Unusual F1 Stats

pi314159 · Post by **pi314159** » 07 May 2013, 21:42

BabyG wrote:
darkapprentice77 wrote:
BabyG wrote:I would love to have a look at the statistics for win by car numbers. I suspect that 5 would come out higher than 1 as I can recall quite a few championships being won by car number 5 when the world champion has struggled to drag inferior equipment round/lost desire/moved to a less competitive team. It would be interesting to see the spike in wins for number 22 after Lewis Hamilton's and Jenson Button's championship winning years. Has a number 22 car won a race outside of the years 2008/2009?

http://www.statsf1.com/en/statistiques/numero/victoire/nombre.aspx

Excellent! Anyone care to try to explain why 5 has had such a large number of wins? It is a consistently successful number - its not just one driver contributing to its number of wins and the number 5 has won a race almost every year since the 1990s. One explanation is that you are likely to be driving for a competitive team and be the number one driver in that team, but why are the numbers so much greater than for number 3?

It can be partly explained by the fact that 5 and 6 were the "traditional" Williams numbers until 1992.

gnrpoison · Post by **gnrpoison** » 07 May 2013, 21:52

I think its because the teams that won during the set numbers era that have had numbers 5 to 6 have been Brabham, Lotus, Williams, think Ferrari and McLaren have had them aswell, add in Red Bull recently and it explains as most of the teams in the top positions for most wins at some point have had the number 5 car.

pi314159 · Post by **pi314159** » 07 May 2013, 21:56

Meanwhile the number three had been used by the struggling Tyrrell team for decades, while their last win was in Detroit 1983.

WeirdKerr · Post by **WeirdKerr** » 07 May 2013, 21:56

Number 3 was traditionally on the Tyrell from 1974 to 1995

WeirdKerr · Post by **WeirdKerr** » 07 May 2013, 21:57

pi314159 wrote:Meanwhile the number three had been used by the struggling Tyrrell team for decades, while their last win was in China 2012.

fixed

pi314159 · Post by **pi314159** » 07 May 2013, 22:01

WeirdKerr wrote:
pi314159 wrote:Meanwhile the number three had been used by the struggling Tyrrell team for decades, while their last win was in China 2012.

fixed

If you count Mercedes as Tyrrell, ok. Then we have the following teams in 2013:
1/2 Stewart
3/4 Ferrari
5/6 McLaren
7/8 Toleman
9/10 Tyrrell
11/12 Sauber
14/15 Jordan
16/17 Williams
18/19 Minardi

20/21 Lotus
22/23 Manor

Sunshine_Baby_[IT] · Post by **Sunshine_Baby_[IT]** » 07 May 2013, 22:56

pi314159 wrote:
WeirdKerr wrote:
pi314159 wrote:Meanwhile the number three had been used by the struggling Tyrrell team for decades, while their last win was in China 2012.

fixed

If you count Mercedes as Tyrrell, ok. Then we have the following teams in 2013:
1/2 Stewart
3/4 Ferrari
5/6 McLaren
7/8 Toleman
9/10 Tyrrell
11/12 Sauber
14/15 Jordan
16/17 Williams
[url]18/19 Minardi [/url]
20/21 Lotus
22/23 Manor

I really would like to see the real Minardi back...

Onxy Wrecked · Post by **Onxy Wrecked** » 08 May 2013, 01:02

FantometteBR wrote:Can be, but if there wasn't (of if there was that time), could imagine the tons of drivers that could get more results?

Marussia and Caterham might have unrejectified themselves as teams by now if that were the case.

wsrgo · Post by **wsrgo** » 08 May 2013, 02:13

pi314159 wrote:20/21 Lotus

22/23 Manor

I disagree. Caterham/Lotus haven't undergone any ownership changes since 2010, only the name has changed. And I'm not sure Manor counts, they didn't even start a race with that name. It was Virgin right from Bahrain 2010.

dr-baker · Post by **dr-baker** » 08 May 2013, 19:43

If the Virgin Marussia team is Manor, then surely the Lotus Caterham team ought to be either Litespeed or 1Malaysia?

