get the credit.

[Knock-on]

So far I think Pirelli have been doing exactly what the sport wanted them to do. It does seem to me that at some races the choices for tires made by the FIA seem on the softer side and that leads to a lot of rubber off line very early in the race. But the tires themselves are doing what they are supposed to do IMO.

Shfter and Wedge make good points IMHO but The Black Knight isn't taking all the facts into consideration (for once).

He says that the fastest car and driver should win but this is rather 2 dimensional. These days, you have a complete package. Car, driver, team, reliability, tyres, fitness, psychology, strategy, pitstop crew etc all make up the pakage. The tyres are just a tool that need to be used in the best way possible.

At the moment, Pirelli seem to be providing a tyre that needs to be used correctly and adds, rather than detracts to the spectacle. They have got it spot on and exactly what they were tasked by the FIA to do.

[jens]

I disagree completely. Motor racing should not be a lottery. It is a race they are driving i.e. The fastest driver in the fastet car should get to the finish first. While there is certainly room for tactics in F1 there is no longer room for a driver to showcase his skills as much. Do you honestly think Jenson Button would be as close as he is to Lewis Hamilton were they both able to drive flat out lap after lap? Not on your nelly and this is particularly evident in qualifying. The Pirelli's do a good job of bunching the cars up but they also do a good job of making lesser drivers look better than they are in a good car. If a team has done a great job and produced a great car, do you not think they deserve to be out front and win the WCC and one of their drivers the WDC? I think most will agree here that McLaren appear to have the fastest car this year overall but take for example Lewis in Australia, unable to switch the tyres on. Ferraris unable to switch their tyres on etc. It's a bit ridiculous.


I see one of your arguments is based around Hamilton v Button. And that Hamilton is supposed to be the better and faster driver and if he is not, then rules are wrong. Well, but why shouldn't tyre management be part of the skill-set needed for an F1 driver? Driver would still need to drive to the finish as fast as possible, but in a different way. I don't consider it as a lottery. In this case Prost somehow lucked into a lot of lottery jackpots in the 80's, when cars were fragile and needed to be nursed.

By the way, being the fastest is relative. You say if Hamilton is faster than Button, then it is right. But if he is slower and unable to switch the tyres on, then something is wrong. Turn it the other way around. If Hamilton is faster, then why is Button slower? Perhaps there is also something ridiculous going on, which doesn't enable Button to maximize the potential of the car. I remember in 2010 Button complained that he couldn't heat the tyres up. We had those hard Bridgestones that year. Perhaps it could be claimed that those tyres were ridiculous and created "a lottery", because they were too hard and couldn't be heated at all?

I think it is a bit of a simplistic view that some are "better drivers and better teams", who deserve to be at the front. They are all top professionals with their own strengths and weaknesses. We talked about drivers. Now if, say, Sauber, is smart enough to design a car around tricky tyres and beat those highly-funded factory teams, why shouldn't this be considered as a fantastic feat on merit?

Ferrari's inability to switch their tyres on is ridiculous? I say this is fantastic. IMO it reveals, how difficult F1 really is and should be. Why should top teams have it easy in adapting to the rules and underfunded teams are left behind? If top teams are struggling, it shows that nobody - even the smartest engineers - are having an easy time. Imagine the engineering departments of all the teams. All are wondering and scratching their heads: "What to do, what to do, these tyres are really tricky." Great, this is a challenge for everyone!

[Brown, Jon Brow]

Mercedes started testing their new car later than most of the other teams. Perhaps it has just taken them a few extra races to find the sweet spot with the tyres.

[longisland]

I reckon the most important thing is the tire behavior has to be consistent. All teams are given the same amount of time during testings, free practice sessions and race to collect data and figure out what works best for the car. It's a level playing field as far as I'm concerned and it's up to the team to come up with the correct setting and components for each Grand Prix and make the right call during the race. The real lottery is the FIA's interpretation of regulation; for me, the Mercedes current DRS-F Duct system is just like the the Brawn 2009 double diffuser and the Red Bull 2011 blown diffuser. The team will gain great advantage once their innovation is deemed legal by FIA; all other teams will have to spend the rest of the season retrofitting the car and do catch up.

[schmenke]

DRS = gimmick
KERS = gimmick
Pirellli tires = gimmick
Formula one = joke.

[Dave B]

Pirellli tires = gimmick
Formula one = joke.
I've been watching some older races where it was a gamble whether your Goodyears and Bridgestones would make it to the end without delaminating or the sidewalls failing, so nothing much has changed. Tyres are simply yet another factor to take into account when deciding your strategy. Lotus arguably took a gamble with Kimi in China which could have paid off had they got it right, instead they over-estimated the tyres and dropped from a podium position to almost nowhere. That's not a lottery, it's a calculated risk.

[schmenke]

I've been watching some older races where it was a gamble whether your Goodyears and Bridgestones would make it to the end without delaminating or the sidewalls failing, so nothing much has changed. Tyres are simply yet another factor to take into account when deciding your strategy. Lotus arguably took a gamble with Kimi in China which could have paid off had they got it right, instead they over-estimated the tyres and dropped from a podium position to almost nowhere. That's not a lottery, it's a calculated risk.

Agreed, but it's the seemingly imposed unpredictability of the tires from race to race that is exasperating.

[SGWilko]

Agreed, but it's the seemingly imposed unpredictability of the tires from race to race that is exasperating.

Going into races this year, not knowing if Ferrari, Sauber, Lotus, Mercedes, RedBull or McLaren will win is, for me, a big fat bonus and is making me enjoy the racing that much more.

The midfield battle right now is equally as exciting as it is upfront.

Heck, look at the top 10 qualifiers in Q2 in China, sperated by less than a second!

Bring it on I say. :up:

[Brown, Jon Brow]

Agreed, but it's the seemingly imposed unpredictability of the tires from race to race that is exasperating.

Who wants to watch predictable racing?

Murray Walker would call this seasons races 'predictably unpredictable'.

[SGWilko]

Who wants to watch predictable racing?

Murray Walker would call this seasons races 'predictably unpredictable'.

Once he'd stopped his startwatch he would, yes!!!

[Brown, Jon Brow]

I can't imagine what sort of problem Raikkonen had at the end of the race. I imagine it was some sort of grip problem.

[SGWilko]

I can't imagine what sort of problem Raikkonen had at the end of the race. I imagine it was some sort of grip problem.

It was indeed a grip problem. Once tyre tread has worn sufficiently, the ability of the carcass to maintain temperature is impeded. The tyre loses temperature and thus grip. As you lose grip you lose traction. Once you lose traction the more you spin the tyres and so the tyre degrades even more - catch 22.

[Brown, Jon Brow]

It was indeed a grip problem. Once tyre tread has worn sufficiently, the ability of the carcass to maintain temperature is impeded. The tyre loses temperature and thus grip. As you lose grip you lose traction. Once you lose traction the more you spin the tyres and so the tyre degrades even more - catch 22.

I was doing a Murrayism :p

[SGWilko]

I was doing a Murrayism :p

In that case, excuse me while I interrupt myself :)

[schmenke]

Who wants to watch predictable racing?

Murray Walker would call this seasons races 'predictably unpredictable'.

Well, I guess you’re now watching the right show, if this is what F1 has now been allowed to become :s .

F1 is a constructors' series.

I can think of no other motorsport where either technology or regulations are imposed not for the benefit of the advancement of the cars, teams or drivers, but solely to artificially manipulate the on-track action.

Indeed, technological innovation, once a hallmark or Formula 1 designers, has over the last few years slowly been suppressed to alleviate the risk of supremacy by a team. This is contradictory to the purpose of a constructors’ series.

[Tazio]

I agree with Airshifter, F1 got exactly what they asked for from Pirelli. As for its propriety it's arguable. It is just another part of the formula, and is acceptable. This small window of getting peak performance is maybe a little more elusive than the new down force reg's are ready for.

[Dave B]

Agreed, but it's the seemingly imposed unpredictability of the tires from race to race that is exasperating.
There's four hours of practice before qualifying, plenty of time for the teams to get a reasonable handle on the tyres, weather permitting.

[Brown, Jon Brow]

Well, I guess you’re now watching the right show, if this is what F1 has now been allowed to become :s .

F1 is a constructors' series.

I can think of no other motorsport where either technology or regulations are imposed not for the benefit of the advancement of the cars, teams or drivers, but solely to artificially manipulate the on-track action.

Indeed, technological innovation, once a hallmark or Formula 1 designers, has over the last few years slowly been suppressed to alleviate the risk of supremacy by a team. This is contradictory to the purpose of a constructors’ series.

Well Mercedes innovation with the gimmicky DRS contradicts your point to some extent.

I would like to see more open regulations with regards to the KERS. Innovation in this field could be very useful to road cars.

[truefan72]

I don't mind DRS and Kers
I do mind (rather slightly) unpredictable tires
If they have degradation issues, then fine, whatever, but if they cause half the teams to struggle to bring them up to temperature, then this is an issue in my book that has nothing to do with promoting competitive racing and improving the show.
I take no joy in watching compromised cars struggle to stay on track unable to maximize their potential.
I say, if you want to make tire usage a lottery, then at least allow teams the option of refueling, thus setting up the race as they see fit.
I'm tired of "fuel saving mode" and constant tire issues

[schmenke]

Well Mercedes innovation with the gimmicky DRS contradicts your point to some extent. ...

True, but Formula One is closer now to a spec series than it has ever been. But that is perhaps subject to a separate thread. I don't want to hijack this tyresome one :)

[Mark]

Formula 1 has never been about just driving as fast as you can flat out all the time.

[donKey jote]

I can think of no other motorsport where either technology or regulations are imposed not for the benefit of the advancement of the cars, teams or drivers, but solely to artificially manipulate the on-track action.


NASCAR ? BTCC ? :andrea:

[DexDexter]

Well, I guess you’re now watching the right show, if this is what F1 has now been allowed to become :s .

F1 is a constructors' series.

I can think of no other motorsport where either technology or regulations are imposed not for the benefit of the advancement of the cars, teams or drivers, but solely to artificially manipulate the on-track action.

Indeed, technological innovation, once a hallmark or Formula 1 designers, has over the last few years slowly been suppressed to alleviate the risk of supremacy by a team. This is contradictory to the purpose of a constructors’ series.

The world has changed and the competition for people's attention is so fierce that in order to survive, F1 needs to cater for the casual fans who want to see action. In the modern world of internets, social medias etc. etc. seasons like 1988 or 1992 would mean death to the sport since people would just lose interest and do something else.

[schmenke]

NASCAR ? BTCC ? :andrea:

True, and IRL. All of which are largely spec series, not constructors (as much as NASCAR likes to believe they are).

Formula One has now surpassed these series in the blatant gimmicks, including manipulating tire compounds, imposed on the sport in order to achieve a good show.

[zako85]

I too don't like the idea of flawless tires allowing fast cars to run away. This is dull racing. I'd rather see the fast cars drop into mid-pack after changing tires every once in a while and then row their way through slower cars. It's fair enough when you have well established teams with $200 million budget pitted against smaller shops with budget that's a quarter of that.

I would disagree with the notion of being able to make "the tires work". It's the whole car that matters. Some cars shine on one track and do not so well on another. Suspension setup also plays a role. Ferrari and Sauber had fine cars (and drivers) to win a wet race in Malaysia, and that's what got them podium finishes. In my view, the race in China was actually somewhat predictable. From qualification performance, it's clear that McLaren and Mercedes are some of the fastest cars this year. What's surprising is that Mercedes had scored only 1 point in the first two races.

[wedge]

F1 is a constructors' series.

Most people care about the WDC. Who cares about technology that takes skill away from the driver? Senna certainly didn't.


Indeed, technological innovation, once a hallmark or Formula 1 designers, has over the last few years slowly been suppressed to alleviate the risk of supremacy by a team.

And Osama Bin Laden is hiding in a cave in Waziristan.

EBDs, DDDs, even a proposal for full on grounds effects have been banned/rejected because fears of an arms race gettting out of hand; the RRA and calls for budget cap shows its all to do with money and resources.


I say, if you want to make tire usage a lottery, then at least allow teams the option of refueling, thus setting up the race as they see fit.
I'm tired of "fuel saving mode"

They aggressively fuel the cars. Fuel is ballast. Refuelling gave us pit passing. Who wants that again? Gimmicky tyres is therefore the lesser evil.

[Ranger]

Most people care about the WDC. Who cares about technology that takes skill away from the driver? Senna certainly didn't.

Well I know he definitely wasn't a fan of them in 1992...

But I never read a quote of him criticizing the level of race-car technology whilst he drove the best car on the grid from 1988-1991.

[wedge]

Well I know he definitely wasn't a fan of them in 1992...

But I never read a quote of him criticizing the level of race-car technology whilst he drove the best car on the grid from 1988-1991.

Senna wrote a letter to the FIA saying he didn't like driver aids or to that effect - or you could argue that Senna was foreseeing/knew it was an arms race that McLaren would lose.

Fans and commentators say Senna's best drive was the 1993 European GP but Senna admitted it would be his first win in Portugal in 1985 because he had no TC.

[ioan]

I agree with schmenke. this is not motorsport anymore. It has become a Sunday show for the uneducated consumerism driven masses where luck is the most important factor.

Only a few years ago people were complaining about tires being the deciding factor of the race. Now the same people say it's great.

Then again there are people around here considering DRS overtake as being great racing!

It would be cheaper to just draw the drive names from a hat to decide the winner of the championship.

[schmenke]

Most people care about the WDC. ....

Then why award points for the Constructor's championship. Why is there a Constructor’s championship at all. If no one cares, then why not make it a spec series with the same chassis for all teams? Let’s make it easier for everyone... Let’s scrap the series altogether and watch IRL :up: .


...And Osama Bin Laden is hiding in a cave in Waziristan...

Is he? I didn’t know. Interesting, as I see him on the news just about every night. Thanks for the update :up: . Anyways, I don’t understand what this has to do with this thread?

[ArrowsFA1]

Formula 1 has never been about just driving as fast as you can flat out all the time.
True. It's always been about managing the car, tyres, engine, conditions etc etc better than anyone else in order to reach the chequered first.

Pirelli have done exactly what they were asked to do, and the tyres remain just one element in the whole package.

[ioan]

Then why award points for the Constructor's championship. Why is there a Constructor’s championship at all.

Because teams are in it for themselves not for the drivers unlike some fans like to believe.

Anyway as a spec championship and a dumb one on top of it it fails to provide attraction to most of the manufacturers, to the point where we now have only 4 engine providers with Cosworth set to leave too.

[ioan]

NASCAR ? BTCC ? :andrea:

Yep, that's about the, low, level that f1 has managed to reach, and you'll see it go down some more!

[schmenke]

Yep, that's about the, low, level that f1 has managed to reach, and you'll see it go down some more!

That’s sort of what I fear. That Formula One, in its effort to spice up the show, will eventually be consigned to a contrived championship, where the competition is dictated more by imposed technical and sporting regulation restrictions rather than constructors’ innovation and originality.
Time and again technological innovation, which is what largely sets F1 apart from other series, has been suppressed by the FIA in order to level the playing field. What’s the point of having a constructors’ series if the teams are forced to restrain from ingenuity, resulting in all cars essentially the same?

