Why were Ferrari/Schumacher not that quick in 2003?
Discussion
As we all know 2002 and 2004 were two of the most dominant seasons in F1 history, yet sandwiched in-between them was 2003 which went down to the wire. This is despite there being no regulation changes between these seasons.
With 2 races to go Williams were actually ahead of Ferrari in the constructors. Although Schumacher led the drivers standings since round 8, he, Montoya and Raikkonen were all within 2 points of each other with just 3 races remaining.
It is just bizarre that the rest of the field suddenly caught up with Ferrari in 2003 and then completely dropped back again the following year.
With 2 races to go Williams were actually ahead of Ferrari in the constructors. Although Schumacher led the drivers standings since round 8, he, Montoya and Raikkonen were all within 2 points of each other with just 3 races remaining.
It is just bizarre that the rest of the field suddenly caught up with Ferrari in 2003 and then completely dropped back again the following year.
DOCG said:
As we all know 2002 and 2004 were two of the most dominant seasons in F1 history, yet sandwiched in-between them was 2003 which went down to the wire. This is despite there being no regulation changes between these seasons.
False.There were significant regulation changes introduced in 2003 specifically to try and reduce Ferrari's dominance.
The points system was amended to reduce the advantage of winning. The old system of 10-6-4-3-2-1 was replaced with 10-8-6-5-4-3-2-1.
Parc ferme rules were introduced to prevent qualifying engines etc. - this was done specifically due to Ferrari admitting that they had 1,000hp qualifying engine coming for 2003.
Tyre companies could only bring one type of wet tyre - this was done to remove the much superior Bridgestone intermediate tyre.
One shot qualifying was introduced - again specifically a measure to introduced to give the Michelin teams an advantage as it was clear in 2001-02 that the Michelin was better over a single lap but less durable.
The FIA was quite open at the time that these measures were aimed specifically at Ferrari.
ralphrj said:
False.
There were significant regulation changes introduced in 2003 specifically to try and reduce Ferrari's dominance.
The points system was amended to reduce the advantage of winning. The old system of 10-6-4-3-2-1 was replaced with 10-8-6-5-4-3-2-1.
Parc ferme rules were introduced to prevent qualifying engines etc. - this was done specifically due to Ferrari admitting that they had 1,000hp qualifying engine coming for 2003.
Tyre companies could only bring one type of wet tyre - this was done to remove the much superior Bridgestone intermediate tyre.
One shot qualifying was introduced - again specifically a measure to introduced to give the Michelin teams an advantage as it was clear in 2001-02 that the Michelin was better over a single lap but less durable.
The FIA was quite open at the time that these measures were aimed specifically at Ferrari.
I meant regulations for the cars, Ferrari even used the 2002 cars for the first 4 races of 2003. My point was that usually when there is a big mix up of team performance it is due to a major regulation change (for example 2009, 2014, 2022).There were significant regulation changes introduced in 2003 specifically to try and reduce Ferrari's dominance.
The points system was amended to reduce the advantage of winning. The old system of 10-6-4-3-2-1 was replaced with 10-8-6-5-4-3-2-1.
Parc ferme rules were introduced to prevent qualifying engines etc. - this was done specifically due to Ferrari admitting that they had 1,000hp qualifying engine coming for 2003.
Tyre companies could only bring one type of wet tyre - this was done to remove the much superior Bridgestone intermediate tyre.
One shot qualifying was introduced - again specifically a measure to introduced to give the Michelin teams an advantage as it was clear in 2001-02 that the Michelin was better over a single lap but less durable.
The FIA was quite open at the time that these measures were aimed specifically at Ferrari.
Siao said:
Tyres, the car was chewing them compared to previous years. Otherwise it was a very good car, quite fast. Combined with the expanding Michelins, they got on the backfoot mid-season, but then they got some form back.
It was a great season that one.
I thought that the controversial Michelin 2003 tyres were also used for much of 2002.It was a great season that one.
DOCG said:
Siao said:
Tyres, the car was chewing them compared to previous years. Otherwise it was a very good car, quite fast. Combined with the expanding Michelins, they got on the backfoot mid-season, but then they got some form back.
It was a great season that one.
I thought that the controversial Michelin 2003 tyres were also used for much of 2002.It was a great season that one.
ralphrj said:
They were introduced at Monaco 2003.
Interesting background reading on the expanding tyres:http://www.atlasf1.com/2003/ita/goren.html
andycaca said:
Interesting background reading on the expanding tyres:
http://www.atlasf1.com/2003/ita/goren.html
Great share, plenty of detail in that.http://www.atlasf1.com/2003/ita/goren.html
The F1 knowledge and experience* at this table, what a time;
‘Dennis was seated at the front row of the press conference table on Friday afternoon at Monza. To his left was Ferrari's technical director, Ross Brawn. Behind them were Williams's technical director Patrick Head and Renault's team chief Flavio Briatore. Three Michelin-shod teams versus one Bridgestone-shod representative. The odds were never going to be in Brawn's favour.’
- plus Flav…
Gassing Station | Formula 1 | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff