Even like this, you would have the impact of the circuit on the car. For example, it's not the same for a Ferrari to run in Monza than in Monaco, where in Monza would have a slight advantage because on their top speed, but in Monaco the car would underperform. So the "Communist F1" wouldn't work here either, although I never thought about it and it would be pretty funny to watch the drivers swapping teams every weekend.
I guess you could balance it by choosing two very different tracks for a driver to race in a given car. Say, if you get Ferrari in Monza, you also get Ferrari in Monaco.
Decent analysis but how often has team orders impacted the score of the second driver? Especially at Ferrari when in past years they have clearly had a No.1 and No.2 driver and the second driver will always have had to cede points to the lead driver....the teams swapping drivers will never, ever happen.
I was thinking the same thing. Often times the second driver gets sacrificed in order to protect the number one. It's not often that the lead team has the luxury or the team mentality to allow its drivers to fight eachother hard throughout the season.
@@300ml_brasil I don't think any team has ever deliberately done that. Rather, they look for different things in a #1 and #2 driver, because there is no single "best" a driver can be. The #1 driver would likely be the guy (or girl) who's great at qualifying and does a cracking job at wheel-to-wheel racing, while the #2 driver would be the one who consistently manages to avoid incident and deal with adverse conditions to consistently pick up the points.
"In past years." Let us just look at '96 onwards. Irvine was second driver to michael, except '99 when the michael broke his leg. From '00 to '05 rubens had to back up michael ("let michael pass for the championship" and so on) in '06 felipe was no2 in '07 and '08 the driver lower in the championship was second fiddle. '09 is a hard year to judge the driver status for ferrari although until hungary, if i remember correctly, kimi was in better form. After that felipe was second driver to alonso, then kimi to fernando and seb and then charles leclerc came in and challenged the establishment by pure pace
I’d love to see an analysis of fuels in F1. We talk a lot of car and engine, but can a fuel supplier make a difference in performance? Does a Mercedes engine perform differently in a different car using a different fuel supplier?
@Sean De Groote this was a topic in 2014(Mclaren) and 2018(Red Bull) where these customer teams had a different fuel/lubricant supplier than the motor manufacturer and therefore might have had a performance/reliability disadvantage. But afaik this is currently not the case. Every team uses the manufacturer tested fuel/lubricant supplier: Mercedes: Petronas Ferrari: Shell Honda: ExxonMobil Renault: BP/Castrol So this only becomes a topic if a customer team decides to take an oil company sponsor. And then it is more a question of, does the financial benefit outweigh the performance/reliability risk?
it absolutely does make a difference, pretty much everything they put on or in the car is done for performance purposes (maybe reliability too). I remember seeing an interview with Vettel a few years ago, about 2015/16 time just after he got to Ferrari. He said that through that season Shell had made some changes to the fuel (exactly what or how that works is way beyond my understanding!) and he said that they gained roughly an extra 40hp just from that change in fuel! Now this might have been exaggerated, hell it might be a flat out lie for PR purposes but every component and company who makes them are continually improving everything so it might well be true. If true that is a huge amount of power to gain from something very trivial and that took Ferrari no extra effort to gain that advantage
Engine oil as well, seems like teams use different formulas which may affect the reliability of the engine overall, there were like races last year where mercedes could stay close compared to other cars with less overheating
Quite a few ignoramuses who don't understand performance metrics of different fuels here. It's not like one team is running straight alcohol vs another who has c16, in which the former would have an advantage despite the octane discrepancy since these are turbocharged engines that could benefit greatly from added cooling via alcohol.
I thought you'd bring up the second driver in the team, and I don't that's really balanced to bring that up to comparison since usually the "secondary driver" in the team is set up to not compete with the arguably better/dominant "primary driver"
Yeah, all of the statistics regarding 1st v 2nd driver performance seem pretty misleading. Even completely discounting team orders it ignores the massive impact of the leading teams constantly having to pick winners through race and pit strategy. It makes sense, too. Competitive teams don't really want to lose points because their drivers are always fighting each other, so when a 1st and 2nd driver *are* performing fairly evenly that's exactly when you'll see the most strategizing to keep them apart. We've seen a lot this season that a team not "forcing" a position swap doesn't really matter if the pit strategy has basically given the 1st driver the lead.
The Russel's drive with W11 confirms that driving a better car makes driving easier and faster to win the championship. Though the driver must be able to adapt to the car and drive it perfectly they can win the championship .
I like to think think of it like this: The car sets the macro boundaries of what is achievable, but the driver min-maxes the capabilities of the car and squeeze the best performance out of it.
Mercedes: Team cohesion Red Bull: Engine Ferrari: Regulations McLaren: Patience Force India: New names Alpha Tauri: Driver swaps Haas: Any cohesion at all Alfa Romeo: Fun Williams: Money
8:05 Waiting for those budget limitations ✌️ 9:25 some years teams go months without making the perfect car setup for the driver, now try changing that every one to two weeks
@@OnionChoppingNinja if he was slightly above average, what does that make Fernando Alonso, whom he tied with on his rookie season? And in turn, Michael Schumacher, who was unstoppable until Alonso showed up?
In simpler words, Hamilton has the talent eith maturity, Verstappen has talent, but is not in his true prime yet (i believe so, he has room to improve in decision making and the sheer coldness hamilton has under pressire)
Car is always more important in terms of competitiveness. You put Alonso, Hamilton, Senna, Schumacher, Vettel or Prost in the slowest cars of f1 historically (Arrows, Minardi, Spyker, Williams, etc etc) and they will NEVER compete for podiums let alone wins unless there are exceptional circumstances and changing conditions like heavy rain, safety cars, lots of DNFs and so forth. But when the car is already competitive and the margins are small between the cars of other teams, I'd say the driver makes a huge difference. It's the decision making, how to manage the tires, when and where to overtake, when to push, when not to push, when and how to defend, how to maximise the car in qualifying and overall improve the car with appropriate feedback given to the engineers. I'd say in general it's about 70% car, 30% driver.
I agree with this, but will add. Drivers do a lot more than just drive fast. Lewis for example pushes his team on all aspects, including development, operational, and communication. Alonso is a great pure driver but he lacks the in team building and feed back department. His immense adaptability often leaves the engineers unsure where to focus development.
