Blog / Entries / 13

The Manipe F1 Blog

Mon, 22 February, 2010A alternative view of point-scoring comparisons

  • Sebastian Vettel (DEU) Red Bull-Renault RB5 leads at the start. 2009 British Grand Prix, Rd 8, Race day. Silverstone, England. Sunday 21 June 2009. © Red Bull/Getty.
  • Cars make their way through turn 1 at the start. 2009 Turkish Grand Prix, Rd 7, Race day. Istanbul, Turkey. Sunday 7 June 2009. © Toyota.
  • Cars in parc ferme after the race. 2009 Japanese Grand Prix, Rd 15, Race day. Suzuka, Japan. Sunday 4 October 2009. © Bridgestone.
23/3
NewsNow.co.uk

Fans, pundits and drivers alike have been bemoaning the new points-scoring system being introduced in 2010 because, among many things, it will render historical points-scoring comparisons useless, with race wins now attracting 25 points compared to the 10 points of 2009 and before. In truth however, using points scored as an accurate tool of comparison between drivers of different eras has been broken for quite some time.

To begin with, the points system has changed numerous times over the lifetime of the world championship. In 1950, just 8 points were rewarded to drivers for a race win, while only the top 5 finishers scored points. With race wins in 2009 attracting 10 points, comparing points scores in 1950 with those of 2009 would mean every five wins in 1950 would be 'worth' just four wins in 2009 standards. Surely though, victories at circuits such as the old and fearsome Nurburgring, Spa-Francorchamps and Silverstone should be worth the same, if not more, than wins in the present day at venues such as Valencia, Budapest and Bahrain? While the points system has moved only incrementally from year-to-year, with the last big change coming in 2003 when the top 8 finishers scored points, it nevertheless skews any potential comparisons with previous eras.

The number of victories or podium finishes are also regularly used as a measure of one's talent, but even here the comparisons have their flaws. In 1950, just seven Grands Prix were included in the world championship, although many more were held that did not count towards the title. Nowadays, the calendar is pushing towards three times that number, with 19 races due to be held in 2010, pending the completion of the new track in South Korea. Again one must ask if it is fair that drivers such as Fernando Alonso, Michael Schumacher and Lewis Hamilton have the opportunity of collecting dozens of race winning trophies, when their predecessors could have achieved only a handful.

While the challenge of winning a single race in any specific era is not up for debate, drivers of yesteryear should not be penalised for failing to win races that did not exist. As an example, Italy's Alberto Ascari won the 1952 champions with Ferrari in dominant style, winning 6 of that year's eight races. But looking at Schumacher's comparably (although arguable less so) dominant year for the Scuderia in 2004, the German notched up 13 wins. Disregarding car performance or rivals' strength, was Ascari's feat only half as good as Schumacher's, or are they somewhat more comparable than that?

The same philosophy can be applied to the points system. When comparing drivers of the 1950s and 1960s to those of today, current drivers have the distinct advantage of having competed in more world championship races, giving them an insurmountable advantage. Attempting to compare Juan Manuel Fangio's achievements with those of Schumacher or Alonso are therefore trivial.

While we do not claim to be able to solve the question of who the world's greatest driver is or was, Manipe F1 has decided to make the effort of comparing drivers with respect to points scored slightly easier and more concrete. In an effort to avoid the usual problems discussed above, we have decided to use the 2010 points-scoring system of 25-18-15-12-10-8-6-4-2-1 for all years of the championship. Then, to put the drivers of the 1950s and 1960s on a level footing with the current flock, we have weighted each race so that points are scored at each event as if there were 20 races that season. Therefore, for a season with 10 races (ie. 1965), a race win would earn the driver 50 points instead of 25.

For simplicity, races which awarded half-points on the day due to insufficient distance being reached are awarded full points, while races shared between drivers have the points shared equally among the drivers, regardless of the regulations of the day. No points have been awarded for fastest lap, as was the case in the 1950s.

While the leading driver in our standardised points system is unsurprising, it is interesting to see five-time world champion Juan Manuel Fangio come in at third in the list. A conventional comparison of drivers' points would have placed Fangio just 23rd in the list, behind the likes of Ralf Schumacher, Gerhard Berger and Juan Pablo Montoya. Jack Brabham also jumps up the rankings to 10th from 26th under the conventional comparison, as does Jim Clark from 24th to 14th. Alberto Ascari elevates from 52nd to 30th.

Here are the top 30 drivers in the standardised points system table. Tell us what you think of the system in the comments below.

