Tyred of the current state of F1?

[Slyboogy]

My problem is, you don't need DRS when you have these degrading tyres.

DRS is just a horrible tool, you are allowed it in qualifying, you are allowed it when you are lapping a car. Why?

The tyres are okish, F1 is a bit of a lottery at the moment, change in temperature by a few degrees the running order is different, true that the top 3 drivers are top in the championship, but that's because they all have a consistent car in all conditions, plus they are great drivers too obviously.

But one thing I like to point out, I like how we managed to get a 2 stopper, and a 1 stopper on the podium the last race.

But the driver who leads into the first corner usually wins, only Canada put a stop to me saying "always", since the rest of the drivers tyres drop off in traffic, once you are in traffic you are duffed.

The mandatory pit stops for tyres does not help matters either, then we could see several strategies play out which would be great. Plus the qualifying rules, where some drivers don't run, mostly the midfield drivers (I technically mean Force India), and having to start on the tyres you qualified on.

I understand that rule was brought in so that those out of Q2 could get an advantage, since back in the refuelling days they had the advantage of picking their fuel loads after qualifying, rather than those in Q3 who had to run with their race fuel.

Why is this rule needed? We saw some drivers last year disadvantaged by this, those out in Q1 where able to get into the points several times since they had tyres saved up, but why should he be able to? He was slower on merit, why should he have a big advantage compared to those around him? Same with those that qualify in 11th and 12th.

But I'm probably just too picky.

 

[ecclestoned]

Am I the only one who thinks that Pirelli have silently changed those Tyres?
After getting a lot of bad comments they did say they were changing the “tyre allocation” for the Spanish GP,and my believe is they made their rubber more durable since then.
The race in China probably convinced them to do so:there were more marbles at some parts of the track than there are balls in Ikea’s children’s ball baths!
Alonso tried to overtake on them and skated off track.
We saw a processional train of top drivers behind Kimi,all within reach of the podium until the end of the race,not even daring to get out of the slipstream of the car in front of them.
Only when Kimi and Vettel(to a lesser extent)hit that dreaded cliff by gambling to “only” do a 2 stopper,the grid positions finally changed.
For me that race was screwed with defective rubber .
Nobody in his right mind would have gone for 1 stop in those first 4 races,except for Perez in Australia,scoring 4 points doing so(good boy).
The fact that Lewis managed to finish 8th(from 24th) in Spain by greeting his pit crew once less(who would blame him) than the others,staying out 31 laps on his last set,must have gotten the other teams thinking.
So we saw the next race ,in Monaco, almost every team going for just 1 stop.
In Canada,Ferrari and Red Bull tried to stay out with 1 stop,and failed .
But they weren’t exactly hitting that cliff they would probably have encountered with the tyres of the first 4 races.
Besides,Grosjean and Perez stood on the podium by stopping once , they pulled this off by
better timing , gradually moving up the grid,putting just a little bit less strain on their tyres than those at the front have to do to maintain their position(I guess)
Grosjean might even have won the race if he hadn’t gotten caught up behind Di Resta at the start!
The Canadian GP also learned me that Hamilton can go flat out again without an extra pit stop.On his new shoes he was flying like hell,reeling in Alonso and Vettel by more than a second a lap,and the tyres were still ok to complete 18 laps .
When Vettel was finally reshoed,much too late,he also managed to put his foot down,wringing the neck of his Bull,setting the fastest lap of the race,kissing the wall of champions.
On a sidenote :I agree with Gary Anderson ,Ferrari should have pitted again,but I disagree Red Bull couldn’t have done better.
It is true their lack of top speed and so so Kers would hamper them for the win at this circuit.The way Lewis overtook Fernando just after the first pit stop,and Vettel not being able to do so,demonstrated that very well.
But knowing all this and seeing the pace Lewis could develop,why not pit him round lap 56/57,he didn’t stand a chance against that McLaren anyway.
Horner said they didn’t because he would come out behind Grosjean.So what!
It would at least have brought him out in front of the trio Massa/Rosberg/Perez who were fighting for position at that time,and Grosjean was out already 37 or so laps on the same tyres.
Where’s that pro-active team ,calling the shots and if needed adapting to changing circumstances from 2011?
Pit stops of 4,1s and 4,7s aren’t good enough for a team challenging for the title.
A poor performance compared to the clockwork they demonstrated in 2011.
To come back to my” rubberchange since Spain hypothesis”,this would also coincide with Button’s dramatic drop of form.
For me he has difficulties to adjust his driving to longer lasting tyres for the moment and has been “rowing in sauerkraut”for the last 3 races.

