Jump to content


Photo
* * * - - 4 votes

Ferrari/Pirelli tyre tests


  • Please log in to reply
146 replies to this topic

#101 fenixracing

fenixracing
  • Member

  • 340 posts
  • Joined: February 10

Posted 22 June 2013 - 09:51

people keep saying merc tested 2013tyres, while they did not .
they tested tyres that not will even be used.
Do you realy think that Ferrari tested with a real 2011 spec car. and Ferrari did the test with the current tyres they learned just as mutch or even more then merc.
just as merc they used a loophole and got a way with it.

Advertisement

#102 Nomore

Nomore
  • Member

  • 248 posts
  • Joined: May 13

Posted 22 June 2013 - 09:53

You said before that you would not watch or follow F1 anymore if you believed FiA was corrupt. Now you are saying that FiA is corrupt, that Ross and Jean made an arrangement (because they are friends from their time at Ferrari?) so I think that it is safe to assume that you have seen your last F1 race? F1 nomore?

I wish you good luck finding another interest, something that is not corrupt at the top. Unfortunately, I have no real suggestion to give you, even chess is ugly behind the scenes.


well you are right is the best solutions ...at least i will spend my time much more effectively in weekends...better the sea than this farce


Edited by Nomore, 22 June 2013 - 10:00.


#103 Gyno

Gyno
  • Member

  • 175 posts
  • Joined: March 13

Posted 22 June 2013 - 09:57

THis is nothing and if someone says "Never seen a team so openly cheat and get away with it" they haven't followed F1 for more then a few years time.

Back in the good old days they cheated all the time and many times got away with it.


THis is F1 where cheating is allowed and you just get a slap on the wrist.
Mclaren cheated during Mika hakkinen years all the time and was caught and got nothing.
Ferrari cheated many times and got nothing.

Only when Mclaren STOLE secrets from another team and blatantly lied doing so, did they get a penalty.
They should have been DSQ imidiatly and thrown out from F1 for atleast 1 year.
But no they got a slap on the wrist.

THis is how it's always has been so get over it.

#104 Nomore

Nomore
  • Member

  • 248 posts
  • Joined: May 13

Posted 22 June 2013 - 10:17

THis is nothing and if someone says "Never seen a team so openly cheat and get away with it" they haven't followed F1 for more then a few years time.

Back in the good old days they cheated all the time and many times got away with it.


THis is F1 where cheating is allowed and you just get a slap on the wrist.
Mclaren cheated during Mika hakkinen years all the time and was caught and got nothing.
Ferrari cheated many times and got nothing.

Only when Mclaren STOLE secrets from another team and blatantly lied doing so, did they get a penalty.
They should have been DSQ imidiatly and thrown out from F1 for atleast 1 year.
But no they got a slap on the wrist.

THis is how it's always has been so get over it.


i started to watch F1 in mid 96..and yep confirm...Never seen a team so openly cheat and get away with it..i understand a "smart technical solutions" that is in the border of cheating and what is allowed...but this man...it was just plain to be stupid.

I don't know if people understand but FIA just made a big joke with F1 fans, they just offended us with this ridiculous IT...that it sound like "information technology" but nope, it's called "International criminaliTy"




#105 halifaxf1fan

halifaxf1fan
  • Member

  • 4,846 posts
  • Joined: March 09

Posted 22 June 2013 - 16:47

Yeah, your opinion trumps the independent tribunal.
They should lose their WCC points for employing Hamilton anyway, eh?



You keep changing the topic! Why would you want to implicate a driver?

Your avoiding the question says it all - confirms that the 'penalty' didn't fit the crime. Mercedes with Pirelli's help gets away with potentially one of the biggest illegal mid season sporting advantage gains over its competitors perhaps in the history of the sport and sufffers less than Ricciardo lining up wrong in the pit lane.

Edited by halifaxf1fan, 23 June 2013 - 14:51.


