Alonso eager for another F1 tyre war

59 comments on “Alonso eager for another F1 tyre war”

1. 

   Brian Kneis (@clustr1)
   21st May 2015, 0:08

   I think something significant has happened on the heels of this “strategy group meeting.” It has nothing to do with their proposals, but has everything to do with the new-found openness of the drivers. Maybe I’m wrong, but I cannot recall a time when so many of the drivers have so specifically voiced their opinions on how the current formula is broken. The world of F1 seems allergic to real progress, however with the drivers being honest, critical and outspoken all together… I feel… hope?
2. 

   @HoHum (@hohum)
   21st May 2015, 0:43

   Well I’m finally convinced, who’d have thought it was possible to make tyres that are not only fast but can last a whole race distance, thank you Fernando. So, no doubt they will fix the tyres but only if they can screw-up the racing some other way like refueling.
   1. 

      DaveD (@daved)
      21st May 2015, 16:21

      I’m afraid Bernie is too happy with the favorable contract terms he has with Pirelli to allow it to actually be fixed. I’m afraid we’re stuck waiting for Bernie to finally fill in that coffin he likes to talk about.

      Did I mention that I volunteer to nail it shut? Hey, he’s the one who said we should do it…I’m just trying to make the guy happy.
      1. 

         petebaldwin (@)
         21st May 2015, 16:43

         I don’t have an issue with Pirelli – they were told to create the tyres they have created. They have said repeatedly that they can make a tyre that can last a race distance and can be pushed but they have been asked not to…
         1. 

            DaveD (@daved)
            21st May 2015, 17:04

            @petebaldwin
            Fair enough. The tyre issues are part of Bernie’s idea of creating a “show”. But I’ve not been happy with the way Pirelli have handled the issues when we had all the blowouts back in 2013 and how they went into denial. Again, the teams were using the tyres in ways they were not supposed to (switching sides, etc). But does the average person learn about all those nuances or do they remember that Pirelli makes tyres that won’t last for more than 10 laps in Formula 1 and sometimes just randomly blow up?

            Frankly, I think it’s a very poor business decision on their part to agree to put their name on a product that is intentionally made to be “defective” to a speck Bernie wants. It drags their name through the mud and has people associating them with “bad tyres”. They should tell Bernie to P off. It’s Pirelli’s right to do this if they want, but it doesn’t mean I have to respect them for it or want to buy their products.
            1. 

               petebaldwin (@)
               21st May 2015, 17:48

               @daved – Couldn’t agree more with that – if I was a tyre manufacturer and was asked to put my name on a tyre that was designed to be rubbish, I’d refuse as well.

               Other than the bad PR, it just doesn’t fit with F1 either. Fuel is limited which forces the manufacturers to really push the boundaries to create super-efficient units. They limit the amount of components used per year which forces the teams and manufacturers to make everything very durable and long lasting. Again – forcing engineers to be clever and push the boundaries.

               What do rubbish tyres do? Force the engineers to go against the grain and design positive features out of the tyres… It’d be like asking one of the teams to deliberately create a slow car. It would go against the whole ethos of F1 which is pushing the limits and creating the fastest car you can.
            2. 

               DaveD (@daved)
               21st May 2015, 17:54

               @petebaldwin
               A total +1
               You’ve nailed the analogy: intentionally degrading tyres would be like asking engineers to deliberately create a slow car!

               And then ask them to put their name on it!!! Ludicrous.
3. 

   Maciek (@maciek)
   21st May 2015, 0:59

   Nice video preview @keithcollantine you should def do a regular video commentary feature, would be great.
4. 