All those thoughts are just made by a patatoe sitting in his couch,waiting to be peeled alive by statisticians and technicians

 

[gethinceri]

As I'm off carbs I'll decline to comment.

 

[ecclestoned]

As I'm off carbs I'll decline to comment.

hope you're not on a Wasabi peas diet

 

[soccerman17]

Yes but no. I like the Pirellis and the DRS to a degree. But there are flaws that could be ironed out such as the marbles off track. But there definitely needs to be more room for development. The rules are too strict and the testing ban is awful. While unlimited testing would be unfair and expensive, a testing limit seems a lot more sensible than what we have now. Engine development would also be great not only to get names back in the sport but also to get some different varieties of engines. This season it seems to be irrelevant what engine is used- unless you have the Cosworth. They all seem the same. While I love watching this season as a spectator, I think most of the innovative spirit of the sport is going down the drain.

 

[jez101]

ecclestoned - I don't really want to let the facts get in the way of a good conspiracy theory, but the tyres have behaved very much as they did track for track last year. You are right that performances have been very different since Spain but that is Monaco and Montreal having wildly different demands to Bahrain.

http://cliptheapex.com/threads/2011-formula-one-pirelli-tyre-analysis.4315/

http://cliptheapex.com/threads/2012-formula-one-pirelli-tyre-analysis.4723/

We saw in Australia straight away how the yellow tyre was no faster and quite a bit more flimsy that last year's yellow. Last year's yellow behaved much more like this year's white, which is no surpirse as it is the same compound with a different colour stripe.

Malaysia rained so we didn't see tyre deg there, but China looked much like you would expect. Bahrain was new to Pirelli this year and the first hot race which is why I think there was so much variation in performance. If you test in February with temps 10-20 deg C and then suddenly run the tyres when it's in the 30s or 40s for the first time, it's normal that some teams will find the solution faster.

That is not to say that it is all about temperature as the plot in this posts shows http://cliptheapex.com/threads/2011-formula-one-pirelli-tyre-analysis.4315/#post-99152. Monaco 2011 had the highest track temp and the lowest wear on the option tyres, while it was only 2 degrees cooler in Spain 2011 where deg was almighty.

In Spain this year we saw how much closer this year's silver tyre is to the rest of the set which made for a totally different race to Barcelona last year when there was 2s a lap between yellow and silver.

Monaco was a 1 stopper because there was very low deg on that slow street circuit, and we saw exactly the same last year.

It rained in Canada last year so we don't have a direct comparison but the warm up and deg patterns were similar to Monaco - the only difference is that you can't stay ahead in Montreal when you are trundling around 2s off the pace.

 

[teabagyokel]

Tired of the current state of F1? I couldn't love it more.

For the tyres, there are 12 teams striving to make the best use of them. And some of them get it right, some of them get it wrong. It is an unending delight of 2012 that the teams cannot simply find a formula that will win them the race every week - that they have to set up the car properly from Friday morning onwards, that the teams' and the drivers' abilities are tested to the utmost rather than allowed to take pace for granted.

As for overtaking, and DRS/KERS, its just a case of reintroducing some of the things F1 had in the past before people (and computers) got too clever. DRS acts like slipstreaming, in a sense, that was only available on straights when you were behind a car and you did get it from lapped cars. However, DRS prevents the slipstream turkey shoot as well. As for KERS, call that your turbo boost button - both drivers get that one, its intelligent use of it (as Lewis Hamilton exhibited in Shanghai last year) which is the difference.

Is it a lottery? It is very difficult to predict who will win the next event, certainly. But have a look at the Drivers' Championship and the three drivers standing together at the top are Lewis Hamilton, Fernando Alonso and Sebastian Vettel. They are commonly considered the best three drivers in the Championship. And as for the "7 winners in 7 races" thing, there have been 7 different winners of 7 races on 6 occasions before (although, unsurprisingly, some of those are overlaps). Many of these were in the early 80s.

As for rivalries, some claim that developing a frontrunning rivalry is more difficult in 2012, and maybe it is. But, frankly, all of the bile and vitriol is a distraction from the racing rather than a necessary sideshow. The Senna/Prost and Piquet/Mansell fights were made by the racing, not by their mutual distaste for each other (at the time), just as the Hakkinen/Schumacher rivalry was not made more dull because the two of them got on very well. In essence, I would suggest that the racing is what will create interest - if you wanted a soap opera you'd be watching the EastEnders omnibus of a Sunday afternoon.

