Anthony Davidson said this today during second practice, red button TV on BBC coverage. I thought it couldn't possibly be right because Alonso is worth 0.6s but no, according to the underrated diminutive Brawn ginger-nut an exceptional driver might be worth no more than 0.4s is any given car. Otherwise, the grid is separated by car differences only.
I for one shall be listening to Radio 5 live commentary tomorrow during qualifying to hear more of these gems.
But I think he's trying to put a number to something we already knew was so. How far wide of the mark is he?
Apologies for the non-Hamilton thread.
Good -> Exceptional driver worth 0.4s
Started by
Buttoneer
, Apr 03 2009 21:42
42 replies to this topic
Advertisement
#2
Rob
-
- 9,223 posts
- Joined: February 01
Member
Posted 03 April 2009 - 21:44
I'd say he's about two tenths wide of the mark ;)
#3
scheivlak
-
- 16,482 posts
- Joined: August 01
Member
Posted 03 April 2009 - 21:48
As we all should know Alonso said he was worth 0.6 seconds not specifically because of his driving abilities but because of his technical expertise and feedbackOriginally posted by Buttoneer
Anthony Davidson said this today during second practice, red button TV on BBC coverage. I thought it couldn't possibly be right because Alonso is worth 0.6s but no, according to the underrated diminutive Brawn ginger-nut an exceptional driver might be worth no more than 0.4s is any given car. Otherwise, the grid is separated by car differences only.
I
(a good relationship with Pedro de la Rosa didn't hurt either)
#4
HaPe
-
- 1,017 posts
- Joined: November 07
Member
Posted 03 April 2009 - 21:48
Still so funnyOriginally posted by Buttoneer
because Alonso is worth 0.6s
#5
pingu666
-
- 9,272 posts
- Joined: October 07
Member
Posted 03 April 2009 - 21:52
hmm, how much does mcnish bring in?
#6
krapmeister
-
- 11,619 posts
- Joined: August 08
Member
Posted 03 April 2009 - 21:52
Originally posted by Buttoneer
Anthony Davidson said this today during second practice, red button TV on BBC coverage. I thought it couldn't possibly be right because Alonso is worth 0.6s but no, according to the underrated diminutive Brawn ginger-nut an exceptional driver might be worth no more than 0.4s is any given car. Otherwise, the grid is separated by car differences only.
I for one shall be listening to Radio 5 live commentary tomorrow during qualifying to hear more of these gems.
But I think he's trying to put a number to something we already knew was so. How far wide of the mark is he?
Apologies for the non-Hamilton thread.
Even if Anthony unfortunately can't get a drive (in F1) we are more than blessed that he's been picked to provide commentary/insight with the BBC - he's got a great media career ahead of him.
Personally - and obviously I am not as qualified as Anthony to make this statement - but I feel it may only be a couple of tenths in ultimate pace.
I guess the real difference though is in the ability to consistently, lap after lap, go at that pace - where other drivers may be prone to a bit more variation in lap times. Also in and out lap pace can be a good differentiator.
#7
Blythy
-
- 960 posts
- Joined: February 07
Member
Posted 03 April 2009 - 21:53
Originally posted by Buttoneer
Alonso is worth 0.6s
comparisons to piquet don't count. (even though he was probably being generous to piquet)
#8
ensign14
-
- 61,916 posts
- Joined: December 01
Member
Posted 03 April 2009 - 22:04
Alonso is the Spinal Tap amp of F1. Most go to 0.4, he goes to 0.6.
#9
Buttoneer
-
- 19,094 posts
- Joined: May 04
Admin
Posted 03 April 2009 - 22:04
I honestly thought his commentary was fantastic. He had actually become the main commentator for the period i watched and everyone else was irrelevant. He was great to listen to - authoritative and believable (hard to spell on six Kronenbourgs and a glass of Woodford Reserve) and full of good insight.Originally posted by krapmeister
Even if Anthony unfortunately can't get a drive (in F1) we are more than blessed that he's been picked to provide commentary/insight with the BBC - he's got a great media career ahead of him.
Personally - and obviously I am not as qualified as Anthony to make this statement - but I feel it may only be a couple of tenths in ultimate pace.
I guess the real difference though is in the ability to consistently, lap after lap, go at that pace - where other drivers may be prone to a bit more variation in lap times. Also in and out lap pace can be a good differentiator.
You are right though that ultimate pace is only part of the picture. Consistency is an enormously important part. Both Webber and Trulli are rightly lauded for their single lap pace, for example, but no WDC so far...
#10
Tony Matthews
-
- 17,519 posts
- Joined: September 08
Member
Posted 03 April 2009 - 22:17
Originally posted by Buttoneer
He was great to listen to - authoritative and believable (hard to spell on six Kronenbourgs and a glass of Woodford Reserve)
Probably easier to spell than pronounce! By the way that was some time ago, what's the tally now? Just intrigued...
Edited to say, I was looking at the wrong clock, and I've only had half a bottle of wine and a pint of water, so I doubt you've had time for another Woodford's!
#11
Phillip_Pirrip
-
- 3 posts
- Joined: October 07
New Member
Posted 03 April 2009 - 22:22
Originally posted by Buttoneer
Anthony Davidson said this today during second practice, red button TV on BBC coverage. I thought it couldn't possibly be right because Alonso is worth 0.6s but no, according to the underrated diminutive Brawn ginger-nut an exceptional driver might be worth no more than 0.4s is any given car. Otherwise, the grid is separated by car differences only.
I for one shall be listening to Radio 5 live commentary tomorrow during qualifying to hear more of these gems.
But I think he's trying to put a number to something we already knew was so. How far wide of the mark is he?
Apologies for the non-Hamilton thread.
His comments were in response to a viewers questions regarding cost saving by cutting drivers salaries. They discussed the budget caps in F1 and the division of investment between car development and driver salary as to which could yield greater performance advantages.
Although drivers names were mentioned to back up the hypothesis, the figure of 0.4s was an arbitrary figure to highlight the suggestion that it would be better and more beneficial for the sport to invest in talented drivers who could find that time on the track than to spend large amounts of money finding the time through engineering solutions and computer modelling.
#12
krapmeister
-
- 11,619 posts
- Joined: August 08
Member
Posted 03 April 2009 - 22:25
Originally posted by Buttoneer
...You are right though that ultimate pace is only part of the picture. Consistency is an enormously important part. Both Webber and Trulli are rightly lauded for their single lap pace, for example, but no WDC so far...
To be fair to both Trulli and Webber - they have never driven a car capable of winning a championship.
#13
DOF_power
-
- 1,538 posts
- Joined: February 09
Member
Posted 03 April 2009 - 22:39
>
^ So what ?!
The days of Fangio (in the best cars) beating a pitiful bunch of amateurs, who where in F1 because either they where rich, or because, like Kling and Lang and Co. , they had to make the cars go fast for Fangio and Moss and give them their cars if theirs broke, are long gone.
I say bring back the active rides and let the engineers improve the breed.
^ So what ?!
The days of Fangio (in the best cars) beating a pitiful bunch of amateurs, who where in F1 because either they where rich, or because, like Kling and Lang and Co. , they had to make the cars go fast for Fangio and Moss and give them their cars if theirs broke, are long gone.
I say bring back the active rides and let the engineers improve the breed.
#14
krapmeister
-
- 11,619 posts
- Joined: August 08
Member
Posted 03 April 2009 - 22:42
Originally posted by DOF_power
>
^ So what ?!
The days of Fangio (in the best cars) beating a pitiful bunch of amateurs, who where in F1 because either they where rich, or because, like Kling and Lang and Co. , they had to make the cars go fast for Fangio and Moss and give them their cars if theirs broke, are long gone.
I say bring back the active rides and let the engineers improve the breed.
#15
Buttoneer
-
- 19,094 posts
- Joined: May 04
Admin
Posted 03 April 2009 - 22:45
See now would such a discussion have taken place between James and Martin? I don't fink so.Originally posted by Phillip_Pirrip
His comments were in response to a viewers questions regarding cost saving by cutting drivers salaries. They discussed the budget caps in F1 and the division of investment between car development and driver salary as to which could yield greater performance advantages.
Although drivers names were mentioned to back up the hypothesis, the figure of 0.4s was an arbitrary figure to highlight the suggestion that it would be better and more beneficial for the sport to invest in talented drivers who could find that time on the track than to spend large amounts of money finding the time through engineering solutions and computer modelling.
