Webber says tyres produce more exciting racing

F1 Fanatic round-up

Posted on

| Written by

In the round-up: Mark Webber joins the debate over whether F1’s tyre situation is helping or harming the sport.


Top F1 links from the past 24 hours:

Webber defends the Pirellis (Sky)

“We would all love to have quicker lap times, extremely consistent tyres, finishing with the race pace like we had in qualifying. That’s obviously what the drivers would love, but that wasn’t the most exciting thing for the racing. Trying to find somewhere in the middle is never easy and at the moment we have a pretty good show for the crowd. Whether it’s by design or accident… it’s turned out that way.”

Force India via Twitter

“Due to the lack of running for Paul [di Resta] today we have chosen to split the final day of Mugello testing between Paul and Nico [Hulkenberg]. Paul AM & Nico PM.”

Craig Scarborough via Twitter

“Exhausts [on day two at] Mugello: Top exit: Mercedes, Lotus, HRT, Marussia. McLaren-style exhaust: McLaren, Williams, Force India, Sauber and Toro Rosso. Sauber ramp: Red Bull. Red Bull tunnel: Caterham. Ferrari have Ferrari exhausts, which might change to the Sauber (Red Bull) exhaust or perhaps McLaren (McLaren) exhausts…”

The last time Formula 1 ignored the signs (Autosport, subscription required)

“It is a matter of record that Ecclestone owned Kyalami in the 1980s, having bought it for a pittance (plus liabilities of one million rand, then $500,000) on the day of the 1979 Grand Prix. It was sold on public auction at the height of the FOCA/FISA war a year later; rumour had it Ecclestone appointed a frontman to appease FISA, which accused him of conflict of interest as FOCA boss, Brabham team owner and circuit proprietor.”

Testing… 1, 2, 3! (Unibet)

My weekly column for Unibet.

Comment of the day

Atticus saw Jenson Button’s demo run in Hungary on Tuesday:

I live in Budapest and I was there. These parades brings the action so so close. Button literally did his spins 10 metres away from me. Indeed, there were a lot of people out there. Jenson did his runs, signed autographs and one girl incidentally noted how small he is – despite being of the tallest on the grid. I managed to take some magnificently polished close-ups of the MP4-26 as well, they are among my best latest photos. (I am an amateur photographer.)

And boy, these V8 sounds good nevertheless – I only heard them live once so far in 2009 at a similar event of Red Bull in Budapest. The V10s of 2005 at the Hungaroring are an even more distant memory. I hope to get to Spa or Monza this year or the next – if Spa remains.

All in all, Button’s demo run was a great experience.

From the forum

Happy birthday!

Happy birthday to J.Danzig!

If you want a birthday shout-out tell us when yours is by emailling me, using Twitter or adding to the list here.

On this day in F1

Nigel Mansell made it four wins from four starts at the beginning of the 1992 season with victory in the Spanish Grand Prix 20 years ago today.

Mansell dominated the wet race but Michael Schumacher impressed for Benetton, finishing second after Riccardo Patrese crashed. Jean Alesi completed the podium for Ferrari.

Here’s the start of the race. You can see how the track has changed since its original incarnation, including the loss of the fast Nissan chicane, the changes at Campsa, and the more recent addition of a chicane before the final corner.

Image © Red Bull/Getty images

Author information

Keith Collantine
Lifelong motor sport fan Keith set up RaceFans in 2005 - when it was originally called F1 Fanatic. Having previously worked as a motoring...

Got a potential story, tip or enquiry? Find out more about RaceFans and contact us here.

90 comments on “Webber says tyres produce more exciting racing”

  1. Hahah, I was about to type in “Brace yourself Seb, photoshops are coming” but those look pretty good!

    1. They are actually quite good, but that didn’t stop people from doing photoshops of it! : )

      1. ‘Vettels Independent Trading Co’

  2. I’d prefer quicker lap times.

    1. And no passing?

      1. @alfe @prisoner-monkeys I’d prefer 06 or 07 aero regs adapted to the longer cars due to refuelling, and 06 or 07 bridgestones.

        I’ve said it many times, and I’ll say it again. The problem is much deeper than the tyres, it’s the aero regulations. Change those, add a few laps to the tyres, goodbye DRS, goodbye dropping back in the pack 5 laps from the end of the race…

        1. How could anyone want to go back from where we are now?
          The racing is great!

          Doing as you suggest will undo all the work that has been done to improve the on track competition.

