F1 Winter Break
Red Bull owner Mateschitz says Formula 1 is “no longer about the racing”
Red Bull Racing
Posted By: James Allen  |  13 May 2013   |  12:53 pm GMT  |  359 comments

Red Bull owner Dietrich Mateschitz says Formula 1 is “no longer about the racing” after tyre management played a huge role in the outcome of Sunday’s Spanish Grand Prix.

A remarkable 77 pit stops were made during the 66-lap race with several drivers being told to lift off in certain corners to protect the high-degrading Pirelli tyres.

In an interview with Autosport, Mateschitz said his two drivers – Sebastian Vettel and Mark Webber – were not able to push their Red Bull to the limit without ruining the tyres.

Mateschitz said: “Everyone knows what happens here. This has nothing to do with racing anymore. This is a competition in tyre management. Real car racing looks different. Under the given circumstances, we can neither get the best out of our car nor our drivers.

“There is no more real qualifying and fighting for the pole, as everyone is just saving tyres for the race. If we would make the best of our car we would have to stop eight or ten times during a race, depending on the track.”

Championship leader Vettel finished fourth in Barcelona, behind race winner Fernando Alonso of Ferrari, Lotus’ Kimi Raikkonen and Ferrari’s Felipe Massa, saying after the race: “Our car is quick enough to match them [Ferrari and Lotus] any day.

“But if you talk about a race distance looking after these tyres it is a different game. The car is quick enough but there is something we probably do to the tyres that makes them wear more.”

Red Bull team principal Christian Horner agreed that tyres were playing too big a role in the results of races.

He said: “It’s too confusing for the fans. When we’re saying to Sebastian Vettel, you’re racing Kimi Raikkonen for position, but you’re not and don’t fight him, that’s not great. Pirelli are a capable company and they can get on top of it, but it’s a bit too much at the moment.”

Pirelli motorsport director Paul Hembery said the Italian manufacturer will make changes to the tyres.

“For British GP we will change our tyres again, whether we will do it with all the compounds I cannot say yet,” he said. “Certainly we will work on the construction.”

However, Hembery added that it’s a tricky situation for Pirelli because while Red Bull has been critical of the 2013-spec tyres since the start of the season, other teams are in favour of the current compounds.

“Lotus and Ferrari don’t want to change the tyres and we don’t want to be accused of wanting to make Red Bull won the world championship,” he added.

Featured News
MORE FROM Red Bull Racing
Share This:
Posted by:

Add comment

E-mail is already registered on the site. Please use the login form or enter another.

You entered an incorrect username or password

Sorry, you must be logged in to post a comment.


by Oldest
by Best by Newest by Oldest

Maybe Rbr and Merc should include "TYRE" as part of performance bit while designing their car instead of focus 100% on AERODYNAMIC alone???


By that standard, then the teams should make their own tires, right?


Sorry but this is just rubbish. If RBR had a car that was walking off with the title because the tyres suited it everyone would be complaining. Hemberys made it pretty clear part of his remit is to stop Red Bull winning. That's not what F1 is about for me, F1 should be about the best team, car, driver combination winning.

We saw it in years gone by with Ferrari where the FIA kept banning their technology, and even changed the points scoring system to try and halt Schumacher. Now we're seeing the same, undesirable manipulated forces at work to prevent Vettel winning (and we've seen it with both Renault and Mclaren previously too). Is that good for the sport? Probably not I'd say. It'd be like banning Djokovics brand of tennis racket, and making balls that don't suit his style of play to give the others a chance.

Far too many people are putting personal allegiances ahead of the sport here. I'm no Lewis Hamilton fan, but I'll tell you now, there is something seriously seriously wrong in F1 when Gutierrez beats Hamilton on pace. I'm not surprised Nikki Lauda is complaining as well.

F1 should be a mixture of driver skill, fitness, team tactics, car and also tyres. It should not be tyres tyres tyres and tyres. That's what it is at present and that is a massive turn off for the sport. We've seen F1 in the past be ruled by aerodynamics, and that was rubbish. Now we see it purely ruled by tyres and that's rubbish too. We need balance. Sure let the tyres wear out after 20 laps if you take it easy, or 17 if you hammer it, but not 3 laps and they're dead if you push on them.

I find it really disappointing that 'fans' are more interested in seeing their driver win, than seeing a motor race where drivers actually push.

As a fan of F1 for over 25 years I'm really really struggling to call this a sport nowadays.

Grayzee (Australia)

At last! An unbiased sensible comment. Well said, Paul!


totally agree with you Paul.


When the two fastest cars end up 6th and 12th in the race, you know that the most important constituent of the car is the tire. The question is should it be the 'most'. The P in GP is now Pirelli!


Fastest means doing everything right. Aero efficiency, aero grip, mechanical grip, managing wear and tear.

Any race over 10 laps will include tyre management.

To paraphrase Kimi, "STFU, and get on with it."

Complaining to try to get the other equipment changed more to your liking is a valid way to improve your performance I guess, but it does smack of whinging. 🙂


If they end up 6th and 12th they weren't the fastest cars in the race.


Exactly, handicapped by the tyres.




If you make a very soft very grippy tyre it should be ultra fast even if it wears out quickly(like the old qualifying tyres). The problem here is that the Pirelli softs wear out fast just for the sake of it and aren't especially quick. The point here is that the tyres are just (a bit) rubbish and it makes Pirelli look bad which is not what they are doing it for


Any tyre manufacturer that wants a positive promotion of their product ought to making the best they can. This currant situation does not reflect well on Pirelli.

Also, listening to the exhaust notes of the cars on over-run yesterday, it sounds as if the engine people may have found a (another) way around the blown defuser rule


Once again the lack of understanding on the tire issue is RAMPANT on this blog. If the FIA mandates it, Pirelli (or Bridgestone, or Goodyear or hell even Falken) can make a tire that lasts the whole race. Pirelli makes the tires they are told to make. Geez get a grip 🙂


I always try to drive my Honda Civic @ about the optimum speed and acceleration so as to get 38MPG instead of 34 that I get otherwise. I also tend to drive slowly around the corners so that I can get to replace the tyre every 60,000 miles, instead of the 40,000 miles.

Given my experience for the last 10 years, I will be more qualified for the RB seat than Vettel & Webber as they tend to race now&then ruining the tyres and destroying them.


Drivers are just moaning and politicking because they have to work harder and drive smarter now.

Spain 2012

Pole: Lewis 1:21.797

Race: Pastor 1:39:09.145

Spain 2013

Pole: Nico 1:20.718

Race: Alonso 1:39:16.596

Poor drivers…complaining that thet are 90% or 80% while posting 100% times and not wanting to work as hard to get the results they are paid tens of millions for. Forgive me if I am deaf to their fake cries. Clock doesn't lie!


See Bee

My first reaction would be, I'm going to need exactly 5 sets. But then when I think on it, I would say actually, give me about 10 sets. Because I need a few sets to practice my life first, because otherwise I'll be spending my whole life in the slow lane. Then I would need atleast 3 sets to start my life in the right position and not spend my whole life playing catch up and then when I get to actually living my life, I want plenty in hand so if I decide to burn the candle and go hell for leather, I have some spare capacity. Spending all my life, just making use of the tyres so I could reach 100% could be incredibly dull for me, sure I would reach the end, but would I have really enjoyed my life? Either that or I would ask for 5 sets which could take me 40% of my life, so then I can choose to use all 5 hell for leather, or just use 3 somewhat gently but still be able to take more life than I need! Atleast I would have options

Something I was musing on another website, and something which is pertinent to the debate. All the teams begin designing there car well in advance. Indeed Mercedes have already said that well over half of there resource goes towards next year. They have designed a complex and clever suspension system that delivers great performance over the last several years. The regulations they are working within are all written well in advance but the biggest variable in any calculation of how a race car performs seems to be the tyres. Which they aren't allowed to test with or be given any data about until the point where the car is designed, crash tested and homologated. Meaning its an impossible task to design a car to the tyres. Therefore it stands to reason that the tyres should be homologated 12 monts prior to racing them like the so the teams can develop the car well in advance around the tyres. The fact that Pirelli are now changing the tyres again mid season shows how farcical the situation has become. What chance does any engineer have of building a car when the biggest variable remains unknown and changes over and over?

The situation at the moment makes hard engineering work complete pot luck. You could have the best chassis, the best driver but you could be nothing if the tyres you get given at the en of the process don't work with your design philosophy.

Paul Hembery made the interesting point that Pirelli don't have a current car to test with, so therefore can't develop the tyres to work with the cars. The manufacturer can't test the tyres until the car is built. So they can't develop a car to work with the tyres. It's an impossible situation and makes for Pot Luck racing as neither Pirelli nor the teams have any clue what the performance will be like until the eyes of 500 million viewers are tuned in.



I respectfully disagree. Comparing pole and total race time YoY from same venue of dry races is as Apples to Apples as it gets.

If I may....

If I told you a set of tires would last you 20% of your life, what would you say?


The times from one year to the next font really prove very much, The engineers make cars faster, and then each year the rule makers make cars slower. The times don't take into effect track condition on any given day, and which compounds cars were using. Wider analysis can produce a more accurate picture but comparing two years fastest times is a bit like comparing apples and oranges.

Back to the case in point, I think the biggest problem with the tyres, is that they aren't fit for purpose. The hardest tyre could barely manage 30 miles on full tanks without degrading significantly, to the point here drivers were losing 3 or 4 seconds per lap to those on fresh tyres. An to get those 30 miles, you have to seriously conserve tyres. If the driver decided to go all out and really attack, he gets 1 lap... Three miles... Before the tyre begins to significantly degrade and you are losing those 3 seconds again. So the penalty for pushing hard far outweighs the reward. The biggest problem is the drop off with a degraded tyre is far too high. The cars should be around 1.2seconds faster in a 10 lap stint a fuel burns, and are actually 3.5 seconds slower as tyres degrade. So that's net 4.7 seconds loss in performance. If you are driving laps of 1:22 lap becomes a 1:27. That's around 6 % performance drop off. If you consider that a car that's 7% slower in qualifying isn't allowed to race and you can see how ridiculous the situation has become. Tyre deg transforms a front runner to a back marker.



I think you're not reading my post right. Over the ENTIRE race distance, the time is 7 seconds longer than 2012. Also, 13 seconds slower than 2011.

As for those poles...even going back to 2010 - Nico's lap is comparable. Now remove the blown defusers, flexi wings, DRS everywhere for Quali...

I'm telling you guys...it's not bad at all.

Grand Prix can't finish in 80 or 85 minutes!



Redline Racing

Really? You think that 2012 is a good benchmark year for when tyres weren't so soft? Let me remind you that in 2012 we artificially had 7 different race winners from the first 7 races. If you look at the times from 2010, the last non-Pirelli year under the 2009 regulations, a rather different picture emerges...


Pole: 1.19.995 (Webber)

Fastest Lap: 1.24.357 (Hamilton)


Pole: 1.20.718 (Rosberg)

Fastest Lap: 1.26.217 (Gutierrez)

The fastest race lap was set by a SAUBER. Evidently, something is wrong there. And it's over two seconds slower than 2010's fastest lap. I understand the lack of a double diffuser would have made up for 1 second of that deficit, but not a whole two seconds. Clearly, the top drivers we having to lift so frequently that a Sauber on younger tires managed to set the fastest lap. Evidently, drivers are driving at 80% as opposed to 100% - their cries are not fake. You're right - the times don't lie.


They don't have to work harder at all. Your stats are just headlines, mate, they don't show the 80% of the race were they were just trundling around at 80% or whatever the actual stat is. The WHOLE point about these tyres is that they are quick for a lap and then fall to pieces, both of your stats are a single lap.



Also, Mateschitz seems unaware of type of racing called endurance racing, where the cars are conserved for almost the entire race. Group C (!) was conceived with fuel saving as a major point. Formula One is not sprint racing.

Having said that, it isn't really endurance racing either, and I do believe the tyre conservation has been excessive a couple of times this season (China, Spain).


Absolutely agree - would love to know how much the regulation change on blown exhaust gasses is affecting RBR - seems to me that they focused a lot on that over the winter and all of the engine mapping that they thought they would be able to change - In the end all of the teams got to test the 2013 rubber at the end of last season, so complaining about them now just because you miscalculated your design makes it seem like they are just bad losers


Come on guys, this is NOT about any one team or driver as much as everyone seems to want to make it about that - this is about the sport as a spectacle. Sunday was an embarrassment, Mateschitz is right. The drivers are not racing each other any more, they don't even know if they should be racing each other half the time they have to ask their teams. They do not overtake each other any more (there are of course a couple of exceptions) they just cruise past a crippled car because of the tyres.

Even ALO who won the race said it was confusing, DIR didn't even know what strategy he was on half way through the race and HAM "could not drive any slower" and VET looked ridiculous driving that RBR well within himself through no fault of his own.


