Jump to content


Photo
- - - - -

The All-Time Motorsport Ranking (Feedback appreciated)


  • Please log in to reply
61 replies to this topic

#1 RasmVest

RasmVest
  • New Member

  • 27 posts
  • Joined: September 22

Posted 02 October 2022 - 07:36

Hi everyone

 

I'm proud to release to you a project I have been working on for countless hours on and off the last two years.

 

I wanted to compare the achievements of every notable racing driver in motor racing history from the 1894 Paris-Rouen to today.

 

It has resulted in this ranking - or prestige list - of more than 6000 racing drivers ranked using a points system weighting a lot of championships and major races.

 

It is obviously not definitive. It would be impossible to do that as greatness is so many other things than results alone.

 

I hope you will find it interesting to look through it and seeing who ranks where.

 

Feedback, comments and suggestions of all kind are highly appreciated, as I want to improve the ranking before I release it to everyone else.

 

Please, let me know what you think and how to improve it.

 

What do you think about the weighting of the championships compared to each other?

Are there any major championships missing?

 

You can find it here: (It will open in Excel Online)

https://1drv.ms/x/s!...0fGrrPdPpQF7MKd

 

Enjoy!

 

 

 

Here are two screenshots to show the top ranked drivers and part of the points system.

 

 

LPBEQ9.pngLPBMBe.png

 

 


Edited by RasmVest, 03 October 2022 - 14:37.


Advertisement

#2 RasmVest

RasmVest
  • New Member

  • 27 posts
  • Joined: September 22

Posted 03 October 2022 - 13:48

I guess it wasn't the best timing to post this on the morning of a grand prix then...

 

Has anyone checked it out yet?

 

What do you think of the points system?



#3 PlatenGlass

PlatenGlass
  • Member

  • 3,813 posts
  • Joined: June 14

Posted 03 October 2022 - 13:57

People are scared of the link.

#4 TradeMark

TradeMark
  • Member

  • 672 posts
  • Joined: June 16

Posted 03 October 2022 - 14:07

I guess it wasn't the best timing to post this on the morning of a grand prix then...

 

Has anyone checked it out yet?

 

What do you think of the points system?

I did check quickly and love how much work you put into this. 

 

I think the best way to optimize it is by trying to make a reasonable list of what you'd consider the best drivers without using numbers, and then try to work towards that with the numbers. The list looks mostly good but for example Jim Clark should be much higher than he is in my opinion. Maybe it could be because he did fewer years/races than others and maybe that should be corrected for then?



#5 RasmVest

RasmVest
  • New Member

  • 27 posts
  • Joined: September 22

Posted 03 October 2022 - 14:24

People are scared of the link.

 

Hmm. I see your point. That's just how a OneDrive link looks like though... How to make a link not scare people?

 

 

I did check quickly and love how much work you put into this. 

 

I think the best way to optimize it is by trying to make a reasonable list of what you'd consider the best drivers without using numbers, and then try to work towards that with the numbers. The list looks mostly good but for example Jim Clark should be much higher than he is in my opinion. Maybe it could be because he did fewer years/races than others and maybe that should be corrected for then?

 

Thank you! I wouldn't want to know how many hours have gone into it.

 

Exactly. Jim Clark's ranking is hurt by the tragic fact that he was taken way too soon. I am quite likely going to add a separate Peak Ranking, where he would obviously be ranked higher.

 

Then again. I have already done what you suggest and I think the ranking (at least the top half or so) looks fairly acceptable. It's way tougher when we get to the lower scoring drivers.



#6 ArnageWRC

ArnageWRC
  • Member

  • 1,919 posts
  • Joined: April 10

Posted 03 October 2022 - 14:34

Some serious amount of work, and loads of data processed. Well done for this!!

 

I think there is far too much bias towards F1.....but these type of rankings always do. I can't accept Loeb in the 40s for all time rankings......



#7 Atreiu

Atreiu
  • Member

  • 17,229 posts
  • Joined: May 07

Posted 03 October 2022 - 14:37

Some serious amount of work, and loads of data processed. Well done for this!!

 

I think there is far too much bias towards F1.....but these type of rankings always do. I can't accept Loeb in the 40s for all time rankings......

 

I agree with you and would like to add:

 

"I think there is far too much bias towards F1" and achieving longevity in it.



#8 BobbyRicky

BobbyRicky
  • Member

  • 1,420 posts
  • Joined: May 13

Posted 03 October 2022 - 14:47

I like it.

Well done!


Edited by BobbyRicky, 03 October 2022 - 14:49.


#9 Currahee

Currahee
  • Member

  • 571 posts
  • Joined: November 11

Posted 03 October 2022 - 14:47


My opinion is the rally drivers seem too low.

Also Speedy Thompson? What a superb name.

#10 RasmVest

RasmVest
  • New Member

  • 27 posts
  • Joined: September 22

Posted 03 October 2022 - 14:49

Some serious amount of work, and loads of data processed. Well done for this!!

 

I think there is far too much bias towards F1.....but these type of rankings always do. I can't accept Loeb in the 40s for all time rankings......

 

 

I agree with you and would like to add:

 

"I think there is far too much bias towards F1" and achieving longevity in it.

 

Thanks!

 

I have actually been worried about this as well. How would you avoid it?

 

A quick change of WRC's points multiplier from 30 to 40 moves Sébastien Loeb from 42nd to 26th just behind Scott Dixon and Al Unser and just ahead of Denny Hulme and Nigel Mansell.

 

At the same time it elevates Ogier from 83rd to 46th and Carlos Sainz Sr. from 86th to 55th.



#11 ARTGP

ARTGP
  • Member

  • 23,573 posts
  • Joined: March 19

Posted 03 October 2022 - 14:52

Interesting.  Out of curiosity, are there no bike riders in the rankings? I can't seem to open the link so haven't seen any further. 

 

Also, I guess I'm surprised not to see legends like Sebastian Ogier and Sebastian Loeb pretty far up there. They've had levels of success and longevity that far exceed someone like Kimi Raikkonen, yet it doesn't feel like they are rewarded for it at all.  Kimi even went rallying and was much slower than them. 


Edited by ARTGP, 03 October 2022 - 14:54.


#12 RasmVest

RasmVest
  • New Member

  • 27 posts
  • Joined: September 22

Posted 03 October 2022 - 14:56

I like it.

Well done!

 

Thank you. I was going to quote you on including 'non-open-wheel championships', but I see you found out they are already there :)

 

 

My opinion is the rally drivers seem too low.

Also Speedy Thompson? What a superb name.

 

Noted. Indeed, that's one of the great motor racing names.

 

Interesting.  Out of curiosity, are there no bike riders in the rankings? I can't seem to open the link so haven't seen any further. 

 

Also, I guess I'm surprised not to see legends like Sebastian Ogier and Sebastian Loeb pretty far up there. They've had levels of success and longevity that far exceed someone like Kimi Raikkonen, yet it doesn't feel like they are rewarded for it at all. 

 

No bike riders. Only four-wheeled championships.

 

For some reason copying the link doesn't seem to work, as it has left out something in the middle. It works when I click on it though..

 

You are not the first to mention the low ranking of rally drivers. Have you seen my comment above regarding how a change in the WRC multiplier affects their rankings?



#13 PlatenGlass

PlatenGlass
  • Member

  • 3,813 posts
  • Joined: June 14

Posted 03 October 2022 - 20:17

Hmm. I see your point. That's just how a OneDrive link looks like though... How to make a link not scare people?

 

 

 

 

Well I think maybe people didn't want to be the first. But now the discussion has started, it should be fine!



#14 RasmVest

RasmVest
  • New Member

  • 27 posts
  • Joined: September 22

Posted 04 October 2022 - 07:41

Interesting.  Out of curiosity, are there no bike riders in the rankings? I can't seem to open the link so haven't seen any further. 

 

Also, I guess I'm surprised not to see legends like Sebastian Ogier and Sebastian Loeb pretty far up there. They've had levels of success and longevity that far exceed someone like Kimi Raikkonen, yet it doesn't feel like they are rewarded for it at all.  Kimi even went rallying and was much slower than them. 

 

 

Just saw you added this to your post. I guess that argument could counter the other way. Ogier and Loeb both went circuit racing and didn't beat up all the guys who aren't even in F1... It's really difficult to compare different types of racing. 

 

Anyway, here are a few more examples of how upping WRC's multiplier from 30 to 40 affects the rally stars' ranking.

 

Note: 40 would be the third highest multiplier of all championships behind only F1 and the pre-war Euro DC - both 100.

 

Loeb: 42 -> 26
Ogier: 83 -> 46
Sainz: 86 -> 55

Kankkunen: 123 -> 79

Solberg: 191 -> 139

Alén: 203 -> 144

Tommi Mäkinen: 208 -> 143
McRae: 231 -> 160

Vatanen: 244 -> 201

Mikkola: 251 -> 178

Grönholm: 257 -> 179

Latvala: 276 -> 187

Biasion: 278 -> 190

D. Auriol: 296 -> 207

Hirvonen: 306 -> 207

Neuville: 309 -> 215

Röhrl: 317 -> 236

Waldegård: 326 -> 251

Blomqvist: 343 -> 266

Burns: 404 -> 311

---

Mouton: 742 -> 603 (best woman on the ranking)

---

Henri Toivonen: 2068 -> 1748

 

Does everyone think it looks better than before?

 

Any other championship rated too low? Or high?

 

Any championship missing entirely? I could really use some help regarding if I have missed some prestigious championships from the old days, but maybe I should ask that in the Nostalgia Forums?



#15 JvsKVB77

JvsKVB77
  • Member

  • 235 posts
  • Joined: June 18

Posted 04 October 2022 - 10:23

Hi. Is it fair to take A1GP, when they never had drivers standings and some drivers takes more points only because not missing rounds? 



#16 pacificquay

pacificquay
  • Member

  • 5,363 posts
  • Joined: March 07

Posted 04 October 2022 - 10:27

Rallying isn't racing and shouldn't be categorised with it.

