2010 in stats part two: Vettel and other champions

2010 F1 season review

Michael Schumacher and Sebastian Vettel, 2010

Michael Schumacher and Sebastian Vettel, 2010

Was Sebastian Vettel’s victory win on a par with the 60 previous championship wins? The new points system makes it hard to tell.

The second part of F1 Fanatic’s look at 2010 in statistics compares Vettel’s victory with those of Michael Schumacher, Ayrton Senna and other champions.

You can also review the 2010 data in detail with the new-look interactive charts.

Drivers’ championship points

By any measure this was a remarkable season in the drivers’ championship, with four drivers still in the hunt at the final race.

The chart below shows how the race for the drivers’ title unfolded:

http://www.f1fanatic.co.uk/charts/2010drivercolours.csv

Bahrain Australia Malaysia China Spain Monaco Turkey Canada Europe Britain Germany Hungary Belgium Italy Singapore Japan Korea Brazil Abu Dhabi
Sebastian Vettel 12 12 37 45 60 78 78 90 115 121 136 151 151 163 181 206 206 231 256
Fernando Alonso 25 37 37 49 67 75 79 94 98 98 123 141 141 166 191 206 231 246 252
Mark Webber 4 6 24 28 53 78 93 103 103 128 136 161 179 187 202 220 220 238 242
Lewis Hamilton 15 23 31 49 49 59 84 109 127 145 157 157 182 182 182 192 210 222 240
Jenson Button 6 31 35 60 70 70 88 106 121 133 143 147 147 165 177 189 189 199 214
Felipe Massa 18 33 39 41 49 61 67 67 67 67 85 97 109 124 128 128 143 143 144
Nico Rosberg 10 20 35 50 50 56 66 74 75 90 94 94 102 112 122 122 122 130 142
Robert Kubica 0 18 30 40 44 59 67 73 83 83 89 89 104 108 114 114 124 126 136
Michael Schumacher 8 9 9 10 22 22 34 34 34 36 38 38 44 46 46 54 66 72 72
Rubens Barrichello 1 5 5 5 7 7 7 7 19 29 29 30 30 31 39 41 47 47 47
Adrian Sutil 0 0 10 10 16 20 22 23 31 35 35 35 45 45 47 47 47 47 47
Kamui Kobayashi 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 7 15 15 17 21 21 21 27 31 32 32
Vitaly Petrov 0 0 0 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 7 17 19 19 19 19 19 19 27
Nico Hulkenberg 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 10 10 16 17 17 18 22 22
Vitantonio Liuzzi 2 8 8 8 8 10 10 12 12 12 12 12 13 13 13 13 21 21 21
Sebastien Buemi 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 5 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 8 8 8 8
Pedro de la Rosa 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6
Nick Heidfeld 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 6 6 6
Jaime Alguersuari 0 0 2 2 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 5

The close championship was not necessarily a product of the new points system. Had last year’s points system been used the same four drivers would have gone into the final round like this:

1. Fernando Alonso – 99
2. Mark Webber – 96
3. Sebastian Vettel – 94
4. Lewis Hamilton – 92

And the final score would have been:

1. Sebastian Vettel – 104
2. Fernando Alonso – 101
3. Lewis Hamilton – 100
4. Mark Webber – 97

The most significant difference would have been Lewis Hamilton finishing third instead of Mark Webber.

The latest change of points system makes it harder to compare this season with others.

For example, Vettel scored more points than any other driver ever – but with a win worth 2.5 times what it was last year, that was almost inevitably going to happen.

Had the current points system been used in every world championship since 1950, 14 previous champions would have out-scored Vettel:

Year Driver Points*
2002 Michael Schumacher 380
2004 Michael Schumacher 367
2001 Michael Schumacher 327
2005 Fernando Alonso 322
2006 Fernando Alonso 321
2000 Michael Schumacher 286
1992 Nigel Mansell 279
1988 Ayrton Senna 275
1991 Ayrton Senna 274.5
2007 Kimi Raikkonen 272
1993 Alain Prost 271
1998 Mika Hakkinen 271
1995 Michael Schumacher 268
1996 Damon Hill 258
2010 Sebastian Vettel 256

*under 2010 system

This does not include any drivers who might have out-scored him without winning the championship.

