Gran Premio de España 2013

Locked

Who will win the Spanish Grand Prix?

Sebastian Vettel
5
23%
Kimi Raikkonen
4
18%
Lewis Hamilton
3
14%
Fernando Alonso
5
23%
Mark Webber
2
9%
Felipe Massa
1
5%
Romain Grosjean
0
No votes
Paul di Resta
0
No votes
Nico Rosberg
0
No votes
Jenson Button
1
5%
Sergio Perez
1
5%
Other
0
No votes
 
Total votes: 22

dacer
Donator
Donator
Posts: 590
Joined: 20 Jun 2007, 15:42
Location: Almeria, Spain

Re: Gran Premio de España 2013

Post by dacer » 14 May 2013, 08:59

phil1993 wrote:Yes.

Massa was beaten by Alonso. He did a good job to go from 9th to 3rd, but 8/10 is a good mark.

Vettel's start was good but ultimately the RB9 wasn't competitive. 4th was the best result, hence 8/10

Webber deserves one less because he was a position behind and it was his own fault he made a poor start.

Most publications I've read have given very similar marks...
Everyone has his own opinion, and all one are as valid as any other, of course.

Mine, is that Vettel loose position on a track that is very difficult to overtake. Not sure now (still didn't watch full race), but was the only on race overtake of top driver? (kimi to vettel). If we don't take care of Mercedes. He was the only one unable to keep his position. For me, Vettel deserve the worst value of top drivers, even worse that Hamilton or Rosberg, too penalized of their car.

Massa beaten by Alonso?, yes, but 9 to 3 on Montmelo (like Monaco) is an awesome result. And Alonso did an stellar job, no one can beat him this race.

Sl2

User avatar
mikhailv
F1 Routinier
F1 Routinier
Posts: 4110
Joined: 31 Mar 2008, 15:27
Location: Mansfield, Nottinghamshire

Re: Gran Premio de España 2013

Post by mikhailv » 14 May 2013, 09:29

dacer wrote:
phil1993 wrote:Yes.

Massa was beaten by Alonso. He did a good job to go from 9th to 3rd, but 8/10 is a good mark.

Vettel's start was good but ultimately the RB9 wasn't competitive. 4th was the best result, hence 8/10

Webber deserves one less because he was a position behind and it was his own fault he made a poor start.

Most publications I've read have given very similar marks...
Everyone has his own opinion, and all one are as valid as any other, of course.

Mine, is that Vettel loose position on a track that is very difficult to overtake. Not sure now (still didn't watch full race), but was the only on race overtake of top driver? (kimi to vettel). If we don't take care of Mercedes. He was the only one unable to keep his position. For me, Vettel deserve the worst value of top drivers, even worse that Hamilton or Rosberg, too penalized of their car.

Massa beaten by Alonso?, yes, but 9 to 3 on Montmelo (like Monaco) is an awesome result. And Alonso did an stellar job, no one can beat him this race.

Sl2
Am I the only one massively disapointed with Massa? I mean wahey he gets a podium, but he couldnt make the tyres last, he was blitzing one lap then suffered the next, he had a car capable of beating Kimi but didn't, got a penalty which was stupid but still got a penalty and his race start got him upto his qualifying position. I mean, It shouldve been a Ferrari 1-2. Massa was about 3 seconds behind Alonso at one point, where did he lose over 16 seconds?

User avatar
phil1993
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 25503
Joined: 29 Sep 2007, 17:32
Contact:

Re: Gran Premio de España 2013

Post by phil1993 » 14 May 2013, 10:25

Tyres to be tweaked
http://www.f1zone.net/news/pirelli-to-t ... ada/18919/

A good move. 2/3 stops is ideal and it isn't a fundamental change.

User avatar
Eric_Cartman
F1 Rookie
F1 Rookie
Posts: 807
Joined: 23 Aug 2009, 21:52
Location: road to wembley

Re: Gran Premio de España 2013

Post by Eric_Cartman » 14 May 2013, 10:33

dacer wrote:
phil1993 wrote:Yes.

Massa was beaten by Alonso. He did a good job to go from 9th to 3rd, but 8/10 is a good mark.

Vettel's start was good but ultimately the RB9 wasn't competitive. 4th was the best result, hence 8/10

Webber deserves one less because he was a position behind and it was his own fault he made a poor start.

Most publications I've read have given very similar marks...
Everyone has his own opinion, and all one are as valid as any other, of course.

Mine, is that Vettel loose position on a track that is very difficult to overtake. Not sure now (still didn't watch full race), but was the only on race overtake of top driver? (kimi to vettel). If we don't take care of Mercedes. He was the only one unable to keep his position. For me, Vettel deserve the worst value of top drivers, even worse that Hamilton or Rosberg, too penalized of their car.

Massa beaten by Alonso?, yes, but 9 to 3 on Montmelo (like Monaco) is an awesome result. And Alonso did an stellar job, no one can beat him this race.

Sl2
what? Vettel was never able to challenge Raikkonen as the Lotus was massively faster than the Red Bull in the race. And it's not impressive to gain 6 positions at Barcelona with the tyre situation we have in 2013. I addition the Ferrari was the fastest car together with Lotus. Those two were miles ahead in terms of race-pace compared to Red Bull. So P4 was the MAXIMUM Vettel could achieve.
FC BAYERN 7 - BARCELONA 0

dacer
Donator
Donator
Posts: 590
Joined: 20 Jun 2007, 15:42
Location: Almeria, Spain

Re: Gran Premio de España 2013

Post by dacer » 14 May 2013, 12:29

Eric_Cartman wrote:what? Vettel was never able to challenge Raikkonen as the Lotus was massively faster than the Red Bull in the race. And it's not impressive to gain 6 positions at Barcelona with the tyre situation we have in 2013. I addition the Ferrari was the fastest car together with Lotus. Those two were miles ahead in terms of race-pace compared to Red Bull. So P4 was the MAXIMUM Vettel could achieve.
Vettel grid 3. Kimi grid 4. Seems Vettel car was faster than Kimi.

And tyre?, that are excuses!!!. Vettel/RBR managed tyres very very bad. They must did his second pit stop a lot of laps before they did. That were their fail, and complain about it is kidding.

Barcelona, as Monaco, it's very difficult to gain any position on race..

Sl2

User avatar
mikhailv
F1 Routinier
F1 Routinier
Posts: 4110
Joined: 31 Mar 2008, 15:27
Location: Mansfield, Nottinghamshire

Re: Gran Premio de España 2013

Post by mikhailv » 14 May 2013, 13:00

RBR and Mercedes are always great in qualifying this year; they can do brilliant lap times on one lap. problem is they cant make the tyres last due to the design of the car.

I do reckon RBR did poor with Vettel because they tried to do a 3 stop then halfway through decided to do a 4 stop. They were too bothered about going slow enough to do 3 stops and make the tyres last longer as opposed to going fast enough to do a 4 stop. Thats the problem RBR have; they and many others bar Lotus and Ferrari focus on going as steady as possible to do less stops where as the other go flat out to do more stops.

User avatar
Suntrek
GP2 Driver
GP2 Driver
Posts: 498
Joined: 30 Jul 2007, 23:32
Location: Sweden

Re: Gran Premio de España 2013

Post by Suntrek » 14 May 2013, 13:30

mikhailv wrote:
dacer wrote:
phil1993 wrote:Yes.

Massa was beaten by Alonso. He did a good job to go from 9th to 3rd, but 8/10 is a good mark.

Vettel's start was good but ultimately the RB9 wasn't competitive. 4th was the best result, hence 8/10

Webber deserves one less because he was a position behind and it was his own fault he made a poor start.

Most publications I've read have given very similar marks...
Everyone has his own opinion, and all one are as valid as any other, of course.

Mine, is that Vettel loose position on a track that is very difficult to overtake. Not sure now (still didn't watch full race), but was the only on race overtake of top driver? (kimi to vettel). If we don't take care of Mercedes. He was the only one unable to keep his position. For me, Vettel deserve the worst value of top drivers, even worse that Hamilton or Rosberg, too penalized of their car.

