F1asco: Thanks to politics and Michelin’s inability to supply safe tires, the
2005 U.S.G.P. turned out to be a farce

NIGEL ROEBUCK
Published Date: 6/20/05

Michael Schumacher won the U.S. Grand Prix, as he almost always does. Rubens Barrichello made it a Ferrari 1-2 finish with nothing very new about that, either. But the result, as Ferrari boss Jean Todt said, was achieved, “Under very unusual circumstances. To put it in boxing terms,” Ferrari’s general manager went on, “Ferrari and Bridgestone won with a technical knock-out.”

No argument there. On the podium with Schumacher and Barrichello was Jordan’s Tiago Monteiro, followed in by his teammate Narain Karthikeyan, then the Minardis of Christian Albers and Patrick Friesacher.

There were only six finishers.

The problem was, of course, that there had only been six starters. At the end of the formation lap, 14 cars, all of them on Michelin tires, peeled off into the pit lane. Engines were shut down and the cars pushed into their respective garages. McLaren’s Juan Montoya sat in tears; this was as good as a home race for the Colombian, as thousands of native fans traveled to cheer on their idol (each having paid at least $100 per person just to enter the Speedway grounds). Only now had they begun to understand they had wasted time and money at the sixth USGP in Indianapolis.

Briefly, the fans were so stunned at the sight of only six cars on the grid that there was no discernible reaction. Then they got the message. Not surprisingly, they showed their wrath, some mildly with a thumbs-down, a few more overtly by throwing plastic bottles; on lap six, Barrichello ran over one, without damage to his tires.


Michael Schumacher and Rubens Barrichello tried to put on a good show by battling hard against each other during the race. The Jordan and Minardi teams also raced and like Ferrari, use Bridgestone tires.

The whole weekend was about tires. On Friday afternoon, as he did last year, Ralf Schumacher had a sizeable accident at the last corner, turn 13, the only corner on the Speedway’s oval (Turn One). Twelve months ago, Schumacher was seriously injured, and it was fortunate that in the interim the SAFER barrier had been extended to include the section he hit once more.

Apparently unhurt this time, he later complained of a pain in his eyes and was declared unfit to race; his place in the Toyota team was filled by test driver Ricardo Zonta, who himself had an accident shortly before Schumacher.

In both cases, the cause was tire failure. The seeds of what followed were sown in a statement by Michelin executives, the gist of which was that they acknowledged their tires had failed but they didn’t yet know why.

That wasn’t the end of the drama. Some Michelin runners—including Renault and Williams—reported no tire problems whatever. Still, all together there were eight failures, not two. On the Toyotas the tires actually blew; on the other cars, including Pedro de la Rosa’s McLaren, they were about to.


Fans were plenty ticked off about what happened.

By Saturday the picture was getting bleaker. All the Michelin teams took part in the day’s on-track activities, and McLaren’s Montoya and Kimi Raikkonen looked the class of the field, but word emerged that the two were running substantially higher pressures than normal. This, of course, took away grip in the tight infield section, but was considered essential for safety through the high-speed section.

There were suggestions that, in the search for slow corner grip, Toyota had run tire pressures lower than those recommended by Michelin, but the team adamantly denied this. A Michelin statement issued Saturday made it clear there was a major problem with their tires: “Despite all the checks that we’ve done, both here and in our test facilities in Clermont-Ferrand, we have not been able to understand or reproduce the problem of yesterday.”

So, would the Michelin-shod cars compete or not? They turned out for qualifying and even compromised by higher-than-normal pressures, set the pace. Was there a clue at the post-qualifying press conference? Toyota took its first F1 pole with Trulli narrowly beating Raikkonen, but afterward Trulli’s mood was hardly that of a man who couldn’t wait to race tomorrow: rather, he sounded like a man who suspected he was through for the weekend. Indeed: his car had qualified with about a pint of fuel in it.

