|
|
Post by charleselan on Aug 26, 2020 12:55:19 GMT
I am sure you have all seen the recent piece claiming to have a full analysis by algorithm of the fastest drivers of all time. It certainly appears to have stirred some debate about this topic, yet again.
Firstly its claim in the title "of all time" is incorrect, as it is only from that past 30 - 40 years, so thereby complete tosh!
This morning I skimmed through Mark Hughes piece on it, but lost all interest when he used the same wording about the algorithm that had been used for the disastrous one recently used for assessing the English "A" Level examination results. When ever I see the word "robust", I see red, as it is term more often than not used by someone who cannot fully describe in articulate terms what is in front of them.
For me the outcomes and results from this material is not worth debating, it is meaningless for so many reasons. What I do find worth remarking upon is the fact that Ross Brawn has announced that it is a very accurate and worthy analysis, well sorry Ross but that is another of your more recent comments that should question your credibility.
Mark Hughes also made the assertion that modern data and its availability brought driver performance closer together from within the same team. Basically a less gifted driver can now get very close to someone of more natural in talent, something I will not disagree with. However the use of that example actually shoots many other aspects of the argument in the foot does it not. With all this data being available to drivers the ability of a driver to do the job on talent alone is now diminished, and combine that with the far less challenging circuits being used now opens up yet another debate.
Elsewhere there was a feature claiming that Verstappen is like Senna in that they both have comprehensively destroyed all of their team mates. Really!
Ayrton did not destroy Alain Prost and neither did he destroy Mika Hakkinen when they were together all too briefly at McLaren. Max did not destroy Ricciardo and neither did he destroy Carlos Sainz when they were at Toro Rosso together, so yet another inaccurate and hysterical bit of "journalism" from an online source.
|
|
|
|
Post by René on Aug 26, 2020 15:28:26 GMT
I've seen it and honestly, I didn't even want to bring it up here because it is so ridiculous. The claims are based on data from 1983 onwards so indeed not 'of all time'. A list of the fastest F1 drivers of all time without Peterson and Villeneuve on it cannot be taken seriously (but it has Kovalainen, Trulli, Hülkenberg, Norris, Button, Fisichella on the list!). Totally bonkers!
|
|
|
|
Post by robmarsh on Aug 26, 2020 16:10:36 GMT
Agree with you both Rene and Charles. Really what passes for journalism these days is appalling. I am afraid Mark Hughes has become so analytical he is in danger of losing the point about racing and the journalism that goes with it. I am afraid that the more Ross Brawn puts his pen to paper or opens his mouth the more he damages his previous reputation.
So far the only really good things about F1 have been the young drivers eg Norris, Sainz, Leclerc, Russell and Albon and the fact that apart from Spain, Russia and the Emirates all the tracks they race on will be predominately old school. I also like the fact they are going back to Turkey.
|
|
|
|
Post by Carl on Aug 26, 2020 17:02:27 GMT
I've seen it and honestly, I didn't even want to bring it up here because it is so ridiculous. The claims are based on data from 1983 onwards so indeed not 'of all time'. A list of the fastest F1 drivers of all time without Peterson and Villeneuve on it cannot be taken seriously (but it has Kovalainen, Trulli, Hülkenberg, Norris, Button, Fisichella on the list!). Totally bonkers!
Is this "algorithmic analysis" on the MS website?
I agree that Mark Hughes has become too analytical, which detracts from the pure enjoyment of the sport.
|
|
|
|
Post by robmarsh on Aug 26, 2020 17:40:30 GMT
It's all over the bloody place unfortunately Carl but yes it is on the MS site or Hughes' response is.
|
|
|
|
Post by charleselan on Aug 26, 2020 19:11:48 GMT
Agreed, it appears that Mark is disappearing up his own exhaust pipe these days. This reliance on data etc, lacks soul and passion and that is really what motor sport is about.
Data analysts are really the in vogue thing, and to be honest leave me cold and it is more often than not completely useless.
All of us here have been around motor sport for long enough to know who is quick, and who was the stand out in a certain era, we do not need some mathematical "genius" to tell us something contrary to what we already know.
What makes me laugh is that Schumacher is second and Mika doesn't even get in the top ten, and look where Alain Prost is. Absolutely blooming laughable.
