SPEED: F1 at Indy; Driver Stand-Off
Senior Member
Joined: Jan 1999
Posts: 1,327
Likes: 2
From: OK
Of course, that FIA press release is just ONE side of the story.
I watched the F1 "race" (Tivo'd NASCAR
) and can't remember anyone but the FIA ever saying that the second set of tires were also unsafe.
Basically, it comes down to the teams blaming FIA, the FIA blaming Michelin and F1 in the US going down the toilet faster than cars in turn 13.
I watched the F1 "race" (Tivo'd NASCAR
) and can't remember anyone but the FIA ever saying that the second set of tires were also unsafe.Basically, it comes down to the teams blaming FIA, the FIA blaming Michelin and F1 in the US going down the toilet faster than cars in turn 13.
Senior Member
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 528
Likes: 0
From: Indy
Originally Posted by MnFatz
This is all about Michelin being sore losers. The FIA and Indy aren't to blame for anything. I think many of you will change your mind after reading this press release. Personally, I think the teams that drove off should be banned for the rest of the season.
Here's the statement from FIA (www.fia.com)
2005 UNITED STATES GRAND PRIX
20.06.2005
Formula One is a sporting contest. It must operate to clear rules. These cannot be negotiated each time a competitor brings the wrong equipment to a race.
At Indianapolis we were told by Michelin that their tyres would be unsafe unless their cars were slowed in the main corner. We understood and among other suggestions offered to help them by monitoring speeds and penalising any excess. However, the Michelin teams refused to agree unless the Bridgestone runners were slowed by the same amount. They suggested a chicane.
The Michelin teams seemed unable to understand that this would have been grossly unfair as well as contrary to the rules. The Bridgestone teams had suitable tyres. They did not need to slow down. The Michelin teams’ lack of speed through turn 13 would have been a direct result of inferior equipment, as often happens in Formula One. It must also be remembered that the FIA wrote to all of the teams and both tyre manufacturers on June 1, 2005, to emphasise that “tyres should be built to be reliable under all circumstances” (see correspondence attached).
A chicane would have forced all cars, including those with tyres optimised for high-speed, to run on a circuit whose characteristics had changed fundamentally – from ultra-high speed (because of turn 13) to very slow and twisting. It would also have involved changing the circuit without following any of the modern safety procedures, possibly with implications for the cars and their brakes. It is not difficult to imagine the reaction of an American court had there been an accident (whatever its cause) with the FIA having to admit it had failed to follow its own rules and safety procedures.
The reason for this debacle is clear. Each team is allowed to bring two types of tyre: one an on-the-limit potential race winner, the other a back-up which, although slower, is absolutely reliable. Apparently, none of the Michelin teams brought a back-up to Indianapolis. They subsequently announced they were flying in new tyres from France but then claimed that these too were unsafe.
What about the American fans? What about Formula One fans world-wide? Rather than boycott the race the Michelin teams should have agreed to run at reduced speed in turn 13. The rules would have been kept, they would have earned Championship points and the fans would have had a race. As it is, by refusing to run unless the FIA broke the rules and handicapped the Bridgestone runners, they have damaged themselves and the sport.
It should also be made clear that Formula One Management and Indianapolis Motor Speedway, as commercial entities, can have no role in the enforcement of the rules.
Here's the statement from FIA (www.fia.com)
2005 UNITED STATES GRAND PRIX
20.06.2005
Formula One is a sporting contest. It must operate to clear rules. These cannot be negotiated each time a competitor brings the wrong equipment to a race.
At Indianapolis we were told by Michelin that their tyres would be unsafe unless their cars were slowed in the main corner. We understood and among other suggestions offered to help them by monitoring speeds and penalising any excess. However, the Michelin teams refused to agree unless the Bridgestone runners were slowed by the same amount. They suggested a chicane.
The Michelin teams seemed unable to understand that this would have been grossly unfair as well as contrary to the rules. The Bridgestone teams had suitable tyres. They did not need to slow down. The Michelin teams’ lack of speed through turn 13 would have been a direct result of inferior equipment, as often happens in Formula One. It must also be remembered that the FIA wrote to all of the teams and both tyre manufacturers on June 1, 2005, to emphasise that “tyres should be built to be reliable under all circumstances” (see correspondence attached).
A chicane would have forced all cars, including those with tyres optimised for high-speed, to run on a circuit whose characteristics had changed fundamentally – from ultra-high speed (because of turn 13) to very slow and twisting. It would also have involved changing the circuit without following any of the modern safety procedures, possibly with implications for the cars and their brakes. It is not difficult to imagine the reaction of an American court had there been an accident (whatever its cause) with the FIA having to admit it had failed to follow its own rules and safety procedures.
The reason for this debacle is clear. Each team is allowed to bring two types of tyre: one an on-the-limit potential race winner, the other a back-up which, although slower, is absolutely reliable. Apparently, none of the Michelin teams brought a back-up to Indianapolis. They subsequently announced they were flying in new tyres from France but then claimed that these too were unsafe.
What about the American fans? What about Formula One fans world-wide? Rather than boycott the race the Michelin teams should have agreed to run at reduced speed in turn 13. The rules would have been kept, they would have earned Championship points and the fans would have had a race. As it is, by refusing to run unless the FIA broke the rules and handicapped the Bridgestone runners, they have damaged themselves and the sport.
It should also be made clear that Formula One Management and Indianapolis Motor Speedway, as commercial entities, can have no role in the enforcement of the rules.
FIA a failed as the sanctioning body to provide direction in the interest of safety and for the good of the sport. IMS was willing to do anything to provide a world class event. IMS was willing to alter the course or delay the race. FIA cowtoed to Ferrari and disgraced the fans, sponsors, IMS, Indianapolis, and the United States by doing so.
When CART had a problem at Texas a few years ago, they cancelled the event in the interest of driver safety - but the fans were refunded their money. NASCAR is constantly making rule changes in the interest of safety on a moments notice. The IRL does the same thing. FIA was an embarassment yesterday in their lack of implementing their authority on the series.
I do not fault Michellin for telling their drivers not to run in the interest of safety. They made a wise decision by acknowleding safety is more important than saving face; however, I do fault them for bringing a product that was not able to stand up to the known rigors of the track.
Senior Member
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 528
Likes: 0
From: Indy
Originally Posted by dlb
This is one thing NA$CAR does right -- 1 tire manufacturer. Why have tire wars and compromise safety? 
Also, BFGoodrich (who is owned by Michellin) has expressed interest in running NASCAR in the near future.
Senior Member
Joined: Jul 2003
Posts: 174
Likes: 0
From: So Cal
I'm a huge race fan of anything. My fav is NHRA. For those who watch that, ever see the guy on the safety safari at the end of the track who pulls the drivers out of the car? He's wearing the blue suit, white helmet and purple visor. He's a friend of mine. His name is Donie Butts. Only reason I add that is because he owns a totally cool built 1997 Blown Ford F150 4x4.
As a race fan, I tend to watch IRL and Cart more than F1, but still....I think it's ashame they couldn't have worked all that out before the race. Those guys run days of practice and qualifying and they should have had all the kinks worked out by race day.
As a race fan, I tend to watch IRL and Cart more than F1, but still....I think it's ashame they couldn't have worked all that out before the race. Those guys run days of practice and qualifying and they should have had all the kinks worked out by race day.
Senior Member
Joined: Aug 2003
Posts: 1,921
Likes: 0
From: Susquehanna Valley, pa.
^^^^^
I know someone who works on Larry Dixons pit crew. I go to Maple Grove and Indy every year and sometimes out to Englishtown. I have some cool Larry Dixon parts from his car.
I know someone who works on Larry Dixons pit crew. I go to Maple Grove and Indy every year and sometimes out to Englishtown. I have some cool Larry Dixon parts from his car.
Senior Member
Joined: May 2005
Posts: 706
Likes: 0
From: Arkansas
The first F1 race I watched was the one before this incident and I am hooked 
. I like it alot more than nascar but I never was a very big nascar fan to begin with. I will be watching all of these races from now on.
. I like it alot more than nascar but I never was a very big nascar fan to begin with. I will be watching all of these races from now on.
Thread Starter
|
Senior Member
Joined: Oct 2002
Posts: 2,363
Likes: 0
From: Titusville, FL
Originally Posted by The professor
The first F1 race I watched was the one before this incident and I am hooked . I like it alot more than nascar but I never was a very big nascar fan to begin with. I will be watching all of these races from now on.
. I like it alot more than nascar but I never was a very big nascar fan to begin with. I will be watching all of these races from now on.with Gilligan, the Skipper too,
the Millionaire, and his Wife,
the Movie Star, the Professor and Mary Ann,
here on Gilligan's Isle.
Sorry, I had to.
Senior Member
Joined: Mar 2000
Posts: 140
Likes: 0
From: Durham, NC USA
Originally Posted by 36fan
NASCAR had a problem in the early 90s when Hoosier and Goodyear ran. This was the same time Ernie Irvan had his wreck at Michigan (where, ironically NASCAR ran yesterday) and nearly died. Shortly after his wreck Hoosier pulled out.
Also, BFGoodrich (who is owned by Michellin) has expressed interest in running NASCAR in the near future.
Also, BFGoodrich (who is owned by Michellin) has expressed interest in running NASCAR in the near future.
Goodyear has been a stalwart on the NASCAR tours for decades, but rumblings are getting stronger that NASCAR is considering a major change in its tire-supplier contract.
Michelin is rumored to be in line for the exclusive deal in the next year or two.
NASCAR people are still talking about Goodyear running out of tires for last year's 24 Hours of Daytona, a faux pas that was probably a key in the France family's switching to Hoosiers for this year's 24 Hours.
Michelin is rumored to be in line for the exclusive deal in the next year or two.
NASCAR people are still talking about Goodyear running out of tires for last year's 24 Hours of Daytona, a faux pas that was probably a key in the France family's switching to Hoosiers for this year's 24 Hours.
http://http://www.journalnow.com/ser...=1037645509200
Senior Member
Joined: Nov 2004
Posts: 135
Likes: 0
From: Chicago
Originally Posted by 36fan
I've already read the press releases from FIA, Michellin, and IMS. FIA is not taking resposnibility as the rulemaker. They have a responsibility to the fans, the drivers, the owners, and the sponsors. They let Ferrari run the show yesterday. Ferrari is having a bad year and they saw this a chance to make up points. All they did was hurt the sport yesterday.
FIA a failed as the sanctioning body to provide direction in the interest of safety and for the good of the sport. IMS was willing to do anything to provide a world class event. IMS was willing to alter the course or delay the race. FIA cowtoed to Ferrari and disgraced the fans, sponsors, IMS, Indianapolis, and the United States by doing so.
When CART had a problem at Texas a few years ago, they cancelled the event in the interest of driver safety - but the fans were refunded their money. NASCAR is constantly making rule changes in the interest of safety on a moments notice. The IRL does the same thing. FIA was an embarassment yesterday in their lack of implementing their authority on the series.
I do not fault Michellin for telling their drivers not to run in the interest of safety. They made a wise decision by acknowleding safety is more important than saving face; however, I do fault them for bringing a product that was not able to stand up to the known rigors of the track.
FIA a failed as the sanctioning body to provide direction in the interest of safety and for the good of the sport. IMS was willing to do anything to provide a world class event. IMS was willing to alter the course or delay the race. FIA cowtoed to Ferrari and disgraced the fans, sponsors, IMS, Indianapolis, and the United States by doing so.
When CART had a problem at Texas a few years ago, they cancelled the event in the interest of driver safety - but the fans were refunded their money. NASCAR is constantly making rule changes in the interest of safety on a moments notice. The IRL does the same thing. FIA was an embarassment yesterday in their lack of implementing their authority on the series.
I do not fault Michellin for telling their drivers not to run in the interest of safety. They made a wise decision by acknowleding safety is more important than saving face; however, I do fault them for bringing a product that was not able to stand up to the known rigors of the track.
Honestly, the more I think about it, I really can't believe I'm even having this argument in an automotive forum of all places. These are the same lame excuses you'll hear out of every poor sport at a drag race. What do you want next? A rule requiring John Force to pull a plug wire before each run?
Any competitor in any motorsport will tell you the same thing when you make excuses for losing:
Ya run what'cha brung.
If nothing else, you've got the beginnings of an excellent 'excuses' tshirt!
-Fatz
Senior Member
Joined: Aug 2003
Posts: 1,921
Likes: 0
From: Susquehanna Valley, pa.
Originally Posted by MnFatz
Ya run what'cha brung.
Technical Article Contributor
Joined: May 2004
Posts: 6,509
Likes: 6
From: Georgia on my mind...
Originally Posted by MnFatz
Ya run what'cha brung.
A friend of mine has been gloating all week about Schuey's win...big whoop, it was in a field of six cars.
Senior Member
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 528
Likes: 0
From: Indy
Originally Posted by MnFatz
What you (and others) aren't understanding is 6 teams were ready to roll. They didn't have a single problem with anything. They didn't want rule changes, they didn't want track changes; they wanted to run the race they prepared for.
Honestly, the more I think about it, I really can't believe I'm even having this argument in an automotive forum of all places. These are the same lame excuses you'll hear out of every poor sport at a drag race. What do you want next? A rule requiring John Force to pull a plug wire before each run?
Any competitor in any motorsport will tell you the same thing when you make excuses for losing:
Ya run what'cha brung.
If nothing else, you've got the beginnings of an excellent 'excuses' tshirt!
-Fatz
Honestly, the more I think about it, I really can't believe I'm even having this argument in an automotive forum of all places. These are the same lame excuses you'll hear out of every poor sport at a drag race. What do you want next? A rule requiring John Force to pull a plug wire before each run?
Any competitor in any motorsport will tell you the same thing when you make excuses for losing:
Ya run what'cha brung.
If nothing else, you've got the beginnings of an excellent 'excuses' tshirt!
-Fatz
But what you aren't understanding is that 100,000+ people that paid money and came in from all over the world got screwed because the tires were unsafe. These teams were willing to run for no points, but that wasn't acceptable. They were willing to take penalties and run the race, that wasn't acceptable. FIA has a rule that you run the entire race on the tires you qualify on and they weren't going to do anything about it.
If you hadn't heard, the fans were so pissed off about, 24 deputies were brought in riot gear to surround the pagoda. Luckily nothing happened and a riot didn't break out - but it easily could have.
Oh, and the other 2 teams that ran were willing to compromise and have a race - Ferrari wasn't.
Last edited by 36fan; Jun 21, 2005 at 11:38 PM.
Senior Member
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 207
Likes: 0
From: 49 45' 40.76"N 119 10' 12.84"W Sol III ᐰ
here is an inside account of what went down prior to the race, written by Minardi boss Paul Stoddart. It's kind of long, but worth reading...
http://www.planet-f1.com/features/ra...ry_20035.shtml
regards
http://www.planet-f1.com/features/ra...ry_20035.shtml
regards