85 replies to this topic

[BobbyRicky]

I want flat out racing - not some unnecessary random pseudo tactical stuff and trade-off games for nerds in armchairs.

 

[SenorSjon]

But what do you actually need for a weekend?

1 H (mandatory)

1 M (mandatory)

1-2 S for Q1

1 S or 1 M for Q2

2 S for Q3

 

The rest is testing what you want for the race. A M-H-H or M-M-H is the max you will ever need. So you need at least a M set for FP.  You also want to do at least 1-2 qualy sims combined with a first stint sim. That will cost you at least 3 S sets.

So you will need at least:

1-2 H

3-4 M 

7-8 S 

 

That is awful close to the tire selections you usually see. Most bring 1 H + 1 M between drivers and an additional S to test both compounds to sweep the track in FP1 and to give them back to Pirelli.

Edited by SenorSjon, 19 July 2019 - 10:28.

[f1paul]

Teams voted down the abolishment of the Q2 tire rule last year. Lower midfield profits from their competitors running a sub-optimal strategy if they reach Q3. The rule was designed in a time the top 3 teams didn't have such a clear gap to the others.

IF the gap between Ferrari, Mercedes, Red Bull to the rest of the field was less than a second (or less than the difference between the soft and the medium) then the starting on your Q2 tyre rule would work really well IMO because the front three teams would have to come in early (if there was a significant tyre wear difference between soft and medium too) and you would get a midfield runner leading the race for a bit and the leaders would have to do some overtaking.

 

That's why if there was a step difference between the soft and medium then it would perhaps force the front 3 teams to do this.

 

Personally, I don't mind the 'start on your Q2 tyre' rule. It livens up Q2 and IF the competition was closer, it would be really exciting in Q2 and in the early stages of the race.

[SenorSjon]

If midfield is position 11 and up, it needs a whole lot of cars to pit first.

[Sterzo]

I want flat out racing - not some unnecessary random pseudo tactical stuff and trade-off games for nerds in armchairs.

This should be adopted as the Mission Statement for the FIA and Liberty, and I hereby call for you to be promoted to R4mses the Great.

[Fatgadget]

FF1600 - when some club drivers used only 1 set of tyres a season...

Ha! Now that is how you save costs  in motor racing!

[ExFlagMan]

And if you were lucky enough to some of the FF1600 races in the '70s you would understand what 'flat out racing' really means.

 

I once heard the commentator at Silverstone utter the memorable phrase

'And Jim Walsh is leading with everybody else second'.

[Sterzo]

And if you were lucky enough to some of the FF1600 races in the '70s you would understand what 'flat out racing' really means.

Or indeed at the 2018 Formua Ford Festival. Smaller and less important it may be these days, but the racing remains brilliant, and continues to prove your point that a low grip durable tyre is a great basis for a racing series.

[Atreiu]

Nobody seemed to like Bridgestone and they made grippy rocks.

 

I see people advocating for there being less tyre options, that's a horrible pathway. Horrible and shortsighted. Whoever wins will be accused of benefitting from favouritism by the tyre company, which is both a marketing and sporting problem. Besides that, guess where teams will spend money as soon as they have plateaued in tyre-related development... aerodynamics. Nobody wants that.

 

The solution is to flood teams with options but keep them in the dark. Have Pirelli bring more different tyres to each weekend and DO NOT let the teams know which tyres these will be in advance. Brief them about it on Thursday morning. "From our ten tyres used in winter testing, we have brought options 1, 2, 5, 8 and 10. Everyone gets a set of type 10 and a pick of a dozen more sets. Inform us of each driver's choices by noon so the tyres can be unloaded in your garages by 6pm". 1 being a qualifying tyre and 10 a no stop safety option.

 

That's it.

[SenorSjon]

That was the dual compound rule in that Bridgestone era. 

[Clatter]

Nobody seemed to like Bridgestone and they made grippy rocks.

 

I see people advocating for there being less tyre options, that's a horrible pathway. Horrible and shortsighted. Whoever wins will be accused of benefitting from favouritism by the tyre company, which is both a marketing and sporting problem. Besides that, guess where teams will spend money as soon as they have plateaued in tyre-related development... aerodynamics. Nobody wants that.