How can you be enjoying this artificial nonsense that is making a mockery of our sport? We don't want American wrestling on wheels, we want the best drivers driving fast in the fastest cars in the world - don't we?

Johan Pienaar

it seem to me as a old racing fan that most of the respondeds like to see animated Grand Prixs i s o real wheel to wheel battles which we older purists prefer!


Wayen, I agree with everything you just said. There is another side of the story though. If Pirelli is going to make a change to compounds now, it will compromise the integrity. These compounds are far from perfect, but nobody knew how different teams will perform on them. If Pirelli will make changes now, they have tons of data to make it work for one team and to not work for another. Changing it now will mean manipulation. This is what Hembery said and I agree with him:

"It is a bit bizarre - unless you all want us to give tyres to Red Bull to help them win the championship, which appears to be the case.

"I think it is pretty clear. There is one team who will benefit from a change and that is them."


Well Wayne, as we say here in America: poppycock! I think whining and complaining are more of an issue than tires. As someone else on this blog pointed out when the RBR blown diffusers were all the rage, everyone, EXCEPT RBR of course, was complaining about those. Now its the Pirelli tire degradation issue. OK so maybe the tires don't suit everybody, but Ferrari and Lotus seemed to have made the adjustment. Maybe the other teams who have dealt with Pirelli's for the past 2 seasons should stop complaining and, ahem, get up to speed on the tire issue.

By the way this isn't the first time tires have been an issue. Do you remember the 2005 US Grand Prix at Indianapolis? Now THAT was an embarrassment (Dietrich probably doesn't remember that because he was busy formulating foul tasting beverages). And what about that unholy alliance between Ferrari and Bridgestone back in 2003, remember that? Not to mention the processions, ah the processions. Were those racing? Watching paint dry was more exciting, although I assume Dietrich wouldn't complain about that as long as RBR was leading the procession.

To bottom line it in Kimispeak: "Stop complaining and drive the damn car"!


Of course they're bad losers...

Do you know any good losers?


James, if Pirelli make harder tyres, surely all that means is that the teams continue to run to delta times and the races all become very dull 1 stop affairs? Is there anything in your opinion F1 can do to get rid of running to delta times from the races? It's becoming more and more extreme and its killing the racing.


Maybe we should stop communication from the pit wall to the driver other than for when to come in for a pit stop or to stop the car. This could be done by lights that would not go out until the car had gone through the pit lane. They would then have to judge themselves how fast to go.


Teams will always try and make 1 pit stop than is required, and to do so will require racing to a delta so yes you're point is valid. That said, Alonso pushed for most of the race because he chose to do 4 stops from the outset. If Kimi did a 4 stopper too he would've pushed massively but his car was fine to do 3 stops, 2 for mediums


I'm yet to hear any real reason for the constant mention of one-stop races as dull. Pit stops are not entertaining to watch, are they? Why should we want many of them? Its the on-track action that makes F1 interesting, not pit stops.

I think we are in danger of getting unconciously caught up in tyre marketing. One stop races are not in the least bit dull.



Maybe some people just enjoy watching pit stops.


What is dull is a driver running away with the WDC by mid season like Vettel did in 2011! right now Ferrari, Lotus and Red Bull can win races. That's good for F1.




I seem to remember the Austin race in 2012 remembered very fondly for the battle at the front which was described v exciting. That was one stop aswell, i dont see the problem with them, except from Monaco as a one off, due to the overtaking problems.


Austin 2012 was probably the best "regular" race in the Pirelli era (i.e. no rain or other shenanigans to mix up the race order). It was also the race most like the pre-Pirelli era...


History begs to differ.

Bring Back Murray

I think with the depth and breath and drivers we have these days the racing would be exciting enough anyway. The Mansell / Senna / Prost days were some of the best and those guys only ever made one stop and they could still push each other throughout the race.


That is a great point well made! We are doing these drivers a dis-service by suggesting that they need all this artificial nonsense to make them exciting!

Come on!

We have the greatest thinking driver of them all :ALO

We have an exciting, divisive but lightning quick driver: HAM

We have the Iceman, whose ability to exert calm but tensely mounting pressure is incredible: RAI

We have the new wunderkid, super quick and devastatingly ruthless: VET

I could go on and on.......

People keep whining about the SCHUMI years, there was in no way the depth and breadth of talent we have now for much of that period.


Strategy in F1 is one thing ..... Professional racing drivers not being able to drive on the limit for the majority of the race is not racing. Come on Pirelli, do something so they can race.


How much are they really holding back? Or do you think that the crying coming from Red Bull, Mercedes, McLaren et. al. (i.e. all the teams struggling with using the current spec Pirelli tyres) is part of a strategy to bring themselves closer to the front-running teams (Ferrari and Lotus)?

Lap times don't lie, so let's have a look:

2012 Spanish GP:


#1 Lewis Hamilton - 1:21.707

#2 Pastor Maldonado - 1:22.285

#3 Fernando Alonso - 1:22.302


Romain Grosjean - 1:26.250

Winner Race Time

Pastor Maldonado: 1:39:09.145

2013 Spanish GP:


#1 Nico Rosberg - 1:20.718

#2 Lewis Hamilton - 1:20.972

#3 Sebastian Vettel - 1:21.054


Esteban Gutierrez - 1:26.217

Winner Race Time:

Fernando Alonso - 1:39:16.596

Looks pretty similar, no?


Yes Kevin, no doubt quali times are good compared to last year, as are fastest laps in the races ...... It's the inability of the teams to keep sustained race pace due to the ridiculous high rate of tyre deg' that is the issue.

Fans want to see fast laps over the whole 300 km's , not just one or two laps in every pit-stop stint.


Hi Kevin, you make a fair point, and I don't disagree. All I'm saying is that a motor race (particularly F1) should be about drivers being able to push their machines to the limit in order to compete and win. I'm not suggesting they should have tyres made if titanium that will last a whole race (god knows we have been there!). Tyre deg' should be one of the variables created to challenge the teams (as you point out) .... I just think that Pirelli have swung the pendulum way too far this year which has resulted in drivers and teams having to literally slow down for long periods during a Grand Prix - which in my book is counter initiative for most racers and race fans.


Hi Adam,

Just checking that you remember 2011, right? When RBR got the tyres working for themselves right off the bat, and the tyres were hard wearing so that they could drive close to maximum for most of the race?

How exciting was it to see Vettel drive off into the distance just about every single race? Was there close racing when the tyres were durable?

What happens when tyres perform at their maximum all the time, is that they are removed as a variable. When the teams control all the variables, then the team that minimises the variable effects is fastest. All the time.

When tyres aren't variable, you get teams qualifying like the Spanish GPs of old - team mates next to each other, in order of how quick their respective cars are.

And when the Red Bull (or Ferrari F2004) has so much potential performance, the leader builds a lead, then cruises to the finish. The rest don't bother to try to catch him, because they know he'll just pull away at will.

Why were wet races usually exciting? Because they introduced a variable that the teams couldn't control.

The 2013-spec Pirellis are doing much the same thing.


After the previous race, I cancelled my extended Dish network subscription which was required this year to watch formula tyre.... er.... I mean formula 1 in the US.

I was in the UK for the Spanish race, so I tuned in to the free coverage on the BBC. It didn't do anything to convince me to change my mind. The race was terminally boring. When Lewis complains over the radio 'I can't go any slower!' then F1 has completely lost the plot.


People are acting like this is the first time Hamilton has said those words. It isn't. He word for word said the exact same thing at the 2010 European GP, and the proceeded to say "I can't go any faster" later in the race.


In another race dominated by crappy tyres , at the conclusion of which telegraph columnist Thom Gibbs commented ".... this was a deeply unmemorable race."


Hate these jelly pirelli tyres


Someone invent a flying car quick.... This tyre talk is boring


Button said the following which sums it up nicely...

"It is a right mess. The problem is that a lot of people watching will think there's a lot of overtaking [so] it's great, isn't it?" he said. "But when we're going round doing laps three seconds slower than a GP2 car did in qualifying, and only six seconds quicker than a GP3 car did in the race, there's something wrong. This is the pinnacle of motor sport."


Button can button it up!

Suddenly he's the guy who's spinning the numbers?

Here are some numbers for you Mr. Button!

F1 Spain 2012

Pole: Lewis 1:21.797

Race: Pastor 1:39:09.145

F1 Spain 2013

Pole: Nico 1:20.718

Race: Alonso 1:39:16.596

GP2 Pole 1:28.706 - 8 seconds slower.

Do remind me Mr. Button how much the GP2 cars weigh, how many laps the GP2 races are, how much fuel they have to carry for that short race vs. F1, etc. etc. etc.

Let's button it up please and not spread misinformation. Alonso remarks about 90% are BS too. 90% of F1 is GP2! WOW, what's next F1 drivers? You expect to get 30M a year to do routine in-out GPs? A revolt because suddenly you have to do more thinking and work than in 2012?

Pirelli should pull out, let someone else do this thankless job. Clearly their work is not appreciated.

Oh, and just for the record, I'm about to get a new set of 18 inch tires for my car, and I'm going to make darn sure they are Pirelli!


Comparing this season's times to last year's is just plain dumb.

It assumes progress in car development is not being made. With that assumption than there's no need for F1, the pinnacle of motorsport technology.


If you didn't notice, the F1 guys were lapping 1:30+ for the majority of the race. Lines up nicely with Jenson's point, doesn't it?


If you want to prove your point, show me a calculation of the lap time penalty for the fuel load. We'll then compare the effects of the fuel load vs the effects of managing the tires by reducing the pace of the car to see how each contribute to the race lap times of the F1 machinery. Oh wait, don't actually. Because as I've already said, it's my opinion that GP2 cars should not be capable of lapping quicker than F1 cars - ever. The race began with laps in what, the 1:31-1:35 range? Do you really think the gap from these times to quali times is all down to fuel load? No. It's down to this and management of the car - including the tires. However, management of the tires is being artificially introduced. Some fans have an issue with this, and all your fantastic points about how the race times are pretty equal, etc. are moot. Simply because the fact that the cars are going much slower than what they are capable of. Reasons for this are many, but tires are certainly high on the list. I stated I was not concerned with the overall race times year to year because I'm not. I'm concerned with what the potential times could be vs what they are.



It's simple really.

Race 1 - 37 laps 1h:00m:39s

Race 2 - 26 laps 0h:41m:50s

Add it up - 1h:42m:29s

Now add 3 laps, let's say 1:35.000 each lap so about 5 minutes, and then add another 10 minutes for the large fuel load they would have to carry if they did start at 66 laps and went all the way through.

GP2 is 90% of F1, and it will come out in that range for pole and race. Take GP2 time, multiply by .9 and you get your F1 time quite closely. GP2 race of 66 laps would take 2hrs. even.

If today's cars would be allowed to refuel, we'd probably shave good 5-10 minutes out of a GP is my guess.



How can I have a discussion with you when you ignore the fact that GP2 car carried 26 laps of fuel and F1 carried 66?

Read my other posts. GP2 is 90% lap time of F1 already. Throw in 40 laps of fuel difference at the start and you don't think it will get closer for a few laps? It's a numbers spin without facing facts.

How can you argue about a difference which is explainable and not be terribly concerned about total race time, which clearly tells facts? That YoY the cars are able to cover same distance in the same time at nearly identical speed.


I'm not terribly concerned with the total race time. A number of factors influence this, and that wasn't really the point Jenson was making. In your original post, you claim that he is spinning the numbers, but he really isn't. It is a fact that he spent a good portion of the race lapping slower than a GP2 car is capable of. The discrepancy between the ultimate lap time of the cars and the times they are being forced to run due to artificial measures is larger than its been in decades, if not the history of F1. Personally, I don't wish to see GP2 cars capable of lapping quicker than F1 cars ever - including quali vs race times. I agree with a lot of what you've said in other posts, and I'm not going to bash Pirelli simply because they are doing what's been asked of them, or because its popular to do so. I simply prefer F1 to be more about speed, and less about management. There has always, and will always be, the aspect of management in F1. But it's starting to cross the line, in my opinion.


To filter out fuel, number of laps etc, what was the average lap time across all laps for the winner of F1 and then for GP2?

What about the average for all laps for all runners that finished in each race?

Somebody must have this on excel.


Yeah, lines up nicely when the race this year without defusers and without flexi wings is 7 seconds slower over total race distance than 2012 and 13 seconds slower than 2011. No one cried then.

I have got to get me one of those awesome expensive magical Laser Turntables, because if I keep this up I'm going to wear this record out on my conventional turntable!


The teams and drivers complaining about the tires should also take the blame. They tested these tires at the end of last season, plus as a driver yo have to adapt your driving to get the best of the car you got. Lotus car seems to be gentle with these tires, and they should be congratulated.

Redline Racing

Button has it right. Gutierrez's fastest lap was two seconds slower than the 2010 fastest lap. Take one second off for the lack of a double diffuser, and it's still one second slower and set by a Sauber. That's huge. Besides, Sebee, I'm pretty sure Button is more qualified to make these remarks than you are.


You mean this one?


Yes, my favorite line:

They (fans) want to imagine the drivers are thrashing the cars from start to finish, even if that is not what is actually happening.

5.5s slower than pole is not an issue to me. The car is heavier and at the end with worn out tires vs. fresh soft rubber. Even though they are light ideally, they have just done a GP, and that will mean aero covered in dirt and rubber, fluds not optimal, and usually engines turned down.

Pole gives you the fastest car over one lap. Race gievs you fastest car over race distance. 2s lap time vs. pole is just a number. It's not fixed in stone and etched that it must be achieved or is the holy grail magic number because D.C. or anyone else says so.

Not once did I ever show any concern that the fastest lap in the race was this many seconds slower than pole, until this comment today. And I still don't care.

I care about who comes across the line first, and if the GP I just watched entertained me. Sometimes I'm satisfied about both points, sometimes one point, sometimes both points are not satisfied. Such is life.

This fixation on demanding constant satisfaction as if F1 owes it, is in itself rediculous.

Redline Racing

Go read DC's BBC column. He makes my point, and he should know.


To be clear about those seconds...

Your 2s difference is split up as you state with no defuser, flexi wings, etc. for 1 second and the other second as I point out is down to the extra 22KG car weight.



1 second per lap slower according to you.

66 laps in the race.

4 stops this year vs. 3 stops last.

Why then is the total race time 7 seconds slower in 2013 than in 2012? With the extra lap time. And don't go to 2010, that was a whole other game ball.

Cars in 2010 were 620kg minimum

Cars in 2013 are 642kg minimum

There were obviously other changes. But there is your 1second right there!


I'd rather listen to Button (by the way I'm not his fan) than read that rather childish post of yours.

The point was not that Button said it by the way. Rather, what he said nicely summed up the state of affairs with regards to high deg tyres.


"Now imagine with the quality of drivers we have today"

Depressing... isn't it?


Sebee, you are missing the point a little around this debate with all your stats (which to be frank, I can't be bothered to verify).

For me the point of this debate is about the fact that tyres have stopped guys from racing. Just listen to the drivers with a bit of an open mind instead of thinking that these professionals are lazy, moaners etc (which you seem to be saying in several posts).

As an example, look at Austin 2012 - it was a great battle between Hamilton & Vettel. Two great drivers battling it out. While they still had to look after the tyres it did not prevent them from racing.

Now imagine with the quality of drivers we have today how exciting it would be to actually see them try to hold position, race hard to catch the front runner knowing that their tyres will allow them the opportunity to at least try instead of scaring them off.



2005 Imola F1 pole was 1:19.886, 2005 GP2 pole was 1:33.505. GP2 is about 90% of F1 8 years ago.

So my point, well made if I may say so, is that GP2 is now 90% of F1 as it was 90% in the past. It's a formula and it has always been this way. And Button showing surprise by this is about the same as I was surprised that he managed to get his name on the WDC list.

Pole this year is faster than last, and race this year is nearly same like last year and year before. I didn't hear anyone cry then that F1 was slow, or 90%, or 80% or whatever. Clock doesn't lie! So what that it's 4 stops vs. 3 stops. Same total race time! Therefore - it can't be slower! In fact, more stops in same time likely means the average lap time is actually faster, and that's without blown defusers, flexi wings, etc.

Plus, those people who paid for paddock and pit straight grandstand want to see some action beside cars going by at 300km/h like a blur.


Again, all over 1 lap which honestly misses the point completely.


Sebee, maybe checking to see how each driver did, relative to their own 2012 performance, might yield other results. I don't know, haven't done it, but think it might.

Also, Alonso slowed right down after the final corner, to take the flag. His total race time could've been 3 sec's quicker I'm sure.

I recall in 2011 how only the top 4 cars finished on the lead lap (the two RBR's and the two McLarens), and the Ferrari that day, despite getting the lead at the start, faded horribly as soon as it put on the prime tire (still finished 5th, so not a complete horror show like the Merc's on Sunday). But then Ferrari went on to win at Silverstone, and was 2nd best in Valencia that year.

There was a lot of lifting thru corners yesterday, which in a perfect world, we wouldn't see. Tires that are less tempermental would be better, b/c it reduces the strategy choices of the teams. Seeing as the teams don't really get to see how the tires work on their car until winter testing (and so designing for the tires before that time will always involve some form of guesswork), they can act as a random arbiter between which car is able to go fastest.

Perhaps Pirelli could design a car, a dummy car say, that all teams could test the tires with. This car would be nothing like an F1 car, save for it'd be running the same spec of tires. I don't know.

The race, apart from the opening laps, was not that exciting to watch (disclosure: HAM fan speaking here, so doubly bad for those like me). Can anyone point to a truly exciting moment beyond lap 8? Maybe my bias is clouding my judgment.


...and if you are thinking of the GP2 pole consider that with only 26 laps of fuel they did 41:49.895 for total race distance. GP2 cars would easily need another 20 minutes to complete the 66 laps of F1 GP.

F1 is way faster...GP2 is 90% of F1, as it's pretty much always been.


Race distance number is right there Wayne. 2013 race distance time is 7 seconds lower than 2012 even with 4 stops, and only 13 seconds slower than 2011. Please don't glaze over that point.


how is it more work to drive slower? Routine in-out GP's ? what are you talking about? The drivers want to be able to drive as fast as they can, not as fast as they are told to do in order to make 5 sets of tyres last the race distance...


Yeah, we've gone over this in past post.

Why is everyone moaning about the limiting factor of tires but not engines? Or KERS power amount and delivery time? Or any other limiting factor. Didn't you see the Newey unlimited Forumla 1 car fantasy design?

I can't believe how people can direct their anger toward a tire, yet not toward a V8 engines or anything else. It's a FORMULA! And the formula says, these cars with brands who pay tens of millions to be on them need to be on track for 100 minutes air time.

You say you don't want short life tires.

I say I don't want low power engines.

You say 5 sets. I say, that's 20% of Grand Prix life for each set, and considering that it takes them 2.6s to chagne the tires, where is the beef?

And it's more work because they have to think about the car, the tires, the strategy for attack, can we stay out one more lap, etc. vs. normal routine pit 1/3 into the case, pit 2/3rds into the race, let the chips fall where they may.




If they were winning like the past few years they wouldn't be complaining..

James, do you think there is a real problem with the construction with is causing the delamination? Their Renault test car must be racking up some serious miles!


As Paul Hambrey explained the delaminations look dramatic due to the tyre construction this season. There is a metal layer below the rubber outer layer and when the tyre is cut , all the rubber on the outside just tears apart and flies all over the track.

This metal layer was the reason Alonso's puncture did not cause an instant deflation of the tyre. And there was a slow loss of pressure that allowed him to get back to the pitlane.

His race would have been over with the 2011-12 tyres, if he had suffered the same puncture with instant deflation, as happened with Vettel at the 2011 AbuDhabi GP at T1.


Last I heard they'd stopped using the Renault - there were a few teams claiming it gave Lotus an advantage.


Of course they wouldn't...

Just like Ferrari and Lotus aren't complaining now... wait until they get tyres that don't suit their car.


The race by Merc is even more proof than the Red Bull bosses words. Fastest in quali, slaughtered by the tyres, yesterday was a nightmare to watch.

There was yet another delamination too. I'm sure Pirelli will find the usual excuses; lets just pray there isn't a serious accident soon. F1 is becoming quite embarrassing.


. There has always been punctures, delaminations etc etc. More often than not it's caused by the teams (eg Red Bull) exceeding recommended limits on settings.

I seem to remember Michelin having far greater problems in the past.

In Moto GP in 2011 the slow warm up of the Bridgestone tyres had a part to play in riders crashing on the first lap and arguably played a part in Simoncelli's last accident.

Perhaps you know how many tyres failures there have been per season in the last 20 seasons?

Well, if you care to look you'll see that there are no more this season than in the past.


How many engines, transmission, hydraulic systems have failed so far this year?

You guys really do want a 100% predictable, perfect, flawless F1? Why not just hire Deep Blue from IBM and run F1 simulation races all season long. It will be absolute perfection. Northing will fail. No tire, engine, transmission, etc. will fail. No pit stop will go wrong. No one will ever get hurt. And we can have 2 GPs run every weekend, all year long. Deep Blue doesn't have to sleep, and will not complain about anything. You can have a GP race like Alonso says at 90%, then you can have one at 110% like Alonso wishes we had.

Can't you see that since nearly ever other type of failure has been engineered out of F1, Pirelli is taking it on the chin here and working hard to give us some level of unpredictability - which is absolutely necessary?

Bjornar Simonsen

“Lotus and Ferrari don’t want to change the tyres and we don’t want to be accused of wanting to make Red Bull won the world championship,” he added.

That's exactly it, a very tricky situation. If the tires need some minor tweaking, how do you do it without favouring - or appearing to favour Red Bull?

I want Alonso to win, but I also think 4 stops is too much and I fear making the tires more durable will secure the WDC for Vettel yet again.

Catch 22?


Arguably, their actions could be construed as an Italian company favouring an Italian racing team.


"That’s exactly it, a very tricky situation. If the tires need some minor tweaking, how do you do it without favouring – or appearing to favour Red Bull". Good question. But if they can't can't do it now, how did they manage to change the tyres at the beginning of the season without favouring anyone? Or did they?


Difference is that all the teams got to test the 2013-spec tyres before the season started.

Ferrari and Lotus are the two teams that have obviously gotten to grips with the tyres are specced.

The others - Red Bull, Mercedes and McLaren (though McLaren seem to have problems that are more fundamental) are complaining and lobbying for a change in the tyres to help their performance, because they didn't do as good a job adjusting their cars to the 2013 tyres as others have.

It's a legitimate tactic - try to get something changed to help you (and, unspoken, compromise Ferrari and Lotus) - but it does come across as whining.

To answer your question - the tyres weren't changed to favour anyone at the end of the 2012 season. Everyone gets the same tyres, and Ferrari and Lotus figured it out.

The others are now playing catch up, and are trying everything they can. Pirelli should stick to their guns, and Red Bull/Mercedes/McLaren need to pull their collective fingers out and figure it out.

If they can't, then sucks to be them, try again next season.

That's what F1 should be, imo.


Kidza - there is certainly more to being a top class F1 driver than tyre management.


That is a part of the skill set. If you can't manage your tyres, GTFO of F1. Any race that is more than about 10 laps will require management of the tyres. Have a look at the Driver's World Championship order - Vettel, Raikonnen, Alonso, Hamilton. All previous World Champions. The cream does rise to the top. (Button is hamstrung by the MP4-28's issues)

The tyres *are* a stable base for the teams to work from, in the sense that they are the same tyres for each and every team, supplied by the same factory.

Just because Red Bull (who are crying the loudest) want the tyres changed for their benefit, because they haven't got them figured out yet, or don't want to change the strengths of the RB9 so that it will work with the car better - should that mean that Ferrari and Lotus, who *have* done the research and testing to get their car to work with a standard tyre - should they be penalised because they got it right?


Could someone please enlighten me on this one! Do the teams get to test (all) the tyres before or after they have designed, crash tested and homologated the chassis? If the cars are designed first, then in some ways it’s a lottery as to who gets it right with the tyres and it could well penalise those cars that have found performance in other areas that may well have suited last year tyres but not this year’s. It then becomes a season long mission to ‘re-design the car to suite the new tyres” after having spent so much money “re-designing the car to get better ultimate or core pace”.

I just think there are better ways of making F1 more exciting than playing around with tyres. The tyres should ideally be a stable base on which to work on rather than an ever moving target not only from season to season but also from race to race (minor tweaks excepted).

Red Bull could make the hard and medium tyres work in Bahrain but couldn’t make the exact same tyres work in Barcelona. The podium finishers in Barcelona hardly ever actually raced against each for position due to either different strategies or tyre conservation. How is all this good for F1?

We used to be told these are the best drivers in the world (pay drivers aside). So how come even world champions now need lessons in driving? We hear them constantly being told what to do in this and that corner, not right! The drivers and the cars are being shackled by these Pirellis in my view. We no longer see the true pace of a car or driver. All we see is how good they are on the Pirelli tyres.

Surely there is more to being a top class F1 driver that tyre management.


Mateschitz, all in a sudden sounds like Luca di Montezemolo when Ferrari had hard time winning.



LdM saw some years of mediocre results when complaining about too much aero influence.

One race 'bad' result and RB is crying like a little child.

Instead they should make their car more gentle on these tyres.


yeah he seems to forget that Vettel won with 4 stops in 2011. Admittedly, the tyres didn't drop off as much then as they do now.


In 2011, Vettel & Hamilton were racing flat out to the death. In 2013 everyone was cruising 10 seconds apart and Vettel told to let Raikonnen go.


It is what happens I guess when there are points paid for finishing in the top 10.

It's a consequence of how the sport works. You're driving for WDC points, not wins.

Should the WDC be decided solely on race wins, with points to break deadlocks, then do you think we'd see more "going for broke"?

James - I read elsewhere that Ferrari's basic strategy for Spain was to go with 4 stops, and let Alonso and Massa go hell for leather. What's your read on that?


It's all in the Strategy Report


2012 Austin is what I think most F1 fans want. Display of skills with a pinch of resource management.


As I said the tyres didn't fall off then as much as they do now. Funny how Pirelli got it right in year 1!


Bernie wanted softer tyres in order to create more pitstops because races were seen to be boring. Now we have that, we don't like it either. Before we jump in and play about with the rules again, we need to stop and think what we really want this sport to be. Does less reliance on tyres mean more reliance on aero and therefore less overtaking, for example? Getting this sport balanced is not a task for enthusiastic amateurs.

Bring Back Murray

Well we'd still have the DRS (love it or hate it) to help the drivers get past each other, even if the tyres were toughened up.


Pirelli is only suppling the means for what Fia and Ecclestone wanted to happens: to have cars starting from 3rd to 5th row, climbing up the order and possibly being able to fight for victory.


James, you know it best of all. People will always complain when they are not winning. Lotus is OK with how it is now and that is why they believe it is not fair to change compounds. Ferrari struggled with aero and LDM was always sending a strong message that F1 because way too much aero dependent.

It might be that tyres are way too extreme, but I do not think it is fair to change them now because today Pirelli can easily manipulate the outcome of the championship based on data they have.

Tyres were designed before the beginning of the season, Pirelli did not know how teams will cope. Everybody is on the same boat, so let them finish the season as they started. And...they should change for next year. Not idea, but it is fair. I prefer it to be fair and not manipulated.


Your final paragraph echoes my opinion exactly. Change what they like next year but don't become even more controversial by changing the tyres this year. I'm a RB fan and dislike the current tyres but they are the same for everyone. Some just cope better through better fundamental design and driver ability. If a change is needed for safety reasons then by all means do it, otherwise leave well enough alone.


I think you are spot on. Winners want to keep status quo, losers to change things. If Lotus and Ferrari designed their cars to be easy on the tires, and thus surrendering some aerodynamic efficiency of the car, it would seem unfair to now change the tires because Red Bull and Mercedes did not think about the tires and optimized the car for aerodynamics.

Issues such as dangerous delaminations should obviously be addressed, but the "character" (what ever that might mean) should be kept as intact as possible. The criticism should be then taken into account when designing next years tires.


Doesn't it sound like manipulation when Pirelli actually mentions teams like Lotus and Ferrari by name? It sets the alarm bells ringing for me.

All we want are tyres that can be raced on, not Pirelli bubble gum that delaminates dangerously.


2014! this year the game is what it is. the real farce is to change the rules midway just because people moan. And you´re wrong not everybody is complaining. rbi, hammy, merc and vetted fans are... the rest not so much


What rules are being changed?


Fernando Alonso’s Barcelona winning race time was only 7 seconds off last year’s winning time. Sebastian Vettel’s race time was 20 seconds QUICKER! He was quicker in China too. The way Red Bull have been telling it, you would have thought we’d been running foul of the two-hour race limit. Funnily enough, the race that was slower was Bahrain – Vettel’s winning time around one minute slower than the time he won the race in in 2012, or some one second a lap, and yet Red Bull were not complaining after winning in Bahrain. I wonder why?


I wonder why Ferrari and Lotus aren't complaining?

Any ideas?


@ Quade, hey man, only ignorant people are complaining, saying things like Pirelli doesn't know how to make good tires, or saying that Hamilton or Button could not Race with this tires, they could race, they could go for more stops. Going for 3 stops and then moaning about having to run in destroyed tires, is a real joke.

BTW Red Bull is the most notorious moaner about the tires, they want to change the tires so it favors them.

I don't remember Lotus or Ferrari Moaning about Blow diffuser in 2011.


Typical diatribe and gnashing of the teeth from the Losing Team. Don't see this amount of crying from the Losing Team when their car finishes 1st.....

You got to suck it up a bit and get on with evolving the car best u can before 2014 sets in.

So far the numbers between this and last year are arguably negligible.

Some adjustment is necessary but to bring back the 2012 specs is not a fair and balanced approach


So is this years car supposed to be slower than last year?


Brilliant comment, thanks


I wonder why the attack on Red Bull?

Almost all other teams have complained about the tyres. Almost all the drivers too, have complained about the tyres. Almost all the fans are unhappy with the tyres as well.

All over the internet and in pubs across the land, F1 is becoming the new joke.


If the Ferrari and Lotus are well designed making the tyres more durable should increase their advantage and not slow them down except am missing something.


You do not know how compounds will change and how cars will react to the change. I do not want any manipulation. Red Bull and other teams should try hard to work around the situation and I am sure they will.


Well read Your reply again Hembrey saying if they made durable tyres Redbull would dominate is that not manipulation? also I think that's a breach of confidentiality as they are directly revealing redbulls data information they re not supposed to.


Too much crying about tires... Ferrari and Lotus have made great use of the tires. Mercedes keep complaining about tires, but the reality is that the only reason they keep getting pole is because of the tires. They get a ton of heat into their tires, which is great for qulay, but horrible for the race.

If they change the compounds too much Red Bull will back on top easily and Lotus will most likely tumble.


I have not heard Mercedes complaining about the tyres,we have all heard them talk about the car being hard on the tyres, but i think they acknowledge its more of a car issue than tyre issue.


Cue celebrating Ferrari fans that Red Bull are upset, shame the rules are tailored to make certain teams and drivers competitive - they should be sad.


I think it goes a bit deeper than that - there is always an element of the FIA/FOM tweaking the rules to prevent a walkover by 1 team season in, season out, like when the 2005 season tyres had to last a whole race, completely handicapping Schumacher and Ferrari.

I think RBR in particular has been chasing blown diffuser/minimal KERS/minimal DRS gains for seasons now - and now that the engine mapping wizardry has been severely limited this season, there is a backlash against the tyres... the 2013 change in engine mapping & blown diffuser rules was made very clear by the FIA at the start of last season, and they got away with using it for all of 2012. I dont have much sympathy for them really.


He could just create a new competing format where the fastest at qualifying will win, but then Red Bull would have to deal with Mercedes.


I wish Paul Hembery will stop doing interviews and commenting on individual teams. Whenever that happens, I switch the TV off for some minutes or change channel.

Before now, there has never been the macabre experience of a tyre manufacturer commenting on race strategy etc. Paul Hembery is even an advisor to Charles Pic. That can't be right.

The above is just one aspect, but the entire tyre situation is excessive beyond reason.

Stephen Taylor

Really? If that is the case then that is conflict of interest? No wonder Caterham and their upgrades are now ahead of Marussia if you're right.


Yep totally agree with that comment.


When a driver is told to race his race ie let the driver he is battling past so to save tires... that is not racing. Fact. Races like China (apart from last 10 laps) and Spain have left me abit cold towards the sport. I understand Prielli have been given a order to spice up the racing and have to keep up to stay ahead of 11 well funded and large teams but this is too much.

We don't live in a perfect world nor do we watch a perfect sport so I feel that the sport will never be a 100 percent. 100 percent tyres would be tyres that give the tyres all the grip in the world, allow them to push to the limit and then fall off the cliff without warning thereby forcing the teams to think about pitstops. We don't have that nor will we ever I imagine.

The racing this year has been abit patheric to be honest and if I hear one more statement about a driver saying I wasn't pushing I will be sick. Question James which would be interesting to hear your responce can you imagine Senna agreeing to race in such a sport?


Let me present you with another scenario. A few years back, we had Red Bull racing the following way: Get away in the first two laps before the DRS were enable. Vettel used to do that, so the race was over after two laps. I didn't like that type of racing. It seems right now there are three team able to win races and perhaps certain drivers and teams should acknowledge they didn't do a good job adapting their driving style or designing their cars. Tyres are part of a car and these teams tested these tyres at the end of the last season.


Yes Vettel would that, but no cars were deliberately being handicapped.

No one could match the Newey genius, and that's fair competition.


Yip, very well said. How often, during that period, did we not hear said driver saying "I was managing the gap". Surely that's not racing at 100%?


So you prefer the type of racing where drivers are letting the cars behind past them with little or no fight so not to ruin the tyres?


well said

Nic Maennling

Like I said before another Pirelli GP. Mateschitz is perfectly correct. Entertainment 1, Racing 0. The offline comments were pretty nasty - take it easy out there !


I could be well wrong mate but I suspect many of those "gripping" (incl RB and Merc mgt) would be very happy if we resorted to 2012 specs? Wonder why.....

Safety is paramount, and tyre tuning is required but the sport BADLY needs an "open field" to maintain and attract viewers, regardless of team bias.


If ferrari, lotus, forceindia can design thier cars to be ease on tyres why not redbull?. Its not right to change tyres in middle of the season coz most of the teams designed thier cars to take care of tyres. Redbull cries like a baby when things dont go In thier favour.


As I said in the last blog.

Formula egg and spoon racing.


What happens if these tyres fail and a driver gets injured. Will Pirelli be liable?


Very difficult for Pirelli and for the sport. Pirelli have been asked to fill a tough brief but without the opportunity to test their tyres to see if they actually work! The teams complain but they had the opportunity to bring back a degree of in season testing but rejected it. It seams a bit too easy to put all the blame on Pirelli hear. and who is to say that different tyres would suit all teams. It looks to me for example that Merc and Red Bull have very different tyre issues.


Pirelli don't get a chance to test their tyres? Lol.

Watch this video:




Just for a minute - take the exact opposite view to your normal stand and challange yourself on some of the points you put foward. Just to see if it stands up to the challange. Don't fight with yourself. Simply, check out the other side of the coin.


That's a Lotus chassis by the way. Just think how apoplectic the Vettel haters would be if they had used a Red Bull chassis instead.


In a car that bears ro relationship to 2013 specs!

None of their tyre testing showed up overheating/graining.... issues.

The teams can't agree for one of them to provide a car as that might prove advantages to that particular team and Pirelli can't go and buy one for the same reason.

So if Ferrari and Lotus have focused on the mechanical side and gained an advantage over RBR, good for them.


If the tyres were properly engineered, then the spec of the car wouldn't matter in the least.

There is not that much difference in the spec anyway.

Pirelli have tested their tyres, produced truly atrocious rubber and are now blaming anything that moves... "The FIA told us to do it..." "We do not have a 2013 car to test with..." I won't be shocked if we next hear, "we are are not auto engineers, anyway!

Its really sad.


Rather like saying ‘F1 is no longer about the connection with performance cars because we specialise in drinks’.

Irrelevant - Pirelli is doing a good job.

RB is still leading WDC/WCC and have a good chance of continuing to do so.


Instead of asking Pirelli to make tires last about 100km (which isn't relevant to motorsport or driving on the road), why doesn't F1 just make it mandatory to have 3 pit stops if they are so desperate to have pit stops. In any event, the tires don't actually last for '20' laps because they cannot sustain full attack for the whole 20 laps, not even 10 laps probably. This whole situation really started when refueling was banned.


nicely stated mate


He obviously has no idea what racing is then. Its about getting to the finish line fastest, not driving flat out.


'Racing' inherently suggests the drivers want to keep the following car behind. Drivers are being specifically told not to fight for positions.

We currently have 22 cars doing time trials on the same pieces of track as opposed to Motor races.


Do you thin?

i have seen Alonso Racing Rikonnen in 2 different strategies but finishing les than 10 seconds apart, if that is not racing i can't imagine procession style racing isn't either.


That sums it up perfectly. I was thinking along the same lines my self.


Ouch! Once upon a time getting to the finish line fastest MEANT driving flat out...

Bring Back Murray

Can you imagine how Mansell would have got on in this era...


He would have made 6 stops and still managed to win!

Seriously though, even in Mansell's era it was not possible to drive flat out for a whole race without worrying about tyres. In fact, having followed F1 for a long time, I can only think of the few years in the last decade after Michelin left and before Pirelli came along when Bridgestone were the only supplier. Plenty of boring races with almost no overtaking as I remember....

I do think Pirelli have gone too far though. I do not think that it is the number of pitsops that makes F1 exciting- there were lots in the refueling era, but almost no on track overtaking. I would like to see a choice of compounds which drivers can choose to suit their style, allowing them to choose between running fewer stops and look after tyres a bit more or more stops and go faster longer. Late 80s are a good example- one tyre supplier but Goodyear would take several compounds to each race with a free choice for teams. There was a clear difference between compounds in terms of speed an wear rates, and no dreaded 'cliff' which leaves drivers helpless. Silverstone 87 and Jerez 86 are both classics from this era with different strategies converging at the end of the race.

Before we get too sentimental, those races were rare even then, and most overtaking aided by the boost button. After 89 (when turbos were banned) most races would involve James Hunt explaining to viewers (again) why it was so hard to overtake in F1...

Bring Back Murray

But it's still nice to push the car close to the limit in at least some parts of the race - which basically nobody had a hope of doing yesterday.


I listened to a fascinating interview by Prost on SkyF1 during one of the practice sessions.. where he explained how much freedom he had in tire choice..

that once he started the race on quali tires for the fronts.

And that sometimes they put soft tires on one side of the car and harder on other side...

I wish the rules could be tweaked to let drivers and teams decide which tire to put on when.. and not having to make the mandatory stop.


I agree with you 100%. It doesn't have to be so artificial. Bring 3 compounds and let each driver decide how to use them. GPs this year are like an individual time trial, there's no racing.

Ferrari and Lotus aren't complaining now, but I wouldn't bet against Newey figuring it out soon. It would be highly ironic if Alonso or Raikkonen lost the championship due to one of the Pirellis delaminating.


Giving teams/drivers the freedom to choose compounds as they wish would bring back an exciting element for engineers. For example in Spain many drivers were limited by the front-left tire. Had they had the freedom to put a different compound on that wheel... would it have thrown up interesting & smart surprises?

In the past we saw exciting races due to tire-choice freedom: Senna won Monaco 92 because he decided for a non-stopper (gambling on failure of the leaders)!


...and of course you all know there is not going to be another tyre war...


Redbull is doing a great deal of lobbying this season, its amazing...Its the first time in 3 years that they don't have the fastest car on the grid and they aren't racking up pole positions and dominating races they start moaning and accusing pirelli..its really pathetic..
as a Ferrari fan, I often found Ferrari's excuses of not producing a really fast car for the last few years also pathetic and stupid. if you are not happy with the package you have, you have yourself to blame and not others. Redbull should stop moaning about the tires, its making them look really sore losers. Good for ferrari and Lotus for producing fast and gentle cars and their drivers deserve to be winning at this point of the championship. Redbull need to work on their car, fix their issues and get on with it. same with Mercedes.
Its really not fair for Lotus and ferrari if pirelli changes the tires dramatically and i hope this doesnt happen, its not fair. let them do it for next year, not in the middle of this season. This is so stupid and this public lobbying by redbul needs to stop. Im sick of redbull's comments about racing and tires.
One final thought, if the redbull is so fast without tire degradation, how come they are not getting every pole position like before, enough is enough. I hope pirelli makes small changes for silverstone, and next year, do what you want. Don't favor red bull while we are in the middle of this season.


Why does RBR think Ferrari were pushing

When a sauber went 1/2 second faster then Alonso and set fastest lap time

All drivers are driving below the max of the cars speed


I think that was more to do with the fact that Alonso was way out in front at the end of the race so there was no need to push. I believe Alonso would have done the same no matter what the tyres are like


It has nothing to do with teams. Practically all F1 fans hate seeing highly talented drivers trundling around like athritis stricken addled tortoises, all because of the woebegone tyres.

High tech, speed and exhuberance are what F1 used to be all about. We want that back.


So u want see dat 1 stop races and stupid bull domination again. Tyres r same for every one. Redbull failed to design thier car to look after the tyres. Ferrari and lotus did goid job and enjoying the results.


I'm not a Red Bull fan, but it is offensive to call the team stupid.

All the cars would be even faster than they now are, if genuine tyres are produced.

Pirelli should also have stuck to the tyre the teams tested in Brazil last year. But, no, they went and changed them after the teams had agreed and designed their cars to that spec. Not only that, Pirelli which should be neutral, continues to mention particular teams in their defense. If you ask me, Pirelli is opening the door for accusations of manipulation.


To be fair, RedBull complained of the tires even after their dominating win at Bahrain.


Exactly. Pirelli admitted that they don't want to favour Red Bull and change the tyres because it would make Ferrari and Lotus angry. There is a clear bias there and it's not towards Red Bull. I almost feel pity for them.


I'm not sure you can say Pirelli is bias there towards any team in particular. Lotus have done a great job in particular this year, if Pirelli decides to change the tires it would be unfair. They have done something which is helping with tyre degradation, other teams need to improve or accept they have to drive slowly.


The way they are moaning and lobbying is stupid. not the team itself, their attitude and behavior is stupid. Just because they are not winning, doesn't mean that something is wrong. they should just get on with the job, they have been making a fuss about tires since the beginning of the year and its ridiculous. if they don't do the best job out there, they will not win. basically, they are saying well we have a fast car but we cant go fast because of the tires..wa wa wa..too bad !!! is it our fault? is it the other teams fault? is it pirelli's fault? NO. redbull eats the tires and thats that. fix it redbull.

I agree about the paul hemprey's comments about the teams, he shouldn't say anything. but im sure its frustrating, hes getting all the criticism.

Finally, about pirelli changing the tires, i think i read about that, but im not sure what happened exactly.


If they not winning, they're moaning...

Just like any other team.


But they do have the fastest car on the grid. Just terrified stiff of driving the damn things in case the tyres explode and hurt the drivers/spectators or marshals.


Yeah, more excuses, now you're saying they cant compete for fear of hurting people, shees!! LOL


This is the team that had to be warned about running tyres outside the manufacturers camber tolerances - get real.

The fact is that Redbull have seriously dropped the ball this year by not designing their car to work with the tyres as other teams have (or in Merc's case haven't) they've already had one change made to the tyres to their benefit, they can't be allowed to influence the formula to their own advantage mid way through a season.

The only thing that NEEDS to be sorted out is the delamination issue, the rest whilst not ideal needs to remain a level playing field for all the teams for the whole year.


who said they have the fastest car on the grid? i don't see them dominating pole positions and races. they've had the luxury of having the fastest car on the grid for the past 3 years ( which they completely deserve), this years they do have a fast car, just not the fastest. i don't care how the tires are and how they behave, pirelli supplies the same tires to all the teams. so i don't know how we can prove redbull have the fastest car to be honest, one thing for sure, they are struggling with tires but thats their own problem.


Superb comment dan


/But they do have the fastest car on the grid. /

As it could be seen both on Saturday and on Sunday.


60% will mean they (Red Bull) could have gone for a 5 stop really short and fast sprint strategy and win the race, do you think thats real?

If that is so i have a beautiful red bridge that i casually inherited and want to sell it to you.


Are you sure Horner said 60%? 'Cos I remember him saying 80%. If he did say 60%, then I guess next week it'll be 50%, and on, and on ...


Paul Hembery says with more durable tyres Red Bull would win at a canter, which suggests they do have the fastest car.

Horner, Marko & Mateschitz say they are just cruising at the moment. 60% in Horners words.


Oh. This has nothing to do with racing anymore, if our car doesn't win as it used to.


Was it about racing when RB did a one-two a few weeks ago? I remember Horner saying that Seb had found an approach to these tyres... He would probably be saying the same, had they won this one as well.


Be fair. Horner complained about tyres after Vettel's win, too. And we saw some good racing in Bahrain despite the tyres. Pirelli surely did change the tyres for Barcelona -- for the worse.

Bring Back Murray

I think in this race the tyre degradation was exceptionally poor however


Like all teams, if you're not winning you're not happy...

I don't see why people find this so hard to understand...


>> if you’re not winning you’re not happy…

and that's why they want to change the rules instead of doing a better job...


Nobody's changing any rules... just the tyres...


As much as I don't like RBR or Dietrich or Christian, I totally agree with their position on tyres.

They (tyres) are a joke (DRS is also a joke, but way more tolerable).

I can agree they add something unique to F1, but c'mon, F1 is about speed and skill and not tyre preservation. Let's then make F1 racing even more silly - let's count how much fuel each car have at the end of the race - the "greenest" car (with the most fuel left) will receive 100 points... this will magically cure all tyre issues as all cars will be travelling at 50-100 Kmph just to conserver fuel...


My god at last someone who has got his blinkers off. Today we have a tyre strategy and management contest that favours the car that puts the optimum (just the right amount)amount of energy through the tyres. The difference is plainly visible compared to other era's with nothing like the exciting wheel to wheel action we used to enjoy. One merely overtakes because the other car is going backwards or because of DRS. It is completely artificial. Yes tyres have always been a factor to a lesser or greater extent, but they have never dominated the scene as they do today. There simply is nowhere near enough latitude in the tyres for proper racing to happen.


But hasn't tyre management always been part of F1 to some degree or other? Drivers have always complained about wear on tyres, no matter what.

The only way I can see to remove any kind of tyre management is to have a tyre so hard it performs the same on the last lap as on the first.

Pirelli are stuck between a rock and a hard place at the moment. They are working to requirements demanded by the FIA/FOM yet being vilified by teams and fans for delivering just that. And this is pretty much a separate issue on why they are so fixated on "overtaking" (there's far too much of it!).

I think the problems arise because the compounds change and the teams don't do much in the way of in-season testing to be able to understand how these tyres work with their car. Throw in the fact that there is, what, five different compounds, any two of which are chosen for different circuits. A tacticians nightmare, I'm sure.

It's really down to the skill of each team's engineers to overcome tyre limitations and variances to enable their cars to handle more consistently and be balanced enough to cope with the variety of tyres used. Compare Mercedes to, well, almost anyone else. They munch through tyres a lot quicker than anyone else and that is *their* problem, not Pirelli's. Other teams and drivers seemed to cope reasonably well and while they may complain (which they always do no matter what!) the drivers and engineers do what they can to minimise the impact the tyres have on their overall performance and make them work better to achieve the best results.

Whatever happens, though, as long as we don't get a second manufacturer in then everyone is in the same position. And I, for one, don't want a return to the dullness that was the early 2000s and those rock-hard grooved nasties that created those consistently processional races we had.

I think what I'm trying to say here is, there is more to the issue of tyres than just their type, compound, wear or Pirelli than just round, black things. The issue of WHY we have these variable tyres is part of a wider one that runs through all F1 races and that is the presumption that all overtaking is good and so that's what we must have at all costs - and I could rant about that for quite a while!


Well first time we hear from Mr Matesitchz - must be real head scratching going on at Red Bull Racing.

I say leave the compounds alone- only look at the construction to ensure we don't have any delamination.

Stay conservative on compound choices if need be.

Like Paul Hembrey said - we have to be sure we are not seen to be favouring one team over another.


Yes, and he also said that he doesn't want to make Lotus and Ferrari angry. That's very unbiased of him and not favouring, of course.


because any changes would favor RBR, and hence anger those that have made a better job with the car. Sven don´t spin things up, please.


PS: F1 is now more about entertainment and spectacle than it is about being an actual sport. If it was more about sport it would not be owned by venture capitalists.


IP'm sick of hearing Pirelli shrugging their shoulders and saying 'this is what you asked for' and absolving themselves of all responsibilty. Let's make this clear...it's what some people within F1 asked for, I don't recall a survey coming through my door asking do I fancy WWF style racing. Irrespective of what other people are saying; if I was in charge of Pirelli I'd be mightly hacked off my product was being brought intro question and make the changes myself, without the need for being prompted.

The casual fan that is being chased so aggresively probably can't comprehend that this isn't a spec series. If one team builds the best car then so be it, it's up to the others to match it. Watching Lewis cruise round to be a lap down yesterday was appalling. We have some of the best drivers in the world and their machinery limited by farcical tires. If people want to see everyone on a level playing field then let me point in the direction of a spec series....ie GP2.


"it’s what some people within F1 asked for, I don’t recall a survey coming through my door asking do I fancy WWF style racing. "

...and if you were a member of the FIA this would be an issue...

Luckily, you're not.


Well said.

Paul Hembery says that if Pirelli make changes, Red Bull will win the races. I'd put forth that its not the tyre suppliers remit to decide who wins the races.


So by your logic, Pirelli should not change the tyres at all (unless tyres unsafe), midseason, giving RB the tyres they want and the advantage they obviously need to be able to comfortably beat other teams - other teams that have succeeded were RB FAILED, i e managing to adjust to the initially agreed tyre specifications. Yes?



Pirelli should be making changes to the tyres if they are required. Not having Hembery say 'if we change the tyres Red Bull will win'. Who wins the races should be of no concern to the tyre manufacturer.


Yes, teams are spending millions on drivers and developing the car, only for Pirelli to be messing about with the tyres every other race

Pirelli said they were changing the hard tyre for Spain and now say they will change the tyres for Silverstone, how can teams develop the car when the tyres are changing whenever Pirelli want


Its shame even after spending millions they cant design thier cars to last long the tyres. Kudos to ferrari , lotus and forceindia.



Well said.


What's your opinion James? Is this fabricated racing?