      2. To say we had no passing Pre-Pirelli is incorrect.

        There was more overtaking in 2010 than any season since 1989 & I don’t recall anyone saying races were boring & there was no overtaking back in 1989.

        I want to see proper racing & these crappy tyres don’t give us this.

        1. Your desire to see “proper racing” will likely result in a situation where nobody can pass anyone. Remember the 1999 Spanish Grand Prix? There was just one recorded overtake for the entire race. But hey, proper racing!

          1. You highlight 1 race which featured little overtaking, However I could highlight many more races in 1999 that featured a lot of overtaking & a lot of very good racing.

            I never got the argument that Pre-2011 there was no overtaking. Most races saw a good level of overtakes, You had the odd race where there was very little but the majority featured good levels.
            For instance people say 2010 feature no overtaking yet it feature more on-track overtakes than any season since 1989 (547 overtakes in total) & on average there was 28.79 overtakes per-Gp.

            And I guarantee that 95%+ of those overtakes were far more exciting to watch than 95% of the passes we have seen in the Pirelli/DRS-Era.

        2. Only thing that made that time exiting is rivalry between Hakkinen and Schumacher.

          Most exiting thing was to watch qualifying, it was amazing how those guys would come out and beat each other by hundreds of a second on every try.

      3. Cluffy_Wedge
        3rd May 2012, 10:21

        Exactly! People seem to forget the FIA has spend nearly a decade gerrymandering with the regulations in a bid to see more action. You can argue whether F1 should be NASCAR/Rollerball style entertainment or not, but I for one always hated races where you could just go and make lunch after the opening lap seeing as nothing would happen. Some tracks have always been exciting, but many more NEED the “artifice” of rapidly degrading tyres to be even remotely eventful.

        1. but I for one always hated races where you could just go and make lunch after the opening lap

          then maybe you shoudl have stopped watching & left f1 to the real racing fans who actually understand what a good race actually is.

          fans who love the tyres & gimmicks like drs because they need constant artificial action obviously don’t understand what real racing actually is.

          when we had races in the 60s/70s/80s whith little overtaking but lots of good racing you never heard anyone complaining about a lack of overtaking because all the real fans understood what racing was about.
          now with have all these casual fans who have low attention spans & dont understand racing & need constant action & f1 has become artificial because of them & alienated all the real fans who have stuck by f1 over the years.

          i want racing & not constant artificial, gimmickey action which isn’t even actually exciting to watch.

      4. @prisoner-monkeys If that was a side effect, yes.

        1. Then I think you have your priorities wrong. If the sport change the tyres to produce quicker lap times at the expense of passing, I’m sure everyone will band together and say “You were tight, @alfie – this is the best decisions the sport could have made!”

          And so that there can be no doubt, everyone says it in a highly-sarcastic tone.

    2. I’d prefer slower lap times if it allowed wheel to wheel racing.

    1. Wow, they’re ahead of schedule. I wasn’t expecting sealing to take place for another six weeks.

      1. It’s just a test section on turn 19. First of 4 layers.

        The top layer on normal asphalt paving in the US would be called the seal, a racing surface may not provide a complete seal.

        1. I’m aware of that. However, they’re still well ahead of schedule. I believe they had originally planned to start sealing the surface in July and finish by the end of August.

    2. I just found an aerial photo of the circuit.

      I think the layout might have changed a little. Compare it to this plan and it appears that Turn 2 is now much smoother than it once was, and Turns 3 and 4 seems to have been removed entirely so that it is flat out to the Silverstone replica. The Formula 1 website still shows Turns 3 and 4 intact, but Turn 2 appears to be much smoother.

      1. @prisoner-monkeys If they left out 3 and 4, I wish they also would’ve cut out that awful 13, 14 and 15 bit. Serves no good purpose imo. They also could’ve eased 19 as well.

        Something like this: http://i48.tinypic.com/29aw56w.jpg

        1. @necrodethmortem – It appears that Turns 3 and 4 might still be in there. These two corners will have run-off, and given the angle and distance of the aerial shot, it is difficult to determine where the circuit ends and the run-off begins. Both corners still appear in the circuit map on Formula1.com, which also reveals that Turn 9 has been tightened.

