Jenson Button, McLaren, Silverstone, 2015

Button not guaranteed 2016 drive

F1 Fanatic Round-up

Posted on

| Written by

Jenson Button, McLaren, Silverstone, 2015In the round-up: Jenson Button admits he is not guaranteed a place on the 2016 F1 grid.


Your daily digest of F1 news, views, features and more.

Jenson Button says he does not know if he will be at McLaren next season (The Guardian)

"It is not a given, no – there are always options everywhere."

Eric Boullier Q&A: McLaren's woes won't hurt 2016 prospects (F1)

"If you tell me tomorrow that we can run full downforce then we will be seconds faster."

Pirelli: Not where we need to be (Sky)

"We are looking to make changes next year to get back to two or three stops, but we also need to have an agreement in place to allow us to do the testing to give us better information so we can ensure that happens."

F1 must help promoters - Gastaldi (Autosport)

"If the promoters struggle, there may be no race and that is not good for the future of Formula 1."

Red Bull needs ‘freak luck’ to win - Newey (F1i)

"I can’t see us being able to win a race this year. Not without one of those freak luck things."

German Grand Prix will return in 2016, says Mercedes boss Toto Wolff (The Independent)

"Maybe not going there for a year and coming back next year could be a good thing."

Honda to seek FIA clarification over 'free' engine (Motorsport)

"We do not know the details of how we gain back the Austrian penalties etc. We have to confirm the details going forward, now that the FIA has made its decision."

Is Lewis Hamilton now the world's most stylish sportsman? (The Telegraph)

"It was a particularly outlandish Etro floral print shirt that saw him refused entry to Wimbledon’s Royal Box last week, for ignoring the dress code and not wearing a jacket and tie."

Welshman in charge of VIP security explains why F1 ace had to go (Wales Online)

"He wasn’t wearing a jacket or tie. Wimbledon is not a beach in Marbella, it’s a major tennis tournament."


Comment of the day

Start, Circuit de Catalunya, 2015Is it time to stop thinking about ‘improving the show’, and concentrate on something more important?

The sport is all. The ‘show’ is just a lucky by-product.

The never-ending quest by Ecclestone for more and more money is distorting this picture, not helped by the shallow clamouring for more overtaking, more winners, more sparks.

When Arsenal won the [football] Premier League without losing a single match, I don’t recall calls to restructure the sport, declaring it a ‘crisis’. Instead, they were celebrated, as a team that had competed and beaten all they faced.

I believe F1 should hold true to it’s core as a sport. If that makes it entertaining (I believe it will) then fantastic. If it doesn’t attract the viewing figures required to attract the money to keep it the global sport it has become, then I will be sad – but that would be a clear sign that our sport has had it’s day, and show bow out proudly rather than whoring itself out for money to struggle on as soulless mockery of what it once was.
Adam Hardwick (@Fluxsource)

From the forum

Happy birthday!

Happy birthday to Jv!

If you want a birthday shout-out tell us when yours is via the contact form or adding to the list here.

On this day in F1

While Alain Prost completed a hat-trick of wins for Ferrari with victory in the British Grand Prix 25 years ago today, his furious team mate Nigel Mansell announced he was retiring from F1. Already incensed at discovering his team mate had quietly been given the chassis he had been using, Mansell had led his home race from pole position only to drop out with another gearbox problem.

This was the last race on Silverstone’s simple configuration before extensive changes to the layout began. A huge field of 35 cars entered, and pre-qualifying was needed to eliminate five of the slowest nine:

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.

Posted on Categories F1 Fanatic round-upTags

Promoted content from around the web | Become a RaceFans Supporter to hide this ad and others

  • 77 comments on “Button not guaranteed 2016 drive”

    1. Here’s what would be cool. Button to Ferrari. 2 WDCs at the prancing horse, and Button gets a hat trick of being teammates with the 3 top drivers of this generation. I think him and Vettel would get along very well and great feedback on car development.

