Pirelli tyres

[rdjohn]

zac510 said:

Next week's winner will be withheld until Scuffers the driver his approval on whether the driver was racy enough. We'll delay the podium ceremony until he gives it the thumbs up.

Isn't that one of Bernie's / Stewards job?

I think that with tyres falling apart towards the end of the race, there could be an awful lot of argy-bargy down the grid resolving who did what, when.

[rdjohn]

Pirelli ready to supply Q3-only tyres. Well Hembery is thinking on the right lines, perhaps decent race tyres will follow soon:-

http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/99766

Clearly, negativity towards the tyres are getting to Pirelli.

Death where is thy sting

[rdjohn]

Ahonen said:

Did you ever answer when I asked which tyre company you work for?

Just for absolute clarity, I don't and never have.

Like others writing here, I just see great falseness in what we are witnessing.

As Heebeegeebee says - it may be entertaining, but it is not sport. That is why I will enjoy myself elsewhere this weekend on some very durably Yokahama 048s.

[rdjohn]

Eric Mc said:

I agree.

The thread has grown tyred.

Or should I say that the tyre has worn out its thread.

So to summarise:-

Shed loads of money and engineering excellence, coupled with drivers capable of sustaining high speeds for much of the race, brings about stability (form), which in turn can make a race somewhat boring for fans who have been around for a while.

The Pirelli tyres bring about randomness to an extent where luck can play an overriding part in who will actually win.

Bernie said a while ago that there is no future for Europe in F1 “it’s a bust flush”, so the furure belongs to the Far East where the IPO will also take place.

I know nothing about spread-betting, but I suspect that you can get some very good odds on the number of overtakes by driver xxxxx during a race (fill in blanks)

So making the results more like a lottery may stay for the long-term. And it will please EriicM

[rdjohn]

Bedazzled said:

Well I enjoyed quali, Q3 was ace.

Q3 was the race, the guys are so good at hooking things up for qually.

Even the threat of rain did not make the actual race remotely exciting. Watching on radio was probably a smart move.

[rdjohn]

iiyama said:

Now I am prepared to disagree with JS on that. Marbles have always existed, although maybe not as early in the race as they are now....

Just come back from the LM test day

There are more marbles on track from 24 F1 cars in 90mins - going slow!!! than there are from 50+ in the LM 24 hour race. The huge quantity adds to making it less likely to pass, other than with DRS on a straight, or on a pit stop, or if someone’s tyres have hit the wall.

If you are new to F1, then I can understand your enthusiasm, but I cannot understand why some fans refuse to see that they are just not racing for the greater part of the time. They are (relatively) cruising, because they have to, because the tyres will only last 5-7 laps if they actually raced.

That is not managing the tyres under race conditions – it is just driving to a delta; skilful, but not racing.

[rdjohn]

Fernando Alonso not ruling out a Ferrari victory in Canadian Grand Prix

http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/100240

Obviously, it is Fernando’s turn for the good tyres agian this week!

Stop playing games with fans. Let’s see some real racing for the finish.

[rdjohn]

When LH said it may be a one-stopper, my heart sank. Ironic as it was the excitement of Canada 2010 that Pirelli were asked to emulate.

Fortunately I do not have Sky and so wont have to endure the tedium.

[rdjohn]

Megaflow said:

Sorry, tedium?

Possibly the best race ever.

How anybody can slate these tyres when they produce a race like that is beyond me.

So you are clearly happy with Button in 16th - same car?

Lewis drove his Plan A perfectly, potter round for two stints and then really go for it, pass the 1-stoppers when thay are lame ducks.

He sold the dummy perfectly in the Friday press conference when he said he might one-stop. Ferrari and Red Bull bought it.

[rdjohn]

Ahonen said:

That's a pretty silly thing to say.

Do you think teams, any teams in any form of racing, plan their strategies based on what a driver from a rival team says in a press conference? F1 teams employ people specifically in order to calculate strategies and study the pace and deg of rival teams in order to try to work out what everyone is up to. They simulate all sorts of race scenarios beforehand and attempt to calculate the ultimate race time based on a massive number of variables: and the 'What Lewis said in the press conference two days ago' algorithm is not one I'm personally familiar with.

Part of the strategy is to guess what the opposition will be doing. Miss-information is part of that game.

Presumably you missed Gary Anderson say this was a two-stop race before the race. One was possible from the back 11, starting on the harder compound. I guess that Lewis' comment "Are you sure that they are not one-stopping" was said to reinforce the dummy.

It was a well deserved win but Lewis' Friday times showed who the most likely winner was going to be, as passing is not difficult in Canada, but the serious opposition FA and SV were wrong-footed and lost the possibility of better placings through their poor choice of strategy.

[rdjohn]

You are correct; I did not see the SKY coverage. Still in denial.

Lewis could put in fast times more or less as he wanted, all weekend, but he needed decent rubber to do this.

The risk of two-stopping was loosing track position if all the front runners were two-stopping. The dream scenario was convincing the serious contenders, that you could not do a one-stopper. Lewis did this beautifully.

The big risk with a one-stop (option first) was the prime tyres hitting the wall (not of champions), which they did as, when he was in the lead, Lewis allowed them to stay tantalisingly in-touch, but pressing-on.

With these Pirelli tyres the obligation is to drive to deltas and not be tempted into a race. Where you end up at the finish line is determined by the (best-guess) use of the tyres and not necessarily the absolute skills of the team, driver or performance of the car. This is what I believe is fundamentally wrong with the Pirelli tyres.

[rdjohn]

RYH64E said:

rdjohn said:

loosing

Woops sorrey!

[rdjohn]

http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/100318

Pirelli to test new hard compound tyre in practice at the British Grand Prix

[rdjohn]

Scuffers said:

so we are back to this then:

Sort of sums it up perfectly. Though it is perhaps more like 4 Rubik cubes.

[rdjohn]

http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/100328

This is where the future of close racing should be. Capped budgets and enforceable resource restrictions on the numbers of aero devices per annum etc. And some lovely sticky Pirellis.

This is the real issue. Engineers need to be given a sensible annual budget. If not sponsors will leave the sport because of lack of viewing figures on pay-TV and races at accessible venues for their guests.

CVC is the greatest threat to the sport of F1 – they need it to be a cash cow of a business, hopefully they will not be able to float and so sink in the very near future. A bit of grist from the FIA would also help as share ownership has changed significantly since the phony deal between Max and Bernie was done. They should reclaim ownership of the series.

[rdjohn]

Ahonen said:

Eric Mc said:

So you pay no attention to what the other teams might do? You just run your own race blindly ignoring other teams' stated intentions?

Of course you plan for other teams. As I said above, you try to work out what they're up to also. But what I was largely getting at was the fact that you don't tend to base your strategy on what a driver says in a press conference - although rdjohn has now brought me up to speed, for which I'm grateful.

Do you not concede that, even with multiples of your years of race experience, and possible better resources, both Alonso's and Vettel's race engineers looked pretty dumb with the outcome of the race on Sunday?

To quote EricM the main "known" about these tyres is that once they hit-the-wall they will be useless if an attacking role is required in the latter part of the race. A two-stop was the only safe option for those starting the race on options. Alonso was presumably lightly fuelled and so could not increase his pace, had he tried to cover Hamilton’s two-stop.

[rdjohn]

http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/101883

Ross Brawn wants less randomness in the second half of the season and equates the first half to going fishing.