FORUMula1.com - F1 Forum

[What's Burning?]

The only apples to apples measure of F1 drivers is against their team mate. We can discuss (argue and name call for some) this thing till we're blue in the face Vettel has been clearly better than Webber, next year we'll see if he's clearly better than Ricciardo but I'd not place too much stakes in the numbers in the first half of the season as transitioning into a new team/car can have a decent learning curve.

We know nothing more and nothing less how any of the top drivers (with perhaps the exception of Lewis and Alonso) would measure against one another.

[mnmracer]

Yeah, it usually takes rookies about 6 - 8 races to find their pace, but even getting used to new teams can get a bit of finding your footing.

[CookinFlat6]

The only apples to apples measure of F1 drivers is against their team mate. We can discuss (argue and name call for some) this thing till we're blue in the face Vettel has been clearly better than Webber, next year we'll see if he's clearly better than Ricciardo but I'd not place too much stakes in the numbers in the first half of the season as transitioning into a new team/car can have a decent learning curve.

We know nothing more and nothing less how any of the top drivers (with perhaps the exception of Lewis and Alonso) would measure against one another.

Well said WB, apples and pears. I think also that a drivers truest measure is against a teammate, and reputations are created on the quality of teammate. Senna's reputation largely comes from his battles with Prost, another legendary champion.

Lewis and his performance against Alonso, in his rookie year set his credentials and built a large following. There is also the fact that he has beaten 2 reigning WDC teammates in his short career.

Thats also the main reason MS, despite his 7 titles is still doubted by many.

[madbrad]

There are a couple of points that make me not so sure it's apples to apples when 2 guys are in the supposedly same car.
I'm wondering about the core buildup of the car... "settings", for lack of a better word, that are not adjustable, but more of the nature of the chassis. This chassis might for all I know be designed around the star driver. Every driver has different styles and techniques. The all need different cars to excel. If the car were built around Webber would he beat Vettel? Same question for a myriad of pairings - say, Alonso and Whoever teamed with him in Renault, or MS and Rubens, Hill and Prost at Williams, Hakkinen and Coulthard at McLaren, etc., if the tables were turned.
Also, even though a team says it lets their drivers race, One gets preferential treatment. Ron Dennis was famous for claiming his guys could race, but reading autobiographies and biographies I glean that in the top teams, the two cars are separated into two distinct separate teams within the team. The crews war against each other. Not much is shared. But there's a crucial difference between these two "teams": the team principal sides with one of them. That side always has more success because the boss' favouritism gets that side more attention in engineering and development stuff. Dennis rarely acknowledged Coulthard and always referred to that side of the garage as "them". The same thing happened to him at Williams. Dennis even publicly protested and appealed a penalty against Senna that benefitted his other driver, Prost!

[racechick]

I don't think Hughes in his article was trying to say that either one of Hamilton , Alonso or Vettel were better than the other two. He was trying to show what gives the three of them their edge over other drivers. ( I'm sure we all have our own ideas as to which of those three is the best) . He details what it is about those three drivers that he feels gives them their edge over the rest. What struck me was, both Vetel and Alonso have learnt a way of making their cars go faster round the corner. Hamilton is different in that he brakes later and allows his instinctive car control and fast reactions to deal with the result. He's a reactive driver. Which of the thre 'techniques' is the best? The most versatile? I guess it depends on lots of other factors. Neither style would give these drivers an edge in a Marrusia. It sounds as though Hamilton's would be the most versatile, since he reacts to what he's presented with.

I tell you what I'd like to see. Those three going head to head. 10 laps in a Mercedes, ten laps in a Red Bull and ten laps in a Ferrari. Now THAT would be something!!!

[CookinFlat6]

There are a couple of points that make me not so sure it's apples to apples when 2 guys are in the supposedly same car.
I'm wondering about the core buildup of the car... "settings", for lack of a better word, that are not adjustable, but more of the nature of the chassis. This chassis might for all I know be designed around the star driver. Every driver has different styles and techniques. The all need different cars to excel. If the car were built around Webber would he beat Vettel? Same question for a myriad of pairings - say, Alonso and Whoever teamed with him in Renault, or MS and Rubens, Hill and Prost at Williams, Hakkinen and Coulthard at McLaren, etc., if the tables were turned.
Also, even though a team says it lets their drivers race, One gets preferential treatment. Ron Dennis was famous for claiming his guys could race, but reading autobiographies and biographies I glean that in the top teams, the two cars are separated into two distinct separate teams within the team. The crews war against each other. Not much is shared. But there's a crucial difference between these two "teams": the team principal sides with one of them. That side always has more success because the boss' favouritism gets that side more attention in engineering and development stuff. Dennis rarely acknowledged Coulthard and always referred to that side of the garage as "them". The same thing happened to him at Williams. Dennis even publicly protested and appealed a penalty against Senna that benefitted his other driver, Prost!

Interesting questions you have raised. We could take them and apply them to the 3 drivers in the article and their teammates and see if any pattern emerges.

Every driver has different wishes true, but the mark of a great 'driver' as opposed to fast racer should be the ability to adapt and drive anything. Like the greatest musicians can play several instruments and make good music despite the medium, so a great driver should be relatively good in any car. There should be no excuse. Talent is generally divergent in nature and not convergent. How many true geniuses do we know who were one trick ponies? Micheangelo?

The 2007 McLaren was a car unknown to both drivers so thats a good sign of both drivers adapting and doing well. I cannot remember any car or car setup that has caused either driver Lewis or Alonso to lose significant performance relative to their teammate.

It is fairly obvious that most drivers have a comfort zone in which they will perform at their highest level. When the team is prepared to bend over backwards to accomodate that, and when it is to the detriment of the other driver, then there generally has to be favouritism. Either because the favoured driver is simply much better or because the team are more interested in social politics than competitiveness. This could have been the case in the second half of 2007, with Lewis preferred because Alonso turned against the team, however it could have been that Ron felt Lewis was faster (which he was). When we look at Seb, Alonso and Lewis in this regard we can safely say that Alonso and Seb appear to have been clearly favoured and the cars built for their comfort at the teammates detriment. Whereas Lewis has had much less instances and, indeed has had McLaren damage his chances by attempting to turn a duck into a swan.

So to cut a long story short, Lewis' technical advantage is the most adaptable, he maintains an edge over his teammates whether the car is neutral, setup for him or for his teammate. The edge has remained when he may have been favoured but also when the unfavoured driver with the team more focused on his teammate.

Alonso has only once been the less favoured driver, in 2007, and he lost. Apart from that he has always been the favoured driver, and as we all know the extremes to which his teammates have been disadvantaged and he wins all those. As far as I know he has never ever lost performance by not being able to adapt his technical adge

finally, Seb. He has never been the less favoured driver and has been better than his teammates. One could argue ofcourse that he and Webber were a lot closer in performance until Seb became the favoured driver. With the team focused on his comfort zone Webber no longer comes close, unlike the earlier years and ofcourse the period when he lost his trick. Sebs technical edge appears to be carrying speed and dealing with the oversteer, however it could be that unlike Lewis, Seb prefers (or requires) the extra downforce that appears through his 'trick' once oversteer is induced, to help tame the oversteer, whereas Lewis just relies on his ability.

So all 3 drivers are the fastest round corners, Lewis does not need teammates, favouritism or tricks. Alonso does not need tricks. Would Seb be as fast round the corner as the other 2 without the car built around his trick that helps tame the understeer? Or would he be as effective if the car was built for the comfort of his teammate?

[Jabberwocky]

You could also say that part of a drivers abilities is to build the team around him and get them to design the car around them and not have to their team mate.

I think there is a lot more to being a driver than just getting in the car and driving.

Most top drivers of the past were loved by their team and they would do anything for them

Sent from my GT-N7100 using Tapatalk 4

[CookinFlat6]

Some drivers do not appear to require the team built around them or the love of the team to go around corners as fast as they always go.

