When is....

[mapguy]

David Coulthard's press conference announcing that this is his year to win the title? :D :D

[mnkywrch]

Is he the #1 driver for McLaren this year?

I saw that Ralfie got demoted to #2 by Williams... when is Willi Weber going to come out and :cry: about that?

[Peter Venkman]

I would think that if you looked at points won the past two years, and who over-drove their car when near Schumaker, it would indicate that David is number one at McLaren.

[mnkywrch]

Originally posted by Peter Venkman
I would think that if you looked at points won the past two years, and who over-drove their car when near Schumaker, it would indicate that David is number one at McLaren.

Who is more likely to win a WDC with McLaren - Kimi or David?

Now, I'm not sure that Kimi's going to be a WDC, but I can tell you I'm POSITIVE David Coulthard won't be a WDC.

[GrandView]

Speaking of the Williams pairing....and Williams in general....

Frank is expecting to hear from BMW next month on whether they will extend their relationship.

And this tidbit from Patrick Head...

Head said: "Juan has enormous talent but I think he’s quite a way to go to be at a level where he could win a championship."

Given the right car and circumstances, JPM is certainly capable of winning a championship. But I wonder if it will be with Williams?

GV

[WickerBill]

So name the top 3 drivers in F1 minus MS, in your opinion.

Juan, David, and Kimi for me...

[Cam]

Ummmm...... I agree WB... But I would like to put Jarno in there somewhere...... But I just can't....:confused:

[mapguy]

Originally posted by WickerBill
So name the top 3 drivers in F1 minus MS, in your opinion.

Juan, David, and Kimi for me...

Juan, Kimi and Jacques. I would put Mark Webber in 4th.

[Peter Venkman]

It is my opinion that Coulthard is currently, a better driver than Kimi.

He's proven that he can run with and pass MS, and he's never been intimidated by the Super Fast German.

Kimi is very good, and may someday be WDC material, but IMO, he doesn't have it completely. Montoya is heir apparent to Schumaker, and given the same directed support that Schumaker has gotten from Ferrari, could possibly challenge Michael's records.

I would bet that if McLaren can get their car competitive with the Ferraris, it would be David Coulthard that would be challenging from McLaren, not Kimi.

[Hink]

WB - Let me give it a shot.

Montoya, Villeneuve, Little Schumacher, Heidfeld.

I've never been a DC believer ever since he let Häkkinen make him look like a solid #2.

(edit) I will give DC this: He doesn't crash in inopportune momments anywhere near as much as he used to.

[GrandView]

Originally posted by Peter Venkman
It is my opinion that Coulthard is currently, a better driver than Kimi.

He's proven that he can run with and pass MS, and he's never been intimidated by the Super Fast German.

I agree.

Michael is the most complete Formula One driver right now. I doubt he's lost the skills that allowed him to win races in a less than dominant car.

However, in competitive cars my three picks other than Schumacher would be Villeneuve, Coulthard, and Montoya.

Of the three I'd guess only Montoya has a chance for a future championship......particularly while Schumacher is still driving for Ferrari.

GV

[Foxman]

Montoya, Coulthard, Kimi.
I think that if Williams can give Juan a competitve car, and Michelin can give Williams stable and sticky tires I think that of anyone, Juan could not only take the fight to MS, but could beat him.

[mnkywrch]

My top three?

Juan, Kimi, and ... I don't know.

I'm not sure if Webber truly has "it"; I mean, I thought Button had "it" at one point, but those days seem long ago. For all I know, Alonso could have "it".

Fisichella and Trulli are quick but I'm not sure if they have "it"; either. I know Fisi's manager should be canned; he never seems to make a right move...

And my lack of regard for JV is well-known. Either he's overrated, has no car development ability, and was flattered by his Williams, or Olivier Panis is the most under-rated guy on the grid.

[Classic Apex]

Kimi, Juan and Rubens.

It's been pretty bad for me this winter. I've already dug the F1 tapes out of storage. Watched Spa practice and qualifying last night. Damn that Kimi has some big ones.

[GrandView]

Originally posted by mnkywrch
And my lack of regard for JV is well-known. Either he's overrated, has no car development ability, and was flattered by his Williams, or Olivier Panis is the most under-rated guy on the grid.

Well, I'm certainly on record as a believer in Schumacher's contributions to Ferrari's current success. I also think the combination of Honda, BAR budget, and Villeneuve was really over-sold in 1999. So take your pick to what level you apply credit and blame to the respective drivers in the above scenarios.

