World Champions From The Start?

[RasputinLives]

In a recent debate on this forum over Danial Ricciardo it was suggested that a future world champion should show the potential as a champion from the start. I initally dismissed this thinking that every driver develops at their own pace until I looked at a few stats and started putting together the following. The below shows how many Grand Prix it took the last 16 champions to score a race victory in F1(including the race they won in)

Jacques Villeneurve 4 GP
Lewis Hamilton 6 GP
Ayrton Senna 17 GP
Michael Schumacher 18 GP
Damon Hill 19 GP
Alain Prost 21 GP
Sebastian Vettel 22 GP
Nelson Piquet 23 GP
Fernando Alonso 30 GP
Alan Jones 31 GP
Niki Lauda 32 GP
Kimi Raikkonen 36 GP
Keke Rosberg 64 GP
Nigel Mansell 76 GP
Mika Hakkinen 92 GP
Jenson Button 115 GP

Now obviously there are 4 big exceptions to the rules here at the end but I'll come to them in a bit but these stats show that on average an F1 world champion has a race victory under his belt by the end of his second full season in Formula 1. Kimi and Lauda slightly buck the trend of this as both took their first GP victory very early on in their 3rd full F1 seasons - but if we say the avergae F1 season is now 18 races a year then the top 12 all managed a victory within their first 2 seasons of F1.

If you look as those stats as facts then Toro Rosso's recent decision to drop Sebastian Buemi (55 GPs) and Jaime Alguersauri (46 GPs) seems pretty sound if the idea of thier youth programme is to find future world champs. In the same light the likes of Nico Rosberg(108 GPs), Kamui Kobaysashi(40 GPs) and Adrian Sutil(90 GPs) are fighting a battle against stats as they strive to be future world champions. If you work by the same logic despite the state their careers are in now Robert Kubica (won his 29th GP) and Heikki Kovalainen (won his 28th GP) at least don't have to fight history to be world champions.

Yeah but they all got early victories because they were in the top cars early I hear you say. This is of course very true but untrue that they started out in them. yes the top of the tablers such as Villenurve and Hamilton did but Senna spent a season at Tolmen, Hill at Brabham, Alonso at Minardi, Vettel at Toro Rosso and even Schumacher starting out in the 92 Benneton was hardly a start at the front. The truth of it is that if a talent arrives in F1 that has world championship potential then a place in the top teams pretty much clears by itself. Senna's 84 season got him the Lotus seat, Alonso's tiem at Minardi meant he was lined up for the Renault seat, Schumahcer's one qualifiying session in a Jordon suddenly cleared a spot at Benneton and Sebastian Vettel powered his way to the Red Bull seat. Thats just the way its done.

That led me to reflect on some of the drivers we consider to be future world champions in todays field and you have to say statstically the pressure is on for the likes of Di Resta, Hulkenberg and Perez. All 3 have 19 races under their belt and this second season should really be the one they set on fire in order to push themselves into the bigger seat. The potential is there - Perez is lined up for the Ferrari seat whilst Hulkenberg and Di Resta go head to head for the Merc seat but in order to get them they really need to show how good they are this season. Statistically this should be their season of their first victory - I can't see either a Sauber or a Force India grabbing a race win so maybe they'll have to fight that statstic.

Slightly stepped up for them are Ricciardo and Vergne who take over the Toro Rosso seats both starting their first full season. This is the head to head I'm most interested in because I do honestly believe if one of them puts in a good enough performance then they'll take Webber's seat at Red Bull for 2013 and really will have world championship potential however as has been shown with Alguersauri and Buemi if you only perform average you're not going anywhere.