I think that the car has a greater impact for one simple reason: all F1 drivers are top class. There will never be an F1 driver losing 2 seconds from the teammate, while the pace of the worst cars is often that far away (or more) from the best ones.
@@J0shM0nster the point is, a good driver is better than a Bad driver. And a good car is better than a Bad car. Thats obvious. But ask claire, Mercedes car or Hamilton...they Will get the car
Agreed. No one of the past champions would have won in a shitty car that year. They have to be driving the top or one of the absolute top cars in the grid (if more than one team has a similarily great car). Schumacher, Hamilton are great but if they were drivinf for diferent teams, they wouldn't have won all those championships.
For sure! But a driver doesn't only drive, it's only part of the job as mentioned in the video. So a good driver can make the car better too by doing all the auxiliary stuff.
Absolutely. Certain circuits can favor the driver, but for the most part the car makes the difference. I think most can agree Alonso is “better” driver than Bottas, but look at the 2018 standings. That being said a fast car is not a guarantee to a championship, a good driver is necessary. And to do it multiple times you need to be great, i.e., Seb, Lewis, Schumacher, Prost, Senna, etc.
@@jorge8596 Yes, but you could resurrect Fangio and Senna, somehow blend their talent together into a mutant superdriver, and still not get beyond 19th place in a 2019 Williams. That car was apocalyptically bad...
@@manawearblack Excuse me what? George is driving a williams, that's not his fault. Doesn't mean he isn't a good driver. Romain won gp2 also and he isn't winning. Even when he had a winning car, he didn't win. Frankly everyone in f1 is an excellent driver. The car definitely plays a bigger role, but there are distinct differences between drivers.
@@jorge8596 Kimi is a world champion but only scored 1 win to vettel's 14 as teammates in a wining car. What exactly is your point? The driver is extremely important, not only to drive, but develop, inspire, marketing, and designer/engineer acquisition. Charles and max, got top drives because they blew away the competition in the lower categories. Lewis/senna/schumacher were the same.
I really like your work keep it up! Your Idea is quite creative, but there are 2 major problems that make it even more complex. 1) the fastest driver, which they all believe to be, won't want the slowest car on the fastest circuit... 2) This season prooved us, that numbers of races ain't fixed or garanteed... What then?
What also needs to be considered is that each car handles the way of the drivers liking and their driving style. While some things can be balanced out with setup, there are general things youll never get out of the car without reconstructing the suspension, aero and everything else. Just look at Gasly last season. He is not a bad driver but just couldnt properly work with the redbull thus getting bad results. So while you were right with everything you said in your video, you should add that its not driver + car its the "symphony" of both combiend that set the pace. Other than that: great video and i like the idea of swapping teams and drivers around but it wouldnt really work out because certain cars got certain strenghts and weaknesses and therefore are more or less ideal for certain tracks.
I just thought: "Hmm, that doesn't exactly underline your statement that you like the guy, you were just talking about." But some people seem to have browned their pants.
When you have "more" in a sentence, "both" can't be the answer. Ps: you're right, a car can't drive itself without driver and a driver can't win races without a car.
Guys what are we talking about, just look the 2020s rankings of Bottas vs Russell. 200+ vs 3, and in Sakhir gp he proved that he is way better than Bottas by overtaking him almost twice in a car completely strange for him. I am even wondering why would someone keep a Drivers championship it is completely worthless.
Driver’s skill > Car Lewis vs Bottas for Mercedes George beating his teammate in qualifying for Williams Also, since cars gets developed in wind tunnels it will depend on the facility available. Assuming everything is the same, driver skills matter.
You know when Max Verstappen made a theory about the Mercedes W11 for being too dominant and George Russell drove it for Sakhir GP 2020? Yup, I'm with Max - he does have a solid point after all.
Car is almost always most important, but as you demonstrate the actual relative weighting can vary depending on the performance spread. With contemporary F1 there is probably a 1.5s spread between the best and worst drivers and at least a 3s spread between the best and worst car.
You should make video about how the tv camera direction has changed over the years. The cars these days look so much 'slower' on screen compared to the old days
Perhaps a less wacky idea would be to have one or two extra races during a weekend, where the drivers are put in F2 Cars at random, and the winners get a prize money. They used to do a similar challenge with touring cars back in the day, so we got to see a Lauda v Senna in a merc 190 I think. That sort of stuff would be awesome
Loving the new look Chain Bear intro! I wanted the answer to this question, and you have given me a video for it. Thank you! Keep it up man. Been following you since your tire videos in 2018 and I have never been disappointed.
The new intro/outro with the music is so good - even though it's the same music as last year, the different volume levels and the logo at the beginning are awesome
The biggest factor that the second driver comparison misses is the fact that one of any two team-mates will be on a superior strategy to the other due to the constrictions of pitting. Often teams will choose a number one and number two driver, and put the number one guy on the favoured strategy. This is especially the case at Mercedes rn during the second half of seasons.
I think that layout would be good for maybe a partner or junior series; I don't imagine a scenario where a championship-winning level driver would be that happy to shuffle around teams though.
The problem with the model you proposed is that it takes time for a driver to really know a car down to every detail and it may lower the entertainment value if the races are more sloppy
There's also the extra difficulty seeing that the best drivers and the best cars aren't independent of each other. What I mean is that the top teams with the most money can spend more money on their car and the drivers. So you can't just easily decoupled. Which is the point of this entire video, but I thought let's use the comment section to write a comment.
Indeed, not to mention that the greatest drivers in F1's history are often lauded for their great feedback to engineers that directly helped develop the car. Great drivers can play an important role in making the cars they drive great as well, to a point.
Great video as always! One factor which should be noted though is that drivers and constructors often work in harmony - like constructors designing a car to suit a driver's style or vice versa. Vettel and Webber were quite evenly matched at the start of 2012 (and Vettel was initially unhappy with the direction of the car's development) but when the Red Bull's behaviour and Vettel's style converged, the German was the much quicker driver. One issue I have with a driver-rotation championship is that drivers and constructors will need to become more "general purpose" than specialized for one another. The overall excitement may still be worth it, but I would prefer some way to leave the current setup and just make it more of a level playing field for constructors.
a more simpliest way to answer the question is: Champion drivers like Vettel or Alonso, couldn't achieve championship again because they didn't have the right car. Ferrari had the best car in 1999, but the champion was Hakkinen. Answer: the best driver in the best car, is the best formula.....finish, that is all.....Hakkinen-Mclarec, Ferrari-Shumacher, Renault-Alonso, Ferrari-Raikkonen, Brawn-Button, Red Bull-Vettel, Mercedes-Hamilton, Mercedes-Rosberg, Mercedes-Hamilton....it is always, always, the bets driver in the best car.
this film reminds me of: "Gentlemen, a short view back to the past" and yes, although Max would be very upset, the Formula All actually sounds do-able at least this year and Grosjean adds a little music chair effect to the fans, tho the teams would go insane with this😂
Both in a way. But simply. If Vettel went to Mercedes and not Lewis. Likelihood is that it would be Vettel breaking Schumacher’s records. Both are talented drivers. But one got a consistent and powerful car, while the other’s was inconsistent, attempted to cut corners, didn’t support Vettel and had non-existent strategy plans
9:30 You didn't think your idea to the end: It wouldn't be fair as there are tracks where it is hardly possible to overtake and on the other side there are tracks where you can overtake easier. Starting at the end of the field in Monza due to a penalty would be less bad than in Monaco or Hungary. Besides every car has its individual strengths and weaknesses. How do you want to find out the strengths and weaknesses of every team before and during a season and guarantee that it will be fair in average for every driver? Besides teams try to develop cars fitted to a driver's' drive style. Your idea wouldn't work.
Your idea at the end is intriguing, although I doubt it could be done between the confusion it would cause (since drivers would end up all over the place by design) and difficulties in implementing the changes seamlessly (because it would take drivers some time to get used to a new car, since they can't possibly drive all 10 cars in pre-season testing)
An important consideration when comparing the performance of the #1 to the #2 driver is that the #2 driver's setup is often heavily dictated by the #1 driver's driving style. If the #2 driver were to be given the design considerations, his performance in that same car could be much better than that obtained as the #2 driver.
While I do understand & concede you are 100% correct ..... I still would not want to give up rooting/cheering for my favorite driver/team combination(s). There is a point where being "pure" takes away from the fun, spectical, & competition of the sport as a whole. Thank you for honestly making me think but I opt to not go that far. Good day sir!
Looking at the difference in performance between Hamilton and Verstappen and their teammates you can clearly say that the driver is important, even considering that Bottas' races are regularly sacrificed. I do however feel that Formula 1 is a constructors championship. This is what makes F1 better and more fun than other racing classes. The difference in cars due to budget, yes, but ultimately it is innovation, engineering and management that makes cars able to win races. Just look at recent examples like the Toyota and Honda F1 teams. Ferrari has been known to not win championships while investing incredible amounts of money and having excellent drivers and engineers. Adding to this I am all for a budget cap but firmly against homologated parts unless teams are still free to design their own parts and not use the FIA regulated parts if they so choose. Now for the drivers circulating between all the teams: I love the idea but I see a lot of problems with this. Aside from the fact that none of the teams will agree with your idea. Maybe you could rotate everyone once in the first 10 races and then let them finish the season at their own respective teams. That way you have the drivers championship first and then the constructors. I can not figure out a way to make that work any other way. This set up would have to include a relegation/promotion between the junior classes. Let's say the bottom 6 or so relegate out of F1 and new drivers would be promoted in from F2 and other feeder championships. But what about WEC, IndyCar, Formula E and other top class championships? Can their drivers join F1? Will they be able to just offer the top drivers a big check and lure them out of F1? Should they get create a similar rotating model? To implement this you would have to change all championships in all classes. Making it extremely complicated and difficult to find a way into f1. Or worse, if you prefer endurance there is almost no way of getting there since it is a top tier championship but not the highest. It turned into a bit of a long read but I'd love to hear your thoughts on all of it. Keep making great videos like this!
I think there should be some homologated parts, but those that do not dramatically affect the performance of the car (of course every part affects performance in some way). For example, I'm sure there are engine components and parts of the chassis that teams spend a lot of money researching and developing, but the improvements do not make that much difference. Homologating parts would definitely save money and given the current financial situation, I think it's necessary to help the teams survive.
@@matt_dobson0614 Hi, Let's put it like this then: All teams have a budget cap. I would happily accept homologated parts as long as the teams have the option to spend their own budget on developing this part for themselves. You can only spend your money once after all and it would mean that other parts of their car will be less developed than that of the teams that do opt for the homologated parts. As a kind of incentive to keep using the homologated parts they could even make a rule that requires to make their research public after 1 or 2 seasons
I think saying Bottas' races are regularly interfered with is exaggeration.. team orders given to him before he was out of championship contention is barely twice
Finally someone who understands F1 explaining my point better than I ever could. Great job mate 👍 👏 👌... i hope fan boys who have no clue bout F1 watch this and understand the car isn't everything. The 2nd driver is where you actually know where the car is sometimes. The best drivers extract everything plus more from the car. I dont know which driver on the grid would have won on 3 wheels.
Whenever there's a wealth of reliable data to draw from, Chain Bear always delivers a quality analysis. On the other hand when there's not - such as this video, it seems his videos often disappoint. This subject is more about reading between the lines than simply crunching the numbers and perhaps that's not his strong suit. Despite the fact that there much to be explored in this subject, this video seems a bit shallow. I've watched for 11 minutes and learned... basically nothing. Perhaps a different approach is required for these sorts of topics in the future.
Yeah, that makes sense, but maybe the purpose of this video is not to teach us anything, but to show some data that would normally be pretty hard to be gathered, put it in the video in an easy way to understand and make us think about it, and therefore take our conclusions. What do you think?
Switching driver's would only put more stress on the car itself, setuping a car to the drivers needs is very important, not all drivers like the same level of understeer or oversteer or "x" or "y" ajustement. Mercedes is VERY good at setting up the car Hamilton wants it. Compared to Vettel having issues and complaining for 2seasons now. It's absurd thinking they could get it right in 2races. Or look at redbull where both cars are setup the way 1 driver likes it because he's the important one... I don't think it would work very well.
Bad statistics crate bad results. You want to check if the car or the drivers mean more. So you compere the best car (both driver) and the best driver on the non best car. but you need to compare all drivers, or at least equal amount of drivers. Most team has a good (primary) driver and a team (secondary) driver, so first we need to plot the average difference between the first and the second drivers, by checking the point difference and averaging them, which gives us a nice average difference between the two drivers on the board. Than check if the difference between the second driver on average has more drop in performance, than the the teams difference between performance. Eg.: if the average difference between first and second driver is 25%, and the average difference between the best team and the other teams (all averaged), than we have the difference between teams and between the two drivers. if the average team difference to the best team is lets say 55%, than yes, the car has much more boost, than the drivers, if the average team difference is 10% than the drivers has the larger share of difference. of course this will still not help for the simple most important part, aggregate advantage: the better team has better cars, better drivers and better ice cream holders, so they will get ahead way more than they should, since everyone wants to win, and we all know, the most important is the ice cream holder, he decide the fate of the championships.
Drivers have different driving styles that work better with certain cars, so they spend most of the season learning, developing, and getting used to the car. Rotating drivers through teams means that cars can't be optimized as much. so we'll get more of a generic car, and average drivers. It would be a "Jack of all trades master of none" kind of thing
The W Series has this rotating thing going on. Cars are spec but to make sure the drivers don't get an advantage with a more talented staff in one specific team, they have to change cars and teams after each race; they share everything and there's that added pressure of not crashing your car because you might be the one getting into a crashed car in the next race. It's a pretty interesting concept imo
This is an interesting debate because on tracks like Brazil or Austria, Red Bull-Honda’s cars had a slight advantage in 2019 while Mercedes’ cars overheated. That is an instance where car seemed to matter a lot because the cars capitalized on the tracks. However when you look at Brazil 2016, we see how a good driver in the wet like Verstappen could drag his car onto the podium due to his ability easily overtake in the rain, despite the misaligned tire strategy throughout the race.
![Six Hundred Strike [EPIC: The Musical] Full Animatic](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/zov6NXIAuow/mqdefault.jpg)
i will never sleep again because of square cowboy Grosjean
That was some nightmare fuel for sure.
i thought i was the only one..
I was going to sleep after this video, but now I can't
Had to dislike because of that like WTF
@@masonz7162 he definitely throws some very strange shit in his videos sometimes
Therapist: Don't worry. Your nightmares aren't real.
My nightmare: 8:30
literal nightmare fuel
I think that’s my sleep paralysis demon
im so confused
My nightmare is 0:10
Underrated comment
8:31 What the hell is that?!
I want to know too
MY SLEEP PARALYSIS DEMON
Yeah, I'd like an explanation too
It means: The best video about F1 ever produced (I had a big laugh) or signs of prolonged social distancing (That's why I laughed)
grosjean 2
Even like this, you would have the impact of the circuit on the car. For example, it's not the same for a Ferrari to run in Monza than in Monaco, where in Monza would have a slight advantage because on their top speed, but in Monaco the car would underperform. So the "Communist F1" wouldn't work here either, although I never thought about it and it would be pretty funny to watch the drivers swapping teams every weekend.
I was going to say excactly this, so thanks that you did it, so i don't have to hahaha
I guess you could balance it by choosing two very different tracks for a driver to race in a given car. Say, if you get Ferrari in Monza, you also get Ferrari in Monaco.
It would still be a lot more balanced than the current method
The other main issue is that cars are made to fit the driver and each driver need some seat time before he is comfortable with a new car
Plus how would you get new drivers in when old ones retire or underperform
What more important driver or car?
Actually starting the season is more important
Cant wait
it will start soon.. with vettel in the 2019 ferrari... wtf
Keisuke Takahasi they should have kicked binotto instead of seb
@ never gunna let you down
Couldnt be gorjesean
Decent analysis but how often has team orders impacted the score of the second driver? Especially at Ferrari when in past years they have clearly had a No.1 and No.2 driver and the second driver will always have had to cede points to the lead driver....the teams swapping drivers will never, ever happen.
Also the fact that teams hire no2 drivers that are a bit worse but good enough to score and keep rivals off of no1 driver
I was thinking the same thing. Often times the second driver gets sacrificed in order to protect the number one. It's not often that the lead team has the luxury or the team mentality to allow its drivers to fight eachother hard throughout the season.
Merc too since 2017
@@300ml_brasil I don't think any team has ever deliberately done that. Rather, they look for different things in a #1 and #2 driver, because there is no single "best" a driver can be. The #1 driver would likely be the guy (or girl) who's great at qualifying and does a cracking job at wheel-to-wheel racing, while the #2 driver would be the one who consistently manages to avoid incident and deal with adverse conditions to consistently pick up the points.
"In past years." Let us just look at '96 onwards. Irvine was second driver to michael, except '99 when the michael broke his leg. From '00 to '05 rubens had to back up michael ("let michael pass for the championship" and so on) in '06 felipe was no2 in '07 and '08 the driver lower in the championship was second fiddle. '09 is a hard year to judge the driver status for ferrari although until hungary, if i remember correctly, kimi was in better form. After that felipe was second driver to alonso, then kimi to fernando and seb and then charles leclerc came in and challenged the establishment by pure pace
Mercedes: my drivers.
ChainBear: our drivers.
*Sovjet anthem starts playing*
bloody thief
@@shadowfan982 Chairman of Redistribution*
@@DaHitch aka thief
@@shadowfan982 Workers of the world unite!
8:30 my sleep paralysis demon now has a sleep paralysis demon, thanks
You must be popular on tumbler
I would like to see the look on mercedes when the FIA says “this week you get Grosjean, hope your car is not to expensive to repeir”
Cue teams making dummy cars to give drivers who are more likely to crash their cars than score points
Okay Mercedes, this weekend we've paired you with Perez and Ocon. Good luck!
I think that week Merc just lets Grosjean drive one of the safety cars LOL
@@CSum-em8jg Then Grosjean would win because everyone has to line up behind him.
If only Maldobaldo was still in F1
7:30
Kvyat for champion 2020. The sorting algorithm knows already!
"Bono, my tires are gone!"
"You mean OUR tires"
Communism 100%
I’d love to see an analysis of fuels in F1. We talk a lot of car and engine, but can a fuel supplier make a difference in performance? Does a Mercedes engine perform differently in a different car using a different fuel supplier?
Probably, but that thing is a company secret formula where they develop it specific to an engine for MAXIMUM PERFORMANCE.
