Big Break or Slow Progress?

[Jonte]

I was thinking this morning about WRC and Formula1 (and I havent come to a conclusion yet) how drivers enter the top series and if there is some sort of trend coming.

For example, many drivers have big breaks that more or less totally open up their careers or at least gives them the ticket to success. For example - Tommi Mäkinen in finland 2004, Colin McRae in Sweden 1992 and Loeb in Monte 2002. Driver who were known as good drivers but didnt have WRC stearings on a regular basis. The opposite I would say is Petter Solberg and Hirvonen who din quite a few years in WRC before his first win, but more I see a lot of drivers in WRC-driving-school. Wilson is a good example and there is for sure a few more over the years. No real big breaks has happened lately. (mabye Duval in Germany could cound as a big break?) q

In fomula one "big breaks" is more common at the moment than in WRC. Look at Hamilton, but also Alonso. Still - of course - there has been a lot of slow progress drivers there as well.

Is this a trend? Can you really be a fast WRC driver by training in WRC? Or is it in reallity only the super talents (big brakers) who will end up as legends? Drivers who is fast from the beginning?

[Tomi]

I think it's more about the car than driver in F1, thats why young guys can easily brake there, with current recce regulation it takes some time before the same can happen in WRC.
But in both sports i belive that if a guy has exceptional talent he gets chanses to show what he goes for, some get more some less mostly it depends on the backing, in professional sport it's good to have a proper manager.

[Jonte]

On top of this there are many talents, or Drivers regarded as talents, who gets a chance to a Big Break, where it doesnt happen. Sordo, Duval, Touhino among others. And ofcourse those who breaks big, but nothing more really - like Rovanperää in Sweden 2001.

[Livewireshock]

In reality, big breaks are not a magical touch of a wand & there you are, in the big time.

Many, many years have often been put into people getting where they are. Their sudden appearance on the scene depends on your perspective.

Hamilton has arrived with a bang but we all know it has been a carefully managed grooming for nearly ten years. Hardly an immediate success. His actual big break came all those years ago when he convinced Ron Dennis to take notice of him. In the meantime, it was his hard work & efforts that has kept him in the prime position for a good seat. Had he come in the middle of the field in all the junior formulae, Ron would have severed the ties.

In rally there are a thousand such stories of personal effort & struggle. No one I can think of has been plucked from pure obsurity & been successful.

[jonkka]

Interesting post which raises many questions. And fails to answer, which proves how difficult it is to say what's the correct or best way to the top.

First, lets get some facts straight.


For example - Tommi Mäkinen in finland 2004, Colin McRae in Sweden 1992 and Loeb in Monte 2002.

Tommi did not drive in 2004 any longer, he quit after 2003 season. You must refer to his 1000 Lakes win in 1994 but I personally think equally big things were his performance in 1987 Finland where he was doing his 1st WRC event and chasing Alex Fiorio so hard that Cesare reputedly went to see who he was or his 5th overall in 1991 Finland with underpowered works Mazda 323 way ahead of team mate Hannu Mikkola.
Colin McRae's big break, if defined by wins as you did with Tommi, must have been 1993 NZ but then again, he had been groomed for a long by both his daddy and Dave Richards. Which is not to deny his major talent, I think his big break was national titles two years running.
Loeb, similarly, did some astonishing times already in 2000 with Toyota Corolla WRC, especially in San Remo.
Now, this leads us to the question about big break.


I was thinking this morning about WRC and Formula1 (and I havent come to a conclusion yet) how drivers enter the top series and if there is some sort of trend coming.

It is important to note that these two series have entirely different philosophy as to what comes to who can enter question. In F1, you race only if you have a contract with a team. In WRC, you can race if you get accepted by the rally organisers which is getting easier again after the categorical maximum of 90 entries rule which has now been laxed. WRC is that much more easier to get in but not necessarily any easier to make the impression.


No real big breaks has happened lately. (mabye Duval in Germany could cound as a big break?)

So, what is a big break then? If you look at the current works drivers, you'll notice that none of them won before they got works drive. In fact, Atkinson hasn't even looked like winning (likely car's fault), Sordo might but at the moment is prevented by Citroen's Loeb-1st policy and Hirvonen won first time only because Gronholm had problems.

I think that this shows that works drivers are now, as most of the history, have been picked by their promise, not their actual accomplished big breaks - which usually come only after they got works support - which in turn leads to stories of drivers that have not delivered even after such opportunity.

[jonkka]

No one I can think of has been plucked from pure obsurity & been successful.

This is what I was trying to say, too.

[BDunnell]

I hate to always hark back to earlier times, but it was undoubtedly easier to get noticed 25-30 years ago. Then, it was possible to buy a competitive Escort or similar and perform well. You were first noticed in your 'national' championship if you were in a country with a really strong one, like Britain, because you were competing against top WRC drivers. Jimmy McRae and Malcolm Wilson spring to mind. Of course, neither really made it at WRC level and Wilson's career was set back through injury, but I think the point still stands up. Both were amongst their country's finest drivers, and able to compete against the world's best on occasion — neither often had the best equipment, but they aren't looked on any less fondly by many because neither won a WRC round.

Today, where are the equivalents? I am sure that it is no coincidence that the fall in prominence of British championship rallying has 'coincided' with the end of top-level British participation in the WRC. The British series is no longer a natural entry point for an up-and-coming driver, and I am sure that this scenario has been repeated elsewhere in Europe. Instead, it is now viewed as being on an equal level to the national championships in almost any country you care to name.

