| Zornorph | 06-19-2005 05:19 PM |
Just because Michelin can't design a tire to handle it - those cars are still not reaching the speeds of indy cars on that circiut. Michelin deserves to hang their head. Did the Bridgestone tires fall apart?
| eastcoastbumps | 06-19-2005 05:19 PM |
That stinks.
| johnfelstead | 06-19-2005 05:22 PM |
Are you aware of any company that has never made a mistake with it's products? I dont know of any.
Michelin made a mistake in manufacturing, they are a company made up of people, just like every other company, people make mistakes. That mistake meant that should their products be used, it could result in the death of someone, they had no choice but to withdraw that product knowing their was such a serious problem with their product.
So what was left posible to get around this problem that could not and would not go away? You could run the product in a way that would guarantee it would perform in it's safe parameters. That is why they elected to withdraw the tyres unless the course was altered to bring the tyres back into a safe to run situation. They could not permit their product to be used at all if the potential was there for it to go outside safe parameters, potentially they could be comiting corporate manslaughter, no company will allow that.
So knowing this was the reality of the issue, what do you do? You should try and make the best of a bad situation and be flexible, some things in life you cant predict (and quite frankly this was very predicatable to happen one day in F1 the way the rules on tyres and testing are implemented).
What was the best option in these circumstances? IMHO it would have been to install a chicane, put the bridgestone runners at the front of the grid, let the race run giving the top bridgestone runners the points with the michelin runners then getting the remaining points so they had an incentive to race properly. The fans would get a show, the sport would come out of a crisis situation having dealt with a problem in a profesional way putting the fans first.
Michelin should be aplauded for having the balls to say you cant use our products as it's unsafe, i know i wouldnt allow a driver to drive a car knowing it was a potentailly fatal crash for that driver, course worker or spectator.
The FIA ****ed this one up, they showed a serious lack of ability to see the big picture and F1 in the USA is going to suffer serious problems as a result.
Michelin made a mistake in manufacturing, they are a company made up of people, just like every other company, people make mistakes. That mistake meant that should their products be used, it could result in the death of someone, they had no choice but to withdraw that product knowing their was such a serious problem with their product.
So what was left posible to get around this problem that could not and would not go away? You could run the product in a way that would guarantee it would perform in it's safe parameters. That is why they elected to withdraw the tyres unless the course was altered to bring the tyres back into a safe to run situation. They could not permit their product to be used at all if the potential was there for it to go outside safe parameters, potentially they could be comiting corporate manslaughter, no company will allow that.
So knowing this was the reality of the issue, what do you do? You should try and make the best of a bad situation and be flexible, some things in life you cant predict (and quite frankly this was very predicatable to happen one day in F1 the way the rules on tyres and testing are implemented).
What was the best option in these circumstances? IMHO it would have been to install a chicane, put the bridgestone runners at the front of the grid, let the race run giving the top bridgestone runners the points with the michelin runners then getting the remaining points so they had an incentive to race properly. The fans would get a show, the sport would come out of a crisis situation having dealt with a problem in a profesional way putting the fans first.
Michelin should be aplauded for having the balls to say you cant use our products as it's unsafe, i know i wouldnt allow a driver to drive a car knowing it was a potentailly fatal crash for that driver, course worker or spectator.
The FIA ****ed this one up, they showed a serious lack of ability to see the big picture and F1 in the USA is going to suffer serious problems as a result.
| Max | 06-19-2005 05:25 PM |
The Michelin runners quit because everything wasn't perfect. So what, Michelin supplied them with the equivalent of H speed rated tires while the Bridgestone runners got the equivalent of Z speed rated tires. BMW, Mercedes, they're just a bunch of pansies that quit when things got tough. I can't respect those fools, they left points on the table, they forked their sponsors by not displaying their logos and they forked the fans. Thumbs down to BMW, Mercedes, Honda, Toyota, Red Bull Cosworth, Sauber, Renault. They are unrespectable. Every team that started the race at the 24 Hours of Le Mans is a champion compared to the F1 Michelin running haggots.
| StuBeck | 06-19-2005 05:27 PM |
[QUOTE=OnTheGas]Stu & REX8 - I don't understand how FIA would have "given" points to the Bridgestone teams. Was it that a normal race would be run, but the Michelin teams would not receive any points, no matter where they finished?
If that was the case, then you would have the possibility that a competitor of Ferrari would crash into a Ferrari, and people would say that it was in the interest of the Michelin runner to see the Ferrari tossed off course... which is true![/QUOTE]
The agreement would have been to change the course, which is not right for the bridgestone teams. To give the fans a race, make it a non-championship round, but give the bridgestone teams points because it is not their fault the course had to be changed.
Yes, something like that could have happened, but that can happen in any race and it does not, so I doubt it would have happened.
If that was the case, then you would have the possibility that a competitor of Ferrari would crash into a Ferrari, and people would say that it was in the interest of the Michelin runner to see the Ferrari tossed off course... which is true![/QUOTE]
The agreement would have been to change the course, which is not right for the bridgestone teams. To give the fans a race, make it a non-championship round, but give the bridgestone teams points because it is not their fault the course had to be changed.
Yes, something like that could have happened, but that can happen in any race and it does not, so I doubt it would have happened.
| gleinz | 06-19-2005 05:28 PM |
As far as I know the Bridgestones did fine... they were rated to go 100+ laps. I got too bored after around lap 30 to watch any more.
| StuBeck | 06-19-2005 05:28 PM |
[QUOTE=Max]The Michelin runners quit because everything wasn't perfect. So what, Michelin supplied them with the equivalent of H speed rated tires while the Bridgestone runners got the equivalent of Z speed rated tires. BMW, Mercedes, they're just a bunch of pansies that quit when things got tough. I can't respect those fools, they left points on the table, they forked their sponsors by not displaying their logos and they forked the fans. Thumbs down to BMW, Mercedes, Honda, Toyota, Red Bull Cosworth, Sauber, Renault. They are unrespectable. Every team that started the race at the 24 Hours of Le Mans is a champion compared to the F1 Michelin running haggots.[/QUOTE]
They didn't quit because everything wasn't perfect, they quit because there was a safety issue. BTW, the word is ****, not fork.
They didn't quit because everything wasn't perfect, they quit because there was a safety issue. BTW, the word is ****, not fork.
| Max | 06-19-2005 05:35 PM |
[QUOTE=StuBeck]They didn't quit because everything wasn't perfect, they quit because there was a safety issue. BTW, the word is ****, not fork.[/QUOTE]
Michelin said it was ok to run at a slower speed. The safety issue was that the Michelin teams weren't feeling very safe about being slow.
Michelin said it was ok to run at a slower speed. The safety issue was that the Michelin teams weren't feeling very safe about being slow.
| StuBeck | 06-19-2005 05:39 PM |
[QUOTE=Max]Michelin said it was ok to run at a slower speed. The safety issue was that the Michelin teams weren't feeling very safe about being slow.[/QUOTE]
Yes, because a car going 100mph when another car is going 190 is a major safety issue. The other issue is they didn't say how much slower they could go, would 180 work, or would only 60 work? The teams were told by Michelin not to run in the event so they were forced not to.