Villeneuve had a great rookie year in a clearly superior Williams, finishing 2nd to his teammate. His sophomore year he was more inconsistent, but still managed 7 wins and a final podium finish to win the championship. However, that was against a field that saw McLaren have 7 podiums and 3 wins, Benetton 7 podiums and 1 win, and Ferrari 13 podiums and 5 wins.

I think Villeneuve may still have what it takes to make a good car better. The four seasons with BAR are throw-aways as far as results, but they've perhaps made him a better, more seasoned driver. Every year in Formula One likely improves a driver.

My gut feeling is Villeneuve would have improved the Williams success rate over the Ralf/JPM duo had he been there. Understand, I'm not making excuses for him.........career management is part of the game. Villeneuve made the decision to go to BAR for a lot of money.

Unless BAR/Honda make a quantum leap in performance and reliability in 2003, Villeneuve will likely never have the opportunity to validate my hunch.

GV

[Hink]

(tangent) - I really blew it with my picks. How I forgot Fisichella I don't know.

[mnkywrch]

Originally posted by GrandView
I think Villeneuve may still have what it takes to make a good car better. The four seasons with BAR are throw-aways as far as results, but they've perhaps made him a better, more seasoned driver. Every year in Formula One likely improves a driver.

My gut feeling is Villeneuve would have improved the Williams success rate over the Ralf/JPM duo had he been there. Understand, I'm not making excuses for him.........career management is part of the game. Villeneuve made the decision to go to BAR for a lot of money.


I guess I think more highly of a driver who can take a car and put it in a place on the grid... where it has no business being.

That seems to be the way to "move up" in F1, as best I can tell - start in a terrible car and put it somewhere on the grid where it shouldn't be.

Kind of like Alonso - who got noticed for taking a Minardi places on the grid where one would think it shouldn't be. I know he's not the first person to do that.

That, or you test really well, or you show favorably to a more experienced driver.

I guess JV taking the best car on the grid and doing well... I don't think so much of that, because I think a lot of guys on the grid could do that. I'd like to think the list of drivers who could win in the F2002 would be quite long.

But not everyone could hop in a Minardi and, say, qualify 12th or 14th with it and finish ahead of some mid-pack teams. Being able to do that, to me, is a sign of a great driver.

JV, it seems to me, rarely if ever shows the "flash" one would expect from a WDC. I would never see the times or the results and see JV just destroying Panis, like I would expect.

[GrandView]

[QUOTE]Originally posted by mnkywrch
I guess I think more highly of a driver who can take a car and put it in a place on the grid... where it has no business being.

That seems to be the way to "move up" in F1, as best I can tell - start in a terrible car and put it somewhere on the grid where it shouldn't be.

I understand what you're saying wrench. I think there are very few drivers that could have made the podium 8 times with 3 wins in the 1996 Ferrari. I don't think Villeneuve could. And that is certainly a measure of a top driver. As is the ability to test and develop a top level car.

I'm not saying the BAR development woes are all Villeneuve's, but I do think that type of start-up effort certainly doesn't play to his strengths. And I believe the continued lack of results surely affected his attitude and desire.


I'd like to think the list of drivers who could win in the F2002 would be quite long.

The list is likely long if there is only one F2002.

If everyone has an F2002, or a Minardi PS02, I believe Villeneuve would be a top 5 finisher.

He's certainly a prima donna, and requires motivation. But in his rookie year he more than held his own against the eventual champion, and completely dominated his teammate in his sophomore championship year.

GV

[oddlycalm]

Originally posted by GrandView

I'm not saying the BAR development woes are all Villeneuve's, but I do think that type of start-up effort certainly doesn't play to his strengths.

Indeed. Having seen Villeneuve drive for quite a few years now, it's clear that while he truly is a world class driving talent, his car development contributions are simply not on the same level with say a Michael Schumacher. He's also proven to not be the same type of unifying influence with the team that Schumacher is.

Obviously these skills won't make up for dreadful aerodynamics or a Honda engine/grenade, but every bit helps.

oc

[mnkywrch]

Hmmm. More questions...

So is having car development skills part of being a great driver?

Now, granted, at some point, there's only so much you can do... but if you can't communicate to your crew what's needed to go quick, how useful are you as a driver?

Is being able to "rally the troops", so to say, part of being a great driver?

I guess I'd say no... thinking that if you're winning, the troops will rally to you.

[GrandView]

Originally posted by mnkywrch
So is having car development skills part of being a great driver?

Yes, particularly in Formula One.


Now, granted, at some point, there's only so much you can do... but if you can't communicate to your crew what's needed to go quick, how useful are you as a driver?

Formula One constructors create a new car every year. The top of the field continue to modify that car during the season. These aren't simple adjustments, it's almost a manufacturing environment.


Is being able to "rally the troops", so to say, part of being a great driver?

I guess I'd say no... thinking that if you're winning, the troops will rally to you.

The object of the exercise in Formula One.....for everyone involved on the team.....is to build a better car. The more involved, and the more successful the contribution the driver inputs to this exercise the better the team will be. Michael Schumacher is absolutely the best at it right now.

I have great admiration for Frank Williams. I think he is a great example of the true "spirit" of Formula One. He also is an unabashed admirer of Michael Schumacher. He rarely speaks of Michael's ontrack performance....which talent is obvious. He talks about Michael's singular dedication to the team. Testing, physical fitness, state of mind, attitude, desire to improve the car and himself...

Michael wins not because he's so much better than other drivers but because he expends so much effort making the team better.

GV

[Napoleon]

I have to agree with Wrech's logic on this one on how to judge a good driver.


Originally posted by mnkywrch
So is having car development skills part of being a great driver?


To me having car development skills is a little like a football player having special teams skills. Nice but its secondary to the main skills in the game.

That having been said, is car development skills relavent at all in 2002. I understand it was in 1965 where the sole source of imput (well, other then tire wear and pyrometer readings) was the driver's feedback. But today telemetry provides the engineers with so much relavent data frankly I have a hard time believing that the engineers are going to listen to the driver if he gives feedback that conflicts with the data (of course there will still be an advantage to having a driver who during a race can give feedback, assuming that the engineers do not have real time data).

I am interestedd what others think on this subject.

[GrandView]

Originally posted by Napoleon
To me having car development skills is a little like a football player having special teams skills. Nice but its secondary to the main skills in the game.

That having been said, is car development skills relavent at all in 2002.

I'm guessing it might not be as critical in a series like CART or IRL where everyone starts with the same basic package, and a rules package that tends to restrict modifications.

However, I think Formula One is a completely different environment. You're building a car from scratch each year. In some cases evolutionary....in others revolutionary.

Just what specifically Schumacher's involvement in the development process is I have no idea. However, there are Ferrari engineers in Japan at Bridgestone....and Bridgestone engineers at Ferrari in Italy. Schumacher meets with both groups at both localities. I'm guessing his involvement is more than just a courtesy.

I do know he spends hours in private testing with Ferrari engineers. I have to believe his input is more than fostering camaraderie.

For the good of the order, here are some Frank Williams quotes...

"There is one area where he is greatly improved," team owner Frank Williams said of Montoya at the beginning of the season. "He understands that when Michael (Schumacher) leaves the circuit his mental application doesn't diminish at all. He is always thinking about how to make his car, his team and himself better. Juan is gradually spending more and more time doing a similar thing."

"Michael is superior to his peers," says Williams. "The real trouble is that Michael is racing seven days a week and the rest are not. They think a bit about the cars but mainly, if they're not testing, they relax."

Sir Frank Williams says: "Michael is a machine. Formula one is suffering because of it, but it's not his fault."

But Frank Williams, owner of the BMW-powered cars driven by Ralf Schumacher and Montoya, sounded as if he might be in the camp that thinks Michael Schumacher is the best when he said: "Michael is also a major contributor. The only other great contributor to a team to equal him would have been Ayrton (Senna)."

GV

[Napoleon]

Originally posted by GrandView
I do know he spends hours in private testing with Ferrari engineers.

But then again alot of the inseason changes/peices/parts are tested by the 3rd driver on the team. Either that guy gives great feedback or the data collected by the car does the job for them.

(BTW my brother when working in Modino would on his lunch hours go down to their test track and hang over the fence and watch Ferrari's test team test parts).

[mnkywrch]

I don't think it would be libel to suggest Frank Williams still might wonder on some level "what would have been" if he had Senna driving his car for, say, four seasons... instead of four races.

He's a racer through and through, don't get me wrong... but he's also a human being.

