Pirelli defend tyres after Schumacher blast

[CNR]

Formula One: Pirelli defend tyres after Schumacher blast | Deccan Chronicle (http://www.deccanchronicle.com/channels/sport/motor-racing/formula-one-pirelli-defend-tyres-after-schumacher-blast-082)

Formula One tyres suppliers Pirelli on Monday defended themselves after being
accused by seven-time champion driver Michael Schumacher of creating tyres that
prevent drivers pushing to their limits.

German Schumacher, 43, who worked his way through the field from 22nd on the
grid to finish 10th, for Mercedes, complained after Sunday's Bahrain Grand Prix
that the current tyres prevented all-out racing and were turning F1 into a
tyre-conservation contest.



this coming from the driver that got the best tyres when bridgestone used to supply ferrari with a better tyre then the other teams

[TMorel]

this coming from the driver that got the best tyres when bridgestone used to supply ferrari with a better tyre then the other teams

So this means he's probably the most qualified to speak in regards to what is a good tyre and what is a bad tyre!

Personally, I'm enjoying the show, but that's what it is, it isn't racing. And if the old man says he has plenty of ooomph left in reserve but the tyres are holding him back, how much more frustrating must it be for a really quick guy?

[Garry Walker]

this coming from the driver that got the best tyres when bridgestone used to supply ferrari with a better tyre then the other teams

Really really dumb thing to say, but I am not surprised.
Anyway, I have been critical of these nonsense tyres since the start, this artificial show and crap tyres is completely stupid.

[aryan]

Personally, I'm enjoying the show, but that's what it is, it isn't racing. And if the old man says he has plenty of ooomph left in reserve but the tyres are holding him back, how much more frustrating must it be for a really quick guy?

It's the same for everyone. It's called a 'formula' for a reason, it's a formula that everyone needs to adhere to.

Sure, MSC' driving style, which is to drive flat out a few laps before and after a pit stop (i.e., sprinting) isn't suited to this tyre, but I don't find that necessarily the tyre's fault. Formula 1 is not a sprint race, it's never been about driving flat out all along. It's always been a combination of pace, with durabiblity and balance thrown in. Yes, the importance of durability and balance in regards to outright pace is probably much higher than the Bridgestone era, but then again, that's not necessarily bad.

[Tazio]

Look here! It has reached the point in the season when all the real contenders, even considering Ms as one, have had moments when they were dead meat when just about anybody with new tire can smoke them. I agree in principle with M!ke's contention because it really is a dilemma, because there still is a lot of unknown. Plus MS is frustrated by his race retirement because of a pit stop error, and he (should at least) understand the evolution of the tires, and do the best that he can. He is catching on, I think of the two drivers M!ke is still the master of running consecutive Lap time near the max for his car in race trim. If M!ke has a well organized approach to the racing, Kind of like Lewis and other guys like Giles before him, He can roll the whole lot of the field when the stars align for him,
steal their watches too.

[call_me_andrew]

So MS's problem is that these tires are making him work harder? That's exactly what they're supposed to do!

[DexDexter]

Really really dumb thing to say, but I am not surprised.
Anyway, I have been critical of these nonsense tyres since the start, this artificial show and crap tyres is completely stupid.

Yep, let's get back to follow my leader-type of racing. That's so exciting.

[F1boat]

The times has changed and maybe Michael is too old to adapt. :( But I like the modern F1 much more than the sprints in previous years.

[Knock-on]

2009 scored 1/2 of the points of his team mate.
2010 scored 5/6ths of the points of his team mate.
2011 so far has scored 1/16th of the points of his team mate.

Now he's moaning about a set of tyres that the rest of the field has to work with and feels it's unfair. He's probably right. In the past he's had illegal electronics, illegal cars, preferential treatment from Bridgestone, a rear gunner to give him points and cover his ass and FIAssistance. No wonder he's not happy now that he's on a level plain wth everyone else.

There's always going to be excuses for Schumacher and his fans but he should just STFU. It's about time this serial cheat retires for good.

[F1boat]

Well, this is a bit harsh, Michael benefited for the advantage of Ferrari in the same way other drivers benefited from the advantages of Williams in the 90s and McLaren Mercedes in 1998-1999. Michael has proven that he is a great driver, not only in his dominant years, but in the years in which he was with visibly slower cars, like in 1998, or 1996, or yes - 1997, despite his move of Jacques in the final race. In reality Jacques should have won the championship very early, but he didn't because Michael was simply better. And I think that it is not objective to name of the greatest drivers in history "a serial cheat" only because of several moves in his long career. By the same logic one may call Senna stupid names too and I think that many people would have done it, if he was alive.
But I think that the problem is that an old driver can not change his habits like a young one and that's why it is time for Mike to retire. However, I'd always defend him against people, who claim that he is average driver. He was spectacular in his prime and he is decent for a 42-years old athlete. However, he can not fight time. It'd be best for him to retire.
And it'd be best for his haters to grow up.

[Knock-on]

Oh come on F1boat. Stop with this haters rubbish, it's something I expext from ioan. If you disagree with me then discuss it but without pointless rhetoric.

You may not consider him a seriel cheat but many of us do. From the illegal Electronics in the Bennetton and Ferrari to punting Hill and Jacques off the track to win championships. (Well, he did win one that way so cheating paid off)

Then we have years of people denying that the FIA favoured Ferrari only for Ferrari to foolishly confirm it a couple of years ago.

This has been documented many times along with quite a few others and that doesn't even touch on the many suspected instances which can't be proved.

Nobody denies he wasn't a brilliant driver. I used to be a fan and believe he could have become the undisputed best of all time but he resorted to cheating. He was past his prime and should have retired at least a year before he did the first time around. Now he's moaning that he has the same equipment as everyone else and just needs to free up that seat so it's not wasted. Hell, he's even making Rosberg look good.

[odykas]

Knock-On,

I agree on everything apart from retirement.
I want more :devil:

[wedge]

2009 scored 1/2 of the points of his team mate.
2010 scored 5/6ths of the points of his team mate.
2011 so far has scored 1/16th of the points of his team mate.

Now he's moaning about a set of tyres that the rest of the field has to work with and feels it's unfair. He's probably right. In the past he's had illegal electronics, illegal cars, preferential treatment from Bridgestone, a rear gunner to give him points and cover his ass and FIAssistance. No wonder he's not happy now that he's on a level plain wth everyone else.

There's always going to be excuses for Schumacher and his fans but he should just STFU. It's about time this serial cheat retires for good.

When Schumi had inferior tyres he did indeed STFU.

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.

When Goodyear used to supply tyres to Ferrari in the tyre war with B'stone they were at worst terrible and could blister easily. Ferrari was hard on its tyres in 1997 which was why JV could overtake Schumi at the last race.

Shumi has raced when Goodyear and B'stone were sole tyre suppliers. He didn't do too badly did he?

Schumi was very diplomatic, I must say, as he doesn't exactly have the demeanor of wanting to throw toys out of his pram:

FTJnd7XX5Pc

I do sympathise. The style of racing we have now is like walking on tip toes. It's like giving the teams a fixed amount of fuel. It's still racing but not racing per se in that it takes out the purity of driving close to the limit when one needs when managing tyres over a stint.

I seem to recall NASCAR used softer compounds about a decade ago and seem to remember the drivers saying that it wasn't racing, more like trying to survive. Perhaps F1 does need a rethink.

[BDunnell]

I do sympathise. The style of racing we have now is like walking on tip toes. It's like giving the teams a fixed amount of fuel. It's still racing but not racing per se in that it takes out the purity of driving close to the limit when one needs when managing tyres over a stint.

Very well put. I agree completely.

[jens]

You may not consider him a seriel cheat but many of us do. From the illegal Electronics in the Bennetton and Ferrari to punting Hill and Jacques off the track to win championships. (Well, he did win one that way so cheating paid off)

Then we have years of people denying that the FIA favoured Ferrari only for Ferrari to foolishly confirm it a couple of years ago.


Dear Knock-on. I don't see, what do Benetton, Ferrari and FIA issues have to do with Schumacher's cheating. As you claim this makes him a "serial cheater". Applying this logic Pérez and Kobayashi were cheaters in Australia '11, because they had an illegal car. Button was a cheater in 2005 and was subsequently banned for a few races. Brundle and Bellof were serial cheaters in 1984 and both were DQ'd from the season. We are going to absurd if the decisions of team principals and designers are blamed on the driver.




It's like giving the teams a fixed amount of fuel.


Interesting that in the 80's we actually had such fuel rule, which meant that all teams needed to conserve fuel throughout the race and even then many cars ran out of fuel in the final laps!

All in all. I am realizing that the arguments of drivers not having any option to push at all, are a reason for thought. And claims that they should at least have an option for going flat-out, even if at the expense of making more pitstops.

But then again, can it be achieved without taking away the excitement of F1? Because personally I don't want to lose it either. Besides all - even though everyone needs to conserve a lot, still we are seeing varieties in strategies and some people have managed to make the tyres work for a longer period of time. There are drivers, who have made 2-stoppers work. Pérez has made even a 1-stopper work.

[BDunnell]

Dear Knock-on. I don't see, what do Benetton, Ferrari and FIA issues have to do with Schumacher's cheating. As you claim this makes him a "serial cheater". Applying this logic Pérez and Kobayashi were cheaters in Australia '11, because they had an illegal car. Button was a cheater in 2005 and was subsequently banned for a few races. Brundle and Bellof were serial cheaters in 1984 and both were DQ'd from the season. We are going to absurd if the decisions of team principals and designers are blamed on the driver.

Exactly, jens.

[SGWilko]

2009 scored 1/2 of the points of his team mate.
2010 scored 5/6ths of the points of his team mate.
2011 so far has scored 1/16th of the points of his team mate.

Now he's moaning about a set of tyres that the rest of the field has to work with and feels it's unfair. He's probably right. In the past he's had illegal electronics, illegal cars, preferential treatment from Bridgestone, a rear gunner to give him points and cover his ass and FIAssistance. No wonder he's not happy now that he's on a level plain wth everyone else.

There's always going to be excuses for Schumacher and his fans but he should just STFU. It's about time this serial cheat retires for good.

I must remember not upset you when you've got a cobb on!

[Zico]

Guys, can I just say.. great debate!. So many valid points coming from all sides of the fence and you are all mature with it, thats why I keep coming back here, great stuff!

On one hand I can apreciate that looking after the tyres is part of racing but should it be such a large part of F1? Isn't it a more apropriate feature of endurance racing? Personally I think I want to see the quickest drivers being rewarded more than those who can look after their tyres the best... I think it has gone too far in the wrong direction and find myself agreeing with MS. Whether I rate him, like him or hate him is irelevant to me.

[ShiftingGears]

2009 scored 1/2 of the points of his team mate.
2010 scored 5/6ths of the points of his team mate.
2011 so far has scored 1/16th of the points of his team mate.

I think it is pretty apparent why he has scored 1/16th of Rosberg's points, it doesn't take a genius to figure it out if you were watching the races.


Now he's moaning about a set of tyres that the rest of the field has to work with and feels it's unfair. He's probably right. In the past he's had illegal electronics, illegal cars, preferential treatment from Bridgestone, a rear gunner to give him points and cover his ass and FIAssistance. No wonder he's not happy now that he's on a level plain wth everyone else.

Funny, I don't recall him throwing the toys out of the pram when he didn't have the best car or tyres on the grid. It is clearly just a successful driver giving his opinion on what he thinks formula one tyres should be. It was a level playing field the last two years and he didn't object then, so why now?

I think you are frankly still unhappy about all the years Schumacher was the best driver on the grid by a clear margin.


There's always going to be excuses for Schumacher and his fans but he should just STFU. It's about time this serial cheat retires for good.

His comments don't display any level of hypocrisy like you are suggesting, nor does it have anything to do with his career. I think the only excuses we are seeing at the moment are from people who want to denigrate his past achievements.

[ArrowsFA1]

I think you are frankly still unhappy about all the years Schumacher was the best driver on the grid by a clear margin.
Tyres played a big role in that as they do today. The difference is that then they worked for one team all the time to the detriment of the other teams.

Today we have tyres that work for different teams at different times depending on car setup and conditions. Mercedes got it spot on in China and we didn't hear any complaints from Michael then.

Bottom line is that the teams are being supplied with the same tyres and it's up to them to make them work for their car.

[wedge]

Funny, I don't recall him throwing the toys out of the pram when he didn't have the best car or tyres on the grid. It is clearly just a successful driver giving his opinion on what he thinks formula one tyres should be. It was a level playing field the last two years and he didn't object then, so why now?

I think you are frankly still unhappy about all the years Schumacher was the best driver on the grid by a clear margin.



His comments don't display any level of hypocrisy like you are suggesting, nor does it have anything to do with his career. I think the only excuses we are seeing at the moment are from people who want to denigrate his past achievements.

:up:

Schumi was wearing his Elder Statesman hat on.

He's gone through numerous rule changes to improve the 'show'. Why else would he STFU on refuelling, it begs to wonder?

[F1boat]

Michael was the best driver in his generation, maybe of all time and I will always rate him very highly. But I think that he is now past his prime and getting desperate because of his ill fortune. And about this argument that the racing is not pure, stop it. Pure is an ideal, never a reality. We have good, entertaining racing. I don't want the bad all days, when overtaking was impossible, nor would I want a rule which penalizes smart drivers, who care about their tires. And I am sure that you don't either - but the Internet encourages moaning about all things, from F1 racing trough movies and music.

[Knock-on]

^^^ What he says ^^^

[tfp]

IMO the purposely shorter lasting tyres make a much less predictable and more fun racing, I prefer to watch this season than 2010 for example. I'm surprised the shoe is saying this, his career is so long now that surely he will have had to adapt his driving style at some other point in his career to suit different tyres! He should be a veteran to this by now.

[SGWilko]

IMO the purposely shorter lasting tyres make a much less predictable and more fun racing, I prefer to watch this season than 2010 for example. I'm surprised the shoe is saying this, his career is so long now that surely he will have had to adapt his driving style at some other point in his career to suit different tyres! He should be a veteran to this by now.

