Jump to content


This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


F 1 Pilots Top-9 Ever Weird Comparsion

Recommended Posts

As a kind of digital worm i present you my new weird as always:

"F 1 Pilots Top-9 ever weird comparsion" I just made 3 rankings.

How i made it - it is easy to do - just hard to explain for me - even in russian.

Be very attentive if you want to understant a bit of eureka. Heh.




PILOTS ARE (Order by Wins): MS, AP, AS, NM, JS, JC, NL, JMF, NP.

And later i plan to compare Stirling Moss with all Top-9.

Last note: % is more imporpant than raw number of wins. Rank order is by %-age.

1st = RESISTANCE FACTOR (Wins * %s) via Self-Team-Mates


NM 11 35

NL 06 24

AP 10 20

AS 06 15

JMF 03 13

JC 01 04

MS 00 00

NP -02 -09

JS -05 -19

2nd = FIGHT * (Wins * %s) via ALL


NP 15 65

NM 16,5 53

AP 26 51

JS 12,5 46

JC 11,5 46

AS 17 41

NL 09 36

MS 26 29

JMF 2,5 11

3rd = RESISTANCE FACTOR "*2-/2" (Wins * %s) via ALL


NM 16,5 53

AS 18 44

AP 20,5 40

NL 09 36

JC 6,5 26

NP 06 26

JMF 3,5 15

MS 13 14

JS 2,5 09

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

Too much math for me.

Yep. I just used to it. And i can make it clear and easy to got the basic idea.

Just say 2 pilots from above Top-9. And i gonna explain all those math on easy example.

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites
im sorry but i don't even understand what you are trying to say so i don't get it.

Math says. I just compare numbers an %-ages.

And in this topic i just try to show the idea that Comparsion and %-afes itself

are in facts more important than all well-known raw numbers. As Wins, etc ...

Choose any 2 pilots from Top-9 and i can show you what math says.

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'll trust your numbers and how you got them, as Nigel is near the top on all three (I'm a fan of Il Leone). Now I need some help figuring out WHO some of your drivers are:

NM - Nigel Mansell

NL - ?

AP - Alain Prost

AS - Ayrton Senna

JMF - Juan Manuel Fangio

JC - Jackie Chan

MS - Michael Schumacher

NP - ?

JS - Jackie Stewart? (He's known as JYS, btw)

Could you fill in the question marks?

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

As i said Top-9 is chosen by number of Wins in F-1 history.

So as ranked # 10 is Damon Hill with 22 wins - others are:


NL = Niki Lauda

NP = Nelson Piquet

Kidding ? And why MS is lower than most of Top-9 ? Aha?

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

Oke. All 3 ranks have much in common. The key difference is deeply in details.

Lets start easy (?) explanation with Nigel Mansell as example:

1st = RESISTANCE Factor (Wins * %s) via Self-Team-Mates * PILOT W % * NM = 11 wins * 35 % * How to "read" this 1st rank math (not mess) ?

Approximatly 11 wins were very hardly achieved by NM. And in comparsion with his overall 31 wins - it is 35%.

What is "resistance factor" = "hardly achieving" ? It is when win is done not in the best car in current season.

So NM`s team power is important and also his team-mate power has influence too. Other teams and pilots has less influence in 1st rank (RF-1)

2nd = FIGHT Factor * (Wins * %s) via ALL * PILOT W % * NP = 15 wins 65 % * How to "read" this 2nd rank math ? (FF-2)

Approximatly 15 wins were made under hard pressure from other teams, cars, pilots on Nelson Piquet`s and his current team and car.

And since NP has overall 23 wins - he has 65 % of FF-2 wins. Same with Nigel Mansell: NM 16,5 wins- but just 53 % as he has 31 wins overall.

3rd = RESISTANCE Factor "*2-/2" (Wins * %s) via ALL * RF-3 * PILOT W % * NM = 16,5 wins * 53 % * As we see NM has same numbers in FF-2.

And it is oke - no problem. As i said above: ranks have much in common. And key diffenerce is deeply in details.

Just for NM all details in FF-2 and in RF-3 played same role in overall. Heh. And note - other pilots has other details influence.

1st + 2nd + 3rd = NM is high ranked in all 3 ranks. MS is low ranked in all 3 ranks. So what ?

Basic eureka is: NM has very powelful rivals in his F-1 career. So all his wins has very high COSTS-payed. No matter PRICE for win is 10 was 9 points.

MS "payed" much less - not "for all" - but for every of his wins. And also all 3 ranks "says": Who of the Top-9 was winning in harder conditions !

All 3 ranks says: IF NM has less resistanse from rivals - he could win more. And if MS has more resistanse from rivals - he could win less.

No matter MS was often in best cars - if he raced in harder conditions (as AP, AS, NM) he gonna have less wins in numbers - but more "payed".

All 3 ranks has nothing in common with my very another rank: SF-0 - STABILITY Factor.

In example - in terms of stability MS is definately higher than NM. All ranks not a way so say who is better or worse.

It is just to wider open eyes (often shut) on F-1 hidden facts.

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

By the way: without * not with * Brawn - MS won just 3 GP (all in 1996). And feel the difference and mutual enfluence:

And without * not with * MS - Brawn won: 95: +2 GP - JH, 99: +4 GP - EI, 00-05: +9 GP - RB, 06: +2 GP - FM. Overall = 2+4+9+2 = 17 GP.

* MS overall wins: 91. 3 is 3,3 % * Ross wins: 91+17 = 108. 17 is 15,7 % *

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Create New...