Of course there were many more races this year than there were in previous seasons. So to get the full picture we need to take into account how many points each driver scored per race.

Here is that data, also adjusted to use the 2010 points system:

F1 champions' points per race under 2010 points system

F1 champions' points per race under 2010 points system

(Half points races have been taken into account. Points for pole position and fastest lap have not. Where drivers scored points for ‘shared drives’ they have been given the full points score. See here for more information)

Clearly, Vettel scored fewer points per race than average compared to most other champions.

But don’t jump to the conclusion that this automatically makes him a ‘lesser’ champion. After all, he faced far stronger opposition than some other champions did, particularly those at the top end of the chart.

Drivers’ championship position

http://www.f1fanatic.co.uk/charts/2010drivercolours.csv

Bahrain Australia Malaysia China Spain Monaco Turkey Canada Europe Britain Germany Hungary Belgium Italy Singapore Japan Korea Brazil Abu Dhabi
Sebastian Vettel 4 7 2 5 3 1 5 5 3 4 3 3 3 5 4 2 4 3 1
Fernando Alonso 1 1 2 3 2 3 4 4 5 5 5 5 5 3 2 2 1 1 2
Mark Webber 8 10 8 8 4 1 1 3 4 3 3 1 2 1 1 1 2 2 3
Lewis Hamilton 3 4 6 3 6 6 3 1 1 1 1 2 1 2 3 4 3 4 4
Jenson Button 7 3 4 1 1 4 2 2 2 2 2 4 4 4 5 5 5 5 5
Felipe Massa 2 2 1 6 6 5 6 8 8 8 8 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6
Nico Rosberg 5 5 4 2 5 8 8 6 7 6 6 7 8 7 7 7 8 7 7
Robert Kubica 11 6 7 7 8 6 6 7 6 7 7 8 7 8 8 8 7 8 8
Michael Schumacher 6 8 10 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 10 9 10 9 9 9 9
Rubens Barrichello 10 11 12 13 12 12 12 12 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 10 10 10
Adrian Sutil 11 12 9 9 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 9 10 9 10 10 10 10
Kamui Kobayashi 11 12 15 16 16 17 15 16 13 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12
Vitaly Petrov 11 12 15 12 13 13 13 13 15 15 14 12 13 13 13 13 14 15 13
Nico Hulkenberg 11 12 14 15 15 15 15 16 17 17 17 15 15 14 14 14 15 13 14
Vitantonio Liuzzi 9 9 11 11 11 11 11 11 12 13 13 14 14 15 15 15 13 14 15
Sebastien Buemi 11 12 15 16 16 15 15 14 13 14 14 16 16 16 16 16 16 16 16
Pedro de la Rosa 11 12 15 16 16 17 18 18 18 18 18 17 17 17 17 17 17 17 17
Nick Heidfeld 11 12 15 16 16 17 18 18 18 18 18 19 19 19 19 18 17 17 17
Jaime Alguersuari 11 12 13 14 14 14 14 15 16 16 16 18 18 18 18 19 19 19 19

NB. Rank of points scored, does not include ‘count back’ results in the event of a tie.