Yes, because a car going 100mph when another car is going 190 is a major safety issue. The other issue is they didn't say how much slower they could go, would 180 work, or would only 60 work? The teams were told by Michelin not to run in the event so they were forced not to.
| Max | 06-19-2005 05:44 PM |
[QUOTE=StuBeck]Yes, because a car going 100mph when another car is going 190 is a major safety issue. The other issue is they didn't say how much slower they could go, would 180 work, or would only 60 work? The teams were told by Michelin not to run in the event so they were forced not to.[/QUOTE]
By that logic Minardi should never be allowed to race again. I guess some people are like sheep, you tell them what to do and they do it. Jacky Ickx said it best "Champions have no fear", you sir, are no champion.
By that logic Minardi should never be allowed to race again. I guess some people are like sheep, you tell them what to do and they do it. Jacky Ickx said it best "Champions have no fear", you sir, are no champion.
| REX8 | 06-19-2005 05:49 PM |
[QUOTE=Max]By that logic Minardi should never be allowed to race again. I guess some people are like sheep, you tell them what to do and they do it. Jacky Ickx said it best "Champions have no fear", you sir, are no champion.[/QUOTE]
Are you serious? A Minardi's pace is at least on same relative level to the other cars, we're talkign about cornering potentially 1/2 the speed of other cars...Minardi's are down about 5-10%...
Are you serious? A Minardi's pace is at least on same relative level to the other cars, we're talkign about cornering potentially 1/2 the speed of other cars...Minardi's are down about 5-10%...
| StuBeck | 06-19-2005 05:55 PM |
[QUOTE=Max]By that logic Minardi should never be allowed to race again. I guess some people are like sheep, you tell them what to do and they do it. Jacky Ickx said it best "Champions have no fear", you sir, are no champion.[/QUOTE]
Umm, okay?
I didn't know Minardi was limited to 100mph on the straights either.
And yes, champions have fear, otherwise they would crash a lot more because they wouldn't be scared about hitting the wall.
Umm, okay?
I didn't know Minardi was limited to 100mph on the straights either.
And yes, champions have fear, otherwise they would crash a lot more because they wouldn't be scared about hitting the wall.
| paultg | 06-19-2005 05:59 PM |
Wow. I think a member actual went to the race. He must be pretty upset.
| MattNJ2.8 | 06-19-2005 06:01 PM |
The real losers were the fans today.
I'm glad I went to Montreal this year, and not the one in Indy.
Shame on you F1, don't you realize who pays your ******* salary? It's the fans, not the corporations who support your half-ass racing.
I thing we're going to see a schedule change for next year.
I'm glad I went to Montreal this year, and not the one in Indy.
Shame on you F1, don't you realize who pays your ******* salary? It's the fans, not the corporations who support your half-ass racing.
I thing we're going to see a schedule change for next year.
| AWDPilot | 06-19-2005 06:02 PM |
Actully, they ran the bridgstones, so he was one of teh 6 cars running ;)
| GotHP? | 06-19-2005 06:09 PM |
Michelin is solely responsible for this in the first place. They didn't say if it was a mfg defect or just a poor compound choice, either way they should be held accountable for many $$$ millions. Mclaren spends over $300 million a year so their sponsors can get exposure, and Michelin's screw up prevented that!! Those engineers must be dusting off their resume's...
| StuBeck | 06-19-2005 06:14 PM |
Yep, the fans were the big losers, that's what makes me feel sick about the whole deal. This is going to destroy the chances we as F1 fans have in the US to get more fans.
| Zornorph | 06-19-2005 06:15 PM |
Further confirming the F1 prima donna image...
real racers run what they brung. Who said racing was safe?
real racers run what they brung. Who said racing was safe?
| dwx | 06-19-2005 06:22 PM |
Is there a huge reason they couldn't just put Bridgestones on all the cars? There are plenty of tire changing places in Indy. :)
| Snowphun | 06-19-2005 06:25 PM |
You do not send racers out there on tires that the manufacturer says will not finish the race. Ralphy hit the wall already again this year because a Michelin failed, you think the rest of the field should have driven until they had failures?
IMO the mess is on the FIA's hands. They blew it. They could have put the 6 Bridgestone's at the front of the grid and let the Michelin guys use the new tires.
IMO the mess is on the FIA's hands. They blew it. They could have put the 6 Bridgestone's at the front of the grid and let the Michelin guys use the new tires.
| OnTheGas | 06-19-2005 06:26 PM |
Why A Non-Points / Points Race Did Not Happen
�
�
[QUOTE=REX8]...by your theory, any driver, out of the points in ANY given race, would be gunning for the front runners.[/QUOTE]Drivers punting each other off for points, has happened on rare situations, historically, toward the end of the season, in a close points battle, where one driver holds a slight lead over the other driver. If the driver that holds a slight lead punts off the other driver, he doesn't have to worry about losing the championship, though he may take himself out at the same time.
Examples punt for points maneouvers include two incidents by a young Michael Schumacher. The first time he succeeded. He punted off Damon Hill in 1994 at the last race of the season (Australia), and consequently won the WDC by 1 point. The second time that Michael Schumacher did this was at the last race of the 1997 season, when he attempted to punt off Jacques Villeneuve. That time, Michael failed in two ways: first he did not succeed in disabling Villeneuve's car. In fact, Michael's car broke, and Jacques went on to a podium finish with his hobbled car, and won the championship. The second failure was that FIA said that Michael's maneouver was unsportsmanlike, and they took away all of his drivers points... Which didn't really matter, since Michael was not interested in finishing the championship in 2nd anyway.
Prior to the Michael Schumacher's punt for points maneuvers, there was the famous punt of Alain Prost by Ayrton Senna at the 1990 Japanese Grand Prix. Ayrton was successful, in that Alain was not able to continue, and also it enabled Ayrton to win the championship.
But we have a race which consists of a mixture of non-points cars, and points paying cars, the points paying cars are going to be vulnerable, because non-points paying cars have nothing to lose.
[QUOTE=REX8]Let alone that is the FIA awarded points prior to the race, it would have been on qualifying position, thereofer even if a Bridgestone car didn't finish, they still may have gotten points for the race...[/QUOTE]Besides violating many rules, that would not be practical. If I receive points before the red lights go out, why would I want to race?
But let's move beyond that... What about the 2 races per engine rule? If some teams are enabled to earn points, and other teams are not enabled to earn points, what is the fair way to handle the 2 races per engine rule?
If your team is fielding two non-points paying cars, wouldn't it be advantageous to run for awhile, and then blow both engines? Fresh engines for the next race!
Examples punt for points maneouvers include two incidents by a young Michael Schumacher. The first time he succeeded. He punted off Damon Hill in 1994 at the last race of the season (Australia), and consequently won the WDC by 1 point. The second time that Michael Schumacher did this was at the last race of the 1997 season, when he attempted to punt off Jacques Villeneuve. That time, Michael failed in two ways: first he did not succeed in disabling Villeneuve's car. In fact, Michael's car broke, and Jacques went on to a podium finish with his hobbled car, and won the championship. The second failure was that FIA said that Michael's maneouver was unsportsmanlike, and they took away all of his drivers points... Which didn't really matter, since Michael was not interested in finishing the championship in 2nd anyway.
Prior to the Michael Schumacher's punt for points maneuvers, there was the famous punt of Alain Prost by Ayrton Senna at the 1990 Japanese Grand Prix. Ayrton was successful, in that Alain was not able to continue, and also it enabled Ayrton to win the championship.
But we have a race which consists of a mixture of non-points cars, and points paying cars, the points paying cars are going to be vulnerable, because non-points paying cars have nothing to lose.
[QUOTE=REX8]Let alone that is the FIA awarded points prior to the race, it would have been on qualifying position, thereofer even if a Bridgestone car didn't finish, they still may have gotten points for the race...[/QUOTE]Besides violating many rules, that would not be practical. If I receive points before the red lights go out, why would I want to race?
But let's move beyond that... What about the 2 races per engine rule? If some teams are enabled to earn points, and other teams are not enabled to earn points, what is the fair way to handle the 2 races per engine rule?
If your team is fielding two non-points paying cars, wouldn't it be advantageous to run for awhile, and then blow both engines? Fresh engines for the next race!
| jlyttle | 06-19-2005 06:32 PM |
The tires were obviously unsafe, as seen by the two failures during testing/qualifying. I don't blame them for pulling out under the circumstances, but I also DO blame them for causing the problem in the first place. I don't understand how this could actually happen. It is not f1's fault or the teams, but Michelin's. The cars simply could not be run on that track at tose sppeds on those tires. Michelin needs to accept ultimate responsibility for what happened.
Having said that, I also believe that it was up to F1 to bend a little and accept some compromise. Again, they did not cause the problem, but ultimately it is F1 that will take the image hit in the US, and their fans that had to suffer today. The rules may have been on FIA's side, but in the end they need to think and act in what will be the best thing for the sport. If they had bent a bit some rules may have had to be twisted, but they would have put on a great show for the world and for the US fans that they are trying to court. Instead, they hid behind the fact that they had strict rules that had to be followed above all else. No other consideration was made even if the goal was to avoid huge embarrassment for the whole of F1.
Again, I do not hold F1 or FIA responsible at all for causing the problem, but they could have done much in the way to ease the situation and still have a successful weekend. Intead, to steal a line from "Days of Thunder", the whole lot of them let their egos rule the day and ended up "looking like a monkey f**cking a football". :rolleyes:
Having said that, I also believe that it was up to F1 to bend a little and accept some compromise. Again, they did not cause the problem, but ultimately it is F1 that will take the image hit in the US, and their fans that had to suffer today. The rules may have been on FIA's side, but in the end they need to think and act in what will be the best thing for the sport. If they had bent a bit some rules may have had to be twisted, but they would have put on a great show for the world and for the US fans that they are trying to court. Instead, they hid behind the fact that they had strict rules that had to be followed above all else. No other consideration was made even if the goal was to avoid huge embarrassment for the whole of F1.
Again, I do not hold F1 or FIA responsible at all for causing the problem, but they could have done much in the way to ease the situation and still have a successful weekend. Intead, to steal a line from "Days of Thunder", the whole lot of them let their egos rule the day and ended up "looking like a monkey f**cking a football". :rolleyes:
| theformula175789 | 06-19-2005 06:37 PM |
Well, I just got back from the track. As a racer and a fan I want to express my thoughts.
First off I place zero blame on FIA and IMS. The blame here lies with eithier Michalin or the teams that MADE THE CHOICE to run thier product.Whichever you prefer from any of the dozen possibly angles. Expecting FIA to change the rules is absurd! Bridgestone and the three team that ran Bridgestones should not lose the advantage they gained by properly developing a chassis tire combination that worked; and did under the current rules. Now if FIA could have done something to allow the michalin guys to run safely while not effecting the advantage gain by the teams who had a successfully developed package, then I could see some action taken by FIA.
Case in point, the teams have a contract to compete in every event and tey broke that contract. It was the teams descision to run michalin products and I feel they are ultimatley to blame. It is the responsability of the teams to choose suppliers that will allow them to maintain there contract agreement.
I commend FIA for sticking with its rules. A chicane is an uterly stupid idea. Ferrari, Menardi, and Jordan have spent millions developing a car and set-up for the USGP. Is it even remotely fair to change that circuit, ultimately throwing out there set-up, due to the fact that 7 teams and 1 tire manufacture completely failed at developing a safe package? Mosley and Berni made there descision based on racing ethics rather than dissregaurding the success of 3 teams and a tire manufacture in order to appease the public.
Everyone is looking for a way things should have been handled today to make the outcome right. I think that is the wrong way of looking at it. The problem was unsolvable today. What should have happened is that Michalin should have admitted failure and advised the teams not to run. The teams should have then addmitted that they made a poor choice in tire supplier and that they must withdraw due to safety concerns and accept any repremands for violation of there contract with FIA. Then the three more competent team should have ran the race by themselves.
Thats pretty much what happened except for the admitance of error was replaced by whinning and crying. There was no possible "perfect solution" today. The solution to this problem would have had to occur days, weeks or months ago by the guilty parties.
First off I place zero blame on FIA and IMS. The blame here lies with eithier Michalin or the teams that MADE THE CHOICE to run thier product.Whichever you prefer from any of the dozen possibly angles. Expecting FIA to change the rules is absurd! Bridgestone and the three team that ran Bridgestones should not lose the advantage they gained by properly developing a chassis tire combination that worked; and did under the current rules. Now if FIA could have done something to allow the michalin guys to run safely while not effecting the advantage gain by the teams who had a successfully developed package, then I could see some action taken by FIA.
Case in point, the teams have a contract to compete in every event and tey broke that contract. It was the teams descision to run michalin products and I feel they are ultimatley to blame. It is the responsability of the teams to choose suppliers that will allow them to maintain there contract agreement.
I commend FIA for sticking with its rules. A chicane is an uterly stupid idea. Ferrari, Menardi, and Jordan have spent millions developing a car and set-up for the USGP. Is it even remotely fair to change that circuit, ultimately throwing out there set-up, due to the fact that 7 teams and 1 tire manufacture completely failed at developing a safe package? Mosley and Berni made there descision based on racing ethics rather than dissregaurding the success of 3 teams and a tire manufacture in order to appease the public.
Everyone is looking for a way things should have been handled today to make the outcome right. I think that is the wrong way of looking at it. The problem was unsolvable today. What should have happened is that Michalin should have admitted failure and advised the teams not to run. The teams should have then addmitted that they made a poor choice in tire supplier and that they must withdraw due to safety concerns and accept any repremands for violation of there contract with FIA. Then the three more competent team should have ran the race by themselves.