F1 should be about speed - not tire managing. I'm supporting Alonso, but his Ferrari isn't the fastest car out there - and Fernando knows it. He won the race by 10 seconds and he said: "We need to improve". He knows that his car is kind to the tires, but that the situation will change, just like last year. And changed from outside the teams - by Pirelli.

What do I mean: my opinion is that Bernie creates a tire war (with only one supplier!), by creating a situation where one team is favored at the beginning of the season, and some other at the end. The result? - championship to the wire! Problem? - it's false. It's choreographed championship. Now, if the tires stay the same to the end of the championship, everybody (except Lotus and Ferrari) will protest and say that the championship was given to the conservative car - not the fastest! It against the spirit of F1. But when the tires change, it makes this start of the season irrelevant, all but for the points. But that creates a false championship race.

F1 puts itself in a lose-lose situation again. So very sad.

That's my (conspiracy) theory. I'm not alone, mind.


They have now got themselves in a pickle, as we say in England!

Whatever change happens from now on, the ones disadvantaged will be crying out. Who has more influence over the decision makers Red Bull and Mercedes (pro-change) or Ferrari and Lotus (against change)?

F1 has always had an element of tyre managing, but it's not been a first order priority, whereas it is today. That's too much and most people in F1 accept this.

But, and it's a big but, Bahrain and Spain are the two hardest races on tyres. Any change from Silverstone will lead to one stop races in the second half of the season.



Were Pirelli given a remit to design a batch of aggressive tyres or did the FIA & Teams agree on the final specification? I only ask this question because no-one appears to be taking control of this situation


My Nissan 350z needs a new set of shoes, and i was at a tire shop this morning browsing for some fresh rubber. They had tires from 2 makes that were readily available in stock : Yokohoma and Pirelli. both were similarly rated, came with almost the same warranty and within ~ $15 of each others price. I put my money down on Yokohoma because somehow in my mind i could not imagine running on tires made by a company that makes notoriously unreliable products in F1.

I'm not saying every tire customer will think about a makers racing performance vs making a practical choice, but nevertheless i dont see how these jelly Pirelli tires can be called as "good publicity" for them.


I for one think that what is a real farce is that the tires be changed mid season. Don´t get me wrong, i appreciate what the anti pirelli camp has to say about the tires, but i am starting to get tired of the comment.

"I´ve been watching F1 since... and the other day i switched off my TV".

Ok. so what? I switched off my TV when Brawn won a championship with a borderline interpretation of the rules. Don´t get me started with EDB and the double diffuser and the holes, flexiwings and everything RBR has done over the last three years. Was that fair driving? Ferrari on more than one occasion stated that all of those were fringe cars, and that they broke the spirit of the rule... but RBR got to keep their toy for the season. Curiously, the one race when RBR has the double diffuser banned (nurburing 2011), ferrari won. I was against those cars because i thought that they were against the spirit of the rules, but because they didn´t infringe any written rule had to accept that that was the story for the year and accept that tough, that´s what F1 is about, better luck next year.

But this year it´s different! Some cars can treat their tires nicely and go about business in a manner that others can´t... and these guys now want to win in the offices what they can´t win on track. What I find disingenuous is the amount of fans moaning and demanding that Pirelli do something, now mid season "because this win´t real racing". I fail to see which mythical past these fans remember but I have to say: shut it! These are the tires this year, and if RBR and Mercedes can´t cope that´s too bad! They had the same testing time as everybody else, and some have found better solutions: tough!

And for all those saying I won´t watch F1 unless Pirelli do something about the tires you really have to get real: it´s an absolute disgrace to suggest the rules of the game be re established mid game to accommodate the moaners. If you want pirelli´s to be better, harder or pink I´ve only one answer for you: 2014!


"Ferrari on more than one occasion stated that all of those were fringe cars, and that they broke the spirit of the rule"

Oh well... if Ferrari said it then they should all stop and hand the trophies to Ferrari...


Well said +1




+ 1000 !!

i love what you said about Brawn winning in 2009 with a car that had a clear advantage and the last few years redbull have enjoyed the luxury of having the best downforce producing car ( they deserved winning)...even this year, they tried to play with engine mapping only for the engine mapping to stop that..redbull have been able to squeeze the rules to the max and use that advantage for them ( good for them !). As a ferrari fan, that has been very frustrating, but i always though ok ferrari if Redbull can do it, so can you !! i dont think i really cared about the spirit of the rules that much but more about the lack of innovation at ferrari. Now :

this year ferrari and lotus have done a good job and guess what...Redbull is lobbying and trying to force pirelli to change their tires for their favor again because we all know redbull have the most downforce producing car. well, that is not my problem !!! who told redbull and mercedes to produce a car that is not gentle on the tires, why should ferrari and lotus suffer now ???? this is seriously sickening. Teams and Fans need to shut it, this is the formula this year and everyone should get on with it.


Who decided that 1 stop racing was bad for the sport? I don't get this infatuation with the number of pitstops. Particularly when there's DRS.


Wheel to wheel racing has hardly ever happened in F1, you can look back over as much footage as you like, you'll find a miniscule percentage of races had wheel to wheel racing.


A one stop strategy is not bad for the sport, but it's unlikely to induce the wheel-to-wheel racing that we (the fans) crave.


But why are one stop races demonised in this era of DRS & KERS James?

In the Bridgestone era of 30 lap 'Trulli trains' people were absolutely justified to dread one stop races but not in the current era in my opinion.

Abu Dhabi, Austin, even India last year produced exciting races utmost the need for 80+ pitstops.


One way to spice up the show could be to

1) make durable tyres

2) Have a per-determined no of pitstops for everyone

3) The first pre-determined no of laps, the driver has to come in, get out the car, get on a bicycle and cycle round the track and pre-determined no of laps

4) come back into the pits, dance with a pom-pom girl

5) Get back into the car this time with different sets of tyre compounds on the cars..e.g. Soft and Hard at the same time and "race" to the finish line. That ought to do it.. a bit of sunderland afternoon carry on with my Dinner.


Formula E in five years...

Steve Brisbane Oz

Hi James

Once again, an insightful overview!

Some interesting points raised above, but I'd like to play devils advocate if I may?

Lets remove the Pirelli/F1 agreement for a moment,push aside the issues of branding v's closer racing.

Perhaps the issue of tyres should be on the manufacturer. Lets allow all brands to compete? More brands = more brand awareness?

Could be a coup for Mr. E? $$$

Not sure who has the rights to AVON...but I'd buy a couple...lol


It is funny they are so critical against the tires. They are leading the constructor championship and Vettel is doing well, even better than he did last year in the beginning of the season.

Bring Back Murray

Just imagine if we were still racing round Indionapolis. They'd only have to go round the embakment one time and that's it.


Very soon there will be an accident caused by the tyres. None of these tracks is remotely as demanding as Indianapolis, yet we have regular delaminations from the gummy tyres.

The tyres are so wretched, the tread can't even remain stuck to the body, even when driving in a straight line.

To play on words, those tyres are degrading F1 very rapidly.


And we've never had an accident caused by a tyre failure of a Bridgestone , Goodyear or Michelin have we?

Just to name one of hundreds of examples, Mansell, Australia 1986.

Stephen Taylor

The only way to bring back REAL Racing is have 1998 style front and rear wings with huge tyres. Just a thought.


Didn't they change to grooved tyres and skinny wings for '98? I think you may be meaning '97... and yes, that was the last year of pure racing in F1: I remember '97 as being my first visit to Silverstone, and watching Schumacher hounding Villeneuve through Becketts, never more than a few feet separating them despite the corners and speed.

Breathtaking stuff, and something that vanished for '98 and has only made a comeback in the Pirelli era. The reasons we're seeing it again are different - to do with massive variations in tyre performance rather than inefficient and underdeveloped aero - but I'd sooner have this than a lot of the bore-fest that was the "noughties", in particular after Michelin withdrew.

I also remember "back in the day" when there would often be fewer than 6 finishers (awful if you've paid £100+ to be at the race). I remember one-or-two teams running away with things to the extent they'd lap the entire rest of the field on a regular basis. I remember when the only hope for a surprise result was if the rain came down unexpectedly, or the leading drivers got caught-up in a big accident. There were certain thrills to be had from all of this, but a lot of this "harking back" is just looking through rose-tinted specs IMO.

In effect your argument is to make F1 be like Formula Ford but with gert-big engines and tyres... sounds fantastic and I'd watch it for sure, but would it be F1? I'm not so sure it would be.


Some would say the last year of pure racing in F1 was 1967. The seeds of this whole mess were planted in 1968.


F1 is currently an ongoing experiment at the moment. Everyone wants to cherrypick the right amount of DRS and the right amount of tyre wear into making classic races happen. It can never work 100% of the time.


This problem has been created due to the knee-jerk reaction in 2010 to poor races like Bahrain, Abu Dhabi and Valencia and then what happened in Canada. The problem with this line of thinking is that it assumes durable tyres made the show poor, however this is completely incorrect.

If you look back over the last 10 years of F1, durable tyres were never the issue that led to poor races and drivers not being able to overtake. The actual problems were one of either two things:

-Dependence on aerodynamics, which caused too much 'dirty air' and made it difficult to pass once you were within a second of the guy in front.

-Poor track design. Too many modern circuits have too many slow corners, particularly before straights, which causes a field spread. India, Korea, Abu Dhabi, Bahrain, Valencia and Singapore are all examples of this.

After the 2010 season, Jean Todt said that some circuits would have to change track layout in order to have races there as they were poor for the racing, however the Pirelli tyres let the FIA ignore this issue.

We also had the proposed rule change whereby cars would move to ground effect and that was scrapped as well.

Durable tyres were never the issue and never will be.


Right to the point. It is mostly the layout of the tracks that made racing boring. A study conducted in 2008 by FIA concluded that a car could not overtake another in most tracks unless it was about two seconds faster!!! The fronteunners could only overtake the backmarkers!!! They introduced KERS in order to facilitate overtaking and later DRS. The degrading tyre approach to making the races exciting has not added excitement, rather made the races quite boring. Can a repeat of Kimi's feat from 17th to 1st in Japan in 2005, and some of Schumi's memorable charges from the back of the back be repeated with these Pirelli's? No way.


It's easy to blame Pirelli for this, but as Paul Hembery said yesterday in Sky's coverage, this years cars are generating much more downforce than Pirelli anticipated, and this puts more strain on the tyres. Pirelli do not have a current F1 car to test with, and all F1 testing is massively curtailed, and so they have no opportunity to hone their tyres to balance the needs of the teams with the requirements of the FIA and Bernie.

I do think it somewhat laughable that Red Bull are bleating so loudly about this though - they were happy when their engineers had managed to create the best solution to the F1 regulations, and the situation is the same for everybody. Find a way of dealing with it just like everybody else does - if that means 8 stops then make 8 stops!!!

Personally I think that the delaminations are what we need to be concerned about (and Pirelli have acknowledged this). I do not think that the fact the tyres suit some teams better than others is any argument at all for the tyres to be changed.

As for the racing? It's the same for everybody. This is chess, it ain't checkers!


I find it baffling that teams were unwilling to sell Pirelli a test car. Surely any team that did this would have the tyres virtually custom made for their car.

I can only imagine the teams are worried about having their design secrets leaked or Pirelli were unwilling to pay the full price for the car.

Do you have any insight into this James?


You've answered your own question with your first sentence. It's perceived as an advantage to provide the test car for Pirelli. There was no agreement on which team should supply a car (each of them wanting the advantage while not wanting the advantage to go to their rivals) and so we end up with no test car at all. I guess the only alternative would be 11 test cars; one from each team!


I saw a segment with PH from Pirelli on the BBC post-race forum where he said that the de-laminations were due to the steel banding in the tyre which is new this year. Instead of deflating when they get punctured as previously, they delaminate but the central core tends to stay inflated.

This, then, indicates that it's a "feature" rather than a "problem" and that we're less likely to see straight-out flat tyres this year.


I've heard the same. The banding was made of kevlar, last year, whereas it is of metal so as to avoid full deflating of the tyre when punctured this year.

As well, I heard that, because of this metal, some cars (e.g., Merc, McLaren) are passing more heat and quicker than that one that was foreseen by the engineers from the brakes/hubs towards the tyres. This would be good for qualifying (together with the setting of the car purposely made to this end) and bad for racing.

In turn, RB have the best aerodynamic design of the group, and short gear ratios, so that they apply more downforce on tyres. The Ferrari design, on the opposite, is built to apply less downforce and use long gear ratios. Hence, Ferrari's is not so good in Qualys but has a good race pace at least in circuits with speed bends. (Excuse me for this extension, which admittedly has gone further than just answering your comment.)


"Excuse me for this extension, which admittedly has gone further than just answering your comment"

Not at all. Interesting insight.