#106 halifaxf1fan

halifaxf1fan
  • Member

  • 4,846 posts
  • Joined: March 09

Posted 22 June 2013 - 16:50

Ooohh so now this is a whole conspiracy that Mercedes cooked up this test with Pirelli, organized no doubt to have multiple upgrades to the car present and the Pirelli dudes just stood around watching Mercedes perform an in season test of their own? Oh, sorry, I forgot my tin foil hat.



Mercedes did cook up this test with Pirelli, thats why they were both sent to the tribunal. :drunk:

Do you have a list of the tires they used?

Edited by halifaxf1fan, 22 June 2013 - 16:59.


#107 Szoelloe

Szoelloe
  • Member

  • 5,661 posts
  • Joined: December 06

Posted 22 June 2013 - 16:53

Mercedes did cook up this test with Pirelli, thats why they were both sent to the tribunal. :drunk:

Do you have a list of the tires they used?


Only Pirelli has that list. So what exactly is the problem?


#108 halifaxf1fan

halifaxf1fan
  • Member

  • 4,846 posts
  • Joined: March 09

Posted 22 June 2013 - 17:07

Only Pirelli has that list. So what exactly is the problem?


Earlier RicardoF1 claimed that they only used 2014 tires and I am of the opinion that we don't know what tires were used.

#109 Szoelloe

Szoelloe
  • Member

  • 5,661 posts
  • Joined: December 06

Posted 22 June 2013 - 17:12

Earlier RicardoF1 claimed that they only used 2014 tires and I am of the opinion that we don't know what tires were used.


I am on the opinion that nobody but Pirelli knows what tyres were used.


#110 ExFlagMan

ExFlagMan
  • Member

  • 1,617 posts
  • Joined: January 10

Posted 22 June 2013 - 17:15

Earlier RicardoF1 claimed that they only used 2014 tires and I am of the opinion that we don't know what tires were used.

As Pirelli have yet to define what the 2014 tyres are going to be then any tyre they took could be classified as a potential 2014 tyre, even if it was the same compound and construction as a current tyre.

#111 trogggy

trogggy
  • Member

  • 7,244 posts
  • Joined: March 10

Posted 22 June 2013 - 18:07

You keep changing the topic!

Your avoiding the question says it all
- confirms that the 'penalty' didn't fit the crime. Mercedes with Pirelli's help gets away with potentially one of the biggest illegal mid season sporting advantage gains over its competitors perhaps in the history of the sport and sufffers less than Ricciardo lining up wrong in the pit lane.

There was no question.
Maybe you imagined a question? And then jumped from my failure to answer it to your 'argument' being proven?
That's a brilliant leap of logic, so well done you. :up:

#112 Ricardo F1

Ricardo F1
  • Member

  • 38,412 posts
  • Joined: August 99

Posted 22 June 2013 - 23:45

Earlier RicardoF1 claimed that they only used 2014 tires and I am of the opinion that we don't know what tires were used.

Actually I believe they "mostly" used next years tyres, Pirelli did say they tried one set of potential 2013 tyres with the reinforced sidewalls. I'm pretty sure the Tribunal knows exactly what tyres were used. The drivers apparently did too. I still say they've lost more than they gained by doing it in the end, they've been penalized for the FIA's incompetence not only in running the sport but in answering a simple question!!


#113 dave34m

dave34m
  • Member

  • 457 posts
  • Joined: February 11

Posted 23 June 2013 - 04:55

Actually I believe they "mostly" used next years tyres, Pirelli did say they tried one set of potential 2013 tyres with the reinforced sidewalls. I'm pretty sure the Tribunal knows exactly what tyres were used. The drivers apparently did too. I still say they've lost more than they gained by doing it in the end, they've been penalized for the FIA's incompetence not only in running the sport but in answering a simple question!!

I thought Pirelli have refused to say what tyres they used in the Ferrari test.

#114 Ricardo F1

Ricardo F1
  • Member

  • 38,412 posts
  • Joined: August 99

Posted 23 June 2013 - 05:32

I thought Pirelli have refused to say what tyres they used in the Ferrari test.

Not sure that's relevant.


