That article is shocking, there analysis is so, so shallow. "Yeah, DRS is worth half a second, so let's just take that off each lap time". "Yeah, each track is roughly the same length, and the calendar's were practically the same, so lets just use the time difference rather than converting to %age's". "Weather, what does that matter?". They've ended up with some figures that I could have knocked up in 20 minutes (quicker with the amount of data they get access to), and used them as justification. It seems even Gary is slipping to BBC standards. If anyone from the BBC is looking in, contact me, I could do vastly superior statistical analysis for a fraction of the price you're no doubt paying your "analysts". It's a joke.
It's probably worth bearing in mind that the BBC need to keep it fairly simple so that the maximum number of people can understand. Well, that and the fact that they are a media business and they will have decided on an angle to pursue to create maximum interest.
I don't think it matters how complicated the analysis is, there's ways of presenting them to appeal to both the masses and to more hardcore fans. Seeing as a lot of their audience is mostly the latter, I don't think there's an excuse for half-baked analysis. As for creating an angle, the BBC are supposed to be unbiased, and let the facts dictate the article, rather than the other way around.
Oh, I agree with you except about the bias. Yes, they're supposed to be unbiased but in reality they're not, the 'supposed to be' part just keeps them in check a bit, IMO. Their business is attracting the biggest possible audience and that will usually prevail over genuine impartiality.
I thought the numerous articles about Hamilton's dog were for the simpletons. If they're going to do any serious or technical features they should do a good job of it, not fudge some statistics in attempt to deceive casual viewers in to thinking what they're seeing is the world's best racing drivers pushing to the limit. They should stick to the trashy, glossy magazine style nosing into drivers' public private lives type articles for the casuals, and produce some proper insightful content for more serious fans, or they should scrap their garbled attempts altogether.
http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/107671 Mercedes apparently had an extra test 1000km tyre test after Barcelona. Thought this season had been a bit quiet on the controversy front. Stand well back now!
This is potentially huge. If they've learnt much, which they must have with a dedicated test session with Pirelli like that, they could be the team to beat the rest of the season. If they're not banned. I think they'll get a huge fine for it, will the FIA take more serious action though? It's not like running something illegal where you can just disqualify them, this is knowledge they've gained illegally that they're going to have for the rest of the season. Disgraceful on Pirelli's part too, at that time the FIA hadn't intervened in their plans to change the tyres for Canada, it looks like they were trying to make them bespoke for the Mercedes.
I agree. Perhaps I ought to say that my posts aren't trying to justify the BBC's behaviour, it's just my interpretation. One more rather obvious thing: they're in competition with Sky now and this will affect their decisions on what and how to broadcast.
I wanna know how we didn't know this until now. A 1000km Formula One test was carried across three days immediately following a grand prix, yet all the media personalities, drivers and personnel had no idea.
So it's not necessarily an issue over why the test took place, more a matter of transparency on Pirelli's part. Makes you wonder how many of these have they done in the past and how on earth they kept a test at Barcelona 'secret'.
I'd also like to hear Pirelli's side of the story. I thought he was demanding that Pirelli sort the tyres out: careful what you wish for...
Got to love f1, nothing is ever simple. Hamilton and Rosberg getting to test Canada spec tyres and no one noticed. Makes you wonder how many other secret tests have happened before.
This will surely put Pirelli's contract in jeopardy. None of the top teams are going to want them as sole supplier if they're favouring Mercedes like that. They have no choice for next year but Pirelli want a three year deal I think, can't see Red Bull and Ferrari agreeing to that. This will surely have a knock on effect for the concorde agreement too. Next year's going to be a mess I think, if there's no concorde agreement you'll see rules being broken all over the place, everyone will ignore the testing ban.
Apparently, from what i'm reading, Ferrari were the first team Pirelli asked to test the tyres in Bahrain. Only they took that as still having to conform to the testing rules and used their 2010 car, while Mercedes took the opportunity to test this years car.
I've not seen anyone mention an exact rule thats been broken so if its a loophole in the rules it a heck of a loophole!
Indeed! But there's been so much pressure on Pirelli to do something, especially from Red Bull, and now they have. I'm very keen to hear Hembury's side of the story.
"It's completely regular in that we are allowed to do a 1000-kilometre tyre test with any team," said Hembery."In the World Rally Championship contract it's exactly the same. We can do it with a representative car. "We've done it before with another team, and we've asked another team to do some work as well. "In reality, we were looking at next year's solutions and trying a variety of different things. "Mercedes haven't a clue what on earth we were testing in reality." Asked about the prospect of Mercedes gaining the upper hand, Hembery added: "Absolutely not, no, because it's no relevance to what's happening here. "The bottom line is we've been trying to find a way to test." Regarding whether it was with this year's tyres or those for next year, Hembery said: "Ninety per cent next year. We changed at the last minute."
