I want to put something into perspective. Micheal joined the Scuderia in 1996 and he just barely won the championship finally in 2000. If we compare this to Charles journey it is a similar timeline. I think the Scuderia are on a good trajectory. Some of the team are not used to fighting for a championship or used operating on that level. Charles and the team will learn and mature. Michael had already won multiple championships before joining the Scuderia. Charles is fighting for his first. The team still needs a ‘Todt’ to add to the ‘Brawn’. Binotto needs help. Ross had it and we see how they became a juggernaut.
As much as I'd like to agree, I don't think you can compare in any way. The team Ferrari was in 96-00 was way different than the one Ferrari has now. Reliability was a big factor in all the races for all the teams in that era, and then in 1999 Ferrari had incredible reliably which was a key to Irvine contending for the WDC, and the team winning the WCC. Now all the teams (for the most part) are incredibly reliable, so any DNF can be very costly. Also Ferrari didn't have the best car until 1999 (barely), which of course MSC got injuried. Ferrari now have the best car, but with reliability issues and a team riddled with mistakes. Ferrari of 96-00 rarely made mistakes, and Schumacher proved he was a champion, while Leclerc is still making silly mistakes, even if he one of the fastest on the grid.
Yes. We can, should, and do compare. Ferrari is a different team? What? It’s not the same people? Reliability is still a big factor. It was a factor then and it’s a factor now for both championship contenders. Ferrari didn’t have the best car in 1999 or in 2000. The McLaren Merc was easier to drive and easier on the tires and equally as fast. Michael broke his leg in 1999 because of Ferrari unreliability. His brakes failed!!! The Ferrari then had multiple reliability failures in 2000. The Ferrari and the McLaren Merc were very close in relatability. Ferrari don’t have the best car now. It’s equal with the Red Bull both in speed and in reliability. Ferrari faster in the turns and RB in the straights. RB had their reliability failures early in the season and Ferrari are having them now. As my post said the team needs to operate at a higher level and need a ‘Todt’ to the ‘Brawn’ so to speak to balance out where Binotto is weak. As I pointed out Schumacher had already won the championship twice before joining the Scuderia and it still took 5 years. Schumacher ‘proved he was a champion’ by driving into Villeneuve and getting disqualified from an entire season. LeClerc has yet to win an F1 drivers championship and is performing very well for his experience. Considering the time it took the machine that was Schumacher to deliver a championship to Ferrari, 5 years. Charles is doing VERY well and will be champion at Ferrari. Your post is simply contrarian.
I was there. Heartbreaking to say the least! I was so disappointed I wanted to leave the track immediately but Carlos was doing a great race too. The SF75 looks great on track, a real shame we only have 4 victories..
Unfortunately as we said in French : comparaison n’est pas raison ! I would love to see Charles evolving in the same way than Michael. I hate to say that but I now have some doubts about this. He is one of the best qualifier I have ever seen since 35 years. But his outstanding speed worth nothing if he’s unable to deal with pressure during the hot phase in a race. Maybe i’m too disappointed right now to be fair ..
Charles is by far one of my favorite Ferrari drivers, he pushes the car, yes it does not always work but in some respects he reminds me of Gilles, like him Charles never seems to give up. In short he tries to get the maximum out of the car. When he get out of the car there is that same love of racing, that same self reflection. In some respects the Ferrari team now reminds me of the one in the early 80's too.
Nothing wrong in comparing Leclerc to Villeneuve, but it would be better if he was in the Lauda mould instead. FYI, Villeneuve made no qualms about saying he wasn't chassing a championship, but only wins. In the opposite, for Lauda winning the championship was his goal, and he applied his efforts to that end.
I have to agree on this one either. Of course I loved Gilles and his way of driving, but in the end winning a championship is the only genuine goal for a team or a driver.
Yes you are too disappointed to be fair right now. Charles is 24. Micheal was 25 when he won his first championship. Charles will mature from this season and win his championship with the Scuderia. William, you’re missing the context of my post. I’m saying it wasn’t a respectable behavior. My sentence should have been a question with a question mark at the end.
If not a Todt or a Brawn, at minimum a Luca Baldisserri, the guy in charge of strategies—that worked!—during the Schumi years.
Villeneuve was like Nuvolari in his "All or nothing" approach to racing. He didn't care about nursing th car or adopting a conservative pace, it was flat out all the time. "Compter les points, c'est pour les épiciers* !" he once said. * Counting points is for greengrocers.
Which is why I was not much of a fan of his. To arrive first, first you have to arrive. A lesson the Prince of Destruction never learned. Sadly he could have walked the WDC the year he perished.
They had Meekes (however it’s spelled) and he did well and they promoted him and now strategy sucks again.
Mekies (I looked it up ) I don’t think was ever involved in strategy but was/is (?) sporting director. They poached him from his previous job at the FIA so makes sense he was involved in the sporting aspect. Previous to his job at the FIA I think he came from Renault and that’s where strategist Rueda was before so wonder if Mekies isn’t the guy keeping him there. I think Rueda’s claim to fame was many years ago when at Renault kept Kimi out on really old tires and lucked out with a good result but hasn’t dune much since then. Seems he’s always trying some clever strategies where a boringly simple, logical one works be best.
Chuck will come around , pretty obvious he is feeling the pressure and i highly doubt he has been under such intense scrutiny in his racing career so far. He is still a kid and he has what it takes to win , talent , speed and competitiveness . Just a little bit of mental coaching and i feel he will be one of the dominant drivers of the next decade.
I guess you took offense to someone disagreeing with you. 2) Ferrari have completely different people and is run completely differently then and now. Can't compare at all. 3) Google 1999 Formula 1 and see how many DNF's were in that season. It's probably more than the last several seasons combined. Ferrari had just 3 retirements and 1 DNS (Schumacher at Silverstone), including the time MSC binned it from the lead in Canada. That's insane reliability for that era. 4) 1999 Mclaren were faster in quali, but Ferrari was faster in the race. Keep in mind this was mostly with Irvine as lead driver, and he was typically 8 tenths slower than Michael. Reliability wise Ferrari was much better than McLaren. I'd say Ferrari for sure had the best car in 1999 and would have easily won the WDC with Michael if he did not get injured. 2000 McLaren and Ferrari were extremely equal and it made for a great season. 5) Ferrari having 8 poles, should have won Monaco easily, should have won Silverstone, Leclerc has DNF'd from the lead 2 times or was it 3? Fastest car on average in outright pace. Equal on reliability? Not sure how anyone could think that. But because of Ferrari's reliability issues, that could mean they don't necessarily have the "best" car, but there is enough to suggest they have the fastest across the whole season. 6) I'd love to see Ferrari operate at the Todt/Brawn level, but as I said, they aren't the same team and they are far from that level of "perfection". 8) The point of bring that up is what? As you even said in point 7, MSC proved he was a champion (double champ even) prior to joining Ferrari. 9) "for this experience"? Elite drivers can perform at a champion level quite quickly. Hamilton nearly won it in 2008, look what Alonso did as soon as he had a good car. MSC dominated once he got a good car. Charles is considered by most as Elite as well. He has all the skills to be a champion, but he is a victim of his own mistakes on several occasions. 10) Call it what you like. You are claiming Ferrari of 2022 are on the same path as Ferrari was starting in 1996, suggesting that Ferrari is destined to win the championships in 2024, give or take a year. That's just fantasy talk. There is almost no resemblance between those teams so there is no grounds for a logical prediction.