   Joey-Poey (@joey-poey)
   21st May 2015, 0:59

   Here’s what I don’t understand from the people who want tires that last the whole race and can be pushed on. You could do that with the Bridgestones at some races (remember Italy and Vettel going all the way to the end on one set before changing?). Yet getting up behind another car still risked taking the life out of the tires and drivers were told to back off to preserve them anyway. The differences in the tires allow for chances to pass. It also rewards drivers who think long term or simply have a deft ability at being fast and smooth. Sure, it’d be cool to see drivers have the option to be able to go the whole race if they think they can preserve the tires and I think it’d be great to see more variety like that. But maybe that’s where the idea for teams to choose from the 4 tires instead of just two would open things up. I’d rather they go that route instead of just making extra durable ones with every driver on the same compound and unable to get close to each other because there’s just no variance.
   1. 

      GT Racer (@gt-racer)
      21st May 2015, 1:21

      @joey-poey Was 2010 But Monza isn’t really the best example as tyre wear/degredation has never been an issue at Monza because its a circuit that doesn’t really stress the tyres & which has a very nonabrasive surface.

      That was actually a race that showed how stupid the ‘use both compounds’ rule was/is. If the tyres were good enough to go the distance, Why force them to stop.
      Pre-refueling Monza was always a non-stop race for most unless you hit trouble.
   2. 

      Key (@key75)
      21st May 2015, 1:37

      I think what F1 needs on the tires side is competition like between manufacturers. With someone competing against you, you always tend to do better and have the extra motivation to find new ways of beating the other one. But with this I would also let the teams chose freely whatever they want from the two tires suppliers without the 2 compounds rule! It will add more variety and possibilities of surprises during the races without refueling needed making the teams have to pass more on the track. But with this FOM needs to upgrade their TV info graphics so we don’t have lost fans during race weekend.

      Whatever it’s done, F1 can’t expect to find a unique solution to everything. It needs some change that’s for sure!!!!
      But if they go for new tires or even new refueling system or anything, what they really need to do is inform the fan! Let the fan come in, be more involved with what’s happening during a race, let them feel they are almost there in the pit lane (not totally because we need the mystery behind strategy lol), and I think with more understanding less complain!
      1. 

         Key (@key75)
         21st May 2015, 1:39

         I wanted to post a new comment.. so don’t see it like a direct answer to your comment @joey-poey :\ Just another opinion!
      2. 

         Lancer033 (@lancer033)
         21st May 2015, 4:51

         the only thing i think F1 needs to avoid with a tire war is a tire manufacture that plays favorites with a team. If the tire manufactures will treat all teams equally, then i’m for it. What i’m worried about is a situation that happened with the ALMS series ~6 years ago where a certain manufacture blocked their tire supplier from giving tires to a privateer team. Left a really bad taste in my mouth from a team i had supported up until then.
      3. 

         Evans (@earmitage)
         21st May 2015, 7:57

         I don’t get why there needs to be a different manufacturer. Pirelli can make better tyres (longer lasting). They’re just making them according to what they have been told to do. This could just create other gaps between teams.
         1. 

            Baremans
            21st May 2015, 16:01

            if you’d have 2 manufacturers who were asked to make the current 4 compounds, there would still be competition for clients. Both manufacturers would be challenged to make a better product than the other. If your supersof can go 2 laps more than the other. Or be worht 2 tenths in quali… or if you’re a lot cheaper than the other guy… I definitely see benefits for the teams if there would be more suppliers.
            1. 

               Evans (@earmitage)
               22nd May 2015, 5:59

               But what does that have to do with improving racing which is the current problem? Some teams will get faster than other teams because they’re running different tyre compounds. What would be the gain in that? Makes it even harder to compare drivers as well.
   3. 

      petebaldwin (@)
      21st May 2015, 16:50

      Tyre don’t need to last a race distance – they just need to allow the teams to do a 1 or 2 stopper and push for all of that time rather than protecting tyres.

      Having said that, all of this talk about refuelling and more durable tyres completely misses the point when the cars are still unable to follow each other and rely on DRS to pass. You could have tyres that last a whole season, 2000bph engines that are so loud they make your ears bleed, no limits on how fast they can go, the re-introduction of gravel traps, the replacement of the more boring Tilke tracks with the best circuits from around the world and no restriction on fuel and it’d still be dull to watch if they are unable to follow each other closely and overtake without the use of DRS!
5. 

