Ignoring Cars

[yurp 0]

Here I'm just listing the points difference between team mates with 'identical' equipment...

Button +14 Barichello

Alonso +9 Piquet

Vettel +7.5 Webber

Heidfeld +6 Kubica

Hamilton +5 Kovi

Rosberg +4.5 Nakajima

Trulli +2.5 Glock

Buemi +2 Bourdais

Massa = Kimi

Now I know it's early in the season and that a lot of this depends on how poor the second driver is (piquet?), but it's still interesting to see.

Buttons lead over Rubins is, in part due to there being a greater point difference at the head of the field (i.e. 2pts between 1st and 2nd and 2nd and 3rd), but still.

Given this, it's hard to argue that Button isn't driving up a storm. Alonso, Vettel, Heidfeld should also be congratulated. Piquet's never that hard to beat, but the fact that Alonso's got 9 pts out of that tank is pretty damn good.

Vettel's doing great - Webber's no slouch, so Vettel should be commended.

Heidfeld's lead over Kubica surprises me - Kubica's had some bad luck so far this season, which must be a lot to blame, but Heidfeld's also picked his game up since last year.

As I say - it's early yet, things will change, but looking over the first few races, if this pattern is followed it's hard not to be impressed with certain performances thus far.

There are plenty of reasons why this doesn't mean tht much, but hey.

Discuss.

[Argento Reloaded 1]

In a season like the current is obvious both drivers hasn

[Max Mosley 2]

I tend to think the old patterns will be true this year after you account for all the technical differences: Alonso and Hamilton will be doing the best jobs, followed by Massa, Button, Vettel, Kubica etc.

[Rainmaster 7]

I think are too many variables to try and make a purely objective judgement at this stage. I also think it's pretty hard to measure, e.g. drivers in better cars can show they are doing better (than their team mates) by putting more points on the board, whereas drivers in poor cars may be outperforming their team mates massively, but have nothing to show for it in terms of points, wins, fastest laps etc. So it's difficult to measure objectively from that pov.

Then there are all the other problems, the car suits one drivers style more than the other, mechanical incidents, first lap accidents which weren't your fault, team favouritism, general performance dips/peaks over races...etc.

Even if the cars were completely identical you still can't make an accurate judgement on team mates based only on results.

Looking at it subjectively and objectively, I'd say Button was doing the best job of it so far, as he has maximised his opportunities; although that doesn't mean that another driver wouldn't do better in the same car.

Anyway, I do think we need more time to judge, as a lot of the stuff I mentioned above tends to balance out over a season.

[yurp 0]

There are plenty of reasons why this doesn't mean tht much, but hey.

Discuss.

I agree with all of you

On the other hand, I'm not sure that this kind of comparison is completely without interest - drivers have some effect on these point differences no?

[Rainmaster 7]

I agree with all of you

On the other hand, I'm not sure that this kind of comparison is completely without interest - drivers have some effect on these point differences no?

Yep, but to make any valid conclusions you have to take into account all of the other factors too

The only thing the points differences tells us is that driver A is outperforming driver B, but it doesn't tell us why (and it ain't always 'cos he's better), which is the part that interests me when comparing drivers (other than their packages of course).

[raw 0]

Here I'm just listing the points difference between team mates with 'identical' equipment...

Button +14 Barichello

That's pretty massive difference in points, but honestly it's hard to say which one is doing a better job so far. Rubens has made some messy races like Australia, but on the other hand there's so much more to him than we see on the track - for example this weekend Button would struggle if it wasn't for him and he admitted it himself. I believe that if RB didn't share his telemetry and setup he would've won ( he still should but something gone wrong with those last softs as he suddenly lost ground)

Alonso +9 Piquet

For me there's no doubt who's better of the two but the difference isn't that big as it may appear. Remeber that Piquet's car has been one or two steps behind Alonso's in terms of development and new parts.

Vettel +7.5 Webber

This is the driver's lineup I was most looking forward to this season and so far it's as exciting as I expected. They're very evenly matched and both top class.

Heidfeld +6 Kubica

Heidfeld has been badly outqualified so far but he has much more luck when sunday comes. I reckon sooner or later Kubica will outscore him as well.

Hamilton +5 Kovi

Not much to say here as Kovalainen only finished 2 races out of 5.

Rosberg +4.5 Nakajima

Imo Nakajima is the worst driver on today's grid. Shouldn't even be here to be hones.

