Thread: Did Pirelli go too far?

Originally Posted by wedge

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.

I disagree that the WDC, or the WCC for that matter, is "tainted" in any way whatsoever.

The emphasis in 2012, as always, is "being at the front winning/fighting for wins". The reason that the likes of Sauber and Williams are able to get out of the midfield is that the teams generally are more closely matched than I can remember.

Ultimately the team and driver who do the best job over the whole of the season will deserve their titles and, aside from DRS, I see few reasons to complain about the racing we are getting this year.

I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again…

What distinguishes Formula One is that it’s a constructors’ series where originality and technological innovation is employed to engineer and build a car from the ground up for the purpose of racing and dominating the field. It’s up to other teams to employ similar strategies to close the gap. The competition amongst teams in Formula One, unlike other series, takes place in the factories and garages as much as on track.

Lately it has been the FIA that has been introducing both technical and sporting regulation changes to artificially “close the gap” and spice up the show. As soon as a team develops a technical innovation (e.g. double diffusers, blow diffusers, etc.) that provides an advantage the FIA promptly ban it rather than allowing other teams to either devise similar technologies or conceive of counter-measures.

Some claim that gimmicks like DRS and unpredictable tires are good for the show, but I certainly feel they contradict the essence of the sport.

By the way, in football leagues it is completely normal that top teams lose a few matches against midfielders/backmarkers every season. Does it mean football is fake just because someone like Wolves can beat ManU on occasion? Yet it is the consistency of top teams that brings them more points and consequently titles over a full season. So what would be so wrong about midfield teams winning a couple of races in F1 per season with the majority still belonging to top teams?

I think people are so used that every race win should belong to a chosen group of top teams, so even a single win out of norm is labelled as weird. Yes, as mentioned above, there is a reason, why top teams generally come out on top in the championship. But it doesn't mean they should come out on top by a huge margin. It is enough if they are winning by a small margin over a full season. Last I looked at the points table, RBR and McLaren still have almost twice as many points as, say, 4th best team in WCC. And that's quite a lot, to be honest. No-one outside RBR, McLaren (perhaps Lotus) has even a remote shot at WCC, regardless of how much "lottery" we are having.

It would be fine if by the end of the season WCC winner (a top team, by the way, not midfielder!) has 300 points, while, say, the 5th team has 150 pts. It would show the depth of the competition with the best-engineered/-funded/etc teams still coming out on top. Why would it need to be 500 pts vs 50 pts like some seem to think should be "the norm"?!

I enjoy, what I am seeing. And I don't get the hysteria. "Omg, a midfield team won a race - F1 is so wrong and fake, top teams should dominate every single session, only then it is a fair competition."

Originally Posted by jens

I enjoy, what I am seeing. And I don't get the hysteria. "Omg, a midfield team won a race - F1 is so wrong and fake, top teams should dominate every single session, only then it is a fair competition."

I don't understand either. Even during the Ferrari/McLaren/Williams domination of recent years, before Pirelli apparently "ruined" everything, you had teams like Jordan or Stewart winning the occasional race.

Originally Posted by SGWilko

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.

They did that to cool the tyres down, bring them back into their operating temperature and use the increased grip to pass. We're talking about managing tyre wear which is an entirely different subject.

Interestingly if you propose drivers stuck in a train back off to give their tyres a break, you're then proposing that they should start giving away their positions (or at least risk it). Is that how far tyre management should go in a racing situation?

Originally Posted by SGWilko

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

Yes, he did exactly what I said drivers have to do to preserve their tyres. He was in free air for the vast majority of that last stint so he could manage them properly.

During that time he was being dropped by a second a lap by a Sauber, two seconds a lap by a Ferrari and Williams, and up to three/four seconds a lap by the Loti. He was lucky to finish where he did because the cars behind him were having equal trouble or were held up behind slow cars like Webber. I'm sure Lewis is happy with the level of pace he got out of that car....

Originally Posted by henners88

Who is this 'one particular driver' F1boat, Schuey?

With or without tires Michael will have difficulty to win a race. I speak about some fans of Lewis who are very vocal about their distaste for the tires in forums like P-F1 or Autosport Atlas. Which is bloody ridiculous because in Spain Lewis himself proved what can be done with the tires if you are careful.

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?

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.

Its not too big a jump to see a Williams and a Ferrari finish over a minute ahead of the RBRs and McLarens in bone dry conditions on a track that traditionally acts as an arena where you could clearly see the performance differentials between cars? Sure you could argue that three of those four drivers had problems before or during the race but to that extent? Really?

As I said its great to see Williams finally win a race again and as a Sauber supporter at least I can imagine them getting another couple of podium finishes this year but can I truly honestly say to myself that its entirely due to their having developed a cracking car and not being lucky with getting the most out of the tyres that particular weekend?

As for Alonso and Perez in Sepang, the conditions were wet and changing so one could view the results as being typical for such freak conditions like Fisi's win back in 2003 (?).

