76 replies to this topic

[RedFever]

OK, first things first.....this is NOT to trash or bash or start any fights with anyone. Can we all try to keep it civilized?

Second, there has been a little too much speculation lately about the "special" relationship between Ferrari and Bridgestone. SOme claim this relationship should be reduced or limited. THe logic behind is that the transfer of info is too limited to Ferrari's needs. This is a discriminatory disadvantage to the other Bridgestone teams (they get Ferrari-type tires, it's the claim), but also to the Michelin teams, because Michelin is "forced" to satisy both Williams and McLaren, hence being forced to produce "compromise" tires which are much slower. SOme critics even went as far as suggesting that Bridgestone basically gave Ferrari over a second a lap over the competition al lyear around. Now.....what do the teams that compete against Ferrari think? they should lnow better than the rest of us, no?

Today in thepress conference:

"Eddie Jordan: I am not sure what that question really means, but we are at a situation where decisions have to be made. My personal view is that we are getting unbelievable service from Bridgestone. We are, and try to be, a very loyal team and there is not reason to believe. I noticed your question about Ferrari, but we have not suffered in any shape or form as a result of the development that may be seen to be going to Ferrari. He comes to our factory every week with his group of people and the attention to detail that we get from Bridgestone is absolutely first rate."


Q: Gerhard, talking about the dominance of Ferrari, do you think that if McLaren were still on Bridgestones that Williams and Michelin would have won more races this year?
GB: Not at all. First I think the dominance of Ferrari is not a tyre question, I think that Ferrari have built a fantastic car, there is a fantastic reliability and on top of it you have Michael Schumacher who is also doing quite a good job! We have seen some circuits where I think Michelin had the best choice of tyres, we have seen some circuits where Bridgestone was very strong, but again, it is not a tyre question. I think for Michelin to get the help of two top teams is very helpful. I have also seen in the past and you also have seen in the past, if you have a tyre company that has just one top team and then the top team has a problem, then it is very difficult to figure out: Is it the tyres, is it the driver, is it the chassis, what is it? So from this side I think we always have a good reference point with McLaren and they have a good reference point with us and it helps sometimes. I think if you have to work very close with one team, like Bridgestone do with Ferrari, it gives some advantages and some disadvantages and I think both ways are okay."


So, here you have it. Jordan expresses personalized attention to his team needs. Of course, Bridgestone does 90% of the development with Ferrari. The Italians have two testing circuits and two full time test drivers and a full time test team. But the findings and developments are then shared and optimized for each team. Chances are actually that Jordan and Co. are actually benefitting from Ferrari enourmous amount of testing.

From the opponent front, Berger goes as far as stating that Michelin actually was the best tire at times (so much for the second a lap the entire season...). He also gives great inside in another misperception. wYes, Ferrari might have some advantage by being the major force being developing Bridgestone tires. But by having two top teams working on the Michelin's, these guys have more chances of finding new and improved solutions, as there are more ways they want to explore.

So, it seems that huge issue of banning the relationship between Ferrari and Bridgestone is a huge issue only in cyberspace. It appears the issue doesn't even exist in the F1 paddock. Any (civilized, please) comments?

[karlth]

Eddie Jordan's comments are especially interesting because didn't either Fisichella or Anderson complain about Bridgestone favouring Ferrari and leaving Jordan in the cold earlier this year?

[AMD]

early in the season Fisichella was critical of the relationship between Ferrari and Bridgestone:

"The Ferrari is a very good car but this is a problem for us,” Fisichella told Motorsport News. “Bridgestone works for Ferrari, so the tyres are particularly good for them. But they only suit the Ferrari. For us they're not good at all, yet. We have to chase the set-up, and with the new construction we get a lot of oversteer in the middle and exits of corners."

[Ghostrider]

Originally posted by AMD
early in the season Fisichella was critical of the relationship between Ferrari and Bridgestone:

"The Ferrari is a very good car but this is a problem for us,” Fisichella told Motorsport News. “Bridgestone works for Ferrari, so the tyres are particularly good for them. But they only suit the Ferrari. For us they're not good at all, yet. We have to chase the set-up, and with the new construction we get a lot of oversteer in the middle and exits of corners."

The heavy Honda engine + gearbox does not give the Jordan car the weight distribution that Ferrari has and that suits the Bridgestone tyres perfectly. But Jordan has a light Cosworth engine for next year so I hope they stay with Bridgestone. And it seems like EJ want that as well.

[RedFever]

"For us they're not good at all, yet."