@Sean De Groote this was a topic in 2014(Mclaren) and 2018(Red Bull) where these customer teams had a different fuel/lubricant supplier than the motor manufacturer and therefore might have had a performance/reliability disadvantage. But afaik this is currently not the case. Every team uses the manufacturer tested fuel/lubricant supplier:
Mercedes: Petronas
Ferrari: Shell
Honda: ExxonMobil
Renault: BP/Castrol
So this only becomes a topic if a customer team decides to take an oil company sponsor. And then it is more a question of, does the financial benefit outweigh the performance/reliability risk?
it absolutely does make a difference, pretty much everything they put on or in the car is done for performance purposes (maybe reliability too). I remember seeing an interview with Vettel a few years ago, about 2015/16 time just after he got to Ferrari. He said that through that season Shell had made some changes to the fuel (exactly what or how that works is way beyond my understanding!) and he said that they gained roughly an extra 40hp just from that change in fuel! Now this might have been exaggerated, hell it might be a flat out lie for PR purposes but every component and company who makes them are continually improving everything so it might well be true. If true that is a huge amount of power to gain from something very trivial and that took Ferrari no extra effort to gain that advantage
Engine oil as well, seems like teams use different formulas which may affect the reliability of the engine overall, there were like races last year where mercedes could stay close compared to other cars with less overheating
Quite a few ignoramuses who don't understand performance metrics of different fuels here. It's not like one team is running straight alcohol vs another who has c16, in which the former would have an advantage despite the octane discrepancy since these are turbocharged engines that could benefit greatly from added cooling via alcohol.
I'm just here for the reactions to 8:28
what hell was that?
Shit my pants. That's it
That was legitimately frightening.
grosjean 2
Horror movie level stuff
I would appreciate if you never make anything like 8:30 again
I second this
it was disturbing
grosjean 2
Grosjean 2: Electric Boogaloo
Grosjean.exe
What was that at 8:31
cursed
grosjean 2
a random nightmare
James: Valtteri, it's James. Valtteri would like to pass
Valtteri: No, James, I will not let Valtteri pass me
Valtteri, it’s Valtteri.
"Valtteri, its Lewis
Pass James when in *B O X B O X*
And let Toto pass on Turn 12"
Hami, its james, let Grosjean by
I thought you'd bring up the second driver in the team, and I don't that's really balanced to bring that up to comparison since usually the "secondary driver" in the team is set up to not compete with the arguably better/dominant "primary driver"
Yeah, all of the statistics regarding 1st v 2nd driver performance seem pretty misleading. Even completely discounting team orders it ignores the massive impact of the leading teams constantly having to pick winners through race and pit strategy. It makes sense, too. Competitive teams don't really want to lose points because their drivers are always fighting each other, so when a 1st and 2nd driver *are* performing fairly evenly that's exactly when you'll see the most strategizing to keep them apart. We've seen a lot this season that a team not "forcing" a position swap doesn't really matter if the pit strategy has basically given the 1st driver the lead.
7:32 SHOCKING: Codemasters reveal how they made their driver cards!
Ivan Pozdeev Eh, they just randomly distribute 4 different numbers for each driver and call the average their “overall rating.”
@@jdhenshaw6119 Just as Fifa. Shocking right ? :P
The Russel's drive with W11 confirms that driving a better car makes driving easier and faster to win the championship. Though the driver must be able to adapt to the car and drive it perfectly they can win the championship .
This aged very poorly
@@GoldenEDM_2018 not really
I like to think think of it like this: The car sets the macro boundaries of what is achievable, but the driver min-maxes the capabilities of the car and squeeze the best performance out of it.
Mercedes: Team cohesion
Red Bull: Engine
Ferrari: Regulations
McLaren: Patience
Force India: New names
Alpha Tauri: Driver swaps
Haas: Any cohesion at all
Alfa Romeo: Fun
Williams: Money
That's right
You may have forgotten clueless 😉
Ferrari:Strategy, a driver who doesn't make mistakes and a good all round car,
Renault: Forgetable
@@Locormus2 I still stand by clueless although forgettable works too 😁
8:31 I saw it on your Twitter a while ago but that is absolutely cursed
grosjean 2
Damn, that idea of rotating the drivers through the teams during the season sounds soo interesting, would love to see it.
this video starts at 1:02, ends at 8:29 and re-begins at 8:38. You're welcome!
Thank you
I Appreciate people who do this. Thank you
Yes bc I too find it hard to sit for a minute while whoever I'm supporting is trying to support themselves
Genuine fear my eyes flicked backed to the screen at 8:30
8:05 Waiting for those budget limitations ✌️
9:25 some years teams go months without making the perfect car setup for the driver, now try changing that every one to two weeks
Plus some cars suit different drivers' driving style better.
Verstappen fans: "Car!"
Hamilton fans: "Driver!"
Verstappen would destroy Hamilton in that Mercedes
@@OnionChoppingNinja Hamilton "above average"? lmao what are you smoking.
@@OnionChoppingNinja if he was slightly above average, what does that make Fernando Alonso, whom he tied with on his rookie season? And in turn, Michael Schumacher, who was unstoppable until Alonso showed up?
Automobili You really think he’d “destroy” him? Come on mate be realistic.. none of the top 4 guys would destroy either lol
In simpler words, Hamilton has the talent eith maturity, Verstappen has talent, but is not in his true prime yet (i believe so, he has room to improve in decision making and the sheer coldness hamilton has under pressire)
Car is always more important in terms of competitiveness. You put Alonso, Hamilton, Senna, Schumacher, Vettel or Prost in the slowest cars of f1 historically (Arrows, Minardi, Spyker, Williams, etc etc) and they will NEVER compete for podiums let alone wins unless there are exceptional circumstances and changing conditions like heavy rain, safety cars, lots of DNFs and so forth.
But when the car is already competitive and the margins are small between the cars of other teams, I'd say the driver makes a huge difference. It's the decision making, how to manage the tires, when and where to overtake, when to push, when not to push, when and how to defend, how to maximise the car in qualifying and overall improve the car with appropriate feedback given to the engineers.
I'd say in general it's about 70% car, 30% driver.
Did you watch the video mate?
I agree with this, but will add. Drivers do a lot more than just drive fast. Lewis for example pushes his team on all aspects, including development, operational, and communication. Alonso is a great pure driver but he lacks the in team building and feed back department. His immense adaptability often leaves the engineers unsure where to focus development.
I think that the car has a greater impact for one simple reason: all F1 drivers are top class. There will never be an F1 driver losing 2 seconds from the teammate, while the pace of the worst cars is often that far away (or more) from the best ones.
Car is more important but the driver gives that extra few percent
I feel like in the straight always it’s all the car
Ask Williams if they would rather have Hamilton or the Mercedes car. There is your answer.
Ask mercedes if they'd rather have hamilton or grosjean.
Lol you both make perfect sense, it's now back to square one
@@J0shM0nster still doesn't decline what he said
@@J0shM0nster wouldnt the equivalent be to ask mercedes if they would rather have the haas car or grosjean?
@@J0shM0nster the point is, a good driver is better than a Bad driver.
And a good car is better than a Bad car.
Thats obvious.
But ask claire, Mercedes car or Hamilton...they Will get the car
Let's be real, the car is WAY more important. Just ask a professional driver, they'll tell you
Agreed. No one of the past champions would have won in a shitty car that year. They have to be driving the top or one of the absolute top cars in the grid (if more than one team has a similarily great car). Schumacher, Hamilton are great but if they were drivinf for diferent teams, they wouldn't have won all those championships.
For sure! But a driver doesn't only drive, it's only part of the job as mentioned in the video. So a good driver can make the car better too by doing all the auxiliary stuff.
Absolutely. Certain circuits can favor the driver, but for the most part the car makes the difference. I think most can agree Alonso is “better” driver than Bottas, but look at the 2018 standings. That being said a fast car is not a guarantee to a championship, a good driver is necessary. And to do it multiple times you need to be great, i.e., Seb, Lewis, Schumacher, Prost, Senna, etc.
I think its always gonna be both look at Pierre gasly and max verstappen last year same car drastically different results
I can drive a silver arrow but never win a race
90% car 10% driver. Oh, and that laughing Grosjean scared the hell out of my dog.
The best drivers in f1 were the best drivers in the junior categories when the cars were spec.
@@jorge8596 Yes, but you could resurrect Fangio and Senna, somehow blend their talent together into a mutant superdriver, and still not get beyond 19th place in a 2019 Williams. That car was apocalyptically bad...
@@manawearblack Excuse me what? George is driving a williams, that's not his fault. Doesn't mean he isn't a good driver. Romain won gp2 also and he isn't winning. Even when he had a winning car, he didn't win. Frankly everyone in f1 is an excellent driver. The car definitely plays a bigger role, but there are distinct differences between drivers.
@@jorge8596 Kimi is a world champion but only scored 1 win to vettel's 14 as teammates in a wining car. What exactly is your point? The driver is extremely important, not only to drive, but develop, inspire, marketing, and designer/engineer acquisition. Charles and max, got top drives because they blew away the competition in the lower categories. Lewis/senna/schumacher were the same.
@@Bahamuttiamat You seem to have misread my comment, please go over it again and then re-reply
I really like your work keep it up!
Your Idea is quite creative, but there are 2 major problems that make it even more complex.
1) the fastest driver, which they all believe to be, won't want the slowest car on the fastest circuit...
2) This season prooved us, that numbers of races ain't fixed or garanteed... What then?
Imagine the nightmare of being an F1 commentator on a season where drivers get shuffled around teams like that
What also needs to be considered is that each car handles the way of the drivers liking and their driving style. While some things can be balanced out with setup, there are general things youll never get out of the car without reconstructing the suspension, aero and everything else. Just look at Gasly last season. He is not a bad driver but just couldnt properly work with the redbull thus getting bad results. So while you were right with everything you said in your video, you should add that its not driver + car its the "symphony" of both combiend that set the pace. Other than that: great video and i like the idea of swapping teams and drivers around but it wouldnt really work out because certain cars got certain strenghts and weaknesses and therefore are more or less ideal for certain tracks.
"Rotate the drivers between cars"
"There's the chances of botched pitstops"
Russell in Sakhir 2020: ):
8:31 Uhhhh...you OK, there?
I thoroughly enjoyed 8:30
I just thought: "Hmm, that doesn't exactly underline your statement that you like the guy, you were just talking about."
But some people seem to have browned their pants.
sometimes it almost feels like there isn't the word "both", on the internet.
*M O A R P O L A R I Z A T I O N*
Well both things cant be more important. They cab both be important but thats not the question
We always have to sort things into boxes, tell things apart, rate them. Humans...
In this case, probably because saying both would be extremely boring and completely defeat the purpose of this video.
When you have "more" in a sentence, "both" can't be the answer.
Ps: you're right, a car can't drive itself without driver and a driver can't win races without a car.
Guys what are we talking about, just look the 2020s rankings of Bottas vs Russell. 200+ vs 3, and in Sakhir gp he proved that he is way better than Bottas by overtaking him almost twice in a car completely strange for him. I am even wondering why would someone keep a Drivers championship it is completely worthless.
Maybe it's because I'm drunk but I liked the 8:30 part lol
Me too and I don't drink 😂😂😂
8:40 Absolutely. LOVE IT
Driver’s skill > Car
Lewis vs Bottas for Mercedes
George beating his teammate in qualifying for Williams
Also, since cars gets developed in wind tunnels it will depend on the facility available. Assuming everything is the same, driver skills matter.
Let’s forget Russell’s performance for mercedez vs on Williams, right???
You know when Max Verstappen made a theory about the Mercedes W11 for being too dominant and George Russell drove it for Sakhir GP 2020? Yup, I'm with Max - he does have a solid point after all.
Car is almost always most important, but as you demonstrate the actual relative weighting can vary depending on the performance spread. With contemporary F1 there is probably a 1.5s spread between the best and worst drivers and at least a 3s spread between the best and worst car.
8:30 imagine Romain Grosjean watching this video. That was mean...
You should make video about how the tv camera direction has changed over the years. The cars these days look so much 'slower' on screen compared to the old days
Little correction at 2:00 Mika won the championship in 1999 :)
Magnifico Figaro Ferrari won the constructers title
Perhaps a less wacky idea would be to have one or two extra races during a weekend, where the drivers are put in F2 Cars at random, and the winners get a prize money. They used to do a similar challenge with touring cars back in the day, so we got to see a Lauda v Senna in a merc 190 I think. That sort of stuff would be awesome
Loving the new look Chain Bear intro! I wanted the answer to this question, and you have given me a video for it. Thank you! Keep it up man. Been following you since your tire videos in 2018 and I have never been disappointed.
In an era where all drivers on the grid have a raw pace within a few tenths, the most important value of a driver is their consistency and composure.
“Ordered at random to sidestep controversy”
WELL, which Randomisation Algorithm did you use?!?!
Love your approach to rotate drivers through teams 👍
7:35 NO-ONE is better than the Torpedo.
The new intro/outro with the music is so good - even though it's the same music as last year, the different volume levels and the logo at the beginning are awesome
80% car 20% driver
The biggest factor that the second driver comparison misses is the fact that one of any two team-mates will be on a superior strategy to the other due to the constrictions of pitting. Often teams will choose a number one and number two driver, and put the number one guy on the favoured strategy. This is especially the case at Mercedes rn during the second half of seasons.
The car. Look at Russell’s performance after he filled in for Lewis in the penultimate race of 2020. Compare it to his performance for Williams. 🤣
I think that layout would be good for maybe a partner or junior series; I don't imagine a scenario where a championship-winning level driver would be that happy to shuffle around teams though.
This is much like W Series. They change car & engineer each and every round
and how did that work for W Series!?
The problem with the model you proposed is that it takes time for a driver to really know a car down to every detail and it may lower the entertainment value if the races are more sloppy
4:23 How do you get negative percentage of someone's points in 1972?
I really love all of these recent chart filled vids. Keep it up!
There's also the extra difficulty seeing that the best drivers and the best cars aren't independent of each other.
What I mean is that the top teams with the most money can spend more money on their car and the drivers.
So you can't just easily decoupled. Which is the point of this entire video, but I thought let's use the comment section to write a comment.
Indeed, not to mention that the greatest drivers in F1's history are often lauded for their great feedback to engineers that directly helped develop the car. Great drivers can play an important role in making the cars they drive great as well, to a point.
Great video as always! One factor which should be noted though is that drivers and constructors often work in harmony - like constructors designing a car to suit a driver's style or vice versa. Vettel and Webber were quite evenly matched at the start of 2012 (and Vettel was initially unhappy with the direction of the car's development) but when the Red Bull's behaviour and Vettel's style converged, the German was the much quicker driver.
One issue I have with a driver-rotation championship is that drivers and constructors will need to become more "general purpose" than specialized for one another. The overall excitement may still be worth it, but I would prefer some way to leave the current setup and just make it more of a level playing field for constructors.
The video starts at 1:03
a more simpliest way to answer the question is: Champion drivers like Vettel or Alonso, couldn't achieve championship again because they didn't have the right car.
Ferrari had the best car in 1999, but the champion was Hakkinen.
Answer: the best driver in the best car, is the best formula.....finish, that is all.....Hakkinen-Mclarec, Ferrari-Shumacher, Renault-Alonso, Ferrari-Raikkonen, Brawn-Button, Red Bull-Vettel, Mercedes-Hamilton, Mercedes-Rosberg, Mercedes-Hamilton....it is always, always, the bets driver in the best car.
this film reminds me of:
"Gentlemen, a short view back to the past"
and yes, although Max would be very upset, the Formula All actually sounds do-able at least this year
and Grosjean adds a little music chair effect to the fans, tho the teams would go insane with this😂
Both in a way. But simply. If Vettel went to Mercedes and not Lewis. Likelihood is that it would be Vettel breaking Schumacher’s records. Both are talented drivers. But one got a consistent and powerful car, while the other’s was inconsistent, attempted to cut corners, didn’t support Vettel and had non-existent strategy plans
9:30 You didn't think your idea to the end:
It wouldn't be fair as there are tracks where it is hardly possible to overtake and on the other side there are tracks where you can overtake easier. Starting at the end of the field in Monza due to a penalty would be less bad than in Monaco or Hungary.
Besides every car has its individual strengths and weaknesses. How do you want to find out the strengths and weaknesses of every team before and during a season and guarantee that it will be fair in average for every driver? Besides teams try to develop cars fitted to a driver's' drive style.
Your idea wouldn't work.
Preferably a driver and car combination that optimizes race performance.
E.g. Schumaker & Ferrari, Hamilton & Mercedes, etc.
7:26 Ah yes Kvyat is the best driver of them all.
Lmao I understand your point of placing them randomly, great video anyways. Cheers.
Your idea at the end is intriguing, although I doubt it could be done between the confusion it would cause (since drivers would end up all over the place by design) and difficulties in implementing the changes seamlessly (because it would take drivers some time to get used to a new car, since they can't possibly drive all 10 cars in pre-season testing)
8:41 Lenin approves!
Depends who you are asking. Vettel winning for Torro Rosso = Driver. Vettel winning for Ferrari = Car.
Maybe having a series in general
I say the car has to be competive, the best driver is only as good as their equipment.
Car, because without it drivers would just be walking
An important consideration when comparing the performance of the #1 to the #2 driver is that the #2 driver's setup is often heavily dictated by the #1 driver's driving style. If the #2 driver were to be given the design considerations, his performance in that same car could be much better than that obtained as the #2 driver.
Theyre both as eqully important as seen with allonso and the mclaren honda
Great driver + poor car = bad results
While I do understand & concede you are 100% correct ..... I still would not want to give up rooting/cheering for my favorite driver/team combination(s). There is a point where being "pure" takes away from the fun, spectical, & competition of the sport as a whole. Thank you for honestly making me think but I opt to not go that far. Good day sir!
Looking at the difference in performance between Hamilton and Verstappen and their teammates you can clearly say that the driver is important, even considering that Bottas' races are regularly sacrificed.
I do however feel that Formula 1 is a constructors championship. This is what makes F1 better and more fun than other racing classes. The difference in cars due to budget, yes, but ultimately it is innovation, engineering and management that makes cars able to win races. Just look at recent examples like the Toyota and Honda F1 teams. Ferrari has been known to not win championships while investing incredible amounts of money and having excellent drivers and engineers.
Adding to this I am all for a budget cap but firmly against homologated parts unless teams are still free to design their own parts and not use the FIA regulated parts if they so choose.
Now for the drivers circulating between all the teams: I love the idea but I see a lot of problems with this. Aside from the fact that none of the teams will agree with your idea.
