The end of this season has not been a particularly healthy one for Formula 1. Two major names have left, and another has had an emergency meeting to consider if it should leave too.

First of all, the sole tyre supplier, Bridgestone, has announced that it will quit F1 at the end of 2011 when its current contract ends. This came as a shock. With the spotlight on car manufacturers, it doesn’t seem to have entered anyone’s mind that a company such as Bridgestone, which has been so incredibly loyal to the sport, would consider upping sticks.

I can remember a time when Bridgestone were not in F1, but only just. When I started watching Formula 1 in the mid-1990s, Goodyear was the sole tyre supplier. But Bridgestone entered in 1997, beginning the “tyre war”. When Goodyear left soon afterwards, it was not long until Michelin came in to begin an even fiercer tyre war.

I wasn’t a big fan of the tyre war. Mostly, one tyre was a major advantage over the other, so we were essentially left with two championships — a Bridgestone championship and a Michelin championship. Considering Bridgestone practically tailor-made their tyres to suit Ferrari, this essentially made Ferrari a shoo-in for the championship every year. That was until the 2005 regulations — which banned mid-race tyre changes — handed the advantage to Michelin in a big way.

2005 was the year when the tyre war well and truly jumped the shark. In the quest for the competitive edge, both companies had made their tyres softer and softer. The resurfaced banking at Indianapolis bit, Michelins exploded all over the shop and we were left with a farcical race in which only the six Bridgestone-shod cars competed.

On the back of the problems, the FIA decided that a sole company should supply the tyres for all the teams. The problem with this was that it had the potential to severely reduce the amount of exposure that tyre company got. With no tyre war to talk about, people might not talk about tyres. For this reason, Michelin refused to have any further part in F1.

The upshot was that Bridgestone and the FIA colluded to concoct the maddest new rules and gimmicks in order to contrive some interest in the tyres. One has to paint green lines all over the tyre in a crass attempt to pretend they care about the environment. Of course, the green on the tyres clashes with teams’ liveries, making the scheme not only nonsensical, but also damn ugly.

Teams are also forced to use a sub-optimal tyre compound at some point during the race. While this may have superficially “spiced up” the action, it is artificial. Drivers are critical of it, and Fernando Alonso even said that he would rather race with wet tyres on a dry circuit.

Moreover, there is a sense that Bridgestone may have deliberately made their tyres behave strangely in an attempt to get drivers and teams discussing tyres with the media. Nick Heidfeld has said that the tyres could be “ten times better”. Joe Saward expanded:

The Bridgestones react differently on each car and finding the tricks that make them work is not easy. Some drivers can do it at some tracks and not at others. Even World Championship challenger Jenson Button has struggled with this…

Bridgestone seems to have concluded that it is better to have people talking about the tyres rather than not talking about them – even if a lot of the references are negative.

I rejoiced when it was announced that a “control” tyre was to be brought in. But it has brought the wrong sort of control. I am not too sure that the current dark behaviour is an improvement over the honest competition of the tyre war.

If you have reached the stage where your marketing strategy is to have people make negative comments about your product, it probably is time to call it a day.

In many ways, Bridgestone get a huge amount of brand exposure through their involvement in F1. As noted in this week’s Formula1Blog.com podcast, you simply cannot watch a Grand Prix without learning that Bridgestone supply the tyres. Yet, after thirteen seasons (fifteen by the time they leave), the marginal returns to their investment must surely have diminished to almost zero. And As Keith at F1 Fanatic has pointed out, their costs are set to soar as they now have to supply twelve or thirteen teams rather than ten.

Nonetheless, it is a shock and a surprise that Bridgestone, a company that has stuck with F1 through thick and thin since 1997, has so abruptly pulled the plug. Now the FIA and Bernie Ecclestone will have a big headache trying to find someone to take Bridgestone’s place. With bridges burned with Goodyear and Michelin, and Pirelli uninterested, options seem thin on the ground.