Restricting ingenuity and design freedom, coupled with enforced sporting gimmicks may “spice up the show” for the casual fan, but it certainly contradicts the original spirit of the sport, at least in my humble opinion.

[steveaki13]

Well I know he definitely wasn't a fan of them in 1992...

But I never read a quote of him criticizing the level of race-car technology whilst he drove the best car on the grid from 1988-1991.


I wonder if he would have been a fan if he had been driving that all conquering Williams.


I agree with schmenke. this is not motorsport anymore. It has become a Sunday show for the uneducated consumerism driven masses where luck is the most important factor.

Only a few years ago people were complaining about tires being the deciding factor of the race. Now the same people say it's great.

Then again there are people around here considering DRS overtake as being great racing!

It would be cheaper to just draw the drive names from a hat to decide the winner of the championship.

Have to say I am in the corner of opnion with Ioan and Schmenke.

Although I enjoyed the race Sunday and I did, the level of driving while battling so closley was amazing.

However I am just left cold by F1 slightly more than how I remember feeling in the late 90s and early 2000s.

I don't think this is as much about the tyres as I like a varying tyre compounds. I have said before though I would get rid of tyre regs and let teams uses which ever compounds they wish.

But it is more about the DRS & to a lesser extend KERS. When I see a car get up behind a competetor and no theres only one outcome I feel flat. Some people I have spoken too say that it can work the opposite way next lap, but if a Sauber is battling to to hold off a Mclaren, once the Mclaren is given its helping hand past, the Sauber will never be able to stay close enough to use DRS next lap.

One of the most exciting things in past F1 is a driver in a slower car being able to battle and hold off a faster one, and today this is less likely.


That’s sort of what I fear. That Formula One, in its effort to spice up the show, will eventually be consigned to a contrived championship, where the competition is dictated more by imposed technical and sporting regulation restrictions rather than constructors’ innovation and originality.
Time and again technological innovation, which is what largely sets F1 apart from other series, has been suppressed by the FIA in order to level the playing field. What’s the point of having a constructors’ series if the teams are forced to restrain from ingenuity, resulting in all cars essentially the same?

Restricting ingenuity and design freedom, coupled with enforced sporting gimmicks may “spice up the show” for the casual fan, but it certainly contradicts the original spirit of the sport, at least in my humble opinion.

Agree

[ioan]

They could look at how the ACO did manage to bring in top manufacturer with different technology, all that is needed is to stop turning the, once upon a time, sport into a freaking cheap show.
C'mon there is enough dancing stars, and whatnot out there for the dumb to watch, real motorsport is what is hard to find and what they should all push for and what the knowledgeable fans want.

Anyway it looks like with the upcoming bahrain GP I will give up losing my time every other Sunday with this 'yet another anonymous show' so I'll let Bernie kill it before he retires.

[ioan]

One of the most exciting things in past F1 is a driver in a slower car being able to battle and hold off a faster one, and today this is less likely.

I'll call it impossible.

But then again who cares about drivers in slower cars?! certainly not the Joe's who watch F1 to see Hamilton, Button, Alonso or Vettel win.

[airshifter]

Having now watched F1 for decades, I think the racing today is every bit as technical and the drivers every bit as skilled as in years gone by. I really feel sorry for those thinking it's all just the luck of the draw.... I guess those same people assume that certain cars and drivers are simply lucky much more than others.

Since not long since it began, F1 has been subject to a variety of technical changes, and for the most part aimed at keeping speeds down to somewhat sane levels. The number of drivers being killed on a regular basis simply wasn't accepted, and shouldn't have every been. Every new challenge tests the teams and designers, and in time they claw back everything they lost, and often some more. At some point the FIA has to step in and adopt rules to once again slow things back down.

Don't like DRS? Don't watch F1, it's that simple. I've now seen a great number of races where it provided very little advantage, and overall now it is a factor of setting up the car, not a sure thing. I thought it was just as boring or worse when the cars could easily hold up another car that was several seconds faster.

Don't like the tires? Don't watch F1, it's that simple. Much as with DRS the tire wars in the past produced some obvious favoritism to some teams at times. There were also instances of changing tire rules when nobody was using any illegal tires, in theory to even the field and get rid of advantage.

Just as with the changes in getting rid of refueling, the spec tires have evened the field and caused a huge change in the overall package of the car. We have seen sub 3 second pit stops as a result, and with everyone having the same tire choices there are many more strategy options. In the past we had qually engines, and race grenades as well. Was there not luck involved when several of the front runners grenaded engines and a lesser car finished on the podium?

When we see a sub standard car with a crappy driver win races on a regular basis, I will think the sport has been degraded to pure luck. Until then, I see it as a more challenging sport than it has been in quite some time. And despite the obvious insults from Ioan claiming those of us who still like the sport are the uneducated consumer driven masses, I'll just assume they can't understand that the sport from the very early days has been in a constant state of change. Some can't accept change, and will remain unhappy unhappy until they find something else to do with their time.

I'm hoping they find that something soon, as I've heard more whining here than you can usually hear at a day care center. ;)

[F1boat]

I like the DRS and the Pirelli tyres. They make the races interesting and unpredictable. Some people compare F1 to the BTCC as it is a bad thing. Well, F1 is top, but comparison to the BTCC is flattering - it is a highly entertaining series. Some people say that F1 has become too much of a show. You know people, F1 exists because of the fans. Because of the people who turn it on instead watching a movie or going outside for a walk. So it is nice that F1 is trying to please the fans, to please the majority of us, who like unpredictable and close racing. Ioan, who is always against the sport since Massa faded, gives is an example with ACO. So what ACO did. What's the pleasure in watching the WEC when you know that Audi's gonna win all the time. Where's the fun in that? It's a pure sport, you say. For who? For you and for how many people? F1 is the pinnacle of motorsport for your average Joe and it's him who made the sport what it is. Not the so called purists who are against everything new, since I care to remember. So I'm tired of F1 bashing. F1 is exciting and it's fun and that's the most important thing. Because remember, it's not competing with the WEC it is a hundred times more popular. It is competing with soccer and the major movies in cinemas and DVD.
And it is doing a fine job.

[EuroTroll]

I have to say I've really enjoyed the F1 season so far. I've enjoyed it more than any other season after Senna died. The sporting regulations are currently good, I think. The drivers face an interesting challenge with the tyres. And I have no problem with DRS, for reasons which I explained some time ago.

I guess I am an uneducated mass. :)

[AndyL]

Although I enjoyed the race Sunday and I did, the level of driving while battling so closley was amazing.

However I am just left cold by F1 slightly more than how I remember feeling in the late 90s and early 2000s.

I don't think this is as much about the tyres as I like a varying tyre compounds. I have said before though I would get rid of tyre regs and let teams uses which ever compounds they wish.

Personally I felt colder about it in past decades when if you had the wrong tyre supplier your chances were slim.



But it is more about the DRS & to a lesser extend KERS. When I see a car get up behind a competetor and no theres only one outcome I feel flat. Some people I have spoken too say that it can work the opposite way next lap, but if a Sauber is battling to to hold off a Mclaren, once the Mclaren is given its helping hand past, the Sauber will never be able to stay close enough to use DRS next lap.

One of the most exciting things in past F1 is a driver in a slower car being able to battle and hold off a faster one, and today this is less likely.


But still not impossible, at least when they get the DRS zones right. We've often seen faster cars stuck behind slower ones for many laps so it is still possible to defend, and a DRS pass is not a foregone conclusion. The Red Bulls and McLarens were held up by Raikkonen in China until his tyres were completely shot. What has changed is that your pace needs to be much closer to your opponent's in order to defend successfully. It's no longer possible to indefinitely block a car that's 2 seconds a lap faster. I'm not so sure that's a bad thing.

I don't like the philosophy of DRS and I'd rather they tackled the root of the problem - i.e. chop the wings off. But that's not happening any time soon. DRS may be a sticking-plaster solution but I'd rather see that than the open wound underneath it.

[ioan]

Ioan, who is always against the sport since Massa faded, gives is an example with ACO. So what ACO did. What's the pleasure in watching the WEC when you know that Audi's gonna win all the time. Where's the fun in that?

You obviously complete missed the point if you think that me watching F1 had/has anything to do with Massa or any other driver.
Then again it's funny to see who reacts vehemently with personal attacks to my comments where I didn't name any forum members. :D

[airshifter]

You obviously complete missed the point if you think that me watching F1 had/has anything to do with Massa or any other driver.
Then again it's funny to see who reacts vehemently with personal attacks to my comments where I didn't name any forum members. :D

Do you really claim to not understand that an insult directed at a large number of people remains an insult? You know full well many members here have no problems with the changes to the sport, yet you label them/us as "uneducated consumerism driven masses".

I named you by name, but made no such insults. I simply stated that I assumed you didn't care for the changes, even though they have gone on for many years. Quit playing victim after insulting people, and accept the fact that we don't all agree that change is bad. If you think there was any attack please report the post and see what an unbiased outside opinion thinks of who attacked who. You might also take note of the fact that several people support your view and were not named by name in my post. That's because they gave their opinions and discussed it like adults rather than sling insults at everyone who doesn't agree with them.

[TheFamousEccles]

Personally I felt colder about it in past decades when if you had the wrong tyre supplier your chances were slim.

But still not impossible, at least when they get the DRS zones right. We've often seen faster cars stuck behind slower ones for many laps so it is still possible to defend, and a DRS pass is not a foregone conclusion. The Red Bulls and McLarens were held up by Raikkonen in China until his tyres were completely shot. What has changed is that your pace needs to be much closer to your opponent's in order to defend successfully. It's no longer possible to indefinitely block a car that's 2 seconds a lap faster. I'm not so sure that's a bad thing.

I don't like the philosophy of DRS and I'd rather they tackled the root of the problem - i.e. chop the wings off. But that's not happening any time soon. DRS may be a sticking-plaster solution but I'd rather see that than the open wound underneath it.

(my emphasis) Three points that sum my view neatly. If F1 is going to move on and stay relevant, 1/ a single, reliable tyre supplier is essential - going back to the bad old days of some teams favoured with good tyres and others not so would be retrograde (I dont doubt that there is favouritism going on now with even a single supplier - it's happening in MotoGP, and they almost always slavishly copy what F1 is up to, but at least it's not like the bad old days). 2/ The DRS seems to be here to stay, but the zones need to be sorted by someone who knows what racing is about, not a TV producer. Make DRS open slather and then stand well clear. 3/ Aero is where the greatest expense is mostly found (as you all know), so increasing reliance on mechanical grip and reducing aero grip would make for greater innovation and better racing.

Of course, neither of the last two points will happen any time soon, but - dare to dream...

[SGWilko]

(my emphasis) 3/ Aero is where the greatest expense is mostly found (as you all know), so increasing reliance on mechanical grip and reducing aero grip would make for greater innovation and better racing.



Problem here is that, although you can ban wings/make them benign, the designers will ultimately spend on the chassis, and how this can create more downforce. You cannot unlearn stuff!

[F1boat]

You obviously complete missed the point if you think that me watching F1 had/has anything to do with Massa or any other driver.
Then again it's funny to see who reacts vehemently with personal attacks to my comments where I didn't name any forum members. :D

And I name you. You despise F1. Why post here?
If this post is against the rules, I apologize to the forum moderators.

[Dave B]

Personally I felt colder about it in past decades when if you had the wrong tyre supplier your chances were slim.
This. It was a ludicrous situation when the teams would turn up to what had been declared a "Bridgestone track" and if you happened to be signed up to their rivals you had very little chance of victory. Imagine now if those with Brembo brakes or Elf oil were handed an advantage, that would be stupid.

[F1boat]

This. It was a ludicrous situation when the teams would turn up to what had been declared a "Bridgestone track" and if you happened to be signed up to their rivals you had very little chance of victory. Imagine now if those with Brembo brakes or Elf oil were handed an advantage, that would be stupid.
You are right. Ferrari suffered from this in 2005. Michelin had enormous advantage and Ferrari, as a team which ran on Bridgestone, suffered. Although Bridgestone made the 1997 Hungarian GP exciting, when Hill almost won.

[SGWilko]

You are right. Ferrari suffered from this in 2005. Michelin had enormous advantage and Ferrari, as a team which ran on Bridgestone, suffered. Although Bridgestone made the 1997 Hungarian GP exciting, when Hill almost won.

Ferrari had made their bed vis a vis Bridgestone and 2005 was them having to sleep in it. How Ferrari managed to beat the opposition at Indy that year is amazing......

[F1boat]

It's always Ferrari's fault for some fans, I guess...

[ioan]

Do you really claim to not understand that an insult directed at a large number of people remains an insult? You know full well many members here have no problems with the changes to the sport, yet you label them/us as "uneducated consumerism driven masses".

I named you by name, but made no such insults. I simply stated that I assumed you didn't care for the changes, even though they have gone on for many years. Quit playing victim after insulting people, and accept the fact that we don't all agree that change is bad. If you think there was any attack please report the post and see what an unbiased outside opinion thinks of who attacked who. You might also take note of the fact that several people support your view and were not named by name in my post. That's because they gave their opinions and discussed it like adults rather than sling insults at everyone who doesn't agree with them.

Another one who confesses to consumerism. Thanks.

[ioan]

And I name you. You despise F1. Why post here?
If this post is against the rules, I apologize to the forum moderators.

Again you missed the whole point and are making it a personal fight.

[airshifter]

Another one who confesses to consumerism. Thanks.

You seem to enjoy stating things never stated by myself. If I "confessed" to consumerism, quote it. If you want to make up things and claim the superior stance, you'll find that the uneducated masses aren't nearly that easily fooled.

Let me make clear to you and anyone fooled by your claims, that you have no idea of my education, my likes or dislikes for the Formula 1 technical regs, and certainly not my stance on consumerism as it relates to any form of motor racing. Don't put words in my mouth as you certainly don't speak for me.

I use a very simple way of communicating with others. I actually listen and if they clarify their stance I accept that as their true intent. It's a very simple concept, you should try it some time. If they claim they never made such a statement, I quote it. Do you need me to quote your insults or would you rather pretend that they weren't insults?

[SGWilko]

It's always Ferrari's fault for some fans, I guess...

Can't blame them for monopolising what was, one year, the tyre manufacturer with the best tyres. However, this alienated the other 'Stones teams who defected to Michelin. It was inevitable that when Bibendum got it right, the only strong Bridgestone team would struggle......

I certainly would not lay the blame on British Telecom.........

[F1boat]

I certainly would not lay the blame on British Telecom.........

Haha, you made me smile, dear Sir :) Love the British sense of humour. :)

[F1boat]

Again you missed the whole point and are making it a personal fight.

No, not a personal fight. I defend my favorite sport and wonder what a hater of it is doing in this forum. ;)

[SGWilko]

Haha, you made me smile, dear Sir :) Love the British sense of humour. :)

Our sense of humour is about the only good thing going for us these days!!! :p

[F1boat]

Our sense of humour is about the only good thing going for us these days!!! :p

McLaren are doing fine ;)

[steveaki13]

People saying if you don't like DRS or whatever then don't watch F1 is really not helpful.

We are here to discuss our views on the tyres, DRS or whatever but we each have a valid opinion of what F1 should be.