      1. Omar R (@omarr-pepper)
        15th July 2015, 0:21

        @uan the only downside would be to change an oldie (Kimi) for another (JB)…

        1. @omarr-pepper

          true, but at least he’ll be demonstrably more engaged! And imagine the tell all book he can write after his career? Who really was the fastest JB? (though in fairness, if he left, he didn’t get to compete against Alonso in a competitive car).

          McLaren should keep both JB and FA and slot their two young drivers into some teams down the grid to get them some experience. That worked well for Ricciardo and Kvyat, though it may not be in McLaren’s DNA to do that.

          1. You mean up the grid. :)

            1. well played sir, well played

      2. i’m with you on that one. JB looks a lot more focused than Kimi. It would be nice to see him in reds…


        If Button wants to taste Ferrari power he should instruct his agent to call Gene Haas.

      4. I want the crack you’re obviously smoking!

      5. @uan JB only beat one teammate in his entire career, so the chances of beating Seb should amount to nothing.

        1. @peartree

          JB only beat one teammate in his entire career

          2002: Trulli
          2003: Villeneuve
          2004-05: Sato
          2006-07, 2009: Barrichello
          2011: Hamilton
          2014: Magnussen

          1. @david-a Go back to wiki and read that whole thing. Read about the pre-season of 09 as well and also 2011 dnf record and also, no one, no one cares about points, to beat a teammate you beat with pace and consistency. Read the wiki. Villneauve beat JB on pace so did Trulli not Sato but Barrichello did well and Mag was a rookie.

            1. @peartree
              Pre-season is irrelevant in determining who beat who. Barrichello wasn’t faster or more consistent over the 17 races of 2009. JB had the better of him in 2006 and 2007 as well. Barrichello was better in 08.

              In 2011, Hamilton had 3 DNFs, two of them crashes, with one mechanical DNF in an anonymous Brazilian GP. Button had 2 DNFs, both mechanical failures. JB was definitely more consistent that year, taking 12 podiums to 6.

              Villeneuve? Outqualified 8-6, outscored 12-6, sacked. Trulli? The number one source for your info says: “although often outqualified by Trulli, he showed the faster race pace to outscore his more experienced teammate”.

          2. @david-a If it wasn’t for his looks and passport, JB wouldn’t lasted 3 seasons in F1. On one hand I’m thankful he did stayed in F1, JB has become quite average but on the other hand he does not deserve to be as successful and loved as he is. For an F1 driver he’s just an honest likeable character. Perhaps only Felipe Massa stands in F1 after a decade of being beaten by his teammates.

        2. @peartree

          JB only beat one teammate in his entire career

          2002: Trulli
          2003: Villeneuve
          2004-05: Sato
          2006-07, 2009: Barrichello
          2011: Hamilton
          2013: Perez
          2014: Magnussen

    2. Omar R (@omarr-pepper)
      15th July 2015, 0:16

      Could Button imply he is going to Haas? He might not be happy with McLaren for the way he was treated last year, not knowing if he or Magnussen received the boot… and checking Honda from the inside, he surely knows if that car has any hopes next season. He could arrive at Haas and have fun there, no big pressure, no corporate image to worry about. Or he may follow Webber to WEC, as Jenson already suggested once on his official Twitter account.

      1. I’d have to think that Button is resigned to the fact that another world championship is extremely unlikely at best, and to my mind, and for the reasons you suggest, a move to Haas would be a great way for him to see out the last couple years of his F1 career. The downside might be that adding to his wins total would be unlikely at Haas, but I don’t see him getting any more W’s at McLaren either.

      2. I guess Button has once said he’s not a WEC fan.

        1. Well he said that he’s not a fan of driving around with cars in different categories and very different speeds, but he later stated that he wouldn’t rule out moving there.

          1. Which is F1 now
            Those with cash -fast
            Those w No cash – slow
            Those w Cash and slow – Woking & Milton Keynes

        2. @jcost If he had said that Dennis would have never retained Button. Whether JB likes WEC or not, if you want your job you ought not talk about other people’s jobs.