          As for Turns 13, 14 and 15, there are there for two reasons: first of all, it is a spectator area, allowing spectators to see the cars come down the straight and weave through the section. It’s actually two perfect replicas of Hockenheim’s stadium section, which is reasonably quick to begin with, and it wouldn’t surprise me if the tarmac through those corners was deliberately mixed to offer more grip so the drivers can take it quickly.

          Secondly, it appears to have been deliberately designed to be at odds with the rest of the circuit. This seems to be Tilke’s latest little trick, trying to force the teams to make a choice in their setup. This is most-prevalent in Korea, where the first sector relies on straight-line speed and braking, the second sector tests a driver’s raw ability, and this third sector challenges the drivers to set the car up perfectly. Tilke has recognised that different cars are getting their speed in different places, and has laid down the gauntlet: the teams can have a setup that is okay in all three sectors, but not necessairly super-quick – or they can set the car up for two sectors, sacrifice speed in the third and try to make up the difference. We saw it in qualifying last year where the cars were setting very similar lap times, but wildly different sector times. It’s secretly brilliant, although somewhat diminished by DRS. It’s also evident in India; half the circuit is about straight-line speed and braking, while the other is very driver-oriented.

          I think that’s what they’re trying to repeat here: forcing the drivers to make a setup choice that will make them blindlingly quick around the circuit, but vulnerable through two corners, or generally quick everywhere, but not necessarily as fast as they could be.

          1. @prisoner-monkeys I know that section is a stadium section replica, but unlike Hockenheim, this circuit has other high downforce sections, so it won’t have the same effect. I could be wrong, but I think the 13-15 section will only make the teams run even higher downforce, which will make for a more boring race.

            And Tilke’s little trick to put a bit of everything in one track is the number one reason I hate his designs. If it was just one or two tracks on the calendar it could be great, but more than half of the calendar has been through his hands and in the future probably close to 75% or more. In this case, I think it would be much more interesting to make a couple of low downforce tracks, a few drivers tracks and a few high downforce tracks (but all with at least one good overtaking spot) to at least offer some real variation, instead of 20 something tracks with similar layouts. Also, it may be interesting for qualifying, but as evident in Korea and India, in a race you see a higher downforce car either running away from a low downforce one if it’s in front, or being stuck behind it if it’s behind, with very boring races as a result.

            One last thing: why is this track a tribute to European circuits, while there are at least as many great ones in North America where F1 never comes? Think about Road Atlanta’s esses and the old dip, Virginia’s rollercoaster, Watkins Glen’s outer loop, Mosport’s turn 2, Laguna Seca’s corkscrew, etc etc. I feel it’s a bit of a missed opportunity.

          2. <blockquote.I could be wrong, but I think the 13-15 section will only make the teams run even higher downforce, which will make for a more boring race.
            High downforce does not automatically equal a boring race.

            And Tilke’s little trick to put a bit of everything in one track is the number one reason I hate his designs.

            Tilke himself didn’t actually design this circuit. The concept was created by Tavo Hellmund and Kevin Schwantz, and one of Tilke’s architects was charged with making their ideas into reality.

            it may be interesting for qualifying

            I just used qualifying in Korea as an example.

            why is this track a tribute to European circuits, while there are at least as many great ones in North America where F1 never comes? Think about Road Atlanta’s esses and the old dip, Virginia’s rollercoaster, Watkins Glen’s outer loop, Mosport’s turn 2, Laguna Seca’s corkscrew, etc etc.

            You would have to ask Tavo Hellmund.

  3. Scarbs tweets are driving me crazy, just not enough info. I look forward to his in depth analysis.

  4. @keithcollantine – Happy one million comments!

    I think. If the URL for a new comment coincides with the number of comments made on the blog, then my last comment was number 1,000,315, which means you’ve successfully managed to pass one million comments.


    1. And more than half of them from Prisoner Monkeys.

      1. It’s difficult not have a chuckle at that : )

        1. Actually, BacCB posts more often than I do. On the old blog layout, there was a functon where you could see who the top posters for the past 30 days was. Shortly before Keith changed the layout, Bas was at the top of the pile, with about 150 more comments than me (if memory serves, I was third or fifth at the time).

