Drivers praise COTA but race prospects aren’t good

35 comments on “Drivers praise COTA but race prospects aren’t good”

1. 

   George (@george)
   17th November 2012, 0:51

   Hm, maybe that Vet-Ham-Alo podium will happen tomorrow?
   1. 

      BasCB (@bascb)
      17th November 2012, 13:50

      Ï think Webber can spoil that one here .
2. 

   @HoHum (@hohum)
   17th November 2012, 0:57

   I’m sure that Seb will romp of into the distance even if Mark surprises again with another pole so I guess it makes sense at this stage for both cars to be putting their eggs in the “high downforce/low speed” basket, but with Marks famously slow starts ( when it happens to Lewis it is a McLaren fault, but at RBR it is Marks fault ) I wonder if the alternate strategy used so effectively by Seb might not be a good idea.
   1. 

      @HoHum (@hohum)
      17th November 2012, 0:58

      for Mark, that is.
3. 

   OmarR-Pepper (@)
   17th November 2012, 1:00

   Vettel can win if he keeps that pace, but I imagine RB are exhaustively checking that water leak, the fuel robot, the alternator, the DDRS and the Coanda exhaust
   1. 

      John H (@john-h)
      17th November 2012, 14:38

      Robot or rain dance? The choice is yours.
4. 

   Todd (@braketurnaccelerate)
   17th November 2012, 1:28

   Hmm. Looks like Pirelli missed the mark.
   1. 

      Keith Collantine (@keithcollantine)
      17th November 2012, 2:05

      @braketurnaccelerate I think we should let them off the hook for this one. Better an underwhelming race (if that is what we get) than a repeat of the 2005 race.
      1. 

         Fer no.65 (@fer-no65)
         17th November 2012, 3:23

         @keithcollantine Regardless of the unknown conditions, I get the feeling that Pirelli are being conservative because they don’t want to be the ones “giving” the title to a team/driver because of their tyre choices.

         They rather be conservative and “watch it happen”.
         1. 

            Colossal Squid (@colossal-squid)
            17th November 2012, 3:36

            I’ve never thought about that element, but I fear there might be some truth to it.
            It was fine to do as they pleased in 2011 – the championship was never really in doubt – but if say Ferrari got a huge advantage from a certain set of tyres then there would be a massive controversy! Better for Pirelli’s sake to err on the side of caution.
      2. 

         Todd (@braketurnaccelerate)
         17th November 2012, 3:32

         @keithcollantine – Fair enough. Though I’m sure there was plenty of time for them to ship Alguersuari and their Renault R30 over to get some feel for the track. Heck, there hadn’t been a race car to complete a full circuit before they declared the Hard/Medium combo. I think they were predicting Texas to be much much hotter than it was for some reason. Looking at past weather the average high temps in Austin are around 75-65ºF (24-18ºC) for the month of November, exactly what it is now.
5. 

   Aldoid
   17th November 2012, 1:36

   Such a shame that a conservative tire choice by Pirelli might spoil what could be a really great race. It’s too early to pass full judgement, but the tires definitely don’t suit the circuit.
   1. 

      roger_e
      17th November 2012, 1:44

      i think pirelli have done the right thing.

      cars had little grip through fp1/fp2 & it was a joy to watch drivers really having to drive the cars again, fighting for grip & sliding around everywhere. was the best, most enjoyable session i’ve seen for years :)

      the soft/high wear tyres have given the drivers far too much grip for far too long, the hard compounds giving less grip is just what we need as its exactly what drivers often had to deal with right up until the early 90s when refueling saw compounds start to get a lot softer.
   2. 

      AndrewTanner (@andrewtanner)
      17th November 2012, 16:58

      In all fairness, Pirelli didn’t have much of a choice.
6. 

   Dizzy
   17th November 2012, 1:40

   To me the recent comments from drivers talking about not been able to follow a car ahead shows how utterly ridiculous DRS & high-Deg tyres are.
   Both may produce passing/unpredictability in certain situations, However neither does anything to actually improve the racing.

   They are both just masking the initial problem & as long as there still been relied upon to ‘artificially spice up the show’ the underlying problems that actually harm the racing are never going to be solved.

   I know the phrase ‘Ban DRS, bring proper tyres’ usually gets replys like ‘There will then be no passing’, However I think that would actually be the best thing for F1 as it would once again put full emphasis on whats causing the problems & the teams/FIA would then be forced to actually do something about them rather than just applying the DRS/Pirelli Band-aid.

   Don’t forget that Pre DRS/Pirelli the talk was all about changing the cars/tracks, Tracks like Abu-Dhabi spoke of alterations to improve racing & the teams were planning a less aero/limited ground effects formula for 2014 (Something used in other open wheel series such as Indycar).
   DRS was originally only a temporary stop-gap to get us to 2014 when it would go & the new regs would take over, However now teams have dropped the 2014 reg changes because they believe DRS/Pirelli’s are a cheaper & easier to implement solution way of ‘artificially spicing up the show’.

