Jump to content


Photo
* * * * - 8 votes

Qualifying Averages Between Team Mates


  • Please log in to reply
360 replies to this topic

#101 ed24f1

ed24f1
  • Member

  • 973 posts
  • Joined: November 10

Posted 25 June 2011 - 15:59

Thanks for the data.

D'Ambrosio and Alguersuari have really dropped off the cliff in the past few qualifying sessions, after strong starts to the year.

Advertisement

#102 Dunder

Dunder
  • Member

  • 6,784 posts
  • Joined: April 01

Posted 25 June 2011 - 16:13

Thanks for the data.

D'Ambrosio and Alguersuari have really dropped off the cliff in the past few qualifying sessions, after strong starts to the year.


Indeed.
The Sutil/di Resta "battle" looks like being close all season long.

In terms of the cars, Ferrari have moved closer to Red Bull and McLaren but Mercedes and Renault are making no progress (in the case of Mercedes this is probably due to them trying to focus on race setup). The four midfield teams are so closely matched in quali but Sauber are the ones who really show up on Sundays.


#103 ed24f1

ed24f1
  • Member

  • 973 posts
  • Joined: November 10

Posted 25 June 2011 - 16:15

I've just noticed that in the past 3 races, the aggregate of Schumacher's and Rosberg's Q3 laps are equal, to 3 decimals!

EDIT: Actually, I think you've made a typo with the Mercedes Monaco gap.

Edited by ed24f1, 25 June 2011 - 16:24.


#104 Dunder

Dunder
  • Member

  • 6,784 posts
  • Joined: April 01

Posted 25 June 2011 - 16:34

I've just noticed that in the past 3 races, the aggregate of Schumacher's and Rosberg's Q3 laps are equal, to 3 decimals!

EDIT: Actually, I think you've made a typo with the Mercedes Monaco gap.


Rosberg's time is from Q2.


#105 ed24f1

ed24f1
  • Member

  • 973 posts
  • Joined: November 10

Posted 25 June 2011 - 16:38

Right, I should have read your methodology, as mentioned above.

#106 tyker

tyker
  • Member

  • 214 posts
  • Joined: April 11

Posted 29 June 2011 - 13:00

After Monaco (Monaco difference)

Sorry for my absense i need to catch up, not sure what to make of Monaco with Q3 ruined somewhat by Perez's crash. Clearly Hamilton and Rosberg were not able to set a representative time in Q3 after being quicker than their teammates in Q2 so i've nullified the result for this race, also Alguersuari didnt set a time he was capable of in Q1 (traffic?) so i've nullified this result as well.

1. Liuzzi 0.71s (-)
2. Vettel 0.5s (0.463s)
3. Alonso 0.46s (0.165s)
4. Glock 0.4s (0.822s)
5. Kovalainen 0.373s (0.003s)
6. Rosberg 0.371s (-)
7. Petrov 0.28s (0.399s)
8. Buemi 0.25s (-)
9. Hamilton 0.22s (-)
10.Barrichello 0.11s (-0.281s)
11.Kobayashi 0.007s (-0.491s)
12.Di Resta 0.02s (0.003s)


#107 tyker

tyker
  • Member

  • 214 posts
  • Joined: April 11

Posted 29 June 2011 - 13:38

After Canada (Canada difference)

1. Liuzzi 0.62s (0.15s)
2. Vettel 0.49s (0.415s)
3. Glock 0.47s (0.877s)
4. Alonso 0.39s (0.018s)
5. Rosberg 0.32s (0.05s)
6. Kovalainen 0.31s (-0.041s)
7. Buemi 0.27s (0.393s)
8. Hamilton 0.23s (0.273s)
9. Petrov 0.22s (-0.023s)
10.Kobayashi 0.07s (-)
11.Barrichello 0.042s (-0.288s)
12.Di Resta 0.04s (0.179s)

Edited by tyker, 29 June 2011 - 14:17.