Drivers’ grid positions

http://www.f1fanatic.co.uk/charts/2010drivercolours.csv

Bahrain Australia Malaysia China Spain Monaco Turkey Canada Europe Britain Germany Hungary Belgium Italy Singapore Japan Korea Brazil Abu Dhabi
Jenson Button 8 4 17 5 5 8 4 4 7 14 5 11 5 2 4 5 7 11 4
Lewis Hamilton 4 11 20 6 3 5 2 1 3 4 6 5 2 5 3 8 4 4 2
Michael Schumacher 7 7 8 9 6 7 5 13 15 10 11 14 21 12 9 10 9 8 8
Nico Rosberg 5 6 2 4 8 6 6 10 12 5 9 6 14 7 7 6 5 13 9
Sebastian Vettel 1 1 3 1 2 3 3 2 1 1 1 1 4 6 2 1 1 2 1
Mark Webber 6 2 1 2 1 1 1 7 2 2 4 2 1 4 5 2 2 3 5
Felipe Massa 2 5 21 7 9 4 8 6 5 7 3 4 6 3 24 12 6 9 6
Fernando Alonso 3 3 19 3 4 24 12 3 4 3 2 3 10 1 1 4 3 5 3
Rubens Barrichello 11 8 7 11 17 9 15 11 9 8 8 12 7 10 6 7 10 6 7
Nico Hulkenberg 13 15 5 16 13 11 17 12 8 13 10 10 9 8 17 9 11 1 15
Robert Kubica 9 9 6 8 7 2 7 8 6 6 7 8 3 9 8 3 8 7 11
Vitaly Petrov 17 18 11 14 19 14 9 14 10 15 13 7 23 20 12 13 20 10 10
Adrian Sutil 10 10 4 10 11 12 11 9 13 11 19 13 8 11 15 15 14 22 13
Vitantonio Liuzzi 12 13 10 18 16 10 18 5 14 20 21 16 12 19 16 17 17 16 16
Sebastien Buemi 15 12 13 13 14 13 14 15 11 16 16 15 16 14 13 18 16 20 18
Jaime Alguersuari 18 17 14 12 15 17 16 16 17 17 15 17 11 15 11 16 15 14 17
Jarno Trulli 20 20 18 20 18 19 19 20 19 21 17 20 15 17 21 19 18 18 19
Heikki Kovalainen 21 19 15 21 20 18 20 19 20 18 18 19 13 18 19 20 21 19 20
Karun Chandhok 24 24 22 24 24 23 24 24 23 23
Bruno Senna 23 23 23 23 21 22 22 22 24 20 22 18 22 23 23 24 24 23
Pedro de la Rosa 14 14 12 17 12 15 13 17 16 9 14 9 24 16
Kamui Kobayashi 16 16 9 15 10 16 10 18 18 12 12 23 17 13 10 14 12 12 12
Timo Glock 19 21 16 19 22 20 21 21 22 19 23 18 20 24 18 22 19 17 21
Lucas di Grassi 22 22 24 22 23 21 23 23 21 22 24 21 22 21 20 21 22 21 22
Christian Klien 22 23 24
Sakon Yamamoto 24 22 24 19 23 24 23
Nick Heidfeld 14 11 13 15 14

The new interactive charts above and below have been designed by Kareem Shaya (who wrote this excellent guest article last year) and I hope you agree they look very good.

You can select which drivers to view so you can quickly compare team mates and closely-matched rivals. You can also select all or none of the drivers with a single click.

You can compare all the race, starting grid and championship data for all the teams and drivers in the charts above and below.

Drivers’ race results

http://www.f1fanatic.co.uk/charts/2010drivercolours.csv

Bahrain Australia Malaysia China Spain Monaco Turkey Canada Europe Britain Germany Hungary Belgium Italy Singapore Japan Korea Brazil Abu Dhabi
Jenson Button 7 1 8 1 5 2 2 3 4 5 8 2 4 4 12 5 3
Lewis Hamilton 3 6 6 2 14 5 1 1 2 2 4 1 5 2 4 2
Michael Schumacher 6 10 10 4 12 4 11 15 9 9 11 7 9 13 6 4 7
Nico Rosberg 5 5 3 3 13 7 5 6 10 3 8 6 5 5 17 6 4
Sebastian Vettel 4 1 6 3 2 4 1 7 3 3 15 4 2 1 1 1
Mark Webber 8 9 2 8 1 1 3 5 1 6 1 2 6 3 2 2 8
Felipe Massa 2 3 7 9 6 4 7 15 11 15 2 4 4 3 8 3 15 10
Fernando Alonso 1 4 13 4 2 6 8 3 8 14 1 2 1 1 3 1 3 7
Rubens Barrichello 10 8 12 12 9 14 14 4 5 12 10 10 6 9 7 14 12
Nico Hulkenberg 14 10 15 16 17 13 10 13 6 14 7 10 10 8 16
Robert Kubica 11 2 4 5 8 3 6 7 5 7 3 8 7 5 9 5
Vitaly Petrov 7 11 13 15 17 14 13 10 5 9 13 11 16 6
Adrian Sutil 12 5 11 7 8 9 10 6 8 17 5 15 9 12 13
Vitantonio Liuzzi 9 7 15 9 13 9 16 11 16 13 10 12 6
Sebastien Buemi 16 11 10 16 8 9 12 12 12 11 14 10 13 15
Jaime Alguersuari 13 11 9 13 10 11 12 12 13 15 13 16 12 11 11 11 9
Jarno Trulli 17 17 17 15 21 16 15 19 13 19 21
Heikki Kovalainen 15 13 14 16 17 14 16 18 16 12 13 18 17
Karun Chandhok 14 15 17 14 20 18 18 19
Bruno Senna 16 16 20 19 17 15 14 21 19
Pedro de la Rosa 12 11 12 14 7 11 14
Kamui Kobayashi 12 10 7 6 11 9 8 7 8 10 14
Timo Glock 18 18 19 18 18 16 18 17 14 20
Lucas di Grassi 14 19 19 19 17 18 17 20 15 18
Sakon Yamamoto 20 19 20 19 16 15
Christian Klien 22 20
Nick Heidfeld 8 9 17 11

