124 replies to this topic

[Just]

I've been reading a fair amount of the debate on these and other forums lately, where people have been attempting to make direct comparisons between teammates. This is difficult enough to do even when just comparing two drivers who are driving the same car, for a variety of obvious reasons: reliability, team orders, differences in strategy between teammates, drivers being caught up in others' mistakes, etc, etc. It gets even more interesting seeing people trying to compare drivers who have never been teammates but have at some point shared a common teammate (eg "MS > JB because MS > RB and RB > JB", as someone claimed in one of the teammate comparison threads). And then of course you get circular situations when Driver A beats Driver B who beat Driver C, but Driver C beat Driver A, etc.

I've been wondering if there's a better way to evaluate how drivers have done throughout their careers against their teammates. Points are obviously very misleading, as reliability has a huge bearing, and points are often meaningless for the drivers in the low to mid-field teams. So in an attempt to make a better comparison, I've put together the following statistic for the 2007 drivers: Number of times each current driver has beaten his teammate when they have both finished the race.

I'm hoping that by making the comparison this way, it will help to limit the effect of reliability and of driver accidents/collisions. If two teammates both finished a race, then there's a reasonable chance that the driver who crossed the line first had a legitimately better race pace. Of course, there could be still many other factors at play, which I wasn't even going to mention due to their obviousness, but I'm sure if I don't then there'll be at least a few of you who will get on my case. The statistic obviously doesn't cater for reliability problems when drivers are still able to complete the race (eg in qualifying), nor does it eliminate the influence of differences in the talent of teammates, team strategies, team orders, or other factors. The fact of the matter is that no statistic is perfect - but for now, this is as good as I know how to calculate, in a reasonable amount of time.

The table below has the following columns: Driver, "Wins" against teammates when both have finished a race, "Losses" against teammates when both have finished a race, percentage of "Wins". The table is sorted by percentage.

The results are from races from the beginning of the 2000 season up to and including Turkey of this year. If there's interest in me going back further then I can do so, but I've only started the comparison at 2000 as I haven't yet had time to calculate for years in the 20th century.

So, for example, since 2000, Alonso has had 54 races where both he and his teammate have finished. Of these 54, he has beaten his teammate 40 times and been beaten by his teammate 14 times. Hope that helps to make the numbers a bit clear.

In addition to the 2007 drivers, I've also calculated the stat for Michael Schumacher and for Montoya, just because I was curious what the numbers would look like for them.

Again, take these numbers for what they're worth. The intention isn't to fairly rank all drivers on the grid against each other - there's simply no fair way to do that, until all drivers are driving the same car. The intention is only to rank how drivers have fared against their teammates over the years.

It's taken me a while to put these numbers together, so hopefully at least some of you find them interesting. Enjoy!

[B]Driver 	 	 	W 	L 	%[/B]

Mark Webber 		31	4	88.6%

Michael Schumacher	68	18	79.1%

Fernando Alonso 	40	14	74.1%

Kimi Räikkonen		32	16	66.7%

Nick Heidfeld 		33	18	64.7%

Jarno Trulli 		42	24	63.6%

Juan Pablo Montoya 	32	19	62.7%

Jenson Button 		41	27	60.3%

Vitantonio Liuzzi 	9	6	60.0%

Christijan Albers 	10	8	55.6%

Heikki Kovalainen 	6	5	54.5%

Lewis Hamilton 		6	6	50.0%

Scott Speed 		6	6	50.0%

Adrian Sutil 		2	2	50.0%

Giancarlo Fisichella 	38	38	50.0%

Ralf Schumacher 	33	35	48.5%

Felipe Massa 		27	31	46.6%

Robert Kubica 		6	8	42.9%

Jacques Villeneuve	19	26	42.2%

Nico Rosberg 		5	7	41.7%

David Coulthard 	17	28	37.8%

Alexander Wurz 		6	10	37.5%

Sakon Yamamoto 		1	2	33.3%

Takuma Sato 		11	26	29.7%

Rubens Barrichello 	21	69	23.3%

Anthony Davidson 	1	5	16.7%

Edit: Fixed slight error in stats. Added Villeneuve.

[giacomo]

So Webber is better than Schumacher. And Albers is better than Massa.

Or maybe Webber and Albers had just weaker teammates than Schumacher and Massa...

[Just]

Or maybe someone didn't read the OP?

