38 replies to this topic

[Marklar]

I'm thinking about this question since I read an James Allen article today.

The key to being a top F1 driver is repeatability; the knack for putting your three best sectors together in a qualifying lap when it counts, doing it every time and essentially not having off days.

http://www.jamesalle...pment-in-italy/

His reports are based from statements from engineers in the paddock.

But I found that confussing because for me this cant be the only point to define a top level driver.

So what is your opinion? Are you ageeing with Allens article? Or do you think that it takes more to be an top level driver?

[pRy]

30% consistently good

70% having the right car at the right time

Edited by pRy, 17 July 2015 - 23:22.

[RubalSher]

#1 Talent - Not anyone can just about become a top F1 driver.

#2 Discipline & focus - Which pretty much is what JA says.

#3 Patience & hunger - Ability to stand tough in adverse conditions and fight till the last.

 

And then of course some luck. But if you are really a top F1 driver, you usually make your way to a top team.

 

Having said that, this should hold true for most sport, if not all. Not sure how you fancy F1 to be an exception.

[TurnOffTheLights]

Ambition and zeal. That's what really distinguishes top drivers from good drivers. Nowadays all the guys in Formula 1 are good, there are only slight differences in talent.

I'm convinced you can compensate for more than these differences with hard work alone. So the most talented driver can become one of the worst in the grid, if he's lacking these important characteristics.

Edited by TurnOffTheLights, 17 July 2015 - 23:55.

[loki]

The key to being a good race driver period is repeatability.  It's not something that is specific to F1.

[Guizotia]

I think the key to bring a top F1 driver is being able to drive a car really, really fast. Like proper fast.

[warp]

"As for Hulkenberg, he is in demand lower down the grid; Force India would like him to stay and the new Haas F1 team are interested in his services, but that elusive top team seat seems destined not to happen for the German.

Detailed analysis of his on track performance data by the engineers, which Williams management will be studying now, as all the teams do, shows that while he has his moments of magic, he’s not at the level of a Bottas or a Ricciardo"

 

 

 

Interesting, he may be jumping into conclusions but... I would not call Hulkenberg inconsistent. Rather the opposite.

That may explain why he has been avoided all along by top teams. But it doesn't explain cases of the likes of Perez who landed a seat at Macca's while not being really consistent.

[Schumacher7]

Having said that, this should hold true for most sport, if not all. Not sure how you fancy F1 to be an exception.

Have only read as far as this post so apologies if it's already been said but the difference is the number of vacancies, there's the same number of people in one football match as there are on the grid, the gaps between the top percent of any sport are going to be small so if there's a small number of openings there's going to be some guys that are just as good sat on the sidelines. It's about being good enough and in the right place at the right time.

[CurbPainter]

Having the talent to drive very precise corner after corner lap after lap.

 

The most talented drivers can take on more downforce and be faster with it because they are able to hit the exiting corner speed near perfect corner after corner, while the less talented ones are losing time by missing the exiting corner speed way too often when driving with the same amount of downforce. Once you miss your optimum exiting corner speed combined with the more drag you have from carrying more downforce, you will loose a lot of time after a corner, so the less talented ones are actual faster while driving with less downforce, but are still slower as the most talented ones who drive with more downforce and are hitting most corners near perfect.

 

However the lower downforce setting allows still to be good at Qualifying laps, hence you have seen Rosberg doing quite well in Qualifying from time to time but in the races he couldn't threaten Hamilton (the races Rosberg is faster has more to do with Hamilton not getting his set up quite right (even the best have weekends when they don't find the sweet spot)).

Edited by CurbPainter, 18 July 2015 - 02:49.

[BlinkyMcSquinty]

[aramos]

Have an army of fans that write off any perceived under-performance.

[ViMaMo]

Talent and Hardwork...... applies everywhere doesnt it? 

[Atreiu]

Follow radio instructions to perfection.