Another thing they are trying to factor in on the MS site today is the fact that driver weight plays a significant part in performance, well yes that has been discussed to infinitum. To say however that Mansell was half a second slower than Prost due to him being 15 - 20Kgs heavier is pushing it a bit.
|
|
|
|
Post by robmarsh on Aug 27, 2020 4:40:41 GMT
Another thing they are trying to factor in on the MS site today is the fact that driver weight plays a significant part in performance, well yes that has been discussed to infinitum. To say however that Mansell was half a second slower than Prost due to him being 15 - 20Kgs heavier is pushing it a bit. When I read that I lost all interest. Next thing they will be comparing how head and helmet size affected airflow to the rear wing or engine intake or both and applying 10ths of a millisecond to that. |
|
|
|
Post by chrisb on Aug 27, 2020 6:49:04 GMT
I hadn't bothered to read it, then a friend messaged me Sunday basically telling me "I told you so" after all he is a massive Senna fan, so I glanced at it but couldn't bring myself to bother reading it, as I find these things crap, and asked him if he thought Ayrton was quicker than Gilles, to which he replied 'proof' to which I replied this is all nonsense, there has only ever been one quickest driver and that is Jimmy, [not realising that it was supposed to be in the past 40 years- which turned out to be 37 years] to which the messages stopped, end of story
One thing I notice is when you start running out of things to say you use technical speak to fill column spaces, wonder if Mark is also tired of all the shenanigans going on in F1 and yearns to write on subjects as he had previously,
Rob, like MotoGP the new and younger riders/drivers are proving far more interesting and 'pure' in terms of racing.
|
|
|
|
Post by robmarsh on Aug 27, 2020 8:18:43 GMT
One thing I notice is when you start running out of things to say you use technical speak to fill column spaces, wonder if Mark is also tired of all the shenanigans going on in F1 and yearns to write on subjects as he had previously, Chris, MH has stopped writing his long reports that he used to do, apparently they are not financially viable given the time he spends on them. He has also stop been exclusive to MS and writes for F1 amongst others. |
|
|
|
Post by charleselan on Aug 27, 2020 12:58:50 GMT
To add from the above. In the "debate" about driver weight being a disadvantage on the MS site, there are also thoughts that Mansell's greater upper body strength would have offered him an advantage on the faster corners in the days of cars not having power steering. This folks is the man who used to get out of the car post race and virtually collapse, whereas Ayrton and Alain would look as fresh as daisies  . I am not trying to knock Nigel here, but highlighting the absurdity of the comments being placed elsewhere. If we take all this nonsense onboard then i am minded to think that Ronnie must have been not only a genius, but a "super genius" as he was a tall chap and probably weighed more than many of his fellow competitors. Also he was deemed by some so called journalists to have been unfit by 1976/77. He still blitzed all of his team-mates, so just imagine what he would have done had he been lighter; shorter and super fit  . Then there was big Dan Gurney back in the old 1.5 litre formula.......... Incidentally it was Jensen Button who commented that Verstappen was like Ayrton in destroying his team-mates; however if one reads past the inaccurate headline he was merely referring to the last two seasons of Max's career. The question of Gilles v's Ayrton, that is one of the big ones isn't it. Along with Jim v's Stirling; Jim v's JYS and Fangio v's Ascari (1955 onwards). |
|
|
|
Post by robmarsh on Aug 27, 2020 13:33:25 GMT
The question of Gilles v's Ayrton, that is one of the big ones isn't it. Along with Jim v's Stirling; Jim v's JYS and Fangio v's Ascari (1955 onwards). The mind boggles with pleasant thoughts on those match ups. Gilles vs Aryton: The best seasons would be 85/86. Aryton on the up and probably faster over a single lap and GV defending with guile and experience. GV would be in his late 30s by then so probably not so fast. Jim vs Stirling: 1963 and 64 would have been great, very close seasons with Jim forging ahead in 65 Jim vs JYS: 68 would have been dominated by Jim, 69 probably shaded by JYS as the MS80 was better than the 49. 70 would have been a walk over for Jim in the Lotus 72c and 71 would probably go to JYS if Jim was still racing. Fangio vs Ascari: probably would have ended up with them winning four championships each in total so 56 and 57 to Ascari. I doubt Fangio would have got a ride for Ferrari in 56 if Ascari had been there. |
|
|
|