Maybe you could rotate everyone once in the first 10 races and then let them finish the season at their own respective teams. That way you have the drivers championship first and then the constructors.
I can not figure out a way to make that work any other way.
This set up would have to include a relegation/promotion between the junior classes. Let's say the bottom 6 or so relegate out of F1 and new drivers would be promoted in from F2 and other feeder championships.
But what about WEC, IndyCar, Formula E and other top class championships?
Can their drivers join F1?
Will they be able to just offer the top drivers a big check and lure them out of F1?
Should they get create a similar rotating model?
To implement this you would have to change all championships in all classes. Making it extremely complicated and difficult to find a way into f1. Or worse, if you prefer endurance there is almost no way of getting there since it is a top tier championship but not the highest.
It turned into a bit of a long read but I'd love to hear your thoughts on all of it.
Keep making great videos like this!
I think there should be some homologated parts, but those that do not dramatically affect the performance of the car (of course every part affects performance in some way). For example, I'm sure there are engine components and parts of the chassis that teams spend a lot of money researching and developing, but the improvements do not make that much difference. Homologating parts would definitely save money and given the current financial situation, I think it's necessary to help the teams survive.
@@matt_dobson0614
Hi,
Let's put it like this then: All teams have a budget cap. I would happily accept homologated parts as long as the teams have the option to spend their own budget on developing this part for themselves. You can only spend your money once after all and it would mean that other parts of their car will be less developed than that of the teams that do opt for the homologated parts.
As a kind of incentive to keep using the homologated parts they could even make a rule that requires to make their research public after 1 or 2 seasons
@@merijnfluitman5761 That sounds like an interesting proposal. Perhaps that may be the way that the F1 bosses decide to implement such parts.
I think saying Bottas' races are regularly interfered with is exaggeration.. team orders given to him before he was out of championship contention is barely twice
Finally someone who understands F1 explaining my point better than I ever could. Great job mate 👍 👏 👌... i hope fan boys who have no clue bout F1 watch this and understand the car isn't everything. The 2nd driver is where you actually know where the car is sometimes. The best drivers extract everything plus more from the car. I dont know which driver on the grid would have won on 3 wheels.
Whenever there's a wealth of reliable data to draw from, Chain Bear always delivers a quality analysis. On the other hand when there's not - such as this video, it seems his videos often disappoint. This subject is more about reading between the lines than simply crunching the numbers and perhaps that's not his strong suit. Despite the fact that there much to be explored in this subject, this video seems a bit shallow. I've watched for 11 minutes and learned... basically nothing. Perhaps a different approach is required for these sorts of topics in the future.
Yeah, that makes sense, but maybe the purpose of this video is not to teach us anything, but to show some data that would normally be pretty hard to be gathered, put it in the video in an easy way to understand and make us think about it, and therefore take our conclusions. What do you think?
Subtle, always the nebulous digs, but that's poetic license.
8:32
please... NEVER do that again! thanks
Switching driver's would only put more stress on the car itself, setuping a car to the drivers needs is very important, not all drivers like the same level of understeer or oversteer or "x" or "y" ajustement. Mercedes is VERY good at setting up the car Hamilton wants it. Compared to Vettel having issues and complaining for 2seasons now. It's absurd thinking they could get it right in 2races. Or look at redbull where both cars are setup the way 1 driver likes it because he's the important one... I don't think it would work very well.
Put Hamilton in a Williams.
Heres your answer
🤣🤣🤣🤣 I would love to see this
Max in a Mercedes-Benz formula 1 could be Yeahh I know
We know
Awesome 😎😎😎😎😎😎😎😎😎😎😎😎😎😎
This question is even harder to answer when you consider different cars need different driving styles
Also the best teams attract the best driver, like Hamilton to Merc, Schumi to Ferrari, Senna to McLaren or whatever.
The championship suggestion you gave at the end is really nice. Maybe F1 can consider something like this for one season!
Imagine Croft trying to explain which driver is driving for who each weekend. His commentary would be all over the place!
Bad statistics crate bad results. You want to check if the car or the drivers mean more. So you compere the best car (both driver) and the best driver on the non best car. but you need to compare all drivers, or at least equal amount of drivers. Most team has a good (primary) driver and a team (secondary) driver, so first we need to plot the average difference between the first and the second drivers, by checking the point difference and averaging them, which gives us a nice average difference between the two drivers on the board. Than check if the difference between the second driver on average has more drop in performance, than the the teams difference between performance. Eg.: if the average difference between first and second driver is 25%, and the average difference between the best team and the other teams (all averaged), than we have the difference between teams and between the two drivers. if the average team difference to the best team is lets say 55%, than yes, the car has much more boost, than the drivers, if the average team difference is 10% than the drivers has the larger share of difference. of course this will still not help for the simple most important part, aggregate advantage: the better team has better cars, better drivers and better ice cream holders, so they will get ahead way more than they should, since everyone wants to win, and we all know, the most important is the ice cream holder, he decide the fate of the championships.
OH MAN ...WHY I LOVE YOUR VIDEOS IS BECAUSE YOU EXPLAIN IN IT VERY VERY CLEARLY....THANK YOU VERY MUCH
Drivers have different driving styles that work better with certain cars, so they spend most of the season learning, developing, and getting used to the car.
Rotating drivers through teams means that cars can't be optimized as much. so we'll get more of a generic car, and average drivers.
It would be a "Jack of all trades master of none" kind of thing
The W Series has this rotating thing going on. Cars are spec but to make sure the drivers don't get an advantage with a more talented staff in one specific team, they have to change cars and teams after each race; they share everything and there's that added pressure of not crashing your car because you might be the one getting into a crashed car in the next race. It's a pretty interesting concept imo
Great graph work! So easy to understand
This is an interesting debate because on tracks like Brazil or Austria, Red Bull-Honda’s cars had a slight advantage in 2019 while Mercedes’ cars overheated. That is an instance where car seemed to matter a lot because the cars capitalized on the tracks. However when you look at Brazil 2016, we see how a good driver in the wet like Verstappen could drag his car onto the podium due to his ability easily overtake in the rain, despite the misaligned tire strategy throughout the race.
I salute your extensive research and mathematical solution/equations just to relay a reseanable and statistically accurate readings!