          1. But I can bet my right arm that you (@prisoner-monkeys) are leading the total word count (by a mile) :-)

    2. i thought we just hit 400000 a week or so ago?? :s

    3. @prisoner-monkeys No the URL doesn’t relate to the total number of comments posted. If you include spam we’ve had over three million. But in terms of legitimate comments we’ve had just over 400,000:


  5. By supplying tyres to F1, Pirelli are a sponsor of F1 so the drivers and the teams all feel some degree of obligation to not criticise them or even the characteristics of the current tyres because of the ignorant commentators who link the brand with characteristics that they have been asked to engineer into the product. Puting our heads in the sand and pretending there is no problem does nobody any good, let’s have a frank and open discussion of the type of tyre that will be best for our sport without over-emphasising the politically correct responses of interested parties or the totally unsupported statement that the majority of fans want the current tyres.

    1. Headlines suggesting Mark Webber said the current tyres create “riveting” or even “exciting” racing are a gross exageration of Webbers response to a question about the tyres, his opinion was that at the moment they are putting on ” a pretty good show”, the headline for this statement could just as easily have read;
      “Webber damns tyres with faint praise”

      1. “a pretty good show”
        And thats all F1 is now with Pirelli’s & DRS, an artificial show that comes at the expence of racing.

        Poeple go on about all the great racing that happens & all the great overtaking that happens thanks to DRS & pirelli, However I havn’t actually seen any proper racing actually going on?

        I see cars driving past one another on straghts due to DRS, Thats neither good racing or exciting to watch?
        I see cars driving around to save tyres & cars on fresher tyres easily driving by cars on more worn tyres. Not really good racing & in many cases certainly isn’t exciting to watch.

        I’ve been following F1 for about 43 years & I don’t think I have ever seen racing of such poor quality than it is in F1 now.
        Everyone just looks at quantity of passes now & ignored the fact that 90% f them are of very poor quality

        1. Formula 1 has moved with the times. In the 60’s there was real music, real people, real racing. In 2012 we have lady gaga & Justin Bieber, plastic people and fake racing to improve the show, to please the masses. More GP’s per season, more show attracts more viewers = more $

          1. So, twelve races and no passing is the purest form of racing?

            Am I the only one who thinks that’s a little backwards?

          2. confucious says: backwards is where one ends when pursuer presses steering wheel button

          3. Not at all. When used properly, DRS gives an attacking driver just enough of a boost to get his front wing in line with a defending driver’s rear wheel. After that, it’s all down to the driver. But, as we’ve seen at times – from what I hear, it was misplaced in Bahrain – DRS isn’t always applied properly, so passing becomes a little too easy.

            The really sad state of affairs is that DRS is needed at all. Modern Formula 1 is over-reliant on aerodynamics, and when the cars cannot close to within a second of one another simply because the wake of the car in front makes it impossible for the car behind to get close. But since the teams won’t give up so much as an ounce of downforce, DRS is a necessary evil.

      2. What he said really seems like a very backhanded compliment. He’s not saying its good racing, just that its entertaining to watch.

        1. yep i think its another case of Aussie sarcasm (‘ Not bad for a Number 2 driver ‘)

        2. When used properly, DRS gives an attacking driver just enough of a boost to get his front wing in line with a defending driver’s rear wheel.

          But 95% of the time this does not happen.
          95% of passes which involve DRS are ridiculously easy drive-by’s in which the passing car is well past before they even get to the braking zone.

          I’ve yet to see a single DRS pass that has been remotrely exciting or intresting to watch.
          DRS does nothing but produce easy, boring, unexciting, unintresting & dull drive-by highway passes.

  6. i want too see drivers attacking, and the best driver winning thats what i want to see in F1. The real drivers can overtake without the 2dollar pirellis and DRS. Alonso/Kimi/hamilton/Kubica had no problem overtaking, it’s just the rest couldn’t. get some better drivers that can overtake and drive then we will have some racing on our hands. With the Pirellis all you gotta do is be in 1st on the first lap and you ‘ll have the win. BORING.

    1. AJ (@ascar2000us)
      3rd May 2012, 5:51

      @matt2208 A lot of those guys you mentioned could overtake because they were in superior cars.
      As you name suggests (Anti RBR), you are upset that RBR/Vettel have enjoyed success and you would use every opportunity to belittle their success.
      “1st on the first lap and you ‘ll have the win” was true of Bridgestone, except that Refuelling played a role.