I only caught the arse end of this discussion while I was waiting for the washing machine repairman chap but it seemed like one worth having here. But it alludes a little to the recent threads asking whether people would choose Ross Brawn or Michael Schumacher for their fantasy f1 team.
And third glass of woodford reserve now. Time for bed otherwise 9am will be a tricky target.
#16
AndreasF1
-
- 1,200 posts
- Joined: February 02
Member
Posted 03 April 2009 - 23:41
quote: "because Alonso is worth 0.6s "
_______________________________________________________________________________________
Where were those .6 seconds in 2007 with McLaren racing against Hamilton?
I do blieve that in the right car Alonso is about .2 sec quicker on average. There will be some tracks where he might be .4 sec quicker but then there will be some where he will be .2 sec slower than the car allows.
_______________________________________________________________________________________
Where were those .6 seconds in 2007 with McLaren racing against Hamilton?
I do blieve that in the right car Alonso is about .2 sec quicker on average. There will be some tracks where he might be .4 sec quicker but then there will be some where he will be .2 sec slower than the car allows.
#17
AndreasF1
-
- 1,200 posts
- Joined: February 02
Member
Posted 03 April 2009 - 23:44
quote: "To be fair to both Trulli and Webber - they have never driven a car capable of winning a championship."
_________________________________________________________________________________________
I think both Webber and Trulli are perfect Alesi/Frentzen clones. Whille there were definite signs of brilliance we all know that having a top car at your disposal doesn't guarantee automatic WDCs.
_________________________________________________________________________________________
I think both Webber and Trulli are perfect Alesi/Frentzen clones. Whille there were definite signs of brilliance we all know that having a top car at your disposal doesn't guarantee automatic WDCs.
#18
hallo
-
- 212 posts
- Joined: December 08
Member
Posted 03 April 2009 - 23:54
In modern f1 the difference is about 0.3 -0.5. Only two drivers on the current grid have proved to possess this edge in speed. Alonso and Hamilton.
#19
slideways
-
- 3,395 posts
- Joined: January 09
Member
Posted 04 April 2009 - 00:49
Ironically Alonso is not a bad test subject for this. He's had plenty of shithouse teammates to find the maximum difference with.
Fisico
Kovalainen
Piquet
Take your pick.
Fisico
Kovalainen
Piquet
Take your pick.
Advertisement
#20
GerardF1
-
- 693 posts
- Joined: June 01
Member
Posted 04 April 2009 - 00:54
The best drivers aren't worth 0.6 or 0.4 or whatever - The best drivers are the ones who know when it is best to be .6 faster and when it is best to be .6 slower.
Car- tyre management - ability to control gaps and think of the race as a whole rather than just that .6 right now.
Car- tyre management - ability to control gaps and think of the race as a whole rather than just that .6 right now.
#21
chrcoluk
-
- 56 posts
- Joined: March 09
Member
Posted 04 April 2009 - 01:08
I think what is starting to become clear is that racers that can handle race conditions well and qualifying are worth the money.
Last year look at all the times hamilton got pole even tho he wasnt #1 in FP, this suggests in FP other drivers did have the pace but then when under pressure they blow it. In australia this year we didnt see all the qualifying from hamilton but he drove a good race far exceeding most expectations.
So yes consistency in laps, staying on the track in dry/wet conditions, ability to overtake, ability to defend, keeping your head at start of race. All things that can be worth a lot of money.
Schumacher defending in spa against hill, that kind of skill is very valuable drivers who can drive in rain without changing tryes.
Last year look at all the times hamilton got pole even tho he wasnt #1 in FP, this suggests in FP other drivers did have the pace but then when under pressure they blow it. In australia this year we didnt see all the qualifying from hamilton but he drove a good race far exceeding most expectations.
So yes consistency in laps, staying on the track in dry/wet conditions, ability to overtake, ability to defend, keeping your head at start of race. All things that can be worth a lot of money.
Schumacher defending in spa against hill, that kind of skill is very valuable drivers who can drive in rain without changing tryes.
#22
David Ricardo
-
- 245 posts
- Joined: March 09
Member
Posted 04 April 2009 - 01:10
The funny thing is Alonso knew that his car was doctored in China 2007 because he was 6 tenths slower than Hamilton in qualyfication. He said it is impossible for any driver to be 6 tenths faster than other driver in the same car if none of them made any mistake.