#115 Clatter

Clatter
  • Member

  • 27,239 posts
  • Joined: February 00

Posted 23 June 2013 - 10:02

Even if they didn't use 2013 tyres, didnt know exactly what the tyres were, and didn't change any parts on the car (all of which I personally find unbelievable), surely no one can deny the drivers derived some benefit from this test. Especially Lewis who has been having problems adjusting to the brakes. This was a great opportunity for him to try different things without any of the normal pressures. It's no wonder he was rushed back from the states (assuming the reports are true).

Edited by Clatter, 23 June 2013 - 10:02.


#116 Szoelloe

Szoelloe
  • Member

  • 5,661 posts
  • Joined: December 06

Posted 23 June 2013 - 10:11

Even if they didn't use 2013 tyres, didnt know exactly what the tyres were, and didn't change any parts on the car (all of which I personally find unbelievable), surely no one can deny the drivers derived some benefit from this test. Especially Lewis who has been having problems adjusting to the brakes. This was a great opportunity for him to try different things without any of the normal pressures. It's no wonder he was rushed back from the states (assuming the reports are true).


I don't.
No one denied that. Brawn has said so himself. How is that a problem now?

#117 Szoelloe

Szoelloe
  • Member

  • 5,661 posts
  • Joined: December 06

Posted 23 June 2013 - 10:11

Even if they didn't use 2013 tyres, didnt know exactly what the tyres were, and didn't change any parts on the car (all of which I personally find unbelievable), surely no one can deny the drivers derived some benefit from this test. Especially Lewis who has been having problems adjusting to the brakes. This was a great opportunity for him to try different things without any of the normal pressures. It's no wonder he was rushed back from the states (assuming the reports are true).


I don't.
No one denied that. Brawn has said so himself. How is that a problem now?

#118 Szoelloe

Szoelloe
  • Member

  • 5,661 posts
  • Joined: December 06

Posted 23 June 2013 - 10:14

Mercedes did cook up this test with Pirelli, thats why they were both sent to the tribunal. :drunk:

Do you have a list of the tires they used?


Hmm, no. Pirelli cooked up this test with Mercedes. That's why they basically havent been punished by the IT. Time to move on.


#119 Clatter

Clatter
  • Member

  • 27,239 posts
  • Joined: February 00

Posted 23 June 2013 - 11:12

I don't.
No one denied that. Brawn has said so himself. How is that a problem now?


Has that benefit been undone?

Advertisement

#120 mattferg

mattferg
  • Member

  • 847 posts
  • Joined: July 12

Posted 23 June 2013 - 11:38

Q1 - Has anyone asked the FIA what exactly constitutes a 2011 car - you know the one you can apparently test with as much as you like with who you want to drive without anyone knowing or complaining.
Q2 - Does anyone check these 2011 cars when they are used for testing to see if they conform to those rules.

Seems like an open door that Ferrari appear to have been given a golden ticket to walk through.


A car that conforms to the 2011 regulations.

One could say that they could add parts they developed for later cars that would've been legal in 2011 - but tbh, the car is a whole package, you can't just bolt on parts and hope they improve an older car. And to go out and spend masses of time and resources developing parts specifically for an older car would be a bonkers waste of time.

So the whole "they could add new parts to an old car" stuff is nonsense.

#121 mattferg

mattferg
  • Member

  • 847 posts
  • Joined: July 12

Posted 23 June 2013 - 11:38

Hmm, no. Pirelli cooked up this test with Mercedes. That's why they basically havent been punished by the IT. Time to move on.


They've both been punished and found guilty, just the punishment was minor. Time to move on, stop deflecting please :)


#122 Szoelloe

Szoelloe
  • Member

  • 5,661 posts
  • Joined: December 06

Posted 23 June 2013 - 11:40

Has that benefit been undone?


