Quote from Mustafur :

Yes I know there has been a strategic element and a racing element but now the whole thing is Strategy.

Well, for example in the race last weekend, if Alonso hadn't passed Raikkonen at the start, he wouldn't have been able to put himself in the position to jump Vettel in the pits which put him in the ideal position to win the race, it could have been a different result if it wasn't for that. Pretty similar with Vettel in Bahrain. In Malaysia, there was plenty of racing. That sort of thing is pretty much the same sort of racing in F1 there has been in the modern era. A lot of people are overreacting imo. Spain was still too much but it wasn't as bad as everyone is making out.

Quote from IsaacPrice :

Well, for example in the race last weekend, if Alonso hadn't passed Raikkonen at the start, he wouldn't have been able to put himself in the position to jump Vettel in the pits which put him in the ideal position to win the race, it could have been a different result if it wasn't for that. Pretty similar with Vettel in Bahrain. In Malaysia, there was plenty of racing. That sort of thing is pretty much the same sort of racing in F1 there has been in the modern era. A lot of people are overreacting imo. Spain was still too much but it wasn't as bad as everyone is making out.

Yeah the first stint dictates everything, then pretty much any passing you see afterwards is just a straight pass without defence, and if they try to defend their tyres go off.

Its lame.

Quote from N I K I :

And that's exactly why it's so interesting. There's hardly any sport out there where player has to be committed to it for that long of a period constantly on the edge with just few straights here and there to rest for few seconds. F1 driver on 50% of his capabilities does way more than great majority of all other sportsmen do in their field of expertize. Every game is about strategy if you take a closer look. Every team has strategies etc. etc. and still take Force India car this year and go bash it out you'll have no problem, car manages tires itself by design. In Mercedes you have to manage it, because car is incapable of doing that for you at the moment. It's fascinating how much thought is behind this mustafur.

I'm not fan of F1 by accident mate. It's absolutely the pinacle, the best of the best in something I love and that is why I'm trying to show you a deeper level of understanding, since it's necessary in such a complicated sport. Else, you just end up with complaints about things of things instead of perhaps admiring great work the Ferrari crew has done with their car this year compared to RedBull, who hasn't moved a step since last year.

It's a shame this announced tires change after Canada. Ferrari, Lotus and especially Force India have worked really hard in finding the perfect balance in their car, via suspension geometry, setups and other things to be in perfect thermal area of 2013 Pirelli tire. It's greatly unfair to widen that narrow operating window to allow other teams to exploit temperatures which are basically not allowed. Even in LFS the operating window in temperature range is generally tight and it's something as normal as that. It's just the consequence of tire war that teams got used on having it easy mate and that's why we now have all this misunderstandings going on.

F1 has many, many times gone backwards in the past to allow the racing to become closer, ergo more competitive and more attractive. If there were only few rules and teams were never stopped from going forward, everyone would be running V12 engines, going 400kmh on Monza and driving 3 meter wide cars with such grip the best of tires would probably be as F1's ordered tire today is. The point is, it would cost unimaginable amount of money and there wouldn't be racing, we'd be watching business. So, there are few steps back from perfection to give us racing from that.

Even in pure racing, there are strategies how you overtake someone, or defend from someone. I'm sorry, but stating things as you did just makes me thing all thru this tread that you wish to ignore everything that has been kindly given to you here in terms of knowledge to stick with your entry fan levels of knowledge in order just to be different and to argue with basically, everyone here. Mate, I strongly suggest you not to state things way out of your range with attitude I don't really follow this sport.

You follow football. It's the biggest game of chess on planet that. It's just that the board is not black and yellow, it's completely green, how about that.

Football is Football, Racing is racing.

The whole concept of each is completely different. If you try to put much too emphasis on the strategy then its not exactly racing as the driver them selves are basically pawns to the team on how to drive and what to do at any given moment.

Im not trying to sound like this is change change is bad im saying from the perspective of the whole concept onnwhat your seeing is forming into another type of sport.

Hamilton Passed Webber in last laps of Bahrain. Webber passed him back. Then Hamilton passed him in last lap!!!!!!!! Just to name one example that you're 100% wrong. I'm getting sick of arguing with you. You no longer deserve me sharing anything intelligent with you Mustafur. You've officially become worse than BlueFlame.

Quote from CrAZySkyPimp :

Mate, listen, I had it on another forum since the space pilot 3k episode ok, so you're way behind me. You were still in diapers back then.

I couldn't care less about other forums. This forum is the one that matters.

Quote from N I K I :

Hamilton Passed Webber in last laps of Bahrain. Webber passed him back. Then Hamilton passed him in last lap!!!!!!!! Just to name one example that you're 100% wrong. I'm getting sick of arguing with you. You no longer deserve me sharing anything intelligent with you Mustafur. You've officially become worse than BlueFlame.

Your unwillingness to see the drivers point of view in anyway makes me wonder why your on this forum in the first place.

I see two drivers on worn cheese tyres taking a gamble on trying to finish ahead of each other while trying to save the tyres or they will hit the cliff, defending is next to impossible and the result is out of their hands and its basically luck that will win or who had the fresher tyres.

The whole stint they are basically saving tyres, even when "battling".

That is chess, it is not racing.

Now you can make 10 paragraphs on why strategy, chess and football is interesting but at the end of the day those are not racing.

Quote from yet another driver(Daniel Ricciardo this time):
"The first two seasons they had were better, and you think they would develop and get better basically."They're basically falling apart very quickly.
"A lot of guys had to make four pit stops on the weekend, including myself.
"It means you have to look after the tyres, you can't really race at full speed. You're playing a bit of a game of chess instead of racing as hard as you can.
"Formula One is meant to be the pinnacle of motor racing, it's meant to be the fastest cars in the world racing around.
"It's not really that at the moment."

Now ask yourself, Is this not exactly what im saying?

I can't even be bothered anymore. Check your inbox.

Quote from Mustafur :

Trying to make tyres as bad as possible to stop people winning sounds more like WWE then competition to me.

Teams shouldn't be punished for being better.

If they were better, they would find a way to win. They would be able to adapt to change.

Quote from Mustafur :

Yes I know there has been a strategic element and a racing element but now the whole thing is Strategy.

Since when was it not? Almost all forms of racing is mostly strategy. That's how it is in nearly any sport. If you're going to reference the bridgestone era then your argument would be invalid through all forms of contradiction in your prior arguments.

Quote from Mustafur :

Yeah the first stint dictates everything, then pretty much any passing you see afterwards is just a straight pass without defence, and if they try to defend their tyres go off.

Its lame.

Why wouldn't the first stint dictate near everything? Its the only stint where the cars are closest together and the most important overtakes will happen because of it. If you have to get as much as you can as fast as you can else you may not get another chance the rest of the race. That's how racing has always been.

Sorry in advance if the multi-quote failed on my phone.

Quote from PMD9409 :

If they were better, they would find a way to win. They would be able to adapt to change.

Thats an invalid argument, when the performance of your car is Dependant on a Tyre company that can choose to change around the compounds for each race at will, the main factor of the entire race has therefore been changed.

Quote :

Since when was it not? Almost all forms of racing is mostly strategy. That's how it is in nearly any sport. If you're going to reference the bridgestone era then your argument would be invalid through all forms of contradiction in your prior arguments.

You could argue this, but strategy up untill the pirelli era was never limiting what the driver could do on the track to the point he couldn't race anyone due to tyres going off the cliff, or atleast on a Regular basis.

Quote :

Why wouldn't the first stint dictate near everything? Its the only stint where the cars are closest together and the most important overtakes will happen because of it. If you have to get as much as you can as fast as you can else you may not get another chance the rest of the race. That's how racing has always been.

What im trying to say is after the first stint there is no more racing, it is completely up to strategy and saving tyres, any passing you therefore see after the first stint isn't going to be really contested or even at all, I can't think of a single racing category in which this happens.

Now this doesn't happen at all tracks, such tracks like Monaco and Monza there is basically no wear, but then you go to other tracks and then racing is not possible because of wear, its become wacky.

Quote from Mustafur :

Thats an invalid argument, when the performance of your car is Dependant on a Tyre company that can choose to change around the compounds for each race at will, the main factor of the entire race has therefore been changed.

So what you're saying is that Ferrari and Lotus should be complaining too as this change in tire each race is hurting them right? I don't think so.

Redbull, a fast learning team who have for once not been the quickest to figure something out. Mercedes, the same boat they have been in since last year and maybe earlier. They can make a car go fast, but only in a qualifying format. When it comes to race, they haven't changed. Why do we feel there is a difference now? Because Hamilton is more vocal. Onto Lotus, opposite of Mercedes. They haven't mastered qualifying at all, yet have a strong grasp for race. And finally Ferrari, they have clearly built an all around car.

Racing has always been about being put into a box, trying to stretch the limits of that box, and trying to make it from start to finish as quick as possible.

Quote :

You could argue this, but strategy up untill the pirelli era was never limiting what the driver could do on the track to the point he couldn't race anyone due to tyres going off the cliff, or atleast on a Regular basis.

You're right, it wasn't the tires falling off, instead drivers couldn't be on the limit due to not being able to get close enough to overtake the car ahead because of the aero loss.