Constructors’ championship points

http://www.f1fanatic.co.uk/charts/2010teamcolours.csv

Bahrain Australia Malaysia China Spain Monaco Turkey Canada Europe Britain Germany Hungary Belgium Italy Singapore Japan Korea Brazil Abu Dhabi
Red Bull 16 18 61 73 113 156 171 193 218 249 272 312 330 350 383 426 426 469 498
McLaren 21 54 66 109 119 129 172 215 248 278 300 304 329 347 359 381 399 421 454
Ferrari 43 70 76 90 116 136 146 161 165 165 208 238 250 290 319 334 374 389 396
Mercedes 18 29 44 60 72 78 100 108 109 126 132 132 146 158 168 176 188 202 214
Renault 0 18 30 46 50 65 73 79 89 89 96 106 123 127 133 133 143 145 163
Williams 1 5 6 6 8 8 8 8 20 31 31 40 40 47 56 58 65 69 69
Force India 2 8 18 18 24 30 32 35 43 47 47 47 58 58 60 60 68 68 68
Sauber 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 7 15 15 23 27 27 27 37 43 44 44
Toro Rosso 0 0 2 2 3 4 4 8 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 11 11 11 13

Spotted anything interesting in the 2010 data? Which drivers make for interesting comparisons? Share your findings in the comments.

2010 F1 season review

Browse all 2010 F1 season review articles

Advert | Go Ad-free

45 comments on 2010 in stats part two: Vettel and other champions

  1. So I think it is true that McLaren had a second quickest car. Too bad they could not convert it to winning for both drivers, and this is where FA won team principals vote.

    • Keith Collantine (@keithcollantine) said on 6th December 2010, 17:00

      Funnily enough, the final part of 2010 in stats will be looking at car performance data.

      • Mr. Zing Zang said on 7th December 2010, 1:49

        Kieth can you do like an analysis showing the consistency of the drivers. Like standard deviation or something of that nature?

    • Monad said on 7th December 2010, 1:01

      In way was the Mclaren car the second best. It was clearly Ferrari. Mclaren only had the advantage in a few specific circuits like Turkey and Canada.

      • ConfusedLotusFan said on 8th December 2010, 22:14

        well, they didn’t really have the advantage in turkey, they only got a 1-2 cause of vettel and webber’s argument about who gets the top bunk spilling over onto the track

  2. alexf1man said on 6th December 2010, 17:32

    should do points comparison as: points scored per race finished / classified and then maybe attempt for constructors

    • bananarama said on 6th December 2010, 18:37

      I wonder if the ‘points per race’ statistic is points per race they participated in or points per all races of the season (oh god what a horrible sentence). I’m wondering because of Jochen Rindt, if he really scored “so little” points or if his stat dropped because .. well .. he died.

      • Keith Collantine (@keithcollantine) said on 6th December 2010, 18:53

        All races of the season.

        • bananarama said on 6th December 2010, 19:36

          Thats what I thought .. but isn’t it kind of unfair to ‘penalize’ him for .. dying …
          But I see why it was done, since a championship counts all races, not only those someone participates in. Nevertheless, that other statistic would be kind of interesting, as, something like 30 years ago it wasn’t uncommon for drivers to skip races.

          I’l lstop thinking about it now, thanks for the interesting stats :-)

          • Daniel said on 6th December 2010, 20:37

            This is exactly why the ‘best races’ rule was used initially. In the early days of the championship it was acknowledged many drivers couldn’t be at every round. Sometimes events might clash, or a driver/team was short cash needed to compete. It was especially difficult for the European drivers to do the Indy 500. So, this stops someone winning the championship just because they had enough money to do every event when their competitor didn’t.

          • US_Peter (@us_peter) said on 6th December 2010, 20:50

            Yeah that was a really interesting statistic, and just shows how much closer the competition was this year than any of the other championships in the last decade, although 2008 and 2009 are both a ways down the list as well.

          • bananarama said on 6th December 2010, 23:39

            Sadly I feel like this championship was only this close because of mistakes and not because of “awesomeness”. Lets face it, the RedBull should have blown everyone away, but they failed too many times in the beginning of the year. Vettel crashed twice all by himself. Webber crashed twice. Hamilton crashed once and had some technical problems but also a littlebit of luck (reprinamds, overtaking safetycar). Alonso ruinde his championship by crashing in Monaco and Spa and had some bad luck with Hamilton twice (somehow also his own fault if he gets tricked). Button was sometimes just too slow in qualifying and had bad luck in Monaco and Spa. Massa was just bad at many occasions.

            Everything I mentioned above paints mainly a picture of failure, not of a fantastic championship. On the other hand there was some great stuff, good overtaking moves, tough battles, interesting weather conditions. But overall I’d say the championship was more lost by the others than won by the champion.

            (maybe i’m just too negative :-P)

        • For the points per race graph, before ~1970/1960 when only the best 5 results / best 7 results / best ‘whatever’ results in a season counted, have you divided total points by 5, 7 or total no GP’s in that season in the calculations.

  3. DaveW said on 6th December 2010, 18:08

    This is very lovely stuff. My only nit is that the tables with rankings should be inverted so the low number is high. And I really don’t get the race results table. It does not appear to show finishing position per race, Is it a running average finishing position?

    The main tale is the reversed fortunes of Hamilton and Alonso in the 4th quarter of the season. Hamilton went from having strong hold on the title–he even could survive the Hungaroring disaster—to disappearing completely under a 3 solid waves of ill fortune. Alonso did the reverse, coming from a series of disasters to snatch an firm lead. Of course, both of them were on borrowed time, as the RB6 had the ability to exert sustained dominance at any time, whenever they pulled it togeter..

    I was convinced post Spa that Hamilton would take the title, purely because RBR had by then established their inabilty to execute or to avoid mistakes. I didnt think RBR would pull it together. But for Hamilton the car never really recovered from its Silverstone-Hungary surgery; I think the car was worse. Maybe quicker in absolute terms, but even harder to set up and drive. (See Button’s flailing around in Korea and Brazil.)

    Vettel’s title worthiness is difficult to work out. One the one hand, he had a whole crew of very good drivers to deal with in pretty good cars. On the other hand, those other guy’s cars only seemed pretty good because of how poorly he and the team executed. His numbers really should look like Schumacher’s in 2002 or at least Alonso’s. Schumacher had Hakkinen to deal with the Alonso had Schumacher, formidable foes, but it was just them.

    I suppose Keith’s car performance work will answer this conundrum. I am predicting that it will show that the RB6 itself was as dominant as Schmacher’s greatest Ferraris and at least as good as Alonso’s championship Renaults.

    For McLaren, if the car does turn out to be third-best, it will be of some historical interest that they led the WDC for 7 races and came very close to a WCC.

    Because I have it in for Goss and Lowe so badly, I am also keen to see proof that the relative pace cratered after the car went under their knives at Silverstone.

