Team-mate % Stats

[pirateplunder]

Yes, if points were given out on the basis of race position throughout the season then its true, method 2 would say Hamilton wouldn't quite be in the title fight. In fact the predicted points up to the end of Texas would be...

Sebastian Vettel 274
Fernando Alonso 253
Lewis Hamilton 230
Jenson Button 165
Kimi Raikkonen 160
Mark Webber 153
Romain Grosjean 121
Nico Rosberg 96
Felipe Massa 95
Pastor Maldonado 71
Sergio Perez 69
Michael Schumacher 57
Kamui Kobayashi 48
Nico Hulkenberg 47
Paul di Resta 37
Bruno Senna 18
Jean-Eric Vergne 12
Daniel Ricciardo 12

So Hamilton would still be some way behind and out of contention. Of course, points aren't given like that so method 2 would never be as good. Its also a statistical approximation so would never be as accurate as someone expert looking at each individual race and calculating the what ifs. That's also inherently difficult though - Spa being a good case, who gets what points for Hamilton and Alonso? Also what about Lewis anit-roll bar failure at Korea? A number are down to slow pit stops but then Alonso had a slow one in Texas. etc etc.

 

[Brogan]

Indeed.
It gets increasingly difficult to factor in every non-driver issue.

One of these days I might just do it for this season, obviously with predicted points finishes where drivers retired, based on their pace at the time, etc.

Perhaps

 

[Jen]

Maybe controversial here - but what is wrong with current standings. Surely, that is what has happened?

 

[jez101]

Although Lewis has had 5 or 6 brilliant races this year, he has also had some spent a fair bit of time running in the midfield for different reasons (Bahrain, Spain, UK, Germany, Japan, Korea). Yes, those problems were not Lewis underperforming, but it's a package. That's what these numbers measure Lewis + McLaren / Mercedes.

Without issues, they would all be higher - I don't think you can only apply the "what if" to just one guy.

 

[Brogan]

Agreed, you can't apply it to just one guy.
Of the top three teams/drivers though, Hamilton has come off by far the worst due to errors outside his control and therefore these manipulated statistics don't truly reflect things, in my opinion.

Might as well just take the WDC standings as Jen suggests, or the actual head to head data.

 

[sushifiesta]

The WDC gives the best indication of the most deserving package (driver+car+team, speed+reliability+factors out of your control), but once you have to separate out one or two of those components it's no longer the correct benchmark. If you assume that the team have made the correct strategy calls, not made mistakes in pit stops, had a reliable car and not been influenced by the errors of other drivers 100% of the time then the WDC points comparison between team mates is fair. In reality this is never the case.

I'm with Brogan that, whilst all of the stats posted so far are interesting, none of them give a true indication of driver performance alone.

 

[pirateplunder]

^^ its an approximation that's never truly going to reflect everything but at the same time doesn't allow subjective judgement to come in to it, and the inevitable calls of bias. Also, of those top drivers Vettels predicted points are +1 over reality, Alonso's are -7 from reality, Hamilton's are +40 and Buttons are +2. Thats almost two entire race wins for Hamilton over Alonso's tally even with Alonso being shunted out in Spa.I would say thats quite a significant reflection of Lewis' team problems, even if not full.

I'm also quite surprised that Vettel's predicted (thats not really the right word but never-mind) and actual points are within 0.3% of each other.

 

[sushifiesta]

pirateplunder Yes ok, perhaps I'm putting too much emphasis on Hamilton and Schumacher's issues. I hadn't realised some of the points swings were so large but I must say that the overall positions aren't really altered. You have to weigh that up with the extra points that the likes of Grosjean get as a result of their own errors as well.

Going back to the percentages there is another point I've been meaning to make. Note that 2nd place gets 72% the points of 1st place and 10th place gets 50% the points of 9th place. If you have two teams, one where driver A finishes 1st at every race and driver B finishes 2nd at every race and one where driver A finishes 9th at every race and driver B finishes 10th at every race, this system tells you that the number two driver in the less competitive team is 22% worse compared to his team mate than the number two driver in the more competitive team. That doesn't seem quite right.

Also, please don't think I'm putting anyone down. The only reason I'm posting these things is because I'm interested and I like to work out the details!

 

[RasputinLives]

I think after a long complexed debate we may have all agreed that the championship table is the best and fairest way to judge how good each driver has been all season. I think thats probably why they use it. My original aim was to compare team-mates and show how the second drivers had done relative to their better team-mate. I do understand its not an accurate system but realistically its probably the best one we can get.

What it shows to me is that the majority of the front running teams are happy for their second driver to get between 45% to 65% of their lead drivers points. Massa had his contract renewed at much lower and Red Bull are completely happy with Webber despite the fact that for the second season running he's only on the 60%ish mark. The midfield teams seem to have it much closer and I guess that because their points scoring oppotunities are less they need both drivers to be on it to pick the points up for them to get the good results.