 

It would be like doing a ranking of "best rugby players" and including both union and league as well as Aussie Rules and NFL



#17 Secretariat

Secretariat
  • Member

  • 558 posts
  • Joined: July 11

Posted 04 October 2022 - 10:49

All very interesting and appreciative of a effort such as this. What is your rationale regarding how series are tiered and the multipliers? You may have done this but have you (I have not checked for it yet) accounted for drivers that have had long, varied careers and have participated in multiple "tier 1" series?  



#18 ArnageWRC

ArnageWRC
  • Member

  • 1,919 posts
  • Joined: April 10

Posted 04 October 2022 - 13:42

Rallying isn't racing and shouldn't be categorised with it.

 

It would be like doing a ranking of "best rugby players" and including both union and league as well as Aussie Rules and NFL

 

It doesn't say it's a racing ranking; it's a motorsport ranking......



#19 William Hunt

William Hunt
  • Member

  • 10,237 posts
  • Joined: July 01

Posted 04 October 2022 - 13:52

Congratulations for an amazing job, now let the discussion begin ;)

 

I must say; the order looks pretty good to me, I can agree with most of it but my first remark: Jim Clark is too low, he possibly would be my number 1 purely based on his talent.

 

The list off course doesn't take in to account drivers who died early or who had a shorter carreer because of WW2 Bernd Rosemeyer at nr. 187 is a bit of a joke, he would be in my top 10, possibly even top 5, of all time. My top 3 probably would be Clark, Fangio & Senna followed by Rosemeyer 

 

PS: ranking rally drivers that low is shocking. Top rally drivers were just as good as top F1 drivers if not better (in particular Group B era). I would rate a driver like Walter Röhrl top 10 of all time personally


Edited by William Hunt, 04 October 2022 - 14:00.


Advertisement

#20 PlatenGlass

PlatenGlass
  • Member

  • 3,813 posts
  • Joined: June 14

Posted 04 October 2022 - 13:55

Congratulations for an amazing job, now let the discussion begin ;)

I must say; the order looks pretty good to me, I can agree with most of it but my first remark: Jim Clark is too low, he possibly would be my number 1 purely based on his talent.

The list off course doesn't take in to account drivers who died early or who had a shorter carreer because of WW2 Bernd Rosemeyer at nr. 187 is a bit of a joke, he would be in my top 10, possibly even top 5, of all time. My top 3 probably would be Clark, Fangio & Senna followed by Rosemeyer

PS: ranking rally drivers that low is shocking. Top rally drivers were just as good as top F1 drivers if not better (in particular Group B era)

This is about achievements rather than how good someone was though.

#21 JvsKVB77

JvsKVB77
  • Member

  • 235 posts
  • Joined: June 18

Posted 04 October 2022 - 14:14

 

 

The list off course doesn't take in to account drivers who died early or who had a shorter carreer because of WW2 Bernd Rosemeyer at nr. 187 is a bit of a joke, he would be in my top 10, possibly even top 5, of all time. My top 3 probably would be Clark, Fangio & Senna followed by Rosemeyer 

 

Maybe using average instead of sum can fix it slightly.



#22 RasmVest

RasmVest
  • New Member

  • 27 posts
  • Joined: September 22

Posted 04 October 2022 - 14:17

Hi. Is it fair to take A1GP, when they never had drivers standings and some drivers takes more points only because not missing rounds? 

 

I'm aware of this, but I thought drivers who raced A1GP should be awarded, and I think the best way is to take the unofficial drivers' standings.

 

Rallying isn't racing and shouldn't be categorised with it.

 

It would be like doing a ranking of "best rugby players" and including both union and league as well as Aussie Rules and NFL

 

It doesn't say it's a racing ranking; it's a motorsport ranking......

 

Exactly, ArnageWRC. There are so many drivers who have done both rally and circuit racing that I think it's fair to take both disciplines into account. Well, otherwise Loeb probably wouldn't even make the top 500...

 

All very interesting and appreciative of a effort such as this. What is your rationale regarding how series are tiered and the multipliers? You may have done this but have you (I have not checked for it yet) accounted for drivers that have had long, varied careers and have participated in multiple "tier 1" series?  

 

Thank you! The tiers have been pretty much a working tool for me in the proces. Actually that column is not going to be included in the final version of this ranking...

 

The more prestigious a championship is the higher the multiplier and of course that gives drivers who achieve something in these categories more points.

 

A long and varied career alone in a top class isn't enough - only achievements. But as you can see points are awarded for more drivers in top championships than lower ones in order to boost drivers staying long in eg. F1 without a lot of succes compared to drivers who win a lot in eg. Whelen Euroseries..



#23 RasmVest

RasmVest
  • New Member

  • 27 posts
  • Joined: September 22

Posted 04 October 2022 - 14:23

Congratulations for an amazing job, now let the discussion begin ;)

 

I must say; the order looks pretty good to me, I can agree with most of it but my first remark: Jim Clark is too low, he possibly would be my number 1 purely based on his talent.