#108 tyker

tyker
  • Member

  • 214 posts
  • Joined: April 11

Posted 29 June 2011 - 14:16

After Valencia (Valencia difference)

1. Liuzzi 0.64s (0.779s)
2. Glock 0.56s (1.182s)
3. Vettel 0.45s (0.188s)
4. Alonso 0.354s (0.081s)
5. Kovalainen 0.346s (0.57s)
6. Buemi 0.31s (0.553s)
7. Rosberg 0.27s (0.009s)
8. Hamilton 0.23s (0.265s)
9. Petrov 0.13s (-0.287s)
10.Kobayashi 0.08s (0.132s)
11.Barrichello 0.06s (0.156s)
12.Sutil 0.01s (0.388s)

Edited by tyker, 29 June 2011 - 14:16.


#109 marcoferrari

marcoferrari
  • Member

  • 2,004 posts
  • Joined: June 10

Posted 29 June 2011 - 14:50

After Monaco (Monaco difference)

Sorry for my absense i need to catch up, not sure what to make of Monaco with Q3 ruined somewhat by Perez's crash. Clearly Hamilton and Rosberg were not able to set a representative time in Q3 after being quicker than their teammates in Q2 so i've nullified the result for this race, also Alguersuari didnt set a time he was capable of in Q1 (traffic?) so i've nullified this result as well.

1. Liuzzi 0.71s (-)
2. Vettel 0.5s (0.463s)
3. Alonso 0.46s (0.165s)
4. Glock 0.4s (0.822s)
5. Kovalainen 0.373s (0.003s)
6. Rosberg 0.371s (-)
7. Petrov 0.28s (0.399s)
8. Buemi 0.25s (-)
9. Hamilton 0.22s (-)
10.Barrichello 0.11s (-0.281s)
11.Kobayashi 0.007s (-0.491s)
12.Di Resta 0.02s (0.003s)

In Monte Carlo FP3 Jaime set a time 1:16,617 and finished 8th... It is still his best this year s effort ahead of qualifying... So, it is pretty clear that the 1:17.820 (+1,5 sec) is not representative (set only on soft tyre)... Buemi s max. was 1:16,300 in Q2...



#110 F1_conman

F1_conman
  • Member

  • 505 posts
  • Joined: January 08

Posted 29 June 2011 - 14:55

After Valencia (Valencia difference)

1. Liuzzi 0.64s (0.779s)
2. Glock 0.56s (1.182s)
3. Vettel 0.45s (0.188s)
4. Alonso 0.354s (0.081s)
5. Kovalainen 0.346s (0.57s)
6. Buemi 0.31s (0.553s)
7. Rosberg 0.27s (0.009s)
8. Hamilton 0.23s (0.265s)
9. Petrov 0.13s (-0.287s)
10.Kobayashi 0.08s (0.132s)
11.Barrichello 0.06s (0.156s)
12.Sutil 0.01s (0.388s)




I've seen many stats for Liuzzi in the past and his no. 1 position against Karthikeyan is not that convincing. Other than that big :up: to Heikki.


#111 robefc

robefc
  • Member

  • 8,020 posts
  • Joined: July 08

Posted 29 June 2011 - 14:56

After Valencia (Valencia difference)

1. Liuzzi 0.64s (0.779s)
2. Glock 0.56s (1.182s)
3. Vettel 0.45s (0.188s)
4. Alonso 0.354s (0.081s)
5. Kovalainen 0.346s (0.57s)
6. Buemi 0.31s (0.553s)
7. Rosberg 0.27s (0.009s)
8. Hamilton 0.23s (0.265s)
9. Petrov 0.13s (-0.287s)
10.Kobayashi 0.08s (0.132s)
11.Barrichello 0.06s (0.156s)
12.Sutil 0.01s (0.388s)


I might be reading this wrong but how has hamilton's gap to button come down if he out qualified him in valencia?

Ah, hang on, the times in brackets are the difference for that race and the actual gap has stayed the same to the nearest 100th?

Edited by robefc, 29 June 2011 - 14:58.


#112 hammibal

hammibal
  • Member

  • 1,857 posts
  • Joined: May 11

Posted 30 June 2011 - 01:34

Very good Dunder and Tyker keep up the good work

Edited by hammibal, 30 June 2011 - 01:37.


#113 Otaku

Otaku
  • Member

  • 475 posts
  • Joined: March 11

Posted 30 June 2011 - 07:17

I think the values should be % of fastest lap between teammates instead of absolute time. It's not the same to lose 1 second on a short track like Monaco than on a long track like Spa.

% makes all tracks weight equal.

#114 tyker

tyker
  • Member

  • 214 posts
  • Joined: April 11

Posted 04 July 2011 - 19:44

I've seen many stats for Liuzzi in the past and his no. 1 position against Karthikeyan is not that convincing. Other than that big :up: to Heikki.

Well i'd say Karthikeyan is definitely what you would call a pay driver, i'm tipping Liuzzi wont be at the top of the list now with Ricciardo has his teammate

I might be reading this wrong but how has hamilton's gap to button come down if he out qualified him in valencia?

Ah, hang on, the times in brackets are the difference for that race and the actual gap has stayed the same to the nearest 100th?

Yep interesting how consistent the gap has become like its set in stone now

#115 tyker

tyker
  • Member

  • 214 posts
  • Joined: April 11

Posted 10 July 2011 - 14:21

After Silverstone (Silverstone difference)

1. Glock 0.6s (0.951s)
2. Liuzzi 0.57s (0.575s)
3. Vettel 0.39s (-0.032s)
4. Alonso 0.38 (0.608s)
5. Kovalainen 0.35s (-)
6. Rosberg 0.3s (0.447s)
7. Buemi 0.21s (-0.505s)
8. Hamilton 0.14s (-0.478s)
9. Petrov 0.12s (0.071s)
10.Kobayashi 0.11s (0.106s)
11.Maldonalso 0.02s (0.531s)
12.Sutil 0.01s (-0.048s)


#116 Chomsky

Chomsky
  • Member

  • 363 posts
  • Joined: January 10

Posted 11 July 2011 - 00:49

Your difference for Petrov and Heidfeld for Silverstone is off by a second.

#117 Dunder

Dunder
  • Member

  • 6,784 posts
  • Joined: April 01

Posted 13 July 2011 - 13:22

Updated after Silverstone
As indicated previously, the second round of 'exclusions' have been applied.

Drivers
Posted Image

Cars
Posted Image

#118 marcoferrari

marcoferrari
  • Member

  • 2,004 posts
  • Joined: June 10

Posted 13 July 2011 - 15:54

Updated after Silverstone
As indicated previously, the second round of 'exclusions' have been applied.

Drivers
Posted Image

Cars
Posted Image


Why excluding the half second advantage of Alguersuari in Silverstone? Both STR drivers "were on the same boat" missing the "dry run" with softs and there were no traffic problems... I don t understand these calculations about which result should be included and which should be excluded... I consider the other system more representative then this...

#119 marcoferrari

marcoferrari
  • Member

  • 2,004 posts
  • Joined: June 10

Posted 13 July 2011 - 15:55

Updated after Silverstone
As indicated previously, the second round of 'exclusions' have been applied.

Drivers
Posted Image

Cars
Posted Image


Why excluding the half second advantage of Alguersuari in Silverstone? Both STR drivers "were on the same boat" missing the "dry run" with softs and there were no traffic problems... I don t understand these calculations about which result should be included and which should be excluded... I consider the other system more representative then this...


Advertisement

#120 marcoferrari

marcoferrari
  • Member

  • 2,004 posts
  • Joined: June 10

Posted 13 July 2011 - 15:56

After Silverstone (Silverstone difference)

1. Glock 0.6s (0.951s)
2. Liuzzi 0.57s (0.575s)
3. Vettel 0.39s (-0.032s)
4. Alonso 0.38 (0.608s)
5. Kovalainen 0.35s (-)
6. Rosberg 0.3s (0.447s)
7. Buemi 0.21s (-0.505s)
8. Hamilton 0.14s (-0.478s)
9. Petrov 0.12s (0.071s)
10.Kobayashi 0.11s (0.106s)
11.Maldonalso 0.02s (0.531s)
12.Sutil 0.01s (-0.048s)


It makes sense... :up:

#121 Alarcon

Alarcon
  • Member

  • 2,468 posts
  • Joined: April 11

Posted 13 July 2011 - 17:09

Amazing job !!! Many thanks for your work. :)





#122 Dunder

Dunder
  • Member

  • 6,784 posts
  • Joined: April 01

Posted 23 July 2011 - 17:37

Updated after Germany

Drivers
Posted Image

Maldanado 'passes' Barrichello

Cars
Posted Image

#123 Bonaventura

Bonaventura
  • Member

  • 7,698 posts
  • Joined: November 09

Posted 23 July 2011 - 17:58

Updated after Germany

Drivers
Posted Image

Why did you exclude todays qualy from Lewis & Button?

