Button and Massa say current tyres are good for F1

2013 Bahrain Grand Prix

Jenson Button, McLaren, Shanghai, 2013Jenson Button and Felipe Massa believe the current generation of tyres are producing good racing in Formula One.

The 2013 specification Pirelli tyres have been criticised by some who feel they are too aggressive. But in today’s press conference ahead of the Bahrain Grand Prix Button said they are working as intended:

“I think there’s been a lot of overtaking. We’re never going to be happy with everything in this sport or in any sport. But I think the race has been good fun.”

“I was on the receiving end of most of it at the last race because obviously doing less stops you’re running old tyres most of the time so there’s people overtaking pretty much all the time. So it’s not the most enjoyable part of it for me. But I think if you were doing a three-stop strategy at the last race I think it was a fun race. It seemed like they were able to push pretty hard.”

Button added the current situation is better than what F1 had before: In the past we had tyres that could last the whole race and there wasn’t any overtaking.”

“So it’s very difficult to get the correct balance but we’re having two or three stops which I think was the idea was about the racing in 2013, so that’s good.

“And there’s a lot of teams fighting at the front. I think Formula One’s great. I’m really enjoying the racing – as I say I haven’t watched the race – but from what I see around me it looks good to watch.”

Massa said it is a good thing if the tyres make life hard for the drivers: “Sometimes our life is a little bit difficult, you know. But when you are at home and watching the race I think the race is very nice to see now.”

“It’s nice race to see, it’s much more nice compared to the past. Many people have complained what Pirelli is doing but I think they are doing a good direction for the sport.”

But the Ferrari driver said it is important for Pirelli to pick the correct tyre allocations for each race:

“I think what is the problems is to choose right the difference between all the tyres: super soft, soft, medium and hard. I think that’s the little thing they need to work in the better direction but I think the races are very nice to watch.

“We need to think not just about ourself we need to think about everything. I think it’s not really impossible to learn how to drive and how to save the tyres and everything.”

2013 Bahrain Grand Prix

Browse all 2013 Bahrain Grand Prix articles

Image ?? McLaren/Hoch Zwei

Advert | Go Ad-free

108 comments on Button and Massa say current tyres are good for F1

  1. Fer no.65 (@fer-no65) said on 18th April 2013, 14:06

    I hope drivers support these tyres because of that reason: producing better races.

    Maybe then FIA will realize they need to experiment with a DRS-free race once in a while. You know? going the other way… DRS should be a temporal solution. Progressively taking it out (if the problem doesn’t persist, ofc), would be pretty nice.

    They need to try !

    • Keith Collantine (@keithcollantine) said on 18th April 2013, 14:08

      @fer-no65

      Maybe then FIA will realize they need to experiment with a DRS-free race once in a while.

      I hope so. There were far too many easy passes in China that were not in the slightest bit interesting to watch.

      • Fer no.65 (@fer-no65) said on 18th April 2013, 14:14

        @keithcollantine plus it makes racing elsewhere in the track completely pointless, as we’ve all discussed many times before.

        China was a joke in that respect. Seeing Hamilton being passed like nothing by both Alonso and Massa was devastating and it was just the 4th lap. Having stayed up until 4 to watch the race, it completely disrupted my mood…

      • BasCB (@bascb) said on 18th April 2013, 14:30

        Agree, China would be one place where its not at all needed.

      • M Dickens (@sgt-pepper) said on 18th April 2013, 14:35

        (@keithcollantine)

        Maybe then FIA will realize they need to experiment with a DRS-free race once in a while.

        I hope so. There were far too many easy passes in China that were not in the slightest bit interesting to watch.

        I’ve started praying for rain, just so DRS is disabled.

        (@bascb)

        Agree, China would be one place where its not at all needed.

        Make that ALL the Tilke-dromes. And Spa.

      • sato113 (@sato113) said on 18th April 2013, 14:39

        @keithcollantine i have an idea. they need to make the DRS effect less powerful than then slipstream effect. that way if someone overtakes too early on the straight using DRS, the other driver can actually get him back using slipstream.
        to maintain DRS effectiveness though, they need to make the opening more narrow but lengthen the DRS zones.

        • verstappen (@verstappen) said on 18th April 2013, 15:07

          Too complicated.
          If we accept the permanent status of the work around which DRS was, then simply only using it on the tracks which produce boring racing by itself – eg. Hungary, Barcelona – is a lot easier to implement.

    • Häkä said on 18th April 2013, 15:31

      Well, Monaco is basically a DRS-free race because its effect there is so minimized. Unfortunately Monaco is also the race where any overtaking help is needed the most.

    • Bleeps_and_Tweaks (@bleeps_and_tweaks) said on 18th April 2013, 15:51

      Totally agree @fer-no65 DRS should be seen as a solution to the lack of overtaking on specific circuits, not an all encompassing measure at every track. There are some tracks like China, Brazil, Spa etc where overtaking has always been possible, and simple don’t need DRS.
      In my opinion if we had no DRS at all, just the current tyres, we would have plenty of good racing anyway. Plus the FIA still don’t seem to have been able to crack this idea that DRS should only be powerful enough to put a driver in contention in the next breaking zone. Even a cursory glance at some of the overtakes in China would show this is not being achieved. DRS is still far too powerful on some circuits.

      • @bleeps_and_tweaks +1 on everything you said – my sentiment exactly! If DRS isn’t necessary, don’t use it! Places where it isn’t necessary include the longest straight in Formula 1.

      • matt90 (@matt90) said on 18th April 2013, 18:54

        I hate DRS in principle, but don’t mind so much seeing it applied to races like Hungary and Monaco where the aerodynamic disruption is at its worst. Although it is a shame that dirty air has an affect at all races, I don’t see any evidence based on the last few years that an overtaking aid is actually necessary at most circuits. Only races where overtaking has always been marginal and is now near-impossible should have DRS.

        • @matt90 +1 to you also! I believe the whole point of it was to negate the dirty air effect which was making it nigh-on impossible to overtake on certain tracks – I use the word certain, because on tracks like Spa overtaking has never really been a problem. With how close the grid is and the effect of the tyres, it really is only necessary in places like Hungary, Monaco (although there it doesn’t have much of an effect anyway) and perhaps Suzuka.

    • I agree with everything written here but I must say that Ferrari and McLaren are most obviously lobbying Pirelli here. F1 has been making big strides in self improving, I would call the current DRS rule enhancing, but I think all that has been done with the tyres is great, the tyres aren’t performance limited, they grip well they just can’t hold it forever and that’s racing in my book.

  2. kcarrey (@kcarrey) said on 18th April 2013, 14:14

    new tyre supplier for 2014????