Well I have followed F1 since I can remember really, early 90s, and just like some people didn't like active suspension, Turbos, re fuelling, no re fuelling. I happen to not like the way F1 has gone on DRS.

I like the tyres and disagree with Ioan on this, but that is our individual point of view which we are entitled too.

However we agree on DRS and both feel this is not the way F1 should be going. There are many other ways F1 could address the cars aero situation to enable cars to follow one an other more closely without making it unfair on one of the cars.

My point is that just because we don't like the way F1 is going with DRS while maybe 95% of you do like it, both sides of the arguement are valid, so to say we should just not watch the sport we have followed for years, is not really fair.

Things come and go in F1 and I am sure in 5 years DRS may have gone (it may not have of course), things roll around in F1, I just feel I will enjoy the racing more when DRS disappears.

F1 is for all, its easy to say it needs the fans who watch 5-10 races a year and want excitement, but it also needs the hardcore fans that watch every weekend and fill the grand stands with hard earned money. This point is nothing to do with DRS, just the wider point of F1 going Bernie's route. including DRS,tyres, losing classic venues and poor political decisions, all of which could harm F1's core following.

All in all I can see both sides of the DRS and Pirelli situation and know which side of the fence I sit on.

[F1boat]

aki13, not all hardcore fans are against the changes. I follow F1 since 1992, and am a big fan since 1996. And I love the DRS and the new tyres. You can't say - only the casual fans like this and the hardcore are against it. I think that the purist are against it - and sorry, but I think that they are against everything new. However, I am curious about those FIA surveys. What's the public opinion about the changes?

[steveaki13]

aki13, not all hardcore fans are against the changes. I follow F1 since 1992, and am a big fan since 1996. And I love the DRS and the new tyres. You can't say - only the casual fans like this and the hardcore are against it. I think that the purist are against it - and sorry, but I think that they are against everything new. However, I am curious about those FIA surveys. What's the public opinion about the changes?

No you are right F1 Boat I didn't write it very well.

I said earlier in post 5% might not like DRS and 95% probably do. I understand that I am in a minority.

I also did not mean to suggest that only those who dislike DRS are hardcore fans.

I was meaning to say at that point that maybe F1 is losing hardcore fans for other reasons. Some like my 5% for DRS. Some for Pirelli tyres, some maybe becuase of the politicial situations F1 finds itself in, or just the loss of some classic F1 venues.

I didn't mean to refer just to DRS at that point.

Sorry for misunderstanding.

[Dave B]

With DRS I think it's important to remember that for much of 2011 it was a work in progress, and certainly some of the zones were far too long resulting in passes being too easy. I believe that the zone should be just long enough to negate the effect of running in dirty air, and set up the possibility of a pass at the end of a straight - it should still be down to the skill of the driver to make the move stick. Long zones where one car simply breezes past a rival halfway down the straight have no place in the sport, but thankfully the FIA seem to be learning as they go.

[Garry Walker]

When races are decided based on who can save tyres better and not on who is the fastest guy on track, then you know you have a problem.

[Dave B]

When races are decided based on who can save tyres better and not on who is the fastest guy on track, then you know you have a problem.
There's always been a lot more to F1 than simply who can drive the fastest, you know that.

[ioan]

When races are decided based on who can save tyres better and not on who is the fastest guy on track, then you know you have a problem.

Fully agree.
The day when there is more tire saving in F1 than there is in the Le Mans 24 hours race you can safely say that F1 has lost their identity. Pinnacle of motorsport my arse.

[Garry Walker]

There's always been a lot more to F1 than simply who can drive the fastest, you know that.

Yes, but it is ridicolous now. Rosberg said that he didn't go flat out last race for any lap, because otherwise he would have screwed his tyres at once. Is that normal, do you want to see such races or do you want to see the fastest guy win?

[jens]

Is that normal, do you want to see such races or do you want to see the fastest guy win?

It depends on semantics, but even in current situation fastest combination (team+car+driver) wins. :) Last I checked, stopwatch still registers the winner based on who has gone quickest. But we can say saving is part of going as fast as possible now.

[ioan]

It depends on semantics, but even in current situation fastest combination (team+car+driver) wins. :) Last I checked, stopwatch still registers the winner based on who has gone quickest. But we can say saving is part of going as fast as possible now.

Going as fast as allowed by the crap tires, that's what you see, not going as fast as possible for cars and drivers.

[Garry Walker]

Fully agree.
The day when there is more tire saving in F1 than there is in the Le Mans 24 hours race you can safely say that F1 has lost their identity. Pinnacle of motorsport my arse.


Going as fast as allowed by the crap tires, that's what you see, not going as fast as possible for cars and drivers.

Exactly.

[wedge]

Going as fast as allowed by the crap tires, that's what you see, not going as fast as possible for cars and drivers.

Pre-Pirelli's comeback, how often were the drivers told to turn down the car in the final stint?

[Dave B]

His decision-making was sublime, knowing just when to pounce and possessing the skills to do so, and he never relied on sheer pace but always drove at the slowest speed necessary to win.

Who is that quote referring to? Juan Manuel Fangio (http://en.espnf1.com/alfaromeo/motorsport/driver/456.html). T'was ever thus...

[ioan]

Pre-Pirelli's comeback, how often were the drivers told to turn down the car in the final stint?

Not as often as we see drivers unable to push nowadays, and they only did it when they were winning it by a serious margin.
You're failing to see the difference between a teams own decision and crap imposed by the show makers, but then again I'm not surprised.

[airshifter]

My point is that just because we don't like the way F1 is going with DRS while maybe 95% of you do like it, both sides of the arguement are valid, so to say we should just not watch the sport we have followed for years, is not really fair.



And that is a valid point. Personally I don't care if only 1% likes or dislikes something, they have every right to that opinion and to state that opinion.

As I said in the previous post, I take exception to that when that percentage (regardless of what that number is) resorts to insulting everyone that does not have the same point of view. When they combine that with constantly stating that the sport is boring to watch are they prefer sport X, then I'll gladly encourage them to quit watching F1 and watch sport X instead.

Just like many if not most fans of F1, there are changes I have liked and changes I have disliked. But if I was to the point that I was disgusted with the sport, I wouldn't be tuning in, nor would I be posting here on the forum crying about the decay of the sport and insulting people. I'd just move on and be done with it.


So please, take no offense to anything I've said unless it applies to you. On this thread I've only seen one person it applies to and it's not you or the majority of other forum members that dislike DRS. We all like the sport for different reasons and most here can express those reasons and likes/dislikes without dragging the forum down to the level of childish insults.

[jens]

Good thoughts airshifter. I think in the end it comes down to adaptability in life. Adaptability is something that is often related to drivers, when it comes to performing through different regulations, but it also applies to F1 fans. It is down to the drivers/teams to adapt to all kinds of issues (currently fragile tyres) and it is also down to the fans to widen their enjoyment window and find different aspects to follow, if situations in competition change.

A page or so ago there was a short discussion whether people are part of an "uneducated mass". But in the end it doesn't matter. We are all human beings and need to find things to enjoy in life, whatever they are. It doesn't prevent us from discussing, what can be done to improve F1 from the fan's point of view, but it is not the matter of life and we can do only so much. :)

[Garry Walker]

Who is that quote referring to? Juan Manuel Fangio (http://en.espnf1.com/alfaromeo/motorsport/driver/456.html). T'was ever thus...

What an awful awful comparison.


Pre-Pirelli's comeback, how often were the drivers told to turn down the car in the final stint?

Good comparison. These days they are told to save tyres from the first lap on.

[Garry Walker]

Good thoughts airshifter. I think in the end it comes down to adaptability in life. Adaptability is something that is often related to drivers, when it comes to performing through different regulations, but it also applies to F1 fans. It is down to the drivers/teams to adapt to all kinds of issues (currently fragile tyres) and it is also down to the fans to widen their enjoyment window and find different aspects to follow, if situations in competition change.


F1 should be about the highest quality in the world in racing. These days they are driving on monkey tyres, which sometimes are dead after 4-5 laps of pushing. That is not quality, that is artificial crap more suitable to WWF than F1.

I so miss the tyre wars between Michelin and Bridgestone.

[F1boat]

No you are right F1 Boat I didn't write it very well.

I said earlier in post 5% might not like DRS and 95% probably do. I understand that I am in a minority.

I also did not mean to suggest that only those who dislike DRS are hardcore fans.

I was meaning to say at that point that maybe F1 is losing hardcore fans for other reasons. Some like my 5% for DRS. Some for Pirelli tyres, some maybe becuase of the politicial situations F1 finds itself in, or just the loss of some classic F1 venues.

I didn't mean to refer just to DRS at that point.

Sorry for misunderstanding.

Now I not only understand you, but I agree with you. While I love the DRS and the new Pirelli tyres, the loss of classic venues makes me very sad.

[Dave B]

What an awful awful comparison.
What's your actual argument?

You know that in Fangio's day the reliability was so awful that you had to drive smart, not just fast. No good disappearing off into the distance only to have the car fall apart halfway through the race.

Even in the 80s and 90s when I really got into F1 the drivers still had to look after their cars and show sympathy to their machines. Tyres punctured and delaminated, engines blew, suspension components failed, parts overheated. Nursing a car throughout a whole race has always been part and parcel of the sport and is a hugely important part of a driver's skillset.

[F1boat]

What's your actual argument?

You know that in Fangio's day the reliability was so awful that you had to drive smart, not just fast. No good disappearing off into the distance only to have the car fall apart halfway through the race.

Even in the 80s and 90s when I really got into F1 the drivers still had to look after their cars and show sympathy to their machines. Tyres punctured and delaminated, engines blew, suspension components failed, parts overheated. Nursing a car throughout a whole race has always been part and parcel of the sport and is a hugely important part of a driver's skillset.
Well said :)

[EuroTroll]

Schumacher thinks Pirelli have (http://www.planetf1.com/driver/12433/7693748/Fuming-Schumi-slams-Pirelli) gone too far... A strong argument for the anti-Pirelli camp, I must say.

[A FONDO]

Schumacher thinks Pirelli have (http://www.planetf1.com/driver/12433/7693748/Fuming-Schumi-slams-Pirelli) gone too far... A strong argument for the anti-Pirelli camp, I must say.

He is just nostalgic for the old times without rules when he was dominant.

[The Black Knight]

Schumacher thinks Pirelli have (http://www.planetf1.com/driver/12433/7693748/Fuming-Schumi-slams-Pirelli) gone too far... A strong argument for the anti-Pirelli camp, I must say.

Not a strong argument at all. The Pirellis are a joke. Today was a prime example of the sort of ****e they are providing the drivers to drive with.

[airshifter]

Not a strong argument at all. The Pirellis are a joke. Today was a prime example of the sort of ****e they are providing the drivers to drive with.

The flip side to that point of view is that todays tires show that we have many crap drivers unable to adapt to changes. ;)

[A FONDO]

I have been thinking about Kimi's attack over Vettel. He had been pushing like mad for several laps and when caught him, he missed the chance and had to surrender because the tyres were completely finished for another try. Conclusion? Use the maximum of the opportunity when you got it, or you lose, simple as that! No room for mistakes and retries!

[ioan]

I have been thinking about Kimi's attack over Vettel. He had been pushing like mad for several laps and when caught him, he missed the chance and had to surrender because the tyres were completely finished for another try. Conclusion? Use the maximum of the opportunity when you got it, or you lose, simple as that! No room for mistakes and retries!

Wrong conclusion.
The right conclusion is that crap tires only give you crap show (can't call it racing).
I don't care if it's Pirelli who can't produce a serious tire or if Bernie wants them to drive on chewing gum, this is not racing it's crap.
Glad I am not watching it anymore, however last season and the first 3 races this season were enough of a joke.
Watched FIA GT1 yesterday and today and they did race for 2x1 hour going full chat all the time overtaking, defending and trying to overtake lap after lap. That's what I call racing.

The problem with F1 has been aero related since the end of the 90's yet they addressed and changed everything but the real issue they have. Bunch of morons are in charge of what was ones real motorsport.

[denkimi]

why do they still keep the "2 compound" rule anyway? there's no need to force drivers to use even worse tyres if the "good" tyres only last 15 laps.

[wedge]

Watched FIA GT1 yesterday and today and they did race for 2x1 hour going full chat all the time overtaking, defending and trying to overtake lap after lap. That's what I call racing.

They run success ballast. I'm not a huge fan of such systems. Its artificial and more of a gimmick than joke tyres. Apart from Spa 24hrs all the races are series of 1hr races and a mandated pit windows.

ALMS races has varying race lengths and the shorter made-for-TV Grand Prix style lengths doesn't resort to gimmicks that I know of.


Schumacher thinks Pirelli have (http://www.planetf1.com/driver/12433/7693748/Fuming-Schumi-slams-Pirelli) gone too far... A strong argument for the anti-Pirelli camp, I must say.

The racing certainly left me cold and Pirelli said they were looking at 3-stopper max for races.

For sure having someone Schumi speaking out is like facing a mirror but I'm prepared to give Pirelli some benefit of doubt. Pirelli probably getting a bit cocky and should have brought medium and hard compounds which they took to Malaysia which has similar hot temperature.

The tyres need a bigger operating window.

[dj_bytedisaster]

The tires were a complete and utter joke in this race. The first drivers came in after lap 8, for crying out loud and that was with a track temperature being 10° less than in qualifying. Thanks Mike for having the cojones to say what all others thought but were too chicken to admit. Just ask McLaren. I don't think they're too avid Pirelli fans right now. Even without HAM's, botched pit stops they were going backwards because the tires did everything except what they were supposed to do.

[Dave B]

Schumacher thinks Pirelli have (http://www.planetf1.com/driver/12433/7693748/Fuming-Schumi-slams-Pirelli) gone too far... A strong argument for the anti-Pirelli camp, I must say.
I don't remember him complaining when this Ferrari's Bridgestones were dominating.

And didn't his own team mate just win a race that many expected to be heavy on Merc's tyres? They can't be that bad...

[ArrowsFA1]

Before yesterdays race Kimi was saying (http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/99072) that after the Chinese GP his team understood the tyres more and would apply what they'd learned in the GP. They certainly did that very effectively. No complaints about the tyres.

[SGWilko]

4 different drivers taking a win in the first 4 races - each driving for a different manufacturer. Close racing with lots of hard fought-for overtakes. Different strategies working for different teams playing to the strengths of each car.

A close championship battle that has thus far seen three of the 6 world championship winning drivers on the grid take a win.

Now, I arks you, is this a dull season?

Nope, I don't think they have gone too far at all.

[Knock-on]

It's funny that Drivers that aren't performing are moaning...... non?

[The Black Knight]

4 different drivers taking a win in the first 4 races - each driving for a different manufacturer. Close racing with lots of hard fought-for overtakes. Different strategies working for different teams playing to the strengths of each car.

A close championship battle that has thus far seen three of the 6 world championship winning drivers on the grid take a win.

Now, I arks you, is this a dull season?

Nope, I don't think they have gone too far at all.

I love close racing, natural close racing. I don't have an issue with that. What I do have an issue with is drivers being unable to push to their limit and having to gingerly nurse their tyres for fear that they'll lose grid positions and then after doing that they might still fall off the cliff ala Kimi last week.