But yes its a valid skill, so say Buttons special edge for example is getting the team around him

but it hasnt really helped him this year, whereas Lewis' edge doesnt seem to rely so much on others

[madbrad]

Good point said by a few of you that one mark of a great driver is that he can adapt to any car. Would you say Vettel has done that or would you say that hasn't yet come up in his case? I'm leaning toward the latter. Not to disparage him or take away from his skill, just that from here it looks like he has had it done for him since he got all comfy in Torro Rosso.
I'm not so sure Alonso and Hamilton got into an unknown McLaren. Hamilton was raised by the team and Alonso got lots of time to test and develop pre season(not a lot of time though - testament to his car developing prowess?). But you're right that they haven't slipped back when changing cars.

At the beginning of 2012 the Red Bull was not the dominant runaway car, and Vettel looked frustrated. Without getting into personalities and diva talk and throwing toys out of prams, it looked like he was kind of doing that when his car was not the fastest, maybe was demonstrating he cannot succeed or win without the runaway fastest car, and maybe that's the case but I'm not saying it is.

I suppose it's inevitable that any team will build itself around its star driver, even if it's a subconscious process. The team is a living organism and its a team sport and all the parts need each other. It may be just a natural eventuality. You know, like the adage that the guy that puts the decals on the car is as important as the driver, bla bla bla, each person aids the success of all the other persons and they all have the one goal of getting as many points as possible this race? Ferarri with MS was an extreme example. Definitely not a subconscious thing, and bespoke Ferari tires to boot. We'll have to leave that example out of the equation.

And internal team dynamics is something we just simply have no idea about. even a seasoned pitlane journalist cannot know intimately the finer nuances of the goings on within the team and between drivers and between all the various sections or relationships with suppliers etc. There are millions of facets to that stone. We can't form but a tiny fraction of understanding of all that from reading articles about it, no matter how much of it we read.

Button - his edge is having a double diffuser when no one else does.

Getting back to the apples to apples thing, I think you would need a perfectly spec series where the cars are randomly assigned to the drivers 1 minute before the green lights so they don't even have different minor settings, and even then you need several consecutive races to form a reliable opinion about how the drivers compare to each other. But who wants spec cars? That's boring. The odd one off IROC or ROC type thing is fine for giggles though.

[CookinFlat6]

At the beginning of 2012 the Red Bull was not the dominant runaway car, and Vettel looked frustrated. Without getting into personalities and diva talk and throwing toys out of prams, it looked like he was kind of doing that when his car was not the fastest, maybe was demonstrating he cannot succeed or win without the runaway fastest car, and maybe that's the case but I'm not saying it is.
/snip

And internal team dynamics is something we just simply have no idea about. even a seasoned pitlane journalist cannot know intimately the finer nuances of the goings on within the team and between drivers and between all the various sections or relationships with suppliers etc. There are millions of facets to that stone. We can't form but a tiny fraction of understanding of all that from reading articles about it, no matter how much of it we read.

Button - his edge is having a double diffuser when no one else does.

/snip

But who wants spec cars? That's boring. The odd one off IROC or ROC type thing is fine for giggles though.

Webber and Seb appeared to be much closer in performance in the early days. And when the blown diffuser was removed. When the blown diffuser was removed the Red Bull in Sebs car did not look special. I remember he messed up quali a few times, and Webber was sometimes faster and qualified higher. But I am not sure the car is the main factor

I remember the team giving Marks front wing to Seb, I also remember Mark saying something about being a number 2 drivers as he beat Seb. Since then I am not sure if the politics in the team have swung behind Seb or Mark. Seb has become much much better than Mark since tho

Buttons edge didnt seem to help him in the second half of 2009 against Reubens his own teammate, once Reubens had the car and brakes setup the way he wanted. Reubens pretty much outquaulified him through the second half and despite having a lot of setbacks in the races scored more points overall. And ofcourse poor Reubens had the other teams improve their own DDs and started sharing the points. Shame Reubens didnt have the car favouring him in the first half.

