No. Racing is about putting your foot down (or twisting a bike's throttle) at the right time. Just ask Mick Doohan or Valentino Rossi (for instance) - or countless others who understand the long haul. This is Grand Prix racing; it is not kart racing! Schumacher actually knows this of course; but has run so low on ammo that he stoops to the next lower rung every time until he finds what he hopes will be firm ground; and in this case, his downward step to the next level is to get in front of a camera in an attempt to alter things for himself. - After all: it worked before, so why should he not attempt it again? Almost all races I've ever competed in - except very early in my career when competing in rather low quality clubman's and national sprint races - the like of which Schmacher prefers - have required an overall appreciation of the situation. Even if you look at motorcycle racing, tyre management is crucial. (Oops: another thing he wasn't very good at). You mention Hamilton and Räikkönen as examples of "other attacking drivers", but what I see from them is a determination to get to grips with the situation they currently find themselves in, rather than going in front of a camera in an effort to trivialise (or influence) the current, exciting format F1 has (or to play down their own short-comings). The reason I have focussed on the arrogant Schumacher is because it was he who whinged in front of the world, on camera; rather than keeping his mouth shut and simply getting on with the job as have the other two you've mentioned (and virtually every other driver on the modern-day, very competitive grid). Hmm… speaking of competitive grids, no wonder scumacher is whinging… Oh, and another thing: along with various patsies and numerous other advantages, he enjoyed during his own era's particular, one-sided format which was designed to keep Ferrari happy (including endless, bespoke tyre testing specifically designed for his car with a significant input in from himself, together with sitting down with Tilke to design his own corners!). He is whinging because he is not getting it all his own way any more - for first time in his career. He was a better than average driver (as are Martin Brundle and Johnny Herbert and virtually everyone who has ever competed in F1) but it was he who demonstrated a singularly ruthless streak which appealed to F1 as a spearhead for Bernie's brand, Max Mosley, and their favourite team; and who has not the remotest hint of integrity on a race track. - Exactly what the various doctors wanted to expand F1's global monopoly. He was part of a machine and has grown to believe his own bull. - No wonder he doesn't feel comfortable with 'ordinary' status and being blasted away by others who can better cope with the situation they find themselves in. This is why I say he should get out (again). He's a failure second time around (Karma catches up) and now he is just whinging like a spoilt child who got the wrong present for Christmas. What a … (most derogatory words will fit here) … What I find incredulous is how some actually admire the various 'anti-qualities' this guy has.
I have to disagree. The new tyres may make the race better for us the viewers, but if a driver of Schumacher's calibre is questioning the effect these tyres are having on driving styles, and racing approaches, then it makes sense to listen to him. He was always the most painfully anal driver, was on first name terms with every component involved in the assembly of an F1 car. If a man with such technical nous is questioning the effects of the tyres, we should take heart from what he says, he's won 7 world titles, i think he knows a damn site more about F1 than us.
Well, far be it for us to question his motives eh Kyle?⦠I swear to you that when this guy whinges, he whinges for two reasons and two reasons only: He's losing to his team mate. He wants to alter things so as to off-set his short-comings.
I'm sorry, but i think he has a point, the tyres have ruined F1, they've allowed average drivers like Perez to look better than they are, and they've punished the more aggressive drivers, making them look worse than they are. The only upside to these tyres is that it makes it harder/less likely for Lewis Hamilton to win.
That's fine Kyle. There's no need to apologise: you are perfectly entitled to your opinion. But I ask that you consider the philosophy behind the whole idea, which was to make the racing less predictable - which it has certainly achieved. When it became clear that Pirelli were being encouraged to supply F1 with shall we say, 'less than durable rubber', I was concerned that it would lead us back into sprint racing where drivers need have little concern for tyres because they know all other drivers would be doing the same. Bear in mind that when this was announced, each team also had two more sets of dry tyres available for the whole weekend. However, much to my surprise and pleasure, I was wrong. Pirelli quickly got their act together to produce several tyres, each of which were capable of forming part of a combination strategy, meaning that it was less predictable than I'd expected. To put it bluntly, I'd completely underestimated Pirelli's capacity to produce tyres which would truly encourage different strategies. But they did it! And they have got the balance just about right when we consider the spread of the 12 teams currently on the grid. And when I say 'balance', I am talking about what they have achieved in encouraging more than one viable method of completing a race distance in a very similar time. This is what is making the racing interesting, and not that tyres will last 200 or 20 miles. In order to achieve this, what matters is that a tyre supplier produces several viable alternatives. This is the single most important factor and is an incredibly difficult to do. Indeed, it is a most unreasonable request to make. Whether tyres last a long time or a short time, if there is only one reasonable strategy, all teams will adopt it and we will see far less action. However, if there are viable alternatives, teams and drivers will need to consider how best to make use of what is available, which is far more interesting and is one of the biggest single factors for a dramatic increase in F1's global appeal. We have two options: (1). Provide tyres which make strategy a no-brainer: such that everyone does the same and we get less guile, less cunning, less intrigue and less action. (2). Provide tyres which give several reasonable alternatives, with the consequence of more guile, more cunning, more intrigue and more action. Viewing figures and feedback polled from F1 fans in extensive questionnaires, show that (2) is far more desirable. Option (2) also makes greater demands upon a driver; but of course, some drivers will be less able to cope with the extra demandsâ¦
Schumacher was awful in 2010, and used to blame his poor performances then on the Bridgestones. The only time he hasn't complained about the tyres is when Bridgestone designed him an outrageously expensive bespoke set which no other teams were allowed to use.
What racing driver wouldn't want to have a set of tyres he could rag the arse off every lap? I can see what Schumacher is saying, but at the end of the day it's the same for everyone, and the cream still rises to the top. I must admit though that I don't like the tyres or the rules. The tyre falls apart too much making any offline attempt too risky late into the race as the great lumps of rubber (the word marble is no longer an adequate description for what comes off the tyre) have turned the offline into areas of almost zero grip. Forcing everyone to use the same rubber automatically gives advantage to certain cars and drivers, let it be open so they can choose the tyre compound that best suits the driver/car combo for their startegy.
Do you mean forcing them to use both compounds is giving an advantage, or restricting them to just two different compounds? I agree with the former, not so sure about the latter. Two compounds is meant to simulate two tyre suppliers, I think, while maintaining control over tyre wear to ensure they're safe. I think two compounds is adequate, but they should be free to use them as they see fit. I'd like to see them reduce the marbles but how can they do that while providing high-grip tyres? It's more extreme with this much debris off the racing line but, whether it's marbles or dirt, off-line always gives less grip and traction. I don't see that it's preventing overtaking at the moment, though, and the 'cutback' (as it's being called since 'undercut' has been hijacked for something else) is more employed now than I can ever remember (although that's probably a consequence of there being so little overtaking before).
Most, in fact almost all, of the overtaking in China happened near the end of the race, so the marbles aren't having that much of an affect. It's not ideal having so much debris off line though, not just because of the low grip, there's also a risk of it getting wedged in end fences or brake ducts. It's hard for them to keep high deg and reduce the marbles though, Bridgestone's used to leave a film of rubber rather than marbles, to get high degradation you'd have to have a lower tread depth with these kind of tyres so they'd probably get completely destroyed when people lock up. I'm sure Pirelli are working on a solution to reduce marbling.
Last season they said they would but I'm not sure they have. I think they've just decided that it's not that big an issue - as you say, it's a natural consequence of high degradation and it doesn't prevent overtaking in the latter stages of a race. Brake ducts have fine mesh over the inlets now (or some do) to prevent debris getting in, although I'm not sure how resistant this is to hot, sticky tyre compound.
I do not think marbling is as bad as it was last year anyway. Last year the racing line was almost a visable path through all the marbles, while this year there is not really a visably noticeable build up of marbles on the track. I am not saying they aren't there, just that the build up does not seems to be as bad as it was last year.
Fair enough. I thought it was worse this year, more in terms of bigger chunks flying off the tyres but, if the racing line isn't as bad as last year in the races we've had so far, then maybe Pirelli have done something about it. Some comparison pics would be interesting but I'll take your word for it.
Schumacher driving wise is much more on top form compared to 2010, but the tyres are holding him back from showing his improved pace, his race craft is still there, we can see that with his overtakes... This is why people rack him for his "lack of speed", he would be able to show his speed, if his tyres didn't fall out after 6 laps. Anyway, lets see what happens. I just think that with DRS and KERS, enough is enough.
