Hulkenberg vs Perez - who won and what did we learn?

[f1316]

So the pairing of Hulk and Perez has come to an end. These two - perhaps with Maldonado, Di Resta and Grosjean, maybe Ricciardo at a push - form what I'd characterise as a specific generation of drivers to make it into F1. They are as distinct from the Hamilton, Piquet, Vettel generation as they are from Verstappen, Sainz, Werhlein (maybe Guittierez was on the cusp) etc.

So it was interesting seeing them go head to head because it gave us the chance to directly compare two of the better drivers from that generation.

To start with, here are some stats:

qualifying

2014 Hulk 12-7 Perez; hulk wins by .473
2015 Hulk 11-8 Perez; hulk wins by .395
2016 Hulk 12-9 Perez; hulk wins by .071

Overall: Hulk 35-24

drivers' championship points

2014 Hulk 96;Perez 59
2015 Hulk 58; Perez 78
2016 Hulk 72; Perez 101

Overall: Hulk 226; Perez 238

Podiums: Hulk 0; Perez 4

So the temptation would be to conclude that Hulkenberg is the quicker over one lap and Perez the better over race distances - but I'd suggest that's overly facile.

What's particularly interesting is how their battle has changed over the years, with Perez performing better as the years passed - incidentally (or not, you decide) as Force India's constructors championship position has improved.

I would suggest that it is less that Perez driving better has helped Force India to do better and more that having a better car has enabled him to drive better; Hulkenberg seems like the more consistent performer in both qualifying and races but Perez has a style that can pay off massively in particular conditions.

I believe that - should we get more durable tyres in 2017 - drivers who are 'faster' (I.e. Those usually winning intra team qualifying battles) - will benefit and the particular conditions in which Perez thrived will prove less regular. So were I a team principal choosing a driver, I would personally still choose Hulkenberg - even though he scored fewer points than Perez two years running.

Interested to hear the thoughts of others though - hence the thread

[ME4ME]

This might be of interest:
Perez vs Hulkenberg: The result after three years
http://www.f1fanatic.co.uk/2017/01/09/p ... ree-years/

2016 F1 season driver rankings #8: Perez
http://www.f1fanatic.co.uk/2016/12/13/2 ... s-8-perez/

2016 F1 season driver rankings #9: Hulkenberg
http://www.f1fanatic.co.uk/2016/12/12/2 ... ulkenberg/

Personally I find this particular bit quite telling (regarding Hulkenberg):

Monaco was undoubtedly his best opportunity. He was running fourth and catching the slow Mercedes pair when Force India gambled on pitting him – and dropped him into the queue behind Felipe Massa.

Sergio Perez, who trailled his team mate until they pitted, caught the other side of this break and reached the rostrum. Nonetheless Hulkenberg netted sixth place with a surprise attack on Nico Rosberg on the final lap.

Another possible podium for Hulkenberg in Brazil was lost due to a puncture. Here too his team mate inherited third place, but lost it in the final laps to Max Verstappen.

Hulkenberg also got tired of heading home before the first lap was over. In Russia he was rammed by Esteban Gutierrez (who also hit the Force India driver again in Baku), he was dumped into the pit wall at Singapore

[PlatinumZealot]

Perez won to me. Once both of them got up to full speed they were both consistenlty qualifying close to each other and they were also close in the races. However, why Perez wins it in my opinion is because he is a smarter racer. He avoids trouble, seems to be a better overtaker and he is patient. Hulk was slightly quicker.. But to me he just didnt seem to develop. Not an exciting career to follow.

[f1316]

Thanks ME4ME, that is interesting - similar kind of thing as I was trying to do.

Perez won to me. Once both of them got up to full speed they were both consistenlty qualifying close to each other and they were also close in the races. However, why Perez wins it in my opinion is because he is a smarter racer. He avoids trouble, seems to be a better overtaker and he is patient. Hulk was slightly quicker.. But to me he just didnt seem to develop. Not an exciting career to follow.

There is that 'what might have been' with Hulkenberg, for me.

How close was his move on Hamilton for the lead of the 2012 Brazilian Grand Prix to coming off? Would he have won the race if it had? What difference would that race win have made to his stock/confidence? Would he have got the 2014 Ferrari seat for example?

I know 'shoulda coulda woulda' but he was so close to doing one of those oh so rare wins on merit in an uncompetitive car, that it still deserves recognition in its own right.

[Fulcrum]

Perez has maximised his chances, he's scored podiums with few opportunities to do so. On such a small opportunity set one could argue his results are somewhat circumstantial, but I'll give him the benefit of the doubt. His improvement against Hulkenberg over their 3 year pairing indicates, to me, that McLaren were harsh letting him go after only a year. I certainly consider him at least the equal of Magnussen.

Hulkenberg appears to be the quicker driver (imo), but he's blotted his copybook a few times. He could have won in Brazil, and certainly come 2nd. Instead he made a mistake.

I do wonder how heavily tyre behaviour has influenced their relative trajectories though? Perez is well known to be 'kind' to his tyres. Hulkenberg seems average in this regard. That's a point in Perez's favour, and I'm not trying to detract from his abilities, but my guess is Hulkenberg would outperform Perez if tyres were largely without degradation (Michelin-Bridgestone era).

