My Past F1 Predictions

[rjbetty]

Since I´ve been having fun trying to predict how F1 would turn out this year, I thought I'd share some of the expectations I had in the past, so you can see how wrong they were. I always imagined the field closing up more and more, but it almost never happened that way. The first season I really made a prediction for was 1999, and it went something like this.

Average Qualifying
1.Mika Hakkinen (McLaren)
2.Michael Schumacher (Ferrari) +0.21
3.David Coulthard (McLaren) +0.24
4.Damon Hill (Jordan) +0.78
5.Eddie Irvine (Ferrari) +0.78
6.Heinz-Harald Frentzen (Jordan) +1.00
7.Ralf Schumacher (Williams) +1.08
8.Giancarlo Fisichella (Benetton) +1.15
9.Jacques Villeneuve (BAR) +1.22
10.Alessandro Zanardi (Williams) +1.26
11.Alexander Wurz (Benetton) +1.40
12.Jean Alesi (Sauber) +1.40
13.Ricardo Zonta (BAR) +1.69
14.Pedro Diniz (Sauber) +1.90
15.Rubens Barrichello (Stewart) +2.04
16.Jarno Trulli (Prost) +2.13
17.Olivier Panis (Prost) +2.43
18.Johnny Herbert (Stewart) +2.44
19.Tora Takagi (Arrows) +2.90
20.Pedro de la Rosa (Arrows) +2.98
21.Luca Badoer (Minardi) +3.86
22.Marc Gené(Minardi) +4.28

Points
1.M.Schumacher 82pts
2.Hakkinen 76pts
3.Coulthard 62pts
4.Irvine 38pts
5.Hill 35pts
6.R.Schumacher 26pts
7.Frentzen 19pts
8.Fisichella 19pts
9.Villeneuve 14pts
10.Zanardi 14pts
11.Alesi 12pts
12.Wurz 10pts
13.Zonta 8pts
14.Diniz 6pts
15.Barrichello 5pts
16.Trulli 3pts
17.Herbert 2pts
18.Panis 2pts
19.Takagi 2pts
20.de la Rosa 1pt
21.Badoer
22.Gené

1.McLaren 138pts
2.Ferrari 120pts
3.Jordan 54pts
4.Williams 40pts
5.Benetton 29pts
6.BAR 22pts
7.Sauber 18pts
8.Stewart 7pts
9.Prost 5pt
10.Arrows 3pts
11.Minardi


As you can see, how wrong was I?! I absolutely did not forsee how well Stewart and Frentzen, and Irvine would do, or how badly Hill, Zanardi or BAR would be.

[jens]

Wow, that's a long time ago and you must have been quite a bit younger while doing this prediction.

To be honest, I'd say it was not too far off. Obviously Stewart wasn't foreseen and Prost was also quicker than that, but the team standings is pretty close. First two well clear, then Jordan best of the rest, then skipping the Stewart come Williams and Benetton. Arrows and Minardi slowest.

Qualifying averages were also pretty good, with minor exclusions of Stewart and Prost only. You said BAR had a bad season, but in terms of speed they were pretty okay and Villeneuve qualified into top 10 a lot.

I think had I made a 1999 prediction back then, it would have been worse. It would have seen Zanardi up there in the top six almost certainly.

[rjbetty]

Haha thanks Jens, yes I was just turning 15 when I did this. Boy has time gone fast!

I was still new-ish to F1 then. 1998 was my first full season, but I was too 'not-into-it-yet' and didn't have a thought or clue as to how the season would go. I didn't know who was driving for who, and didn't clock any new colour schemes till the first race.

Hey actually I just remembered I did have some thoughts!! I expected M.Schumacher would take the title with about 78pts, Villeneuve would have about 72pts. But the big thing I was expecting was Fisichella to come 3rd with around 42pts, since he had made a big move to Benetton which I regarded as a top team (they had come 3rd in '97 and at the time I hadn't understood it wasn't a great season by their standards). As for Wurz, since he wasn't a big name (imo), I didn't expect much and thought he'd bank around 15pts and be miles off Fisi.

I didn't rate Irvine that much and predicted Damon Hill in a Jordan would outscore him (around 28pts to 24). My sister wasn't too happy with this prediction!

That's about it for 98.



1999 was my first season where I was able to have some knowledge and preparations and thoughts during the pre-season. Though being my first time, I couldn't see Zanardi beating Ralf. I just remember being very excited for the season, not knowing how it was all going to turn out, how BAR were going to do etc!