By the end of 2006, I was thoroughly fed up with the tyre war. When Michelin left Formula 1 I was glad. This wasn’t because I have anything against the French company, but because I was simply fed up with championships seemingly being decided almost entirely by tyres — literally black boxes. Formula 1 had become a glorified tyre championship.

Two years on, and I’m beginning to wonder if anything actually changed. Even with a single tyre manufacturer, the performance of the teams seems to fluctuate wildly for seemingly little reason. And what is that reason? Tyres of course.

This seems to be the stock excuse that explains just about everything in F1. If Sébastien Bourdais is not performing, it’s the tyres. If Nick Heidfeld is struggling in qualifying, it’s the tyres. If Kimi Räikkönen is trundling around in 6th place, it’s the tyres.

Now Ferrari have been complaining about the compounds that Bridgestone have chosen in recent races, claiming that Bridgestone have tended to edge towards the harder end of the range. Hard tyres, we now know, suit McLaren well, whereas Ferrari prefer softer tyres.

Ferrari’s technical director, Aldo Costa, complained in particular about the compounds that Bridgestone took to Hockenheim — a race that the McLaren of Lewis Hamilton dominated:

I think the last race for us was very difficult for finding the good grip from the tyres, but we were not the only team. Most of the drivers were having, during the race mainly, a lot of problems to find grip.

The tyres were very, very hard, probably too hard for that kind of circuit, especially the hard tyre. There was no wear at all; the tyre just was not working for that kind of circuit. This was valid for us and it was valid as well for most of the teams.

It is a bit rich for Ferrari to be complaining about Bridgestone. The Japanese tyre company has spent the best part of the past decade pandering to the Scuderia’s every need while every other Bridgestone runner was told to suck it. At least Bridgestone are now treating their role as sole tyre supplier to F1 without favouring their old partners any more.

Bridgestone’s Hirohide Hamashima has backed up the theory:

“Basically the Ferrari has more of a tendency to understeer than the McLaren,” Hamashima told autosport.com. “The McLaren is a little bit oversteery. When the tyre has good grip, the car with the oversteer tendency will be quicker over a single lap than a neutral or understeering car.

“But when you think about racing conditions – especially with the temperatures we had at the Hungaroring – then an oversteering car will have heat generating at the rear much higher than the understeering car.

“Looking at Hungary and (Lewis) Hamilton’s car behaviour, after a few laps he struggled with oversteer – so he was making lots of counter-steering movements. On the other hand the Ferrari had a good balance after a few laps.

“That’s why the temperature is making a difference.”

I have learned this year that even with just one tyre manufacturer in F1, tyres still make a huge difference to a team’s performance. You could argue that, when everyone is given the same tyres to use, it is up to the teams to find a way to maximise the performance of the tyres themselves. However, with four compounds for Bridgestone to choose from, the teams simply have to build their cars not knowing which tyres they will end up using most often.

Perhaps F1 could bring in a genuine control tyre, where Bridgestone make just one compound of tyre for all circuits so that the teams will know exactly what to expect all season. However, Bridgestone would be dead against this because they want people to talk about the tyres more often. Also the performance of the tyres would probably vary from team to team depending on the weather conditions and the characteristics of each circuit.

I suppose I should just accept that tyres will always play a huge role in motor racing. With tyres being the only part of the car that really propels the vehicle, their importance ought not to be such a surprise. But I’d even rather be talking about how important silly aerodynamic pieces like shark fins are than talk about these dull, dull, dull tyres.

One driver whose coat is on a shoogly peg is Sébastien Bourdais. After a strong Australian Grand Prix, Bourdais’s season has been rather disappointing to say the least. He is completely anonymous during races. While this at least means he isn’t making many mistakes, the fact is that he is being utterly outclassed by his team mate Sebastian Vettel.

Bourdais has excused his performances, explaining that he will come good when slick tyres make their long-awaited return to F1. The Frenchman is of course used to slick tyres having used them for several years in ChampCar.