Fisichella said YET. Which means, he expected they would develop them further to suit Jordan. Sorry, but what you expect? Ferrari is offering 2 full time drivers to develop the tires. The first results will be the direct outcome of Ferrari's feedback. Then overtime, each team weekly adds their feedback and the tires are optimized for their own chassis. I have a feeling that overtime this gives Jordan and Sauber better tires visavie Michelin thanks to Ferrari pushing the envelope so much, then they would if Ferrari would leave F1 and leave Jordan and Sauber sort by themselves how to develop the Bridgestones for their needs.

[AMD]

Originally posted by RedFever
Sorry, but what you expect?

I expected another tiresome rhetorical question

[Ghostrider]

Originally posted by RedFever
"For us they're not good at all, yet."
Fisichella said YET. Which means, he expected they would develop them further to suit Jordan. Sorry, but what you expect? Ferrari is offering 2 full time drivers to develop the tires. The first results will be the direct outcome of Ferrari's feedback. Then overtime, each team weekly adds their feedback and the tires are optimized for their own chassis. I have a feeling that overtime this gives Jordan and Sauber better tires visavie Michelin thanks to Ferrari pushing the envelope so much, then they would if Ferrari would leave F1 and leave Jordan and Sauber sort by themselves how to develop the Bridgestones for their needs.

, I agree, eventhough the tyres may not fit all them perfectly, they still are better than Michelin most of the times. And like the Bridgestone president or something said in F1 Racing, "many of our partner teams have promised us test sessions as long as their arm, but they haven't fullfilled those promises. With Ferrari, we now that they keep their promises". So Ferrari testing a lot is only helping Bridgestone runners.

[Chris G.]

Originally posted by RedFever
OK, first things first.....this is NOT to trash or bash or start any fights with anyone. Can we all try to keep it civilized?

Kind of hard to keep it civilised when EJ's and Gehard's comments basically TRASH a ton of the garbage spewed by Ferrari haters over the past year.

[Electric Sheep]

I agree, Red. Ferrari and Bridgestone are simply doing a far better job than Williams/McLaren and Michelin, respectively. Well done to both of them (and I'm no fan of Ferrari...)!

[bira]

The setting looks like this:

Pierre Dupasquier , Hisao Suganuma
< 5 inch space >
Gerhard Berger, Eddie Jordan, Norbert Haug


And you expected Eddie or Gerhard to even slightly criticise their tyre providers, as they sit right behind them, in an official FIA press conference?

You'd hear a different tune from the teams in more private talks...

[RedFever]

"many of our partner teams have promised us test sessions as long as their arm, but they haven't fullfilled those promises. With Ferrari, we now that they keep their promises". So Ferrari testing a lot is only helping Bridgestone runners"

Exactly. Jordan experienced serious financial issues, which thankfully appear to have been sorted out now. So, even if he had to drop the ball and reduce enourmously the testing Jordan did for Bridgestone, they still had Ferrari pushing the development further. Maybe not 100 optimal to Jordan's needs ,but still better than sitting on their asses for months while the French come up with better rubber

[RedFever]

Bira - you have a point but................

"And you expected Eddie or Gerhard to even slightly criticise their tyre providers, as they sit right behind them, in an official FIA press conference?

You'd hear a different tune from the teams in more private talks... "


Berger has always been very upfront with things. I don't see why he wouldn't say, if that is what he felt, as you seem to imply "Well, Ferrari arrangement with Bridgestone is unfair. They have their people at each other's firm and work exclusively on one team's tires. This is an unfair approach, the other teams are getting screwed. ANd so are the Michelin's teams, because our tire provider is fantastic, but they are to serve two top teams, so they cannot beat Bridgestone"

Now, why could Berger not say that? he would still keep Michelin happy and tell it like it is. It seems to me that he actually DOESN"T believe that this is what it is. He seems to believe that of Williams, BMW, Montoya, Michelin, Berger and Thiessen want to beat Ferrari, al lthey have to do is....do a better job than they are doing. It is that simple. If you re-read his entire statement and his continuos reference to the past, Berger very much believes in the cyclical ups and downs of F1 teams.

[Ghostrider]

Originally posted by bira
The setting looks like this:
Pierre Dupasquier , Hisao Suganuma
< 5 inch space >
Gerhard Berger, Eddie Jordan, Norbert Haug
And you expected Eddie or Gerhard to even slightly criticise their tyre providers, as they sit right behind them, in an official FIA press conference?
You'd hear a different tune from the teams in more private talks...