#124 Dunder

Dunder
  • Member

  • 6,784 posts
  • Joined: April 01

Posted 23 July 2011 - 18:00

Why did you exclude todays qualy from Lewis & Button?


Each drivers' worst two results are excluded. There are no subjective judgements in terms of which individual sessions are representative.


#125 robefc

robefc
  • Member

  • 8,020 posts
  • Joined: July 08

Posted 23 July 2011 - 18:01

Why did you exclude todays qualy from Lewis & Button?


Presumably because the 2 worst results for each driver are excluded.

What's cracking me up is one of massa's best results that is being excluded he still lost to alonso!

#126 Bonaventura

Bonaventura
  • Member

  • 7,698 posts
  • Joined: November 09

Posted 23 July 2011 - 18:02

Each drivers' worst two results are excluded. There are no subjective judgements in terms of which individual sessions are representative.

ooooooooooooooooooooookay

#127 VresiBerba

VresiBerba
  • Member

  • 8,951 posts
  • Joined: April 02

Posted 24 July 2011 - 03:37

Updated after Germany

Drivers
Posted Image

If I may ask; first, why is China excluded between Shumi and Nico, and second, where did you get the '+0.838' figure from the Chinese qualification? These are the differences between Nico and Shumi at the Chinese qualification:


Shumi versus Nico
q3 +1,787 (Shumi's q3-time compared to Nico's q2-time)
q2 +0,607
q1 +0,236


Edited by VresiBerba, 24 July 2011 - 03:39.


#128 Dunder

Dunder
  • Member

  • 6,784 posts
  • Joined: April 01

Posted 24 July 2011 - 08:22

If I may ask; first, why is China excluded between Shumi and Nico, and second, where did you get the '+0.838' figure from the Chinese qualification? These are the differences between Nico and Shumi at the Chinese qualification:


Shumi versus Nico
q3 +1,787 (Shumi's q3-time compared to Nico's q2-time)
q2 +0,607
q1 +0,236


It is Rosberg's Q3 time 1:34.670 compared to Schumacher's Q1 time 1:35.508.
Each drivers' worst two results are excluded from the average.



#129 race addicted

race addicted
  • Member

  • 19,535 posts
  • Joined: June 01

Posted 24 July 2011 - 08:26

Now I'm confused again! Do you really compare times across the three sessions??

#130 YellowHelmet

YellowHelmet
  • Member

  • 3,800 posts
  • Joined: April 10

Posted 24 July 2011 - 08:26

why are buttons/hamiltons times from nurburgring excluded?

Edited by YellowHelmet, 24 July 2011 - 08:27.


#131 Dunder

Dunder
  • Member

  • 6,784 posts
  • Joined: April 01

Posted 24 July 2011 - 08:30

Now I'm confused again! Do you really compare times across the three sessions??


Yes. The best time is taken regardless of which session.


why are buttons/hamiltons times from nurburgring excluded?


See post #124.

#132 YellowHelmet

YellowHelmet
  • Member

  • 3,800 posts
  • Joined: April 10

Posted 24 July 2011 - 08:36

See post #124.

thanx :up:
sorry missed it

Like this it makes sense, although the margin of lewis to button would be much bigger, without that.

#133 race addicted

race addicted
  • Member

  • 19,535 posts
  • Joined: June 01

Posted 24 July 2011 - 08:36

Yes. The best time is taken regardless of which session.


These averages are totally worthless then.

#134 marcoferrari

marcoferrari
  • Member

  • 2,004 posts
  • Joined: June 10

Posted 24 July 2011 - 08:37

Waiting on Tyker s qualy analysis as there is nothing excluded, so it offers a more representative view...

#135 Dunder

Dunder
  • Member

  • 6,784 posts
  • Joined: April 01

Posted 24 July 2011 - 08:41

These averages are totally worthless then.


