F1 Performance: is it the car, is it the driver?

[bhall]

Cam I think you may be missing bhall's point, I think he's saying "it's always the car" that set's the limit a driver can perform to.

Which is kind of obvious IMO.

Well I agree. But we have been discussing whether a driver can effect that performance or not, i.e. put another driver in the same car gets sam/not same results.

I don't think there's a black and white answer to that question. Again, there are too many variables, and the results are all over the place.

For one thing, if a team has a car that neither of its drivers can fully exploit, I think there's a decent chance something is wrong with the car. Otherwise, I think it's inevitable that one will find the limit, and his results will reflect the capability of his machinery. That's just a thought, however, because I can't support it objectively one way or the other...sorta like most driver comparisons.

When Vettel stepped in for Kubica at the 2007 USGP, he qualified nearly 0.6s off Heidfeld's pace and was just over 0.4s off Heidfeld's fastest lap. He did score points, though, and it was a good drive for a rookie in his first race. For context, Kubica and Heidfeld were pretty evenly matched that year.

On the flip side, and bless his heart, poor ol' Luca Badoer put in two of the worst performances in F1 history when he replaced Massa in 2009. Frankly, it was painful to watch, and the less said about whole ordeal the better.

So, there's that. Make of it what you will.

We've now beaten this horse to an undignified, bloody pulp, and I'm done.

For real this time.

I mean it.

Just like last time.

You can't read this.

[Richard]

In modern times, but when I was young and handsome, JYS won the wdc in this shitbox, not even Chris Amon could handle it.

As I mentioned earlier, the cars are now so well optimised by the engineers, the optimal performance is so well defined, and the drivers are so well drilled on how to stay at that optimum point that the individual characteristics of the driver have a greatly diminished influence on the order of the grid.

We have hard data to back this up. We can see the order on the WDC and WCC are very similar in the Brawn/Red Bull/Merc eras. Remember when the WCC used to be exciting? Nowadays its just a rinse & repeat of the WDC. That tells us that the tables are decide by the car, and the drivers merely determine the order within the team.

[JimClarkFan]

In modern times, but when I was young and handsome, JYS won the wdc in this shitbox, not even Chris Amon could handle it.

As I mentioned earlier, the cars are now so well optimised by the engineers, the optimal performance is so well defined, and the drivers are so well drilled on how to stay at that optimum point that the individual characteristics of the driver have a greatly diminished influence on the order of the grid.

We have hard data to back this up. We can see the order on the WDC and WCC are very similar in the Brawn/Red Bull/Merc eras. Remember when the WCC used to be exciting? Nowadays its just a rinse & repeat of the WDC. That tells us that the tables are decide by the car, and the drivers merely determine the order within the team.

The direction of travels towards that view is pretty clear, I agree. But there are still clear differences.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2009_Formula_One_season
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2010_Formula_One_season
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2011_Formula_One_season
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2012_Formula_One_season
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2013_Formula_One_season

(looking at the top 6 or so positions in the drivers)
In 09 Vettel leap frogged a Brawn car +1 position compared to WCC positions
In 10 Alonso leapped past two Mclarens and a Red Bull (+3), Kubica a Mercedes (+1) compared to WCC positions
In 11, Button leaped a Red Bull (+1) and Alonso a Mclaren (+1) compared to WCC positions
In 12, Alonso (+1) leaped a Red Bull and Kimi (+3)leapped two Mclarens and a Red Bull compared to WCC positions
In 13, Alonso leaped a Red Bull and two Mercs (+3), Kimi one Merc (+1) compared to WCC positions

Vettel has been largely absent because he has won the past 4 years.

I admit, this is a crude analysis, but I am having trouble accepting that there is no merit in this kind of analysis.

Of course one could point to a poor team mate and say x brought the average down. True of course.


Edit - I should clarify, as it has been brought to my attention that I perhaps misunderstood your post

I too believe it is all the car, but I also believe that different drivers are capable of extracting different %'s of absolute car performance.

