39 replies to this topic

[August]

If we exclude Caterham and Marussia who look like they'll never win a race, hardly even score a point, then Sauber and Force India are the only teams that have never won races, unless we count the wins of Jordan and BMW Sauber to them. And Sauber and FI have had races where they would've had the pace for a win but couldn't take it, Belgium '09 and Malaysia '12 as the most notable examples. But were those their best chances, will they ever win a race?

 

I have more faith in Sauber. I believe Hinwil has better facilities because it was once BMW's works team. Somehow I have an impression FI has the worst facilities excluding Caterham and Marussia, maybe STR has worse but they have RB behind. But I'm afraid that once a Hinwil-built car wins a race, it's not anymore a Sauber, somebody will have bought the team. But in the current economic situation, I don't see any serious buyers for the team, so Sauber has at least few years to win a race.

Edited by August, 03 April 2014 - 13:23.

[Seanspeed]

Maybe.

[HaydenFan]

Well in some form or another, ever F1 team except Marussia and Caterham have taken a Grand Prix victory. I think something absurd would have to occur again (ala '03 Brazilian GP), for one of these mid pack efforts to take the top step of the podium (or even 3rd place podium).

[sopa]

Looking at the effect of 2014 regulations, I'd say Force India could have one of its best ever chances to win a race this year. Superior Mercedes engines and FI has the ability to outperform both McLaren and Williams on a good day. Then if a circuit is particularly suitable for Mercedes (like Montreal), there are only the two works Mercedes cars between them and a potential victory. They have a great driver in Hulkenberg, who I still view as an outside shot or underdog winner in a wet race.

 

But unless we get some regulations which really mix up the field, like the 2012 tyres, which nobody understood in the beginning and on which Sauber almost won and had other great races, it is likely that these teams will have to wait for a win at least till getting a new ownership sometime in the unforeseeable future.

Edited by sopa, 03 April 2014 - 13:15.

[noikeee]

They're routinely in a upper midfield position where they just need a slightly bigger fluke to get it. Spa 2009 and Malaysia 2012 almost went the way of FI and Sauber respectively, but then Williams were consistently worse than both of these teams for the past few years and got it in Spain 2012. Could've easily been them.

 

I think sooner or later both are going to have to be sold and renamed though, and the odds of that win coming before that are maybe slightly against them. So I'd vote "neither" - if the option was there in the poll, think you forgot it.

[TheUltimateWorrier]

OP you forgot the best example; Brazil 2012.  Hulkenberg should've won til he dun goofed. That was probably Force India's best ever chance to date for a race win.

[August]

 

I think sooner or later both are going to have to be sold and renamed though, and the odds of that win coming before that are maybe slightly against them. So I'd vote "neither" - if the option was there in the poll, think you forgot it.

 

 

Edited.
 

[PayasYouRace]

I'm sure they'll both have their days in the sun (figuratively. In reality they're more likely to win on a strange wet day). Maybe not this year, but if they survive long enough, they'll do it.

[metz]

On merit...not likely

Bernie's money allocation, FIA technical regulations, and Team politics are stacked against them.

 

If it happens this year it will be Hulkenberg with a fluke of luck.

[ensign14]

If we exclude Caterham and Marussia who look like they'll never win a race, hardly even score a point, then Sauber and Force India are the only teams that have never won races, unless we count the wins of Jordan and BMW Sauber to them.

 

Why shouldn't we?  They're the same teams.

[Fastcake]

All it takes is the perfect weekend, or another randomiser like the 2012 tyres. We don't often see an unexpected car win out of the blue, but if they produce a car that can compete near the front they just need to take advantage whatever comes their way.

 

OP you forgot the best example; Brazil 2012.  Hulkenberg should've won til he dun goofed. That was probably Force India's best ever chance to date for a race win.

 

I'm still not convinced Hulkenberg could of won that race. Both Button and Hamilton had it over him, in my opinion.

[KavB]

I think Force India stand a better chance. They've had two chances to win a race so far (Belgium 09 and Brazil 12) and I do think at some point things will go their way. They haven't made a bad car since the first half of 2009. I have doubts with Sauber though. They came close in 2012 but I'm not sure whether they will ever build a car as good in the future. Especially since they are forced to sign drivers based on their budget rather than being able to sign the best talent they can.