Malbec, the teams of Williams and Sauber obviously built cars who are competitive with the current tires

Originally Posted by Knock-on

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 have absolutely no doubt whatsoever that Williams have done a great job turning their performance around, and I agree that the management decisions made over the past year or so have worked. Also, Williams have showed great pace for short periods earlier in the season but again do you think they are genuinely 1 second a lap quicker than an RBR or a McLaren?

What "genuinely" means? In life you never have "perfect" circumstances.

Yes, in reality McLaren had the pace to win at least two more races (China and Spain). They made mistakes and paid costly for them. This doesn't diminish the victories of Mercedes GP and Williams. Like Red Bull in 2010 - made many mistakes and let Ferrari and McLaren to benefit. The difference is that now we at least have fun races.

I was just saying, not arguing

Originally Posted by henners88

Of course they are not that far ahead or evenly consistently at the front with figures like that. That is enough for total dominantion of the season and I don't see them finding speed like that overnight especially when they are not faster than McLaren in qualy trim.

Ok then. I'll discount Lewis' time because he finished at the back, he only finished 1 minute 8 seconds off Maldonaldo after a 66 lap race. Button however finished 1 minutes 25 off Maldonaldo which is way over a second a lap and beyond bad handling he had no race issues to explain his poor performance.

I'll admit thats a very crude comparison but it shows exactly how dominant Williams were on Sunday against the traditional front runners. Since you agree that you don't believe that level of pace is what the Williams is really capable of over the full season then I'm sure you'll agree then that their use of the tyres was the likely cause for their sudden pace. So basically it boils down to the fact that victory is pretty much a lottery depending on how well a particular team gets to grips with a tyre on any particular weekend.

I appreciate that people think that the teams get the optimal tyre use through merit but if over a full season well resourced and extremely engineering heavy teams like McLaren and Red Bull get it consistently wrong while smaller less well resourced teams get it right on a regular basis then that suggests otherwise.

Maybe because smaller teams searched for years for small benefits while biggies were sure that their aero superiority will prevail. I'm not sure that this is the reason, but it may be. It may not be on pure luck. But still - the rules are the same for everybody, I agree that the tires might be made to prevent domination, but that's not so bad IMO.

Originally Posted by henners88

Likewise

We have also seen since Pirelli have come intot he sport that pole position is very important. It is so easy to build and maintain a gap with these tyres in clean air and I have no doubt Lewis would have enjoyed an Abu Dhabi style dominance had he not been demoted 23 places on the grid.

Probably, although he struggled in Oz and Malaysia.

Originally Posted by Malbec

I appreciate that people think that the teams get the optimal tyre use through merit but if over a full season well resourced and extremely engineering heavy teams like McLaren and Red Bull get it consistently wrong while smaller less well resourced teams get it right on a regular basis then that suggests otherwise.

Umm, Red Bull and McLaren are leading the championships, which means that they have been getting it right more often than midfield teams. If RBR and McLaren were 6th and 7th in WCC, then I'd agree with you.

Originally Posted by jens

Umm, Red Bull and McLaren are leading the championships, which means that they have been getting it right more often than midfield teams. If RBR and McLaren were 6th and 7th in WCC, then I'd agree with you.

Thats why I said if :wink: Its odd though that more people aren't at all perturbed by a very unexpected result at a track that rarely ever produces surprises.

Originally Posted by Malbec

Thats why I said if :wink: Its odd though that more people aren't at all perturbed by a very unexpected result at a track that rarely ever produces surprises.

Indeed, cos we all love a good procession, eh?

Originally Posted by Malbec

I'll admit thats a very crude comparison but it shows exactly how dominant Williams were on Sunday against the traditional front runners. Since you agree that you don't believe that level of pace is what the Williams is really capable of over the full season then I'm sure you'll agree then that their use of the tyres was the likely cause for their sudden pace. So basically it boils down to the fact that victory is pretty much a lottery depending on how well a particular team gets to grips with a tyre on any particular weekend.

The technical regulations are so tight this year that winning the races may be down to suspension setup, strategy, good pit work, and good tire management. However, I really don't like the way the word "lottery" is being thrown around. Suspension tuning and tire management are not a lottery. I want to believe that some teams and drivers have done a better job than others, and that's that. Was it because of this "tire lottery" that McLaren screwed up so many of its pit stops this year and then under-fueled Hamilton last weekend? I don't think so. It's just bad form IMO. No longer it's enough to have a good driver and a fast car. Now they have to work very hard for the wins every race weekend.

In my view, the technical regulations are so tight that a weaker team can score if everything goes its way on a certain weekend. For years, this was the goal that motivated various funding caps, engine development freeze, tire unification, many other rules, and this is the result. I think this situation is similar to IndyCar before 2012. Before 2012, IndyCar was a spec car series with everyone using two similar types of chassis of the same maker, and only one engine. The top two teams still won most races, but lesser teams still managed to surprise every few races, with Dan Wheldon's 2011 Indy 500 win being the win that surprised most last year.

So far I like this years championship. The only big problem that I see is that teams are not given enough tires to really duke it out without any reservations in the qualification sessions.