Top 30 standardised points-scorers:
1. Michael Schumacher - 4384
2. Alain Prost - 3137
3. Juan Manuel Fangio - 2442
4. Ayrton Senna - 2351
5. Rubens Barrichello - 2167
6. Nelson Piquet - 2159
7. David Coulthard - 2056
8. Graham Hill - 2041
9. Nigel Mansell - 1893
10. Jack Brabham - 1893
11. Jackie Stewart - 1887
12. Gerhard Berger - 1753
13. Niki Lauda - 1718
14. Jim Clark - 1715
15. Kimi Räikkönen - 1713
16. Mika Häkkinen - 1686
17. Stirling Moss - 1645
18. Fernando Alonso - 1600
19. Denny Hulme - 1570
20. Bruce McLaren - 1522
21. Carlos Reutemann - 1503
22. Emerson Fittipaldi - 1425
23. Riccardo Patrese - 1402
24. Nino Farina - 1364
25. Damon Hill - 1346
26. John Surtees - 1307
27. Ralf Schumacher - 1292
28. Jean Alesi - 1266
29. Jacques Laffite - 1196
30. Alberto Ascari - 1190

« Previous postPrint postNext post »

Comments

  • Posted by Shimky on Mon, 22 Feb 2010 at 13:21 (Reply)

    David Coulthard, 7th? Well that doesn't make any sense at all, then! :Op

  • Posted by Manipe on Mon, 22 Feb 2010 at 14:01 (Reply)

    @1: Funnily enough, Coulthard also comes 7th if one compares the actual points scored by drivers...

  • Posted by Addmanniw on Mon, 22 Feb 2010 at 14:11 (Reply)

    How does this break down on points per race? Barrichello/Coulthard are high up that list, but have never won world Championships, but have driven for a high amount of seasons.

    Who has the most 'points' per standardised race?

  • Posted by AntuanF1 on Mon, 22 Feb 2010 at 14:32 (Reply)

    Good job, I think that could be interesting that you show us the two list with the different points systems.

    It's a surprise to find David Coulthard in P7, I think that you have to make other list only with World Champions Drivers. I think it will be more realistic because Schumacher, Prost, Fangio, Senna, Piquet, Hill, Mansell, .... it's a good list.

    Very good job.

  • Posted by Gavin Brown (RubberGoat) on Mon, 22 Feb 2010 at 14:36 (Reply)

    Great Post!

    I really like how you have applied a weighting system to try and find out who would have scored the most points 'all things being equal' - it's a really interesting way of looking at the problem!

    I have also had a look at how the different points systems worked on my blog 'Making Up The Numbers'.

    First, I looked at how different points systems awarded the points down the field proportionally and compared different systems - the goal was to look at whether a certain system was better at rewarding winning or consistency. This was done to test the theory that the new system in 2010 rewards winning more, as proposed by FOTA. The link is here: http://f1numbers.wordpress.com/2010/02/09/points-systems-comparison-1950-2010/

    The second post looked at how 'fair' a points system was, as that was the other reason FOTA gave for changing the points system. So I looked at what likelihood a car qualifying or entering a Grand Prix had of finishing in the points - all the way back to 1950. The link to that post is here: http://f1numbers.wordpress.com/2010/02/18/how-fair-have-the-f1-points-systems-been/

    Basically though, the system for 2010 may have more points scoring places, but it isn't any fairer than that used in 2009 and it is a lot more unfair than in previous decades with smaller grids or higher chance of unreliability. It also does not reward winning more than the 2009 system, which is a meaningless incentive anyway if the cars are unable to overtake!


    //RubberGoat

  • Posted by Manipe on Mon, 22 Feb 2010 at 14:36 (Reply)

    @3: Interesting question, I've done a bit of calculations for you. As you mention, Barrichello/Coulthard are both high by virtue of having raced for a long time. Taking the average standardised points scored per race, the top 13 drivers turn out to be world champions, with Juan Pablo Montoya being the first non-champion in 14th.

    I haven't weighted the races as before however, since it would give drivers in early eras a big advantage.

    Here is the top 10:
    1. Michael Schumacher - 14.89
    2. Juan Manuel Fangio - 14.06
    3. Alain Prost - 12.54
    4. Lewis Hamilton - 12.19
    5. Alberto Ascari - 11.75
    6. Ayrton Senna - 11.68
    7. Nino Farina - 11.59
    8. Jim Clark - 11.45
    9. Jackie Stewart - 11.20
    10. Fernando Alonso - 10.28

    For your interest, Coulthard and Barrichello come in at 34th and 42nd respectively, probably more representative than 7th and 5th...

  • Posted by quench on Mon, 22 Feb 2010 at 18:42 (Reply)

    Is there any chance you could print the whole list? It would be interesting to see how all the lower driver's compare, like Katayama & K Nakajima for example.