I'm sure I remember Damon Hill coming 2nd in a testing day at Barcelona, leading me to proclaim he could fight with the McLarens on some days. I remember how I creased up laughing when I read Alain Prost considered 3rd in the WCC a realistic aim possibly. But even that didn't beat the ridicule when I read (not Sir at the time) Jackie Stewart's prediction that the team could win a race.

In hindsight, I can see that Prost had some potential against the Supertec teams, and if you don't realise how well Jordan and Stewart would do, but regard them more on '98 levels, I can see his thinking.

I was however, humbled in regard to JYS prediction - well done.

I could NEVER have forseen neither Zanardi AND BAR not scoring at all, and the former struggling so much.

You're right Jens about BAR not being bad. I was aware Villeneuve was good in qualifying, but I meant their ability to score any points.

[jens]

So it was 1. M. Schumacher, 2. Villeneuve, 3. Fisichella for 1998? Not too bad if you forgot the McLarens, who were so far out in front that you failed to notice them.

But yeah, if I try to recall early 1998, then behind the McLarens we quite often had Schumacher, Villeneuve, Fisichella racing for positions. Obviously Irvine had a good season as well as Wurz. And later in the season Jordan emerged.

In retrospect I have had to adjust some of my past understandings or at least re-define them. For example it was mysterious to me, how could rookie Alex Wurz be so damn good in 1998 and beat Fisichella, yet be nowhere in 1999/2000. In retrospect I have concluded that the early-1998 Benetton on superior Bridgestone tyres was a damn good package and Fisichella was still adapting to the team and not fully up-to-speed. That's how Wurz stood out. But while in the subsequent seasons circumstances weren't so favourable for Wurz any more, he dropped back. A bit like circumstances were very favourable for Kevin Magnussen in Australia 2014 and he finished second, yet has failed to repeat the drive/result in subsequent races.

That's just one example. I am sure there is more to analyze in retrospect.

[jens]

More to note from that era. I have to say 1999 was a meaningful year to me too. It was the second season I followed very closely like a proper fan and it was fascinating to see all those changes. It already felt like being a somewhat experienced viewer if you get to experience a new season and new things.

During 1998 you got used to the same thing all year (only Jordan moved up through the field), so 1999 was pretty enlightening to see a new F1. McLaren/Ferrari and its line-ups were still the same, but behind them there were interesting new combinations and how they performed.

I saw already in 1998, how much car counts in performance due to big gaps between teams that year, and 1999 taught me quite more, how different can fates be depending on car choice. For example in 1998 Villeneuve and Frentzen had been team-mate with Villeneuve coming out on top. Then suddenly in 1999 I saw them in different teams with Villeneuve scoring nothing at all, yet Frentzen being close to the sharp end.

I remember I considered Frentzen just a lucky bastard at the time, who had got both a fast and reliable car while Villeneuve's BAR was anything but reliable. It was retrospectively I started rating HHF's driving that year very highly.

Another thing about 1998 vs 1999 was that in 1998 I got used to team-mates performing pretty closely. It was largely influenced by gaps between teams obviously. But 1999 saw some big team-mate gaps. Hill, Zanardi really not scoring anywhere in the region of their team-mates, Herbert was trailing Barrichello for much of the year too before late-season resurgence. Salo qualified 18th in Hungary for Ferrari.

I also realized, how important luck is, esp regarding reliability, because Hill, Villeneuve, Zanardi, Alesi, etc all suffered from bad reliability and didn't get many good results. And also I could see that in the same team luck could be very different, because R. Schumacher's and Frentzen's cars were running like clockworks.

[rjbetty]

I remember my sister was a huge fan of Wurz in 1998 while I supported Fisichella. Given how I thought Fisi was the best thing since sliced bread, I also found it surprising how well Wurz did. But somehow, even in my very primitive understanding, I was somehow able to know that though Wurz was great, he had had more preparation and understanding of how to drive the 1998 cars. I remember either F1 Racing or Autosport saying he was quick because he understood how the new generation of cars needed to be driven.

Alex actually outscored Fisi by 1pt, but even then I noticed that from mid-season, Fisi had a clear advantage, and could tell it was because Fisi was taking some time to get up to speed in his new team. I felt Wurz would have a poorish year in 99, and so it proved, but much more so than expected.

I also remember 1999 being notable for one team-mate dominating the other in most teams, except the bottom two.



I remember at the time thinking Frentzen was amazing! I never saw him beating Damon, simply because of Hill's status; a bit immature in my understanding there.

tbh even at the time I didn't really understand why Zanardi was rated SO highly, so much so that I read in F1 Racing that new signing Ralf Schumacher's contract was for 2 years and would automatically be renewed for another 2 years if he scored at least 60% of Zanardi's points total over 1999-2000. This was before the 1999 season started and even then this surprised me. I never expected Zanardi would beat Ralf in 1999, though I thought he'd perform well, like he did from Hungary-Monza, but like that most of the time.

Again, I could never, ever have imagined that neither he, or both BAR drivers, would both score no points at all... Incredible.

I also thought Herbert would be closer to Barrichello.

Speaking of Rubens, he impressed me in 1999, and it was during 1998-99 that I could not understand how he did not seem well rated and was not in a top drive. My understanding of F1 at the time was shaped a lot by Grand Prix 2 which I'd got in February 1998, which was based on the 1994 season, and had the season results for all points scoring drivers in the handbook, plus driver profiles for all drivers in the game.

From this, my understanding was that Barrichello was a brilliant driver, having finished 6th in the championship with 19pts in a humble Jordan-Hart, MUCH better than Irvine who only banked 6pts. Also, I usually only did quickraces, and Barrichello would always start high up while Irvine was in the midfield. The default quickrace performances of the A.I. drivers shaped my opinions of them early on. It was only years later I realised I had underrated Martin Brundle and overrated Rubens somewhat.

I also understood later on that the main reason most people weren't convinced by Barrichello was because of his poor 1995 season, which I was unaware of.

[journeyman racer]

Why would you try to predict anything is such detail? You only leave yourself to being more and more wrong!

A pity for you the two of you that you started following F1 from 98/99. Overall, 97 was the best, and my favourite, F1 season. So many twists and turns, so many points of interest. The last season of F1 before the FIA really started mucking around with the cars.

- HHF seemed to benefit from being in a new environment at Jordan. There was a lot of unnecessary pressure at Williams previously, it seemed.

- Barrichello was a rated driver in the mid 90s, but an opportunity hadn't yet opened for him. You can't just move anytime you like. He wasn't rated as highly as HHF I don't recall, otherwise it may've been him going to Williams for 97. There was the opportunity at Ferrari for 96, but I think Ferrari chose Irvine because he could be treated as second class, like he was, without disturbing the team focus on Schumacher too much.

- After the success of JV, Zanardi was supposed to continue on with that form having won the last two Champcar titles. So that's where the expectation came from.

I would never have seriously thought Webber would ever win a GP. I'm disappointed to be wrong.

[rjbetty]

Why would you try to predict anything is such detail? You only leave yourself to being more and more wrong!

I just had great fun over the years. I had so much more passion back then!

A pity for you the two of you that you started following F1 from 98/99. Overall, 97 was the best, and my favourite, F1 season. So many twists and turns, so many points of interest. The last season of F1 before the FIA really started mucking around with the cars.

Yes it is a pity!! I didn't appreciate the 1997 season at the time. I just thought it was totally ordinary for midfield teams to be winning and challenging for wins. It was only in 1998 I realised 1997 was just not normal. In hindsight, 1997 is almost a mythical season to me, for how so many teams and drivers could be in the mix. Times were usually very close and every race was memorable for one reason or another.*

And I totally think 1997 is curiously and strangely overlooked and forgotten in general.

*Bear in mind I'm probably suffering from a severe case of rose-tinted spectacle-itis.

- Barrichello was a rated driver in the mid 90s, but an opportunity hadn't yet opened for him. You can't just move anytime you like. He wasn't rated as highly as HHF I don't recall, otherwise it may've been him going to Williams for 97. There was the opportunity at Ferrari for 96, but I think Ferrari chose Irvine because he could be treated as second class, like he was, without disturbing the team focus on Schumacher too much.

I read in 1999 that Williams had considered him for the season, but it was felt that though he was good, he hadn't shown enough to be quite worth the punt. I still always felt he was horribly unfortunate to be driving such an uncompetitive car in 1998 in which he couldn't make much impression. I thought he was amazing in Canada that year. I think he qualified 12th(?) but I'm sure I remember him overtaking everyone early on and running as high as 3rd(?)

- After the success of JV, Zanardi was supposed to continue on with that form having won the last two Champcar titles. So that's where the expectation came from.

Without wanting to be harsh or drag up old chestnuts, I just cannot believe the CART field of '98 was close to being a match for the F1 grid of '99, and I think that alone is a contributing factor.

I would never have seriously thought Webber would ever win a GP. I'm disappointed to be wrong.