I don't think I'm getting my point across very well though

[Stradivarius]

I am not sure if I understand the message from many who write on this topic. If it was all about the car, we would have seen the standings in the driver's championship sorted by teams. For example like this:

1. Hamilton (Mercedes)
2. Rosberg (Mercedes)
3. Alonso (Ferrari)
4. Raikkonen (Ferrari)
5. Ricciardo (Red Bull)
6. Vettel (Red Bull)
7. Hulkenberg (Force India)
8. Perez (Force India)
9. Button (McLaren)
10. Magnussen (McLaren)
11. Bottas (Williams)
12. Massa (Williams)
etc.

But this isn't the case. Thus, the drivers do have an influence. They utilize their car's capabilities differently and that is why the teams actually care about which drivers they have to drive for them. That is why Ferrari decided to let Massa go and keep Alonso. Massa has been 6th, 6th, 7th and 8th in the driver's championship the last 4 years. Alonso has been 2nd, 4th, 2nd and 2nd. That's a pretty big difference, although I am aware that Massa has been given some team orders and had some other unfavorable treatment. But overall, Alonso defnitely performed much better and finished typically 4 places higher in the championship. The difference between those drivers is actually comparable to the difference between two teams, like the difference between Ferrari and Mercedes. So richard_leeds argument, that the performance curve will flatten out over time, can actually be used the oposite way. As the performance between different cars get smaller, the difference in the driver performance will be more important. Right now, the cars are very different due to new regulations, at least when it comes to who is winning the races. But over time, when this evens out, it will be more up to the driver and less up to the car. Unless, there is reason to believe that the driver performance will even out more than the car performance.

[PlatinumZealot]

The driver's job is to drive the car to finish line in the fastest way possible for the car to do so. It is clear that a crappy driver won't be able to do it as quickly as a faster, smarter, more adaptable driver. The car is a large factor but you still need a good driver to extract its potential.

[Mandrake]

I am not sure if I understand the message from many who write on this topic. If it was all about the car, we would have seen the standings in the driver's championship sorted by teams.

If there were no issues with reliability yes, we would see that. If there are no driver errors, yes we would see that. If the cars would perform similarly regardless of the race track, yes we would see that. In 2014 the gap between cars currently is big enough that given no problems of the above appear, team mates would only battle with themselves. However, since this is currently more a rule than exception that unforeseeable things happen, we are lucky to see more fighting than we would see in more reliable cars.

Coming back to Vettel vs Ricciardo 2014, at the moment Ricciardo is performing better than Vettel, no one can deny that. How much of that is down to a car that is not working properly for one driver is a question without answer. I for one believe that only in Barcelona Vettel had a car that worked flawlessly and we were robbed of a real fight due to the huge gap between Ricciardo and Vettel. Was is enough to beat Ric? No one knows. I also believe that the radio messages of Vettel are real. What would be the point to rant about something not performing correctly if it's just a lie? This would just confuse the team and would do no good.
Taking only the Qualifying results is also not going to work. Vettel has had a share of issues here as well (again, would he lie to have an excuse in front of the press? I do not think Vettel is such kind of person) and Ricciardo is a very very good qualifier (see results against Vergne). He was almost beaten by Vergne due to race pace, not lack of qualifying speed. Therefore putting a Ricciardo who seamingly is okay with the handling of the car against Vettel who isn't, I am not surprised to see the gaps we see. Happened with Mark Webber as well.

What remains to see is if Vettel can turn around this trend this season. And 50% of that goes down to RedBull getting their act on the car together. Forgetting to install a Roll-Bar? Impossible to think of in the last 4 years. Whether it's loss of key staff or just lack of motivation due to not being able to win I don't know.....

[PlatinumZealot]

A forgotten roll bar? I think that is set up mistake more than delinquency. As a former Mclaren fan I remember times when Mclaren ran their cars without roll bars in the last few years depending on track. I think Vettel may have been playing with that sort of setup, to soften the ride a bit and he simply forgot to change back.