Thats pretty much what happened except for the admitance of error was replaced by whinning and crying. There was no possible "perfect solution" today. The solution to this problem would have had to occur days, weeks or months ago by the guilty parties.
| StuBeck | 06-19-2005 06:54 PM |
Forumla175789, that's exactly what happened. Michelin told the teams not to run because of safety concerns. The 7 Michelin teams sent a pres srelease explaining why they couldn't run, because of the safety issues. Yes, they're going to complain when they believe there was a way to give the fans some actual race as opposed to what happened.
| theformula175789 | 06-19-2005 06:54 PM |
I should also add that I spoke with an IMS official, who by the way was just as angry as any fan at the track, which informed me that Tony George was very disspleased with the situation (that was completely out of his control) and that he intended to take a major loss on the event and give ticket holders refunds. He said this information would be available on the IMS website in the next few days. He did not have any further details but was addiment that Tony would try and make the best out of things.
Also, to all you who threw items on the track in protest: "You are a completely irresponsible and juvenile idiot". Thank you so much for showing the integrity of US racing fans. Go to a local roundy round if you wanna act like trailer trash!
Lastly, I propse a BAN ON MICHALIN TIRES! My testing has concluded that they are unsafe on midly banked, gradual, right hand turns. At the very least you should contact your local or state highway department and have Pre-turn chicanes installed on all RH corners so you may safely use Michalin Products.
Also, to all you who threw items on the track in protest: "You are a completely irresponsible and juvenile idiot". Thank you so much for showing the integrity of US racing fans. Go to a local roundy round if you wanna act like trailer trash!
Lastly, I propse a BAN ON MICHALIN TIRES! My testing has concluded that they are unsafe on midly banked, gradual, right hand turns. At the very least you should contact your local or state highway department and have Pre-turn chicanes installed on all RH corners so you may safely use Michalin Products.
| grippgoat | 06-19-2005 06:58 PM |
I am the kind of person that would tend to think people are stupid for throwing things onto a race track.... But in this case, I really wish more people had. I wish they had littered the track so badly that the race HAD to be stopped. The fans got screwed, and I think the fans would have been completely justified in screwing F1 right back.
-Mike
-Mike
| theformula175789 | 06-19-2005 06:59 PM |
[QUOTE=StuBeck]Forumla175789, that's exactly what happened. Michelin told the teams not to run because of safety concerns. The 7 Michelin teams sent a pres srelease explaining why they couldn't run, because of the safety issues. Yes, they're going to complain when they believe there was a way to give the fans some actual race as opposed to what happened.[/QUOTE]
The teams could care less of the fans in this situation. They were thinking only of themselves. I dont think anyone is confused about that. Luckly, someone was concerd about the three teams and one manufacturer who showed up to work and protecting there rights. There is just no justification for bending rules for those who failed when it takes away from the success of those who succedded. Thats not what F1 is about. Any form of motorsports for thast matter.
The teams could care less of the fans in this situation. They were thinking only of themselves. I dont think anyone is confused about that. Luckly, someone was concerd about the three teams and one manufacturer who showed up to work and protecting there rights. There is just no justification for bending rules for those who failed when it takes away from the success of those who succedded. Thats not what F1 is about. Any form of motorsports for thast matter.
| punkcav | 06-19-2005 07:02 PM |
lets hope that teams don't start pulling out of formula one. I have a problem with the the FIA when they started to decrease the grip on the tyres to decrease the performance of the cars. i think it is madness that cars at that level have to run on the same tyres for the weekend. Bridgestone had serious performance issues earlier in the sesion, they had double tyre failure on Michael's car in Spain. The bridgestones also lost grip in monaco and in other races. Ferrari even blamed Bridgestone for theitr poor performance earlier in the year. I can't blame Michelin decision for not racing for safety reasons , both manufactures are having alot of trouble adapting to the new rules that the FIA has put in place. There is no other racing series that i can think of that don't change tyres
| theformula175789 | 06-19-2005 07:03 PM |
[QUOTE=grippgoat]I am the kind of person that would tend to think people are stupid for throwing things onto a race track.... But in this case, I really wish more people had. I wish they had littered the track so badly that the race HAD to be stopped. The fans got screwed, and I think the fans would have been completely justified in screwing F1 right back.
-Mike[/QUOTE]
What an ignorant comment. Do you have any clue what a bottle of water will do to a polycarbonate visor at 200+ MPH? I understand the emotion and motive of the fans who participated in this action. There means of action was completely stupid though. Every person who threw an object on the track should by charged with involuntary attemped manslaughter. No ifs, ands, or Buts about it!!!!!!
-Mike[/QUOTE]
What an ignorant comment. Do you have any clue what a bottle of water will do to a polycarbonate visor at 200+ MPH? I understand the emotion and motive of the fans who participated in this action. There means of action was completely stupid though. Every person who threw an object on the track should by charged with involuntary attemped manslaughter. No ifs, ands, or Buts about it!!!!!!
| Snowphun | 06-19-2005 07:07 PM |
The British press is going to tear the FIA apart tomorrow.
| StuBeck | 06-19-2005 07:08 PM |
[QUOTE=theformula175789]The teams could care less of the fans in this situation. They were thinking only of themselves. I dont think anyone is confused about that. Luckly, someone was concerd about the three teams and one manufacturer who showed up to work and protecting there rights. There is just no justification for bending rules for those who failed when it takes away from the success of those who succedded. Thats not what F1 is about. Any form of motorsports for thast matter.[/QUOTE]
I simply don't agree.
I simply don't agree.
| Wheels | 06-19-2005 07:16 PM |
Actually the press will tear the FIA and Indy.
The tire damage was not Michellin issue it was a track issue. Look at the history of the track this year and you will see the real cause was a poor resurface job that caused it all and its been ongoing since before the INDY 500. Only the weekend of the indy 500 race had alot more rubber on the track so it wasnt as bad as it is now with the rain they have had there is no rubber on the track not enough at least. But bridgestone knew of this from the indy and produced harder tires and mitchellin produced a near spec tire to last year.
Remember the farce last year when ralf went off and hit the wall and it took the ambulance and saftey car forever to get to him. Well noone wants to see that again.
The tire damage was not Michellin issue it was a track issue. Look at the history of the track this year and you will see the real cause was a poor resurface job that caused it all and its been ongoing since before the INDY 500. Only the weekend of the indy 500 race had alot more rubber on the track so it wasnt as bad as it is now with the rain they have had there is no rubber on the track not enough at least. But bridgestone knew of this from the indy and produced harder tires and mitchellin produced a near spec tire to last year.
Remember the farce last year when ralf went off and hit the wall and it took the ambulance and saftey car forever to get to him. Well noone wants to see that again.
| WagnerRX03 | 06-19-2005 07:18 PM |
[QUOTE=Hotrodguru]After reading the statement by the FIA I have to agree about the lack of chicane. I mean Ferrari has sucked all year do to the poor performance of the Bridgestones. Now there is a race where the Bridgestones stronger and the Michellin runners want to change the track configuration to suite there setups?
Guru[/QUOTE]
anyone has a link to the statement?
Guru[/QUOTE]
anyone has a link to the statement?
| asquaredrex | 06-19-2005 07:20 PM |
Never got a comment on my question from a few pages back: does anyone think this has to do with the new tire rules?