  3. HoHum (@hohum) said on 18th April 2013, 14:33

    When drivers make pronouncements like this people have to realise that it is a part of their PR duties, at least in as far as they are not to say anything negative.
    Easy for Button to do anyway as actually racing the McLaren would show just how slow the car is, and easy for Massa as Ferarri are winning races again and who knows what might happen if something changes.

    • KeeleyObsessed (@keeleyobsessed) said on 18th April 2013, 14:44

      No, I’m sorry @hohum I have to disagree.

      When drivers make pronouncements like this people have to realise that it is a part of their PR duties

      Appearing at the Press Conferences is part of their PR, but they are asked for their opinion. 3 Drivers have now come out and said that these tyres should not be changed. These are drivers that are in top teams and are well respected in the paddock.

      The tyres are the same for every team and driver. It’s the cars that are the problem, and the teams are the ones to blame for that. Pirelli were asked for tyres that degrade quickly, that’s what we’ve got. The whole tyre debate is just silly in my opinion

      • tvm (@tvm) said on 18th April 2013, 17:16

        No you are silly :)
        Along with Keith! you don’t really understand what 80% racing means, let me try:

        * “Excuse me Lewis, you seemed to drift a little coming out of turn 4 old chap, cant afford that watch the TIRES”

        * “Should I defend or just let him pass?”

        * Turning down a 750 hp engine to 600 something in the majority of the “race”

        * Having Button complete God knows how many triathlons during winter break and all drivers hitting the gym 7 days a week in order to be able to take sustained 4 G cornering for Nothing

        *”Just come back Sebastian, no point in qualifying”

        *”Little bit slower Jenson, we want to hit that 2 minute mark”
        *”I said SLOWER Jenson!”

        *”You are driving to fast, relax baby”

        Check this video, do you reckon any of those drivers are contemplating letting others pass to preserve their tires, contemplating not attacking, contemplating not racing their bottoms out?
        http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t56jiz-V4w8

        • matt90 (@matt90) said on 18th April 2013, 18:33

          That’s a 12 lap race with no pit stops (and therefore no pit stop strategy).

          • HoHum (@hohum) said on 18th April 2013, 19:45

            @matt90, F1 used to run races without pit-stops and therefore no pit-stop strategy, I believe those years are referred to as the “Golden Years”.

          • tvm (@tvm) said on 18th April 2013, 19:46

            Yeah 12 laps with not much consideration to the tires, the most we have seen so far is one driver (Vettel) doing what, 5 laps all out? And then the tires where shot.

            Can’t wait for an all rain race again, for some 100% racing…

          • Mike (@mike) said on 19th April 2013, 14:54

            @hohum

            If you mean the bridgestone years I dunno about that….. Because if you think you can replicate the 80′s good luck.

            @tvm
            That’s a joke right? In the rain the drivers are doing anything but 100%. 100% effort yes, but not pushing 100%. Which is that same as with the tyres nowadays.

            For some fun, go karting in the wet, you will see what I mean! :D

          • KeeleyObsessed (@keeleyobsessed) said on 19th April 2013, 15:54

            @hohum

            F1 used to run races without pit-stops and therefore no pit-stop strategy, I believe those years are referred to as the “Golden Years”.

            F1 did try no tyre changes (although with refuelling). You’re right. Look up the 2005 US GP, the 2005 European GP, You’ll start to see the problem.

          • HoHum (@hohum) said on 19th April 2013, 16:02

            @keeleyobsessed, I’m not talking about yesterday, I’m talking pre 92 or whenever it was Bernie started fiddling with the rules to create “more talking points for the commentators”
            If you look at the years without pit stops you will start to see what I regard as the problem.

  4. kbdavies (@kbdavies) said on 18th April 2013, 14:41

    With all due respect Button and Massa are talking absolute rubbish. Whilst fans, and drivers don’t want tyres lasting the whole race, they don’t want tires that are good for only a single lap either! With low fuel, and a rubbered in track, Vettel was losing a minimum of 1sec/lap after he bolted them on.
    It is not even a “qualifying tyre” as Paul Hembry reapeatedly tries to justify, as it takes 3 laps to do a single qualifying run. Moreso, what is the point in racing with what Hembry calls a “qualifying” tyre??

    And Massa must be smoking something if he really thinks the “the race is very nice to see now.”
    NOBODY wants to see a guy who didn’t qualify, have an unfair advantage on those who bothered to, then chase them down on new tires, whilch the other did not have the advantage of being available to them, and still unable to do the job because the tires failed him. What exactly is the point of that?
    If i want to see theatre, manufactured sub plots, and exciting drama, then i will go to the theatre or to the movies. If i watch a “sport”, then i want to see real competition, with equality between ALL competitors, so we know who is best. F1 has become a joke, and sadly the people at the sharp end of it cannot seem to see it.
    I keep saying F1 is a business, and not a sport; unfortunately, it was sold to us fans as a sport.
    Massa, Button and all the drivers get paid – NO matter what tires they are driving on. It is the fans who are getting shortchanged.

    • KeeleyObsessed (@keeleyobsessed) said on 18th April 2013, 14:55

      @kbdavies

      With all due respect Button and Massa are talking absolute rubbish. Whilst fans, and drivers don’t want tyres lasting the whole race, they don’t want tires that are good for only a single lap either!

      I’m glad that you’ve decided what the fans and drivers want, after the drivers have said what they want.

      And Massa must be smoking something if he really thinks the “the race is very nice to see now.”
      NOBODY wants to see a guy who didn’t qualify, have an unfair advantage on those who bothered to

      From what I remember, Vettel, Button and Hulkenburg didn’t finish on the podium. In fact, I’m yet to see someone who missed Q3 finish on the podium (Correct me if I’m wrong). So where this ‘advantage’ is based from I’ve got no idea. It simply isn’t translating to the race results, I’m sceptical it even exists..

      I keep saying F1 is a business, and not a sport; unfortunately, it was sold to us fans as a sport.

      In a sport, you play by the rules given the tools at your disposal. It’s the same in all sport. You don’t see people using tennis bats in cricket or baseball, or make the goal smaller in football, because that would be changing the tools used.
      Also, there is no sport that has a major TV presence that hasn’t taken to sponsorship to make money. Sport and business are entwined in today’s world.

      • kbdavies (@kbdavies) said on 18th April 2013, 15:16

        I’m glad that you’ve decided what the fans and drivers want, after the drivers have said what they want.

        Well, based on general comments from drivers, ALL F1 websites, blogs and forums, i can reasonably conclude that MOST drivers do NOT like the 2013 Pirelli’s especially the Soft, and MOST fans don’t either. If you disagree, what is your disagreement based on?

        From what I remember, Vettel, Button and Hulkenburg didn’t finish on the podium. So where this ‘advantage’ is based from I’ve got no idea.

