bennyx_o wrote: » https://twitter.com/MercedesAMGF1/status/1405193540796289027?s=19 Grosjeans test in the Mercedes postponed
flazio wrote: » Discussed a bit in the race thread.
barryribs wrote: » https://www.bbc.com/sport/formula1/57476106 Pirelli investigated their own tyres and to the shock of absolutely no one, the found that their tyres were fine. Its hard to think of a worse tyre manufacturere in F1 without a tyre war going on.
Joeface wrote: » COLD tire pressure checks this weekend as well
El_Duderino 09 wrote: » I have no love for Pirelli but i think that's harsh. They keep telling the teams to not d1ck about with the tyre pressures because it can cause tyres to fail and the teams keep d1cking about with tyre pressures and they tyres failed. How is that Pirelli's fault?
barryribs wrote: » Both teams have said that they complied with Pirelli's instructions at all times and Pirelli have no obligation to make tyres so close to the limit. Almost every year there is one race where there are multiple tyre failures, meaning that they are not properly constructed to withstand the load, or are not robust enough to allow teams to run on them. But you're probably right, its not Pirelli's fault, not the teams fault, like Jenson said - voodoo magic caused it.
duploelabs wrote: » Except the team boss is also his agent
El_Duderino 09 wrote: » Yeah I know. I said "for example" at the beginningand "who knows?" at the end to signify that it's an example and that it was conjecture. Its also true that a co tract with Alpine doesn't preclude a contract with Mercedes and it's conjecture based on the fact that we have conflicting information from sources within within f1, where your Ferrari point is just made up based on nothing.We have conflicting information so we can't be sure wither way. Why is this such a big deal to some people?
Frank Bullitt wrote: » Can't say we do. We have an official contract announcement with a team, and then you have rumours.
El_Duderino 09 wrote: » People sign contracts all the time and both parties will give very different understandings of what the contract means. There are 4 potential parties involved and we've only heard from one of them - Alpine. And they gave the one version that they want to argue which is that they have full control of the driver. We haven't heard from Ocon, Mercedes or Wolff (acting as Ocon's manager). They're under no obligation to tell us anything. I'll just stick to the unconventional approach of not pretending like I know information that I couldn't possibly know. You can do as you please, obviously.
Frank Bullitt wrote: » Grand, you can stick with the conspiracy theory approach, I will stick with the known facts.
El_Duderino 09 wrote: » Ah that's being silly. I can't see your reason for getting caught up on this point. It's pretty trivial. We have different people telling us conflicting info and they only cover small parts of the situation. What can we say except "I don't know"? Why would you or I need to pretend we know the whole story when neither of us could possibly know?
El_Duderino 09 wrote: » Is it voodoo magic? I hadn't considered that. I'd say it's just down to the teams getting around the tests and running the tyres lower than the regulations permit, against the manufacturer's instructions. The tests are done before the race, so they do their best to test compliant and then run the pressure lower during the race. The teams want the regulation pressure reduced so they can gain performance, and Pirelli want to increase the pressures to increase safety. You say it's nobody's fault, I think the cause is pretty clear. If you were Pirelli and you told the teams and the FIA that running the pressures below the regulations increases the chances of a tyre failure. The FIA set the regulation pressure and the teams insist on running the pressures as low as possible during the race, would you accept responsibility when their tyres fail and they were running the pressures lower than you wanted? You say it's voodoo. I think it's much simpler than that. Teams always try to get around regulations and try to gain as much performance and come as close to failure as possible without actually causing a failure. This time the two teams whose tyres failed erred slightly on the wrong side.
flazio wrote: » Wasn't Flavio Briatore Alonso's manager throughout his McLaren, Ferrari and Renault days?
Pen Rua wrote: » In Sky’s F1 Show (available on YouTube) they ask Ocon if the Mercedes dream is over. He says he is still “managed by Mercedes” (direct quote). He says he will be a “full Alpine driver” for the next 3 years with “no interaction” with Mercedes.
“I am completely [an] Alpine driver for the next three years, that is where I stand at the moment,” he said. “For sure, there are connections with Mercedes but the job I’m doing is to be with Alpine and fully with Alpine so there will be nothing, no interaction, with Mercedes Grand Prix team,” he maintained.
Frank Bullitt wrote: » Full quote here:
quokula wrote: » You seem to be making stuff up - there is zero evidence that either team didn’t comply with the recommended tyre pressures - in fact all evidence is to the contrary, that they did comply, and you’re just advancing a conspiracy theory that two completely different teams with completely different car designs somehow both magically got around the limits in a way nobody can prove or measure. I have sympathy for Pirelli, it’s near impossible for them to make good tyres with the extreme testing limits and the seriously overweight unfit for purpose hybrid cars, but they have produced absolutely nothing to suggest the tyre failure was anyone else’s fault.
Frank Bullitt wrote: » I can't really understand your point though. Ocon has just signed a 3 year deal with Alpine, yet you think/say he is still a Merc driver. He is managed by Toto yes, but it is clear that Russell is fav to step into that, Ocon clearly sees this and has stuck to Alpine (great move for both with the marketing etc and rule change). There is no conflicting info.
El_Duderino 09 wrote: » Lol. So there we have it. He still had a contract with Mercedes while also having a contract with Alpine.
El_Duderino 09 wrote: » The evidence for my "conspiracy theory" is growing, I've even got Hamilton here talking about it: "As you know every weekend, whenever there is a failure, they always put the pressures up - so that tells you something," he said. "More often than not, [it's] that the tyres are not being run at the pressures that are being asked. We didn't have a problem with our tyres". Motorsport.com: Hamilton: Pirelli not to blame for Baku tyre blowouts.http://www.motorsport.com/f1/news/hamilton-pirelli-not-to-blame-for-baku-tyre-blowouts/6577971/amp/ Plus the fact that Pirelli's solution to the problem is to increase the recommended tyre pressure and another rooster said they're going to test the tyres when cold to control for temperature changes to tyre pressure. "However, a swift response from the FIA to ramp up tyre pressure and temperature checks for this weekend's French Grand Prix, has offered answers about teams potentially trying to get around limits being a factor." And here's Pirelli saying RB and AM wer running the tyres at low pressures during the race - but didn't break the rules because they complied with the checks at the start - isn't that exactly what I said? "And while Pirelli confirmed that both Red Bull and Aston Martin had followed the regulations with the minimum starting pressures and maximum blanket temperatures, it says that things deviated from what it expected once the cars were running." Motorsport.com: Pirelli: Red Bull and Aston Martin were running with lower pressures.https://www.motorsport.com/f1/news/red-bull-and-aston-martin-were-running-with-lower-pressures-says-pirelli/6579071/amp/
Joeseph Balls wrote: » Wait, wasn't there a report somewhere in the days after that Hamilton's rear left had scarring too? I'll have to find it.