No. But that is not Mercedes's problem anymore. I have said this before, look at it like this: Pirelli needs those frigging tests. The teams do too, if they want to take their fare share out of development, if for nothing else, because the should, and then to have tyres supplied to them next season that are satisfactory in a fair way. Input into these tyres from the teams has been limited to zero. That resulted in a kind of lottery. Some teams suck, some teams don't( and I a not necessarily speaking of Mercedes, that is extreme), and they are no closer to understanding the reasos than 2 years ago. Mercedes has agreed to pioneer this, and if that moron Horner does not get carried away by Vettel's and his own feelings about what exactly happened, and stops to think for two minutes, by today we would have a schedule for the Pirelli tests of other teams who preferred to do the same, payed by Pirelli. Instead Horner not only shot himself and his team in the leg, but basically did the same to all other teams. So no, the benefit - although not a big one - is not undone, and now I don't know if it will be. It is, though, not Mercedes' problem anymore. Horner is a dumbass.






#123 ExFlagMan

ExFlagMan
  • Member

  • 1,617 posts
  • Joined: January 10

Posted 23 June 2013 - 11:46

A car that conforms to the 2011 regulations.

One could say that they could add parts they developed for later cars that would've been legal in 2011 - but tbh, the car is a whole package, you can't just bolt on parts and hope they improve an older car. And to go out and spend masses of time and resources developing parts specifically for an older car would be a bonkers waste of time.

So the whole "they could add new parts to an old car" stuff is nonsense.

Anyone there at the test to check that?

#124 Clatter

Clatter
  • Member

  • 27,239 posts
  • Joined: February 00

Posted 23 June 2013 - 12:04

No. But that is not Mercedes's problem anymore. I have said this before, look at it like this: Pirelli needs those frigging tests. The teams do too, if they want to take their fare share out of development, if for nothing else, because the should, and then to have tyres supplied to them next season that are satisfactory in a fair way. Input into these tyres from the teams has been limited to zero. That resulted in a kind of lottery. Some teams suck, some teams don't( and I a not necessarily speaking of Mercedes, that is extreme), and they are no closer to understanding the reasos than 2 years ago. Mercedes has agreed to pioneer this, and if that moron Horner does not get carried away by Vettel's and his own feelings about what exactly happened, and stops to think for two minutes, by today we would have a schedule for the Pirelli tests of other teams who preferred to do the same, payed by Pirelli. Instead Horner not only shot himself and his team in the leg, but basically did the same to all other teams. So no, the benefit - although not a big one - is not undone, and now I don't know if it will be. It is, though, not Mercedes' problem anymore. Horner is a dumbass.


Even if it's accepted that Pirelli need to test with a current car, it's still 100% wrong to test with any team in isolation during the season. No matter how the test is conducted an unfair advantage will be gained. And considering how we are being told that it was 2014 tyres being tested then I'm not so sure that a 2013 car is any more representative than a 2011 one.

Whilst we have to accept the findings personally I still don't agree with the verdict and feel that Merc have got off extremely lightly.

As far as tyre testing is concerned I was hoping this would be fully addressed as there really does need to be more transparency. If a current team is involved, no matter what car is supplied, there should be no secrecy involved. All teams should be allowed to monitor the tests and have access to any data that is shared with the testing team.

#125 Szoelloe

Szoelloe
  • Member

  • 5,661 posts
  • Joined: December 06

Posted 23 June 2013 - 12:29

Even if it's accepted that Pirelli need to test with a current car, it's still 100% wrong to test with any team in isolation during the season. No matter how the test is conducted an unfair advantage will be gained. And considering how we are being told that it was 2014 tyres being tested then I'm not so sure that a 2013 car is any more representative than a 2011 one.

Whilst we have to accept the findings personally I still don't agree with the verdict and feel that Merc have got off extremely lightly.

As far as tyre testing is concerned I was hoping this would be fully addressed as there really does need to be more transparency. If a current team is involved, no matter what car is supplied, there should be no secrecy involved. All teams should be allowed to monitor the tests and have access to any data that is shared with the testing team.


I agree with most of that, but the problem you highlight has nothing to do with Mercedes, it is Pirelli's concept to do individual tests. Pirelli asked for a 2013 car, from Red Bull and from Mercedes too. So it is their preferred choice, theorizing about it from me or others is pointless, I don't know if you are right or not, you can't be sure about that either. The unfair advantage that is gained is inevitable by running a car, it would be in a joint test to0, wich basically annulates an unfair advantage if the tests are made possible to all the teams as was intended? It's not Mercedes that got off lightly IMHO, but the FIA and Pirelli themselves. my point still stands: Mercedes had created an opportunity that could have been exploited to help developing better tyres. If the teams need transparency( obviously they do), it was an opportunity to establish that too at the same time. That opprtunity is lost thanks to Horner, who pressed this on to the IT. Again, that is not Mercedes' problem anymore.

While we are at it, has the benefit of Ferrari working on their tyres several times in tests they conducted and payed for been undone? I bet Hamashima was there on every occasion. It is the FIA's job and obligation to oversee, police, and regulate these things. Instead they gave Pirelli a free card and blindfolded themselves.

#126 Clatter

Clatter
  • Member

  • 27,239 posts
  • Joined: February 00

Posted 23 June 2013 - 12:41

I agree with most of that, but the problem you highlight has nothing to do with Mercedes, it is Pirelli's concept to do individual tests. Pirelli asked for a 2013 car, from Red Bull and from Mercedes too. So it is their preferred choice, theorizing about it from me or others is pointless, I don't know if you are right or not, you can't be sure about that either. The unfair advantage that is gained is inevitable by running a car, it would be in a joint test to0, wich basically annulates an unfair advantage if the tests are made possible to all the teams as was intended? It's not Mercedes that got off lightly IMHO, but the FIA and Pirelli themselves. my point still stands: Mercedes had created an opportunity that could have been exploited to help developing better tyres. If the teams need transparency( obviously they do), it was an opportunity to establish that too at the same time. That opprtunity is lost thanks to Horner, who pressed this on to the IT. Again, that is not Mercedes' problem anymore.

While we are at it, has the benefit of Ferrari working on their tyres several times in tests they conducted and payed for been undone? I bet Hamashima was there on every occasion. It is the FIA's job and obligation to oversee, police, and regulate these things. Instead they gave Pirelli a free card and blindfolded themselves.


Didn't Pirelli say they did not ask for a 2013 car for this test and that it was Mercs idea to use it?

You keep blaming Horner, but IMHO he has done nothing wrong. Any team that believes another has broken the rules has the right to challange them. No opportunities to doing anything have been lost due to that challange.

And no, any advantage that Ferrari gained has not been lost, but at least all the other competitors agreed it was not breaking the fundamental rule that Merc broke. I did say though that IMHO it's totally wrong for any team to test in isolation, and if it has to be done then there should be no secrecy regarding it. The FIA have left a huge gap allowing these tests, and it's one that should have been plugged as part of this fiasco.

#127 1Devil1

1Devil1
  • Member

  • 2,642 posts
  • Joined: May 12

Posted 23 June 2013 - 12:46

Didn't Pirelli say they did not ask for a 2013 car for this test and that it was Mercs idea to use it?

You keep blaming Horner, but IMHO he has done nothing wrong. Any team that believes another has broken the rules has the right to challange them. No opportunities to doing anything have been lost due to that challange.

And no, any advantage that Ferrari gained has not been lost, but at least all the other competitors agreed it was not breaking the fundamental rule that Merc broke. I did say though that IMHO it's totally wrong for any team to test in isolation, and if it has to be done then there should be no secrecy regarding it. The FIA have left a huge gap allowing these tests, and it's one that should have been plugged as part of this fiasco.


That's the point. Mercedes just said "oh no 2011 car here, we can't bring it up"

#128 Szoelloe

Szoelloe
  • Member

  • 5,661 posts
  • Joined: December 06

Posted 23 June 2013 - 12:58

Didn't Pirelli say they did not ask for a 2013 car for this test and that it was Mercs idea to use it?

You keep blaming Horner, but IMHO he has done nothing wrong. Any team that believes another has broken the rules has the right to challange them. No opportunities to doing anything have been lost due to that challange.

And no, any advantage that Ferrari gained has not been lost, but at least all the other competitors agreed it was not breaking the fundamental rule that Merc broke. I did say though that IMHO it's totally wrong for any team to test in isolation, and if it has to be done then there should be no secrecy regarding it. The FIA have left a huge gap allowing these tests, and it's one that should have been plugged as part of this fiasco.


Pirelli said many things. What do you think Pirelli preferred and asked for, when Horner has confirmed they had been asked for a 2013 car before the Barcelona Pirelli test with Merc? I am not blaming Horner. Not at all. I am saying he was dumb, and he has harmed not only his own team, but the others too, apart from Mercedes, of course. Everybody was/is so focused on 2013. The only team, really, the only one, who grasped the importance of this was Sauber, namely Monisha Kaltenborn. She speaked about the importance of input in the 2014 tyre development in the case of the Mercedes test, and expressed the hope of that input opprtunity will be given to the other teams too. That is what Horner has jeopardized.


#129 scheivlak

scheivlak
  • Member

  • 11,368 posts
  • Joined: August 01

Posted 23 June 2013 - 13:01

Didn't Pirelli say they did not ask for a 2013 car for this test and that it was Mercs idea to use it?


From the IT's decision:

Third hearing, Pirelli

(.......) They also told that they this year are worried because [of] some serious deflation (sic) of the tyres which also is a safety matter. They told that they had had a discussion with Charlie Whiting to solve the problem. The Lotus 2010 they have used earlier was not available. They also said if they had followed the 4.2 article in their contract to invite all competitors they would not be able to test until September. It was important to test with a representative car and top drivers.

So Pirelli asked for a "representative car".

Edited by scheivlak, 23 June 2013 - 13:03.


#130 1Devil1

1Devil1
  • Member

  • 2,642 posts
  • Joined: May 12

Posted 23 June 2013 - 13:09

From the IT's decision:

Third hearing, Pirelli

(.......) They also told that they this year are worried because [of] some serious deflation (sic) of the tyres which also is a safety matter. They told that they had had a discussion with Charlie Whiting to solve the problem. The Lotus 2010 they have used earlier was not available. They also said if they had followed the 4.2 article in their contract to invite all competitors they would not be able to test until September. It was important to test with a representative car and top drivers.

So Pirelli asked for a "representative car".


following the argumentation of Mercedes that could have been a 2011 car because the difference is not that big - Pirelli never asked for a 2013 car and were surprised that Mercedes came up with a 2013 car

#131 scheivlak

scheivlak
  • Member

  • 11,368 posts
  • Joined: August 01

Posted 23 June 2013 - 13:16

following the argumentation of Mercedes that could have been a 2011 car because the difference is not that big - Pirelli never asked for a 2013 car and were surprised that Mercedes came up with a 2013 car

Where do you find that?

Again, from the IT's decision:

Pirelli’s position

(......)
(5) Pirelli had no responsibility for the specification of the car which Mercedes used in the testing, although it had a real interest in ensuring that the testing was carried out in circumstances which, as far as was feasible and permissible, replicated those in which the problems of delamination, which it accepted were at some of the issues which this testing had been designed to address, had arisen.
(6) In any event, whether or not it was permissible for it to do so in the manner in which it did, FIA approved the car which it had been expressly informed Mercedes would be using, and did in fact use, during the testing.
(7) Mercedes derived no sporting advantage from the testing.


There's no mention at all of Pirelli being surprised and they took it for granted that the FIA had permitted Mercedes to test with a 2013 car.

#132 Szoelloe

Szoelloe
  • Member

  • 5,661 posts
  • Joined: December 06

Posted 23 June 2013 - 13:19

Isn't it the wrong thread for all this, btw?

#133 halifaxf1fan

halifaxf1fan
  • Member

  • 4,846 posts
  • Joined: March 09

Posted 23 June 2013 - 15:11

Hmm, no. Pirelli cooked up this test with Mercedes. That's why they basically havent been punished by the IT. Time to move on.


How to move on when there is potentially an imbalance now on the race track? Mercedes has already claimed a win which cannot logically be separated from this illegal test. Ferrari now is implicated as well.

In the case of Mercedes, one of the top teams in a deal with Pirelli has taken a potentially huge illegal step forward and this will skew the results for the rest of the season. How does the sport legitimately move forward when Mercedes was found guilty and then not fairly penalized? The season has been irreparably damaged if Mercedes was competent at all in obtaining results from a three day private test on the benchmark track the week after a gp on that same track with their current car and both competing drivers.

