Ed Gorman
Hello everybody. Looks like the blog has taken off on other posts this week, especially the one about Ferrari and which is bigger, Formula One or Ferrari.
By the way, on that subject, I still don't see the "crisis" over budget capping as all that serious. There is a lot of grandstanding going on with people saying things that read well but mean little and the FIA is not going to be deflected. The teams can't seem to decide what they don't like? Is it the budget cap? Is it a two-tiered championship (which is not going to happen)? Is it Mosley's style of government? Or is it the prospect of lots of low-budget new teams coming in and spoiling their fun?
The meeting at Heathrow today is unlikely to make a big breakthrough because Ferrari have got to continue to sound unhappy for a bit longer. On the subject of Ferrari, if they really wanted to leave Formula One - like, say, Honda - they would have left, not threatened to...
Anyway, I am supposed to review the debate on Augusto Baena's excellent analysis and, though the volume of comment is less than in some weeks, there is still some excellent stuff here including a full run-down by Tim who knows his onions on Formula One. Most of you see Brawn and Jensino going all the way chased by the Red Bull cars. I tend to feel the same; the season is already starting to look set in its ways and you would imagine that several of the teams are going to quietly switch their efforts to next year (as soon as they have stopped arguing about the rules with the FIA).
So here are some of the more interesting snippets with a comment or two from yours truly...
RichyS
I have to agree on your assessment of Toyota. Their big chance to win was at Bahrain, where they still had the diffuser advantage, and the advantage of extensive winter testing at Sakhir. But, they blew it with a strategy that speaks volumes for Toyota. They just don't have the mentality of race winners.
From now on the other teams will develop their cars faster. I'm not sure why this is. Partly it may be due to the slower speed that Toyota work at (due to their lingering 'corporate' nature); but mostly (I suspect) due to being in the F1 no-man's land of Cologne. Without the constant and easy movement of staff, there is little seeding of ideas. This always used to be a problem with Ferrari, but they spent their way out of trouble in the late 90s (plus, I imagine it's easier to move from somewhere around Reading to Northern Italy than it is Reading to the Ruhr valley!).
Ed: I quite agree that Toyota do not have the "mentality" of race winners. I sense that in the senior management of the team and in the person of Jarno Trulli who looks good in quali but does not convince in races. I suspect that RichyS is quite right too about Toyota's ponderous thought and production process amid its relative isolation in Cologne. They also have the Tokyo angle. The guys at Brawn must feel such a weight off their shoulders not having to deal with - and fly to - Tokyo every few days to get approval to do this or that.
Colin Grayson
The main problem for Brawn is going to be lack of budget, but the fact that the mercedes kers system will be available to them if they judge it necessary just swings things in their favour in my view
Ed: I don't think money is a problem for Brawn this season. They got tons of it from Honda in return for taking the team over and keeping it looking respectable for the first year - and what a job they are doing in that regard. My impression is that they have enough resource to develop this year's car fully (and they know which way to go under Ross as well).
supercampeaobrasileiro
Never write off kimi - season marred by reliability.
Ed: That's a hard sell supercamp...
Tim
Bahrain and Barcelona are very different tracks and what works well on one doesn't necessarily work well on the other.
The best indicator of this was McLaren. Lewis Hamilton scored a good result in the desert but looked downright ordinary in Spain, especially in qualifying. The Circuit de Catalunya is an aero track and McLaren's weakness in this area was always going to be exposed here. Aerodynamic performance is not so critical at Bahrain and Hamilton's talent was able to make up the difference. Monaco is next and Lewis is likely to be back in contention for a decent haul of points. But the team's form will depend very much on the demands of each circuit until they can sort out their fundamental aero issue.
The main constant at all the races so far has been Brawn and Red Bull at the sharp end. At the moment the Brawn has the edge due to its long run pace and the team's operational superiority. Jenson Button's victories in the last two races owed much to a driver and team being in total harmony. I don't believe the Brawn team orders conspiracy theory - Rubens Barrichello lost victory in Spain because he simply wasn't quick enough. It was apparent during the first stint, when Rubens could barely pull out little more than a second over his team mate. In the crucial third stint, Barrichello only needed to find four seconds over 19 laps (including a phase where Button would be heavy with fuel) but Rubens blew it and he admitted as much himself.
Red Bull can compete on qualifying pace but need to smarten up their act and limit their vulnerability to KERS cars - this has lost the team two races so far.
Ferrari looked very good in Spain but the team has traditionally had a good aero package that works well at Barcelona. It doesn't mean that form will be carried over to circuits with different characteristics, particularly Monaco.
Toyota have flattered to deceive so far. The car was quick in Australia and Malaysia and could have won Bahrain. It's not clear why the team struggled in Spain. A first win is still more than possible.
Renault were quietly impressive last weekend. The car still looks awkward and ungainly but Nelson Piquet's improved form is a sure sign that the car's speed is getting easier to access. Nonetheless, it's likely to be a good while before Renault are fighting for victories again.
BMW Sauber introduced a raft of updates for the last race but the car still looks awkward. It appears as if BMW's early switch to the 2009 rules has lead them up a blind alley - always a risk with that approach. The approach worked for Brawn because they concentrated on building a simple but effective racing car that was good on all fronts. BMW has tried to be too clever.
Yet again, Williams has looked very strong in early races but failed to deliver solid results. I can't see that pattern changing this year.
In essence, I reckon the title fight is likely to be between Brawn and Red Bull with Toyota, Ferrari, McLaren, Renault, Williams and BMW Sauber (generally in that order) fighting for the scraps in an incredibly close midfield group.
Ed: The post of the week from Tim who predicts Lewis will be back in the mix at Monte Carlo. Could be an interesting weekend...
Nik
Ross Brawn was far more responsible for turning Ferrari into a one-man racing team than Schumacher ever was - I can assure you, Button will have every advantage available to him this year, and I'm not looking forward to it at all.
As a footnote, I am genuinely surprised by how good Massa is, well played to the lad.
Ed: Interesting point on Ferrari from Nik and one I heard being made in the media centre in Spain. Just how much of all those years of glory at Ferrari should be attributed to Michael and how much to Ross? As far as Massa goes, I have always rated him more highly than most. He may still need a lot of coaching and help but what is wrong with that? It amazes me - as it does JYS for example - that drivers in Formula One do not use coaches more. However, I suppose this could be Felipe's last season at Maranello. Or perhaps he will stay, Kimi will get the boot, and Felipe will he find himself having to play second fiddle to Fernando next year (Fernando does not like competitive team-mates).
Gordon McCabe
At the moment, the 2009 Grand Prix season appears strangely reminiscent of 1995. Then, as now, we effectively have a battle for supremacy between Ross Brawn and Adrian Newey.
Back in 1995, Michael Schumacher's Benetton won the contest against Newey's superior Williams. Brawn was able to couple his strategic political cunning, and his tactical improvisation in each race, to an excellent all-round car, and a driver, in Schumacher, who was capable of implementing that tactical improvisation.
Now, in 2009, Button's Brawn is winning the contest against Newey's superior Red Bull. Brawn has coupled his strategic political cunning (think of the double-diffuser), and his tactical improvisation in each race, to an excellent all-round car, and a driver, in Button, who is capable of implementing that tactical improvisation.
Ed: Nice comparison. I would back Ross on the tactical front to outsmart the Red Bull pitwall, even if the car is not as good.
IDR
What is really impressive is how close all teams are this year. Improving 2% your actual performance will mean you will be fighting for a win. I remember there was a rule in which all cars performing at 107% of the fastest car where not allowed to race. This year, no one single car (Nelson Piquet included ?) would be out because that old rule.
Ed: This is why we call Formula One the "pinnacle" of motor racing, I guess.
Phil H
The season is pretty much over, although if Adrian Newey manages to nail the double diffuser on the Red Bull, they could start to catch up.
Newey also said that he thinks there are sill quite a few "low hanging fruits" to pick up in terms of aero upgrades for the cars - most of the teams are still getting their heads around the new regs, so the team that finds these advantages first could make a big jump quickly.
Ed: Yes, there is a nagging feeling that this year could turn into a runaway season for Jenson and Brawn. We need others to win races and get on terms otherwise it will seem like a walkover which will devalue the currency of Jenson's championship (should that turn out to be the case).
Paul
Though it's always tricky to predict Augusto could be on the money there!
But I have noticed in Ed's comments over the months that despite being relatively new to the game he seems to have succumbed to the "Logans Run" mentality common in certain motorsports scribblers. That is that drivers should be retired when they reach a certain age (it's never applied to motorsports journalists obviously...)
I accept we can see who the No 1 driver at Brawn is at the minute - though I will wait unil after Monaco and Silverstone before making a definite judgment on that one.
But I often get the impression from Ed's comments that he thinks Rubens is standing in the way of hordes of younsters who would do a better job. Personally I wonder where the hell these drivers are?
Look at the third diffuser team for example, currently employing two young drivers, and currently on a stunning 4.5 points...
Have a gander at Nico's lap times from Barce Ed - Rubens laps may not have been quick enough but at least they make some sort of sense.And I won't even mention Piquet Junior because that's below the belt...
I would argue that Rubens current position isn't luck - more Ross looking at the New Generation, puffing his cheeks and shaking his head....
Fastest Q2 time,Fastest Race Lap and of course if Rubens hadn't been there for Jenson to copy his settings Mark Webber quite possibly would have have won the race.
But better to bring in young Bruno Senna eh Ed? Bernie's coffers could do with another famous surname...;-)
Ed: Actually I agree with most of this. Part of the problem for teams at the moment is that they are not required to use third drivers so it is difficult to bring people on and evaluate them and there does seem to be a dearth of outstanding candidates just now. And I agree that Rubens may yet have his day. However, I still stand by the point that, had Honda not sold out, Rubens would not be driving for them this season. They were looking for new blood to revitalise their line-up and Rubens was the one who was being chopped. Ross changed all that once he knew just how different the landscape had become. Under his ownership the team has very different priorities. Ross knows Rubens well obviously from their days together at Maranello. He wanted a safe pair of hands and someone who was not going to go and bend cars all over the place and cost the team a fortune. The price is that he has a second driver who is not on the pace with Jenson - so far anyway. But that's not a problem. Each team only needs one championship contender.
jmjm
Jenson has a naturally negative outlook (remember how quickly he has descended into "we are not quick enough; our car is not there yet") and that spreads doubt quickly and impacts performance and confidence, which results in mistakes (just look at Ferrari).
Ed: I don't know about this. In my view Jenson complained or explained the failings of his cars but I wouldn't say he had a negative outlook. One of his qualities is that he managed to stay reasonably positive in public at least, when many a driver would have given up.
IDR
Hi Ed, this post is just to keep you busy reading the comments of this debate...
I'm afraid you are going to re-write all comments that have been posted here for your new weekly task of answering us.
I sincerely hope your wine collection has been improved considerabilly during this week, keeping in mind the time you're saving reading the comments of this thread.
Ed: Sadly IDR, my wine collection has not improved at all because I haven't had time to get to the dealer because I am sitting at my computer reading this comment...wouldn't want it any other way though. Seriously....
Click
No comments:
Post a Comment