I have been giving some thought as to why McLaren, with their extremely strong driver pairing, their great resource and technical ability, have always managed to be at the front or thereabouts but struggle to reach the ultimate goal. Of course, we can point to their strategy problems but if we ignore them for a moment where else could we look for issues and is there something perhaps fundamental somewhere in their philosophy?
On thing that gets thrown around and causes a lot of problems is the driver equality issue which we can only speculate on and will always be fruitless. there is somewhere else we can go with this, though, and it is the idea that neither driver is overly important in the design process. That the drivers are a component of the car and not that the car is an instrument to be wielded by the driver. After all, introducing the driver into the design process is to introduce a human factor into the design process and McLaren come across as being quite against that sort of thing.
"We build the car, we do what the computer says, you get in and drive it".
Could this explain why their form changes from circuit to circuit and shifts from driver to driver? Could they achieve better results by focusing more around a driver and what they want from a car than focusing on the car and then what they want from the driver? As reports could be interpreted, Fernando Alonso is quite headstrong in elevating the pilot and standing as an imposed divine purpose for the engineers, at least, in his Ferrari environment. Quite the opposite of the balance that I observe at McLaren.
Just my rambling thoughts.
On thing that gets thrown around and causes a lot of problems is the driver equality issue which we can only speculate on and will always be fruitless. there is somewhere else we can go with this, though, and it is the idea that neither driver is overly important in the design process. That the drivers are a component of the car and not that the car is an instrument to be wielded by the driver. After all, introducing the driver into the design process is to introduce a human factor into the design process and McLaren come across as being quite against that sort of thing.
"We build the car, we do what the computer says, you get in and drive it".
Could this explain why their form changes from circuit to circuit and shifts from driver to driver? Could they achieve better results by focusing more around a driver and what they want from a car than focusing on the car and then what they want from the driver? As reports could be interpreted, Fernando Alonso is quite headstrong in elevating the pilot and standing as an imposed divine purpose for the engineers, at least, in his Ferrari environment. Quite the opposite of the balance that I observe at McLaren.
Just my rambling thoughts.


To be honest I'm happy with my comment relating to Button's contribution based solely on the number of times he returns to the factory between GP's to work on progressing the car. We also hear his feedback to his engineer during practice before each GP, most on the site refer to it as complaining. It's worth remembering my original comment was a reaction to someone saying McLarens drivers just turn up to drive and then if something goes wrong they go away and wait for it to be fixed. Maybe you can enlighten me and explain why my comment created so much reaction when this absurd posting suggesting McLaren's drivers just turn up to drive and don't contribute was ignored. 