      3. @omar-pepper I know he gets paid well and F1 is a shark pit but wouldn’t it be nice if McLaren just said — thank you for putting up with a dreadful year in such a loyal and supportive way – we will pay you back with a drive next year, stick with it.

        1. You used ‘loyal’, ‘supportive’ and ‘mclaren’ in the same sentence. ha ha ha

      4. I’ve been thinking this for a while. It makes sense for Haas to run someone like Button and Rossi – it’s going to get them a legion of fans in both the UK and US, and some great initial exposure too. Haas would also benefit massively from having someone like Button on board, and when he retires he could also continue to work with the team (a bit like Coulthard to Red Bull).

        I know Button has said in the past he’d like to be in a car that can win races, but realistically, that’s not going to happen at Maclaren. I think it would be a great move for him.

      5. More that Button moves to FI as Hulkenberg goes to Ferrari. I think FI wants a veteran driver like Button to improve the car.

    3. Pirelli “Not where we need to be” and still determined to make things worse rather than better.

      1. I wish Pirelli would just ask the FIA rule-makers to mandate minimum 2 stoppers or even 3 stoppers at other races. Make durable rubber to encourage hard racing and not punish attempts at overtaking. We also need a relapse in the tighter front wing components flex test to offset some of the effects of following in dirty air. The FIA are sleeping on engineering proper solutions to the basic problems of F1. We don’t need egg tires which would discourage attempts at overtaking and hard racing, or encourage conservative driving. The engine, gearbox and fuel limits are already producing conservative racing.

        1. Put fuel back on the mix and the tyres will matter again.

      2. Indeed @hohum sick and tired of their obsession with multiple stops.

      3. Hm, it seems that what Pirelli sees as not being where they should be (according to their “mandate”) is not all too far off of what many fans want to see, including you @hohum (tyres lasting decently, enough that a one stopper is easily possible at most tracks)

        1. @bascb, but I still see 1 pitstop as 1 too many unless it’s a case of a team gambling on being able to make up the time in the pits by using 2 sets of softs against another team no-stopping on 1 set of mediums, but that kind of tactical freedom not allowed.

      4. In my opinion its not the degradation that’s the issue it’s the immediacy of it when the tyres are pushed. The tyres should be good for a number of laps and if you overuse the tyres then that number will become less, or if you are easy then the laps become greater. Up to that point the tyre should be consistent in its performance.

        1. So @tvr350, you want the drivers to go easy ? and this will improve the racing/show how ?

          1. No, I want the drivers to be able to choose when and how to push. The alternative seems to be a super grippy tyre that will last the whole race without degrading – see Sochi as to why I consider that a bad idea. It follows therefore that tyres should degrade over a race.
            Yeah sure a driver could back off and reduce the number of tyre stops, but it could well be that someone pushing hard with an extra stop could be faster and will have the spare tyre capacity to force overtakes. The issue at the moment is that the tyres operate in a small window of temperature and loading and when you leave that window the tyres seem to be permanently degraded, so the downsides of pushing/trying to overtake and greater than the benefits.

    4. Both Mclaren’s should be given back their penalties, giving them places forward after qualifying. And if they start last, and they cannot take the whole 25 places, every other drive on the grid gets to drive through.

      1. This is hilarious, with their rate of attrition they will be back to grid place penalties after 1 race anyway. Now they need to lobby for triple points in the last race and have a redress of 25 grid places applied to that race and liberate the full potential of their engine for that 1 race.

    5. Pirelli doesn’t need tomchange anything in my opinion. Their tyre choices have been pretty good and it has been the first year were sincerely I don’t have a single bad opinion to them, if they wanted the tyres to be more agressive, then they could have changed the tyre allocarions since the start of the season. Putting super-softs in Australia, going back to a 4-stopper in Malaysia with Softs, also aiming a two or three stop strategy in Silverstone with the Softs and Mediums. They reaaly don’t have to changed anything, just changing their allocations.