Yes of course they are a little diplomatic.
Since Bridgestone has been the better tyre this year I think Eddie is happy with Bridgestone. If Berger and Haug is happy with McLaren is another thing. But I wonder about Ford and how that will affect Jordan relationship with Bridegstone. Ford and Firestone are not exactly friends in the US, are they?

[RedFever]

also, Jordan is a small fish, so he must keep Bridgestone happy if he wants to compete. But I must seriously doubt you inference to Berger .Do you really believe that BMW, via Berger, would coverup Michelin's incompetence or Bridgestone's tricky ways, if that was the case, and instead take on the blame on themselves, as part of the key components to their defeat??? no way ,BMW would never discredit their image, it is for tha image alone that they are spending hundreds of millions of $ in F1!!!!

[Dunder]

advantage - yes
unfair advantage - no

[JVRACER]

Even though it was a practice session today look at the numbers.Jacques is the only Bridgestone runner after Ferrari in 13th PLACE!.While all the Michellin runners are within comparable times to each other.Bottom line is Ferrari gets it tires specifically made for them and every other Bridgestone shod team is made to suffer.I just can imagine how hard it must be to try to replicate the suspensions on the Ferrari (which are constantly updated) to chase the optimal setup.Bridgestone only cares that it tires shod the World Champions car they could give a Flying Finn about the others.As for Jordans comments, Not to long ago Jordan introduced a new suspension for his current car , more than likely they were sucessful at copying what Ferrari had created.Furthermore since when are you ever gonna hear what Team principles really have to say at press conferences.

[sensible]

Originally posted by JVRACER
Even though it was a practice session today look at the numbers.Jacques is the only Bridgestone runner after Ferrari in 13th PLACE!.While all the Michellin runners are within comparable times to each other.Bottom line is Ferrari gets it tires specifically made for them and every other Bridgestone shod team is made to suffer.I just can imagine how hard it must be to try to replicate the suspensions on the Ferrari (which are constantly updated) to chase the optimal setup.Bridgestone only cares that it tires shod the World Champions car they could give a Flying Finn about the others.As for Jordans comments, Not to long ago Jordan introduced a new suspension for his current car , more than likely they were sucessful at copying what Ferrari had created.Furthermore since when are you ever gonna hear what Team principles really have to say at press conferences.

You could argue that this backs up what berger says, vis-a-vis that the order is imposed primarily by the cars. If you forget tyres and just look at the cars, the order you get is pretty much what you'd expect, ie ferrari, williams, mclaren, renault etc

[RedFever]

sensible...exactly. And besides, it was just a dumb warmup session. Last race Fisichella started 6th. How does that fit with "poor Jordan is getting **** tires". How boring......

[Ricardo F1]

To be honest I think the true proof of the pudding, so to speak, will happen next year with the F2003. That's what Bridgestone and Ferrari have been working toward with a totally new way of working.

As for this year, I'm sure as the Bridgestone tyre gets better and better other teams will learn how to work with it and get the best they can out of it with their chassis. That doesn't stop the fact that it works at its best with the Ferrari and no other Bridgestone runner will ever have that advantage. And clearly the Michelin IS a compromise for two major teams both of whom seem to want something slightly different from it.

[RedFever]

"To be honest I think the true proof of the pudding, so to speak, will happen next year with the F2003. That's what Bridgestone and Ferrari have been working toward with a totally new way of working."

Good point. Today's gap between F1-2002 and the rest is actually the result of a design that was completed last summer, so obviously when McLaren was involved as much as Ferrari.

My point is.....Williams enjoyed the same advantage last year and nobody cared. Ferrari and McLaren were sharing their Japanese tires, which were a compromise of the feedback of the the two teams. Then Dennis decides to leave and join Michelin (some say because he felt he was slipping in Bridgestone's eyes......like it was the Japanese's fault that from 1998 to 2001 the team kept losing its edge......others instead think that Michelin had given the first signs that it was going to be a dominant tire, after having sorted out the first year's kinks, so Dennis jumped ship just in time to enjoy the advantage.....not so, I am afraid). Williams instead was free to work with Michelin and it was the only team with any real chance, so Michelin gave them all they wanted, the only two drivers with a chance to win (and win they did, 4 GPs).

Now, thanks to Dennis, Ferrari found itself in Williams' enviable position. And what happens? all of a sudden it is an unfair advantage that should be outlawed. Not so, sorry. It was OK for Williams, it is OK for Ferrari now. And after all, whether for political or other reasons, the other teams don't find anything to complaining, so I think it is just another way a team can work a niche advantage.