The exception to all of this is Mclaren who have a very close pairing and whilst all race fans will say they want to see all team-mates be able to race as they are the only ones in the top 5 teams that have a pairing like this and it hasn't worked for them yet again you have to question the philosophy.

jez101 - can I defend Vergne please? his qualifying has been awful but he always comes through in the race and tends to score the results over Ricciardo. Ricciardo does indeed look quick but tends to fade at the end. At the end of the day F1 is a results business and whether he's had the best debut season or not he has outscored his team mate and that has to count for something.

 

[jez101]

Of course you can defend JEV, I kind of thought you would

Danny has 6 points scoring finishes, JEV 3. Vergne just managed his in races when cars were falling off the track in front of him so his were all 8ths. The problem with the WDC standings is not at the top of the table, but at the cut off between points and no points. eg Ricciardo has 14 finishes in the top 13, while JEV has only 8. If points were awarded for 1-15, the WDC table might look at bit different for these two.

Pos	Daniel Ricciardo	Jean-Éric Vergne

[TR][TR][TD1]8[/TD1][TD1]0[/TD1][TD1]3[/TD1][TR][TR][TD1]9[/TD1][TD1]4[/TD1][TD1]0[/TD1][TR][TR][TD1]10[/TD1][TD1]2[/TD1][TD1]0[/TD1][TR][TR][TD1]11[/TD1][TD1]1[/TD1][TD1]1[/TD1][TR][TR][TD1]12[/TD1][TD1]3[/TD1][TD1]3[/TD1][TR][TR][TD1]13[/TD1][TD1]4[/TD1][TD1]1[/TD1][TR][TR][TD1]14[/TD1][TD1]1[/TD1][TD1]3[/TD1][TR][TR][TD1]15[/TD1][TD1]2[/TD1][TD1]2[/TD1][TR][TR][TD1]16[/TD1][TD1]0[/TD1][TD1]2[/TD1][TR][TR][TD1]17[/TD1][TD1]1[/TD1][TD1]0[/TD1][TR][TR][TD1]Ret[/TD1][TD1]1[/TD1][TD1]4[/TD1][TR]

[TR]

 

[ExtremeNinja]

Brogan. Yep, but given it is a team effort to compete in a race I think it is a pretty accurate measure. He's a step behind because he and his crew collectively have not been on-point in the same way that Vettel and Alonso and their respective crews. It does not provide a direct driver comparison but it's fairly close to a driver and crew comparison.

RasputinLives. Speak for yourself. I certainly don't agree. I think both Alonso and Hamilton have driven better than Vettel this year and both deserve to be ahead in the championship. Although, Vettel has also been quite supurb. Again, it does give a good reflection of how good the drivers and their crews have performed.

The driver championship standings do not fully reflect the performance of the drivers because there are many cases where a driver has performed and been let down by the crew or where the crew have performed and been let down by the driver.

We can't just ignore the fact that drivers are in different teams driving different machinery in different circumstances with different levels of support and competency of support. This is F1, not arm-wrestling.

You might argue that it all averages out, but that would be a falsehood because it doesn't. If one team performs better than another team over the course of a season, you can't simply say at the end that they all performed at the same level and everything is down to the drivers.

 

[RasputinLives]

ok Ninja. Sorry. Some of us agree not including Ninja

At the end of the day though it is points system is the best, simplist and most accurate way of comparrison and thats why its used. I see what your saying regarding Lewis and Alonso but whatever system is applied they still don't come out on top so you have to say tge championship table is gets the right result at the end of the day.

To be honest F1 has always been about the package of car and driver thats what makes it so much fun. You can keep your spec series. The best drivers end up in the best cars anyways.

Anyways the whole point of this thread was to compare those with equal equiptment and the results they've scored. It does flatter some and os cruel to others but I don't think its too far out.

jez101 I look at those results and see JEV and Ricciardo still pretty much even if I'm honest. Can't really see the argument for keeping one and not the other. I will say that if JEV doesn't sort his quali out by mid point 2013 he might be looking for a new job but having seen him in the world series I honestly believe he will sort it.

 

[ExtremeNinja]

ok Ninja. Sorry. Some of us agree not including Ninja

... and a good 80-90% of other posters on this thread judging by their comments.

The best drivers don't always end up in the best cars and certainly not always at the same time. I don't want a spec series. Most of the drivers have been through many spec series to get to F1. That is, for a large part, how they were measured to be good enough.

However, to judge all of the drivers by their championship points is to pretend that it is a spec series which is a massive leap from reality and why it just doesn't hold up.

The driver's championship is as much a team sport as the constructors championship and to look at the points as an exclusive measure of the drivers completely disregards the efforts and results of the people behind the driver.

Getting back on to team-mates, this is obviously a lot easier. However, at some point in most of the top teams a driver in the pairing will emerge in front and this normally happens quite early. From that point on, they have stolen the initiative and changed the dynamic in the operation of the team. There is no turning that clock back and so once the initiative is embedded in one side of the garage fair comparison goes out the window. The demoted driver has often lost before they have even started.

 

[RasputinLives]

Sorry. I'll edit once again. 10% of people agree the championship table is the best, most sensible and easiest way to judge drivers and competition the other 90% agree with Ninja who is right about everything ever.

