|
||||||||||
|
||||||||||
5 May 2012, 16:32 (Ref:3069903) | #1 | ||
Subscriber
Veteran
Join Date: Jul 2001
Posts: 3,281
|
Ferrari's demise? (again)
In 1994 Todt arrived to a semi chaotic Ferrari that had had two disastrous seasons after the Prost's crisis. In 1996 Schumacher and his Benettton group arrived. The following years are a well-known history, a legendary history, in fact.
In 2007, Schuey retires and virtually his group as well retires. In 2008 Todt leaves the direct operation of the team. Before Todt-Schuey, Ferrari was in a long state of relative mediocrity, except Prost's blip. After the departure of that ultra successful group, Ferrari, *could* be in a phase of coming back to a secondary status. In fact, these last seasons the team seems precisely this way. That intro is not to expose my opinion, not at all. Its purpose is to present the graph about Ferrari's performance since Alboreto's title bid season (1985). The values are the fraction of team points respecting the maximum possible points in the season. I have represented a horizontal line at level 0.5 taht, approximately, can mean the cut line for a very successful team. Is Ferrari "condemned" to a secondary role (again)? |
||
|
5 May 2012, 21:01 (Ref:3070021) | #2 |
Veteran
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 629
|
What is the rolling average for the smooth line?
Very cool! |
|
5 May 2012, 21:21 (Ref:3070031) | #3 | ||
Race Official
20KPINAL
Join Date: Dec 1999
Posts: 21,606
|
Well, Schummy, I'm with you in this analysis. Ferrari seems to be in a downhill.
|
||
__________________
Show me a man who won't give it to his woman An' I'll show you somebody who will |
5 May 2012, 23:52 (Ref:3070074) | #4 | |
Racer
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 197
|
Hope you've factored in the cosy relationship Ferrari had with F1's deal makers at the time of their ascension.
|
|
|
6 May 2012, 00:16 (Ref:3070080) | #5 | |
Retired
20KPINAL
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 22,897
|
It does seem as though Ferrari have gone back to their pre-96 state. But at least they are only a few tenths of a second off the pace, rather than the one or two seconds off the pace that used to be their norm.
The early nineties almost had me feeling sorry for them. They should have done much better with the resources that they had, but sticking with the too heavy and too thirsty V12 engines played a big part in their poor form. |
|
|
6 May 2012, 01:02 (Ref:3070090) | #6 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 4,320
|
I miss the Berger-Alesi era. No teutonic blitzkriegs and relentlessly carpet bombing the opposition without breaking a sweat. Just two heart-on their-sleeves mavericks sneaking a win on the odd occasion. An innocent era in which Ferrari where popular and liked.
|
||
__________________
If I had asked my customer what they wanted, they would've said a faster horse. -Henry Ford |
6 May 2012, 16:13 (Ref:3070267) | #7 | |
Race Official
Veteran
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 9,114
|
I'm not convinced. I always get the sense they can come back. They still have huge wads of money, albeit they lack the McLaren Geek Style Super Spacestation. Ferrari also do not innovate.
|
|
|
6 May 2012, 16:56 (Ref:3070277) | #8 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 545
|
To be fair to them, this isn't just a modern-era trait, they were often stagnant technologically under Enzo.
They stuck with front-engined cars too long (still running the Dino in 1960) and they stuck with space frame chassis too long as well. It is interesting that a team with such a strong tradition isn't at the forefront of development, though, I suppose by definition 'tradition' also implies 'conservatism'. It's an interesting graph Schummy, thanks. |
||
__________________
2013, 2012, 2011 Champion of Brands Winner 2010 Ian Taylor Trophy Winner |
6 May 2012, 17:17 (Ref:3070287) | #9 | ||
Racer
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 317
|
I've also viewed Ferrari as on the decline, but I don't think they're all that bad off. After narrowly winning both 2007 championships, in 2008 they almost won the WDC (although some poor stewarding at Spa made it closer than it should have been) and won as a constructor. In 2009 they were essentially tied with McLaren far behind Brawn and their double-diffuser domination of at least half a season. In 2010 they almost won the WDC. In 2011 they were a good ways off from the Red Bull, but so was everybody. This year isn't off to the greatest start, especially with Massa pulling so little weight, but Alonso has had a decent start to the season and the season is still young.
Ferrari has still been threatening for wins, so while they aren't dominating I don't see a "demise" here. |
||
|
7 May 2012, 14:44 (Ref:3070681) | #10 | |
Veteran
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 1,223
|
Well, that is not entirely true. What about the semi-automatic gearbox in the 1989 Ferrari? Yes, I know that Lotus actually developed long before Ferrari, but still. I know as well, it did have a lot of problems in the car, but it is now de facto in F1.
You can also look at the E-Diff in Schumi's Ferrari. Ferrari are still a top 3 team. It is not like they are suffering the same way Williams are(despite their recent upturn in performance for this season). They still have top technical people there. Plus, probably the best driver in F1(and I'm not talking about Massa ). Sure their season start hasn't been as strong as they could have started with, but I would still say that considering the car they are better placed than they should be. They do seem to be able to develop the car over the season well(much like McLaren do). |
|
|
7 May 2012, 15:23 (Ref:3070701) | #11 | |||
Race Official
20KPINAL
Join Date: Dec 1999
Posts: 21,606
|
Quote:
|
|||
__________________
Show me a man who won't give it to his woman An' I'll show you somebody who will |
7 May 2012, 16:23 (Ref:3070723) | #12 | |||
Subscriber
Veteran
Join Date: Jul 2001
Posts: 3,281
|
Quote:
There is an interesting thing about team positions in WTC. In the eleven season with Schumacher-Brawn, its positions were: 1st - 6 times 2nd - 4 times 3rd - 1 time Average = 1.5, Median = 1 In the 15 non Schu-Brawn they were: 1st - 2 times 2nd - 2 times 3rd - 6 times 4th - 5 times Average = 2.9, Median = 3 In short, Ferrari has been about the third team, except in Schumacher's troupe era, where they were first or second. It amounts to say that with Schuey they were (almost) always contenders, and without him they (almost) never were contenders (since 1986). IMO, Ferrari's image is tinted and flattered by a romantic past and by a phenomenal success in Schumacher's times. They were a winning team sometimes in the past (basically Lauda), but never a consistent contender for the title along the years. More consistent were the Chapman's Lotus, McLaren and Williams. They were contenders with many drivers and designs, along the seasons. What Ferrari has not been is a weak team (except some rare seasons). It is probably his main asset. And of course the huge personality of Enzo Ferrari is a heritage that others cannot have. |
|||
|
7 May 2012, 21:21 (Ref:3070865) | #13 | ||
Race Official
20KPINAL
Join Date: Dec 1999
Posts: 21,606
|
|||
__________________
Show me a man who won't give it to his woman An' I'll show you somebody who will |
12 May 2012, 15:09 (Ref:3073082) | #14 | |
Veteran
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 555
|
Ferrari may be closer to the pace of the fastest then they were pre '96, but so isn't the entire grid?
|
|
|
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
The demise of the FWD-Coupé | Speed-King | Road Car Forum | 3 | 27 Oct 2008 06:05 |
GM's demise... | mogwai | Sportscar & GT Racing | 10 | 29 Nov 2005 03:55 |
The Demise Of Mika Hakkinen | racer10 | Formula One | 23 | 20 Sep 2001 13:00 |
Demise of McLaren | Valve Bounce | Formula One | 8 | 24 Jun 2001 01:37 |