So what about the exceptions? Well Keke Rosberg is a massive exception not just on this stat but also he's the only one of the 16 to have not won a race before his championship season and the only driver to win the championship with 1 win in the entire season. Mansell and Button have a pretty similar story in the fact that both with journeymen who people doubted from time to time but always seemed to get good results with good machinary and they eventually lasted around long enough to find themselves in equiptment that could take them to the championship. The real strange one is Mika Hakkinen who is the only one outside the 36 GPs rules who has more than one world championship and it took him 6 and a bit season before he notched up a Grand Prix win and that one was gifted to him. Strangely the very next season he romped to the title with 8 wins.

But are the 4 who are statistically different actually that much different from the others? They all made an impact right from their entry into F1. Mika dragged a piece of scrap metal posing as a Lotus round to decent results even getting 8th in the championship with 2 4th places in 92 before throwing his lot in with Ron and Mclaren and waiting for them to eventually produce a championship winning car - which they did. Keke Rosberg certainly appeared on everyones radar from the moment he got in an F1 car as a hard charger but a car breaker - he certainly inspired a following though. Jenson Button arrived in F1 under a wave of publicity and was labelled a phenonem and for is first 6 Grand Prixs he looked the part but even after that we got the whole 'play-boy has blown it' story going. Nigel really stands out in this because for his first 4 years at Lotus he was not rated at all infact people questioned why he was even in F1 and it wasn't unil he landed the drive with Williams that people started to see his potential - But thats one out of 16.

So ask yourself this when predicting one of these young drivers is a future world champion - have they really made that starting impact that all the other world champions have? Was Di Resta's rookie year really that good? Does Hulkenberg's pole at Brazil show he's a future world champion? Has Ricciardo made enough impact at the back their in the HRT for us to consider him one? History tends to follow a pattern so don't be surprised if some driver we barely know suddenly rocks up into F1 and suddenly becomes the next front runner because historically this 'growing as a driver in the midfield' stuff has turned out to be nonsense.

 

[landogeorgelewis1]

Good thread Rasputin, i agree with everything you have said.

I suppose we fans get sucked in by the press and automatically think that they're right when predicting a future World Champion too. Like a few Journalists were convinced that Massa was championship material and look at him now!

 

[teabagyokel]

We talk about a lot of future World Champions. There's not that many years.

I remain convinced, given the right car, that Rosberg could win the Title. (In fact, if Mercedes produce a decent car this year, he will win his first race, possibly before 115!)

JEV is the most likely new World Champion on the grid though, as often World Champions can be noted for their quick rise from obscurity.

 

[no-FIAt-please]

How many races a world champion took to win their first race is largely irrelevant due to the car that they're in. Hamilton started in the best car on the grid whereas Button didn't have a car capable of victory for a long time. Usually you can see potential in a driver, even if they're not winning races, look at Vettel in the STR3, it was clear that he was outperforming what an average driver would be accomplishing in that car.

 

[FB]

There have been many drivers who could had the talent to be World Champions but, for various reasons, never made it - Pironi, Alboreto, Berger, Villeneuve Snr, Peterson, Herbert, Cevert, even de Angelis. Some never even won a Grand Prix such as Jarier and Warwick, some never got a proper chance like Tommy Byrne.

On de Angelis in particular, why he was never picked up by a big time whilst Mansell (whom he beat comprehensively at Lotus) went on to bigger and better teams, I've never been able to fathom.

 

[RasputinLives]

How many races a world champion took to win their first race is largely irrelevant due to the car that they're in. Hamilton started in the best car on the grid whereas Button didn't have a car capable of victory for a long time. Usually you can see potential in a driver, even if they're not winning races, look at Vettel in the STR3, it was clear that he was outperforming what an average driver would be accomplishing in that car.

I think my point is that if a driver is world champion material then he wins races early because he forces the big teams to make room for him to take him on. Vettel and Senna being case and point as they both pushed there way to the front when there didn't appear to be space for them.

As you could see from the stats 12 out of 16 of the last world champions have won a Grand Prix by the end of their full second season and if you look at all 12 they've all started from massively different places - whether it be Mclaren and Williams or Minardi and Tolemen.

