2013 Bahrain GP - Sakhir

[Jonnycraig]

Bets on Grosjean crashing at the first corner? He's kept out of trouble recently so he's due a little first lap collision.

It's been 8 races so not a great bet.

At last someone speaking about the unfair it would be if Pirelli changes the tyres to harder compound
as some teams are asking.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/formula1/22204087

That's all a matter of opinion. In my opinion its a pretty sad state of affairs when the best car is being beaten by lesser cars due to the fact the tyres can't handle the amount of downforce they have engineered for themselves. F1 is supposed to be the pinnacle of engineering skill and innovation and its embarrasing in my opinion to have skill and innovation hampered by the notion that its 'not fair' that Red Bulls car is too good. Of course others will have their own opinions which is fine, cant help thinking if it was Ferrari & Mercedes for example being hampered and RB coasting, the calls for change would be deafening.

[carvetia]

F1 is supposed to be the pinnacle of engineering skill and innovation and its embarrasing in my opinion to have skill and innovation hampered by the notion that its 'not fair' that Red Bulls car is too good.

F1 hasn't been a pinnacle of engineering skill and innovation since they had to start banning the likes of ground-effects and speccing engines due to the limitations of human ability and survivability. When F1 began, the speed of the car was limited by the available technology and human ingenuity, but this has not been the case for a very long time. It has been artificially constrained for decades and forever will be; these tyres are just another manifestation of that.

In my opinion they're actually the best constraint we've had from an entertainment point of view. In fact, if the tyres were even less grippy and predictable, the detrimental effect it has on the car's overall performance would let us loosen regulations again in other areas.

[SiLo]

I like the tyres they've brought with them this year, although when they last just six laps it can look a bit silly. With the advent of drs I feel such tyres are not as necessary as they may have been in the past. If the tyres were more durable you might see someone tucked up behind another for longer pushing for a mistake, instead of sitting around a second behind looking after the black stuff.

[zeph]

In my opinion its a pretty sad state of affairs when the best car is being beaten by lesser cars due to the fact the tyres can't handle the amount of downforce they have engineered for themselves. F1 is supposed to be the pinnacle of engineering skill and innovation and its embarrasing in my opinion to have skill and innovation hampered by the notion that its 'not fair' that Red Bulls car is too good. Of course others will have their own opinions which is fine, cant help thinking if it was Ferrari & Mercedes for example being hampered and RB coasting, the calls for change would be deafening.

Did you read the article? That is not what Anderson is saying at all.

So if Pirelli go off and do a different tyre, it will be playing into the hands of some teams and not all.

Is that right? I don't think so because when you introduce a tyre at the beginning of the year the challenge for the teams is to pick up that performance and re-hash their car to suit the rubber. The tyre company should not pander to an individual team that has a bit of a negative. And don't forget that all the teams had some experience on these 2013 tyres in Friday practice in Brazil at the end of last season and all pronounced themselves happy.

What is more, RBR is not exactly at a disadvantage. They took the double in Malaysia, for crying out loud...

And Anderson explains pretty well why they did not dominate in China.


FWIW, I think the tires suck, but they are not the only thing that sucks about F1 right now.

[stefan_]

● Qualifying radio communications

[Jonnycraig]

Did you read the article? That is not what Anderson is saying at all.

Yes, and his opinion of what is wrong differs with what was reported by AMuS (who first reported the issues) as the concern of Red Bull & Mercedes. Added to that, his notion that Vettels driving style is causing problems then raises the question of why Webber, Hamilton & Rosberg are struggling. Webber has a vastly different driving style to Vettel, being infact the complete opposite of what he suggests the issue is, and yet has been wearing his tyres out even quicker than Vettel.

It certainly seems strange that the two teams with the most downforce are struggling when the answer is apparently just to not drive like Vettel.

http://www.auto-motor-und-sport.de/form ... 01436.html

The AMuS article should you be interested. Claims supposedly from RB & Merc that the new construction with steel ring causes more wear the more downforce you have.

What is more, RBR is not exactly at a disadvantage. They took the double in Malaysia, for crying out loud...

Aided by the fact Alonso failed to finish and Raikonnen was nowhere on the intermediates.

[iotar__]

Bets on Grosjean crashing at the first corner? He's kept out of trouble recently so he's due a little first lap collision.

It's been 8 races so not a great bet.

