US Grand Prix

[Greg Phillips]

I don't think anyone was expecting the vibration from the flat spotted tire to break the suspension
I think Kimi felt the tire might go flat or slow him down so that Alonso would pass him, but not a catstrophic failure.
I think that a flat spotted tire was an inconvenience and not a safety issue and that changing a flat spotted tire was a performance enhancement rather than a safety choice.
After Kimi's problems, it is now OK to use the safety rule to change a flat spotted tire, but I am not so sure before that time.

Greg

[RickK]

Even before Kimi's accident I think it was okay to change the tire. I heard the race announcers talking why didn't he come in. Apparently Kimi complained to his team that the vibration was making it hard to see straight, too much shaking, but he wanted to tough it out.

[MikeD]

While the one tire for the race rule is (to quote MikeD) "stupid", it does not preclude teams from changing tires when one has been damaged or deemed unsafe. Kimi could have come in for a front right replacement tire but he and McClaren chose not to give up the lead.

Well, I didn't see or read the details about the cirsumstances surrounding the accident. But according to what was said this past weekend the FIA would have to rule on the tire being unsafe or damaged. And, according to what we know about the FIA it is very likely they would have DQed McLaren because (prior to this incident) under what circumstances would a flat-spot be unsafe?

[kary]

Even before Kimi's accident I think it was okay to change the tire. I heard the race announcers talking why didn't he come in. Apparently Kimi complained to his team that the vibration was making it hard to see straight, too much shaking, but he wanted to tough it out.

During that race, or another I do not recall, one team replaced a rear tire during the race because of some damage to it. The officials looked at it and ok'ed the change quickly.

I do not believe that the single set of tires rule was in play in this situation (Kimi) as the annoucers were basically asking why he did not come in. They were predicting the suspension would fail, it was just a matter of time. If the announcers are doing it I am sure the team knew. And if the team knew and they elected to keep him out there they were gambling he would make it and hold his position versus dropping back out of the points due to a pit stop to make the tire change.

Yes, the tire rule is STUPID, but I do not think it had anything to do with this incident, the team wanted more points, plain and simple.

[paul hastings]

They would have disqualified him. The comments I heard during the race was how ridiculous the one tire rule is and the danger Kimi was facing at the time. Looking at F1's history I am quite certain he would have been disqualified.

[David J Marguglio]

I'm with you Rick, I know these guys are racers, but it seemed pretty obvious from the in-car on previous laps that with rubber flapping around as the tire began to come apart coupled with a vibration so violent that Kimi complained over the radio of blurred vision might have been cause for a stop. But then again...he is getting paid a cool $1M Euros per race.

[Gary Burch]

Makes one wonder, if it had been a Bridgestone on a Ferrai, what the official decision would have been.

[Jad]

One factor if it had been the other way, the 14 cars would have been a good race, the 6 (2 fast and the 4 slowest) was pathetic.

Right-wrong real or political, both sides should have done whatever it took to have a real race, whether the rules allowed it or it was unfair to some, they should have put on a show and dealt with the rest on their dime, not the fans.

I have lost a lot of respect for both sides and believe the egos are more than show and marketing, they really believe they are better than the rest. Kinda funny how the 'great' F1 drivers (granted they only do OK in F1) go to other series like CART and continue to only do OK. They are no better than the others in general. If CART wanted to be faster than F1, 2 simple rules changes and it would be no contest, double boost and reduce the minimum weight by 500lbs and the CART cars would be much faster than the 'technology showcase' of F1. It is all within the rules as to how fast the car is, not the technology. Throw a turbo on a Minardi and see who wins races A few tweeks and the 1200 hp Porsches of the 70's and 80's could probably beat the current F1 cars if they had todays tire tech.

Get over the ego and realize, like NASCAR, you are just putting on a show for fans and sponsors, nothing more.

[paul hastings]

I do not agree with ok F1 drivers being ok Cart drivers. It's definitely a different level in F1. Alex Zanardi is probably the best example, not a very successful F1 driver to a great Cart driver back to not a successful F1 driver. Outstanding F1 drivers tend to have had their way with Cart, Nigel Mansell for example. I think there are more reasons for this then just driving skill. F1 is such a circus compared to racing in the USA.

I do agree the race should have been run for the fans and solve the problems later. However, auto racing in general and specifically F1 has so much money on the line with manufacturers and sponsers they really did have themselves in a tough way at the USGP. Unfortunately F1 will certainly be in trouble in the US unless they find someway to payback.

[MikeD]

For those that may be interested:

It is important for people to realise that Minardi, the seven Michelin teams, Bernie Ecclestone, and the promoters did not agree with Mr Mosley’s tactics. For the reasons previously outlined, it may take some considerable time, if ever, for this to be admitted, but there is no question in my mind that the farce that occurred on Sunday, June 19, 2005 at Indianapolis was the responsibility of the FIA President, Max Mosley, and compounded by the lack of support from Jean Todt.

http://www.minardi.it/press/dettaglio.a ... icatiTipo=

[MVZ944T]

On the other hand (other, other hand?), there was LeMans (LeeMo), where there was some great racing, a great finish (especially for Corvette (5th OA), and some great comraderie at the finish that is rearely seen in Formula 1. That's what racing should be about. Unfortunately I was not able to watch much of it. It will be interesting to see how Porsche fares in the P2 class later this year.

[ttweed]

Formula One will have it's hands full trying to make the series less costly for the teams.

You can check out the proposals for cost-cutting in F1 at this link:
http://www.speedtv.com/articles/auto/formulaone/17615/

These proposals were published on June 6, 2005, long before the tire debacle at Indy, and include going back to slicks with a spec tire.

TT

[ttweed]

They would have disqualified him. The comments I heard during the race was how ridiculous the one tire rule is and the danger Kimi was facing at the time. Looking at F1's history I am quite certain he would have been disqualified.

This is incorrect. They would have allowed him to change the tire for safety reasons. The damage to the tire was obvious, and other teams have been allowed the same this year, without disqualification. Kary is right, McLaren chose to take the risk for the win. They gambled and lost. It was nearly a tragic mistake, too, as Kimi came within a hairs-breadth of taking out Button's BAR when he spun. If he had contacted the other car, the crash would have been much more severe than it was.

TT

[Jad]

I think the difference is WHEN he changed the tire. At first, when it had a flat spot, they probably would have dq-ed him, but a couple laps later when it started separating and really vibrating the car, they would not have for sure. It clearly went from a flat spot to a safety issue in a couple laps, so I think you are both correct.

[Jad]

I do not agree with ok F1 drivers being ok Cart drivers. It's definitely a different level in F1. Alex Zanardi is probably the best example, not a very successful F1 driver to a great Cart driver back to not a successful F1 driver. Outstanding F1 drivers tend to have had their way with Cart, Nigel Mansell for example. I think there are more reasons for this then just driving skill. F1 is such a circus compared to racing in the USA.

I do agree the race should have been run for the fans and solve the problems later. However, auto racing in general and specifically F1 has so much money on the line with manufacturers and sponsers they really did have themselves in a tough way at the USGP. Unfortunately F1 will certainly be in trouble in the US unless they find someway to payback.

Paul, I disagree, most drivers like Justin Wilson and Salo were ok F1 drivers and ok CART drivers. The top 2-3 F1 drivers are certainly going to be top CART drivers as well. I think the level in the two series is pretty comparible. Hard to tell if Christiano was car or driver, but Montoya went from top CART to near top F1 (yes Michael is really good and would dominate either series) and I bet Sebastian B. could be near the top in F1 as well.