Your thoughts on who will win the teammate rivalries 2013?

[raymondu999]

Mercedes
Hamilton has outqualified Rosberg 4-3
Hamilton has outraced Rosberg 5-2 (though arguably this should be 4-3 thanks to team orders)
Hamilton has outscored Rosberg 1.35:1
Fairly clear top dog: Hamilton (Same as last time)

McLaren
Button has outqualified Perez 5-2
Button has outraced Perez 4-3
Button has outscored Perez 2.08:1
Fairly clear top dog: Button (Button ↓)

Force India
DiResta has outqualified Sutil 4-3
DiResta has outraced Sutil 5-2 (though arguably this should be 6-1 thanks to team orders)
DiResta has outscored Sutil 2:1
Clear top dog: DiResta (Same as last time)

Hamilton/Button/DiResta have beat their teammates 4-3 and 5-2. Button in fact has a higher outscore ratio than DiResta. The numbers say that Button has equalled Di Resta in 2/3 statistics and beat him in the other statistic. So why in feck is Di Resta a "clearer" top dog?

[beelsebob]

Mercedes
Hamilton has outqualified Rosberg 4-3
Hamilton has outraced Rosberg 5-2 (though arguably this should be 4-3 thanks to team orders)
Hamilton has outscored Rosberg 1.35:1
Fairly clear top dog: Hamilton (Same as last time)

McLaren
Button has outqualified Perez 5-2
Button has outraced Perez 4-3
Button has outscored Perez 2.08:1
Fairly clear top dog: Button (Button ↓)

Force India
DiResta has outqualified Sutil 4-3
DiResta has outraced Sutil 5-2 (though arguably this should be 6-1 thanks to team orders)
DiResta has outscored Sutil 2:1
Clear top dog: DiResta (Same as last time)

Hamilton/Button/DiResta have beat their teammates 4-3 and 5-2. Button in fact has a higher outscore ratio than DiResta. The numbers say that Button has equalled Di Resta in 2/3 statistics and beat him in the other statistic. So why in feck is Di Resta a "clearer" top dog?

Good question – I wondered for all 3 of these "is that clear or fairly clear" and didn't actually notice that they were all nearly identical – this is why I need a consistent system of measuring what's "fairly" clear. I still don't have any good ways to do it though. I'm open to suggestions.

[Stradivarius]

I thought I'd just present some numbers which hopefully can make it easier to judge what can be considered a clear top dog, and what can be considered a "equal" or "even", (although I actually havent seen this term used here for anyone yet). The terms fairly clear and slim top dog can then be put somewhere between.

I have looked at all the drivers who have both scored points and had the same team mate for at least 2 seasons after the point's system was changed ahead of the 2010 season. I have then tried to see what variations in performance, based on points, we can expect to see between two team mates. It is my opinion that in order to be a clear top dog, the difference between him and his team mate should be greater than these variations.

For example, if a driver scores 150 points during one season, and his teammate scores 151 points during the same season, we can't say with confidence that the latter is the better driver and that he will probably continue to outscore his teammate in the future. However, if a driver scores 300 points and his teammate scores 50 points, he is clearly a better driver and can be expected to perform better than his team mate in the future as well. But were do we draw the line between "clearly better" and "not possible to determine"? And where can we fit in the "probably better" or "fairly clear top dog"?

I want to make it clear that I don't consider this an exact science, I am simply playing around with numbers based more or less on intuition. So any comments or suggestions for improvements or changes are encouraged.

Now, let's look at the data:

Code: Select all

    	Red Bull		Ferrari	 	McLaren	 	Mercedes		Toro Rosso	
    	VET	WEB	  ALO	MAS	  BUT	HAM	  ROS	MSC	  ALG	BUE
2010   256	242	  252	144  	214   240	  142	 72	    5  	8
2011   392	258	  257	118  	270   227	   89	 76	   26	 15
2012   281	179	  278	122  	188   190	   93	 49	    -  	-

We see for example that Vettel scored 14 points more than Webber in 2010, and 134 points more than Webber in 2011. This is a change of 120 points, which says something about how much the driver's performance can vary. We also see that Alguersuari changed from -3 points compared to Buemi in 2010 to +11 points. Of course Alguersuari could never hope to improve as much as Vettel, as 120 points is way out of reach for his team. So in order to make the variations for teams with different performance more comparable, I will scale the number by the team's total score and instead of points, look at how many percent of the team's total points each driver scores.

So here are the teams' points and each driver's contribution to his team:

Code: Select all

        Red Bull	Ferrari		McLaren		Mercedes	Toro Rosso   
2010		498		  396			 454			 214			13	
2011		650		  375			 497			 165			41	
2012		460		  400			 378			 142		 	-	


         Red Bull	      	Ferrari	       	McLaren	       	Mercedes	      	Toro Rosso	
       VET      WEB        ALO      MAS        BUT      HAM        ROS      MSC        ALG      BUE
2010  51.41%   48.59%     63.64%   36.36%     47.14%   52.86%     66.36%   33.64%     38.46%   61.54%
2011  60.31%   39.69%     68.53%   31.47%     54.33%   45.67%     53.94%   46.06%     63.41%   36.59%
2012  61.09%   38.91%     69.50%   30.50%     49.74%   50.26%     65.49%   34.51%       -        -

Now, each driver has a score which is not too much influenced by how good his car is, some sort of relative performance. We see for example that Alonso generally scores higher than Vettel, although Red Bull has scored more points than Ferrari every season. This may be a result of Alonso being better than Vettel, or Webber being better than Massa. This study doesn't give any answer to that.

So now, let's look at the changes/variation that we actually observe. I will simply look at two seasons at a time and compare each driver's relative performance:

Code: Select all

                   Red Bull	     	Ferrari	      	McLaren	      	Mercedes	     	Toro Rosso	
                 VET      WEB       ALO      MAS       BUT      HAM       ROS      MSC       ALG      BUE
2010 and 2011   8.90%   -8.90%     4.90%   -4.90%     7.19%    -7.19%  -12.42%   12.42%    24.95%  -24.95%
2010 and 2012   9.68%   -9.68%     5.86%   -5.86%     2.60%    -2.60%   -0.86%    0.86%       -        -
2011 and 2012   0.78%   -0.78%     0.97%   -0.97%    -4.59%     4.59%   11.55%  -11.55%       -        -

Obviously, the sum of changes within a team is always zero, since we are talking about relative changes within the team. Toro Rosso is an extreme example, probably mostly caused by the fact that they rarly scored points in 2010 (only 13 points in total) which means the numbers are more influenced by chance. So let's look at McLaren in 2010 and 2011 for example: We see a change of 7.19%. If we multiply this number with the total number of points that McLaren took in 2010 and 2011, we get 68 points. This number resembles the difference in driver performance measured in points, which is 69 points, i.e. Button improved relative to Hamilton by 69 points (from -26 to +43) . The reason why we don't get exactly 69 is that McLaren didn't score the same number of points in 2010 as in 2011.

Now, if we take the average of the absolute value of these numbers, which happens to be equal to the average of only the positive numbers above, and multiply it by 2, we should have some indication of the performance fluctuation that we may see from one season to another. The average value is 7.32%, so we get 14.64% after multiplying by 2. Of course, this number should ideally be based on a lot more data, but at least it gives an indication. It makes no sense including the decimals, as this number is very rough anyway, so let's say it's 15%. This is not an expected change, the expectancy should be that nothing changes from one season to another. But it gives an idea of how large the changes may normally be.

Now, I actually feel like dividing by 2 again in order to determine the margin with which a driver should outscore his teammate to be probably better: If driver A scores 115 points one season, and his teammate, driver B scores 85 points during the same season, the difference is 30 points, which is exactly 15% of the team's total points. This may change for the next season, so that both drivers score 100 points (and driver B could ahead based on better single race position). So now it could be 1 - 1 in terms of full-season teammate battles. But driver A still has more points in total than driver B over the two seasons, so he should still be ranked first. Since this is a two-side uncertainty we only have an idea of how much things may vary, so driver A could also outscore driver B with 130 points to 70 during the next season.

Let's say 7%: If one driver scores 107 points and his teammate scores 93 points, which gives exactly 7%, it is not only quite possible that he won't outscore his teammate the next season, it is also possible that he won't outscore his teammate in total.