[Mandrake]

The way he put it on the radio, that it felt like last time when the anti roll bar was broken, does not sound like a serious setup attempt The inner front wheel went up into the air, hardly something you want on your F1 car

[djos]

The driver's job is to drive the car to finish line in the fastest way possible for the car to do so. It is clear that a crappy driver won't be able to do it as quickly as a faster, smarter, more adaptable driver. The car is a large factor but you still need a good driver to extract its potential.

True but I reckon it's 85% car 15% driver nowadays.

[stephenwh]

Well I can't agree with that - at all. It takes bravery and skill to find the limit, and the limit in an F1 car is very narrow, they can snap spin away so easily. There is also rain, needing to conserve the car or push like mad depending on the situation. Then the big thing is driver feedback on developing the car. Good driver feedback which results in improving the car is 15% of the equation? I think not. Take a look at this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oqwbn3ZJjGs

[djos]

Well I can't agree with that - at all. It takes bravery and skill to find the limit, and the limit in an F1 car is a very narrow, they can snap spin away so easily. There is also rain, needing to conserve the car or push like mad depending on the situation. Then the big thing is driver feedback on developing the car. Good driver feedback which results in improving the car is 15% of the equation? I think not.

I'm not sure I explained myself very well, perhaps I should have said the speed is 85% car and 15% driver - the driver is the final ingredient to access the speed inherent in the car.

On a side note, I wonder if any of the teams have played with an AI driver in their simulators to see what the computer thinks is the optimum fastest lap etc?

[MercedesAMGSpy]

A bit annoying these days is that some fans think F1 cars are easy to drive and everybody can do it. Sure, to reach F1 you have to be a very good driver, but their is a difference between them and having one of the top drivers is still an asset.

Yes, even if you have a Mercedes W05, because drivers can give feedback to improve the car and even with a dominant car I have seen enough drivers not extracting the full potential of it.

Of course the car is the most important factor, but a good driver can still make a difference.

[stephenwh]

I edited my post while you were posting and added a link...the video I think highlights some of the driver skill that is required...

[djos]

Don't get me wrong, I'm not claiming F1 cars are easy to drive, I'm just saying the car is the dominant factor in the combined performance of the car + driver combination.

[Cam]

True but I reckon it's 85% car 15% driver nowadays.

Not sure of those exact number, but I agree there is a reasonable gap - which is why the driver performance makes a massive difference in results, example:

Unhappiness among workers in America is costing a shocking $300 billion per year in lost productivity, the Gallup-Healthways estimates. The recent Well-Being Index shows that Americans are increasingly unhappy with their jobs and work environments. When people aren't happy with their jobs or their employers, they don't show up consistently, they produce less and their work quality suffers.

Now, without intending to offend anyone or insulting anyones heroes, when I look at some of the drivers, I, IMO, can see driver performance being effected - and as such, I question whether some drivers are in fact even getting the 85% out of the car, let alone 100%. Some drivers do nothing but complain after each race (about this, that or something else) - there's always an excuse. Those same drivers have nothing positive to say about their own car or team.

A 2011 Harvard Business Review article stated that the level of happiness has a profound impact on workers' creativity, productivity, commitment and collegiality.

It's in this context where I believe the driver will make a big difference in the overall performance of the car.

Look at Ricciardo. You can't wipe the smile of that guy's face. His attitude is right up there and that's effecting his confidence - and just look at his performances on track. It's as though he's making his own luck. Something Vettel is finding out that Webber went through. Webber was unhappy at Red Bull and his performance suffered - nothing went right for him in the end. Now look around the grid - do we see any similarities?

There's too much research being done into this to discount it. Whether a car can do X, Y or Z, will only be relative to the capabilities of the driver. And to say, "put driver A in that car will get same results", I do think discounts the effects the mind has on a persons abilities.