 

The list off course doesn't take in to account drivers who died early or who had a shorter carreer because of WW2 Bernd Rosemeyer at nr. 187 is a bit of a joke, he would be in my top 10, possibly even top 5, of all time. My top 3 probably would be Clark, Fangio & Senna followed by Rosemeyer 

 

PS: ranking rally drivers that low is shocking. Top rally drivers were just as good as top F1 drivers if not better (in particular Group B era). I would rate a driver like Walter Röhrl top 10 of all time personally

 

 

This is about achievements rather than how good someone was though.

 

 

 

 

Maybe using average instead of sum can fix it slightly.

 

 

Thank you William Hunt!

 

At the moment this is a ranking where drivers are ranked on absolute achievements.

 

I explained the Jim Clark situation earlier in the thread. It's a similar story for Senna, Rosemeyer and (sadly) so many other drivers. That's why I'm working on a separate "Peak Ranking" where those drivers would obviously be placed much higher. Whether that is average or something like a three-year peak haven't I decided yet.

 

As for Walter Röhrl maybe his skills indicate he should be higher, but his achievements doesn't, although he is definitely a legend of the sport. He will move up though, as I'm probably changing the WRC multiplier to 40 as mentioned above (where I have also written how it will affect his ranking).



#24 Collombin

Collombin
  • Member

  • 7,063 posts
  • Joined: March 05

Posted 04 October 2022 - 14:35

Don't be swayed. If you are tempted to tweak the results or create new variations to fit preconceptions then you may as well have just done a subjective list in the first place! People just need to think of it as a ranking of "most impressive trophy cabinets", for want of a better phrase. And anyway, Moss managed to be top 10 despite a career that ended at the same age as Jimmy's (albeit helped in part by the one dubious thing I could spot - the apparent special status accorded to the Monaco GP? If that's anything to do with a misguided definition of the triple crown, then please invent a different explanation before posting this on the Nostalgia Forum. Doug Nye will self destruct!).

#25 William Hunt

William Hunt
  • Member

  • 10,237 posts
  • Joined: July 01

Posted 04 October 2022 - 15:08

You could even try to make a list that... takes in to account performances of drivers in weaker cars / less competitive material



#26 Collombin

Collombin
  • Member

  • 7,063 posts
  • Joined: March 05

Posted 04 October 2022 - 15:12

I couldn't read the criteria very well on my phone, but (apart from Monaco) does a driver get any credit for winning a world championship Grand Prix other than the indirect benefit on their WDC placing? I feel like it must be on the list somewhere but I couldn't see it.

#27 RasmVest

RasmVest
  • New Member

  • 27 posts
  • Joined: September 22

Posted 04 October 2022 - 15:53

Don't be swayed. If you are tempted to tweak the results or create new variations to fit preconceptions then you may as well have just done a subjective list in the first place! People just need to think of it as a ranking of "most impressive trophy cabinets", for want of a better phrase. And anyway, Moss managed to be top 10 despite a career that ended at the same age as Jimmy's (albeit helped in part by the one dubious thing I could spot - the apparent special status accorded to the Monaco GP? If that's anything to do with a misguided definition of the triple crown, then please invent a different explanation before posting this on the Nostalgia Forum. Doug Nye will self destruct!).

 

 

I couldn't read the criteria very well on my phone, but (apart from Monaco) does a driver get any credit for winning a world championship Grand Prix other than the indirect benefit on their WDC placing? I feel like it must be on the list somewhere but I couldn't see it.

 

Thank you, Collombin! I'm not swayed but I want input to improve the weighting of the championships, as I admit I do not have the definitive answer to how they should be weighted - just a very good and considered idea which is of course why they are weighted as they are. But I'm very open to suggestions on how to improve it.

 

The whole point of it is to create a points system that gives a ranking, so it's not just subjective that driver x is greater than driver y, but based on a worked through and qualified judgement of the championships' status.

 

I know Monaco is an outlier as every other GP only impacts the WDC - they do not award points for the ranking. I did it this way because the Indy 500, Le Mans, Daytona, Sebring, Targa Florio, Mille Miglia and a few others award points even when they are part of a championship. As you can see Monaco is the only GP to do that, although the French, Italian, British, German and Spanish does it pre-F1 when they were 'Grandes Epreuves'.

 

You could even try to make a list that... takes in to account performances of drivers in weaker cars / less competitive material

 

I think that would require some math skills that I don't have. Do you know F1metrics? He's done it. It's recommended.

 

 

---

 

I know it's easy to focus on a few specific drivers' rank, but let's focus on the championships themself and the points they award.

 

Does the weighting look correct? (a few examples)

 

F1: 100

Euro DC: 100

Indycar: 30

WRC: 30 (probably upping it to 40)

WEC Hypercar: 25

F2: 20

FE: 20

NASCAR: 20

DTM: 20

Can-Am: 15

IMSA DPI: 12

Super Formula: 12

F3: 10

Indy Lights: 6

 

 

Also what do you think of the points system 10-6-4-3-2-1 as the basis before adding the multiplier to each series?

 

Should it be the 25-points system instead? Or something else entirely?