Unfourtunatly part of that 10% that agree just happen to be the FIA so we're stuck with it.

The point of my above post before all of this wasn't to debate the system but to say that when it comes to judging team mates against each other I think the per centage method is the most fair and unbiased.

 

[jez101]

Can't really see the argument for keeping one and not the other. I will say that if JEV doesn't sort his quali out by mid point 2013 he might be looking for a new job but having seen him in the world series I honestly believe he will sort it.

I agree it would be harsh on JEV / anyone to drop him after one season. He has raced well enough considering where he started, but he has been pretty awful in qualifying and failed in Q1 7 times to his team mate's 2. I guess I put more emphasis on that than you do!

I just can't see a future for a driver who qualifies so badly so regularly. Ricciardo certainly seems to have benefited from his time at HRT and maybe that's been the difference between the two. Maybe JEV will make a big step next year and maybe he does deserve another chance but for me he has used up his Mulligans.

As you know, I had some doubts about Danny last year and although he has done enough this year to get year 3, we really don't know how good he is either. Although the choice between keeping Buemi or Alguersuari would have been impossible to make, a lot of the uncertainty now is because they both went and we lost the reference point.

jez101 I look at those results and see JEV and Ricciardo still pretty much even if I'm honest.

Depends on where you put the emphasis

All I will say is that JEV's 8ths were in Malaysia (rain & safety car), Spa (demolition derby) and Korea (where the car worked for both drivers by JEV's tyre strategy was better than DRs who was ninth and right behind JEV). Ricciardo has been much more consistent even when the car (or their luck) wasn't good enough to fight for points.

I would love to see Alguersuari given another go somewhere. Buemi too, because I think they would have beaten both these guys.

 

[jez101]

Kamui Kobayashi has score 88% of the points Sergio Perez has in a Sauber

Closest pairing are Kobi and Perez - explain to me again why one is off to a big team and the other might not get a drive because I'm really confused on that one.

In life generally I have found that the most important thing is being in the right place at the right time! I think there is a skill to being in that place, although of course luck is also required, but even there I think Vettel shows that the old addage of 'the harder I work, the luckier I get' works.

For all of the mistakes, Perez has been on the podium three times this year, each time seeming to go beyond the car's capability. He has something and McLaren don't have much to lose trying to harness that. I think a lot of his mistakes have been impatience which can be unlearned (especially by bagging that first win).

Kobi would be very unlucky not to have any drive next year but I think his time at Sauber has reached a natural ending. If he needs to find money, then surely he can because he has the driving skills (maybe he doesn't have the right people managing him and he should hire Kartikeyan's manager if that's the problem). Remember when Honda and Toyota would pay for any old Japanese bloke to drive in the hope he was good enough? Now they have one of the world's top 24 drivers, surely someone can find a Japanese company to support Kobi?

Personally, I would like to see Kobi at Force India next year as him vs di Resta would be very interesting.

 

[ExtremeNinja]

RasputinLives. I am not suggesting that I am wholly right and nor am I suggesting that 90% of people, or in fact anyone, agrees with me. I was just refuting your claim, which I feel was unsubstantiated, that we are all in agreement with the stance that the championship table is the best reflection and measure of a drivers performance over the course of a season - just to clear that up. I also think that the FIA are fully aware that the drivers championship is also a team effort, which you seem determined not to accept.

Anyway. Can we stop bickering please? I am sure we can have a debate without resorting to ridicule and sarcasm.

 

[teabagyokel]

TMP: Ricciardo vs Vergne

 

[sushifiesta]

This doesn't quite fir here but it is along similar lines. What I've done is for each race looked at the best placed driver in a team and awarded each team points purely based on that leading driver, specifically the points that that driver one plus the points for the place below. For example, in a race where a team's drivers finish 1st and 4th I award them the points for 1st and 2nd, in a race where a team's drivers finish 6th and 24th I award them the points for 6th and 7th and in a race where a team's drivers finish 1st and 2nd I award them the points for 1st and 2nd.

The assumption is that one of a team's drivers maximizes the potential of the car at each race. This should then give an indication of how much each team has lost as a result of unreliability, bad luck and poor driver performances. The results are as follows:

Team	New Pts	WCC Pts	% Diff
Sauber	193	124	56%
Mercedes	209	136	54%
Force India	146	99	47%
Williams	111	76	46%
Ferrari	514	367	40%
McLaren	493	353	40%
Lotus	407	302	35%
Red Bull	569	440	29%
Toro Rosso	26	22	18%

I don't have the time to analyse it right now, but I think it's interesting. Sauber have actually had very few races in which both Kobayashi and Perez have managed to bring home the spoils.

EDIT: I have no idea why the table wants to fall off the bottom of my post...

 

[RasputinLives]

Interesting stats there sushifiesta.

Seems when it comes to Sauber and Force India only one driver brings home the bacon at a time.

Stunned by how the difference percentage wise it is for Ferrari is the same as for Mclaren. Seems only one of them brings home the bacon at s time as well.

Back to mine and jez101 discussion on Toro Rosso. Seems these stats reflect that JEV and Ricciardo have been pretty much following each othrr round all season!