Thread: Did Pirelli go too far?

From webber after the race

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

I hit the limiter: Webber | Fox Sports

Originally Posted by ArrowsFA1

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

+1

Coulnd't have put it better myself.

Originally Posted by i_max2k2

From webber after the race



I hit the limiter: Webber | Fox Sports

OK, so who forgot to tell Lewis?

Originally Posted by ioan

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

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

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

Originally Posted by wedge

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

Merit has become more and more of an abstract concept.

With tongue placed firmly in cheek:









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

Originally Posted by ArrowsFA1

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Originally Posted by Malbec

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

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

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

Originally Posted by i_max2k2

From webber after the race :

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



I hit the limiter: Webber | Fox Sports

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

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

Originally Posted by Dave B

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

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

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

Stop complaining people!

Originally Posted by Dr Giacomo Rappaccini

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

ftfy

Originally Posted by Malbec

...is it great racing?

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

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

Originally Posted by wedge

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Originally Posted by Dr Giacomo Rappaccini

With tongue placed firmly in cheek:

That is quite funny.

Originally Posted by Malbec

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

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

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

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

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

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

Originally Posted by SGWilko

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

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

Originally Posted by ArrowsFA1

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

Another good point

Originally Posted by ArrowsFA1

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

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

Originally Posted by ArrowsFA1

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

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

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

This year merit has become an abstract concept.

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

From another thread:

Originally Posted by Mark

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

What a great day for F1 !

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

Originally Posted by wedge

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

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

Originally Posted by wedge

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Is it so surprising?

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

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

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

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

Originally Posted by ArrowsFA1

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

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

Originally Posted by ArrowsFA1

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

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

Originally Posted by ArrowsFA1

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

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

Originally Posted by ArrowsFA1

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

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

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