Formula 1 - All Time Drivers' Points Weighted by Races per Season
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 13 янв 2023
- We are the Data Dudes. 2 data enthusiasts who's mission is to tell the story of F1 using various data visualisations in an interesting and informative way.
In this video we have made a FANTASY time-lapse review of every single Formula 1 championship point scored by drivers but applying a weighted points system from the modern era. We use a modern era points system to score every single Grand Prix from GP 1 - BRITAIN 1950 until GP 1079 - ABU DHABI 2022 (the most recent GP at the time of creation).
So… how exactly have we scored each GP? We have given the top 10 classified finishes in each race the following points for 1st place to 10th place: 25, 18, 15, 12, 10, 8, 6, 4, 2, 1. Any races were less than 75% of the full distance was completed, we award half points.
Once the points per driver finish have been established they are then weighted according to how many races there were per season. We weight the points assuming an average of 20 races per season. Therefore if the season has 20 races, then a win is worth the standard 25 points. However, if the season only has 10 races, the win would be worth 50 points.
We also give the driver who has the officially recorded fastest lap an extra point but only if they finish the race classified within the top 10. This extra points for FL is not weighted by number of races per season.
Applying this ruleset: We do NOT apply sprint race points, nor do we award things like double points to special races as seen in ABU DHABI 2014. Our intention is to try and apply the easiest to understand ruleset whilst removing any advantages gained by one off rule changes, exceptions or recent additions such as said sprint race points or double points races. In short: a more even playing field with regards to points scoring at least. In the cases where podium steps or finishing positions are shared, we simply give both drivers the points, rather than trying to cope with fractional points, or assigning the points on “merit”.
We understand there a lot of other ways to apply these rules, but we are trying to keep things as straightforward as possible. We are also planning to apply other forms of weighting in future videos, so look out for other videos in the future where we attempt other ways to level the playing field.
We hope you like the video. If you do, please make sure to like and subscribe for more F1 time series videos!
NOTE: Please do not use any portion of this material without the full permission of the creators.
Contact Info:
The Data Dudes [Content]: datadudesinfo@gmail.com
Spectrum Monkey [Data Visualisation System]: monkey@spectrummonkey.com
Minos Fylaktos [Music]: marbleorchestra@gmail.com
Credits:
Data Visualisation System by Spectrum Monkey
Music by Minos Fylaktos
Content by the Data Dudes - Copyright © 2023 
Развлечения
Probably the closest we are gonna get to an objective ranking system based on drivers championship points.
Weighting it by how reliable the cars were would help give a better picture. Still, good video and interesting to think about.
It's certainly a very useful way of getting there, but how do we now account for how many seasons/races a driver actually competed in.
Ascari is a long way ahead of Fangio when he died for example and how would Clark have faired if he had raced for Hamilton's 15 seasons rather than the 4/5 he did get?
@@quintuscrinis8032 I watched the last video (25 Pts + FL scoring) and thought about the races per season, then got this one recommended, had the same thoughts about carreer length... maybe the next video will have that accounted for, too?
Though, that also introduces a new bias towards short careers, the "luck" factor of being in the right car at the right time and knowing when to quit.
Lol no, it's about as objective as a Kardashian view of global politics!
@123manny321 feel free to make a more accurate ranking system based on championship points then
Fangio started in F1 at age 40, ran just 8 seasons and won 5, started in 52 GPs and went to the podium 35 times, with almost 50% of the victories. Imagine if he had started at 18 years old and raced for 25 years...
he also raced in pretty much most amateur F1 in the history of this sport. Some ppl are able to learn new things very fast, adapt faster than others, but if you would give enough time to those others, and they would train enough time, they would overcome the skill ceilling of those fast learners. I am not saying this is the case here, but who knows, maybe Fangio was this prodigy fast learner, but there was not enough professionalism in the sport so that everybody was able to unlock their full potential.
Also there were like no racing schools, no professional licenses like we have today etc etc, totally different times. Racing was not even remotely close to popularity it has nowadays, so there was not that many new ppl coming into this sport.
@@jankowalski1501
I understand your point about F1 drivers being 'amateurs' in the early years. However, we cannot ignore the fact that F1 fields have always been littered with drivers who did not make the grid based on their skills as a driver (e.g. Lance Stroll). Given this, every driver who excelled on the track was beating other drivers who should probably not have been out there.
This analysis lacks comparison with team mates, to take out car/team superiority as much as possible
Once the effect of the team is removed, Fangio claims the top spot, followed by Alain Prost in second and Fernando Alonso in third position, according to a study by the Sheffield college
Very clever weight system! Nice to see Fangio up top for so long, he was a beast!
My take away from most of these videos is that Graham Hill has been seriously underrated as the great that he was in the 20 years that I've been following F1 religiously.
Also, it would be interesting to see this data used to see who had the best per season points average.
He’s the only Triple Crown holder, so there’s that.
I had the exact same thought, I always think about Jim Clark from that era but watching these videos over the past few days the performance of Graham Hill in all of them really made me realise how impressive he was.
@@esunisen Alonso tried, because he's already won Le Mans - twice. Verstappen wants to try Le Mans, too, apparently together with Alonso. Half-joking for now, I doubt either of them can find space in their F1 calendars. It'd be interesting to see if someone would manage the Triple Crown, and if so, who would.
Watching several videos about history of F1, I fully agree.
is it an idea to darken the bar of a driver when they retire (or unfortunately pass away)? so that it is easier visible which drivers are still active and which ones are inactive
As big moustache would have said: Fantastic job !
On a more sad note:
... When you witness the rises of the two late 80s-early 90s superheroes and everything stops suddenly in 94 😢😢😢
This shows how Piquet is the most underrated driver of all time. He remained top 3 for a long time, finished 8, started his career at an old age for todays standards and had the best car of the grid for only 2 seasons. Still the only driver in history to win a drivers championship with the third car on the constructors championship. Also the only driver to win more than one drivers championship with a car that was not constructors champion.
This is good. But I think there should have been used 9-6-4-3-2-1 or 10-6-4-3-2-1 points system because back then and actually most of the history most drivers dropped out because of mechanical issues. That is why drivers from the last 20 years tend to be higher. Fangio, Prost, Senna, Stewart, Lauda all deserved more compared to Alonso, Raikkonen, Barichello.... Its clear that statisticall Hamilton and Schumacher will be at the top. But I think Prost definitely should be third statistically and Fangio up there as well.
It's interesting to see how good Rubens Barrichelo was. If he had more self-love or an indomitable genius like Senna or Piquet, he could have been one of the best. Something difficult to measure is competitiveness, I mean, in the times of Senna, Prost, and Mansel there was a dispersion of champions diluting the points. Unfortunately, Schumacher didn't have much competition, it would be good to see him against Hamilton, for example. But life has not given us this privilege.
Another great effort, Dudes! - Interesting:
1. 9 Brits, 5 Brazilians, 3 Germans (without Ralf Sch. this time), 3 Finns, 3 Aussis, 2 Argentinians, 2 Austrians, 1 French, 1 Spaniard, 1 Dutch,
1 Kiwi, 1 Italian (and 0 Mexican)
2. 2 of the top 3 are German
3. 3 of the top 10 are Brazilian
4. 5-time WDC Fangio only no.10
5. Coulthard no.11 (?!)
6. Only a single Italian, Patrese (but 3 Finns!)
7. Berger > Lauda.
Fangio started in F1 at age 40, played just 8 seasons and won 5, started in 52 GPs and went to the podium 35 times, with almost 50% of the victories. Imagine if he had started at 18 years old and raced for 25 years...
2 Aussies and 2 Kiwis mate
Well, statistics are statistics but to me Fangio, Senna and Clark are the greatest F1 drivers of all time. The Holy Trinity of Formula 1.
damn, seeing as Hamilton is going into his 17th year in F1 and Verstappen jumping up this list in his first super dominant year and going into his 9th year..
if we get another few dominant Max years he'll definitely top this chart by the time he's in his 17th year in F1 if he doesn't retire before that.
It took Max to long to win his first championship, he would need to be ultra consistent for the rest of his career and I don’t see him doing that at Redbull.
It all depends on the effect that the cost cap has, as well as how adaptable Verstappen is.
I'm not sure you can really ever find the objective GOAT of F1, because at the heart of it the question of how is a subjective one.
Does it make sense to weigh points by the amount of races in a season? Is it really harder to win 4 out of 8 races (50%) than it is to win 8 out of 20 (40%)?
What about consistency? Is the better driver the one who is first for four races and dnfs for the next four, or the driver who is 3rd for 8 in a row?
And machinery? Is Lewis the greatest because he dominated so long with a car that was never worse than 2nd? Or is it someone like Button or Senna who won in a car that was known as a mid tier one?
The issue is that every one of these questions you can find statistics to measure and compare, but every fan is going to have different feeling and preferences on which determinations are more important. At the end of it all you only end up with the same debate, just now everyone is armed with statistics.
As for me, I'm happy to say there are GOATs but there really isn't "A" GOAT in anyway other than people's own opinions.
Solid take 👍
You should add up percentage points gained of each season for each pilot to account for the increase or decrease in number of races
Really interesting analysis. The debate will rage on for as long as motor racing exists about who is the GOAT. Thank you for compiling the material.
Really awesome work guys
The music, the stats, the historic names... this is awesome! Thank you!
Prost have 202 gp against Vettel Schumacher and Hamilton who have 300+ go - Prost - boss😃
The point being it was leveled to the last season's rules in terms of counting points, so the number of GP through their careers doesn't count. Still an impressive feat though
Prost and Schumacher are just *giga chad*
In my books Senna was better than both of them. Especially on a wet track where skill and bravery counts. He was my all time hero and I have not watched a single F1 race since he died in 1994.
Great to see and a well balanced assessment. However, if i may, This system still favours drivers of the modern era, in which it is not only possible to debut very young but also to retire very old.
Drivers of yesteryear generally did not debut in their teens, nor due to the safety problems could they enjoy long careers before injury or death. E.g. Stewart or Clarke would surely have scored enormous tallies today.
A further balance could be to take the totals from this table and express them as a percentage of the total points available to a driver over their competitive career. In this way career length would not be a handicap to drivers from the sports more dangerous era's as drivers who won most of the races they entered and then called it a day would not be outscored by guys who racked up average finishes over decades.
Agreed, but that would in some way hurt drivers like Alonso or Kimi who had peaks WAY better than their latter years, adjusting the points by multiplying by the ratios of races is a bit fairer, and while it is true that new machinery makes it easier to retire later on, those last years are not usually point scoring years
the safety factor is a great point, as anyone that's watched "1" knows - would be cool to see a way to weight this for the years prior to 1995
Good point, the safety factor influenced the number of races in a season, but also career length. You can really create a lot of different models and criteria, would be nice to see one or a dozen variations of that.
Lewis debuted when he was 22
Amazing work guys !!!! Respect !!!!!
it's like reviving my history of watching F1. Good memories. Schumacher-Alonso era was the best for me.
I think this work very hard, coming soon😃
Proportionally no one comes close to Juan Manoel Fangio and what he did.
Pretty cool to see Stirling Moss stay in the top 30. Also didn’t know Jenson Button was this successful. He was the guy I always chose in F1 2000 long b4 I knew anything about F1
Amazing!
Haha, this is what I meant in my reaction on the other 25 pts video, great!
Almost impossible to determinate who is the best racing driver using a point system, so many things happen during the carrear of every driver that is totally out of their hands, like mechanical failure, DNF by being hit by another driver and so one...
For instance.. what is more difficult? Start a race from P20 and finish in P03 or start at P01 and finish at P02? By points the second exemple is a better driver. Another thing that make impossible to mesure is the car..
F1 never had a very well balanced grid of cars and before anyone argue that the car isn't important, look at Honda in 2008 with Button and Barrichello, they did almost nothing that season and next year won the drivers championship with Button and constructors. This example by itself show us that figuring out who is the best is impossible simple because there are too many variables, including luck, good or bad judgement, careers cutted short by accidents...
But nice video guys! For sure this is the best way to check by points who would be on the top.
GOATmilton
Another great video with a *Super Epic Soundtrack!*
Nice one, buit have some few more suggestions how you could make it even more accurate (I understand, it would take a lot of work probably).
Would love to see another factor included: data from this video combined with how many races they actually finished (so we substract DNFs etc if it was not the fault of the driver). Just be sure what u substract from what, not to double promote DNFed ppl :)
And actually you could also add 1 more variant to the above - weighting of what car they have been driving. So champion car - lower weghting than slower car, you could use end of the season total standings of teams.
Another factor: what kind of drivers you had as teammates (because they have been stealing points from you, right, the faster teammate in winning car - the less points u score as he can win races too) - VERY IMPORTANT factor. We could also use end of season standings as reference, but would be hard with for example Senna-Prost 1994 when Senna died - overall standings probably do not reflect his speed as Prost's teammate. So you would have to be carefull here and come up with some good solution :) Could eventually be previous season maybe, not sure if there was a rookie that died in F1 car in the history of this sport. If yes, for them there would have to be some other solution, or maybe other solution in genral, for all drivers :)
Best would be to have each of such benchmark separately, and after that, 1 that combines everything.
It would still not be perfect ofc, but I think we would get close to really great benchmark if we have such final scoring combining all of the above.
I think F1 fans would kill for such video ;)
The Dutchman cometh
At last! Thank you for this. I don’t think it told anything we didn’t know though!
Great visual! Can you please update after the 2024 season? Thanks!
Is there is more recent version yet?
One more method of ranking the F1 drivers, and we still end up with a Hamilton, Michael Schumacher and Vettel top three.
I wonder how much of a difference the use of a different scoring system (like 90s 10Pts) would make.
Imagine if Senna never died, and if Ruben wasn’t always forced to be second. How close would they both be to Prost, or even higher? Ruben is criminally underrated, and Senna is Senna.
Comparing drivers of the last twenty years with those of the fifties, sixties and seventies os like comparing the best RAF pilots of today with those of the Battle of Britain.
Of couse they're brave, technically talented and competent but they aren't facing death every time they go out.
Super!
I'd like to see total points divided by total races. This would give a split between shooting stars and those with higher total number due to longevity.
Fangio in the top 5 till 2009... Awesome !
Prost - while I don't like him - is a top rank truster and so a great pilot (alas with no charisma)...
Special mention to Nelson Piquet, the most underrated F1 driver.
Love your videos !!!
The best video of F1 points, but not all the drivers has raced with the same car and the same number of seasons
Should (I guess you probably have) done a avg points per race / 26 to give an average of maximum points available.
Fascinating. But Isn’t this a bit biased towards today’s drivers as there are far more races on the calendar now than ever before 🤷♂️
Barrichello over Fangio, good system.
Really interesting. Is there some way to filter the mechanical failures? The cars are much more reliable the last decade, which favours younger drivers.
I think I found one. But would be very hard to do since you need to calculate it the way they did but for every single driver in a season. For this vid they could just make if the season had 11 races, then just double the value of those points, but with mechanical failures you need to look up every single race result and check why they didn't finish. If it was a mechanical failure subtract it from their amounts of races like if it had 11 but with 1 mechanical failure, make their race count 10. Now you need to adapt the values of the points for 10 races and you need to do that for each season and for each driver. Also you need to find out why a driver didn't finish the race. A crash shouldn't be subtracted but a mechanical failure should be.
TLDR: Yes there is a way but it would take you decades to calculate.
I don't understand the value of 'weighting' these results based on 'races per season'.
Instead, why not just calculate the number of points PER RACE for each driver?
I would like to see a chart by points per race run for the drivers.
Do one with number of races run to percentage of wins. Then you will find the truth. Takes away the advantage of racing in more races due to longer schedules and does not penalize those that died racing all too young.
Poor Rubens, all those points and no prizes
The problem with points awarded with fastest laps, it's that drivers who shouldn't have got it get it anyway by pitting in the last laps. This rule has completely destroyed the value of the fastest lap.
Now we talkin
Not sure I understood the scoring system. Is this average points per race? Or average points per season?
It lacks comparison with team mates, to take out car/team superiority as much as possible
Once the effect of the team is removed, Fangio claims the top spot, followed by Alain Prost in second and Fernando Alonso in third position, according to a study by the Sheffield college
if we factor the Michael took a few years off and came back, had he not done so, he probably would could still be leading the all time points up till 2022
I think this is a good idea, however, I would also weight points according to the average career length of each driver competing that year. E.g. 16 years was unimaginable before Schumacher, in the 50s 8 yrs was a long career. But now a lot of people getting almost double of that, e.g. Grosjean got to 10 with ease while Stirling Moss, a much better driver got 11. So they had almost the same amount of seasons.