      As of today aerodynamics play a huge role in overtaking. I am not a huge fan of DRS. But the tires are fine. as a driver if you are to adapt to whatever car your team sits you in, you bloody well make the best of the tires cos the tires are one thing that is constant across the field.

  7. the crappy pirelli joke tires have not improved the racing at all, they have just made it more artificial & i certainly do not find that more entertaining.

    was considering going to the race in texas later in the year but think i’ll buy tickets to some indycar races instead so that i can go watch some real racing with no artificial gimmicks like drs & watch cars race on some proper tires!

    there was some polling done by speed channel recently & 76% of the fans who voted said they disliked what the pirelli tyres had done to f1 & 84% also said they disliked drs.
    if f1 wants to succeed in america they need to drop drs & start using proper tires because clearly the north american f1 fans at least don’t like the direction f1 has gone. tv figures on speed are also way down as well as a result of these things.

    1. another thing, nascar went down this artificial entertainment route & it worked for a while but recently fans have been turning away in significant numbers.
      seems people want to see some racing now & not a lot of artificial bs & thats exactly what the pirelli joke tires & drs are.

      1. Quite correct, but please don’t blame Pirelli, they are making what they have been asked to make, by linking them to the problem it makes it harder for the teams, drivers, FIA and Bernie to admit there is a problem. Criticise the TYRES not Pirelli.

    2. I hear a lot of people squawking about how the racing is artificial and that it’s bad for the sport and that people will inevitably turn their backs on Formula 1 because of it, but do you know what I’m not hearing?

      Suggestion on what Formula 1 could do to make the racing more organic. For all your complaints and dire predictions, I haven’t heard a single person from within the self-proclaimed voices of reason step forward and actually say “You know, I think the sport is in bad shape – but it could be made better if they did this and that”. Right now, all you’re really doing is running around shouting “Tyres, bad! DRS, evil! Racing, doomed!” as if you’re the only ones who can see it and the rest of us are just being blindly led around like a group of lemmings.

      So, we’ve established that some people think the current state of the sport is far from healthy. You’re perfectly entitled to that opinion, and I’m certainly not criticising you for having it. But there is a subtle-yet-important difference between criticism and constructive criticism. Could we perhaps have a little less of the former and a lot more of the latter? Because right now, all you’re doing is reaffirming my belief that Formula 1 fans are only happy when they have something to complain about.

      1. This is why we have Bernie, without him everything would have fall apart.

        There are plenty of smart people, but very few with a strong character. Most people with strong character not very open minded. Humanity at it’s best.

        I wonder if re-introducing side skirts on expense of wing downforce will help drivers with turbulent air issue while following close behind.

        1. Rory Byrne and Patrick Head suggested bringing ground effects back for 2014, to coincide with the next generation of engines. However, the teams rejected the idea. They thought it was asking too much to have ground effects and the new engines.

          1. /sadface

      2. severely reduce downforce. keep wings just for aesthetics
        if that dosent work then groove the tyres :)
        if that dosent work then just get everyone into F3 cars

      3. Minimize wing area and for compensation wider cars with bigger tyres and more power :)

  8. The fact that Pirelli have suddenly got so defensive about there product is I think a sign that critisism is mounting.

    Last year there was some critisism here & there regarding tyres but this year it seems there is way more & now it seems drivers are talking out as well. It started with Schumacher & then Brundle mentioned having spoke to other drivers who echoed Michael’s comments & it seems a lot of the fans share vis opinion based on polls/comments I have seen about the interwebs.

    I think its pretty clear Pirelli have gone way too extreme this year.

    1. AJ (@ascar2000us)
      3rd May 2012, 5:58

      Brundle?? errr anyway… Schumacher started this debate because despite having a reasonably good car he has not been able to produce results unlike NICO.
      then he makes comments at the start of the season advising Kimi not to expect much on his comeback as its tuff. Kimi goes on to score a podium and has had a super comeback. hmmm…

      1. @AJ

        He says Brundle SPOKE to other drivers. It is hard to produce reasonable results when-
        1st race = retirement because of gearbox
        2nd race = spun by rookie at first corner
        3rd race = retirement because of wheel loose after pitstop
        4th race = drs faliure in qualifying, then gearbox change & starting from 22nd

        How well do you think Kimi would have looked if his comeback was made alongside as fast a driver as Rosberg rather than a rookie and in a very poor Mercedes 2010?

        1. AJ (@ascar2000us)
          3rd May 2012, 15:34

          @snowman well Schumi has had bad luck in 2012 agreed. and his performance has been better this year. but that is after 2 years. I don’t think Grosjean is any slower. Besides he has come off 2 GP2 seasons while Kimi not so much..
          You have to admit that Kimi has been on the pace straight away while Michael has been quite the silly racer in 2011 and not so impressive in 2010 either. at time over half a second slower than Nico.
          And I think i speak for many here. Kimi would have fared much better in michael’s place.

          1. How well do you think Kimi would have looked if his comeback was made alongside as fast a driver as Rosberg rather than a rookie and in a very poor Mercedes 2010?

            3 podiums and a total of 214 points. That 2010 Mercedes certainly didn’t look very poor in Rosberg’s clutches.

  9. Matt (@agentmulder)
    3rd May 2012, 4:23

    I made a point in my podcast, why not reintroduce refueling with the 2011 Pirelli tires? This would allow aggressive drivers to push longer on softer tires and lighter fuel loads, while giving conservative drivers the option to stop less. It could also boost the whole “eco-F1” crowd by making more efficient use of the fuel, as quite a bit of the stuff now is wasted due to the massive weight at the race start.

    I haven’t chastised Pirelli too much for Bahrain, as it was their first time there (could have brought harder tires, but that runs the risk of Bridgestone Redux). However, this season does seem to be trending towards tire conservation a bit too much. It seems they went overboard in correcting for the latter half of 2011, when teams were taking the tires extremely far.

    1. @agentmulder

      why not reintroduce refueling with the 2011 Pirelli tires?

      Because refuelling turns the race into a series of glorified time trials. All a driver has to do is meet certain lap time targets lap after lap, and will build a suitable enough buffer that he can simply leapfrog people in the pits. He won’t have to attempt a pass because he knows that if he meets his targets, he will come out on top.

      1. Refuelling has also created some very artificial passing in the past. Kamui Kobayashi won “pass of the year” in 2009 for his move on Jenson Button at the (first) hairpin in Abu Dhabi. But Button had just pitted and came out fuel-heavy and on fresh tyres. Kobayashi was at the very end of the stint (he pitted within about five laps), and the Bridgestone tyres were both durable and fast. Kobayashi’s pass on Button was an inevitablity (and it was a very poor pass because he nearly took Button out; he should have waited for the straight); given the conditions, any of us could have pulled it off. But because Kobayashi was in his third race and Button had just been crowned champion in Brazil, everyone ignored the way Button had literally just come out of the pits and Kobayashi had not gone in yet.

        1. But Kobayashi got past or defended, while exhibiting great race craft in two successive races, while in a battle with Button, so it wasn’t all down to refueling.

        2. also lets not forget the all to famous incidents which could have resulted in major accidents…

    2. Refueling would just move the racing back into the pit lane though like it did last time.
      One reason we saw a drop in on-track overtaking from 1994 onwards was because teams were using fuel strategy/pit stops to pass other cars in the pits. as soon as refueling was banned for 2010 the level of on-track overtaking jumped back upto pre-94 levels.
      2010 saw more on-track overtaking than any year since 1989 which is why i never got the ‘there is no overtaking” argument we often heard in 2010.

  10. I agree with some of what you say, but not every pass should be an instant classic. If you have to pull off the move of the year just to make a pass then there is something wrong.

    All the talk that the passes are of lesser quality now I think misses the point. There are just as many high quality passes as their used to be, but now they are between more closely matched opponents. There are more average passes, but it is these that are improving the racing because they are allowing similarly matched cars to actually end up in a situation where they are together on track, and this is when great passes occur.

    A great pass made by Schumacher on Kovalinen is nothing to write home about, if it’s Alonso and Hamilton going at it that’s far more memorable.

    I’m not a fan of DRS in its current form, but the tyre situation now is far better than it has been previously in a one make situation. Aside from seeing good passes between comparable cars and drivers, strategy is now more open too, because it is not being dictated solely by track position as it was in the past.

    1. Yep, look at Rikkonen.

      How often with regards to Kimi did you hear Martin Brundle say: “not very often we see drivers overtake here”. And he already said this in 2012 :)

      Some drivers don’t need DRS as much, but some drivers focus too much on it.