Massa beaten by Alonso?, yes, but 9 to 3 on Montmelo (like Monaco) is an awesome result. And Alonso did an stellar job, no one can beat him this race.

Sl2
Am I the only one massively disapointed with Massa? I mean wahey he gets a podium, but he couldnt make the tyres last, he was blitzing one lap then suffered the next, he had a car capable of beating Kimi but didn't, got a penalty which was stupid but still got a penalty and his race start got him upto his qualifying position. I mean, It shouldve been a Ferrari 1-2. Massa was about 3 seconds behind Alonso at one point, where did he lose over 16 seconds?
Probably.

I'd say Massa did a great job here, but in terms of tyre management you can never compete him with Alonso. Massa has records from day 1 in his F1 career of smoking up tyres. He's always done that and I'll suspect he'll continue to do so. That said. he did extremely well at the start here and that is was brought him to his final position.
Be who you are and say what you feel because those who mind don't matter and those who matter don't mind.

User avatar
tderias
PL Manager
PL Manager
Posts: 1696
Joined: 06 Jun 2011, 14:59

Re: Gran Premio de España 2013

Post by tderias » 14 May 2013, 13:32

Massa did very well, and in the case of Vettel it was his strategy that ruined his race because Mark committed to the 4 stopper and finished not far adrift.

User avatar
phil1993
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 25503
Joined: 29 Sep 2007, 17:32
Contact:

Re: Gran Premio de España 2013

Post by phil1993 » 14 May 2013, 13:44

I know there's a GP2 thread but no-one reads it. So here's a rant...
http://www.f1zone.net/news/has-gp2-miss ... our/18923/

rising
car driver
car driver
Posts: 5
Joined: 06 Mar 2012, 13:46

Re: Gran Premio de España 2013

Post by rising » 14 May 2013, 13:49

mikhailv wrote:
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!
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?

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.
In 2004 they had refueling as well which mean cars didn't need to carry full load of fuel at the start which made them faster so if you take into account aswell there is rarely much difference

Well I though Spain 4 stop was bit to much it would better if there were 2 stopping and 3 stopping strategies but the fact is without this tire changes and all it will be just precession with fastest car winning it will boring atleast tires will make team think about something and make teams strategies and gives some unpredictability and I don't just agree with idea that fastest car should always win driving is not just about driving fast it much more it adopting to changes

If I can give examples all buses or trucks that run in Europe are not suitable to Indian roads companies like Volvo had made some changes so even I reality you have to adopt

User avatar
Vlad-SRB
F1 Rookie
F1 Rookie
Posts: 531
Joined: 02 Dec 2012, 23:06

Re: Gran Premio de España 2013

Post by Vlad-SRB » 14 May 2013, 13:53

mikhailv wrote:
Vlad-SRB wrote:Tyres influence racing just too much. Today's race was the best proof of that. This is not the F1 I want to see.

Because it dont suit your team :zz:

Tell me a season where tyres were never important regarding which manufacturer, which wet tyre, which compound worked better, why a team couldnt switch a tyre on.

I was most gutted about Mercedes, to be honest. It was really a bad thing to see. And yes, I still don't change my opinion. tyres are just too influential in this part of the season. I hope they'll change it.
Image

Human at Sight,
Monster at Heart!

User avatar
mikhailv
F1 Routinier
F1 Routinier
Posts: 4110
Joined: 31 Mar 2008, 15:27
Location: Mansfield, Nottinghamshire

Re: Gran Premio de España 2013

Post by mikhailv » 14 May 2013, 14:07

Vlad-SRB wrote:
mikhailv wrote:
Vlad-SRB wrote:Tyres influence racing just too much. Today's race was the best proof of that. This is not the F1 I want to see.

Because it dont suit your team :zz:

Tell me a season where tyres were never important regarding which manufacturer, which wet tyre, which compound worked better, why a team couldnt switch a tyre on.

