F1 tyre supplier up for grabs.

[Andy B]

It seems Bridgestone are throwing their hat into the F1 ring but is this to replace Pirelli or to compete against them which is nothing new and would I think add some spice to the racing.

https://www.planetf1.com/news/bridgestone-rival-pirelli-f1-tyre-tender-report/

[Jericoke]

I would assume it's to be the single supplier.

For the longest time I thought that having multiple suppliers would make the sport more interesting, but like everything else in F1, if one competitor becomes too strong compared to the others, it makes things less interesting.  I think having multiple compounds per race, from the same supplier, adds just enough spice to the show without risking a two tiered grid where half the cars have the 'wrong' tires for a whole season.

[Dare]

I would assume it's to be the single supplier.

For the longest time I thought that having multiple suppliers would make the sport more interesting, but like everything else in F1, if one competitor becomes too strong compared to the others, it makes things less interesting.  I think having multiple compounds per race, from the same supplier, adds just enough spice to the show without risking a two tiered grid where half the cars have the 'wrong' tires for a whole season.

Jeri where you live are you being affected by the smoke?

[Jericoke]

I would assume it's to be the single supplier.

For the longest time I thought that having multiple suppliers would make the sport more interesting, but like everything else in F1, if one competitor becomes too strong compared to the others, it makes things less interesting.  I think having multiple compounds per race, from the same supplier, adds just enough spice to the show without risking a two tiered grid where half the cars have the 'wrong' tires for a whole season.

Jeri where you live are you being affected by the smoke?

We've had smog advisories where I am.  The sky is hazy, but nothing like the nightmare pictures from New York and Ottawa

[Monty]

I think it can only be one supplier. They are forced to make tyres to meet the FIA requirements so two manufacturers could not compete.

[Willy]

I like the idea of two tire manufacturers in theory but if we recall the fiasco that was Indianapolis a while back, maybe it's not such a great idea.

[rmassart]

I really don't care about the tires. What I would like though is to get rid of the tyre rule where you must use at least 2 different tyre types. We now have the budget cap. I assume this includes the tires. So if a team wants to save a few bob by running one tyre all race, why can't they? If soft tires were designed to last about a third of the race, mediums two thirds and hards a full race then teams could choose their own strategy as appropriate. I am sure in Monaco everyone would put on the hards!

In fact if a team decided to only run hards all season, they would not need the pit stop team at all. Further savings they could invest elsewhere! With the budget cap there are so many rules which now don't make sense anymore.

[Andy B]

I think F1 has too many rules and it should be more open!

[Jericoke]

I really don't care about the tires. What I would like though is to get rid of the tyre rule where you must use at least 2 different tyre types. We now have the budget cap. I assume this includes the tires. So if a team wants to save a few bob by running one tyre all race, why can't they? If soft tires were designed to last about a third of the race, mediums two thirds and hards a full race then teams could choose their own strategy as appropriate. I am sure in Monaco everyone would put on the hards!

In fact if a team decided to only run hards all season, they would not need the pit stop team at all. Further savings they could invest elsewhere! With the budget cap there are so many rules which now don't make sense anymore.

I wonder if the tire contract is just a flat fee, or if the teams pay by the tire (set)

Do you get a discount if your wreck your car on turn one of free practice one and can't get it ready for the rest of the weekend?

I would imagine it's a flat fee, otherwise the tire supplier is stuck bringing a million tires to every race that they might not get paid for.  Even for a multibillion dollar company, that perception of wastefulness is going to be a consideration.

In the Bridgestone era they did have full race distance tire compounds, so it's not impossible.  Someone somewhere believes that pitstops are an integral part of the sport.  Either to spice things up, or to put the tire supplier in the discussion.  Probably both.

What I do miss is teams being able to order a custom allotment for the weekend.  Although that usually meant that one (or more) team(s) ordered the wrong allotment and just didn't do very well.

[John S]

I really don't care about the tires. What I would like though is to get rid of the tyre rule where you must use at least 2 different tyre types. We now have the budget cap. I assume this includes the tires. So if a team wants to save a few bob by running one tyre all race, why can't they? If soft tires were designed to last about a third of the race, mediums two thirds and hards a full race then teams could choose their own strategy as appropriate. I am sure in Monaco everyone would put on the hards!

In fact if a team decided to only run hards all season, they would not need the pit stop team at all. Further savings they could invest elsewhere! With the budget cap there are so many rules which now don't make sense anymore.

Taking away the mandatory pit stop will make many races DRS train borefests, and take away strategy choices at most others. 

It could also kill off suprise wins/podiums by midfielders who luck into a beneficial safety car.