80 replies to this topic

[Anderis]

Here are Autosport driver ratings for all F1 drivers since 2016 that have made their debut as a stand-in driver for someone else:
 

Bearman 10

Lawson 8
De Vries 10

Aitken 7

Fittipaldi 7

Giovinazzi 9

Vandoorne 9

Average: 8.57

Average for other drivers in the same races: 6.92

 

So stand-in drivers are on average rated 1.65 points better than regular drivers and it’s questionable whether in theory they would even deserve to match the regular drivers, because on average, stand-in drivers would be worse drivers than regular drivers, because there’s a reason for why they weren’t regular drivers at the time. Vandoorne, Giovinazzi and De Vries all got the chance to be regular drivers later in their careers and they were all rated below average compared to the rest of the gird when they were regular drivers.

So if you correct for that, I think stand-in drivers’ performances (especially if we are talking about rookies) are on average overrated by at least around 2 points, which is utterly ridiculous margin on a 1-10 scale. It just shows how biased these ratings can be and how much fans and pundits overestimate the difficulty of stepping in as a reserve driver and doing a solid job. I used Autosport driver ratings but this is completely in line for what I saw in official „Driver of the Day” votings, our Voting Championship on this forum and pretty much anything else. Just wanted to show you this, because while you could make a reasonable argument to defend each of those ratings in isolation, the collective numbers leave me in no doubt that there’s a huge and irrational bias favouring these stand-in drivers.

 

[PayasYouRace]

Does experience and practice count for nothing, Anderis?

[Afterburner]

I don't remember Giovinazzi's stand-in drive, and I thought Fittipaldi and Aitken were completely forgettable in theirs. I remember Vandoorne appearing to be a big deal, but the McLaren-Honda combo in those days was occasionally a wild card.

 

Lawson appeared very impressive in his debut given the circumstances, but we haven't seen any more from him. De Vries is the only one that for sure flattered to deceive. I think the jury's still out on Bearman—I might be in the minority thinking he should've done better but I also don't rate Leclerc anywhere near as highly as some others do.

 

As for the driver ratings, yes, I agree they are grossly overdone. A 10 implies nobody could've done better in the circumstances, and I don't think that was true of Bearman or De Vries' races. If I recall Aitken's race he basically crashed out, and Fittipaldi was totally anonymous. I guess the writers wanted to be polite...

[MikeTekRacing]

with virtually no testing standing in for an F1 drive is super hard.

I am impressed by all that do a good job at it. 

[Mat13]

with virtually no testing standing in for an F1 drive is super hard.
I am impressed by all that do a good job at it.

Agreed, gone are the days of loads of running in similar cars elsewhere, new drivers have so few opportunities to get their eye in that it’ll always be impressive to see what Bearman did.

[Primo]

In the same way as a Sauber or even a Haas driver can get a 10; the  grading is not against anything absolute but rather from "really really bad" to "much much better than could be expected".

[Nathan]

I think we just get excited to see a new driver, a new underdog, and we consistently want half the grid fired, so the kids get the benefit of the doubt and some extra hype . 

[PayasYouRace]

I don't remember Giovinazzi's stand-in drive, and I thought Fittipaldi and Aitken were completely forgettable in theirs. I remember Vandoorne appearing to be a big deal, but the McLaren-Honda combo in those days was occasionally a wild card.

 

I remember Giovinazzi. He stood in for Wherlein at Sauber at the first couple of races of 2017. Unfortunately the main thing I remember him for was crashing the Sauber in China. I completely forget Fittipaldi, and only really remember that someone had to sub for Grosjean. Aitken I remember being there, but not much else.

 

 

 

Lawson appeared very impressive in his debut given the circumstances, but we haven't seen any more from him. De Vries is the only one that for sure flattered to deceive. I think the jury's still out on Bearman—I might be in the minority thinking he should've done better but I also don't rate Leclerc anywhere near as highly as some others do.

 

As for the driver ratings, yes, I agree they are grossly overdone. A 10 implies nobody could've done better in the circumstances, and I don't think that was true of Bearman or De Vries' races.

 

 I'm not sure exactly what else you'd expect from a driver parachuted in from F2 on Saturday morning to achieve. His pace was good for the amount of time he's had in the car. He didn't destroy the car, or break any rules, or even look like breaking the rules. He qualified well and he made up positions in the race. What else do you want?

 

I think the 10 implies that they could have done no better in the circumstances. Not that nobody could.

[Risil]

and I thought Fittipaldi and Aitken were completely forgettable in theirs.

Forgettable? Aitken basically cost Russell his first Grand Prix win!

[MikeTekRacing]

Forgettable? Aitken basically cost Russell his first Grand Prix win!

neah, that was mercedes

[Afterburner]

Forgettable? Aitken basically cost Russell his first Grand Prix win!

I remember that being the fault of the Mercedes pit crew. 

[PayasYouRace]

Forgettable? Aitken basically cost Russell his first Grand Prix win!

 

I've just realised I've confused Aitken with that time di Resta subbed for Massa. Wow!

 

A lot was going on in that race. I can't remember what Aitken did to Russell.

[Ali623]

I mean, in general driver ratings are wildly inconsistent and filled with bias, Autosport or otherwise. In the case of stand-in drivers, it's a combination of low expectations and lot's of hype around them. Therefore, assuming they don't crash or make a complete fool of themselves, they're basically guaranteed high ratings from journalists.

Edited by Ali623, 11 March 2024 - 19:41.

[TomNokoe]

Yes, they may be young but are still professional racing drivers. It speaks to the general fan culture that anyone not in F1 is assumed not good enough, until suddenly they race in F1 and are perfectly fine!

[Autodromo]

Yes, they may be young but are still professional racing drivers. It speaks to the general fan culture that anyone not in F1 is assumed not good enough, until suddenly they race in F1 and are perfectly fine!

It does bring to mind the earlier discussions about whether Antonelli could step into a Mercedes at the end of the year.  I am not comparing Bearman and Antonelli, but pointing out that the whole "he's so young and inexperienced" argument can be negated by talent.

[TomNokoe]

It does bring to mind the earlier discussions about whether Antonelli could step into a Mercedes at the end of the year. I am not comparing Bearman and Antonelli, but pointing out that the whole "he's so young and inexperienced" argument can be negated by talent.

It's fine for a one-off, but an entire season in a top seat is a different ball game, so in that instance I'd agree with the conservative choice!

[RacingFan10]

Even if he had the 2nd best car by some margin, Bearman was impressive because he adapted so quickily in the ferrari F1 car, a machine that he had pretty much no experience on it, and not to test but to actually race

[MikeTekRacing]

I've just realised I've confused Aitken with that time di Resta subbed for Massa. Wow!

 

A lot was going on in that race. I can't remember what Aitken did to Russell.

lost the front wing exiting the last term - "left" it on track, bringing the SC where Mercedes muffed the tyre change (they fitted tyres for the wrong cars)

[PayasYouRace]

lost the front wing exiting the last term - "left" it on track, bringing the SC where Mercedes muffed the tyre change (they fitted tyres for the wrong cars)

 

Oh yeah. So much happened in that race.

 

Plus I was watching it on a Zoom call with friends. Alcohol may have been involved.

[Deeq]

Even if he had the 2nd best car by some margin, Bearman was impressive because he adapted so quickily in the ferrari F1 car, a machine that he had pretty much no experience on it, and not to test but to actually race

And it was unexpected emergency substitution, in a Ferrari!
He was expected to do "well" or his career could be hurt badly before it started..had he done a Stroll in his real trial.
It was high risk, high gain situation, and he passed with flying colours. 👍😁👍

[Rediscoveryx]

I agree with the OP. Even though Bearman was impressive, a 10/10 in my book would have implied that he beat Leclerc (or at least matched him).

I would prefer the ratings to be as unbiased as possible and then we could instead marvel at a stand-in driver getting a 7 or whatever, using our own subjective interpretations at that stage instead of having them fed to us from the beginning. Now it’s almost the opposite - he got a 10/10, but it was according to the stand-in scale so it doesn’t really count does it?

Edited by Rediscoveryx, 11 March 2024 - 21:49.

[Myrvold]

He was expected to do "well" or his career could be hurt badly before it started..had he done a Stroll in his real trial.

 

Stroll is a good example.

 

Look at Stroll in his first GP. Especially the practice sessions. Then factor in the insane amount of testing he did in F1 cars before that. Compare to Bearman who have had 1x 400km at Fiorano. 2x FP1 and 1x Young Driver Test for Haas. + unspecified amount of laps in 1 day at Barcelona. Bearman looks insanely much better in that comparison.

[Myrvold]

I completely forget Fittipaldi, and only really remember that someone had to sub for Grosjean.

 

I don't. Because I still feel Haas should've given one race to Fittipaldi and one to Deletraz... or both to Deletraz.

[dia6olo]

All these drivers know how to drive, it may be their F1 debut but it's not like they have never driven a car before!

In terms of how they fared on their first outing, the car they get to debut in is a significant factor.

It's like with Bearman, it was a solid drive, but let's not forget that he was in the second quickest car, a car that finished 14 seconds ahead of the third best car and was closer to 20 seconds ahead if you factor in the safety car...

[Anderis]

Does experience and practice count for nothing, Anderis?

Apparently it makes you perform less admirably when you get more of it, judging by the data from the opening post.

[GreenMachine]

Apparently it makes you perform less admirably when you get more of it, judging by the data from the opening post.

 

Apparently people expect a different level of performance from the old hands compared to the newbies, judging by the data and the responses. 

[Anderis]

Apparently people expect a different level of performance from the old hands compared to the newbies

Yes, that's kinda the point of the OP, or even the thread title if you read very carefully.

[PayasYouRace]

Apparently it makes you perform less admirably when you get more of it, judging by the data from the opening post.

That’s called skill progression. The longer you do something, the better you’re expected to be.

[PayasYouRace]

I don't. Because I still feel Haas should've given one race to Fittipaldi and one to Deletraz... or both to Deletraz.

Shows how everything melds into one. I had convinced myself that Bahrain was the final two races of that season, with the Outer being the last race.

 

I’m getting old.

[Risil]

I suppose another way of looking at it is that once you've got a 10, where do you go from there? Are there really no better performances to be had by Bearman?

This feels a bit like pseudo-analysis though. Edd Straw giving a driver a 10 or a 7 or a 5 isn't an event, it's commentary on an event, which we're free to take or leave.

[Risil]

Shows how everything melds into one. I had convinced myself that Bahrain was the final two races of that season, with the Outer being the last race.

I’m getting old.

2020. I was convinced for about two years that the Outer loop race happened before Grosjean's crash, not after.

[Reynardff]

I don't remember Giovinazzi's stand-in drive, and I thought Fittipaldi and Aitken were completely forgettable in theirs. I remember Vandoorne appearing to be a big deal, but the McLaren-Honda combo in those days was occasionally a wild card.

 

Lawson appeared very impressive in his debut given the circumstances, but we haven't seen any more from him. De Vries is the only one that for sure flattered to deceive. I think the jury's still out on Bearman—I might be in the minority thinking he should've done better but I also don't rate Leclerc anywhere near as highly as some others do.

 

As for the driver ratings, yes, I agree they are grossly overdone. A 10 implies nobody could've done better in the circumstances, and I don't think that was true of Bearman or De Vries' races. If I recall Aitken's race he basically crashed out, and Fittipaldi was totally anonymous. I guess the writers wanted to be polite...

I agree Bearman was not driving a Haas or Williams or Alpine. He brought the car home way back in the field, Sainz would have been expected to finnish way further up. He had already practiced for the F2 race so circuit knowledge was not an excuse. He had already done two FP1 sessions previously and would have done loads of simulator work so really a pass was all I would give him. Look at Piastri last year not in a Ferrari, FOX spent the whole weekend talking about Bearman, otherwise we would have heard Lando, Hamilton, Russel endlessly so it was probably a change at best.

[Myrvold]

He had already practiced for the F2 race so circuit knowledge was not an excuse.

Arguably that's not an advantage though...

[expert]

To echo the general sentiment perhaps, I think the reserve drivers are generally well prepared so the basics of operating the car and car control are not a problem. So they're on a good pace immediately, but that last 3/10ths of ultimate pace isn't there yet.  

 

The most impressive thing about Bearman was the lack of mistakes.  He certainly fulfilled his brief.  I wonder though if that is a factor of a slightly conservative approach taken to the task as a fill in (don't ding the car).  Given a proper full time drive and more pressure to deliver the ultimate pace of the car would the mistakes start to come.  I wondered the same about Lawson.

 

Sargeant on the other hand, hasn't had good pace AND has made a lot of mistakes.  So Bearman currently looks good in comparison.

Edited by expert, 12 March 2024 - 03:42.

[messy]

Said it before, I think when a driver stands in unexpectedly, they immediately have a default score of 9/10 for the weekend and can only lose points from that by being ridiculously slow, taking out 8 other drivers at the first corner, or maybe dropping their trousers and having a little poo in the driver parade. Default praise. They're in unexpectedly, down on track time, nobody expects much and its generally a win-win for them. When De Vries jumped in at Monza everybody raved about him and teams were falling over themselves to sign him, even when Robert Kubica stood in for Kimi he got very high scores for actually not always being last after that season with Williams.

So I'm generally pretty cautious on the impact stand-in drivers have, but given the context of the whole thing I think Ollie Bearman did well by any standards. Yeah objectively he was a fair bit slower than Sainz would have been, but there's no shame in that.

[Beri]

The Race did a pretty fair assesment on Bearman. They were singing his praises as well, but then also highlighted that he, theoretically, should have finished 5th if he had showed the form and consistency, that he had from about the 2nd half of the race, throughout the whole race.

So it is far from a perfect race even to their admission. Yet Autosport chose to rate him a 10 out of 10. Whilst those drivers lack testing in real life, they still are very well prepared. Sim work and rigorgeous other training do make any debutant better prepared than ever before. So Bearman stepping in would make for him to be judged how he performed. Not how he performed as a rookie. And he did very well. But he did miss out on Q3 and he didnt finish P5. So all in all I'd rather rate him 8 out of 10. Perhaps 9 out of 10.

[Rediscoveryx]

I think they should score Bearman the same as they had scored Sainz if he had been in the car. That's more fair, and then the rest of us can marvel at a newcomer scoring a 6 "I would have been pleased with a 3" rather than using different parameters for different drivers.

 

Otherwise they'd score me a 10 if I managed to get the car out of the pitlane at some point during the weekend.

[noikeee]

Here are Autosport driver ratings for all F1 drivers since 2016 that have made their debut as a stand-in driver for someone else:
 

Bearman 10

Lawson 8
De Vries 10

Aitken 7

Fittipaldi 7

Giovinazzi 9

Vandoorne 9

Average: 8.57

Average for other drivers in the same races: 6.92

 

Key details: how many of those jumped in after FP2, and in a difficult street circuit with fast bends next to walls, and aged only 18, and with a star driver as team-mate.

 

Last one I remember jumping in after FP2 was Di Resta in the Hungaroring in a Williams. He was pretty bad, qualifying 8 tenths behind Stroll. And he wasn't a rookie.

[PlatenGlass]

That’s called skill progression. The longer you do something, the better you’re expected to be.

The point is that if you could perfectly account for drivers' first-race status, their ratings should be approximately the same as other drivers on average. But according the the OP they are much higher, so there seems to be an over-compensation going on.

[William Hunt]

I didn't (have low expectations), I had a bet with someone and my bet was he would qualify 10th and finish 7th. I expected him to do well since I rate him highly

[Burai]

He had already practiced for the F2 race so circuit knowledge was not an excuse.

 

I've done track days at Brands Hatch and Thruxton, so if any BTCC teams are reading this and need a driver at short notice, let me know.

[F1matt]

His first stint did look like he was trying to hard but it is part of the learning curve, giving him 10/10 shows what a joke of a publication Autosport now is.

 

The problem is where does his next drive come from? We are in an era of so many old & average drivers taking up the field the grid is stale, it used to be a job where if you had a couple of bad races you were out of the door but the grid is like a packet of Werther’s originals now.

[pacificquay]

People here are really harsh.

 

For a driver thrown in mid weekend my expectation level is they'd likely qualify last and finish near the back.

 

F1 races are difficult.

 

The 10/10 rating makes sense - it's about him doing amazingly well on the day, which he did.

 

Similarly someone above said di Resta was "really bad" when he filled in for Massa - he was dropped in just before qualifying and was within a second of the regular driver having been out of F1 for a few years - that's not bad, that's very good.

[garoidb]

In a race like that for Bearman, getting through the race and gaining the experience is highly important, probably more so than absolutely optimising the result. Crashing at the start would have been regrettable and might lead to being passed over for later substitution opportunities (e.g. Australia, if necessary). Hence, it should be a more conservative race than usual. For that reason, it is not necessarily that predictive of how the driver would do over multiple races, a season or a career. 

 

There are different scenarios too - I assume it is easier if the driver either got to do all the F1 practice sessions or, less favourably, was actually racing at that circuit in a different series on the given weekend (knows the circuit etc). An inactive reserve driver might have a bigger adjustment to make. Against that, someone with a large reserve of experience might fare better (e.g. Hulkenberg a few times). 

[TomNokoe]

His first stint did look like he was trying to hard but it is part of the learning curve, giving him 10/10 shows what a joke of a publication Autosport now is.

Just another example of the inorganic "everything is great" ethos that pervades F1. No room for criticism allowed, lest you be heralded a "hater" or "bias". This strategy keeps young and impressionable fans hooked because they buy in to this "once in a lifetime" "never seen before" marketing spiel.

A superb contrast to this cheap lie is the rise of Luke Littler and the effect this has had on Darts in the UK and Europe. A real phenomenon.

Edited by TomNokoe, 12 March 2024 - 14:36.

[Bleu]

If Sainz had qualified 11th and finished 7th in Saudi Arabia, he would have got probably 7.

[MikeTekRacing]

If Sainz had qualified 11th and finished 7th in Saudi Arabia, he would have got probably 7.

Probably Sainz would have deserved a 6 for that, not a 7.

A rookie with no prior experience of either F1 or the car he is driving, not even an entire weekend is a completely different benchmark

Edited by MikeTekRacing, 12 March 2024 - 15:15.

[Colbul1]

I can understand the 10/10 being a bit generous, I think a 9 was perhaps more appropriate.  But, when you take into consideration all of the factors around his race, I think Ollie Bearman was stellar and perhaps did merit his 10.  Take for example:

1. He had not driven the car before, on a circuit with an average speed of 155mph and walls mms away.  The look on his dad's face during qualifying told you everything you needed to know about the magnitude of a step up that was and he almost nailed it.  0.036 off Q3, 0.3 behind qualifying king Leclerc at his first go and bar some small errors when his tyres were fresh, he would have made Q3.  The fact he was disappointed and felt he let the team down tells me how good he will be and how solid that qualifying was.

2. He didn't make any mistakes in the race, he aced the start (something Lando failed to do) surrounded by cars and drivers he has no reference with (I mean, I was expecting Yuki to tango with him!), he got the double stack pitstop right, something he will not have done or practiced before (and again, Lando missed his marks on his pitstop late in the race losing 2 seconds to Lewis to show how easy it is to make a tiny error), on the restart he nailed it past Yuki, and once past Hulk he matched Fernando and George's times with the gap of 6.5 seconds finishing about 5.5.

3. He handled the pressure in the race superbly, he was frustrated by Hulk outsmarting him with battery usage (something again he has never done before in a race), but he learnt quickly and eventually got past the Haas. The fact that annoyed him that he had been schooled and had to learn the system on the job is great to see.  He stayed cool, sorted it out and got past as he should.  The telling factor I think was towards the end though and how he stayed in front of Lando and Lewis.  When they came out behind him there were 8 laps left and 6 seconds to close.  His engineer even said to him they'll catch him in 4 laps and so I think the team were resigned to a 9th place finish. Catch him did they heck, he was still 2.5 seconds up the road at the flag, on far inferior tyres and in a far more exhausted condition (as the cushion on the headrest attested) but he showed that desire to put in the laps to the end and take those points.

 

Those 6 points might just be the difference at the end of the season and the fact he didn't stick it in the wall like season 7 Stroll did, means the cost cap isn't worried by any damage he caused.

[Gravelngrass]

Bearman 10, Lawson 8. There seems to be an additional bias there…

[messy]

Autosport go OTT. That's not a new thing. As soon as Bearman was announced you just knew they'd be going to town on making out he's the reincarnation of Senna for weeks. But to be fair to them, 1. He did do a good job, and 2. What else are they going to talk about? This is 2024, it's already looking like a dull rerun of 2023, there are no actual new drivers or novelties or feelgood stories to dine out on - except this one.

To be honest I think arguing that someone didn't warrant a 10/10 and should have had an 8 instead, if I was Ollie Bearman I'd take that!