 

The solution is to flood teams with options but keep them in the dark. Have Pirelli bring more different tyres to each weekend and DO NOT let the teams know which tyres these will be in advance. Brief them about it on Thursday morning. "From our ten tyres used in winter testing, we have brought options 1, 2, 5, 8 and 10. Everyone gets a set of type 10 and a pick of a dozen more sets. Inform us of each driver's choices by noon so the tyres can be unloaded in your garages by 6pm". 1 being a qualifying tyre and 10 a no stop safety option.

 

That's it.

 

And whats to stop the accusation of favourtism in the choices for any given weekend?

[Atreiu]

And whats to stop the accusation of favourtism in the choices for any given weekend?

 

Reaslistically, nothing.

 

But the simple fact there are more options will undermine the credibility of most complaints.

 

"We (Pirelli) have provided plenty of competitive options, pick your tyres, do your job and shut up Binotto and Horner".

[Button4life]

So why were the 2011-2013 tyres so hated again? Are 2-4 stops a race really less exiting than the constant 1 stop we have seen the last 4 years?

[SenorSjon]

So why were the 2011-2013 tyres so hated again? Are 2-4 stops a race really less exiting than the constant 1 stop we have seen the last 4 years?

Because if used as a Bridgestone or Michelin it would detonate after half a lap.

[Marklar]

I actually think the current tyres are more or less like they should be for the race (qualiying is a different matter, there the window is too small). You can push hard on them, thus enabling close fights (altthough this can be still improved.as they still overheat a bit) But tyre management is still a skill that is useful. Only issue is that the performance difference betweent he compounds are not huge enough to encourage alternate strategies.
 

So why were the 2011-2013 tyres so hated again? Are 2-4 stops a race really less exiting than the constant 1 stop we have seen the last 4 years?

 

It felt to me like you have to handle them with kid gloves and that hardly ever we saw drivers really pushing. Obviously this isnt ruining anything on the entertainment factor (which was very high) of those races, but I can see why it wasnt fully liked. Especially since you can never satisfy everyone in this sport 

[f1paul]

Agree with you there Marklar, make the difference between the soft, medium and hard bigger and have a slightly bigger operating window and the current tyres are not too bad.

 

The only other thing I would say is that Pirelli promised two pitstops at most races this year, which to be fair we have had more two pitstop races than last year but a one stop is still used at 50% of the races.

[Button4life]

I actually think the current tyres are more or less like they should be for the race (qualiying is a different matter, there the window is too small). You can push hard on them, thus enabling close fights (altthough this can be still improved.as they still overheat a bit) But tyre management is still a skill that is useful. Only issue is that the performance difference betweent he compounds are not huge enough to encourage alternate strategies.


It felt to me like you have to handle them with kid gloves and that hardly ever we saw drivers really pushing. Obviously this isnt ruining anything on the entertainment factor (which was very high) of those races, but I can see why it wasnt fully liked. Especially since you can never satisfy everyone in this sport

The drivers still aren’t pushing and have been for a few years. They’re driving to a delta the whole race except when they have to overtake. In those years we had at least multiple strategies because every car and driver dealt with the tyres differently. Since the tyre change we have had races where doing a whole race on the medium/hard tyre was possible without drop off. How is that more entertaining than seeing drivers struggling with tyre wear. Conserving your tyres used to be a valuable skill. Now that skill isn’t even needed.

[SenorSjon]

I don't find struggling drivers on crap tires very entertaining. We have F2 for that. The battles in Silverstone aren't possible, neither a recovery drive like Austria.

And why do people want 2 stops? Zero stops are fine with me.

[pdac]

The drivers still aren’t pushing and have been for a few years. They’re driving to a delta the whole race except when they have to overtake. In those years we had at least multiple strategies because every car and driver dealt with the tyres differently. Since the tyre change we have had races where doing a whole race on the medium/hard tyre was possible without drop off. How is that more entertaining than seeing drivers struggling with tyre wear. Conserving your tyres used to be a valuable skill. Now that skill isn’t even needed.

 

And, no matter what changes are made, they will continue to drive to a delta. That's modern, computer-assisted, racing for you. Each team will work out exactly what is possible for them before the race. They will always do what is required to attain that. The only time they will change their strategy significantly is it, during the race, they see an opportunity. But that will only be small strategy changes - they won't deviate wildly from the original plan because they'd rather achieve their objective than risk all or nothing.