Anyways, I think that supposed 6 tenths thing wasn´t because of Alonso´s driving skills, but because of his ability helping the engineers design the car.
Anyways, I think that supposed 6 tenths thing wasn´t because of Alonso´s driving skills, but because of his ability helping the engineers design the car.
#23
GerardF1
-
- 693 posts
- Joined: June 01
Member
Posted 04 April 2009 - 01:21
Originally posted by David Ricardo
The funny thing is Alonso knew that his car was doctored in China 2007 because he was 6 tenths slower than Hamilton in qualyfication. He said it is impossible for any driver to be 6 tenths faster than other driver in the same car if none of them made any mistake.
Anyways, I think that supposed 6 tenths thing wasn´t because of Alonso´s driving skills, but because of his ability helping the engineers design the car.
And I knew my Lottery ticket was doctored because I didn't win
#24
David Ricardo
-
- 245 posts
- Joined: March 09
Member
Posted 04 April 2009 - 03:11
Well, on Sunday the stewards confirmed tyre pressures in Alonso´s car weren´t Ok.Originally posted by GerardF1
And I knew my Lottery ticket was doctored because I didn't win
And Kovalainens car was perfectly ok in his first attempt at china´s 2008 Q3, when he was faster than Hamilton, but in his last attempt, after changing tyres and when his times should have been 3 tenths faster, suddenly his car lost all grip.
And there are a lot more Poltergeist´s happening in Mclaren´s non Hamilton cars if you aren´t blind to see.
#25
KAus
-
- 49 posts
- Joined: October 05
Member
Posted 04 April 2009 - 03:22
~0.4 sec/lap sounds reasonable to me. That is a huge margin in qualifying and over a race distance though.
Thread could have done without the Alonso 0.6 but anyway ...
Thread could have done without the Alonso 0.6 but anyway ...
#26
nada12
-
- 460 posts
- Joined: July 06
Member
Posted 04 April 2009 - 03:25
When and how did they prove that?Originally posted by hallo
In modern f1 the difference is about 0.3 -0.5. Only two drivers on the current grid have proved to possess this edge in speed. Alonso and Hamilton.
#27
slideways
-
- 3,395 posts
- Joined: January 09
Member
Posted 04 April 2009 - 03:29
Originally posted by nada12
When and how did they prove that?
The moment they were given sub-par teammates.
#28
hallo
-
- 212 posts
- Joined: December 08
Member
Posted 04 April 2009 - 03:46
Originally posted by nada12
When and how did they prove that?
Thats the gap they have had between all their team mates, except each other. No other drivers have shown the same.
#29
hallo
-
- 212 posts
- Joined: December 08
Member
Posted 04 April 2009 - 03:47
Originally posted by slideways
The moment they were given sub-par teammates.
So anyone they out pace is automatically 'sub par'?
#30
wewantourdarbyback
-
- 6,360 posts
- Joined: September 08
Member
Posted 04 April 2009 - 07:19
Anyone else noticed that the volume on the iPlayer goes all the way up to 11?Originally posted by ensign14
Alonso is the Spinal Tap amp of F1. Most go to 0.4, he goes to 0.6.
#31
slideways
-
- 3,395 posts
- Joined: January 09
Member
Posted 04 April 2009 - 07:23
Originally posted by hallo
So anyone they out pace is automatically 'sub par'?
Do you really want to argue over how crap those three drivers are?
#32
Jambo
-
- 2,614 posts
- Joined: January 09
Member
Posted 04 April 2009 - 07:33
Originally posted by wewantourdarbyback
Anyone else noticed that the volume on the iPlayer goes all the way up to 11?
I have had that conversation with one of my friends...
#33
V8 Fireworks
-
- 10,824 posts
- Joined: June 06
Member
Posted 04 April 2009 - 07:54
Perhaps it is right.
But IMHO Kubica, Raikkonen, Hamilton, Alonso, Vettel, Rosberg, Webber, Button and Trulli are 'exceptional drivers' within 0.2 tenths from optimal pace of the car (they aren't so exceptional as there are so many of them, rather a slightly more optimal form of ordinary only!!!). Kovalainen, Barrichello, Glock, Button, Fisichella, Heidfeld etc are 'standard' drivers within 0.3 tenths difference from the optimal pace of the car. Whilst Piquet, Nakajima, Sutil etc are 0.6 tenths from the optimal pace of the car.
