In many aspects, Ferrari's current dominance of the Formula One World Championship resembles that enjoyed by McLaren at the end of the eighties and the start of the nineties. Yet there are some vital differences that could see the Italian team continue with a winning streak that the British squad were unable to hold on to. Richard Barnes reviews the ingredients for Ferrari's continued success

After the controversial finish of the Austrian Grand Prix, Ferrari's Michael Schumacher said: 'I hope that the Championship is soon finished so we can go for real racing.' Most would have assumed that Schumacher meant 'securing first place in the World Drivers Championship' and not 'winning the WDC, clinching the Constructors' Championship and ensuring second place for Rubens Barrichello in the WDC too'. In the aftermath of Sunday's Hungarian Grand Prix, only the wildly optimistic could ever hope to see the two Ferrari teammates pitted against each other in 'real racing'.

There's no doubt that Ferrari's decision to boost Barrichello into second place in the WDC is both within the rules and in Ferrari's best interests as a F1 competitor and employer. However, Ferrari's cakewalk domination is not doing much for the fans' interest in the remainder of the season and, by extension, the image of the sport itself.

It is pointless expecting Ferrari to change their operating procedures. Modern sport is all about winning, and Ferrari are only doing what their fans demanded (and what the sport's purists missed) during the 21-year WDC drought. It is equally pointless looking to the FIA to legislate genuine competition back into F1. As the pinnacle of innovation and engineering excellence in the world of motor sport, F1 should be about pitting the best against the best, no holds barred and no technical regulatory manipulation required. While F1 continues to stand as both an individual and team sport, it is also impractical to implement racing regulations that favour the individual driver over the team effort.

Clearly, the challenge to dethrone Ferrari must not come from the rule-book, but from the ten rival team owners themselves. It's not by any stretch a new situation in the sport. When Ron Dennis's McLaren team were lapping the field in 1988/9, Dennis stated that it wasn't his job to slow down, it was his rivals' job to go faster. Back in those times, it was inevitable that fortunes would swing, and F1 empires would rise and fall, based on the whimsy and limited availability of major manufacturer backing. For more than a decade, McLaren and Williams swapped roles as the dominant players in F1, based mainly on the commitment and development curve of their major manufacturer engine suppliers - from TAG to Honda to Renault to Mercedes-Benz.

Ron Dennis put together the prototype of today's much-vaunted 'package', by putting together the best chassis, top tyres, and an unmatched engine - and then getting the best two drivers in the world to humiliate the field. It was never a recipe that was going to last indefinitely. Alain Prost and Ayrton Senna hated each other, Honda's interest in F1 waned after they'd met their goals, and the McLaren design team members gradually drifted away to face fresh challenges elsewhere. That natural splintering of the winning formula opened the door for Williams's early-90s dominance.

Ferrari have simply taken the ingredients of the 'package' concept several steps further. There are basically seven ingredients that comprise the modern F1 package. These are the basic design for each season, encompassing chassis, engine, and tyres working together. The fifth element is the drivers, the sixth is the ability to develop the car throughout the season, and the final element is the continuity to ensure that the formula can be repeated year after year. Ferrari may not have the perfect package yet, but there are no apparent chinks in their approach either.

For decades, Ferrari have enjoyed the bespoke relationship between engine and chassis, with both designed in-house and around the needs of each other. It was logical to add a bespoke tyre into the mix, and the special relationship with tyre supplier Bridgestone has accomplished this effectively. With their own two testing tracks, a huge budget and a wealth of technology available, Ferrari's season-long development ability is a traditional strength. An amicable and established driver hierarchy ensures effective teamwork on track, and as long as the core brains trust of Luca di Montezemolo, Jean Todt, Ross Brawn, Rory Byrne and Michael Schumacher stays intact, continuity is assured.

The final element, the new design wheeled out at the start of each season, could be an Achilles heel - staying ahead of the pack requires revolutionary designs, and revolutionary designs are notoriously risky. Ferrari have reduced that risk element recently, by wrapping up Championships so early and so dominantly.

That allows Rory Byrne to focus on the next season's design much earlier than his rival designers. It also gives Ferrari a 'plan B', of starting each new season with a hybrid of the previous year's design, as they did so successfully this year. Technical director Ross Brawn has again called upon Rory Byrne to pen a revolutionary rather than evolutionary design for next season. If the new car isn't judged to be competitive or reliable enough, Ferrari will doubtless trot out an upgraded F2002 for Australia 2003 - and win with it.

For the moment, and possibly even for the duration of the current key Ferrari contracts, the Scuderia's package approach poses unanswerable questions for their rivals. Ferrari's recipe for success may seem more the result of a corporate MBA think-tank than the spark of genius inspired by racing passion. But, if we are to embrace the concept of F1 as business rather than sport, one can only marvel at the sheer overwhelming impetus that drives the team to eye-popping new 'this is nothing, wait till you see us next year' benchmarks in Championship dominance.

The rest of the 2002 season may well follow all rational predictions, and see Barrichello claiming second in the WDC while Schumacher and Ferrari set new single-season points records. For genuine excitement, though, we need look no further than Williams's Juan Pablo Montoya and McLaren's Kimi Raikkonen.

Sunday's brief scrap between the two marked the only overtaking move of note in the entire Hungarian GP, and also served to hone the growing rivalry between these two young stars. At Hockenheim, it was Montoya whose nerve held out, forcing Raikkonen to put two wheels on the grass before deferring. On Sunday, Raikkonen returned the favour, proving that his phlegmatic Scandinavian image and cool exterior cannot disguise the true and fiery racing spirit underneath.

Both Raikkonen and Montoya epitomise what racing should be all about - the refusal to accept traffic or grid position as excuses, but rather as minor inconveniences. Both display an ability to make things happen for them, to force a pass or turn in a hotlap when machinery or conditions dictate that it shouldn't be possible. It's an intangible quality that made Senna and Gilles Villeneuve stand out from their rivals. If nothing else, the remainder of this season will fire up the emerging Montoya-Raikkonen rivalry even further. Hopefully, in the years to come, 2002 will be remembered not only for Michael Schumacher's dominance, but also as the year in which Montoya and Raikkonen established their credentials and started another legendary racing rivalry.