Could a team 'do a leicester' in F1?
Discussion
For those that don't know, in the world of football Leicester City have basically done the equivalent of Manor winning the Constructors Championship this year. 5000-1 odds yet over an entire season they comfortably outperformed the established big money clubs with an entire squad worth less than many individual players and after only just managing to stay in the league a year before.
Could this ever happen in F1, and if not, is the sport poorer as a result? I'm struggling to think of many freak one off results (Fisichella 2nd at Spa about 8 years ago, Vettel winning in the Toro Rosso, Bianchi 9th at Monaco), let alone genuine upsets over the course of a whole championship. I guess Brawn is the obvious contender, but with the pedigree involved it never felt like a major shock as such.
Most sports have the potential for an upset, and that's what many nuetrals or fair weather fans tune in to hope for. It doesn't feel like F1 has that, or even the potential for that to happen.
Could this ever happen in F1, and if not, is the sport poorer as a result? I'm struggling to think of many freak one off results (Fisichella 2nd at Spa about 8 years ago, Vettel winning in the Toro Rosso, Bianchi 9th at Monaco), let alone genuine upsets over the course of a whole championship. I guess Brawn is the obvious contender, but with the pedigree involved it never felt like a major shock as such.
Most sports have the potential for an upset, and that's what many nuetrals or fair weather fans tune in to hope for. It doesn't feel like F1 has that, or even the potential for that to happen.
Maybe.
Brawn pulled one out of the hat due to one great idea.
However, it can't be done in the same way - namely team spirit and graft and working for each other.
You need a stroke of genius from a Chapman figure.
Because there are many great minds in F1, and the winners have the money to employ the most great minds, to work on the tiny details that make the difference.
- In football, you need a big team ethic and working together to upset an apple cart. In F1, you need the opposite!
Brawn pulled one out of the hat due to one great idea.
However, it can't be done in the same way - namely team spirit and graft and working for each other.
You need a stroke of genius from a Chapman figure.
Because there are many great minds in F1, and the winners have the money to employ the most great minds, to work on the tiny details that make the difference.
- In football, you need a big team ethic and working together to upset an apple cart. In F1, you need the opposite!
RYH64E said:
Brawn reaped the rewards of massive Honda investment the year before, it wasn't the underdog it looks at first sight.
Well aside from having to shoehorn in a new engine at the 11th hour and having to raise funds from race to race...There is a great interview with Ross Brawn on the Motorsports podcast channel, well worth a listen.
RYH64E said:
Brawn reaped the rewards of massive Honda investment the year before, it wasn't the underdog it looks at first sight.
Honda invested massively year after year for no reward. Plus, all the investment and planning the year before would have been with a different engine. The turmoil of Honda withdrawing and a last minute change of engine supplier means for me Brawn is definitely still the answer.
kambites said:
Anyone know what the odds of Brawn winning the championship were at the start of the year?
Button was 5-1 for the Championship after pre-season, 50-1 prior to that.Aside from the Brawn comparison, how about shock/freak one-off results aside from those I've mentioned in recent years, and could we realistically expect another?
Edited by ukaskew on Tuesday 3rd May 08:32
ukaskew said:
kambites said:
Anyone know what the odds of Brawn winning the championship were at the start of the year?
and could we realistically expect another?IMO now would be a good time for the entire "Formula" to be re-written if closed cockpits are going to be the way forward for increased driver protection; something along the lines of the RB concept perhaps. That would give at least a hope of a smaller team coming up with a slightly different solution that happens to work better than the others.
The closest comparison for me was Heinz-Harald Frentzen getting into the championship showdown in 1999 with Jordan.
OK, Jordan had won a race before, but that was in freak conditions. In the second half of 99, for a couple of weekends in a row, it looked like HHF was about to top the might of Ferrari and McLaren.
These days, with such a gulf in budgets, I can't see it happening again. But I'd love to be proved wrong.
OK, Jordan had won a race before, but that was in freak conditions. In the second half of 99, for a couple of weekends in a row, it looked like HHF was about to top the might of Ferrari and McLaren.
These days, with such a gulf in budgets, I can't see it happening again. But I'd love to be proved wrong.
I can't see it happening. The rules are so restrictive that all the cars are the same basic design principle with the bigger budgets meaning the fine details can be endlessly refined.
But going back twenty-odd years ago when we had a mix of V8, V10 and V12 engines and the cars were different in their execution around those engines, we still had the same group of teams at the top. Yes, some were better on the twisties and some were better on the straights, but there still wasn't a chance of a Zakspeed or a Forti reaching the podium. Ofcourse there is an exception to every rule, and Minardi could prove that.
But going back twenty-odd years ago when we had a mix of V8, V10 and V12 engines and the cars were different in their execution around those engines, we still had the same group of teams at the top. Yes, some were better on the twisties and some were better on the straights, but there still wasn't a chance of a Zakspeed or a Forti reaching the podium. Ofcourse there is an exception to every rule, and Minardi could prove that.
heebeegeetee said:
RYH64E said:
Brawn reaped the rewards of massive Honda investment the year before, it wasn't the underdog it looks at first sight.
Honda invested massively year after year for no reward. Plus, all the investment and planning the year before would have been with a different engine. The turmoil of Honda withdrawing and a last minute change of engine supplier means for me Brawn is definitely still the answer.
RYH64E said:
Do you think that Brawn designed a new car in the time between Honda leaving and the new season starting? The car was basically a works Honda fitted with a Mercedes engine, all of the double diffuser and chassis design work was done under Honda ownership and with lots of Honda money, if Honda hadn't sold up they would have won the 2009 championship. The biggest change to the car was the name on the front.
You should listen to the recent Motorsport podcast with Brawn, lots of behind-the-scenes insight.RYH64E said:
Do you think that Brawn designed a new car in the time between Honda leaving and the new season starting? The car was basically a works Honda fitted with a Mercedes engine, all of the double diffuser and chassis design work was done under Honda ownership and with lots of Honda money, if Honda hadn't sold up they would have won the 2009 championship. The biggest change to the car was the name on the front.
Sorry but no they would not have done. The Honda engine was almost as good as their current one.That car would have been 3rd or 4th best with the original engine.
AndrewEH1 said:
RYH64E said:
Do you think that Brawn designed a new car in the time between Honda leaving and the new season starting? The car was basically a works Honda fitted with a Mercedes engine, all of the double diffuser and chassis design work was done under Honda ownership and with lots of Honda money, if Honda hadn't sold up they would have won the 2009 championship. The biggest change to the car was the name on the front.
You should listen to the recent Motorsport podcast with Brawn, lots of behind-the-scenes insight.ukaskew said:
Button was 5-1 for the Championship after pre-season, 50-1 prior to that.
OK so nowhere near the 5000:1 that Leicester were. I wonder what the odds of Manor winning this year were? It would be interesting to know which side of 5000:1 they were. The only other example I can think of off the top of my head is Cooper in 1959.
Gassing Station | Formula 1 | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff