 |
| Source: motorsport.com |
After the end of the 2010 season, not many people believed that racing could get any closer or more exciting. However, wind the clock back to the pre-season period and the picture was very different indeed: the days of re-fuelling in Formula 1 were at an end for the foreseeable future, and were pre-emptively mourned by a great number of die-hard fans. Similar to the ending of the V10 era, many fans simply weren't satisfied, and expected the pinnacle of motorsport to experience an unsavoury dilution. Boy, were they wrong. Not only did 2010 produce one of the most widely-inclusive and closely-fought title battles in years, it also nurtured the rise of the youngest world champion in the sport's history. Yep, I think that was a fairly decent year. Was Formula 1 satisfied? Of course not, and we shouldn't have expected anything less.
Nevertheless, Bridgestone's decision to pull out of motorsport's hottest seat came as a surprise, especially since racing was so exciting. Their reason? To 'redistribute [the company's] resources as part of a changing business strategy'. In other words, they were running out of time and money for Formula 1. A shame indeed, but Bernie Ecclestone saw it differently. On the one hand, the motorsport fanatic in him saw an opportunity to fully exploit the potential of the world's finest racing cars. But on the other hand, as is so often the case, the greedy little gremlin that is him saw an opportunity to make a butt-load of cash. And so, armed with the mandate to make Formula 1 even more exciting and unpredictably mental, Pirell set out to create tyres which would promote less tactically-oriented racing. Well, judging from the start of the European leg of the 2013 season, I'd say the fans' premonitions are nearing realisation. However, I wouldn't say they were for the precise reasons they were bemoaning: in an astonishing series of events from the Spanish GP to last weekend's manic race at Silverstone, Pirelli's tyres have managed to "go from being a nuisance to being downright dangerous", in the words of the automotive sage Jeremy Clarkson (only he was describing a somewhat battered Lancia Beta Coupe. Perhaps it's an Italian thing?).
Where on earth do I start? The saga seemed to have been in full swing by the weekend of the Spanish GP in May on the back of tyre failures in both Malaysia and Bahrain, which sparked intrigue but not a huge amount more. The race itself seems to have had all the ingredients required for an emotionally-charged event, with Fernando Alonso performing a stunning set of moves on the first lap to move up into third place, and subsequently storming past Nico Rosberg on lap 13 to take the lead. That is where he stayed, and the Spanish fans went crazy for him. Let's get one thing straight: this was not an exciting grand prix. It may have been exciting from Alonso's viewpoint (and who can blame him), but for the rest of us it was really rather astonishing to watch. Both of the Mercedes dominated qualifying, but were left floundering for position in the race. Lewis went from 2nd on the grid to finish 12th. Dropping ten places is not fun for a driver to endure, let alone the heartbroken fans who had sadly come to expect nothing less of Mercedes' race pace. Rosberg wasn't much better, as he went from pole to finish 6th. This is a guy who is renowned for being blisteringly quick and knowing how to nurse a tyre. In all honesty, you may be forgiven for thinking he was having a nap.
Alright, you may be thinking, Mercedes' race pace has been off for a few years now due to an irritating and inexcusable ability to keep its tyres fresh(ish), so it's no wonder they struggled on such an arduous circuit. But when you looked at Ferrari and Lotus, Massa and Raikkonen, and even Vettel and Webber, you could see they weren't trying to race the nuts off their cars. Massa catching Raikkonen in the closing stages of the race was a prime example of this: the prospect of a dramatic climax was looking likely (not for the win, mind), but his Pirellis decided something more akin to a funeral procession would be better. Needless to say, he backed off without a fight. So did Vettel, who said that he "just didn't have the tyres to fight with the guys in the front". That's not 'the speed', that's 'the tyres' (but Formula 1 should be mostly about speed, right Bernie?). All became clear when Red Bull boss Dietrich Mateschitz marched straight up to the multi-billionaire after the race and declared that "Formula 1 is nothing to do with racing any more", and that "we can't get the best out of our car". If that isn't a wake-up call I don't know what is. I'm all for strategy in Formula 1- without it, the sport would be very processional. But drivers not trying in Formula 1 is like a rockstar not playing their guitar at a concert-it's completely pointless. Frankly, they may as well be driving around on lawnmowers.
