Should we get rid of the two-mandatory-compounds rule?

[Sonic]

My point is that it should be possible to do the entire race on hard tyres and do less stops or the entire race on soft tyres and doing more stops.

Sorry. Misunderstood. I think if that were the situation the rule could be dropped, but clearly the Pirelli hard couldn't manage a full GP distance on the back of a truck.

[Bagwan]

Tailoring the tires to the required two specs must be extremely hard to do .
Add in that the cars , themselves , can be tailored , to a degree , to each use the tires differently , and you've got a job that might take some time yet to tweak .

I would like to see the hard prime get 3/4 of the way , and the option sketchy after 1/4 distance , but fast as heck in a handbag .

The only thing the two compound rule does is force strategy away from a no-stopper .

The option , I suppose , would be to simply mandate at least one stop . Then , the only way to get there would be on a set of hards , and the only sensible thing to do would be to run long on them and finish on options .

Pit stops are a part of the race , showing the win is due to the efforts of a whole team , not just a driver .
They are part of the spectacle , and tires that can last a whole race lose us that element of the show .

We don't refuel any more so mandating a tire change isn't so bad .

[Mark]

But with the tyres we have now going an entire GP distance without a stop is pretty much out of the question. Last year, I'll grant you that we could have seen no stop races with the Bridgestones.

I certainly agree what to you want is a very fast soft which will only last 1/4 of the race and a slower hard which will last 3/4 and then have the classic tortoise and hare scenario.

[Sonic]

^^^ whilst this was my preference hhis time last year, I'm more than happy with what Pirelli have brought. If in 12 months time the teams have got wise to the strategy calls, mix it up again and chaos can once again reign!

[Hawkmoon]

^^^ whilst this was my preference hhis time last year, I'm more than happy with what Pirelli have brought. If in 12 months time the teams have got wise to the strategy calls, mix it up again and chaos can once again reign!

You're absolutely right. The more variables, the better the racing. It's why wet/dry races are often so good. The problem we have now is that the FIA has been elimiating variables over the last decade or more. Standard engine configurations and single tyre suppliers might be good for the balance sheet but they're detrimental to the racing. They've given the teams a variable (high wearing tyres) to play with and we suddenly get better racing, despite what ioan thinks about artifical gimmicks. The problem, as you say, is that the teams will eventually work out how to eliminate that variable and the procession will be back. It's the FIA's task to make sure that the variables remain and that the teams have to keep guessing.

[Jared East]

Yes please get rid of it!
If anything I would like to see maybe only one set of softs and you can use them anytime during the weekend... Maybe in qualifying to make the 107 rule, or to pull away at the start of a race maybe even to try to win the race late.

[Sonic]

^^^ I doubt you could just bung on a set of options without at least some sort of opportunity to sample them and adjust tyre pressures, car setup etc to suit.

[V12]

It's NEVER added anything to the sport to be honest. The last time tyres were interesting was2001-2006.

[Bagwan]

But with the tyres we have now going an entire GP distance without a stop is pretty much out of the question. Last year, I'll grant you that we could have seen no stop races with the Bridgestones.

I certainly agree what to you want is a very fast soft which will only last 1/4 of the race and a slower hard which will last 3/4 and then have the classic tortoise and hare scenario.

Perhaps , if they can get the tires exactly right , it will offer more than one strategy . But it seems a touch more complicated to produce the right number of laps in each case , to ensure that the teams don't all pick one way to go .

As the cars all improve over the season , and different tracks offer up different characteristics , they will tweak the skins to suit .
They will have to .

And , they have dealt with the "super-marble" issue pretty well .

The two compounds need to be radically different to induce the different strategies .
Too different , and the risk is that one will be too risky , and they may all choose the other .

That can lead to processional races .

The troubles they have at the moment are the hard compound wasn't lasting long enough(It was slow enough , but not quite as durable as I'd like to see) , and the sudden drop-off , or "cliff" the engineers speak about .

They'll get it right .

It's those tires , and they fact that they have to use both specs , that is making for the proliferation of differing strategies , not that stupid wing thing .
A couple of seconds difference between cars is what you need to have hard fights .

You have that with the two compound rule .

[nigelred5]

If you don't have the forced option you basically have one scenario, everyone choosing the same tire, and all of the tires going off at relatively the same intervals. It does nothing to scramble the field, which is exactly what they wanted and have so far received. I've thoroughly enjoyed what Pirelli has provided so far, though it still baffles me how and why F1 refuses to use track dryers to blow the track clean now and then during a weekend.

I'd still like to see them halve the number of pit crew members changing tires on each car and mandate each car have it's own crew. sam number of crew members and a fair fight between team mates.