[SeanValen]

Like some posts have pointed out above, I think give it time, 2003 maybe, and see more of the development and working relationships between non-Ferrari Bridgestone runners and non top Michelin teams. Hopefully we won't be making comparisons too much, and having more competitive cars up front setting good times

[BuonoBruttoCattivo]

IMO, motorsports is about finding that elusive 'unfair advantage' and using it to your maximum.
The Porsche 917-30 was considered an unfair advantage in '70s CanAm, yet today we admire it with awe and respect, much like we will the current Ferrari steamroller 20 years from now.
C'mon Williams, McLaren and Michelin..........get your act together and provide some show to your fans.

[Ricardo F1]

Originally posted by RedFever
"To be honest I think the true proof of the pudding, so to speak, will happen next year with the F2003. That's what Bridgestone and Ferrari have been working toward with a totally new way of working."

Good point. Today's gap between F1-2002 and the rest is actually the result of a design that was completed last summer, so obviously when McLaren was involved as much as Ferrari.

Now, thanks to Dennis, Ferrari found itself in Williams' enviable position. And what happens? all of a sudden it is an unfair advantage that should be outlawed. Not so, sorry. It was OK for Williams, it is OK for Ferrari now. And after all, whether for political or other reasons, the other teams don't find anything to complaining, so I think it is just another way a team can work a niche advantage.

Red - I know we've had this discussion before and as I said I don't think we'll see the true meaning of the Bridgestone deal until next year. But it IS different from the Williams position last year or the McLaren/Bridgestone advantage in 1998. They were developing tyres based primarily on one teams feedback, for sure, but they didn't have the intense data swapping / sharing factory space deals that Ferrari and BS have. No doubt this has helped accelerate the development of the tyre for Ferrari this year (but as I think we agree this can easily benefit other teams as well, just not as much as Ferrari) and MAY have significant reprecussions for next year.

But as you pointed out the Michelin guys seem to be happy fighting on this level for now and we should entrust them to know better than us!!! Come Melbourne 03 I guess we'll have an answer (although it might not be a catagorical one as the F2003 might not be ready and if it is might be able to run with wooden tyres and still win!!!).

[ffiloseta]

Originally posted by bira
The setting looks like this:

Pierre Dupasquier , Hisao Suganuma
< 5 inch space >
Gerhard Berger, Eddie Jordan, Norbert Haug

And you expected Eddie or Gerhard to even slightly criticise their tyre providers, as they sit right behind them, in an official FIA press conference?

You'd hear a different tune from the teams in more private talks...

Please elaborate. What are the private tunes ? And for the record, in my opinion, if Mr. Jordan or Mr. Berger had a real issue with their providers, I'm sure they would have found quite a different wording for their thoughts. Something in the line of "We have been working and making progress. Next race will take us to another level" type of crap and not the open praise or justification I read.

[ffiloseta]

Oh BTW Bira, sono curioso, cosa cavolo accadrá presto ? L'arrivo del messia ebreo ? La fine del mondo ? L'incremento del costo della soscrizione ?

[Ricardo F1]

ffiloseta - not to answer for the lovely Bira, but no user of Michelin is going to criticize them in a press conference in any way, shape or form especially with the team boss of the other Michelin runner in attendance.

[Mrv]

You haven't seen nothing yet with the tire issue, concerning Ferrari and Bridgestone. 2003 will see an unfair advantage for Ferrari that everyone seems to think has occured this year.

[dynamite7]

It is cleary not an unfair advantage.

If Arrows had the cash to run two tyre-specific test teams instead of ferrari's one, and Arrows had the best car by far... then cleary Arrows would be enjoying the same benifits.

Anyone can gain team can gain this advantage if they do their job properly.

[bira]

Originally posted by ffiloseta
Oh BTW Bira, sono curioso, cosa cavolo accadrá presto ? L'arrivo del messia ebreo ? La fine del mondo ? L'incremento del costo della soscrizione ?

Vivrò in Italia!

[Melbourne Park]

Originally posted by Mrv
You haven't seen nothing yet with the tire issue, concerning Ferrari and Bridgestone. 2003 will see an unfair advantage for Ferrari that everyone seems to think has occured this year.

Last year MRV you were saying the F2002 was going to be really special.

Now your saying the tyre benefits will be really special.

No doubt the features of the new Ferrari are being developed with next year's Bridgestones in mind.

MS looks like a 6 times WDC IMO.