For the past decade Formula 1 has been unusual among motor racing categories for its use of grooved tyres in dry conditions. Slicks were abandoned in 1998 in a bid to reduce speeds amid a newly-ignited tyre war between Goodyear and Bridgestone. The powers that be were in no hurry to do away with grooves as the tyre war between Bridgestone and Michelin was even more intense. But now that Formula 1 now effectively has a control tyre with one supplier, the need to curb tyre development is no longer there.

Grooves were always unpopular among fans who prefer to look of a proper racing car with slick tyres. Drivers also tend to dislike grooves because of their reduced grip and the safety issues this entails. Grooves also reduced the role of mechanical grip which in turn put the emphasis on aerodynamics. This has led to a perceived reduction in the amount of overtaking.

Jacques Villeneuve was particularly outspoken about the introduction of grooved tyres.

Later on that year he said “the new rules are bluntly shit.” For those comments, Villeneuve was punished by Max Mosley (whose vanity project grooved tyres was) through the FIA’s World Motor Sport Council.

It was always rather strange that a driver would come through the ranks from an entry-level series through to F3 then F3000 / GP2 always using slick tyres, then be expected to use grooved tyres when he reaches F1. Given that Sébastien Bourdais feels that he has not been able to show his true potential without slicks, has the past decade been a lost decade for top-level grand prix racing?

Which other F1 drivers might have been awesome if only they had slicks?

Would Pizza Boy have been the best thing since flattened bread? Not likely given that he even struggled in other formulae with slicks.

But perhaps a decent case can be made for some other drivers. Perhaps Robert Doornbos would have been slick on slicks. He did well in F3000 and even scored a couple of wins in ChampCar. Maybe Justin Wilson couldn’t get into the grooves. He has also had a strong career in the USA where slicks are the norm.

The reverse seemed to happen for Mika Häkkinen. When grooved tyres were introduced in 1998, Häkkinen’s hitherto dormant career exploded into action. His first win did come in 1997, on slicks, but that was effectively gifted to him. On the other hand, Häkkinen’s talent was plain for all to see even before 1998.

Do I think Sébastien Bourdais will improve on slick tyres? My feeling is that tyres have a small role to play. But it’s not a very significant role. I think it would be closer to the truth to say that the standards of driving in ChampCar are much lower than in F1 and Bourdais simply doesn’t have the talent to hold his own at the highest level.

One of the most common criticisms about Formula 1 is the fact that often it is just the driver of the best car who wins. They’re only half right. The reality is far worse than that.

Not only did last week see the exit of Michael Schumacher from Formula 1, but it also saw the exit of the Michelin tyre company. With a control tyre due to be brought in by the FIA for 2008, it has brought to an end the tyre war for the foreseeable future.

With more and more restrictions being placed on chassis and engine development, most time can be gained through improvements in tyre technology. It is said that 2006’s tyres were 2 seconds per lap faster than 2005’s. The rivalry between Bridgestone and Michelin had become increasingly competitive over the past few years.

Here is an extract from an article by Paul Kimmage in The Sunday Times from a couple of months ago.

At a press conference the next afternoon at the [Istanbul] circuit, [Jenson Button] is joined on stage by fellow drivers David Coulthard, Kimi Raikkonen and Tiago Monteiro. A French journalist raises his hand and asks, “Question to you all: who will win the world championship? Schumacher or Alonso?” The four give the same reply: the championship will basically be decided by the team with the best tyres. The journalist is annoyed. What? No names? No opinions? “We’ve given our opinions,” Button insists. “We can’t see into the future. We don’t know what’s going to happen.”

We meet an hour later and I pull him up on it again. “What was all that corporate crap? Why couldn’t you give the guy a straight answer: Alonso or Schumacher? As a journalist and a fan, I find that absolutely infuriating.”

“Because it’s the truth,” he says. “It will all come down to the tyres.”

“The tyres,” I repeat, incredulous.

“The tyres, 100%,” he insists.

Kimmage might not have believed him, but it is true. Over the past few years if a driver won the World Championship the tyre manufacturer got the credit. If Schumacher qualified on pole it was because Bridgestone produced a good qualifying tyre. If Alonso won the race it was because Michelin had produced a good race tyre.

In reality, we no longer had a Drivers’ Championship or a Constructors’ Championship. All we had left was a glorified Tyre Championship in all but name. It’s not as heroic as a driver standing up on his seat to win a race. It’s not as sexy as a constructor pushing the boundaries of technology to make their car better. Formula 1 had come down to four — literally — black boxes. Elements that are peripheral to the cars became central to the championship.

Competition is good. It drives improvement. But the thing about tyres is that because they’re black boxes you simply don’t see that improvement. Today’s Formula 1 tyres look almost exactly the same as they did in 1998, even if what goes inside them has developed radically.

The only way we can actually see a tyre making a difference is by looking at a list of lap times. It’s not like watching a driver making an audacious overtaking manoeuvre, a team making improvements to their car design or even the crew executing a slick pit stop. Put simply, tyres are boring. End of.

At first the tyre war added another variable into the mix; a new angle to look at the Championship at. But by the end it had overwhelmed the entire Championship. It drowned out all of the other elements that make motor racing what it is.

Alonso ran away with the first half of the season. When Michael Schumacher made his comeback it was accompanied by a Toyota resurgence at certain races. That wasn’t because of anything Schumacher or Toyota did. It wasn’t not a coincidence that Ferrari and Toyota both used Bridgestone tyres.

Here is what F1Fanatic had to say on the morning of qualifying at the Chinese Grand Prix.

The Toyota drivers Ralf Schumacher and Jarno Trulli, whose average starting positions this year prior to Japan were 10.38 and 11.19, are third and fourth. The swing in tyre performance is so great that its making a mockery of the endeavours of teams and drivers – just as it did to Michael Schumacher and Ferrari last year.

The tyre war has provoked some cripplingly dull races this year when either Michelin or Bridgestone have been miles ahead, handing Alonso and Schumacher some very uncomplicated wins.

I couldn’t agree more. This season might have had a topsy-turvy championship because of the competition between the tyre manufacturers. But a lot of the races themselves — particularly at the start of the season — were shockingly dull, simply because one tyre company would have such a huge and obvious advantage over the other.

F1Fanatic also makes reference to a piece by Mark Hughes in favour of the tyre war. Some F1 fans have relished the tyre war because it has often made things exciting. But that just shows up the big problem with Formula 1 at the moment. How many people can honestly say that they started watching motor racing because they were interested in tyres? Any takers? Surely not. Motor racing is about great drivers and great cars — not bits of rubber.

When Kimi Räikkönen lost the 2003 World Championship, it was blamed on 23 laps of the rain-hit United States Grand Prix when the Bridgestones had a 1.4 second per lap advantage on a drying track. Those crucial 23 laps were, so Michelin said in the December 2003 edition of F1 Racing magazine, the only laps where Bridgestones were faster than the Michelins. And it won Schumacher the championship.

It might have made that particular aspect of the championship interesting. But I don’t want to see a driver win the Drivers’ Championship because he has superior rubber. Nor do I want to see a constructor win the Constructors’ Championship because it happens to use the best tyres. It makes a mockery of the whole idea of racing. You might as well just take one Bridgestone and one Michelin and roll them down a hill to decide who wins the championship.

So good riddance to the tyre war. If it means that next year’s season has fewer twists and turns, then so be it. At least I will be able to see what makes a winning team — because it will no longer be concealed in those anonymous black boxes.

An entertaining race, well worth getting up at 6am for. Even if it’s zombified me for the rest of the day. It seemed as though Renault were going to walk away with it today. With the changeable conditions, the Michelins were clearly coping better in the wet.