So I suggest the following rating:
Margin smaller than 7%: Slim top dog
Margin of 7% - 15%: Farily clear top dog
Margin greater than 15%: Clear top dog

So what if look at some of the teammates in this perspective? Red Bull, Ferrari and Lotus are quite clear already, as they haven't changed drivers for this year and they have clear top dogs. So let's look at some other teams (numbers are rounded off to closest integer):

McLaren: 37 points
7% margin: 3 points
15% margin: 6 points
Button: 25 points
Perez: 12 points
Clear top dog: Button

Mercedes: 134 points
7% margin: 9 points
15% margin: 20 points
Hamilton: 77 points
Rosberg: 57 points
Fairly (almost) clear top dog: Hamilton

Force India: 51
7% margin: 4 points
15% margin: 8 points
di Resta: 34 points
Sutil: 17 points
Clear top dog: Hamilton

Toro Rosso: 20
7% margin: 1 point
15% margin: 3 points
Vergne: 13 points
Ricciardo: 7 points
Clear top dog: Vergne

The number 7% may be inaccurate because it is base on limited data, but so may any conclusion based on only 7 races be, as they are based on even less data. One race is still enough to turn things upside-down even in teams with a clear top dog at the moment. Things like technical failures and team orders are not compensated for here and as I have said earlier, qualifying has already been accounted for and given the appropriate weight according to how it influences the points.

[beelsebob]

That's a really nice approach.

There's something I'm not entirely happy with though, which is that it concentrates only on championship points, this can skew things dramatically. For example, it would mean that a driver for marrussia who had beaten his team mate 6 times out of 7 was considered "no better" than his team mate. In general, there's a bit of a scale problem. Consider red bull (who being number 1 in the WCC we'd expect in a perfect world to finish 1-2), suppose one driver dominated all races – we'd expect them to score 58% of the team's points (25/43). Now consider Mercedes (who being no 3 we'd expect to finish 5-6), here, a dominating driver would score 55% of the team's points (10/18). Next, consider Force India, here we'd expect a dominating driver to score 67% of the team's points (2/3). Finally, at Marussia we'd get a division by 0 error.

Because of that, I've slightly adapted the system. We'd similarly expect that a driver who was even would get "exactly" 50% of the race and qualifying results in their favour, we can apply the same scale to the proportion of higher finishes each driver gets.

Thus, I will apply the following. If a driver has scored:
0-3% (above 50%) of the team's points, they will be considered to be "within the error bars" and hence score 0 points on the newly enacded bob's overly named unilaterally silly system.
5.0001%-10% (above 50%) of the team's points, they will be considered to be "fairly clear top dog" and score 1 BONUSS point
10.0001%-15% (above 50%) of the team's points, they will be considered to be "clear top dog" and score 2 BONUSS points
15.0001% and up (above 50%) of the team's points, they will be considered to be DOMINATING and score 3 BONUSS points

Similarly, if a driver has...
0-7% (above 50%) of the team's finishes in the lead (or qualifying results in the lead), they will be considered to be "within the error bars" and score 0 BONUSS points.
7.5001%-15% (above 50%) nets you 1 BONUSS point
15.001%-22.5% (above 50%) nets you 2 BONUSS points
and 22.5001% and up (you get the idea).

Finally, I will sum the points (removing points where the other driver is beating them), any driver who scores...
1-2 BONUSS points will be considered to be a "slim leader"
3-4 BONUSS points will be considered to be a "fairly clear top dog"
5-7 BONUSS points will be considered to be a "clear top dog"
8-9 BONUSS points will be considered to be DOMINATING.

For teams where no points have been scored, this will be adjusted to:
1 point – slim leader
2/3 points – fairly clear top dog
4/5 points – clear top dog
6 points – DOMINATING

Thus...
RedBull
Vettel has outqualified Webber 7-0 - 50% above 50% – DOMINATION – 3 BONUSS points.
Vettel has outraced Webber 7-0 - 50% above 50% – DOMINATION – 3 BONUSS points.
Vettel has scored 65.7% of Red Bull's points – 15.7% above 50% – DOMINATION – 3 BONUSS points.
Vettel is DOMINATING.

Ferrari
Alonso has outqualified Massa 5-2 – 21.4% above 50% – Clear top dog – 2 BONUSS points.
Alonso has outraced Massa 6-1 – 35.7% above 50% – DOMINATION – 3 BONUSS points.
Alonso has scored 66.2% of Ferrari's points – 16.2% above 50% – DOMINATION – 3 BONUSS points.
Alonso is DOMINATING

Lotus
Raikonnen has outqualified Grosjean 7-0 - 50% above 50% – DOMINATION – 3 BONUSS points.
Raikonnen has outraced Grosjean 6-1 – 35.7% above 50% – DOMINATION – 3 BONUSS points.
Raikonnen has scored 77.2% of Lotus' points (27.2% above 50%) – DOMINATION – 3 BONUSS points.
Raikonnen is DOMINATING

Mercedes
Hamilton has outqualified Rosberg 4-3 – 7.1% above 50% – Too close to call – 0 BONUSS points.
Hamilton has outraced Rosberg 5-2 – 21.4% above 50% – Clear top dog – 2 BONUSS points.
Hamilton has scored 57.5% of Mercedes' points (7.5% above 50%) – Fairly clear top dog – 1 BONUSS point.
Fairly clear top dog: Hamilton

McLaren
Button has outqualified Perez 5-2 – 21.4% above 50% – Clear top dog – 2 BONUSS points.
Button has outraced Perez 4-3 – 7.1% above 50% – Too close to call – 0 BONUSS points.
Button has scored 67.6% of McLaren's points (17.6% above 50%) – DOMINATION – 3 BONUSS points.
Clear top dog: Button

Force India
DiResta has outqualified Sutil 4-3 – 7.1% above 50% – Too close to call – 0 BONUSS points.
DiResta has outraced Sutil 5-2 – 21.4% above 50% – Clear top dog – 2 BONUSS points.
DiResta has scored 66.7% of Force India's points (16.7% above 50%) – DOMINATION – 3 BONUSS points.
Clear top dog: DiResta

Toro Rosso
Ricciardo has outqualified Vergne 4-3 – 7.1% above 50% – Too close to call – 0 BONUSS points.
Vergne has outraced Ricciardo 4-3 – 7.1% above 50% – Too close to call – 0 BONUSS points.
Verge has scored 65% of Toro Rosso's points (15% above 50%) – Clear top dog – 2 BONUSS points.
Slim leader: Vergne

Sauber
Hulkenberg has outqualified Guttieres 7-0 - 50% above 50% – DOMINATION – 3 BONUSS points.
Hulkenberg has outraced Guttieres 4-3 – 7.1% above 50% – Too close to call – 0 BONUSS points.
Hulkenberg has scored 100% of Sauber's points (50% above 50%) – DOMINATION – 3 BONUSS points.
Clear top dog: Hulkenberg

Williams
Bottas has outqualified Maldonado 5-2 – 21.4% above 50% – Clear top dog – 2 BONUSS points.
Bottas has outraced Maldonado 5-2 – 21.4% above 50% – Clear top dog – 2 BONUSS points.
Neither driver has scored
Clear top dog: Bottas

Marrussia
Biancci has outqualified Chilton 6-1 – 35.7% above 50% – DOMINATION – 3 BONUSS points.
Biancci has outraced Chilton 6-1 – 35.7% above 50% – DOMINATION – 3 BONUSS points.
Neither driver has scored
Biancci is DOMINATING

Caterham
Pic has outqualified Van Der Garde 4-3 – 7.1% above 50% – Too close to call – 0 BONUSS points.
Pic has outraced Van Der Garde 6-1 – 35.7% above 50% – DOMINATION – 3 BONUSS points.
Neither driver has scored
Fairly clear top dog: Pic

Thankfully, most drivers stay in the same place – the main adjustments being that some drivers gain the newly introduced rank DOMINATING.

[Stradivarius]

Overall, I think this is a good approach. I specified that the differences I looked at works best for teams that regularly score points,


I still have a small objection regarding qualifying in normal races, where team orders and technical failures don't happen. Just to illustrate this with an example, let's say driver A takes pole and his teammate (driver B) qualifies 2nd. Driver A has performed better, and you reward him. So far, so good! In the race, both drivers perform equally well, and driver A wins 1 second ahead of driver B. Now you reward driver A again, despite the race performance being equal. Driver A will of course get 25 points, while driver B will get 18 points. For the third time, driver A is rewarded, basically for being quicker in qualifying. I don't think it makes sense to split up the weekend like this. I think that if you consider both drivers' performance over the whole weekend, driver A is worth 25 points, while driver B is worth 18 points.