    • Daniel said on 6th December 2010, 20:48

      I really think we should stop talking about reliability and speed like they aren’t linked. It’s easier to make a fast car if you skimp on reliability and vice versa. The key is to get the balance right. Because good cars are on such a knife edge with reliability drivers can’t just drive the wheels off them all the time – a driver needs to manage their machinery.

      Reliability is not luck, but rather an aspect of design and the result of careful management. Others were better on that front but not as quick in raw pace terms. This year, in the end, Vettel and Newey managed the best combination of all aspects of performance. It was a closely run thing, but we shouldn’t imagine simply that Vettel and RBR were unlucky not to wrap the championship up earlier.

      • Calum said on 6th December 2010, 21:21

        They aren’t neccesarilly.

        The 2004 Ferrari barely ever broke down, the 2007 and 2008 Mclaren and Ferrari never broke down, the 1996 and 1997 Williams cars never broke down, the Brawns never broke down.

        Build a fast car and coat it in steel. :D

        • 2007 Ferrari broke down at Spain & Nurburgring for Kimi.

        • Raymond said on 7th December 2010, 4:47

          You’ve completely missed what the guy is saying. If Adrian Newey had diverted a bit more of his attention to reliability rather than pure pace, the speed differential would be cut by several tenths, and the RB6 would be a lot more robust.

          • DaveW said on 7th December 2010, 14:49

            And I think what Calum is saying is that the evidence that speed and reliability, in the modern era, are inversely related is thin.

            Granted, if Newey only has 15 hours a day to work, he can only focus on so many things, but it’s not necessarily the case that every new development creates a reliability issue, or that a performance development also does not make the car less reliable. After all, adding more fins and ripples to the splitter doesnt affect reliability at all.

            For the RedBull cars, I think this is a special case. Newey apparently has a way of working in which he disregards reliability at first, and then works it in later. But sometimes it doesn’t work out at all. See the MP4-18/19. His Leyton House Marches were promising and innovative cars, but desperately fragile—and they never got to the front. Not everything he touches turns to gold. And dont forget it took many years of mediocre RedBull cars, that were also very unreliable, to get to the RB6.

            Chronic unreliability is a basic tradeoff of his approach. Maybe its a result of his unusually conceptual approach, where he just draws stuff with pencils, and sees if it works. From what I understand, he sits in the CAD room at a separate desk with his #2s and paper and does his thing, and carries our a notebook in the paddock doodling.

  4. Victor. said on 6th December 2010, 18:24

    These tables are epic!

    Considering how Hamilton would have been only three points down on Vettel in Abu Dhabi, last year’s points could have meant an even tighter season finale. The top four drivers would have entered the race with the following amount of points:

    Alonso – 99
    Webber – 96
    Vettel – 94
    Hamilton – 93

    Hamilton would have entered the race with only a third-place deficit to Alonso rather than a victory-deficit…

  5. sumedh said on 6th December 2010, 18:35

    Had we used last year’s points system, 3 drivers would have scored atleast 100 points.

    I believe that has happened only once before in 2007.

    Put this in comparision with the 2006 season. Michael scored 121 points, an average of 6.6 points per race (or 16.7 points per race by 2010 system) but finished runner-up. In 2007, Kimi scored 110 to win the championship, 2008 – Lewis 98, 2009 – Jenson – 95 and in 2010 – Sebastian – 104.

    Michael as runner-up scored more points than any of the champions thereafter.
    I think this means either of 3 things, one, the competitors are making too many mistakes, two, the cars are far more closer in performance, three, Alonso and Michael were truly sensational in 2006.

    • 2006 Only Ferrari and Renault were competitive that year & both MIchael & Alonso used team orders and had teammates stay out of their way.

    • BasCB said on 7th December 2010, 7:12

      I think it shows the points being spread between more drivers.

      Look at those champions with low average points per race (2 seasons of Piquet winning it, Keke Rosbergs championship, …), those are years where we had an intense fight between several drivers and teams getting into the points. Just like we had this year.

  6. Adam Tate said on 6th December 2010, 18:48

    @ sumedh, I think it means all three of those things. :)

    Great article Keith! I especially like the tables where it shows past championships under the new points system. I bet that took a lot of work to figure up.