It's an absolute absurd situation to be in and it's making the driving more mundane than it normally would be and the races are a lottery based on what team just happens to pick the correct set up. 4 different team wins in 4 different races, that isn't just because everyone is so close, it's because nobody knows how to treat the tyres. This is why it's a lottery, nobody knows what's coming next with these tyres. I long for Bridgestone to reenter the sport.

[dj_bytedisaster]

I don't remember him complaining when this Ferrari's Bridgestones were dominating.

And didn't his own team mate just win a race that many expected to be heavy on Merc's tyres? They can't be that bad...

I think you are comparing apples to oranges here. He didn't complain about the tires per se, he complained that Pirelli overshot the target in trying to make races interesting. Fact of the matter is that they were all on an economy run, conserving tires. And I think he has a point. His words (in a German interview) were:

"I don't think it should be like it was today. You're dawdling around corners at 60% or 70%. If you try harder the tires will blow off the rims."

While Schumacher was the most vocal of the critics, several other drivers agreed with the sentiment. The tires also robbed us out of a battle for the lead. Kimmi said in the post-race that he tried once to outbreak Vettel and after that his tires were shot. So, anyone who's annoyed that Vettel ran away with it again should send a big fat "Thanks for nothing"-letter to Pirelli.

BTW: The Bridgestones were the opposite extreme. They were too durable.

[ArrowsFA1]

...the races are a lottery based on what team just happens to pick the correct set up...
I disagree. I think Renault (sorry, Lotus!!) are just one example of a team applying lessons learned in one race and producing a result in the next. Teams don't just pick setups at random in the hope they'll work. They base them on extensive analysis. It's then the job of the team & drivers to maximise the potential result from that analysis.

Red Bull have, comparatively, been all at sea in the first few races, but on Sunday they got things spot on. That's not random guesswork, that's hard work.

The tyres are clearly affecting the racing, but they are just one element of a package that all the teams and drivers have to make work. Formula One has always been like this.

[F1boat]

4 different drivers taking a win in the first 4 races - each driving for a different manufacturer. Close racing with lots of hard fought-for overtakes. Different strategies working for different teams playing to the strengths of each car.

A close championship battle that has thus far seen three of the 6 world championship winning drivers on the grid take a win.

Now, I arks you, is this a dull season?

Nope, I don't think they have gone too far at all.

I agree with you. After all, from what I understand, driving F1 has become very difficult with this tires and no mistakes are allowed, as SlowSon pointed. Maybe Michael is a bit nostalgic, which again leads to the question should he retire at all. About the comparison in FIA GT1, made by ioan, that's another series in which the rules are made in a way to guarantee close racing and honestly I have nothing against it. I wouldn't want to go back to racing in which smart drivers, who are able to nurse their tires have no opportunity to do so and overtaking is practically impossible.

[The Black Knight]

I disagree. I think Renault (sorry, Lotus!!) are just one example of a team applying lessons learned in one race and producing a result in the next. Teams don't just pick setups at random in the hope they'll work. They base them on extensive analysis. It's then the job of the team & drivers to maximise the potential result from that analysis.

Red Bull have, comparatively, been all at sea in the first few races, but on Sunday they got things spot on. That's not random guesswork, that's hard work.

The tyres are clearly affecting the racing, but they are just one element of a package that all the teams and drivers have to make work. Formula One has always been like this.

McLaren have bee at sea yesterday but dominated in Australia, so that's the result of extensive analysis as well? Mercedes dominated in China but were nowhere this race. Is that the result of extensive analysis? We'll see where RBR are the next race or two. If they win them then I guess you'll be right but I wouldn't be counting on it.

[ArrowsFA1]

McLaren have bee at sea yesterday but dominated in Australia, so that's the result of extensive analysis as well? Mercedes dominated in China but were nowhere this race. Is that the result of extensive analysis? We'll see where RBR are the next race or two. If they win them then I guess you'll be right but I wouldn't be counting on it.
Nor would I :p

Clearly McLaren and Mercedes didn't hit the sweet spot in Bahrain, but isn't it a good thing that, unlike during Ferrari's period of domination or Red Bull's in the last couple of years, one team hasn't brought a dominant car to the first race and we watch and snooze as it keeps its dominance all year?

The tyres are the same for everyone and it is for the teams to find the key to getting the tyres working with their cars and drivers. Clearly they're capable of doing that as McLaren, Mercedes, Sauber, Red Bull and Lotus have shown at different times.

[F1boat]

Nor would I :p

Clearly McLaren and Mercedes didn't hit the sweet spot in Bahrain, but isn't it a good thing that, unlike during Ferrari's period of domination or Red Bull's in the last couple of years, one team hasn't brought a dominant car to the first race and we watch and snooze as it keeps its dominance all year?


I think that it is nice :) Like in the 2nd part of 2009 - there were, at one point, six different winners in six races.

[wedge]

I don't remember him complaining when this Ferrari's Bridgestones were dominating.

And didn't his own team mate just win a race that many expected to be heavy on Merc's tyres? They can't be that bad...

Neither did he complain when Bridgestone had the inferior tyres in 2005, nor the first half of 2006 when Ferrari initially struggled to optimize their car for B'stone's stiffer tyre construction - which they eventually sorted with front suspension modifications.

Its still very early in the cars' development cycle. If "80%" teams are still struggling in the summer then I would go into greater agreement there's something wrong with the tyres.

[jens]

I can understand people having preferences and not liking the tyres, but I can't agree with the "lottery" part. Last I saw, HRT or Marussia wasn't winning a race. And RBR and McLaren are still on top of the standings. Point is that tyres are what they are, but after all, laws of nature and physics apply to them too. Which means that they can be understood after extensive learning process. Sure it isn’t easy. And of course it is pure science, even challenging for the engineers. For example there is a significant difference in whether the weather during the race is 20C or 30C. And you need to setup the car accordingly based on conditions. So perhaps top-notch meteorologists are now in demand, who would predict the exact weather for the weekend. :p :

At the moment teams are in a learning process. This far they didn’t know much about tyres, hence the inconsistencies. But during the fly-away races they have been gathering a lot of data in different conditions. In cold (China), in hot (Bahrain), in wet (Malaysia) conditions. I fully expect teams to make conclusions from all these and actually become more consistent. But of course, if the field is tight and many teams are within one second, then it is not easy to be consistent anyway. :)

[ioan]

All the armchair experts know better than a 7 times WDC driving in F1 since 1990.
I wonder why you guys are still reduced to watch a TV show every 2nd week instead of winning F1 races on the track, though I am sure there is certainly a good reason for that. :laugh:

[BDunnell]

All the armchair experts know better than a 7 times WDC driving in F1 since 1990.
I wonder why you guys are still reduced to watch a TV show every 2nd week instead of winning F1 races on the track, though I am sure there is certainly a good reason for that. :laugh:

What did I say the other day about hoping you didn't make every contribution to the F1 forum — to which I thought you were no longer contributing after this weekend just gone — a moan about those who have continued to watch the sport. You have certainly started as I fully expected you to go on.

And Schumacher started in F1 in 1991, not 1990.

[djparky]

back in the 1980's drivers had to look after their tyres=- it was part of their job- drive flat out and risk an extra tyre stop- or manage them. An art lost during the pit stop era of F1 from the mid 90's onwards- where it was one sprint from pit stop to pit stop and tyre management didn't come into it. Whilst that might have been fascinating for the strategists and for the drivers themselves for those of watching on TV- you could watch the first 5 laps and go back 1 hour later and it would still be the same cars in the same places- boring doesn't begin to do it justice at times
Pirelli have done a brilliant job and exactly what they were asked to do- combined with DRS has made the last couple of years (even with Sebs dominance last year) more entertaining than any year since the grooved tyres came in. I have noticed that Schueys team mate seems to be doing well this year on the same tyres.......

[BDunnell]

Yep and over half way through the 1991 season so not even close.. :p

Still, let us not worry about such historical faux pas, for that must have been ioan's last post on the F1 forum, mustn't it?

[BDunnell]

I have noticed that Schueys team mate seems to be doing well this year on the same tyres.......

Exactly! As I have said before, you have to deal with the circumstances pertaining at the time, whatever they may be.

Here are some views of James Hunt's as to drivers claiming not to be adaptable: James Hunt swears during live BBC broadcast of 1989 Monaco Grand Prix - YouTube (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=khA67-r5lSQ)

[Garry Walker]

What's your actual argument?

You know that in Fangio's day the reliability was so awful that you had to drive smart, not just fast. No good disappearing off into the distance only to have the car fall apart halfway through the race.

Even in the 80s and 90s when I really got into F1 the drivers still had to look after their cars and show sympathy to their machines. Tyres punctured and delaminated, engines blew, suspension components failed, parts overheated. Nursing a car throughout a whole race has always been part and parcel of the sport and is a hugely important part of a driver's skillset.
But they could still push the max for a while, couldn't they? Rosberg said there was NO lap at China when he was flat out or otherwise he would have at once destroyed his tyres.

In fact, you mentioned Fangio. The greatest drive of his life wouldn't have happened with the tyres of today, because these days you can never go flat out, hell you even have to conserve your tyres in qualifying. This is not normal.


Schumacher thinks Pirelli have (http://www.planetf1.com/driver/12433/7693748/Fuming-Schumi-slams-Pirelli) gone too far... A strong argument for the anti-Pirelli camp, I must say. Finally someone says it. He is obviously right and finally had the balls to say it. These tyres are a complete joke and an embarrassment and the dumb fans who buy into this artificial nonsense are an even bigger embarrassment to the sport and human intelligence.


I don't remember him complaining when this Ferrari's Bridgestones were dominating.
Because, well, his tyres didn't give up after half a lap of pushing.


And didn't his own team mate just win a race that many expected to be heavy on Merc's tyres? They can't be that bad... Who even then said he never went flat out in that race, which is quite frankly nonsense. This is not Le Mans 256 hours, this is F1.

[Garry Walker]

Exactly! As I have said before, you have to deal with the circumstances pertaining at the time, whatever they may be.

Here are some views of James Hunt's as to drivers claiming not to be adaptable: James Hunt swears during live BBC broadcast of 1989 Monaco Grand Prix - YouTube (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=khA67-r5lSQ)

I am sure James Hunt would have something to say about the tyres we have these days, the words used in that video might just have been used by him too.

[BDunnell]

In fact, you mentioned Fangio. The greatest drive of his life wouldn't have happened with the tyres of today, because these days you can never go flat out, hell you even have to conserve your tyres in qualifying. This is not normal.

I don't really care too much about the tyres one way or the other — on balance I lean towards your view, because the tyres as they are at present don't give a driver a choice as to how they treat them, instead forcing everyone into tyre conservation mode whether they like it or not — but I think this is a bit of a non-argument given the number of ways in which the circumstances pertaining then are completely different from today.

[zako85]

I think high degradation results in too much artificial "drama" instead of racing. The number of tire changes per race is getting out of hand. No one should use a 3-stop strategy, even on a highly abrasive race track, unless using ONLY supersoft tires. In Bahrain we saw most drivers on 3-stop strategy, even with harder tires are added to the mix. This means that an average tire lasted what.. about 15 laps? Tires should be good enough to allow for 1 or 2-stop strategy to be successful on most tracks IMO.

[BDunnell]

I think high degradation results in too much artificial "drama" instead of racing.

All of this begs the question — is it now possible for F1 to see close racing without artificial inducements of one sort or another?

[Garry Walker]

All of this begs the question — is it now possible for F1 to see close racing without artificial inducements of one sort or another?

I hate dominance in F1, I hated it even when MS was winning. So seasons like 1992, 2002 and 2004 were sleepfests for me. But I would rather those than artificial racing with DRS and joke tyres.

[BDunnell]

I hate dominance in F1, I hated it even when MS was winning. So seasons like 1992, 2002 and 2004 were sleepfests for me. But I would rather those than artificial racing with DRS and joke tyres.

You see, I enjoy close competition in sport; without it, why watch? It is a shame that one of the sports I happen to favour, namely F1, is the only one that is forced — and I can absolutely see why it's been done — to take steps to improve the competition.

[denkimi]

back in the 1980's drivers had to look after their tyres=- it was part of their job- drive flat out and risk an extra tyre stop- or manage them. An art lost during the pit stop era of F1 from the mid 90's onwards- where it was one sprint from pit stop to pit stop and tyre management didn't come into it. Whilst that might have been fascinating for the strategists and for the drivers themselves for those of watching on TV- you could watch the first 5 laps and go back 1 hour later and it would still be the same cars in the same places- boring doesn't begin to do it justice at times

Pirelli have done a brilliant job and exactly what they were asked to do- combined with DRS has made the last couple of years (even with Sebs dominance last year) more entertaining than any year since the grooved tyres came in. I have noticed that Schueys team mate seems to be doing well this year on the same tyres.......
[/QUOTE]
the problem is not that drivers have to to care of their tyres, the problem is that they cannot go flat-out for 1 lap without ruining them.

tyres should last for about 5 to 10 laps flatout, depending on driving style, and then gradually degrade. that way drivers can choose to push or not, depending on what they want to achieve.

now they last for 15 laps when conserved, and half a lap when pushed. this means there is almost no more real overtaking, since you only get 1 or 2 chances for an attack before your tyres are ruined. if that happens, you are suddenly 2 to 5 seconds a lap slower, which makes it extremely easy for the people behind to overtake you (you become an hrt).

these tyres kill real racing, only to replace it by artificial overtaking. they force fast drivers to drive slow, which is the opposite of what racing is supposed to be about.


All of this begs the question — is it now possible for F1 to see close racing without artificial inducements of one sort or another?
I believe it is.
we need to get back to more mechanical grip instead of aerodynamic, thats the only solution.

[Tazio]

I like the competition this year, but it begs the question; how cost effective is it while teams are trying to crack the code? What F1 needs is consistency. I'm referring to the tire specs right now but there are other less glaring issues. How long will it be until they change the tire specs again? My guess is it will be next season. I say if this is the way F1 is going, then for christ sake stick with it for a while. Let teams build their cars with this formula for a few years, or ditch it altogether for more consistent skins.

[wedge]

Gary Anderson has a dig at Schumi's comments:


It was also interesting to hear Mercedes' Michael Schumacher complain about the Pirelli tyres.

He is a professional racing driver, and it's all about looking after your tyres. You do that by getting the right balance on the car.

When I was involved with Bridgestone tyres with Jordan in the early 2000s, in the middle of the tyre war with Michelin, Schumacher and Ferrari had tyres we were not even allowed to look at.

They cost so much money that Bridgestone could not afford to supply them to everyone. And whenever we did have an opportunity to run a derivative of those tyres, our lap times were much, much better.

It's a bit sad that Michael now sees things the other way around, because a lot of his competitiveness in those days was down to the working relationship he and Ferrari had with Bridgestone, one to which nobody else had access.

Now there's a standard tyre, it's down to him and Mercedes to get it working properly, not point the finger at the supplier.

BBC Sport - Bahrain GP 2012: Gary Anderson on Kimi Raikkonen's display (http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/formula1/17816565)

[i_max2k2]

Before yesterdays race Kimi was saying (http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/99072) that after the Chinese GP his team understood the tyres more and would apply what they'd learned in the GP. They certainly did that very effectively. No complaints about the tyres.

