32 replies to this topic

[Peri_Piket]

I'm really surprised with McLaren and Renault - currently top teams - promoting rookie drivers Hamilton and Kovailanen.

Williams did last year with Rosberg, but they weren't WDC/WCC real contenders last year.

As I remember, the last time it happened was DC replacing Senna death in 1994, but that also wasn't a planned move.

Of course, some things have changed along those years.
The test driver hole have increased a lot, with Kovailanen being a "freshment" with thousands of KMs aboard of a F1.
Also the decision of countinuing his racing education in house, instead of lending him to a lesser gifted team in technical terms, that might now teach him the adequate corrections to the problems faced along the season.
The long term contracts regarding to the team's driver development programs bonding raising stars for several season, making the team change very costly, for example, the Buttongate.

Anyway, instead of hiring promises in smaller team, the top teams are preferring to launch their own future champions in house.
Are they waisting a top seat in their former year?
Wouldn't an average good driver do a better job, hunting down WCC?

[Clatter]

Button was a rookie when he started at Williams.

[Peri_Piket]

Originally posted by Clatter
Button was a rookie when he started at Williams.

Point taken, but Williams wasn't in line for WDC/WCC as the BMW engine project was new, in their come back to F1.
So Williams was grooming Button, instead of going into WDC/WCC.

I forgot that one.

[kamix]

WDC no, WCC yes.

[Mauseri]

Barrichello, Montoya, Webber, .... didnt adapt so well to their new teams.

Old & average or a motivated young without bad habits, now that's a question.

[WHITE]

Originally posted by micra_k10
Old & average or a motivated young without bad habits, now that's a question.

Good question !


yungsters are easier to "shape"

[Group B]

Here's another question; how many WDC's of the last 20 years began their careers in top teams?

[Gemini]

Well, there are no more Minardis, Jordan's Arrows', Sauber's that could take those younsters in return for some money (like Minardi did with Alonso) RedBull has shitload of cash and they will pursue their own marketing objectives, and not be nursing somebody's drivers.

[WHITE]

Originally posted by Group B
Here's another question; how many WDC's of the last 20 years began their careers in top teams?

Jacques Villeneuve

[BorderReiver]

Originally posted by Group B
Here's another question; how many WDC's of the last 20 years began their careers in top teams?

Ooooh this'll be fun.

Right, off the top of my head . . .

Prost ('86) started at McLaren (though in the very early 80s they weren't too strong).
Mansell ('92) debuted at Lotus when they were still a fairly stong outfit.
Villeneuve ('97) at Williams, undoubtedly the major force of the 1990s.

And that, I think, is about it.

[Peri_Piket]

Originally posted by micra_k10
Old & average or a motivated young without bad habits, now that's a question.

As Ron stated, there is a learning curve the Rookies have to go through, making mistakes in the begin of season and sort them out along the year.

[Clatter]

Originally posted by Group B
Here's another question; how many WDC's of the last 20 years began their careers in top teams?

JV is the only one that springs to mind. But then there have only been 8 champions in the last 20 years.

[RDM]

The top teams are quite capable of knowing what is "right" for them, so if they choose to stick a rookie in their top team, it must, by definition, be right.

[Group B]

Hmm, that's what, two/three* from eight? I'm not totally against it, but on the whole I think most drivers benefit from a spell at the lower end.

*Lotus is borderline

[WHITE]

Originally posted by Clatter


JV is the only one that springs to mind. But then there have only been 8 champions in the last 20 years.

That is true. Before, I can only remember Andretti and Fittipaldi starting their careers in a top team: Lotus.

[carbonfibre]

Originally posted by BorderReiver


Ooooh this'll be fun.

Right, off the top of my head . . .

Prost ('86) started at McLaren (though in the very early 80s they weren't too strong).
Mansell ('92) debuted at Lotus when they were still a fairly stong outfit.
Villeneuve ('97) at Williams, undoubtedly the major force of the 1990s.

And that, I think, is about it.

Prost started at Renault as far as i know.

[Clatter]

Originally posted by Group B
Hmm, that's what, two/three* from eight? I'm not totally against it, but on the whole I think most drivers benefit from a spell at the lower end.

*Lotus is borderline

I disagree. I think there is no benefit to a driver starting his career at the lower end, he will learn less there than at a top team.

You could say there is an advantage to a team of not having a rookie, and letting a lesser team blood him.

