Every year at the end of the season we the fans have the pain of a 4 month F1 race vacuum. Which is why the car launches and testing get such intense scrutiny from us the F1 depraved deprived fans.
For me testing has always been a mixed bag, its great seeing the pictures of the new cars on track but the times seem so random its impossible to work out who is quick and who isn't until the first qualifying session of the year.
With this in mind I have under taken a little project in anticipation of the 2013 testing season. I have entered every testing result for the last 3 years and compared them to the first qualifying session of that season. My goal was to come up with a ‘sand bagging factor’ (SBF), that is, a number to adjust the average testing results in order to predict the most likely qualifying result at Melbourne for 2013.
Of course to call it sand bagging is not entirely fair. Many teams are simply concentrating on race pace with others concentrating on qualifying pace. But the result is the same, some teams appear artificially slow and others artificially fast during testing. Sand bagging factor or SBF seems as good a way to describe this as any.
Why 3 years of results? Well I reason that to go back further would introduce errors due to changes in team ownership, drivers, management or simply just philosophy. Yet to base it on less than 3 years would mean factors like crashes, bad weather etc would be too prominent in the calculation. 3 year seems about right to get a reasonable average whilst maximising the potential for accurate prediction in 2013.
I entered into this expecting to see no patterns and to have wasted my time, but I was pleasantly surprised to see that practically every team for the last 3 years has either under performed or over performed during winter testing in a consistent way from year to year when compared to their qualifying result in the first race of the season.
So let’s take a look at the figures.
N.B. a positive SBF means the team would do better in qualifying than in testing. Negative SBF means the team would do worse in qualifying than in testing.
Redbull
On average the most consistent and extreme of all the teams when it comes to sand bagging during testing. Year on year Redbull have ran their cars on average with enough fuel on board during winter testing to give a false result in their pace by an average 5.7 places lower than their qualifying result at the first race. So if they appear to be running in 5th and 6th in testing chances are they will be on pole for the first race.
Mclaren
With the exception of 2010, Mclaren have actually sand bagged during testing to an even greater extent than Redbull, in 2012 running 8 places lower on average in testing than they pulled out in qually. When you average the last 3 years that works out as a SBF of 5.2 places lower than their qualifying result at the first race.
Ferrari
The least consistent of the top teams with a huge swing in SBF for 2010 (SBF 4.5) to 2012 (SBF -5.33) if we discard the oldest result in 2010 then we see that Ferrari tend to over perform in testing and are disappointing in qually that has certainly been the case in the last 2 years if not 3. Ferrari are the wild card in the pack the rest of the teams are much more consistent. Average SBF -0.83
Mercedes
The last of teams we will look at that run artificially slow during testing. In 2011 they were fairly honest in pace but for 2010 and 2012 they ran around 4 places lower in testing than they managed in qually. Average SBF during testing 2.67 places lower than their qualifying result at the first race.
Sauber
The team that really goes out to get their car low fuel ready, or if you’re being more sceptical, the team that goes out to grab headlines during testing. Sauber seem to run their cars on very low fuel and in qually trim more often than any other team. With the assistance of the other teams running race simulation Sauber have on average appeared to be 5.5 places faster during testing than they have managed during qualifying.
Toro Rosso
The remaining team worthy of individual mention due to there apparent change in philosophy during testing. In 2010 they were running a massive 7 places faster than they eventually managed in qually. Possibly glory hunting like Sauber. For 2011 and 2012 this seems to of been abandoned with Toro Rosso actually under performing in testing in much the same way as Redbull. Read into that what you will. But I can’t help but think the number 2 team was reminded it was number 2. Average SBF 1.39 places higher in testing than in qually.
Lotus / Force India / Williams / Caterham / Marussia
These remaining teams appear to run fairly honest. On average just 1 or 2 places higher in testing than they manage in qualifying. This demotion in qualifying of 1 or 2 places can be accounted for by the sand bagging top teams moving forward to their correct positions.
So in summary it appears that the top teams only concentrate on race pace and never, not once carry out a low fuel qually simulation. I find that very surprising. At the same time Sauber in particular seem to be concentrating a large amount of their time setting up their car to run on low fuel, possibly glory hunting to help win sponsors pre season.
I feel this has been a worth whilst look into past form for the teams and await 2013 testing with a new enthusiasm.
I will be updating this post with my qually predictions after 2013 testing is completed. It will be interesting to see how accurate this ‘Sand Bagging Factor’ theory turns out to be.
For me testing has always been a mixed bag, its great seeing the pictures of the new cars on track but the times seem so random its impossible to work out who is quick and who isn't until the first qualifying session of the year.
With this in mind I have under taken a little project in anticipation of the 2013 testing season. I have entered every testing result for the last 3 years and compared them to the first qualifying session of that season. My goal was to come up with a ‘sand bagging factor’ (SBF), that is, a number to adjust the average testing results in order to predict the most likely qualifying result at Melbourne for 2013.
Of course to call it sand bagging is not entirely fair. Many teams are simply concentrating on race pace with others concentrating on qualifying pace. But the result is the same, some teams appear artificially slow and others artificially fast during testing. Sand bagging factor or SBF seems as good a way to describe this as any.
Why 3 years of results? Well I reason that to go back further would introduce errors due to changes in team ownership, drivers, management or simply just philosophy. Yet to base it on less than 3 years would mean factors like crashes, bad weather etc would be too prominent in the calculation. 3 year seems about right to get a reasonable average whilst maximising the potential for accurate prediction in 2013.
I entered into this expecting to see no patterns and to have wasted my time, but I was pleasantly surprised to see that practically every team for the last 3 years has either under performed or over performed during winter testing in a consistent way from year to year when compared to their qualifying result in the first race of the season.
So let’s take a look at the figures.
N.B. a positive SBF means the team would do better in qualifying than in testing. Negative SBF means the team would do worse in qualifying than in testing.
Redbull
On average the most consistent and extreme of all the teams when it comes to sand bagging during testing. Year on year Redbull have ran their cars on average with enough fuel on board during winter testing to give a false result in their pace by an average 5.7 places lower than their qualifying result at the first race. So if they appear to be running in 5th and 6th in testing chances are they will be on pole for the first race.
Mclaren
With the exception of 2010, Mclaren have actually sand bagged during testing to an even greater extent than Redbull, in 2012 running 8 places lower on average in testing than they pulled out in qually. When you average the last 3 years that works out as a SBF of 5.2 places lower than their qualifying result at the first race.
Ferrari
The least consistent of the top teams with a huge swing in SBF for 2010 (SBF 4.5) to 2012 (SBF -5.33) if we discard the oldest result in 2010 then we see that Ferrari tend to over perform in testing and are disappointing in qually that has certainly been the case in the last 2 years if not 3. Ferrari are the wild card in the pack the rest of the teams are much more consistent. Average SBF -0.83
Mercedes
The last of teams we will look at that run artificially slow during testing. In 2011 they were fairly honest in pace but for 2010 and 2012 they ran around 4 places lower in testing than they managed in qually. Average SBF during testing 2.67 places lower than their qualifying result at the first race.
Sauber
The team that really goes out to get their car low fuel ready, or if you’re being more sceptical, the team that goes out to grab headlines during testing. Sauber seem to run their cars on very low fuel and in qually trim more often than any other team. With the assistance of the other teams running race simulation Sauber have on average appeared to be 5.5 places faster during testing than they have managed during qualifying.
Toro Rosso
The remaining team worthy of individual mention due to there apparent change in philosophy during testing. In 2010 they were running a massive 7 places faster than they eventually managed in qually. Possibly glory hunting like Sauber. For 2011 and 2012 this seems to of been abandoned with Toro Rosso actually under performing in testing in much the same way as Redbull. Read into that what you will. But I can’t help but think the number 2 team was reminded it was number 2. Average SBF 1.39 places higher in testing than in qually.
Lotus / Force India / Williams / Caterham / Marussia
These remaining teams appear to run fairly honest. On average just 1 or 2 places higher in testing than they manage in qualifying. This demotion in qualifying of 1 or 2 places can be accounted for by the sand bagging top teams moving forward to their correct positions.
So in summary it appears that the top teams only concentrate on race pace and never, not once carry out a low fuel qually simulation. I find that very surprising. At the same time Sauber in particular seem to be concentrating a large amount of their time setting up their car to run on low fuel, possibly glory hunting to help win sponsors pre season.
I feel this has been a worth whilst look into past form for the teams and await 2013 testing with a new enthusiasm.
I will be updating this post with my qually predictions after 2013 testing is completed. It will be interesting to see how accurate this ‘Sand Bagging Factor’ theory turns out to be.
or am I thinking about the year before?
