Schmachers F1 dominance explained ?
Discussion
Quote from Gary Anderson, BBC's F1 technical analyst
It was also interesting to hear Mercedes' Michael Schumacher complain about the Pirelli tyres. He is a professional racing driver, and it's all about looking after your tyres. You do that by getting the right balance on the car. When I was involved with Bridgestone tyres with Jordan in the early 2000s, in the middle of the tyre war with Michelin, Schumacher and Ferrari had tyres we were not even allowed to look at. They cost so much money that Bridgestone could not afford to supply them to everyone. And whenever we did have an opportunity to run a derivative of those tyres, our lap times were much, much better. It's a bit sad that Michael now sees things the other way around, because a lot of his competitiveness in those days was down to the working relationship he and Ferrari had with Bridgestone, one to which nobody else had access.
So, tyres that were so special, that no one else could have them. Not surprising he won all the titles then, is it ?
It was also interesting to hear Mercedes' Michael Schumacher complain about the Pirelli tyres. He is a professional racing driver, and it's all about looking after your tyres. You do that by getting the right balance on the car. When I was involved with Bridgestone tyres with Jordan in the early 2000s, in the middle of the tyre war with Michelin, Schumacher and Ferrari had tyres we were not even allowed to look at. They cost so much money that Bridgestone could not afford to supply them to everyone. And whenever we did have an opportunity to run a derivative of those tyres, our lap times were much, much better. It's a bit sad that Michael now sees things the other way around, because a lot of his competitiveness in those days was down to the working relationship he and Ferrari had with Bridgestone, one to which nobody else had access.
So, tyres that were so special, that no one else could have them. Not surprising he won all the titles then, is it ?
I don’t think that Shuey was asking for a return to a tyre war, so Anderson’s comments, while interesting, are largely irrelevant.
He was simply stating that if the FIA choose to have control tyres, they should be durable and not materially determine who will win the race, and that he believed that 80% of drivers would probably agree with him.
Driver race craft should be paramount, pretty much like every other formula from kids karting to Gp2.
Why Pirelli would want to sign-up to providing tyres that fall apart after a few laps baffles me.
He was simply stating that if the FIA choose to have control tyres, they should be durable and not materially determine who will win the race, and that he believed that 80% of drivers would probably agree with him.
Driver race craft should be paramount, pretty much like every other formula from kids karting to Gp2.
Why Pirelli would want to sign-up to providing tyres that fall apart after a few laps baffles me.
rdjohn said:
I don’t think that Shuey was asking for a return to a tyre war, so Anderson’s comments, while interesting, are largely irrelevant.
He was simply stating that if the FIA choose to have control tyres, they should be durable and not materially determine who will win the race, and that he believed that 80% of drivers would probably agree with him.
Driver race craft should be paramount, pretty much like every other formula from kids karting to Gp2.
Why Pirelli would want to sign-up to providing tyres that fall apart after a few laps baffles me.
Yes but if the tyres are durable all we have is a procession, all the teams use the same tyres, they follow each other into the pits and follow each other out. With these Pirellis that does not happen we get some variety in the racing, and I am sure that if we had had durable Pirellis we'd all be complaining about the lack of competition on track, and one of the teams, probably Red Bull would have romped off in to the distance by now.He was simply stating that if the FIA choose to have control tyres, they should be durable and not materially determine who will win the race, and that he believed that 80% of drivers would probably agree with him.
Driver race craft should be paramount, pretty much like every other formula from kids karting to Gp2.
Why Pirelli would want to sign-up to providing tyres that fall apart after a few laps baffles me.
Did Pirelli not want a 'tyre war' as a preference?
The thing that baffles me on the whole Schumacher debate is why people can't or won't try to understand that what made him great wasnt just being better than the average F1 driver behind the wheel, but the way he managed his world. Getting the pieces where and how he wanted them and shutting out the advantage for others. All built on working harder and smarter.
