why does everyone say michelin is at fault here? | Page 2 | FerrariChat

why does everyone say michelin is at fault here?

Discussion in 'Other Racing' started by crazynova23, Jun 19, 2005.

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, Skimlinks, and others.

  1. TinaDK

    TinaDK F1 World Champ

    Jun 23, 2004
    11,823
    Denmark
    Full Name:
    Tina Poulsen
    That's my opinion too !!!! noone have heard Bridgestone complaint like that....
     
  2. Strasse

    Strasse Formula Junior

    Apr 12, 2004
    252
    Perth, Australia
    Full Name:
    Phil
    How about we leave the ignorant bigotry at home and focus on sporting debate here?

    Michelin is indeed at fault. The situation is fairly clear: they lacked the right compound for Indianapolis, making them professionally negligent. Not having the right tyre for the race, their preferred solution was to change the track itself. This was a ludicrous suggestion, and highly unfair to the Bridgestone teams who've struggled up to this point to make tyres that, as we all saw, easily coped with the Indianapolis track today.

    No one manufacturer must be allowed to bully the establishment for their own convenience. The issue Michelin have been purporting is driver safety, but it is also their responsibility to make sure their product is safe. Michelin offered two compounds for Indy; both were inadequate. And now the reputation of the sport has been hurt, as Frank Williams has said: 'perhaps irrevocably in the USA,' because of this unprofessionalism.

    Ultimately, we shall criticise the ridiculous rule changes that have occurred this year, and naturally the FIA. But at this moment, the fault lies with Michelin. The sad part is that Formula One is more 'festering pile of politics and bureaucracy' than sport these days, so the blame will keep bouncing back and forth between organisers, teams, the track itself, and ever the poor bastards who have nothing to do with this whole fracas. Throwing beer bottles at drivers, especially when they are on-track trying to put on what little show they could in the circumstances, is reprehensible.

    Likewise, much of the blame right now is being pinned on the organisers, the powers that be so to speak (at least this is the impression I got from the British telecast). While this whole fiasco could easily be chalked up as another moronic outcome of the FIA's absurd management of the 2005 season, the problem right now lies with Michelin. While buckling to the Michelin teams' pressure may have resulted in a full grid today, it would have set a horrible precedent and been unfair to the Bridgestone teams.

    Heck, I'm betting even Ferrari is going to cop some sh*t for this, someway, somehow. They always do.
     
  3. BMW.SauberF1Team

    BMW.SauberF1Team F1 World Champ

    Dec 4, 2004
    14,244
    I hope they leave Indy. Please please please please please move it to a waterfront city. Chicago streets would be BAD@SS imo!
     
  4. BMW.SauberF1Team

    BMW.SauberF1Team F1 World Champ

    Dec 4, 2004
    14,244
    Okay, we know there is risk in it. Heck, there's risk in anything you do. It's not IF THERE IS risk if you will do something, but HOW MUCH risk there is and how much you are ADVERSE to that risk. Here's an example. Say out of all the F1 Michelin drivers there's an inherent risk they know of 1% risk of crash for mechanical problems, but they're willing to go up to a 15% risk. Say that when tire failures come about, failure jumps to 50%, but the drivers won't race because it's past their limit of risk! Simple economics, this happens in the investment market all the time, are the returns worth the high risk? We know they want to race and take risks, but when the odds of crashing are high, people won't race.

    Would you get into a car that I guaranteed would burst into flames and crash at 250mph? I mean, c'mon, you want to race so you will take risks, but will you race that car?
     
  5. wax

    wax Five Time F1 World Champ
    Lifetime Rossa

    Jul 20, 2003
    51,457
    SFPD
    Full Name:
    Dirty Harry
    A] June 19, 2005 - June 20, 2004 = 364 days for Michelin to prepare for Indy.
    B] June 19, 2005 - June 20, 2004 = 1 day for Indy to prepare for Michelin.


    Confused?


    Hint: The Michelin Baby is alive and kicking... and screaming... and soiling it's rubber pants...
     
  6. Z0RR0

    Z0RR0 F1 Rookie

    Apr 11, 2004
    3,470
    Montreal, Canada
    Full Name:
    Julien
    Why didn't the drivers exchange their ******* for balls and actually drive? They're F1 racers, not accountants ... there is a risk, live with it!!! If you're too scared, lift off! If you can take the heat, go for it! I don't see any difference between a suspension arm breaking and a tire exploding. A failure that can happen.

    Today was a glorious day for motorsports.

    This being said, Michelin better get their act together. That didn't look very serious ... which is still nothing in comparison of how the rest of the day went. LMAO
     
  7. LSU348

    LSU348 Formula 3

    Dec 19, 2003
    1,047
    Sugar Land
    Full Name:
    Mike
    As I understood it had the chicane been added the race would not have been sanctioned. It would have been meaningless either way.

    This was a sorry day for F1; however, if Bridgestone has their tires up to Michelin's qualifying abilities now we have a new season on our hands (points wise). I am disgusted with Bichelin.

     
  8. BMW.SauberF1Team

    BMW.SauberF1Team F1 World Champ

    Dec 4, 2004
    14,244
    I guess you didn't read my post a couple above your's. The question is, if I gave you a race car and guaranteed it would catch on a fire and crash at 250mph, would you race it? Keep in mind you would be an F1 race driver in title contention.
     
  9. iceburns288

    iceburns288 Formula 3

    Jun 19, 2004
    2,116
    Bay Area, CA
    Full Name:
    Charles M.
    Oh no way, if it was fast I'd drive it everywhere and all the time. I just wouldn't go 250mph, the simple and easiest solution. The FIA recommended something similar...
     
  10. s_eric09

    s_eric09 Formula Junior

    Feb 7, 2004
    570
    SoCal
    Full Name:
    George
    AT THE END OF THE DAY, THE GUY WITH THE BEST EQUIPMENT AND TALENT WINS THE RACE.

    all the other stuff is just plain politics, what F1 is all about.
     
  11. RickDay246

    RickDay246 Karting

    Sep 10, 2004
    224
    San Diego
    Full Name:
    Rick Day
    Michelin wasn't there last year and doesn't have the same data Bridgestone has? C'mon. While I disagree with your viewpoint, I agree that the FIA could've done something better for the fans, such as saying the race goes on with a chicane, but Michelin cars don't get points.
     
  12. LSU348

    LSU348 Formula 3

    Dec 19, 2003
    1,047
    Sugar Land
    Full Name:
    Mike
    Supposedly Michael Schumacher did too...something about just drive slower. I forget the exact quote (that I hear second hand).
     
  13. ernie

    ernie Two Time F1 World Champ
    Lifetime Rossa Owner

    Nov 19, 2001
    22,574
    The Brickyard
    Full Name:
    The Bad Guy
    ABOSULUTLEY DISGUSTING AND DISPICABLE!!!!!!!!

    What a bunch of cry babys. OH, it was okay that the Bridgestone teams were having VERY bad luck with their tires, but as soon as the Michilin teams were have a problem we have to addapt to them. COMPLETE and TOTAL BULL****!!! What if Bridgestone had asked to have the race track altered? Then there would have been all sorts of complaining that Ferrari trying to control F1 in there favor. This is the lowest move I have EVER seen. I total agree 100% with the decision of the FIA not to change the track. There is no way any vendor sould control the layout of a track just because it does not favor their product. Complete SHAME on Michilin. I hope the FIA sues them for loss of revinue, and penalizes the teams that participated in the shameful act that took place today.
     
  14. PSk

    PSk F1 World Champ

    Nov 20, 2002
    17,673
    Tauranga, NZ
    Full Name:
    Pete
    Michelin are a risk taking company ... they simply pushed over the limit and the tyres failed. Thus as ALL their tyres were failing they had no choice but to pull out on safety grounds.

    Now why have Michelin been the best tyre so far this year?

    Because of this risk taking ... and why have Bridgestone been so hopeless for the first half of the season?

    Because they won't take as much of a risk!

    Brundle pointed out that a set of Bridgestone F1 tyres are 6kg's heavier than a set of Michelin!!! Think about how big an advantage that has been to Renault and McLaren over Ferrari on flat tracks.

    As I have said before competition forces thin safety factors ... Michelin just fncked up.

    This would have never happened if we just had a single tyre supplier ... and in 2006 I bet that will be what happens.

    What I cannot understand is why the FIA have allowed 2 tyre suppliers for so long ... and then continued to moan about safety and how F1 is too fast, and too expensive, etc. If you want to slow a race series down ... simply make it have to use a control tyre, the easiest and standard way all over the world. Think of the reduction in testing that would immediately bring.

    Indy was an embarrassment to the FIA far more than for Michelin IMO.
    Pete
     
  15. BMW.SauberF1Team

    BMW.SauberF1Team F1 World Champ

    Dec 4, 2004
    14,244
    You can't really use previous data for this year. With the one tire rule, tread has to last 200 miles, but not nearly as much last year. For Indy, the sidewalls also act as regular tread on the banking, but Michelin couldn't test the sidewalls on a track to see if they would last a race distance (they don't have data for Indy for 1 race set tires).
     
  16. PSk

    PSk F1 World Champ

    Nov 20, 2002
    17,673
    Tauranga, NZ
    Full Name:
    Pete
    True ... but Michelin could have made a really, really safe tyre if they wanted to.

    Remember they are not idiots and know an enormous amount about tyres. They could have sacrificed performance to ensure their tyres were safe.

    They didn't because they wanted to beat Bridgestone ... and if their tyres had just been strong enough they would have!

    Get back to a single control tyre ASAP!
    Pete
     
  17. 2000YELLOW360

    2000YELLOW360 F1 World Champ

    Jun 5, 2001
    19,800
    Full Name:
    Art
    The people that got screwed were the fans. Wanna bet that Tony George doesn't host next year's event? It's going to be a disaster spectator wise.

    Art
     
  18. PSk

    PSk F1 World Champ

    Nov 20, 2002
    17,673
    Tauranga, NZ
    Full Name:
    Pete
    I have to say that I am pleased that the teams are actually still in this sport for the sake of winning and did not bow down to putting on some sort of compromised race just for the fans.

    This is supposed to be real racing, etc. ... not just a show.

    It is up to the FIA to ensure the rules are right to guarantee that the spectators see racing ...
    Pete
     
  19. Z0RR0

    Z0RR0 F1 Rookie

    Apr 11, 2004
    3,470
    Montreal, Canada
    Full Name:
    Julien
    I'd drive 249mph. What's the difficulty of the concept?

    BTW, failure was not guaranteed, although quite likely to happen. There's a fine line here that anyone gutsy enough should have exploited. No one did. They're all ******* and that's it. Michelin messed up with tires that weren't strong enough ... but none of the drivers put their money on the table saying "f*ck that, I'm going for it". Yes, that's taking a serious risk, but that's their job.
     
  20. LetsJet

    LetsJet F1 Veteran
    Owner

    May 24, 2004
    9,334
    DC/LA/Paris/Haleiwa
    Full Name:
    Mr.
    why does everyone say michelin is at fault here?

    Michelin is at fault for not making a tire to withstand the track at Indy. They are not at fault for how the teams handled it.
     
  21. dretceterini

    dretceterini F1 Veteran

    Apr 28, 2004
    7,289
    Etceterini Land
    Full Name:
    Dr.Stuart Schaller

    Do you really think that if Ferrari said the chicane idea was OK, the FIA would have still made the same decision? Having a chicane wouldn't have hurt anyone, as NONE of the teams had their chassis set up for one, so they would have all been on equal footing.

    I don't see how allowing the Michelin shod teams just use a lesser performing but safer tire without a penalty for a tire change would have hurt the anyone either. At least there would have been a full field, and the Bridgestone teams would have still had a tire advantage.
     
  22. exoticalex

    exoticalex Formula Junior

    Mar 10, 2004
    422
    Walnut Creek, Ca
    Full Name:
    Alex L
    At this point in time, I place all the blame on the FIA. They are the governing body, and it is their DUTY to see that racing conditions are fair and safe. The FIA should of allowed the teams to swap tires.

    The fans are the ones who really got screwed today. I had plans to attend this years race, but things fell through the cracks.... and now Im almost glad I didnt make it to Indy.
     
  23. Turb0flat4

    Turb0flat4 Formula 3

    Mar 7, 2004
    1,244
    Singapore
    Full Name:
    RND

    Everyone who blames the drivers has forgotten one major thing - it's NOT the drivers' fault ! Racing is a team effort, and the decision to go out or not is certainly not the drivers' alone. Here, what likely happened is that the tire manufacturer washed their hands of the affair, and possibly even spooked the Michelin-using teams into not going out. It's in Michelin's interest that none of the Michelin teams go out there and have a spectacular tire failure with injury/death to an innocent driver. Because, bad as this farce was, I guarantee you that it would be a 100 % worse for us all, and especially for Michelin's image, if something like that had happened.

    So Michelin likely forced the issue, warning teams very strongly that they shouldn't go out there. So the teams had no choice but to issue orders to their drivers to come back into the paddocks. A driver can't just ignore orders because he can't race without the agreement of his team bosses. Withoutthe team's backing, who's going to service him in the pits ? If he crashes the multimillion dollar piece of equipment, can he afford to pay for it out of pocket ? Because it would be unfair to expect the team to cover the loss since they never agreed to the race.

    So please don't blame the driver. Blame the tire manufacturer at fault for not bothering to have a race ready tire, and blame the FIA for ridiculous rules about tire changing. But don't blame the drivers. It really isn't their call or their fault.
     
  24. dannebrog

    dannebrog Rookie

    May 11, 2005
    6
    Did Michelin screw up? Royally. Were the teams right not to race because it was unsafe? Definitely. Was the FIA right to stick to the rules? Perhaps, but it cut its nose off to spite its face and gave the high hard one to fans worldwide, especially those in what could eventually be F1's largest single market who by the way spent big bucks and took hard-earned time off to attend the race.

    I wouldn't be surprised if US fans put F1 out of business here for good. Oh, and how about those sponsors that just lost a bazillion impressions on thier catrillion-dollar investments?

    The blame lies equally with the teams, Michelin, the FIA and Bernie who, despite a ton of supposed brain power, could not figure out it was the fans - the ones that pay their bills - who were going to get the shortest end of the stick. Morons.

    I hope the fans, the sponsors, the Brickyard and all others who had a vested interest in this embarassment file a class action lawsuit to send a message and get some justice. Let's see: 120,000 fans times x $1500 spent by each on hotels, food, tickets, flights, rental cars, merchandise = $180,000,000 out the window.

    And for all you lawyers out there, one third of that is $60,000,000. SICK 'EM!
     
  25. Cincy Ken

    Cincy Ken Karting

    Jan 24, 2004
    219
    Cincinnati
    Most of you on this racing forum are certainly way more knowledgeable than I am on these topics, so maybe it's just my ignorance. It seems to me that a big part of this problem is the LIMITATION ON NUMBER OF TIRES PER RACE WEEKEND. It seems that the race would have proceeded with all drivers had they been able to pit and change tires as needed. If the sport and teams really care most about driver safety, then this limitation should be revisited. Had this limitation not been in place, we likely would have had a real race and fan satisfaction rather than a Bridgestone test session with mostly angry fans.
     

Share This Page