#28 William Hunt

William Hunt
  • Member

  • 10,237 posts
  • Joined: July 01

Posted 04 October 2022 - 16:04

WRC weight is ridiculously low, European F3 & and F3000/F2 should also get a much heavier weight: drivers that reach F1 pass through it anyway but their junior carreer should be weighed in just as well



#29 Collombin

Collombin
  • Member

  • 7,063 posts
  • Joined: March 05

Posted 04 October 2022 - 16:10

I love 10-6-4-3-2-1, but some say it puts too much emphasis on winning (!).

Regarding the series weightings, it's difficult to judge. Obviously some racing series vary in strength quite considerably over time, eg the late 70s Can't Am fields had the likes of Rosberg, Ickx, Jones and Tambay whereas by the mid 1980s it was a dying swan - but it would be too arbitrary to vary the weightings accordingly and anyway if my "trophy cabinet" analogy is close to what you are trying to achieve then the strength of competition over time within a series is arguably irrelevant.

#30 pacificquay

pacificquay
  • Member

  • 5,363 posts
  • Joined: March 07

Posted 04 October 2022 - 16:16

It doesn't say it's a racing ranking; it's a motorsport ranking......

 

Indeed. 

 

That's why I made the analogy with rugby.

 

A motorsport ranking doesn't make sense to me.



#31 JvsKVB77

JvsKVB77
  • Member

  • 235 posts
  • Joined: June 18

Posted 04 October 2022 - 16:33

I don't think FE deserve same points as F2. With F4(gen1) and slightly slower than FRegional(gen2) level of speed even with good drivers. And DTM to. 



#32 ARTGP

ARTGP
  • Member

  • 23,573 posts
  • Joined: March 19

Posted 04 October 2022 - 17:33

Just saw you added this to your post. I guess that argument could counter the other way. Ogier and Loeb both went circuit racing and didn't beat up all the guys who aren't even in F1... It's really difficult to compare different types of racing. 

 

 

Excellent point.

 

I've been thinking a bit more, and I think my feedback was a bit misplaced. If we are simply looking to categorize how much success drivers are having over the duration of their driving careers, then I would expect the formula drivers will be more heavily rewarded because they've simply had much longer careers in formally recognized junior and adult motorsports series. In that sense it makes sense why the rally drivers are scoring a bit lower. Whether or not there should now be a bias for rally drivers? I have no idea but it seems it would make sense to do such. I guess that would have the implication of basically inventing junior careers in formally recognized junior rally categories and basically giving them points to compensate for the lack of such opportunity that any run of the mill Formula track driver would have gone through. 


Edited by ARTGP, 04 October 2022 - 17:37.


#33 PlatenGlass

PlatenGlass
  • Member

  • 3,813 posts
  • Joined: June 14

Posted 04 October 2022 - 17:47

I'm not sure I'd even include junior formulas like F2, let alone put it on the same level as NASCAR. There's no real prestige to winning as such - it's just something to propel you somewhere else.

#34 PlatenGlass

PlatenGlass
  • Member

  • 3,813 posts
  • Joined: June 14

Posted 04 October 2022 - 17:53

Also you could put in something like diminishing returns. It might be better to win an F1 championship than an Indycar one, but arguably better to win 5 F1 championships and 1 Indycar than 6 F1, for example. So each extra championship in the same category is worth less.

#35 ARTGP

ARTGP
  • Member

  • 23,573 posts
  • Joined: March 19

Posted 04 October 2022 - 17:54

There's probably something to do with scaling the average career length of rally drivers to that of a formula driver. Just to make sure the formula guys aren't being rewarded just for merely existing. 

 

although that sentiment might again be misplaced because I guess you could say the goal of an all time ranking IS to reward merely existing (of course they are doing a lot more than "merely existing" but you get the point :lol: ). If it's normal for formula track to have much longer careers, then I guess that should be rewarded. 


Edited by ARTGP, 04 October 2022 - 17:56.


#36 William Hunt

William Hunt
  • Member

  • 10,237 posts
  • Joined: July 01

Posted 04 October 2022 - 19:27

I don't think FE deserve same points as F2. With F4(gen1) and slightly slower than FRegional(gen2) level of speed even with good drivers. And DTM to. 

 

I think it does because Formula E has very strong fields and a lot of talent on the grid, it is in fact the 2nd strongest series in the world if you look at driver talent: there's more talent on the grid as in IndyCar. DTM always had very strong fields too. The speed of the cars is less important as the talent on a grid.



#37 PlatenGlass

PlatenGlass
  • Member

  • 3,813 posts
  • Joined: June 14

Posted 04 October 2022 - 19:56

I think it does because Formula E has very strong fields and a lot of talent on the grid, it is in fact the 2nd strongest series in the world if you look at driver talent: there's more talent on the grid as in IndyCar. DTM always had very strong fields too. The speed of the cars is less important as the talent on a grid.

I was thinking about this and that I see this list as more about prestige than performance. Indycar and the Indy 500 are still a bigger deal than the relatively new Formula E and I would have that reflected in an all-time ranking list based on success or prestige.

#38 Beamer

Beamer
  • Member

  • 2,776 posts
  • Joined: September 00

Posted 04 October 2022 - 20:53

Respect for the work you put in!