At last someone speaking about the unfair it would be if Pirelli changes the tyres to harder compound
as some teams are asking.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/formula1/22204087

That's all a matter of opinion. In my opinion its a pretty sad state of affairs when the best car is being beaten by lesser cars due to the fact the tyres can't handle the amount of downforce they have engineered for themselves. F1 is supposed to be the pinnacle of engineering skill and innovation and its embarrasing in my opinion to have skill and innovation hampered by the notion that its 'not fair' that Red Bulls car is too good. Of course others will have their own opinions which is fine, cant help thinking if it was Ferrari & Mercedes for example being hampered and RB coasting, the calls for change would be deafening.

Not this "best car" nonsense again. In which alternative universe is RB faster and on which made up theoretical tyres? Are other cars included in this made up comparison? Everyone knew in which direction tyre development went, everyone had the "same" (richer teams better of course) chance.

Last year it was all a "lottery" now it's "tyre limiting speed" but RB's saying something to explain their "struggles" does not make it automatically true. Speaking of a "lottery", interesting that last year's tyre management advantage by Lotus which was all thanks to blind chance, their affinity with high temperatures and a very narrow optimal operating window (not present now) has transferred to this season. Even more remarkable is the fact that some engineering solution, namely best interlinked suspension, is responsible for that. [Oversimplifying and in a popular belief, I have no clue if it's true, but at least it can't be a lottery now, can it?]

I agree about this alternative scenario where Ferrari are calling for tyre change and RB are cruising but it only makes point about tyre whining being driven by particular interests and not care for the sport valid. That's why tyre discussion has to be separated from one particular season and one particular team's point of view. Completely separated (between the seasons) but it's not going to happen in F1. Problem is teams like Red Bull think that after making a deal with Ecclestone they can do and expect everything they want.

[Donuts]

Shame that Lotus "messed up" when it comes to Grosjean(I bet he would have outqualified his team mate). Raikkonen messed up like many times before. James Allen on F1:

http://www.jamesallenonf1.com/2013/04/t ... sing-pace/

Agreed, James.

[Jonnycraig]

Not this "best car" nonsense again. In which alternative universe is RB faster and on which made up theoretical tyres? Are other cars included in this made up comparison? Everyone knew in which direction tyre development went, everyone had the "same" (richer teams better of course) chance.

1 second faster than Ferrari in Melbourne and 1.5 seconds faster than Lotus in qualifying.

When they reigned in the one lap pace and looked for race pace in Malaysia they were 1.1 seconds faster than Ferrari in qualifying.

Ted Kravitz has been commenting since Australia on the expectation in the paddock that once everyone gets the tyres sorted RB will run away with it.

There can be little doubt that RB have by far the fastest car on the grid on one lap pace.

With regards everyone knowing what was coming, they got 90 minutes running in Brazil with a prototype compound and will then have been sent parameters by Pirelli to work around. If what AMuS claim is true and the steel band is causing trouble for cars with more downforce and the teams knew this in advance then clearly they wouldve attempted to design their cars around it.

I agree about this alternative scenario where Ferrari are calling for tyre change and RB are cruising but it only makes point about tyre whining being driven by particular interests and not care for the sport valid. That's why tyre discussion has to be separated from one particular season and one particular team's point of view. Completely separated (between the seasons) but it's not going to happen in F1. Problem is teams like Red Bull think that after making a deal with Ecclestone they can do and expect everything they want.

That then leads into the point above, people dont feel that issues with the tyres should be sorted because they dont want RB to walk away with the title. As claimed by several journalists, more than 1 team have worries about the construction of the tyres and want Pirelli to go back one notch - ie 2013 medium = 2012 medium rather than 2013 medium = 2012 soft.

[cooken]

That's all a matter of opinion. In my opinion its a pretty sad state of affairs when the best car is being beaten by lesser cars due to the fact the tyres can't handle the amount of downforce they have engineered for themselves. F1 is supposed to be the pinnacle of engineering skill and innovation and its embarrasing in my opinion to have skill and innovation hampered by the notion that its 'not fair' that Red Bulls car is too good. Of course others will have their own opinions which is fine, cant help thinking if it was Ferrari & Mercedes for example being hampered and RB coasting, the calls for change would be deafening.

If the best cars are being beaten, are they really the best cars then?
If the engineers are highly skilled, and are top notch innovators, why don't they just improve their design to best suit the current tyre behaviour?

To say that the RB is the best car because it has most downforce or "raw pace" or whatever you want to call it (too good) is simplifying a complex matter based on one narrow perspective.

PS - I don't much like the tyres either and IMO there is a better solution out there.

[BoBee]

Bets on Grosjean crashing at the first corner? He's kept out of trouble recently so he's due a little first lap collision.

It's been 8 races so not a great bet.

