2015 Australian Grand Prix - Melbourne

[Andres125sx]

I think they should be allowed to use any tire in the range they want at any time. But that all tires have a linear degradation, and are all each faster than the last.

So some teams could try a no stop race, but be slower each lap, or a 4 stop race but be a lot faster each lap. It would be great to watch.

Except in practice, that wouldn't happen.

In practice, the teams would all test each tire once in practice for the race, build a model of exactly how fast they are and when, and then all use exactly the same choice of tire for the race, because they would all calculate the optimal race the same way.

This already happens in fact. Teams all tend to agree on the optimal tire strategy, and go out and run it.

In theory, yes

Reality is then you have to look for a gap with no trafic for that ideal strategy to work. If you get stuck behind a car with old tires that ideal strategy will never work, that´s the reason not every team would use same strategy, but some prefer to use a different strategy with harder tires and less if any pit-stop.

But today they all are forced to use two components, no matter how slow they are, wich rule out many options. Since they´re forced to do at least one pit-stop they all use very similar strategies.

With free choice for tires, from no pit-stops with hard tires to 4-5 pit-stops with supersoft tires we´d see many different strategies, but teams should be free to use whatever tires they want. It´s the rule wich force them to use two different components chosen by Pirelli what makes all strategies very similar if not the same

[SectorOne]

I think on paper it´s a great idea, but i think in reality no matter how many compounds they are allowed to use even without being forced to run a specific set of compounds or being forced to pit the computers will still spit out roughly the same "best" strategy to use for the race.

One tire is gonna have the best performance/longevity for that particular track and it will be the fastest tire to be on, after that you simply divide the race up for maximum efficiency.

[andartop]

I think on paper it´s a great idea, but i think in reality no matter how many compounds they are allowed to use even without being forced to run a specific set of compounds or being forced to pit the computers will still spit out roughly the same "best" strategy to use for the race.

One tire is gonna have the best performance/longevity for that particular track and it will be the fastest tire to be on, after that you simply divide the race up for maximum efficiency.

This fails to consider all the things the computers cannot simulate and predict accurately and precisely: individual driver performances, accidents, mistakes, safety cars, changing weather conditions, deer on track (oh dear!)..
Pretty much everything that makes us actually sit down and watch a race rather than just calculate where each car will finish based on previous data.
The point being, one strategy will always be theoretically the best and fastest, but if they were allowed to use whichever tires they wanted, there would be more opportunities to divert from the theoretically best strategy when the race conditions and track position were such that an alternative strategy could give an advantage.
Add to that an option to refuel (or not), and you might come up with more races like 2004 Magny Cours.

[Moose]

I think on paper it´s a great idea, but i think in reality no matter how many compounds they are allowed to use even without being forced to run a specific set of compounds or being forced to pit the computers will still spit out roughly the same "best" strategy to use for the race.

One tire is gonna have the best performance/longevity for that particular track and it will be the fastest tire to be on, after that you simply divide the race up for maximum efficiency.

This fails to consider all the things the computers cannot simulate and predict accurately and precisely: individual driver performances, accidents, mistakes, safety cars, changing weather conditions, deer on track (oh dear!)..
Pretty much everything that makes us actually sit down and watch a race rather than just calculate where each car will finish based on previous data.
The point being, one strategy will always be theoretically the best and fastest, but if they were allowed to use whichever tires they wanted, there would be more opportunities to divert from the theoretically best strategy when the race conditions and track position were such that an alternative strategy could give an advantage.
Add to that an option to refuel (or not), and you might come up with more races like 2004 Magny Cours.

Except that in reality, what you're talking about is much more close to theory, and far from practice than what he's talking about.

The reality, and the practice is, go watch a race. Of the top 10, who start on the qualifying tire, 90% are going to run the exact same strategy.

Sure, some of them are going to be able to wait for the guy behind to pit first, and some of them are going to have to take a gamble on the undercut, but ultimately, 90% of them are going to take the same (optimal) strategy.

In practice, the strategy does not change much based on the fluid parameters that you're talking about.

[andartop]

Let me highlight some keywords in my post:
...
The point being, one strategy will always be theoretically the best and fastest, but if they were allowed to use whichever tires they wanted, there would be more opportunities to divert from the theoretically best strategy when the race conditions and track position were such that an alternative strategy could give an advantage.
Add to that an option to refuel (or not), and you might come up with more races like 2004 Magny Cours.

Never claimed that would make all races very exciting, just that more options could allow more risk taking, in the right conditions. Surely, that makes sense, no?

That's why I mentioned a specific example. In that race the Renault/Alonso combination was the fastest based on quali results. Alonso made the perfect start and MS was following him for the first part of the race, unable to overtake. Brawn thought of trying something other than the (theoretically) optimum strategy, and the rest is history. Rubens couldn't do the same to overtake Trulli as he would never have been able to put down the laps like Schumi did, and he would have finished 4th had Trulli not made a mistake on the 2nd to last corner of the race. Even Schumi would (probably) have been unable to make this work if he had to use a hard compound at some point in the race.

