2022 Hungarian Grand Prix - Hungaroring, July 29 - 31

[Sieper]

this is a semantics discussion. Some people want to make it very clear they are never in awe with a drivers performance I feel, it is simply what the car is capable off. Whilst secretly they do think, what the! (at least, I hope).

F.e. when Hamilton was slowly closing in on Verstappen in that second stint I did think, wow that is impressive. Then Hamilton had his little off track moment and after that he also stopped gaining on Max for a number of laps. He adjusted his pace to be a bit more on the safe side. Before that he was thus extremely close to the limit. Which is very good and needs to be recognized. Not just a technically correct "It is in the car".

[Tvetovnato]

this is a semantics discussion. Some people want to make it very clear they are never in awe with a drivers performance I feel, it is simply what the car is capable off. Whilst secretly they do think, what the! (at least, I hope).

F.e. when Hamilton was slowly closing in on Verstappen in that second stint I did think, wow that is impressive. Then Hamilton had his little off track moment and after that he also stopped gaining on Max for a number of laps. He adjusted his pace to be a bit more on the safe side. Before that he was thus extremely close to the limit. Which is very good and needs to be recognized. Not just a technically correct "It is in the car".

Yes, it’s a semantics discussion. The fact that no one can drive a car faster than is physically possible does not diminish a driver’s performance input or relevance. It’s about staying as close to 100 % if what the car can do as often as possible, something which a few drivers on the grid are very good at, as showed in Budapest. I think all here can agree on that.

[Just_a_fan]

this is a semantics discussion. Some people want to make it very clear they are never in awe with a drivers performance I feel, it is simply what the car is capable off. Whilst secretly they do think, what the! (at least, I hope).

I'm one of those that thinks it's important not to make the drivers in to god-like characters. Yes, they are amazing drivers, but it's important to remember that the hyperbole of "he's driven that car over its limit" is just media rubbish.

When I see a driver having a "where did that come from?" performance, I'm as amazed as anyone. But I never think "he's got 110% out of the car" because that's not possible and I think we should remember that - this is a technical forum, after all.

If we're happy to believe that a driver gets 110% out of a car, then we should just give up on the technical aspect and just start an F1 religion.

[Sieper]

But I don’t like religion (abuse there off) so let’s just be amazed every now and then (hopefully, that is what makes the sport so exciting) and call that 100%

[codetower]

This is the way I see it: Let's say a "Perfect" drive constitutes a driver getting 100% out of a given car on any given track. Hitting every turn perfectly, utilizing ERS perfectly, accelerating at the right time out of every turn at the right amount, manage tyre deg perfectly, etc. The best drivers in the world; The Hamilton's, the Schumachers, the Sennas, and so on, are the drivers who drive as close to perfect more often than most other drivers. I don't believe even the best drivers regularly drive 100% every race, every lap, but they get close more often.

Todays drivers like Verstappen, Leclerc, Russel, Lando will drive closer to that 100% than say Latifi, Stroll, Tsunoda etc. As an example, Verstappen probably drives that RB at an average of 97%-98% whereas Perez probably averages around 94%-95%. But no, you can't drive better than perfect.

[Just_a_fan]

Todays drivers like Verstappen, Leclerc, Russel, Lando will drive closer to that 100% than say Latifi, Stroll, Tsunoda etc. As an example, Verstappen probably drives that RB at an average of 97%-98% whereas Perez probably averages around 94%-95%. But no, you can't drive better than perfect.

Interestingly, I think the percentages are closer than that. I think the difference between the best and the almost best drivers (a reasonable description of Max and Sergio), is often much less than 1%. In Q3 in France, for example, the difference was 0.159 seconds over a lap of less than 92 seconds. That's a fraction of 1% between them.

It's always amused me when we talk about drivers "destroying their team mate" when we refer to a difference in performance of much less than 1%. Yes, it's motor racing, but being only perhaps 0.5% slower is amazingly close in any rational sense.

Some of us remember when drivers failed to qualify because their car/driver combination was more than 7% off the pace. These days, even the "slow" and "rubbish" drivers are within less than half that from pole. Times change, eh?

[Edax]

This is the way I see it: Let's say a "Perfect" drive constitutes a driver getting 100% out of a given car on any given track. Hitting every turn perfectly, utilizing ERS perfectly, accelerating at the right time out of every turn at the right amount, manage tyre deg perfectly, etc. The best drivers in the world; The Hamilton's, the Schumachers, the Sennas, and so on, are the drivers who drive as close to perfect more often than most other drivers. I don't believe even the best drivers regularly drive 100% every race, every lap, but they get close more often.

Todays drivers like Verstappen, Leclerc, Russel, Lando will drive closer to that 100% than say Latifi, Stroll, Tsunoda etc. As an example, Verstappen probably drives that RB at an average of 97%-98% whereas Perez probably averages around 94%-95%. But no, you can't drive better than perfect.

I agree. Racing is about much more than being fast. I reckon most drivers can be 1 second faster on any given lap of a race, but what is the use if you are running on rims after 5 laps or on fumes after 50, or go trough a gearbox every other race. Laptime is a poor indicator for driver ability.

The best driver is the one who wastes the least of the resources given to him. That means automatically staying within the limits of the material.

I think a better indicator is how far some of the drivers are from their actual limits. You hear some of the drivers casually chatting about the weather and need for hydration, tire strategy, things they see on the trackside screen and wildlife around the track, while setting consistent fast laps. On the other side you hear some drivers in a semi perpetual mode of panic.

I guess the best drivers never exceed the limits of the car while the worst drivers regularly exceed the limits of their abilities.

[codetower]

Todays drivers like Verstappen, Leclerc, Russel, Lando will drive closer to that 100% than say Latifi, Stroll, Tsunoda etc. As an example, Verstappen probably drives that RB at an average of 97%-98% whereas Perez probably averages around 94%-95%. But no, you can't drive better than perfect.

Interestingly, I think the percentages are closer than that. I think the difference between the best and the almost best drivers (a reasonable description of Max and Sergio), is often much less than 1%. In Q3 in France, for example, the difference was 0.159 seconds over a lap of less than 92 seconds. That's a fraction of 1% between them.

It's always amused me when we talk about drivers "destroying their team mate" when we refer to a difference in performance of much less than 1%. Yes, it's motor racing, but being only perhaps 0.5% slower is amazingly close in any rational sense.

Some of us remember when drivers failed to qualify because their car/driver combination was more than 7% off the pace. These days, even the "slow" and "rubbish" drivers are within less than half that from pole. Times change, eh?

Maybe closer... I just pulled those numbers out of my, uh.... shoe

I do agree though about drivers being much closer than we, or the media, make them out to be. You know what I would love to see, instead of all these sprints? Is to take the F1-75, the RB18 and the W13 and have each driver on the grid do a couple of quali laps in each car. each car obviously takes a different driving style, but I'd be curious to see how each would fare in similar cars.

[Sieper]

If you are looking at laptimes the procentual difference is very small. Between even the very best and worst currently driving.

But still, I can easily name a quarter of the grid that I don’t count to the best drivers and lots of talent that don’t have and maybe never will get a seat.

[Just_a_fan]

If you are looking at laptimes the procentual difference is very small. Between even the very best and worst currently driving.

But still, I can easily name a quarter of the grid that I don’t count to the best drivers and lots of talent that don’t have and maybe never will get a seat.

But on what grounds do you claim them to be no good? Very few have sat next to the "greats" and so very few can be directly compared.

Do I think Max, Lewis, Fernando, etc., are better than Ocon, Latifi, Stroll? Why, yes, I do. But how do I prove it?

Back in the day, the drivers would have raced each other in the junior formulae. But even that is a crude metric. We have a grid of drivers that span one and a half decades. Few raced each other. And even fewer, if any, raced each other in equal cars.

There are any number of ways to compare drivers over the years, but few of them, if any, are accurate.

[PlatinumZealot]

This is the way I see it: Let's say a "Perfect" drive constitutes a driver getting 100% out of a given car on any given track. Hitting every turn perfectly, utilizing ERS perfectly, accelerating at the right time out of every turn at the right amount, manage tyre deg perfectly, etc. The best drivers in the world; The Hamilton's, the Schumachers, the Sennas, and so on, are the drivers who drive as close to perfect more often than most other drivers. I don't believe even the best drivers regularly drive 100% every race, every lap, but they get close more often.

Todays drivers like Verstappen, Leclerc, Russel, Lando will drive closer to that 100% than say Latifi, Stroll, Tsunoda etc. As an example, Verstappen probably drives that RB at an average of 97%-98% whereas Perez probably averages around 94%-95%. But no, you can't drive better than perfect.

With the Pirelli tyres the car has to be nursed to keep them in good shape kver the stint, so in that Ideal world the drive at 100% would taking perfectly just enough out of the tyre not to damage it too much to leave just enough life so the drop off curve happens just after the driver completes his fast lap at the end of his stint!

So the limit at the first laps in that perfect could actually be slower than another driver who foolishly burns up his tyres!

So yeah there is a new and very cloudy, obscure definition of what is the limit during these races!

In qualifying it is a clearly definition though.

[mzso]

This is the way I see it: Let's say a "Perfect" drive constitutes a driver getting 100% out of a given car on any given track. Hitting every turn perfectly, utilizing ERS perfectly, accelerating at the right time out of every turn at the right amount, manage tyre deg perfectly, etc. The best drivers in the world; The Hamilton's, the Schumachers, the Sennas, and so on, are the drivers who drive as close to perfect more often than most other drivers. I don't believe even the best drivers regularly drive 100% every race, every lap, but they get close more often.

Todays drivers like Verstappen, Leclerc, Russel, Lando will drive closer to that 100% than say Latifi, Stroll, Tsunoda etc. As an example, Verstappen probably drives that RB at an average of 97%-98% whereas Perez probably averages around 94%-95%. But no, you can't drive better than perfect.

Neither of them qualify as one of the best drivers the way I see it. Schumacher and Senna were collision causing jerks/bullies who had a lot of bias towards them. Hamilton just drove the utterly fastest car while being decidedly better than Bottas, marginally better than Rosberg, and not at all better than a newcomer Russel.

[xaero]

Schumacher, Senna were and Verstappen now is collision causing jerks/bullies who had a lot of bias towards them. Schumacher, Senna, Prost, Mika, Alonso, Seb, Hamilton, Verstappen just drove the utterly fastest car while sometimes being decidedly better than their teammates and sometimes marginally better than them.

Fixed for you

[mzso]

Schumacher, Senna were and Verstappen now is collision causing jerks/bullies who had a lot of bias towards them. Schumacher, Senna, Prost, Mika, Alonso, Seb, Hamilton, Verstappen just drove the utterly fastest car while sometimes being decidedly better than their teammates and sometimes marginally better than them.

Fixed for you

Broken english and nonsense besides. Some fix...

[vorticism]

Schumacher and Senna were collision causing jerks/bullies who had a lot of bias towards them. Hamilton just drove the utterly fastest car while being decidedly better than Bottas, marginally better than Rosberg, and not at all better than a newcomer Russel.

You rendered thirty years of F1 commentary obsolete within two sentences. Impressive.