Edited by Atreiu, 18 July 2015 - 06:39.

[sopa]

I agree that the Hulkenberg argument in the article is a bit unconvincing. I mean - qualifying? If anything, qualifying is his strength, he has been above Perez in that department almost all the time (while Perez matched Button in qualis). I'd understand more if they said Hulkenberg's racing is inconsistent, which is where Perez has had an upper hand at times.

 

In an answer to the question in the title - everything together I guess.  But high-level consistency is very important and very hard to master! Because many drivers can be occasionally fast, that's for sure. But as we know, that's not enough.

[superden]

Follow radio instructions to perfection.

Sadly, these days, this is about right.

[redraven9]

Over a career:

 

-Be a good qualifier

-Be consistent

-Be good in every regulations

-Be good in different conditions

-Good racecraft/race pace

-Be good in inferior cars

 

a la Fernando Alonso, Lewis Hamilton and Michael Schumacher

[V8 Fireworks]

I'm thinking about this question 

 

 

What is the key to be an top level F1 driver?

 

 

In all seriousness there is an oversupply of competent formula racing drivers.  Kobayashi, Vergne, di Resta, Magnussen, Beumi, Alguesauri, Petrov (what ever happened to Petrov ) , etc could all still make the grid and look perfectly professional.  Likewise many of the GP2 drivers would be more than competent.

 

The differences between most of the top level open wheel drivers, including ones who did not make F1, is absolutely minimal IMO.  Are the ones in Indycar rubbish?  No, over time they have refined a somewhat different skillset.  GP2 is a very good preparation for F1 these days.

Edited by V8 Fireworks, 18 July 2015 - 14:06.

[BlinkyMcSquinty]

There are thousands of drivers who are fast and consistent. Being able to attract and maintain sponsorships is one of the most vital parts, often overlooked by fans. All of the big names in racing are connected to major sponsorship deals and partnerships. Most assume that a driver gets into a Formula One car based on skill then develop sponsorships, but the reality is the other way around. A driver must have sponsorship deals first.

 

Senna was sponsored by Nacional most of his career. If you examine any driver, they all have personal endorsements that contribute to them getting drives.

 

 

Anyone hear of Raiffeisen bank? They are the people he got a loan from to buy a ride in BRM.

 

 

 

[V8 Fireworks]

Yup, Webbo was sponsored by Yellow Pages.

 

Being a top bloke Webber also personally sponsored Will Power, Mitch Evans and others.

[Ice1Fan]

A big sponsor whose name starts with S and ends with R with middle letters being ANTANDE in that order.

A really good manager who will get himself banned for you.

Obviously talent and racecraft.

Now you are set to go.

[Timantti]

Speed.

 

It always makes me wonder what people think when they bring stuff such as overtaking ability into discussions regarding drivers' skill levels. Sure, overtaking is glamorous and it's one of the key elements that make this sport exciting but it's also one of the less important skills on a drivers entire skill set. Being fast and being able to put it together over a one lap is what makes you a great driver and what wins you championships. Everything else is just icing on the cake.

[V8 Fireworks]

Being fast and being able to put it together over a one lap is what makes you a great driver and what wins you championships. 

 

 

 

Rubbish, many of the fastest drivers to ever race in F1 never got anywhere near a championship.  Some of the driver's that did win championships were not amongst the fastest either.

[wrcva]

raw speed, racecraft, and having big balls were important in the old days but nowadays I am not sure as they no longer make a difference in any case.  If the car is good maybe even Chilton could be up there.

[Timantti]

 

 

Rubbish, many of the fastest drivers to ever race in F1 never got anywhere near a championship.  Some of the driver's that did win championships were not amongst the fastest either.

 

If you dominate every teammate you have, chances are you'll land a seat in a car capable of winning championships. It might not always happen because luck plays such a major role in this sport but this is something that is not exclusive just for F1. Some of the finest players ever to grace the football pitch have never won a champion's league title just because they played in the wrong clubs at the wrong time.

[extremeday]

Speed.

 

It always makes me wonder what people think when they bring stuff such as overtaking ability into discussions regarding drivers' skill levels. Sure, overtaking is glamorous and it's one of the key elements that make this sport exciting but it's also one of the less important skills on a drivers entire skill set. Being fast and being able to put it together over a one lap is what makes you a great driver and what wins you championships. Everything else is just icing on the cake.

 

So Hamilton doesn´t deserve the 2014 championship because Rosberg was the great driver?

 

It was Rosberg 11 – Hamilton 7 in qualifying last season, Rosberg was the fastest driver over one lap, so he was the best driver, wasn´t he? I guess I must ignore that it was Rosberg 4 – Hamilton 10 in races.

 

Just think of 2014 Brazil GP (Edit: sorry, Abu Dhabi, Brazil was the penultimate race), Rosberg got pole position and then Hamilton overtook him at the start, just few seconds and being the fastest over one lap meant nothing. Rosberg couldn´t overtake Hamilton although he had been faster over one lap, then reliability issues, then game over.

 

To be among the greats, much more than speed over one lap is required, we have obvious examples of it. Senna was much more than speed over one lap, the same thing can be said about Prost and Schumacher, Hamilton is clearly more than speed over one lap or he would have never won the 2014 title and during the race Alonso is capable of destroying teammates who had outqualified him previously, just think of Massa.

 

I don´t know why the myth about speed over one lap keeps rolling. Speed in general is what trully matters, during one lap, during the whole race, when the driver is overtaking, when he is defending, when he takes care of the tyres. The great drivers can always be really fast and to be always really fast they must have great racepace and great skills when they are defending and attacking. 

Edited by extremeday, 18 July 2015 - 16:09.

[aramos]

If you dominate every teammate you have, chances are you'll land a seat in a car capable of winning championships. It might not always happen because luck plays such a major role in this sport but this is something that is not exclusive just for F1. Some of the finest players ever to grace the football pitch have never won a champion's league title just because they played in the wrong clubs at the wrong time.

Forwarded to Nico Hulkenberg

[Timantti]

So Hamilton doesn´t deserve the 2014 championship because Rosberg was the great driver?

 

It was Rosberg 11 – Hamilton 7 in qualifying last season, Rosberg was the fastest driver over one lap, so he was the best driver, wasn´t he? I guess I must ignore that it was Rosberg 4 – Hamilton 10 in races.

 

Just think of 2014 Brazil GP (Edit: sorry, Abu Dhabi, Brazil was the penultimate race), Rosberg got pole position and then Hamilton overtook him at the start, just few seconds and being the fastest over one lap meant nothing. Rosberg couldn´t overtake Hamilton although he had been faster over one lap, then reliability issues, then game over.

 

To be among the greats, much more than speed over one lap is required, we have obvious examples of it. Senna was much more than speed over one lap, the same thing can be said about Prost and Schumacher, Hamilton is clearly more than speed over one lap or he would have never won the 2014 title and during the race Alonso is capable of destroying teammates who had outqualified him previously, just think of Massa.

 

I don´t know why the myth about speed over one lap keeps rolling. Speed in general is what trully matters, during one lap, during the whole race, when the driver is overtaking, when he is defending, when he takes care of the tyres. The great drivers can always be really fast and to be always really fast they must have great racepace and great skills when they are defending and attacking. 

 

Hamilton is faster than Rosberg, that's why he's the champion. He was the faster racing driver in 2014 and he's the faster driver this year. By speed I didn't only mean qualifying, I meant race distance as well. Having a faster time over a lap, or several laps, than your competitors is what matters.

[Timantti]

Forwarded to Nico Hulkenberg

 

He hasn't really dominated his teammates, has he? He couldn't touch Barrichello on his debut year and Perez hasn't been a cakewalk either. But if Hulk keeps on beating every single teammate he's thrown at, sooner or later he will probably get a chance to shine.