I keep two alternative sets of figures, one on the basis of common sessions only and one on the basis of subjectively excluding 'non-representative' times.
The averages, with one or two small exceptions, are virtually the same.

Edited by Dunder, 24 July 2011 - 08:46.


#136 Dunder

Dunder
  • Member

  • 6,784 posts
  • Joined: April 01

Posted 24 July 2011 - 08:45

thanx :up:
sorry missed it

Like this it makes sense, although the margin of lewis to button would be much bigger, without that.


Actually with no results excluded the average is 0.201, so the difference is less than 0.01 seconds.


Waiting on Tyker s qualy analysis as there is nothing excluded, so it offers a more representative view...


With respect, I suspect you would consider whichever set of results makes Alguersuari looks best to be 'more representative'. You posted earlier in the thread suggesting that one of Jamie's results should not be included but now it's best when "there is nothing excluded"?


#137 race addicted

race addicted
  • Member

  • 19,535 posts
  • Joined: June 01

Posted 24 July 2011 - 08:47

I keep two alternative sets of figures, one on the basis of common sessions and one on the basis of subjectively excluding 'non-representative' times.
The averages, with one or two small exceptions, are virtually the same.


That's completely by chance then. I always used to do these qualifying averages (have several threads on the subject) but I never compared times across the sessions.
Where say only one driver reached Q2, I went back and compared their times in Q1. I tried to rule out instances where one driver suffered a problem that legitimately cost performance.

#138 YellowHelmet

YellowHelmet
  • Member

  • 3,800 posts
  • Joined: April 10

Posted 24 July 2011 - 08:50

Actually with no results excluded the average is 0.201, so the difference is less than 0.01 seconds.

ooh.

but maybe you should also post those stats, to satisfy some who say that this stats are selective.

I personally like it. :up:

Edited by YellowHelmet, 24 July 2011 - 08:51.


#139 Dunder

Dunder
  • Member

  • 6,784 posts
  • Joined: April 01

Posted 24 July 2011 - 08:53

That's completely by chance then. I always used to do these qualifying averages (have several threads on the subject) but I never compared times across the sessions.
Where say only one driver reached Q2, I went back and compared their times in Q1. I tried to rule out instances where one driver suffered a problem that legitimately cost performance.


Which I seem to recall was always a source of debate/argument/angst because it requires subjective analysis based on often incomplete information.
It is a valid approach but I prefer mine!


Advertisement

#140 trogggy

trogggy
  • Member

  • 7,247 posts
  • Joined: March 10

Posted 24 July 2011 - 08:55

That's completely by chance then. I always used to do these qualifying averages (have several threads on the subject) but I never compared times across the sessions.
Where say only one driver reached Q2, I went back and compared their times in Q1. I tried to rule out instances where one driver suffered a problem that legitimately cost performance.

What's great about the way Dundee's doing this is that he set the rules first and isn't being subjective. As soon as you say 'I don't think that should be included' you're into subjectivity and there's room for argument - excluding worst results should take care of odd situations.

Edited by trogggy, 24 July 2011 - 08:56.


#141 arknor

arknor
  • Member

  • 2,298 posts
  • Joined: March 10

Posted 24 July 2011 - 08:58

These averages are totally worthless then.

just goto f1 fanatic stats instead
Team mate comparisons
Driver Beat team mate Average gap to team mate
Fernando Alonso 9 -0.374s
Vitantonio Liuzzi 8 -0.631s
Heikki Kovalainen 8 -0.478s
Nico Rosberg 8 -0.237s
Timo Glock 7 -0.604s
Paul di Resta 7 -0.604s
Sebastian Vettel 7 -0.356s
Sebastien Buemi 7 -0.344s
Vitaly Petrov 6 -0.56s
Lewis Hamilton 6 +0.016s
Pastor Maldonado 5 -0.375s
Kamui Kobayashi 5 -0.149s
Sergio Perez 4 +0.127s
Rubens Barrichello 4 +0.375s
Jenson Button 3 -0.016s
Nick Heidfeld 3 +0.56s
Jaime Alguersuari 2 +0.344s
Mark Webber 2 +0.356s
Adrian Sutil 2 +0.604s
Jerome D’Ambrosio 2 +0.604s
Michael Schumacher 1 +0.237s
Jarno Trulli 1 +0.478s
Pedro de la Rosa 0 +0.302s
Felipe Massa 0 +0.374s
Daniel Ricciardo 0 +0.575s
Narain Karthikeyan 0 +0.639s

Average gap to team mate: Compares their best times in the last part of qualifying where both set a time.