[Napoleon]

Oh and GV I absolutely agree with you that development is much more important in F1 then CART, I just wonder with todays technology how much the engineers really rely on the driver, unlike 1965 when like it or not the engineers had to rely on the driver.

[GrandView]

Originally posted by Napoleon
But then again alot of the inseason changes/peices/parts are tested by the 3rd driver on the team. Either that guy gives great feedback or the data collected by the car does the job for them.

True. Also in Ferrari's case this year, they dedicated their 2nd test driver (Burti) to tire testing.

I'm unsure how the 60-man test team interfaces with with Michael or Rubens, other than their operation is all under Ross Brawn.


(BTW my brother when working in Modino would on his lunch hours go down to their test track and hang over the fence and watch Ferrari's test team test parts).

Cool. I'd like that opportunity.

GV

[GrandView]

Originally posted by mnkywrch
I don't think it would be libel to suggest Frank Williams still might wonder on some level "what would have been" if he had Senna driving his car for, say, four seasons... instead of four races.

Oh, I'm positive Frank realizes what a force that might have been.

All credit to Damon Hill for picking up the workload in '94, '95, and '96, but in all likelihood Hill and Villeneuve wouldn't be WDC's had Senna lived. And Michael probably wouldn't have 5 titles.

We missed a great rivalry in those years.

GV

[GrandView]

Originally posted by Napoleon
Oh and GV I absolutely agree with you that development is much more important in F1 then CART, I just wonder with todays technology how much the engineers really rely on the driver, unlike 1965 when like it or not the engineers had to rely on the driver.

I think there are some subtleties involved that only particular drivers can impart.

For instance, Senna would sometimes baffle his McLaren engineers by throwing out quicker lap times regardless of which way they made a particular change.

Senna's explanation was....

"If you want quicker lap times, I can give you quicker lap times. I want a quicker car. Let's do this...." or "let's go back to this..."

Senna was one-of-a-kind.

GV

[mnkywrch]

Originally posted by GrandView
I think there are some subtleties involved that only particular drivers can impart.

For instance, Senna would sometimes baffle his McLaren engineers by throwing out quicker lap times regardless of which way they made a particular change.

Senna's explanation was....

"If you want quicker lap times, I can give you quicker lap times. I want a quicker car. Let's do this...." or "let's go back to this..."

Senna was one-of-a-kind.


You've just put your finger on what I'm getting at. What you've just described... is the kind of driver I admire the most.

That's what I see MS and JPM as being able to do with a car. Not only can they zero in on the setup and turn in a quick lap.... but they can "drive around" a problem and still be quicker. As best I can tell from what I've read, Raikkonen also has that ability.

That's what I perceive JV as being unable to do, and I suppose is why I don't hold him as high in regard as others do.

Perhaps I'm wrong; then again, the past couple of years with Panis being very much JV's equal have kind of led me to this conclusion.

[Cam]

Originally posted by mnkywrch

Perhaps I'm wrong; then again, the past couple of years with Panis being very much JV's equal have kind of led me to this conclusion.

Ding Ding Ding Ding Ding Ding!!!! One of the reasons Panis was at McLaren was for his testing and feedback. BAR lured him away with the ride. Maybe JV feels that he doesnt need to do it because OP does it for him? :saywhat:

[Twisty Bits]

Juan, Jacques and Kimi.
:cool:

[Napoleon]

GV-

A PS to my earlier post. I don't give any weight to the fact that ferrari may have their engineers consult with MS since it could be nothing more then a way to stroke his ego. After all it engineers really don't use the drivers feedback very much do you expect them to say that to the drivers?

[GrandView]

Originally posted by Napoleon
After all if engineers really don't use the drivers feedback very much do you expect them to say that to the drivers?

Probably not.

Do you think Ferrari engineers often dismiss Michael's feedback?

GV

[TrueBrit]

Originally posted by mapguy
David Coulthard's press conference announcing that this is his year to win the title? :D :D

I thought he already had?? It was when he was slamming Toyota for dumping fellow Scot McNish after just one season...

[WickerBill]

Originally posted by TrueBrit
I thought he already had?? It was when he was slamming Toyota for dumping fellow Scot McNish after just one season...



Leave it to the new guy to actually answer the original question in the thread. :)


WB

[Cam]

Originally posted by WickerBill
Leave it to the new guy to actually answer the original question in the thread. :)
WB

And your point IS WB????? ;)