[sensible]

Heidfeld does (I think) surprisingly well. Esp when considered that he had some pretty decentteammates over the years

[giacomo]

Dont worry, I did read the thread opener. Kudos for your work BTW.

The problem is that such statistics makes no sense. Being paired with an absolute no-hoper does not make a superstar out of a mediocre driver.
And that's what those figures are suggesting.

[Alfisti]

Originally posted by giacomo
Dont worry, I did read the thread opener. Kudos for your work BTW.

The problem is that such statistics makes no sense. Being paired with an absolute no-hoper does not make a superstar out of a mediocre driver.
And that's what those figures are suggesting.

Ummm that's why he put the disclaimer in BIG BOLD LETTERS.

[Just]

Originally posted by giacomo
The problem is that such statistics makes no sense. Being paired with an absolute no-hoper does not make a superstar out of a mediocre driver.
And that's what those figures are suggesting.

No one is (yet) suggesting that other than yourself. That doesn't mean the statistics make no sense, it just means you can't directly compare drivers to decide which one is faster. You *can* compare drivers to see which ones have dominated their teammates more; that is all. I've now said that 3 times... I don't think I can make that any clearer.;)

I think one *actual* use of the stat is to see which drivers deserve a better or worse drive than they currently have. Webber, for example - seeing as he's one of the driver's you mentioned - would seemingly deserve a better drive than the mid-field car he's spent most of his career in. I'm not by any means saying he's better than Schumacher or Alonso or anyone else, but if he's consistently beating his mid-field teammates than a step up to a more competitive car to me seems warranted.

And I just thought the numbers would be interesting on their own, without any comparisons. For instance, I agree with sensible: Heidfeld was higher than I was expecting. As was Button, come to think of it.

[united]

It depends. Massa had Schumacher and enjoys Raikkonen's company these days. Apart from Heidfeld, Rosberg (younger version) and Coulthard (older version), Webber was partnered with Yoong, Davidson, Pizzonia (both in Jaguar and Williams) and young Klien.

I think you should create some kind of smart Google's PageRank algorithm, so that week teammates cannot be compared equally with the stronger ones.

[schead]

You can check each drivers comparison with their team mates, (finishing position, quali, fastest lap, poles, wins and points weighed up) at http://www.f1-facts....tics/team-mates

[Alfisti]

Originally posted by united
It depends. Massa had Schumacher and enjoys Raikkonen's company these days. Apart from Heidfeld, Rosberg (younger version) and Coulthard (older version), Webber was partnered with Yoong, Davidson, Pizzonia (both in Jaguar and Williams) and young Klien.

I think you should create some kind of smart Google's PageRank algorithm, so that week teammates cannot be compared equally with the stronger ones.

But again, 'Just' ha ssaid he's not ranking anyone he's merely saying that the guys at the top who have not been matched with strong team mates maybe deserve a run in a better car against a faster team mate.

Not rocket science.

[emburmak]

Originally posted by Just


Again, take these numbers for what they're worth. The intention isn't to fairly rank all drivers on the grid against each other - there's simply no fair way to do that, until all drivers are driving the same car.

Your last sentence is incorrect. Even driving the same car MIGHT not be fair.

1)The car might be designed with a particular bias (eg the Renault in FA's hands or the current tire excuse) that guarantees the advantage to one driver.

2)The track condition might favour one driver over the other.

3)The rules under which they drove might favour one over the other.

4)Etc etc etc.

Taken to its totality, these parameters are endless. Fact is, there is no way to absolutely match drivers even if they drove the same car. All we can do is fall back on the info we know and limit the parameters to managable numbers.

Nothing is 100% correct but by matching stats, driver comparisons etc, we get results that should be over 90% correct, and at the end of the day that's all comparisions and deductions do. For example; based on the current JB vs RB battle, the odds are that MS would have given JB a similar trashing during 00-05.

Is it 100% certain? No, but it is about 90% and is as close as one will ever get. The human way has always been to compare things we don't know from those we do. Such extrapolations and deductions are the foundation of human thought. Riddiculing it simply because it does not favour your chosen driver is at best incomprehensible, at worst, plainly stupid.

[DaleCooper]

Originally posted by giacomo
Dont worry, I did read the thread opener. Kudos for your work BTW.

The problem is that such statistics makes no sense. Being paired with an absolute no-hoper does not make a superstar out of a mediocre driver.
And that's what those figures are suggesting.

