F1

What are "gimmicks" in motor racing?

Tagged: ,

Viewing 2 posts - 46 through 47 (of 47 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #269571

    Does having tyres that degrade quickly count as a “gimmick” as @Girts suggests? It presents the same challenge uniformly to all the drivers, so I’m not sure that it is.

    However I would say that forcing the top ten qualifiers to use a particular set of tyres from qualifying is a gimmick because it handicaps them relative to the other runners.

    #269579
    Girts
    Participant

    @KeithCollantine

    I agree that the likes of DRS and fragile tyres should not be put in the same basket because non-durable tyres do not directly handicap any driver or team. However, they do change the racing; for instance, they lead to more passes and more pit stops. Pirelli themselves also used to talk about the need to “provide a better show” by providing challenging tyres to the teams.

    Do tyres that degrade quickly affect competitive order? It seems so. Red Bull became much stronger after Pirelli changed the tyres in the middle of 2013 and I also doubt if we would have seen seven different winners in the first seven races of the 2012 season if Bridgestone had still been in charge.

    And how much can teams realistically do to adapt to sensitive tyres? Adrian Newey said last November that Ferrari and Lotus had simply “got lucky” with the original 2013 tyres although not everyone would agree with him.

    If a gimmick is defined “a trick or device to attract publicity or trade”, then I would still call the “raw eggs” a gimmick but maybe it is a good gimmick if there is such a thing!

Viewing 2 posts - 46 through 47 (of 47 total)
  • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.