        Vettel started 9th and finishd 4th. He was 2/10ths behind. Barring a mistake or a lap more and he would have finished on the podim. I would have concluded he had a significant advantage. Button started 8th and finished 5th. This was not due to the pace in his car. The first 3 starters in the race were the same 3 on the podium. They were seperated by even less of a margin than they had in qualifying.

        In a sport, you play by the rules given the tools at your disposal. It’s the same in all sport

        Erm, No, it isn’t. There is no other sport that has a single element of it nullify all the others. What is the point of haveing cars that can reach specific speed based on thier engine output, drivers that are caable of driving to these speeds, pulling specific g-forces, able to produce a quick laptime around a circut, all being unable to do so because of the tires on the car? Please explain this to me.
        Please name a single sports that attempts to totally nullify the skill set of it’s players and the ability of it’s equipment, by introducing another piece of equipment so it can improve the “show”.

        Yes, sport and business are intertwined, but the “sport” ALWAYS came before the business. You do not kill the goose that lays the golden egg because you are more hungry!

        • Wallbreaker (@wallbreaker) said on 18th April 2013, 16:46

          Well, based on general comments from drivers, ALL F1 websites, blogs and forums, i can reasonably conclude that MOST drivers do NOT like the 2013 Pirelli’s especially the Soft, and MOST fans don’t either. If you disagree, what is your disagreement based on?

          Do you have any numbers on that? Any poll you can bring up? “Most” and “all” are not quite meaningful words for that even if they’re written in capital letters. I rather think it’s what @nomore nicely described a bit further down in the comments section:

          Problem is that as far as their favorite driver or team wins for some people is ok (who cares about tires) when he starts losing they start to complain ( we care about tires now )…

          It’s the same thing why Vettel and Red Bull don’t stop complaining. They claim to have built the best car but what they really did is only having built the best aerodynamics. The best car is a combination of engine, aerodynamics and nowadays also tyres. And because tyres are not working for them they start complaining. And it’s the same with the fans. When their hero wins, everything is fine, but can you imagine the ********* Pirelli is currently getting from German fans on websites and forums because Vettel isn’t winning every race anymore? It’s unbelievable at times…

          Vettel started 9th and finishd 4th. He was 2/10ths behind. Barring a mistake or a lap more and he would have finished on the podim. I would have concluded he had a significant advantage. Button started 8th and finished 5th.

          That’s not necessarily an issue with the tyres but rather an issue with the qualifying regulations. Remember? Drivers must start the race on the set of tyres they set their fastest qualifying time on. If drivers like Button and Vettel choose to start on Mediums, then so be it. They sacrifice their grid position for a better strategy in the race but also take the risk getting into trouble at the start and into traffic during the race. And it’s the same for everyone. If that rule didn’t exist, everyone in the Top 10 would probably have started on the Mediums.

          And if he had a significant advantage he would have used it within the race distance and finished on the podium. The argument “one more lap and he would have catched him” doesn’t count here.

          This was not due to the pace in his car.

          Yeah, it was due to his 2 stop-strategy whilst everyone else in the Top 7 opted for 3 stops. And not for any advantage he had by chosing the Medium at the beginning. Vettel chose the Medium too but decided for a three stopper which was faster for him but it wasn’t for Button. They just did what was the best under the given circumstances (car being not quick enough).

          The first 3 starters in the race were the same 3 on the podium.

          Which from my point of view shows that qualifying is still important and that it was no disadvantage not sacrificing grid position for a better strategy. Little contradiction there, eh?

          They were seperated by even less of a margin than they had in qualifying.

          I remember Alonso was some 10 secs ahead of Kimi. Kimi was 2,2 secs ahead of Lewis. Only between Lewis and Vettel there was a gap nearly as small as in qualifying.

          What is the point of haveing cars that can reach specific speed based on thier engine output, drivers that are caable of driving to these speeds, pulling specific g-forces, able to produce a quick laptime around a circut, all being unable to do so because of the tires on the car? Please explain this to me

          See comment on Vettel and Red Bull complaining. It’s part of the game. The conditions are the same for everyone and those who manage them best will come out on top. As easy as that. That’s what Formula 1 is all about.

          • Mike (@mike) said on 18th April 2013, 17:17

            @wallbreaker

            Steady on with that logic there sir, you are ruining peoples rants!

            Seriously though, the racing is exciting, taking out the top ten tyre rule for sure would help. Perhaps separate the tyres allocated for each day, or maybe find another better way to increase running in qually. And then revisit why drs exists and if/where we need to use it.

          • Wallbreaker (@wallbreaker) said on 18th April 2013, 18:24

            @mike I’m taking that for a compliment ;)

          • HoHum (@hohum) said on 18th April 2013, 20:00

            @wallbreaker, “that is what F1 is all about” this year and last year maybe but it is definitely not what Formula 1 was all about for at least 50 years.

          • Wallbreaker (@wallbreaker) said on 18th April 2013, 20:06

            @hohum So you don’t think F1 is not about the best combination of man and machine?

          • HoHum (@hohum) said on 18th April 2013, 20:17

            @wallbreaker, I definitely do think F1 is about the best combination of DRIVER and machine,but not about 16 person pit crews and half a dozen “tacticians” running a time trial .

          • Wallbreaker (@wallbreaker) said on 18th April 2013, 21:04

            @hohum That’s rather cynical. But when you don’t like “16 person pit crews and half a dozen tacticians”, why spending time with F1 anyway, you already should’ve stopped watching the sport a decade ago. Magny-Cours 2004 anyone? ;)

            That’s another thing about Formula 1. It’s constantly changing, the rules and the conditions are constantly changing. And only the best will always cope with that. Both as a team and a driver you have to adapt to the ever-changing rules. That’s the way it was in the 80s, in the 90s, in the 2000s and nowadays.

          • HoHum (@hohum) said on 18th April 2013, 21:19

            @wallbreaker, you forgot the 70′s and 60′s (even I missed the 50′s) .Apart from safety aspects most realchanges have been detrimental to the sport, by real changes I mean restrictions on engine design not changes to engine size for example.

          • Mike (@mike) said on 19th April 2013, 2:31

            @hohum

            And unrestricted Engine design improves the sport how?

            Cars going faster is something we have sacrificed to benefit the safety of the drivers.

