Answering the brief?

[Cam]

When Pirelli were given the F1 tyre contract starting in 2011, they were given one brief. In Hembrey's own words:

"We were asked to provide two to three stops and replicate Canada [2010].

So, we know what Pirelli were asked to do. Did they answer the brief?

To try and answer this, we must go back, way back, to 2010. The Canadian Gp. Let's first start by looking at the race as a whole, the expectations, the results - then we can discuss whether Pirelli have indeed answered the brief they were give - "replicate Canada 2010".

Free Practice:
The biggest story of the day was the extreme tyre degradation the drivers experienced while running on the super-soft compound. Hirohide Hamashima, Bridgestone's director of motosport tyre development, commented that the problem was a result of the tyres being unable to reach their optimum operating temperature. The lack of grip and unpredictable conditions made setting the car up exceptionally difficult.

Qualifying:
The first qualifying session had no surprises.

The second qualifying session saw Michael Schumacher miss the cut as the only surprise elimination.

Bridgestone projected that a one-stop strategy in the race would be impossible with the harder prime compound losing up to seven seconds over half race distance, and the super-soft option tyres losing over sixteen seconds in the same window.

At the third and final session all eyes were on Lewis Hamilton as he had set the fastest time in both qualifying sessions. The teams were running different tyres, making the results unpredictable.

Final Practice:
Hamilton - Mclaren
Webber - RedBull
Alonso - Ferrari
Schumacher - Mercedes
Vettel - RedBull
Kubica - Renault
Sutil - Force India
Button - Mclaren
Liuzzi - Force India
Petrov - Renault

Hamilton and Webber looked good all through practice as did Alonso and the Renaults - they basically qualified in-line with that expectation.

Qualfying:
Hamilton - Mclaren
Webber - RedBull
Vettel - RedBull
Alonso - Ferrari
Button - Mclaren
Liuzzi - Force India
Massa - Ferrari
Kubica - Renault
Sutil - Force India
Rosberg - Mercedes

Usual suspects in the usual spots - nothing really outrageous in these results.

Grid:
Webber was demoted from second place on the grid to seventh after gearbox replacement.

Hamilton - Mclaren
Vettel - RedBull
Alonso - Ferrari
Button - Mclaren
Liuzzi - Force India
Massa - Ferrari
Webber - RedBull
Kubica - Renault
Sutil - Force India
Rosberg - Mercedes

Race Result 70 laps:

Lap stops in brackets.

Hamilton - Mclaren (7, 26)
Button - Mclaren (6, 27)
Alonso - Ferrari (7, 28)
Vettel - RedBull (14, 27)
Webber - RedBull (13, 50)
Rosberg - Mercedes (5, 27)
Kubica - Renault (9, 59)
Buemi - STR (15, 26, 50)
Liuzzi - Force India (1, 15)
Sutil - Force India (6, 27)

The only big surprise here was Buemi up and Massa down. Rosberg gained a few spots - otherwise it's a pretty standard result and nothing like a random order or completely unexpected.

So the actual results of the race were atypical, that is the practice time, qualifying results and starting grid pretty much saw the top teams at the top and finish in the rough order of quality of teams, give or take.

But the biggest thing is ONLY 1 team in the top ten did 3 stops - STR.

Most top teams ran one tyre set for 40+ laps. Some 50+.

So a 2 stop race, long running on tyres.

Now, look at the races for 2011, 2012 and so far in 2013. Look at the absolute lottery we had at the start of 2012. Now look back at Canada 2010 as the base to compare with.

Take away the hype - look at the numbers and facts and really ask - has Pirelli answered the brief?

The floor is open.



A lot of information comes from - Wiki with others as quoted as sourced.

[Pierce89]

I'd say they've been pretty close to the mark. I still haven't really decided whether the racing is better or worse, but I feel that calling it "artificial" is way overkill. I also feel that that the artificial tag normally comes from someone who is unhappy with their teams performance in a recent race. As an aside, I don't believe at all that Pirelli tried to use the tires to peg back one team or level the playing field. In fact, suspension settings that make tires last longer could be seen as quite road relevant.

[beelsebob]

I'd say they've been pretty close to the mark. I still haven't really decided whether the racing is better or worse, but I feel that calling it "artificial" is way overkill. I also feel that that the artificial tag normally comes from someone who is unhappy with their teams performance in a recent race. As an aside, I don't believe at all that Pirelli tried to use the tires to peg back one team or level the playing field. In fact, suspension settings that make tires last longer could be seen as quite road relevant.

It's interesting that the artificial tag gets applied to the tyres actually. Originally the "artificial" tag came about because of DRS, its usage seems to have become corrupt.

[Cam]

Removing any artificial, or good/bad etc - have what Pirelli delivered over almost 3 years, closely (as possible) given us the racing and results that Canada 2010 did, and if so - itemised - why?

personally, I wonder whether the 'spice' was mistaken. They've made such a huge effort to change compounds to replicate that race - but maybe they've missed the original mark what they needed to achieve. Certainly there was no 3-4 stops for top teams, no random winners (see: Maldonado) and the tyres actually went a fair way, in some cases 50+ laps. That's not what we've been given now.

I'm just thinking about what/how I would grade Pirelli for how close they came to what was promised.

[amouzouris]

I am really surprised that people are jumping up and down for the 4 stops of Spain. IIRC all the other races were 2-3 stoppers..It was 4 stops in 2011 as well for Barcelona..no one said anything then...
It is certain teams that are moaning..and getting their fans into it as well! And while the teams look political, fans look stupid... Cam this is not an attack towards you! I think you brought up a very interesting point. Is it artificial?
I don't think that it is...Regarding the random winners of 2012..I didn't see any random winners..the only outsider is Pastor who I think really deserved it!
There's a lot being said about how it is not racing anymore and so on...Oh it is still very much racing!! And the fact that teams are sometimes not fighting it out on the track because they are on different strategies has nothing to do with Pirelli... Each team's strategy will depend on their car, tires are the same for everyone

Did Pirelli did what they were asked to do? I think they did! And they did it very well...

[beelsebob]

Removing any artificial, or good/bad etc - have what Pirelli delivered over almost 3 years, closely (as possible) given us the racing and results that Canada 2010 did, and if so - itemised - why?

personally, I wonder whether the 'spice' was mistaken. They've made such a huge effort to change compounds to replicate that race - but maybe they've missed the original mark what they needed to achieve. Certainly there was no 3-4 stops for top teams, no random winners (see: Maldonado) and the tyres actually went a fair way, in some cases 50+ laps. That's not what we've been given now.

I'm just thinking about what/how I would grade Pirelli for how close they came to what was promised.

I think Maldonado winning in spain is probably the least good example you could ever have chosen. He was the only one within a sniff of hamilton in qualifying, and he dominated the race. He didn't win that race by chance.

[Cam]

Removing any artificial, or good/bad etc - have what Pirelli delivered over almost 3 years, closely (as possible) given us the racing and results that Canada 2010 did, and if so - itemised - why?

personally, I wonder whether the 'spice' was mistaken. They've made such a huge effort to change compounds to replicate that race - but maybe they've missed the original mark what they needed to achieve. Certainly there was no 3-4 stops for top teams, no random winners (see: Maldonado) and the tyres actually went a fair way, in some cases 50+ laps. That's not what we've been given now.

I'm just thinking about what/how I would grade Pirelli for how close they came to what was promised.

I think Maldonado winning in spain is probably the least good example you could ever have chosen. He was the only one within a sniff of hamilton in qualifying, and he dominated the race. He didn't win that race by chance.

I guess that result is an example of 'can't replicate it' - they've never been close before, or since. Sure he was hot on the day, but how much of that was down to pure luck of setup? If Williams had been on the top 5 or even the top 10 since, I would agree with you... but you have to admit it's a strange one off result.

If the tyres were such that it truly gave Williams an advantage, then we'd have seen further proof. This is what I mean by 'random winners'.

[Cam]

I am really surprised that people are jumping up and down for the 4 stops of Spain. IIRC all the other races were 2-3 stoppers..It was 4 stops in 2011 as well for Barcelona..no one said anything then...
It is certain teams that are moaning..and getting their fans into it as well! And while the teams look political, fans look stupid... Cam this is not an attack towards you! I think you brought up a very interesting point. Is it artificial?
I don't think that it is...Regarding the random winners of 2012..I didn't see any random winners..the only outsider is Pastor who I think really deserved it!
There's a lot being said about how it is not racing anymore and so on...Oh it is still very much racing!! And the fact that teams are sometimes not fighting it out on the track because they are on different strategies has nothing to do with Pirelli... Each team's strategy will depend on their car, tires are the same for everyone

Did Pirelli did what they were asked to do? I think they did! And they did it very well...

Thanks amouzouris - I don't take it personally, I'm intrigued (fanboy removed) on the underlying aspect of have they achieved what they wanted too.

Let's look at driver comments from Canada 2010:

Hamilton: The race was one of the toughest races so far but that’s what you want to have the hardest fight.

Button: You are never sure if you are looking after the tyres enough or if you are pushing enough. It was not just a race about being flat every lap. You had to really think about every situation. If you watch the race certain people were very quick at certain parts of the race.

Hamilton: Like Jenson was saying it was difficult to know how much to save your tyres and how much to push, how much longer you had to go and how fast the guy behind you was and whether they were pushing or saving fuel or whatever. It was very, very challenging. It was the ultimate challenge for me at least of the whole year so far and I was really just trying to maintain the correct balance with the different switches that we have.

I had saved a lot of fuel in the mid part of the race and whilst I was behind Fernando, so I was able to push right to the end without any problems.

Button: Yeah, the option was a little bit better than on Friday. The prime tyre, again, was a touch better but still you couldn’t drive flat out on the prime every lap. You got rear graining as you probably saw with quite a few cars out there. When I lapped Hulkenberg, his rear tyres were shredded to bits.

From this I can see that although the drivers were struggling with tyres and some had horrendous tyres - they were still pushing, they enjoyed it. That's not what we hear from the drivers now. So what's missing?

[Cam]

Interesting though is the approach - Bridgestone in Canada 2010 had a issue with getting tyres UP to temp, causing graining - Pirelli have issues with tyres OVERHEATING due to stress.

Brawn - Canada 2010: "You can see quite clearly that Hamilton's aggressive driving style means he can get the tyres working more easily than Button can,"Source

So the answer back then was to drive harder - whereas now it's drive softer - could this be the key difference?

[SectorOne]

I watched the race 2 days ago actually and after the race it became clear Pirelli is not even in the same ballpark to what was proposed.
2011 was ok but the following years especially 13 is so far from Bridgestone 2010 it´s not even funny.
I think what needs to be looked at also is not just how long they went on a compound but how hard they really pushed on those laps.
it´s a big difference if you go near 90-95% for 7 laps then going 70-75% for 7 laps.
In the broadcast you heard the usual "ok think about the tires" a few times but you never heard drivers asking if they could race the other person or worry that they would turn their tires to mush because they were involved in a battle.

It was fun for three years but it´s enough now i think.

[MOWOG]

If the question is, "Has Pirelli successfully replicated the Canada racing experience?", the answer has to be a resounding NO!

This of course is just my opinion and all are welcome to their own opinions on the subject, but I base my view on this statement from David Coulthard. I give his perspective great weight, as he has actually piloted a Formula One car in race conditions, and I think that gives him extra credibility:

-- All tyres get slower through their lives. I never knew an F1 tyre that did not have a peak of performance when it was new and then degraded and wore out as you drove on it. What does seem to be completely clear, though, is that the drivers are not pushing right to the limit in the race. To what degree, depends on who you listen to. But after winning the race on Sunday, Alonso said he had been pushing at 90% most of the way.

In my whole career, I very rarely drove at only 90%. Usually, I'd be coughing up a lung. During my very first win, I remember thinking that if Michael Schumacher behind me didn't slow down, I was going to crash because I couldn't keep the pace up. Most of the time, chasing my team-mate Mika Hakkinen - as I usually was, unfortunately - I couldn't go any faster. Not because I was having to manage the tyres, but because I physically could not go any faster within the grip the tyres generated.

There are many sports that are not about extreme physical endeavour, but F1 has for me always been about man and machine taken to the limit, and if you go beyond that limit there is damage or there is death. Of course, F1 is still dangerous, but that gladiatorial aspect has been lessened.

Not everyone is complaining about the current situation, but many of those who are remember the refuelling days, which ended after 2009, when drivers were able to lap in the race within two seconds of their qualifying time. Even in 2010, the last year of Bridgestone tyres, race lap times were usually within two seconds of qualifying times.

On Sunday in Spain, the fastest lap was 5.5secs slower than the pole time. That's because the drivers are not pushing to the peak of the aerodynamic performance of the car because the tyres do not allow them to. Do that, and the tyre's performance drops off too quickly. In the past, the tyres were more consistent.

As recently as 2009, I remember Alonso asking for the Singapore Grand Prix race distance to be shortened because everyone was physically spent after the first race there in 2008. No-one asks that anymore because the extreme physicality has gone out of it. Drivers go several seconds a lap slower and manage their tyres."

This is directly in line with SectorOne's observation in the post immediately above:

I think what needs to be looked at also is not just how long they went on a compound but how hard they really pushed on those laps. it´s a big difference if you go near 90-95% for 7 laps then going 70-75% for 7 laps.

And so, I vote that Pirelli have failed to carry out the mission given them.

Your mileage may vary. See dealer for details!

[Ganxxta]

Interesting though is the approach - Bridgestone in Canada 2010 had a issue with getting tyres UP to temp, causing graining - Pirelli have issues with tyres OVERHEATING due to stress.

Brawn - Canada 2010: "You can see quite clearly that Hamilton's aggressive driving style means he can get the tyres working more easily than Button can,"Source

So the answer back then was to drive harder - whereas now it's drive softer - could this be the key difference?

I actually think you are on the spot here.
If drivers would NEED to push (to a certain point) to get the max out of the tire we wouldn't see this "driving to a delta (80%)" every race.

Right now we usually don't see any driver errors during the race that are related to "overdriving" the car, pushing to much, we are only seeing mechanical issues, tire delaminations and crashes of the backmarkers mostly.

I really miss seeing drivers push every lap and using every millimeter and more of a track, drifting, braking a bit later than previous lap etc.
If you break too hard now, your fronts are gone.
If you drift too much now, your rears are gone.
If you leave the racing line to overtake someone, you lose grip, get pick-up, slide more, lose even more grip because of that etc.


Edit: Couldn't say it better than DC it that quote, thanks for that. +1

[Sulman]

Interesting though is the approach - Bridgestone in Canada 2010 had a issue with getting tyres UP to temp, causing graining - Pirelli have issues with tyres OVERHEATING due to stress.

Brawn - Canada 2010: "You can see quite clearly that Hamilton's aggressive driving style means he can get the tyres working more easily than Button can,"Source

So the answer back then was to drive harder - whereas now it's drive softer - could this be the key difference?

I actually think you are on the spot here.
If drivers would NEED to push (to a certain point) to get the max out of the tire we wouldn't see this "driving to a delta (80%)" every race.

Right now we usually don't see any driver errors during the race that are related to "overdriving" the car, pushing to much, we are only seeing mechanical issues, tire delaminations and crashes of the backmarkers mostly.

I really miss seeing drivers push every lap and using every millimeter and more of a track, drifting, braking a bit later than previous lap etc.
If you break too hard now, your fronts are gone.
If you drift too much now, your rears are gone.
If you leave the racing line to overtake someone, you lose grip, get pick-up, slide more, lose even more grip because of that etc.


Edit: Couldn't say it better than DC it that quote, thanks for that. +1

DC's always a good read, but I am mindful of the fact he is a de facto spokesman for RBR.

I really don't understand the mythology that has arisen from Montreal 2010; it was not some holy grail. Races like that were the exception for a reason.

I don't think this is a tyre problem as such, rather, it says an awful lot about where F1 is now. There is so much planning and preparation for a race weekend, everything is briefed to a tee. The tyres are the most critical bit, and the thing we notice.

As I understand it, the Pirelli tyres overheat easily, have deliberately high thermal degradation when in their operating range, and grain badly below their operating range. Essentially, they cannot be mistreated at all. It is the fact they can't be mistreated that the fans don't like.

I'm not too bothered about that from an engineering challenge - it's interesting. However, F1 for me is very much a human endeavour, and I'm more worried about Jenson Button's observations, that it is now impossible to tell much about drivers because they are all working to a number; effectively they have become proxies for the pit wall. I feel that drivers are now more like test pilots, and the team that wins is the one that has the best engineering solution and follows the race brief perfectly, because there is only one way to drive the car now.

The same teams are still finishing where they usually do (more or less), but they are getting there in a different, very plodding manner.

The problem is, what is learnt cannot be unlearnt. Make more durable tyres, the teams now will simply do the same thing, it'll just be quicker. They will prep the cars and drive them to a very precise plan.

At the risk of repeating myself, it is interesting, but I don't really consider this the sport that I know. For all the passing, it just seems very...dry. Funnily enough, MotoGP ended up in a similar place.

I don't know what the solution is, outside of dramatically limiting the data teams get, a la NASCAR. After all, it is the availability of so much information that allows the team to put a number on the dash, and the driver to stick to it. It's the fastest way.

[SectorOne]

I remember the days Schumacher used to get a call over the radio saying they needed 25 straight qualifying laps...those were the days

[MOWOG]

it is now impossible to tell much about drivers because they are all working to a number; effectively they have become proxies for the pit wall. I feel that drivers are now more like test pilots, and the team that wins is the one that has the best engineering solution and follows the race brief perfectly,

As I read that, I was reminded of this Williams F1 commercial with JP and Ralf. We thought it was fantasy then, but it seems an accurate depiction of what we are watching this season.

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XzDGpgGQGok[/youtube]