[KTownDevil]

Hulk in Brazil 2014 (wet race).

[Jon83]

FI / Hulk could really do with a podium this season.

 

Sauber could have won in 2012.

 

I suspect it would take the sort of extreme weather which F1 no longer permits for either to really have a chance again.

[DutchQuicksilver]

Sauber, no. Force India possibly.

[BullHead]

Yeah, Force India for sure. Just look at that steady year on year progress since the take over. Slow, yes, but steady, there's gotta be a win soon. Possibly this year.

[spacekid]

Sure, it's possible. But not probable.

It's much harder for a small team to pick up a fluke result now, with reliability amongst the top teams being so high, and F1 tending not to run in 'risky' situations.

On outright merit? Very hard to see it happening.

History buffs - what was it that led to Jordan picking up a couple of wins on merit in '99. Obviously Schumi was absent, but still. Was it engine/tyres? I'm sure they weren't 2 flukes.

[sopa]

History buffs - what was it that led to Jordan picking up a couple of wins on merit in '99. Obviously Schumi was absent, but still. Was it engine/tyres? I'm sure they weren't 2 flukes.

 

 

Yeah it was a weird year with both front-runners McLaren and Ferrari underperforming, despite them generally being above others. A bit like in 2008 both underperformed, which let BMW Sauber, Renault and STR get wins.

[Spillage]

Interesting topic. My gut reaction is maybe, but only in extraordinary circumstances. Really, both should have won a race in 2012, but in both cases the teams' lead drivers made mistakes that spoiled what were otherwise (and in any case) outstanding performances. My guess is that if either team does win a race it'll be a similar story; a young driver brilliantly sticking it to the big boys in a semi-competitive car in wet or otherwise unusual conditions. For that reason I find it very difficult to say whether or not either team will ever win a race - FI look like they have the better chance this year but I'd still be surprised and impressed to see them nick a win. Impossible to look any further ahead than this season, really.

[Jacobss]

So many F1 fans and nobody mentioned that Sauber already has won a race? BMW in 2008 was called "BMW Sauber F1 Team". And they won GP of Canada back then.

 

[KWSN - DSM]

Ever is a long time, no one know if either team will hit upon the most ingenious invention ever in F1 next season and steamroll away to multiple wins. They may never win, they may not exist next season.

 

If the question was this season, I would say no. Anything further into the future, we have nothing to base a real opinion on, except our emotional attachment or lag thereof to one or both the teams. I know that Toro Rosso is aligned with Red Bull, yet they have had 1 podium which was a win in 149 Grand Epreuves.

 

Sauber almost won in Malaysia 2012, they were so close that the usual conspiracy theories were bandied about how Perez followed Ferrari orders. Lightning can strike.

 

Answer is an emphatic 'Maybe'

 

[SpartanChas]

Yeah... It's been said (e: re BMW Sauber win)

What does 'on merit' really mean anyway? Williams won Spain 2012 on merit. If hulk/ Perez had won in Brazil/Malaysia 2012 would that have been on merit? Or Perez in Monza 2012?

Edited by SpartanChas, 03 April 2014 - 19:57.

[sopa]

Interesting topic. My gut reaction is maybe, but only in extraordinary circumstances. Really, both should have won a race in 2012, but in both cases the teams' lead drivers made mistakes that spoiled what were otherwise (and in any case) outstanding performances. My guess is that if either team does win a race it'll be a similar story; a young driver brilliantly sticking it to the big boys in a semi-competitive car in wet or otherwise unusual conditions. For that reason I find it very difficult to say whether or not either team will ever win a race - FI look like they have the better chance this year but I'd still be surprised and impressed to see them nick a win. Impossible to look any further ahead than this season, really.

 

A young talented driver having a very good setup going surprisingly well in the wet and making a name for himself has indeed been the case for a midfield team on multiple occasions, either culminating with a win or not:

2008 Italy Vettel

2012 Malaysia Perez

2012 Brazil Hulkenberg

 

However, we have had a few odd cases, where a normally midfield team has an extraordinarily fast car even in the dry:

2009 Belgium Fisichella

2012 Spain Maldonado

2012 Italy Perez

 

2009 and 2012 situations can arise only if none of the teams understand the new complicated rules properly, so that some underdog teams can get an advantage and genuinely run at the front if they get some developments right. Another such season was 1997, when Bridgestone got its development right, which helped Prost, Stewart and Arrows massively.

 

However, 2014 doesn't seem like such season, because Mercedes is comfortably running at the front and Red Bull is coming up nicely too despite PU deficit. But who knows, what's gonna happen in subsequent seasons. Maybe Mercedes' domination will put so many people off in 2014 that Pirelli will introduce again some weird tyres next year, so that we will get some strange results. Who knows. Like we saw an unusual 2012 after the domination of Red Bull in 2011.

Edited by sopa, 03 April 2014 - 20:04.

[Spillage]

History buffs - what was it that led to Jordan picking up a couple of wins on merit in '99. Obviously Schumi was absent, but still. Was it engine/tyres? I'm sure they weren't 2 flukes.

They were unusual circumstances in Magny-Cours. Schumi was present but that was a crazy, fantastic wet race that's well worth watching if you can find it online (I think you can). Interestingly enough, Alesi and Sauber qualified on the front row of the grid and ran competitively before he spun off in what was basically a monsoon. From memory, Coulthard and Schumacher both suffered mechanical problems while leading and Frentzen ran competitively throughout, managing to out-strategy Barrichello and Hakkinen (who had a messy afternoon) thanks to a late safety car.

 

The win in Monza was more emphatic; Frentzen qualified second and inherited the win when Hakkinen made his famous mistake. Two weeks later, Frentzen took pole and led at the Nurburgring before he ground to a halt after just after his first pitstop. Jordan had had some luck but they were definitely competitive, and Frentzen was driving as well as anyone in the field - he actually managed a further four podiums and trounced Damon Hill so absolutely that Hill nearly retired mid-season. In fact, given the other crazy happenings at the Nurburgring if only his car had kept going he'd have entered the final two rounds of the championship level on points with Irvine, just one point behind Hakkinen and with the momentum of having won the last two races behind him. Who knows what might have been?

Edited by Spillage, 03 April 2014 - 20:05.

[PNSD]

2009 Spa was a huge chance. Giancarlo had the pace, but Kimi matched him, and in the end it was KERS that won it.

[Jejking]

Hulkenberg could take anyone on if the circumstances are crazy enough. Might as well happen for FI this year! He really goofed Brazil 2012 up though, but **** happens. Sauber, I have less trust in them unless there is a really crazy factor like tyres coming into play.  Don't see that one happening again anytime soon.

[metz]

Yeah... It's been said (e: re BMW Sauber win)

What does 'on merit' really mean anyway? Williams won Spain 2012 on merit. If hulk/ Perez had won in Brazil/Malaysia 2012 would that have been on merit? Or Perez in Monza 2012?

On merit means on their own.

BMW won Canada '08 after the front running McLaren and Ferrari took each other out with a collision in the pits.

Not sure how BMW can take credit for that.

[KWSN - DSM]

On merit means on their own.

BMW won Canada '08 after the front running McLaren and Ferrari took each other out with a collision in the pits.

Not sure how BMW can take credit for that.

 

By actually winning?

 

[Nonesuch]

Will is a strong word, but I wouldn't be too surprised if Force India can steal a win when the pieces fall into place. It would probably require some chaos at the front, though.

[August]

2009 Spa was a huge chance. Giancarlo had the pace, but Kimi matched him, and in the end it was KERS that won it.

 

And I believe Fisi could have won if only he would've had a long stint mid-race. He would've stayed in Kimi's tail even with a heavier car and then needed a few flying laps with a light car on a clear track when Kimi'd pitted.

[Jejking]

And I believe Fisi could have won if only he would've had a long stint mid-race. He would've stayed in Kimi's tail even with a heavier car and then needed a few flying laps with a light car on a clear track when Kimi'd pitted.

Completely agree with that, suspect he would have lost a little time with extra fuel (Kimi was pushing as well) but could have made it up when Kimi pitted.

[scheivlak]

They were unusual circumstances in Magny-Cours. Schumi was present but that was a crazy, fantastic wet race that's well worth watching if you can find it online (I think you can). Interestingly enough, Alesi and Sauber qualified on the front row of the grid and ran competitively before he spun off in what was basically a monsoon. From memory, Coulthard and Schumacher both suffered mechanical problems while leading and Frentzen ran competitively throughout, managing to out-strategy Barrichello and Hakkinen (who had a messy afternoon) thanks to a late safety car.

 

The win in Monza was more emphatic; Frentzen qualified second and inherited the win when Hakkinen made his famous mistake. Two weeks later, Frentzen took pole and led at the Nurburgring before he ground to a halt after just after his first pitstop. Jordan had had some luck but they were definitely competitive, and Frentzen was driving as well as anyone in the field - he actually managed a further four podiums and trounced Damon Hill so absolutely that Hill nearly retired mid-season. In fact, given the other crazy happenings at the Nurburgring if only his car had kept going he'd have entered the final two rounds of the championship level on points with Irvine, just one point behind Hakkinen and with the momentum of having won the last two races behind him. Who knows what might have been?

Nice post, some additions:

The real reason Frentzen won at Magny Cours was that when the sudden rain shower came at lap 20 or so, the Jordan guys not only changed to wets but also filled the car to the brim so they didn't have to stop for refuelling anymore later on in the race - what everybody else and Hakkinen, the fastest guy in the wet on the day in particular, still had to do.

 

In relation to Frentzen's mysterious N'ring halt right after his pitstop there was some speculation later on (justified or not) that there was some traction control like trick that could have been switched on and failed - a speculation that was fuelled afterwards by Mosley's hint the next year that one traditional midfield team had become suddenly competitive in 1999 because of traction control. Mosley's ambigiously worded remark didn't mention which one - which let to much speculation whether it was Jordan or Stewart.

Edited by scheivlak, 03 April 2014 - 21:54.

[Spillage]

Nice post, some additions:

The real reason Frentzen won at Magny Cours was that when the sudden rain shower came at lap 20 or so, the Jordan guys not only changed to wets but also filled the car to the brim so they didn't have to stop for refuelling anymore later on in the race - what everybody else and Hakkinen, the fastest guy in the wet on the day in particular, still had to do.

 

In relation to Frentzen's mysterious N'ring halt right after his pitstop there was some speculation later on (justified or not) that there was some traction control like trick that could have been switched on and failed - a speculation that was fuelled afterwards by Mosley's hint the next year that one traditional midfield team had become suddenly competitive in 1999 because of traction control. Mosley's ambigiously worded remark didn't mention which one - which let to much speculation whether it was Jordan or Stewart.

Interesting - I didn't know about that. I'm not so sure about that though - Hill was hardly competitive in '99. Suppose they could have run the system on one car but not the other, but IIRC Hill had a near-identical failure at the start of the race in the Nurburgring which triggered Diniz's massive accident. 

 

Anyway, I just think it's interesting how almost by stealth HH-F and Jordan emerged as pretty serious title contenders over the course of that season, something neither team nor driver would ever manage again.

[Kingshark]

I'm still not convinced Hulkenberg could of won that race. Both Button and Hamilton had it over him, in my opinion.

 

Say what? Hulkenberg was much faster than either McLaren in the changing conditions. If he hadn't crashed, Hulk would have won easily.

[Kristian]

2009 Spa was a huge chance. Giancarlo had the pace, but Kimi matched him, and in the end it was KERS that won it.

 

And the fact that Kimi went completely off-road, negating the need to brake for La Source. I think if that had not happened, Fisi would have had just enough to win it. But hindsight and all that... 

 

It almost seems a travesty that Sauber have never won a race, and I dearly hope they do - they have the facilities and the experts, they probably just need a bit more funding. I think their chance has probably passed now. 

[Jacobss]

2009 Spa was a huge chance. Giancarlo had the pace, but Kimi matched him, and in the end it was KERS that won it.

 

No, it was not. FI was faster that day and Fisi being mediocre driver, he just lost it. After SC restart Raikkonen made the same trick with him like in Japan 2005. He scared Fisi into the first corner, forcing him to take shorter line into La Source, resulting in worse traction going down into Eau Rouge. Not mentioning that back then having KERS  was disadvantage, except for starts.

And the fact that Kimi went completely off-road, negating the need to brake for La Source. I think if that had not happened, Fisi would have had just enough to win it. But hindsight and all that... 

 

It almost seems a travesty that Sauber have never won a race, and I dearly hope they do - they have the facilities and the experts, they probably just need a bit more funding. I think their chance has probably passed now. 

What? Do you even remember that race? Kimi overtook Fisi after the SC came in. Get your memory straight. The off-road incident had nothing to do with it.

 

And Sauber won a race already, it was still BMW Sauber F1 Team in 2008 - stupid thread

Edited by Jacobss, 04 April 2014 - 00:11.

[HeadFirst]

Of course it possible. F1 success is all about money and as outrageous as it sounds it is possible that some energy drink company like  ...... Monster, or whatever, could choose to enter the fray bringing boatloads of cash. The influx of cash might attract a knowledgeable management team, who in turn attract a top designer and a capable staff, while at the same time putting a comprehensive young driver program in place. After a few years of limited success with experienced journeyman drivers, graduates of their young driver program would be ready to lead the team to victory. Having all those pieces falling into place at the right time is a stretch I know, but it is possible.

[George Costanza]

They were unusual circumstances in Magny-Cours. Schumi was present but that was a crazy, fantastic wet race that's well worth watching if you can find it online (I think you can). Interestingly enough, Alesi and Sauber qualified on the front row of the grid and ran competitively before he spun off in what was basically a monsoon. From memory, Coulthard and Schumacher both suffered mechanical problems while leading and Frentzen ran competitively throughout, managing to out-strategy Barrichello and Hakkinen (who had a messy afternoon) thanks to a late safety car.

 

The win in Monza was more emphatic; Frentzen qualified second and inherited the win when Hakkinen made his famous mistake. Two weeks later, Frentzen took pole and led at the Nurburgring before he ground to a halt after just after his first pitstop. Jordan had had some luck but they were definitely competitive, and Frentzen was driving as well as anyone in the field - he actually managed a further four podiums and trounced Damon Hill so absolutely that Hill nearly retired mid-season. In fact, given the other crazy happenings at the Nurburgring if only his car had kept going he'd have entered the final two rounds of the championship level on points with Irvine, just one point behind Hakkinen and with the momentum of having won the last two races behind him. Who knows what might have been?

 

IF HHF and Jordan won in 1999, it would have been absolutely incredible. Because Jordan was never truly a front running car to begin with! And the fact that Damon wasn't even doing that, makes it even more amazing.

 

HHF was having a "Schumacher" type season that year putting the car where it should not been. Had he won the title, I think it would have been one of the finest driving seasons by HHF of all time.....  He really did beat Damon Hill pretty good, though.

 

I am unsure why HFF struggled vs JV in 1997 Williams.... I guess Patrick Head didn't like HHF too much.

Edited by George Costanza, 04 April 2014 - 00:45.

[jjcale]

Why shouldn't we?  They're the same teams.

 

This ..... dont see why history should stop and start depending on who owns a team .... I dont care about their banding.

 

eg ..I prefer to say Brackley rather than Merc .... I dont want to hear any of this - first Merc 1-2 since the 50s nonsense - like this wasnt the last team to win the title before Redbull and they'd never had a 1-2 before    

 

 

To answer the OP ....  it just comes down to money. Your question should really be: Would who ever is willing to put in the money necessary to win keep the current branding? 

 

Either that or it might be fluke win. In which case if you say "ever" rather than give us a time period, its not really possible to say "no", is it?   its not like them fluking a winning would breach the laws of physics or something like that.... 

Edited by jjcale, 04 April 2014 - 05:11.

[Kristian]

 

What? Do you even remember that race? Kimi overtook Fisi after the SC came in. Get your memory straight. The off-road incident had nothing to do with it.

 

And Sauber won a race already, it was still BMW Sauber F1 Team in 2008 - stupid thread

 

Kimi went off at the start passing a bunch of cars on the run-off. That enabled him to be second to pick off Fisi on the restart. I believe that had he been further back, he probably wouldn't have made it given the FI's straightline speed. 

 

And no BMW Sauber did not count as Sauber - the team was registered as BMW, and they kept the name out of respect of the team's history. If it was Sauber-BMW then that would have been another story, but it wasn't.