    • DaveW said on 6th December 2010, 20:40

      Yes, all three. But it’s a lot easier to make mistakes when you have to push like hell at all times and battle for position with a gaggle of other good drivers for the champioship. That is a real difference of 2010 versus 2008 going back to 2002. Quite a lot of Schmacher’s and Alonso’s races were done by half-way. But you can’t take away from Schumcher that he made very few driving errors in his day.

      Also, the Ferraris of Schumacher’s long WDC run were very reliable. I think he went more than three years without a mechanical at one point.

      • US_Peter (@us_peter) said on 6th December 2010, 21:02

        Just looking through Wikipedia it looks like you’re right. Schumacher had no retirements in ’02 and one each in ’03 and ’04 each caused by crashes due to small errors he made, so for 3 seasons in a row he had no mechanical retirements.

  7. sumedh said on 6th December 2010, 20:01

    BTW Keith, Love the new “select all” and “select none” buttons. If you can, get them for all the race and practice analysis charts next year. It becomes easier to use the charts.

  8. LuvinF1 said on 6th December 2010, 21:26

    Hi Keith … I went back to Part 1 to make sure that I had full view of all your charts – which I do. But in Part 2, the only chart I can see is the “F1 champions’ points per race under 2010 points system”. Are there any settings required that I need to adjust on my browser? I have Microsoft’s 64-bit browser – beta version and Office 2007 Professional. Thank you and regards!

  9. What I hope 2010 has shown, is that to win the team title, both drivers have to be close to the front.
    Which means team orders are by default a bad thing as usually a designated #2 driver drives like a division two driver.

  10. Marti said on 7th December 2010, 7:33

    Statistics, lies and statistics.
    It is possible to gather the statistics to prove any point – the facts are; as much as I don`t like it/him – Vettel is 2010 WDC. Similarly Button in 2009.
    Statistically speaking it is 2011 that will count.
    Will he follow the many 1 winner wonders???

  11. Icthyes (@icthyes) said on 7th December 2010, 9:58

    I really like the new charts, but saw nothing wrong with the old ones. Are they staying for future race analyses? Also, there appears to be no way of making these new ones full-screen, so even with only 5 drivers selected it’s hard to read a lot of them. But good work nonetheless :)

    To add to the stats, Lewis Hamilton was the only driver this year to have had all his points come from the first 6 finishing positions. Vettel had one 7th, Alonso a 7th and 8th, Webber three 8ths and a 9th and Button a 7th and two 8ths.

    I think it’s interesting that in the end the previous system came out as giving a closer championship then the new one. I think we would have lost Button earlier, but to be honest his “chance” of the championship really was just a mathematical oddity.

    • sumedh said on 7th December 2010, 12:01

      The new charts are better in few aspects but worse in 1 big aspect – they can’t be zoomed into. Keith, race-charts for races like the Korean GP this year were impossible to read without zooming in lap 4 onwards.

  12. richevans123 said on 7th December 2010, 11:23

    Hamilton must be kicking himself, he lead for 7 events, more than any other driver, those dropped scores in monza and singapore, added to mechanicals in spain, japan and hungary really cost him.

  13. sam crawford said on 7th December 2010, 12:00

    Looking at the chart at Silverstone, then Brazil, points out to me why Fernando Alonso was amazing this year. Also, looking at Massa’s stats shows just how much Alonso drove the wheels off his Ferrari just to keep up with Red Bull and McLaren. Yes, Vettel is the WDC, but for me DOTY is Alonso, without doubt

  14. PepsiPerfect said on 7th December 2010, 14:09

    statistics, lies & statistics as in the cliché.
    There is NOTHING wrong with UR data, just annoyed with the final outcome.
    SECOND best, as Ron himself says: thats first of the losers !!!

  15. I hope that crap happening has been factored in too, otherwise it’s just a case of lies, damn lies, and statistics.

    Too many factors involved to make a real assessment of either car or driver performance.

    How do you factor in Petrov holding both a Ferrari and its driver up for example?

Add your comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

All comments must abide by the comment policy. Comments may be moderated.
Want to post off-topic? Head to the forum.
See the FAQ for more information.