[BorderReiver]

Originally posted by carbonfibre
Prost started at Renault as far as i know.

Have another look . The 1980 history book might help you out ;).

[jokuvaan]

Teams have to look futher ahead than just first season results. Binding potential great driver is very important and productive invesment.

Also rookie might not be so rookie as before, with better experience, training and new technology like simulators.

Nico is no general yardstick of rookies, he had simply miserable car that even limited his Friday training.

[Dudley]

Originally posted by carbonfibre
Prost started at Renault as far as i know.

I was wondering if anyone was going to blunder into that one without having a sneaky check first.

Well done

[carbonfibre]

Damn you guys, well it shows one thing: always check the records first you can't trust your own thoughts.;)

[giacomo]

Originally posted by Group B
Here's another question; how many WDC's of the last 20 years began their careers in top teams?

Unsurprisingly, not too many.
Because in general not too many driver careers of modern F1 did begin in top teams.

Out of memory Jenson Button, Jacques Villeneuve and David Coulthard are fitting this description.
Maybe Alexander Wurz.
Other examples would be number two drivers like Michael Andretti, Satoru Nakajima or Johnny Dumfries.

[Mauseri]

Originally posted by Peri_Piket
As Ron stated, there is a learning curve the Rookies have to go through, making mistakes in the begin of season and sort them out along the year.

Yeah.. it's a high risk to start young or inexperienced rookies in any team. But a prepared and proven rookie isnt that bad. And in top team it's easier. It might be a bit more risk but more exceptation than a 'team change' of old dog. Plus that rookies usually are motivated and cheap. You dont need to tell them push.

Villeneuve or Hamilton?

[Tenmantaylor]

I know Schumacher wasnt in the Jordan long and did an amazing job out of the box mid season but surely he learned his trade at Benetton and went on to win the title with them. Does this count?

[Paul Prost]

McLaren was not a top team when Prost joined them, they were strictly middle of the road. The car broke a lot and Prost lost complete confidence in the car so we basically walked out after a season.

[FLB]

Arguably, Gilles Villeneuve: First Grand Prix in a WDC-winning car (a Team McLaren M23 at Silverstone 1977), then a switch to Ferrari, who won both championships in 1977.

The only reason I say 'arguably' is because in both cases, it was as third driver. Mass's status was unclear with McLaren for 1978, but Lauda was still a Ferrari driver when he went to Maranello, at least in theory. Gilles however did begin the 1978 season as the bona fide second Ferrari driver, only having three Grand Prix under his belt.

[kNt]

I don't really understand this (and also Kubica), since even Kimi and Alonso got better over time. The biggest example of how experience seems to help is imho Massa.

[Wouter]

Damon Hill comes very close as a WDC who started in a topteam; only his first few races where with (absolute backmarkers, at that time) Brabham. Not strictly a rookie, but he was certainly a risky long shot for the second seat of the absolute topteam Williams (at that time). His qualities as driver was then not known anymore than Hamiltons are now - when it comes to predicting how they would do in an F1 topseat (both obviously were/are known from lower racing categories).

[Fatgadget]

Could it be that teams are now getting more adventurous instead of going for the belt and braces approach of yesteryear?..

Midland initiated the trend with Kathkayen (sp) and Monteiro and they did not exactly fall flat on their face as the pundits suggested did they?

[Dudley]

Originally posted by Fatgadget
Could it be that teams are now getting more adventurous instead of going for the belt and braces approach of yesteryear?..

Midland initiated the trend with Kathkayen (sp) and Monteiro and they did not exactly fall flat on their face as the pundits suggested did they?

They didn't?

Plus weren't Narain and Tiago 1 and 2 in world series by renault? Hiring the top 2 finishers in a series 1 step below F1 is not very adventurous.

[carbonfibre]

Then id rather give that credit to Sauber for hiring Raikonen back in 2001 or Massa in 2002.

[Clatter]

Originally posted by Fatgadget
Could it be that teams are now getting more adventurous instead of going for the belt and braces approach of yesteryear?..

Midland initiated the trend with Kathkayen (sp) and Monteiro and they did not exactly fall flat on their face as the pundits suggested did they?

Midland initiated nothing. Teams have been bringing in drivers from the lower series since the sport begun.

[Calorus]

Hang on haven't we worked out that of the worlsd champions in the last 20 years, and of the 5 that didn't at least 2 completed less than half a season with the lower ranked team they started in?