  11. AJ (@ascar2000us)
    3rd May 2012, 6:04

    My proposed Solution:
    1) If at all we have to use DRS, use it on circuits that have small straights eg; Australia.
    Ban it from Spa, Monza, Abu Dhabi. Better still Ban it completely.
    2) Use the current Pirelli Tires.
    3) Scrap the “Start Race on Qualifying Tire rule”. Provide extra sets in Qualifying.
    4) Scrap the use both Compound in race rule.

    This will ensure proper qualifying battles with no-one holding back. Tracks like Spa do not need DRS hence the artificial element eliminated. Top qualifiers not penalized for qualifying well. Teams will be free to race tires best suited to their cars which will see a mix of strategies.

    1. Tracks like Spa do not need DRS

      I disagree. Spa does not produce legendary races by default. There have been plenty of occasions in the past where the races have been rather boring.

      1. AJ (@ascar2000us)
        3rd May 2012, 7:20

        a DRS pass does not make the race Legendary. Vettel pulled of a beauty on Rosberg around the outside of Blanchimont. Webber/Alonso Eau-Rouge. That is what fans wanna see.
        The tires are providing ample overtaking opportunities if used correctly. DRS is plain unfair on a track with such long straights.

        1. DRS is plain unfair on a track with such long straights.

          It’s not the length of the straight that counts – it’s the length of the DRS zone. You can have a long straight with a short DRS zone. That’s what the FIA tried to do in China this year, shortening the distance from the activation point to the braking zone at the hairpin. Arguably, they took it too far, but it does highlight my point: Spa can have a shorter DRS zone if necessary.

          1. I thought it was kept the same as last year?

          2. AJ (@ascar2000us)
            3rd May 2012, 15:38

            The point is, we could do without DRS.
            just cause it aids overtaking don mean we gotta use it..

  12. Webber shoots down Ferrari rumours:

    “Sergio (Perez) was flavour of the month last week for the Ferrari drive. Now, it’s me. I’m focusing 100 percent on this season and doing the best job for myself and Red Bull Racing. I’m not putting any energy into anything else. There’s a whole season ahead of us before we need to think about the future. One day the talk is about Jenson (Button joining Ferrari), then it’s Sergio, now it’s me. I haven’t signed anything. My focus is on this team. We’ve had a good start to the season, we’re only four races down and the road is very, very, very long before we start talking about the future.”

    1. in the same way that Kimi Raikkonen was shooting down rumours of his F1 return? ;)

      1. Correlation does not equal causation. Just because Raikkonen said he wasn’t coming back and then did, that doesn’t mean that Webber is saying he won’t go to Ferrari but plans on doing so. Especially since a lot of people like the way Webber speaks his mind and makes no effort to water things down. For him to say “I’m not going to Ferrari”, only to turn around and go to Ferrari, would be out of character.

        1. do you think Webber would admit he’s going to Ferrari this early in the season if he WAS going to Ferrari?

          1. “He didn’t/wouldn’t say anything, therefore, it must be true” is one of the most flawed arguments you could possibly make.

            Especially since that argument could be applied to Jenson Button or Sergio Perez with equal merit given that they didn’t say anything about going to Ferrari, either.

            Do you see the logical fallacy behind your argument?

        2. ….so lets just dismiss it as rumour. I have no argument…I would say Webber isnt going to Ferrari too…I just wouldnt put my house on it

          1. It’s the same rumour as last year & the year before that.

    2. “I haven’t signed anything” there we are a total rebuttal, absolutely nothing in it, face it you always sign before you talk.

  13. Webber admits he doesn’t like the tyres but takes the PR line of “good for the show” Do we the fans like the show of a close endurance contest were the kindest driver on his tyres wins or do we want actually a race were the best driver wins if he has a decent car under him.

  14. Plain and simple, there is no problem with the current tyres. The vast majority of F1 in previous years (before Bridgestone’s super-durable tyres) were using tyres that could not be pushed to their limits all of the time, so why should it be any different now? People want to see ‘pure’ racing, and yet surely tyre preservation is part of a racing driver’s skill set. Yes, perhaps there needs to be more of a variety in the tyres, to allow driver’s to push harder if that’s their style, or to save the tyre more, if they want to run their race like that, rather than an inevitable drop-off, but if it does stay as it is, then I’m quite pleased, as it has produced some fantastic racing.
    You only need to look at the figures of the ‘Rate the Race’ results to see that the races of this and last year were superior in entertainment than they were in previous years.