They are not suggesting anything, you are! You are not supposed to assume Webber is the best by looking at those statistics, it's only an interesting comparison, given you already know the quality of some teammates.

Sheesh.


Cooper

[DaleCooper]

Originally posted by emburmak


Your last sentence is incorrect. Even driving the same car MIGHT not be fair.

1)The car might be designed with a particular bias (eg the Renault in FA's hands or the current tire excuse) that guarantees the advantage to one driver.

2)The track condition might favour one driver over the other.

3)The rules under which they drove might favour one over the other.

4)Etc etc etc.

Taken to its totality, these parameters are endless. Fact is, there is no way to absolutely match drivers even if they drove the same car. All we can do is fall back on the info we know and limit the parameters to managable numbers.

Nothing is 100% correct but by matching stats, driver comparisons etc, we get results that should be over 90% correct, and at the end of the day that's all comparisions and deductions do. For example; based on the current JB vs RB battle, the odds are that MS would have given JB a similar trashing during 00-05.

Is it 100% certain? No, but it is about 90% and is as close as one will ever get. The human way has always been to compare things we don't know from those we do. Such extrapolations and deductions are the foundation of human thought. Riddiculing it simply because it does not favour your chosen driver is at best incomprehensible, at worst, plainly stupid.

Taken to an extreme, you can't prove you exist outside the figment of my imagination. 100% certainty is for the birds. Likelyhoods are for the rest.


Cooper

[tkulla]

Interesting. Webber clearly deserves a top drive, and this backs that up. Yes, he hasn't had the toughest teammates, but his percentage is impressive nonetheless. Raikkonen and Button have very high % considering the quality of the teammates they've had.

[Spunout]

Interesting statistics.

Of course, the quality of teammates is huge factor here. Also, this comparison favours drivers who have/had the tendency to blunder now and then. Let´s say your teammate is on his way to win. You hang around 7th or 8th...spin/crash out = no impact on stats.

Nevertheless, thanks to Just for putting the numbers together

[Alfisti]

For the love of god, what else? The paint scheme clashes with the drivers retna?

All those things are a matter of a drivers ability to adjust. Period.

Originally posted by emburmak


Your last sentence is incorrect. Even driving the same car MIGHT not be fair.

1)The car might be designed with a particular bias (eg the Renault in FA's hands or the current tire excuse) that guarantees the advantage to one driver.

2)The track condition might favour one driver over the other.

3)The rules under which they drove might favour one over the other.

4)Etc etc etc.

Taken to its totality, these parameters are endless. Fact is, there is no way to absolutely match drivers even if they drove the same car. All we can do is fall back on the info we know and limit the parameters to managable numbers.

Nothing is 100% correct but by matching stats, driver comparisons etc, we get results that should be over 90% correct, and at the end of the day that's all comparisions and deductions do. For example; based on the current JB vs RB battle, the odds are that MS would have given JB a similar trashing during 00-05.

Is it 100% certain? No, but it is about 90% and is as close as one will ever get. The human way has always been to compare things we don't know from those we do. Such extrapolations and deductions are the foundation of human thought. Riddiculing it simply because it does not favour your chosen driver is at best incomprehensible, at worst, plainly stupid.

[Buttoneer]

Originally posted by tkulla
Interesting. Webber clearly deserves a top drive, and this backs that up. Yes, he hasn't had the toughest teammates, but his percentage is impressive nonetheless. Raikkonen and Button have very high % considering the quality of the teammates they've had.

Button would be further up if Villeneuve was added to the equation. Possibly up at Heidfelds level.

[Gecko]

Originally posted by Buttoneer


Button would be further up if Villeneuve was added to the equation. Possibly up at Heidfelds level.

I thought Villeneuve was already included as his teammate in this statistics?

[GhostR]

Originally posted by united
It depends. Massa had Schumacher and enjoys Raikkonen's company these days. Apart from Heidfeld, Rosberg (younger version) and Coulthard (older version), Webber was partnered with Yoong, Davidson, Pizzonia (both in Jaguar and Williams) and young Klien.

Pizzonia, at the time, was rated very highly. He'd shown impressive results testing for Williams and they even took him up after the Jag failure. Williams obviously rated him at the time. The only "no-hoper" I'd put in the list is Yoong. I'd just remove him from the comparisons. Davidson (does he even count? I thought he got DNFs in both Minardi races and therefore isn't in the stats above?), Klien the jury is still out for me. Not as good as Webber at the time, but you know that just says that Webber is a faster driver than 2 guys who were good enough to make it to the F1 grid.