I do think however f1 is overrated as is just sheer longevity.

Apart from that: its impossible to define a non disputed system in any way. Mission impossible. But you put in a great effort and with some tuning.....

#39 jonpollak

jonpollak
  • Member

  • 39,055 posts
  • Joined: March 00

Posted 04 October 2022 - 22:07

Even though he's never had an F1 start Robby Gordon should win.

Jp



Advertisement

#40 RasmVest

RasmVest
  • New Member

  • 27 posts
  • Joined: September 22

Posted 05 October 2022 - 10:57

WRC weight is ridiculously low, European F3 & and F3000/F2 should also get a much heavier weight: drivers that reach F1 pass through it anyway but their junior carreer should be weighed in just as well

 

At the moment winning F3000/F2 is equivalent to finishing 5th in Formula One, and winning F3 is equivalent to finishing 6th in F1. Do you really think it should be higher than that? I don't think Felipe Drugovich 'wins more prestige' this year than George Russell finishing 5th in F1... Or Victor Martins more than Hamilton finishing 6th in F1...

 

I love 10-6-4-3-2-1, but some say it puts too much emphasis on winning (!).

Regarding the series weightings, it's difficult to judge. Obviously some racing series vary in strength quite considerably over time, eg the late 70s Can't Am fields had the likes of Rosberg, Ickx, Jones and Tambay whereas by the mid 1980s it was a dying swan - but it would be too arbitrary to vary the weightings accordingly and anyway if my "trophy cabinet" analogy is close to what you are trying to achieve then the strength of competition over time within a series is arguably irrelevant.

 

I think a ranking like this should emphasize winning more than anything else. Of course a solid, long career as eg. Barrichello's should be rewarded but honestly I think a guy like him is ranked a little too high compared to other drivers who won more and bigger things but maybe not for a very long time. It's a tough balance to find, but I thought the 10-6-4 points system was the best basis to achieve the right balance.

 

It does however make it difficult adjusting the multipliers for series like WRC, Indycar and NASCAR which awards points to more than 6 drivers each season. A multiplier of 35 for example would result in points with decimals for drivers finishing 7th to 10th and I would like to avoid that. So it's either multiplier 30 or 40 - or changing the basis points from 10-6-4 to 25-18-15 and so on. Or indeed just not award points for finishing 7th to 10th in those series. But then again I think it should be rewarded compared to winning a junior formula or less prestigious sportscar series...

 

I agree with you on the Can-Am example. There are only a few championships which have different multipliers at different stages of their history. Eg. the BTCC, where the supertouring era of the 90's awards more points. Other examples are Supercars and Super Formula.

 

Actually the Can-Am is split in two as well. The original Can-Am of the 60s-70s awards more points than the revival with the drivers you mentioned. Maybe that shouldn't be the case??

I also don't award points for the very final years of Can-Am as the competition had evolved into nothing more than a club series as I understand it...

 

I don't think FE deserve same points as F2. With F4(gen1) and slightly slower than FRegional(gen2) level of speed even with good drivers. And DTM to. 

 

As William Hunt very well pointed out it's not only about performance and FE and DTM have much better (professional!) drivers, manufacturers involved and higher prestige than F4 or F Regional. Those series are stepping stones whereas FE and DTM are more like career destinations for some drivers.

 

Excellent point.

 

I've been thinking a bit more, and I think my feedback was a bit misplaced. If we are simply looking to categorize how much success drivers are having over the duration of their driving careers, then I would expect the formula drivers will be more heavily rewarded because they've simply had much longer careers in formally recognized junior and adult motorsports series. In that sense it makes sense why the rally drivers are scoring a bit lower. Whether or not there should now be a bias for rally drivers? I have no idea but it seems it would make sense to do such. I guess that would have the implication of basically inventing junior careers in formally recognized junior rally categories and basically giving them points to compensate for the lack of such opportunity that any run of the mill Formula track driver would have gone through. 

 

With my points system Sébastien Loeb scored his first points in 2002 and he has scored points every year since then. 21 seasons and counting. In comparison Michael Schumacher scored points for 24 straight seasons. Without checking everyone I think Mario Andretti holds the record with 33 seasons (also consecutively..). Carlos Sainz has also gone 33 years from first to latest scored points, but with some gaps inbetween. He could score more Dakar or Extreme E points in the coming years.

 

I could add the old Junior-WRC series that Loeb won, but what else?

 

I'm not sure I'd even include junior formulas like F2, let alone put it on the same level as NASCAR. There's no real prestige to winning as such - it's just something to propel you somewhere else.

 

I understand it maybe shouldn't be on the same level as NASCAR, but in no way should F2 not award points at all. Maybe I have taken too many junior formulas into account, but they play a major role in shaping the career paths of a lot of drivers. That's why they are included with small points to fewer drivers per season. You could argue it's the prestige gained from winning or performing well in a junior formula that propels a driver to the next step.

 

Also you could put in something like diminishing returns. It might be better to win an F1 championship than an Indycar one, but arguably better to win 5 F1 championships and 1 Indycar than 6 F1, for example. So each extra championship in the same category is worth less.

