[akshay380]

OT,

Originally Posted by asr245

The only reason Monaco is worth watching is because of the close walls which drivers almost "kiss" every single lap and, of course, the view from cockpit camera (the few times it's shown). Just love that.

I read a discussion in PF1 forum regarding continuous Cockpit cam view on one of Sky feeds. Anyone knows how to get the same on the internet link we get on First Row sports?

[akshay380]

Now Jenson speaks out.

Jenson Button hopes 'geniuses' can solve tyre problem at Monaco GP | Sport | The Guardian

[Hatari]

A great day for the Pirelli haters, they got exactly what you wanted.
I am sure they will regret the day people stop talking about tire management being critical.

[sgiitk]

Brilliant. The managed the Monte Carlo entire race on one change that too with the Soft and Super Soft. So where are the sceptics now?

[Sn1p3r]

Originally Posted by sgiitk

Brilliant. The managed the Monte Carlo entire race on one change that too with the Soft and Super Soft. So where are the sceptics now?

Do you know that this was the same compound? Or Pirelli under such criticism was compelled to change? yellow lines and red line on the side of donuts doesn't mean anything it's just categorization of tyres.

A fast car was still unable to overtake a slow moving car. Iceman spoiled the race for so many. Ask button how he feels being stuck behind a slow mover but not enough to take risk with the tyres and make a pass. Lewis called in many times to report that the tyres won't last. Vettle was reminded that he had to make them last.

The tyres have not proved anything on the circuit. It's fascinating how the speed train didn't frustrate the purist just because it was a compact top 6 finish.

[sgiitk]

@Sn1p3r; If it did not have the glamour of Monte Carlo the race would have been banned long ago. As for DRS I doubt whether it will help at all on this circuit.

I do not know whether the compound was changed, but will we see the same pair in the Indian GP sine all felt the tyre options were too conservative!

[PuntoMania]

Originally Posted by Hatari

A great day for the Pirelli haters, they got exactly what you wanted.
I am sure they will regret the day people stop talking about tire management being critical.

What did you expect ? Have you watched Monaco for the first time ? At a track where there is barely enough space at most points for two cars to go side by side, no amount of gimmicry will help aid overtaking. This is the reason why no one dared take the extra pitstop. Towards the end of the race, inspite of all being on low fuel, drivers were lapping in the low 1:20s and then 1:25s... the whole pack was actually getting slower inspite of getting close to their qualifying configurations.

The Mozarrellis werent as big an issue because of the particular nature of the track. Lets see what happens at Canada which is a high degradation track. Pirelli has to bring much more durable tyres than the ones at present, else we're in for a 4-5 stopper of a race. We'll be back to the artificial dose of NASCARized F1.

Originally Posted by sgiitk

@Sn1p3r; If it did not have the glamour of Monte Carlo the race would have been banned long ago. As for DRS I doubt whether it will help at all on this circuit.

I do not know whether the compound was changed, but will we see the same pair in the Indian GP sine all felt the tyre options were too conservative!

It was conservative because it was the first race. Mozarelli will be back to their old self this time.

[Hatari]

Originally Posted by PuntoMania

What did you expect ? Have you watched Monaco for the first time ? At a track where there is barely enough space at most points for two cars to go side by side, no amount of gimmicry will help aid overtaking. This is the reason why no one dared take the extra pitstop. Towards the end of the race, inspite of all being on low fuel, drivers were lapping in the low 1:20s and then 1:25s... the whole pack was actually getting slower inspite of getting close to their qualifying configurations.

The Mozarrellis werent as big an issue because of the particular nature of the track. Lets see what happens at Canada which is a high degradation track. Pirelli has to bring much more durable tyres than the ones at present, else we're in for a 4-5 stopper of a race. We'll be back to the artificial dose of NASCARized F1.

It was conservative because it was the first race. Mozarelli will be back to their old self this time.

I was not expecting the Prime or Option tires to last as much as they did! Clearly the teams are understanding the tires better, and we saw a more traditional top 5. No Lotus/Williams mixing it in for critics to point fingers at.

You are sadly living in a dream world in which Bernie finds a magic formula where cars will overtake each other on true merit (whatever that means to you). Do get off your high horse and understand why this was the only option available.

Engineers have begun to rule Formula 1. Something had to be done to take away direct control from them. Tires. Now they must work with drivers to find a solution and extract performance from them. Teams are now devoting resources to understand the tires better rather than meaningless aero gains, which is far more expensive.

And incase you are forgetting, the driver that all the team principals voted to be the best is leading the WDC. (Not Kovalainen, Massa, or Narain).
All is not lost.

[Hatari]

Should have multi quoted..

Originally Posted by PuntoMania

This is the reason why no one dared take the extra pitstop. Towards the end of the race, inspite of all being on low fuel, drivers were lapping in the low 1:20s and then 1:25s... the whole pack was actually getting slower inspite of getting close to their qualifying configurations.

If you really understood the race.. you would have realised that the drivers were conserving tyres more than usual as there was a rain threat throughout the race. The lap times dropped to the 1.25s due to a few spots of rain ontrack! Vergne also gambled with Inters on Lap 70. Thats the reason no one was keen to make an extra stop.

[bottle]

Originally Posted by Hatari

A great day for the Pirelli haters, they got exactly what you wanted.
I am sure they will regret the day people stop talking about tire management being critical.

Hehe yeah and I came across this interesting bit at PF1

Losers
Pirelli
Pirelli were Bridgestone in disguise for this race. They produced race rubber so durable that a one-stopper was easily achievable by the entire field. That might have been helped by the Safety Car's emergence after the first lap debris, but a Safety Car isn't exactly a novelty in Monaco. It looked to us like Pirelli were playing it safe in front of the big clients. With so much corporate schmoozing going on at Monaco they didn't want their rubber disintegrating quickly and undermining the product in front of the biggest audience of the season. In Canada next race, it won't be a problem, but not at Monaco. So then F1 was stuck with a circuit that doesn't work and with a god who would only deliver significant amounts of rainfall once the race had ended. If Pirelli can't be relied on to supply the specification of tyre wear rate that they agreed then the Monaco Grand Prix organisers are going to have to make far more radical changes to the circuit than moving Sergio Perez's barrier back by 15 metres.

Monaco GP Winners & Losers | Planet F1 | Formula One | Features | Race Features

[akshay380]

Canada is a high degradation track and Pirelli have allotted Supersofts and Softs for this track. Lets hope temperatures stay low or it rains. Otherwise SS are up for chewing.

[PuntoMania]

Originally Posted by Hatari

I was not expecting the Prime or Option tires to last as much as they did! Clearly the teams are understanding the tires better, and we saw a more traditional top 5. No Lotus/Williams mixing it in for critics to point fingers at.

Wrong. The tyres did not last as much as they did. Drivers were doing 1:20s in the end on softs which was a full 5+ seconds off the optimal pace of the car on low fuel.I think you're expecting the tyres to explode or something (since you love 'entertainment') but I consider a 5 second drop pretty drastic.

Nico Rosberg's comments after the end of the race :

"Yeah, in general. At the beginning it was pretty straightforward. I was hoping for a good start, I had a good start, but Mark had a pretty good start too. That was it then. And then, it was just a matter of tyre management and everything and I must say I was a bit surprised by how strong we were not only in qualifying but also in the race."

The tyres managed to hold up, relatively better than at other tracks, because of the particular nature of the track and because everyone from the leader downwards realized that an extra pitstop will not help cover the time they lose, thus they were all saving tyres and driving slower than normal. It was stupid to see drivers lapping 5 seconds slower than they really should have been.

Originally Posted by Hatari

You are sadly living in a dream world in which Bernie finds a magic formula where cars will overtake each other on true merit (whatever that means to you). Do get off your high horse and understand why this was the only option available.

Engineers have begun to rule Formula 1. Something had to be done to take away direct control from them. Tires. Now they must work with drivers to find a solution and extract performance from them. Teams are now devoting resources to understand the tires better rather than meaningless aero gains, which is far more expensive.

Engineers have always ruled Formula 1. From the time ground effects were introduced in the 60s to the revolutionary Turbos of the 80s, the invention of pneumatic valves for F1 engines, Active suspension of the 90s, to the present era with DDD, KERS, F-Ducts etc. These innovations from the brilliant engineers in F1 are the primary reason we have had so many different types of cars and different era in Formula 1.

I have no idea what sport you've been watching mate, but it definitely wasnt F1 . (NASCAR ?)

This sport has always, given primary importance to its engineers. Its a tragedy that the modern version of F1 is like a circus with fans actually calling for engineers to be banned and turn F1 into a spec series.

Originally Posted by Hatari

And incase you are forgetting, the driver that all the team principals voted to be the best is leading the WDC. (Not Kovalainen, Massa, or Narain).
All is not lost.

This proves nothing about the tyres.

Originally Posted by Hatari

Should have multi quoted..



If you really understood the race.. you would have realised that the drivers were conserving tyres more than usual as there was a rain threat throughout the race. The lap times dropped to the 1.25s due to a few spots of rain ontrack! Vergne also gambled with Inters on Lap 70. Thats the reason no one was keen to make an extra stop.

Now you're saying yourself that drivers had to conserve their tyres even more ? So you agree that the tyres are just too damn sensitive to see a real motor race.


The drivers did not pit more than once because they were afraid of falling into one of the multiple trains with the 18 seconds they lose in the pitstop. Not because the tyres were awesome. Last year Vettel managed to keep the entire bunch of guys behind him at Monaco inspite of lapping 3 seconds a lap slower than the field on his worn tyres. What part of this strategy did you not understand ? Asking me if I understood the race is a bit rich when you yourself didnt understand it

[asr245]

Originally Posted by PuntoMania

I have no idea what sport you've been watching mate, but it definitely wasnt F1 . (NASCAR ?)

Seems like everyone who disagrees with you isn't watching F1. Were you watching the same race? Vettel did 30+ laps on his SS and the other leaders spent 40+ laps on their softs. Add to that the fact that it was slippery towards the end. And yet you say they were close to qualifying trim?

Originally Posted by PuntoMania

This sport has always, given primary importance to its engineers. Its a tragedy that the modern version of F1 is like a circus with fans actually calling for engineers to be banned and turn F1 into a spec series.

Tires are a part of the car aren't they? And now engineers are being challenged to get them to work. Or is that engineers can be challenged with other stuff (aero, diffusers, suspenion, gear box, engine, etc. etc.) but not tires? Why is it that the it's considered OK that car with the best aero be considered the best/fastest but not the car which can utilize it's tires best?



Same tires for everyone doesn't turn it into a spec series.

[akshay380]

A lap of Monaco is 3.340 km (2.075 mi). Average lap distance around most other tracks is 5.2-5.5kms

[Hatari]

Originally Posted by PuntoMania

Wrong. The tyres did not last as much as they did. Drivers were doing 1:20s in the end on softs which was a full 5+ seconds off the optimal pace of the car on low fuel.I think you're expecting the tyres to explode or something (since you love 'entertainment') but I consider a 5 second drop pretty drastic.

"Tyres did not last as much as they did?"
Pl read what you have written and try again

Originally Posted by PuntoMania

Nico Rosberg's comments after the end of the race :

"Yeah, in general. At the beginning it was pretty straightforward. I was hoping for a good start, I had a good start, but Mark had a pretty good start too. That was it then. And then, it was just a matter of tyre management and everything and I must say I was a bit surprised by how strong we were not only in qualifying but also in the race."

In 2012, it will always be about tire managment during the race! That is what the FIA want, and not meaningless aero spends

Originally Posted by PuntoMania

The tyres managed to hold up, relatively better than at other tracks, because of the particular nature of the track and because everyone from the leader downwards realized that an extra pitstop will not help cover the time they lose, thus they were all saving tyres and driving slower than normal. It was stupid to see drivers lapping 5 seconds slower than they really should have been.

Now you're saying yourself that drivers had to conserve their tyres even more ? So you agree that the tyres are just too damn sensitive to see a real motor race.

Originally Posted by PuntoMania

The drivers did not pit more than once because they were afraid of falling into one of the multiple trains with the 18 seconds they lose in the pitstop. Not because the tyres were awesome. Last year Vettel managed to keep the entire bunch of guys behind him at Monaco inspite of lapping 3 seconds a lap slower than the field on his worn tyres. What part of this strategy did you not understand ?

I'm going to explain this, ONE LAST TIME.

It was threatening to rain, in this scenario no driver wants to risk being on a 2 stopper because if it did rain, they would have to stop once more.

Originally Posted by PuntoMania

Engineers have always ruled Formula 1. From the time ground effects were introduced in the 60s to the revolutionary Turbos of the 80s, the invention of pneumatic valves for F1 engines, Active suspension of the 90s, to the present era with DDD, KERS, F-Ducts etc. These innovations from the brilliant engineers in F1 are the primary reason we have had so many different types of cars and different era in Formula 1.

No point blurting out ure knowledge of F1. You are refusing to understand the point.
Engineers with their aero tech, are causing fewer and fewer chances to allow cars to follow each other closely, thereby shooting themselves in the foot.
In no other era of F1 have engineers induced a "snooze fest"

Originally Posted by PuntoMania

This proves nothing about the tyres.

It proves the world still makes sense, the Pirellis havent reversed the pecking order.

This is my last post on this topic with you, cant argue if you are unable to grasp things.