Strategically Bridgestone have a competative advantage over Michelin, as Michelins tyres must serve at least two if not three masters.

One way to substantiate what is going on would be to do a statistical analysis of Bridgestone teams this year compared to last year, and do the same with Michelin, and compare the variance between teams' performance. I imagine that the Ferrari is a more concistant performer this year than in 2001, and that other Bridgestone teams concistancy is not as good as in 2001. I'd imagine that Michelin teams relative concistancy this year is similar to last year. Concistancy would be on a per race basis. Wish I had the time and the statistical package to look ...

As to the relationship being "unfair", well of course it is. That's what F1 is all about. Ferrari and Bridgestone have lifted the bar, have gone to a new level, have changed the game. Good on them for doing so.

I am not a rules expert on F1. If I was, I could have a legal opinion. In my ignorant view, the relationship is outside the spirit of tyre suppliers. Michelin certainly cannot make a Williams tyre and a McLaren tyre and a Toyota tyre. But Bridgestone is making a Ferrari tyre.

I guess its legal, but IMO Michelin should be allowed to supply more tyre types in order to match Bridgestone's specialisation. Such a change would also the other Bridgestone teams.

[bira]

I was having a background chat with someone in the know today, and he was explaining to me that it's not Jordan, BAR, Arrows or Sauber that are suffering from Bridgestone's special relationship with Ferrari - it's Williams and McLaren that are.

In other words, the fact that Ferrari has a tyre tailor-made to its need while its two main rivals (or most potential rivals) do not have the same kind of capability is what gives Ferrari the "unfair" advantage.

The 'small' Bridgestone teams were complaining at one point or another - some still do - but the these teams' bosses have by now also come to appreciate the benefits of this arrangement which, as someone on the thread already stated, primarily means their tyre testing budget can be significantly reduced: Ferrari and Bridgestone are doing all the work on development. And, there's no doubt the Bridgestone tyre is a good one. It's not like it is only good for Ferrari.

But as far as Michelin goes, they have on more than one occasion this year been torn between vastly different approaches of their two top teams. These two have a very different chassis, and what's worse, they have very different drivers and setups. So in all their efforts are "squandered" far more than Bridgestone's - and that's not something that anyone could do anything about. Ideally, a third tyre manufacturer would come in and then each of the Top Three will have its own "special" development focus. Or, alternatively, one of the current suppliers will quit and the entire field will be on the same tyre.

But either options are not going to happen in the foreseeable future.

It should be noted, though, that part of McLaren's decision to switch to Michelin were their belief that they'll be able to command better ties with the French company vis a vis Williams, than they were able to with Bridgestone/Ferrari. Seeing as Bridgestone did grow closer and had better ties with Ferrari throughout the development and testing stages, Dennis had little choice but to gamble on another manufacturer.

And, from the looks of it, McLaren are currently able to understand and use Michelin better - in overall terms - than Williams. But that has more to do with problems in the Williams car than with Michelin.

[Foxbat]

Originally posted by JVRACER
Even though it was a practice session today look at the numbers.Jacques is the only Bridgestone runner after Ferrari in 13th PLACE!.While all the Michellin runners are within comparable times to each other.Bottom line is Ferrari gets it tires specifically made for them and every other Bridgestone shod team is made to suffer.I just can imagine how hard it must be to try to replicate the suspensions on the Ferrari (which are constantly updated) to chase the optimal setup.Bridgestone only cares that it tires shod the World Champions car they could give a Flying Finn about the others.As for Jordans comments, Not to long ago Jordan introduced a new suspension for his current car , more than likely they were sucessful at copying what Ferrari had created.Furthermore since when are you ever gonna hear what Team principles really have to say at press conferences.

That only works if you assume that 1) every race that the disadvantadged Bridgestone teams do well it is because they have a non-ferrari-optimized compound for that race 2) Ferrari doesn't have much of an advantadge on BAR, the main thing seperating them is how optimized the tyres are for the car ....

[Mrv]

Originally posted by bira
I was having a background chat with someone in the know today, and he was explaining to me that it's not Jordan, BAR, Arrows or Sauber that are suffering from Bridgestone's special relationship with Ferrari - it's Williams and McLaren that are.

In other words, the fact that Ferrari has a tyre tailor-made to its need while its two main rivals (or most potential rivals) do not have the same kind of capability is what gives Ferrari the "unfair" advantage.

Exactly Bira, this is where the problem is. Michelin compounds are compromised and Bridgestones aren't.

[ffiloseta]

Originally posted by bira
Vivrò in Italia!