Edited by arknor, 24 July 2011 - 08:59.


#142 race addicted

race addicted
  • Member

  • 19,535 posts
  • Joined: June 01

Posted 24 July 2011 - 09:01

I do think I removed the best and worst result, which is the un-written rule in such statistics, but there wasn't much debate around the excluded results. If one driver had glazing discs or were visibly held up then that shouldn't be debatable.
My number one beef with your approach though, is that you compare laptimes across the sessions. That's unheard of. Everybody and their dog knows that in 90% of the qualifyings, times drop with each session. One, the track improves, and two, they all move onto the softer compound which the poor bastard that couldn't get out of Q1 perhaps didn't even bolt on.

#143 marcoferrari

marcoferrari
  • Member

  • 2,004 posts
  • Joined: June 10

Posted 24 July 2011 - 09:05

just goto f1 fanatic stats instead
Team mate comparisons
Driver Beat team mate Average gap to team mate
Fernando Alonso 9 -0.374s
Vitantonio Liuzzi 8 -0.631s
Heikki Kovalainen 8 -0.478s
Nico Rosberg 8 -0.237s
Timo Glock 7 -0.604s
Paul di Resta 7 -0.604s
Sebastian Vettel 7 -0.356s
Sebastien Buemi 7 -0.344s
Vitaly Petrov 6 -0.56s
Lewis Hamilton 6 +0.016s
Pastor Maldonado 5 -0.375s
Kamui Kobayashi 5 -0.149s
Sergio Perez 4 +0.127s
Rubens Barrichello 4 +0.375s
Jenson Button 3 -0.016s
Nick Heidfeld 3 +0.56s
Jaime Alguersuari 2 +0.344s
Mark Webber 2 +0.356s
Adrian Sutil 2 +0.604s
Jerome D’Ambrosio 2 +0.604s
Michael Schumacher 1 +0.237s
Jarno Trulli 1 +0.478s
Pedro de la Rosa 0 +0.302s
Felipe Massa 0 +0.374s
Daniel Ricciardo 0 +0.575s
Narain Karthikeyan 0 +0.639s

Average gap to team mate: Compares their best times in the last part of qualifying where both set a time.


Also not representative - I bet a gap of 4 seconds was counted in Australia, where Sutil made a spin in last corner... :drunk: The gap between the two FIndia drivers should be around thousands of a second and not 6 tenths... :D
I see comparing the best laps times of the weekend as the best way...

Edited by marcoferrari, 24 July 2011 - 09:18.


#144 YellowHelmet

YellowHelmet
  • Member

  • 3,800 posts
  • Joined: April 10

Posted 24 July 2011 - 09:06

I see comparing the best laps times of the weekend as the best way...

:up:

#145 Dunder

Dunder
  • Member

  • 6,784 posts
  • Joined: April 01

Posted 24 July 2011 - 09:18

I do think I removed the best and worst result, which is the un-written rule in such statistics, but there wasn't much debate around the excluded results. If one driver had glazing discs or were visibly held up then that shouldn't be debatable.
My number one beef with your approach though, is that you compare laptimes across the sessions. (1) That's unheard of. Everybody and their dog knows that in 90% of the qualifyings, times drop with each session. One, the track improves (2), and two, they all move onto the softer compound which the poor bastard that couldn't get out of Q1 perhaps didn't even bolt on (3).


1) As you can see there was some debate about that earlier in the thread, with no real consensus.
2) It is still a factor but track evolution with the Pirelli's is substantially less than it was with the Bridgestones. So far there have been 28 instances (28%) of drivers being slower in Q3 than they were in Q2 (a few of these are, of course, due to not having fresh option tyres available).
3) This has happened very rarely, only Webber has been knocked out (in China) in Q1 when running the prime tyre and that result is, obviously, excluded from the average anyway.