They understood the tires more because they had 4 new sets of tires, thats why he could push when no one else could, the cars were fairly similar in race pace.

[truefan72]

At the moment teams are in a learning process. This far they didn’t know much about tyres, hence the inconsistencies. But during the fly-away races they have been gathering a lot of data in different conditions. In cold (China), in hot (Bahrain), in wet (Malaysia) conditions. I fully expect teams to make conclusions from all these and actually become more consistent. But of course, if the field is tight and many teams are within one second, then it is not easy to be consistent anyway. :)

and herein lies the problem
4 races into the season and teams are in a "learning process"
and as you said; "This far they didn’t know much about tyres, hence the inconsistencies"

This should not be. That is what the preseason is all about.
How can we have a championship determined by a tire lottery which seems to change its characteristics race by race.
Teams have invested too much money and time on the cars for it to be all washed out with whimsical tire compounds.

What was wrong with last year's tires?
what is wrong with simply having tires that simply work rather than being a fickle mistress?

In all my years of watching F1, I've never seen a situation this compromised by tires.
we didn't have an issue with bridgestone, or when we had them and michelin, or goodyear etc.
Now in 2012 we have cars and teams that simply have no idea how tires ( arguably one of the most important elements of the car) are going to behave from race to race.
:(

[truefan72]

back in the 1980's drivers had to look after their tyres=- it was part of their job- drive flat out and risk an extra tyre stop- or manage them. An art lost during the pit stop era of F1 from the mid 90's onwards- where it was one sprint from pit stop to pit stop and tyre management didn't come into it.

there is a big difference in tires that could be looked after for 20-30 laps or more to maximize potential, and tired that simply fall off the cliff in performance and degradation after 10 laps, no matter how you drive the car
To be honest, most drivers would like a tire to last about 10-15 laps for solid racing and then begin to degrade then, with some managing them longer and others burning them up sooner.
But in 2012 we have tires that struggle to get up to temp, have a very small window of optimum performance, and always seem to compromise 75% of the field on any given race

with this year's tire specs it would be impossible for webber to do what he did in hungary 2010 where he went flat out for like 12 -15 laps to make up the undercut
or MSC back in the day banging in incredible laps in the middle of the race to make the pit strategy work

[F1boat]

Some people complain that the season is unpredictable? I think that it is because their favorite driver (in the most cases Lewis Hamilton) is not winning and because Seb suddenly won. But guess what, with predictable and hard tyres it will be very possible that Red Bull will win the next ten races thanks to pure superiority. And while it will be fun for me to see some of his haters squirm, I don't want this to happen. I hope for a fun, unpredictable season, and this is what we have now, without returning to some mythical good old days of mechanical grip, or narrow tyres, or whatever the Hell people remember.
In the end, a few more words about the Pirellis and racing. For me, the closest racing series in the world is the BTCC, in which the drivers seem to be flat out all the time. Even there, the drivers must take care of their tyres. In other series, like Indy and NASCAR, drivers drive carefully for fuel economy. NO prestigious series is JUST about "pure speed". Qualifying is for pure speed. To win a race, one must be fast when it matters and wise and careful in the rest of the race. And oh, yes, a bit lucky - luck is a natural part of life and racing. So, in conclusion, be happy with what we have - a good, exciting formula with overtaking and interesting races and not predictable parades of following the leader. For fast machines, which follow each other on "pure speed", you might need to check the Japanese super trains.

[ArrowsFA1]

Gary Anderson has a dig at Schumi's comments:
First time I've heard a rival team member of that time come out and make this clear: "Schumacher and Ferrari had tyres we were not even allowed to look at. They cost so much money that Bridgestone could not afford to supply them to everyone. And whenever we did have an opportunity to run a derivative of those tyres, our lap times were much, much better."

Not entirely surprising but still good to hear because it explains a lot.

[schmenke]

......MSC back in the day banging in incredible laps in the middle of the race to make the pit strategy work

True, but those were the days of refueling, so the car would be light as a feather.

[djparky]

there is a big difference in tires that could be looked after for 20-30 laps or more to maximize potential, and tired that simply fall off the cliff in performance and degradation after 10 laps, no matter how you drive the car
To be honest, most drivers would like a tire to last about 10-15 laps for solid racing and then begin to degrade then, with some managing them longer and others burning them up sooner.
But in 2012 we have tires that struggle to get up to temp, have a very small window of optimum performance, and always seem to compromise 75% of the field on any given race

with this year's tire specs it would be impossible for webber to do what he did in hungary 2010 where he went flat out for like 12 -15 laps to make up the undercut
or MSC back in the day banging in incredible laps in the middle of the race to make the pit strategy work

fair point- but if we go back to rock hard tyres then we're back in races where nothing happens- the running at lap 1 is more or less the same at lap 10,20,30 etc- I used to watch the first 5 laps or so then go back towards the end to see what had changed- inavriably nothing had- that's how I watched F1 alot during that period 2002-2008- occasionnally the racing would be good but most of the time it was pit stops and that was it- fantastically interested for the strategists but a mind numbing bore for watching on TV


Now we have wildly variable races affected by DRS and tyres and you never really know what's going to happen- and as someone who watches on TV- that's what I want to see. Long may it last

[BDunnell]

What would be wrong with abolishing tyre stops altogether? Why should they be a part of an F1 race?

[schmenke]

...Now we have wildly variable races affected by DRS and tyres and you never really know what's going to happen...

Why don’t we save everyone some time.
When the red lights extinguish at the start of a race, the cars proceed immediately to parc-fermé where Charlie Whiting draws a number at random to determine the race winner :up: .

[schmenke]

What would be wrong with abolishing tyre stops altogether? Why should they be a part of an F1 race?

I guess because tire changes have always been an integral part of the sport? :mark:

Also, I can only imagine that tires designed to last a race distance simply wouldn’t provide sufficient grip to be safe at consistently high speeds. A race would simply depreciate to a 90-minute tire-management effort.

[BDunnell]

I guess because tire changes have always been an integral part of the sport? :mark:

Also, I can only imagine that tires designed to last a race distance simply wouldn’t provide sufficient grip to be safe at consistently high speeds. A race would simply depreciate to a 90-minute tire-management effort.

It's far from an integral part of the sport if you go some way back.

[SGWilko]

Some people complain that the season is unpredictable? I think that it is because their favorite driver (in the most cases Lewis Hamilton) is not winning and because Seb suddenly won.

I take offence to that statement - given that I am a fan of Lewis. I have stated on this forum that I applaud the unpredictability thus far and am relishing this season and what it could hold.

To label those fans of Lewis as you do insults their intelligence.

[SGWilko]

First time I've heard a rival team member of that time come out and make this clear: "Schumacher and Ferrari had tyres we were not even allowed to look at. They cost so much money that Bridgestone could not afford to supply them to everyone. And whenever we did have an opportunity to run a derivative of those tyres, our lap times were much, much better."

Not entirely surprising but still good to hear because it explains a lot.

It says even more about the calibre of Michelin, and how just how badly F1 ultimately treated them.

[SGWilko]

Why don’t we save everyone some time.
When the red lights extinguish at the start of a race, the cars proceed immediately to parc-fermé where Charlie Whiting draws a number at random to determine the race winner :up: .

Would you trust him with the folded names in a hat???????

[DexDexter]

A lot of people here seem to think the tires have turned the races into a lottery. I disagree, all the races this year have been won by top teams, so it's not lottery at all. When a Caterham or a Marussia starts finishing on the podium, then we have a problem.

[BDunnell]

A lot of people here seem to think the tires have turned the races into a lottery. I disagree, all the races this year have been won by top teams, so it's not lottery at all. When a Caterham or a Marussia starts finishing on the podium, then we have a problem.

This is generally a forgotten point about the artificial enhancements in motor racing: the cream tends to rise to the top most of the time.

[denkimi]

A lot of people here seem to think the tires have turned the races into a lottery. I disagree, all the races this year have been won by top teams, so it's not lottery at all. When a Caterham or a Marussia starts finishing on the podium, then we have a problem.
a car that is 3 to 6 seconds slower is not going to win a race, because it will lose 3 minutes in a 50 lap race, pure based on speed. so even if they gamble correct and win a minute per race with their tyres, they will still be 2 minutes behind.

a car that is in the 1 second gap zone on the other hand, could win, even if it is actually slower. look at raikkonen in bahrain, he used less tyres in qualifying and almost won.

[ShiftingGears]

Also, I can only imagine that tires designed to last a race distance simply wouldn’t provide sufficient grip to be safe at consistently high speeds. A race would simply depreciate to a 90-minute tire-management effort.

If a tyre is well built to last a whole grand prix there is no reason why it couldn't do that. Grip isn't a safety issue, because drivers know how to drive within the limits of the tyre threshold. It would actually be safer, because of the lower cornering speeds.

[truefan72]

fair point- but if we go back to rock hard tyres then we're back in races where nothing happens- the running at lap 1 is more or less the same at lap 10,20,30 etc- I used to watch the first 5 laps or so then go back towards the end to see what had changed- inavriably nothing had- that's how I watched F1 alot during that period 2002-2008- occasionnally the racing would be good but most of the time it was pit stops and that was it- fantastically interested for the strategists but a mind numbing bore for watching on TV


Now we have wildly variable races affected by DRS and tyres and you never really know what's going to happen- and as someone who watches on TV- that's what I want to see. Long may it last

that too is a fair point.
I suppose some middle ground has to be achieved.
Let's just hope the teams have come to grips ( pun intended!) with the tires and we see a fantastic race in Barcelona (for a change)
I suspect the testing in Mugello will include a lot of tire testing by the teams to find that optimum setup

[truefan72]

What would be wrong with abolishing tyre stops altogether? Why should they be a part of an F1 race?

a lot.
I do like tire changes and think that they are integral to the efficency and quality of the sport.
Better tires mean better racing.
the one season (or was it 2) that had no tires changes was odd imo and was quite boring.

[Tazio]

I take offence to that statement - given that I am a fan of Lewis. I have stated on this forum that I applaud the unpredictability thus far and am relishing this season and what it could hold.

To label those fans of Lewis as you do insults their intelligence.
I take the idea of changing the formula for the sole purpose of leveling the playing field just because one team has it right and dominates for a while insulting. When Ferrari and the dream team were winning like it was going out of style, except 2003 when McLaren, and to a lesser degree Williams BMW had the speed to beat them. Steve Matchet went to great lengths to say that it is incumbent on the teams behind Ferrari to up their game, not figure out a way to beat them with rule changes. That should be even less of a no brainer now when Red Bull, and as Gary would say, :s ailor: Beiber ;) are/were dominant. It is an insult to any real aficionado that is worth his salt to accept that rules are in place to reel them in. I don't want to hope for some external entity purposely making rules to slow them down for the reason of the show. I'm really glad we have this break and testing, because it gives everyone enough time to change what it is they need to come to terms with. If that means copying other team’s ideas then good on them, I think it would be foolish to rag on teams for doing it. It is in my opinion irresponsible for teams not to try to do anything within the rules to improve their car.

The RED Bull example was their EBD not the tire reg's

An overall involving Karen Millen Store (http://www.outletsaleskarenmillen.com/) half a dozen days of routines, beginning with the Buddhist Monastery to the Whitened baidunzi, that you'll find a number of times aside on foot.Chanel Bags Outlet (http://www.chanelbagsoutletsales.net/) Acquire at the least 7 or 8 several hours per day, every day commencing in Ten are, on the camping is the celebrities. After a hard day time,Sito Hogan (http://www.scarpeehogan.com/) night sleep. Once the wind flow will be strong camp, filled with sand from your move,alteration by appliance Kate Moss a rapid break individuals tent rods, covering fifty percent laid to rest inside the world. Li Jian, the same team using the Transformers crew an overall total involving some 30 men and women, by having youngsters to participate, most of the people very first visit to the particular Gobi. In the beginning, ft blistered in addition know that discomfort, and also afterwards fully numbing.

An overall associated with Karen Millen Store (http://www.outletsaleskarenmillen.com/) half a dozen days of routines, beginning from the Buddhist Monastery to the Whitened baidunzi, ones there are 4 days absent on foot.Chanel Bags (http://www.chanelbagsoutletsales.net/) Get no less than seven or eight hours per day, each day commencing with Ten are, on the camp out is the celebrities. Following a difficult day time,Scarpe Hogan (http://www.scarpeehogan.com/) good night remainder. When the wind is actually solid camping, filled with sand through the spin,alteration by appliance Kate Moss an abrupt rupture individuals outdoor tents posts, outdoor tents half smothered in the world. Li Jian, exactly the same party with all the Transformers staff an overall regarding some 30 people, by having kids to participate in, a lot of people initial trip to your Gobi. At first, feet blistered also know that ache, and down the road completely numb.

An overall total regarding Karen Millen Dresses (http://www.outletsaleskarenmillen.com/) six to eight days of pursuits, starting from your Buddhist Monastery on the Bright baidunzi, that you can find four days absent on foot.Chanel Handbags (http://www.chanelbagsoutletsales.net/) Consider at least 7 or 8 a long time each day, every single day commencing from 15 are, on the get away will be the megastars. Following a difficult morning,Donna Hogan (http://www.scarpeehogan.com/) night relaxation. When the wind will be robust camping, filled up with fine sand from the spin,alteration by appliance Kate Moss a sudden rupture in our tent north and south poles, tent fifty percent laid to rest within the world. Li Jian, the identical group with all the Transformers team an overall involving some Something like 20 people, by using young children to participate in, most people very first trip to your Gobi. In the beginning, feet blistered additionally understand that discomfort, and later on totally numbing.

An overall of Karen Millen Dresses (http://www.outletsaleskarenmillen.com/) six to eight days of routines, beginning with the particular Buddhist Monastery to the Bright baidunzi, ones you can find a number of days aside on foot.Chanel Handbags (http://www.chanelbagsoutletsales.net/) Take no less than 7 or 8 several hours each day, daily starting from 10 am, for the camp out could be the celebrities. After a hard day,Sito Hogan (http://www.scarpeehogan.com/) good night remainder. Once the wind flow is actually strong get away, full of fine sand from your rotate,alteration by appliance Kate Moss a rapid rupture of our outdoor tents posts, outdoor tents 50 % buried in the earth. Li Jian, the identical team using the Transformers group an overall of several Twenty folks, by using young children to participate in, most people first stop by at your Gobi. In the beginning, foot blistered also understand that discomfort, along with afterwards completely numb.

[truefan72]

I take the idea of changing the formula for the sole purpose of leveling the playing field just because one team has it right and dominates for a while insulting. When Ferrari and the dream team were winning like it was going out of style, except 2003 when McLaren, and to a lesser degree Williams BMW had the speed to beat them. Steve Matchet went to great lengths to say that it is incumbent on the teams behind Ferrari to up their game, not figure out a way to beat them with rule changes. That should be even less of a no brainer now when Red Bull, and as Gary would say, :s ailor: Beiber ;) are/were dominant. It is an insult to any real aficionado that is worth his salt to accept that rules are in place to reel them in. I don't want to hope for some external entity purposely making rules to slow them down for the reason of the show. I'm really glad we have this break and testing, because it gives everyone enough time to change what it is they need to come to terms with. If that means copying other team’s ideas then good on them, I think it would be foolish to rag on teams for doing it. It is in my opinion irresponsible for teams not to try to do anything within the rules to improve their car.