Let's say that in the next race, driver A takes pole again. He then gets his reward, which makes sense, but driver B is quicker in the race and overtakes his teammate. Driver B wins the race, while driver A finishes 2nd. Isn't this race performance from driver B more impressive than driver A's performance in the previous race? Winning from pole is easier than winning from 2nd place, isn't it? But driver B doesn't get any additional credit for winning from 2nd on the grid.

If we look at the qualifyings, driver A has beaten driver B by one position twice, so let's say it is 2 - 0 so far. But when we look at the races, it is 0 - 0 in the first race, as the drivers were equally good. In the second race, however, driver B was best and gained one place, which should give him 1 point. Driver A lost one place, and to me it would then make sense to give him -1 point. So then it is actually 1 - 1 between the two. (Hypothetically, if the drivers finished the race side by side, so they would share the victory, driver B would have gained one position and driver A would not have lost one, so then it would be 1 - 0 for driver B in that race.) This conclusion happens to be in line with the championship positions. Both drivers have 43 points from these two races and that means they are equal. Qualifying is never considered in the championship. Even when two drivers have the same amount of points, qualifying is not considered.

The aim in f1 is to win races and championships. Whether you do that like Vettel and Hamilton, who usually qualifies very well, or whether you do that like Raikkonen and Alonso, doesn't really matter. In my opinion, Raikkonen's victory in Australia was equally impressive as Rosberg's victory in Monaco. Rosberg's qualifying was more impressive than Raikkonens qualifying. But Raikkonens race was equally more impressive than Rosberg's race, as Rosberg only had to stay in front and not make any mistakes, while Raikkonen, who started 7th, had to pass a lot of other competitors on his way to the win. In other words; Raikkonen made up for the qualifying in the race.

Only if there is any reason not to take the race result into account, because of team orders or technical failures or collisions not caused by the driver himself, can I see any reason to pay any attention to qualifying.

[Phil]

Let's say that in the next race, driver A takes pole again. He then gets his reward, which makes sense, but driver B is quicker in the race and overtakes his teammate. Driver B wins the race, while driver A finishes 2nd. Isn't this race performance from driver B more impressive than driver A's performance in the previous race? Winning from pole is easier than winning from 2nd place, isn't it? But driver B doesn't get any additional credit for winning from 2nd on the grid.

IMO - there is no ideal way to combine these two things, because essentially, there are two different skill sets. Especially in todays F1 where tyre conservation and strategy as well as team work plays a much bigger role than qualifying, where the skillset is more centered around the driver and his ability to extract the most performance on a single lap on the underlying track conditions.

If you take the seasons 2010-2013 and look specifically at Button and Hamilton as team-mates, you will see that both had a very different approach. Of course, everyone from the armchair can argue that points, is all that matters. But not every driver is happy to follow that approach. Especially in 2010 and 2011, Hamilton often approached the angle "win or nothing" - which showed his overly agressive approach often fail or get tangled up in collissions that cost him points. In 2011, this wouldn't have made a difference, since Vettel and RedBull utterly dominated. Button on the other hand has always been the driver that especially in that year, was far more happy to rack up consistent points. It seems, he was more actually pleased to finish 2nd or 3rd (various intances point that he was happy to follow a car rather than attempt a risky overtake) - or even further down, as long as it ment scoring consistantly. In the end, you have a driver who was close to his full potential (not necessarely quick in qualifying but always getting the most from his starting position) and another driver who was severely underperforming relative to his potential (qualifying higher, but throwing away points in a desperate attempt to beat the RedBull dominance).

The numbers are what they are in the end of course, but to me it was quite clear that the results especially in 2011 flattered Buttons performance relative to Hamiltons. If Hamilton had driven with the sole purpose of simply beating his team-mate and ignoring the WDC as a whole (which was a lost cause in 2011 anyway you look at it), there's no way he would have faired worse than Button from the better starting positions that he usually qualifyed in.

So where does that bring me? That it's easier to determine who is a quicker driver purely by looking at qualifying because not everyone drives the same race - or has the same challenges during it. In other words, there's no way to account who had the more impressive race, without looking exactly at what happened during it. I.e. A pole starter will always have an easy win because he will often find himself in clean air, where as people starting behind him will be likely more in battles with one another over positions. And how do you quantify if a driver is taken out - completely out of his control - during the race and lost X number of points? Detaching qualifying from race makes the picture more objective because you don't have to look at the What-if scenarios and less circumstances taint the picture.

[Stradivarius]

Especially in todays F1 where tyre conservation and strategy as well as team work plays a much bigger role than qualifying, where the skillset is more centered around the driver and his ability to extract the most performance on a single lap on the underlying track conditions.

If tyre conservation plays a much bigger role than qualifying, why shouldn't a driver who is good at conserving his tyres be rated higher than a driver who is good at qualifying? After all, we are just observing competitors trying to maximize their performance within the competition and to most drivers, at least the top drivers, it is all about maximizing their points.

Detaching qualifying from race makes the picture more objective because you don't have to look at the What-if scenarios and less circumstances taint the picture.

As far as I can tell, I am not looking at any what-if scenarios, I am just arguing that the final results, i.e. the points is what should count. You, on the other hand:

If Hamilton had driven with the sole purpose of simply beating his team-mate and ignoring the WDC as a whole (which was a lost cause in 2011 anyway you look at it), there's no way he would have faired worse than Button from the better starting positions that he usually qualifyed in.

The fact is that Button beat Hamilton in 2011 quite clearly. It is true that Hamilton was usually faster, but Button was usually smarter. They both won 3 races, so your argument that Hamilton had a "win or nothing" approach doesn't change anything. It actually just makes him look stupid, if it is true, since Button took as many wins as him without crashing every 3rd race or so, and also got twice as many podium finishes.

But I suggest we try to keep this discussion abstract, as it has so far proved to be the most contructive way to go: Qualifying well is definitely a skill that makes a race driver better. But the ability to advance to the front, having started from behind, is also a skill that makes a race driver better. So under normal circumstances, the driver's overall performance is reflected by the final race result. When a driver wins a race, he has made up for everything that happened during qualifying, regardless of whether he started first or last. So the final race result already takes both qualifying skill and all other kinds of racing skill into account.

If a driver always beats his teammate in qualifying, but always looses out to him in the race, I would question his race performance rather than celebrate his qualifying performance. If your qualifying doesn't help you do well in the race, it is a useless skill. On the other hand, if a driver gets a lot of good race results becaus he qualifies well, then qualifying is a usefull skill, but it is already reflected by the race result.

[LionKing]

In 2011 Button beat Hamilton on merit. You can not just give the excuse of win or nothing approach.

For instance last year at Australia Lewis was on pole but Jenson was faster in the race. Lewis did not lose that race because of his approach. At Suzuka 2011 Jenson won, Lewis was nowhere and ended up fifth. Majority of Lewis's collisons were with Massa usually for positions 5-8. To give perspective 2011 Massa did not have a single P4 or higher finish in 2011.His bests are a couple of P5s.

[SectorOne]

Yea Button was definitely quicker in AUS 2012.
But where was he the rest of the season? He disappeared from the radar in the middle of the season.

Funny when you think about it, imagine Hamilton not being in the team in 2012 and then seeing Button mysteriously off-pace.
You would think the Mclaren was a dog.

Kinda makes you wonder just how bad this years car really is..

[SectorOne]

Some words from Button, quite interesting.

Staying with Lewis Hamilton. Did you expect that he is doing so badly against Nico Rosberg? Especially in qualifying?

Button: You have to be fair. He has collected at least significantly more points than Nico. Lewis is incredibly fast. But for him the same as all of us is: If he does not have the right balance in the car that suits him, and he was used for many years, then it is not easy. And of course, Nico is also fast. But Lewis has not lost his speed. Is still there. He will come back. And then he will shock you all.

http://translate.google.com/translate?s ... 72001.html

[beelsebob]

After silverstone:

RedBull
Vettel has outqualified Webber 8-0 - 50% above 50% – DOMINATION – 3 BONUSS points.
Vettel has outraced Webber 7-1 - 37.5% above 50% – DOMINATION – 3 BONUSS points.
Vettel has scored 60.0% of Red Bull's points – 10.0% above 50% – Fairly clear top dog – 1 BONUSS point.
Vettel is Clear top dog. (Vettel ↓)

Ferrari
Alonso has outqualified Massa 6-2 – 25% above 50% – DOMINATION – 3 BONUSS points.
Alonso has outraced Massa 7-1 – 37.5% above 50% – DOMINATION – 3 BONUSS points.
Alonso has scored 66.0% of Ferrari's points – 16.0% above 50% – DOMINATION – 3 BONUSS points.
Alonso is DOMINATING

Lotus
Raikonnen has outqualified Grosjean 7-1 - 37.5% above 50% – DOMINATION – 3 BONUSS points.
Raikonnen has outraced Grosjean 7-1 – 37.5% above 50% – DOMINATION – 3 BONUSS points.
Raikonnen has scored 79.8% of Lotus' points (29.8% above 50%) – DOMINATION – 3 BONUSS points.
Raikonnen is DOMINATING

Mercedes
Hamilton has outqualified Rosberg 5-3 – 12.5% above 50% – Fairly clear top dog – 1 BONUSS points.
Hamilton has outraced Rosberg 5-3 – 12.5% above 50% – Fairly clear top dog – 1 BONUSS points.
Hamilton has scored 52.0% of Mercedes' points (2.0% above 50%) – Too close to call – 0 BONUSS points.
Slim Leader: Hamilton (Hamilton ↓)

McLaren
Button has outqualified Perez 6-2 – 25% above 50% – DOMINATION – 3 BONUSS points.
Button has outraced Perez 5-3 – 12.5% above 50% – Fairly clear top dog – 1 BONUSS points.
Button has scored 67.7% of McLaren's points (17.7% above 50%) – DOMINATION – 3 BONUSS points.
Clear top dog: Button

Force India
The two are level on qualifying results – 0% above 50% – Too close to call – 0 BONUSS points.
DiResta has outraced Sutil 5-3 – 12.5% above 50% – Fairly clear top dog – 1 BONUSS points.
DiResta has scored 61.0% of Force India's points (11.0% above 50%) – Clear top dog – 2 BONUSS points.
Fairly clear top dog: DiResta (DiResta ↓)

Toro Rosso
Ricciardo has outqualified Vergne 5-3 – 12.5% above 50% – Fairly clear top dog – 1 BONUSS point.
The two are level on race results – 0% above 50% – Too close to call – 0 BONUSS points.
Verge has scored 51.4% of Toro Rosso's points (1.4% above 50%) – Too close to call – 0 BONUSS points.
Slim leader: Ricciardo (Ricciardo ↑)

Sauber
Hulkenberg has outqualified Guttieres 8-0 - 50% above 50% – DOMINATION – 3 BONUSS points.
Hulkenberg has outraced Guttieres 5-3 – Fairly clear top dog – 1 BONUSS points.
Hulkenberg has scored 100% of Sauber's points (50% above 50%) – DOMINATION – 3 BONUSS points.
Clear top dog: Hulkenberg

Williams
Bottas has outqualified Maldonado 5-3 – 12.5% above 50% – Fairly clear top dog – 1 BONUSS points.
Bottas has outraced Maldonado 5-3 – 12.5% above 50% – Fairly clear top dog – 1 BONUSS points.
Neither driver has scored
Fairly clear top dog: Bottas (Bottas ↓)

Marrussia
Biancci has outqualified Chilton 7-1 – 37.5% above 50% – DOMINATION – 3 BONUSS points.
Biancci has outraced Chilton 7-1 – 37.5% above 50% – DOMINATION – 3 BONUSS points.
Neither driver has scored
Biancci is DOMINATING

Caterham
Pic has outqualified Van Der Garde 5-3 – 12.5% above 50% – Fairly clear top dog – 1 BONUSS points.
Pic has outraced Van Der Garde 7-1 – 37.5% above 50% – DOMINATION – 3 BONUSS points.
Neither driver has scored
Clear top dog: Pic (Pic ↑)

So, Vettel, Hamilton and DiResta all drop a chunk due to no fault of their own; Ricciardo gets back ahead of Vergne in our rankings, despite his tyre disaster; Maldonado seems to be getting a handle on Bottas; Pic seems to be reestablishing himself against Van DerGarde.

[LionKing]

I think it is 6-2 Kimi in qualifying not 7-1.

[beelsebob]

I think it is 6-2 Kimi in qualifying not 7-1.

Formula1.com disagrees.

[LionKing]

I think it is 6-2 Kimi in qualifying not 7-1.

Formula1.com disagrees.

You are right my bad. It was 7-0 before Britain....

[beelsebob]

After Germany:

RedBull
Vettel has outqualified Webber 9-0 - 50% above 50% – DOMINATION – 3 BONUSS points.
Vettel has outraced Webber 8-1 - 38.8% above 50% – DOMINATION – 3 BONUSS points.
Vettel has scored 62.8% of Red Bull's points – 12.8% above 50% – Clear top dog – 2 BONUSS point.
Vettel is DOMINATING. (Vettel ↑)

Ferrari
Alonso has outqualified Massa 6-3 – 16.6% above 50% – Clear top dog – 2 BONUSS points.
Alonso has outraced Massa 8-1 – 38.8% above 50% – DOMINATION – 3 BONUSS points.
Alonso has scored 68.3% of Ferrari's points – 18.3% above 50% – DOMINATION – 3 BONUSS points.
Alonso is DOMINATING

Lotus
Raikonnen has outqualified Grosjean 8-1 - 38.8% above 50% – DOMINATION – 3 BONUSS points.
Raikonnen has outraced Grosjean 8-1 – 38.8% above 50% – DOMINATION – 3 BONUSS points.
Raikonnen has scored 79.8% of Lotus' points (29.8% above 50%) – DOMINATION – 3 BONUSS points.
Raikonnen is DOMINATING

Mercedes
Hamilton has outqualified Rosberg 6-3 – 16.6% above 50% – Clear top dog – 2 BONUSS points.
Hamilton has outraced Rosberg 6-3 – 16.6% above 50% – Clear top dog – 2 BONUSS points.
Hamilton has scored 54.0% of Mercedes' points (4.0% above 50%) – Too close to call – 0 BONUSS points.
Fairly Clear Top Dog: Hamilton (Hamilton ↑)

McLaren
Button has outqualified Perez 7-2 – 27.7% above 50% – DOMINATION – 3 BONUSS points.
Button has outraced Perez 6-3 – 16.6% above 50% – Clear top dog – 2 BONUSS points.
Button has scored 67.3% of McLaren's points (17.3% above 50%) – DOMINATION – 3 BONUSS points.
DOMINATING: Button (Button ↑)

Force India
DiResta has outqualified Sutil 5-4 – 5.5% above 50% – Too close to call – 0 BONUSS points.
DiResta has outraced Sutil 6-3 – 16.6% above 50% – Clear top dog – 2 BONUSS points.
DiResta has scored 61.0% of Force India's points (11.0% above 50%) – Clear top dog – 2 BONUSS points.
Fairly clear top dog: DiResta

Toro Rosso
Ricciardo has outqualified Vergne 6-3 – 16.6% above 50% – Clear top dog – 2 BONUSS point.
Ricciardo has outraced Vergne 5-4 – 5.5% above 50% – Too close to call – 0 BONUSS points.
Verge has scored 54.1% of Toro Rosso's points (4.1% above 50%) – Too close to call – 0 BONUSS points.
Slim leader: Ricciardo (Ricciardo ↑)

Sauber
Hulkenberg has outqualified Guttieres 9-0 - 50% above 50% – DOMINATION – 3 BONUSS points.
Hulkenberg has outraced Guttieres 6-3 – 16.6% above 50% - Clear top dog – 2 BONUSS points.
Hulkenberg has scored 100% of Sauber's points (50% above 50%) – DOMINATION – 3 BONUSS points.
DOMINATING: Hulkenberg

Williams
Bottas has outqualified Maldonado 6-3 – 16.6% above 50% – Clear top dog – 2 BONUSS points.
Bottas has outraced Maldonado 5-4 – 5.5% above 50% – Fairly clear top dog – 1 BONUSS points.
Neither driver has scored
Fairly clear top dog: Bottas

Marrussia
Biancci has outqualified Chilton 8-1 – 38.8% above 50% – DOMINATION – 3 BONUSS points.
Biancci has outraced Chilton 7-2 – 27.7% above 50% – DOMINATION – 3 BONUSS points.
Neither driver has scored
Biancci is DOMINATING

Caterham
Pic has outqualified Van Der Garde 6-3 – 16.6% above 50% – Clear top dog – 2 BONUSS points.
Pic has outraced Van Der Garde 8-1 – 38.8% above 50% – DOMINATION – 3 BONUSS points.
Neither driver has scored
Clear top dog: Pic (Pic ↑)

Vettel regains his domination factor, along with Hamilton and Button reaffirming their higher position.