I became aware of Webber in the FIA GT championship at Mercedes in 1998, but it was in 2000 he made a big impression on me. Driving for Paul Stoddart's European Arrows F3000 team, he led the championship early on! I hadn't expected much as the previous years drivers only managed 4pts between them. So to see Mark being right up there made me take notice. It also helped that the team were affiliated with Arrows F1 and ran their own version of the Orange Arrows colour scheme which I had fallen in love with! Hmmm I think it should have been obvious at Jaguar that Mark was VERY good.

[rjbetty]

2000 - The Big One


This was the first year where I properly tried to predict average qualifying times as well as points; my first full, real pre-season.

I have to say this was my most anticipated season of all time. I didn't expect it to be anything other than epic! I had high expectations after the crazy 1999, and my understanding being immature, simply expected everything to be closer and more exciting year on year.

I remember being so excited at the Christmas issue of Autosport in 99, which showed a main story with pictures of the drivers in their new cars testing. Everything looked so bright and modern. There was Trulli getting his big break with Jordan, Alesi joining his friend Alain Prost, the always beautiful Saubers (what a far cry from today!) with Salo and Diniz's helmets suiting so well, Irvine with his red helmet in a white Stewart, and one of my favourites, Rubens in red getting a top drive he deserved!

It was all a salivating prospect, and this is exactly how I thought qualifying over the year might go:

1.M.Schumacher (Ferrari)
2.Hakkinen (McLaren) +0.10
3.Barrichello (Ferrari) +0.28
4.Coulthard (McLaren) +0.47
5.Frentzen (Jordan) +0.50
6.Irvine (Jaguar) +0.60
7.Trulli (Jordan) +0.64
8.Villeneuve (BAR) +0.84
9.Herbert (Jaguar) +0.90
10.R.Schumacher (Williams) +1.18
11.Fisichella (Benetton) +1.20
12.Alesi (Prost) +1.24
13.Wurz (Benetton) +1.37
14.Salo (Sauber) +1.40
15.Heidfeld (Prost) +1.50
16.Zonta (BAR) +1.50
17.Diniz (Sauber) +1.67
18.Verstappen (Arrows) +1.80
19.Button (Williams) +1.80
20.de la Rosa (Arrows) +1.82
21.Wilson (Minardi) +2.47
22.Gené (Minardi) +2.80


I suppose in some ways, it wasn't tooooo far off. Hakkinen wasn't as far off, I overrated Rubens, and underestimated Coulthard, thinking he'd struggle further, in his final season for McLaren(!) as other teams closed up.



JORDAN/JAGUAR:
Sadly, Jordan and Jaguar were nowhere near my prediction. I believed they would create a new "big four" with McLaren and Ferrari to replace the long running one of Williams-McLaren-Ferrari-Benetton which had ran since the mid-80's, only being brought to an end in '98. I somewhat believed the hype over Jaguar, also believing Herbert would carry on his late '99 form - his race win having galvanised him; while I just didn't want to believe Jordan inexplicably having to run old Mugen-Hondas would affect their performance...


BENETTON:
I showed that I was starting to learn lessons by putting Fisichella 11th, even though I could not conceive of him not being in the top 10 best overall. I had learned from 1998 and 1999 to be more realistic, so I was pleased with myself for this prediction. I wasn't expecting huge things this time, just a step towards consolidation and respectability without being so all at sea. This is pretty much how it turned out. In fact, 20pts was probably a few more than I predicted.

I thought Alex Wurz would improve after 1999 and be more respectable, but it wasn't to be.


PROST:
I expected good things from Prost, with Alesi being recharged to find his potential. At the time, Nick Heidfeld was THE next big thing, and all eyes were on him to do well. He was in line for a long term future at McLaren-Mercedes; it's really strange to think this now... For me, Prost were the big unknown. You see, they had ended 1999 rather strongly: Panis had qualified and run well early on at the Nurburgring before Trulli took 2nd, showing great racecraft to hold off the superior Stewart of Rubens (again strange to think this maybe considering the long running reputation Trulli was about to gain). Japan was even better, and one of my great memories was Panis and Trulli qualifying 6th and 7th, with Panis in particular on fire through the weekend, as he made a start like a rocket into 3rd, only to sadly retire while looking set for a good result.

This meant Prost were looking good, and I thought they may do even better than predicted. Could they qualify 5th and 7th at Melbourne say, and do well as Stewart had the previous year. Sadly, try 10 places back from that...


SAUBER:
At the time, I liked Sauber's line up, but very much felt it was a little weak and uninspiring, which funnily enough mirrors my exact feelings 14 years later. Oh the irony! I remember someone writing they sensed it would be a year where Sauber would score quite a lot of points. I hoped so.