 

I think that would be quite hard to implement. Also on the contrary do you think Hamilton or Schumacher would say their 4th title were worth less than their 1st? Or their 7th less than their 4th?

 

I was thinking about this and that I see this list as more about prestige than performance. Indycar and the Indy 500 are still a bigger deal than the relatively new Formula E and I would have that reflected in an all-time ranking list based on success or prestige.

 

Exactly. Currently winning the Indy 500 AND Indycar in the same season (which obviously rarely happens) would award 630 points while winning the FE title awards 200 points. 

 

This year Marcus Ericsson scored 360 from his Indy 500 win and 6th in the championship while Stoffel Vandoorne scored 200 becoming FE champion. Doesn't that sound about right? Maybe the 500 should award a little more?

 

Respect for the work you put in!

I do think however f1 is overrated as is just sheer longevity.

Apart from that: its impossible to define a non disputed system in any way. Mission impossible. But you put in a great effort and with some tuning.....

 

Thank you! Indeed, it's a very difficult if not impossible mission. But with some tuning it could be even better.

 

I guess you would boost the points awarded to other major championships than F1 then?

 

In my opinion longevity does create legends. It's about finding the right balance of course, so 10 seasons at the back of F1 doesn't award more points than eg. finishing in the top a few times in other major series...

 

Even though he's never had an F1 start Robby Gordon should win.

Jp

 

Let me know, how the points system could be tweaked to make sure of that...



#41 Collombin

Collombin
  • Member

  • 7,063 posts
  • Joined: March 05

Posted 05 October 2022 - 11:26

You said that most WDC races only impact your scoring via the effect they have on a driver's WDC placing - is that because you are trying to avoid them getting a double benefit? If so then I think you might need to look at a similar effect being gained by Indy 500 winners getting a massive boost to their AAA points score from just that one race (and the points per mile system in place at that time). I'm actually happy with that because I value Indy and those titles higher than most here probably do, but it is a potential inconsistency if you have avoided crediting individual WDC races for the double benefit reason.

#42 noriaki

noriaki
  • Member

  • 1,901 posts
  • Joined: April 14

Posted 05 October 2022 - 11:35

I think it's a very decent ranking, but I would title it differently (maybe "most successful auto racing drivers" ranking? If you refer to this as a motorsport ranking that will surely just trigger fanboys to judge that it's a subjective ranking of the drivers' skills)... and potentially remove all WRC and other rally drivers. It's such a different realm with so little overlap from other categories in the ranking, that it's really not fair to categorize their drivers alongside other drivers on the list.

(Admittedly so's NASCAR, too. But at least it's wheel to wheel racing on closed courses.)

#43 Risil

Risil
  • Administrator

  • 52,367 posts
  • Joined: February 07

Posted 05 October 2022 - 11:41

Let me know, how the points system could be tweaked to make sure of that...

 

Only include races from March-June 1995, exclude Canadians, boost CART by 5000%.



#44 KLF1F

KLF1F
  • Member

  • 199 posts
  • Joined: August 17

Posted 05 October 2022 - 12:16

It's good, but I'd say it weights F1/Grand Prix too highly and has a certain amount of recency bias (see Schumacher, Hamilton, Vettel in top 4). I'd suggest

 

1) Increase the weight of Indy/Champ to at least 50%.

2) Find a way to downweight Championships achieved with the same car/rules configuration (when the same car dominates for years on end, these championships should clearly have less weight).



#45 Collombin

Collombin
  • Member

  • 7,063 posts
  • Joined: March 05

Posted 05 October 2022 - 12:29

Given the quality of the driver line-ups it's a shame that there was no world sportscar title awarded to drivers before 1981. Had there been, Ickx would be ahead of Prost and Vettel in 3rd overall.

#46 PlatenGlass

PlatenGlass
  • Member

  • 3,813 posts
  • Joined: June 14

Posted 05 October 2022 - 13:24

 

 

I think that would be quite hard to implement. Also on the contrary do you think Hamilton or Schumacher would say their 4th title were worth less than their 1st? Or their 7th less than their 4th?

 

I probably would say it should add less to their total score, but not as a reflection of those particular seasons. I think a better way of illustrating it is looking at positions lower than first. A world champion is more successful than someone who has only come second in the world championship, even if they've come second multiple times, so I'd want a way of capping the points you can get from a certain achievement - e.g. halving the points each time, but it doesn't have to be half specifically.

 

Also, aside from winning the championship, I think race wins are more important than championship position. I remember David Coulthard saying he'd rather finish lower in the championship with more wins than second place with fewer wins. I would probably not bother awarding points for second and lower in championships, but would have something for race wins. This could be scaled by number of races in the championship in some way, so that recent race inflation doesn't have such an effect.



#47 Nathan

Nathan
  • Member

  • 5,647 posts
  • Joined: February 00

Posted 05 October 2022 - 13:33

Cool project!    If I had a gripe it is the exaggeration of grand prix scoring relative to the top end American series.  All this Eau Rouge talk comes from people that never went into a concrete wall full chat on an oval.  I think the speeds and level of competition between the two continents were pretty similar through most decades.  Both sides of the Atlantic have long had deep pools of driver talent and ways to let the cream rise to the top. We also have to consider the logistics of at least half of motorsport history didn't allow a series to be global for quite some time.  I think it's unfair drivers in American series get so slighted because people in Paris believed they were the be all and end all.


