F1

The Pirelli debate

Tagged: , ,

Viewing 15 posts - 16 through 30 (of 35 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #228807
    andae23
    Participant

    In my opinion, the non-durable tires make it possible to go for alternative strategies instead of just one stop at the midway point and that’s it. There was a fantastic strategic battle between the conservative 3-stoppers and the risky 2-stoppers, and eventually taking a risk paid dividends for Raikkonen but backfired on Hamilton.

    The problem with the Pirelli tires is the way it degrades, not the amount of laps it stays alive. The Pirellis has a very narrow operating temperature, meaning that when the tyre are not up to temperature (for instance at the beginning of a stint) tire wear is very high. On top of that, the tires degrade slowly and at some point it loses all grip, known as the ‘cliff’.

    What I think should happen is that these two problems are solved. The narrow operating temperature is something Pirelli (under orders from the FIA) purposely designed into the tires for a reason I don’t really get. I’m not sure about this, but I believe that the cliff phenomenon is not something the FIA wanted, possibly a side effect of the former. When these two problems are resolved, the drivers will again be able to ‘push’ consistently as they won’t have the feeling they are driving on eggs.

    #228808
    Tayyib
    Participant

    I like it the way it is now but I also liked the durable Bridgestone 2010 tyres, yeah we only had one stop but it forced people to overtake after the pitstops.

    #228809
    tmekt
    Participant

    @freelittlebirds

    I think this is the 1st time a tyre manufacturer has won a race on merit all by itself…

    I’m not quite sure what you’re talking about about but that tyre manufacturer also occupied all the other places from the 2nd to the 20th.

    I found this race almost impossible to follow as I didn’t know who was really leading. It’s almost as if NBC and the race need to focus more on the tyres – perhaps, instead of the cars themselves we can see a giant tyre with a number marking the number of pit stops the driver has made and the suspected tyre degradation.

    How long have you been watching the sport? Do you remember the era of refueling? Cause if you switch the word “tyre” to “fuel” in your post and it describes a majority of races in before 2010 – I had no trouble following who was really where, at which position, then and I had no trouble doing so today.

    Back then it was almost all about the strategy, battles between cars could happen when they were actually half a lap apart. When cars pitted and refueled they showed an anticipated number of laps they could with the fuel load. The most races were really boring, overtaking was very difficult: I think the worst year was 2005 when tyre changes were banned, there were only a handful of overtakes at every race (this was the year of the Indy-fiasco). There was neither DRS or cheese-like Pirelli-tyres so the drivers could really push the whole race without worrying about them though so it must’ve been amazing.

    Take the Indian GP from last year and switch Vettel’s Red Bull with Michael Schumacher’s Ferrari and you pretty much get the idea.

    #228810
    Michael
    Participant

    @tmekt I see your point but I’m not sure I agree with it. First of all, unless there are weather changes 3 pit stops get really tiresome for the audience. That means we have to watch close to 60 pit stops over 2 hours – I don’t enjoy pit stops that much that I would feel comfortable watching them for over 25% of the race. The pitstops got so boring that the time it took to change the tires became irrelevant and were not even discussed.

    I value strategy and I think it has its place in F1 but I also firmly believe that when drivers are together and fighting for position or at least can see their opponent, those are the races that are the most interesting. Fighting for position on the other side of the circuit does not really excite the audience. In fact, it’s usually a letdown when a driver gains a few positions by having a better strategy than another driver…

    According to the commentator, this race had 7 leaders – did all the races before 2010 also have 7+ leaders?

    About the tyres, it’s hard to argue that they weren’t the #1 factor today in determining the victory. I’m not saying the tyres shouldn’t matter but are they the true stars in F1? What if the basketball itself or the hard wood floors decided the outcome of a match in the NBA? What if the football used in soccer decided the outcome of a match between Barcelona and Real Madrid?

    #228811
    tmekt
    Participant

    @freelittlebirds

    I’m not saying the tyres shouldn’t matter but are they the true stars in F1? What if the basketball itself or the hard wood floors decided the outcome of a match in the NBA? What if the football used in soccer decided the outcome of a match between Barcelona and Real Madrid?

    Those examples you gave actually describe F1 quite good, the way it has always been. The most important factor in determining the winner of each race or championship is the car, races are very rarely (and championships even more rarely) won without the best car (reliability and tyre-management are also parts of car’s quality). It’s always more about the car than the driver itself (it’s still possible though to lose with the best car).

    According to the commentator, this race had 7 leaders – did all the races before 2010 also have 7+ leaders?

    More than 7 leaders was unusual even then but the races usually had 2-5 different leaders most of who didn’t have any realistic change of winning (I’m just throwing these figures from the top of my head so they aren’t necessarily based on any exact facts).

    In fact, it’s usually a letdown when a driver gains a few positions by having a better strategy than another driver…

    No, it’s just normal and it’s always been this way and continues to be in future

    #228812
    Michael
    Participant

    @tmekt just curious, do you work for Pirelli’s PR department? Because I cannot see anyone enjoying 60 pit stops or keeping track of them. Last year the pit stops mattered and if you stopped for 4 seconds versus 3 , the other guy would pass you. That’s how tight it was. 1 second was irrelevant yesterday – the tyres provided massive advantages to slower cars… The Lotus won but it wasn’t really the fastest car except on the medium tyre with fuel load…

    #228813
    magon4
    Participant

    Hey guys, its as simple as that: I love the Pirelli strategy fest and have enjoyed these outcomes in the last two seasons, and the tyres have been the most important factor to make F1 entertaining and the races great.

    What I don’t agree with is that one can put on a new set of tyres and one looses speed instead of gaining it. That is unacceptable.
    If tyres become so sensitive that you don’t want to race he others, just get your tyres back home by avoiding actual racing, then I do think that we have a problem.
    Kimi only raced Adrian, and didn’t need to “waste” any of his precious tyres on it because Adrian was saving up his so he was told to let Kimi go.
    That’s not motorsport! At least it shouldn’t be.

    #228814
    tmekt
    Participant

    @freelittlebirds

    just curious, do you work for Pirelli’s PR department? Because I cannot see anyone enjoying 60 pit stops or keeping track of them.

    Lol what? No, I just don’t get how it could be so hard or unenjoyable to keep track of a few different strategies.

    @magon4

    Kimi only raced Adrian, and didn’t need to “waste” any of his precious tyres on it because Adrian was saving up his so he was told to let Kimi go.
    That’s not motorsport! At least it shouldn’t be.

    Did Hamilton save his tyres when he was fighting with Alonso?

    Sutil was on a one-stopper and Kimi on a two-stopper and the rest stopped three times so what aren’t they allowed to save their tyres. Maybe introduce a rule where everybody has to destroy their tyres on lap one and struggle with their dead tyres for the rest of the stint? Would we see faster lap-times? (no)

    #228815
    Jon Sandor
    Participant

    Yes, I don’t see how people can complain about how “artificial” DRS is and and still be alright with the current tyre situation.

    People say that “Everyone drives on the same tyres”, and of course they do. The point is that – largely through chance – some cars will happen to work well on the new seasons rubber right out the box, while other teams will spend several races trying to come to grips with them.

    Some people like this and point to the seven different drivers winning in the first seven races of 2012. And maybe they’re correct, maybe it’s in the best interests of F1 if things are kept unpredictable. But it’s still an artificial unpredictablness.

    #228816
    magon4
    Participant

    @tmekt, sorry dude but Hamilton is part of the point. He was on a two-stopper and or putting up a fight, he had to pit early and distroy his strtategy. That’s just kinda sad.

    #228817
    Jack Lenox
    Participant

    I have to say I’m pretty much in full agreement with @tmekt on this one. F1 has always been like this and there has always been a number of key factors around which the teams pivot. You could moan that it’s unfair that some cars will run better at some tracks than at others. Was it unfair that the Mercedes was so fast in China last year and should the rules be changed to stop that? Was it unfair that Jenson pulled off one of the most amazing chases from the back of the grid to a win in Canada in 2011 because he was the first onto the slicks when it was still a bit damp? The races where strategy plays the biggest part are usually the most thrilling and all of the teams knew that tyres would be important. If they’ve made a car that is really heavy on the tyres then that’s their mistake and they’ll need to try to rectify it as Red Bull did last year.

    Last year the Lotus was very good on its tyre wear, this year it seems to be even better. Degradation has obviously been a massive factor in Lotus’s development of the car and they’re reaping the rewards.

    @Jon Sandor

    People say that “Everyone drives on the same tyres”, and of course they do. The point is that – largely through chance – some cars will happen to work well on the new seasons rubber right out the box, while other teams will spend several races trying to come to grips with them.

    Do you really think it’s largely through chance? I think it’s pretty unfair to suggest that Lotus’s victory was just a fluke. They’ve won two of the last four races. Ferrari were second and Red Bull were third and this reflects how the race went for the three teams. Lotus had the fastest car considering the conditions, Ferrari second and Red Bull third. It’s fair.

    #228818
    Michael
    Participant

    It’s funny that Niki Lauda calls the the tyre situation fundamentally wrong and so does Horner.

    @Jack Lenox – They won 2 races but one was not technically on merit and this was purely on strategy.

    How about a maximum pit cap? You set it to 40 for the whole race which is 2 pit stops per driver including retired drivers and then everyone goes crazy to make sure they are not left out:-) How about that for suspense? Can you imagine if there have been 38 pit stops and Vettel and Alonso need to pit then a Caterham jumps in and uses the 39th pit stop leaving just one for Alonso and Vettel? We could add more suspense by making the team principals have a pit reservation card. If they run and get it to Charlie Whiting before the other team principal then they can reserve the last pitstop.

    Now that would be absolutely fantastic to watch as Domenicali and Horner scramble to get the pitstop while their team runs interference in the paddock!!! Of course, the person left on old tire would either retire and kiss the WDC goodbye but the emotions.

    In one simple post, I have doubled the suspense and viewership of F1 at, of course, the expense of the sport…

    #228819
    Jon Sandor
    Participant

    @Jack Lennox

    Do you really think it’s largely through chance? I think it’s pretty unfair to suggest that Lotus’s victory was just a fluke.

    My remarks were about the Pirelli tyres in general during the current era, not specifically about the last race in Australia. Yes, I think there is a large degree of chance involved. There is always a large degree of chance in any sport.

    Was it unfair that the Mercedes was so fast in China last year and should the rules be changed to stop that?

    The fact that it happened only once even though the rules were NOT changed to stop it is an example of the (tyre induced) random chance I mentioned. If you look again I dd not even say that these tyre games should be halted – I only pointed out that it is no less “artificial” than DRS.

    #228820
    Jon Sandor
    Participant

    That’s a little naive. If the result of changing the tyres for the new season really was “the same for everybody”, what would be the point in doing it? To throw some work to Pirelli’s engineers?

    The FIA orders different rubber compounds and tyre profiles each year in the hope and expectation that the result will not be the same for everyone, and that therefore the order of the previous year will be shaken up. They make various changes to the technical regs before (and sometimes during) the season for the same reason.

    I don’t think any of this is inherently bad unless it’s take to extremes. It seemed like last season it was taken to extremes, but I get the impression the FIA regards last season as the ideal.

    #228821
    Aled Davies
    Participant

    I think I know what some people are saying here. I think at the start of last season some teams all of a sudden had the tires performing, but they didn’t really know why! It’s the perceived randomness of it all that I think gets to people.

    I’d like to see drivers being able to push a bit more myself! the fact the tires go off a cliff isn’t a problem to me it’s just the fact there’s such a narrow operating window so very rarely are the drivers anywhere near to actually pushing.

    That being said, strategy and preserving your tires/fuel has always been part of the sport.

    It’s a hard one…I just think pirelli have gone slightly too far in the wrong direction but lets just hope with time they can get it right.

    they’ll never please anyone that’s for sure :-)

Viewing 15 posts - 16 through 30 (of 35 total)
  • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.