BAR:
I absolutely loved BAR's new white machine with silver and red, with their new more humble, no-nonsense approach. I expected not amazing things, but a good deal of respect to be gained, and 1-3 good podiums to have a great chance of 5th in the WCC, which though they wouldn't have been happy, would actually have represented a very good step.



WILLIAMS:
BMW-Williams were expected to be fairly disastrous. I didn't have them doing that badly, and thought a good score of lower points finishes and maybe a podium would be a very decent return for year 1.

One of my greatest F1 memories was the day I found out on the news that Jenson Button had been signed for Williams. In my primitive understanding, this was utterly out of the blue. I well remember during the winter of 1999, for seemingly ages, the 2nd Williams seat wasn't filled, and I had no idea who would fill it. It could have been Panis or Darren Manning, or Jorg Muller or anyone else. At the time, I had no net, no Autosport, just monthly F1 Racing, so had no idea about the shootout tests or that Button had had any involvement with Williams whatsoever.

I do remember being very excited when I found out about his Prost test. I had followed Button closely during 1999 in British F3. The first I saw of him was when I was 14; I saw his British flag helmet and thought "wow!" So decided then on to follow him closely as he'd just won the Formula Ford Festival and the championship. Next I heard, he had joined F3 as I picked up a rare copy of Autosport with the season preview (also included Luciano Burti, Narain Karthikeyan, Takuma Sato and Alex Yoong). Come to think of it, I think it was in THAT famous issue after the Australian GP 1999, which introduced us to 14 year old Lewis Hamilton!!!

Jenson had struggled with an underpowered Renault engine (some things just do not change) against the future Red Bull and Marussia F1 teams (and the Manor/Marussia driver won)! Last I heard, Jenson was going to continue in F3, then suddenly he's announced at Williams?! :O

I thought he'd do well to get within 6-7 tenths off Ralf in year 1, on rare occasions qualifying in the top 10, and only failing to look better because of the ultra-competitive field I expected.


ARROWS
I think we all expected an improvement here, but because of everyone else being competitive, Arrows would still be 10th best team, but this time, on the back of the midfield group and able to qualify in the upper midfield on occasion. I thought Verstappen might edge de la Rosa, as Jos was always very highly rated back then.


MINARDI
For a long time it looked like one of my favourite F3000 drivers, Max Wilson would drive for Minardi in 2000. So I was very disappointed indeed when they signed loser Mazzacane instead, though I did go on to be very fond of Gaston for some reason (wish he could have kept that Prost drive).





POINTS
While the qualifying looks pretty accurate, here's where it all goes silly.

I expected lots of crazy incidents, retirements, and thrills and spills, simply because 1999 had them. And I took it for granted there would be even more errors in 2000, which with a close field resulted in something like this:

1.M.Schumacher 78pts
2.Barrichello 62pts
3.Hakkinen 57pts
4.Frentzen 51pts
5.Irvine 48pts
6.Coulthard 34pts
7.Trulli 32pts
8.Herbert 24pts
9.Villeneuve 18pts
10.Fisichella 16pts
11.R.Schumacher 16pts
12.Alesi 12pts
13.Wurz 9pts
14.Salo 8pts
15.Heidfeld 6pts
16.Zonta 6pts
17.Button 6pts
18.Diniz 3pts
19.Verstappen 2pts
20.de la Rosa 1pt
21.Gené
22.Mazzacane

1.Ferrari - Ferrari - 140pts
2.McLaren - Mercedes 91pts
3.Jordan - Mugen-Honda 83pts
4.Jaguar - Cosworth 72pts
5.Benetton - Playlife 25pts
6.BAR - Honda 24pts
7.Williams - BMW 22pts
8.Prost - Peugeot 18pts
9.Sauber - Petronas 11pts
10.Arrows - Supertec 3pts
11.Minardi - Fondmetal

I had Barrichello and Irvine both winning 3 races each, and imagined Trulli leading Barrichello home to win a ´96 style Spanish GP, from well down the field! I thought Herbert would win USA, Irvine Silverstone (holding off a recovering Hakkinen) and Monaco, and one other. McLaren and Schumacher would make a lot of mistakes, causing lower finishes and retirements I thought. I also had a strange feeling there would be quite a lot of disqualifications this year, something that did seem to be happening as Salo was DSQ'd from Australia and Coulthard from Brazil.

[Rollo]

Webber will never win a World Championship and unless he's given the best car in the field, probably will never win a race either.

- 25th March 2006.

Webber never did win a World Championship.
Webber never did win a race until given the best car in the field; even then Vettel had already racked up 3 victories.