According to JA, the tyres could last structurally the whole race, it is just the performance drop-off that has been designed into them.

[ShiftingGears]

Bottom line is that the teams are being supplied with the same tyres and it's up to them to make them work for their car.

This point is blatantly obvious and I don't think it detracts from Schumacher's opinion.

[F1boat]

Nico defends the new tyres now, says that they are great for F1!

[SGWilko]

Karen Millen is advising Pirelli now?

[The Black Knight]

I'm still with Schumi on this. F1 is the pinnacle of motorsport. The drivers should be balls to the wall throughout the race and the fastest person with the fastest car over the course of a race should win. This is what true racing is about. Last year wasn't too bad, I felt they got it pretty spot on, but this year it's glaringly apparent that most of the drivers are nursing their cars throughout a race. While it's good for the show in all, it doesn't echo to me what F1 should be about and that is racing, not gently nursing your tyres. I don't blame Pirelli because this is what they were asked to do but overtakes because the guys tyres in front of you are shot and yours are in better shape don't give me excitement. I'd rather see a guy having to work for that overtake. It's up to F1 to find a solution that provides enjoyment for both the drivers and spectators. At the moment they have one but I'm will to suggest that if you ask any driver on the grid, they would much rather driver a 2004 spec F1 car with Bridgestones than todays ones.

[F1boat]

I'm still with Schumi on this. F1 is the pinnacle of motorsport. The drivers should be balls to the wall throughout the race and the fastest person with the fastest car over the course of a race should win. This is what true racing is about.

I am not sure that driving a rocketship like the F2004 is harder that fining the perfect balance between a quick lap and a lap which allows you to manage your tyre. I personally think that now F1 is very hard for the drivers and teams and this is good for motorsport as well as for the fans. You claim that last year was better, but with 12 wins for the Red Bull Racing it was boring for some people. Besides, Pirelli allows at least 5 racing teams, all of them with fine drivers, to compete for the win, not only the usual suspects Red Bull and McLaren.

[ArrowsFA1]

The drivers should be balls to the wall throughout the race and the fastest person with the fastest car over the course of a race should win. This is what true racing is about.
Juan-Manuel Fangio was famous for winning at the slowest possible speed. That's not to say he wasn't capable of being the fastest when circumstances demanded it, the 1957 German GP being a prime example.

[The Black Knight]

I am not sure that driving a rocketship like the F2004 is harder that fining the perfect balance between a quick lap and a lap which allows you to manage your tyre. I personally think that now F1 is very hard for the drivers and teams and this is good for motorsport as well as for the fans. You claim that last year was better, but with 12 wins for the Red Bull Racing it was boring for some people. Besides, Pirelli allows at least 5 racing teams, all of them with fine drivers, to compete for the win, not only the usual suspects Red Bull and McLaren.

I am sure a rocketship, as you put it, like the F2004 enables a drive to push to the limit lap after lap. The enjoyment must be intense and incredibly satisfying. Drivers like Schumacher and Alonso have all come out and said that they preferred those cars to the ones we have now. They were physically more exerting.

There were many factors that allowed RBR be so dominant last year and it wasn't down to tyres alone. F1 is hard for a driver now because he can't push his car to the limit which is what any drive wants to be able to do at any time. It's hard in a bad way not in a good way where the driver tests his speed. Now it's just like being the fastest man to gingerly push his car around the track for fear of pushing a little too hard and destroying the tyres. It's like being in a Ferrari road car and sticking to the 100kmph speed limit, whomever stick closest to the 100kmph benchmark for the longest time wins. It's frustrating and this is now what the pinnacle of motorsport is about opposed to being about raw speed, car control and talent.

Kimi is a prime example of this. His losing so many places in a lap in China was ridiculous. It's not fair on a driver to be punished like this after doing such a fine job up until then.

Like I said, it's great for the sunshine supporter, oh yeah this new generation of F1 is great, but I love watching cars being pushed to the limit lap after lap. I don't like seeing a driver being punished for being quicker which is what these tyres do.

[heliocastroneves#3]

Schumi is completely right because f1 raci
ng should be about racing to the cars limit or even over it now its all about driving below the cars limit as you need to spare your tires and thats not good at all as it takes the racing away a little bit

[Knock-on]

It's strange that the driver whose fans claim can drive around a cars problems and get results from his drive that are above and beyond what it's capable of is the only one really moaning about the tyres. They're the same for everyone and Schumacher is showing that he can't cope. Perhaps his former successes were more due to the superior machinery and unique matched Bridgestones than the driver?

Whatever the reason, you can only judge Schumachers performance against his team mate. For the first time in a long time he is in a straight fight and doesn't have a lap-dog. The results speak for themselves.

[Big Ben]

I certainly enjoy MS' comeback. It's nice of him to come back and shake off that false super driver aura.

[The Black Knight]

Schumi is completely right because f1 raci
ng should be about racing to the cars limit or even over it now its all about driving below the cars limit as you need to spare your tires and thats not good at all as it takes the racing away a little bit

Exactly. Can you imagine what Senna would think of today's rules? He would hate having to nurse a car during the entire race. It's a completely absurd situation for the supposed pinnacle of motorsport. Senna would turn in his grave.

[ArrowsFA1]

Kimi is a prime example of this. His losing so many places in a lap in China was ridiculous. It's not fair on a driver to be punished like this after doing such a fine job up until then.
I think that was a prime example of team and driver getting it wrong.


Can you imagine what Senna would think of today's rules? He would hate having to nurse a car during the entire race. It's a completely absurd situation for the supposed pinnacle of motorsport. Senna would turn in his grave.
Perhaps. Impossible to say. The one thing Senna hated was electronics & computers taking control away from the driver but the current tyres do not do that. They add an element which the driver (and team) has to manage.

Maybe he, as a driver, would welcome the challenge of looking after the tyres, and doing that better than anyone else. It was something he excelled at in the era of 1-lap qualifying tyres.

[Malbec]

Exactly. Can you imagine what Senna would think of today's rules? He would hate having to nurse a car during the entire race. It's a completely absurd situation for the supposed pinnacle of motorsport. Senna would turn in his grave.

Did he not do exactly the same though except with fuel management, turning the boost levels up and down depending on whether he needed outright power or wanted to conserve fuel for the duration of the race? How is that different to how drivers have to nurse the tyres these days?

[The Black Knight]

I think that was a prime example of team and driver getting it wrong.

It's an example of how ridiculously easy it is to get it wrong with these tyres. To lose that much places in one lap because you went longer with your tyres is absurd in any form of motorsport.

This is not racing and considering what a good job Kimi had done until then he didn't deserve the drop off he got. I'm not even a Kimi fan but I still found that harsh and completely absurd that a tyre should drop off like that.

[Knock-on]

Come on Knighty baby. The Kimster and his team took a gamble. They tried to eek it out past where they needed to change tyres. The old adage for tyres is to ALWAYS be on the right tyres at the right time. We have seen some classic races where teams have been changing from dry tyres to wets, to inters etc throughout race to ensure they don't lose time by being on the wrong rubber. You get some drivers (Senna and Hamilton spring to mind) that seem to be able to make dry tyres work a la or two more than other drivers in progressivly wet conditions but ultimatly they need to be on the right boots.

Hamiltons' debut season ws a prime example of a team getting it wrong and staying out on worn rubber too long. It cost him the championship!! The Lotus team took a punt and misjudged it.

[SGWilko]

To lose that much places in one lap because you went longer with your tyres is absurd in any form of motorsport.

Personally, I see it as no different to a driver grenading his engine with 'too much - for too long' with turbo boost in the 80's to keep a competitor at bay.

[DexDexter]

I'm still with Schumi on this. F1 is the pinnacle of motorsport. The drivers should be balls to the wall throughout the race and the fastest person with the fastest car over the course of a race should win. This is what true racing is about. Last year wasn't too bad, I felt they got it pretty spot on, but this year it's glaringly apparent that most of the drivers are nursing their cars throughout a race. While it's good for the show in all, it doesn't echo to me what F1 should be about and that is racing, not gently nursing your tyres. I don't blame Pirelli because this is what they were asked to do but overtakes because the guys tyres in front of you are shot and yours are in better shape don't give me excitement. I'd rather see a guy having to work for that overtake. It's up to F1 to find a solution that provides enjoyment for both the drivers and spectators. At the moment they have one but I'm will to suggest that if you ask any driver on the grid, they would much rather driver a 2004 spec F1 car with Bridgestones than todays ones.

Nursing tires has been a big part of F1 for many years and it's good that those times are back. A good example is the 1990 French GP where Ivan Capelli decided not to stop for tires and go through the race with one set of tires. He nearly won it after a great battle with Alain Prost. What's wrong with that?

[wedge]

Did he not do exactly the same though except with fuel management, turning the boost levels up and down depending on whether he needed outright power or wanted to conserve fuel for the duration of the race? How is that different to how drivers have to nurse the tyres these days?

Problem with today's Pirelli's is its horrible heat cycle and that they suffer greatly from thermal tyre degradation. For most, any attempt at pushing (turning up the boost) you overheat the tyres and its pretty much downhill, the grip just goes and lap times go higher. However it should be noted that the tyres wear very well.


Kimi is a prime example of this. His losing so many places in a lap in China was ridiculous. It's not fair on a driver to be punished like this after doing such a fine job up until then.

Bad strategy call. Renault called in Kimi too early and Kimi had to do a long final stint whilst stuck on a 2 stopper.


Come on Knighty baby. The Kimster and his team took a gamble. They tried to eek it out past where they needed to change tyres. The old adage for tyres is to ALWAYS be on the right tyres at the right time. We have seen some classic races where teams have been changing from dry tyres to wets, to inters etc throughout race to ensure they don't lose time by being on the wrong rubber. You get some drivers (Senna and Hamilton spring to mind) that seem to be able to make dry tyres work a la or two more than other drivers in progressivly wet conditions but ultimatly they need to be on the right boots.

Hamiltons' debut season ws a prime example of a team getting it wrong and staying out on worn rubber too long. It cost him the championship!! The Lotus team took a punt and misjudged it.

Funny you make that point. 2006 Hungarian GP Schumi stayed out on inters and worn them down to slicks and went backwards in the process. Did he moan about Bridgestone's tyres?

[SGWilko]

Did he moan about Bridgestone's tyres?

Did he my ar5e!

[F1boat]

I am sure a rocketship, as you put it, like the F2004 enables a drive to push to the limit lap after lap. The enjoyment must be intense and incredibly satisfying. Drivers like Schumacher and Alonso have all come out and said that they preferred those cars to the ones we have now. They were physically more exerting.


Yes, but is it harder? I don't think so. It may be enjoyable for the drivers and fantasy for some fans who think that their favorite driver may benefit in such condition ;) But in my opinion the current F1 is much harder for both drivers and teams, mentally and strategically. F1 is tough again, very tough and very interesting. And I am not a "sunshine fan" - I have loyally followed this sport since 1996. So far only 2003 and 1999 come as entertaining as this one - 1999 was close because Michael didn't race in half the races and McLarens were unreliable, 2003 because of the tire war. This is actually better than either scenarios. And MUCH better than 2004, mind you.

[ArrowsFA1]

Michael Schumacher (http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/99498):
We have four of them [tyres] each time we go out and it's the same for everybody.
:up:

[CNR]

Pirelli says it will not change approach - Racer.com (http://www.racer.com/pirelli-says-it-will-not-change-approach/article/240825/)


Hembery said that he was not upset at Schumacher's comments, but was slightly
baffled because it was Mercedes boss Ross Brawn who pushed so hard for the tires
to be so challenging.

[F1boat]

Thanks God! F1 will remain unpredictable, at least for a few more races...

[Garry Walker]

Nico defends the new tyres now, says that they are great for F1!
Nico needs to grow some balls


Perhaps. Impossible to say. The one thing Senna hated was electronics & computers taking control away from the driver but the current tyres do not do that. They add an element which the driver (and team) has to manage.

Maybe he, as a driver, would welcome the challenge of looking after the tyres, and doing that better than anyone else. It was something he excelled at in the era of 1-lap qualifying tyres. Yes, I am sure Senna would have enjoyed not going out in qualifying in order to save his tyres for the race. I am sure he would have enjoyed almost half of 10 guys not doing a proper fast lap in qualifying because they need to save tyres for the race. Yes, that is true racing, not some artificial crap made to humour the less intelligent "racing" fans.


Nursing tires has been a big part of F1 for many years and it's good that those times are back. A good example is the 1990 French GP where Ivan Capelli decided not to stop for tires and go through the race with one set of tires. He nearly won it after a great battle with Alain Prost. What's wrong with that?
Because back then you had the option of pushing or saving tyres. Also, the skill of the driver to nurse tyres was important. Nowadays NO ONE can push, NO ONE. Nor do they have an option of pushing, because then they need to pit after every 3 laps.


Thanks God! F1 will remain unpredictable, at least for a few more races...
And fake and artificial. I cannot imagine anyone besides a complete idiot enjoying this fake stuff we see now. It is like Coronation Street or Home and Away.

[aryan]

Juan-Manuel Fangio was famous for winning at the slowest possible speed. That's not to say he wasn't capable of being the fastest when circumstances demanded it, the 1957 German GP being a prime example.


Arrows, sometimes it's so nice to have someone who knows the history and pedigree of F1 as clearly as you do.

Tyre management was a lost art in F1 for decades, and now it's made a comeback. I think both viewers and drivers are having to adjust to this, and some are doing it better than others.

Personally, I think these Pirelli tyres are the best thing that could have happened to F1.

[Knock-on]

Well there we are then.

Me too. I guess I'm an idiot on Garrys' scale of things. I find this strangly reassuring :D

[DexDexter]

These Garry Walkers and Ioans should just stop watching the series, I mean nobody forces you to watch it, do they?

[F1boat]

Garry Walker should stop insulting fans who enjoy the sport. If he doesn't like it, he may leave and shut the **** up.

[SGWilko]

Garry Walker should stop insulting fans who enjoy the sport. If he doesn't like it, he may leave and shut the **** up.