Trulli +2.5 Glock

Trulli for me as he's better qualifier.

Buemi +2 Bourdais

As I said many times before Bourdais can only get the maximum out of the car if it suits him very well and that's a weakness that top driver just can't have. So far Buemi has made a better impression but still too soon to tell.

Massa = Kimi

I've always rated Kimi higher simply because his driving style is for me the most challenging - that's just something you can't learn no matter how hard you try. This season so far it's not much to talk about given the team's overall performance but putting weird things aside it looks like Raikkonen was the better of the two so far - especially when it comes to race.

[yurp 0]

Yep, but to make any valid conclusions you have to take into account all of the other factors too

The only thing the points differences tells us is that driver A is outperforming driver B, but it doesn't tell us why (and it ain't always 'cos he's better), which is the part that interests me when comparing drivers (other than their packages of course).

true, but in all but one case here I'd argue that it IS because they're better.

Button > Barichello (I do think Button on race day is better than Rubins)

Alonso > Piquet (Yep!)

Vettel > Webber (Yep - but only just)

Heidfeld > Kubica (This one is the exception - I rate Kubica over Heidfeld)

Hamilton > Kovi (Yep)

Rosberg > Nakajima (Yep!)

Trulli > Glock (Yep - but I think this will change)

Buemi > Bourdais (Yep - never rated Bourdais that highly)

Massa = Kimi (Yep - these two are pretty close if you ask me)

Of course this gives us absolutely no indication of who's the best driver overall. But I'd say that it's got to be one of the guys in the left hand column

@raw

largely agree with your take on the in team battles too.

[Rainmaster 7]

true, but in all but one case here I'd argue that it IS because they're better.

Button > Barichello (I do think Button on race day is better than Rubins)

Alonso > Piquet (Yep!)

Vettel > Webber (Yep - but only just)

Heidfeld > Kubica (This one is the exception - I rate Kubica over Heidfeld)

Hamilton > Kovi (Yep)

Rosberg > Nakajima (Yep!)

Trulli > Glock (Yep - but I think this will change)

Buemi > Bourdais (Yep - never rated Bourdais that highly)

Massa = Kimi (Yep - these two are pretty close if you ask me)

Of course this gives us absolutely no indication of who's the best driver overall. But I'd say that it's got to be one of the guys in the left hand column

@raw

largely agree with your take on the in team battles too.

I agree with those driver ratings, and, in general I would agree that it is because they are 'better' than their respective team mates. But I'd like to know what makes them better, is it talent alone? A better work ethic? Better communication with their engineer? Experience?

I guess it's a combination of all that which affects performance and makes one driver better than another, and then when comparing performance you have to look at a bunch of other factors too (the stuff in my first post). This is kinda why it's so difficult to understand who is the best driver in F1 and why.

Largely the results do speak for themselves, but I just prefer to wait a season before I make any real conclusion about team mates.

Edit - err was going to write something else but clicked enter by accident. Bollocks to it. Was gonna explain the mystery of the universe as well. Ah well. Maybe next time.

[King_Alonso786 0]

At present Fernando Alonso and Lewis Hamilton are the best drivers followed by Kubica, and Vettel

[monza gorilla 1]

And your reasoning for that is?

Edit: Welcome back, King Buxton. They'll miss you on 606.

[King_Alonso786 0]

And your reasoning for that is?

Edit: Welcome back, King Buxton. They'll miss you on 606.

And whats your user name on 606?

[dribbler 6]

And your reasoning for that is?

Because he just is.

[mikathegreat2 2]

Alonso is the best driver out there but in a crap car! If he was in a Brawn then everyone can kiss the WDC goodbye but so far it's Button who's been the best thanks to the fact that he's in the best car out there!

[riseofstars 0]

Alonso is the best driver out there but in a crap car! If he was in a Brawn then everyone can kiss the WDC goodbye but so far it's Button who's been the best thanks to the fact that he's in the best car out there!

but i think its time for others to kiss goodbye to WDC...Button seems to finish the title challenge within next 5 or 6 races...

[The Rumble Strip 0]

Agreed.

Button has done well but certain drivers would beat him in his own car.

[Quiet One 15]

Ok..let's see...

1) As George said, it is quite difficult to determine which one is the absolute best. Too many factors.

2) Button was crap in a crap car. Alonso and Hamilton are not crap in their crap cars. They are (so far) on a different level than Button.