At last someone speaking about the unfair it would be if Pirelli changes the tyres to harder compound
as some teams are asking.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/formula1/22204087

That's all a matter of opinion. In my opinion its a pretty sad state of affairs when the best car is being beaten by lesser cars due to the fact the tyres can't handle the amount of downforce they have engineered for themselves. F1 is supposed to be the pinnacle of engineering skill and innovation and its embarrasing in my opinion to have skill and innovation hampered by the notion that its 'not fair' that Red Bulls car is too good. Of course others will have their own opinions which is fine, cant help thinking if it was Ferrari & Mercedes for example being hampered and RB coasting, the calls for change would be deafening.

Not this "best car" nonsense again. In which alternative universe is RB faster and on which made up theoretical tyres? Are other cars included in this made up comparison? Everyone knew in which direction tyre development went, everyone had the "same" (richer teams better of course) chance.

Last year it was all a "lottery" now it's "tyre limiting speed" but RB's saying something to explain their "struggles" does not make it automatically true. Speaking of a "lottery", interesting that last year's tyre management advantage by Lotus which was all thanks to blind chance, their affinity with high temperatures and a very narrow optimal operating window (not present now) has transferred to this season. Even more remarkable is the fact that some engineering solution, namely best interlinked suspension, is responsible for that. [Oversimplifying and in a popular belief, I have no clue if it's true, but at least it can't be a lottery now, can it?]

I agree about this alternative scenario where Ferrari are calling for tyre change and RB are cruising but it only makes point about tyre whining being driven by particular interests and not care for the sport valid. That's why tyre discussion has to be separated from one particular season and one particular team's point of view. Completely separated (between the seasons) but it's not going to happen in F1. Problem is teams like Red Bull think that after making a deal with Ecclestone they can do and expect everything they want.

+1 =D> I couldnt describe it any better than you mate...

[Jonnycraig]

If the best cars are being beaten, are they really the best cars then?
If the engineers are highly skilled, and are top notch innovators, why don't they just improve their design to best suit the current tyre behaviour?

To say that the RB is the best car because it has most downforce or "raw pace" or whatever you want to call it (too good) is simplifying a complex matter based on one narrow perspective.

PS - I don't much like the tyres either and IMO there is a better solution out there.

If the Government decided to limit all Lamborghini's & Ferrari's to 30mph on public roads and allow all Kia Cee'ds to go 70mph, the Ferrari & Lamborghini would still be clearly better cars when not disadvantaged through no fault of their own.

With regards engineers, they clearly are having to tinker their design to suit the current tyres with them going from 1 second a lap faster in Malaysia to 2 tenths slower in Bahrain, a track that couldnt be more suited traditionally to RB and which Vettel has been on pole for the last 2 visits.

[beelsebob]

If the best cars are being beaten, are they really the best cars then?
If the engineers are highly skilled, and are top notch innovators, why don't they just improve their design to best suit the current tyre behaviour?

To say that the RB is the best car because it has most downforce or "raw pace" or whatever you want to call it (too good) is simplifying a complex matter based on one narrow perspective.

PS - I don't much like the tyres either and IMO there is a better solution out there.

If the Government decided to limit all Lamborghini's & Ferrari's to 30mph on public roads and allow all Kia Cee'ds to go 70mph, the Ferrari & Lamborghini would still be clearly better cars when not disadvantaged through no fault of their own.

If on the other hand Ferrari and Lamborghini decided to design their cars with rubbish suspension, because it meant they could have better aerodynamics, and as a result couldn't do more than 30mph, that would be their fault, and make their car clearly not the best

[cooken]

If the Government decided to limit all Lamborghini's & Ferrari's to 30mph on public roads and allow all Kia Cee'ds to go 70mph, the Ferrari & Lamborghini would still be clearly better cars when not disadvantaged through no fault of their own.

I hardly feel that's a reasonable comparison. Nobody has specifically targeted the RB or any car for that matter and chosen to impose a limit on their car. As previously stated, all cars were designed based on the same input requirements, of which tyres were inlcuded (and are evidently somewhat important).

With regards engineers, they clearly are having to tinker their design to suit the current tyres with them going from 1 second a lap faster in Malaysia to 2 tenths slower in Bahrain, a track that couldnt be more suited traditionally to RB and which Vettel has been on pole for the last 2 visits.

Yes...this is a good thing. Not necessarily because it is RB/Vettel, but because it is a new challenge and ALL teams are having to work for each and every result.

[Mika1]

Rosberg needs to survive the first stint. Then he will win this race.