2010 Driver & Chump of the Weekend

[F1Yorkshire]

Would it not be better to calculate the percentage of votes received per race and then total up those figures to get a more accurate result when its time to work out the overall winnners.

Check the first post

How did you work out your final percentages?

Did you add the number of votes received by the driver divided by the total votes x 100

Example using Vettel's votes

(126/404) x 100 = 31.2%

I think it may be more accurate if you add the percentage of votes for each driver per race then divide by the number of races x 100. Slightly more complicated but the result is accurate in terms of percentage.

Example using Vettel's percentage of votes.

7+40+92+45+33+33+94 = 344

Number of races 13 x 100 = 1300

(344/1300) x 100 = 26.4%

So in effect Vettel has earned 344 percentage points out of the potential 1300 points available.

The overall result changes when you compare Webber to Hamilton as Webber collected most of his chump points at the start of the season where the number of votes were lower than when Hamilton collected his chump points.

Sorry about the amount of numbers I have just added to this topic but I have too much time on my hands!

 

[Brogan]

I just did votes/total votes.
That seems to me to be the most accurate way of doing it

 

[F1Yorkshire]

I just did votes/total votes.
That seems to me to be the most accurate way of doing it

Thats fine for working out the votes for each individual race but its more complicated when you try to calculate the final positions due to the varied number of votes received per race.

I may be wrong though and I'm sure there are 1 or 2 database genuises on this forum who can help correct me.

 

[Brogan]

It's easily changed but your method has weighting based on the number of votes per race.

For example, if we take Jenson's 4 votes for CotW, out of a total of 404 this gives him an overall total of 1%.
However with your system he has 1.7% which is almost double.
Yet 1.7% of 404 is almost 7.

Essentially it comes down to whether you want a flat or weighted average.

 

[F1Yorkshire]

It's easily changed but your method has weighting based on the number of votes per race.

For example, if we take Jenson's 4 votes for CotW, out of a total of 404 this gives him an overall total of 1%.
However with your system he has 1.7% which is almost double.
Yet 1.7% of 404 is almost 7.

Essentially it comes down to whether you want a flat or weighted average.

Button received 2 votes in Malaysia which was 13% of the vote at the time.

Alonso recieved 2 votes in Belgium but due to the larger number of voters it was only 4% if the vote.

Any votes received earlier in the season have a greater impact than votes at this stage of the season, I'm just trying to calculate the votes so there is a true average over the season.

 

[teabagyokel]

Currently we have the tables as the total number of votes received. As the number of users on the forum has expanded the popularity of this feature has doubled and in some cases tripled since the start of the season. This means any winners of CotW or DotW in the later races have a disproportionate number of votes compared to the early races.

Would it not be better to calculate the percentage of votes received per race and then total up those figures to get a more accurate result when its time to work out the overall winnners.

Brogan, your method of doing votes/total votes does not solve the problem that F1Yorkshire has posed in the post I've quoted.

What F1Y is suggesting is that each race is equalised before a total count is made. Just taking votes/total votes still means that, say, Hamilton's 68% in Turkey is worth 17 marks, which is equal to the value of Petrov's 47% in Hungary.

Under F1Y's system Hamilton would get a 68 and Petrov 47. F1Y's way of working seems to be fairer to me, because early season mistakes under Brogan's system would be buried and late season mistakes amplified.

 

[Brogan]

Like I said, it's a weighted average as opposed to a flat average.

In terms of pure votes, the simple method is correct.

If you want to get a comparison between each race based on the same number of votes, then the weighted method is correct.

Both methods are correct, depending on what you want to represent.

 

[F1Yorkshire]

Like I said, it's a weighted average as opposed to a flat average.

In terms of pure votes, the simple method is correct.

If you want to get a comparison between each race based on the same number of votes, then the weighted method is correct.

Both methods are correct, depending on what you want to represent.

I don't think it will change the overall result of either championship as both contenders for the titles have been consistently good/bad all season .

I'm quite happy to work out the weighted average for when the final figures are released.

 

[Brogan]

I'm quite happy to work out the weighted average for when the final figures are released.

Already done chap.

The tables in the first post now have flat and weighted averages.

 

[Brogan]

I'm still tempted to do polls for Bahrain too as it's a shame that's the only one which is missing...

 

[F1Yorkshire]

I'm still tempted to do polls for Bahrain too as it's a shame that's the only one which is missing...

Do we have the highlights of the race linked to the website?

We could create a post showing them with a link to the poll underneath.

 

[teabagyokel]

Indeed here is a Bahrain highlights video:



It shows everything interesting that happened!

I'll go for DotW: Vettel because he ought to have won and CotW: Hulkenburg for spinning and for being dead last of the established teams.

 

[Brogan]

Okay, the Bahrain threads have been created.

2010 Bahrain GP Driver of the Weekend

2010 Bahrain GP Chump of the Weekend

 

[ATL11]

Indeed here is a Bahrain highlights video:

Is it me or is the link working?

 

[Brogan]

Indeed here is a Bahrain highlights video:

Is it me or is the link working?

I presume that's tby's sense of humour at work again...

It is in fact just a black image with a triangle on it, thereby implying that there were no highlights from the race.

 

[teabagyokel]

Indeed here is a Bahrain highlights video:

Is it me or is the link working?

I presume that's tby's sense of humour at work again...

It is in fact just a black image with a triangle on it, thereby implying that there were no highlights from the race.

That is the implication of the image, as my sense of humour continues to run amok on this website and destroy all it touches!

 

[fat jez]

That is the implication of the image, as my sense of humour continues to run amok on this website and destroy all it touches!

It's OK, TBY, I appreciated it

 

[Grizzly]

i chuckled.

its annoying that text has no pronunciation

 

[snowy]

Autosport:

The Spaniard has been under the spotlight at times this year - following his jump-start in China and crash in Monaco practice – while rivals Sebastian Vettel and Lewis Hamilton have also made high-profile blunders in races.

One failed overtaking manoeuvre all season, you are a blunderer and lumped in with another driver who has made a catalogue of mistakes and under performed on numerous occasions.

 

[ladyinred]

Alonso failed sometimes, because he was faster than his car!
But I understand it's not easy to understand it.

But now the car is faster than in the beginning & Fernando will not make more faults