The more reactions they get, the more they will post! Ignoring posts you dislike and not responding is the best medicine.

Except Tamburello of course, if you keep at it for long enough, he normally blows a gasket in public (or via PM of course!) :p

[Knock-on]

The more reactions they get, the more they will post! Ignoring posts you dislike and not responding is the best medicine.

Except Tamburello of course, if you keep at it for long enough, he normally blows a gasket in public (or via PM of course!) :p

Tamb was great. You just keep pointing out where he was full of 'something' or telling porkies and suddenly you get threatened with waking up with a horses head in your bed.

As for the other two you mentioned, I generally start to worry when I find I agree with them :laugh:

[Dave B]

These Garry Walkers and Ioans should just stop watching the series, I mean nobody forces you to watch it, do they?
One of them claims to have stopped watching F1 in response to the series racing in Bahrain - I'm sure he'll be as good as his word, having made many posts about the hypocrisy of others in the past.

[Tazio]

One of them claims to have stopped watching F1 in response to the series racing in Bahrain - I'm sure he'll be as good as his word, having made many posts about the hypocrisy of others in the past.That doesn't preclude him from listening to it on "The Marconi" :confused:

[Knock-on]

One of them claims to have stopped watching F1 in response to the series racing in Bahrain - I'm sure he'll be as good as his word, having made many posts about the hypocrisy of others in the past.

<sniggers>

Mind you, I don't think he actually watched many GP before Bahrain judging by the accuracy of his posts ;)

[steveaki13]

Arrows, sometimes it's so nice to have someone who knows the history and pedigree of F1 as clearly as you do.

Tyre management was a lost art in F1 for decades, and now it's made a comeback. I think both viewers and drivers are having to adjust to this, and some are doing it better than others.

Personally, I think these Pirelli tyres are the best thing that could have happened to F1.


Agree on both counts actually.

Firstly It is great to have a range of F1 fans and Arrows certainly knows his stuff.

Also despite what I have said about Pirellis tyres, you are correct. We adjust to Fuelling and No Refuelling, and its the same with the tyres. In a few years we may not have this type of F1. With Turbo's and alike.

[wedge]

Garry Walker should stop insulting fans who enjoy the sport. If he doesn't like it, he may leave and shut the **** up.

I don't like the performance of the stewards nor do I would like to see wings taken off so should I STFU?

It's not acceptable to most and even I have a tolerance but being insulting shows a level passion for the sport.

[F1boat]

I don't like the performance of the stewards nor do I would like to see wings taken off so should I STFU?

It's not acceptable to most and even I have a tolerance but being insulting shows a level passion for the sport.
Wedge, I mean this post:
"I cannot imagine anyone besides a complete idiot enjoying this fake stuff we see now."
You never were so insulting. Neither, I hope, was I.

[wedge]

Tyre management was a lost art in F1 for decades, and now it's made a comeback. I think both viewers and drivers are having to adjust to this, and some are doing it better than others.

Let me give you the example of 2006 season:

San Marino GP Schumi held off Alonso for lap after lap in the second stint and yat at the same time also conserved his tyres so he could push after Alonso pitted.

Brazillian GP Schumi gets a puncture and WDC hopes have been compromised. Conserves his tyres for the first half of his long second stint with the help of Massa not lapping him then in the second half of that stint he pushes like crazy.

In that regard this year's Pirelli's are far, far too compromising.

[wedge]

It's something schuey will have to get used to in that case. Times change.

2006 Hungarian GP Schumi stayed out on inters on a dry track and went backwards. And nor did he moan about Bridgestone's crap tyres for that particular race.

Is it about getting used to a style or racing or a preference. I would argue its the latter.

[BDunnell]

2006 Hungarian GP Schumi stayed out on inters on a dry track and went backwards. And nor did he moan about Bridgestone's crap tyres for that particular race.

Is it about getting used to a style or racing or a preference. I would argue its the latter.

I'm not sure a preference matters in this case, though. After all, everyone has to get used to it somehow.

[Tazio]

Putting it into perspective; this is of course motor racing and is attended by people that want to be entertained. Just be happy that when your wife goes into labor and is 50% dilated before you head to the hospital that you don't have a set of the super softs on your sedan and the hospital is a 60K drive :laugh:

[Knock-on]

Putting it into perspective; this is of course motor racing and is attended by people that want to be entertained. Just be happy that when your wife goes into labor and is 50% dilated before you head to the hospital that you don't have a set of the super softs on your sedan and the hospital is a 60K drive :laugh:

To be fair though. If you have a super soft, the chances of your wife being pregnant in the first place ar pretty rare ;)

[F1boat]

Let me give you the example of 2006 season:

San Marino GP Schumi held off Alonso for lap after lap in the second stint and yat at the same time also conserved his tyres so he could push after Alonso pitted.

Brazillian GP Schumi gets a puncture and WDC hopes have been compromised. Conserves his tyres for the first half of his long second stint with the help of Massa not lapping him then in the second half of that stint he pushes like crazy.

In that regard this year's Pirelli's are far, far too compromising.

But is it better to see a much faster driver unable to overtake, as in Imola in 2005 or 2006? I think not :)

[wedge]

But is it better to see a much faster driver unable to overtake, as in Imola in 2005 or 2006? I think not :)

It was still exciting and still engrossing and far, far more rewarding than a meaningless DRS-assisted overtake when one blasts by on the outside line.

And yes, there are instances of frustration as in Abu Dhabi 2010 but its namely aerodynamics to blame.

[ShiftingGears]

The first step is getting rid of DRS. Way too gimmicky.

[F1boat]

It was still exciting and still engrossing and far, far more rewarding than a meaningless DRS-assisted overtake when one blasts by on the outside line.

And yes, there are instances of frustration as in Abu Dhabi 2010 but its namely aerodynamics to blame.

I guess that it's a matter of taste :) I prefer this year's races :)

[steveaki13]

It was still exciting and still engrossing and far, far more rewarding than a meaningless DRS-assisted overtake when one blasts by on the outside line.

And yes, there are instances of frustration as in Abu Dhabi 2010 but its namely aerodynamics to blame.

You speak the truth Wedge.


This is it

[Garry Walker]

Garry Walker should stop insulting fans who enjoy the sport. If he doesn't like it, he may leave and shut the **** up.
Did I told the likes of you to leave and shut the **** up when your kind were crying about the lack of overtaking? No, I didn't. I don't like the gimmick artificial "racing" we have nowadays and I will say about it whatever I want, I want proper racing back where the fastest driver win, not like we have now.

btw: the opinion of someone like you is less important to me than used toilet paper.


These Garry Walkers and Ioans should just stop watching the series, I mean nobody forces you to watch it, do they? I am watching in more from habit, not from passion anymore due to idiotic changes to rules and these awful gimmick tyres.
BTW: Did I told the likes of you to stop watching the series if you are not happy with the lack of overtaking?


Let me give you the example of 2006 season:

San Marino GP Schumi held off Alonso for lap after lap in the second stint and yat at the same time also conserved his tyres so he could push after Alonso pitted.

Brazillian GP Schumi gets a puncture and WDC hopes have been compromised. Conserves his tyres for the first half of his long second stint with the help of Massa not lapping him then in the second half of that stint he pushes like crazy.

In that regard this year's Pirelli's are far, far too compromising.
At Brazil Schumi was pretty much flat out the whole stint. At San Marino he saved tyres and then pushed, something that wouldn't happen these days, because even after one lap of pushing on race fuel you kill the tyres.

[F1boat]

You have the right to b1tch, moan and whine as much as you want, Walker. What you can't do is insult people who enjoy the phenomenal year we have. Your insults show only your lack of proper manners.

[Garry Walker]

You have the right to b1tch, moan and whine as much as you want, Walker. What you can't do is insult people who enjoy the phenomenal year we have. Your insults show only your lack of proper manners.

you think I lack proper manners, yet find it acceptable to tell me to STFU. Does hypocrisy not exist in where-ever you live in?

[F1boat]

Perhaps I have not spoken clearly enough. You can moan as much as you want about tires. You have the right to prefer dull DTM-like racing, the likes of which we saw in previous year, like the Abu Dhabi 2010 GP. What I think is unacceptable is to cyber-bully the fans of this year's racing with insults. This, I think, is ill-mannered.

[F1boat]

You both need to mind your manners and stop the bickering as most here don't want to read it.


OK, I apologize for spamming the thread :)

[airshifter]

You both need to mind your manners and stop the bickering as most here don't want to read it.

The fact of the matter is Pirelli have delivered to the mandate set yet are the ones getting all the flack. All rule changes attract opposition from fans and within teams, but thats something that will not go away with a bit of shouting. At the beginning of 2009 when the aero regs were changed and we had higher, slimmer rear wings and wing front wings, we had alot of opposition amongst fans. The front wings were declared dangerous by some because they were too wide but guess what, we've all gotten used to it. The same will happen to the tyres and the teams will work out how to make them work better. Its not welcome for all, but we ain't going to change it now so lets just enjoy the racing.

Great post Henners.

At the end of the day it's what we have for current regs and we along with the drivers have to deal with it. And for the sake of not making the forum a daycare center, we should express our opinions and accept those that oppose them without resorting to insults and childish attacks.

[steveaki13]

You both need to mind your manners and stop the bickering as most here don't want to read it.

The fact of the matter is Pirelli have delivered to the mandate set yet are the ones getting all the flack. All rule changes attract opposition from fans and within teams, but thats something that will not go away with a bit of shouting. At the beginning of 2009 when the aero regs were changed and we had higher, slimmer rear wings and wing front wings, we had alot of opposition amongst fans. The front wings were declared dangerous by some because they were too wide but guess what, we've all gotten used to it. The same will happen to the tyres and the teams will work out how to make them work better. Its not welcome for all, but we ain't going to change it now so lets just enjoy the racing.

This

A few thoughts..

I saw a reference to Abu Dabi 2010. Which I agree was a terrible race, but of course alot of races that season were great.
Same with 2004, it wasn't vintage but these years there were good races, and DRS and Pirellis would have struggled to stop Ferrari in all likelyhood.

So its not case as some seem to make it that F1 was terrible then and great now, and visa versa great then terrible now.


Now I have made my feelings clear before about DRS, and that I would prefer it to be gone.

I like the concept of Pirelli tyres as it makes for a more varied race, than the later bridgestones, when softs could last the whole race. However I do feel they have maybe gone a tad too far.

That said unlike some, although I have a 10% doubt about the tyres, I still think F1 is great. And think despite our slight differences in opinion most here would love F1 no matter what the rules and regs.

F1 was great before Pirelli and DRS, and F1 is great now with DRS and Pirelli, its just a matter of personal preference. It doesn't mean we are head to head.

[ioan]

Perhaps I have not spoken clearly enough. You can moan as much as you want about tires. You have the right to prefer dull DTM-like racing, the likes of which we saw in previous year, like the Abu Dhabi 2010 GP. What I think is unacceptable is to cyber-bully the fans of this year's racing with insults. This, I think, is ill-mannered.

:rolleyes: Cry me a river. :rotflmao:

[ioan]

How long before the Pireli board give Hembery the boot?!
One can't read Autosport without an almost daily attempt from Hembery to defend his crappy tires, while people keep talking about how they seemingly can't produce a competitive race tire, something that Bridgestone did with such ease.

Michelin left for the reasons we know and following that Bridgestone left after a couple of years because they knew that without competition they are not proving anything to anyone.
Pirelli arrived and the tire lottery started. No matter how much the average Joe will love the total unpredictability of the races Pirelli isn't coming out of it as a winner as they are not beating any rival and on top of it the whole commentary during the races is about when the tires of driver X will be dead, and usually it's about 10 to 15 laps which is laughable.

I can't see the board in Milano being happy with this kind of image, but hey this is just my view, so I'll now hand it over to the 'experts' who will tell the world how Alonso vs MS in Imola 2005 and 2006 was not great racing and what they watch now is the best ever racing. :D

[SGWilko]

This

A few thoughts..

I saw a reference to Abu Dabi 2010. Which I agree was a terrible race, but of course alot of races that season were great.
Same with 2004, it wasn't vintage but these years there were good races, and DRS and Pirellis would have struggled to stop Ferrari in all likelyhood.

So its not case as some seem to make it that F1 was terrible then and great now, and visa versa great then terrible now.


Now I have made my feelings clear before about DRS, and that I would prefer it to be gone.

I like the concept of Pirelli tyres as it makes for a more varied race, than the later bridgestones, when softs could last the whole race. However I do feel they have maybe gone a tad too far.

That said unlike some, although I have a 10% doubt about the tyres, I still think F1 is great. And think despite our slight differences in opinion most here would love F1 no matter what the rules and regs.

F1 was great before Pirelli and DRS, and F1 is great now with DRS and Pirelli, its just a matter of personal preference. It doesn't mean we are head to head.

DRS was originally a concept born from use on the front wings. It was felt that, whilst it aided the drivers dial out understeer as the tyres wore, it did not give the benefit it was originally intended to give.

So we got the the DRS as it is now. Effectively, I think opinion on its use was swayed by the benefits first demonstrated with the F-Duct. What I do think, is that the FIA got it wrong first time around, and became a foregone conclusion at most tracks, that DRS would aid an overtake.

They seem to be learning, and it is now becoming less easy to get mugged on the straights. I still see a lot of non DRS overtaking.

I guess we are stuck with it, so there really is no point crying over spilled milk.

[F1boat]

When I see you make the claim once again ioan that Pirelli are failing to deliver a race tyre yet Bridgestone did it with ease I am just left wondering if you are being deliberately provocative? You know full well what the mandate was, set by the FIA ioan, and yet you keep repeating this point over and over. Then again do you understand it? Pirelli were not just asked to copy Bridgestone and so far have failed, they were given a totally different brief altogether. I've lost count how many times this has been explained to you.

From what I understand the FIA asked Pirelli to produce tires, which will make the races similar to the 2010 Canadian Grand Prix :) I think that they have done the job and I am absolutely sure that nobody will seriously think that these F1 tires are representative of the quality of the product which Pirelli sells to road cars.