3) Nor Alonso, nor Hamilton are smooth drivers. Quite the contrary. (This is in reply to a post somewhere else). They both have a rather rugged but extremely effective way of driving. The price is being more error prone than a Button. The advantage: being much more adaptable to changing conditions. Kubica is going this way, too.

4) Vettel is somewhere in between Button and Nando/Lewis. A powerful combination, if he can unleash his full potential. He seems to have the best of both worlds.

5) I feel for Webbo and Rubinho. Both great drivers, hard workers and likeable guys. But perfection is out of their league. They will always fall short, even if for the smallest of margins. On their defense, Button and Vettel owe them lots. Without their knowledge and generosity nor Vettel, nor Button would be where they are now. Button himslef acknowledged that he had to copy Rubinho's setup.

6) Nick is quick. But Bob does the job. Unless Doctor M. ****s'em.

7) Trulli seems to be both extremely unlucky and, regretfully, too irregular.

8) The rest are just there to fill in the remaining grid spaces. (nah, not true, but that's enough for one post)

[Max Mosley 2]

It is difficult to say who's best, of course: too many factors, but it's just occured to me that spec cars might help with that. Oh and a question for Adam - it's only fair since you asked the entire forum one, right? What do you watch F1 for? For me, determining the best driver is the most interesting part of F1 by far. Don't no one give me none of that innovation bollocks - there's as much innovation in the world of toilet seat design.

I don't think Button was always crap in a crap car. There have been times when he was exceptionally good - even if I grant you he had a poor-ish season last year in particular. Also I doubt if Nando or Lewis would always be as good as they are now if they had 6 seasons of crap cars to look forward to rather than maybe 6 races - even if I grant you they are certainly better than Jenson overall. Pat Symonds (a surprisingly useful source!) says Nando's performance fell off when his car sucked last year and I'm sure Lewis's can too.

Finally, I find it strange that so many people think that you can't say who is the best and why. Isn't the point of sport to see who's the best?

[yurp 0]

Oh and a question for Adam - it's only fair since you asked the entire forum one, right? What do you watch F1 for? For me, determining the best driver is the most interesting part of F1 by far. Don't no one give me none of that innovation bollocks - there's as much innovation in the world of toilet seat design.

i think the cars were a modernist work of art (real form follows function stuff) - beauty in motion - until all the measures started coming in to slow them down. now they're just fugly.

don't knock toilet seats - you should try the japanese ones.

[raw 0]

Finally, I find it strange that so many people think that you can't say who is the best and why. Isn't the point of sport to see who's the best?

The only way to find out who's the fastest is to look at the telemetry. We can't do that and nobody can do a comparision for all the drivers on the grid. Only people involved in F1 teams can see who's got the better feeling for the limit (btw. this is why some teams tend to favour one driver - f.e. Ferrari didn't build a team around Schumacher just because they liked him so much, they just knew by looking at the data that he's just better than any of his teammates. I saw his telemetry and also Barichello's and Herbert's - it was obvious that he's getting 100% out of the car and the others are close but not really on the same level).

Actually I've looked up ferrari website and they provide some telemetry comparision between Raikkonen and Massa from 2008. That's only one lap each (the fastest of the race) but what I saw is quite interesting stuff. First of all Raikkonen may have had a crappy season but even so the data show that he's slightly better of the two (what's weird even when Massa's lap time was better - like in Brazil his telemetry is still a bit worse).

Second thing both are much better than some of telemetry data's I've seen from the drivers of the past like Damon Hill, Herbert, Coulthard, Hakkinen etc. It's much more like Schumacher's - very smooth and obviously right on the limit. So if we assume that most of today's grid can do the same and I bet it's true, the conclusion is that what we have today in F1 is probably the best driver lineup ever.

[Grabthaw the Hammerslayer 4]

Hmm "The Best" - bit of a daft topic... how do you measure "the best"? Its too subjective.

- Biggest eyebrows - Alonso

- Limpest wrist - Rosberg

- Most spinningest - Nakajima

- Best driver in a supporting role - Barrichello

- Best impression of a "real" racing driver - Piquet....

The best is the one with the most points.

Ah, then we get the same tired old argument: "oh but its the best car..." which has been levelled at Hamilton, Hakinnen, Button, Hill, Mansell, Prost even on occasions....

You could argue that the best driver is the one who has the foresight to pick the best team. This is then countered with "oh but he is lucky" and then I think of my dear, departed papa who always maintained you make your own luck...

