2019 Tyre Nonsense

[Mr Pointy]

This one is for all of the simpletons who were moaning about being unable to cope with the current concept of seven tyre grades & identifying colours:

https://www.motorsport.com/f1/news/pirelli-reveals...

Right, so a red soft tyre may actually be a 1,2 or 3 or an A, B or C compound. That's not confusing at all. I trust the whingers are happy now.

[SteBrown91]

Agreed. The tyre system needed simplifying but this was not the answer.

It should be:
Soft, medium and hard and these same compounds are used at every circuit. Teams choose in advance what they want and they should have to use at least 2 of the compounds.

Make sure there is a big step between each compound so they have to choose whether running a medium and soft is fast but could have to bail at the last minute or run the hard that can do the distance but doesn’t have the performance.

[Kraken]

The fact that someone is on a "soft" tyre and someone else is on a "medium" is all that is really relevant within the race itself. The fact that the soft might be two levels softer than the one used at the previous race is totally irrelevant to what goes on in the current race.

[Graveworm]

Can they also sort out this weekend tyre thing. As CH suggested why not have tyres per session or day. That way we would not have spectators sitting in the rain watching an empty track and TV companies filming drivers playing angry birds because they are saving inters for Quali and Sunday. I would still keep the Quali 2 tyre to start the race on for the top 10 though.

[Mr Pointy]

Gaz. said:

So exactly the same as the 2007-2010 Bridgestones. That was easy.

Not quite though is it? Seven is a much bigger range & it wasn't quite so obvious. The hardest tyre could only ever have been hard & the softest could only ever have been soft of while the middle two might be soft or hard. Next year the same compound tyre could be a hard, a medium or a soft depending on which of the range is taken to the race.

Kraken said:

The fact that someone is on a "soft" tyre and someone else is on a "medium" is all that is really relevant within the race itself. The fact that the soft might be two levels softer than the one used at the previous race is totally irrelevant to what goes on in the current race.

It does matter to those who actually follow F1. Each car has particular tyres it goes well on & those it doesn't (cf the blistered rears on the Ferraris). We are going to end up with car then went well on softs in one race going like a dog in the next because the compound has changed. The commentators are still going to have to explain why this is the case & start reffering to the actual compound names.

[Kraken]

Mr Pointy said:

t does matter to those who actually follow F1. Each car has particular tyres it goes well on & those it doesn't (cf the blistered rears on the Ferraris). We are going to end up with car then went well on softs in one race going like a dog in the next because the compound has changed. The commentators are still going to have to explain why this is the case & start reffering to the actual compound names.

Out of the total audience those who actually care about that level of detail and can't find it out are, I expect in a tiny minority.

I don't see why the commentators will need to refer to what you mention at all. Do you think many people get or are even interested in the nuances of different track surfaces, downforce levels, compounds etc. All that info will still be there for anyone who wants to look it up.

Part of the problem is that the commentators talk about tyres and fuel saving too much. It's always been a massive part of F1 and most motorsport for that matter but they just talk about it ad nauseum which really puts the average punter off.

[markcoznottz]

As soon as Ben Edwards opens his mouth the words 'super soft' fall out, and I go to sleep. Not helped by his dry delivery. Not an ounce of danger or glamour or humour anywhere in the sport.

[EDLT]

Now if the commentators could avoid the tedious "Soft compound, which is actually the super soft compound, but is the softest tyre available this weekend" line that we will hear every single race this change might have some effect.

[sgtBerbatov]

You know how tyres make F1 exciting?

You get more than one constructor involved. Do that, you only have to do that.

[thegreenhell]

sgtBerbatov said:

You know how tyres make F1 exciting?

You get more than one constructor involved. Do that, you only have to do that.

Then it's all about being on the right brand of tyre, and if you're not then you won't win no matter how good your car is. It becomes all about the tyre, which would be even more tedious than the current situation.

[anonymous-user]

thegreenhell said:

sgtBerbatov said:

You know how tyres make F1 exciting?

You get more than one constructor involved. Do that, you only have to do that.