The thing that baffles me on the whole Schumacher debate is why people can't or won't try to understand that what made him great wasnt just being better than the average F1 driver behind the wheel, but the way he managed his world. Getting the pieces where and how he wanted them and shutting out the advantage for others. All built on working harder and smarter.
Jungles said:
Schumacher was successful for a many reasons. Tyres was just one of those. To attribute all his success on tyres is not fair on him, no matter how "dirty" one might think of some of his tactics.
Agreed, I also think that his main competition was not as great - he was head and shoulders above much of the field and effectively reigned etween Senna and Alonso. The opposite is now true; we have several WDCs and very strong new blood.Most people watch F1 to see who will win the WDC and not who can achieve the best compromise with Mickey Mouse tyres.
rdjohn said:
Most people watch F1 to see who will win the WDC and not who can achieve the best compromise with Mickey Mouse tyres.
I think the tyres should be more durable as well. But to call them Mickey Mouse seems a bit harsh.The drivers can still drive hard and race each other. We can see plenty of that. But they need to be judicious with how long they do it for. In the last race, we saw Raikkonen go at Vettel very hard for at least half-dozen laps. Obviously he couldn't keep up that kind of effort without his tyres getting knackered, but it was certainly not contrived.
Last season, teams also had difficulty making their tyres work. But once they did a few European races under more predictable conditions than the Australasian ones, they figured the tyres out and there were no complaints.
Jungles said:
I think the tyres should be more durable as well. But to call them Mickey Mouse seems a bit harsh.
The drivers can still drive hard and race each other. We can see plenty of that. But they need to be judicious with how long they do it for. In the last race, we saw Raikkonen go at Vettel very hard for at least half-dozen laps. Obviously he couldn't keep up that kind of effort without his tyres getting knackered, but it was certainly not contrived.
Last season, teams also had difficulty making their tyres work. But once they did a few European races under more predictable conditions than the Australasian ones, they figured the tyres out and there were no complaints.
Would anyone buy Pirelli road tyres if they fell apart after 1000 miles?The drivers can still drive hard and race each other. We can see plenty of that. But they need to be judicious with how long they do it for. In the last race, we saw Raikkonen go at Vettel very hard for at least half-dozen laps. Obviously he couldn't keep up that kind of effort without his tyres getting knackered, but it was certainly not contrived.
Last season, teams also had difficulty making their tyres work. But once they did a few European races under more predictable conditions than the Australasian ones, they figured the tyres out and there were no complaints.
It is Pirelli's willingness to go along with "the show" argument that I find most surprising.
I think you overrate how much the public correlate road car tyre performance with race car tyre performance. They know they're not the same. In their minds every part on an F1 car is special, unique, technologically superior, things of aspiration. Just look at the hyperbole fed to them by the media on driver performance and tech advancements. If it wears out faster or misbehaves that's OK because it's on an F1 car.
Being a control tyre and making them misbehave a little is far cheaper for Pirelli than a tyre war and keeps them in the news the same amount. It's all good publicity for them.
Being a control tyre and making them misbehave a little is far cheaper for Pirelli than a tyre war and keeps them in the news the same amount. It's all good publicity for them.
rdjohn said:
Would anyone buy Pirelli road tyres if they fell apart after 1000 miles?
It is Pirelli's willingness to go along with "the show" argument that I find most surprising.
From a technical view it's FAR FAR harder to engineer tyres in the way pirelli have and to stay one step ahead of the teams for another year is impressive. I don't think Bridgestone could do what Pirelli have done for two reasons, 1. Being Japanese they have a need to reign supreme in the public eye. 2. They couldn't unlearn what they already knewIt is Pirelli's willingness to go along with "the show" argument that I find most surprising.
Pirelli's level of expertise is better demonstrated in gp2, where the cars are identical, the performance and consistancy amongst the tyres is incredible. Make you wonder why some of their road car tyres are so s
t 
Gassing Station | General Motorsport | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff