Thoughts on the United States Grand Prix

polo2028 · Post by **polo2028** » Wed Jun 22, 2005 3:25 am

N. Jones wrote:You could, but with six Bridgestone shod cars coming around at full speed, trying to pass say, two to four Michelin cars, the potential for disaster increases big time.

I'm still wondering why FIA didn't put on a chicanne, since 9 teams had accepted. If it was due to safety reason, I can't see why a car crashing into temporary barriers in <100mph is more dangerous than a replay of Ralf Schumacher's crash in 2004 (a car crashing into the walls at ~300mph).

Bundy · Post by **Bundy** » Wed Jun 22, 2005 10:32 am

polo2028 wrote:
N. Jones wrote:You could, but with six Bridgestone shod cars coming around at full speed, trying to pass say, two to four Michelin cars, the potential for disaster increases big time.
I'm still wondering why FIA didn't put on a chicanne, since 9 teams had accepted. If it was due to safety reason, I can't see why a car crashing into temporary barriers in <100mph is more dangerous than a replay of Ralf Schumacher's crash in 2004 (a car crashing into the walls at ~300mph).

But then why must Ferrari, Jordan and Minardi be made to drive through this chicane as well?
After all they brought tyres that stood up to the tracks conditions as per the requirements

Kapel · Post by **Kapel** » Wed Jun 22, 2005 2:55 pm

bundy wrote:
polo2028 wrote:
N. Jones wrote:You could, but with six Bridgestone shod cars coming around at full speed, trying to pass say, two to four Michelin cars, the potential for disaster increases big time.
I'm still wondering why FIA didn't put on a chicanne, since 9 teams had accepted. If it was due to safety reason, I can't see why a car crashing into temporary barriers in <100mph is more dangerous than a replay of Ralf Schumacher's crash in 2004 (a car crashing into the walls at ~300mph).
But then why must Ferrari, Jordan and Minardi be made to drive through this chicane as well?
After all they brought tyres that stood up to the tracks conditions as per the requirements

I concur

which i've been doing for 3 days now

rah · Post by **rah** » Wed Jun 22, 2005 3:12 pm

I concur to your concur. Do we have an accord?

Bundy · Post by **Bundy** » Wed Jun 22, 2005 3:52 pm

do you mean accord as in agreement or honda accord?

don't mind me...not having a good day!!

Kapel · Post by **Kapel** » Wed Jun 22, 2005 4:02 pm

rah wrote:I concur to your concur. Do we have an accord?

I guess so

Byron Forbes · Post by **Byron Forbes** » Thu Jun 23, 2005 12:06 am

bundy wrote:But then why must Ferrari, Jordan and Minardi be made to drive through this chicane as well?
After all they brought tyres that stood up to the tracks conditions as per the requirements

But then, why should Bridgestone get data from the Indy 500 when Michelin were allowed no testing at IMS at all?

Byron Forbes · Post by **Byron Forbes** » Thu Jun 23, 2005 12:09 am

Here's another thought -

Look at all the rules the FIA have in place with reguards to equality and fairness in testing. Does the data obtained by Bridgestone from Firestone at the Indy 500 breach these rules?

Bundy · Post by **Bundy** » Thu Jun 23, 2005 12:17 pm

Michelin knew the track condition...Even though it had been resurfaced it was not different to previous years so this CANNOT be used as an excuse....Michelin haven't even used this as an excuse or even complained about it, so why are you

Julian Mayo · Post by **Julian Mayo** » Thu Jun 23, 2005 12:31 pm

bundy wrote:Michelin knew the track condition...Even though it had been resurfaced it was not different to previous years so this CANNOT be used as an excuse....Michelin haven't even used this as an excuse or even complained about it, so why are you

Is your mother- in- law currently visiting?

Bundy · Post by **Bundy** » Thu Jun 23, 2005 12:33 pm

and i'm not happy about it

jnc · Post by **jnc** » Thu Jun 23, 2005 1:14 pm

bundy wrote:But then why must Ferrari, Jordan and Minardi be made to drive through this chicane as well?
After all they brought tyres that stood up to the tracks conditions as per the requirements.

I agree, to force them to give up their advantage would have been unfair.
However, taken to its extreme, then you get what we actually had - a six car race. You can't have it both ways.

Michelin told their teams the tires were unsafe, and could not be run on the circuit as it stood. So the two choices were i) have a race with only six cars, or ii) do something to make it safe to run the Michelins. The FIA opted for i).

I still think the best option would have been to give points only to the Bridgestone teams, and run the race with the chicane. Not great, but it was better than any of the other options. If would have rewarded the Bridgestone teams (who would, let's be serious, have finished in the same order among themselves), and penalized the Michelin teams, and it wouldn't have royally shafted the fans. The Michelin teams offered this, but the FIA turned them down.

jnc · Post by **jnc** » Thu Jun 23, 2005 1:20 pm

K-D wrote: flying in tires would have set a bad presedent.

Actually, Michelin *did* fly tires in - but when they tested them, they had the same problem. So there was no solution there.

K-D wrote: I place all!! the blamce on Michelin, 2 weeks ago their design concept cost Kimi R?ikk?nnen a win

I thought that what happened there was that Kimi badly flat-spotted it, and the vibration (over time) destroyed the suspension. I seem to recall that when the corner came off, the tire was intact, no?

Bundy · Post by **Bundy** » Thu Jun 23, 2005 1:27 pm

jnc wrote:
bundy wrote:But then why must Ferrari, Jordan and Minardi be made to drive through this chicane as well?
After all they brought tyres that stood up to the tracks conditions as per the requirements.
I agree, to force them to give up their advantage would have been unfair.
However, taken to its extreme, then you get what we actually had - a six car race. You can't have it both ways.

Michelin told their teams the tires were unsafe, and could not be run on the circuit as it stood. So the two choices were i) have a race with only six cars, or ii) do something to make it safe to run the Michelins. The FIA opted for i).

I still think the best option would have been to give points only to the Bridgestone teams, and run the race with the chicane. Not great, but it was better than any of the other options. If would have rewarded the Bridgestone teams (who would, let's be serious, have finished in the same order among themselves), and penalized the Michelin teams, and it wouldn't have royally shafted the fans. The Michelin teams offered this, but the FIA turned them down.

One problem with that is, what if say Alonso took Schumacher out of the race and both were unable to finish. Because Alonso is not racing for any points it doesn't matter if he doesn't finish he just need to make sure MS doesn't get any points.

If they were going to have a "race" in that situation they should have given every Bridgestone driver 10 points each, win, lose or DNF and just race for the spectacle.

jnc · Post by **jnc** » Thu Jun 23, 2005 1:38 pm

bundy wrote:
jnc wrote:
I still think the best option would have been to give points only to the Bridgestone teams, and run the race with the chicane. Not great, but it was better than any of the other options. If would have rewarded the Bridgestone teams (who would, let's be serious, have finished in the same order among themselves), and penalized the Michelin teams, and it wouldn't have royally shafted the fans.
One problem with that is, what if say Alonso took Schumacher out of the race and both were unable to finish. Because Alonso is not racing for any points it doesn't matter if he doesn't finish he just need to make sure MS doesn't get any points.

But Alonso could have done exactly the same thing if the Michelin teams had adopted one of Mosley's proposed solutions, and either run slower in turn 13, or whatever.

News On F1 Forums - Talk Formula 1

Thoughts on the United States Grand Prix

Driver of the day