I was most gutted about Mercedes, to be honest. It was really a bad thing to see. And yes, I still don't change my opinion. tyres are just too influential in this part of the season. I hope they'll change it.
But tyres have always been influential. Always in Formula 1. On the right tyre? Make the tyre last? What stint do you use the tyre? How do I drive on the out lap? How do maintain a relative pace? Which tyre manufacturer do I go with? Do I design my car around a harder bridgestone or do I go for a softer Michelin which likes understeer?

Tyres have ALWAYS been heavily influential in Formula 1. ALWAYS. Anyone who says, like yourself, that tyres are too influential is bias and blind to the past 13 years minimum. Were you moaning about Bridgestone having superiority by getting tyres specifically for Ferrari, the rest of the bridgestone users being given secondary tyres? Alternatively, did you moan about Michelin being better in 2005 and 2006?

Zero equality and parity between teams there. Tyres influenced whether you even stood a chance of fighting for the WDC let alone whether you would get THE best tyres from that manufacturer.

Its people whinging because their team is losing. Simple as. I didn't berate Pirelli because Ferrari couldn't work the hard tyres in 2011. Its down to the design of the car. What did Ferrari do? Hire Hamashima. Solved their problems.

Formula 1 is about building a race winning car. That means a car that can use its tyres, its engine, its mechanical grip to maximum effect. If the tyres last all race; then its about making an endurance F1 car. If the tyres don't last all race, its about a car which can extract the performance without punishing the rubber.

It used to be about who could nail the manufacturer of tyres best. I remember 2006; Button still struggled with the front right warming up. What did they do? Adapt the suspension, he changed how he warmed the tyres up. Job done.

RBR's problem is they cannot adapt, Newey builds a downforce rocket and is succeptable to straightline speed and tyre degredation. Whats the difference between that and a car which is succeptable to mechanical failures? NONE. Its upto the team to sort its own problems out.

What do RBR want? To get more bhp from the Renault engine and the tyres durable so it suits THEM. How about building and adapting your car to suit the equipment universally given to all?

User avatar
mikhailv
F1 Routinier
F1 Routinier
Posts: 4110
Joined: 31 Mar 2008, 15:27
Location: Mansfield, Nottinghamshire

Re: Gran Premio de España 2013

Post by mikhailv » 14 May 2013, 14:14

rising wrote:
mikhailv wrote:
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!
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?

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.
In 2004 they had refueling as well which mean cars didn't need to carry full load of fuel at the start which made them faster so if you take into account aswell there is rarely much difference

Well I though Spain 4 stop was bit to much it would better if there were 2 stopping and 3 stopping strategies but the fact is without this tire changes and all it will be just precession with fastest car winning it will boring atleast tires will make team think about something and make teams strategies and gives some unpredictability and I don't just agree with idea that fastest car should always win driving is not just about driving fast it much more it adopting to changes

If I can give examples all buses or trucks that run in Europe are not suitable to Indian roads companies like Volvo had made some changes so even I reality you have to adopt
Exactly. Its adaptability. Ferrari struggled with Hard compounds, hired Hamashima from bridgestone, problem solved. If you've got a fast car but reliability is costing you, you fix your reliability. If your overheating the tyres, you change your suspension and air flow. If your getting too much understeer, you try to get more downforce to the car, change wing levels, change wings. Brakes overheating? Don't be so aggressive, change the brake bias.

Turbos, Tyres, engines, gearboxes. They all used to be crucial factors for over 5 years. You nursed components in your car to get to the finish. Formula 1 is about crossing the line first. You don't have to be fastest in a single lap, you need to be able to extract the maximum performance from your engine, gearbox and tyres. Make sure you have the best car which can counter full fuel load and running light. Ultimate laptime on Saturday doesn't mean anything on Sunday; Alonso was slow in sector 3, but in the race he clawed a hell of a lot back even though he qualified 5th. Why? Focused on the race.

No car can do pole laps all race. Its about consistently extracting the best from the equipment you have. Going fastest doesn't win you a championship unless your consistently fastest and doing a better job with the equipment you have.

User avatar
Suntrek
GP2 Driver
GP2 Driver
Posts: 498
Joined: 30 Jul 2007, 23:32
Location: Sweden

Re: Gran Premio de España 2013

Post by Suntrek » 14 May 2013, 14:51

mikhailv wrote:
Vlad-SRB wrote:
mikhailv wrote:
Vlad-SRB wrote:Tyres influence racing just too much. Today's race was the best proof of that. This is not the F1 I want to see.

Because it dont suit your team :zz:

Tell me a season where tyres were never important regarding which manufacturer, which wet tyre, which compound worked better, why a team couldnt switch a tyre on.

I was most gutted about Mercedes, to be honest. It was really a bad thing to see. And yes, I still don't change my opinion. tyres are just too influential in this part of the season. I hope they'll change it.
But tyres have always been influential. Always in Formula 1. On the right tyre? Make the tyre last? What stint do you use the tyre? How do I drive on the out lap? How do maintain a relative pace? Which tyre manufacturer do I go with? Do I design my car around a harder bridgestone or do I go for a softer Michelin which likes understeer?

Tyres have ALWAYS been heavily influential in Formula 1. ALWAYS. Anyone who says, like yourself, that tyres are too influential is bias and blind to the past 13 years minimum. Were you moaning about Bridgestone having superiority by getting tyres specifically for Ferrari, the rest of the bridgestone users being given secondary tyres? Alternatively, did you moan about Michelin being better in 2005 and 2006?

Zero equality and parity between teams there. Tyres influenced whether you even stood a chance of fighting for the WDC let alone whether you would get THE best tyres from that manufacturer.

Its people whinging because their team is losing. Simple as. I didn't berate Pirelli because Ferrari couldn't work the hard tyres in 2011. Its down to the design of the car. What did Ferrari do? Hire Hamashima. Solved their problems.

Formula 1 is about building a race winning car. That means a car that can use its tyres, its engine, its mechanical grip to maximum effect. If the tyres last all race; then its about making an endurance F1 car. If the tyres don't last all race, its about a car which can extract the performance without punishing the rubber.

It used to be about who could nail the manufacturer of tyres best. I remember 2006; Button still struggled with the front right warming up. What did they do? Adapt the suspension, he changed how he warmed the tyres up. Job done.

RBR's problem is they cannot adapt, Newey builds a downforce rocket and is succeptable to straightline speed and tyre degredation. Whats the difference between that and a car which is succeptable to mechanical failures? NONE. Its upto the team to sort its own problems out.

What do RBR want? To get more bhp from the Renault engine and the tyres durable so it suits THEM. How about building and adapting your car to suit the equipment universally given to all?
Whatever tyre make/ engine make/car make we've had in the past they'd always tried to make the optimum they could do in their branch respectively. That's normal and sound in any given sport. (and yes., I realize I'm an idiot for still considering F1 a "sport") I'd say FIA did big mistake when asking Pirelli to make s*** tyres just to add to the spectacle, because that means Pirelli CAN manipulate races in the future -> better tyres -> Red Bull. worse tyres -> other team. Do we really want the outcome of races decided by ONE tyre maker who's suceptible to who yells the loudest? This is a discussion totally new to F1 and it's not going to end well. Whatever pans out, it'll give a bad taste in the mouth. This is a sport that was deliberately manipulated from FIA themselves and now we have to live with it, because if you START manipulating, there'll be no end to it. And yes, I don't give a damn about Red Bull, I am an Alonso fan. I just want the sport to be clean. And yes, I'm naiive. :(
Be who you are and say what you feel because those who mind don't matter and those who matter don't mind.

User avatar
mikhailv
F1 Routinier
F1 Routinier
Posts: 4110
Joined: 31 Mar 2008, 15:27
Location: Mansfield, Nottinghamshire

Re: Gran Premio de España 2013

Post by mikhailv » 14 May 2013, 15:19

Suntrek wrote:
mikhailv wrote:
Vlad-SRB wrote:
mikhailv wrote:
Vlad-SRB wrote:Tyres influence racing just too much. Today's race was the best proof of that. This is not the F1 I want to see.