   GT Racer (@gt-racer)
   21st May 2015, 1:14

   Know there are other articles dedicated to refueling discussion but wanted to share this in the latest one.

   I was talking this afternoon to a friend who was at what was FOCA (Now FOM) through the 90s (I got to know him when I started there in 97) that throughout 1994/1995 there was a lot of discussion about re-banning refueling because many of the teams (I was told all of them apart from Ferrari) felt at the time it was having a negative impact on the racing.

   The teams at the time felt so passionately that it should be re-banned as soon as possible that they went as far as suggesting moving to 2 shorter races that could be done on 1 tank for 1995 & then going back to 1 full Gp for 1996 with cars that could do that on 1 tank as was the case Pre 1994.

   Ferrari remained opposed as did Bernie (Since refueling was originally his proposal to spice up the show) with Max Mosley siding with them, Thus refueling remained for the next 15 years.

   I actually remember in the early/Mid-2000s when I was there; there was talk of banning it on a couple occasions as it remained unpopular with a lot of the teams & I was also reminded by this friend that it was actually the teams (Via FOTA) that voted for the refueling ban in 2009.
   1. 

      GT Racer (@gt-racer)
      21st May 2015, 1:15

      I was also linked to this discussion from a 2010 FOTA fan forum:
      http://www.grandprix.com/ns/ns23369.html

      Q: Would you like to see refueling brought back?

      James Allison: Personally, I think it would be the wrong thing to do. Having a race with no refueling means you tend to do your racing on the track, not via pit stop strategy; the refueling makes the pit stops slow and much less of a spectacle than the current ones, which are a frantic explosion of activity, and, from a team point of view, it costs quite a lot of money to shunt the refueling equipment around the world and have the people look after it. Also, it’s stuff that we don’t design, we have to buy it from an outside supplier. When it goes wrong, and no matter how much love and attention you festoon upon it, it goes wrong at some point, it’s an extraordinarily bitter feeling to see your opportunities in the race squandered by something that you don’t have direct control over.

      Paul Monaghan: I wouldn’t rush to bring it back. I don’t think the sport has suffered without it. The pit stops are now an amazing spectacle and we’re very privileged to be able to stand so close to them. If you’re on a good pit stop, you hear all four wheel guns go together and you feel them all go again and then the car’s gone. The ban on refueling has also given the drivers an extra element because they now have to take a car from qualifying, when it has very light fuel, to the race, when it starts with a full fuel load and that’s a transition they have to get on top of.
   2. 

      JCost (@jcost)
      21st May 2015, 7:46

      I wonder if the Strategy Group (and some fans) would defend the very same positions (like refueling) if this meeting was held just after the Malaysian GP…

      The speed people change opinions in F1 world amazes me much more than the speed of 1990s cars.

      The overreaction in F1 is tremendous. Cars can be faster, tyres can be harder but the main (olde) issue still is: a dominant car!

      It’s not the first era of a dominant car, the 1990s and 1980s were great but we had those Williams years remember? 2000s are now praised but early in that decade Schumacher was smashing the field and from 2009 until 2013 it was all about another German!

      The probability being served more of the same in 2017 is pretty high. All things the same, cars going 5 seconds faster in Monaco will not make F1 more spectacular. The best races this year? Malaysia and Bahrain, because P1, P2 and P3 were not settled halfway through the race.
   3. 

      ColdFly F1 (@)
      21st May 2015, 8:45

      @gt-racer, I actually like the idea of ‘2 shorter races that could be done on 1 tank’.

      Oftentimes a 300km race tends to get a bit boring.
      How good would it be to do 2 races with a small interval in between. faster cars; 2 starts; 2 races to the finish; and an ad break in between without missing any of the race!
   4. 

      StefMeister (@stefmeister)
      21st May 2015, 11:07

      @gt-racer On Sky’s Monaco FP1 post session coverage Brundle & Chritian Horner were talking about refueling.

      Christian was saying that he was against refueling in the strategy group meeting as he remembered how it worked last time & felt it didn’t making the racing better & that meetings held in the Monaco paddock have seen all teams in opposition.

      Said there’s new people to F1 in the strategy group who haven’t been around all that long who he seemed to suggest were the only one’s pushing for it. I would guess those new people he mentioned were probably the representatives from CVC (And maybe some new people at the FIA) as i believe those from teams & obviously Bernie/Todt have been around a while.
      1. 

         Solo (@solo)
         5th June 2015, 13:16

         If the teams were against it then it mean the proposal got threw because FOM and FIA voted together and it ended 6 against 12 since FOM and FIA have 6 votes each.
         Why does Todt insist voting with Bernie and letting him do whatever he likes is beyond me. His just there to receive the coins tossed from CVC it seems and nothing else.
6. 

   Stig Semper Fi (@stigsemperfi)
   21st May 2015, 1:51

   I look at the link: ‘Drivers have lost respect of fans’ – Ricciardo. I’m thinking ‘wait, what?’. Open the page, it’s the other way round!
7. 

   reiter (@reiter)
   21st May 2015, 3:08

   Keith looks pretty much exactly as I’ve imagined him all this years, haha.
8. 

   Spencer Ward (@)
   21st May 2015, 3:12

   Love some of the hard hitting questions on the fan survey. My favourite being “Should Bernie Ecclestone be running the sport?”. No.
   1. 

      Fer no.65 (@fer-no65)
      21st May 2015, 3:22

      @sward28 I did that survey like a grumpy cat… No, no, no, no, seriously no, really really no, YES, no, no, no… xD
9. 

   Fer no.65 (@fer-no65)
   21st May 2015, 3:21

   Great video preview ! how hard was it to drive and talk? specially something that was (surely?) scripted.

   When I simrace, I cannot pay attention to anything else, let alone talking ! Good job !
   1. 

      Estesark (@estesark)
      21st May 2015, 3:32

      I’m also interested in the filming of that video, it was great! Was it your first time in a simulator, @keithcollantine? You did a lot better than I think I would have!
   2. 

      ColdFly F1 (@)
      21st May 2015, 8:51

      +1
10. 

    Sumedh
    21st May 2015, 5:57

    Just read the transcript of the drivers’ press conference where they were asked their views on refueling.
    Marcus: I like it as it is now.
    Romain: Don’t care.
    Valtteri: I’ve never tried refuelling so maybe it would be nice to try.
    Jenson: It’s not a question that has a yes or no answer is it? You obviously the safety aspect – the reason we went away from refuelling – and also the money, the cost. In terms of racing, I think it was great, back in the day when we had refuelling. If you had an issue on lap one, you could change your race around, you could do something different – whereas now it’s very difficult…
    Lewis: I’m going to say yes.
    Kimi: Yes.

    So, looks like drivers and fans have a differing opinion on this!
    1. 

       BasCB (@bascb)
       21st May 2015, 6:49

       pretty much, yes.

       The drivers argument that going slow at the start (coulthard, Ricciardo, etc) is not much fun feels just very badly thought out, especially when they then go on to say how they want it to be more difficult. Now I understand that a heavy car feels heavy and makes you impatient to unleash it, but surely adapting to the changes of behaviour is one of the arguments of why refuelling was ditched and it asks the skill to do so from the drivers as well.

       Thing is, with the guys in the pits knowing exactly how much the tyres, mechanical parts etc, are being used, and the simulation tools at their hand, they are always going to want to tell the driver how to approach the race (save fuel, tyres, engine, …) to get there as slow as possible.

       Its hard to unlearn planning the whole weekend/race up front with endless simulation scenarios, and the races get more fun when teams have to suddenly improvize (see Mercs losing it in Malaysia). The trick is how to achieve that.

       I can see some merit in what Pirelli proposes – not letting the teams know up front what tyres they are going to bring, but then again, we could just as well make fuel allowance random or allow/disallow DRS in new bits of track/for qualifying or forbid use-age of sensor info during the race, or indeed ban instructions to drivers about how to drive. But all of those mean throwing dice to influence the race, not using tools that are readily available, just as much as the crazy sprinkler idea Bernie had.
       1. 

          @HoHum (@hohum)
          21st May 2015, 8:09

          @bascb,once again we are talking about fixing the symptom instead of curing the disease, if the tyres were durable enough there would be no need to drive slowly on full fuel, the power to weight ratio is still pretty spectacular and all cars are equally handicapped, they might not be quite as tidy as they would be at the same speed with 50-90 less Kg of fuel onboard but they could still race hard and display their skill and reflexes, just fix the tyres and everything else falls into place, domination excepted.
          1. 

             Sumedh
             21st May 2015, 8:21

             bascb is right. What is learnt can’t be unlearnt. The strategists are always going to tell the driver how best it is to cover 70 laps. And the answer always involved some conservation. Even if tyres were made durable, strategists will put less fuel and there will be fuel saving as a lighter car will travel 70 laps faster than a heavier one.

             One thing they could do is increase the min. weight, that will reduce the advantage of a car with full fuel versus an empty car.
             1. 

                russell
                21st May 2015, 17:25

                Why not make the cars all start the race with the full fuel allowance on board. That would give the drivers one less thing to preserve.
    2. 

       mef
       21st May 2015, 11:05

       Just about a perfect encapsulation of all that is wrong with F1 (apart from DRS, awful tyres, CVC Capital, Alonso in poor machinery). Utterly banal and glib responses from the so called ‘stars’ of F1. Button stands out here as a paragon of insight and eloquence…
    3. 

       Bullfrog (@bullfrog)
       21st May 2015, 17:32

       Did anyone ask Max? Thanks to refuelling, Max almost never happened…
11. 

    TheBullWhipper (@thebullwhipper)
    21st May 2015, 6:28

    @keithcollantine loving the YouTube video. Great work and a very nice pre-race review.
    Thank you.
    1. 

       Keith Collantine (@keithcollantine)
       21st May 2015, 17:12

       @thebullwhipper Thanks very much, appreciate it!
12. 

    Jay Menon (@jaymenon10)
    21st May 2015, 6:37

    List of Formula 1 World Champions

    2005: Fernando Alonso
    2006: Fernando Alonso
    2007: Kimi Raikonnen
    2008: Lewis Hamilton
    2009: Jenson Button
    2010: Sebastien Vettel
    2011: Sebastien Vettel
    2012: Sebastien Vettel
    2013: Sebastien Vettel
    2014: Lewis Hamilton
    2015: Lewis Hamilton
    2016: Lewis Hamilton
    2017: Lewis Hamilton
    2018: Lewis Hamilton

    Well done Lewis.
    1. 

       BasCB (@bascb)
       21st May 2015, 6:50

       hm, well, we thought Hamilton would be on a string of wins from 2008 onward too …
    2. 

       Todfod (@todfod)
       21st May 2015, 6:54

       Waiting to see who shows up in 2017 alongside Lewis… I fear that might be his only competition
       1. 

          JCost (@jcost)
          21st May 2015, 7:53

          @todfod

          Bottas would be harder to beat than Nico… his agent will start selling him to Mercedes sooner than later and if Nico fails to impress this season 2016 will be his last at Mercedes.

          If Ocon gets a mid-range team next year he will have a full season under his belt in 2017 and if it goes well he could well be Lewis next teammate.
          1. 

             Todfod (@todfod)
             21st May 2015, 8:31

             @jcost

             I don’t get the hype behind Bottas. He has been marginally better than Felipe Massa this season, and I don’t see why he should get a shot at Mercedes before Ricciardo or even Hulkenberg.

             By the end of 2016, I have a feeling that Verstappen might be hot property in the driver’s market, and as you mentioned, even Ocon might have a season to impress. Lets also see how Nasr and Sainz progress over the next couple of seasons as well.
             1. 