Post by **DemocalypseNow** » 08 May 2013, 20:46

dr-baker wrote:If the Virgin Marussia team is Manor, then surely the Lotus Caterham team ought to be either Litespeed or 1Malaysia?

Except Virgin Racing isn't Manor, so that doesn't apply.

The originals are "Lotus Racing" & "Virgin Racing".

Nessafox · Post by **Nessafox** » 08 May 2013, 22:11

Stramala wrote:
dr-baker wrote:If the Virgin Marussia team is Manor, then surely the Lotus Caterham team ought to be either Litespeed or 1Malaysia?

Except Virgin Racing isn't Manor, so that doesn't apply.

The originals are "Lotus Racing" & "Virgin Racing".

Can't we just call the damn thing Simtek?

Salamander · Post by **Salamander** » 08 May 2013, 22:32

This wrote:
Stramala wrote:
dr-baker wrote:If the Virgin Marussia team is Manor, then surely the Lotus Caterham team ought to be either Litespeed or 1Malaysia?

Except Virgin Racing isn't Manor, so that doesn't apply.

The originals are "Lotus Racing" & "Virgin Racing".

Can't we just call the damn thing Simtek?

I agree, Simtek is a far superior name to everything else they've used.

Sunshine_Baby_[IT] · Post by **Sunshine_Baby_[IT]** » 08 May 2013, 23:58

BlindCaveSalamander wrote:I agree, Simtek is a far superior name to everything else they've used.

You're absolutely right.

Jocke1 · Post by **Jocke1** » 09 May 2013, 09:10

Jocke1 wrote:Interesting statistic after the Chinese GP:

F1 Top 5 finishes:

1. Michael Schumacher - 183
2. Fernando Alonso - 122
3. Alain Prost - 121

To continue with this:

Drivers ranked by career Top 5 Percentage since 1950 (drivers with 100+ races)

1. Lewis Hamilton - 64%
2. Sebastian Vettel - 63,8%
3. Alain Prost - 60,8%
4. Fernando Alonso - 60,7%
5. Michael Schumacher - 59,8%

Jocke1 · Post by **Jocke1** » 09 May 2013, 13:17

Michael Schumacher has as many wins as Fernando Alonso, Sebastian Vettel, Lewis Hamilton and Felipe Massa combined.

Schumacher 91 wins / 306 races

FA (31)
SV (28)
LH (21)
FM (11) = 91 wins / 596 races

Jocke1 · Post by **Jocke1** » 09 May 2013, 13:20

Charles Pic is closing in on being 2nd all-time in Most Races without a point.
If he ends 2013 without scoring a point, he will have 39 races and no points.
That will be good for 2nd all-time behind only Luca Badoer.
--------------------------
Adrian Sutil is closing in on being tied for 2nd all-time in Most Races without a podium.
If he ends 2013 without a podium finish, he will have 109 races and no podium.
That will be good for tying Philippe Alliot for 2nd, behind only Pierluigi Martini.

Jocke1 · Post by **Jocke1** » 23 May 2013, 22:57

Strangest thing.
Indy 2005.
Schumacher set his fastest lap time on lap 48, Barrichello also on lap 48, Monteiro on lap 44, Karthikeyan lap 65, Friesacher lap 43.

and...

Christijan Albers on lap 2 :shock:

And it was only 0.537 sec slower than Karthikeyan's.
0.583 faster than Friesacher's.

How did he do that?

wsrgo · Post by **wsrgo** » 24 May 2013, 05:11

Jocke1 wrote:Strangest thing.
Indy 2005.
Schumacher set his fastest lap time on lap 48, Barrichello also on lap 48, Monteiro on lap 44, Karthikeyan lap 65, Friesacher lap 43.

and...

Christijan Albers on lap 2
And it was only 0.537 sec slower than Karthikeyan's.
0.583 faster than Friesacher's.

How did he do that?

Probably the first instance of a Red Bull-Minardi tie-up. Somebody should have checked Albers's caffeine levels..

Jocke1 · Post by **Jocke1** » 24 May 2013, 13:36

wsrgo wrote:
Jocke1 wrote:Strangest thing.
Indy 2005.
Schumacher set his fastest lap time on lap 48, Barrichello also on lap 48, Monteiro on lap 44, Karthikeyan lap 65, Friesacher lap 43.

and...

Christijan Albers on lap 2
And it was only 0.537 sec slower than Karthikeyan's.
0.583 faster than Friesacher's.

How did he do that?

Probably the first instance of a Red Bull-Minardi tie-up. Somebody should have checked Albers's caffeine levels..

I mean, it was his first flying lap (Albers), and he couldn't better it for the next 69 laps!
How is that possible? Even if you try to do it on purpose?

Even so, he still managed to be ahead of Friesacher in the end, despite also spending 27 seconds longer time in the pits than Friesacher.
It doesn't add up. I'll have to re-watch this race, for it has been many years since I saw it last.

Klon · Post by **Klon** » 24 May 2013, 14:05

Jocke1 wrote:How is that possible? Even if you try to do it on purpose?

Perhaps he believed in the first rounds that he could win this thing and decided to drive the nuts off the car until realising that SCHUMIWINSLOL would celebrate a comeback there.

Jocke1 · Post by **Jocke1** » 28 May 2013, 10:22

Williams F1 Team after the first 6 races through the years:
points

2013 = 0
2012 = 44
2011 = 2
2010 = 8
2009 = 7.5

2008 = 15
2007 = 13
2006 = 10
2005 = 35
2004 = 35

2003 = 35
2002 = 50
2001 = 18
2000 = 15
1999 = 12

1998 = 16
1997 = 40
1996 = 65
1995 = 32
1994 = 25

1993 = 55
1992 = 84
1991 = 33
1990 = 20
1989 = 31

1988 = 1
1987 = 45
1986 = 46
1985 = 17
1984 = 11.5

1983 = 24
1982 = 21
1981 = 58
1980 = 34
1979 = 4

1978 = 3
1976 = 0
1975 = 0

wsrgo · Post by **wsrgo** » 28 May 2013, 18:25

Jocke1 wrote:Williams F1 Team after the first 6 races through the years:
points

2013 = 0
2012 = 44
2011 = 2
2010 = 8
2009 = 7.5

2008 = 15
2007 = 13
2006 = 10
2005 = 35
2004 = 35

2003 = 35
2002 = 50
2001 = 18
2000 = 15
1999 = 12

1998 = 16
1997 = 40
1996 = 65
1995 = 32
1994 = 25

1993 = 55
1992 = 84
1991 = 33
1990 = 20
1989 = 31

1988 = 1
1987 = 45
1986 = 46
1985 = 17
1984 = 11.5

1983 = 24
1982 = 21
1981 = 58
1980 = 34
1979 = 4

1978 = 3
1976 = 0
1975 = 0

Er..I don't think Williams existed in their current form before 1977. That was 'Frank Williams Racing Cars', considered to be a completely different and now-defunct team.

In that regard, this is Williams F1's worst start to a championship season.

Zetec · Post by **Zetec** » 28 May 2013, 18:46

Jocke1 wrote:Williams F1 Team after the first 6 races through the years:
points

2013 = 0
2012 = 44
2005 = 35
2004 = 35

2003 = 35
2002 = 50
2001 = 18
2000 = 15
1999 = 12

1998 = 16
1997 = 40
1996 = 65
1995 = 32
1994 = 25

1993 = 55
1992 = 84
1991 = 33
1990 = 20
1989 = 31

1988 = 1
1987 = 45
1986 = 46
1985 = 17
1984 = 11.5

1983 = 24
1982 = 21
1981 = 58
1980 = 34
1979 = 4

1978 = 3
1976 = 0
1975 = 0

What about the changed point system? You can't compare 2012 to 1996 for example at all. With the current point system they would have had 185 points in 1996 after 6 races

Post by **Nuppiz** » 28 May 2013, 18:53

Zetec wrote:What about the changed point system? You can't compare 2012 to 1996 for example at all. With the current point system they would have had 185 points in 1996 after 6 races

Yeah, what I'm suggesting is calculating the average finishing position, as that is never affected by whatever points system was used. You could leave out retirements/DNQs (has Williams ever had any of the latter?) entirely or look at the final race result to see how high up they are in the table (based on how many laps they completed).

IdeFan · Post by **IdeFan** » 28 May 2013, 19:59

BabyG wrote:
darkapprentice77 wrote:
BabyG wrote:I would love to have a look at the statistics for win by car numbers. I suspect that 5 would come out higher than 1 as I can recall quite a few championships being won by car number 5 when the world champion has struggled to drag inferior equipment round/lost desire/moved to a less competitive team. It would be interesting to see the spike in wins for number 22 after Lewis Hamilton's and Jenson Button's championship winning years. Has a number 22 car won a race outside of the years 2008/2009?

http://www.statsf1.com/en/statistiques/numero/victoire/nombre.aspx

Excellent! Anyone care to try to explain why 5 has had such a large number of wins? It is a consistently successful number - its not just one driver contributing to its number of wins and the number 5 has won a race almost every year since the 1990s. One explanation is that you are likely to be driving for a competitive team and be the number one driver in that team, but why are the numbers so much greater than for number 3?

Yannick offers the best explanation for number assignment prior to 1996:

Yannick wrote:But before 199X, it was only the team of the drivers champion that switched car numbers with the team of the previous year's drivers champion. Besides that, only occasionally, when too many holes opened up in the car numbers list, teams with high numbers were given lower numbers.

Tyrrell were assigned numbers 3 and 4 in the first year of that system (1974), which coincided with the beginning of their decline, they would never win another world championship. This explains why 5 is ahead of 3, since no championship challenging team would get 3 or 4. We would expect lead drivers (in odd numbered cars) to be ahead of "number 2" drivers (in even numbered cars). The typical championship would have the lead driver from an established team, driving number 5, challenging the reigning world champion, in car number 1.

In 1974 Lotus, as reigning constructor champions, were given 1 and 2 (since world champion driver Jackie Stewart had retired), this left Tyrrell with 3 and 4 and McLaren with 5 and 6. McLaren driver Fittipaldi won that year's championship, swapping Lotus to 5 and 6. Here's how the numbers evolved:

1974: Mclaren (WDC WCC)
1975: Lotus (swap with McLaren).
1976: Lotus
1977: Lotus
1978: Lotus (WDC WCC)
1979: Brabham (swap with Lotus, 1977 champion Lauda moved to Brabham in 1978).
1980: Brabham
1981: Brabham (WDC)
1982: Williams (WDC) (swap with Brabham, Alan Jones earned the #1 for them in 1980).
1983: Brabham (WDC) (swap with Williams)
1984: Williams (swap with McLaren)
1985: Williams
1986: Williams (WCC)
1987: Williams (WDC WCC)
1988: Williams (1987 champion Piquet took the #1 to Lotus)
1989: Williams
1990: Williams
1991: Williams
1992: Williams (WDC WCC)

1993 is where it breaks down slightly. McLaren should have taken 5 and 6 from Williams, but Brabham had gone bust leaving a gap at 7 and 8. It seems that Michael Schumacher, who finished 3rd behind the Williams drivers in 1992, was given 5 and 6 while McLaren filled the 7 and 8 gap.

1993: Benetton
1994: Benetton (WDC)
1995: Williams (swap with Benetton)

From 1996 the system was changed, results based on the previous season's constructors championship, with the exception that the driver's champion always had 1 and his teammate 2. For 1996 champion Schumacher went to Ferrari, leaving constructors champions Benetton with 3 and 4 and runners up Williams with 5 and 6.

1996: Williams (WDC WCC)
1997: Ferrari (Hill took the #1 to Arrows, leaving Williams 3-4 and 1996 runners up Ferrari with 5-6).
1998: Benetton
1999: Williams
2000: Jordan
2001: Williams
2002: Williams
2003: McLaren
2004: McLaren
2005: Renault (WDC WCC)
2006: Ferrari
2007: Ferrari (WDC WCC) (Alonso took the #1 to McLaren)
2008: Renault
2009: BMW-Sauber
2010: Red Bull Racing (WDC WCC) (Button took the #1 to McLaren)
2011: Ferrari
2012: Ferrari
2013: McLaren

UncreativeUsername37 · Post by **UncreativeUsername37** » 28 May 2013, 20:24

Nuppiz wrote:
Zetec wrote:What about the changed point system? You can't compare 2012 to 1996 for example at all. With the current point system they would have had 185 points in 1996 after 6 races

Yeah, what I'm suggesting is calculating the average finishing position, as that is never affected by whatever points system was used. You could leave out retirements/DNQs (has Williams ever had any of the latter?) entirely or look at the final race result to see how high up they are in the table (based on how many laps they completed).

That's still affected by attrition, though. What I would suggest is what position they're in in the constructors' championship. That would take out the points system problem too.

Jocke1 · Post by **Jocke1** » 30 May 2013, 17:41

Drivers with one WDC season and one 0p season in their F1 careers:
(criteria is that the driver had to have raced a full season, all the races during the 0 points season)

Of the 32 F1 World Champions, it has only happened to three of them.

Niki Lauda WDC in 1975, 1977 and 1984.
0 points in 1972. Completed 78.4% of the laps. Average finish 15.3

Fernando Alonso WDC in 2005 and 2006.
0 points in 2001. Completed 66.4% of the laps. Average finish 15.8

Jacques Villeneuve WDC in 1997.
0 points in 1999. Completed 57.3% of the laps. Average finish 15.3

I did not consider Michael Schumacher's 1997 season as a valid candidate.

DanielPT · Post by **DanielPT** » 30 May 2013, 18:12

Jocke1 wrote:Drivers with one WDC season and one 0p season in their F1 careers:
(criteria is that the driver had to have raced a full season, all the races during the 0 points season)

Of the 32 F1 World Champions, it has only happened to three of them.

Niki Lauda WDC in 1975, 1977 and 1984.
0 points in 1972. Completed 78.4% of the laps. Average finish 15.3

Fernando Alonso WDC in 2005 and 2006.
0 points in 2001. Completed 66.4% of the laps. Average finish 15.8

Jacques Villeneuve WDC in 1997.
0 points in 1999. Completed 57.3% of the laps. Average finish 15.3

I did not consider Michael Schumacher's 1997 season as a valid candidate.

Incredibly Benson has managed to escape this stat in 2003 when he profited of an high attrition race and managed a 5th and in Honda annus horribilis, 2008, with a 6th in Spain achieved by avoiding trouble and bringing the car home.

Rasmus · Post by **Rasmus** » 30 May 2013, 18:22

It's even more indredible that only Jacques has done it AFTER he was world champion. :lol:

Bleu · Post by **Bleu** » 30 May 2013, 19:19

Keke Rosberg as well, or you didn't count because he didn't participate all the weekends. He missed only one event in 1981 and two in 1978, didn't score on either of them.

Jocke1 · Post by **Jocke1** » 30 May 2013, 19:48

Rasmus wrote:It's even more indredible that only Jacques has done it AFTER he was world champion.

Exactly.

Bleu wrote:or you didn't count because he didn't participate all the weekends.

Yes.

Jocke1 · Post by **Jocke1** » 05 Jun 2013, 10:45

Karun Chandhok
2010 BAHRAIN GRAND PRIX

Practice 1:
0 laps

Practice 2:
0 laps

Practice 3:
0 laps

Qualifying:
7 laps

Race:
1 lap

:lol:

AndreaModa · Post by **AndreaModa** » 05 Jun 2013, 11:16

No wonder he didn't know that the bump he crashed out on existed! He'd only gone over it seven times previously! :lol:

ibsey · Post by **ibsey** » 05 Jun 2013, 11:34

AndreaModa wrote:No wonder he didn't know that the bump he crashed out on existed! He'd only gone over it seven times previously!

But on those 7 previous laps in qualifying had he been running with a full tank of fuel, like he would have done in the race?

An F1 car that is something like 160 kg's heavier due to race fuel is likely to react to differently to bumps. In comparison to an F1 car in qualifying spec, with hardly any fuel in at all.

Jocke1 · Post by **Jocke1** » 05 Jun 2013, 11:41

Friday

Karun Chandhok, P1 - no time, 24th; P2 - no time, 24th
"My car was fired up this morning. I was hoping that it would be in condition to run fully a bit later than my team mate's. We know that all systems are working and with the third practice still ahead of us we can still look positively at the start of our first weekend of racing."

Saturday

Karun Chandhok (24th, Q1 - 2m 04.904s)
“I still can't believe that we will be on the grid tomorrow. It was not looking good in the morning and I was not sure if we would make it to the qualifying session as well. I didn't expect to be driving the car for the first time in qualifying but as I have always said these are the circumstances and we made the best of it. For me it was just a string of installation laps and to finish just a second slower than Bruno is definitely a huge achievement. I think I might be the only driver in the history of F1 to go straight into a qualifying session of a race without even having done a shakedown of the car! Once again I think the team have done a brilliant job so am very grateful to them.”

Sunday

Karun Chandhok (DNF)
“Sorry, this was my fifth lap on this track. I hit a bump in the new part of the circuit, I was not that much experienced in that part of the track as I had driven only four timed laps over the week-end. I was pushed on exit curb, trying to bring tyres in gently, I did not know that part of the circuit. I want to thank my mechanics for accompanying my first laps on this track and the whole team for a great weekend and long sleepless hours. Now let's look forward to start again in Melbourne."

Maybe if Karun had done more of this on wednesday-saturday, he'd have known about the bump :roll:

:

ibsey · Post by **ibsey** » 05 Jun 2013, 13:50

Jocke1 wrote:Maybe if Karun had done more of this on wednesday-saturday, he'd have known about the bump :

Lets not forget it was the guy's 1st GP & the team's 1st ever GP. So even if he spotted the bump on the wednesday-thrusday before the race, could Karun have fully anticipted the effect on the car with full fuel loads? Especialy considering Karun's servere lack of running & experience in an F1 car. And the extra stress & pressure that probably caused him. IIRC even his seat wasn't to his liking because of the lack of running. And I can tell you from personal experienece being uncomfortable in a seat when racing massive affects your ability to concentrate on the race it self. As Eddie Irvine will also tell you from 1996 & 1997.

Jocke1 · Post by **Jocke1** » 05 Jun 2013, 14:26

Yes, it was a nightmare weekend for poor old Karun. Nothing went right. Perhaps even Senna (the fast one) would have struggled.

I wonder if anyone has had a more trying debut than Chandhok's in modern times?

good_Ralf · Post by **good_Ralf** » 06 Jun 2013, 14:06

Jocke1 wrote:Strangest thing.
Indy 2005.
Schumacher set his fastest lap time on lap 48, Barrichello also on lap 48, Monteiro on lap 44, Karthikeyan lap 65, Friesacher lap 43.

and...

Christijan Albers on lap 2
And it was only 0.537 sec slower than Karthikeyan's.
0.583 faster than Friesacher's.

How did he do that?

Another unusual Albers fact is that he was the first retirement of the 2005, 2006 and 2007 seasons!
In 2005, he was out in Australia with gearbox failure. (Lap 17)
In 2006, he was out on the startline in Bahrain with a driveshaft/transmission failure. (Lap 1)
And in 2007, Christijan shunted at turn 3 in Australia, supposedly when he was fiddling with his earpiece! (Lap 11)

Hülkenberg is coming close to matching Albers' ignominious feats.
He got knocked out on the first lap of 2012 in Melbourne and although his fuel pump broke before the race started this year, pundits could well count that in.

Bleu · Post by **Bleu** » 06 Jun 2013, 15:48

Williams duo's qualifying battle in 2002 was quite strange.

Over the season, JPM won the battle 9-8. That's pretty close. The strange thing is that Montoya managed to get 7 pole positions, so he was faster of the two only twice when he was not on the pole. Those were 2nd place in Sepang and 4th place in Indianapolis.

Meanwhile, when Ralf was faster, he didn't get a pole, and even on the front row he was only twice. (Austria and Germany)