Halfway through the season I was sure that Mika Hakkinen and not Michael Schumacher was going to win his third championship. McLaren was definitely faster than Ferrari and Mika had managed to overcome the set up problems that were so prevalent in the early part of the season. McLaren, who were always fast, gained reliability and were clawing back Ferrari’s lead.

So why did Michael win the championship with such a demanding lead?

I believe that the answer to this question lies not just with the ability of the drivers. It is far more complex than that. Teamwork, strategy changes on the day and driver versatility, all played their role.

Ross Brawn has to be one of the best, if not the best, F1 strategist ever. It is not that he can come up with a winning race strategy much faster than any of his competitors but his brilliance is in his ability to constantly review the plan against events as they unfold and make the right change at the right time. Schumacher has the ability to contribute to race strategy during a race while still maintaining very fast laps, which has turned into a formidable partnership.

Schumacher’s versatility can also not be ignored. Apart from his huge technical skill as a driver he has the ability to compensate for minor weaknesses in his car, which often got him on the podium when other drivers would not even have finished in the points. He is exceptionally quick on a wet track, virtually unbeatable in a pit stop and very good at overtaking back markers.

He has always been able to find the extra speed when it was needed most and seemed to be able to sustain almost qualifying pace for lap after lap to gain position.

Most of all he was lucky. Often it would rain when he needed it to.

Garry Player, in a press interview agreed that he was a lucky golfer but added: "You know, the more I practice, the luckier I get".

Similarly, Michael Schumacher makes his own luck.

Ferrari did not have it all their way this season. Initially they had a huge reliability advantage but they were never quite as fast as McLaren. They struggled with tyre wear throughout the season and every time they added a little speed it was only to find that McLaren added just enough to still be faster. They had to rely on tactics, often gamble, and it paid off.

They deserve the win.

McLaren, on the other hand, must feel that they handed both championships to Ferrari.

Their strategy often did not seem to take race circumstances into account. Dry to wet tyre changes alone must have cost them the difference in the constructors championship. Their timing always seem to be wrong and I can think of two races when they let Coulthard struggle a lap at an appalling pace because they timed their pit stops wrong.

Twice, when it was critical, McLaren lost track position (and consequently, valuable points) because of premature starting (10 second penalties that early in the race invariably means that you join at the back of the pack).

I wonder if this inclination to crawl on the starting grid is not related to the blistering starts we have seen from this team. It is possible that the technology that allows McLaren (especially Hakkinen) to beat all the others off the line may also cause the car to amble forward unintentionally.

Hakkinen is a brilliant driver. He is consistent and very fast.

It appears, however, that Mika needs everything to be just right before he can do his best. In the early part of the season he was not matching Coulthard’s performance. Towards the end of the season he was consistently faster than Coulthard. Possibly because he had finally found out how to set the car up or McLaren found out what was needed to present him with a car that he can perform in.

Mika can be reasonably fast in the wet, but only if his car was set up for a wet race. A dry setup with rain tyres reduces him to a pedestrian performance.

In short: I believe that Mika, although very fast, lacks the versatility to adapt to unexpected changes. Against a rival like Schumacher it was not good enough.

McLaren were faster, but overall, Ferrari were the better team.

Barrichello and Coulthard are not that easy to assess. Neither lived up to my expectations, this season.

David Coulthard drove some brilliant races earlier in the season and was poised to be the challenger for the championship and then it all turned to custard.

As soon as Hakkinen managed to come to terms with his car, it seems that Coulthard stepped back. He still managed to occasionally produce a fastest lap but never seemed to challenge Hakkinen.

Strange. Stranger still when you remember his Kamikaze overtaking approach that sidelined Hakkinen in previous seasons.

Barrichello, on the other hand, seemed to extend his honeymoon period until it took up the whole season.

He never looked comfortable in the car. He always looked as if he did not get it set up in time for the race, let alone qualifying. He even looked uneasy behind the wheel in the one race that he won.

If I were Barrichello I would not take too much time off during the off-season and spend it getting used to next year’s Ferrari, before somebody else does.

I am not suggesting that Barrichello should be faster or as fast as Schumacher, that may be too much to expect, but I am sure that the powers at Ferrari are entitled to expect him to finish a lot closer to Schumacher. After all, they are driving the same car.

In the next fortnight or so I will publish a team and driver review of the season. Following that, I will watch the off-season testing with interest and give you my views and predictions (unreliable as they may be – off season testing has always been inconclusive) as the teams get ready for what could be a very competitive season.

Agree or disagree ?
Please submit any comments you have on this commentary below
Your comments and the Heretic's reply could be published on NewsOnF1.

Back to Top
Back to the Diagnosis & Prognosis Main Page