[Tenmantaylor]

Good stat attack!

You can only really compare a driver to his respective team mate so it seems one of the best ways to judge a drivers ability.

However it can be slightly misleading. Micheal is at the top because he was a great driver (with no 1 status). Rubens is at the bottom mostly because he was michaels team mate for a long period. Had Rubens been driving in other teams for the same period he may well have been much higher in these stats (and without having to kneal before MS would have had at least 1 extra win to his name in austria).

Very impressive showing from Webber! Clearly aided by a full season against Alex Yoong in 02, unsettled team mates in 03 in Wilson and Pizzonia neither of which were given chance to settle, a rookie Klien in 04. He's always been a great performer though. Putting the Jaguar on the front row at Sepang was an amazing achievement. His best scalp is probably beating Heidfeld at Williams in the 05 season but it wasnt by much points wise. His car failure rate seems to be uncommonly high - has this worked in his favour stats wise?

[fastlegs]

Originally posted by Just
Or maybe someone didn't read the OP?

Right on.

I don't know how many times I've seen a good thread created on this BB only to have some dimwit respond right off the start with negative or smart ass reply.

[Alfisti]

Originally posted by Tenmantaylor
His car failure rate seems to be uncommonly high - has this worked in his favour stats wise?

I would doubt it becuase he has an uncanny nack of sropping out when in the points. The 06 Williams was famous for it.

[Melbourne Park]

Originally posted by Alfisti


I would doubt it becuase he has an uncanny nack of sropping out when in the points. The 06 Williams was famous for it.

The difference is though that his team mate drops out while not in the points ... MW's reliability has been pretty much similar to his team mates.

MW is pretty aware of it all though - he said before he got his podium this year, that he was worried about the car breaking until it actually crossed the finishing line.

[Just]

Originally posted by GhostR
The only "no-hoper" I'd put in the list is Yoong. I'd just remove him from the comparisons.

I'd agree with that assessment - some of Webber's teammates have been weak, but Yoong I think was the only one who didn't actually deserve his F1 seat. Anyway, taking Webber's 2002 year out of his stat's line changes his percentage very little - down to 86.7%. This is because Davidson didn't finish a race in 2002, and Webber and Yoong only finished 4 races together.

[Just]

Originally posted Buttoneer
Button would be further up if Villeneuve was added to the equation. Possibly up at Heidfelds level.

Originally posted by Gecko
I thought Villeneuve was already included as his teammate in this statistics?

Yep, Villeneuve is included in his stats.

[skylark68]

I like the analysis and and it is terrific you did it. Very interesting stats.

Of interest is Coulthard - Five of those years (00/01/02/03/04) were with McLaren and I wonder how many times of the 44 he and Raikkonen and Hakkinen both crossed the line in the same race? You can understand problems with Red Bull and both teammates crossing in the same race but it gives the impression good old DC, while a good driver, will never be considered a great driver

[Just]

I've just edited the OP, as I discovered a slight error that meant the last round in two years were being ignored, due to a copy-and-paste error from f1-facts.com, which confused my script that produces the result. The numbers have therefore changed very slightly (less than 1%) for a handful of drivers. I've also added Villeneuve to the list, just because someone mentioned his name.;) Another bug in my script occurs when a single driver has driven for two different teams in the same year, as is the case with Vettel. So I've just removed him altogether. I could update the script to fix this, but it would take quite a bit of effort, and other than Vettel I can't think of another case where this has happened. (Can anyone else?) Besides, with only 3 drives, his number is pretty meaningless.

[PassWind]

Originally posted by united
It depends. Massa had Schumacher and enjoys Raikkonen's company these days. Apart from Heidfeld, Rosberg (younger version) and Coulthard (older version), Webber was partnered with Yoong, Davidson, Pizzonia (both in Jaguar and Williams) and young Klien.

I think you should create some kind of smart Google's PageRank algorithm, so that week teammates cannot be compared equally with the stronger ones.

Why were they considered Weak team mates? Well what is the indicator they were weak? Inability to beat their team mate I suppose. Who was their team mate.

Its kinda a side effect of blitzing a team mate isn't it, you are seen as weak of course.

How else would you form the opinion they are weak if they were not soundly beaten?

Nick Hiedfield was Webbers strongest team mate, speed wise Nick didn't fare well, his tenacity and some luck had him on even keel while Webber wallowed in some bad luck and some bad driving errors.

The stat is interesting in that it ruffles the feathers of those living in the universe of their very own. So you can read it a couple of ways, Webber appears to be the odd one out, blow it off as his weak team mates, or that he dominates team mates in the same manner as the 9WDC's and multiple race winners at the top of the list with him, who drove the very fastest cars in F1. There in lies the difference and I would guess if Webber was in one of those teams his stats would fall, but maybe his race wins would climb from zero and possibly a WDC in there somewhere, though with MS about it was hard for anyone to wrest that away until Renault built a quick car.

Of course Rubens stats is an indication of how dominant MS was
during their time together.

[LukeM]

as others have said yoong and pizzonia kinda skew this(not alot), but it once again proves that webber is ridiculously underrated because alot of people are just results based and dont look at the underlying facts. This year everyone is singing the praises of heidfeld and rosberg, both of which webber was quicker than in the same car(beat rosberg by a long way). Unfortunately unless RBR make a super fast car next year, webbers career will probably go down as "over-hyped". Oh well!

[Just]

Originally posted by skylark68
I like the analysis and and it is terrific you did it. Very interesting stats.

Of interest is Coulthard - Five of those years (00/01/02/03/04) were with McLaren and I wonder how many times of the 44 he and Raikkonen and Hakkinen both crossed the line in the same race? You can understand problems with Red Bull and both teammates crossing in the same race but it gives the impression good old DC, while a good driver, will never be considered a great driver

From 2000-2004, DC beat his teammate 5 times and lost 17 times (22.7%). Yeah, it ain't easy spending half your career being compared to Raikkonen and Hakkinen. From 2005-2007, DC beat his teammate 12 times and lost to his teammate 11 times (52.2%), which is quite a bit more respectable.

[pedrovski]

The drivers are over-hyped anyway, F1 is team sport and it's the team that create the world champion, if Heidfeld was leading the world championship I'd buy into this stuff. Alonso won his championships as a development programme began to peak for Renault he was stronger than fisi that's all we can say, now he's been beaten by a rookie, and acting like a spoilt brat. Great Champion Huh? or maybe a great 1000 man team behind him. Ron Dennis said something once about Senna leaving mclaren. senna's enormous financial demands were actually restricting development, he went on to say that from now on "they'd do what williams did and put all their resources into building a car that an assortment of drivers could win in .

[Buttoneer]

Originally posted by Gecko


I thought Villeneuve was already included as his teammate in this statistics?

You're right, sorry. I couldn't spot him last night.

[Buttoneer]

Originally posted by Just
I've also added Villeneuve to the list, just because someone mentioned his name.;)

Aha! That's why I didn't spot him.

[Group B]

Originally posted by sensible
Heidfeld does (I think) surprisingly well. Esp when considered that he had some pretty decentteammates over the years

Indeed.

[sanjiro]

Originally posted by pedrovski
The drivers are over-hyped anyway, F1 is team sport and it's the team that create the world champion, if Heidfeld was leading the world championship I'd buy into this stuff. Alonso won his championships as a development programme began to peak for Renault he was stronger than fisi that's all we can say, now he's been beaten by a rookie, and acting like a spoilt brat. Great Champion Huh? or maybe a great 1000 man team behind him. Ron Dennis said something once about Senna leaving Mclaren. senna's enormous financial demands were actually restricting development, he went on to say that from now on "they'd do what williams did and put all their resources into building a car that an assortment of drivers could win in .

fact is that this difference in times from a top F1 driver and just a good f1 driver ( both deserving of a drive ) is about 0.2-0.4 s a lap.
The driver does make a difference.
Just not as much as many like to think.
But more than some give credit.

Sadly from the lower middle to the front of the grid is around 2s a lap and no driver can make up that difference.
The teams can put a dollar value on earning 0.2-0.4s a lap from the car.
They can also put a dollar value on a driver able to bring the car home and not paint the fence.

The simple fact is that more than %50 of the WDC wins came to a driver who had no real competition other than his team mate.
However we dont watch F1 to see a test of driver alone.
Its all about the team and the driver.