My point is that around 85% of the time the real talent doesn't bother waiting to grow in the midfield but pushes it to the front and which of the young runners can you see doing that now? not many. As FB says JEV is fast on the rise and could well be in a Red Bull by 2013 and the new front guy and Ricciardo too (although not both together) but can you see you Di Resta's and your Hulkenbergs in a race winning car by the start of 2013? Because I can't.

 

[EvilWhippet]

If Merc get it right and Schumi moves on to his retirement ranch to grow a beard and rear cattle of several breeds it's not hard to see Paul or The Dog getting some really competetive machinery.

 

[Viscount]

I agree that future world champions generally do something extraordinary early in their careers, but I don't think that a win within their first 36 GPs is much of a trend of world champions. A number of drivers have won a race within their first 36 GPs yet never went on to win a championship. Alan Jones is the earliest world champion on your list (discounting Lauda's 2 championships in F1 before he retired and came back as that would have to include more than the 16 drivers on your list), and since Jones began his career in 1975 I thought I'd see how many drivers who began their F1 career in 1975 onwards have won a race in their first 36 GPs but never won a world championship.

Juan Pablo Montoya 15 GP
Gilles Villeneuve 19 GP
David Coulthard 21 GP
Gunnar Nilsson 22 GP
René Arnoux 27 GP
Michele Alboreto 28 GP
Heikki Kovalainen 28 GP
Robert Kubica 29 GP
Gerhard Berger 35 GP
Didier Pironi 36 GP

So out of the 22 drivers who since 1975 have won a race within their first 36 GPs, 55% have won a world championship.

I do think you're right that truly talented drivers will make it to a top team if they're that good, but you still need a car capable of winning if you do, a prime example being Jean Alesi at Ferrari. But since there's only really 3 teams at any given time realistically fighting for the driver's championship due to the limited amount of seats, even with talent it's incredibly hard to get in a top seat. Alonso after an impressive debut season still had to spend an entire season as a test driver before racing for Renault and getting his first win.

Currently there are already capable race winning drivers and 6 world champions on the grid but with no driver changes at the top 3 teams in the past 2 seasons (or for next season) only 5 drivers have won in the last 42 races.

 

[Slyboogy]

If you look as those stats as facts then Toro Rosso's recent decision to drop Sebastian Buemi (55 GPs) and Jaime Alguersauri (46 GPs) seems pretty sound if the idea of thier youth programme is to find future world champs. In the same light the likes of Nico Rosberg(108 GPs), Kamui Kobaysashi(40 GPs) and Adrian Sutil(90 GPs) are fighting a battle against stats as they strive to be future world champions. If you work by the same logic despite the state their careers are in now Robert Kubica (won his 29th GP) and Heikki Kovalainen (won his 28th GP) at least don't have to fight history to be world champions.

If Webber didn't sign a new contract last/ or this year, I pretty sure Alguersuari or Buemi, whoever would have got promoted, most likely Buemi after 2010, then they would have at least won a grand prix. It's easier for Ricciardo/Vergne to get the Red Bull seat compared to the other two if they are evenly matched since Webber is not the same Webber as 2010, a guy fighting for the championship. So therefore, are more likely to win a race. I'm sure if Webber didn't have that season in 2010, he would have been replaced by on of the Toro Rosso drivers. This time around, the seat is warmed up for the next Toro Rosso driver.

The same could be said for Rosberg who declined a McLaren seat twice.

I would have liked to have seen Kovalainen been giving a proper chance at McLaren in 08/09. Despite finishing 7th in 08, he was very unlucky in the first half of the season. 09, god knows what happened there.

The circumstances for winning a race seem made for the Toro Rosso victor. Not sure about di Resta or Hulkenberg as it's rumored that they are Mercedes bound, but when will Mercedes rise to the top? Who is replacing Massa? Perez is not the only candidate, there are several, including Kubica, so who knows.

If I was either of these guys, I wouldn't worry myself of a stat like this. But regarding what happened to both Toro Rosso drivers and Sutil this season, after they all had their best seasons to date....maybe they should.

Another thing, I know I keep rambling on but...it is much harder to win a grand prix these days compared to back in 2009 and below. First of all, the grid isn't tight, as it was back in 2008-2009, second of all reliability is solid. Even if the top cars drop out, Mercedes or Renault are more likely to snatch that chance. We have at least 4 teams which are basically guranteed for points, you could say 5 if you put Renault in the mix.

As we saw this season, the highest anyone finished in the midfield cars this season, was 6th (excluding Renault as they are exception due to their pace early on in the season). The season before that was 5th, never mind a win....a podium is nigh on possible to achieve for the guys that have been named.

 

[Galahad]

Its all about circumstances, isn't it? As Slyboogy points out, the determining factor on one of the Red Bull young guns getting a seat at the big team is how long Webber decides to carry on for - something outside their control. Of course, some drivers show such a dramatic talent (like Vettel) that their progression is accelerated, but there are very few drivers in his category. Where and when would Lewis Hamilton have made his F1 debut, if Montoya hadn't walked out of Woking in mid-2006?

There are a lot of drivers that are hard to separate in terms of ability until they get a race-winning car, then they either thrive on it, or flop.

On de Angelis in particular, why he was never picked up by a big time whilst Mansell (whom he beat comprehensively at Lotus) went on to bigger and better teams, I've never been able to fathom.

I agree, though Brabham was a big team in '86. If that car had worked as intended Elio was more than capable of winning races and championships with it.

Why Williams signed Mansell remains an enduring mystery.

 

[teabagyokel]

Its all about circumstances, isn't it? As Slyboogy points out, the determining factor on one of the Red Bull young guns getting a seat at the big team is how long Webber decides to carry on for - something outside their control. Of course, some drivers show such a dramatic talent (like Vettel) that their progression is accelerated, but there are very few drivers in his category. Where and when would Lewis Hamilton have made his F1 debut, if Montoya hadn't walked out of Woking in mid-2006?

McLaren's four-time World Champion Fernando Alonso would be very interested to know the answer to that question. On loan to Spyker or Williams? Could Montoya have buggered off before the United States Grand Prix, thus giving the two greatest talents of the next 5 years their débuts in the same race... again (see Australia 2001).

 

[tooncheese]

Alonso's early career doesn't look that exceptional, in F300 he finished 4th, then he moved to Minardi scoring no points, before a year as a test driver (remember them?). He then replaced Button and suddenly started scoring podiums and a pole positon before the win in Hungary. A relativley unimpressive 2004 followed, outscored by Trulli, then next thing he is world champion, I never saw that coming.

 

[RasputinLives]

Alonso's early career doesn't look that exceptional, in F300 he finished 4th, then he moved to Minardi scoring no points, before a year as a test driver (remember them?). He then replaced Button and suddenly started scoring podiums and a pole positon before the win in Hungary. A relativley unimpressive 2004 followed, outscored by Trulli, then next thing he is world champion, I never saw that coming.

hmmm think you're viewing that from a different angle. Alonso landed his test driver seat after impressing in a Minardi - a car at the time which was horribley slow - because he was being groomed to take over the seat which is the same root Mika Hakkenien went down with Mclaren and as for Alonso having an unimpressive 2003 and 2004. Think we might have been watching different sports.

Juan Pablo Montoya 15 GP
Gilles Villeneuve 19 GP
David Coulthard 21 GP
Gunnar Nilsson 22 GP
René Arnoux 27 GP
Michele Alboreto 28 GP
Heikki Kovalainen 28 GP
Robert Kubica 29 GP
Gerhard Berger 35 GP
Didier Pironi 36 GP

So out of the 22 drivers who since 1975 have won a race within their first 36 GPs, 55% have won a world championshi

Firstly Viscount can I say great response and stats hunting! that list does read like a list of "why the hell weren't they champions". Some weren't for tragic reasons (Villeneuve and Nilsson) others because they just coouldn't cope with the pressure from their competitiors (Montoya, Coulthard). The list kind of backs my point up though if you look at all the drivers on it all bar one of them were driving for one of the top 4 teams by the time they were in their 3rd full season. The one exception is Alboreto who had to wait until his 4th full season to land a top 4 car. So I still argue that more often than not a true talent in F1 makes an immediate impression.

Its all about circumstances, isn't it?

Well yes it is of course and I'm not denying that their are some on the list of winners before their 36th Grand Prix who are on there due to where they landed their drive but at the same time if you look at my list along with Viscount's list of the 36ers and then compiled a list of the 'greatest F1 drivers since 1980' apart from chucking on the 4 at the bottom of the world champions list and maybe chucking off Kovi, Pironi and possibley Albereto I don't think they'd be much different.

As for Sly's point about Webber and the Toro Rosso boys I have to disagree - I think Webber's 2010 season made it more likely that Red Bull would have swapped him for one of Buemi/Alguersauri if they'd thought they were good enough. Lets not forget how much he rocked the boat that season with media comments and such. We've seen many a driver who were a number 2 that did too well against the so called number 1 end up being dropped (Berger in 93 anyone?) and I honestly think if they'd thought that either were good enough they would have switched them - same with this season. They made room for Vettel when he was doing well at Toro Rosso right?

Another thing, I know I keep rambling on but...it is much harder to win a grand prix these days compared to back in 2009 and below. First of all, the grid isn't tight, as it was back in 2008-2009, second of all reliability is solid. Even if the top cars drop out, Mercedes or Renault are more likely to snatch that chance. We have at least 4 teams which are basically guranteed for points, you could say 5 if you put Renault in the mix.

Sorry Sly mate got to completely disagree with you on that front. Since the early 90's its pretty much consistantly been just like this year with the top 2 teams sharing the majority of the victories and the odd one being picked up by the 3rd (or 4th team). Now the 80's were a different story but to be honest until 2009's great shake up F1 was dominated by the same 4 teams Ferrari, Mclaren, Williams and Benneton/Renault - with occasional interloper (Jordan 1999 and BMW 2008) it stayed like that until the shake up that put Red Bull and Brawn/Merc at the top of the pile.

Here's the stats for same period I'm talking about:

1980 - 7 winners - 4 teams
1981 - 7 winners - 6 teams
1982 - 11 winners 7 teams
1983 - 7 winners 6 teams
1984 - 5 winners 4 teams
1985 - 8 winners 5 teams
1986 - 5 winners 4 teams
1987 - 5 winners 4 teams
1988 - 3 winners 2 teams
1989 - 6 winners 4 teams
1990 - 6 winners 4 teams
1991 - 5 winners 3 teams
1992 - 5 winners 3 teams
1993 - 4 winners 3 teams
1994 - 4 winners 3 teams
1995 - 5 winners 3 teams
1996 - 4 winners 3 teams
1997 - 6 winners 4 teams
1998 - 4 winners 3 teams
1999 - 6 winners 4 teams
2000 - 4 winners 2 teams
2001 - 5 winners 3 teams
2002 - 4 winners 3 teams
2003 - 8 winners 4 teams
2004 - 5 winners 4 teams
2005 - 5 winners 3 teams
2006 - 5 winners 3 teams
2007 - 4 winners 2 teams
2008 - 6 winners 5 teams
2009 - 6 winners 4 teams
2010 - 5 winners 3 teams
2011 - 5 winners 3 teams

 

[Brogan]

Completely off topic, but 2008 was the first time since 1985 that there had been more than 4 different teams recording a win in the season.

