Mercedes wins Monaco Grand Prix.

[grober]

Mercedes won The Monaco Grand Prix today amid protests about extra tyre tests with Pirelli. Legitimate protest or "toys out of pram" because you have a faster car than us ? Discuss.

Mercedes angry at criticism of its Formula 1 tyre test with Pirelli - F1 news - AUTOSPORT.com

 

[neilrr]

Dunno about the tyres.

The main thing I noticed in that race was how completely unsuitable & dangerous the Monaco GP course is for a modern F1 car.

 

[baxlin]

I really enjoy F1, and now my own car is a Mercedes, and MSC has retired, I have good reasons for following one particular team.

But yesterday I switched off (i was watching the BBC highlights, didn't know the result) when the safety car came out. My thinking was that the safety car couldn't make it more of a procession than it already was. So I went to the red button, saw the result, but I'm afraid even the news that there was a later red flag couldn't persuade me to watch the rest.

Why oh why do they keep going to Monaco, at least from a racing aspect? The money and 'apres ski' I can understand, but for exciting racing? No.


Malcolm

 

[Billy-cls55]

I really enjoy F1, and now my own car is a Mercedes, and MSC has retired, I have good reasons for following one particular team.

But yesterday I switched off (i was watching the BBC highlights, didn't know the result) when the safety car came out. My thinking was that the safety car couldn't make it more of a procession than it already was. So I went to the red button, saw the result, but I'm afraid even the news that there was a later red flag couldn't persuade me to watch the rest.

Why oh why do they keep going to Monaco, at least from a racing aspect? The money and 'apres ski' I can understand, but for exciting racing? No.


Malcolm

I totally agree, I have been to Monaco many times "not for the racing" and really don't know why the host the F1, it's about racing at the end if the day, not traffic jams or crashing, I would rather they race through London any day.
Will they drop monaco probably never, too much history, wealth private charters and the like.

 

[Paul/]

Merc recently have best quali form but poor in race- both symptoms of a car that works its tyres hard. Difficulty of overtaking at Monaco makes the best of these characteristics.

The tyre testing regs apparently require cars to be at east 2 years old so would seem to be have been clearly contravened. Extra testing using a current car must provide an opportunity to better understand the current car, regardless of the format or reason for the tests.

I think the tests will have helped the team improve the car, so was an unfair advantage over others, but many were already expecting Monaco's characteristics to enable Mercedes to translate their usual good qualifying in to a win.

 

[bolide]

The main thing I noticed in that race was how completely unsuitable & dangerous the Monaco GP course is for a modern F1 car.

Yes - brilliant, isn't it?

Nick Froome

 

[wemorgan]

It's far from the best circuit, but at least when the driver misses the racing line there is a significant risk of crashing, whereas on many modern circuits there is just more tarmac.

Perez and Sutil found ways of overtaking (crashing). Which made me think: should minor points be awarded for; pole position, fastest lap, places gained?

 

[grober]

Dunno about the tyres.

The main thing I noticed in that race was how completely unsuitable & dangerous the Monaco GP course is for a modern F1 car.

Why then is it the most popular GP venue and the one all the drivers want to win. Perhaps because it is so different with time after time drivers/cars winning against the run of the mill for the rest of the season. Its glamorous demanding and dangerous. Part of motor racing's appeal is that its a blood sport. The people running F1 and the sponsors know it. It might be argued that's in won in practice and qualifying rather than the race but that doesn't seem to diminish its appeal. I have to say that it may be a glorious anacronism but in comparison to the frankly Scalextric experience offered by tracks like Bahrain long may it continue.

 

[effbee584]

The main thing I noticed in that race was how completely unsuitable & dangerous the Monaco GP course is for a modern F1 car.

I was talking to Martin Brundle some years ago (he was still driving then) and Monaco was his favorite circuit, because it required enhanced driving precision and also added danger. Stirling Moss said the same about danger.

Martin did concede that for the spectator it was probably a procession. Well done to Perez for livening things up.

I would rather see Monaco kept in the calendar and lose Bahrain, with its empty stands, sand and Political difficulties (remember all those doctors imprisoned).

Sticking to F1, surely there is a film documentary to be made about the logistics of moving between races, eg Monaco to Canada or Australia to Malaysia, it must be quite an operation.

I also feel that I can support Mercedes, now that MSC has gone and Lewis is there, it would help if Lewis or Nico be persuaded to use a different helmet colour. Team colours are not the best either.

 

[Clkrichard]

Wasnt the Pirelli tyre testing conducted in older cars and thus within the rules ?
Surely its in everyones best interests to introduce greater variation in tyre choice ?

 

[brucemillar]

The rules on testing a very clear. They can tyre test for three days but only by using a car that is a previous model usually two years is the accepted norm. Both Mercedes and Pirelli claim that they had the permission of the FIA. What has upset Red Bull and Ferrari is that the testing was not transparent to all teams with only Mercedes being involved. Also that Mercedes did not use test drivers with both Hamilton and Rosberg doing the entire stint. The implication being that this was a test session outside of the rules that would benefit Mercedes in the main.

Whatever the outcome it does appear to have been poorly handled.

With regards to Monaco's attraction. All street circuits carry a fascination and attraction to drivers and spectators alike. I went up to Regents street and London a few years ago to watch a variety of F1 cars being blatted up and down the street. The crowd were simply staggering. The noise with the tight confines of the buildings was awesome.

Having been to the Monaco GP on several occasions it has the same attraction.

Go to Silverstone where you see cars for a split second as the blast past at full chat -- fun but not the same.

Brands Hatch in the good old days was brilliant. Get out to Dingle Dell and watch these cars cresting and cornering is just a fantastic sight and sound.

 

[Tack]

God damn it, my fault I suppose going onto a car forum before seeing the race.

However, as you say it is often a parade anyway.

Perhaps a title without the punch line next time ;-).

 

[effbee584]

Wasnt the Pirelli tyre testing conducted in older cars and thus within the rules ?

Apparently not, Mercedes used the current cars and drivers - according to the BBC team EJ and DC.

 

[Clkrichard]

Didnt the testing take place openly at the circuit while the other teams were packing up ? How could that not be transparent ? Do the rules say only test drivers could be used ?
I am not sure what personal or team advantage was gained by Rosberg and Hamilton testing tyres in 2 year old cars.

 

[grober]

FIA said on Sunday night that it had not been kept up to date with plans for the test following Pirelli's approach. "At the beginning of May, the FIA was asked by Pirelli if it was possible for it to carry out some tyre development testing with a team, using a current car," a FIA statement read.

"Within the contract Pirelli has with the FIA as single supplier, there is provision for them to carry out up to 1000km of testing with any team – provided every team is offered the opportunity to do so.

"Pirelli and Mercedes were advised by the FIA such a development test could be possible if carried out by Pirelli, as opposed to the team that would provide the car and driver, and that such tests would be conditional upon every single team being given the same opportunity to test in order to ensure full sporting equity.

According to Ross Brawn [ all caveats apply]
"Pirelli has been asking teams to help them out for 12 months and people haven't been supporting them, so there are lots of communications between Pirelli and teams asking them to do 1000km for them.


If true it sounds as if the FIA Ferrari and Red Bull all took their eye off the ball, whereas Mercedes, perhaps with a tyre wear problem greater than most , saw an opportunity and took it.
Ferrari and RED Bull with no tyre problems were perhaps less inclined to accommodate Pirelli. There's plenty of the season left maybe all the protesting teams should get their turn to get an extra 1000km tyre development also to keep things right. But you do get the impression that the protest was more to do with stopping Mercedes getting any extra tyre testing rather than the others missing out on their chance. If you are in a winning car you don't want the opposition improving theirs do you. I think the expression is "dog in the manger"

 

[brucemillar]

Didnt the testing take place openly at the circuit while the other teams were packing up ? How could that not be transparent ? Do the rules say only test drivers could be used ?
I am not sure what personal or team advantage was gained by Rosberg and Hamilton testing tyres in 2 year old cars.

The rules on "testing" are very strict with exceptions for "young driver" testing and straight-line aero testing.

I have not seen the full complaint but have read that this is seen as a tyre test using this years car with the two team drivers. So that would seem to contravene the rules if no other teams were allowed the opportunity to test in this way.

 

[Clkrichard]

So it was with current cars then ...... what a muddle !
No doubt it will become clearer in time

 

[brucemillar]

By Andrew Benson

Chief F1 writer in Monaco


Mercedes face an investigation by Formula 1's governing body the FIA after being accused of taking part in an illegal tyre test.

Red Bull and Ferrari lodged an official protest at the Monaco Grand Prix after discovering tyre supplier Pirelli used Mercedes to do a three-day test.

In-season testing in F1 is forbidden. Pirelli says it has a contract with the FIA allowing limited testing.

The Monaco GP stewards are to prepare a report for the FIA.

A statement said the governing body "may bring the matter before the International Tribunal".

The body, effectively for these purposes the FIA's court, can impose any number of penalties, ranging from exclusion from the world championship to a fine.

Ferrari team principal Stefano Domenicali said: "As it is to do with the sporting regulations, you might expect a sporting penalty, but because it is not really clear what could be the effect on the race weekend, it is maybe bigger than that.

"I honestly don't know what should be the solution. Because there is no precedent, I have no idea what should happen."

Red Bull and Ferrari have accused Mercedes of breaking article 22.4 of the sporting regulations, which forbids in-season testing other than for a single three-day young driver test or for very limited straight-line aerodynamic tests.

Pirelli say they are allowed to ask teams to do up to 1,000km of testing, which was as much as Mercedes did over three days at the Circuit de Catalunya in the immediate aftermath of the Spanish Grand Prix, the race before Monaco.

But Red Bull and Ferrari say the rules state this must only be with a car that is at least two years old. Mercedes used their 2013 car.

Rival teams were not informed about the test, which not only involved Mercedes' 2013 car but also race drivers Nico Rosberg and Lewis Hamilton.

Rival teams are angry because extra testing could give Mercedes a technical advantage. Mercedes say they sought permission from the FIA, which approved the test.

Mercedes have been struggling with heavy tyre usage this season.

The tyres used were development designs for next season and a new tyre Pirelli wants to introduce at the Canadian Grand Prix, the next event after Monaco.

Pirelli is aiming to introduce rear tyres that are less vulnerable to delamination following a series of failures. But the plan is in dispute - Ferrari, Lotus and Force India have yet to approve it.

Red Bull team principal Christian Horner said he had only learnt about the test on Saturday night.

"I can understand Pirelli wanting to test the tyres," he said.

"What's disappointing is it's been done in not a transparent manner. A three-day test has taken place with a current car running on tyres that are going to be used in the next grand prix and irrelevant of what you call it, that's testing."

He added: "We need to deal with it through the proper channels so that's what we'll look at doing."

A Ferrari spokesman added: "Pirelli can offer to the teams the chance to do 1,000km of testing for tyre development and safety. But the fundamental aspect is the year of the car because if you use a current car it should be allegedly a breach of article 22.

"We want a clarification on this because if it is not against article 22 we would be interested in doing this."

Mercedes' test is the second tyre test conducted by Pirelli this season. The first was done by Ferrari between the Bahrain and Spanish Grands Prix but involved a 2011 car.

Insiders say Mercedes' tyre problems this year made it logical for Pirelli to use their car in assessing new tyres aimed at preventing failures.

 

[LTD]

Never heard Red Bull complain much about illegal floorpans, customised mappings outwith remit or flexiwings ....

 

[grober]

I reckon that the fairest thing will be to allow all the teams that protested the chance to duplicate the 1000km tests that Mercedes did = current car+ team drivers +the same anonymous development tyres for next year. But as I said in my previous post I suspect that not the real motivation behind the protest.