The RED Bull example was their EBD not the tire reg's

agreed, but if you were the team what would you do?
spend millions redesigning your car and or figuring out how to implement and upgrade to improve your competitiveness
or spend a lot less money on lawyers and time waging a pr & legal campaign (as there are always thousands of reporters ready to feed the fodder) to try and get the thing banned...thus improving your competitiveness :\

usually in the world one says" If you can't beat them, join them"
but in F1 it is if you can't beat them, ban them"

And of that bunch the biggest whiners are usually, Williams, RBR, Renault/Lotus, and Ferrari imo when things don't go their way
It is a tactic, one I don't agree with and find cynical, and actually works less than you might think.

[DexDexter]

a car that is 3 to 6 seconds slower is not going to win a race, because it will lose 3 minutes in a 50 lap race, pure based on speed. so even if they gamble correct and win a minute per race with their tyres, they will still be 2 minutes behind.

a car that is in the 1 second gap zone on the other hand, could win, even if it is actually slower. look at raikkonen in bahrain, he used less tyres in qualifying and almost won.

Lotus is not a second a lap slower than the best car out there, in fact in all of the races so far, they've been very close to the front. Again, all the races have been won by the teams with most resources and money. A slower car (Ferrari) with a multiple WDC has won one race in mixed conditions which always produce weird results. So what's the problem with you guys? Vettel, Button,Rosberg, Alonso, Mclaren, Red Bull, Ferrari and Mercedes are names that one would expect to see at the front.

[F1boat]

I take offence to that statement - given that I am a fan of Lewis. I have stated on this forum that I applaud the unpredictability thus far and am relishing this season and what it could hold.
To label those fans of Lewis as you do insults their intelligence.

Not all fans, my friend, only some of them ;) I have my view from this board and the atlas board... and of course there are the fans who are never satisfied, because it is not like in the 80s. But I stopped caring about their opinion...

[ioan]

Some people complain that the season is unpredictable? I think that it is because their favorite driver (in the most cases Lewis Hamilton) is not winning and because Seb suddenly won.

Why does this rubbish resurface again and again?! :rolleyes:
People simply think that F1 is not about what we see nowadays with crap tires and DRS. It has nothing to do with favorite drivers.

[ioan]

I suspect the testing in Mugello will include a lot of tire testing by the teams to find that optimum setup

Difficult. It looks like a difference of 2 degrees Celsius makes a huge difference for these tires. cars that work Saturday will not work on Sunday and the other way around.

[ioan]

agreed, but if you were the team what would you do?

Thrive for excellence.
What is so great about beating the competition through use of regulation changes?

[airshifter]

Why does this rubbish resurface again and again?! :rolleyes:
People simply think that F1 is not about what we see nowadays with crap tires and DRS. It has nothing to do with favorite drivers.

In reality what we watch at every race is in fact the real F1 of today. Why does the crap keep coming to the surface about the people that are in denial of reality? :)

[DexDexter]

A couple of my friends who became disinterested with F1 years ago have again started watching the races because they are so exciting. I suspect that's the case for many others as well.

[Knock-on]

Thrive for excellence.
What is so great about beating the competition through use of regulation changes?

You still here? I thought the door caught your ass on the way out last time.

Stop torturing yourself with all this rubbish and set yourself free. That way you can leave this futile series to those of us that enjoy it.

[ArrowsFA1]

"The drivers are fundamental - because they are the sensors in the car and they have to spot when the tyres are going. The trick is spotting when it happens - because drivers can be good at spotting when the problem happens. The key is doing it the lap before."
F1 teams believe that getting strategies perfect will be key in 2012 - F1 news - AUTOSPORT.com (http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/99168)

Good to hear that driver input is significant. For too long the teams seemed to set the strategy and the driver simply had to drive to a pre-set plan until the chequered flag dropped. Not now.

[ioan]

You still here? I thought the door caught your ass on the way out last time.

You thought wrong. The only one who left whining and got hit by the door on his way out was you.

[gloomyDAY]

You thought wrong. The only one who left whining and got hit by the door on his way out was you.You make me laugh, man! First you said you'd leave the F1 forums, and now you're trollin' like a villain.

Love it! Stay here forever. :D

[Fastonslicks]

I like it.We ve wait to have an even playing field for a decade or so.I believe that they will be able to fully understand the tyres within 1 or 2 more races so we are in for a cracker.Gonna be a tight battel till the end(Hopefully.

The only negative is the unusual amount of marbles so it is a bit risky to go off the racing line but they all have to deal with it.

Long lasting tyres would mean going backward and see cars turning around and folowing like a train,we dfont want to go back to that right?

[DexDexter]

The FIA tried to enhance overtaking and make the races more exciting for years with all sorts of regulation changes and now they've finally come up with rules that work. I don't see it being any more artificial than putting grooves on tyres or introducing refueling. I remember the era of free regulations in the 80's and early 90's and oh boy those races were generally boring.

[ShiftingGears]

I don't find the use of the Pirelli tyres artificial as such, I just think the mandatory use of two compounds, and how KERS is implemented, is artificial.

[ioan]

Laugh ahead man! Just take care not to choke, it would be a big hit to humanity to lose you.
I said I won't ever watch F1 again, and I didn't and won't do it.
Keep laughing.

[ioan]

The only negative is the unusual amount of marbles so it is a bit risky to go off the racing line but they all have to deal with it.

Which obviously doesn't help overtaking. Oh wait...

[BDunnell]

Laugh ahead man! Just take care not to choke, it would be a big hit to humanity to lose you.
I said I won't ever watch F1 again, and I didn't and won't do it.
Keep laughing.

What you actually said is now in my signature.

[Fastonslicks]

Which obviously doesn't help overtaking. Oh wait...

Still we had plenty of overtaking in 4 races dont you think?

[jens]

Here has been way too much emphasis on personal comments recently. I hope you take notice and act accordingly. In the heat of emotion people have been saying many things. We won't get far if we keep reminding these things all the time.

BDunnell, Pino has recently issued that member quotes shall not be in signatures.

[F1boat]

Rosberg now says that tyres make racing challenging and this is great for F1:
Nico Rosberg says challenge of 2012 Pirelli tyres is great for Formula 1 - F1 news - AUTOSPORT.com (http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/99247)

[F1boat]

still I am happy to see a driver supporting this tires :)

[djparky]

The FIA tried to enhance overtaking and make the races more exciting for years with all sorts of regulation changes and now they've finally come up with rules that work. I don't see it being any more artificial than putting grooves on tyres or introducing refueling. I remember the era of free regulations in the 80's and early 90's and oh boy those races were generally boring.

agreed- nor do we want a repeat of that period (minus the trye war years) of 2002-2008 when it was generally follow the leader until an exciting overtake in the pit stops

[Knock-on]

Its going to be very entertaining discussing F1 with an individual who isn't watching the races yet still has an opinion on what they haven't seen.



I don't think we will notice any difference.

[longisland]

I'd say it's a tad too late now. There's a big possibility Pirelli has produced 70% of the season's tire supply by now. I doubt they are going to change the compound judging from the response to Shuey's comments recently. Have they gone too far? Perhaps but only the teams and the drivers would know. IMHO, it wouldn't be an issue if an extra set of new hard and soft compound tires are given to all teams on Sunday. The main problem is teams that are fighting for the front rows had to sacrifice a set of new tires in Q3. They ended up having to use used tires on Sunday.

[F1boat]

The funny thing is that they will change the tires for the next season, again surprising the teams... which will be cool for the fans xD

[gloomyDAY]

Let it go Mike. (http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/99437)

[F1boat]

Mark and Nico supported the new tyres, now Michael moans again. I may sound rude, but these tyres are the same for every driver. Shut up and drive, or retire, old man!

[Dave B]

Let's see how he does in Spain, and whether that changes his tune. His team mate seems to be doing ok.

[fandango]

"We drive like on raw eggs and I don't want to stress the tyres at all." Schumacher.

Is that some kind of odd translation from German? Anyone know? I mean, I get that he means that he can't push to the limit of the car, but that's a really strange analogy...

Is it some mix up of "like walking on eggshells", perhaps?

[Dave B]

Driving on eggs with petrol from Shell.

[Bagwan]

"Raw eggs" , as in "not hard boiled" .

He's just having a hard time managing the degradation , a skill he didn't need back in the days of custom Bridgestones .
The Merc has a very small window of temperature where it works best , and finding a set-up without zillions of laps around Fiorano is tough on the old guy .

[ioan]

Here you go, further proof of Pirelli's race tire manufacturing abilities:

Pirelli: Teams completely ignored advice | WSBK News | May 2012 | Crash.Net (http://www.crash.net/world+superbikes/news/179401/1/pirelli_teams_completely_ignored_advice.html)

Funny snippet:


The rain tyres run well at 50per cent-60 per cent...

Have fun Pirelli fanboys! The 50% and 60% performance is the future of the Formula Pirelli. :laugh:
This must be why they all look so fresh at the end of F1 races like Malaysia! They drive at 60% of the cars' and drivers' abilities!

[ioan]

Still we had plenty of overtaking in 4 races dont you think?

Don't know about the fourth race but the first 3 were meh. If you call that overtaking then I pity your racing culture.

[ArrowsFA1]

It seems the teams are pushing beyond the advised limits simply for that extra edge, and therefore creating a problem for themselves. Rather than a driver blasting around as fast as they can in sprints, its become a situation where intelligence and planning is demanded of them instead.
Indeed. This brings to mind Red Bull exceeding the advised camber angle of the tyres last season and Adrian Newey experiencing "one of the scariest races I've been involved in" in Belgium as a consequence. Things turned out ok then but the bottom line that teams will always explore and push the limits. It's not Pirelli's fault when some go over that limit, or can't adapt to make the most of tyres that are the same for everyone.

[ioan]

Very interesting how everyone but Pirelli are wrong, even when they bring 4 years old tires to a WSBK race.

[airshifter]

Thanks for that. It seems the teams are pushing beyond the advised limits simply for that extra edge, and therefore creating a problem for themselves. Rather than a driver blasting around as fast as they can in sprints, its become a situation where intelligence and planning is demanded of them instead. It could be worse though, we could have a situation like 2010 where drivers can get 50 or more laps from one set of tyres and we are faced with races where its incredibly dull to watch. I'd rather see the order mixed up personally.

Should it be a shock that rain tires don't withstand dry track conditions? I think common sense would dictate otherwise, especially when intermediate tires are available. Maybe I should see if I can get some Pirelli slicks to fit one of our vehicles, and then use it in heavy rain so that I can complain about lack of grip.

[ArrowsFA1]

Very interesting how everyone but Pirelli are wrong.
Not everyone...Just Michael Schumacher :D

[AndyL]

Here you go, further proof of Pirelli's race tire manufacturing abilities:

Pirelli: Teams completely ignored advice | WSBK News | May 2012 | Crash.Net (http://www.crash.net/world+superbikes/news/179401/1/pirelli_teams_completely_ignored_advice.html)

Funny snippet:



Have fun Pirelli fanboys! The 50% and 60% performance is the future of the Formula Pirelli. :laugh:

Which manufacturer do you think does produce superbike race wets that can be used for multiple laps at 210mph on a mostly dry track?

[AndyL]

Have fun Pirelli fanboys! The 50% and 60% performance is the future of the Formula Pirelli. :laugh:

By the way crash.net's article is a misquote with the "%". What the original Pirelli statement said was that the wets are designed to run at 50-60°C. They were reaching 200°C on the dry straights at Monza which was why they were disintegrating.

[Robinho]

By the way crash.net's article is a misquote with the "%". What the original Pirelli statement said was that the wets are designed to run at 50-60°C. They were reaching 200°C on the dry straights at Monza which was why they were disintegrating.

There you go bringing logic and common sense into the arguement - you should know that they are most unwelcome in these parts!

[gloomyDAY]

Here you go, further proof of Pirelli's race tire manufacturing abilities:

Pirelli: Teams completely ignored advice | WSBK News | May 2012 | Crash.Net (http://www.crash.net/world+superbikes/news/179401/1/pirelli_teams_completely_ignored_advice.html)Wow! You're posting Crash.net as a source to talk trash on Pirelli? Clutching at straws ol' boy.

[Tazio]

Indeed. This brings to mind Red Bull exceeding the advised camber angle of the tyres last season and Adrian Newey experiencing "one of the scariest races I've been involved in" in Belgium as a consequence. Things turned out ok then but the bottom line that teams will always explore and push the limits. It's not Pirelli's fault when some go over that limit, or can't adapt to make the most of tyres that are the same for everyone.
As I have stated earlier, Pirelli has given to F1 what was asked of them and it can make excellent drivers like Mike, Lewis, and Kimi look bad when the strategy is wrong. I don't mean to be critical of these three but they are the ones that come to mind in specific situations of the guys at the pointy end having been caught out and probably because of a bad pit wall decision . I’m sure there are others, in fact I'm sure every driver has had the tire degradation whoopsies, but just not so glaring, or nobody even said anything about it, or
I just don't remember them. :confused:
Using these types of tires as Arrows pointed out brings a couple extra layers of technical know-how, Strategy, driver savvy, along with both the drivers and the technicians on the wall having to be smart in concert about their usage. That means most of the time what they are trying to do is quite simply getting the best speed along with the most life out of their tires. Whether you like it or not is a different story. I’m pleased that the races are not quite as processional as they have been in the past, but that is JMHO.

[Bagwan]

As far as I know , Pirelli is the first manufacturer to have been asked to design a tire that isn't the fastest they could put together .
They've given them dimensions , in terms of "footprint" , but never really gone beyond that .

In the days of the Bridgestone/Michelin wars , they just got faster and faster , and more tailored to the cars .
There were many compounds from which to choose .

Apart , I suppose , from the vicious gasses these things must have been giving off , having been kept in sealed compartments until the very last minute , I suppose life was good .


I think the only part I feel they need to work on is the fact that the tire "falls off the cliff" so fast .
Kimi losing a zillion places in one lap was perhaps the best example of this issue .

But , I too , like the fact that the tires are making a big difference to the show .
It's not that you can't go fast , but rather , that if you do go too fast , there is some consequence .

[Tazio]

Which manufacturer do you think does produce superbike race wets that can be used for multiple laps at 210mph on a mostly dry track?Funny you should bring that up; I just changed the tires on my Aprilia and went from Pirelli to Michelin, because Pirelli are so damned expensive in this of the woods

[i_max2k2]

Not everyone...Just Michael Schumacher :D

You gotta be soft on him, he knows a bit about racing.

[F1boat]

Michael had his time and it was glorious. But now the sport has evolved and he hasn't... that's why this comebacks are bad idea.