[FPV GTHO]

The drivers still aren’t pushing and have been for a few years. They’re driving to a delta the whole race except when they have to overtake. In those years we had at least multiple strategies because every car and driver dealt with the tyres differently. Since the tyre change we have had races where doing a whole race on the medium/hard tyre was possible without drop off. How is that more entertaining than seeing drivers struggling with tyre wear. Conserving your tyres used to be a valuable skill. Now that skill isn’t even needed.

I feel like since 2017 the teams understanding of the tyre management has gone up a notch, to where they've realised how much slower they can go to negate the second pitstops at most tracks. 2017 most tracks were 1 stop using the 2 softest compounds. 2018 they were still mostly 1 stop but with the 2 hardest comoounds. This year seems a bit more mixed up but obviously plenty of teams are struggling with the thinner gauge tread.

The V8 years there wasn't much understanding of the tyre yet, and particularly 2011 many drivers felt it didn't matter how they drove, the tyres still degraded.

[ray b]

use what ever goes fastest

 

if that means soft fronts and hard rears are a tenth faster then all mediums so be it

or if a track favors one side even two different tyres on front

 

races are won by faster cars 

[ExFlagMan]

Maybe the 'drive to a delta' is more down to the need to make the PU last much longer than in past years.

[Clatter]

Maybe the 'drive to a delta' is more down to the need to make the PU last much longer than in past years.

 

It doesn't help, but I think the main reasons are fuel and tyre related. They will only put as much fuel in as they can get away with, and they need to manage that throughout the race. Go too fast and the tyres go out of the temperature window. Even in Q the tyres often can't maintain performance for a full lap.

[pdac]

It doesn't help, but I think the main reasons are fuel and tyre related. They will only put as much fuel in as they can get away with, and they need to manage that throughout the race. Go too fast and the tyres go out of the temperature window. Even in Q the tyres often can't maintain performance for a full lap.

 

No, I think it's all data related. They have so much data on every aspect of the car and its performance. Remember, these are people who strive to eliminate all unknowns and uncertainties. No matter what changes, as long as they have some data, they will be able to calculate the optimum strategy - and that optimum strategy is never going to be flat out racing.

[noikeee]

And, no matter what changes are made, they will continue to drive to a delta.

 

This isn't true if the tyre can handle being pushed to the limit most of the race, which former performance tyres were perfectly able to. With performance tyres they would still lift and coast to save fuel, and use conservative power modes to make the engine last, but wouldn't be refraining themselves to go to the grip edge in the corners like they apparently still do now (although to a lesser extent than the earlier Pirelli years).

 

But I'm not 100% sure pure performance tyres is what we need, I think this would get us back to 2010-like races which were boring. DRS would make overtaking easier than then, but there would be very little strategic variance and the races would become more predictable.

Edited by noikeee, 20 July 2019 - 19:26.

[shure]

This isn't true if the tyre can handle being pushed to the limit most of the race, which former performance tyres were perfectly able to. With performance tyres they would still lift and coast to save fuel, and use conservative power modes to make the engine last, but wouldn't be refraining themselves to go to the grip edge in the corners like they apparently still do now (although to a lesser extent than the earlier Pirelli years).

 

But I'm not 100% sure pure performance tyres is what we need, I think this would get us back to 2010-like races which were boring. DRS would make overtaking easier than then, but there would be very little strategic variance and the races would become more predictable.

They would still try to conserve to save wear and tear on the engines, but it wouldn't be to the same extent as now.  The tyres are IMO the single biggest factor in that regard.  

 

But the benefits of a performance tyre include being able to follow other cars without worrying unduly bout the tyres and personally I think it may give us some better racing as it would reduce the imbalance with drivers who struggle with making these current tyres work.  I think that's one of the biggest differentiators in race pace we have at the moment.

[Celloman]

I don't find struggling drivers on crap tires very entertaining. We have F2 for that. The battles in Silverstone aren't possible, neither a recovery drive like Austria.

And why do people want 2 stops? Zero stops are fine with me.

I don't know how 0 stops would work out, but I have a feeling it could lead to at least a few extremely boring races. When watching a race, a significant part of the discussion both before the race and during the race is about strategies, pit stop windows, etc. You remove this element and you basically have one less thing to look forward to.