[Facts Only]

Perez all the way, the big number for a midfield team is Podiums 4 vs 0, Podiums are a massive boost to the teams morale, coverage and ability to attract sponsors. Apart from Canada a couple of years ago Perez has made every podium opportunity count.

Also Perez was coming off the back of what must have been a pretty morale destroying removal from McLaren.

Looking at the Quali' and points numbers as well Perez is definitely on an upward curve.

[CBeck113]

I have to say Perez as well, for a very simple reason: the results count, not the potential. I am a Hulkenberg fan, since he's been the only German driver that doesn't complain when things go wrong (MS was similar but used too many dirty tricks to succeed when his talent and car weren't enough). But always having potential and not really succeeding is probably the worst situation to be in: you have nothing to show for all your work. It would have been nice to see him in a top seat, but sadly he didn't really do enough to prove his worth.

[Pierce89]

I believe that Pirelli is the ONLY reason that Perez has outscored Hulk. Also, in 2014 FI could only make weight with Perez in the car, with Hulkenberg it was above the minimum and yet Hulkenberg had a better season. I put this down to the fact that the 2014 tire had the lowest degradation of the Shitelli era, meaning drivers had more opportunity to drive close the their max.

[f1316]

I believe that Pirelli is the ONLY reason that Perez has outscored Hulk. Also, in 2014 FI could only make weight with Perez in the car, with Hulkenberg it was above the minimum and yet Hulkenberg had a better season. I put this down to the fact that the 2014 tire had the lowest degradation of the Shitelli era, meaning drivers had more opportunity to drive close the their max.

Pretty much agree. I think it's a skill to drive to what you have - and Perez has made good use of the tyres he's had in his era (and people like Hamilton, Alonso and Vettel manage to find their way to the top of the pile regardless) - but in another era Hulkenberg, as the out and out faster guy, would have won imho.

[Pierce89]

I'd like to know why someone removed my +1 but not the one further above. Care to elaborate?

[PlatinumZealot]

I am not sure we can blame the tyres for why one driver performs better than another, when the tyres contribute the same to car balance for everybody. Hulk had all the tools at his disposal to make the tyres work for him. In fact, he was quicker in qualifying so he must have liked the balance of the Pirellis. Race balance is even easier to manage than qualy balance. So with balance out of the way, that leaves warm up and degradation. Hulk is one of the best at tyre warm up so that's out of the equation. And that means you guys are implying that Hulk cannot manage the Pirelli tyre degradation as good as Perez can. Is that a problem with the tyre, a problem with Hulk, or a skill of Perez?

[Fulcrum]

In my earlier comment I regarded this as a strength of Perez. He's got a history of good tyre management (remembering his Sauber drives).

I also happen to agree with Pierce89 and f1316. Tyres that don't degrade nullify Perez's best attribute, and Hulkenberg is ostensibly faster over 'flying' laps, as evidenced by qualifying results.

Hulkenberg being less adept at managing tyre degradation can certainly be a function of all three factors.

- His driving style, hence his problem.
- Perez's skill. We're conducting a comparative analysis. Perez is the yardstick. Perez being very skilled at tyre management makes Hulkenberg look worse at it (even if he's objectively the 2nd best in the field).
- The tyres themselves. The tyres thermal characteristics determine how they wear. If you interact with them more appropriately, better results.

I'm sure Hulkenberg has adapted to the tyres, but some people are just intrinsically better suited to their innate characteristics, Perez appearing to be one of them. What that is a function of, I have no idea. Throttle modulation, ballast bias (they'll never have the same car balance, Hulkenberg is much larger), all the settings with respect to brakes, aero, etc...?

In any event, I'm not trying to detract from Perez. His podiums for Sauber and Force India do differentiate him from Hulkenberg; 7-0 to Perez after the same number of race entries is stark.

If Hulkenberg doesn't manage a podium this year he will have driven the most races without achieving one, a record currently held by Adrian Sutil.

[Manjhi]

Its all about the tyres, but we can't deny the fact that Checo improved a lot as a driver since 2014 after joining Force India. Hulk on the other side had weight disadvantage, he is always an exceptional talent, but arrived in F1 at wrong time. Lets hope he can score some podium with Renault.

[Mandrake]

If you look outside F1 Hulk did an outstanding Job at LeMans being consistent AND clever through traffic. The amount of first lap incidents where he was put out of contention without being anywhere at fault is a direct correlation to his qualifying success. The more you start in the hot zone, the larger the potential fail is. I bet the very backmarkers have a much better 1st lap history than both Perez and Hulk.

Without having exact facts to back it up I have the feeling it was mostly down to strategy that Perez shone in the races where the Podium was a chance, and Hulk was always the one being screwed. Also the side effect that in those races some of the top teams were negatively impacted as well as Hulk.

Perez has certainly upped his game in recent years, but I'd still rate Hulkenberg higher than him....

[PlatinumZealot]

Hulk had like five years to prove himself. He is quick.. But.. Can't remember any outstanding drives. Sorta like the new Nick heidfeld. Quick Nick part two.