0.6 - 0.2 This could be where the 0.4 tenths comes from? But it's only in comparison to "below standard" drivers.
But IMHO Kubica, Raikkonen, Hamilton, Alonso, Vettel, Rosberg, Webber, Button and Trulli are 'exceptional drivers' within 0.2 tenths from optimal pace of the car (they aren't so exceptional as there are so many of them, rather a slightly more optimal form of ordinary only!!!). Kovalainen, Barrichello, Glock, Button, Fisichella, Heidfeld etc are 'standard' drivers within 0.3 tenths difference from the optimal pace of the car. Whilst Piquet, Nakajima, Sutil etc are 0.6 tenths from the optimal pace of the car.
0.6 - 0.2 This could be where the 0.4 tenths comes from? But it's only in comparison to "below standard" drivers.
#34
tormave
-
- 1,627 posts
- Joined: January 02
Member
Posted 04 April 2009 - 08:02
Could you specify exactly when Alonso drove with Kovalainen as his shithouse teammate? In go-karts?Originally posted by slideways
Ironically Alonso is not a bad test subject for this. He's had plenty of shithouse teammates to find the maximum difference with.
Fisico
Kovalainen
Piquet
Take your pick.
#35
Seanspeed
-
- 21,814 posts
- Joined: October 08
Member
Posted 04 April 2009 - 08:06
He said in FP1 or FP3 in Australia that no more than .6 or .7 separated the best from the worst in F1.
Kinda changin the story a bit cuz thats a pretty big difference.
Kinda changin the story a bit cuz thats a pretty big difference.
#36
wewantourdarbyback
-
- 6,360 posts
- Joined: September 08
Member
Posted 04 April 2009 - 08:08
Friends? no one on here is allowed outside friendsOriginally posted by Jambo
I have had that conversation with one of my friends...
#37
Oho
-
- 11,836 posts
- Joined: November 98
Member
Posted 04 April 2009 - 08:10
No not really, form best to worst, sbout .7 on the mean that means .35 with rather strong assumption on symmetrical distribution around mean or vanishing third moment.
#38
ensign14
-
- 61,916 posts
- Joined: December 01
Member
Posted 04 April 2009 - 08:53
But 40% of the time the delta phi kappa means you have to augment the last five-tenths by a semitone.
#39
hedges
-
- 1,227 posts
- Joined: February 01
Member
Posted 04 April 2009 - 10:28
WTF, a second guess the F1 driver thread?
Since he wasn't claiming the 0.4 seconds for himelf I'm inclined to agree with whatever he suggests.
Since he wasn't claiming the 0.4 seconds for himelf I'm inclined to agree with whatever he suggests.
Advertisement
#40
slideways
-
- 3,395 posts
- Joined: January 09
Member
Posted 04 April 2009 - 10:51
Originally posted by tormave
Could you specify exactly when Alonso drove with Kovalainen as his shithouse teammate? In go-karts?
Must have been thinking of something else.
#41
Supreme Dan
-
- 87 posts
- Joined: October 08
Member
Posted 04 April 2009 - 11:28
What about senna....
2s faster then Prost in the same car in monaco....
and prost was probably 0.5s to 1sfater then any other driver on the grid on the same car.
2s faster then Prost in the same car in monaco....
and prost was probably 0.5s to 1sfater then any other driver on the grid on the same car.
#42
Buttoneer
-
- 19,094 posts
- Joined: May 04
Admin
Posted 04 April 2009 - 13:00
Haha. Rule one of F1 club is never talk about F1 club.Originally posted by wewantourdarbyback
Friends? no one on here is allowed outside friends
#43
DOF_power
-
- 1,538 posts
- Joined: February 09
Member
Posted 04 April 2009 - 17:24
Originally posted by Supreme Dan
What about senna....
2s faster then Prost in the same car in monaco....
and prost was probably 0.5s to 1sfater then any other driver on the grid on the same car.
Probably Honda fiddling with the boost. And Prost was pitiful when it came to tire warming, by his own admission; and didn't have the physical condition/training of Senna. Everyone knows how to warm tires today and all have a good physical condition.