Per Bacco ! Contragulazioni !

[AndreasNystrom]

But do all Bridgestone teams get the same compound?
In MotoGP, only the best drivers get the best compounds. 2 soft tires can have different compounds etc, and that can mean .5-1sec / lap.

[bira]

Originally posted by AndreasNystrom
But do all Bridgestone teams get the same compound?
In MotoGP, only the best drivers get the best compounds. 2 soft tires can have different compounds etc, and that can mean .5-1sec / lap.

Absolutely. The teams do not get to choose the set of tyres they use over a weekend and there are no separate tyres made for each team. There up normally two option tyres on offer to all teams supplied, and the tyres are alocated randomly, under FIA supervision, to the teams in equal and limited share.

[Melbourne Park]

Originally posted by bira
... - it's Williams and McLaren that are.

In other words, the fact that Ferrari has a tyre tailor-made to its need while its two main rivals (or most potential rivals) do not have the same kind of capability is what gives Ferrari the "unfair" advantage.
....

But as far as Michelin goes, they have on more than one occasion this year been torn between vastly different approaches of their two top teams. ...

I agree; and such a conclusion is the only logical outcome.

[Melbourne Park]

Originally posted by bira
... Ideally, a third tyre manufacturer would come in and then each of the Top Three will have its own "special" development focus. Or, alternatively, one of the current suppliers will quit and the entire field will be on the same tyre.
...

Your presumptions are not quite correct in your alternative possability Bira. The entire field would not be equal if Michelin dropped out; a Bridgestone equipped field would have two classes of car; the Ferrari tyred car, and the ill equipped rest ...


To me, that highlights how the "spirit" of the only one type of tyre spec (with one being softer) rule is not being met by Bridgestone. While Michelin is supplying a tyre for all (or at least two), Ferrari are supplying a tyre for one ... if Michelin are to be competitive, they need to be able to supply more than one tyre type, or focus on just one team. Then we can have maybe a two car championship. How exciting.

[ffiloseta]

Originally posted by Ricardo F1
ffiloseta - not to answer for the lovely Bira, but no user of Michelin is going to criticize them in a press conference in any way, shape or form especially with the team boss of the other Michelin runner in attendance.

Oh, I see, its a matter of not showing weaknesses to your rival. I agree somewhat, but this comment is limited to Michelin, so I still think that Mr. Jordan is genuinely satisfied with Bridgestone, and that is the origin of this thread.

[Ricardo F1]

Originally posted by ffiloseta


Oh, I see, its a matter of not showing weaknesses to your rival. I agree somewhat, but this comment is limited to Michelin, so I still think that Mr. Jordan is genuinely satisfied with Bridgestone, and that is the origin of this thread.

As Bira said all this development must be producing a decent tyre for the others, there's just no way they could ever compete with Ferrari even if their car was good enough.

[Bladrian]

I've heard Michelin explain some poor performances by stating that they made a compound that was too soft. Then they explained some more poor performances by stating that they'd made the compound too hard. Maybe the excuse this time will be that Uranus was in opposition to Jupiter ....

Or maybe, just maybe, they'll come out with the truth. "Michael Schumacher is too fast for our drivers."

?


No - I don't think they will, either.

[Ricardo F1]

Michael Schumacher is irrelevant to Michelin's problems. Ferrari and Bridgestone are their biggest headache.

[Foxbat]

Originally posted by Ricardo F1
Michael Schumacher is irrelevant to Michelin's problems. Ferrari and Bridgestone are their biggest headache.

Cue longwinded discussion about how the 50.000 people involved direcly and indirectly with the Ferrari operation are more important to the on-track results then Micheal Somebody who couldn't win if it wasn't for Al-qaida not flying airliners into the Ferrari factories and windtunnel...
Maybe we should just make three Ricardo sticky threads that you could refer to, we could just put all the previous discussion on:
"Rubens Slowichillo is the crappiest driver this side of Yoong, and didn't really win a race in Germany"
"Ferrari's current results have nothing to do with Micheal Schumacher's alleged winningness"
and
"Coulthard didn't literally say next year will be my year, he only makes the claim that he will be a championship contender in the following season".

That way whenever you stumble on one of your hot-button issues you can just post a link, saving you and us a lot of trouble. That would also give you more time to comment on how pathetic Nik's style of forumming is

[Ricardo F1]

I'm sorry was there something untrue about my statement? Ferrari and Bridgestone have the best package on the grid. Not true? I don't think it's Michelin's job to battle Schumacher, it's Michelin's job to provide better tyres and McLaren, Williams et al to supply a better car to their drivers whose job it IS to beat Schumacher.