                JCost (@jcost)
                21st May 2015, 12:03

                @todfod

                Ricciardo is a possibility but Bottas past with Toto could help his cause. Ocon is a talent and could well impress in a single season and become a candidate.
             2. 

                Enigma (@enigma)
                21st May 2015, 21:36

                @todfod I don’t think it’s just about speed. Bottas’ maturity, calmness, teamplay and so on make him such a good driver and it seems like it’s being noticed.
    3. 

       @HoHum (@hohum)
       21st May 2015, 8:14

       You are forgetting the law of diminishing returns for Mercedes development, or maybe you are assuming the comedy committee will do everything they decided.
    4. 

       Boomerang
       21st May 2015, 8:40

       2016th onwards Michelin supplying tires exclusively for strategy group nonmembers!

       The world champions list:

       2016. Lewis Hamilton
       2017. Romain Grosjean
       2018. Nico Hulkenberg
       2019. who knows…

       Just my imagination running wild ;-)
       1. 

          dam00r (@dam00r)
          21st May 2015, 12:42

          Grosjean? LOL! Are you on drugs?

          2016: Lewis Hamilton
          2017: Lewis Hamilton
          2018: McLaren-Honda Driver, Bottas/Kevin Magnussen?
          2019: Ferrari driver
          1. 

             Boomerang
             21st May 2015, 14:58

             No! Are you?
    5. 

       sumedh
       21st May 2015, 9:13

       Looking at this list, I realized that Hamilton is the only driver to have won championship with and without refueling in the entire history of F1
       1. 

          JerseyF1 (@jerseyf1)
          21st May 2015, 10:05

          Didn’t Nelson Piquet win one of his championships when Brabham started refueling?
          1. 

             KaIIe (@kaiie)
             21st May 2015, 10:44

             Yes; no refueling in 1981 and refueling in 1983.
13. 

    ColdFly F1 (@)
    21st May 2015, 8:34

    On this day 15 years ago – oh those memories:
    – Schumacher winning;
    – racing at the Nurnburgring;
    – a McLaren on pole;
    – and the European GP still in Europe.
14. 

    John H (@john-h)
    21st May 2015, 9:10

    I was hoping you’d say something like ‘stop talking to me in the corners’ on that unibet video Keith. Nice multi-tasking.

    Still recall when you took the plunge to run F1F full time. Well done for making it a success!
    1. 

       Keith Collantine (@keithcollantine)
       21st May 2015, 17:11

       @john-h Haha, I might use that next time!

       I must admit, I had to turn down the difficulty a bit in order to be able to drive and talk at the same time. The traction control was pretty high, but for dignity’s sake I insisted on keeping steering, throttle, brake and gears.

       Thanks very much for the feedback :-)
15. 

    Sauber (@mumito)
    21st May 2015, 15:35

    Of course ALO wants new tires. He knows he is stuck. The only chance is a big shake and grab (yet another time) the best tires as he did when he was WDC. Many people believe he was WDC because the Michelin rubbers…
    1. 

       Keith Collantine (@keithcollantine)
       21st May 2015, 17:10

       @mumito Looks like one of them is Franz Tost…
       1. 

          Sauber (@mumito)
          21st May 2015, 18:11

          Franz Tost has in his hands most of the best prospects in F1. For sure SAI, VES and James Key are the future of F1. Why change? Toro Rosso is stronger than ever before. Toro Rosso is making the Red Bull team look like a bunch of infants.
          At the end of the day is always the same…the ones wining do not want to change, the losers wants a revolution.
          Thats what ALO needs. He is intelligent. He has already seen RedBull and Mercedes. It takes long to be dominant. You can pull a half a season hailmary like Brown did back in 09….but to be dominant? You need no less than 4 years.
          mercedes won China 2012…..then in 2013 a couple of races (I believe 2 or 3)……
          Its a process….Mc Laren would be lucky to score a podium.
          I cant see Mc Laren wining in 2015/2016.
          So ALO knows that best case scenario…he will be really old in 2020….

Comments are closed.