          • HoHum (@hohum) said on 19th April 2013, 13:54

            @mike, The reason F1 is different to almost all other series is that it is a technical development series,hence the MANUFACTURERS championship, engines are a major component of a race car and as the saying goes “there’s more than 1 way to skin a cat”
            different engine designs have different power characteristics, eg. Ferarri V12′s had more top-end horsepower so had a higher top speed than the V8′s (same capacity) but the V8′s were lighter,shorter, and had more torque lower in the rev’s, so in general V8′s accelerated faster out of a corner but on a long straight the V12′s had a higher top speed (sound familiar, think DRS) there was no need for artificialy organising overtaking, a V12 could overtake on a straight, be slipstreamed by a V8 and be passed on the exit of the corner, of course on a track like Monza V12′s were usually successful but at tighter twistyer tracks less so,.It is the homogenising of the cars that is most responsible for the lack of overtaking in F1 today. Please put aside your convictions and give this some thought, you may begin to understand where us older fans are coming from, thanks for reading.

          • Mike (@mike) said on 19th April 2013, 15:14

            @hohum

            MANUFACTURERS championship

            Ermmm, well, yeah, however that was 1958 I think.

            Now we have the constructors championship.

            I think you are vastly underestimating the effects open engine design would have on the sport. Everything from safety and economic security, to the gaps between teams widening etc, etc.

            I see where you are coming from, but I don’t think you could detail a way for it to work.

          • HoHum (@hohum) said on 19th April 2013, 15:47

            @mike, you got me there, but “a rose by any other name”. Regarding safety, that is a totally false red herring, carbon fibre, design and minimum weight have all changed to improve safety, but there has been no substantial decrease in speed to improve safety.
            Sadly we don’t have the coverage of those days to re-live them but I think you could find facts and opinions to support my claims about the different engines making for exciting racing and I left out reliability as another factor, 1966 would be a good season to study, I’ve seen 4,6,8,10,12 and 16 cylinder, straight,flat V and H, F1 engines. A lot more interesting than hard,medium,soft and supersoft, don’t you think? It has been done before, why not again ?
            @keithcollantine, mike has drawn me out here, I hope you have the time to read our debate to understand why I am such a moaner.

        • KeeleyObsessed (@keeleyobsessed) said on 18th April 2013, 18:04

          Please name a single sports that attempts to totally nullify the skill set of it’s players and the ability of it’s equipment, by introducing another piece of equipment so it can improve the “show”.

          I like a challenge. How about Cricket, where bats over a certain size have been outlawed after someone brought a larger bat onto the pitch, thus completely covering the wicket.
          This is a similar situation to the tyres in F1. As many have noted, the Bridgestone tyres were far too conservative in 2010, most notably in Monza, when the option tyres lasted for over 45 laps in some cases if I remember rightly. Now, we have tyres that don’t do that. However, we still have to have tyres, much like cricket players still have to have bats. They still use the bats, they still use the tyres, but the way they use them is different. It is not the tyres that should change mid-season, the cars should be modified by the teams to try and get past the 305 and a bit km mark the fastest, taking into consideration the tyres.

          If it rained in Bahrain on Sunday, despite no warning and the completely wrong climate for it, would people bring the same issue? Would they blame freak climactic conditions? Why would they blame conditions that are known and can be controlled?

          • HoHum (@hohum) said on 18th April 2013, 20:21

            @k-o, your cricket analogy is flawed, as you point out the bigger bat is advantageous and cricket is not a technical development sport like F1 is supposed to be.

          • KeeleyObsessed (@keeleyobsessed) said on 19th April 2013, 15:47

            @hohum

            the bigger bat is advantageous

            And outlawing it results in more cricket balls hitting the wicket, which improves the show for those watching, thus fulfilling the brief set out by @kbdavies

            (F1 is supposed to be) a technical development sport

            I’d argue that’s not true. Technical development is a benefit of F1, and it is a very useful one, but I wouldn’t say that all these people go out to various countries around the world and spend millions of pounds to advance technology. They do it for other reasons: Sponsors/Getting the teams name out there/Just for the sheer fun of it. The technical development benefit is more a by-product in my opinion

    • bimo said on 18th April 2013, 15:28

      I am happy with it.

  5. Jason (@jason12) said on 18th April 2013, 14:52

    I think what Button means is that these tyres gives slow drivers a chance to win.

    • KeeleyObsessed (@keeleyobsessed) said on 18th April 2013, 14:57

      @jason12

      Last 5 race winners: Hamilton, Button, Raikkonen, Vettel, Alonso. Where are the slow drivers there?

      Apologies for those who are getting bored of my comments, I’m just trying to understand what the argument is here…

      • cg22me (@cg22me) said on 18th April 2013, 15:18

        Thumbs up to you in my opinion.
        You’re making a good point…

        Whilst it gives drivers in midfield teams a chance to do better, it, by no means, disadvantages the top teams and top drivers, in comparison.

      • Nomore (@nomore) said on 18th April 2013, 15:33

        @keeleyobsessed

        Bored from jour comments ? Not at all..you are 100% right mate…

        Problem is that as far as their favorite driver or team wins for some people is ok (who cares about tires) when he starts losing they start to complain ( we care about tires now )…

        Does anyone remember that Last year in Bahrain Alonso didn’t set a time in Q3 ?…but tires were ok for the same people that complains now …..were they ?…. or is just because Alonso and ferrari aren’t a big mouth like a driver and a team now ?

        http://www.formula1.com/results/season/2012/867/7166/

      • matt90 (@matt90) said on 18th April 2013, 18:37

        And if I remember correctly, Webber is the only non-champion to finish on the podium this year. It was the most recent race, when tyres were most criticised, that 5 champions finished in the top 5 positions for the second time ever, and the first time all in different cars.

    • Todfod (@todfod) said on 18th April 2013, 15:25

      I think what Button means is that these tyres gives slow drivers a chance to win.

      Thats exactly why Jenson is that happy.

    • vishy (@vishy) said on 18th April 2013, 16:52

      Actually it is exactly the opposite.

      Looking at it another way these tires equalize the cars to a certain extent and let the drivers be more relevant than the cars themselves. If the cars have to be driven at 80-90% of their potential then teams with slightly weaker cars can match others.

      This also reinforces the results where the best drivers have won in the first 3 races. My only concern is that teams are not fighting for positions in fear of spoiling their race strategy. But maybe it is partly due to the fact that there is no point in resisting as the DRS zones are so effective. If we make DRS zones smaller or reduce the advantage of DRS then wouldn’t the driver who is chasing have more issues with tires and the game would be equal?

    • HoHum (@hohum) said on 18th April 2013, 20:22

      @jason12, well slow cars a chance to get some points.

  6. andrewf1 (@andrewf1) said on 18th April 2013, 15:13

    I think the issue with this type of races produced by the Pirelli tyres is, as Martin Brundle noted during the race commentary, that it produces a lot of action all over the track, yes, but not racing. Drivers unwilling to race, defend or attack because of the vulnerabilty of the tyres is bad racing, imo. It produces a lot of position changes maybe to the point where nobody knows exactly who’s fighting whom, but it doesn’t produce real action and fighting as we’ve been used to seeing and what we’ve grown (i assume most of us) to love F1 for.