But it does kind of enforce my point about the lack of testing in my earlier post.


Maybe the tyre situation has gone just a bit too far. For me, in the past, Pirelli’s Paul Hembery made some ill considered remarks about the situation. I think this irritated a number of people both inside and outside F1.

The reality is that every team is given a huge amount of data about the tyres and it is up to them to interpret it, and use it when designing their cars. If anybody wants a glimpse of the type of data. Have a look at that supplied for a F3 tyre. British F3 in the menu. http://www.avonmotorsport.com/resource-centre/downloads. F1 gets much more data. F1 has always required drivers to look after their tyres, nothing new. Rather than just putting the blame on Pirelli, maybe we should be criticising those teams that have failed to interpret data correctly, and ended up with a poor design. Remember that all performance aspects of the car, aero, suspension, tyres etc., are interdependent. So Red Bull and others, saying that it’s the tyres that are stopping them achieving their full potential, is incorrect. In F1 everybody seems to have a ready excuse 🙂 Changing the tyre design as suggested by some, is blatantly unfair on those who have done a good job so far. It might require some major design changes in the car. Maybe a small change to compound mix is all that is required. The embedded steel belt looks like a good idea, because it appears to be stopping violent deflation. Though I wonder if it is affecting the overall thermal characteristics.


Maybe the way to get everyone racing again is to ban pit to car radio. This would stop all of the strategic calls from the team to the driver and leave the driver to get on with their job (Kimi would probably like this a lot :-)) The drivers would be the ones that make the decision to push or not and pay the price if they overcook it. Given that they are by nature racers I think they would all find it very difficult to hold themselves back.


Yes, this would be great! We can only dream though...


Pirelli say things like "if we make durable tyres, RBR will win everything, and you all will complain to us".

That is indirect admission they are manipulating the competition to make things harder for RBR by making tyres that hurt RBR the most from the top teams, to slow them down enough to have some kind of show.

If I was RBR I would sue them for those things they said thems elves on their own Twitter account even. That is admission of competition manipulation.


Well said. +1


I have just read something simiar, although it doesn't appear to be a direct quote from Hembery, here is the quote from Oliver Brown in The Telegraph:

"Hembery's theory is that if the sport were to revert to the predictability of one-stop strategies, Red Bull's championship leader, Sebastian Vettel, would once again sail off into the sunset"

If Hembery said this then it looks to confirm that the FIA/Pirelli philosophy is to stop Red Bull/Vettel at all costs. I think it goes without saying that this is completely unacceptable.


All domination periods were stopped by changes in regulations (single set of tyres for the race in 2005 for instance) to keep the sport attractive.


No it's not..it's them saying that Red Bull have produced a car which is very heavy on it's tyres aerodynamically so introducing heavy tyres will give them a big advantage (Merc too) over the teams that have built cars around these current tyres,


Excellent comment.


No, Pirelli fully admit the tyres they make hurt RBR the most. And if they would change the tyres to the 2012 tyres, RBR would be unstoppable and how people don't want that.

It is clear as can be.

The 2012 tyres were changed to have more 'competition', i.e., stop RBR.

The teams have not built cars around these tyres, that is hogwash. Also because the tyres were first tested in 2013 winter testing when the cars were already designed and built months ago before that. SO there goes your theory.


So here goes your theory:

If the cars were built before the tyres were designed and it was unknown how these cars would be, how could they hurt RBR since they never tested with one of their cars?

all teams had some months to adapt to pirellis. Some did a good job some didn´t.

"The 2012 tyres were changed to have more ‘competition’, i.e., stop RBR."

This comment lacks the most basic or elemental logic.


Unless Ferrari and Lotus had new Pirelli tyres before anyone else, they couldn't have "built" their cars around these current tyres.


If I could, I'd make these suggestions:

1) Drop the "two compounds mandatory" rule.

2) Let teams choose how to distribute their 6 sets for qualifying and race between harder and softer (3-3, 4-2, 5-1, 6-0...).

3) Make the harder compound of each GP able to go the full race distance with minimal and smooth degradation and the softer last about 65% of the race distance with better performance. Let the teams figure out how much better they can make the softer work and if it's worth it to them.

If I were given carte blanche, I'd actually make the tyres last 65% and 40% before losing performance and reintroduce refueling. I'd also drastically reduce the wings. Perhaps lower the height limit for rear wings too.

That'd make it "about racing". People should remember racing is not about overtaking. It's about engineering and driving on the limit skills.

In a perfect world, we'd have at least three tyre suppliers and none of this tyre management nonsense would be necessary.


"If I were given carte blanche, I’d actually make the tyres last 65% and 40% before loosing performance..."

For which package/team would those numbers be valid? As of now it looks as Lotus can travel xy% of race distance longer than e g Mercedes with same/better speed. The way the CARs are built obviously makes a difference and Pirelli cannot cover all of them I guess...unless they start going the Bridgestone way...and then we are back at square one again. By then people will start moaning about THAT...poor Pirelli I say.

Mike from Colombia

The man is right. True F1 died in 2011.


Ah yes 2010. The last year of 'true' F1- almost no overtaking on track and Alonso losing the championship because of one mistimed pitstop and overtaking being impossible even in a much faster car. How we all loved the pure, flat out true racing of 2010.


It's a good point well made. Answer that Mr Mateschitz.

Mike from Colombia

So you wanted him to artificially overtake Petrov ? Would have made you happier ?

Petrov was fighting for position and enjoyed watching Alonso struggle to find a way past. As with Hamilton struggling to get past Vettel.


I agree,it's funny to see how drivers save tyres instead of pushing 100% like it was during Prost/Senna/Schumacher/Mika times.

Everyone admire F1 as the formula of the speed and not of a formula of the tyres !

The current F1 race speed is about GP2 and that's for the childs. This is a first or second step for F1 sunset.


This complaining about not being able to go flat out is just stupid. The moment racing tracks have corners and curves in them is the moment the cars can't go flat out anymore. If you want to see flat out racing, go see drag racing.

Formula 1 is about finishing the race as fast as possible, given a specific "formula" which includes the tires. If you can't drive the car as fast as possible because you failed to take one aspect of the formula into account, then the fault lies with your car design, not with the formula.


Agreed! If they wanted to make the cars as fast as possible, they shouldn't have banned ABS, active ride height, traction control, etc.


I think what most people mean by flat out is driving the car as fast as possible in the corners and straights. You'll find that the fastest lap in the race was about 5 seconds slower than the fastest qualifying lap and remember drs can only be used in designated areas not the whole lap in qualifying. The drivers are visibly holding back because if they do push as hard as possible soon the tire performance will degrade quite rapidly and they will no longer be able to achieve fast lap times.


once more someone is saying this is not racing. onwer dietrich mateschitz name is to be added to the long list of people who feel the same way about formula one these days. racing is about speed and pushing the car and driver to the egde and beyond sometimes if not all the time. if there was something wrong with the engine, are you having tranmission problems, are if the suspension is damage. then you could understand if the team say be careful, take it easy, back off the throttle a little, watch your shifting points. nooooo what you hear is be careful to save these tyres, are i can not drive any slower. lap distance at spainish gp is 2.8 miles x 16 laps is 46.272 miles. my trip to work and back is 55 miles this means somewhere on my way back i need to change the tyres to keep the performance my drive the same on these pirelli tyres. this can not be good for the brand are sells....


Didn't you hear by now people that Pirelli was tasked by Mr.F1 to create very sensitive compounds in order to throw odds. Now everyone is jumping on Pirelli, and Pirelli is just doing what they were told. I doubt that your car, that you drive, has 700 HP and acceleration of 2.5 sec from 0-100 km/h and decelerating back to 0 in one sec.


I remember a race in Hungary (2010 maybe) in which Webber did 40 laps on options: that was a real joke!!!


We all know what RB wants. They want the pole in every race, they want Vettel to open and big gap with the rest of the drivers and they want to win always and without sweating.

Well I have news for RB. That´s not racing either.


Well said.


Agree 100%. They are simply getting ahead of themselves. RBR believes that they are F1.


well, they did all of that true to the spirit of the regulations. Its a pity you blame them for their success.


First they have crossed the line with their own interpretation of the rules, like chaging engine maps. Anyway I don´t blame them for winning. It is their duty to try to win. But when rules are changed they, as a team, complaint like spoilt children. Complaint all you want but with manners and logic arguments. They never see their own mistakes. For example yesterday they planned the wrong strategy with Vettel.


The fastest car always crosses the finish line first, isn't it?


No, there are many things that could happen. Rain, accidents,engine problems, DRS problems, KERS problems, pit stop problems,etc. If the fastest car in one race has a problem of some kind I think it´s hard to always finish first.


You are wrong: that's racing, as opposed to what's happening now. If RB build the fastest car, if they have the driver who can win poles and make the wins look easy, they fully deserve to win.

What's happening now is FIA and Pirelli providing artificial obstacles to stop the best car from winning. This is not fair. This is pathetic.


It is no racing when Vettel wins unchallenged by other drivers. And all we see is a line of cars 15 to 20 seconds behind him the entire race


I do not favor these tyres. In fact I´m against the soft and supersoft. But Pirelli was asked to make them.

Maybe we have a different point of view about racing. If a horse is racing against a snail I don´t think we can call that real racing. One thing is Marussia and another thing is RB. Of course we don´t fix this problem with tyres and DRS. So how can we get more equal opportunity? Then let the drivers and team work make the difference.


What you mean Anne, is that its not a great show...

But it is definitely racing... 🙂 Racing means you go as fast as possible within the rules. The rules and factors should be constant. These tires are anything but constant or a given value. They introduce a random effect... Most true F1 racing fans (which are not necessarily the same people who like to see a good show/race) like the fact that you can count on stable, know quantities and then its up to team/car/driver to go as fast as possible. If there are balanced cars/drivers, they do will fight for the championship pretty closely. If not, well, naturally someone will start to slip away in races and standings. And that, for some, is pure racing, and is what F1 is all about. Was 1992 a competitive season!? No way! Was it F1 ? You bet! Williams built a massively technological car, 1/2secs faster than anyone else and they dominated, especially Mansell whose driving style suited it like a glove. They steamrolled that season and that is how it show be! Now, maybe the real problem with this approach is that there seems to be only one Adrian Newey...

This situation with the tires is akeen to saying fuel will be standard and it can vary from 85-105 RON. You will not really know what you get, its a random distribution.

Random factors should be left to the weather and other uncontrollable events, NOT the tire manufacturer (or FIA/Mr. E) whims any more than it would be acceptable for stewards to start giving random penalties left and right, using a roulette.

Its fine that you don't do quali laps all through the race. It would even be fine if the driver could (like in older times) trade lap time for tire duration (so, you go slower, the tire is more consistent and for more laps). But its not whats happening. If you are mildly aggressive, the tires fall apart! Ask Lotus why kimi could not attack alonso in the end of the race... If he had even tried, he would loose the tires and have to do a fourth stop.


'Certainly we will work on the construction'

Is this an admission that the current construction is unreliable...possibly even unsafe?

I've been a supporter of Pirelli, but I have to agree with a comment by James above: (to paraphrase massively) Whatever they do now, they're screwed...

I also find it very telling that James says this is too much, especially when you consider that it is (I would assume) generally in his his best interests to stay neutral.

I don't want indestructible tyres, but nor do I want to feel like I could get out on track and run faster than they can drive.

There's a middle ground, and Pirelli have to find it.


How bad is it for F1 when the owner of two teams is saying F1 is not racing anymore!!!

How can this be good in attracting sponsors, new teams, new engines suppliers, new fans?

I think we need to get rid of Pirelli or new instructions given to them about making tyres.


Good points. Red Bull are really sounding like spoiled children. Sounds like they got their design wrong re tires while Lotus and Ferrari got it right. Now RB want the rules changed in mid-season to suit the way they designed their car. Not very sporting if you ask me.


There is one way to sort this out. Allow another competitive tyre manufacturer to enter the sport! If another tyre manufacturer entered

offering durable tyres the situation would change overnight. The very soft Pirelli tyres who qualify best, but five laps into the race they would be overtaken as their tyres dropped away. Yes that's the answer. - Let the complaining teams have their own supplier!

James Stapleton

Lets not forget how good the racing was in 2012 and 2011. Pirelli did a good job then. All we need to do is revert back to 2012 spec and bring correct tyres to grand prix.


No the racing was not good! Exciting maybe to the unintiated, but what you were watching was degradation and DRS, almost entirely artificial. You need to learn what proper aggressive racing looks like, not the prancing around like a bunch of pussies to save the tyres.

James Stapleton

In 2011 and 2012 the racing was good I think most would agree. I never said it was good this year if you read my comment properly I was implying that its gone too far and pirelli need to revert back to previous compounds which allowed the drivers to push.


I feel like I'm the only one or at least one of the few who's prepared to just stop watching F1 now. I've watched every single season since '92 and this is the first time I've felt like I just can't watch it any more. For me, the clincher is hearing the teams not to race the guy coming behind them and other variations of that. I can't stomach watching it any more and I feel sad to have to admit that. Does anyone feel something similar?


You're not the only one - several others have commented that they're on the verge of leaving the sport (if they haven't already) and I must admit that watching the race in Barcelona was a little painful.

Aside from seeing who would take the flag out of Alonso and Raikkonen I had no real interest in the race and only continued to watch it more out of habit and the fact that I had nothing better to do on a Sunday night.

With any luck we can all look back at this later and call it the low point, but if I end up being wrong about that it could be a sad state of affairs indeed...


Yeah. I'd almost given up before Bahrain, but that race was a positive surprise. But now Barcelona... I can't really figure out anymore why I'm watching this. Because it's on TV?


For me the issue is very simple (although the solution is complex).......

"The drivers just aren't challenged to go fast in the cars."

It would appear that no-one gets to push the car up to their individual driving limits, and that just aint motor racing any more.

SO what if Alonso Kimi and Massa, did the race in the same time as last year. Virtually no-one had to take a risk, no-one was under pressure to drive faster, to have a go, to actually race!


In his advanced age, Bernie must be enjoying all the tyre drama. It's about power, and controling races or manipulating gullible 'fans' is an exciting thing


Well for what ever reason Pirelli have really made a miscalculation this year with the tires. No matter what you think of how RBR and Lotus have designed their chassis, the structure of the tire that is allowing these delaminations is unsafe.

It is pretty obvious to me that the FIA and maybe FOM have tried pretty hard to keep RBR in check for whatever reason. Those that complain about RBR complaining about the tires, just remember that they are the only team that has had complete rule changes to slow them down in the recent past.

Shocking that an Italian company would not want RBR to beat Ferrari.


Sorry I hit reply too early.

Even though I would love to see a level playing field with the tires, I think to much change would be bad at this point.

For the remainder of the year:

Teams should have 2 more sets of each of the compounds.

Teams should be able to start the race with new tires of the same compound.

The delaminations need to be eliminated. This has been going on since testing started and there is just no excuse.

There should be an additional round of testing allowed. This should be IMPOSED by FIA on the teams and participation not compulsory. Probably carried out the week before Silverstone, the Lord knows there are plenty of free weeks on F1's schedule.


Pirelli are very cleverly using the fact that people always hate on Red Bull. They refuse to change tyres for the better saying that it would help Red Bull. They say that doing that would make Ferrari and Lotus unhappy.

The question is, why exactly do they care more about what Ferrari and Lotus think than the fact that all teams but Ferrari and Lotus are suffering and F1 has become impossible to watch? What the hell? So what, as long as Red Bull(among many others) is struggling, then it's okay to produce terrible tyres?

Something is very wrong with that picture.


Strange this, we never heard anyone from Red bull moan and cry about the "lack of racing" and "There is no more real qualifying and fighting for the pole", while they were using their engine not only for driving the cars forward, but also for generating downforce - even when the car was travelling at very low speed. During those years both their drivers would CRUISE to front row on Saturdays and from there CRUISE to 1-2 finishes on Sundays. If, god forbid, any of the competition came within a few seconds of them during the race, the driver would press a button, get an instant boost of whatever and disappear further ahead again. Is it that the kind of "racing" and "fighting for the pole" that they are missing so badly?

They are by no means way behind as seen by the results thus far, so you have to start wondering, is it really the lack of fighting they are bemoaning, or is it the massive competition they are facing that is triggering all this crying and panicking? After all, this is probably the first time in recent years, that they do not have a significant speed advantage over the absolute majority of the other teams...and they have every opportunity in the world to at last actually FIGHT. And the rules are actually the SAME for all other teams and drivers...

Oh well, if they used all the time they moan (at least most interviews Horner/VET gives), cry and complain to do some meaningful work, probably they would soon be cruising again...thank god they are moaning instead - at least that is fun to watch.


The current F1 car that is easiest on its tyres, was designed and built in Enstone.

The car that Pirelli used to develop the current tyres, was designed and built in Enstone.

I'm not suggesting foul play here... merely that something in the way the cars use their tyres may have been carried over 3 seasons.

So really, all Red Bull would have had to do for the current tyres to suit them better, would be to donate Pirelli one of their championship-winning RB6s!


Indeed, this might even solve Pirreli's 'issue' where they underestimated the downforce levels the cars would produce this year; the RB6 had silly levels of grip after all.


Tyres are the wrong differentiator.

F1 should be about abundance. I am vey much looking forward to the ERS & turbo era. Starting in 2014.


Agreed, should be great, but if Pirelli don't sort this then with the extra torque and wheelspin the tyres will be chewed up and spat out within a lap or two: Not good.


EB of Lotus makes the point that they designed a car to work with the tyres and say's that others simply got it wrong. Blaming the tyres is just a way of deflecting attention from that fact. I agree, yesterdays race was exciting and to see cars set up to race beating carss that focused more on qualifying was great to see. protecting tyres and knowing when to push is one of the arts of F1 racing. Racing with one tyre for the whole race is not F1 therefore the tyres must reflect the job they are intended to do and there must be a challenge involved including a limited life span and technical understanding. They fact that some teams can make them work better than others means that those teams should be the focus when discussing the tyres and those who are complaining should have their offerings examined closely to highlight their mistakes in not getting it right and trashing their tyres. Red Bull have aeguably the best designer and are well funded so they assume that if they cant make it work it must be the components fault,in this case the tyres. They wont admit that they got it wrong even though a less funded team Lotus got it spot on. Watching Kimi's tyres during onboards clearly showed a well balanced usage throughout. The way the Ferrai's stormed througout the field on a different strategy showed that their is a variation of strategic options to those who are successful in understanding the tyres. Look at the drivers Felipe passed to get to third. I say well done Pirelli,they have produced a racing tyre rather than a qualifying tyre.


I don't have found memories of the blown diffusers led processions of 2011. I think tyres are much more relevant for interesting racing than aerodynamics the way it developped under the Red Bull era.


I would suggest Lotus/Ferrari to pull out of the championship if they change the construction of the tires.

To put in millions of money to build a car to suit the tires and help with the racing, only for the main parameter (tires) to be changed mid-season will be a travesty.

I remember Ferrari telling everyone that some of the teams might be caught off-guard about the tires, even before the beginning of the first race. That sounds like they knew what they were up to.

Simply because you got a car with a lot of downforce pouring from all holes, doesn't mean you have to win all the races.

RB/Merc designed a car that punishes the tires, which in turn punishes them.

Give these tires some time. Everyone will understand them and work a way around them.


Lets change the name to Formula T (for formula tyre racing). 🙂


When Alonso got a penalty at Monza in 2006 he said it wasn't racing either, and I'm pretty sure that was Schumacher's opinion in 2005 too.

'Twas always thus in F1. If you're not winning there must be someone out to get you...

I'd always been of the opinion that in F1 the aim of the FIA was to slow the cars down, and the challenge was for the engineers to, within the formula, produce a car that could defy that wish. We all know that, by the last 5 races of the season, the best (funded) teams will have developed their cars to the point of being able to 2 stop anyway, so Pirelli changing anything beyond the construction characteristics in order to reduce the risk of delamination would be an insult. It's formula racing, they were all given the formula in 2012 so don't complain now. Change it next year if you like (a la 2005-2006 - the '05 regulations were a joke but they stayed in place throughout the season)and make sure that you design a car that can do the job the formula requires.


Sanity and logic is alive after all.

How refreshing!


Stop crying, just because you don't win in Formula One doesn't mean Formula One is boring. Lotus got it right, you did not. Get on with it.


Dear Dietrich Mateschitz.

Please make the same claims when you win a race. Until then stop complaining, it just makes you look a bad loser.



Tyre management was part and parcel of F1 up until teams began experimenting with pit stops in1982. Calling it antithetical to the spirit of the sport simply betrays a lack of knowledge about its history.


It seems F1 it seems always need a pantomime villain.

In the late 90’s it was refuelling that was to blame. Teams were more interested in pass in the pits than on the track. Boring.

Early last decade it was the horrible Ferrari budget that could outspend almost everyone.

Let’s not forget those horrible team orders that were ruining our races!

The Bridgestone tires which would go on and on and allow Schumacher to stroll round.

Our last villain was Hermann Tilke who allegedly built boring race track after boring race track to ensure boring racing and brought as the spectacle of Alonso not winning a world championship because he was stuck behind a much slower car.

Now its Pirelli’s turn to be

the bad guy, despite providing what was asked of them. Strangely the team principles who speak out about them never do it when they have just won a race. The current top three drivers in the field are position 1,2,3 in the Championship. They have between them won all the races. Coincidence, I think not. The cream always rises to the top.

If Mercedes and Red Bull do not like the tires then they should have built a car that worked with the tires. The rule book was the same for everyone at the start of the year.


To hell with spec tyres. Have multiple tyre suppliers and non-exclusive choices, no restrictions on what tyres must be run -- wide open tyre choice. Why not -- this is essentially a cost is no object sport. And then get the radios out of the cars and force drivers to race and manage strategy/tactics during the race from inside the car. You can still have strategy planed and implemented by the team before races, and altered by team management during races by communications using a 1m x 1m message board. Then we'll have racing.

Kostas Galanis

I guess everyone can have an off year and don't get everything perfect except Red Bull. I wish all moaners a perfectly dull Bridgestone championship full of exhaust gases, flexing and ofcourse with only one pit stop. Passing permitted only through pit stops. Feel the excitement? Or even better, tyres made especially for the needs of one team. Just like Ferrari and Bridgestone during Schumacher era.


I have said for a long time that tyre management has too much influence on the races. However, to change things at this stage (mainly to suit Red Bull) would be totally wrong. One day Paul Hembery says they are not going to change, and then Hey Presto, Mateschitz turns up in Spain and he changes his mind. It appears that money really does talk! Lotus, Ferrari, and others have learnt to manage the current tyres so it would be unfair to change them now. Having said that, please change them for next season and scrap DRS so that we can see some real racing.

Stephen Taylor

If mercedes are 1 and 2 into the first corner at Monaco we could well have f1 cars doing this.





Steve, you have too much time on your hands, but I like your sense of humour ... 🙂


RBR have become quite the whiners haven't they? Tyres are the same for everyone so I don't understand what Ll the fuzz is about?

What difference would it make if the cars run at 100% or 80%? They are limited by fuel, drive train AND engine restrictions...not just tyres. So why moan just about tyres? Have happened more than once THIS SEASON that a driver was told to conserve fuel Do you hear the teams, media and "purists" lobby for a different fuel mixture? Nope.

Hell knows I won't be able to sit through another Fer/Bridgestone season.

Right, so what's the alternative? Tyres that last forever, but have a set amount of mandatory stops per race? Maybe like DTM with "pit windows"?

But for now maybe RBR needs to suck it up and rather spend their time to get their car to work with what they've got. Be true champs.


When RBR is winning then everything is rosy. Now that the performance is questionable lets blame tires. How many times in 2012 FA had to loose places due to high tire degradation of F2012 and no one from SF was performing tantrums. They went back to the "drawing boards" and also learned tire management better. So they are winning now with F138. After all tires are same for all. The only thing that worries is delamination, but it could be that the team left it for to long instead of changing it earlier.


"How many times in 2012 FA had to loose places due to high tire degradation of F2012 and no one from SF was performing tantrums. They went back to the “drawing boards” and also learned tire management better."

F2012 was really hard on tyres, it is worth recalling.


Thanks to pirelli for saving f1 from redbull. I dont want to see one team dominating and 1 stop races again , im bored of it.


The only thing Pirelli really needs to look at is the tire failures. Another one in Spain suggests there's a weakness there that needs to be dealt with before a more serious incident occurs.

As for the rest, let the teams work on the problem and adapt their cars accordingly. Clearly, Ferrari and Lotus are doing a pretty good job with the tires.

The only other thing that needs tweaking is the DRS zones. Seems the DRS systems are so efficient now that the zones really need to shorten up a bit.



Failed tires give great looking slow-mo replays!

Everyone is so P.C. Nothing can fail anymore?

What's next? We clame Apple than their iPhone failed after you dropped it in the toiled? It happens. Tires fail, phones get droped in doodoo, it rains once in a while.


The odd tire failure is acceptable, particularly if its due to debris. Tire failure due to poor construction isn't acceptable (recall Michelin?).

It's not about PC, it's about safety. I don't think anyone is likely to be injured or worse if you drop your iPhone in the guano.

Moderator: curious to know how my previous comment on Button's embarassing complaining broke the house rules...


Should not Mateschitz, instead of hitting out at Pirelli, first be asking the redbull management WHY VET was on a 3-stopper at the start of the race? I mean, if you are confident about the pace of your car (as seems the case with RB) and yo