    6. The way the rule needs to work with Honda is simple. When it comes to using their seventh engine (or whatever number the next one is) they get it free. If they don’t use it then all is done. The rule didn’t exist before and does now, so that seems like the only logical way to do it.

      1. the 6th is their next engine @strontium. And I agree that logic should mean they can change to that one without penalties. I just hope the FIA confirm that this is true.

    7. I still don’t get the obsession with having to have 2-3 stop races.

      If you make tyres that degrade quickly again to force 2-3 stops your going to introduce a lot more tyre management & fans have seemingly grown tired of tyre management playing such a big role as it has the past couple seasons.

      Your also of course making things like the undercut & pit passing more important than the actual ontrack racing which is where i’ve always felt the primary focus should be as watching cars racing/overtaking on track is far more interesting/exciting than watching the undercut & the pit passing that it generates.

      If we look at Silverstone as an example, That race woudl have been 1000x more exciting if Lewis was forced to overtake the Williams on track rather than pitting x laps earlier, putting in a few laps 1-2 seconds faster on fresh tyres & then ending up in the lead having overtaken nobody on track.

      Also making tyres that fall to pieces again to force 2-3 stops is going to introduce more tyre management which based on recent surveys & fan comments is something it seems most fans have grown tired of.
      Give them tyres they can push hard & race with, Ditch the mandatory pit stop that forces them to run both compounds & lets get the primary focus in terms of racing/overtaking back on the track & away from the pits!

      1. +1 @rogera, why anybody would want to continue with these farcical tyre necessitated pit stops is beyond me, unless that is you are a driver like Grosjean with no chance of winning a race unless other teams suffer misfortune or are otherwise penalised for using the full performance of their car.

      2. The biggest mistake f1 can make is listening to fans, the second biggest mistake is putting not making Ross brawn the czar of f1. Ross needs to cement his place in history by creating a rule set to take f1 into the next decade. Listening to fans however is not the right way to go. Fans are fickle, usually lacking in technical knowledge, and change their mind faster than Lewis changes outfits. No, we as fans need to be told what we want, not do the telling. If we disagree we vote with out cash but we should never be allowed into the rule making aspect. We need Ross brawn to tell us what we want, and if you think you know better than him, please see my previous statement about fans not knowing anything.

        1. No layercake, the biggest mistake we can make is to keep quiet, the FIA and FOM have to sort through the comments and decide which may be useful and which may not.

      3. It’s all very well saying you don’t want pit passing and undercuts so we will do away with that, but that in itself doesn’t make on track overtaking any more likely or easier so you would more likely end up with the tedium of a procession in grid order

        1. @tonybananas I believe it would make ontrack overtaking more likely & would generate closer, more hard fought battles because the primary focus would be based towards the racing done on the track.

          If you remove the option of the undercut then its moves the emphasis towards pushing harder to overtake ontrack so we would more than likely see drivers pushing harder to overtake rather than complaining that its impossible, giving up & hanging back to wait for the pit stops.

          1. To your point, could you explain how anyone would pass Mercedes this year if they didn’t have to pit? Merc would lap the field 2-3 times. The only chance anyone has of finishing ahead of even one of the Mercedes is when you get a driver like vettel who can make an alternate tire strategy work. Some things sound great on paper though.

            1. Artificially forcing strategy with mandatory stops & bubblegum tyres to slow the best car down & give others a chance isn’t what racing is or should be about.

              If Mercedes do a better job than the rest it should be upto the others to improve there cars to catch up. Using artificial means to bring Mercedes closer to the others is wrong on every level.

              Its like saying that Usain Bolt needs to stop to change shoes to give other runners a chance to get ahead of him, Absurd!

            2. @layercake, if it really is impossible to overtake on track we could have had a Williams 1-2 at Silverstone.