Quote :

What im trying to say is after the first stint there is no more racing, it is completely up to strategy and saving tyres, any passing you therefore see after the first stint isn't going to be really contested or even at all, I can't think of a single racing category in which this happens.

Why would you contest a car who is clearly quicker than you? It'll just slow you both down and ultimately have you lose more time/positions in the end. Its the middle of the race, you must race your own race. At the end of the race you don't think someone would contest a position? That's insane.

The tires have solely changed how cars perform between qualifying and race. You can build a car for overall speed (Merc), a car for solely for race (Lotus), or sacrifice a little of both and get an overall car (Ferrari). Where does Red bull stand? Not far off in qualifying trim, but when it comes to race they just simply don't have the car that watches after their tires. Why would it be the tire manufacturers fault for that? If all teams were suffering, then yeah something is wrong, however that isn't the case. When more teams start to figure out the tire, you will see your contesting more often. Until, welcome to the break-in stage.

Lotus are complaining, they're just not throwing their toys out of the pram like Red Bull.

http://www.f1zone.net/news/tyr ... ed&utm_medium=twitter

Not really a complaint, more of a realistic overview.

True but they are being far more realistic ans dignified than Red Bull could ever be, I mean just look at their boss' out burst.

Well Red Bull are just a Viennese money making machine that only use people for finances.

Boulier is obviously going to moan, that's his job, just like every other team principle. However his argument has a gaping hole in it. Particularly this bit.

“I don’t know a lot of other sports where, let’s say in football, they decide to increase the size of the goals in the middle of a season”

Well, if the goal manufacturer's had a mandate to provide goal sizes that provided 'entertaining' games, then it would be perfectly reasonable if the games weren't entertaining they would in fact INCREASE the size of the goals mid-season. If you had a team that had perfected small goal tactics, then tough luck.

You can't have a tyre manufacturer whose sole objective is to provide tyres that make 'good' racing and then expect for them to somehow respect some 'sporting' philosophy.

I've never heard of a sport that changes the rules mid-season. It always happens in the off season in response to something that occurred during.. Although F1 has always been pretty stupid for changing rules on a whim. diffuser crap and other stuff as examples of this.

But things like Rugby, Football, Golf are all neanderthal games where the rules haven't changed since 600bc.

F1 is an everchanging, ever evolving sport.


I mean it's not like Football has a demand from the governments/public to create a more energy saving or efficient ball, with energy recovery systems. :P

Quote from dawesdust_12 :

I've never heard of a sport that changes the rules mid-season. It always happens in the off season in response to something that occurred during.. Although F1 has always been pretty stupid for changing rules on a whim. diffuser crap and other stuff as examples of this.

They are not changing the rules. It's perfectly within the rules for Pirelli to change tyre construction and compound.

The teams wanted a tyre manufacturer that provided better racing. This is a result of that. Should they then whine about it? (yes of course they all should at all times) BUT this is EXACTLY what was asked for. If they can't adapt and change, tough.

And F1 isn't like other sports. There are only 24 cars in the world that can compete in any given year. How many sports have things like the Concorde agreement?

Quote from Intrepid :

They are not changing the rules. It's perfectly within the rules for Pirelli to change tyre construction and compound.

Article 12.6.3 of F1's technical regulations:

"Tyre specifications will be determined by the FIA no later than 1 September of the previous season. Once determined in this way, the specification of the tyres will not be changed during the championship season without the agreement of all competing teams."

http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/107487



In be4 mad RBR fans.

lGO KIMI!

There we go.

Yeeesss monaco will be on nbc

They can't make big changes to the tyre specs mid-season, it's stupid, the teams have had a whole pre-season to develop their cars to suit the tyres, it would make all of that effort pointless and completely change the complexion of the championship.

It's the FIA's fault that they are stuck with this silly formula where piss-weak tyres are required to make the racing superficially interesting. And we just have to swallow it until next season, at the earliest.

A lot of more sensible forum posts here lately and a very nicely put words together from Ferrari giving very clear opinion of situation here : http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/107461

RBR should really be ashamed of themselves, especially after all that Malaysia saga, now all this outbursts from team-bosses that contradict their past. Can't really say I'd like to see them to their senses, I've always been against them anyway and their way of exploiting everything in their way.

From Barcelona race onboard you can clearly see that RBR lacks grip in high-speed corners, the front end lacks it and I'd dare to say that their flappy front wing might be having more issues than their tire management. In no phase of the race was Vettel quick thru T3 at all. Hence, they will be in heap of trouble at Silverstone, even despite the slightly modified tire I'd say.