[MajorDanby]

There has been much discussion recently regarding the impact that the Pirelli tyres are having on the current state of Formula 1. Terms such as the ‘F1 Lottery’ are becoming more and more abundant, and many fans are seeing the current situation as an overall decline in the spectacle of the sport. Couple this with the polarising opinions regarding the DRS system and we are fast approaching an abyss with fans either side extolling either the virtue or decline of F1 in the 2012 season.

Such a difference of opinion in many experienced and knowledgeable fans leads me to cast my mind back to the times when I first started watching, what many people consider to be the highest level of motorsport. On what side of this fast approaching divide do I actually sit?

My story starts towards the end of the Senna/Prost battles that where the mainstay of the early 1990’s. What many people consider being the golden turbo age of Forumla 1 in the 1980’s was approaching its twilight years, with the computer assisted driving aides becoming more and more prevalent as we fast approached the end of the century.

This was the time of multiple tyre manufactures and multiple compounds, with Pirelli, Avon, Goodyear and Michelin all producing tyres at various points throughout the 80’s and 90’s. Unsurprising many races were determined by tyre management, with conservation and outright attack all winning strategies at various points. In essence it was a balancing act. Unsurprisingly very similar to what we are seeing today.

For me, the true decline of this magnificent era started in 1998. With computer technologies such as traction control and reactive suspension common place, and the shear speed of F1 cars fast approaching the limit to which drivers could physically survive the FIA stepped in to curtail the cornering speeds of the cars. In an effort to reduce mechanical grip levels the grooved tyre was first introduced.

In order to maintain the grooves, tyre manufacturers had to make harder compounds, which in turn resulted in a more consistent and long living type of rubber. We lost Goodyear, who has been manufacturing tyres since 1959 and entered the Bridgestone era. Despite the loss in mechanical grip levels, the engineers began to claw back lap time in the only way they were able to; and that of course was through ever increasing levels of aerodynamic down force.

Greater levels of down force, harder and more consistence tyres coupled with refuelling that had been allowable since 1993 all had the effect of reducing the spectacle of the sport. No longer were pit stops necessary to change rubber – it was all about the fuel effect, pit stops were completed at optimum point in the race for this and this alone, with a fresh pair of boots being put on almost as an after thought.

The result? Well any fan of more than a few years can tell you the answer to that. Races that were split into several short sprints, with overtaking all but extinct outside of the pit lane and a slow trickle of fans leaving the sport that soon turned out to be a flood.

When I hear calls for a reintroduction of refuelling, more consistent tyres and races that are sprints I think back to those times….

Would I want this? For me personally, the answer is a comprehensive no.

Edit: Duplicate thread closed by moderator

Should F1 change its tyre strategy?

For more information see the forum rules

[Author]

Posts