From Newsgroup: rec.autos.sport.f1


'However Russell was reluctant to blame Pirelli, acknowledging how
difficult it is for the tyre supplier to tick all the boxes.

rCLI think Pirelli get a hard time no matter what,rCY he said. rCLIf thererCOs lots of tyre degradation people say itrCOs not real, the drivers canrCOt
push, we have to manage, we donrCOt like that. Then when thererCOs no tyre degradation, we say itrCOs a boring race. They donrCOt seem to be able to
win in any case.

rCLSo realistically, you want a tyre that you can push full gas, but it doesnrCOt go the whole race. If you could choose for the tyre, itrCOs a
tyre, you go flat out, but after 15 laps, it falls off a cliff, and you
have to do a two or three-stop race.

rCLAnd ideally, the soft tyre thererCOs 12 laps, the medium tyre does 15
laps, and the hard tyre does 20 laps, and then it falls off the cliff.
But that is a lot easier said than done. As I said, Pirelli get a very
hard time. They do their best. They have given us a substantially better
tyre. This tyre is very good, but it causes bad racing.rCY

He added: rCLAll of the races recently been one stops, and even from the sprint race yesterday, the Ferrari couldnrCOt overtake Carlos. Years ago,
that would not have been the case. I donrCOt really know, but I think itrCOs just lack of tyre deg.rCY '

https://adamcooperf1.com/2025/10/20/why-frustrated-russell-believes-that-pirellis-current-f1-tyres-create-bad-racing/
--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: rec.autos.sport.f1

In article <10d60v8$3dogo$1@dont-email.me>, News <News@Group.Name> wrote:

'However Russell was reluctant to blame Pirelli, acknowledging how
difficult it is for the tyre supplier to tick all the boxes.

<snip>

I think he makes some good points there, but it's also fair to say that a
part of the "issue" is that the whole field is so much more competetive
now than it was even a decade ago. The cost cap has brought that parity
in, and it's broadly a good thing that it's not just one or two teams
lapping the whole field - most races there's half the grid who could
reasonably end up on the podium. Another aspect is the cars - they're too
damn big! Seeing footage from the early 2010s is a real eye-opener, the
cars are tiny by comparison.

Re tyres, is there a case to make for a rule mandating that all compounds
must be used in a race, soft and medium and hard? That'd make every race a two-stopper, and you'd have people start on softs to try and gain places
early and others who'd save the softs for a sprint to the finish. It could
be good...
--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: rec.autos.sport.f1

In article <vintageapplemac-2110250844540001@192.168.1.134>, vintageapplemac@gmail.com (scole) wrote:

Re tyres, is there a case to make for a rule mandating that all compounds must be used in a race, soft and medium and hard? That'd make every race a two-stopper, and you'd have people start on softs to try and gain places early and others who'd save the softs for a sprint to the finish. It could
be good...

No thoughts on this? Would it be a good idea or would it be too much of an intervention on the sport? Has it ever been tried before, in F1 or another formula?
--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: rec.autos.sport.f1

On 2/11/2025 11:41 pm, scole wrote:

In article <vintageapplemac-2110250844540001@192.168.1.134>, vintageapplemac@gmail.com (scole) wrote:

Re tyres, is there a case to make for a rule mandating that all compounds
must be used in a race, soft and medium and hard? That'd make every race a >> two-stopper, and you'd have people start on softs to try and gain places
early and others who'd save the softs for a sprint to the finish. It could >> be good...

No thoughts on this? Would it be a good idea or would it be too much of an intervention on the sport?

I think the TWO compound thing is too much intervention. I'd like to see a season where there is
only one tyre compound, roughly equal to the current 'medium', with no mandated stops. A gradual
drop-off in lap times but no 'cliff' would make pit stops an option for faster cars that are hard
on their tyres. Conversely cars that are easier on their tyres (but slower overall) could get away
with fewer of even no pit stops. Car set-up would certainly be easier for the teams (perhaps making
sprints more viable?).

A single compound would make Pirelli's task easier and reduce the carbon footprint of F1. It would
also be easier for newer punters to follow the action on track as there's less data to follow.

Just a thought. I'm open to hearing reasons why this might not be good for F1 and why we shouldn't
try it.

Has it ever been tried before, in F1 or another
formula?

I'm not sure that it's been tried before. It hasn't been TTBOMK.
--
Shaun.

"Humans will have advanced a long, long way when religious belief has a cozy little classification
in the DSM"
David Melville.
--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: rec.autos.sport.f1

On 2025-11-02 10:00 PM, ~misfit~ wrote:

On 2/11/2025 11:41 pm, scole wrote:

In article <vintageapplemac-2110250844540001@192.168.1.134>,
vintageapplemac@gmail.com (scole) wrote:

Re tyres, is there a case to make for a rule mandating that all
compounds
must be used in a race, soft and medium and hard? That'd make every
race a
two-stopper, and you'd have people start on softs to try and gain places >>> early and others who'd save the softs for a sprint to the finish. It
could
be good...

No thoughts on this? Would it be a good idea or would it be too much
of an
intervention on the sport?

I think the TWO compound thing is too much intervention. I'd like to see
a season where there is only one tyre compound, roughly equal to the
current 'medium', with no mandated stops. A gradual drop-off in lap
times but no 'cliff' would make pit stops an option for faster cars that
are hard on their tyres. Conversely cars that are easier on their tyres
(but slower overall) could get away with fewer of even no pit stops. Car set-up would certainly be easier for the teams (perhaps making sprints
more viable?).

A single compound would make Pirelli's task easier and reduce the carbon footprint of F1. It would also be easier for newer punters to follow the action on track as there's less data to follow.

Just a thought. I'm open to hearing reasons why this might not be good
for F1 and why we shouldn't try it.

Has it ever been tried before, in F1 or another
formula?

I'm not sure that it's been tried before. It hasn't been TTBOMK.

Back in the "old days", F1 cars basically ran a single compound. You can
see photos of cars with treaded tires. If I remember correctly -- not at
all a given -- the cars had a selection of tires they could chose from, different makes if nothing else. But they could run their tires for the
entire race if they chose. Teams with more cash could purchase the tires
from the "best" maker and come in for a tire change if they felt the
need, while poorer teams might have to make do on cheaper tires or even
reuse tires at subsequent events.

I do hope I've got the fact right. By the time I was going to races,
slicks had replaced tires with treads, but I believe that there were no
rules about mandatory tire changes and compound changes. Teams had
advanced to sponsorship deals with the tire makers so pretty much
everyone had a shot at getting good tires. Although that produced the laughable Indianapolis race in which one manufacturer withdrew their
tires for safety reasons, leaving only a couple of teams actually
running the race.

The good old days, right?


--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: rec.autos.sport.f1

~misfit~ <shaun.at.pukekohe@gmail.com> writes:

On 2/11/2025 11:41 pm, scole wrote:

In article <vintageapplemac-2110250844540001@192.168.1.134>,
vintageapplemac@gmail.com (scole) wrote:

Re tyres, is there a case to make for a rule mandating that all compounds >>> must be used in a race, soft and medium and hard? That'd make every race a >>> two-stopper, and you'd have people start on softs to try and gain places >>> early and others who'd save the softs for a sprint to the finish. It could >>> be good...

No thoughts on this? Would it be a good idea or would it be too much of an >> intervention on the sport?

I think the TWO compound thing is too much intervention.

Please stop sharing so many of the opinions that I have! :)

Phil
--
We are no longer hunters and nomads. No longer awed and frightened, as we have gained some understanding of the world in which we live. As such, we can cast aside childish remnants from the dawn of our civilization.
-- NotSanguine on SoylentNews, after Eugen Weber in /The Western Tradition/
--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: rec.autos.sport.f1

On 9/11/2025 8:38 am, Phil Carmody wrote:

~misfit~ <shaun.at.pukekohe@gmail.com> writes:

On 2/11/2025 11:41 pm, scole wrote:

In article <vintageapplemac-2110250844540001@192.168.1.134>,
vintageapplemac@gmail.com (scole) wrote:

Re tyres, is there a case to make for a rule mandating that all compounds >>>> must be used in a race, soft and medium and hard? That'd make every race a >>>> two-stopper, and you'd have people start on softs to try and gain places >>>> early and others who'd save the softs for a sprint to the finish. It could >>>> be good...

No thoughts on this? Would it be a good idea or would it be too much of an >>> intervention on the sport?

I think the TWO compound thing is too much intervention.

Please stop sharing so many of the opinions that I have! :)

LOL! Sorry about that.
--
Shaun.

"Humans will have advanced a long, long way when religious belief has a cozy little classification
in the DSM"
David Melville.
--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2