I also don't buy this argument that today's drivers are necessarily better. If you had stuck a young Jackie Stewart into one of today's cars he'd probably do very well.

So in conclusion, the best driver is quite simply whoever you think it is.

Apart from Alonso

(....only joking)

Oh yeah, and I'm still the best

[Jenson_Rules 0]

Alonso is the best driver on the grid. I would say Hamilton is probably second, followed by the closely matched group of Button, Kubica, Kimi, Vettel, and Massa.

[Max Mosley 2]

i think the cars were a modernist work of art (real form follows function stuff) - beauty in motion - until all the measures started coming in to slow them down. now they're just fugly.

don't knock toilet seats - you should try the japanese ones.

Definitely - there is more innovation in toilet seats! Anyway, to me F1 cars aren't really the most beautiful things in the world, but each to their own. (Btw if we had a spec series we wouldn't need all these restrictive regs and we could design a really beautiful car...)

The only way to find out who's the fastest is to look at the telemetry. We can't do that and nobody can do a comparision for all the drivers on the grid. Only people involved in F1 teams can see who's got the better feeling for the limit (btw. this is why some teams tend to favour one driver - f.e. Ferrari didn't build a team around Schumacher just because they liked him so much, they just knew by looking at the data that he's just better than any of his teammates. I saw his telemetry and also Barichello's and Herbert's - it was obvious that he's getting 100% out of the car and the others are close but not really on the same level).

Actually I've looked up ferrari website and they provide some telemetry comparision between Raikkonen and Massa from 2008. That's only one lap each (the fastest of the race) but what I saw is quite interesting stuff. First of all Raikkonen may have had a crappy season but even so the data show that he's slightly better of the two (what's weird even when Massa's lap time was better - like in Brazil his telemetry is still a bit worse).

Second thing both are much better than some of telemetry data's I've seen from the drivers of the past like Damon Hill, Herbert, Coulthard, Hakkinen etc. It's much more like Schumacher's - very smooth and obviously right on the limit. So if we assume that most of today's grid can do the same and I bet it's true, the conclusion is that what we have today in F1 is probably the best driver lineup ever.

Interesting post! Personally, I don't think checking the telemetry is the only way to assess a driver, although it would be great to see the telemetry, of course. For example, the Kimi fans go on and on about his fastest lap records so I kind of expected his fastest lap in a given race to be better than Massa's. The question mark over Kimi would be what about all the other laps he did - the telemetry of his qualifying laps would probably show Massa's were better.

The final point you make is really fun. I do tend to think we probably have a very talented group of drivers overall.

[yurp 0]

Of course you are right - 'the best' title was purely for tabloid shock value and indeed we'll never get an answer because there can never actually be an answer, but I always enjoy hearing people explain why their particular driver is 'the best' - entertaining in an embarrassing kind of way.

[yurp 0]

sorry - that last post was in answer to mr spice.

in answer to this...

Definitely - there is more innovation in toilet seats! Anyway, to me F1 cars aren't really the most beautiful things in the world, but each to their own. (Btw if we had a spec series we wouldn't need all these restrictive regs and we could design a really beautiful car...)

Sorry old bean, but the idea that a spec series could create beauty misses the point entirely.

Spec series are, in their very conception, restrictive. Far far more restrictive than the current F1 restrictions. They start from the point - 'you can ONLY do this' at least F1 says 'you can do anything, but NOT these things'. I would prefer the ultimate 'you can do anything'.

What I want to see is something designed to go as fast as it bloody well can in any direction asked of it. Not something designed by one bloke and mass produced.

If you are a modernist then you see beauty in the honesty of a design stemming soley from an object's purpose. In the case of racing cars that's even more wonderful to see when done right because its not only sculpture, but moving, speeding, balancing, growling, dynamic, natural sculpture. Many people (even self-professed modernists) see this beauty in square buildings and lack of decorative features / simplicity of furniture design / architecture / product design etc. I see it there, but also in nature. Every animal and every part of every animal has been evolved to carry out it's role(s) as perfectly as it can. Many people don't realise that vernacular architecture is actually modernist in philosophy. I'd like monza's views on that one - I'm sure he'll disagree, but I'll fight my corner.

The perfect F1 car would be so evolved that it would look like something natural - not something designed.

I don't expect many people to understand this, but that's the way I see it.

I'd rather be misunderstood and appreciate the beauty than to deny it for acceptability.