    8. Thanks for the COTD. Although I wish I’d spent more time looking for typos now…

      1. @fluxsource Quite frankly your COTD can be defined very easily…. Hammer meets nail… right on the head! Very well said, just the kind of thinking F1 needs. Leave the sport alone, let it be a sport. It isn’t WWE (or WWF as it was known) where the point is entertainment and not sport. Yes F1 needs to cut costs, reduce ticket prices and return to free-to-air TV. But none of that would change the sport.

        1. I think that F1 is to motorsport as the English Premier League is to football; they’re the commercial, wider-public front-end of their sport which go after people who may not actually like it. And I’ve compared the EPL to WWE before, but yeah, you’re right that F1 needs to watch itself too regarding where it wants to be on the sport-vs-entertainment scale. And when F1 changes a rule (which inherantly it must do occasionally) it needs be honest with itself about which side of the scale that rule’s coming from.

          And as a fan of sport in general, I applaud @fluxsource COTD’s attitude and would rather F1 had the same. For me; stay fast, clever and experimental or go home.

    9. If I were both Button and Alonso I would simply accept that this year was a mistake, they weren’t to know this would happen, and get seats elsewhere. It could be that in 2016 Honda have got themselves sorted out, but it could also be that, come 2016, nothing is different. Fact is we don’t know, but their careers are nearing the end now, so if I were them I wouldn’t want to hang around waiting for the grass to grow.

    10. Oh regarding the Button article, It confirms what I said at the end of last year.. By sticking with Jenson they simply kicked the can down the road & will end up with an identical issue at the end of this year & if they stick with him again they will just kick the issue to the end of 2016.

      I’ve always liked Jenson, I think he’s a good driver & a nice guy… But at this point I don’t feel he’s what McLaren need when it comes to moving forward over the next 5-10 years.
      They have Kevin Magnussen & Stoffel Vandoorne, Kevin showed potential last year & Stoffel is clearly something very special with many in the Motorsport world singing his praises.
      McLaren need to figure out what to do with both of them, Its unfair on Kevin to keep him in the reserve role when he could be out there continuing to learn & improve & its also not going to do Stoffel any favors if he wins the GP2 title this year (Which he seems almost certain to do) & is then left on the sidelines for a year at a point when he had a ton of momentum behind him.

      I personally felt they should have kept Kevin in the car for this year alongside Alonso, By giving him a 2nd season they would have seen if he’d improve & by how much which would then have given them a much better idea on what to do with Stoffel Vandoorne.
      Depending on how well Kevin did in that 2nd year it not only woudl have helped McLaren decide what to do with there driver line-up going forward nut woudl have also given Kevin more exposure to other teams who woudl have had more to go on should he leave Mclaren.
      Right now all we have to go on is 1 year in a difficult car where he showed flashes of real speed along with some ups & downs you expect from a rookie, Not really easy to build a proper opinion.

      As it is there left with a tougher choice, Button’s career is winding down, Kevin hasn’t raced for a year & has missed out on a year of further learning where he more than likely woudl have improved over his 1st season & Stoffel is looking highly impressive in GP2 & seems to be something very special by most accounts.

      1. @rogera, with a car barely able to outperform the Manors when it does manage more than a few laps I can’t for the life of me see any reason ($s aside) why McLaren would want to replace such an experienced and proven driver as JB whereas there are many obvious reasons both JB and FA might prefer to be elsewhere.

        1. To give the inexperienced experience, so when they do build a good car they are ready.

      2. Once again, I fail to see why Magnussen’s name is even in the picture! People keep going on about how unfair it is for poor Magnussen. I’m sorry, but this is nonsense – he got his chance, got a full race seat for a whole season and was utterly demolished by Button. There are no other words to describe how badly he was beaten by Button. He tried and failed miserably. I’m sorry, but this is fact. Button beat Magnussen in EVERY sense of the word in 2014 – even in qualifying, an area in which Button does not excel.

        What I don’t understand is why the conversation is about whether McLaren will stick with Button as opposed to whether Button will stick with McLaren.

        Button has proved himself time and time again against some of the best in the business, and yet this nonsense rages on. Hamilton was the first at McLaren who was supposedly going to SMASH Button. Then after he left, it was Perez who was going to thrash Button. Then it was Magnussen who was going to show Button up.

        Honestly, when the hell are people going to realise that Button is the real deal and one of the very best drivers on the grid??? How much does one driver have to prove himself?

        As far as I’m concerned, Button should get his manager to put together a deal with Ferrari at all costs. He will have his final year or two in a competitive car and despite what any of the naysayers think, will show Vettel up on more than a few occasions!

        1. @nick101 I’m sorry but Button didn’t ‘demolish’ Magnussen, It was very close between the 2 of them in terms of sheer pace as you see looking at the qualifying results, 9/10 to Jenson but Kevin was on average within 1 tenth of him.

          Jenson was beat far more soundly & by far bigger gaps by his team mate Ralf Schumacher in his 1st year in F1 (Only beat Ralf twice) & was beaten again in his 2nd year by team mate Giancarlo Fisichella again by a fairly wide average gap (Jenson only finished ahead of Giancarlo once all year).
          He went on to improve over the next 2-3 years & became a much better driver with the extra experience, How do you know the same would not have been true for Kevin?

          It can be hard to judge talent based on just 1 season because drivers improve as they gain experience, McLaren obviously felt that Kevin had the talent because if they didn’t the decision on who to keep would have been easier… But I guess you know better than Mclaren without all of the bits of data, knowledge & experience that they have right?

          1. @RogerA

            Yes, I’m afraid Button did demolish Magnussen.

            126 points to 55 (that’s Button with 229% of Magnussen points!)

            Finished ahead of Magnussen in races 82% of the time

            Spent 66% of racing laps ahead of Magnussen

            Finished ahead of Magnussen 14 times to 3

            Out qualified Magnussen 10-9

            Clearly Button didn’t demolish Magnussen in qualifying, but as Button is hardly known for his qualifying and everyone likes to tell us how much ‘raw pace’ Magnussen is supposed to have, I think its worth pointing out.

            And you talk about ‘sheer pace’ when referencing qualifying. Why? The only ‘pace’ that actually matters is race pace. Last time I checked, races were usually slightly longer than 1 lap on low fuel. Why everyone puts such emphasis on qualifying pace is beyond me.

            Its like saying Usain Bolt is the best 5000m runner because he’s the fastest over 100m! Utter nonsense.

            And FYI, in Buttons first year, he scored 12 points to Ralf’s 24. Meaning he beat Magnussen by a larger margin than Ralf beat him.

            1. @nick101

              And FYI, in Buttons first year, he scored 12 points to Ralf’s 24. Meaning he beat Magnussen by a larger margin than Ralf beat him.

              That stat ignores the fact there were less points available back then (10/6/4/3/2/1).
              Looking beyond just points Ralf ‘demolished’ Jenson far more convincingly than Jenson did Kevin last year & Fisichella did much the same a year later.

              End of the day regardless of all these figures Kevin obviously impressed enough for those with far more information & knowledge than us (The people actually within the McLaren team) that many felt he was a better choice.
              Let us not forget that most of the engineer’s as well as Ron Dennis wanted to keep Kevin rather than Jenson, They have far more information, data & a far greater understanding of driver performances than any of us do so quite clearly Kevin wasn’t as ‘demolished’ in there opinion.
              If they felt he had been demolished or whatever it would have been an easy choice, The fact it took them so long to decide with so many of them wanting to go with Kevin shows they obviously saw something in Kevin that you obviously wish to ignore while blinding going only by results.

              Fans only look at end results I guess as thats all the data they have, The teams however look beyond them because results alone don’t tell the entire story.
              If teams did look just at results then several very good drivers (Including Jenson) may not have been around to win races/championships that they went on to win.