    I can also understand why people don’t like DRS, but I’d rather see the DRS used in F1, than have the driver stuck behind because of the disadvantage of the wake from the car in front. I agree that there should be some tweaks, because at some tracks, it is a little too over-powered, but that should reduce as more experience is gained.
    My only real qualm with the DRS is that we no longer see cars from the back of the field being able to mix it in the top 10, because as soon as they’re caught, they usually get passed quite easily, but then again, with the tight field we have this year, it’s not like we aren’t seeing some great mixed-up results!

  15. Honestly, the only thing I would like Pirelli to fix, is the marbles, even though of course that would be difficult. If they can keep the same or similar levels of performance drop-off without the marbles, I think they’re perfect.

    As it is, the marbles essentially create a single racing line, similar to the Bridgestones. But where the Bridgestones did it by rubbering in the racing line, the Pirellis do it by dropping excessive marbles off-line. If they can get rid of them, it would open a lot more overtaking opportunities and also be less costly for people being overtaken, potentially giving them a chance to get back at the overtaker a bit more. It would also have less effect on the races of the backmarkers who now constantly find themselves having to go off-line onto the marbles with blue flags.

    1. @ral I’m not at all convinced that marbles are doing anything to impair the quality of racing.

      People complaining about marbles give an entirely inaccurate impression that drivers are sitting on the racing line and rivals are queuing up behind them, not risking going off-line for fear of getting on the marbles.

      A glance at the last F1 and GP2 races shows that simply isn’t the case. Vettel had no qualms about going off-line to defend from Raikkonen. Nor did Rosberg with Hamilton and Alonso. Sometimes the drivers were able to get past sometimes they weren’t.

      A pass made on the marbles is even more impressive because you know the driver has pulled it off in tricky circumstances. Check out Esteban Gutierrez’s superb pass on Max Chilton on the marbles at the end of the first GP2 race:


      Marbles are just part of racing – you make a mistake, you get on the marbles, you lose time, you’re punished for the mistake. Given all the complaints about tarmac run-offs replacing gravel traps I’d’ve though more people would be glad to see that.

      1. Oh, that wasn’t meant as a criticism. More of a “if that’s the only thing that’s wrong with it, just stop complaining about the tyres already” sort of thing. Something’s gotta be the limiting factor in speed during the race. The way the regulations are at the moment and with the reliability of the cars as high as it is, it’s the tyres. And on past evidence, I would think that’s only a temporary situation until the teams get on top of how to use them.

  16. I was about to say, Keith, they’re almost a substitute for the gravel. I understand people will say ‘yeh, but that’s on track!’, but clearly it hasn’t deterred many from making a move.

  17. Webber yet again makes a good point. Racing drivers want to go fast. They don’t want to think that they are being beaten by someone faster, especially if they feel they could have gone faster if it weren’t for a limiting factor. However, these guys themselves know that F1 isn’t solely about speed. They are in F1 by virtue of having the ability to race AND think more than any other race driver in the world. I do fully expect from time to time that their instinct will kick in and they complain about just wanting to go faster. It’s understandable.

  18. how does this sound for a “solution”:

    – have tires that instead of having to be nursed for 15 laps last 15 laps pushing almost flat out and possibly 18-19 managing them, where if you go over you hit “the cliff.” I can’t appreciate the sport as “racing” if the drivers aren’t actually trying to drive fast
    – eliminate drs and instead use more powerful kers- this at least gives the car in front a way to defend himself while kers can be used more effectively by the attacker if he sees a specific opportunity (ex: running wide)
    – get rid of parc ferme in its current form. It was instituted because teams ran qualifying engines, brakes, gearboxes. Just allow the team’s to change the setups and do nothing to gearbox, engine, etc. – also top 10 get to start on new tires so people will actually run in q3. qualifying lower shouldn’t be an advantage

    And just for the record people, schumacher isn’t complaining because he isn’t getting custom made tires like he did with ferrari. he’s complaining because the tires aren’t letting ANYONE drive on the limit, which I don’t think is right. Just look at it from a driver’s point of view. They want to drive as fast as possible, not just cruise around to a slow lap delta

Comments are closed.