Edited by Timantti, 18 July 2015 - 16:28.

[extremeday]

Hamilton is faster than Rosberg, that's why he's the champion. He was the faster racing driver in 2014 and he's the faster driver this year. By speed I didn't only mean qualifying, I meant race distance as well. Having a faster time over a lap, or several laps, than your competitors is what matters.

 

I totally agree with the bolded part.

 

You said " Being fast and being able to put it together over a one lap is what makes you a great driver". There are drivers who can be the fastest and put it together over a one lap and even so they are not the better or faster drivers, as Hamilton proved last season. 

[Timantti]

I totally agree with the bolded part.

 

You said " Being fast and being able to put it together over a one lap is what makes you a great driver". There are drivers who can be the fastest and put it together over a one lap and even so they are not the better or faster drivers, as Hamilton proved last season. 

 

I worded it horribly. I meant being fast (overall) and being able to put it together in qualifying is what matters. With the current rules drivers only have two laps in Q3 so it's incredibly important to be able to string good sector times on the lap that counts. Qualifying is still very important even if it isn't the race weekend defining session that it used to be just a couple a years ago. 

Edited by Timantti, 18 July 2015 - 16:57.

[extremeday]

I worded it horribly. I meant being fast (overall) and being able to put it together in qualifying is what matters. With the current rules drivers only have two laps in Q3 so it's incredibly important to be able to string good sector times on the lap that counts. Qualifying is still very important even if it isn't the race weekend defining session that it used to be just a couple a years ago. Who knows what kind of a dynamic we would have if 1 hour of unlimited qualifying made a comeback.

 

Ok, I understand you now.

 

I agree, being fast overall is what matters. Qualifying is obviously important and great drivers have to be  fast in qualifying, they have to be always fast, although if the driver doesn´t manage to put it together in qualifying and he starts right behind his teammate or really close to him, he can overtake his teammate at the start or during the race and be the better driver at the end.

 

That´s why I used the Rosberg - Hamilton example, because Rosberg beat Hamilton in qualifying, he put it together in qualifying more times than Hamilton, and even so Hamilton had better racepace and was the better driver at the end of most races that both of them finished. Let´s not forget that Hamilton had 3 retirements and Rosberg had 2 retirements, this helped Rosberg to be closer at the end of the season. Bahrein, Abu Dhabi and Austin are examples of Rosberg outqualifying Hamilton and even so the latter won those races. I want to add that in Canada, Hungary and Belgium, Rosberg got pole position and Ricciardo won those races. In Hungary Hamilton beat Rosberg too, in Canada and Belgium he couldn´t finish the race. 

 

Being fast overall, that is the point. 

[Seanspeed]

I do agree with Allen for the most part. Most high-eschelon racing drivers can perform at a top level on their day. Those who can do it on a regular basis become top drivers. Basically, you can rank the entire grid by how often they perform at this level.

[rhukkas]

“If somebody is talented, very talented, you probably need to spend €1 million in karting through junior, senior and international races,” says Wolff. “You need at least a season in F4 or Formula Renault which is another €350,000 if you do it properly. You need €650,000 for an F3 season so we are at €2 million. You probably need another season of F3 so you are at €2.6 million or €2.7 million and then you haven’t done any GP2 or World Series. So let’s say you are at €3 million if you are an extraordinary talent.

“GP2 is another €1.5 million so probably, if you want to be on the safe side, you are around €4.5 million and €5 million and you have only done one year of GP2. You are on the verge of getting into Formula One but you are not in there. You need another €2 million to €3 million to get the drive. So you are talking about €7 million to €8 million so let’s call it $8 million.”

 

[superden]

Ridiculous money. Like all sports, F1 lost touch with reality a long time ago.

[HeadFirst]

Ridiculous money. Like all sports, F1 lost touch with reality a long time ago.

