Pirelli defend tyres after Schumacher blast

If people are so stunned about the pace of Williams, why does no-one comment on Ferrari? Let's put it this way - "omg, Ferrari was so quick, this means F1 is a Pirelli lottery, because they are not supposed to be up there". Because based on 2012 performances so far there is little to choose between Ferrari and Williams in dry conditions - they were close in Australia, China (remember the relentless blocking by Maldonado against Alonso in the end - those two have been battling all the time this year!) and Bahrain. So if Williams is used as an example of "Pirelli lottery", then Ferrari is in the same boat. Why isn't Ferrari mentioned?

It looks like people are arguing for the need of having a couple of chosen top teams at the front, rather than trying to be impressed by the genuine progress of midfield teams. And yes, I mentioned genuine. Because if Ferrari in 2012 being at the front of the grid is OK for you and not the matter of luck, then so should be Williams, who has designed an almost equally good car, regardless of how you are trying to put it.

I remember in 2009 there were complaints as well. That the top teams (McLaren/Ferrari) were handicapped due to the fiasco of KERS and DDD saga and we had fake teams at the front.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by wedge

Williams know how to win? They've never made top cars.

---

I started watching F1 in 1985.

In 1985, the Williams was a winner.

It was too in '86, Mansell was robbed the title by tyre failure.

'87 Car was a winner.

'88 Fast car, average engine that overheated a lot. 2 second places mind you.

'89 & '90 Started their love affair with Renault. Good car, OK engine to start with, journeymen drivers (IMO)

'91 Bloody fast car, grappling with semi-auto box gremlins. Runners up.

'92 Probably the equivalent to F1 mecca that car. 2 seconds advantage on most tracks. Title taken.

'93 Title

'94 & '95 - Did Bentetton cheat their way too these????? :laugh:

'96 Title

'97 Title

'98 to present mainly buggered by engine suppliers, and a bloke called Mario who I think is a class A stroker!

So yep, they aint gotta clue Wedge my boy.......

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jens

If people are so stunned about the pace of Williams, why does no-one comment on Ferrari? Let's put it this way - "omg, Ferrari was so quick, this means F1 is a Pirelli lottery, because they are not supposed to be up there". Because based on 2012 performances so far there is little to choose between Ferrari and Williams in dry conditions - they were close in Australia, China (remember the relentless blocking by Maldonado against Alonso in the end - those two have been battling all the time this year!) and Bahrain. So if Williams is used as an example of "Pirelli lottery", then Ferrari is in the same boat. Why isn't Ferrari mentioned? Oh yes, they are a so-called top team and hence have a "rightful position" at the sharp end of the grid, regardless of whether they actually have produced a crap car or not.

---

I'd also like to remind people that in the second part of the 2009 Formula One season we had many races with different winners:
Turkey - Button
Great Britain - Vettel
Germany - Webber
Valencia - Barrichello
Hungary - Hamilton
Belgium - Raikkonen
Between Germany and Belgium four different constructors won a race - Red Bull, Brawn GP, McLaren and Ferrari. The form of the cars varied a lot. After a period of dominance by Brawn, Red Bull were untouchable in Great Britain and Germany, then Brawn won again in Valencia, a race in which he was challenged by the McLarens and Red Bull was no where. In Hungary McLaren and Ferrari seemed head and shoulders above the rest and in Belgium Force India had the fastest car, but lost to Raikkonen's brilliant driving (IMO). I can also say that this was a very fun and nice period of Formula One racing. I am happy that the current season seems to be even more entertaining... and quote the 2009 result to show that it is possible for a team to look like a winner in one race and to be nowhere in another one... even in relatively dull seasons like 1997 this happened - Ferrari and Williams fought for the WDC and WCC, but in Germany Benetton competed for the win with Jordan and in Italy McLaren were racing Benetton, while Williams and Ferrari were awful slow. Not to mention the 2002 Monaco GP, in which McLaren and Williams suddenly looked competitive to the all-conquering Ferrari.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SGWilko

I started watching F1 in 1985.

In 1985, the Williams was a winner.

It was too in '86, Mansell was robbed the title by tyre failure.

'87 Car was a winner.

'88 Fast car, average engine that overheated a lot. 2 second places mind you.

'89 & '90 Started their love affair with Renault. Good car, OK engine to start with, journeymen drivers (IMO)

'91 Bloody fast car, grappling with semi-auto box gremlins. Runners up.

'92 Probably the equivalent to F1 mecca that car. 2 seconds advantage on most tracks. Title taken.

'93 Title

'94 & '95 - Did Bentetton cheat their way too these????? :laugh:

'96 Title

'97 Title

'98 to present mainly buggered by engine suppliers, and a bloke called Mario who I think is a class A stroker!

So yep, they aint gotta clue Wedge my boy.......

---

Historically Williams are the third most successful Formula One team in history, after Ferrari and McLaren.

One more thing. Remember 1997. One reason, why that season was so remarkable, were the tyres or more specifically the beginning of a tyre war after a break several years. This included some impressive performances of Panis and of course the Hungary drive of Damon Hill. Hill's achievement of almost winning a race in an Arrows is still part of F1's folklore. Yes, if you think about it, it was largely down to tyres as Bridgestone was much superior to GoodYears on that day, on which the top teams were running.

Does it mean the heroic performance of Arrows/Hill was insignificant? Yet it is worth mentioning that that drive is remembered fondly by people as a special moment of F1, when an underdog managed to rise to the top. So my question - why can't some people enjoy current F1 and the special moments? You can always argue about luck and circumstances. Yes, if you are extremely serious you can claim coldly - Hill almost won only thanks to tyres, Maldonado won only thanks to tyres. And so what? The point of F1 is entertainment and the moments should be enjoyed instead of being grumpy about many things.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jens

It looks like people are arguing for the need of having a couple of chosen top teams at the front, rather than trying to be impressed by the genuine progress of midfield teams. And yes, I mentioned genuine. Because if Ferrari in 2012 being at the front of the grid is OK for you and not the matter of luck, then so should be Williams, who has designed an almost equally good car, regardless of how you are trying to put it.

---

:up:

jens, I agree with all your comments on this subject. Spot-on.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jens

And so what? The point of F1 is entertainment and the moments should be enjoyed instead of being grumpy about many things.

---

This, for God's sake, THIS!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ioan

I can't see the board in Milano being happy with this kind of image, but hey this is just my view, so I'll now hand it over to the 'experts' who will tell the world how Alonso vs MS in Imola 2005 and 2006 was not great racing and what they watch now is the best ever racing. :D

---

Well, after talking to the average 'Joe' on the streets of Milano today, I can tell you that people are pretty invigorted about F1 this year. Mind you, they're just your IQ80 sort of people so it doesn't matter.

"Cry me a river" LOL :laugh:

Cant understand the complaints, this year weve had 2 drivers taking their first race win, and genuinely I cannot guess who will win in Monaco. Compared to the rubbish (IMO) season last year where we knew who was going to win, this is like a breath of fresh air :)