[wedge]

How long before the Pireli board give Hembery the boot?!
One can't read Autosport without an almost daily attempt from Hembery to defend his crappy tires, while people keep talking about how they seemingly can't produce a competitive race tire, something that Bridgestone did with such ease.

I highly doubt it.

More like mission accomplished when you reach a mass audience, the majority of which according to our favourite forumite Garry Walker have an IQ level lower than 80:


I buy a couple of croissants, settle at a table and sort a few words and photos before stepping into a familiarly orange tube. We reach Gatwick on time and I take the train to East Croydon prior to catching a Beckenham-bound tram. As I board, I can hear two passing blokes talking quite loudly: "Yes, but did you see how Kimi Räikkönen was catching Alonso by two seconds per lap towards the end of the race?"

The voices fade as the doors close, but there's a visible hint of animation about their continuing debate. It's been a long time since F1 was quite so unpredictable, but the wider world seems to like it.

F1 diary: Spanish grand prix - Telegraph (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/motoring/motorsport/formulaonediary/9265215/F1-diary-Spanish-grand-prix.html)

[SGWilko]

I highly doubt it.

More like mission accomplished when you reach a mass audience, the majority of which according to our favourite forumite Garry Walker have an IQ level lower than 80:

Bloody hell - that quote suggests someone went to Croydon.......

.....and survived!

Believe me, whenever I've had to visit our DR site at Croydon, the dweebs, richard heads and morons that you see along the pedestrian precinct (sometimes have to walk along it to get to Craplin) is astonishing.

Not a nice place.

[ArrowsFA1]

No matter how much the average Joe will love the total unpredictability of the races...

World Drivers Championship Standings:

Vettel[/*:m:b1ykp4lu]
Alonso[/*:m:b1ykp4lu]
Hamilton[/*:m:b1ykp4lu]
Raikkonen[/*:m:b1ykp4lu]
Webber[/*:m:b1ykp4lu]
Button[/*:m:b1ykp4lu]

World Constructors Championship Standings:

Red Bull[/*:m:b1ykp4lu]
McLaren[/*:m:b1ykp4lu]
Lotus[/*:m:b1ykp4lu]
Ferrari[/*:m:b1ykp4lu]
Mercedes[/*:m:b1ykp4lu]
Williams[/*:m:b1ykp4lu]

This 'disastrous Pirelli induced unpredictable shambles' is not reflected in the championship standings.

[ioan]

World Drivers Championship Standings:

Vettel[/*:m:14py8deo]
Alonso[/*:m:14py8deo]
Hamilton[/*:m:14py8deo]
Raikkonen[/*:m:14py8deo]
Webber[/*:m:14py8deo]
Button[/*:m:14py8deo]

World Constructors Championship Standings:

Red Bull[/*:m:14py8deo]
McLaren[/*:m:14py8deo]
Lotus[/*:m:14py8deo]
Ferrari[/*:m:14py8deo]
Mercedes[/*:m:14py8deo]
Williams[/*:m:14py8deo]

This 'disastrous Pirelli induced unpredictable shambles' is not reflected in the championship standings.

Maldonado wins a race beating Alonso. Ahem. Business like usual, huh?

[ioan]

I highly doubt it.

More like mission accomplished when you reach a mass audience, the majority of which according to our favourite forumite Garry Walker have an IQ level lower than 80:

You know what's worse? Garry's fully right.

[BDunnell]

Maldonado wins a race beating Alonso. Ahem. Business like usual, huh?

In no sense did Maldonado not deserve that race win. And there is a way in which it was business like usual — there have occasionally been races in which there have been unexpected, yet still genuine, winners. It is precisely because it was unexpected that Maldonado's victory came as such a wonderful surprise. I fail to understand why this is a troublesome concept.

[wedge]

In no sense did Maldonado not deserve that race win. And there is a way in which it was business like usual — there have occasionally been races in which there have been unexpected, yet still genuine, winners. It is precisely because it was unexpected that Maldonado's victory came as such a wonderful surprise. I fail to understand why this is a troublesome concept.

Yes it was a deserved win but was it a warranted win to the point that inconsistent tyres has so far given inconsistent and therefore unpredictable results.

A decade ago F1 was at its lowest ebb and the likes of McLaren of keeping the purity of F1 being the pinnacle. Now the pendulum has swung to the other extreme and the fascination of keeping the audience entertained.

[airshifter]

World Drivers Championship Standings:

Vettel[/*:m:2fmn39rm]
Alonso[/*:m:2fmn39rm]
Hamilton[/*:m:2fmn39rm]
Raikkonen[/*:m:2fmn39rm]
Webber[/*:m:2fmn39rm]
Button[/*:m:2fmn39rm]

World Constructors Championship Standings:

Red Bull[/*:m:2fmn39rm]
McLaren[/*:m:2fmn39rm]
Lotus[/*:m:2fmn39rm]
Ferrari[/*:m:2fmn39rm]
Mercedes[/*:m:2fmn39rm]
Williams[/*:m:2fmn39rm]

This 'disastrous Pirelli induced unpredictable shambles' is not reflected in the championship standings.

Nothing but a bunch of hacks. When we get new tires the good drivers and teams will rise to the top! :laugh:

[ArrowsFA1]

Yes it was a deserved win but was it a warranted win to the point that inconsistent tyres has so far given inconsistent and therefore unpredictable results.
The championship standings do not support the idea that we are seeing "inconsistent and therefore unpredictable results" IMHO. If HRT were up there challenging then yes, but there hasn't been a dramatic change to the established order. Some may point at Williams because they were nowhere last season but that's not the tyres; it's a new design team having produced a fine car combined with them having the championship winning Renault engine. So yes, it was a warranted win IMHO.

[SGWilko]

Williams......Renault engine

That about sums it up for me. Williams know how to win, and they are back on their way up.

Caterham now have the Renault, but they are still very much building the team up.

But yes, I fear the Cosworth was very much the weak link in seasons past for WIlliams.

[F1boat]

In the end every fan has to ask and answer for himself - do you prefer the races we have now or do you like the races we had in 2004, 2002, 2010 more? Do you want to have more overtaking or you prefer the "follow the leader" style of racing which we had until last year? Do you want to see many winners in different cars or one or two top-teams running away with it? In the end these are the questions who, at least in my opinion, matter. Some people I think have some ideal F1 in their head in which everything is unrestricted, drivers push to the limit, BUT have to be careful because some "natural" and not "artificial" things may happen. The reality is that this happened, from what I saw, in the early 80s. But it won't happen again. The teams are just too good, with too much money, too much everything. So, if we manage the series to be "pure" the end result will be very much something like the modern DTM racing - great looking cars, highly professional environment and dull, processional and very boring racing. I very much prefer what we have now to this and I think that for the Formula One World Championship it will be much healthier if it stays interesting, exciting and unpredictable even if it is not "pure" in the eyes of some people.

[ArrowsFA1]

In the end every fan has to ask and answer for himself - do you prefer the races we have now or do you like the races we had in 2004, 2002, 2010 more?
F1 constantly evolves and changes. I don't think what we have now is ether better or worse than before. It's simply different, but I guess everyone has their favourites.

As a F1 fan I love the late 1960's period...then the Cosworth era of the 1970's & 80's...ground effects...turbos...the technical wizardry of the 90's...even Ferrari dominace was impressive in its own way :D

The Spanish GP had me on the edge of my seat from beginning to end. It's the first time that's happened in a very long time and, putting it bluntly, I don't particularly care why. The race had excitement, drama and skill. Can't ask for much more than that in a motor race IMHO.

[SGWilko]

F1 constantly evolves and changes. I don't think what we have now is ether better or worse than before. It's simply different, but I guess everyone has their favourites.

As a F1 fan I love the late 1960's period...then the Cosworth era of the 1970's & 80's...ground effects...turbos...the technical wizardry of the 90's...even Ferrari dominace was impressive in its own way :D

The Spanish GP had me on the edge of my seat from beginning to end. It's the first time that's happened in a very long time and, putting it bluntly, I don't particularly care why. The race had excitement, drama and skill. Can't ask for much more than that in a motor race IMHO.

Indeed. SPain 2012 had a number of 'displaced' fast cars, and to see them coming through the field, along with a long awaited Williams win, was really quite something.

[wedge]

That about sums it up for me. Williams know how to win, and they are back on their way up.

Caterham now have the Renault, but they are still very much building the team up.

But yes, I fear the Cosworth was very much the weak link in seasons past for WIlliams.

Williams know how to win? And that's why Sam Michaels fell on his sword?

They've never made top cars. Suddenly gaining a second overnight going into the Spanish GP at Catalunya - the greatest test on a car's aero. I find it too good to be true.


In the end every fan has to ask and answer for himself - do you prefer the races we have now or do you like the races we had in 2004, 2002, 2010 more?

2002 - as I said earlier, arguably F1's lowest ebb in recent history.

2004 - yes Ferrari dominated but the battle for best of the rest was immensely enjoyable and the year Bunsen came to the fore.

2010 - good races and bad races, much like any other season. Final showdown was an anti-climax.

Quite frankly there was no need nor a valid excuse to mess with this year's tyres. Last year's construction was perfectly fine.

[F1boat]

Williams know how to win? And that's why Sam Michaels fell on his sword?

They've never made top cars. Suddenly gaining a second overnight going into the Spanish GP at Catalunya - the greatest test on a car's aero. I find it too good to be true.



2002 - as I said earlier, arguably F1's lowest ebb in recent history.

2004 - yes Ferrari dominated but the battle for best of the rest was immensely enjoyable and the year Bunsen came to the fore.

2010 - good races and bad races, much like any other season. Final showdown was an anti-climax.

Quite frankly there was no need nor a valid excuse to mess with this year's tyres. Last year's construction was perfectly fine.
Wedge, that's why I only asked the questions, Every fan must answer them for himself of herself. For me, 2012 is arguably the best start of a season I have witnessed, ever, and extremely enjoyable. If you like 2004 or 2010 better, fine, that's your point of view. But for me the current trend is better for the sport and its popularity. I guess that TV rating can confirm or deny this...

[ArrowsFA1]

Suddenly gaining a second overnight going into the Spanish GP at Catalunya - the greatest test on a car's aero. I find it too good to be true.
wedge, I'm not sure I understand. Maldonado's Williams was battling Alonso's Ferrari for position in Australia, as in Spain, and yet it's a shock? :dozey:

[BDunnell]

Williams know how to win? And that's why Sam Michaels fell on his sword?

They've never made top cars.

Never? Not even in the seasons when Williams won the World Championship with demonstrably the best cars?

[wedge]

wedge, I'm not sure I understand. Maldonado's Williams was battling Alonso's Ferrari for position in Australia, as in Spain, and yet it's a shock? :dozey:

I'm not questioning Maldonado as a racer. It's his relative to the car's performance.

In Australia and the other races he was about a second off the leaders and then suddenly turns up at Barcelona fighting for pole - a track that tests the aerodynamics of the car.

http://www.motorsportforums.com/f1/152284-did-pirelli-go-too-far-14.html#post1036806

[jens]

If people are so stunned about the pace of Williams, why does no-one comment on Ferrari? Let's put it this way - "omg, Ferrari was so quick, this means F1 is a Pirelli lottery, because they are not supposed to be up there". Because based on 2012 performances so far there is little to choose between Ferrari and Williams in dry conditions - they were close in Australia, China (remember the relentless blocking by Maldonado against Alonso in the end - those two have been battling all the time this year!) and Bahrain. So if Williams is used as an example of "Pirelli lottery", then Ferrari is in the same boat. Why isn't Ferrari mentioned?

It looks like people are arguing for the need of having a couple of chosen top teams at the front, rather than trying to be impressed by the genuine progress of midfield teams. And yes, I mentioned genuine. Because if Ferrari in 2012 being at the front of the grid is OK for you and not the matter of luck, then so should be Williams, who has designed an almost equally good car, regardless of how you are trying to put it.

I remember in 2009 there were complaints as well. That the top teams (McLaren/Ferrari) were handicapped due to the fiasco of KERS and DDD saga and we had fake teams at the front.

[SGWilko]

Williams know how to win? They've never made top cars.

I started watching F1 in 1985.

In 1985, the Williams was a winner.

It was too in '86, Mansell was robbed the title by tyre failure.

'87 Car was a winner.

'88 Fast car, average engine that overheated a lot. 2 second places mind you.

'89 & '90 Started their love affair with Renault. Good car, OK engine to start with, journeymen drivers (IMO)

'91 Bloody fast car, grappling with semi-auto box gremlins. Runners up.

'92 Probably the equivalent to F1 mecca that car. 2 seconds advantage on most tracks. Title taken.

'93 Title

'94 & '95 - Did Bentetton cheat their way too these????? :laugh:

'96 Title

'97 Title

'98 to present mainly buggered by engine suppliers, and a bloke called Mario who I think is a class A stroker!

So yep, they aint gotta clue Wedge my boy.......

[F1boat]

If people are so stunned about the pace of Williams, why does no-one comment on Ferrari? Let's put it this way - "omg, Ferrari was so quick, this means F1 is a Pirelli lottery, because they are not supposed to be up there". Because based on 2012 performances so far there is little to choose between Ferrari and Williams in dry conditions - they were close in Australia, China (remember the relentless blocking by Maldonado against Alonso in the end - those two have been battling all the time this year!) and Bahrain. So if Williams is used as an example of "Pirelli lottery", then Ferrari is in the same boat. Why isn't Ferrari mentioned? Oh yes, they are a so-called top team and hence have a "rightful position" at the sharp end of the grid, regardless of whether they actually have produced a crap car or not.

I'd also like to remind people that in the second part of the 2009 Formula One season we had many races with different winners:
Turkey - Button
Great Britain - Vettel
Germany - Webber
Valencia - Barrichello
Hungary - Hamilton
Belgium - Raikkonen
Between Germany and Belgium four different constructors won a race - Red Bull, Brawn GP, McLaren and Ferrari. The form of the cars varied a lot. After a period of dominance by Brawn, Red Bull were untouchable in Great Britain and Germany, then Brawn won again in Valencia, a race in which he was challenged by the McLarens and Red Bull was no where. In Hungary McLaren and Ferrari seemed head and shoulders above the rest and in Belgium Force India had the fastest car, but lost to Raikkonen's brilliant driving (IMO). I can also say that this was a very fun and nice period of Formula One racing. I am happy that the current season seems to be even more entertaining... and quote the 2009 result to show that it is possible for a team to look like a winner in one race and to be nowhere in another one... even in relatively dull seasons like 1997 this happened - Ferrari and Williams fought for the WDC and WCC, but in Germany Benetton competed for the win with Jordan and in Italy McLaren were racing Benetton, while Williams and Ferrari were awful slow. Not to mention the 2002 Monaco GP, in which McLaren and Williams suddenly looked competitive to the all-conquering Ferrari.

[F1boat]

I started watching F1 in 1985.

In 1985, the Williams was a winner.

It was too in '86, Mansell was robbed the title by tyre failure.

'87 Car was a winner.

'88 Fast car, average engine that overheated a lot. 2 second places mind you.

'89 & '90 Started their love affair with Renault. Good car, OK engine to start with, journeymen drivers (IMO)

'91 Bloody fast car, grappling with semi-auto box gremlins. Runners up.

'92 Probably the equivalent to F1 mecca that car. 2 seconds advantage on most tracks. Title taken.

'93 Title

'94 & '95 - Did Bentetton cheat their way too these????? :laugh:

'96 Title

'97 Title

'98 to present mainly buggered by engine suppliers, and a bloke called Mario who I think is a class A stroker!

So yep, they aint gotta clue Wedge my boy.......

Historically Williams are the third most successful Formula One team in history, after Ferrari and McLaren.

[jens]

One more thing. Remember 1997. One reason, why that season was so remarkable, were the tyres or more specifically the beginning of a tyre war after a break several years. This included some impressive performances of Panis and of course the Hungary drive of Damon Hill. Hill's achievement of almost winning a race in an Arrows is still part of F1's folklore. Yes, if you think about it, it was largely down to tyres as Bridgestone was much superior to GoodYears on that day, on which the top teams were running.

Does it mean the heroic performance of Arrows/Hill was insignificant? Yet it is worth mentioning that that drive is remembered fondly by people as a special moment of F1, when an underdog managed to rise to the top. So my question - why can't some people enjoy current F1 and the special moments? You can always argue about luck and circumstances. Yes, if you are extremely serious you can claim coldly - Hill almost won only thanks to tyres, Maldonado won only thanks to tyres. And so what? The point of F1 is entertainment and the moments should be enjoyed instead of being grumpy about many things.

[ArrowsFA1]

It looks like people are arguing for the need of having a couple of chosen top teams at the front, rather than trying to be impressed by the genuine progress of midfield teams. And yes, I mentioned genuine. Because if Ferrari in 2012 being at the front of the grid is OK for you and not the matter of luck, then so should be Williams, who has designed an almost equally good car, regardless of how you are trying to put it.
:up:

[BDunnell]

jens, I agree with all your comments on this subject. Spot-on.

[F1boat]

And so what? The point of F1 is entertainment and the moments should be enjoyed instead of being grumpy about many things.

This, for God's sake, THIS!

[Knock-on]

I can't see the board in Milano being happy with this kind of image, but hey this is just my view, so I'll now hand it over to the 'experts' who will tell the world how Alonso vs MS in Imola 2005 and 2006 was not great racing and what they watch now is the best ever racing. :D

Well, after talking to the average 'Joe' on the streets of Milano today, I can tell you that people are pretty invigorted about F1 this year. Mind you, they're just your IQ80 sort of people so it doesn't matter.

"Cry me a river" LOL :laugh:

[tfp]

Cant understand the complaints, this year weve had 2 drivers taking their first race win, and genuinely I cannot guess who will win in Monaco. Compared to the rubbish (IMO) season last year where we knew who was going to win, this is like a breath of fresh air :)

[wedge]

If people are so stunned about the pace of Williams, why does no-one comment on Ferrari? Let's put it this way - "omg, Ferrari was so quick, this means F1 is a Pirelli lottery, because they are not supposed to be up there". Because based on 2012 performances so far there is little to choose between Ferrari and Williams in dry conditions - they were close in Australia, China (remember the relentless blocking by Maldonado against Alonso in the end - those two have been battling all the time this year!) and Bahrain. So if Williams is used as an example of "Pirelli lottery", then Ferrari is in the same boat. Why isn't Ferrari mentioned?

Alonso has admitted he the tyres have been a problem understanding the true performance of his Ferrari and rivals:


"I don't know," said Fernando Alonso upon being asked if his strong second place indicated that the Ferrari's upgrades have now made it into a competitive car. "In the last race we finished P9, a minute behind the Red Bull. Here we finished one minute ahead of the Red Bull. I don't think our upgrades are worth two minutes over a race! They have worked a little better than expected but even so I don't really know where we are. I think some of the other teams have under-performed, or had problems getting their tyres working because some of the results here feel very strange."

Confusion reigns in Spain | Features & Experts | Sky Sports Formula 1 (http://www1.skysports.com/formula-1/news/22058/7755979/Confusion-reigns-in-Spain)


It looks like people are arguing for the need of having a couple of chosen top teams at the front, rather than trying to be impressed by the genuine progress of midfield teams. And yes, I mentioned genuine. Because if Ferrari in 2012 being at the front of the grid is OK for you and not the matter of luck, then so should be Williams, who has designed an almost equally good car, regardless of how you are trying to put it.

Who now says its OK for Ferrari to be at the front? Malaysia was the second race and was easy to jump to the conclusion that it was down to Alonso.

The same teams stay at the front for period of time is because they consistently do the better job.

Genuine progress of midfield teams came from developing their cars and drivers maximising their cars.

Suddenly picking up a second from one race to the next, especially at Barcelona - arguably the greatest test of a car's aerodynamics on the F1 circuit, sorry, but IMHO alarm bells should be ringing.


I remember in 2009 there were complaints as well. That the top teams (McLaren/Ferrari) were handicapped due to the fiasco of KERS and DDD saga and we had fake teams at the front.

The complaints was on the legality of DDD. It just so happened that some of the lesser teams had exploited the loophole.


And so what? The point of F1 is entertainment and the moments should be enjoyed instead of being grumpy about many things.

Yes, but to an extent and not so that such intricacies become watered down as Mark Hughes fears:


Within this ambiguity it becomes more difficult than ever to assess the performances of the drivers. Maldonado drove a perfectly controlled race, delicately balancing the requirements of looking after the Williams' rear tyres while sustaining big pressure from Alonso. It was a thinking drive which combined with his qualifying speed became the winning combination. But, like Nico Rosberg's China win, or Jenson Button's in Australia, it was a drive that was all about measuring out the energy of the tyres in the fastest, most efficient way. The sustained aggression and relentlessness, maintaining flat-out on-the-limit driving for lap after lap, a skill that so few can master, is currently an obsolete requirement.

Measured by the new, Pirelli-dominated, set of requirements Maldonado is a top driver. The worrying thing is that he may be equal first with the 23 others.

Confusion reigns in Spain | Features & Experts | Sky Sports Formula 1 (http://www1.skysports.com/formula-1/news/22058/7755979/Confusion-reigns-in-Spain#)


One more thing. Remember 1997. One reason, why that season was so remarkable, were the tyres or more specifically the beginning of a tyre war after a break several years. This included some impressive performances of Panis and of course the Hungary drive of Damon Hill. Hill's achievement of almost winning a race in an Arrows is still part of F1's folklore. Yes, if you think about it, it was largely down to tyres as Bridgestone was much superior to GoodYears on that day, on which the top teams were running.


The tyres performed in a consistent manner.

When Pirelli were last in F1 they were grippy but over a short distance.

The tyre war in 1997, Bridgestone was arguably the better tyre as the Goodyears had a tendency to blister more easily.

When Michelin entered F1 this century they used to go into a horrible graining phase after the opening laps.

What can you say about this year's Pirellis? Very peaky. Temperature too low no grip, too high and suffer degradation.



So yep, they aint gotta clue Wedge my boy.......

As I originally questioned:

Remind me why Sam Michaels - who has done some winning in his time at Williams buggered off because its far too simple to blame engines.

[ArrowsFA1]

Suddenly picking up a second from one race to the next, especially at Barcelona - arguably the greatest test of a car's aerodynamics on the F1 circuit, sorry, but IMHO alarm bells should be ringing.

I don't agree that Williams "suddenly" found a second. The car has been competitive since day one of the season and I think credit is due to the team for continually improving since then. In Spain all the factors that make up a win came together for Maldonado but to simply put that down to fluke or the tyres alone does the team and driver an injustice.[/*:m:z36yrg61]
In the light of the above I see no reason for alarm bells. The Williams performed on a circuit where aero is key so might that not suggest a damn fine car that performed better than the competition and appears to have a good chance of continuing to be competitive in the races to come? That's what they're all trying to do after all!![/*:m:z36yrg61]

[SGWilko]

As I originally questioned:

Remind me why Sam Michaels - who has done some winning in his time at Williams buggered off because its far too simple to blame engines.

No idea - I reckon you'd best get the answer to that from t'orses mouth.

I was not referring to Sam anyway, merely setting you straight on your (apparent) lack of knowledge in respect of Williams history.

[airshifter]

I don't agree that Williams "suddenly" found a second. The car has been competitive since day one of the season and I think credit is due to the team for continually improving since then. In Spain all the factors that make up a win came together for Maldonado but to simply put that down to fluke or the tyres alone does the team and driver an injustice.[/*:m:2x092p0z]
In the light of the above I see no reason for alarm bells. The Williams performed on a circuit where aero is key so might that not suggest a damn fine car that performed better than the competition and appears to have a good chance of continuing to be competitive in the races to come? That's what they're all trying to do after all!![/*:m:2x092p0z]


I think part of the picture with the cars being on a more level playing field is also the testing restrictions. The very front of the pack in past years has had the budgets to drop huge amounts of money on minor tweaks after test sessions or through the year. The limits on testing time took some of that advantage away.

I personally enjoy having a number of cars capable of winning. The years any car dominated got boring quick most of the time.

[F1boat]

Cant understand the complaints, this year weve had 2 drivers taking their first race win, and genuinely I cannot guess who will win in Monaco. Compared to the rubbish (IMO) season last year where we knew who was going to win, this is like a breath of fresh air :)

+1 :)

[ArrowsFA1]

...genuinely I cannot guess who will win in Monaco...
Indeed :up: I think it is probably safe to exclude Caterham, Marussia & HRT from the list of possible winners but other than that who knows :crazy:

[wedge]

I don't agree that Williams "suddenly" found a second. The car has been competitive since day one of the season and I think credit is due to the team for continually improving since then. In Spain all the factors that make up a win came together for Maldonado but to simply put that down to fluke or the tyres alone does the team and driver an injustice.[/*:m:2h99ikuk]
In the light of the above I see no reason for alarm bells. The Williams performed on a circuit where aero is key so might that not suggest a damn fine car that performed better than the competition and appears to have a good chance of continuing to be competitive in the races to come? That's what they're all trying to do after all!![/*:m:2h99ikuk]

I agree Williams have a competitive car but facts are facts. Look up the times from previous GPs this year.

Ferrari have been up and down in midfield. Same for MGP, RBR, McLaren. Form suggests the same with Williams. If Williams can't consistently sustain a high level - for sake of argument let's say podiums then arguably its a fluke win from the tyres.


No idea - I reckon you'd best get the answer to that from t'orses mouth.

I was not referring to Sam anyway, merely setting you straight on your (apparent) lack of knowledge in respect of Williams history.

I very much respect Williams.

If Williams know winning then surely that implies winning on a consistent basis including recent history? A winless streak for nearly a decade does it suggest Williams know winning? I would have thought 'Williams back to winning ways' would have been more apt.


I think part of the picture with the cars being on a more level playing field is also the testing restrictions. The very front of the pack in past years has had the budgets to drop huge amounts of money on minor tweaks after test sessions or through the year. The limits on testing time took some of that advantage away.

I personally enjoy having a number of cars capable of winning. The years any car dominated got boring quick most of the time.

I don't think it you can put it down to testing. Look at 2009 when FI had a stunning low downforce package.

The ban on EBDs has levelled the playing field and I think the tyres have grossly exaggerated the differences in the cars.

Sport is boring. It's generally the same teams/individuals dominate over a period of time because of consistency of sustaining a high level.

[wedge]

The point of F1 is entertainment and the moments should be enjoyed instead of being grumpy about many things.

I enjoyed the races this year at an individual level. Each have been entertaining, intriguing and fascinating to watch.

Yes, Maldonado's win was a fine win, on merit but a certain kind of merit when you taken into context and the season as a whole its feels too good to be true and a nagging suspicion that something isn't quite right namely unpredictable tyres.

And what is life when one isn't grumpy? Many of us are privileged to live in a liberal democracy and even when we prospered in the boom years did it stop any of us being grumpy at those who govern our countries?

[Garry Walker]

You know what's worse? Garry's fully right. I tend to be right most of the time.


In no sense did Maldonado not deserve that race win. And there is a way in which it was business like usual — there have occasionally been races in which there have been unexpected, yet still genuine, winners. It is precisely because it was unexpected that Maldonado's victory came as such a wonderful surprise. I fail to understand why this is a troublesome concept.
He deserved it fully. It is just that in two races, due to the tyres being idiotic, he might be fighting for 13th position on pace.


In the end every fan has to ask and answer for himself - do you prefer the races we have now or do you like the races we had in 2004, 2002, 2010 more? Do you want to have more overtaking or you prefer the "follow the leader" style of racing which we had until last year? I prefer no overtaking to overtaking with the help of DRS. DRS gives you overtaking, but it is largely meaningless.
Why mention 2004? Why not mention 2003 or 2006, where we had great races without tyres being stupid or without DRS making overtaking as difficult as lighting a match?