[Knock-on]

Funny you should bring that up; I just changed the tires on my Aprilia and went from Pirelli to Michelin, because Pirelli are so damned expensive in this of the woods

I'm on 'stones because they have better life especially when doing lots of flat miles. Also I have been getting them bloody cheap up till now. However, the Pirelli's would be my favoured choice if the price was the same even though they're quicker wearing on motorways as they're not DC. Now, if I was ioan I would use that fact to slag them off and point out how crap they are :rolleyes: but the fact is that the Pirelli's IMHO are the ones I would prefer under me when I'm going pegs down. Forget supposed 'facts' and statistics: When I have my life on the line I would reach for the P's and drop the B's :D

[Garry Walker]

F1 teams believe that getting strategies perfect will be key in 2012 - F1 news - AUTOSPORT.com (http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/99168)

Good to hear that driver input is significant. For too long the teams seemed to set the strategy and the driver simply had to drive to a pre-set plan until the chequered flag dropped. Not now. Do you believe everything you are told?


The FIA tried to enhance overtaking and make the races more exciting for years with all sorts of regulation changes and now they've finally come up with rules that work. I don't see it being any more artificial than putting grooves on tyres or introducing refueling. I remember the era of free regulations in the 80's and early 90's and oh boy those races were generally boring. This obsession with overtaking is idiotic. These days all we see are meaningless DRS passes which no one will ever remember. You want to see passing? Watch Nascar, you will see more overtakings there than in F1 even with drs. Yet, all those overtaking moves are pretty meaningless. The same is now true for F1. You think in 30 years someone will at footage of a DRS overtaking and say, wow, this was a great move? Yeah, sure.
I'd rather see 3 proper moves in a race, than 30 idiotic meaningless DRS moves. DRS has devalued overtaking.


Still we had plenty of overtaking in 4 races dont you think?
Yeah, and that makes racing great? Lay off the booze.


Rosberg now says that tyres make racing challenging and this is great for F1:
Nico Rosberg says challenge of 2012 Pirelli tyres is great for Formula 1 - F1 news - AUTOSPORT.com (http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/99247)
I wonder if Nico enjoys going at 80% of the limit and saving tyres in qualifying.


Mark and Nico supported the new tyres, now Michael moans again. I may sound rude, but these tyres are the same for every driver. Shut up and drive, or retire, old man! Schumacher has been too quiet for too long. Now he has grown some balls and spoken up. This nonsense of driving at 75% of the limit to save your tyres, not going out in qualifying to save your tyres is just insane. The sad thing is that idiot fans are lapping it up and think this is great racing.


Very interesting how everyone but Pirelli are wrong, even when they bring 4 years old tires to a WSBK race.
To celebrate the good job Pirelli are doing in F1, I will never use one of their tyres on my cars again.

[gloomyDAY]

2950

[ioan]

You gotta be soft on him, he knows a bit about racing.

Nah, his detractors know more, especially the ones in this forum who nurtured such a healthy hatred for the man! Good to know that MS haters also hate real racing, that explains a lot of things.

[ioan]

Schumacher has been too quiet for too long. Now he has grown some balls and spoken up. This nonsense of driving at 75% of the limit to save your tyres, not going out in qualifying to save your tyres is just insane. The sad thing is that idiot fans are lapping it up and think this is great racing.

Exactly! :up:

Add to that a bunch of frustrated MS haters, for good measure. If it was Button or Lewis complaining we would have all of them up in arms against Pirelli. That's fanboy objectivity exemplified at it's best.

[ArrowsFA1]

If Schumacher had been among the majority of drivers complaining about the tyres then his views would carry more weight.

Anyway, enough of that. Watching today's race, and watching a Williams up front initially made me wonder about the tyres, but then you remember the fact that the "big" teams don't have an automatic right to race at the front and win all the races.

As it has been said repeatedly, with no counter argument, winning races is all about driver and team putting together a package at a particular race to outperform the opposition. The tyres are simply one part of that and if Maldonado wins this afternoon it will be because he and his team have done a better job under the same rules that apply to everyone else.

[F1boat]

I agree with you Arrows :)

[pino]

Great post ArrowsFA1 :up:

[Dave B]

As it has been said repeatedly, with no counter argument, winning races is all about driver and team putting together a package at a particular race to outperform the opposition. The tyres are simply one part of that and if Maldonado wins this afternoon it will be because he and his team have done a better job under the same rules that apply to everyone else.
This. :up:

It's not all about Sunday's race, it's about putting together a strategy across the whole weekend. It's difficult (but it's meant to be) and occasionally complicated to follow, but we're back to a sport which rewards clever thinking and skillful driving, and provides entertaining races along the way, which is exactly what the pinnacle of motorsport should be.

[ioan]

If Schumacher had been among the majority of drivers complaining about the tyres then his views would carry more weight.

Anyway, enough of that. Watching today's race, and watching a Williams up front initially made me wonder about the tyres, but then you remember the fact that the "big" teams don't have an automatic right to race at the front and win all the races.

As it has been said repeatedly, with no counter argument, winning races is all about driver and team putting together a package at a particular race to outperform the opposition. The tyres are simply one part of that and if Maldonado wins this afternoon it will be because he and his team have done a better job under the same rules that apply to everyone else.

What a load of rubbish.
This season is all about lucking into a setup that is perfect for the tires and ambient temperatures. But who am I kidding here, a bunch of geniuses who got themselves at armchair F1 fan levels?!

[Dave B]

What a load of rubbish.
This season is all about lucking into a setup that is perfect for the tires and ambient temperatures. But who am I kidding here, a bunch of geniuses who got themselves at armchair F1 fan levels?!
This must be killing you: watching the races but not commenting because you'd expose yourself as a hypocrite who went back on his word. You must be watching them, otherwise how can you make such informed comments? Unless, of course, you're just full of it. :p

[F1boat]

This. :up:

It's not all about Sunday's race, it's about putting together a strategy across the whole weekend. It's difficult (but it's meant to be) and occasionally complicated to follow, but we're back to a sport which rewards clever thinking and skillful driving, and provides entertaining races along the way, which is exactly what the pinnacle of motorsport should be.

So well said that I have nothing to add.

[F1boat]

This must be killing you: watching the races but not commenting because you'd expose yourself as a hypocrite who went back on his word. You must be watching them, otherwise how can you make such informed comments? Unless, of course, you're just full of it. :p

:D

[jens]

I have been a die-hard F1 fan for ~14 years by now. And I can tell that most of the time the results are quite logical, "predictable" (roughly, not by exact finishing order :D ) and ordinary. Inbetween there are short periods or even odd races, where there is a lot of uncertainty and you can hardly believe your eyes about what you can see. And currently is one such sensational period. So, why not enjoy while it lasts? As by 2013 or whenever we may easily return back to "normality" with 2-3 top teams winning comfortably all races barring extraordinary circumstances.

I will forever remember the 2003 Brazilian Grand Prix and the win of Fisichella. It was an extraordinary race. Yes, we also had issues with tyres then (only intermediate tyres for full wet conditions) and it was a messy race, but we saw an emergence of a backmarker at the very front of the field. I will always remember the beginning of 2009, when you could hardly believe seeing Ferrari and McLaren in midfield with private teams battling at the front. 2012 so far has been special. It is so refreshing if at times you can witness that the traditional powerhouses are actually beatable and non-conquering.

[wedge]

Hate to say it but its becoming a bit of a lottery and am beginning to err to Ioan & Garry Walker.

Merit has become more and more of an abstract concept.


This. :up:

It's not all about Sunday's race, it's about putting together a strategy across the whole weekend. It's difficult (but it's meant to be) and occasionally complicated to follow, but we're back to a sport which rewards clever thinking and skillful driving, and provides entertaining races along the way, which is exactly what the pinnacle of motorsport should be.

But that's on a particular GP weekend, not over a season.

Where's the class and quality?

Yes, its is arguably too early to tell but who (at this time period of writing) is the complete driver of the season? The consistency of attaining results certainly doesn't and I'm not so sure the current WDC standings reflects this (yet).

The audience craves unpredictability for entertainment but at what cost to the quality of craftmanship, the execution of talent over a consistent basis.

The concept of unpredictablity vs. quality in football by football journalist Tim Vickery written in 2010:


The Premier League has a collective TV deal, with a more equitable distribution of television money than some other major leagues. Even so, those clubs with a wealthy benefactor or a huge fan base can put themselves streets ahead of weaker rivals, while only a handful of clubs go into the season with any realistic chance of winning. A dose of predictability is the price paid for the quality on show.

It is the opposite of domestic football in Argentina, where the first division has become wildly unpredictable. However, the price paid for this excitement is a lack of quality.

BBC - Tim Vickery: Why the Argentine rollercoaster fails to thrill (http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/timvickery/2010/09/why_the_argentine_rollercoaste.html)

[airshifter]

What a load of rubbish.
This season is all about lucking into a setup that is perfect for the tires and ambient temperatures. But who am I kidding here, a bunch of geniuses who got themselves at armchair F1 fan levels?!

You're not kidding anyone Ioan. Many of the people watching F1 are just as informed as you, if not more probably. If you'd like to compare personal experiences with racing I'm more than game. Though my experience is nothing more than some amateur level motorcycle racing, some drag racing time, and a little bit of four wheeled track time, I'm sure it's on par with your vast background.

If you can't accept that others will still like and watch F1, just quit whining and go away. Those of us with a brain are tired of your childish insults. Man up and realize that people are allowed differing opinions regardless of whether you like it or not.

[airshifter]

Hate to say it but its becoming a bit of a lottery and am beginning to err to Ioan & Garry Walker.

Merit has become more and more of an abstract concept.



But that's on a particular GP weekend, not over a season.

Where's the class and quality?

Yes, its is arguably too early to tell but who (at this time period of writing) is the complete driver of the season? The consistency of attaining results certainly doesn't and I'm not so sure the current WDC standings reflects this (yet).

The audience craves unpredictability for entertainment but at what cost to the quality of craftmanship, the execution of talent over a consistent basis.

The concept of unpredictablity vs. quality in football by football journalist Tim Vickery written in 2010:

Nothing wrong with an opinon Wedge, and you manage to state it without insulting everyone.

I'd actually like more durable tires myself, but at the end of the day we have what we have. IMO F1 got the tires they asked for, and we can't blame a manufacturer for that. Lewis put together a strong race today with an unusual tire strategy and less stops, so it can be done. What I really dislike is the limits on the number of tires teams can use. Give them plenty of tires and let them play out their own strategies.

[i_max2k2]

From webber after the race


"If you start towards the back, you’ll invariably finish towards the back because you’re stuck in traffic and you take too much out of the tyres. You end up having to drive as slow as possible to get to the end of the race. I’m not a big fan of racing like that, but the fans seem to enjoy it."

I hit the limiter: Webber | Fox Sports (http://www.foxsports.com.au/motor-sports/formula-one/mark-webber-struggled-to-pass-due-to-lack-of-top-end-speed-during-the-spanish-formula-1-grand-prix/story-e6frf3zl-1226354610821)

[aryan]

winning races is all about driver and team putting together a package at a particular race to outperform the opposition. The tyres are simply one part of that and if Maldonado wins this afternoon it will be because he and his team have done a better job under the same rules that apply to everyone else.

+1

Coulnd't have put it better myself.

[SGWilko]

From webber after the race



I hit the limiter: Webber | Fox Sports (http://www.foxsports.com.au/motor-sports/formula-one/mark-webber-struggled-to-pass-due-to-lack-of-top-end-speed-during-the-spanish-formula-1-grand-prix/story-e6frf3zl-1226354610821)

OK, so who forgot to tell Lewis?

[Knock-on]

Nah, his detractors know more, especially the ones in this forum who nurtured such a healthy hatred for the man! Good to know that MS haters also hate real racing, that explains a lot of things.

I thought the racing was always secondary to you in favour of the technology? I wish you would keep a straight story from one week to the next but with a man whose resolve and principles can be measured in a matter of days (remember your Bahrain stance) then it's no surprise really.

So, get off the 'hatred' high horse as it's getting really boring now. You can listen to an ex F1 driver who is looking for any excuse to explain away his poor performances, inexplicable crashes, dangerous driving and why he has been constantly thrashed by his young team mate. The rest of us are more interested in F1.

[Tazio]

Hate to say it but its becoming a bit of a lottery and am beginning to err to Ioan & Garry Walker.

Merit has become more and more of an abstract concept.

With tongue placed firmly in cheek:

http://a5.sphotos.ak.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ak-ash3/535838_142734132525528_142110035921271_179664_8266 6812_n.jpg

:s ailor:





“A celibate clergy is an especially good idea, because it tends to suppress any hereditary propensity toward fanaticism.” ― Carl Sagan

[Malbec]

Anyway, enough of that. Watching today's race, and watching a Williams up front initially made me wonder about the tyres, but then you remember the fact that the "big" teams don't have an automatic right to race at the front and win all the races.

As it has been said repeatedly, with no counter argument, winning races is all about driver and team putting together a package at a particular race to outperform the opposition. The tyres are simply one part of that and if Maldonado wins this afternoon it will be because he and his team have done a better job under the same rules that apply to everyone else.

Its nice to see wildcard results like Williams winning but I'm not sure this is all as great as you portray.

There's a reason why teams like Ferrari, RBR and McLaren tend to win most races in normal seasons. They have greater resources, develop a more efficient car, have better race engineering teams and make fewer mistakes throughout the race weekend. They usually have a better baseline car that is better setup by Sunday afternoon than midfield teams. Thats why they win so often.

I somehow doubt that the top teams have suddenly forgotten how to do their business over the winter.

Now there is little doubt that the midfield have caught up a lot with the top teams over the winter, but the results should not be this 'random' especially on a track which the teams all know like the back of their hand because they spend all winter testing there, which rewards aero efficiency more than most and therefore which differentiates a lot between cars of differing performance levels.

There are certain aspects of Pirelli characteristics that I quite like. In particular I like the fact that they reward smooth driving and that they fall off a cliff at a certain point. However I do not like the counterpoint, that they degrade far too quickly once a driver is caught in the dirty air behind another car. Ultimately drivers like Rosberg, Alonso and Maldonaldo won their races this year because they broke away from the pack and were almost always driving in free air, able to control their tyre degradation at will. Drivers caught in a train on the other hand found their tyres degrading far too quickly to do anything compromising their race performance too much as a result. Also the fact is that being able to optimise tyre performance does seem to have an inordinately large effect on performance and while this may make a great spectacle, is it great racing?

[SGWilko]

However I do not like the counterpoint, that they degrade far too quickly once a driver is caught in the dirty air behind another car

Many times - late eighties through to mid nineties, I'd see the likes of Mansell/Berger et al come up behind a slower car, struggle to get by within a couple of corners, then back off a bit to give the tyres a break, then come back again for another bash at the pass.

Looking at yesterdays race, I was interested in Ant's explanation of some of Lewis's passes - and how he set them up. For the most part, he'd deliberately take a different line into a corner when behind a competitor to keep in the clean air. I'd also point out that, on these fragile crap tyres (alegedley) he ran a 31 lap stint.........

[Dave B]

From webber after the race :

"If you start towards the back, you’ll invariably finish towards the back because you’re stuck in traffic and you take too much out of the tyres. You end up having to drive as slow as possible to get to the end of the race. I’m not a big fan of racing like that, but the fans seem to enjoy it."