              Thinking back the disconnect between an outsiders view & an insiders view was the same back in 2000 with Jenson. Many on the outside were questioning Williams even signing Jenson because his junior career hadn’t been anything that special & his testing pace has been fairly average compared to Ralf’s… But Williams were adamant that he had impressed them enough to warrant the drive with many engineer’s speaking up about how good they felt Jenson was.
              Heck it was even the same more recently with Vettel, Many fans refused to believe he was anything that special despite the engineer’s at BMW, STR & Red Bull saying otherwise…. Those with all of the data were proved correct & he’s turned out to be as good as there data showed.
              It was even the same to a degree with Alonso back in 2001/2002.

    11. Do I dare comment on LH fashion choices (of course I do). I am beginning to wonder if the Wimbledon faux pas was in fact a staged PR stunt, it certainly has generated a lot more publicity than mere attendance at the event would have. Could Lewis be investing in a fashion label, high risk but vast rewards if it takes off ?

      1. and u are Smart!

    12. Forget what I said about Lewis the other day… it was all intentional and part of secret marketing campaign for his new album entitled No Jacket Required. Oops.

      1. maybe Lewis needs to listen to Suit and Tie for some inspiration

    13. Wimbledon is not a beach in Marbella, it’s a major tennis tournament.

      Yes, it’s also an anachronism.

    14. I bet his contract says, that in order to trigger the option for the 2nd year, he needs to have at least 33% of the points of the WDC leader come September! :)

    15. Finally Pirelli admit that the tyres are not good enough, I mean, a set of supersofts lasting 3/4 of a race is not needed

      1. Beats the hell out off a set of tyres lasting 3-4 laps.

      2. @mim5
        I think a set of supersofts lasting 3/4 of the race at some circuits is fine as it means you could push them a lot and do a one stop strategy while those on the softs went for a conservative pace on a no stop strategy.
        It’s just a shame the tire rules have the stupid 2 tire rule preventing this.

      3. @mim5 and @hohum – worst part is that you guys talk about the same tyres on different tracks.

      4. Pirelli is at least as annoying as Bernie with all these testing bulls!!t!

        I don’t understand why they don’t bring every race weekend 3 different tyre compounds thus giving the opportunity to every team to test whatever they have in the pipeline for the following year. So they would bring extra 3x4x2x10=240 tyres. Now they bring 20 sets or 21 (not sure) for every car (1600) so they will have to bring 15% more tyres! IMO this is better than to moan all year long about the lack of testing…. just thinking out loud over here….

        1. there is not really enough variety in the tires to justify running different compounds. Pirelli might mess up now and then, but their tire selection seems pretty limited except for that new super soft they were testing.

          The problem isn’t tire selection, the problem is limiting opportunities and expecting things to change, or pretending things will change, and hoping people will believe you.

    16. Fine – me want Vandoorne.

    17. Simon (@weeniebeenie)
      15th July 2015, 12:36

      I really do not understand the logic of more pits stops = automatic better races. Call me strange but I prefer to see my racing cars on the track, racing. Not constantly going to change tyres and using strategy that goes along with that to get the pass on the car they’re battling.

      1. The logic derives from no pit stops = poor race as generally qualifying position equates to performance which means the fastest car is at the front the slowest at the back and race becomes a procession. The issue at the moment is that the team strategies are limited – usually to all the same one – by the need to use each of the 2 tyre compounds and the requirement to start on your Q2 tyres (99% the softest compound). The best racing at the moment often comes when drivers have alternative strategies (see Bahrain last year – though SC had a big part to play)

    18. Apex Assassin
      17th July 2015, 6:15

      JB to Haas. Laps Alonso in Melbourne. Rest of us LOL.

    Leave a Reply

    Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

    All comments are moderated. See the Comment Policy and FAQ for more.
    If the person you're replying to is a registered user you can notify them of your reply using '@username'.