I remember in 2009 there were complaints as well. That the top teams (McLaren/Ferrari) were handicapped due to the fiasco of KERS and DDD saga and we had fake teams at the front.
DDD was perfectly legal and it was up to other teams to come up with. What KERS fiasco?

[pino]

I tend to be right most of the time.




That's because your wife loves you :p :

[jens]

What KERS fiasco?

In 2009 it proved to be less efficient than initially thought. All four teams, who had opted to develop and install KERS for 2009 (McLaren, Ferrari, BMW, Renault) were struggling in midfield in the beginning of the season. Needless to say, those teams happened to lock out the whole Top4 in WCC in previous year! McLaren and Ferrari improved later in the season, BMW improved only after they had ditched KERS. So although much of McLaren's troubles were put down on aerodynamics, it was easy to conclude that opting for KERS significantly hindered the progress of factory teams that year.

[Knock-on]

Schuey just needs to try a bit harder and live up to his reputation as being able to adapt to any car. He had a legendary status after he retired that was repeated alot here regarding his adaptation abilities. Four 'idoitic' (hilarious term) tyres should be easy to overcome surely?

The Schue is on the other foot now though. When the German Baron first burst onto the scenes he was amazing and unpredictable. People called him dangerous but those people preferred the Prost type of racing to the creativity of Senna.

Then he became bloated on preferential machinery and 'creative' governance from the FIA. An aura was built around him that he may have deserved in his former years but flattered him in his latter life before FR (first retirement).

Now we see a driver who cannot hold a candle to a young gun who, lets be fair, is not top flight. Nico is a good peddler but no Hammy or Alonso.

In the ole days, ioan would have waxed lyrical about how Schumacher could have taken a Minardi and won races with it. Pfffff!!! Yet again, a hard taste of reality for Mr Armchair Expert. We are seeing the end of a great but terrible Champion who is wasting a seat in F1 the same as Massa is.

Last orders at the Ferrari Old Guard me thinks.

[tfp]

Indeed :up: I think it is probably safe to exclude Caterham, Marussia & HRT from the list of possible winners but other than that who knows :crazy:

Haha :D

I think that is a safe bet! Although it would make my day if one of those teams finished a race tenth and scored one driver point, just so they can boast to the other two teams about the one point they scored :laugh:

[wedge]

Now the engines are more reliable and lucky wins are now decided through the use of tyres rather than a Jordan or a Stewart inheriting the lead due to a McLaren or Ferrari blowing its top or crashing into each other. Nobody used to moan about that.

Because its one of the cliches of motorsport: to finish first, first you must finish.


Schuey just needs to try a bit harder and live up to his reputation as being able to adapt to any car. He had a legendary status after he retired that was repeated alot here regarding his adaptation abilities. Four 'idoitic' (hilarious term) tyres should be easy to overcome surely?

He's past his best. Not the first nor the last to be humbled. Some people thought Barrichello's time came too soon yet he was beaten by a pay driver.


In 2009 it proved to be less efficient than initially thought. All four teams, who had opted to develop and install KERS for 2009 (McLaren, Ferrari, BMW, Renault) were struggling in midfield in the beginning of the season. Needless to say, those teams happened to lock out the whole Top4 in WCC in previous year! McLaren and Ferrari improved later in the season, BMW improved only after they had ditched KERS. So although much of McLaren's troubles were put down on aerodynamics, it was easy to conclude that opting for KERS significantly hindered the progress of factory teams that year.

Depend' on one's view. Some teams thought it was a hindrance to car development whereas McLaren and Ferrari made an effort to optimise KERS with the former and with the latter optimising the package via reducing weight.

[Dave B]

Williams [...] have never made top cars. Suddenly gaining a second overnight going into the Spanish GP at Catalunya - the greatest test on a car's aero. I find it too good to be true.


Seriously? I must have imagined all those championships and race wins. :s

As others have said, Williams have shown genuine pace this season, the win in Spain was earned on merit.

[Dave B]

In the ole days, ioan would have waxed lyrical about how Schumacher could have taken a Minardi and won races with it. Pfffff!!!
Nowadays he'd moan that Minardi only won because of a tyre lottery!

[AndyL]

Haha :D

I think that is a safe bet! Although it would make my day if one of those teams finished a race tenth and scored one driver point, just so they can boast to the other two teams about the one point they scored :laugh:

Even if they don't score a point, the race for 10th place in the constructors could be won in Monaco, given the likelihood of a high number of retirements. If Caterham or HRT can beat Glock's 14th place from Australia they'll take the 10th place in the WCC, and it could easily stand to the end of the season. There is serious money at stake there, more than just boasting rights that's for sure :) so it's an important weekend for the bottom 3 teams.

[wedge]

Seriously? I must have imagined all those championships and race wins. :s

When was the last time have they won a championship? Eight years winless streak with. Yep, Williams are winners....

Sam Michaels saw Williams last win and the cars went downhill under his reign as Technical Director.


As others have said, Williams have shown genuine pace this season, the win in Spain was earned on merit.

Define genuine pace. Alonso - arguably F1's most complete driver can't get his head round on that concept. He doesn't know if Ferrari made genuine gains or tyre lottery.

[F1boat]

But still you say that you enjoyed the races, wedge, and this is the important thing. You said that sport is boring, but this year proves that it must not be so. Maybe it is not "pure', but I don't believe in "pureness" and even if I believed "fun and exciting" is better than "pure and boring" IMO.

[Big Ben]

I doubt I'm saying anything new here but to me the main reason for not having a problem with the tyres is the fact that all teams have to deal with them. So from the competition side of things no harm done.
The race are unpredictable but overall it looks like business as usual to me. It's Bieber and Alonso on top of the standings not Maldonado and Perez. And Schumi is the same average driver he always was :laugh: .

[gloomyDAY]

Did it ever occur to anyone that the deletion of the blown diffusers has a major impact on how the teams cope with the tires? I think that pre-season testing allowed the teams to know where the threshold for the tires was at, but placing them on the car that is inherently more tail-happy tends to be an issue. Not really a big deal in my eyes. I'm happy with F1 at the present moment:

1) Six world champions on the grid.
2) Enthralling racing.
3) Good mix of winners.
4) The stewards aren't getting in the way.

Chill out homies!



I tend to be right most of the time.http://images1.wikia.nocookie.net/glee/images/3/36/Santana_rolling_her_eyes.gif

[wedge]

But still you say that you enjoyed the races, wedge, and this is the important thing. You said that sport is boring, but this year proves that it must not be so. Maybe it is not "pure', but I don't believe in "pureness" and even if I believed "fun and exciting" is better than "pure and boring" IMO.

Purity of Formula One is best drivers and teams building the best cars possible and hopefully legal.

Quality in the sport derives from a small pool of elite teams and/or individuals and hence it can become boring:


Take such artificial restraints away and an inevitable process of concentration begins. Football is the game of the city. The big city giants can afford to pay more, so they attract the best players and a reduced number of clubs cut away from the pack. Make the area of operation worldwide and the number is reduced still further. There is space for a handful of giants to go global, first winning over fans in Asia and North America, and then working to find ways to turn this allegiance into money.

The super-size teams are thus able to assemble squads of dazzling quality, making it hard for the mid-size clubs to compete. The price of quality is a large dose of predictability, the big dilemma of today's top domestic leagues.

BBC - Tim Vickery: A top league with both quality and unpredictability (http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/timvickery/2012/05/a_top_league_with_both_quality.html)

Unpredictability creates excitement but not necessarily sign of quality - the inconsistent performances, questioning Williams' genuine pace being a case in point.

Yes, I did find the races exciting - to an extent. It's like being greedy with rich food and Spain was far too good to be true - Barcelona being the ultimate test of a car's aerodynamics has tended to create snooze-fests.

Last year struck the right balance.

I'd love an underdog to win. It generally came from a special talent 'outdriving' a car - perhaps the ultimate sign of quality.


Did it ever occur to anyone that the deletion of the blown diffusers has a major impact on how the teams cope with the tires?

Pirelli overcompensated via new tyre construction and softer rears.

[gloomyDAY]

Pirelli overcompensated via new tyre construction and softer rears.So? Pirelli did as they were asked to do by the FIA. Time for the teams to buck up and deal with it!

I feel like we're going around in circles here people. I'm bowing out of this thread. Peace.

[F1boat]

If purity is dull, screw purity :D Although the best are still leading and one of them will win in the end. It will just be a little harder this time.

[Garry Walker]

Proof that teams are utterly and completely retarded
Pirelli in new push for qualifying tyres to solve Q3 issues - F1 news - AUTOSPORT.com (http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/99877)


And it was unanimous when we last spoke to them that they felt the tactical intrigue created by not running and having fresh tyres was something that was good for the sport. Where the real solution in that lies I don't know

Really, how have these people gotten to such high level positions when they are such utter and complete idiots? Just amazing.

[pino]

Proof that teams are utterly and completely retarded
Pirelli in new push for qualifying tyres to solve Q3 issues - F1 news - AUTOSPORT.com (http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/99877)



Really, how have these people gotten to such high level positions when they are such utter and complete idiots? Just amazing.


Nice to see that for once...you're in great mood :p : :s

[wedge]

If purity is dull, screw purity :D

That's what NASCAR and Touring Cars are there for.


So? Pirelli did as they were asked to do by the FIA. Time for the teams to buck up and deal with it!

I feel like we're going around in circles here people. I'm bowing out of this thread. Peace.

Pirelli were asked to make aggressive compounds which they did as last year testifies but were Pirelli told to alter to the tyres for this year?

Interesting article in this week's Autosport. Mark Hughes argues whether its "plain dumb luck".

[Dave B]

For the best part of 10 years I've been reading threads on here about how dull the sport is/was when Schumacher or Vettel dominated, and now finally there's a genuine chance for midfield teams to do well and people are complaining.

Tyre management is difficult. Here's the dirty secret: F1 is meant to be difficult. Those who get it right reap the rewards. It's not a lottery, it's hard work, talented designers and skilful driving.

[AndyL]

Did it ever occur to anyone that the deletion of the blown diffusers has a major impact on how the teams cope with the tires?

I think that's a good point.

This is the first year for a while that there has been no clever/loophole-exploiting device that has given a big advantage to the teams that have been able to make the most of it. Mercedes have their double-DRS but its advantage seems to be minor and only in qualifying. Other than that, it's a pretty level playing field in terms of aero and chassis. I think that's a major reason why the field is so closely matched this year, and getting your car to work well at a particular track can move you up a lot of places.

[wedge]

For the best part of 10 years I've been reading threads on here about how dull the sport is/was when Schumacher or Vettel dominated, and now finally there's a genuine chance for midfield teams to do well and people are complaining.

Tyre management is difficult.Here's the dirty secret: F1 is meant to be difficult. Those who get it right reap the rewards. It's not a lottery, it's hard work, talented designers and skilful driving.

If F1 is meant to be difficult then F1 shouldn't be a charity to midfield teams. Such levels of parity is the preserve of NASCAR and Touring Cars.

Is the current parity genuine? Too hard to say.

[Dave B]

I wonder if the old boy will still be whinging about the tyres after setting the fastest time in qualifying?

[wedge]

I wonder if the old boy will still be whinging about the tyres after setting the fastest time in qualifying?

Tyre management for qualy ie. "switching on the tyres" is a completely different skill to managing tyres over a stint.

[markabilly]

I wonder if the old boy will still be whinging about the tyres after setting the fastest time in qualifying?

Now, if you were smart, you would have figured out why he whined, moaned and groaned...........Ms says, Blast them, it is the supid tires......... and then old donKey Jote went out and got da Shoe a special set of supper softies.... ;) ...


the tactic seemed to work just fine, if you ask me. :D

Too bad the same approach did not work at the last race, when he called that idiot an idiot. Maybe he should have said, gee, I am so sorry, it was just a racing incident, I could not imagine why he was going so slow.....so i thought he was broke down and pulling over for me to go around, then he moved back on me before i could do anything--opps-------
:eek:

and given how hard it is to pass at Monaco, and how hard he can make it to be passed, Mr. MS might have easily been the winner tommorrow. :(

[wedge]

Button - "a little bit worried":



But, typical of Formula One when it finally achieves what it set out to achieve, there is a growing feeling now that "unpredictable" may not be such a wonderful thing after all.


Michael Schumacher’s complaints about Pirelli’s hyper-sensitive tyres a couple of weeks ago were shot down as the grumblings of a sore loser, but it is clear that other drivers and teams have their concerns too.


McLaren’s Jenson Button conceded this week he was “a little bit” worried that races were becoming lotteries as teams struggled to get their tyres working. World champion Sebastian Vettel said he was confused by the radical shifts in form.


“It does worry me a little bit,” Button said, “but then again the car is quick. Lewis [Hamilton] put it on pole in Spain by a massive amount and that proves how strong our car is. It is very strange.

“Look at [Williams’ Pastor] Maldonado, he qualified 17th in Bahrain and qualified second in the next race. He was consistently qualifying down the order and then suddenly he was second.

“The fans love the fact it is exciting but I think it will get to a point where they will wonder who they are supporting and why someone is winning and someone is losing.

“Why is everyone a loser and everyone a winner? Hopefully it will get to a point where we all understand what is going on.”

Monaco Grand Prix 2012: Jenson Button says teams must get to grips with tyres - Telegraph (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/motorsport/formulaone/9290928/Monaco-Grand-Prix-2012-Jenson-Button-says-teams-must-get-to-grips-with-tyres.html)

[F1boat]

I hope that you are happy now - hard tyres, no lead changes, "pure" racing.

[wedge]

It's Monaco. At best its a train of cars and frustrating overtake attempts. It's the nature of Monaco. I have no problems.

Hard tyres? Not sure if you paid attention but drivers were having to conserve tyres to make the 1 stopper work.

[F1boat]

If you can make 78 laps with 1 stop, the tire is good!

[N4D13]

If you can make 78 laps with 1 stop, the tire is good!
You could fit those tyres onto my Hyundai Matrix and I'd do 78 laps without stopping. That doesn't mean the tyres are any good, though...

[wedge]

If you can make 78 laps with 1 stop, the tire is good!

Tell that to Kimi who was holding up a train of cars, tell that to McLaren who instructed to their drivers - on different strategies - to conserve their tyres.

[Dave B]

Tell that to Kimi who was holding up a train of cars, tell that to McLaren who instructed to their drivers - on different strategies - to conserve their tyres.
Or compare against last year where the majority of the field did 3 stops. This year the majority chose one stop so it was their own decisions which forced them to conserve tyres.

[F1boat]

Tell that to Kimi who was holding up a train of cars, tell that to McLaren who instructed to their drivers - on different strategies - to conserve their tyres.

Surely you can expect difficulties on one stop trilogy? And BTW wedge, I don't know why you think that only touring cars should be exciting...

[steveaki13]

2002 - as I said earlier, arguably F1's lowest ebb in recent history.

2004 - yes Ferrari dominated but the battle for best of the rest was immensely enjoyable and the year Bunsen came to the fore.

2010 - good races and bad races, much like any other season. Final showdown was an anti-climax.

.

I enjoy every season.

I do think 2002 gets a bad press. Yes Ferrari were dominant, but there were a few decent races that season and alot of action behind the Ferrari's

Australian GP was fun after the first corner smash, the Webber Minardi points was great.

Malaysia GP - I remember the Williams dominated and gave us hope of a close season, and Schumi came from the back to 3rd. Also Bernoldi in Arrows passing Schumi.

Spain.- I remember some good midfield action later in this race, and Frentzen getting a point for Arrows.

Austria - I obviously had the drama of the Barrichello/Schumi switch. And the worring Heidfeld/Sato crash, but Villeneuve was rampant in that race and as always in Austria the midfield action was close.

British GP - Had rain and some great earlier battles and Barrichello from last to 2nd. More great midfield action.

French GP - Raikkonen drove brilliantly for what should have been his first win, but for a late spin on oil.

Italian GP - Irvine in the Jag getting a podium, and Trulli coming from last to 4th.

Japanese GP- Sato getting that 5th place for Jordan.


Just to point out a few of my highlights from 2002.

[donKey jote]

Button - "a little bit worried":

So he should be after his last few races. The rest of the winners appear to be doing fine ! ;) :p

[djparky]

If purity is dull, screw purity :D Although the best are still leading and one of them will win in the end. It will just be a little harder this time.

agreed- have been watching motor sport for 30 plus years I watch alot of motor racing because I like it- but I want it to be entertaining as well. the top drivers in the championship are what I would call the best drivers in F1 in the strongest teams- we just don't know who will win it- that's a great news story as far as I'm concerned. Pirelli were asked by the F1 teams and the series to come up with tyres that make them work harder- they have done precisely that. I reckon Alonso will be champion this year- that's right and proper since he is the best driver out there

if you want to see what rock hard tyres and pesky aero does for the racing - just watch the dvd's from 2002-2008. or this years yawnfest that is NASCAR in 2012- when F1 has more overtaking than an oval series it's doing something right

[F1boat]

NASCAR and Indy Car are getting very dull in recent years and I stopped watching them. Nothing, however, comes close to the DTM - great looking cars and no action at all. Formula One today is however very entertaining, even more than some touring car series...

[wedge]

I enjoy every season.

I do think 2002 gets a bad press. Yes Ferrari were dominant, but there were a few decent races that season and alot of action behind the Ferrari's

Australian GP was fun after the first corner smash, the Webber Minardi points was great.

Malaysia GP - I remember the Williams dominated and gave us hope of a close season, and Schumi came from the back to 3rd. Also Bernoldi in Arrows passing Schumi.

Spain.- I remember some good midfield action later in this race, and Frentzen getting a point for Arrows.

Austria - I obviously had the drama of the Barrichello/Schumi switch. And the worring Heidfeld/Sato crash, but Villeneuve was rampant in that race and as always in Austria the midfield action was close.

British GP - Had rain and some great earlier battles and Barrichello from last to 2nd. More great midfield action.

French GP - Raikkonen drove brilliantly for what should have been his first win, but for a late spin on oil.

Italian GP - Irvine in the Jag getting a podium, and Trulli coming from last to 4th.

Japanese GP- Sato getting that 5th place for Jordan.


Just to point out a few of my highlights from 2002.

A persuasive argument. Austria obviously the lowest point but I was more concerned about the direction of the sport and the technical sophistication was far too OTT.

Niki Lauda test drove a Jaguar and said it was so easy that his grandmother/monkey could drive it! The era had TC, auto upshifts with manual override for downshifts, pit to car telemetry whereby car adjustments could be made from the pits; respect for driver skill was being lost.

Ferrari/Schumi domination didn't help nor a faltering economy which seemingly affected a non-sell out '02 Italian GP.


if you want to see what rock hard tyres and pesky aero does for the racing - just watch the dvd's from 2002-2008.

I have 2003-08 and thoroughly enjoyed them.

2009-10 had rock hard Bridgestone tyres. What gives?


Surely you can expect difficulties on one stop trilogy?

Safety car helped with managing the super soft on the first stint, like SC helped Seb last year.


And BTW wedge, I don't know why you think that only touring cars should be exciting...

As I said earlier purity of F1 and pretty much sport itself.

Touring Cars is more about creating close competition by equalizing the dynamics of the cars and drivers with things like ballast, reverse grids and spec formulas and therefore more of a show.

[Robinho]

Niki Lauda test drove a Jaguar and said it was so easy that his grandmother/monkey could drive it! The era had TC, auto upshifts with manual override for downshifts, pit to car telemetry whereby car adjustments could be made from the pits; respect for driver skill was being lost.




As I said earlier purity of F1 and pretty much sport itself.



IIRC Lauda said that before test driving a car, before spinning several times in a couple of laps and making himself look pretty stupid

Sent from my HTC Desire HD A9191 using Tapatalk 2

[Garry Walker]

For the best part of 10 years I've been reading threads on here about how dull the sport is/was when Schumacher or Vettel dominated, and now finally there's a genuine chance for midfield teams to do well and people are complaining.

Tyre management is difficult. Here's the dirty secret: F1 is meant to be difficult. Those who get it right reap the rewards. It's not a lottery, it's hard work, talented designers and skilful driving.
F1 is not endurance racing, it should not be about driving 2 seconds below the limit to save tyres.


I hope that you are happy now - hard tyres, no lead changes, "pure" racing.

Yeah, watching guys drive to delta time is so much more interesting than seeing the best drivers in the best cars in the world pushing to the absolute limit of their skills and equipment. So interesting.
The other thing that is really interesting is the best drivers in the world having to pit after 8 laps because their tyres are dead eventhough they haven't even pushed to the limit.

[F1boat]

Garry Walker, I guess you enjoy the DTM series? It is completely pure and completely dull. I don't want to see F1 like this and if the price is to compromise purity, so be it (in my opinion). Again, I can't understand why only touring cars (and the BTCC in particular) should be exciting. Also, wedge, surely you can understand that F1 is business and at least partly show...

[ArrowsFA1]

Yeah, watching guys drive to delta time is so much more interesting than seeing the best drivers in the best cars in the world pushing to the absolute limit of their skills and equipment.
The tyres are one part of that equipment. If you push to the limit there is always a danger of going over the limit. The skillset of a driver includes the ability to judge & manage the equipment at their disposal whatever the era.

I don't recall there being such vorciferous criticism of the sport thirty years ago when we saw six different winners in the first eight races of 1982, and seven different winners in the first eight races of 1983. The view then was that it was exciting to see the best drivers in the best cars in the world pushing to the absolute limit of their skills and equipment.

[wedge]

I don't recall there being such vorciferous criticism of the sport thirty years ago when we saw six different winners in the first eight races of 1982, and seven different winners in the first eight races of 1983. The view then was that it was exciting to see the best drivers in the best cars in the world pushing to the absolute limit of their skills and equipment.

There was never an agenda to entertain the audience.

[F1boat]

Yes, there wasn't but it is normal to try to appeal to the fans. I really can't say why people don't understand it. F1 is trying to survive in a world in which there are many entertainments and you need to fight for your survival.

[ArrowsFA1]

There was never an agenda to entertain the audience.
If that was the case then would F1 have been in Las Vegas?

[wedge]

Yes, there wasn't but it is normal to try to appeal to the fans. I really can't say why people don't understand it. F1 is trying to survive in a world in which there are many entertainments and you need to fight for your survival.

Yes, many a sport has gone down that route and upset the purists. Take away the purity you take away the soul and what you have left is a gimmick.


If that was the case then would F1 have been in Las Vegas?

What has Las Vegas got to do with it?

In the early '80s was there an agenda to spice up the show because F1 is boring? Was there an agenda or an obsession for more overtaking? Was there a need for DRS? Comedy tyres?

[ArrowsFA1]

What has Las Vegas got to do with it?
Entertainment.

[F1boat]

Yes, many a sport has gone down that route and upset the purists.


Talk is cheap, please give me an examples. I repeat - F1 must survive in a highly competitive media environment, and for this, it must entertain the majority of its fans. If it upsets some purists, so be it. Purists always reject everything new. A few years ago it was "no overtaking, so bad", now it is "too much overtaking" and the whining continues even after the Monaco GP in which the cars were able to survive on one stop strategy.

[wedge]

Entertainment.

As in glitz and glamour.

Did they go to Vegas because there would be numerous overtaking opportunities? Allow an underdog to win?

The unpredictability was mainly due to the evolution of technology. One would consider Pirelli's tyres as a retro-grade.


Talk is cheap, please give me an examples. I repeat - F1 must survive in a highly competitive media environment, and for this, it must entertain the majority of its fans. If it upsets some purists, so be it. Purists always reject everything new. A few years ago it was "no overtaking, so bad", now it is "too much overtaking" and the whining continues even after the Monaco GP in which the cars were able to survive on one stop strategy.

Snooker - Power Snooker, against the clock; shortened frames in the World Championship.

Cricket - 20/20 cricket.

Make F1 too unpredictable it cheapens the sport and F1 will no longer be the pinnacle. Who would care about genuine pace? Might as well give the drivers the same cars but then why would a team like Ferrari or even Williams feel the need to exist?

[F1boat]

Make F1 too unpredictable it cheapens the sport and F1 will no longer be the pinnacle. Who would care about genuine pace? Might as well give the drivers the same cars but then why would a team like Ferrari or even Williams feel the need to exist?[/QUOTE]

Yes, but F1 is not too unpredictable. Unpredictable yes, too unpredictable no. Let's see the championship - the best drivers lead, same with the constructors. Let's see the teams who have won the races - McLaren, Red Bull and Ferrari - the big three in recent years, Mercedes, which were expected to win sooner or later, and Williams, which are the third most successful team in history. I think that we have the right balance between show and sport. So the best guys still lead, but there is a chance for an underdog and a good show. What you want, wedge, is completely pure sport. What you want is a DTM for open-wheelers. And I think that this is the worst, which could happen to F1.

[ArrowsFA1]

As in glitz and glamour.

Did they go to Vegas because there would be numerous overtaking opportunities? Allow an underdog to win.
You said that "There was never an agenda to entertain the audience" and yet F1 was more than willing to go to the entertainment capital of the States to entertain.

The idea that F1 has only recently become concerned about "entertainment" is misleading IMHO. Entertainment has been a part of the sport since races were first organised for paying spectators.

The current rules don't "allow" an underdog to win. For one thing the rules are the same for everyone, unlike the past when we have seen one team with bespoke tyres, or the time when Goodyear provided special qualifying tyres to a select few teams.

But we're going over the same ground again and again. Our views differ. C'est la vie.

[zako85]

I really don't like how some people on forums disparagingly to formula 1's new "upredictability" and the tire lottery. Both of these labels are undeserved. This year teams have to work harder to extract good pace from their cars. Also, some of the usual predictability was gone because at times some of the top teams and drivers have either shown a bad form, or they suffered from mechanical problems, such as gear box changes, or other penalties. I don't think it was due to some lottery that we have seen some unusually good speed from some teams. Everything we have seen this year so far has an explanation IMO. Another thing that you should remember is that the performance differentials between cars have been reduced considerably. Engine development has been frozen and engines have been "equalized" more than once. The aero rules put a lot of constraints on what teams can do. Overall this results in speeds that are very close to each other. As soon as the front running driver/car/team have made a mistake, they will be within a striking distance from those coming from behind.

The only thing I really don't like this year is that teams are forced to save tires during qualification. This does really mess up the results, and leaves fans disappointed when they see cars parked in a garage during qualification stages.

[wedge]

You said that "There was never an agenda to entertain the audience" and yet F1 was more than willing to go to the entertainment capital of the States to entertain.

The key to entertaining is executing it in a manner little in the way of gimmicks/novelty. Let's face it, Caesar's Palace fell into the latter:

Good idea: race in Vegas

Bad idea: featureless car park behind Caesar's Palace lined endlessly with concrete barriers.



The idea that F1 has only recently become concerned about "entertainment" is misleading IMHO. Entertainment has been a part of the sport since races were first organised for paying spectators.

True but since 2003 there's been a number of radical rule changes. Not Schumi's fault he missed out on a golden generation of competition at his peak.

[ArrowsFA1]

True but since 2003 there's been a number of radical rule changes. Not Schumi's fault he missed out on a golden generation of competition at his peak.
But there have always been rule changes, radical and otherwise, for different reasons. Safety. Aesthetics. Equivalency. Current F1 is no different to previous decades in this respect.

There does seem to be this view that 2000-2005 was somehow a "golden era" when races were broken up into short sprints and there's no doubt Schumacher excelled in those circumstances. Is it a coincidence that he is one of the most vociferous critics of the current rules and tyres in particular. Simply put, they don't suit his strengths.

[wedge]

But there have always been rule changes, radical and otherwise, for different reasons. Safety. Aesthetics. Equivalency. Current F1 is no different to previous decades in this respect.

I find the last 10 years much more radical than previous decades to 'spice up the show'. Eg. single lap quali, knock-out style quali, tyre pit stops banned, team orders banned then re-introduced, race with 2 tyre compounds, soft tyres. Can you say the same for previous decades?


There does seem to be this view that 2000-2005 was somehow a "golden era" when races were broken up into short sprints and there's no doubt Schumacher excelled in those circumstances. Is it a coincidence that he is one of the most vociferous critics of the current rules and tyres in particular. Simply put, they don't suit his strengths.

Short sprints were prevalent when refuelling was introduced in 1994.

[Big Ben]

Not having an obedient team mate and the fastest car don't suit Schumi's strengths either :laugh: . He's a nice bloke though. He was nice enough not to blame the car and the team even if that made more sense to moan about.

[F1boat]

I find the last 10 years much more radical than previous decades to 'spice up the show'.

For an entertainment to survive, modern times are much more difficult. As I have said, F1 is fighting for an audience which is also a target of football, music, movies, etc. In the 90s there were two or three big hits per year, now every week there is a new movie blockbuster. To stay home in Sunday, you need to be entertained IMO.

[SGWilko]

In the 90s there were two or three big hits per year, now every week there is a new movie blockbuster. To stay home in Sunday, you need to be entertained IMO.

How does that work then? You can generally go to the cinema any day of the week you choose. F1 however, will only be shown live once per race.......

[F1boat]

How does that work then? You can generally go to the cinema any day of the week you choose. F1 however, will only be shown live once per race.......

I can, because I am a translator and work in home (that's why I have time to visit this place so often lol), but most people work during the week and for them it will be quite difficult. And if the races are dull... I must admit that at one part of F1 in 2008, a season in which for a second time in a row it seemed that only McLaren and Ferrari can win, I skipped some races to go to see some movies... maybe I am an odd exception, but I still think that in order to survive F1 must be fun.

[Garry Walker]

Garry Walker, I guess you enjoy the DTM series? It is completely pure and completely dull. I don't want to see F1 like this and if the price is to compromise purity, so be it (in my opinion). Again, I can't understand why only touring cars (and the BTCC in particular) should be exciting. Also, wedge, surely you can understand that F1 is business and at least partly show...

DTM pure? In what way? I haven't watched that series for 3 years at least. They have idiotic rules regarding how you can race eachother, how you must pit twice, there is nothing pure about that series.


The tyres are one part of that equipment. If you push to the limit there is always a danger of going over the limit. The skillset of a driver includes the ability to judge & manage the equipment at their disposal whatever the era.These days no one has the possibility of being on the limit during a race, because they are always saving tyres mode. At Monaco they were racing to delta time, that is how big a joke the current tyres are.
Is part of driver's ability not going out in qualifying to save a set of those ****ty tyres for race?



I don't recall there being such vorciferous criticism of the sport thirty years ago when we saw six different winners in the first eight races of 1982, and seven different winners in the first eight races of 1983. The view then was that it was exciting to see the best drivers in the best cars in the world pushing to the absolute limit of their skills and equipment.
LOL. These days those guys are not pushing to the absolut limit of their skills, going 2,5 seconds slower and racing to delta time is not pushing to the limit.
What a complete joke.

Villeneuve another one with a brain.

The Jacques Villeneuve Q&A | Features & Experts | Sky Sports Formula 1 (http://www1.skysports.com/formula-1/news/22058/7798875/The-Jacques-Villeneuve-Q-A)

Jacques, can I start by asking you what you think of the new look Formula 1 because in some quarters it is coming under some criticism, saying there is too much variety, maybe the tyres are not predictable. Do you like the Formula 1 you've seen this year?
Jacques: "I am not a huge fan, there's things I like and things I don't, but I guess that's the case for everybody and everything in life - not everybody will always be happy. But I am not a huge, huge fan right now."

Could you explain why?
Jacques: "Because it is too unpredictable on the tyre front. There is very little the drivers can do, the tyres just suddenly disappear and that doesn't seem to be to the level that F1 should be at. There have been some races this year where in the space of one lap the tyres just disappear and that is a little bit wrong, it should be more gradual."


Every proper race fan hates these joke tyres.

[F1boat]

Garry, you know, you are not the highest authority about who is a proper fan and who is not. I watch F1 since 1992 and can't remember being so entertained as in the first races of the season. However, it looks that Montreal will be again one-stopper, so we are back to days of dull, predictable racing. I hope that you are happy about that. I am glad that there is GT racing this weekend.

[wedge]

Drivers have not been pushing to the absolute limit for an entire race distance and have been racing to delta times for many years now. Pirelli have not changed that aspect of the sport.

In previous years drivers were never told to do 'delta times'. It was purely down to the drivers to manage the tyres when you could run conservatively and then extract more from the tyres. Even this was possible in 2005 when tyre changes were banned.

You really can't do that with Pirellis. The degradation is so atrocious that conservative tyre management is ever more critical.

[jens]

If this is going to be another 1-stopping race, then perhaps we can assume Pirelli got a bit soft due to all this criticism they received and have already designed a bit more "normal" and durable tyres.

[airshifter]

I agree, tire management has been around for years. Ever since refueling was made illegal even more than in the past. During the days of refueling tires could be changed with fuel strategy regardless, and fuel strategy dictated a lot more of more race strategies IMO.

[wedge]

Drivers have been given delta times for various reasons for many seasons now. One I can think of (not concerning tyres) was back in 2010 when Hamilton was given a delta to conserve fuel and told Button was on the same strategy. Were people up in arms because they were not going flat out for all of the race? I don't remember it personally. Button also managed his Bridgestone tyres in that race so he held back for the first half but pushed at the end. Tyre management is nothing new in my viewing experience and I have no problem with the Pirelli tyres forcing drivers to race more intelligently. I don't want a return of tyres lasting 50 laps, thanks.

They were told to slow "conserve fuel" - euphemism for team orders. Up in arms? They drove flat out for two thirds of the race and when they went wheel to wheel they were told to hold station.

The reason why the Bridgestones and could be pushed at the end of the stint was in part of the fuel effect: fuel lessens, less weight thus the tyres can be pushed and the lap times tumble. Degradation is so bad you can't do that with the Pirellis. Drivers are scared of the "edge of the cliff" whereby the grip completely goes away and the laps times shoots skywards.

Tyre management should be about when to conserve and attack but with the Pirellis conservation is of greater importance.

[ArrowsFA1]

Cue complaints about the tyres as Alonso goes backwards attempting a one stopper.

Blame the strategy, not the tyres.

[Dave B]

Two people made it onto the podium with a one-stop strategy: there's nothing wrong with the tyres, whatsoever.

[Garry Walker]

Drivers have not been pushing to the absolute limit for an entire race distance and have been racing to delta times for many years now. Pirelli have not changed that aspect of the sport.
Never has racing to delta time been as prevalent in F1 as now. Never. You might have seen it in some races in times gone by, but never to such degree as you are seeing it now.
BTW: you actually enjoy racing to delta time more than flat-out pushing to limit? I have no words to describe what I think of that if you do.


Garry, you know, you are not the highest authority about who is a proper fan and who is not.I am the HIGHEST authority when it comes to voicing my own opinion and I will keep doing that. You can keep voicing your opinion as can everyone else. In other words, you are free to kiss something that I have and which means the same as donkey.


I watch F1 since 1992 and can't remember being so entertained as in the first races of the season. However, it looks that Montreal will be again one-stopper, so we are back to days of dull, predictable racing. I hope that you are happy about that. I am glad that there is GT racing this weekend.
Yeah, I guess some like seeing the best drivers in world struggle because their tyres are dead after 8 laps, I guess some like artificial racing, I guess WWF is a real sport to some people as well.

BTW: You said DTM is pure racing and I called you up on it, I will ask again, how is DTM pure racing?


Drivers have been given delta times for various reasons for many seasons now. One I can think of (not concerning tyres) was back in 2010 when Hamilton was given a delta to conserve fuel and told Button was on the same strategy. Were people up in arms because they were not going flat out for all of the race? I don't remember it personally. Button also managed his Bridgestone tyres in that race so he held back for the first half but pushed at the end. Tyre management is nothing new in my viewing experience and I have no problem with the Pirelli tyres forcing drivers to race more intelligently. I don't want a return of tyres lasting 50 laps, thanks. You are thinking of one race, where there were about 15 races which were completely opposite.
BTW: actually you are thinking of Turkey 2010 I think, the race where Hamilton started racing to delta after Bieber rammed out his teammate and McLaren were 1-2 leading by a huge margin. Yeah, that is exactly like the last couple of races have been. That is completely normal to take it easy once you are leading by a clear margin.


Thats not what a couple of the doubters here want to hear considering how many laps he did on that one set.. :p
Today the tyres were not like they were in some other races. Very good.

Cue complaints about the tyres as Alonso goes backwards attempting a one stopper.

Blame the strategy, not the tyres.
Do you even understand what people are complaining about or do you just lash out at anyone who dares to interrupt your teenage love affair with these tyres?

Today was a badly calculated risk by Ferrari and no one will complain about tyres lasting when someone attempts to do a stint of over 50 laps on them.
Think a bit.

[Garry Walker]

Two people made it onto the podium with a one-stop strategy: there's nothing wrong with the tyres, whatsoever.

Today was very clearly far different from most races this year.

[Dave B]

Today was very clearly far different from most races this year.
They're all unique. I think that more and more teams and drivers are beginning to understand the tyres and how to get the best out of them. Alonso and Ferrari took a gamble which didn't work, Vettel and RBR did the same but knew when to go to plan B and salvage a position, Perez and Grosjean made it work for them.

[steveaki13]

Fantastic strategy used today by different drivers, the tyres were great. 2 stops and 1 stops could work and teams trying 1 stops differing ways around.

In case I get moaned at.
:D
No major problem with tyres although in one race I forget which we had 4 odd stops may have been slightly to many, but they have added a good element to F1 if there are different strategies that can work.

Just DRS. So no having a go at me for being a combined DRS & tyre hater. Just the one. Unlike some who hate both. ;)

[ArrowsFA1]

Today the tyres were not like they were in some other races.
So what was different?
1) Pirelli brought completely different tyres to Canada
2) Same tyres as before but the teams & drivers are learning how to manage them better
3) Something else

[wedge]

No complaints from me.

Nice to see a natural order of the best teams and drivers going toe to toe.


Today was very clearly far different from most races this year.

Monaco and Montreal are low degradation tracks so teams will try to eke out a one stopper if they can.

[SGWilko]

So what was different?
1) Pirelli brought completely different tyres to Canada
2) Same tyres as before but the teams & drivers are learning how to manage them better
3) Something else

You forgot option 4 - they were square this time out! :p

[ArrowsFA1]

You forgot option 4 - they were square this time out! :p
Ahhh, sorry 'bout that. Clearly I'm far too wrapped up in this "teenage love affair (http://www.motorsportforums.com/f1/152428-pirelli-defend-tyres-after-schumacher-blast-5.html#post1043013)" I'm apparently having with these tyres to think straight :laugh: :laugh:

[Tazio]

5)
The championship, both of them, with the exception of the bottom three teams I believe is now statistically closer.

[F1boat]

Better than Monaco, I am more relaxed now.

[SGWilko]

Better than Monaco, I am more relaxed now.

Good - don't follow through now though!

[Knock-on]

Well Garry my old son, anyone that watched Lewis going hell for leather on Sunday and wringing the neck out of the Mac and the tyres must admit it was superb racing otherwise they're not a real Motorsport fans :laugh:

Just goes to show that if you don't try and use them outside their parameters then they work fine. If you want to run them on long stints then you need to look after them but if you want balls out then you need more stops.

Simples :p

[Garry Walker]

So what was different?
1) Pirelli brought completely different tyres to Canada
2) Same tyres as before but the teams & drivers are learning how to manage them better
3) Something else

1) We don't know if the have changed the construction or the compound of the tyre. They probably haven't.
2) Considering people were doing 50 laps on those tyres and they lasted and there have been races where 9-10 laps on one set is a good result, then there is simply no way the teams have learnt to use the tyres so much better.
In all likelihood this was because of Montreal being very easy on tyres.


Ahhh, sorry 'bout that. Clearly I'm far too wrapped up in this "teenage love affair (http://www.motorsportforums.com/f1/152428-pirelli-defend-tyres-after-schumacher-blast-5.html#post1043013)" I'm apparently having with these tyres to think straight :laugh: :laugh: Yeah, don't worry, soon you will have your entertaining races with tyres lasting 8 laps and all those wonderful DRS passes to drool over like a 13 year old girl drools over justin bieber.


Well Garry my old son, anyone that watched Lewis going hell for leather on Sunday and wringing the neck out of the Mac and the tyres must admit it was superb racing otherwise they're not a real Motorsport fans :laugh:

Just goes to show that if you don't try and use them outside their parameters then they work fine. If you want to run them on long stints then you need to look after them but if you want balls out then you need more stops.

Simples :p But was he pushing all out all the time?

[ArrowsFA1]

Yeah, don't worry, soon you will have your entertaining races with tyres lasting 8 laps and all those wonderful DRS passes to drool over like a 13 year old girl drools over justin bieber.
Now you've gone and spoilt it by mentioning DRS :bigcry:

<Walks off and stamps foot like a petulant teenager would>

:p

[wedge]

It used to be suggested that Montreal was particularly hard on tyres because of the long straights, heavy breaking zones, and winding first sector. Obviously that viewpoint can change if a different tyre supplier comes into the sport no doubt.

It's exit acceleration that is of more concern but long straights and heavy braking zones are meaningless. Monza has long straights and heavy breaking zones and the tyre deg is low.


But was he pushing all out all the time?

Judging by radio excerpts and consistent lap times, yes.

[SGWilko]

heavy braking zones are meaningless.

Heavy braking zones will cause more heat build up in the tyre carcass, and can add significantly to deg if your car is hard on the tyres generally.

[wedge]

Heavy braking zones will cause more heat build up in the tyre carcass, and can add significantly to deg if your car is hard on the tyres generally.

Not really. Where did you get that idea from?

Some teams have been using trick hubs to try to retain heat because the heat transfer is minor as it will easily dissipate on acceleration/straights via cooling effect of the brake ducts.

Deg comes from "traction limited" ie. wheelspin. The rears are softer than the front therefore they are delicate and easy to overheat.