Rookie statistics
#1
Posted 24 October 2007 - 13:26
1959 - Bruce McLaren drives for Cooper for 7 out of 9 races of the WC, he finishes 6th in the WDC.
1970 - Emerson Fittipaldi drives for Lotus for 6 out of 13 races of the WC, he finishes 10th in the WDC.
1994 - David Coulthard drives for Williams for 8 out of 16 races of the WC, he finishes 8th in the WDC.
1996 - Jacques Villeneuve drives for Williams for 16 out of 16 races of the WC, he finishes 2nd in the WDC.
And that's all. Keep in mind the statistics count from 1958 onwards as before that the WCC didn't exist.
Of course we know that McLaren didn't win the WCC this year but that was due to the penalty, they were the fastest car on the grid since they accumulated more points than anyone else.
So it is the second time in F1 history that a rookie is given a full season drive with the fastest team. Both times that driver finished second in the WDC. So Hamilton is in a particularly priviledged position to drive the fastest car from day one which happens extremely rarely in F1.
My conclusion: Lewis is a very fast driver but to be hailed as the greatest talent ever is just empty speculation and attention seeking by F1. The reality is that Lewis was given the fastest and most reliable car on the grid and didn't win the WDC.
Advertisement
#2
Posted 24 October 2007 - 13:30
Originally posted by HUY
Of course we know that McLaren didn't win the WCC this year but that was due to the penalty, they were the fastest car on the grid since they accumulated more points than anyone else.
Ferrari actually won this yeas WCC with legitimate points over McLaren (even if they had not been DQ)
I would say JV was even more impressive in his first year than Lewis as JV entered a alien formula, where as Lewis has been groomed for this since day 1
#3
Posted 24 October 2007 - 13:32
#4
Posted 24 October 2007 - 13:34
No they didn't, it's McLaren 218 points and Ferrari 204 points.Originally posted by Hacklerf
[B]
Ferrari actually won this yeas WCC with legitimate points over McLaren (even if they had not been DQ)
#5
Posted 24 October 2007 - 13:37
Originally posted by HUY
No they didn't, it's McLaren 218 points and Ferrari 204 points.
forgot that mclaren lost their points from hungary.
218-15=203
#6
Posted 24 October 2007 - 13:39
Originally posted by HUY
No they didn't, it's McLaren 218 points and Ferrari 204 points.
You are forgetting the 15 points docked in Hungary.
#7
Posted 24 October 2007 - 13:43
Let's be under no pretense that 1992 was his debut season, as two attempted races for the mortally wounded Brabham simply doesn't amount to a debut IMHO.
So:
1993 Damon Hill drives for Williams in 16 out of 16 races of the WC, he finishes 3rd in the WDC
#8
Posted 24 October 2007 - 13:45
#9
Posted 24 October 2007 - 13:46
That's disingenuous for a couple of reasons.Originally posted by HUY
And that's all. Keep in mind the statistics count from 1958 onwards as before that the WCC didn't exist.
...
So it is the second time in F1 history that a rookie is given a full season drive with the fastest team.
1. Even if there were no WCC before 1958 there would still be a fastest team. In 1954 for example that was Mercedes. And they had rookies Kling and Herrmann.
2. It does not take into account just how good a car was if the "rookie" was not up to it. Lotus won the WDC in 1972. Dave Walker (first full season) scored zero points. Put a Peterson in that car and Lotus were WCC material. Brabham in 1980 was similar, Zunino did eff all with it in his few races.
3. There's a reason why the best teams don't have rookies. They're not good enough. Significant perchance that McLaren went for a rookie.
4. Not many rookies have outpaced a team-mate, let alone the double champ who hustled a 7 time champ into retirement.
As for the Villeneuve comparisons, they've been done to death elsewhere, but Jacques had been driving high-HP 2 hour race single seaters for a few years beforehand.
#10
Posted 24 October 2007 - 13:46
#11
Posted 24 October 2007 - 14:19
#12
Posted 25 October 2007 - 02:42
Originally posted by Deepak
You are forgetting the 15 points docked in Hungary.
IIRC McLaren were going to appeal that decision and then withdrew it when it became irrelevant. So we'll never really know. Regardless ... ignoring penalties, McLaren earned the most points. Whether they or Ferrari were the better season-long package is debatable, but I think it's fair to say that the McLaren car was easily capable of taking both titles had the season played out differently (no penalties, no spy controversy, no Alonso friction).
#13
Posted 25 October 2007 - 15:02
I guess it was, too. The McLaren was simply more reliable in 2007 than the usually-robust Ferrari.Originally posted by GhostR
Whether McLaren or Ferrari were the better season-long package is debatable, but I think it's fair to say that the McLaren car was easily capable of taking both titles had the season played out differently (no penalties, no spy controversy, no Alonso friction).
#14
Posted 24 February 2008 - 16:12
Last night a friend and I were discussing the impressive rookie season of Lewis Hamilton and comparing it to that of Jacques Villeneuve in 1996. Both drivers came into F1 with teams that gave them the best cars on the grid and both had a shot at the title going into the final round.
Here is what we came up with using the 1996 point system. 1996 Point System
1st 10, 2nd 6 , 3rd: 4, 4th 3, 5th 2, 6th 1
Number of GP's
JV: 16
Lewis: 17
Wins
JV: 4
Lewis: 4
2nd
JV: 5
Lewis: 5
3rd
JV: 2
Lewis: 3
4th
JV: 0
Lewis: 1
5th
JV: 0
Lewis: 1
6th
JV: 0
Lewis: 0
7th
JV: 0
Lewis: 1
8th
JV: 1
Lewis: 0
9th
JV: o
Lewis: 1
11th
JV: 1
Lewis 0
DNF's
JV: 3
Lewis: 1
PTS
JV: 78
Lewis: 84
Average points.
JV: 4.875 over 16 races.
Lewis: 4.94 over 17 races.
Take into consideration that Villeneuve gave up 4 points (no fault of his own) to Hill in Australia and the points look like this.
JV: 82
Lewis: 84
Now add an additional race for JV to bring the race total to 17 and the points average for Villeneuve… 82 + 5 (4.875) = 87pts to Lewis' 84.
Reliabliiy
Williams had 7 retirements in 1996 – JV 3* and Hill 4
McLaren had 2 retirements in 2007 - Lewis 1 and Fernando 1
DNF’S
1996 total top ten drivers 58 retirements.
2007 total top ten drivers 23 retirements
*San Marino – Villeneuve Classified 11th. Retired on lap 58 due to suspension after staing 2nd. He is hit during the start.
Brazil - Villeneuve slides into sand while defending against Alesi while in 2nd. Driver error.
Monaco - Villeneuve run into the wall by Badoer as he tries to overtake the slower car after Mira beau - both out while in 4th.
Japan - Villeneuve out - Wheel fell off while in 5th.
China – Hamilton goes off at pit entrance while in 2nd. Driver error.
Individual stats.
JV – Starts 16, Wins 4, Podiums 11, Poles 3, Fastest Laps 6.
Hamilton – Starts 17, Wins 4, Podiums 12, Poles, 6, Fastest Laps 2.
#15
Posted 24 February 2008 - 16:38
#16
Posted 24 February 2008 - 16:43
Originally posted by scheivlak
It has to be said of course that the 1996 Williams was quite clearly superior to the rest of the field while the 2007 McLaren had one very serious challenger ;)
And the MP4-22 also enjoyed much better reliability and the luxury of traction control. Really doesn't matter though. Both cars were the cream of the crop.
#17
Posted 24 February 2008 - 19:41
#18
Posted 28 February 2008 - 12:56
Williams had a distinct advantage compared to anyone else in 1996 while McLaren and Ferrari were both the best cars in 2007.
Hamilton came into the team against no less than Alonso but Fernando had also just joined the team. Villeneuve went to Williams with Damon Hill (himself a top driver and future World Champion) having been there for several season already.
Given all that though, still Hamilton for me. Just. The big test for Lewis will be the 2nd year, particluarly if McLaren produce one of or THE best car. We saw with Villeneuve that when expectation is on you, you have to deliver and mistakes can creep in. Being only in your second season is still pretty raw. Jacques handled it and won the championship in fine style. Let's see what happens with Lewis.
I think he will be a success and could very well be 2007 World Champion. He's a tremendous talent.
#19
Posted 28 February 2008 - 13:15
Then you may as well factor in the points Ferrari potentially lost after McLaren complained about Ferrari's floor, based on information illegally obtained by McLaren.Originally posted by GhostR
IIRC McLaren were going to appeal that decision and then withdrew it when it became irrelevant. So we'll never really know. Regardless ... ignoring penalties, McLaren earned the most points. Whether they or Ferrari were the better season-long package is debatable, but I think it's fair to say that the McLaren car was easily capable of taking both titles had the season played out differently (no penalties, no spy controversy, no Alonso friction).
In my view that would be ridiculous, and you therefore have to respect the points at the end of the season, full-stop, or you start getting into 'what's and 'but's and 'if's for eternity...
Ferrari won the most points in 2007, end of story, unless you want to open the FULL can of worms.
Advertisement
#20
Posted 28 February 2008 - 13:49
Originally posted by Hacklerf
I would say JV was even more impressive in his first year than Lewis as JV entered a alien formula, where as Lewis has been groomed for this since day 1
GP2 ment Lewis got to race on F1 tracks aswell id assume.
#21
Posted 28 February 2008 - 14:51
#22
Posted 28 February 2008 - 15:18
... but since i'm here, what the hell.
- two years of racing IndyCars, back when that meant something, versus a year in GP2, i'd say some rookies are much less rookie than others.
(to perhaps refute an assertion made above: 3 of the 4 tracks where lewis won were not part of GP2, which must mean something)
- the williams was so dominant, it allowed a team-mate to win, by some margin, his first and only WDC. the mclaren was so not dominant that it failed to allow a 2xWDC to win another championship
just saying like.