2013 Monaco Grand Prix

[n_anirudh]

In terms of them being "secured" as in "bolted down" or "fastened down" - I can safely tell people that TecPro is pulled down by sheer force of gravity. Lol.

They are secured by nylon straps between each piece..but nothing more as the crash

[raymondu999]

Yes they're fastened TOGETHER - but not fastened DOWN.

[Kiril Varbanov]

"Normally, I'm the first person to defend F1" - so do I, it's my second job, but Monaco was on the extreme end.
Coulthard: "It was rubbish" - http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/formula1/22678909

+1 from me and once again, I don't force anyone into such opinion.

[SectorOne]

It´s a bit like being a parent and opening the door to the kids room and seeing all hell have broken loose in there.
The living room with adults was the front runners and the kids room was the midfield.

Looked like a demolition derby more then a proper race. And Coulthard´s words "rubbish" fit in quite nicely.

[Vasconia]

"Normally, I'm the first person to defend F1" - so do I, it's my second job, but Monaco was on the extreme end.
Coulthard: "It was rubbish" - http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/formula1/22678909

+1 from me and once again, I don't force anyone into such opinion.

Sadly I agree, the first half of the race was a complete lost of time, but I liked the second half perhaps because Sutil and Perez were bringing some brightness and chaos.

[beelsebob]

Yep, sadly, I have to say, it's tipped too far towards tyres that self destruct now.

[Richard]

I'd say the layout of the track was the problem because the cars that could race were stuck behind cars that couldn't. So all teams had to switch to the same strategy as Merc. If we'd had an open track then the hares could race ahead with more pitstops.

Out of interest, have any teams said they were planning to run a faster pace with more stops?

[Racer X]

I'd say the layout of the track was the problem because the cars that could race were stuck behind cars that couldn't. So all teams had to switch to the same strategy as Merc. If we'd had an open track then the hares could race ahead with more pitstops.

Out of interest, have any teams said they were planning to run a faster pace with more stops?

I think this would be smarter finding that Blance between speed and stops now. With all teams doing this Pireli will bleed money by having to make alot more tires. Oh well.

[turbof1]

I'd say the layout of the track was the problem because the cars that could race were stuck behind cars that couldn't. So all teams had to switch to the same strategy as Merc. If we'd had an open track then the hares could race ahead with more pitstops.

Out of interest, have any teams said they were planning to run a faster pace with more stops?

I think this would be smarter finding that Blance between speed and stops now. With all teams doing this Pireli will bleed money by having to make alot more tires. Oh well.

Pirelli isn't going to spend more or less due more or less pitstops. They have to bring each GP a specific amount of tyres with them for each team. Unused tyres have to be, by rule, destroyed after the weekend.

[Gridlock]

Just watched those Kimi videos, had missed them on Sky. There's a man in a hurry.

Outbraking round the outside on St Devote...

[jamsbong]

I think those barriers did well saving lives. Massa and Maldonado will thank them for sure. I'm sure they will add more straps next year to tighten the swimming pool corners.

Regarding Coulthard's 'rubbish' comment. I have been critical of Pirelli tires since Malaysian GP 2013. I felt last year's trickery tires were already on the borderline of artificial (and I was critical of that as well).
Now, I see that all the pundits and commentators finally had enough of tire management. We WANT A RACE!!! not TIRE Management....
I feel much more relaxed now, because I see the momentum gathering to change the faux grip tires.

[Cam]

I'd say the layout of the track was the problem because the cars that could race were stuck behind cars that couldn't. So all teams had to switch to the same strategy as Merc. If we'd had an open track then the hares could race ahead with more pitstops.

Out of interest, have any teams said they were planning to run a faster pace with more stops?

When you're pushing at 100% and more, mistakes happen, regardless of the track. This is the only excuse I give Monaco for existing. It's so tight, a small slip under huge pressure can mean the end. It's a different kind of race. When cars are cruising around, you remove that element. You end up with:

"Normally, I'm the first person to defend F1" - so do I, it's my second job, but Monaco was on the extreme end.
Coulthard: "It was rubbish" - http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/formula1/22678909

+1 from me and once again, I don't force anyone into such opinion.

