Schumacher criticises Pirelli tyres

Then you would get cars not qualifying at all if it's changed.

And that's what we currently get when the midfield teams get into Q3
I don't think it's luck Mephistopheles. It was obvious from last year that once teams had understood the tyres (by Valencia) they could switch them on. I think it's part of the technical challenge. If a team gets to Brazil without understanding the tyres, then tough - they aren't random, they're just misunderstood :)

I don't think it's a lottery either Slyboogy. Schumacher made a decision to stay in the garage in Q1. Because he was the one on the bubble and he stayed in, so did Jenson who was next - if MS had gone out, so too would have JB and LH. He (or his team) made a choice to try and ride it through. It's a strategic choice. I think Schumacher is doing the old football manager ploy of blaming someone else to protect the idiot in his team who cocked up.

I agree more when you talk about Alguersuari vs Buemi. 18th was definitely better than 17th last year and perhaps 10th is better than 9th ExtremeNinja and if you can get off the line as well as Kimi, then maybe they are better than 5th, but if you look at friday practice times, the fastest cars were the Red Bulls and the Lotuses.

I think they just get to the end via different routes and that made for overtaking and exciting racing.
I agree with Galahad. Another set of options and any of these problems that are real problems go away.
The luck comes into it because of the narrow band to operation that these tyres have, nobody expected such a cool track temperature as was the case on race day in Bahrain if it had been a normal Bahrainian day the race would have turned out a whole lot differently so in that way Renault got lucky, the same happened in China for Mercedes..

All I would ask is that Pirelli give the tyres a wider range of operation thats it really....
So this would be the same Michael Schumacher who used to spend hours and hours pounding round the Ferrari test track as the prefered Bridgestone team, tailoring their construction and design to the exact set up of his car and the way he wanted to drive?
If that's true Sportsman, then he must be the single best placed person to make a useful comment about them,having been a tyre tester and a top spot racer for such a long time.
After calling DRS the silicone tit of motorracing,I'll now call the Pirelli's F1's fragile inflatable doll : push too hard and you're out of the window with it. LOL
For me, one of the things that I used to love about F1 back in the 80's was the unpredictability re. car failures... to a lesser degree I think the tyre allocation reg's inject a modicum of unpredictability into proceedings... albeit with the driver now in control of his destiny vis a vis heavy right foot... I think it is a good thing... does anyone pine for a return to the days of refueling and tyres that could last two race distances with minimal performance drop off... where the passing action was in and out of pit lane... mickey mouse slot car racing ?

As for Herr Schumachers comments... reading between the lines... after four races and being totally DOMINATED by his team mate... methinks this is him voicing his displeasure at his current situation... without railing on his team or mechanics... a little bit of subtle misdirection from his own performances... :yes:
I don't think the problem is due to the tryes.Pirelli have done exactly what the were asked to do by the FIA.
The problem lies here.For the 2011 season the FIA cut the tyre allowance from fourteen sets of tyres to eleven.
That is what is causing the cars not to run in qualifying. SPORTING REGULATIONS 09-03-2012.pdf 25.2 Quantity of tyres during an Event :
a) Except under d) below, no driver may use more than eleven sets of dry‐weather tyres,
six of “prime” specification and five of “option” specification.
b) Except under e) below, no driver may use more than four sets of intermediate tyres and
three sets of wet‐weather tyres.
c) A set of tyres will be deemed to comprise two front and two rear tyres all of which must
be of the same specification.
d) Following a recommendation to the FIA from the appointed tyre supplier, one additional
set of either “prime” or “option” specification tyres may be made available to all drivers.
Teams will be informed about such an additional set at least one week before the start
of the relevant Event.
e) If either P1 or P2 are declared wet one additional set of intermediate tyres will be made
available to all drivers. Under such circumstances, one set of intermediate tyres must be
returned to the tyre supplier before the start of P3.
I have to confess that I am growing very weary with the constant Schumacher bashing. It was FERRARI that had the arrangement with the tyre company, NOT Schumacher, so I don't see how MS can be faulted. As for Anderson's comments, there was a tyre war on at that time which makes all the difference in the world. In such conditions, one team is always preferred over others-Renault were favoured at the beginning of the turbo era, Lotus were preferred at the start of the downforce era and so on. I don't see any slating going on aimed at Colin Chapman for having the cheek to get preferential treatment when it came to tyres.