This little table shows more than many give credit.
your point about Alonso is the perfect example.
Prior to this year he would have had a better rating and looked like a top 4 driver ( not taking WDC into account )
After this year he will not look so shiny, but he will still be up there and still worthy of a drive in ANY front running team.

Williams however have taken their " no one is indispensable " position a little too far over the years though and I think it has cost them wins.
Instability in a team can really mess things up.
Williams dropping JV and DH may well have cost them victories, and all so SFW was not upstaged by some primadona F1 ego.

[Just]

I've updated the numbers up to the end of the season. Still the same deal as before: includes all races from the beginning of the 2000 season (I can go back further if anyone's interested), and Vettel's number may be slightly out due to racing for two teams in the same year (which confuses my script).

[B]Driver			W 	L 	%[/B]

Mark Webber 		31	5	86.1%

Michael Schumacher	68	18	79.1%

Fernando Alonso 	43	14	75.4%

Adrian Sutil 		5	2	71.4%

Kimi Räikkonen		37	16	69.8%

Heikki Kovalainen 	9	5	64.3%

Jarno Trulli 		44	25	63.8%

Nick Heidfeld 		35	20	63.6%

Juan Pablo Montoya 	32	19	62.7%

Jenson Button 		43	28	60.6%

Vitantonio Liuzzi 	10	7	58.8%

Christijan Albers 	10	8	55.6%

Sebastian Vettel 	2	2	50.0%

Scott Speed 		6	6	50.0%

Giancarlo Fisichella 	38	41	48.1%

Ralf Schumacher 	34	37	47.9%

Robert Kubica 		8	10	44.4%

Felipe Massa 		27	36	42.9%

Nico Rosberg 		6	8	42.9%

Jacques Villeneuve	19	26	42.2%

Lewis Hamilton 		6	9	40.0%

David Coulthard 	18	28	39.1%

Alexander Wurz 		7	11	38.9%

Takuma Sato 		13	27	32.5%

Rubens Barrichello 	22	71	23.7%

Anthony Davidson 	2	7	22.2%

Sakon Yamamoto 		1	5	16.7%

McLaren, are you reading this?;)

[sanjiro]

Interesting that this list matches closely to my general impression of the field.
With a few exceptions where the amount of data is too small to make a good judgment i.e. HK

Also interesting to note that the drivers who rate highly on your chart but not in the minds of many are the ones that oft fail to score points or are even out scored by teammates that they are faster than.

Highlights the different way people perceive the races and race outcomes.

[karlth]

Originally posted by Just
... I've put together the following statistic for the 2007 drivers: Number of times each current driver has beaten his teammate when they have both finished the race.

Excellent work.

A much more valuable statistic than purely looking at the points or ignoring retirements in finishing positions.

What would make the data even better is to take into account the position of the driver if the retirement was involuntary.

So for example if a driver retires in the lead due to a mechanical failure with his teammate in 2nd place then the retired driver would have that race as counted to his credit.

Should help with Raikkonen's and Montoya's statistics anyway.

[sanjiro]

Originally posted by karlth


Excellent work.

A much more valuable statistic than purely looking at the points or ignoring retirements in finishing positions.

What would make the data even better is to take into account the position of the driver if the retirement was involuntary.

So for example if a driver retires in the lead due to a mechanical failure with his teammate in 2nd place then the retired driver would have that race as counted to his credit.

Should help with Raikkonen's and Montoya's statistics anyway.

I am not sure you could do that in a fair and balanced way.
You would have to do something along the lines of only include DNF positions if more than %50 of the race is complete and even then differing fuel strat would throw those sorts of figures out

Whats more MW would get an insane boost as most of his mechanical DNFs occurred when in front of his team mate.
With one of the highest mechanical DNF rates in the history of F1 ( you can see that on another thread in this forum. Well over %35 of all his races have ended with mechanical failure)

[karlth]

Originally posted by sanjiro
I am not sure you could do that in a fair and balanced way.
You would have to do something along the lines of only include DNF positions if more than %50 of the race is complete and even then differing fuel strat would throw those sorts of figures out

On the other hand if a driver is miles ahead of his teammate and the slower driver drives off the road, nothing is counted.

It is true though that it would be more debateable which makes the original statistic more impressive. Its simplicity.

