GP2 Singapore

[Armco Bender]

Hopefully they will adress the tyre situation,its crazy that the winner of race one becomes a mobile chicane in race two.

[ace007]

Originally Posted by Armco Bender

Hopefully they will adress the tyre situation,its crazy that the winner of race one becomes a mobile chicane in race two.

This happens if the team uses two times the harder compounds in order to avoid risking premature degradation. Carlin did it in Singapore, Russian time did it in Monaco!

[cappra250]

This tyre situation is a joke at this level. You don't know if the one that wins the feature race is in fact the fastest driver. Because sometimes to use prime-prime strategy is much faster than to use both compounds. They have to address this. Only for safety issues has to be changed. On Sunday there was too much difference in pace between drivers who were on new or used tyres.

[ace007]

Originally Posted by cappra250

This tyre situation is a joke at this level. You don't know if the one that wins the feature race is in fact the fastest driver. Because sometimes to use prime-prime strategy is much faster than to use both compounds. They have to address this. Only for safety issues has to be changed. On Sunday there was too much difference in pace between drivers who were on new or used tyres.

It is a bit extreme, true. But it also depends on the track. For example, in Spa, it worked well for many teams. In Singapore, they chose soft and super soft which is really weird if you consider the heat and humidity... Some inconsistency in the tyre choice from Pirelli if you ask me...

[bella]

Originally Posted by ace007

This happens if the team uses two times the harder compounds in order to avoid risking premature degradation.

like the others, it really bothers me that this is something the teams have to consider. are they there to race or just bimble around??

i have to agree with cappra250. but that's from my biased viewpoint, which is that gp2 is no longer anything to do with any form of "ladder" to f1, it's one spec f1 with all the relevant special features (crap tyres, poor stewarding) for those who can't afford a f1 drive but whose fathers don't want them anywhere near the family company yet.

[ace007]

Originally Posted by bella

like the others, it really bothers me that this is something the teams have to consider. are they there to race or just bimble around??

i have to agree with cappra250. but that's from my biased viewpoint, which is that gp2 is no longer anything to do with any form of "ladder" to f1, it's one spec f1 with all the relevant special features (crap tyres, poor stewarding) for those who can't afford a f1 drive but whose fathers don't want them anywhere near the family company yet.

Waooo that's insulting enough! Surprising to say the least coming from you. But WSR is better with an average budget of 1.2M per driver?

And if none are good enough, where do you get your drivers?

[bella]

i never said anything about whether the drivers were good enough or not, they just don't have the money to buy into f1 (or yeah, also the talent in a number of cases).

formula renault 3.5 is obviously a decent amount cheaper for an average drive. more tracktime, far better stewarding, the tyres are a constant and not an uncontrollable variable. the circuits are just as good, though i'm not convinced about swapping out barcelona for jerez and moscow is more for the drivers than the spectators.

i don't think an average drive in 3.5 is 1.2 million. it can be done for less if you don't insist on a full rebuild after every event to try and combat spurious car problems.

but they're two different products for two different markets. my point is that the market for gp2 has shifted a long way from what it used to be.

[ace007]

Originally Posted by bella

but they're two different products for two different markets. my point is that the market for gp2 has shifted a long way from what it used to be.

Stewarding has always been peculiar indeed. But to say it is not what it used to be, it reminds me of nostalgic people who do not give credit to the present.

It is harder today than it was in 2005 or 2006. Why? Because you are fighting against drivers who have 4 or even 5 seasons under their belt! That GP2 car is a beast that needs some accustoming to. Only a few cases did it in their first year like Hulkenberg who remains, with Hamilton, an example for me.

When Rosberg won it, they were all rookies... When Hamilton did it (1st year well done him!), he was against drivers with a year max of experience in that car.

Maldonado needed 4 years after 2 years of WSR if this is possible. Same story with Valsecchi! With all due respect, that is NOT impressive indeed. 6 years of big machinery!!

I like the WSR format better but I am not sure it prepares you well enough to deal with the F1 tyre which are, these days, very specific. The complaints I read here about managing tyres are correct but unfortunately it is what's needed in F1. Whoever manages the tyres better will be on the podium, which doesnt always suit Hamilton's driving style, obviously...

[Mekola]

It's a fact for me that the concept of GP2 is conceived was not coined in 2004 as we used to know, but in 1996. The one-make F3000 was the first intent to do this, when the concept exploded they reborn it as GP2 in 2005. Now we see some decline, but not as harsh as it was F3000 in 2002-04.

[bella]

Originally Posted by ace007

It is harder today than it was in 2005 or 2006. Why? Because you are fighting against drivers who have 4 or even 5 seasons under their belt! That GP2 car is a beast that needs some accustoming to. Only a few cases did it in their first year like Hulkenberg who remains, with Hamilton, an example for me.

it's a classic chicken and egg situation, isn't it? should drivers be faffing about in gp2 for 3 or 4 seasons? probably not, not if you consider its original purpose. but if they've got the money, why not? but then shouldn't everyone be in the same boat with the car? one of the side benefits of refreshing the car every few years is so that nobody can get an unfair advantage simply because they've been tooling around in it for 3 or 4 years. so... yeah.

Originally Posted by ace007

I like the WSR format better but I am not sure it prepares you well enough to deal with the F1 tyre which are, these days, very specific. The complaints I read here about managing tyres are correct but unfortunately it is what's needed in F1. Whoever manages the tyres better will be on the podium, which doesnt always suit Hamilton's driving style, obviously...

i don't think anything bar actually running on the f1 tyre can prepare you for that nowadays. and even then they change the tyres quite considerably at least once a season at the moment. isn't the point in gp2 really to showcase talent? how can you do that when they're too busy learning how to use bipolar tyres, and compramising up to 50% of the races they get to compete in? for me there's a really significant clash there, and the fact that relatively few teams choose to stable a third driver in gp2 backs that up. for a f1 team arguably it's better to have the lad integrate into the working environment at every f1 race and learn *that* side of the step up. minimise the off-track aspects of adapting to f1 and leave the on-track ones to pre-season testing and learning as they go along.

i know what you're saying about the tyres, and as a standalone arguement i'd totally be with you but the problem is that it conflicts with the idea that young drivers will go from there into f1 and that it's a showcase for young talent for f1 teams to pick from. for me that invalidates both sides of it, you know? that's why i say it's just a spec-f1 for the guys who are lucky enough to be able to afford it for x number of years.