I hit the limiter: Webber | Fox Sports (http://www.foxsports.com.au/motor-sports/formula-one/mark-webber-struggled-to-pass-due-to-lack-of-top-end-speed-during-the-spanish-formula-1-grand-prix/story-e6frf3zl-1226354610821)


In Spain Lewis Hamilton started not towards the back, but at the back, and yet he finished 8th through a combination of clever strategy and level-headed driving. So it can be done, it's just extremely difficult. And here's the thing: it's meant to be difficult.

It's notable that the only drivers whinging about the tyres have yet to stand on the podium in 2012...

[Knock-on]

In Spain Lewis Hamilton started not towards the back, but at the back, and yet he finished 8th through a combination of clever strategy and level-headed driving. So it can be done, it's just extremely difficult. And here's the thing: it's meant to be difficult.

It's notable that the only drivers whinging about the tyres have yet to stand on the podium in 2012...

If there's a miracle and Schumacher stands on pole, I bet he wont slag off the tyres then. After some excuses coming out of his mouth, he will probably blow his own trumpet on how he managed them so well.

[gloomyDAY]

Stop complaining people!


With tongue placed firmly in-between her ....:

http://a5.sphotos.ak.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ak-ash3/535838_142734132525528_142110035921271_179664_8266 6812_n.jpgftfy

[ArrowsFA1]

...is it great racing?
Debateable, but would we prefer a return to the days of bespoke tyres made for one team who dominated for 5 years to the extent that pole and the winner was entirely predictable?

I've followed F1 since the mid-1970's and seen many changes in that time, but the one thing that has offended me most in terms of the racing is DRS, not the tyres. The tyres have presented the teams with a challenge and perhaps, in time, the bigger teams with all their resources will get to the bottom of how to make them work to their advantage, but until (if) that happens I'm enjoying F1. Sunday's race was an absorbing race from start to finish, and I can't say the same of many races in the last 10yrs or so.

[steveaki13]

Hate to say it but its becoming a bit of a lottery and am beginning to err to Ioan & Garry Walker.

Merit has become more and more of an abstract concept.
:

I am not quite sure what I feel. I don't like DRS and would get rid of it straight away.

As for tyres I am not quite sure. I am enjoying the racing this year and glad to see the non DRS passing (i.e Kobayashi yesterday on Button and alike) which is down to tyres I suppose, but I am always left with a nagging voice in my head about the way F1 is playing out. Only a 10% voice but its there.

I also do think it appears more drivers will win races as this season goes on, but we will maybe miss out of the good old fashioned Championship epics.

Where the best drivers battle it out season long. I enjoyed the title races between Alonso, Hamilton, Massa and Raikkonen from a few years back. The tactics and the battles and tension.

I just fear come the end of the season a driver might not be in the title battle due to two races where he is in traffic and loses tyres and cant fight for the title.

I no it will not make sense to some, and its hard to explain, but I guess I am just unsettled by the prospect of 11 or 12 race winners and 6 drivers on with the shout of the title, not on work and craft and skill but maybe because the last races are tyre chaos.

Im sorry I have read through this and I can't quite get the way I feel across without it sounding stupid. :confused:


With tongue placed firmly in cheek:

http://a5.sphotos.ak.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ak-ash3/535838_142734132525528_142110035921271_179664_8266 6812_n.jpg

:s ailor:





That is quite funny. :laugh:


Its nice to see wildcard results like Williams winning but I'm not sure this is all as great as you portray.

There's a reason why teams like Ferrari, RBR and McLaren tend to win most races in normal seasons. They have greater resources, develop a more efficient car, have better race engineering teams and make fewer mistakes throughout the race weekend. They usually have a better baseline car that is better setup by Sunday afternoon than midfield teams. Thats why they win so often.

I somehow doubt that the top teams have suddenly forgotten how to do their business over the winter.

Now there is little doubt that the midfield have caught up a lot with the top teams over the winter, but the results should not be this 'random' especially on a track which the teams all know like the back of their hand because they spend all winter testing there, which rewards aero efficiency more than most and therefore which differentiates a lot between cars of differing performance levels.

There are certain aspects of Pirelli characteristics that I quite like. In particular I like the fact that they reward smooth driving and that they fall off a cliff at a certain point. However I do not like the counterpoint, that they degrade far too quickly once a driver is caught in the dirty air behind another car. Ultimately drivers like Rosberg, Alonso and Maldonaldo won their races this year because they broke away from the pack and were almost always driving in free air, able to control their tyre degradation at will. Drivers caught in a train on the other hand found their tyres degrading far too quickly to do anything compromising their race performance too much as a result. Also the fact is that being able to optimise tyre performance does seem to have an inordinately large effect on performance and while this may make a great spectacle, is it great racing?

This is how I feel and the sort of point I was trying to make earlier.


I'd also point out that, on these fragile crap tyres (alegedley) he ran a 31 lap stint.........

That is a good point you raise. Although this also appears slightly unpredictable because Hamilton is by no means softest on tyre, however give all drivers the challenge of 31 laps and not many would manage that on these tyres.


I've followed F1 since the mid-1970's and seen many changes in that time, but the one thing that has offended me most in terms of the racing is DRS, not the tyres. The tyres have presented the teams with a challenge and perhaps, in time, the bigger teams with all their resources will get to the bottom of how to make them work to their advantage, but until (if) that happens I'm enjoying F1. Sunday's race was an absorbing race from start to finish, and I can't say the same of many races in the last 10yrs or so.

Another good point

[wedge]

Debateable, but would we prefer a return to the days of bespoke tyres made for one team who dominated for 5 years to the extent that pole and the winner was entirely predictable?

That was due to a tyre war. If Bridgestone get sucked into Team Schumacher and favour Schumi/Ferrari then that's their perogative.


I've followed F1 since the mid-1970's and seen many changes in that time, but the one thing that has offended me most in terms of the racing is DRS, not the tyres. The tyres have presented the teams with a challenge and perhaps, in time, the bigger teams with all their resources will get to the bottom of how to make them work to their advantage, but until (if) that happens I'm enjoying F1. Sunday's race was an absorbing race from start to finish, and I can't say the same of many races in the last 10yrs or so.

Individually, yes the races are hugely absorbing but as a whole, as a season, then no.

Last year was terrific. A good balance of good/bad races, entertaining races and engrossing races with minimal overtaking.

This year merit has become an abstract concept.

How does one measure talent? 'Outdriving' a car ie. getting the maximum from the car - and doing it consistently week in week out has become a meaningless concept this year.

From another thread:


Do we have a reason as to why Williams has just gone from Q2 contenders to race winners? We can't blame wet weather etc. So what was it, and can it be maintained?

http://www.motorsportforums.com/f1/152809-what-great-day-f1-2.html#post1036225



If Maldonado/Williams excelling midfield suddenly finds about a second in the dry IMHO there's something clearly wrong.

[ArrowsFA1]

That was due to a tyre war. If Bridgestone get sucked into Team Schumacher and favour Schumi/Ferrari then that's their perogative.
Absolutely, but it was to the detriment of the racing overall.


If Maldonado/Williams excelling midfield suddenly finds about a second in the dry IMHO there's something clearly wrong.
Dont forget that Maldonado qualified ahead of Alonso in Australia, and was racing him for position to the end of the race, so it's not too big a jump to see the same two cars competing for the win in Spain. Why should it be wrong for a Williams to be up front, but Alonso's win in Malaysia passes without comment in the same context?

The "big" teams don't have the exclusive right to be at the front all the time, and if the likes of Williams and Sauber get their package right on a given weekend then I don't see anything wrong in that.

[Knock-on]

It is unfair to attribute the success Williams has experienced this season to how they have been managing the tyres.

Adam Parr did a huge amount of work towards the end of last year and the beginning of this one, turning things around. He has changed some of the old guard, streamlined the Grove team and brought in some very tallented personnel from rival teams.

There was also the strategic decision taken to drop Cosworth in favour of what is argueably the best engine out there; Renault.

What has happened at Williams is a much needed realignment of the team during the last couple of years that was accomplished by a creative Chairman and a team that deserves to be back at the top.

Is it so surprising?

[Knock-on]

(I wasn't going to mention specifics for obvious reasons... but yes ;) )

[SGWilko]

I know this is the Prelli thread (one of 'em, anyway) but, in reference to DRS I'd say this;

Given how there appears to be more overtaking generally (look at some of Seb's and Lewis' moves in Spain) is this solely down to the tyres, or is DRS allowing a move to be set up by being able to stay with a car with less drag on the straights and then use your own better 'twisty bits - high downforce' setup to pass further round the lap.

Certainly, when only the McLaren team had a working F-Duct, they used it more to off-set a bigger wing angle, so had the best of both worlds on any given track?

[F1boat]

A
The "big" teams don't have the exclusive right to be at the front all the time, and if the likes of Williams and Sauber get their package right on a given weekend then I don't see anything wrong in that.

That's it, really. I think that fans of the big teams (and one particular driver) are unhappy that there are new faces who appear to be competitive. But in reality, I can't see any of the winners as undeserving. Red Bull, Ferrari and McLaren were always strong, Mercedes worked hard for their breakthrough win and Williams are historically one of the Big Three. In reality, the new tires have allowed more of the top guys to shine, and that's not a bad thing. But of course if you want your favorite guy to win all the time you might be unhappy.

[wedge]

Absolutely, but it was to the detriment of the racing overall.

In some cases it was and some cases it wasn't. For instance would Schumi had been a strong contender for WDC in 2006?



Dont forget that Maldonado qualified ahead of Alonso in Australia, and was racing him for position to the end of the race, so it's not too big a jump to see the same two cars competing for the win in Spain. Why should it be wrong for a Williams to be up front, but Alonso's win in Malaysia passes without comment in the same context?

Wet races produces such results. Take Vettel's inaugural win in Italy 2008 and afterwards his STR was consistently strong in the midfield.


The "big" teams don't have the exclusive right to be at the front all the time, and if the likes of Williams and Sauber get their package right on a given weekend then I don't see anything wrong in that.

Merit - there's that word again. Is it on their day or is it consistency of attaining and performing at a high level which is what the "big" teams tend to do week in week out.

It's all very well having different winners and good storylines like so called rise of Williams but the WDC is looking more and more tainted as the year progresses. It's less emphasis of being at the front winning/fighting for wins but more of who gets the best job of fighting/getting out of a midfield rut.

[Dave B]

It's all very well having different winners and good storylines like so called rise of Williams but the WDC is looking more and more tainted as the year progresses. It's less emphasis of being at the front winning/fighting for wins but more of who gets the best job of fighting/getting out of a midfield rut.
I don't agree that the championship would be in any way tainted. There are some consistently strong performers such as Alonso, Raikkonen and Hamilton who seem to be getting the hang of their cars; and a decent chasing pack behind them such as Rosberg, Button, Vettel and Grosjean.

Even if Maldonado's win does turn out to be a fluke, I honestly don't think his strong performance devalues the championship - remember that he was chasing Alonso for 5th in Australia when he crashed so it's not like his Spanish pace was a total shock.

The cream always finds a way of rising to the top, the difference being that this year there are a few different flavours of cream.

[ArrowsFA1]

It's all very well having different winners and good storylines like so called rise of Williams but the WDC is looking more and more tainted as the year progresses. It's less emphasis of being at the front winning/fighting for wins but more of who gets the best job of fighting/getting out of a midfield rut.
I disagree that the WDC, or the WCC for that matter, is "tainted" in any way whatsoever.

The emphasis in 2012, as always, is "being at the front winning/fighting for wins". The reason that the likes of Sauber and Williams are able to get out of the midfield is that the teams generally are more closely matched than I can remember.

Ultimately the team and driver who do the best job over the whole of the season will deserve their titles and, aside from DRS, I see few reasons to complain about the racing we are getting this year.

[schmenke]

I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again…

What distinguishes Formula One is that it’s a constructors’ series where originality and technological innovation is employed to engineer and build a car from the ground up for the purpose of racing and dominating the field. It’s up to other teams to employ similar strategies to close the gap. The competition amongst teams in Formula One, unlike other series, takes place in the factories and garages as much as on track.

Lately it has been the FIA that has been introducing both technical and sporting regulation changes to artificially “close the gap” and spice up the show. As soon as a team develops a technical innovation (e.g. double diffusers, blow diffusers, etc.) that provides an advantage the FIA promptly ban it rather than allowing other teams to either devise similar technologies or conceive of counter-measures.

Some claim that gimmicks like DRS and unpredictable tires are good for the show, but I certainly feel they contradict the essence of the sport.

[jens]

By the way, in football leagues it is completely normal that top teams lose a few matches against midfielders/backmarkers every season. Does it mean football is fake just because someone like Wolves can beat ManU on occasion? Yet it is the consistency of top teams that brings them more points and consequently titles over a full season. So what would be so wrong about midfield teams winning a couple of races in F1 per season with the majority still belonging to top teams?

I think people are so used that every race win should belong to a chosen group of top teams, so even a single win out of norm is labelled as weird. Yes, as mentioned above, there is a reason, why top teams generally come out on top in the championship. But it doesn't mean they should come out on top by a huge margin. It is enough if they are winning by a small margin over a full season. Last I looked at the points table, RBR and McLaren still have almost twice as many points as, say, 4th best team in WCC. And that's quite a lot, to be honest. No-one outside RBR, McLaren (perhaps Lotus) has even a remote shot at WCC, regardless of how much "lottery" we are having.

It would be fine if by the end of the season WCC winner (a top team, by the way, not midfielder!) has 300 points, while, say, the 5th team has 150 pts. It would show the depth of the competition with the best-engineered/-funded/etc teams still coming out on top. Why would it need to be 500 pts vs 50 pts like some seem to think should be "the norm"?!

I enjoy, what I am seeing. And I don't get the hysteria. "Omg, a midfield team won a race - F1 is so wrong and fake, top teams should dominate every single session, only then it is a fair competition."

[Dave B]

I enjoy, what I am seeing. And I don't get the hysteria. "Omg, a midfield team won a race - F1 is so wrong and fake, top teams should dominate every single session, only then it is a fair competition."
I don't understand either. Even during the Ferrari/McLaren/Williams domination of recent years, before Pirelli apparently "ruined" everything, you had teams like Jordan or Stewart winning the occasional race.

[Malbec]

Many times - late eighties through to mid nineties, I'd see the likes of Mansell/Berger et al come up behind a slower car, struggle to get by within a couple of corners, then back off a bit to give the tyres a break, then come back again for another bash at the pass.

They did that to cool the tyres down, bring them back into their operating temperature and use the increased grip to pass. We're talking about managing tyre wear which is an entirely different subject.

Interestingly if you propose drivers stuck in a train back off to give their tyres a break, you're then proposing that they should start giving away their positions (or at least risk it). Is that how far tyre management should go in a racing situation?


I'd also point out that, on these fragile crap tyres (alegedley) he ran a 31 lap stint.........

Yes, he did exactly what I said drivers have to do to preserve their tyres. He was in free air for the vast majority of that last stint so he could manage them properly.

During that time he was being dropped by a second a lap by a Sauber, two seconds a lap by a Ferrari and Williams, and up to three/four seconds a lap by the Loti. He was lucky to finish where he did because the cars behind him were having equal trouble or were held up behind slow cars like Webber. I'm sure Lewis is happy with the level of pace he got out of that car....