Nico was never under pressure, none of the top 4 or 5 were. They were all too scared to get close.

[SiLo]

I think they aren't strapped down for a reason, they are meant to absorb as much energy as possible and strapping them down will reduce the amount of forces they can safely absorb from a crash. It's just unfortunate that they got pulled off the barrier the way they did, or maybe they were strapped in but the straps snapped? Who knows.

[FrukostScones]

Montaconal

[RubberSoul]

After having been lurking here for some time, I finally decided to join the forum.

I have been watching F1 races from the days of Keijo (Keke) Rosberg , so it was nice to see Nico winning in Monaco.
As many times earlier, it was quite boring, unless you get excited about the accidents, which I don't. After the qualifying there is usually little to see, or real racing, since overtaking is virtually impossible. However, Monaco used not to be the only place where processional races were the norm earlier, when the cars were first put in the order of speed in qualifying and after that there was no real racing because the slower cars had no hope of catching up the faster ones, let alone overtaking them. So I don't really long after the so called "flat-out" races where in practice very little racing took place.

Actually, I think that there is a very fundamental problem in the “qualifying and racing after that” -process in motor sport, which needs to have some solution in order to have real racing with overtakes in the race. One solution is that the car requirements for the fast qualifying lap and the longer racing distance are somewhat different. Setting up the car then becomes an optimization problem. However, if overtaking is not possible in the race, this doesn’t solve the problem (as seen in Monaco). I believe also that it is good for the F1 if the drivers can have more influence on the result, including using their brains. From that point of view next year's F1 cars look promising due to the more powerful KERS/TERS and the much longer allowed usage of those per lap.

IMO the problem with the current F1 cars is that the aerodynamics plays too big a role. Therefore, it is very difficult to overtake a car in front of you because of the "dirty" air left behind by it. To overcome this and to have some show aka race, the DRS and KERS have been introduced. The fast degrading Pirelli tires were introduced for the same purpose this year. I don't have a lot to say against these "quick fixes" for the real problem, (fixes) which some people like to call "artificial". Without these, the millions of ordinary fans, TV viewers and spectators would be bored to death watching the races where nothing would really happen, because overtaking would be virtually impossible on most tracks. Bernie does understand that the millions of people are the important ones, because the sponsors want to get return for their money. Boring races would cause declining numbers of TV viewers and spectators, the result being less sponsor money and F1 could be heading for a death spiral as a result. Already now the smaller teams seem to be in big financial problems due to the rising costs next year and beyond. The current economic downturn doesn't help either.

However,this time there were also some quite nice overtakes in Monaco and one not so nice attempt which ended poorly for both the attempter and the car in front of him. I think you know what I mean, since there have been more than 10 pages arguments about it.

Anyway, it is a bit puzzling that even the experts, like former F1 drivers, have different opinions about the Kimi vs. Perez case, which is of course the one I'm talking about.

So it must be the case that we human beings tend to see what we want to see, including the experts, see the following examples of this.

I happened to read about the following case that occurred in the UK. A female police officer was convicted because she was found to have lied in court. This was because her fingerprints were found on something that was in the room where the original crime had taken place. However, she denied having touched anything in the room or even ever been there.
She then had to have the fingerprints reanalyzed by some US experts, who found out that the fingerprints on the item in question did not belong to her. After that several other experts confirmed that this was really the case and that the original expert had made an error in interpreting the fingerprints.

The story in the newspaper then continued by telling that errors have also occurred in DNA testing. The DNA test itself is very accurate, but the error can be made by the expert interpreting the result. Furthermore, errors are more likely if the expert knows that he is comparing the sample with the main suspect one's DNA sample.

So the conclusion is that human beings make errors in the interpretation and more errors are made if we have some initial assumption that we want to confirm by the test. Even if the test would be 100% accurate, there will always be a person who will interpret the result and who can make an error. Well, that is quite obvious in hindsight, but we tend to forget that.

The F1 rules are of course much more complicated compared to the above mentioned tests and thus leave more room for interpretation. And then there are of course the numerous other types of errors that we "armchair experts" can make in the argumentation.