This year's Tyrrell began the year much heralded. Thus far, the team's performance hasn't, as is usually the case, lived up to the preseason hype. If you remember, the early claims in 1995 were similarly spectacular, but it didn't take long for the wheels to fall off, if not literally, certainly figuratively. Why the hype, and high expectations this year? The answer clearly lies in something said by the car's designer, Dr. Harvey Postlethwaite.

The good doctor claims to have done something very interesting, and perhaps, as only an academic can. Rather than simply designing a car, he took a long hard look at the tracks on which Formula One events are held and designed a car to fit the them. This may seem obvious enough, but if it is so obvious, someone should have done it long ago. In many respects, designers have been working much like cobblers who make shoes without considering the sizes of customers' feet. Try enough times and eventually you may get it right. Harvey took a different tack; measure the feet then make the shoe. Although the 024 hasn't proven itself yet, and much remains to be done, Tyrrell is clearly taking steps in the right direction, and is on the right track (Please excuse the puns).

Equally as interesting as Postlethwaite's design strategy is something he discovered about the tracks themselves. Prior to the beginning of this season, he noted: "We analyzed all the circuits hosting grands prix in 1995, and the most common corner a Formula One car has to go around is taken in second gear at just 75 miles per hour....Vital ingredients for success in 1996 are going to be good turn-in, good traction and good driveability....Having a car that is brilliant through a high-speed corner is great, but there are only two left; perhaps even only one."

The complexion of Formula One is interesting, isn't it? The whole idea of only two fast turns first came to me as a shocking blow. The highest form of motor racing is run on tracks with a preponderence of slow corners! On one hand, this doesn't say much. On the other hand, it says a lot.

All racing fans love speed. We like to see cars go fast. The faster, the better. High speeds, however, are only gained on the straights. Paradoxically, most of us tend to find vantage points in breaking areas where speeds change quickly, the cars are in view longer, and from where we don't have to snap our necks to watch the action. In a very real sense, we have been doing something subconciously for a very long time, and Harvey Postlethwaite recently picked up on it. Perhaps he is as much of a social scientist as a car designer.

Most tracks have one long straight and at least one short one. That is 32 high speed zones in the course of a season. But only two high speed corners? Yes! And, these are disappearing all too rapidly. Personally, I like the high speed corners. Some of the most exciting moments I've ever witnessed in Formula One took place on the Peraltada. Ditto for Tamborello. The death of Ayrton Senna at the latter undoubtedly signaled the beginning of the end for such turns. But blaming the corner for his misfortune is tantamount to blaming hospitals for all the deaths that occur within. Improving safety through track design is something I've discussed before, and undoubtedly will again, until there is at least one high speed turn at every venue. For now, however, let's move on.

Given that slow corners are everywhere--the norm--more designers will undoubtedly follow Postlethwaite's lead. Exactly how well that bodes for the success of Tyrrell in a relative sense remains to be seen, but that, too, is another matter. Much more important now, at least in terms of navigating slow corners, is related technology, specifically tires.

Firestone's reentry into Indy Car racing (I hope I don't get sued by Tony George or the city council of Indianapolis for using that term!) has certainly heated things up a bit. Bridgestone is making noise about entering Formula One in 1998, and it is no secret that Michelin is testing tires as well. With so many manufacturers competing for a slice of the pie, does anyone wonder how fast cars will get around so-called "slow corners?" I, for one, look for lap times to decrease and speeds to increase. Tire makers will produce a product that will more than compensate for the tightness of the turns. Reflect back a few years. Remember what was said would happen to speeds as tire widths were about to be reduced from 18 to 15 inches? It was claimed they would go down. What actually happened? They went up. Why? Because designers met the challenge. They will again.

Of course, improved tires will drive up the costs of going fast. Or will they?

When asked about threats to Goodyear's monopology in Formula One, Ron Dennis said: "I think it is good. It will probably cost more money for tire companies, but the chances are that it will actually increase the commercial benefits to the teams. They will need to support the teams more, to increase testing and provide them with the performance advantage that they are looking for."

Stated in other terms, costs to the tire makers will go up because they will have to pay the teams to use their products. Profits to the teams will increase as they will be paid for providing a service--testing dressed in the guise of racing. And, who pays the tire makers? You, me, and all the other consumers of commercial tires. And, what do we get for our money? Improved cars from minds like that of Harvey Postlethwaite, better grand prix racing, and better tires on our personal cars. Are we payers or payees? Who cares?

What goes around, comes around.