    Having said that, i’m surprised drivers such as Kimi, Massa and Button haven’t picked up on this fundamental difference between the ‘show’ they’re providing and the real action on track.

    • That is more a result of DRS though I think: I just watched an old video of Hamilton and Vettel battling in F3 without any gimmicks in the wet and it was fantastic! If we remove DRS and reduce aerodynamics as planned we will have great racing and with a slightly toned down version of the current generation of tyres we will also have interesting strategic battles – that’s the best of both worlds in my view.

      • matt90 (@matt90) said on 18th April 2013, 18:39

        I would increase power as well. It would make the cars more of a handful, as they should be in my opinion.

      • HoHum (@hohum) said on 18th April 2013, 20:05

        @vettel1, so Max tell me please what are the tyre strategies used in F3 ? new avatar?

        • @hohum – I see why you’ve said that but I think that’s missing the point though: the tyres don’t have that much of an effect unless a car on new tyres comes up behind a car on old tyres, in which case they should be going by anyway because of strategy differences.

          The F3 situation is more of a result of the lack of DRS and comparative lack of aerodynamics I think, which is a lead F1 I think should follow. Introduce primative ground effects, get rid of front wings and have single plain rear wings – that is the best solution in my view which would still allow for some development.

          As has also been said, increase engine power also and free up development in that area as then engine efficiency would increase with the fuel restrictions, which means F1 becomes more relevant to the current road car development and so we attract more manufacturers.

    • matt90 (@matt90) said on 18th April 2013, 18:42

      @andrewf1 I can’t actually think of too many occasions when the cars have refused to race this year, ignoring the impact of team orders. I think that Hamilton simply didn’t have the pace in Malaysia to catch the Red Bulls. Can you share some examples please?

      • Dizzy said on 18th April 2013, 18:50

        I can’t actually think of too many occasions when the cars have refused to race this year

        Plenty of times over the team radio on the pit lane channel you hear drivers been told not to race the cars around them.

        china was the 1st time those sort of radio messages had made it onto the world feed with button, however that sort of radio message has been a common thing on the extra team radio feed since the start of 2012.

        • HoHum (@hohum) said on 18th April 2013, 20:26

          @dizzy, how did you miss @tvm s post at 17:15 hours.

        • matt90 (@matt90) said on 19th April 2013, 11:40

          I disagree. With Button, he was on a different strategy. It has not been uncommon in the last 20 years to allow faster cars through who are on a different tyre/fuel strategy. Button had no reason to race them, as they were going to finish ahead of him regardless. That is a factor of strategy, not a factor of the tyres ruining racing. This is why I wanted an example , because that is the only obvious one, but is completely invalid. If you take issue with what Button did, then you take issue with having multiple compounds rather than how aggressive they are.

  7. James (@iamjamm) said on 18th April 2013, 15:29

    I agree with Massa on this:

    I think what is the problems is to choose right the difference between all the tyres: super soft, soft, medium and hard. I think that’s the little thing they need to work in the better direction

    The soft tyre in China was just no good for the race, imo. I know others will disagree with me, but I don’t think that a tyre lasting a maximum of 6 laps early on in the race was good for “the show” at all. It was bordering on farcical. They should have taken the Medium and Hard to China as they are doing with Malaysia. I don’t think we need to have any more than two pit stops per race, really. The more pit stops in the race, the easier it is for teams to say “take it easy, we’ll try and jump them at the next round of stops”.

    Don’t get me started on the stupid tyre rules we have at the moment, either.

  8. On the flipside though, the racing was better in 2011 than now in my view. The tyres are too aggressive now – 2 stops should be the maximum, and using both compounds shouldn’t be mandatory. Also, scrap the top 10 rule!

    • matt90 (@matt90) said on 18th April 2013, 18:48

      The two compounds were only to give Bridgestone some press after the end of the tyre war. But Pirelli are aggressive enough that they are talked about anyway. I’d be curious to see a few races with two compounds available but not mandatory. The top 10 rule I think was initially for the same reason, but is a much clearer, arbitrary annoyance in my mind and should definitely be scrapped. Either that or extend it to the entire grid. Then to cover drivers sitting out Q3 to get a tyre advantage, say that anybody who does a Q3 time a certain percentage slower than their Q2 time must use the same tyres that they used in Q2 (this is not my prefered method, but is better than the current rules).

    • matt90 (@matt90) said on 18th April 2013, 18:49

      @vettel1 The two compounds were only to give Bridgestone some press after the end of the tyre war. But Pirelli are aggressive enough that they are talked about anyway. I’d be curious to see a few races with two compounds available but not mandatory. The top 10 rule I think was initially for the same reason, but is a much clearer, arbitrary annoyance in my mind and should definitely be scrapped. Either that or extend it to the entire grid. Then to cover drivers sitting out Q3 to get a tyre advantage, say that anybody who does a Q3 time a certain percentage slower than their Q2 time must use the same tyres that they used in Q2 (this is not my prefered method, but is better than the current rules).

      (posted here because I’m told it’s a duplicate comment for some reason)

      • matt90 (@matt90) said on 18th April 2013, 18:50

        Well that’s confused me. It told me the original hadn’t posted.

      • @matt90 I have seen suggestions that if we have to keep the top 10 rule (which I think is entirely unnecessary) that they introduce the 107% rule in all sessions, so all drivers at least have to go out on track.

        The first part though just really serves to prove why they are entirely unnecessary now those rules – they are a relic of the Bridgestone era and serve no purpose now other than to rob us of a good Q3 session or to rob us of strategic variation in the races! If the compounds were durable enough that it was possible at a stretch to do no stops then that would be better in my opinion.

    • Dizzy said on 18th April 2013, 18:54

      the racing was better in 2011 than now in my view

      i agree with regards to tyres.

      with the exception of 1-2 races, i had very little issue with the 2011 tyres, what we had in 2012 & now this year however i have big issues with because i feel there way too sensitive & force drivers to run around tyre saving all race.

      the only problem with 2011 was drs, i hated it then & hate it 1000x more now having watched it for 2 & a bit years.

  9. bull mello (@bullmello) said on 18th April 2013, 16:35

    I think the current formula of tires and DRS is getting closer to reasonable for racing. Button makes an excellent point about the past when tires would last for a whole race but there was little overtaking. With a better choice of compounds for each race the tire situation could be more effective. The DRS is what needs the most tweaking for the best balance of assisted passing and unassisted overtaking over a full lap on each track.

    Two good points about the current formula of F1 – No refueling has increased safety in the pits for the races immensely. (I mention this because it gets lost in the shuffle of current F1 discussions, but it is part of the reason for the current tire situation and pit stops being what they are today.) The effect of the tires and DRS can be dialed back a bit without reverting to processional races.

    • To be honest, I think DRS should have remained a stop-gap and no more, as it makes the racing extremely artificial. At least with the tyres everyone has equal opportunities – DRS is only available to the trailing driver, which I see as an unfair advantage.

      The only time I could see it being useful is when it is completely necessary in places where it is almost impossible to overtake otherwise, not on the longest straight in formula 1 which is preceded by one of the slowest corners in formula 1 (as was the case in China).

      So basically, scrap DRS and just reduce downforce (which was what was initially supposed to happen in 2014) and as you said dial back the tyres so they aren’t so sensitive and peaky. If you can drive 100% and do a two stop or go a bit slower and do a one that would be ideal I think personally.

      • bull mello (@bullmello) said on 18th April 2013, 18:13

        So basically, scrap DRS and just reduce downforce (which was what was initially supposed to happen in 2014) and as you said dial back the tyres so they aren’t so sensitive and peaky. If you can drive 100% and do a two stop or go a bit slower and do a one that would be ideal I think personally.

        Totally agree. If we must have DRS, much less is better than more. The downforce reduction would be best though.

    • HoHum (@hohum) said on 18th April 2013, 20:41

      @bullmello, thats a very selective quote from Button, for many years tyres were (a) the same for everyone, (b) lasted all race (c) hardly ever mentioned unless punctured. And yet there was a great deal of overtaking and exciting racing, it was the racing from this era that put F1 into the worlds conciousness

      • bull mello (@bullmello) said on 18th April 2013, 21:44

        @hohum – Remembering years of grooved tires and tracks like the Hungaroring are not amongst my fondest F1 memories and would not want to go back to that. I don’t have a problem with the current tires (slicks, thank goodness!) when the best compound choices are made for each track. Having watched F1 since the 60s, there have been a lot of different phases of tires and other developments affecting tires and their usage. Watching after tires has almost always been a factor, to varying degrees ,in F1. I would rather see F1 move on the proposed less downforce and then do away from DRS.

        • @bullmello – even some F1 fans who have lived through the rose-tinted era like the current tyres! I’m a newer fan (although have read up quite extensively on the history, hence the Senna avatar) so possibly my opinion isn’t exactly going to be subjective as I’m used to tyres being degradable, but I think as you do that tyre conservation should play a role (although perhaps not as pronounced as now).

          • bull mello (@bullmello) said on 18th April 2013, 23:20

            @vettel1 – I suppose that F1 is constantly evolving could be considered its blessing and its curse. The teams constantly have to adapt to the regulations, tracks, technology, equipment (including tires) and to a certain extent the drivers too. Those that do it best win, usually. That’s what makes it so fascinating. Every race is different. Some fans seem to never want it to change. Hell, I wish Jim Clark and Ayrton Senna were still around and that a lot of things were like they used to be in F1 and otherwise, but things change.

            Guess that was the long winded way to say I don’t mind the way the tires are now, when they get the compounds right for the track.

            Your studying F1 makes you more knowledgeable and makes it more fun too. We could all benefit from that, myself included.

        • HoHum (@hohum) said on 19th April 2013, 14:05

          @bullmello, hope this jogs your memory,@mike, The reason F1 is different to almost all other series is that it is a technical development series,hence the MANUFACTURERS championship, engines are a major component of a race car and as the saying goes “there’s more than 1 way to skin a cat”
          different engine designs have different power characteristics, eg. Ferarri V12′s had more top-end horsepower so had a higher top speed than the V8′s (same capacity) but the V8′s were lighter,shorter, and had more torque lower in the rev’s, so in general V8′s accelerated faster out of a corner but on a long straight the V12′s had a higher top speed (sound familiar, think DRS) there was no need for artificialy organising overtaking, a V12 could overtake on a straight, be slipstreamed by a V8 and be passed on the exit of the corner, of course on a track like Monza V12′s were usually successful but at tighter twistyer tracks less so,.It is the homogenising of the cars that is most responsible for the lack of overtaking in F1 today. Please put aside your convictions and give this some thought, you may begin to understand where us older fans are coming from, thanks for reading.

  10. Having recently found and watched the entire 1997 season, I am not sure when this mythical period of Formula 1 when there were no exciting races and no overtaking.

    If the FIA wants to improve the show, focus on getting the camera in the right place at the right time and tracking the action. The 1997 Monaco Grand Prix was won by Schumacher by something like 70 seconds. It was still a stonking good race.

    In 1997, the things we had that we are told we “couldn’t possibly” have today because they ruin the show:
    Tire War – Check.
    Low and wide cars – Check.
    Different engine manufacturers making vastly different engines – Check.
    1-2 Pitstop races – Check

    Bottom line – the FIA needs to stop trying to mess with the racing to improve the show. Improve the quality of the show and leave the sport alone. More options on how to view the race, more control over the footage you’re watching, more access.

    When I watch Sport, I want it to be almost voyeuristic; the fact that I am watching should never impact how the sport is played.

    • Dizzy said on 18th April 2013, 19:06

      You should go back a bit further & watch some of the Pre-1994 races when there was no refueling & when it wasn’t that uncommon for drivers to stick on the hardest tyre compound available & run the entire race without making any pit stops.

      Racing was much better & the race strategy we did see was completely in the hands of team/driver rather than been limited by what the tyre supplier thought was best for that weekend & because you had a mandatory stop to run 2 compounds.

      The thing with the comments like ‘there was no racing or overtaking’ is that there in most cases completely incorrect. Yes there were races pre-2011 which were a bit dull & where overtaking was extremely hard, However in a majority of races there was some very good racing & a decent level of overtaking.
      I mean people say that 2010 was boring because overtaking was allegedly impossible, Yet the stats show that 2010 featured a lot of overtaking, Way more than in any other season since 1989 with an average of 28.79 overtakes Per-Gp. We also had a close championship fight down to the last race & plenty of good, close, competitive racing throughout the season.

      Its like the debate about Bahrain, People say its never produced a good race & that overtaking is ‘impossible’ there, However overtaking stats don’t back that up & when you actually watch older races held on that track you find plenty of good racing & exciting overtaking:
      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kQmda9a1Wow

    • HoHum (@hohum) said on 18th April 2013, 20:45

      @hwkii, yes and if you went back another 10 years and then another 10 years things only get better ( safety aside) with even less pit-stops.

      • HoHum (@hohum) said on 18th April 2013, 20:46

        left out the 3rd. extra 10 years.

      • Mike (@mike) said on 19th April 2013, 15:37

        @hohum

        Do you think it’s possible to recreate that environment?

        Secondly, can you do it without being artificial?