Post by charleselan on Aug 27, 2020 15:42:19 GMT
The question of Gilles v's Ayrton, that is one of the big ones isn't it. Along with Jim v's Stirling; Jim v's JYS and Fangio v's Ascari (1955 onwards). The mind boggles with pleasant thoughts on those match ups. Gilles vs Aryton: The best seasons would be 85/86. Aryton on the up and probably faster over a single lap and GV defending with guile and experience. GV would be in his late 30s by then so probably not so fast. Jim vs Stirling: 1963 and 64 would have been great, very close seasons with Jim forging ahead in 65 Jim vs JYS: 68 would have been dominated by Jim, 69 probably shaded by JYS as the MS80 was better than the 49. 70 would have been a walk over for Jim in the Lotus 72c and 71 would probably go to JYS if Jim was still racing. Fangio vs Ascari: probably would have ended up with them winning four championships each in total so 56 and 57 to Ascari. I doubt Fangio would have got a ride for Ferrari in 56 if Ascari had been there. Not a lot to disagree with there Rob, in fact very sound. However the one I am not altogether in agreement with is the Gilles v's Ayrton idea. In 1985 Gilles would have been 35 years old (same as me) and to my way of thinking that is the age when a racing driver is at their very peak. Some loose their speed in the 30's, and others do not that is certain. We were never able to see how Jim; Gilles and Ayrton would have performed at 35 as they had all perished before reaching that age. JYS had retired before attaining that age, but when he did those now quite iconic race car tests for Autocar in 1977 he was still spectacular quick enough to impress Colin Chapman. I think that a 35 year old Gilles would have been as fast as ever, and as you say would have had all that experience as well. In my opinion I think that Gilles would have had the edge on Ayrton in 1985/6 with regard to outright speed and natural flair. He would also have been just that bit more instinctive in poor conditions; Ayrton always said that he had to work at being good in bad weather conditions, Gilles was pure instinct and natural. Where Ayrton would have had an edge would have been in ruthless determination to have the very best. Keke Rosberg was on a par with Senna in 1985 and he and Gilles had some history in Formula Atlantic, so the whole scenario of those three and Prost would have been mind boggling. The one question though is what car Gilles would have been driving! The Fangio v's Ascari competition is also a mouthwatering one. The thought of Alberto and the Lancia D50 coming good and challenging the Mercedes Benz W196 is something to saviour. Would Lancia have sold everything off to Ferrari had Ascari been still alive and getting results with the car, an interesting thought in itself? |
|
|
|
Post by robmarsh on Aug 27, 2020 16:39:16 GMT
Yep good points Charles. I thought GV was a bit older hence my comments but at 35 still on it most definitely. You could also throw Piquet and Mansell into the mix for 85 and that would have been a mega season, none of this one or two teams winning. Assume that GV stayed with Ferrari and did not go to McLaren and that the Brabham was on decent tyres and not Pirellis then I don't think anyone would have won more than three grand Prix with Williams probably picking up the constructors championship.
|
|
|
|
Post by charleselan on Aug 27, 2020 17:20:04 GMT
Yep good points Charles. I thought GV was a bit older hence my comments but at 35 still on it most definitely. You could also throw Piquet and Mansell into the mix for 85 and that would have been a mega season, none of this one or two teams winning. Assume that GV stayed with Ferrari and did not go to McLaren and that the Brabham was on decent tyres and not Pirellis then I don't think anyone would have won more than three grand Prix with Williams probably picking up the constructors championship. Absolutely Rob, I didn't put Nelson in there because I am aware that he is unpopular here, but not with me  . Mansell yes as well but he did inherit wins that should have been Keke's, still quick however. Also of course if Gilles had still been with us we could also have had Didier Pironi, he wasn't slow! 1985 was a wonderful season anyway as we have both mentioned before, one of the best ever, and boy it could have been even greater. |
|
|
|
Post by robmarsh on Aug 27, 2020 19:41:02 GMT
Nelson Piquet was a great driver. DSJ thought very highly of him at the time. I think he tarnished his reputation somewhat towards the end of his career which was sad.
|
|
.
. Then there was big Dan Gurney back in the old 1.5 litre formula..........
. Mansell yes as well but he did inherit wins that should have been Keke's, still quick however. Also of course if Gilles had still been with us we could also have had Didier Pironi, he wasn't slow!