   If they really want to improve the racing & provide a good quality of racing on every track they need to go back to the original plan, DRS & high-deg tyres a temporary stop-gap solution with real changes/improvements to cars/some circuits on the way. Stick with DRS/Pirelli & your always going to have this problems of cars been too aero dependant, been unable to follow one another & the quality of racing will never improve.
   1. 

      substructure
      17th November 2012, 2:05

      i always felt like the way to fix aero dependency was to stop making the track surfaces so perfectly smooth… might be overly simplistic though
      1. 

         Guelph (@guelph)
         17th November 2012, 2:34

         A simpler way to fix aero dependency is to remove the wings from the cars.
         1. 

            beneboy (@beneboy)
            17th November 2012, 15:43

            + Infinity !
   2. 

      Pelican (@pelican)
      17th November 2012, 4:18

      I agree. I don’t know how to fix the problem, but you’re right that all these gimmicks to “improve the show” aren’t it.
   3. 

      David-A (@david-a)
      17th November 2012, 10:19

      Absolutely agree Dizzy.
   4. 

      Poul Winther (@poul)
      17th November 2012, 15:10

      Can I be vice president of this post?

      Let’s get some serious aero regulations and tons of tire grip –> racing!
7. 

   Gridl0k
   17th November 2012, 2:07

   I can’t imagine why Pirelli decided to be conservative with the tyres, what’s the worst that could happen at a US GP if they brought softer ones? :D
   1. 

      Michael Brown (@)
      17th November 2012, 2:47

      Somebody always asks the question you ask and another replies with Indy 2005. Well the circuit has high degradation but it’s nowhere near the amount they faced at Indy 2005, which was a one-off. I wish they would have brought Soft-Medium or Soft-Hard to the circuit to at least bring some variety to the strategy. Plus, wouldn’t faster degrading tires rubber in faster?
      1. 

         David-A (@david-a)
         17th November 2012, 9:37

         @lite992 – I think the smiley means he was kidding ;)
8. 

   Eggry (@eggry)
   17th November 2012, 3:20

   Since Vettel showed great race pace and top speed in Abu Dhabi, I expected Red Bull might more focus on top speed than pure downforce. However it seems that’s not the case.
9. 

   Neel Jani (@neelv27)
   17th November 2012, 7:57

   Here’s Pirelli’s answer. They didn’t wanted the tires to decide the title.

   http://en.espnf1.com/usa/motorsport/story/95120.html
   1. 

      Poul Winther (@poul)
      17th November 2012, 15:13

      But isn’t that exactly what they are doing now? If they have consistently selected matching tires throughout the season, any change from that path will change the path of the championship.
      1. 

         AndrewTanner (@andrewtanner)
         17th November 2012, 17:00

         @poul No. Their choices will always affect the outcome but what they’re doing now is minimising the amount of variables their tyres will impose.
         1. 

            Poul Winther (@poul)
            17th November 2012, 17:22

            Thanks, I understand the idea but I just disagree with the premise:
            When the first 18 races has a certain reasoning for tire selections it is not affecting the championship but part of its foundation. But when you alter that reasoning because of the championship you end up affecting it.

            Of course they are also scared of any kind of US tire disaster but the result may be that the race itself will be so dull that it’s a disaster anyway.
         2. 

            Poul Winther (@poul)
            18th November 2012, 0:52

            I am sorry to say that qualifying only proved my point. The result of “avoiding to affect the championship” is that we are stuck with tires that Alonso just cannot switch on! A fundamentally wrong decision to deviate from the usual praxis. Sad really.
10. 

    Salman
    17th November 2012, 10:52

    Well whatever we say, the fact remains Seb has got the title in bag..the car is too damn fast….
11. 

    JamieFranklinF1 (@jamiefranklinf1)
    17th November 2012, 11:25

    Unless Vettel has more problems, ala Abu Dhabi, then I think it’s going to be very difficult for Alonso to really close the gap. He might be able to keep the Championship alive until Brazil, but by then I expect it to be all but over.

    I blame Grosjean :P
12. 

    HK (@me4me)
    17th November 2012, 11:38

    Hm, really hard to make any sense of the long-stint pace. Both the Ferrari’s and Hamilton are very quick, but not very consistent. Vettel, Webber and Button on the other hand seem more consistent, and about equal on pace. Redbull and Mclaren usually run very heavy on fuel, while Ferrari and Lotus do not. This seems to suggest Hamilton could be the fastest on race day, if he can get the consistency right (could’ve been traffic, not sure..). This could be the first Vettel-Hamilton-Alonso (whichever order) result ever. Really looking forward to the race :)
    1. 

       stirper
       17th November 2012, 14:20

       “Redbull and Mclaren usually run very heavy on fuel, while Ferrari and Lotus do not”

       Well in race they all have the same fuel. In practice how do you know who had more or less???
13. 

    Sir JYS
    17th November 2012, 19:20

    Hey, simplify the aero. Prescribe maximum span, chord, and breadth for front and rear wings. Keep the small rear wing. Make the front wing span smaller and simplify it – a single airfoil with no winglets or other elements. Ban diffusers altogether. It will slow the cars down considerably in corners, make them faster on the straights, and re-remphasize horsepower, braking, tires, suspension, and above all drivers’ skills. And send Adrian Newey off into retirement with a great big golden parachute along with full legal assurance, including deposition of his grandchildren in FIA’s HQ as hostages, that he will never, ever design a race car again. : )

Comments are closed.