 

[Speshal]

Great thread

Schumi moves on to his retirement ranch to grow a beard and rear cattle of several breeds

Isn't that what all ex Scuderia drivers do? http://www.laverstokepark.co.uk/

 

[Slyboogy]

hmmm think you're viewing that from a different angle. Alonso landed his test driver seat after impressing in a Minardi - a car at the time which was horribley slow - because he was being groomed to take over the seat which is the same root Mika Hakkenien went down with Mclaren and as for Alonso having an unimpressive 2003 and 2004. Think we might have been watching different sports.



Firstly Viscount can I say great response and stats hunting! that list does read like a list of "why the hell weren't they champions". Some weren't for tragic reasons (Villeneuve and Nilsson) others because they just coouldn't cope with the pressure from their competitiors (Montoya, Coulthard). The list kind of backs my point up though if you look at all the drivers on it all bar one of them were driving for one of the top 4 teams by the time they were in their 3rd full season. The one exception is Alboreto who had to wait until his 4th full season to land a top 4 car. So I still argue that more often than not a true talent in F1 makes an immediate impression.



Well yes it is of course and I'm not denying that their are some on the list of winners before their 36th Grand Prix who are on there due to where they landed their drive but at the same time if you look at my list along with Viscount's list of the 36ers and then compiled a list of the 'greatest F1 drivers since 1980' apart from chucking on the 4 at the bottom of the world champions list and maybe chucking off Kovi, Pironi and possibley Albereto I don't think they'd be much different.

As for Sly's point about Webber and the Toro Rosso boys I have to disagree - I think Webber's 2010 season made it more likely that Red Bull would have swapped him for one of Buemi/Alguersauri if they'd thought they were good enough. Lets not forget how much he rocked the boat that season with media comments and such. We've seen many a driver who were a number 2 that did too well against the so called number 1 end up being dropped (Berger in 93 anyone?) and I honestly think if they'd thought that either were good enough they would have switched them - same with this season. They made room for Vettel when he was doing well at Toro Rosso right?



Sorry Sly mate got to completely disagree with you on that front. Since the early 90's its pretty much consistantly been just like this year with the top 2 teams sharing the majority of the victories and the odd one being picked up by the 3rd (or 4th team). Now the 80's were a different story but to be honest until 2009's great shake up F1 was dominated by the same 4 teams Ferrari, Mclaren, Williams and Benneton/Renault - with occasional interloper (Jordan 1999 and BMW 2008) it stayed like that until the shake up that put Red Bull and Brawn/Merc at the top of the pile.

Here's the stats for same period I'm talking about:

1980 - 7 winners - 4 teams
1981 - 7 winners - 6 teams
1982 - 11 winners 7 teams
1983 - 7 winners 6 teams
1984 - 5 winners 4 teams
1985 - 8 winners 5 teams
1986 - 5 winners 4 teams
1987 - 5 winners 4 teams
1988 - 3 winners 2 teams
1989 - 6 winners 4 teams
1990 - 6 winners 4 teams
1991 - 5 winners 3 teams
1992 - 5 winners 3 teams
1993 - 4 winners 3 teams
1994 - 4 winners 3 teams
1995 - 5 winners 3 teams
1996 - 4 winners 3 teams
1997 - 6 winners 4 teams
1998 - 4 winners 3 teams
1999 - 6 winners 4 teams
2000 - 4 winners 2 teams
2001 - 5 winners 3 teams
2002 - 4 winners 3 teams
2003 - 8 winners 4 teams
2004 - 5 winners 4 teams
2005 - 5 winners 3 teams
2006 - 5 winners 3 teams
2007 - 4 winners 2 teams
2008 - 6 winners 5 teams
2009 - 6 winners 4 teams
2010 - 5 winners 3 teams
2011 - 5 winners 3 teams

Missed my point...

 

[teabagyokel]

I think a related list is the drivers who waited more than 36 drives before their first win in the same time period:

Jacques Laffite (39)
Olivier Panis (39)
Keke Rosberg (49)
Heinz-Harald Frentzen (52)
Patrick Tambay (53)
Elio de Angelis (54)
Alessandro Nannini (61)
Felipe Massa (66)
Ralf Schumacher (70)
Riccardo Patrese (71)
Johnny Herbert (71)
Nigel Mansell (72)
Eddie Irvine (81)
Jean Alesi (91)
Thierry Boutsen (95)
Mika Hakkinen (96)
Giancarlo Fisichella (110)
Jenson Button (113)
Jarno Trulli (117)
Rubens Barrichello (124)
Mark Webber (130)

In gold are the 4 World Champions, and in red are those who were team-mates to World Champions in their careers. Frentzen, Herbert and Barrichello won their first races in a 'double' WDC/WCC year*. Irvine won his first race in a WCC year where his team-mate would have undoubtedly won the title without an injury. Fisichella won his later two Grand Prix in those circumstances, with the first somewhat a fluke.

This list seems to be a long list of people who have, at some point, been hired as number 2 drivers at top teams, or who never got a top drive (that really only excludes Hakkinen - he was not an intended #2 in 1993, Rosberg was hired as Reutemann's wingman at Williams).

Maybe you simply won't get a seat with a top team as a #1 driver if you don't prove your race winning credentials. In the cases of Hakkinen and Button (and Webber), of course, they followed a team up through the ranks.

*In fact, all of Barrichello's wins have come in years where his team-mate won the WDC and his team won the WCC.

 

[Viscount]

Firstly Viscount can I say great response and stats hunting! that list does read like a list of "why the hell weren't they champions". Some weren't for tragic reasons (Villeneuve and Nilsson) others because they just coouldn't cope with the pressure from their competitiors (Montoya, Coulthard). The list kind of backs my point up though if you look at all the drivers on it all bar one of them were driving for one of the top 4 teams by the time they were in their 3rd full season. The one exception is Alboreto who had to wait until his 4th full season to land a top 4 car. So I still argue that more often than not a true talent in F1 makes an immediate impression.

I completely agree that truly talented drivers show their skills early on to attract the top teams. My point was just that it's incredibly difficult to get into a potential race winning car and it's getting even harder with the top 5 teams all having at least one world champion driving.

 

[Slyboogy]

I completely agree that truly talented drivers show their skills early on to attract the top teams. My point was just that it's incredibly difficult to get into a potential race winning car and it's getting even harder with the top 5 teams all having at least one world champion driving.

That was my point that Ras-ta man missed

 

[RasputinLives]

I completely agree that truly talented drivers show their skills early on to attract the top teams. My point was just that it's incredibly difficult to get into a potential race winning car and it's getting even harder with the top 5 teams all having at least one world champion driving.

I do see what your saying and it probably is a good poin but sometimes I think we get blurred blurred by the titles drivers have. I think its always been difficult to land a potential race winning car. Imagine trying to get a top drive when you had the likes of Senna, Prost, Mansell, Berger, Piquet and Alesi in your way but some guy called Schumacher turned up in 1991 and still managed to get a race win within 18 Grand Prix's. Yes with Mansell and Prost leaving the sport and Senna being killed their was a void in the sport but it was filled very quickly. Sebastian Vettel arrived on the scene with Alonso vs Hamilton at its height and with Kimi and Massa on peak forms too - not to mention Kubica standing in the wings and a certain Nico Rosberg tipped for greatness too yet still space was made for him to raise to the top. I think my point about the Toro Rosso drivers is that if they'd been good enough space would have been made.

In actual fact with the season Webber and Massa have just had and Schumacher expecting his telegram from the queen the path into a race winning car seems a lot clearer than it has for about 10 years I reckon. The trick is not to become a 'number 2' when you get there.

Missed my point...

Sly buddy I do tend to miss points sometimes so if you feel I miss it in future have another go at explaining it too me coz I always want to get the point!