Yes, you probably thought ten days later, Monaco. Surely Pirelli's strategy of mitigating processional driving would pay dividends on a track as narrow as in Monte Carlo? As the many millions who tuned in stared in disbelief, Pirelli's tyres were causing absolute chaos. Obedient and innocent as ever, they were doing just as Mr Ecclestone had asked by providing tyres which wouldn't last more than a third of race distance at the very most. Well done, minions. However, providing tyres that cause drivers to drive so slowly that the entire field bunches up and collides is appalling and extremely dangerous. The front-running drivers were clearly playing the political long-game: driving slowly, preserving tyres and securing points. That's fine, Pirelli, but when the front-running drivers (incidentally the best of their type in the world, if you didn't notice) play this game to such an extent that desperados like Sergio Perez can bully them into letting them past is, quite frankly, tragic. On a track of such huge significance as Monte Carlo streets, only the creme de la creme of motorsport should be able to have the honour of thrashing the fastest racing cars around at insanely high speed. Unfortunately, one of the more stubborn members of this elite refused to play ball, and as a result a nasty crash ensued. From this, one could come to the conclusion that if Formula 1 racing is conducted in the way it should be (i.e. at the highest limit of speed and grip), Pirelli is making the sport dangerous. Not exciting, but dangerous. You only had to look at the way Alonso was driving to tell that the drivers are not only being prevented from exhibiting their enormous talent, but are actually driving in such a way so as to avoid an incident. To add insult to injury, when drivers such as Perez and Grosjean try to put on a good show and go for an overtake, as they rightly should, red flags suddenly appear. It isn't right. Not for the drivers, not for the fans, not for anyone. How good is Pirelli's PR strategy looking now?
Silverstone. What. A. Mess. Up to this point politics had played an unusually minor role in the 2013 Formula 1 season. There had been complaints by the likes of Red Bull and Mercedes, of course, but Pirelli refused to acknowledge that the poor performance of their products constituted a threat to safety. The usual bickering between the top teams rambled on, with the smaller teams looking on in disbelief, but the matter (in Ecclestone and Pirelli's eyes) remained an issue of PR inconvenience. To put it mildly, the race gave Pirelli a lot more to think about than poor advertisement. Six tyres blew up at speeds close to 190 mph, the debris resulting from which nearly killing several drivers, namely Alonso and Raikkonen. "Fernando Alonso is a very lucky boy going home". "We have to assume we have been lucky that no-one has been hurt so far". "We need to do what needs to be done to sort it out". As is evident from these quotes, Pirelli has a lot to answer for. Thankfully, it has been assaulted with questions and enquiries, not that these aren't the norm in today's Formula 1. Worryingly, it appears the construction of the tyre itself is fundamentally flawed. The decision to replace the kevlar belt with a steel one, in conjunction with a substantial reduction in sidewall stiffness, has proven to be a recipe for disaster. As a consequence of the weakness, the teams resorted to an old strategy which involved reversing-mounting the tyres. What this has done is increase pressure on the sidewall, with a view to increasing the life span of the rubber by up to three laps. The problem with this is that the steel to which the sidewall is bound is far weaker than the kevlar used in last year's compounds. Consequently they cannot cope very well with the increase in pressure, which makes them prone to the sort of spectacular blowouts that came to characterise the race at Silverstone. Whilst you could easily blame the teams for reverse-mounting, it seems to be necessary in order to make the tyres last any sort of reasonable distance, a direct consequence of the tyres being too weak in the first place. Who's to blame? Of course, why do I need to ask.
So what's the solution? Simple: revert to using kevlar. Nice and easy. At least now it is, after the greedy execs of Pirelli and Formula 1 management finally admitted that high-speed blowouts might indeed be a slight safety issue, commisioning stronger tyres for the race in Germany (I'm sure the Germans will appreciate their more efficient performance). It's clear that if they had done so earlier they would have dealt with the problem far sooner. Unfortunately, politics got in the way. Again. As Pirelli knew, they would not be able to approve a revision of the stupid design unless they could declare a safety issue. Otherwise, they would have needed to get all the teams to agree- and we all know how successful that would've been. Besides, Pirelli were too focused on bad PR to have the sense to declare an emergency in the first place, a fact which itself presents the most terrifying prospect of the entire saga. They may claim that they had wanted to change the tyres since Bahrain, but the fact is that they were too focused on profit to have the nous to veto all the teams' decisions on the revision process, too business-focused to deny the likes of Ferrari what they wanted in the name of common sense (they must have been taking tips from the FIA, aka Ferrari International Assistance).
I usually don't listen to the doom-mongers who bemoan the death of Formula 1, but it is truly too difficult to ignore their core philosophy. Now, in an era marred by politics and profit-hoarding, Formula 1 is at risk of imploding in a mass of political warfare. One only has to look at how Pirelli have dealt with this situation to understand how politics are ruining the essence of what makes Formula 1 great: combat politics with politically-controversial solutions (*cough*illegal tyre test*cough*). That's sure to work a charm. If Mr Ecclestone and Mr Hembery hadn't been so hungry for profit, racing would be more exciting and would pose much less of a threat to the people involved, who in years gone by were revered for racing their hearts out. Now, they just seem to line pockets. Think carefully about where you want this sport to head, Bernie. Just ask yourself: are you a petrol-head, or a block-head?
Alright, you may be thinking, Mercedes' race pace has been off for a few years now due to an irritating and inexcusable ability to keep its tyres fresh(ish), so it's no wonder they struggled on such an arduous circuit. But when you looked at Ferrari and Lotus, Massa and Raikkonen, and even Vettel and Webber, you could see they weren't trying to race the nuts off their cars. Massa catching Raikkonen in the closing stages of the race was a prime example of this: the prospect of a dramatic climax was looking likely (not for the win, mind), but his Pirellis decided something more akin to a funeral procession would be better. Needless to say, he backed off without a fight. So did Vettel, who said that he "just didn't have the tyres to fight with the guys in the front". That's not 'the speed', that's 'the tyres' (but Formula 1 should be mostly about speed, right Bernie?). All became clear when Red Bull boss Dietrich Mateschitz marched straight up to the multi-billionaire after the race and declared that "Formula 1 is nothing to do with racing any more", and that "we can't get the best out of our car". If that isn't a wake-up call I don't know what is. I'm all for strategy in Formula 1- without it, the sport would be very processional. But drivers not trying in Formula 1 is like a rockstar not playing their guitar at a concert-it's completely pointless. Frankly, they may as well be driving around on lawnmowers.
Yes, you probably thought ten days later, Monaco. Surely Pirelli's strategy of mitigating processional driving would pay dividends on a track as narrow as in Monte Carlo? As the many millions who tuned in stared in disbelief, Pirelli's tyres were causing absolute chaos. Obedient and innocent as ever, they were doing just as Mr Ecclestone had asked by providing tyres which wouldn't last more than a third of race distance at the very most. Well done, minions. However, providing tyres that cause drivers to drive so slowly that the entire field bunches up and collides is appalling and extremely dangerous. The front-running drivers were clearly playing the political long-game: driving slowly, preserving tyres and securing points. That's fine, Pirelli, but when the front-running drivers (incidentally the best of their type in the world, if you didn't notice) play this game to such an extent that desperados like Sergio Perez can bully them into letting them past is, quite frankly, tragic. On a track of such huge significance as Monte Carlo streets, only the creme de la creme of motorsport should be able to have the honour of thrashing the fastest racing cars around at insanely high speed. Unfortunately, one of the more stubborn members of this elite refused to play ball, and as a result a nasty crash ensued. From this, one could come to the conclusion that if Formula 1 racing is conducted in the way it should be (i.e. at the highest limit of speed and grip), Pirelli is making the sport dangerous. Not exciting, but dangerous. You only had to look at the way Alonso was driving to tell that the drivers are not only being prevented from exhibiting their enormous talent, but are actually driving in such a way so as to avoid an incident. To add insult to injury, when drivers such as Perez and Grosjean try to put on a good show and go for an overtake, as they rightly should, red flags suddenly appear. It isn't right. Not for the drivers, not for the fans, not for anyone. How good is Pirelli's PR strategy looking now?
 |
| Source: motorsport.com |
So what's the solution? Simple: revert to using kevlar. Nice and easy. At least now it is, after the greedy execs of Pirelli and Formula 1 management finally admitted that high-speed blowouts might indeed be a slight safety issue, commisioning stronger tyres for the race in Germany (I'm sure the Germans will appreciate their more efficient performance). It's clear that if they had done so earlier they would have dealt with the problem far sooner. Unfortunately, politics got in the way. Again. As Pirelli knew, they would not be able to approve a revision of the stupid design unless they could declare a safety issue. Otherwise, they would have needed to get all the teams to agree- and we all know how successful that would've been. Besides, Pirelli were too focused on bad PR to have the sense to declare an emergency in the first place, a fact which itself presents the most terrifying prospect of the entire saga. They may claim that they had wanted to change the tyres since Bahrain, but the fact is that they were too focused on profit to have the nous to veto all the teams' decisions on the revision process, too business-focused to deny the likes of Ferrari what they wanted in the name of common sense (they must have been taking tips from the FIA, aka Ferrari International Assistance).
I usually don't listen to the doom-mongers who bemoan the death of Formula 1, but it is truly too difficult to ignore their core philosophy. Now, in an era marred by politics and profit-hoarding, Formula 1 is at risk of imploding in a mass of political warfare. One only has to look at how Pirelli have dealt with this situation to understand how politics are ruining the essence of what makes Formula 1 great: combat politics with politically-controversial solutions (*cough*illegal tyre test*cough*). That's sure to work a charm. If Mr Ecclestone and Mr Hembery hadn't been so hungry for profit, racing would be more exciting and would pose much less of a threat to the people involved, who in years gone by were revered for racing their hearts out. Now, they just seem to line pockets. Think carefully about where you want this sport to head, Bernie. Just ask yourself: are you a petrol-head, or a block-head?
No comments:
Post a Comment