When talking to those who do not enjoy Formula One, the criticisms that I have heard have never centred around there being too much going on - quite the reverse. The most frequent criticism from non-F1 fans is that F1 is processional. In 2012, it is not, save for at Monaco. And I will prefer the kind of racing we saw in Melbourne, Shanghai, Barcelona and Montreal this year to the kind of racing we saw at Monaco for ever.

 

[Mephistopheles]

I know we agree on a lot of things teabagyokel and we disagree on others but I don't agree with anything you said in your last post.

Absolutely no offence meant by the way.

the three drivers standing together at the top are Lewis Hamilton, Fernando Alonso and Sebastian Vettel. They are commonly considered the best three drivers in the Championship.

Not by me they aren't Alonso probably is the best driver at the moment and has been for a long time, but the other two don't come close, although I would put Vettel above Lewis, as he has won 2 world championships as has Alonso whereas Hamilton's WDC was won almost by default, that's not to say he didn't deserve it mind you...

As for DRS, KERS and the tyres they are total cobblers, not your opinion that is the items I mean..

That's just my opinion though so don't shoot me for having it...

I hope I haven't been too controversial..

 

[Chad Stewarthill]

Mephistopheles if you don't mind me asking, if you don't rate Hamilton or Vettel as two of the best three drivers in F1 at the moment, who on earth would be your choices? And in what way was Hamilton's title won by default? That's a bizarre claim, even from one who admits to not being a particular fan of his.

On the subject of the current state of F1, I find myself in a quandary. I am in agreement with you in that I don't like DRS and I hate the extreme tyre degradation and marbles. But somehow in spite of these things this season for me is fascinating and, I believe, about to become even more so over the next few races.

 

[Mephistopheles]

Chad Stewarthill I just don't think there is a top 3 order I think all F1 drivers are great drivers or they wouldn't be in F1.

Lewis has his off days or even an off season as was shown last year just like any normal human being I think that Alonso has been the most consistent driver throughout his career which is why I think he is probably the best at the moment and has been for quite a while also as I said Vettel has two WDC's to his name and so is automatically above Lewis.

On the subject of my "by default comment" I meant that he allowed Kimi to close and surpass a quite substantial championship lead in 07 in the last three races and in 08 if it hadn't have been for the weather changes in the last couple of laps in Sao Paulo Massa would have been world champion also there was the cheat gate scandal which robbed Massa of more valuable points and so Lewis would still be chasing his first title, so in my opinion for what it's worth (Not much probably unless I am very much mistaken.) he hasn't delivered a convincing WDC but like I said that doesn't mean he didn't deserve it..

But like you said this is not the subject at hand.

Edit

Also the way things are going with the tyres this year whoever does win the WDC will be a matter of pure luck and that is not the sort of racing I like watching.

I do on the other hand like watching close racing as much as the next person but not this pile of manufactured dog dodo we have at the moment..

That is on topic and again it is only my opinion..

 

[Chad Stewarthill]

Mephistopheles, the debate about Hamilton's 2008 title is, as you suggest, best left for elsewhere.

On the subject of this season, I do not agree that the eventual winner will have done it through pure luck. Whatever your views on the tyres, DRS and KERS (and on these three things I broadly agree with you), the championship is nevertheless at this point being led by (imho) the three current best F1 drivers, which I think is no coincidence.

And whichever driver goes on to win will do it by skill, good judgement and consistency (and yes, maybe a little good fortune here and there along the way). I fully expect the champion to come from the aforementioned three, but of course it could yet be someone else; the standings are very close, with even Button in 8th place, who some are already writing off, being less than two wins behind the leader.

Also, the champion will deserve it because he and his team will have, for one thing, learnt how to get the best from the tyres over the course of the season.

 

[Galahad]

If I can broaden the discussion a bit, I think what we're often debating really is the conflict between sporting purity and artificial measures designed to achieve one of three aims; to make the sport safer, to make the running cost cheaper, and to make the spectacle more entertaining.

Given a free rein, there's no doubt in my mind that teams would build cars that were highly unsafe, extremely expensive and thoroughly dull to watch, hence for me - and, I suspect, for most - regulation is required. The question then is one of personal preference, in terms of which compromises you are willing to accept.

So this discussion could easily cover engines, ground effects, electronic trickery and so on, but I'll stick to tyres for now. There's little doubt that Bridgestone advanced the science of racing rubber beyond that previously seen, and produced products of remarkable grip and longevity. This was a bad thing for the racing but that which has been learned cannot be unlearned, so some standardisation of the spec around much lower performance parameters was needed.

My feeling is that maybe the pendulum has swung a little too far the other way at the moment - this applies to DRS too - remembering of course that there is still a fair amount of variance from circuit to circuit. My hope is that some middle ground wil be found over time to rebalance the consistency/sensitivity equation.