IROC and ROC are ll very well, but a car that your granny could drive to the shops? to be able to beat your teammate in that could be seen by some as significant. Say Top gear, but ofcourse there are many many factors like weather on the day, ageing of the car between teammates driving it, etc etc. but then its just a car your granny could drive

but that could be a dirty, hameless, disgusting, mind damaging distortion of the truth

Nah, I suspect the funs over on this one Madbrad

[madbrad]

Yes I remember well that Rubens got more points than Jenson in the last half of the season. Hamilton was gaining quickly too. That's what I meant by his edge being that diffuser. He didn't have that advantage in the latter half(though he never did have it over Rubens but was soundly beating him anyway) On one occasion, Hamilton's front wing cut Rubens' rear tire requiring a costly pitstop. Costly is an understatement. It cost Rubens the title. I thought maybe there should have been a penalty. Not that it wasn't just a racing incident, but there were penalties handed out for lesser things that were also just racing incidents. What made Rubens suddenly do well in the car anyway?

By ROC I wasn't specifying the type of car, or that it would be some street legal car. It could be an F1 car, just all spec. Anyway I thought US IROC cars were built like NASCAR cars? Don't really pay attention.

[CookinFlat6]

Reubens complained about his brakes and associated setup and finally got them sorted for the second half of the season. He then proceeded to whip Button on performance. Qualifying on the front row where Button couldnt get anywhere near the front. Reubens raced well, much faster than Button who was falling apart it must be said in the second half. Button ofcourse blamed the car saying 'how can this car be so bad' whilst Reubens was competing at the front. But Reubens was very unlucky in the races and even finished the year behind Seb. Had Reubens had his preferred comfort zone setup from the start of the season, going by the second half he would have beaten Button and won the WDC. he outscored him in the second half and out drove him bar the dnfs

So is Seb similar to Button in needing a particular setup to gain a big advantage? again we can only go by his teammate and without the trick of 'extra rear downforce appearing when you are off throttle mid corner helping you tame oversteer', well without that trick the evidence is that he was not much faster than Webber. As Hughes says without the trick, his superiority evaporated

And Andrew Benson says this

Despite the team's protestations that the drivers are allowed to race, that has rarely been the case when they are actually together on the track. Several times, Webber has been told not to try to pass Vettel when he felt he was faster.
Recently, the justification is clear - Vettel is their more consistent front-line performer. But it happened even in 2010, when both were in the running for the title and Webber was actually ahead on points.

Chicken and egg scenario?
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/formula1/23960315

I think next year we will find out how adaptable these drivers all are when they have to deal with turbos delivering a non linear lump of power and torque into narrow rear tyres and no rear extra downforce should you encounter loss of traction and/or old fashioned oversteer. It could even be that young Daniel enjoys have his arse trying to overtake his nose as he goes round corners like Webber. Remember the non blown diffuser suited webber for that reason.

Oh well maybe Newey will find a new trick to help Seb tame the oversteer then we can all say the car is no part of why Seb is so much faster than mark round corners

I dont see any guys in white coats around so its a shame we have no Seb supporters who can put their side of the story and maybe allow Madbrad to rough them up a little

[f1bettings]

Very good read, seems these elite drivers have more discussions with their engineering teams than other drivers that just care about driving. These guys seem to be perfectionists, how does Kimi Raikkonen stack up to these 3?

[CookinFlat6]

I would say Kimi takes less speed in than Lewis and then smoothly 'sails' his way round on the fine limit of oversteer, then once the back is facing the right way, he slams his foot down and just goes as fast as he can till the next corner without making mistakes. Dont know if thats a technical edge in the vein of Hughes analysis (i.e unique to him) or just smooth and fast intuitive feeling his way round the corner on the limit.

Smooth and gentle like Button but more speed and later in and not understeer gorverned

Only my impression of course, I could be wrong and it could be the Lotus

[madbrad]

Why would I rough up a Seb supporter?