As for Schumachers comments regarding the current tyre situation, I agree with tranquility2k9.
sportsman Pirelli have only done as the FIA have asked, but in my opinion the tyre wear was slightly too excessive in Bahrain.
The tyre allowance was cut down to 11 sets first for the 2010 season before Pirelli joined and there wasn't the issue of cars not running in Q3 that season.

In the Bahrain qualifying if you drove at the car's limit in the first sector your tyres would already be off in the final sector. If you can't even do just one whole lap on the limit, I think the wear is a bit excessive. There'll be no more engineers on the radio in the race saying, "we need 10 laps of qualifying" it'll just be the tyre saving advice we have now.

Schumacher wasn't the only one criticising the tyres he was just the most vocal. The only positive thing is that it's the same for everyone.
Did you .../quote]

I just did.
I'm not contradicting any of that,but I agree with siffert_fan.
It's the teams that cough up and any racing driver would gladly take whatever advantage their team offers them.
I'm pretty sure Gary wouldn't mind either if he had constructed the car for that team .
Besides,what happened in 2005?Did Michelin get some early inside information from the FIA about the new no tyre change rule, just to stop the MS/Ferrari/Bridgestone domination ?
Whatever,I'm enjoying this season for its suspence.
Take China,almost everyone thought it was an exciting race ,me included,with a train of drivers behind Kimi and Seb, to claim the second spot on the podium.
But this was mainly to the fact nobody took the risk to overtake.
As long as their rubber was reasonable KR and SV "Kersed" in the "DRS"zone,the rest of the track they were safe because of too many "marbles",untill their tyres "fell of the cliff"or had deteriorated too much.
All the team principals are now saying it's all about the Tyres,and that for me is just a bit too much.
It should be about the cars,the drivers and then possibly the tyres.
Schumacher is entitled to give his opinion about the rubber,he's the most experienced racer on the grid,what happened in the past has nothing to do with what's happening now.
Just a question - what did we all prefer of the various formats:
  • No fuel or tyre stops
  • No fuel stops
  • No tyre stops
  • Both fuel and tyres stops
The FIA has tried each variation with varying degrees of success. From my perspective the "sprint race" format with fuel and tyre stops was hellishly tedious to watch and the fuel stops only format was just a bit daft. My heart hankers for the "good old days" of the 70's and 80's where there were no fuel or tyre stops but I know you can't go back. The current situation has made things unpredictable at least.
The big problem I see with the Bahrain race was that Pirelli had not run there, and I am guessing not a lot else had either, so not only was there issues with a dirty track, the tyres were probably not really suited. I seem to recall the teams got used to the tyres fairly quickly last year, and all the issues that we saw at the start of the season, and all the tip toeing was greatly reduced, as teams worked out how to really use the tyres.

Personally, I like to see things being mixed up. The tyres would allow a driver to push from start to finish, but he would need to stop more, and maybe overtake more, admittedly I think the tyre choice in Bahrain was too agressive, but you cant win them all.

I like the current racing, the tyre issues add a new dimension to the races, and an element of unpredictability that was lacking in the bridgestone era. And technically, the teams will adapt, some better than others, and the ability to deal with the tyres would appear to be a significant contributing factor to the variation in front runners that we have had so far.

So what if you need to choose when to use? Personally, if we get this kind of close action through the season, albeit with a less agressive tyre choice, I think it will be hailed as a success.

Either way, as has been said before, Pirelli are providing the kind of tyres they have been asked to provide, and have done so very well, and should not be singled out for criticism.
I made my comments on another thread but I'll make them again in more detail. Pole position is now 11th place. If you can come 11th fastest in Q2 and you have a decent car for the race then you have a net pole. That is a sensationalist version of my understanding of things as they are in F1 at the moment.
According to Gary Anderson that's what Lotus did, aiming for "pole".

"Their approach to the race was interesting, and in hindsight they might think they could have won it. They chose to have Kimi Raikkonen deliberately miss out on the top-10 qualifying shoot-out so he could have more fresh sets of tyres for the race. That worked well thanks to an aggressive first few laps from Raikkonen, in which he made up a lot of places. But their race strategy could probably have been a little more aggressive and responsive."
Top Bottom