Thoughts on 2012 tyres?

[Nando]

Re: Tyre conspiracy theory
There's more than enough to cause suspicion, but unless some one from the inside comes out with info (as in crash gate) we'll never know for sure. Just like 9/11.

I think 9/11 holds way more water then this though.
Infact i would not even call the 9/11 incident a theory anymore.

This however we need more then simply 5 drivers winning 5 races.

2010 there was 4 drivers winning the first 5 races for example.

[bhall]

(I strongly suggest that any discussion of 9/11 conspiracies take place elsewhere.)

Even though four drivers won the first five races of the 2010 season, there were only two credible winning constructors based on pure speed. Ferrari's victory in Bahrain was the result of the team capitalizing on other teams' failures. In other words, there was nothing particularly unusual about the start of that season.

That's a far cry from this season, when we've seen five different teams take each of the first five races, and all were taken on merit. We've also seen those same teams' fortunes change dramatically from one race to the next.

I don't buy into the idea that there's a concerted conspiracy being implemented by anyone to favor one team or another. For one thing, no one associated with F1 has ever demonstrated the ability to pull off something of that magnitude without it being either completely ineffective or patently obvious. But, it does point to something deliberately being made far more difficult than would ordinarily be the case.

These tires are purposefully constructed with narrow operating windows and with massive degradation that never improves from Friday practice to the race on Sunday, the latter of which flies in the face of generally accepted automobile racing characteristics. The tracks just do not get rubbered-in. Instead, they're left with copious quantities of marbles that make the racing line a tightrope from which deviations are harshly punished.

This was all orchestrated because it's what the powers-that-be think the fans want. And looking around at sites like F1Fanatic, they're probably right. Most people don't seem to care that the Pirellotteris are artificial as hell and go against the very grain of F1. They just want more explicit displays of the action that they feel has been sequestered for years by progress (read: aerodynamics).

Fine. Let them eat cake.

[myurr]

This was all orchestrated because it's what the powers-that-be think the fans want. And looking around at sites like F1Fanatic, they're probably right. Most people don't seem to care that the Pirellotteris are artificial as hell and go against the very grain of F1. They just want more explicit displays of the action that they feel has been sequestered for years by progress (read: aerodynamics).

Fine. Let them eat cake.

And why exactly should fans want performance of all the cars to be exactly the same from race to race so that the same driver or two gets to challenge? As a fan of racing I'm loving the fact that the field is so close and that so many drivers get to have a shot at winning.

What exactly is artificial about that Pirelli's that isn't also artificial about other aspects of F1? Why is a narrow operating window any more artificial than DRS, or having an engine RPM limit, or dictating that all four tyres must be the same compound, or mandating drivers use both compounds of tyre, or having qualifying split into three parts, or any other rule that limits or controls the 'purity' of the cars or racing?

I'm sorry that your favored driver or team isn't dominating this year, whoever they might be, but that doesn't mean the racing hasn't been fantastic this year nor that it's a good thing that so many teams have a realistic shot at glory.

[bhall]

It has nothing to do with a lack of performance from a favored driver or favored team. In fact, I think the Pirellotteris are making Alonso look incredible.

This has everything to do with Formula 1 using band-aids to solve its problems rather than properly addressing them. The moves that have led to virtually identical performance from virtually identical chassis were largely spurred on as cost-cutting measures by teams that left the sport anyway. Rather than admit that F1 is headed down the wrong path, the powers-that-be decided that what was formerly about innovation should now be about tricky tires.

Take away the tires from F1, and what have you got?

This is Formula Pirelli.


EDIT: I wasn't finished. Damn you, new site!

[myurr]

It has nothing to do with a lack of performance from a favored driver or favored team. In fact, I think the Pirellotteris are making Alonso look incredible.

And yet you are only able to throw around 'clever' names whilst ignoring the other points raised?

[bhall]

See edits.

(C'mon. I'm never that brief.)

[xpensive]

The reason why I suspect the outcome of the "Pirellotteries" are to at least some xtent rigged, is that it's typically reasonably credible mid-fielders such as Lotus, Sauber and now Williams that benefits and never the perennial back-markers.
At the same time, top teams like RBR and McLaren seem to get the short straw most of the times?

[amouzouris]

i think that these tires are good! a driver can make the difference again...its not all about the car, now with the new tires a very good driver can do very well....dont get me wrong, a very good car is still needed for the driver to be able to make a difference....but...if the driver can conserve where he should and push where he should he will win!

i think that maldonados win was a pure win and not because of the pirellis!

[myurr]

This has everything to do with Formula 1 using band-aids to solve its problems rather than properly addressing them. The moves that have led to virtually identical performance from virtually identical chassis were largely spurred on as cost-cutting measures by teams that left the sport anyway. Rather than admit that F1 is headed down the wrong path, the powers-that-be decided that what was formerly about innovation should now be about tricky tires.

But innovations are limited across the board. Why do the cars have 7 gears? Why are the wings fixed in a single position? Why is the floor of the car flat and a certain height above the ground? Etc.

There are hundreds of fixed or 'rigged' items that restrict the design of the cars and the sport needs them to survive. Without them the drivers would be unable to physically drive the cars to the limits, they would be unsafe, and the driver wouldn't have any impact on the performance of the car as it would be computer controlled.

With so many restrictions on the cars why single out Pirelli for making the racing 'artificial' just because they produced a tyre with a narrow operating window.

Take away the tires from F1, and what have you got?

Stationary cars.

But seriously if you went back to Bridgestone tyres, for example, then you would probably have a grid where the cars all lined up in roughly pace order so that they'd all run around on race day in that order. Everyone would one stop, and the variation in position for each car from race to race would only be a place or two. You'd likely always have one of two or three drivers on pole, and the races would have been won by two or three different drivers with the make up of the podium pretty much the same.

Frankly that is dull as ditch water and doesn't provide the chance for racing drivers to make much difference. With the 2012 Pirelli tyres you get to see variation of pace throughout the race, variation in strategy, different cars having different strengths in terms of raw pace and tyre logevity, different cars coping differently with the varying weight of the car throughout the race, and ultimately drivers being able to make a big difference.

As you rightly say Alonso is looking good this season. When the car is working well he's right up at the front, and when it's not working well he's making a difference by driving around those problems and dragging the car back up to be near the front. In my view Alonso and Hamilton are the two stand out drivers so far this year, both showing how adaptable they are and how they can man handle a car to extract all it's got regardless of where the balance is.

Why is that any more artificial than the myriad of other aspects governing the performance of the cars or bad for the sport? I understand that you want aero to play less of a role so we get back to 'pure' racing but that cannot happen until 2014 which is when the FIA are trying to do something about it. Until then just sit back and enjoy watching the drivers battle it out on track.

[basrawi]

i think that these tires are good! a driver can make the difference again...its not all about the car, now with the new tires a very good driver can do very well....dont get me wrong, a very good car is still needed for the driver to be able to make a difference....but...if the driver can conserve where he should and push where he should he will win!

i think that maldonados win was a pure win and not because of the pirellis!

ok lets me agree with you for a second there. Then how do you explain the 5 "good" drivers with 5 "good" cars not being able to replicate the result from weekend to weekend? In some of the cases not even running in a race winning pace, let alone winning again.

these tyres are very weak, sensitive, and fragile.

[myurr]

i think that these tires are good! a driver can make the difference again...its not all about the car, now with the new tires a very good driver can do very well....dont get me wrong, a very good car is still needed for the driver to be able to make a difference....but...if the driver can conserve where he should and push where he should he will win!

i think that maldonados win was a pure win and not because of the pirellis!

ok lets me agree with you for a second there. Then how do you explain the 5 "good" drivers with 5 "good" cars not being able to replicate the result from weekend to weekend? In some of the cases not even running in a race winning pace, let alone winning again.

these tyres are very weak, sensitive, and fragile.

Because it is difficult. Why is that bad? Why would it be better if we had one driver winning every GP because of their car advantage?

And we have seen several drivers put in consistent performances. The Ferrari is actually pretty consistently quick in the races. The McLaren has had front row pace in every qualifying session and has usually been there or there abouts in the races. Lotus have been quick in all the races. Williams have been quick in a couple of the races, not just one. Red Bull have been pretty consistent in race pace.

Finally given that the tyres have far less effect on qualifying pace as a single lap isn't enough for degradation to be a dominant factor, how do you explain the variation in qualifying pace amongst the cars if it's all just down to the tyres? My explanation is that it's also a very very close grid where the circuit is making a big difference.

[marcush.]

so:
Pirelli can´t influence the game as the production codes are supplied by FIA and they are allocated by the FIA to the teams....
Clearly it´s impossible for them to put preference on exactly on driver or team.

But:
What about tyres unused in an event returned by the teams or simply those tyres that were not allocated to a team (the spare tyres for unexpected events)?
These tyres are of correct spec but significantly older ,aged when used again in an event the tyre compound is to be used as well....how is this handled -all tyres returned and never used again?

[bhall]

Why is that any more artificial than the myriad of other aspects governing the performance of the cars or bad for the sport? I understand that you want aero to play less of a role so we get back to 'pure' racing but that cannot happen until 2014 which is when the FIA are trying to do something about it. Until then just sit back and enjoy watching the drivers battle it out on track.

The teams aren't given a chassis by the FIA. Nor are they given a suspension, wings, engine or any other component of the car, save for the standard ECU - which, by the way, I'm also against. Instead, they're given a set of regulations from which the challenge is to build the fastest car they're capable of building.

On the other hand, they are given tires. In the last ten years, we've seen tires constructed for performance (Bridgestone vs. Michelin), we've seen tires constructed for performance and durability (Bridgestone vs. Michelin, 2005), and we've seen tires built for outright durability (Bridgestone, 2007-2010). Now we have tires presented for the expressed purpose of being a wild card. That's it. There's no other rhyme or reason for the Pirelli-spec tires.

The reason for this is because, frankly, the regulations are lazy. The focus on cost-cutting and restricting aerodynamic research* has created a formula that produces virtually identical cars that make for dull racing. On top of that, whatever gray areas left behind with room for innovation are closed just as soon as they're exploited. This is short-sighted, and it ignores reality.

I refuse to believe that a species responsible for putting a man on the moon - shut up, x - is incapable of devising sensible and innovative regulations for racing cars that embrace the realities of the times in which we live and take into consideration where we seem to be heading, all without forgetting where we've been. Though that particular question is perhaps too big for this thread, at some point F1's viability will rely upon the answer. It's certainly not as grandiose as it may seem.

These tires are just another way of putting off that discussion. They're a distraction, an obfuscation of reality.

And they're artificial as hell.


* I've never said I want to see less aerodynamic influence on F1, but that's neither here nor there.

[myurr]

But:
What about tyres unused in an event returned by the teams or simply those tyres that were not allocated to a team (the spare tyres for unexpected events)?
These tyres are of correct spec but significantly older ,aged when used again in an event the tyre compound is to be used as well....how is this handled -all tyres returned and never used again?

Unused tyres are shredded after the event. All supplied tyres at an event are new.

[myurr]

The teams aren't given a chassis by the FIA. Nor are they given a suspension, wings, engine or any other component of the car, save for the standard ECU - which, by the way, I'm also against. Instead, they're given a set of regulations from which the challenge is to build the fastest car they're capable of building.

Actually the rules are so restrictive in places that they're not far off being given many other components by the FIA. The materials that can be used are restricted, the design is expressly restricted for many components (dimensions are dictated, the layout or number of components, positions, weights, etc.). Ever wondered why the cars all look so alike?

The standard ECU is a necessity to ensure that artificial driver aids aren't introduced such as traction control. It's been one of the best things to happen to the sport over the last few years.

On the other hand, they are given tires. In the last ten years, we've seen tires constructed for performance (Bridgestone vs. Michelin), we've seen tires constructed for performance and durability (Bridgestone vs. Michelin, 2005), and we've seen tires built for outright durability (Bridgestone, 2007-2010). Now we have tires presented for the expressed purpose of being a wild card. That's it. There's no other rhyme or reason for the Pirelli-spec tires.

The tyres aren't designed to be wild cards, they're designed to be difficult but NOT impossible to work with. By the end of this season I would put money on there being more than one team that have a complete handle on the tyres and can get good life and pace out of them at pretty much every circuit.

We saw that last year where to begin with everyone was bitching about the tyre life, but by the end of the year we were back to boring and predictable races as the teams had completely adapted to the tyres.

The reason for this is because, frankly, the regulations are lazy. The focus on cost-cutting and restricting aerodynamic research* has created a formula that produces virtually identical cars that make for dull racing. On top of that, whatever gray areas left behind with room for innovation are closed just as soon as they're exploited. This is short-sighted, and it ignores reality.

The rules limit innovation across the board but it's not about cost cutting or laziness. It's because otherwise the cars would be too fast - too fast to be safe and too fast for humans to be able to drive them. Can you imagine how fast the cars would be if there was no restriction on the aerodynamics, engine, gearbox, tyres and suspension at all?

I refuse to believe that a species responsible for putting a man on the moon - shut up, x - is incapable of devising sensible and innovative regulations for racing cars that embrace the realities of the times in which we live and take into consideration where we seem to be heading, all without forgetting where we've been. Though that particular question is perhaps too big for this thread, at some point F1's viability will rely upon the answer. It's certainly not as grandiose as it may seem.

That's what they're trying to do in 2014. By limiting fuel flow they can force teams to limit the drag of the cars which in turn will limit the downforce. If the lap times / cornering speed gets too high then they'll just reduce the fuel flow limit a little more. If they get this right then we should hopefully see a relaxation of many of the rules which in turn will lead to greater variety up and down the pit lane. I doubt this will actually lead to better racing though, more likely one or two teams will get it right and will dominate the series for several seasons at a time.

These tires are just another way of putting off that discussion. They're a distraction, an obfuscation of reality.

They're a stop gap whilst major changes are made to the rules. Or do you think these things can be changed over night?

And they're artificial as hell.

No more so than any other aspect of the series. If it's about drivers then anything other than a spec series is artificial, and if it's about the car then anything other than an unrestricted series is artificial.