Whats more MW would get an insane boost as most of his mechanical DNFs occurred when in front of his team mate.
With one of the highest mechanical DNF rates in the history of F1 ( you can see that on another thread in this forum. Well over %35 of all his races have ended with mechanical failure)

Yes but unfortunately it does not take into account the quality of their teammates. Alonso outracing Trulli, Fisichella or Hamilton is certainly more impressive than Webber finishing ahead of Wilson or Yoong.

[ensign14]

Originally posted by karlth
What would make the data even better is to take into account the position of the driver if the retirement was involuntary.

Or taking into account where a driver's pace is faster than his team-mate's but finishes behind because of, say, a gearbox glitch or tyre delamination.

[karlth]

Originally posted by ensign14

Or taking into account where a driver's pace is faster than his team-mate's but finishes behind because of, say, a gearbox glitch or tyre delamination.

;) Yes of course.

[RTX]

Originally posted by ensign14

Or taking into account where a driver's pace is faster than his team-mate's but finishes behind because of, say, a gearbox glitch or tyre delamination.

Faster pace does not always equal a better performance. Alonso got the fastest lap at Canada but I doubt many Hamilton fans will say he was better than Lewis that day.

[ensign14]

Well, maybe because Hamilton had 9 of the 12 fastest laps there, 13 of the top 20 and 27 of the top 50. Alonso's figures were 2, 4 and 5 respectively.

[vaavu]

Excellent statistics, thank you!

I suppose the percentage of Kimi has gone down a little during this season. Which just shows that Massa has done really well this year.

[sanjiro]

Originally posted by karlth
Yes but unfortunately it does not take into account the quality of their teammates. Alonso outracing Trulli, Fisichella or Hamilton is certainly more impressive than Webber finishing ahead of Wilson or Yoong. [/B]

Could not agree with you more.

On that point here are MWs stats using your method only going with years where he had acceptable team mates
( other than AP but not much i can do about that )

2005 NH and some AP
2006 NR
2007 DC

Ahead 12 behind 5 %70.6

Important to note that he was 4 for 4 against NH ( not going into details )
Stunning that out of more than 54 races MW and his team mates only finished together 17 times

%70 would put MW just ahead of KR.
Not a bad performance but the lack of finishes ( for both him and teammates ) shows why so many think he has underperformed.

P.S. more than %75 of MWs DNFs in F1 have been mechanical.

[Just]

Originally posted by karlth
What would make the data even better is to take into account the position of the driver if the retirement was involuntary.

I've had this exact same thought before, but unfortunately I do not know of any site that keeps stats like this - otherwise I would have done exactly that. It would certainly be fairer, as the intention is of course to remove bad luck as much as possible in order to evaluate drivers more fairly. Does Forix keep stats like this? (I'm not a subscriber.)

[Just]

Originally posted by vaavu
Excellent statistics, thank you!

I suppose the percentage of Kimi has gone down a little during this season. Which just shows that Massa has done really well this year.

Thanks. Kimi's percentage has actually increased this year, as he has beaten Massa 10 times and lost to him 4 times (71.4%), which is higher than his overall percentage.

Originally posted by sanjiro
Could not agree with you more.

On that point here are MWs stats using your method only going with years where he had acceptable team mates
( other than AP but not much i can do about that )

Thanks for that sanjiro - I ran your numbers against my script just to confirm that my script is calculating correctly. I also get 12 and 5 for Webber for the last three years, so that's good to know. However for Heidfeld I have the score as 3 and 3, not 4 and 4.

And I agree with you that his score would be much higher if positions before DNFing could be taken into account.

[tkulla]

And to be even more accurate you'd have to incorporate margins of victory over teammates... for instance, if Webber finishes 8th and Coulthard is 9th right on his tail, that's not as significant as if he was 5th with DC in 9th, 30 seconds behind.

[Just]

Originally posted by tkulla
And to be even more accurate you'd have to incorporate margins of victory over teammates... for instance, if Webber finishes 8th and Coulthard is 9th right on his tail, that's not as significant as if he was 5th with DC in 9th, 30 seconds behind.

Yeah I had this exact same thought when I first started putting the numbers together. To take into account the margin of victory in seconds would be a lot of work, as at the moment I'm only keeping of track of finishing positions. But I what I did plan on doing was calculating average finishing position, versus average finishing position of teammate. So rather than a percentage for each driver, it'd be the average number of positions ahead of his teammate. This would only take a few minutes, if anyone would be interested.