Late on Saturday afternoon all kinds of solutions were sought. One proposal: A speed limit—we’re serious—of 280kph through the final turn (to be achieved, and monitored, how?). Other ideas included some sort of race held behind the Safety Car. More seriously was an idea to install a chicane before the final turn.


The boos rained down on, from left, second-place Rubens Barrichello, race winner Michael Schumacher and unlikely third-place finisher Tiago Monteiro during the podium ceremony.

This last plan was requested by Michelin, with the agreement of nine of the 10 teams—Ferrari cast the nay vote. “In total agreement with our partner teams, we have asked the FIA that a chicane, allowing the reduction of car speed, be installed at the entrance to the oval.”

For at least a while this looked to be a done a deal. As David Coulthard said, when he left the track Saturday for his hotel, he understood a chicane would be in place and there would be a race.

Not a bit of it. “The chicane idea was rejected by FIA president Max Mosley,” Minardi team boss Paul Stoddart said. “In no uncertain terms the teams were told that, should this occur, there would be no race.”

Mosley is a keen proponent of the one-tire, one-manufacturer rule in F1. This debacle will not weaken his case.

Ferrari was not keen on the chicane idea and you could understand that. Like Jordan and Minardi, the other Bridgestone runners, they suffered not the slightest tire problems in practice and failed to see why Michelin, having erred so badly, should be indulged.

Still, there was a greater issue at stake. After years of trying to sell itself to the United States consumers—potentially its biggest market—F1 had a collective responsibility to ensure its audience got what it had paid for: a race. And if, as a temporary salve, that had meant the installation of a chicane, all parties should have bitten the bullet. Like the man said, there comes a time when you have to set aside principle, and simply do what’s right.


Formula One czar Bernie Ecclestone, left, and Renault team honcho Flavio Briatore talk just before the race. Renault was among the Michelin-shod teams that decided not to race.

Either recognizing there is a chance to make lemonade from lemons, or willing to “do what’s right” for race fans, (or, dare we say, as an olive branch extended to the George family), Champ Car is making an extraordinary statement by honoring U.S. Grand Prix tickets at its Cleveland race June 26.

After the race, Schumacher talked about the weekend, and pointed the finger at Michelin. “We have left behind tires with better performance, but less durability,” he said, in reference to Bridgestone, “so, frankly, it’s nothing to do with us.”

Perhaps not. Undoubtedly, the root of the problem lay with Michelin. Its choice of compound for Indianapolis had been too marginal. But with a little goodwill, with some cooperation from a variety of sources, the problem could have been righted. As it was every suggested solution was rejected.

Stoddart spoke for many on Sunday afternoon. “Our sincere apologies go out to race fans, both here at Indianapolis, and indeed around the world, for the farce that took place here today. This really was a time when F1 needed to put sport above politics, but sadly this did not occur. A solution which would have allowed the U.S. Grand Prix to have proceeded unaffected today existed, but was resisted by the FIA, and not supported by Ferrari, who claimed it was not their problem.”


Michelin tire failures during Friday's testing led to Sunday's drastic actions.

Tony George’s response was restrained, but to the point. “The Indianapolis Motor Speedway shares in the disappointment of the loyal fans of IMS and F1 that we did not see the exciting race we all anticipated, due to circumstances beyond our control. The FIA, F1, the constructors and manufacturers that represent the cars on the grid made decisions on an individual basis to limit participation in today’s USGP. We suggest the fans who wish to make their feelings known, contact the following”—and there followed the addresses and websites of Michelin, the FIA, and Formula One Management.

Joie Chitwood, president and CEO of the IMS, was clearly an angry man as he answered questions. Was there any question of voiding the contract for the Grand Prix? “It’s premature to be discussing that right now,” he said. “What occurred today was something we were not prepared for. We invested a lot of time and effort in preparing this property for a world-class racing event. The inability to have control over the actions today...to say it’s a disappointment is an understatement.”

It was indeed black Sunday, and no one accepted responsibility. Shortly after the race was official (two laps in), drivers were seen jogging to the exits to avoid embarrassment or spectator ire. With 20 laps to go, F1 honcho Bernie Ecclestone high-tailed it to his private jet. Even the George family, scheduled to hand out the winners’ hardware, avoided the scheduled post-race celebration.

As the fans who had stayed to the end, some disgruntled, some livid, began to make their way home, someone remarked that F1 had shot itself in the foot. In terms of America, it seemed more that it had drawn a blade across its throat.


Fans were plenty ticked off about what happened.

Perhaps the biggest surprise was that this was a crisis Ecclestone couldn’t solve, perhaps proof of changing times in this F1 business. If the F1 powers had a grain of sense it would offer to race for nothing at Indianapolis in 2006.

It won’t, of course, but it should.

RACE RESULTS:

Indianapolis Motor Speedway
2.605-mile road course
June 19

1. Michael Schumacher, Ferrari, 73 laps at 127.162 mph avg. speed; 2. Rubens Barrichello, Ferrari, 73; 3. Tiago Monteiro, Jordan-Toyota, 72; 4. Narain Karthikeyan, Jordan-Toyota, 72; 5. Christijan Albers, Minardi-Cosworth, 71; 6. Patrick Friesacher, Minardi-Cosworth, 71;

NOT CLASSIFED

Jarno Trulli, Toyota, 0 (DNS); Kimi Raikkonen, McLaren-Mercedes, 0 (DNS); Jenson Button, BAR-Honda, 0 (DNS); Giancarlo Fisichella, Renault, 0 (DNS); Fernando Alonso, Renault, 0 (DNS); Takuma Sato, BAR-Honda, 0 (DNS); Mark Webber, Williams-BMW, 0 (DNS); Felipe Massa, Sauber-Petronas, 0 (DNS); Juan Pablo Montoya, McLaren-Mercedes, 0 (DNS); Jacques Villeneuve, Sauber-Petronas, 0 (DNS); Ricardo Zonta, Toyota, 0 (DNS); Christian Klien, Red Bull-Cosworth, 0 (DNS); Nick Heidfeld, Williams-BMW, 0 (DNS); David Coulthard, Red Bull-Cosworth, 0 (DNS)

TIME: 1h 29m 43.181s

MARGIN OF VICTORY: 1.522s

FAST QUALIFIER: Trulli, 1m 10.625s (132.774 mph)

FAST LAP: M. Schumacher, 1m 11.497s (131.155 mph)

CAUTION PERIODS: None

LEAD CHANGES: Two among two drivers

POINT LEADERS: 1. Alonso, 59; 2. Raikkonen, 37; 3. M. Schumacher, 34; 4. Barrichello, 29; 5. Trulli, 27; 6. Heidfeld, 25; 7. Webber, 22; 8. R. Schumacher, 20; 9 (tie) Fisichella, Coulthard, 17

NEXT: France, July 3 (7:30 a.m. Eastern, Speed)

F1 begins to count the cost of its darkest hour

RivalsDM
Posted: 24 minutes ago

After the shame of the day before, Formula One awoke Monday to begin counting the cost of what is being described as "the most catastrophic public relations disaster in the 56-year history of the official world championship." Or, to put it another way, F1's darkest hour.

The sight of 14 F1 cars pulling off the track at the end of the formation lap for the U.S. Grand Prix and returning to the Indianapolis pits instead of racing is already being regarded as the death knell of the sport in the American market.

"Simply stated, this race is done. Forget what the contract says about future events," read the Indianapolis Star's obituary.

Tellingly, Speedway president Joie Chitwood immediately announced that the circuit held no commitment to invite F1 back in 2006.

"We're as much a victim of what transpired today as the fans are," he said. "Mr. Ecclestone is aware of our position and our unhappiness today."

Even Bernie Ecclestone, desperate to break into the American market, admitted the sport's future on the other side of the Atlantic is bleak.

"I'm furious at the stupidity of it all. There should have been a compromise but we could not get one. I tried a million things and thought that if we could get them on the grid we were halfway there. But it did not happen," he complained. "We were just starting to build a great image in America on TV and with the fans. All of that has gone out of the window."

Such somber realization spread as far as the drivers.

"I find it hard to put into words how damaging this is for F1. It throws into doubt the future of the race in U.S.," admitted David Coulthard. "Even if we do come back, half the crowd in the stands won't."

"It is a disaster for Formula One in the United States," added Nick Heidfeld.

The first bills for F1's most shameful episode are expected to be issued in the coming days.

"Sponsors will be lining up to claim millions in compensation from the teams that did not run, while Bernie Ecclestone, the sport's ringmaster, could also be liable to pay huge compensation," reported The Times of London.

With Ecclestone conceding that fans "have been cheated," F1 will be under huge pressure, both moral and legal, to issue full refunds to all the Indy spectators.

Michelin, however, are likely to bear the immediate brunt of F1's shame.

The FIA is expected to charge the French tire manufacturers, whose admission that their rubber was unsafe to use at Indy precipitated Sunday's shambles, with bringing the sport into disrepute this week.

The withering response of Charlie Whiting, the FIA's race director, to Michelin's request for a chicane to be introduced, in which he scorned their failure to supply "correct tires," is likely to be a mere taster of the FIA's response.

"We are very surprised that this difficulty has arisen," Whiting continued. "As you know, each team is allowed to bring two different types of tire to an event so as to ensure that a backup (usually of lower performance) is available should problems occur. It is hard to understand why you have not supplied your teams with such a tire given your years of experience at Indianapolis.

"That the teams you supply are not in possession of such a tire will also be a matter for the FIA to consider in due course under Article 151c of the International Sporting Code."

Under the terms of Article 151C, penalties can be applied for "any fraudulent conduct or any act prejudicial to any competition or to the sport in general."

Michelin's apparent incompetence could not be timed worse, coming just days after the FIA published proposals to limit tire supply to just one organization for 2008 and beyond.

Moreover, "Michelin's failure to supply its teams with safe and durable tires less than two weeks after it was warned by the FIA not to sacrifice safety for performance (after Kimi Raikkonen's tire failure at the Nurburgring) could force the French tire company's withdrawal from the sport," noted The Guardian.

However, in mitigation, Michelin publicly announced its mistake nearly 48 hours before the grand prix began.

That the sport could then not reach a compromise for the sake of its reputation and image damns those far beyond the confines of Michelin.

"The bottom line is Michelin made a mistake. But after that the FIA had it in their hands to find a solution and ensure we all raced out there. The most important people, the fans, have been forgotten in all of this," noted Coulthard.

Jacques Villeneuve, meanwhile, blamed Ferrari for its failure to agree to the introduction of a chicane: "We could have raced with a chicane, if a chicane had been put before the banking, but Ferrari didn't accept."

Michael Schumacher's comment, "I don't know what Michelin's problem is, but this wasn't our problem," spoke volumes about Ferrari's intransigence ahead of F1's race of shame.

F1's blame game is set to explode in the coming days but the damage has already been done. Sunday, this was a sport that imploded.

The cost, which will perhaps never be fully appreciated, will be borne by all those shamed by their association to this reprehensible debacle.

Pierre Dupasquier, Michelin's Competition Director, reflects upon his decision to request that Michelin teams not race last Sunday. He considers the tires Michelin provided were very good, but not well adapted for Indianapolis' specific conditions.

Were the tires proposed by Michelin fundamentally bad?

"The tire was not adapted to Indianapolis's very particular conditions. Proof had been made that the tire provided very good speed, judging by the qualification times. But at the same time, it exhibited the particularily of not being able to withstand the constarints of the Indy race track. We do not know why as of yet. we are still working to know why and we have a few hypothesis on the table. We have accumulated data in destructive and non-destructive tests which prove that the tire was very good."

Can this be attribuable to the grooved tarmac, very different from the usual tarmac compounds?

"The tarmac is one of the hypothesis we have identified"

But with Michelin's experience, could you not have predicted what was going to happen?

"We have found ourselves in face with an environment we were used to work with during the preceding year, with absolutely no issue whatsoever.But the modifications to the structure of the tire made necessary due to the changes in rules that made it necessary for the tire to last much longer resulted in a weakness in Indianapolis. Actually, not exactly a weakness, more of a charactyeristic we hadn't calculated on."

Has the decision to ask your partners not to race be a difficult one to take?

"No. We have evaluated the situation with all the experts with the Michelin society. We have shared instantly all of our data and conclusions with our partners and the decision was taken on Sunday morning."

What has taught you the situation in Indianapolis?

"A comprehension of racing circumstances that we didn't have so far. We are finding something that we hadn't previously expected."

Do you fear a negative consequence for Michelin?

"We could have feared a negative consequence if we hadn't taken the right decision, if we had been irresponsible with regards to the situation. But now, our partners can do nothing else but recognise that we have made a mistake. That is not too bad in itself. It happens to anyone. Our product is good, but it doesn't deliver the right job in Indianapolis."

Car racing is by essence a dangerous activity, why not have let the drivers deal with it and race?

"There exists various types of risks. If you build a trapeze with an old piece of string, knowing that the string will let go after 12 turns and you tell the trapezist to go ahead with it, you endanger him yourself, in addition to the risk he himself consciously takes. As for us, we have the responsability of providing reliable parts that will not deceive the driver concerning the risks he takes when taking to a race."

What is the futur of Michelin in F1?

I wish for it to be bright. Granted we have missed something when elaborating the tire. We have taken our responsabilities. Because no where in time from the development of the tire to the acceptation of the product do we say: "Oh well, it might be ok..' "

How have the race teams reacted?

"They have been informed punctually, step by step. They have followed us and understood because they are engineers. They have been very supportive and very friendly, very flattering for us indeed."

Source: Agence France-Presse

Red Flags Posted for the Six-Car U.S. Grand Prix By DAVE CALDWELL
Published: June 21, 2005
Before a frustrated Formula One fan from Colorado Springs left Indianapolis yesterday, he hired a lawyer to file a class-action lawsuit against nearly everyone connected to Sunday's ill-fated United States Grand Prix.

Larry Bowers, who had paid more than $500 for five tickets to the race, sued the Fédération Internationale de l'Automobile (F.I.A.); Formula One Management, which oversees the finances of the series; the tiremaker Michelin; and the Indianapolis Motor Speedway, said his lawyer, William Bock III.

The lawsuit, which was filed with the United States District Court in Indianapolis, contended that Sunday's event did not "constitute a true grand prix race under F.I.A. and Formula One rules in that the race was started with an insufficient number of participants."

The United States Grand Prix had only 6 cars after the drivers of 14 other cars, all using Michelin tires, withdrew from the race, citing concerns with the safety of the tires. The cars that raced used Bridgestone tires.

Bock said in a telephone interview that Bowers, who had attended the race five times, "felt the situation was handled poorly; he felt as if he wasn't treated fairly."

Bowers was not alone. As the speedway began to sell tickets yesterday for the 2006 United States Grand Prix, some fans visited the speedway offices in Indianapolis looking for refunds.

As of last night, no refunds were offered. Fred Nation, the executive vice president for communications at the speedway, said the track's officials met yesterday to review whether Formula One Management fulfilled its contractual agreement.

More meetings remain. The seven teams that fielded the 14 cars that did not race Sunday have been summoned to Paris for a hearing on June 29 with the F.I.A., the governing body for Formula One. Punishments - like fines, docked points or suspensions - could be levied.

Those seven teams, representing 70 percent of the starting field, said the Michelin tires they were provided with were unsafe to use, particularly on a banked turn known as Turn 1 by Indianapolis 500 fans.