How can we move on with such an unfair penalties that one team is not investigated and the other is guilty of participating in a 1000 km private test and is is penalized less than a driver lining up wrong in pit lane?

Edited by halifaxf1fan, 23 June 2013 - 15:23.


#134 Szoelloe

Szoelloe
  • Member

  • 5,661 posts
  • Joined: December 06

Posted 23 June 2013 - 15:26

How to move on when there is potentially an imbalance now on the race track? Mercedes has already claimed a win which cannot logically be separated from this illegal test. Ferrari now is implicated as well.

In the case of Mercedes, one of the top teams in a deal with Pirelli has taken a potentially huge illegal step forward and this will skew the results for the rest of the season. How does the sport legitimately move forward when Mercedes was found guilty and then not fairly penalized? The season has been irreparably damaged if Mercedes was competent at all in obtaining results from a three day private test on the benchmark track the week after a gp on that same track with their current car and both competing drivers.

How can we move on with such an unfair penalty that a 1000 km private test is penalized less than a driver lining up wrong in pit lane?


Well, be my quest and don't move on then.


Edited by Szoelloe, 23 June 2013 - 15:28.


#135 Seano

Seano
  • Member

  • 257 posts
  • Joined: July 12

Posted 23 June 2013 - 19:59

The season has been irreparably damaged if Mercedes was competent at all in obtaining relevant data from a three day Pirelli controlled blind test on the benchmark track the week after a gp on that same track with their current car and using tyres that will not be used competitively in 2013.


Compare and contrast with the following scenario

The season has been irreparably damaged if the red team was competent at all in obtaining results from a three day secret test on the benchmark track the week before the gp on that same track with their 2011 car and and using the very tyres that would be used in the GP.

Now do you see why the IT declared both tests were unacceptable. Jean Todt should have referred both cases if only to show that he is whiter than white and let the IT decide. Otherwise it just looks like he is favouring his former employer.

Seano



#136 Szoelloe

Szoelloe
  • Member

  • 5,661 posts
  • Joined: December 06

Posted 23 June 2013 - 20:01

2011 was the first year with the fixed weight distribution.

#137 ardbeg

ardbeg
  • Member

  • 1,029 posts
  • Joined: March 13

Posted 23 June 2013 - 20:57

Don't know how much of the info regarding Ferrari's test is just rumors, but there is new pieces every day and it seems like that test is the one we should really be upset about.

#138 halifaxf1fan

halifaxf1fan
  • Member

  • 4,846 posts
  • Joined: March 09

Posted 23 June 2013 - 22:51

Compare and contrast with the following scenario

The season has been irreparably damaged if the red team was competent at all in obtaining results from a three day secret test on the benchmark track the week before the gp on that same track with their 2011 car and and using the very tyres that would be used in the GP.

Now do you see why the IT declared both tests were unacceptable. Jean Todt should have referred both cases if only to show that he is whiter than white and let the IT decide. Otherwise it just looks like he is favouring his former employer.

Seano



Ok, so Mercedes deserves a stiff penalty and potentially Ferrari as well. Agreed? Cheating at that level shouldn't be condoned imo.


Edited by halifaxf1fan, 26 June 2013 - 12:14.


#139 scheivlak

scheivlak
  • Member

  • 11,368 posts
  • Joined: August 01

Posted 23 June 2013 - 23:01

Todt should have ruled on both instead of just Ferrari, I don't agree with him shifting responsibility to a tribunal. That was a cop out.

You make it look like he had a choice :drunk:

I guess you've missed something :wave:


Advertisement

#140 Seano

Seano
  • Member

  • 257 posts
  • Joined: July 12

Posted 23 June 2013 - 23:58

I must admit I still don't really understand the reason for/benefit gained by the Mercedes test.

None of the tyres will be used this year and may never be. If RB's intention was to help Lewis with his braking issue, testing with different tyres will have been of little help.

If that was the reason, why involve Nico, its Lewis that has the problem and the least miles with the team.

I suppose he could have been taking a flyer that kevlar belted ones did get used this year but that's now not going to happen because Lotus won't permit it.

Maybe he really was trying to help Pirelli but that doesn't ring true either.

Either way I doubt Mercedes learnt very much that would give them an advantage over their rivals, except as the IT put it "they learnt what didn't happen".

Its a different story for the red car - I think they found exactly how the tyres were going to behave in Spain and as a result changed their prior event strategy from conservative, few stop to aggressive 4 stop before they event as a direct result of what they had learnt.

This would give them a clear sporting advantage on tyre management over their rivals.


I'm sure that Jean Todt is a decent bloke but sadly he has made a regrettable error of judgement.

By choosing to be the sole arbitrator of who may face sanction, he has weakened his position as the President of the FIA.

Common sense, decency, his previous employment history and possible future pension payments should have made him aware of how this could look.

Seano



#141 halifaxf1fan

halifaxf1fan
  • Member

  • 4,846 posts
  • Joined: March 09

Posted 24 June 2013 - 03:05

You make it look like he had a choice :drunk:

I guess you've missed something :wave:


His stewards could have issued a penalty of up to a three race ban if I am not mistaken. A good place to start.

Edited by halifaxf1fan, 24 June 2013 - 03:06.


#142 Szoelloe

Szoelloe
  • Member

  • 5,661 posts
  • Joined: December 06

Posted 24 June 2013 - 06:08

His stewards could have issued a penalty of up to a three race ban if I am not mistaken. A good place to start.


:lol:

No, they couldn't.

#143 SophieB

SophieB
  • RC Forum Host

  • 2,086 posts
  • Joined: July 12

Posted 24 June 2013 - 06:51

Isn't it the wrong thread for all this, btw?


Yes. There's a couple of other threads to talk about the Merc/Pirelli testing sessions, please use this thread to discuss the Ferrari/Pirelli testing sessions.

#144 Sakae

Sakae
  • Member

  • 19,256 posts
  • Joined: December 03

Posted 24 June 2013 - 10:38

I must admit I still don't really understand the reason for/benefit gained by the Mercedes test.

Not too many do, despite rampant speculations about it. I am in dark as well, but I am also tired of the guessing game, since they aren't going to tell us.

#145 halifaxf1fan

halifaxf1fan
  • Member

  • 4,846 posts
  • Joined: March 09

Posted 25 June 2013 - 04:43

I must admit I still don't really understand the reason for/benefit gained by the Mercedes test.

None of the tyres will be used this year and may never be. If RB's intention was to help Lewis with his braking issue, testing with different tyres will have been of little help.

If that was the reason, why involve Nico, its Lewis that has the problem and the least miles with the team.

I suppose he could have been taking a flyer that kevlar belted ones did get used this year but that's now not going to happen because Lotus won't permit it.

Maybe he really was trying to help Pirelli but that doesn't ring true either.

Either way I doubt Mercedes learnt very much that would give them an advantage over their rivals, except as the IT put it "they learnt what didn't happen".

Its a different story for the red car - I think they found exactly how the tyres were going to behave in Spain and as a result changed their prior event strategy from conservative, few stop to aggressive 4 stop before they event as a direct result of what they had learnt.

This would give them a clear sporting advantage on tyre management over their rivals.


I'm sure that Jean Todt is a decent bloke but sadly he has made a regrettable error of judgement.

By choosing to be the sole arbitrator of who may face sanction, he has weakened his position as the President of the FIA.

Common sense, decency, his previous employment history and possible future pension payments should have made him aware of how this could look.

Seano


You do realize they were using a car two generations old.

Edited by halifaxf1fan, 25 June 2013 - 04:46.


#146 packapoo

packapoo
  • Member

  • 731 posts
  • Joined: May 08

Posted 25 June 2013 - 04:56

You do realize they were allegedly using a car two generations old.







#147 Szoelloe

Szoelloe
  • Member

  • 5,661 posts
  • Joined: December 06

Posted 25 June 2013 - 06:18

You do realize they were using a car two generations old.


Which car was that btw?