Edited by Nathan, 05 October 2022 - 13:35.


#48 RasmVest

RasmVest
  • New Member

  • 27 posts
  • Joined: September 22

Posted 05 October 2022 - 13:52

It's getting hard to keep up with all your great comments. Keep it coming, it's much appreciated!  :clap:

 

 

You said that most WDC races only impact your scoring via the effect they have on a driver's WDC placing - is that because you are trying to avoid them getting a double benefit? If so then I think you might need to look at a similar effect being gained by Indy 500 winners getting a massive boost to their AAA points score from just that one race (and the points per mile system in place at that time). I'm actually happy with that because I value Indy and those titles higher than most here probably do, but it is a potential inconsistency if you have avoided crediting individual WDC races for the double benefit reason.

 

Exactly. It's a good point. I have done it the way I have because I think many drivers in Indycar and sportscar racing values an Indy 500 win or 24 Hours of Le Mans win higher than the championship itself, which is also reflected in the way points are distributed to the ranking. Monaco isn't as big as the F1 title, but it is by far the most prestigious GP win - at least in terms of prestige and fame gained outside the motorsport world...

 

Maybe Monaco should be lowered and all other GPs added with just minor points to the top 3 (or even winners only) to avoid the inconsistency?

 

 

I think it's a very decent ranking, but I would title it differently (maybe "most successful auto racing drivers" ranking? If you refer to this as a motorsport ranking that will surely just trigger fanboys to judge that it's a subjective ranking of the drivers' skills)... and potentially remove all WRC and other rally drivers. It's such a different realm with so little overlap from other categories in the ranking, that it's really not fair to categorize their drivers alongside other drivers on the list.

(Admittedly so's NASCAR, too. But at least it's wheel to wheel racing on closed courses.)

 

Thank you! It's noted. I'm aware of the 'fanboys' but then again there's no way to avoid them haha. I have to live with them.

 

I'm not sure about rally drivers. It's not a circuit racing ranking. It's four-wheeled motorsports in general, and I think there's enough overlap between drivers to argue they should be included. Then the weighting needs to be right of course. It's a difficult comparison but that's also what makes it fun and interesting.

 

 

It's good, but I'd say it weights F1/Grand Prix too highly and has a certain amount of recency bias (see Schumacher, Hamilton, Vettel in top 4). I'd suggest

 

1) Increase the weight of Indy/Champ to at least 50%.

2) Find a way to downweight Championships achieved with the same car/rules configuration (when the same car dominates for years on end, these championships should clearly have less weight).

 

Thank you, I will take that into account. The only recency bias is that there are maybe more championships that award points today than 50 years ago. Well, and the obvious fact that drivers today have longer careers because they don't die at the wheel. I see no problem with those 3 at or close to the top, because that's where their achievements place them. As mentioned earlier I will probably make a separate Peak Ranking where the likes of Clark, Senna, Rosemeyer and even Gilles Villeneuve will be higher ranked.

 

Given the quality of the driver line-ups it's a shame that there was no world sportscar title awarded to drivers before 1981. Had there been, Ickx would be ahead of Prost and Vettel in 3rd overall.

 

I'm very pissed off about this too haha. I have tried to make up for it by awarding points on a race-by-race basis in the World Sportscar Championship before 1981. Same goes for WRC before the drivers' title was a thing, and obviously also Grand Prix racing in times when the F1 and Euro DC titles weren't awarded.

 

I probably would say it should add less to their total score, but not as a reflection of those particular seasons. I think a better way of illustrating it is looking at positions lower than first. A world champion is more successful than someone who has only come second in the world championship, even if they've come second multiple times, so I'd want a way of capping the points you can get from a certain achievement - e.g. halving the points each time, but it doesn't have to be half specifically.

 

Also, aside from winning the championship, I think race wins are more important than championship position. I remember David Coulthard saying he'd rather finish lower in the championship with more wins than second place with fewer wins. I would probably not bother awarding points for second and lower in championships, but would have something for race wins. This could be scaled by number of races in the championship in some way, so that recent race inflation doesn't have such an effect.

 

I understand your point. I will think about how and if it should be implemented. It's definitely something to think about.

 

Two years ago I actually started the project by doing it on a race-by-race basis and then averaging it out by the number of races - instead of by championship position, but I quickly realised that would be an even bigger project than this one. Especially when taking into account the big number of championships included. It would be much more difficult finding race results for a lot of these series than the championship standings I think.



#49 Gravelngrass

Gravelngrass
  • Member

  • 663 posts
  • Joined: April 21

Posted 05 October 2022 - 14:45

This is only for track racing it seems?

#50 AustinF1

AustinF1
  • Member

  • 18,277 posts
  • Joined: November 10

Posted 05 October 2022 - 21:01

Alonso should be in the top 3 ahead of Vettel, imho.