I remember a commment from a WRC driver (Markko Martin?) after a big crash due to used up tires. He said something along the lines of "thanks for trying to cut our costs, but wrecking a few WRC cars due to used up tires pretty much cancels out any savings"
That was the first thing I thought of when I saw this mess. Not saying it's true, just wondering if anyone else thought about that...
I remember a commment from a WRC driver (Markko Martin?) after a big crash due to used up tires. He said something along the lines of "thanks for trying to cut our costs, but wrecking a few WRC cars due to used up tires pretty much cancels out any savings"
That was the first thing I thought of when I saw this mess. Not saying it's true, just wondering if anyone else thought about that...
| joe z | 06-19-2005 07:21 PM |
oh man i didin't think that would happen that sucks. i would have hated to have gone to that race...
| why? | 06-19-2005 07:32 PM |
Boycotting Michelin and all of its products sounds good to me.
And yet again, the NASCAR race was much more entertaining than the F1 race.
And yet again, the NASCAR race was much more entertaining than the F1 race.
| AndrewSS | 06-19-2005 07:37 PM |
[QUOTE=Max]The Michelin runners quit because everything wasn't perfect. So what, Michelin supplied them with the equivalent of H speed rated tires while the Bridgestone runners got the equivalent of Z speed rated tires. BMW, Mercedes, they're just a bunch of pansies that quit when things got tough. I can't respect those fools, they left points on the table, they forked their sponsors by not displaying their logos and they forked the fans. Thumbs down to BMW, Mercedes, Honda, Toyota, Red Bull Cosworth, Sauber, Renault. They are unrespectable. Every team that started the race at the 24 Hours of Le Mans is a champion compared to the F1 Michelin running haggots.[/QUOTE]
hey, i wouldnt call everything perfect when ralf schumacher crashed on turn 13 at like 190mph during practice and could have been really hurt (he had minor injuries) I seriously do not get you point... so you are calling those drivers pansies? why dont you go 190+ mph on a banked turn when your tires could go out anytime... you are so stupid, youre comments dont make any sense... wow
Bottom line is the FIA should have let them put in the chicanes on turn 13 to slow it down or soemthing... i dont know all the facts due to the reason for tire failures but you know what... they ruined the race and thats not arguable, ohhh cool we got to watch ferrari's drive round the track with no competition... SWEET!
I was at the race today, and i wasted the ENTIRE day for that... BS!!! i left after the 5th lap FIA is really rediculous we wanted a race thats all... damn
:mad:
hey, i wouldnt call everything perfect when ralf schumacher crashed on turn 13 at like 190mph during practice and could have been really hurt (he had minor injuries) I seriously do not get you point... so you are calling those drivers pansies? why dont you go 190+ mph on a banked turn when your tires could go out anytime... you are so stupid, youre comments dont make any sense... wow
Bottom line is the FIA should have let them put in the chicanes on turn 13 to slow it down or soemthing... i dont know all the facts due to the reason for tire failures but you know what... they ruined the race and thats not arguable, ohhh cool we got to watch ferrari's drive round the track with no competition... SWEET!
I was at the race today, and i wasted the ENTIRE day for that... BS!!! i left after the 5th lap FIA is really rediculous we wanted a race thats all... damn
:mad:
| chaddeus | 06-19-2005 07:38 PM |
Blame Michelin for USGP Disappointment
�
�
I am pretty surprised by how idiotic some people are by throwing bottles at the race way. It just simply show how some people never think of the consequences it have. If a driver ran over it and cause an fatel accident, is he/she going to take full responsiblity? If the race marshall ran across the track to collect the bottle and hit by the cars, is he/she going to take full responsibility?
Some people boo while some people just join the fun booing. I think those people who join the fun booing should not be an F1 fan.
I was at the race track and seeing how some people give their "professional" comments towards the race by blaming FIA, blaming Ferarri. Well, I know some of them did not keep up to date about the FIA news before coming so I can't really blame them anyway.
- Charles
Some people boo while some people just join the fun booing. I think those people who join the fun booing should not be an F1 fan.
I was at the race track and seeing how some people give their "professional" comments towards the race by blaming FIA, blaming Ferarri. Well, I know some of them did not keep up to date about the FIA news before coming so I can't really blame them anyway.
- Charles
| why? | 06-19-2005 07:38 PM |
I hope this means Michelin is out of F1. You can't make a safe tire, buh bye.
| ChrisW | 06-19-2005 07:38 PM |
this is what you get when you don't allow tire changes.
we don't need more stinken chicanes, we need tire changes. at least then the michilen cars could have just run an extra set to baby the ones they were allowed to the finish.
The FIA truely screwed up on this one. I see only two people responsible for this mess. Those are the ones who proposed these lame rule changes.
we don't need more stinken chicanes, we need tire changes. at least then the michilen cars could have just run an extra set to baby the ones they were allowed to the finish.
The FIA truely screwed up on this one. I see only two people responsible for this mess. Those are the ones who proposed these lame rule changes.
| chaddeus | 06-19-2005 07:41 PM |
[QUOTE=AndrewSS]hey, i wouldnt call everything perfect when ralf schumacher crashed on turn 13 at like 190mph during practice and could have been really hurt (he had minor injuries) I seriously do not get you point... so you are calling those drivers pansies? why dont you go 190+ mph on a banked turn when your tires could go out anytime... you are so stupid, youre comments dont make any sense... wow
Bottom line is the FIA should have let them put in the chicanes on turn 13 to slow it down or soemthing... i dont know all the facts due to the reason for tire failures but you know what... they ruined the race and thats not arguable, ohhh cool we got to watch ferrari's drive round the track with no competition... SWEET!
I was at the race today, and i wasted the ENTIRE day for that... BS!!! i left after the 5th lap FIA is really rediculous we wanted a race thats all... damn
:mad:[/QUOTE]
"change of course in order to help some of teams with a performance problem caused by their failure to bring suitable equipment to the race would be a breach of the rules and grossly unfair to those teams which have come to Indianapolis with the correct tires"
Again, not to blame FIA.
- Charles
Bottom line is the FIA should have let them put in the chicanes on turn 13 to slow it down or soemthing... i dont know all the facts due to the reason for tire failures but you know what... they ruined the race and thats not arguable, ohhh cool we got to watch ferrari's drive round the track with no competition... SWEET!
I was at the race today, and i wasted the ENTIRE day for that... BS!!! i left after the 5th lap FIA is really rediculous we wanted a race thats all... damn
:mad:[/QUOTE]
"change of course in order to help some of teams with a performance problem caused by their failure to bring suitable equipment to the race would be a breach of the rules and grossly unfair to those teams which have come to Indianapolis with the correct tires"
Again, not to blame FIA.
- Charles
| chaddeus | 06-19-2005 07:47 PM |
[QUOTE=BHawk]This is bull ****!!! I can't believe this. F1 is so rediculous. Those stuck up ass holes at Ferrari should have agreed to the chicane. Those guys are a bunch of poor sportsmen. I am more disgusted at Ferrari than ever.[/QUOTE]
"Change of course in order to help some of teams with a performance problem caused by their failure to bring suitable equipment to the race would be a breach of the rules and grossly unfair to those teams which have come to Indianapolis with the correct tires"
Do you think its fair for other teams on Bridgestone? Allow weak teams to decide how they can change the track to suit their tires
- Charles
"Change of course in order to help some of teams with a performance problem caused by their failure to bring suitable equipment to the race would be a breach of the rules and grossly unfair to those teams which have come to Indianapolis with the correct tires"
Do you think its fair for other teams on Bridgestone? Allow weak teams to decide how they can change the track to suit their tires
- Charles
| chaddeus | 06-19-2005 07:51 PM |
[QUOTE=Arioch]This is ****ing retarded! **** Max, **** Michelin, **** the ****ing ****ers!
Now Bernie has allegedly left the event. What a douche!
I hope this is the end of F1 in Indy, but not in the US.
I also hope that Tony George makes Max pay for all the refunds of the tickets.
I hate F1 today. *fume*[/QUOTE]
I think -1 weak fan of F1 isn't a big hit to anyone of us...
- Charles
Now Bernie has allegedly left the event. What a douche!
I hope this is the end of F1 in Indy, but not in the US.
I also hope that Tony George makes Max pay for all the refunds of the tickets.
I hate F1 today. *fume*[/QUOTE]
I think -1 weak fan of F1 isn't a big hit to anyone of us...
- Charles
| chaddeus | 06-19-2005 08:00 PM |
[QUOTE=Don Arm]THIS IS BULL%^&$
Number 1 The track could have changed since a new surface was applied.
Bridgestone would have had advanced information since Firestone ran the 500. Michelin would not have had this information.
Number 2 The FIA and Max Mosley SUX they could have allowed Michelin to bring tires from France (which they were going to do) and wavied the tire rule for this race, for the fans. BECAUSE racing is supported by the fans and their money.
Number 3 Bernie Ecclstone SUXXX BIG horse %^&* and is an A##Hol&. I'm sure this has something to do with the upcoming Concorde situation. I thought it was really interesting to see Bernie and the Ferrari team talking right brfore the race started.
This has just killed F1 at Indy. I left the race as did a lot of other people.
I feel really sorry for all of the people that came from out of town. One guy I just finished talking to drove all night from Canada to get here for the race.
At this point F1 is going the way of CART and the IRL.
There will be NO refunds the race was run, not cancelled !!!!!!![/QUOTE]
Welcome to the real world dude. Information is not cheap and its not free. In real world, if you know more than your competitor, you have a higher chance of winning. In war, if you know more about your enermy than your enermy know more than you, you have a higher chance of winning.
Do you think you can take over Mox Mosley and run the FIA? In fact, are you capable of running it? It may sounds simple from your view but I am sure, taking all factors into consideration, its not something as easy as you see.
I just hope people can take a more understanding view towards today's situation and not be angry about it like some morons throwing things.
- Charles
Number 1 The track could have changed since a new surface was applied.
Bridgestone would have had advanced information since Firestone ran the 500. Michelin would not have had this information.
Number 2 The FIA and Max Mosley SUX they could have allowed Michelin to bring tires from France (which they were going to do) and wavied the tire rule for this race, for the fans. BECAUSE racing is supported by the fans and their money.
Number 3 Bernie Ecclstone SUXXX BIG horse %^&* and is an A##Hol&. I'm sure this has something to do with the upcoming Concorde situation. I thought it was really interesting to see Bernie and the Ferrari team talking right brfore the race started.
This has just killed F1 at Indy. I left the race as did a lot of other people.
I feel really sorry for all of the people that came from out of town. One guy I just finished talking to drove all night from Canada to get here for the race.
At this point F1 is going the way of CART and the IRL.
There will be NO refunds the race was run, not cancelled !!!!!!![/QUOTE]
Welcome to the real world dude. Information is not cheap and its not free. In real world, if you know more than your competitor, you have a higher chance of winning. In war, if you know more about your enermy than your enermy know more than you, you have a higher chance of winning.
Do you think you can take over Mox Mosley and run the FIA? In fact, are you capable of running it? It may sounds simple from your view but I am sure, taking all factors into consideration, its not something as easy as you see.
I just hope people can take a more understanding view towards today's situation and not be angry about it like some morons throwing things.
- Charles
| driggity | 06-19-2005 08:00 PM |
[QUOTE=asquaredrex]Never got a comment on my question from a few pages back: does anyone think this has to do with the new tire rules?[/QUOTE]
If by new tire rules you mean one set per race, then no I don't think that this was a result of that rule. The one rule that may have had something to do with this is limiting the number of tire contructions that each time can bring to a race. Even then its hard to say that it would have really been an issue. I don't remember how many laps Ralf ran in the first practice, but I don't think it was that many. And he hadn't even completed a full lap when he crashed in the second practice. I think the issue may have been due more to the tire just failing from the loads put on it than just wearing out but at this point I don't know that anyone can be sure as to what the problem really was and what it would have taken to avoid it.
If by new tire rules you mean one set per race, then no I don't think that this was a result of that rule. The one rule that may have had something to do with this is limiting the number of tire contructions that each time can bring to a race. Even then its hard to say that it would have really been an issue. I don't remember how many laps Ralf ran in the first practice, but I don't think it was that many. And he hadn't even completed a full lap when he crashed in the second practice. I think the issue may have been due more to the tire just failing from the loads put on it than just wearing out but at this point I don't know that anyone can be sure as to what the problem really was and what it would have taken to avoid it.
| GotHP? | 06-19-2005 08:01 PM |
[QUOTE=Wheels]
The tire damage was not Michellin issue it was a track issue. Look at the history of the track this year and you will see the real cause was a poor resurface job that caused it all and its been ongoing since before the INDY 500. Only the weekend of the indy 500 race had alot more rubber on the track so it wasnt as bad as it is now with the rain they have had there is no rubber on the track not enough at least. But bridgestone knew of this from the indy and produced harder tires and mitchellin produced a near spec tire to last year.
Remember the farce last year when ralf went off and hit the wall and it took the ambulance and saftey car forever to get to him. Well noone wants to see that again.[/QUOTE]
The track was the LAST one at fault here...it's called doing your homework and being prepared. The Japanese did and the French didn't, plain and simple. ok maybe not so simple, I really haven't heard if there was a manufacturing defect or what the root cause was...but bottom line the Bridgestones survived 73 parade laps :lol:
The tire damage was not Michellin issue it was a track issue. Look at the history of the track this year and you will see the real cause was a poor resurface job that caused it all and its been ongoing since before the INDY 500. Only the weekend of the indy 500 race had alot more rubber on the track so it wasnt as bad as it is now with the rain they have had there is no rubber on the track not enough at least. But bridgestone knew of this from the indy and produced harder tires and mitchellin produced a near spec tire to last year.
Remember the farce last year when ralf went off and hit the wall and it took the ambulance and saftey car forever to get to him. Well noone wants to see that again.[/QUOTE]
The track was the LAST one at fault here...it's called doing your homework and being prepared. The Japanese did and the French didn't, plain and simple. ok maybe not so simple, I really haven't heard if there was a manufacturing defect or what the root cause was...but bottom line the Bridgestones survived 73 parade laps :lol:
| LIRex | 06-19-2005 08:04 PM |
[QUOTE=Wheels]The tire damage was not Michellin issue it was a track issue. Look at the history of the track this year and you will see the real cause was a poor resurface job that caused it all and its been ongoing since before the INDY 500. [/QUOTE]
What makes you say that? And, if such was the case than shouldn't the Bridgestones have suffered the same fate? Or at least showed more visible signs of tire damage due to the surface?
You are looking at a combination of Michelin not designing/running a suitable compound AND the FIA being their usual Pompous, Stuffy and unbending self.
F1.......The Drama queens of MotorSports :rolleyes:
What makes you say that? And, if such was the case than shouldn't the Bridgestones have suffered the same fate? Or at least showed more visible signs of tire damage due to the surface?
You are looking at a combination of Michelin not designing/running a suitable compound AND the FIA being their usual Pompous, Stuffy and unbending self.
F1.......The Drama queens of MotorSports :rolleyes:
| chaddeus | 06-19-2005 08:07 PM |
ahhaha.. good one there!!
- Charles
- Charles
| chaddeus | 06-19-2005 08:08 PM |
[QUOTE=Max]Michelin said it was ok to run at a slower speed. The safety issue was that the Michelin teams weren't feeling very safe about being slow.[/QUOTE]
Good one there.
Good one there.
| TOMMY B | 06-19-2005 08:11 PM |
[QUOTE=chaddeus]"change of course in order to help some of teams with a performance problem caused by their failure to bring suitable equipment to the race would be a breach of the rules and grossly unfair to those teams which have come to Indianapolis with the correct tires"
Again, not to blame FIA.
- Charles[/QUOTE]
Charles, You are right on.........
Its just the facts........
I think too many people on this board are living at home with mom or dad........ :o
TOMMY B
RALLY ON //////////////////////////
Again, not to blame FIA.
- Charles[/QUOTE]
Charles, You are right on.........
Its just the facts........
I think too many people on this board are living at home with mom or dad........ :o
TOMMY B
RALLY ON //////////////////////////
| chaddeus | 06-19-2005 08:18 PM |
[QUOTE=asquaredrex]Never got a comment on my question from a few pages back: does anyone think this has to do with the new tire rules?
I remember a commment from a WRC driver (Markko Martin?) after a big crash due to used up tires. He said something along the lines of "thanks for trying to cut our costs, but wrecking a few WRC cars due to used up tires pretty much cancels out any savings"
That was the first thing I thought of when I saw this mess. Not saying it's true, just wondering if anyone else thought about that...[/QUOTE]
In a way, should he know that he is driving on a used tires and so adjust his speed accordingly? Isn't that what racing is all about, adjusting your speed to the corner?
So imagine if you are driving at 100 miles per hour and you are supposed to make a U-Turn. Are you going to slow down to make the U-Turn or continue at 100 mph and if anything bad happen, blame on the tires or your car setup?
- Charles
I remember a commment from a WRC driver (Markko Martin?) after a big crash due to used up tires. He said something along the lines of "thanks for trying to cut our costs, but wrecking a few WRC cars due to used up tires pretty much cancels out any savings"
That was the first thing I thought of when I saw this mess. Not saying it's true, just wondering if anyone else thought about that...[/QUOTE]
In a way, should he know that he is driving on a used tires and so adjust his speed accordingly? Isn't that what racing is all about, adjusting your speed to the corner?
So imagine if you are driving at 100 miles per hour and you are supposed to make a U-Turn. Are you going to slow down to make the U-Turn or continue at 100 mph and if anything bad happen, blame on the tires or your car setup?
- Charles
| Tim K. | 06-19-2005 08:18 PM |
F1 needs to remember that in the end, they are an entertainment driven industry. Without fans, the FIA, F1, etc., would cease to exist. It is because of us, the fans that are willing to spend our dollars and time, that racing can exist at the level it does.
Michelin brought an unsafe tire to the track. If the roles had been reversed, and it was Bridgestone that had the problems, nobody would have really noticed. Remember, Ferrari withdrew their cars due to safety issues earlier this year and people just said, �Tough luck Ferrari.�
Michelin supplies well over half of the F1 field. When they have a problem, it is far more visible then when Bridgestone does. Michelin teams had an option of competing with tire changes. Of course, they would have had to change tires every ten to fifteen laps but they could have competed.
Also, Michelin teams could have put on the new tires and then started at the back. With so many Michelin shod teams, it would have been interesting. The FIA could have also compromised to help the sport. They could have let the Michelin teams put on the new �safe� tires, run where they qualified, but not given them any points.
In the end, it would have provided the fans with a race, the drivers with a competition, and points would have reflected the rules. There was a compromise that could have allowed everyone to race, the fans to see a real competition, and for everyone to satisfied, if not happy.
Instead, we got a battle of egos and everyone lost. I consider myself lucky that I did not travel to Indy this year as I have done in the past. I cannot imagine how upset the fans are that did attend the event. At the very least, they should have their tickets refunded.
Maybe there will be a class action suit against Michelin and the FIA?
Whatever the final outcome, it was a very sad day for F1. We haven't heard the last of this debacle.
Michelin brought an unsafe tire to the track. If the roles had been reversed, and it was Bridgestone that had the problems, nobody would have really noticed. Remember, Ferrari withdrew their cars due to safety issues earlier this year and people just said, �Tough luck Ferrari.�
Michelin supplies well over half of the F1 field. When they have a problem, it is far more visible then when Bridgestone does. Michelin teams had an option of competing with tire changes. Of course, they would have had to change tires every ten to fifteen laps but they could have competed.
Also, Michelin teams could have put on the new tires and then started at the back. With so many Michelin shod teams, it would have been interesting. The FIA could have also compromised to help the sport. They could have let the Michelin teams put on the new �safe� tires, run where they qualified, but not given them any points.
In the end, it would have provided the fans with a race, the drivers with a competition, and points would have reflected the rules. There was a compromise that could have allowed everyone to race, the fans to see a real competition, and for everyone to satisfied, if not happy.
Instead, we got a battle of egos and everyone lost. I consider myself lucky that I did not travel to Indy this year as I have done in the past. I cannot imagine how upset the fans are that did attend the event. At the very least, they should have their tickets refunded.
Maybe there will be a class action suit against Michelin and the FIA?
Whatever the final outcome, it was a very sad day for F1. We haven't heard the last of this debacle.
| chaddeus | 06-19-2005 08:22 PM |
One thing that I dont understand is teams running on Michelin tires. If the agreed on giving the top points to Bridgestone teams (as some of you mentioned) and continue the race, then why can't they just simply run slower and go to the pit and check their tires more often as suggested by FIA?
If that is the case, teams running on Michelin tires can just continue running the race slowly. Now, I think there more political issue here than safety. If Michelin agreed that there's problem with their tires, why are team drivers still do their qualifying lap?
- Charles
If that is the case, teams running on Michelin tires can just continue running the race slowly. Now, I think there more political issue here than safety. If Michelin agreed that there's problem with their tires, why are team drivers still do their qualifying lap?
- Charles
| cooleyjb | 06-19-2005 08:23 PM |
[QUOTE=dwx]Is there a huge reason they couldn't just put Bridgestones on all the cars? There are plenty of tire changing places in Indy. :)[/QUOTE]
This was the best answer in some senses. Instead of one sponsor (Michelin) losing out all of them did as well as the fans. If I had been one of the Michelin drivers I would have walked down pit road and bought a set of Bridgestones from someone.
This was the best answer in some senses. Instead of one sponsor (Michelin) losing out all of them did as well as the fans. If I had been one of the Michelin drivers I would have walked down pit road and bought a set of Bridgestones from someone.
| Wheels | 06-19-2005 08:24 PM |
Bridgestone knew ahead of time because they own firestone who I am sure told them there was issues of bad tire wear at the track. Firestone had over a month to test and build a tire to the standard needed. Where as that cant be said for michellin they had only last seasons data to go off. No one tests at Indy so how can they build a tire to suit it?
| chaddeus | 06-19-2005 08:27 PM |
[QUOTE=Tim K.]F1 needs to remember that in the end, they are an entertainment driven industry. Without fans, the FIA, F1, etc., would cease to exist. It is because of us, the fans that are willing to spend our dollars and time, that racing can exist at the level it does.
Michelin brought an unsafe tire to the track. If the roles had been reversed, and it was Bridgestone that had the problems, nobody would have really noticed. Remember, Ferrari withdrew their cars due to safety issues earlier this year and people just said, �Tough luck Ferrari.�
Michelin supplies well over half of the F1 field. When they have a problem, it is far more visible then when Bridgestone does. Michelin teams had an option of competing with tire changes. Of course, they would have had to change tires every ten to fifteen laps but they could have competed.
Also, Michelin teams could have put on the new tires and then started at the back. With so many Michelin shod teams, it would have been interesting. The FIA could have also compromised to help the sport. They could have let the Michelin teams put on the new �safe� tires, run where they qualified, but not given them any points.
In the end, it would have provided the fans with a race, the drivers with a competition, and points would have reflected the rules. There was a compromise that could have allowed everyone to race, the fans to see a real competition, and for everyone to satisfied, if not happy.
Instead, we got a battle of egos and everyone lost. I consider myself lucky that I did not travel to Indy this year as I have done in the past. I cannot imagine how upset the fans are that did attend the event. At the very least, they should have their tickets refunded.
Maybe there will be a class action suit against Michelin and the FIA?
Whatever the final outcome, it was a very sad day for F1. We haven't heard the last of this debacle.[/QUOTE]
I like your words. Very True!!
- Charles
Michelin brought an unsafe tire to the track. If the roles had been reversed, and it was Bridgestone that had the problems, nobody would have really noticed. Remember, Ferrari withdrew their cars due to safety issues earlier this year and people just said, �Tough luck Ferrari.�
Michelin supplies well over half of the F1 field. When they have a problem, it is far more visible then when Bridgestone does. Michelin teams had an option of competing with tire changes. Of course, they would have had to change tires every ten to fifteen laps but they could have competed.
Also, Michelin teams could have put on the new tires and then started at the back. With so many Michelin shod teams, it would have been interesting. The FIA could have also compromised to help the sport. They could have let the Michelin teams put on the new �safe� tires, run where they qualified, but not given them any points.
In the end, it would have provided the fans with a race, the drivers with a competition, and points would have reflected the rules. There was a compromise that could have allowed everyone to race, the fans to see a real competition, and for everyone to satisfied, if not happy.
Instead, we got a battle of egos and everyone lost. I consider myself lucky that I did not travel to Indy this year as I have done in the past. I cannot imagine how upset the fans are that did attend the event. At the very least, they should have their tickets refunded.
Maybe there will be a class action suit against Michelin and the FIA?
Whatever the final outcome, it was a very sad day for F1. We haven't heard the last of this debacle.[/QUOTE]
I like your words. Very True!!
- Charles
| chaddeus | 06-19-2005 08:28 PM |
[QUOTE=Wheels]Bridgestone knew ahead of time because they own firestone who I am sure told them there was issues of bad tire wear at the track. Firestone had over a month to test and build a tire to the standard needed. Where as that cant be said for michellin they had only last seasons data to go off. No one tests at Indy so how can they build a tire to suit it?[/QUOTE]
So they didn't they do it. The resurfacing of the track isn't a secret issue.
- Charles
So they didn't they do it. The resurfacing of the track isn't a secret issue.
- Charles
| TimStevens | 06-19-2005 08:31 PM |
[QUOTE=Tim K.]Also, Michelin teams could have put on the new tires and then started at the back. With so many Michelin shod teams, it would have been interesting. The FIA could have also compromised to help the sport. They could have let the Michelin teams put on the new �safe� tires, run where they qualified, but not given them any points.[/QUOTE]
There were no "safe" tires. The replacement tires that Michelin shipped over were deemed to have the same fault that struck Toyota.
I've just read Paul Stoddart's statement and apology. He's said that 9/10 teams were in agreement to go ahead with a chicane. One can guess which the 10th was. Honestly I can't blame Ferrari in this case, though, but holy @#$% what a disaster.
Sooo.... how long until we see another USGP? I wouldn't be surprised if the FIA just gives up on the US again for another 5-10 years now.
There were no "safe" tires. The replacement tires that Michelin shipped over were deemed to have the same fault that struck Toyota.
I've just read Paul Stoddart's statement and apology. He's said that 9/10 teams were in agreement to go ahead with a chicane. One can guess which the 10th was. Honestly I can't blame Ferrari in this case, though, but holy @#$% what a disaster.
Sooo.... how long until we see another USGP? I wouldn't be surprised if the FIA just gives up on the US again for another 5-10 years now.
| c9912033 | 06-19-2005 08:32 PM |
Isn't it sad that the U.S miss out on an F1 race. You are all part time fans anyway. It's only because of politics that F1 is in the U.S at all.
Couldn't have happened to a better country.
Couldn't have happened to a better country.
| chaddeus | 06-19-2005 08:35 PM |
FIA gave teams running on Michelin these options.
1. Run Slower
2. Go to the pit more often
However, teams rejected the proposal and insisted on installing the chicane to slow down the car.
So does that shows that the Michelin tires not safe to run too fast but yet, still can run the race with the chicane in Turn12/13 installed? That will also show that they brought the wrong tires.
So now, they do not want to show to the US fans that the Michelin tires are not as good as Bridgestone's in the track so they used the "safety as their upmost priority rubbish" to bring in new tires.
In short, they are not competitive in USGP and thus want the race track to be modified to suit their preference.
- Charles
1. Run Slower
2. Go to the pit more often
However, teams rejected the proposal and insisted on installing the chicane to slow down the car.
So does that shows that the Michelin tires not safe to run too fast but yet, still can run the race with the chicane in Turn12/13 installed? That will also show that they brought the wrong tires.
So now, they do not want to show to the US fans that the Michelin tires are not as good as Bridgestone's in the track so they used the "safety as their upmost priority rubbish" to bring in new tires.
In short, they are not competitive in USGP and thus want the race track to be modified to suit their preference.
- Charles
Không có nhận xét nào:
Đăng nhận xét