At least that was the case in qualifying. You could literally have split the running order in two — the top half was of Michelin runners, the backmarkers were all on Bridgestones. The only person to spoil it was Michael Schumacher who incredibly qualified his car in 6^th. The next Bridgestone runner was his team mate Felipe Massa way back in 13^th. Imagine if everybody was on the same tyres! Schumacher would have completely blitzed the field.

So the buildup to the race this morning went pretty much along the lines of, ‘Schumacher is great. Just a shame his tyres are useless.’ James Allen said that somebody up there was being kind to Fernando Alonso this weekend. Well today that person up there must have decided that he was too kind yesterday, and conspired to give Alonso the lion’s share of bad luck in the race.

It looked good to start off with. Alonso was absolutely supreme in the first corner, as was Kimi Räikkönen. Alonso built up a big lead in the first stint, but problems came after his first pitstop. The front tyres needed changing, but they kept the old rear tyres on. It seemed like a strange decision, and it turned out to be the wrong one indeed as Alonso’s lead was cut to zero before he had to relent to Giancarlo Fisichella and Schumacher.

It wasn’t over for Alonso though. On a decent set of tyres he was still the fastest driver. But during his pitstop where he changed to dry tyres a wheel nut got stuck, adding at least 10 seconds to his time. Were it not for that, Alonso could well have won.

As it was, Schumacher was able to take the victory. The first lap out on dry tyres was clearly crucial. The track was still damp and cold in spots, and we clearly saw that those who fully committed — Alonso, Schumacher — benefited. Meanwhile drivers who tentatively tiptoed out of the pits — Fisichella, Kubica (who changed to dries too early anyway) — lost ground big time. Schumacher’s move on Fisichella into turn 1 on Fisi’s out lap was outstanding.

It was a weekend of good drives. Not only had Schumacher and Alonso excelled themselves, but Jenson Button also shone in the final phase of the race with the drying track. After a little off where he lost a place to Pedro de la Rosa, Button came back in the final laps to spectacularly climb his way up to 4^th which culminated in an amazing scrap at the penultimate corner of the race.

Six cars into one corner doesn’t go. But Button drove smartly to take Barrichello, then Heidfeld. The latter two were both disadvantaged by the traffic, and de la Rosa was able to take 5^th. Takuma Sato was subsequently disqualified for “blocking faster drivers”. Yes, it’s funny how his presence benefited his pseudo-team mate Button. But Sato’s team mate, Sakon Yamamoto, can congratulate himself for finally finishing a race for the first time!

As for the tyre war, during the race it seemed as though the Michelins weren’t quite as dominant as they were in qualifying. Looking at the results, I am no longer so sure. The only Bridgestone runners to get a decent result were Schumacher and Mark Webber (who scored an increasingly rare point for Williams).

Schumacher’s team mate, Massa, had a torrid race which culminated in a clumsy crash with David Coulthard. I am now absolutely convinced that Michael Schumacher drove out of his skin today. He was ecstatic at the end of the race. He obviously desperately wants to end his career on a high.

But Alonso will also be determined to win the Championship this year. He must be looking on at his future team, McLaren, with trepidation. Räikkönen’s car failed yet again today. Reliability is still a major problem for McLaren. This could be Alonso’s last chance to win the Championship for a while.

Anyway, today’s result leaves Schumacher and Alonso tied at the top with 116 points each. But officially Schumacher leads the championship because he’s won more races. Contrary to what most people are saying, the championship is not guaranteed to go down to the wire.

If Alonso fails to score and Schumacher wins in Japan, Schumi’s lead will be unassailable. Even though Alonso could win in Brazil to level the scoring again, Schumacher would still win the championship because he has won more races this year. That would be the closest championship in history. It’s certainly a pleasure to be watching it, even at silly o’clock.

Full race result

Update: F1 Fanatic Keith Collantine points out:

Fernando Alonso would be leading this year’s championship by 15 points if it weren’t for the man who changes his right-rear wheel.