        • HoHum (@hohum) said on 19th April 2013, 16:29

          @mike, why not, and yes. Limit the number of pit crew (saves money as well as making pit-stops longer) or introduce a “control tyre” that performs well for a whole race. Open up the engine regs, reduce engine capacity to keep speeds from increasing beyond what we have now but let the engineers get as much power as they can out of that capacity, always remembering that they have to carry enough fuel to finish the race.
          To me pit-stops are what is artificial in a 2 hour race.

        • HoHum (@hohum) said on 19th April 2013, 17:24

          Well smaller pit crews and fewer tyres would save a lot of money but look at history, engine development has been part of F1 till only very recently, if they could afford to do it in Germany, Italy and England during the WW2 recovery years of the 50′s and in England in ther austerity years of the 70′s they should be able to do it now.

  11. kbdavies (@kbdavies) said on 18th April 2013, 22:32

    HERE is a snapshot of what some of the people in F1 & Motorsport think of the tires –

    Paddy Lowe:
    =======================
    • “And tyre-based overtaking shenanigans doesn’t really provide any extra excitement than overly-easy DRS zones, as Brawn appears to imply. Seeing one car breeze past another because their rival is on knackered/hard/rubbish tyres is hardly the most thrilling of situations either.”

    Pat Fry:
    =======================
    • “But you cannot drive hard on the tyres otherwise they degrade. It is also a little bit that when you try and push the tyres, you tend to damage them a little bit. When you fight in traffic, you take more out of the tyres than if you are running in clear air.” (May 21, 2012)

    Christian Horner:
    =======================
    • “I think what we want to avoid is drivers cruising around under the performance of their car, unable to follow another car closely, otherwise it’s not racing.” (March 22, 2013)
    • “These tyres are pretty marginal regarding construction and compounds. It´not fun, when a driver has to go 5sec slower than he could in order to make the tyres last. Pirelli knows that.”.

    Ross Brawn:
    =======================
    • DRS needs to be reassessed (October 12, 2011)

    Martin Whitmarsh:
    =======================
    • “It’s quite excruciating, trying to save tyres non-stop from start to finish. It feels painful, and however bad it is for me, it must be a lot worse if you have to drive like that.” (April 15, 2013)
    • “The balance has gone “a little bit” too far towards the tyres in F1″

    Hamilton:
    =======================
    • “The life of the [soft] tyre, it’s the worst I’ve ever experienced with bits flying off all over the place” (April 12, 2013)
    • “I was fuel saving from an early point in the race which lost me a lot of time but generally these tyres make… it’s not fun, I didn’t enjoy the race. It’s not the same as back in the day when you had stints where you are pushing to the maximum the whole time, you had tyres that would last. Now you’re just… it’s like you have a hundred dollars and you have to spend it wisely over a period of time. It makes racing a lot different. It’s more strategic rather than pure speed racing.” (March 24, 2013)

    • “the new Pirelli tyres are a disaster” (May 20, 2011)
    • “It’s not racing, it’s just driving around.”

    Webber:
    =======================
    • “[...]it’s a little bit WWF at the moment[...] Adrian Sutil tried that in Melbourne and Pirelli said that there were indications that the race fell apart for him because he tried to race people.” (April 13, 2013)
    • “The whole category is geared around tyres at the moment. Everything is around tyres. Tyres, tyres, tyre, tyres, tyres…” (March 22, 2013)
    • “As soon as you fight, you chew the tyres up” (October 31, 2011)

    • “The guys are saying, use all of your KERS on the full lap and it’s like you can’t drive much slower. If you push, you got to pit. [...]” (May 16, 2012)
    • “Don’t watch me, mate,” said Mark Webber to a spectating Martin Brundle. “I’m only doing long runs this afternoon. It’s going to be painfully slow.”
    • “Some people will like to see cars passing and re-passing all the time. Nascar stock-car racing in America is founded on that. But for some who have a more purist point of view about F1 – like me – overtaking should mean more than that.” (November 17, 2011)

    Schumacher:
    =======================
    • “Not fun to drive with tyres like these”
    • “Racing to a delta time is not real racing”. Wants words with Pirelli.
    • “It is comparable to driving behind the safety car, and says 90% of drivers feel the same.

    Paddy Lowe:
    =======================
    • “And tyre-based overtaking shenanigans doesn’t really provide any extra excitement than overly-easy DRS zones, as Brawn appears to imply. Seeing one car breeze past another because their rival is on knackered/hard/rubbish tyres is hardly the most thrilling of situations either.”

    Pat Fry:
    =======================
    • “But you cannot drive hard on the tyres otherwise they degrade. It is also a little bit that when you try and push the tyres, you tend to damage them a little bit. When you fight in traffic, you take more out of the tyres than if you are running in clear air.” (May 21, 2012)

    Rosberg:
    =======================
    • “F1 is a complete different sport these days”.
    • “It’s simply not possible to drive on the limit at any time, as we have to nurse the tyres since the start of the race.”
    • Confirmed by Schumacher and Rosberg that they don’t drive on limit at any time of the race, sometimes they drive only at 60-70%”
    • After Spanish GP: “I dont know what is happening with this F1. It is so weird. The circumstances are now completely different.” “Just tyre management really.” (May 13, 2012)

    Alonso:
    =======================
    • “In part because of the rules and also because of the restrictions each year in the rules.” Explained Alonso, whilst opening a new Ferrari store in Madrid. “When someone discovers something, the next year it’s banned. They’re limiting more and more every time the creativity or potential development of a car. We’re seeing more similar cars every time and it’s looking more like GP2[...]”
    • “On the other hand we can lose credibility. We cannot lose that the best teams, the best drivers, the best strategies win the races, because at the moment from the outside it seems that in every race anyone can win. It doesn’t matter the talent, it doesn’t matter the team, the performance – it’s like a lottery. What you achieve in Formula One is not by chance. We need to make clear that if you win a race, it’s because you did something better. And I don’t think at the moment that this is clear for everybody.”
    • Unpredictable F1 became ’strange’ in Spain (May 14, 2012)

    Vettel:
    =======================
    • “It doesn’t have much to do with racing, if all you’re doing is going easy on the tyres. If you lose five seconds per lap just because of the tyres, that doesn’t have much to do with the skill of the driver or how good is the car.”
    • “Previously you could attack, but now, when it comes to fights, you’re a bit in the dark. Twice today I didn’t try to defend myself, because it would have just been shooting myself in the foot.”(April 14, 2013)
    • “It doesn’t look very nice I would say. I hope we have enough tyres to survive the race. Today tyre wear was pretty severe for everyone, so obviously you go around way under the [potential of the] car. It is not a lot of fun and that is how it is.” (March 22, 2013)