 

The difference of course is that nowadays you need "beaucoup d'argent" (lotsa money) to even get started in racing, football/soccer ...... a pair of shoes.

[Bloggsworth]

Hmm. That's a difficult one. Perhaps the ability to drive faster for longer than anyone else may suffice...

[PlatenGlass]

Practice and practice and practice some more. Talent is, IMO, ultimately just a substitute word for having the will to be the best. I used to believe musicians where born with much of their ability(I'm talking about real musicians here, not the fronters like Kanye, Beiber or whatever the latest cheesey prettyboy rock band is) until I realized how much they actually put into it. Charlie Parker used to practice more than 12 hours a day, and the local orchestra in my town are on 8 hours a day.

Regardless of whether it is down to practice, motor racing isn't a skill that you can simply pick up and practice like playing a violin. You have to be given the time in the car to start with. So what you're essentially saying is that motor racing is down to opportunity.

[Marklar]

(Malaysia was rain affected, Comparison is been made between the combined best lap and
 the best lap in the last segment for each driver)         

             AUS     CHI     BAH     ESP     MON     CAN     AUT     GBR      AVG
Hamilton     +0.007  +0.000  +0.026  +0.162  +0.071  +0.130  +0.000  +0.000 | +0.049
Vettel       +0.036  +0.000  +0.000  +0.088  +0.004  +0.230  +0.000  +0.148 | +0.063
Button       +0.000  +0.000  -       +0.162  +0.291  -       +0.000  +0.000 | +0.075
Bottas       +0.362  +0.000  +0.000  +0.199  +0.008  +0.000  +0.000  +0.109 | +0.084
Alonso       -       +0.000  +0.009  +0.211  +0.223  +0.000  +0.000  +0.190 | +0.090
Kvyat        +0.190  +0.001  +0.000  +0.206  +0.039  +0.227  +0.000  +0.116 | +0.097
Nasr         +0.000  +0.050  +0.000  +0.380  +0.064  +0.269  +0.087  +0.000 | +0.106
Ericsson     +0.174  +0.172  +0.000  +0.000  +0.001  +0.072  +0.187  +0.249 | +0.106
Sainz        +0.208  +0.205  +0.000  +0.000  +0.170  +0.040  +0.113  +0.138 | +0.109
Hulkenberg   +0.071  +0.251  +0.086  +0.000  +0.218  +0.166  +0.000  +0.118 | +0.113
Verstappen   +0.052  +0.222  +0.010  +0.000  +0.437  +0.065  +0.049  +0.155 | +0.123
Rosberg      +0.292  +0.014  +0.024  +0.129  +0.024  +0.219  +0.350  +0.000 | +0.131
Perez        +0.000  +0.387  +0.000  +0.112  +0.000  +0.402  +0.000  +0.311 | +0.151
Massa        +0.009  +0.000  +0.295  +0.734  +0.041  +0.132  +0.113  +0.001 | +0.166
Ricciardo    +0.001  +0.000  +0.167  +0.373  +0.116  +0.198  +0.038  +0.496 | +0.173
Raikkonen    +0.396  +0.204  +0.107  +0.410  +0.240  +0.021  +0.000  +0.181 | +0.194
Grosjean     +0.011  +0.178  +0.427  +0.344  +0.341  +0.106  +0.000  +0.353 | +0.220
Maldonado    +0.861  +0.013  +0.000  +0.325  +0.253  +0.071  +0.633  +0.182 | +0.292

I've checked - as far as it was possible - the point in this article out which claims that a top level driver has to put his three best sector times together. I think we can agree that this cannot be the whole story when you see where drivers like Hulkenberg, Rosberg or Ricciardo are on this table. But in the top 5 we have 4 WDC (even the guys with the McLaren), it is for sure not a complete fluke...

[PlatenGlass]

What is the key to be a top level F1 driver? This key: