Red Bull vs Ferrari Data & Statistics

[Brogan]

Autosport has posted an interesting few statistics comparing Red Bull to Ferrari over their most dominant periods.
I've added the pole to win ratio to give a better comparison.

Ferrari 2000 - 2004
Races: 85
Poles: 51
Wins: 57
Win Ratio: 67%
Pole to Win Ratio: 112%

Red Bull 2010 - 2012
Races: 58
Poles: 41
Wins: 28
Win Ratio: 48%
Pole to Win Ratio: 68%

 

[ExtremeNinja]

Perhaps Ferrari had a better racing driver...?

...runs for cover...

 

[The Pits]

The qualifying formats have varied in that time, so that may have something to do with it (I think?)

 

[teabagyokel]

I think Vettel is a better qualifier than Schumacher was, and that Juan Pablo Montoya was a moron.

 

[landogeorgelewis1]

teabagyokel

.

 

[MCLS]

Don't forget, from 2000-4 in the years covered, those Ferrari's were bulletproof in terms of reliability, particularly on Schumacher's side of the garage. And the challenge was lessened, it was only really Williams and McLaren challenging Ferrari in those years, while this year, Ferrari, Lotus, McLaren, Sauber and Williams to lessening or greater extents up at the front as shown with the 7 winners in 7 races at the start of the season

 

[teabagyokel]

MCLS - And in 2004, no-one bothered challenging!

 

[Fenderman]

Indeed, it is a well known fact () that if you had a Ferrari in your mirrors you got out of the way like a scared kitty. I vaguely recall an incident (and I really wish I could remember it precisely and when it was) when a back marker with a lot of red in the body colour actually frightened a bloke out of the way because he thought it was Shoemacher!

 

[Olivier]

Back then the Williams was a good qualifier but not so good during the race. In 2002 for instance I seem to recall Montoya "robbing" the pole a few times but failing to materialize it with a win (it may have something to do with what teabagyokel has to say about it, but I'd like to give more credit to Shumacher).

 

[Fenderman]

Personally, I was horrified at the prospect of Montoya entering F1. What seemed to escape a lot of folk's attention at the time was the his propensity for winning it or binning it. His driving in F3000 was akin to last years edition of Maldonado and I expected World War III to break out between him and Shoemacher every time they shared the same tarmac. Back then a driver could still "kill" his car and where Shoemacher definitely had the edge over numerous rivals was his ability to sense a problem and modify his driving to ensure the car made it to the end of the race. Yes, maybe the Williams was unreliable but I don't think Montoya's permanently all out aggression helped.

Of course, and here is my usual disclaimer, I could be completely wrong and always stand to be corrected.

 

[The Artist.....]

I'm not sure you can say very much based on the pole to win ratio... Remember that the Williams was lightning fast in qualifying, but faded during the races- and also this was the beginning of the era of race fuel qualifying- so cars often qualified slower due to a longer first stint!

 

[Galahad]

Red Bull's 2012 does feel a bit like Ferrari's 2003 - new car doesn't perform quite as expected and team struggles to win a championship that should have been wrapped up sooner (though in the former case, they obviously had a lot of help from McLaren).

Michelin got Williams and McLaren a lot of pole positions in the 2001-04 period that the cars didn't really deserve.

 

[teabagyokel]

Galahad - RBR 2010-12 has looked a lot like Ferrari 2001-03, does that mean next year we're going to have 2004?

Think about it. The next two teams (McLaren and Ferrari) build stinkers so the German champions' team run away with it, leaving Enstone and Brackley fighting distantly for second.

 

[Galahad]

I ruddy hope not!