    Button:
    =======================
    • “I tried taking it easy on the tyres. They grain. I’ve tried pushing the tyres. They grain. The overall stint time is almost identical. “When the climate is a bit warmer, I think hopefully driving style will make a difference in terms of looking after the tyres and changing the degradation. At the moment, they just degrade and you don’t really have any choice in the matter.” (February 17, 2013)
    • “My puncture happened after I’d already decided to pit. I got to the braking zone at Turn 14, locked up the front left and the tyre just punctured – there was a hole through it.” (April 12, 2013)
    • “It’s extreme degradation and from a tyre that’s doing a [one minute] 35 in qualifying spec and then in the race after eight laps doing [one minute] 48s, it’s a big difference. We’re slower than GP2 cars by about five seconds.” (April 12, 2013)
    • “It’s very tricky and I don’t think you will see many quick laps in the race; I think we’re all going to be given a time to go to and that’s it. (April 12, 2013)

    Sutil:
    =======================
    • “Whatever fuel load you have got in the car, if you race people, you are in trouble. So just don’t race, put the tyre on and just try and get home.”
    (April 13, 2013)

    Riccardio:
    =======================
    • “It’s unacceptable that we are 10 seconds slower in the races compared to qualifying, just because everybody has to cruise around and save his tyres. That’s not F1. We have to be able to go fast.”
    • “The GP2s were faster in Qualifying than we were during long runs.”
    • “We want to drive faster and not cruise around like my grandpa for ten laps in order to be able to push after that. We want to be able to push all the time.”
    • “Of course we could make the current tyres last much longer, but then we´d have to drive slower than F3-cars” (March 22, 2013)

    Maldonado:
    =======================
    • “You can change some things to get maybe one or two more laps from them, but not 20.”

    Niki Lauda:
    =======================
    • “The situation with the tires is absolutely stupid” (March 19, 2013)
    • “Artificially creating more and more pitstops is wrong” (March 19, 2013)
    Lauda said he understands him because it’s not fun for any driver to drive slow just because of the tyres.

    Villeneuve:
    =======================
    • “I saw a few corners of action and then everybody taking care of their tyres. That’s not real racing.” (April 14, 2013)

    Prost:
    =======================
    • “If I talk for myself I would say yes it is maybe a little bit too unpredictable” (May 25, 2012)

    Dietrich Mateschitz:
    =======================
    • “It has become a kind of lottery to find out the window in which a tyre works.” (May 16, 2012)

    Nigel Roebuck: (Motorsport Magazine)
    QUOTE
    “…and for another, we have tyres which increasingly play an over-important role in the scenario of a Grand Prix. That seemed to me more apparent in Malaysia than ever before, and while the glib response is always that ‘it’s the same for everyone’, my feeling is that it’s bad for everyone when paranoia about tyre wear means that the drivers are running, as Mark Webber put it, ‘at about 80 per cent’, and the team principals are thinking overwhelmingly in terms of ‘getting the cars home’. This is how Le Mans used to be in times gone by – but that was a matter of lasting for a day and a night, not an hour and a half, and it is a supreme irony that, in this era of sports car racing, for such as Audi and Toyota Le Mans – unlike a contemporary Grand Prix – is flat out all the way.”

    • Mike (@mike) said on 19th April 2013, 15:34

      So… at a snapshot. Everyone single person hates the tires….

      Nice… See, this doesn’t help the credibility of your post.

      Also, not that Pirelli are working to improve the situation, starting by taking harder tyres to Bahrain this weekend.

      • HoHum (@hohum) said on 19th April 2013, 16:41

        @mike, you really think your viewpoint is more credible than the viewpoint of those quoted above. ?
        Thanks to @kbdavies for finally laying to rest the argument that it is only a small group of reactionary fans that see a problem with these tyres.

      • kbdavies (@kbdavies) said on 19th April 2013, 17:24

        @Mike -

        I give my opinion on the tires, and i’m lambasted it is ONLY my opinion. I say MOST fans do not like them – according to most websites and forums; and i’m accused of spouting nonsense. Then i supply quotes from the team principals, team directors and the drivers themselves…..and i’m accused of cherry picking quotes?????

        Wow!

        • Mike (@mike) said on 19th April 2013, 19:12

          … Lambasted because you are making a claim, and I don’t think that claim is necessarily correct.

          From google, snapshot.
          “A brief look or summary”
          I think what you provided is not a balanced view.

          Please show me statistics that demonstrate that MOST fans don’t like them. Which websites? Which forums?

          When I say cherry picking, I’m not accusing you of making quotes up, I’m accusing you of picking just the quotes that fit your point of view.

          • kbdavies (@kbdavies) said on 19th April 2013, 22:10

            This is irrational. My claim is not correct though it is supported by quotes made by different people in the paddock?? Of course i will pick quotes that supports my point of view. The ideal response would be for you to find quotes that supports your point of view too….rather than shooting my argument down based on your opinion.

            You are quering my claims, whilst not supplying any evidence to the contrary. How convenient. Most fans on F1 websites do not support the tires. I do not need ant stats to prove that. If you are finding to the contrary, you should say so. And just as you have not provided any stats to support your counter claim either!

        • Keith Collantine (@keithcollantine) said on 20th April 2013, 8:08

          @kbdavies @mike In the most recent poll we did on the tyres here the largest individual group of responses (46%) indicated they were happy with the tyres as they are.

          39% of people said they would like the tyre to be more conservative, of which that vast majority indicated they wanted ‘slightly’ rather that ‘much’ more conservative tyres.

          See: Should F1 change its tyre strategy?

          For a bit of context, 79% of people indicated they don’t support the DRS rules, so I’m not even sure tyres is the number one concern among fans.

  12. kbdavies (@kbdavies) said on 20th April 2013, 11:46

    Thanks for posting that inormation Keith, but as you are well aware, that data is essentially a year old, plus the tires are different (far worse) this year than 2012, hence that data has become irrelevant. As bad as the 2012 tires were, i cannot remember any compound that delivered it’s optimum performance for only a single lap, and lasts just 7 laps in the race.

    Paul Hembry says that it was like this in 2012 until the teams got a hang of the tires and late in the season, there was no more complainnig. Yes, that is true, but they are not the same for this year, so why shouldnt they complain? You can only change something so many times until it becomes unusable – as shown in China.

    Even if the tires are not a number one concern for fans, the evidence for this year suggest they are a major concern; and that cannot be right either. Whether it be DRS or Tires, none are good for F1 as they are the moment.
    A new poll for 2013 would clarify exactly what the fans think of this year’s tires. I’m sure that would come in May.

Add your comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

All comments must abide by the comment policy. Comments may be moderated.
Want to post off-topic? Head to the forum.
See the FAQ for more information.