Then it's all about being on the right brand of tyre, and if you're not then you won't win no matter how good your car is. It becomes all about the tyre, which would be even more tedious than the current situation.

Yep, witness the Michelin fiasco in the early 2000s..... illegal sizes followed by taking their ball in at Indy because their tyres weren't good enough to hang on on the banked portion of the circuit.... we need that like a hole in the head.

[sgtBerbatov]

cb1965 said:

thegreenhell said:

sgtBerbatov said:

You know how tyres make F1 exciting?

You get more than one constructor involved. Do that, you only have to do that.

Then it's all about being on the right brand of tyre, and if you're not then you won't win no matter how good your car is. It becomes all about the tyre, which would be even more tedious than the current situation.

Yep, witness the Michelin fiasco in the early 2000s..... illegal sizes followed by taking their ball in at Indy because their tyres weren't good enough to hang on on the banked portion of the circuit.... we need that like a hole in the head.

You mention that one incident, yet you don't mention Hungary 1997 when Damon Hill was competitive in an uncompetitive Arrows, just because they were on Bridgestone and the rest were on Goodyears.

[thegreenhell]

Imagine Christian Horner's whinging if they had the best chassis, engine and driver but couldn't win because they chose to use Nankangs when all the other teams were on the much better LingLongs.

[anonymous-user]

sgtBerbatov said:

cb1965 said:

thegreenhell said:

sgtBerbatov said:

You know how tyres make F1 exciting?

You get more than one constructor involved. Do that, you only have to do that.

Then it's all about being on the right brand of tyre, and if you're not then you won't win no matter how good your car is. It becomes all about the tyre, which would be even more tedious than the current situation.

Yep, witness the Michelin fiasco in the early 2000s..... illegal sizes followed by taking their ball in at Indy because their tyres weren't good enough to hang on on the banked portion of the circuit.... we need that like a hole in the head.

You mention that one incident, yet you don't mention Hungary 1997 when Damon Hill was competitive in an uncompetitive Arrows, just because they were on Bridgestone and the rest were on Goodyears.

No I am referring to the expanding tyre issue that it took the FIA nearly a whole season to sort out and then in 2005 their tyres couldn't cope with Indy because the FIA made them redesign them a season and a half a go. A tyre war is not a good thing on a number of fronts.

[entropy]

sgtBerbatov said:

You mention that one incident, yet you don't mention Hungary 1997 when Damon Hill was competitive in an uncompetitive Arrows, just because they were on Bridgestone and the rest were on Goodyears.

That year Bridgestone were new to F1 and it was the lesser teams with nothing to lose and more to gain went with them and the big teams stuck Goodyears. I think a tyre war only really works in those kind of scenarios where the lesser the teams are on a different tyre brand and mix it up upfront on the odd occasion which is what happened in the 80s with Pirelli who could create interesting starting grids.

On balance I'm against tyre wars. It's masssive variable and nobody wants results decided by having the best tyre let alone the Merc engine of previous seasons and praying the competition catches up. MotoGP was a good example of why tyre wars are bad that you effectively had two classes racing based on tyre brands and it got to the point Rossi was sick and tired of having inferior Michelins he broke ranks and became the sole Yamaha rider on Bridgestones.

For that reason I just can't see a tyre war working in today's two tier F1 because the midfield is so close a tyre war would create schism with race results based on tyre brands. F1 is that close now.

Having a variable that levels the playing field no bad thing IMHO.

Having said that competition improves the breed. I think it would be interesting in running a tyre war whereby teams weren't contractually tied to a brand but had to use both brands all weekend. Would be a logistical nightmare for all involved!

[thegreenhell]

It's clear that the FIA don't want to 'improve the breed' when they specifically tell Pirelli to make rubbish tyres that fall apart.

[MissChief]

Graveworm said:

Can they also sort out this weekend tyre thing. As CH suggested why not have tyres per session or day. That way we would not have spectators sitting in the rain watching an empty track and TV companies filming drivers playing angry birds because they are saving inters for Quali and Sunday. I would still keep the Quali 2 tyre to start the race on for the top 10 though.

Any Inters and Wets used in FP1 or 2 are replaced at no penalty to the weekend allocation. Sorted!

[sgtBerbatov]

entropy said:

sgtBerbatov said:

You mention that one incident, yet you don't mention Hungary 1997 when Damon Hill was competitive in an uncompetitive Arrows, just because they were on Bridgestone and the rest were on Goodyears.

That year Bridgestone were new to F1 and it was the lesser teams with nothing to lose and more to gain went with them and the big teams stuck Goodyears. I think a tyre war only really works in those kind of scenarios where the lesser the teams are on a different tyre brand and mix it up upfront on the odd occasion which is what happened in the 80s with Pirelli who could create interesting starting grids.

On balance I'm against tyre wars. It's masssive variable and nobody wants results decided by having the best tyre let alone the Merc engine of previous seasons and praying the competition catches up. MotoGP was a good example of why tyre wars are bad that you effectively had two classes racing based on tyre brands and it got to the point Rossi was sick and tired of having inferior Michelins he broke ranks and became the sole Yamaha rider on Bridgestones.

For that reason I just can't see a tyre war working in today's two tier F1 because the midfield is so close a tyre war would create schism with race results based on tyre brands. F1 is that close now.

Having a variable that levels the playing field no bad thing IMHO.

Having said that competition improves the breed. I think it would be interesting in running a tyre war whereby teams weren't contractually tied to a brand but had to use both brands all weekend. Would be a logistical nightmare for all involved!

It'd be interesting but unworkable, as they'd have to redesign the suspension geometry every time they swapped to a new tyre.

[entropy]

sgtBerbatov said:

entropy said:

sgtBerbatov said:

You mention that one incident, yet you don't mention Hungary 1997 when Damon Hill was competitive in an uncompetitive Arrows, just because they were on Bridgestone and the rest were on Goodyears.

That year Bridgestone were new to F1 and it was the lesser teams with nothing to lose and more to gain went with them and the big teams stuck Goodyears. I think a tyre war only really works in those kind of scenarios where the lesser the teams are on a different tyre brand and mix it up upfront on the odd occasion which is what happened in the 80s with Pirelli who could create interesting starting grids.

On balance I'm against tyre wars. It's masssive variable and nobody wants results decided by having the best tyre let alone the Merc engine of previous seasons and praying the competition catches up. MotoGP was a good example of why tyre wars are bad that you effectively had two classes racing based on tyre brands and it got to the point Rossi was sick and tired of having inferior Michelins he broke ranks and became the sole Yamaha rider on Bridgestones.

For that reason I just can't see a tyre war working in today's two tier F1 because the midfield is so close a tyre war would create schism with race results based on tyre brands. F1 is that close now.

Having a variable that levels the playing field no bad thing IMHO.

Having said that competition improves the breed. I think it would be interesting in running a tyre war whereby teams weren't contractually tied to a brand but had to use both brands all weekend. Would be a logistical nightmare for all involved!

It'd be interesting but unworkable, as they'd have to redesign the suspension geometry every time they swapped to a new tyre.

You'd get the same problem in a normal tyre war. Bridgestone came up with a stiffer tyre construction which Ferrari had develop the car around - which debunks the myth Schumi always had the best tyres.

However your point shows why there are engineers - Pat Symonds one of them - against tyre wars. Yes its all very well having nice sticky tyres but they can mask the flaws in the car and nightmare for car development.

[Kraken]

Tyre wars are a disaster from a marketing point of view. Can you imagine with the way F1 is these days if Hamilton on Hankooks lost a race to Verstappen on Toyos (for example) and then said in the press conference it was purely because of the tyres?

There wasn't so much hype around last time we had a tyre war but these days I can just imagine the fallout. It just gives the drivers yet another excuse as to why they haven't won. Given how many people seem to think that Pirelli can't make a tyre to last a GP I wouldn't hold out much hope of fans understanding a tyre war either.