By excluding a bigger number of results (it will increase to 3 for each driver after India) pretty much all anomalies should be filtered out and you are left with a cross between a median and a mean which should prove to be representative.

Edited by Dunder, 24 July 2011 - 09:21.


#146 race addicted

race addicted
  • Member

  • 19,535 posts
  • Joined: June 01

Posted 24 July 2011 - 09:21

There's no doubt you're very aware of what you're doing, Dunder.
...but, I still think it's a flaw to compare across sessions. I'd like to have a look myself when I have the initiative in me.

Edited by race addicted, 24 July 2011 - 09:22.


#147 VresiBerba

VresiBerba
  • Member

  • 8,951 posts
  • Joined: April 02

Posted 24 July 2011 - 15:39

It is Rosberg's Q3 time 1:34.670 compared to Schumacher's Q1 time 1:35.508.

Okay, thanks for the explanation, but why do you compare Shumi's q1-time to Nico's q3-time? Wouldn't it be more fair to compare the times made when both drivers qualified according to their respective performance; in China that would be q2, in Germany, it would be q3. You didn't compare Nico's time in q3 to Shumi's time in q1 in Britain, I hope, so why did you in China?


Each drivers' worst two results are excluded from the average.

If this is, as I suppose to weed out irregularities, then I suggest you exclude the best and worst time for each driver instead of excluding the two worst.

#148 Dunder

Dunder
  • Member

  • 6,784 posts
  • Joined: April 01

Posted 24 July 2011 - 15:53

Okay, thanks for the explanation, but why do you compare Shumi's q1-time to Nico's q3-time? Wouldn't it be more fair to compare the times made when both drivers qualified according to their respective performance; in China that would be q2, in Germany, it would be q3. You didn't compare Nico's time in q3 to Shumi's time in q1 in Britain, I hope, so why did you in China?


It it the best time set for each driver regardless of which session it was set. In China it just happened to be that Schumacher, unusually, set his in Q1.



#149 VresiBerba

VresiBerba
  • Member

  • 8,951 posts
  • Joined: April 02

Posted 24 July 2011 - 16:42

It it the best time set for each driver regardless of which session it was set.

And that's the problem right there because the best time set in Q1 might be different than the best time set in Q3. Just to illustrate the flaw in comparing times from different sessions, what if it rains in Q3 and the team-mate is knocked out in Q2 and the times are suddenly ten seconds slower, what then? Actually, with your logic, why don't you add the best sector-times to get a logical time rather than the best lap-time, it's the same principle.

Just as a suggestion, if you want to do these kind of comparisons, compare the times set when both driver are at the same track, at the same time and in the same session. Also, if you want to eliminate oddities, eliminate the best time and the worst time for each driver rather than the worst two, or you might as well eliminate the worst three, or four.

Edited by VresiBerba, 24 July 2011 - 16:45.


#150 Dunder

Dunder
  • Member

  • 6,784 posts
  • Joined: April 01

Posted 24 July 2011 - 16:52

And that's the problem right there because the best time set in Q1 might be different than the best time set in Q3. Just to illustrate the flaw in comparing times from different sessions, what if it rains in Q3 and the team-mate is knocked out in Q2 and the times are suddenly ten seconds slower, what then? Actually, with your logic, why not use the add the best sector-times rather than the best lap-time, it's the same principle.

Just as a suggestion, if you want to do these kind of comparisons, compare the times set when both driver are at the same track, at the same time and in the same session. Also, if you want to eliminate oddities, eliminate the best time and the worst time for each driver rather than the worst two, or you might as well eliminate the worst three, or four.


Anomalies like this (not due to rain but similar to Webber being knocked out in Q1 in China) is the reason that each driver will have his worst three results excluded from the average (it will increase from two to three in the table after the 14th race).

There are strengths and weaknesses to every system, using times from the same session can and has produced similar anomalies like drivers having no fresh tyres left for Q3 or a driver 'cruising' through to Q2 when his teammate is knocked out in Q1.

I am not quite sure what you mean in the last sentence. It is the worst comparative results that are excluded and the worst result for a driver is, by definition, the best result for his teammate. By the 14th race for example Webber's worst three results will be excluded and Vettel's worst three results will too meaning that the average is a mean of the median 8 results.