 

The bigger issue for Pirelli is is that two stops under the current format will likely never make much sense except for maybe a couple of tracks on the calendar, like Austin or Barcelona. The difficulty of overtaking is the most obvious reason why it makes no sense to stop more. The second is the reduced pit lane speed limit. If I remember correctly, Paul Ricard had a 60 km/h pit limit in place for the race. No wonder nobody even considers stopping twice...

Edited by Celloman, 20 July 2019 - 22:51.

[shure]

I don't know how 0 stops would work out, but I have a feeling it could lead to at least a few extremely boring races. When watching a race, a significant part of the discussion both before the race and during the race is about strategies, pit stop windows, etc. You remove this element and you basically have one less thing to look forward to.

 

The bigger issue for Pirelli is is that two stops under the current format will likely never make much sense except for maybe a couple of tracks on the calendar, like Austin or Barcelona. The difficulty of overtaking is the most obvious reason why it makes no sense to stop more. The second is the reduced pit lane speed limit. If I remember correctly, Paul Ricard had a 60 km/h pit limit in place for the race. No wonder nobody even considers stopping twice...

Most strategies tend to converge tbh.  The main differences tend to centre around a driver attempting an undercut.

 

The main issue I have with mandating pit stops is that it comes from the same school of thought as the comedy tyres and DRS.  It's a patch to try to get around the lack of overtaking but it doesn't actually address the root causes of that problem.  All it does is move the overtaking to the pits instead of the track.

[TomNokoe]

The “three tyre rule” is usually the reason why we have one-stoppers nowadays. If Pirelli only brought two compounds (e.g C2 + C3 e.g.) we would’ve had much more strategic variance.

The hardest compound at most Grand Prix is usually the only viable compound for one-stoppers.

This allows teams to qualify on the middle tyre, and then one stop moving to the harder tyre.

If Pirelli dropped the hardest tyre, teams would probably 2 stop because running the softest compound for half the race isn't feasible at most circuits.

Even if teams continued to qualify on the harder tyre, their only option on Sunday would be to pit onto the softer tyre for one-stoppers. It wouldn't work. Even at Monaco it was the wrong strategy.

I know it sounds counterproductive. The 3-compound rule really did help for a time, but not anymore.

Case in point - Mexico 2019! Bring back two compounds only

Edited by TomNokoe, 29 October 2019 - 11:25.

[Retrofly]

They just need to make all 3 tiers mandatory in a race, minimum 2 stops.

Get rid of this 1 stop where nobody does anything bollocks.

 

Also means the are need to be setup and good on all 3compounds instead of just 1 or 2.

[Marklar]

They just need to make all 3 tiers mandatory in a race, minimum 2 stops.
Get rid of this 1 stop where nobody does anything bollocks.

Also means the are need to be setup and good on all 3compounds instead of just 1 or 2.

That would make the races so much worse because then everyone runs definitely the same strategy. Rigjt now at least you get some trying a 1 stop and some a 2 stop.

[w1Y]

Maybe say every car has to start on the tyre they set their fastest lap in qualy. Whether that be q1 q2 or q3

[Stephane]

That would make the races so much worse because then everyone runs definitely the same strategy. Rigjt now at least you get some trying a 1 stop and some a 2 stop.

 

Everyone on the same strategy, i'm all for it. 

[goldenboy]

I don't have a problem with how it is now actually. Different strategies is great to me.

Sometimes sucks a little for the midfield teams getting P7 to P10 but you win some and lose some.

I wish they were given more tyres over a weekend though. Especially to maximise practice running for the fans that paid a small fortune to be there.

[Wuzak]

When was this time they only used 1 compound?

 

2005 is the obvious answer.

 

Then and for a few seasons prior, they would take two compounds to the track but choose only one for the race. And in 2005 tyre changes were banned, except on safety grounds.

 

 

For much of F1 history tyre changes weren't done, or only done because of tyre problems.

 

 

And remember the famous pass of Mansell on Piquet at Silverstone? That occurred because Piquet went the whole race on one set of tyres, while Mansell got a fresh set and was able to make up teh time he lost pitting.

[CoolBreeze]

Why? Because the whole sport show is run by a bunch of morons.