I don't know if it's because I'm getting old, but for me that was one of the most exciting races (of an era when one car was dominant), despite the fact the overtake was not actually made on track. I'd have that over DRS 'press button to overtake' passes or '2sec/lap faster due to different tires' passes and cruising to save fuel & tires any day of the week.

[Andres125sx]

The reality, and the practice is, go watch a race. Of the top 10, who start on the qualifying tire, 90% are going to run the exact same strategy.

... because they only can choose two compounds, and are forced to use both compounds. Moreover, top 10 are forced to start the race with prime tire. That rule out many strategies and reduce options quite a lot to the point there´re some GPs where starting from 11th position is better than starting 9th or 10th because they´re free to start with any tire

Also, you´re assuming simulations always dictate one strategy as the optimal, when reality is different. At least that´s what Marc Gene has said many times on spanish tv. There are many GPs when two different strategies are very similar and the optimal will depend on trafic or a SC, so reality is not that easy.

And this is considering the limited options they have with current rules, so with free use of any of the four compounds teams will have many more options and we´ll see many different strategies. At least on som GPs

[Andres125sx]

top 10 are forced to start the race with prime tire.

Correction, they´re forced to start with the tire they qualifyed, wich usually is the prime, but not necesary. Anycase the point is the same, they´re forced to start with one specific tire so strategy options are reduced even more

[mikeerfol]

Option, not prime

[Andres125sx]

Option is the softer tire? I don´t get that terminology

Thanks Mikeerfol

[mikeerfol]

Option is the softer tire? I don´t get that terminology

Yup

btw for anyone who is interested the radio highlights article from F1 Fanatic is here http://www.f1fanatic.co.uk/2015/03/20/2 ... ighlights/

[Artur Craft]

With free choice for tires, from no pit-stops with hard tires to 4-5 pit-stops with supersoft tires we´d see many different strategies, but teams should be free to use whatever tires they want. It´s the rule wich force them to use two different components chosen by Pirelli what makes all strategies very similar if not the same

The problem is if Pirelli would like to make such an investment in development. With their current compounds, you would need probably 2 pitstops even with the Hard compound on places like Sepang, Barcelona....

For reference, during Kimi's racesim in Barcelona's test, the following happened on his second stint, using Hard tires:
1st lap = 1.29.5, 6th lap = 1.30.4, 13th lap = 1.31.1 and for the 15th(last lap of stint) = 1.32.5

When he came out of the pit, for the 3rd stint, on Winter Hards, his first lap was 1.27.2 And mind you, Ferrari seems to be the most kind on tyres, this year.

Also, compare this with Michelin-Bridgestone era, when times only got better throughout the stints as cars got lighter and tires had very small drop.

In 2005(no tire change allowed), they were doing their fastest laps of the race towards the end of the GP despite also having light cars earlier, on the end of the inital stints.

Imo, it would be useless if they had an option for tyres that lasted the whole race but you would need to "nurse" them the entire time. To my taste, I want a series in which laptimes keeps getting better, not worse like since 2011, as cars gets lighter. I even remember a time when Raikkonen was making the fastest lap of the race on the very last lap, on pretty much most of the races.

One point I think pretty much everybody agree is to ditch the mandatory use of the 2 available compounds. To pick last race in Australia as an example. I think people would have tried different variations of the 1 pitstop strategy. Some would do what they did, ie, first stint on Q3 softs and then a longer period on the Mediums, while a couple others could've tried Softs on both stints.

What would have been faster, two more agressive stints on Softs/Mediums or two more conservative(I mean controlling the degradation) stints on the faster rubber? Maybe the average laptime of 35 laps on Mediums could be faster(less wear=pushing harder) than 29 on Softs

Tire manufacturers and their engineers have an educated guess of their products perfomances and behaviour, but it is very common that tires perform quite differently than expected on the race day. In summary, simulations' predictions will fail quite often if the outcome of both performances is close

[Andres125sx]

The problem is if Pirelli would like to make such an investment in development. With their current compounds, you would need probably 2 pitstops even with the Hard compound on places like Sepang, Barcelona....

Pirelly tires suffer this massive wear because FIA (or bernie, not sure) asked them to manufacture them that way. It´s not Pirelli choice.

[Juzh]

The problem is if Pirelli would like to make such an investment in development. With their current compounds, you would need probably 2 pitstops even with the Hard compound on places like Sepang, Barcelona....

Pirelly tires suffer this massive wear because FIA (or bernie, not sure) asked them to manufacture them that way. It´s not Pirelli choice.

Convenient excuse.

[SectorOne]

It was actually the teams that pushed for it, after canada 2010.
But it went too far obviously but now the tires are fine from that perspective.

Performance though... Well i bet they are glad there's no competitor in the sport.

[Richard]

Convenient excuse.

It's not an excuse it's the reality. The FIA asked for tyres with a durability that would not last the full race. So we now have tyres that require 2 pitstops.