Good post H2H
Picking up on a couple of points:
F1 is one of the sport events where the use of statistics to evaluate the performance is considerable harder then in basket.
Completely agree. It's like the difference between baseball and NFL, in terms of the use of stats, IMO.
So there are good reasons to use your own mind and the opinon of others and 'experts' to form your personal conclusion. So why should you try to make us of a base rate like points? I will post that when I have more time.
I look forward to hearing. For what it's worth, I would certainly not advocate ignoring the points. Whilst they may be imperfect, they are a very valuable piece of information in terms of coming to conclusions on performance. Possibly the most valuable.
For example, in the context of this debate, I think that any suggestion that Hamilton has destroyed Button is very easily countered by the points table.
I would advocate (and have advocated) not solely looking at the points table.
It is a little amusing that the tables apparently cannot be trusted when comparing Hamilton with Button, but how easily (some) Hamilton fans will trot out that Hamilton is better than Alonso based on their time together at McLaren as Hamilton finished above Alonso in the table (even though they ended on equal points, but LH technically won due to race victories).
What's good for the goose...
I think I've been consistent on here*, despite being a Hamilton fan, in saying I think Alonso has had the edge on Hamilton. I've always thought Hamilton had the potential to be as good as Alonso, and possibly better, but that he hadn't realised that potential (regardless of the 07 points table). I think '12 is the first time Hamilton has begun to live up to that potential (I think he and Alonso have both been equally excellent this season)
But I don't want to derail the thread into that particular discussion - point is, my gander is being treated as per my goose. The '07 points table doesn't, IMO, prove Hamilton is as good as Alonso, just as the '10-'12 points table doesn't do the same re: Hamilton and Button.
[*I honestly think a search through my posting history will bear this out, but look forward to being proven wrong
Maybe I have misinderstood where those arguments are coming from. I believe it is fair to say (and obvious if you read the threads) that those who support Hamilton have been vocally dismissive of Button's ability from day 1 and continue to use silly adjectives to describe him as a person and his ability as a driver. Perhaps it is my bias, but I don't see many comments from the other side dismissing Hamilton, in fact it looks to me like there's clear respect for him and a feeling of pride that Button has done so well. There are notable exceptions on both sides, obviously.
I agree on the approach taken to Button by many in the thread, and it's a shame. It colours the whole rest of the debate, and makes it harder.
IMO, Button has performed excellently these past 3 seasons. Better than certainly I expected him to. Part of the motivation for the move was expressed as taking on a new challenge and he's risen to that. His stock as a driver, and the view of him when looking back on his career, will only be the better IMO for these past 3 seasons.
It's a pity that some of those who support Hamilton struggle with that. There's no need to put Button down to raise Hamilton up (in fact, quite the reverse is true IMO). And I can see the "fantasy points" as seeming as a continuation of that theme: here, look, Hamilton would have destroyed Button by [X] points if it weren't for woulda, coulda, shoulda. So I can see why they get such push back.
Equally, though, I don't think that makes the concept valueless. And where the push back reaches the extreme of "actual points = the only barometer", then IMO it's gone too far (albeit, in the context of the crap pushed Button's way in this thread, it's hardly surprising that should occur).
It is, though, equally frustrating as a Hamilton fan to suffer what seems like the double whammy of watching the guy perform brilliantly, get nothing out of it through no fault of his own, and then be told that because of it Button's equalled him. Yes, all drivers suffer from these things. Yes, you are likely to notice it more when it happens to your guy. But there's a reason why James Allen is writing pieces such as the ones he did: it has happened more to Hamilton this season than to most - and that includes Button despite the fact they drive the same car. And it was similar in 2010. Being told this simply hasn't occurred is a frustrating experience, to be honest. In contrast, being told you can't possibly reliably quantify it, is perfectly understandable.
To try and bring this to some form of conclusion, my thoughts would be:
1. The points table is an excellent piece of information on how drivers have performed, particularly team mates.
2. There's no doubt that Hamilton and Button have been closely matched over their time together - both have their different strengths and weaknesses, and overall as a package there is certainly no gulf in class between the drivers. That's bourne out both by the points table and my impression of their performance.
3. The points table, whilst one of the best pieces (if not the best piece) of information, isn't the be all and end all. In paticular this is because F1 is a team sport - points do not solely measure driver performance (team and car and what other idiot drivers around you do, are also measured). Between team mates, these differences will be much less pronounced, but can and do still exist.
4. My impression of their time together is that Hamilton has been more affected by these differences, and so whilst the points table shows them evens, I think the edge (note, edge - see point 2) has been with Hamilton over the 3 years. This certainly is not an objective view. Whilst I'd like to think all should share it, because I am a genius who is always right, I have to reluctantly accept I am not a genius who is always right and understand that there will be plenty who, quite fairly, disagree.
I have sometimes wondered whether it might be worth starting a 'scorecard' thread purely to discuss how one should score the differences. Are there points of comparison which can be univerally accepted as resonable by most and applied then to different driver pairings to give a reasonable skill assessment? Sort of like the Castrol figures try to do but relying less on the results and create independance from the car.
It'd be fun to do, but I think the goal in bold would be very, very difficult!