  • Posted by Manipe on Mon, 22 Feb 2010 at 20:24 (Reply)

    @7: The list is quite long with almost 500 drivers, so it would be impractical to list them all.

    However, In can tell you that Katayama comes in at 193rd place on 80 'points'. K Nakajima is 250th on 38, and Satoru 119th on 192. Continuing the Japanese team, Sato is 128th on 155 points.

  • Posted by da on Tue, 23 Feb 2010 at 07:34 (Reply)

    It quite work for me - It is not feasible to suggest Barichello & Couthard are better than Hill snr, Mansell, Brabham, Stewart & Lauda.

  • Posted by SiY on Tue, 23 Feb 2010 at 11:40 (Reply)

    Interesting post, manipe. Some of your commenters haven't quite understood that this is just a list of "standardised" career points totals, so of course it will favour drivers with more seasons in top teams. More recent drivers are also helped because car reliability has got a lot better and the risk of being killed or badly hurt in a crash is much lower now.

    Personally I find your points-per-race list more interesting (thanks to you and Addmanniw) - although it still flatters more recent drivers to some extent, thanks to car reliability among other things.

  • Posted by Manipe on Tue, 23 Feb 2010 at 13:41 (Reply)

    @9: As I mention in the sixth paragraph (and as also mentioned by @10) I am not claiming that the table ranks the drivers in order of greatness, as I do not believe driver performance is something that can be calculated. Instead I am merely giving a more accurate and reliable way to compare the drivers' points scored over the duration of their careers.

  • Posted by Matt on Wed, 24 Feb 2010 at 12:18 (Reply)

    I think that all of this work is excellent. I'm a great fan of Coulthard and Barrichello, but a fair system would not show them as high. Although, a long career with a high points haul is also a measure of greatness, albeit not as great as Prost etc. Personnally, I'd give an extra 2 points per race to every driver who drove in a Minardi as nobody else worked as hard. I'd also deduct points and records from those caught cheating to make the historical records more accurate, we all know who they are, be they Brazillian, English, German, Spanish or any other nationallity, but then the FIA never did have any guts, eh?

  • Posted by quench on Wed, 24 Feb 2010 at 14:18 (Reply)

    Since the standardized points are all based on seasons of the same length (20 races), then surely the figures above need to be divided by the number of seasons in which a driver competed, giving them an average number of points per season, making the figures even more accurate. For example, Michael Schumacher:

    1991 Started 6/16 races = 0.375
    1992 16/16 = 1.0000
    1993 16/16 = 1.0000
    1994 12/16 = 0.7500*
    1995 17/17 = 1.0000
    1996 15/16 = 0.9375
    1997 17/17 = 1.0000
    1998 16/16 = 1.0000
    1999 10/16 = 1.6250
    2000 17/17 = 1.0000
    2001 17/17 = 1.0000
    2002 17/17 = 1.0000
    2003 16/16 = 1.0000
    2004 18/18 = 1.0000
    2005 19/19 = 1.0000
    2006 18/18 = 1.0000
    Total: 14.6875
    *DQs counted as non-starts since no points were scored

    Divide his standardized points score by this figure to get his average points per season:
    4384 / 14.6875 = 298.4851

    Juan Manuel Fangio would be:
    2442 / 7.2000 = 339.1666 (Didn't count Indy500 as part of season)

    Ayrton Senna would be:
    2351 / 9.9375 = 236.5786

    Not saying this is right, just a thought.

  • Posted by Matt on Tue, 2 Mar 2010 at 12:21 (Reply)

    Excellent, I like this. It is likely that any accurate standardisation system will require several attempts while we, the jury, constantly think of ways to standardise yet more variables. Q, Did you manage to do this for many others? (I know it's asking a lot)

  • Posted by quench on Tue, 2 Mar 2010 at 17:28 (Reply)

    @14: I did it for Coulthard and Barrichello and they were nowhere near the top drivers, think they had 150ish ratings. But since there's only 30 drivers on the list up top I didn't see much point in doing anymore. I'm guessing Lewis Hamilton would be high up in the list doing it this way, but he's not even on the list up top so can't figure it out without doing loads of work.

  • Posted by phildo on Tue, 16 Mar 2010 at 16:08 (Reply)

    great post, i've been thinking this would be a great thing to to do out of curiousity but never have found the energy to get off my backside and do it. would it possible to note current f1 drivers positions with their respective points?

  • Posted by dlapree on Tue, 30 Mar 2010 at 22:10 (Reply)

    Very shorts, simple and easy to understand, bet some more comments from your side would be great

  • Post a reply
    • Nickname (required)
    • E-mail (required, will not be published)
    • Allowed BBcode: [b][/b], [u][/u], [i][/i], [url=][/url], [url][/url]