Originally Posted by MFAFF
Henry,
In F1 the driver who can best prepare his car and team will usually win the WDC..see Damon Hill, not the best racer by far, nor the quickest, but in talking to those who worked with him and others (like MS) certainly one of the best ever development drivers. He was able to get his car onto the front row and drive from the front, watching him cut thro traffic was painful. I think you may be reading Damon's success incorrectly. I believe that DH's success was based on two factors. First, seat time in a new technology. As a test drive for Williams he had more seat time with Active suspension, automatic transmission and traction control than any drive in the field. As the developer of these technologies William had a jump on the field. As soon a Damon was challenged by a competent driver his dominance ended. Jack Jack Villeneuve as a rookie almost beat DH and would have had a wheel not fallen off in the last race. The next year JV pounded DH in the WDC.
It is the fundamental reason why MS won so often, he crafted a very good team and worked very hard to develop the car he wanted race...that gave him the best possible chance to win WDCs, even when his car was not as good as others.. like the McLaren in 2001. His speed and racing ability ensured he won a record number of WDCs, even if with a 'better character' he could have had another one or perhaps two championships to his name (1997 and 2006) Other than to say MS had exceptional car control along with a great understanding of how race cars function, I agree
FA did the same at Renault, it was there or there abouts with regard to McLaren in 2006, but KR, whilst a better racer and faster on race day was not as diligent as FA during testing and development; hence the car was not as reliable as the Renault.... Development does not happen overnight . FA did not come to McLaren and magically turn them around. FA was the beneficiary of Kimi's development work and the theft of Ferrari technical data for race set up. There is no other way to explain McLaren's ability to come to grips (pun intended) with the Bridgestone tyre. I might add that he shared (at least at first) with Hambone.
You might believe, as an ex-pro that all you can do is turn up, drive as well as you can and hope for the best, but F1 allows the driver far more input, IF that is what they want to do.... MS wanted to, as did DH and as does FA, spending far more time with the team, talking to the designers and engineers about what they want to driver and how they do it...others like Jenson Button and KR have a more relaxed approach, leaving the designers to create the best they can with little additional input. All forms of racing allow the drive to aid in the development of the car. The input is generally restricted to track set up. The driver rarely has input on technical things like engine specs, aerodynamics or suspension hydrodynamics. The driver takes what is offered, makes minor suggestions to suit his style and does the best he can. I would suggest that the Elmor designers would chuckle at Alonzo's attempts at cam specifications, engine management programs or thermodynamics of heat dispercement in exhaust coatings.
I would suggest that a good look at the results over the last decade suggests the teams that have the most driver input during the design and development of the car are those who have the majority of the success, is that luck, talent or hard work? I would counter by saying that the driver who gets the most out of the equipment he is provided with has the most value to a competitive team. It's the job of the test driver to develop the car and the job of the racer to put it through it paces. Pedro de la Rosa has more to do with McLarens current success than Alonzo ever did.
|