OTT: US Formula 1 race great for Ferarri, bad for Michelin

[Dave Eaton]

good to see the debate conducted in a cordial and constructive way.  i have
nothing more to add other than the following observation:

when max mosley raised concerns over the fast escalating pace of f1 last
year, and the implications on safety, he convened a meeting of the world
motorsports council to address it, one of the proposals was that there be a
single tyre supplier.  both bridgestone and michelin (naturally) voiced
their concerns at this.  michelin's suggestion to the proposal to for a
single tyre supplier?  you got it, a tyre to last qualifying and the race.
their press release after the wmsc makes interesting reading:

excerpt from
(http://www.michelinsport.com/sport/actualites/en/act_affich.jsp?news_id=131
70&lang=EN&codeRubrique=61&nomPage=Actuality%20F1)

"Michelin feels that its proposals are very much in line with the FIA's main
objectives for the future. These objectives are to control performances by
reducing cornering speeds for reasons of safety, to offer a very substantial
reduction in costs through the virtual elimination of tyre testing, and to
improve the racing spectacle without introducing artificial rules.

The proposals made by Michelin are:
. the use of one set of tyres for qualifying and the entire race;
. between four sets and two sets of dry tyres to be available for each
driver per weekend, available in one or two types;
. supply of same specification prime and same specification option for all
teams;
. six sets per team for each test day (with a recommendation for a drastic
reduction in testing during the F1 season, to be decided by either the Team
Principals or the FIA)"
-end quote

so the single tyre was michelin's idea to start with, and one might i add,
that has served them very very well this year as it has played on
bridgestones weakness with tyres that run at higher tyre temperatures (not
an issue when tyre changes were allowed, but certainly one when the tyre has
to last the whole gp - meaning they need to use harder compounds).

also, while i find it hard to resist the obvious irony of michelin's stated
desire to "to improve the racing spectacle without introducing artificial
rules" in the light of their suggestion precisely a year later to introduce
a chicane in turn 12 @indy, i won't....

personally, i think that, while michelin must accept the blame for the
technical failure, you cannot fault them for their behaviour during or after
the discovery i.e. identifying and owning up to the issue.  full marks.

where i point the finger of blame is the 7 michelin teams.  their failure to
find a suitable technical solution, and the charade of the parade lap
pointed out where their real objective lay - to point the finger at the fia
and attempt to make the fia the scapegoat.  that is the reason that they are
summoned to the fia to answer charges of bringing the sport into disrepute.
and that michelin isn't.

dave
'01 s8

-----Original Message-----
From: Brett Dikeman [mailto:brett at cloud9.net]
Sent: Wednesday, 22 June 2005 7:09 a.m.
To: Dave.Eaton at clear.net.nz
Cc: quattro at audifans.com
Subject: Re: OTT: US Formula 1 race great for Ferarri, bad for Michelin



On Jun 20, 2005, at 6:23 PM, Dave Eaton wrote:

> that is incorrect.  ferrari had no part in the decision not to
> proceed with
> a chicane.

All the teams agreed to the chicane except Ferrari, and all the
Michelin-equipped teams were willing to race for no points.  Either
"no points for anyone", or "no points of Michelin teams".

>   the decision was solely for the fia to make, as they run the
> series, and they made it.

It is widely argued that FIA management caters to Ferrari's whim,
because if Ferrari takes their blocks and plays elsewhere, F1 would
be in extremely deep dog food.  Regardless of Michelin's problem, FIA
had a responsibility to present an event, not piss off thousands of
ticketholders and millions of fans.