There are undoubtedly some exceptional talents in the WRC today — Loeb, Gronholm, Solberg (despite his recent lack of success) and, I would suggest, Hirvonen spring to mind. Others can do well on occasion, but are nowhere near being big names. This wasn't the case 20 or even 10 years ago, when there was a bigger pool of top-level rally-winning talent. Why is this? I would suggest that the means of being fed into the WRC are at fault. Are the PWRC or JWRC the best means of doing so? I think not. Yet there is no way, for financial reasons more than anything else, that we will ever return (in the foreseeable future) to the strong national championships with works-supported teams at the forefront that I think were so vital to the entry of new drivers into the WRC in the McRae/Sainz/Gronholm/Burns/etc era, to say nothing of before that. What is to be done about this?

Apologies if this post is somewhat rambling, by the way, but there were several points I wanted to make.

[AndyRAC]

I hate to always hark back to earlier times, but it was undoubtedly easier to get noticed 25-30 years ago. Then, it was possible to buy a competitive Escort or similar and perform well. You were first noticed in your 'national' championship if you were in a country with a really strong one, like Britain, because you were competing against top WRC drivers. Jimmy McRae and Malcolm Wilson spring to mind. Of course, neither really made it at WRC level and Wilson's career was set back through injury, but I think the point still stands up. Both were amongst their country's finest drivers, and able to compete against the world's best on occasion — neither often had the best equipment, but they aren't looked on any less fondly by many because neither won a WRC round.

Today, where are the equivalents? I am sure that it is no coincidence that the fall in prominence of British championship rallying has 'coincided' with the end of top-level British participation in the WRC. The British series is no longer a natural entry point for an up-and-coming driver, and I am sure that this scenario has been repeated elsewhere in Europe. Instead, it is now viewed as being on an equal level to the national championships in almost any country you care to name.

There are undoubtedly some exceptional talents in the WRC today — Loeb, Gronholm, Solberg (despite his recent lack of success) and, I would suggest, Hirvonen spring to mind. Others can do well on occasion, but are nowhere near being big names. This wasn't the case 20 or even 10 years ago, when there was a bigger pool of top-level rally-winning talent. Why is this? I would suggest that the means of being fed into the WRC are at fault. Are the PWRC or JWRC the best means of doing so? I think not. Yet there is no way, for financial reasons more than anything else, that we will ever return (in the foreseeable future) to the strong national championships with works-supported teams at the forefront that I think were so vital to the entry of new drivers into the WRC in the McRae/Sainz/Gronholm/Burns/etc era, to say nothing of before that. What is to be done about this?

Apologies if this post is somewhat rambling, by the way, but there were several points I wanted to make.

Good post, but what is the solution? Maybe the S2000 cars are, if they're considerably cheaper the National importers can run 1 or 2 in the National championship, and if the F1A see the light and cut the rounds to 12 it may be possible to see the odd entry by works teams and drivers. Or maybe I'm dreaming, it'll never happen. But when will people see that WRCars as we kmow them are not the future, everything has a lifespan, they've been around since 1997, the early years were fine, but lately they've become too good and expensive. I fear I may have rambled as well, it's just watching an old video got me thinking.

[BDunnell]

Good post, but what is the solution?

I really am not sure!


Maybe the S2000 cars are, if they're considerably cheaper the National importers can run 1 or 2 in the National championship, and if the F1A see the light and cut the rounds to 12 it may be possible to see the odd entry by works teams and drivers. Or maybe I'm dreaming, it'll never happen.

I think S2000 has potential, but whether it will benefit national championships, I really doubt. I am also against the cut to 12 rounds if it means the loss of any of the 'traditional' events, as I think this would do little to solve the WRC's problems, which do not stem from the old calendar. But I can see how it could be of some help.

[AndyRAC]

I seem to remember reading recently that the 'classic' events wouldn't be protected, which is a mistake, remember 1994-1996 and the rotation system, 1995 had no 1000 Lakes, 1996 had no Monte or RAC. 12 events is the limit for the championship, so the 'classics' should always be in. The problem is that every few months a new suggestion for the calendar crops up, which is the sign of a championship which doesn't know what it's doing or going.
Which isn't a great sign for potential new manufacturers.

[ShiftingGears]

There is talent out there, but with teams nominating 2 eligible pointscoring cars before the event doesnt really help. I think 3 or 4 car teams (with the top 2 getting points) would give drivers more chance to show their worth. Firstly as they can be rated against more drivers in an equal car, and it would encourage(I should think) teams to try out drivers.
Also the lack of a successful feeder series for WRC is another thing. And the fact that the most talented aren't always the ones with the money needed.

[Jonte]

Interesting points from all of you. And as I said - Im not done yet.

So, what is a big break then? If you look at the current works drivers, you'll notice that none of them won before they got works drive.

No driver comes from nowere and starts to win, all of them are known as good drivers. But there are a lot of good known drivers around. A big break - as I define it - could then be those drivers who get a chance i a full works (or similar) car AND grabs the chance at once. Mäkinen in Finland (of course I was refering to 1994) is a good example of that. And a lot of others - Grönholm in Toyota Corolla in Finland(was it in 1997? He didnt finish, but that race was probably one of the main reasons why he ended up in Peugeot later). Drivers who - when thy geot the chanse in a good car - grabs it. A lot of those drivers then went or are going to be, legendary drivers.
But then we have those "driving school"-drivers, like Hirvonen, Duval, Sordo, Atkinson and a few more. In the case of Duval - he was in what is regarded to be the best car at that time.

Many drivers slowly grow to winners. Who are good examples of being regarded as one of the legendary drivers but where slow starters? Solberg perhaps?
Will they ever develop to be great legendary drivers?

Then ofcourse the opposite exists... My all time favourite Tomas Rådström. His race in a Corolla, Sweden 1998, was his big break and opened up for a factory drive at Ford and later Citroen. But he didnt managed to grab those chances...