I used to race motocross on the amateur level and followed it closely for many many years. I still watch it occasionally. It was understood that results were based on roughly 80% rider/ 20% bike. The bike could make a difference but it was the rider who determined his results. Back in the 80s they stopped making one-off "works" bikes for the factory riders to give the non-factory guys a better chance. What do you think the % is for driver/car in F1? It seems to me whomever is lucky enough to be sitting in a Mercedes is going to win. Week in and week out. Alonso and Vettel didn't forget how to drive, their cars got slower. A lot slower. It seems to me that it is >90% car and maybe 10% driver. Of course we're talking about professional drivers on the grid, not Joe off the street.
The car is the basis of a winning component. Most drivers today are pretty equal in skill. Being in the better car highlights skills. Very few drivers in the last 10-15 years have elevated a team with their driving ability, and fewer still with their ability to provide feedback that makes a real difference. To me, 90% car, 5% luck(avoiding/not causing an incident) 5% driver.
Purely based on lap times, around .5%. ***Though it also depends on the season. for the current season, the driver to win really makes a very small difference. In seasons when there is an actual competing team it can make a much bigger difference. Overal skills, depends on your opinion. 10%ish.
There was a poll not long ago asking this question; similar statements in that thread. Seems about right. This is a team sport after all. Even the GOAT is going to go nowhere fast without at least a mildly competitive car under him/her.
Just about any driver in the field right now could win with the Mercedes. About 5 to 10 percent sounds right.
Depends on the car...I think in a lesser car the drivers input is higher as they are closer together. In the front (Mercedes) I think one could easily say that the car beats 20 out of 22 cars in the grid, so the car is 90,9%...The remaining 9,1 % are the driver and his team mate and so those are the percentage making the difference between winning and coming home second...
Given the level of Mercedes's current margin less than usual. Let's face it, nearly all of them are very good by most standards. But look at the period that Vettel won his four championships. Everyone moaned that RB we dominating, but if it had been Webber with a similar or lesser teammate, RB wouldn't have won ANY of those WDC's. Drivers like Alonso and Hamilton get paid the big bucks for a few tenths of extra performance they bring (and the racecraft). It's in that gap that championships are won and lost.
I would take a more variable approach. With a Mercedes vs Manor, the driver is 1%. Between teammates, the driver is 90% or more assuming near equal machinery. Between very competitive teams (RB vs Ferrari 2 races ago), the driver is probably about 75%. As the competitive differential increases between cars, the driver's influence decreases. I should think that if the cars are capable of lap times within .3 seconds of each other, the driver will be better than 50% of the equation.
Cars win championships. Everyone on the grid right now is so talented that he could win in the Mercedes. The question becomes can you beat your teammate ? A GREAT driver on any team will outqualify his excellent teammate consistently. My own determination is .2 or .3 secs. If one consistently out qualifies your teammate by this margin the that driver is the real deal. The "problem" comes when you have 2 GREAT drivers on the same team. How can one measure the talent difference then ?
As a lot of overtakings are done in the pitlane (undercut, different tyre choice) I even think that strategy makes more than 25% as overtaking on the track is very difficult...
With the ban on testing, the driver matters more than ever. The driver is a very important feed back loop in addition to harvested data. Its important to not just have someone that can drive a car. Add in the need to memorize and diagnose a host of electronic gizmo's, and the driver becomes even more important. In terms of actual pace on the race track, there won't be a huge difference, as the driver's are running in conserve mode outside of the race starts. It will mostly come down to their ability to drive fast, but in a way that is easy on fuel/tires.
And that is another of many reasons they're losing fans. My GF and I watch the practice, qualifying and the races but we complain almost constantly about the rules and lack of competition. We're both relatively new fans, me for 5-6 years and 2 for her. They're losing us, slowly.
I can't blame you. Hard to hold interest in a "sport" when you always know who the winner will be. The unpredictability and competition is...uh....kinda the whole reason to watch any sport.
An unpopular opinion but I am in favor of handicapping winning teams with added weight as the season progresses. Just as in Horse racing. F1 is entertainment. Close competition entertains.
I love Roger Federer but don't want to see him win every match. Even when he was #1, he still had plenty of competition and didn't win every weekend. Fine if Mercedes (or anyone else) wins the driver and constructor's title for a few years but please let us have a few other race winners. Alonso was at least competitive in a lesser car when Vettel was winning those 4 years.
Reverse order qualify. If Lewis is pole, he goes to the back in a Manor & Hary goes to pole in the Mercedes....etc. That would be a fun race to watch.
I'm not convinced regarding Alonso having a lesser car all those 4 seasons. I think Vettel was a serious hot shoe when he went to RBR.
An interesting observation, and one seen often on this board, is the Mercedes runs best in clean air. While it doesn't happen often, when a Mercedes ends up 3/4/5 cars back they are not able to charge back to the front. So is this because of the driver or the car? Could another driver take a Mercedes, start in the 3rd row and end up 2nd?
+1...I still say LH, FA, and SV are still your surest bets to winning a WDC and you need that slight advantage to ensure you can capitalize on your opportunities. I'm guessing those three have more wins than the rest of the field combined over the past decade (and LH & SV are only 9 seasons in)
My oversvations when champions of both have been at my local kart track - remove the downforce and electronics, and the edge is in NASCAR. Throw in downforce, and they may be a bit even. The top is the top, any competitive series a driver is able to pull in $$$, that seat will be filled by some of the best in the world.
That will not work, because every Driver will sandbag to be in last place and hence by reversal on pole.