[Foxbat]

Originally posted by Melbourne Park


Your presumptions are not quite correct in your alternative possability Bira. The entire field would not be equal if Michelin dropped out; a Bridgestone equipped field would have two classes of car; the Ferrari tyred car, and the ill equipped rest ...


To me, that highlights how the "spirit" of the only one type of tyre spec (with one being softer) rule is not being met by Bridgestone. While Michelin is supplying a tyre for all (or at least two), Ferrari are supplying a tyre for one ... if Michelin are to be competitive, they need to be able to supply more than one tyre type, or focus on just one team. Then we can have maybe a two car championship. How exciting.

If yout to see things in black and white they will remain black and white, and it also makes impossible to change your view of them but I'll give it a shot anyway...
Bridgestone is developing their tyres in close cooperation with Ferrari, not exclusively for Ferrari. McLaren was offered to become part of this close cooperation, but faced with the prospect of having to share their most intimate information they jumped ship to Michelin (which seemed to be on the ascent anyway). This left Ferrari as the sole focus of the developmenmt program, as none of the other Bridgestone teams has to the resources for a real testing program -and Ferrari has them in abundance.

Of course close cooperation doesn't end with tyre development, and the Jordan quote in the topic starter whows that Bridgestone is hugging all it's teams closer than ever before. Bridgestone want to be competetive across the field and they are making investments into achieving that succes.

Then there is the thorny issue of the "Ferrari spec" tyre, this is ultimatly a red herring. When there was only one tyre manufacturer no-one was getting upset that Bridgestone made a "Ferrari-spec" tyre (it was a McLaren/Ferrari spec tyre of course, but with the needs and desires of these teams being so close it was really the same as a pure Ferrari-spec tyre). No one was claiming that 'the other teams could never compete with Ferrari even if their car was good enough'. So the other Bridgestone teams aren't getting shafted, at least not more than usual.

But surely, you will say, the tyre will be designed to Ferrari preferences? How can that not give Ferrari an advantadge over the other teams? Well apart from the fact that for the second-tier teams the situation is really no different from what existed previously, there is another reason why this doesn't mean the other teams are being disadvantadged. When the tyre is developed the qualities that are sought are benificial for everyone, there simply is no such thing as grip that can only be used by a car with a Ferrari aero package, or a wear pattern that is only optimal for a car with the Ferrari rear end.
Fundamentally a good tyre even if designed with team X in mind will be good on all cars, and it's easy enough to see that the situation where a given tyre doesn't work for a team while it works for others it is generally caused by the car. Williamses eating their tyres because the car isn't quite as well balanced as the Mac's and Ferrari's, the Jordan not working with the Bridgestones (remember at this point Jordan was running a heavier rengine and gearbox that weren't even supposed to be raced this season, because the new engine spec still wasn't ready), all point to what fundentally problems with the car. And you can't expect the tyre manufacturers to make tyres that will iron out the problems with the cars...

There is a rub of course, you can't get something for nothing (unless you are Colin Chapman) and therefore tyre design always involves compromising.
And this is what is hurting Michelin.Williams has lots of oomph, while McLaren has great balance. One wants a tyre that is very resistant to wear (which we saw last season), while the other prefers grip at the expense of wear. Now it of course follows that Ferrari, who have both lots of grunt,phenomenal balance and lots of aero grip, will prefer a tyre that offers good wear resistance but without grip being compromised too much. It appears to be a compromise that works well for all the teams.

In conclusion I would argue that it is not an unfair advantadge relative to the other Bridgestone teams, as it is actually giving them a better tyre than they would have otherwise had. And it is not an unfair advantadge in general, because their exploitation of this advantadge hinges on building a car that is great in the aero, balance and power departments.
In fact I would say that it is a very fair advantadge, in that it will disappear the moment other teams build cars that are as good as the F2002

[Ricardo F1]

this situation is really no different from what existed previously

That statement is patently untrue. Never in the history of F1 has a tyre manufacturer been at the HQ of a GP Team and the GP Team at the HQ of the tyre manufacturer. Never has a team technical principal ever said 'we will be designing the car around the tyre' - meaning the F2003. Why not? Because this level of technical data sharing has NEVER happened before.

It may not be bad for other Bridgestone runners, they're going to get a damn good tyre. But it will be a tyre that suits the Ferrari down to a tee.

