I see what you mean, but since I started watching, Tyres have almost been THE most definitive thing. For a while, if you weren't on Bridgestones you had it. When Michellin got competitive, Bridgestone got their tyre banned. Then in 2005 when it was the tyre lasting a whole race, Michellin was the tyre to have. 2006, Michellin had a superb wet tyre with a unique design for expelling water; it dominated Hungary 2006; top 8 were Michellin weren't they?Ether wrote:It's not confusing on guessing who will win the race anyway... especially for us who knows a lot about things in F1 and about the tyres condition, or about the pace itself, saving tyres or something like that.
But for mere newbie, this F1 race could seems confusing though.. on 1 situation the pace of 1 driver could be faster to the opponent in front of him, then the opposite happens... In old days, this could be explained by fuel itself.. Tyres wasn't a big factor once back in bridgestone era! This is what I see actually.. every laps, as the fuel burnt out, the pace got quicker... and tyres would be a factor if it lasted out for a too long run.
But in nowadays f1, it's pretty much different. You could see a lot of gap between fastest pace on tyres and slowest of it. That depends solely on how the driver drive the car.. and how the car itself might perform. Two factors that I must say the biggest role for nowadays f1 is probably 1) Tyres, and 2) Track Circuits, then Cars, Drivers and Team strategy follows. What is the main subject and always been on discussion is tyres. This is not political, I think these tyres are problem to be solved. Why do you think all of fuss was about tyres? this is not conspiring or something like that, that means that tyres is playing to big a role for deciding who will win the race..
I agree about the statement of F1 has becoming an intellectual sports. Actually not everyone new in watching F1 really understands what they watch... What I watch when I was a newbie was simply who is racing who... Actually that already happen now, but understandably this doesn't need that big role of tyres! I think both DRS and Kers could already give us shows of overtaking which is quite good enough for newbies..
Back then in 2010, I remember a lot when DRS was not available, and what was developed was F-duct system in Mclaren which is the pioneer of DRS itself. But Kers is already available. The boring thing is simply not because of the tyres! but element to improve overtaking is too little.. no DRS, and then KERS had become an element to defend! So overtaking had become harder back then...
I think 2011 was a good example of great Pirelli era.. it's well suited, not that much discussion about tyres, yes they were talking about it, but I suggest it was just a transition when things are different, Bridgestone was a very strong and durable tyres, and now Pirelli is a butter cake and melted as it touch asphalt. Why don't they just keep when the situation as its good.. I think the board was politically wanted more racing as RBR was merely dominating through out the season.. But hey, that's not a good solution anyway! I don't think changing tyres could help the smaller or midfield teams to get better, they are just as confused as ever, yet they don't exactly know what happen to their cars! Look at williams, they did pretty well last year, and now.. what are they doing?? I believe it is because of tyres as well.. they could have developing a wrong program.. they might not focusing on cars pace, but tyres pace, just like what seb said..
Even Mercedes I believe is confused as ever! both their drivers were frustrated. We know how good both Rosberg and Hamilton, but they didn't even know why?! and the data itself doesn't really revealing why. And Alonso itself, even he won the race, he also concern about Pirelli's aggressive degradation. it's just too much! This is not political, all are critical on this, so it is a real situation guys! Tyres are critical now, it is!
What make matters worse now, I think, those drivers are not purely racing. They are told several times to save tyres, what might more becoming strange for newbie to hear is: "Do we want to fight?" what??? This is becoming more like a strategy battle, and not racing anymore. I don't care you guys want to see more overtaking or action or excitement in strategy, but I don't fancy that anymore. Actually, I was enjoying 2010 quite well, it was bridgestone, no DRS, only KERS. But I think Kers itself shouldn't been there. F1 was amazing, what make it not amazing was because there were only few drivers able to overtake in that situation.. Let's say: Hamilton, Alonso, and Kobayashi. they race like a pure racer. Nowadays driver are helped a lot by DRS and Kers, not only that, the tyres itself could be a tremendous help when they run on a very different strategy. This happened in old F1, but the factors was fuel. But let's remember, fuel itself don't play such a huge factor on overtaking! they could probably differ up to as much as 1 secs differences. But now, the different could be as much as 2secs, probably more! that's a lot for a tyres only situation!
Then you had Bridgestone with the soft white stripe and normal compound, gotta be on the right compound at the right time. Then we had the green stripe, Monaco 2009; Vettels set lasted just 8 or 9 laps and then he led a train Jarno Trulli would be proud of. It was about doing the most time on the durable and the least time but fastest and most effective time on the softer compound.
Its not different this year to me; you got one tyre more durable than the other, you have to maximise the tyre by adapting the car's set up or drivers driving style to not take out the tyre's life but extract performance. I recall 2008. lewis was accused of being far too aggressive with his tyres, always locking up when he was pushing like hell, didn't he have 2 or 3 punctures that year? Bridgestone were blamed for it.
Its all tough s***. everyone has the same tyres. if your car is so dependent on aero, then tough. you will eat the tyres. funny thing is;
2004 Spanish GP. Schumacher won; 1hr 27mins 32seconds. 66 laps.
2013 Spanish GP. Alonso won. 1hr 39mins 15 seconds
So we look at that. just under 12 minuets longer. Now, 2004 we had V10's and no chicane but grooved tyres. Rosbergs Pole time was 1min 20secs. Schumachers was 1min 15secs. 5 seconds a lap quicker with V10's and no chicane. 5 seconds time 66 is roughly 5 and a half minuets quicker. So basically, 6 minuets is added for the rule change of tyres. that's it. Best part of 4 laps longer say.
Are Pirelli's really that bad? Or is that teams are whinging because they want constant anomaly's that can just go into a race, know they can win and/or dominate and not bother? Where is the fun watching Formula 1 of old where we know who has the fastest car, they don't need to push that much because the status quo will show that Alonso cant catch vettel so he settles for 2nd place, Webber has kers problem so he settles for 3rd, blah blah blah.
The very fact that teams DONT have the safety of knowing every single thing before the race, knowing exactly how its going to pan, meaning its not a constant procession, is something im happy with, VERY happy with.
Hell, people say artificial racing with DRS and Tyres yet team orders isn't artificial racing, no? team orders aren't racing, theyre common sense and times but that's not racing in the slightest. I still don't remember a race where you can say every driver drove flat out 100% every lap to the finish line, because that's never happened at all.
I mean new people coming for pure racing, should watch British Touring Cars to be frank. Formula 1 has never been pure racing. Its those rose tints clouding everyone constantly. The times when secondary teams wave their parent suppliers through. Teammates let each other through so they don't hinder their opposite strategies. Teammates rarely race each other and when they do its discouraged by the team.
I just don't get the whole 'good old days of racing'. You mean, the 'good old days' of two drivers in two cars dominating, everyone left in the status quo for scraps with a reliance on mechanical failures to get out of position and gain something. Riveting racing, lights-to-flag racing, stopping a lap or two within each other for some fuel and resuming the same 2.5 second gaps, the same almost identical laptimes......
Unpredictability and change scares the shite out of formula 1. 16-18inch tyres had them in uproar for gods sake. If they cant let their computer run a race and tell them when to stop, theyre scared out their wits.
Another thing, on about 'driving to a laptime'. Please tell me what drivers in the lead do. Look at Spain last year, Alonso stopped chasing maldanado, just backed off. Wasn't going to catch him so just come home second. So many races where drivers don't bother overtaking because of risk and just settle for points. Is that racing too, or is that racing to a delta; delta of bagging the points? Exactly.