Because it dont suit your team :zz:

Tell me a season where tyres were never important regarding which manufacturer, which wet tyre, which compound worked better, why a team couldnt switch a tyre on.

I was most gutted about Mercedes, to be honest. It was really a bad thing to see. And yes, I still don't change my opinion. tyres are just too influential in this part of the season. I hope they'll change it.
But tyres have always been influential. Always in Formula 1. On the right tyre? Make the tyre last? What stint do you use the tyre? How do I drive on the out lap? How do maintain a relative pace? Which tyre manufacturer do I go with? Do I design my car around a harder bridgestone or do I go for a softer Michelin which likes understeer?

Tyres have ALWAYS been heavily influential in Formula 1. ALWAYS. Anyone who says, like yourself, that tyres are too influential is bias and blind to the past 13 years minimum. Were you moaning about Bridgestone having superiority by getting tyres specifically for Ferrari, the rest of the bridgestone users being given secondary tyres? Alternatively, did you moan about Michelin being better in 2005 and 2006?

Zero equality and parity between teams there. Tyres influenced whether you even stood a chance of fighting for the WDC let alone whether you would get THE best tyres from that manufacturer.

Its people whinging because their team is losing. Simple as. I didn't berate Pirelli because Ferrari couldn't work the hard tyres in 2011. Its down to the design of the car. What did Ferrari do? Hire Hamashima. Solved their problems.

Formula 1 is about building a race winning car. That means a car that can use its tyres, its engine, its mechanical grip to maximum effect. If the tyres last all race; then its about making an endurance F1 car. If the tyres don't last all race, its about a car which can extract the performance without punishing the rubber.

It used to be about who could nail the manufacturer of tyres best. I remember 2006; Button still struggled with the front right warming up. What did they do? Adapt the suspension, he changed how he warmed the tyres up. Job done.

RBR's problem is they cannot adapt, Newey builds a downforce rocket and is succeptable to straightline speed and tyre degredation. Whats the difference between that and a car which is succeptable to mechanical failures? NONE. Its upto the team to sort its own problems out.

What do RBR want? To get more bhp from the Renault engine and the tyres durable so it suits THEM. How about building and adapting your car to suit the equipment universally given to all?
Whatever tyre make/ engine make/car make we've had in the past they'd always tried to make the optimum they could do in their branch respectively. That's normal and sound in any given sport. (and yes., I realize I'm an idiot for still considering F1 a "sport") I'd say FIA did big mistake when asking Pirelli to make s*** tyres just to add to the spectacle, because that means Pirelli CAN manipulate races in the future -> better tyres -> Red Bull. worse tyres -> other team. Do we really want the outcome of races decided by ONE tyre maker who's suceptible to who yells the loudest? This is a discussion totally new to F1 and it's not going to end well. Whatever pans out, it'll give a bad taste in the mouth. This is a sport that was deliberately manipulated from FIA themselves and now we have to live with it, because if you START manipulating, there'll be no end to it. And yes, I don't give a damn about Red Bull, I am an Alonso fan. I just want the sport to be clean. And yes, I'm naiive. :(
Problem is, the sport has always been manipulated in one manner or another. Why did Michelin leave? Because Bridgestone were jealous of their tyres being beaten and not as good, so out priced them. Bridgestone manipulate 2003 by getting Michelin tyres banned. Ferrari manipulated the championship in 2006 by banning the Mass Damper.

Pirelli should just have the b*** to say 'this is what youve got, this is part of the rules, do the best job you can'. Thats it. Teams always moan when theyre losing. 2005 it was 'oh the rules were to stop Ferrari'. 2006 it was 'michelin are too good/ban the damper'. 2008 there was spa-gate. 2009 there was the double diffuser. 2010 it was F-duct. 2011 it was exhaust maps. 2012 it was tyres. 2013 its tyres. Tyres were such a vocal point throughout the 2000's upto 2007.....

Locked