As a purist, part of me does yearn for a return to unrestricted tyre wars in the traditional spirit of F1 competition. But as a fan, I have to recognise that things have seldom been so good.

 

[Mephistopheles]

I have no problem with regulation and things to improve the spectacle but I do have a problem with an unstable bit of trickery which is totally inconsistent and produces chance winners and losers I.E these tyres.

 

[MajorDanby]

Mephistopheles,

Your are of course entitled to your opinion, however i think describing the race tyre as an 'unstable bit of trickery' is taking it a little too far.

I think every season some teams are able to get more out of their tyres at certain races - it just so happens that this season the cars are so close that those few tenths are very noticeable.

Granted I agree that they may have an operating window that is slightly small - and there could be a benefit from widening it. Furthermore, everyone will agree that the amount of debris on the track from the degradation is not really acceptable. Those points aside, even with these tyres, 6 out 7 winners have all come from the top 3 teams. The Williams victory is not even that far out of the park - they have a good race car.

Also lets face it, it is not the first time that a car that isn't a front runner has won a GP is it?

I would argue that the tyres are not inconsistent, they are hard to understand. Consistently hard to understand. Why is this such a bad thing? I can't help but think that part of the reason certain people have such a downer on these tyres is partially due to their favoured drivers or teams not being able to get the best out of them when compared to others.

 

[MajorDanby]

Typo - top 4 teams

 

[Mephistopheles]

I think it is a bad thing because it is the tyres that are deciding races and not the driver or the teams why should so much influence be given to just one area of the car? Especially an area which completely out of the control of the teams and the drivers.

I'm not saying that tyres and tyre management shouldn't play a part in F1 I'm just saying it shouldn't play such a massive part in it....

 

[ExtremeNinja]

The drivers and thier teams decide which tyres to be on at the right time. They also work on Friday and Saturday morning for a total of 4.5 hours of track time to set thier cars up to make best use of the tyres. The ones who get these decisions right in the garage and through the race as couped with a fast and competent performance in the cockpit finish ahead. I don't see how this amounts to a lottery. Over half have been won by two teams. There is no coincident in that, either.

 

[jez101]

Mephistopheles - if the tyres were as unstable as you suggest, they would produce random numbers. Please, look at the tyre analysis thread and the xy plots and best fit lines. You can see how stable and predictable one lap time is after the next...

Yes, there is degradation, but as I have already commented, this is a gradual slippery slope where you lose 0.2s a lap every lap. It is simply not the case that you are suddenly 2s slower. It might look like that because all of a sudden everyone is overtaking you but actually as Alonso in Canada and Raikkonen earlier in the season found, there is a clear formula that the engineers should be able to identify and use to prevent that happening to you.

In both cases, their teams made a mistake of not pitting at the right time, but rather that mitigate that mistake and pitting when the outcome was clear, they hoped that they would be able to bend the laws of chemistry and phyisics that define how tyres perform. They didn't and looked stupid - that was not a lottery and nor was Maldonado winning in Spain. Williams have a fast car that was beautifully set up for both qually and race. For once Maldo didn't make a mistake and they benefited from Lewis' penalty. No mystery, no magic, no randomness, just a driver and team who strung everything together and got the result.

If you are still scpetical, download the data and analyse it for yourself. I promise you, you will see a very scientific and predictable result.

What you are commenting on is the seemingly random ability for any one given team or driver to maximise their performance one weekend and a different team doing a good job the next. It's a bit like Russia in the Euros who looked awesome a week ago when they put everything together against the Czechs and then a week later found they were on their way home after their people had screwed up their next two goes. I know you don't like football, but the analogy could be repeated in any sport you care to mention.

That is not a lottery, nor is it even random. There are ways and means of getting the tyres to work but as ExtremeNinja MajorDanby teabagyokel and others have pointed out, this is the result of learning the particular result of the track layout, surface, compound, car and driver mix. Some people solve a problem faster, some solve it slower but look at last year but it's not always the same guy who solves the problem first - by the time we got to Monza last year, everyone had figured the 2011 rubber out and I promise you that the same is already happening this year.

 

[Mephistopheles]

And suddenly an act of god happens such as a spot of rain over night or the track temp goes up or down by a millionth of a degree and all those hours of effort put in by the teams in the FP's count for sod all just because of the skinny operating window of the black round things on their cars, but one team or driver gets lucky with set up and wins the race at a canter who previously was nowhere in the FP's.

Doesn't sound like racing to me...

 

[Mephistopheles]

I bloody well hope so jez101 or will Pirelli just quietly change the tyres and say oh look the teams have got to grips with them now..