Like I've said you can forget the F2002, it's the F2003 that's going to show whether these concerns are valid or not.

[Foxbat]

Originally posted by Ricardo F1
I'm sorry was there something untrue about my statement? Ferrari and Bridgestone have the best package on the grid. Not true? I don't think it's Michelin's job to battle Schumacher, it's Michelin's job to provide better tyres and McLaren, Williams et al to supply a better car to their drivers whose job it IS to beat Schumacher.

Your statement may not be literally untrue, but there are several things wrong with it. First of all it is one of those statements that generally lead to the discussions I mentioned (to be precise you specifically say that isn't a part of the Ferrari package, leading invariably to RD2), secondly it fits in a general trend on your part of jumping on the mentioning of MS and claiming that his role in this particular aspect is minimal or non-existent (which ultimatly adds up to him being irrelevant in almost every particular aspect of racing), thirdly you misconstrue Bladrians comment to mean that Michelin should compete directly with Schumacher rather than that Schumacher is making Michelin look bad (as happened today for example), fourthly it is factually wrong in that Micheal Schumacher is part of the driver-chassis-engine-tyre package that Michelin and it's affiliated teams have to beat.

I hope that this response is exhaustive enough for you, for I have no wish to go further lest it end in another of those repetetive discussions.

[Ricardo F1]

There was absolutely nothing wrong with it Foxbat. I'm not going into any repetitive discussions, you're the one who seemingly wants to take it there.

[Tec Freak]

This thread helps me understand why some politicians keep getting re-elected. Even reasonably intelligent and articulate people will buy into ridiculous arguments, so long as it those arguments support their predetermined positions.

And I'm sorry, red legions, but the "Ferraristone" alliance provides a huge advantage to Ferrari, at EVERYONE's expense, including teams like Jordan. Are you seriously saying that having one's own, personal tire manufacturer is NOT an advantage? Is that why Ferrari has 10 full-time engineers at Bridgestone?

The tire is an integral part of the suspension, especially in an F1 car, where the 13" wheel diameter reg means the sidewalls are especially flexible. Imagine try to build a race car where one manufacture builds only one form of spring, to be applied to every suspension for every car. If your particlar suspension set-up doesn't work well with that spring, you are in trouble. Now imaging that you have your own personal spring manufacturer, dedicated to constructing the perfect spring for your car. Would this be an advantage?

And to make it even better, let us suppose that the manufacturer develops a special spring for your car for each race, to your specs, and then , two or three days before the race, hands that same spring to everyone else, giving them no time to adapt their suspensions to the spring. Do you think those other teams would be at an advantage or a disadvantage?

Yes, yes, we've all heard the press releases and spin doctored tripe. (My personal favorite is that the other Bridgestone teams benefit from all that Ferrari testing--doesn't look that way this weekend!)

What the heck was Eddie J supposed to tell the press? "This situation sucks and I'm pissed at Bridgestone?" Oh ya, that'll do him a lot of good! Better to put a smile on and try to solve the problem behind closed doors.

Ditto for the crap about "Bridgestone gave McLaren the same chance." It is NOT PHYSICALLY POSSIBLE to develop one tire for two cars. Forget it. By regulation, a tire manufacturer can come to a race with a dry tire of ONE construction and two compounds (hard and soft). Unless the McLaren and Ferrari chassis happen to be identical (not!) one car will be better off.

I don't care if it is "fair" or not. "Fair" is a subjective term with very little meaning. What the situation does objectively is limit competition and eliminate close racing. This is good only if your closet is full of Ferrari T-shirts and you wear a red wig to the race.

The unfortunate, and ultimate outcome of the Ferraristone alliance is that, probably beginning next year, Michelin will be forced to counter with either Michelaren or Michilliams. This means that for every race on the calendar there will be two, and only two, teams with any chance of winning. And this will not change, but will continue for season after season.

It's been like that before you say? Well yes it has, and its been a fricking bore. And even then there was at least the possiblity that a third team would become competitive. That possibility will be over.

[ffiloseta]

Originally posted by Ricardo F1
I'm sorry was there something untrue about my statement? Ferrari and Bridgestone have the best package on the grid. Not true? I don't think it's Michelin's job to battle Schumacher, it's Michelin's job to provide better tyres and McLaren, Williams et al to supply a better car to their drivers whose job it IS to beat Schumacher.

If you were more right, you would be (relativistically) coming from the left. I still don't get why other people insist in including Schumacher. Ferrari would probably be not as succesful, but they would undoubtedly have the BEST PACKAGE.