And we all probably know that's because Senna's career was cut short like so many others.
With the departure of Prost one might have thought so. But it's a bit hasty to forget the arrival of Schumacher and Benetton.
Its a better system but it doesnt take into account how many drivers/cars were capable of winning a GP that particular season. IN the 60s and 70s in particular almost anyone was capable of winning on any given day. Whereas in the modern era there has often been one dominant car with a couple of others capable of winning on a given day.
Remember in the 80s and 90s teams like Coloni and Eurobrun and whoever who were just racing to see who won't be last
Although this is an interesting exercise, it will always be impossible to get 'the GOAT' . There is one thing that can't be found in data, and that is the dominance of the car. The fact that Rosberg (Nico) and Bottas are in this list, and above people like Lauda, Hakinnen, Moss, tells me you can not rank drivers and compare them to their peers over time just by points. Those two would never have been in this list if they weren't driving for Mercedes in the hybrid era. They are good drivers, but they aren't legends. Hamilton is a legend, but his stats would not be the same without the extreme dominance of that car. And there are more drivers in the list that had a superior car for a couple of years in their career.
Amount of points can tell you a driver was good, it can't tell you he's better then others.
The greatest F1 driver of all time!
Showing, how powerfull is, when you sit in top car carrerwide...
I'd like to see the same but averaged out so that a driver with many seasons don't get an unfair advantage over a driver with few seasons. In the early years drivers died often, but some drivers also have to decided to quit after they have taken the championship.
Then you'll need a entire different list. Average points per season would be that. But then drivers with many seasons may have a disadvantage.
Vettel as 3rd best driver of all time CONFIRMED
Regardless the approach you take it is not possible to compare apples to apples. There is no such thing as a GOAT. There are only the All time greats, which is a group composed of those that have shown to be the best of their time.
Barrichello ahead of Fangio is a clear example of how this is not feasible. A driver that won 5 WDC and 47.06% of the races he took part on cannot be trailing another that never won the WDC and only achieved to win 3.41% of the races he participated on.
Moreover, Fangio consistently outscored and outraced his teammates, while Rubens was outscored and outraced by his teammates more than half of the seasons he competed on.
hmmm, change it to all-time total using 25pts + fl weighted by total points per season, this may balance it... maybe
Senna still the G.O.A.T.! Facts!
huh Barrichello high Botas high this mean bolid is more important in this type ranking
My take from this is lies, damn lies and statistics. Michael is the GOAT. Period.
Who about statistics about the tyre manufactors? Race wins, km raced, etc
Why not? *wink*
@@TheDataDudesF1 at least someone which realised what I always think about 😍😍😍 Thank you, Dude. You were probably as bothered as I was to see those Coulthard, Barrichello, Berger, Patrese, way too high compare to their real importance.
Still, the results are not as perfect as I had imagined. Maybe there's an alternative : percentage of weighted points obtained compare to theorical max weighted points available. (with a request level minimum of races disputed, of course)
❤
This was fascinating. I would love to see this redone using the drivers most dominant years. Schummy raced for 19 years, Hamilton for 17 years now(AND ALMOST ALWAYS IN THE BEST CAR), while Clark only raced for 8, Stewart for 9, and Verstappen for 7
What would it look like if they chose the 10 dominant years?
Interesting that you pick out Hamilton as almost always in the best car, but not Schumacher.
Hamilton spent half his career in the Mclaren, which was only the best car for one of those years (arguably his first year, not the one he won the championship). He then had the best car for 7 years at Merc. So 8 of his 17 seasons, half. Schumacher had undoubtedly the best car for 6 years, and possibly another 3 although it was close in all those years. again about half.
@@jamess2873
Schumacher spent the majority of his career in lesser machinery than his competitors lol
He didn’t have the best car on the grid until 2001 and his only dominant cars were the F2002 & F2004.
How many top cars did Lewis have? He already started his career with the best cars. Top machinery in 2007 & 2008, competitive machinery in 2010 & 2012, dominant machinery in 2014-2017, best machinery in 2018 and dominant machinery again in 2019-2020 and still best in 2021. Only recently is he finally driving subpar machinery.
Your take is completely rooted in bias and ignorance if you truly think Schumacher had the best machinery in 6 or more years. You also left out 2021 for Hamilton despite Mercedes winning the WCC & Toto admitting that Max won with a lesser car.
You seriously didn’t watch Schumacher's career if you think he had the best car outside of 2001, 2002 and 2004. The general consensus back then was that Williams had the best car in 1992-1997 and McLaren had the best car in 1998-2000 and Williams had the best car in 2003.
👍
Imagine how lopsided that top line would be had Schumacher while still competitive? Also of course, the many deaths of the 1960s and 1970s before safety started to get better. Still one of the most fair ways to display the GOATs that I've ever seen, wonderful job Data Dudes.
I even look to 2012, Schumacher retiring to allow Lewis in when he could have signed for 3 more years. I mean, 10 time WDC? 6000+ weighted points? Crazy.
I highly doubt it. Rosberg clearly had the edge, consistently, over the aging Michael.
Rosberg would probably be a 4-5 time champ if Michael signed on for another 3+ years.
Only over the first two of his three comeback seasons, if you take away the DNFs due to mechanical issues in the third season, Michael had gotten back into form, developing the car, and had the better final season. Had he not left for three seasons he would have been in top form the entire time.
@@Rhythmic_Hammer
Schumacher was better than Rosberg by 2012. He edged Rosberg out in races H2H, matched him in Qualifying H2H and his lap times were faster on average both in Qualifying and especially on sundays.
He had like 8 unlucky DNFs that year.
my god what a shame hamilton 🤦
How was this calcutated?
With the 2022 points system and normalized to 22 races each year
@@josgarma so like if there was 8 races in a season and someone got 3 wins he would be awarded 8?
@@malopthemapper exactly, is not real, but is better if It compare the wins of Fangio with Schumacher, for example
@@josgarma 20 races per year.
0 times champion Barichello better than 5 times champion Fangio? This is still not fair.
Well, the number of races... People compare Bottas to Barrichello as equivalent, they don't know how wrong they are. Barrichello is at the bottom of championship material, while Bottas is nowhere near. The car at Mercedes was not built for Lewis but for both, it was more like a Verstappen-Perez at Red Bull situation for Barrichello at Ferrari. The guy in 2003 when the car suited him a bit more was a threat for Schumi in terms of speed and potential for the title fight, but the team did not allowed + bad luck. And in 2009 he had another shot, but started average the season, then was a real threat for Button, Hamilton, Vettel, Webber and Raikkonen. And he had some absolute history elite races, only the bests can do that more than once. Still Fangio is a top tier legend, I agree but that's how it goes.
@@grivous9515 Barrichello spoke about that. In 2003, Schumacher showed up in Fiorano to start the tests with the new car but had a lot of neck pain, concluded he needed to work on his fitness and went home. He left Barrichello in charge of the whole development of the car so it was natural that the 2003 Ferrari suited Rubens more than Michael. Michael still won anyway but Barrichello lists that year as his best chance of being a champion with Ferrari. Regarding 2009, Barrichello said that Button decided to test a different brand of brakes (Brembo? Can’t remember) and he stayed on with the original brand because he thought that changing would add risk to a winning car and he didn’t like the behavior of the new brakes. Fast forward to the first race and the new brakes were proving to be a lot better than the original brakes but Barrichello only conceded and changed to the new brakes by the 6th race, when Button had already a massive lead on points. He says that if we compare his performance with Button’s from this point on, he was faster but, by that time, it was already too late and Button was just managing the advantage he had built. Barrichello is a great driver but also a human who made mistakes in his career and talks about it openly, which I think shows how confident he really is. By the way, he’s just been crowned champion in last year’s Stock Car Brasil, which is the country’s main professional series. The man is still going strong.
@@ultrapaiva I agree, from the 6th race to the end it was 54-50 points for Button, in qualifying it was 3-9 for Barrichello, and in the races 7-4 for Button. But if we count from the 8th race, it's 34-42pts for Barrichello as for qualifying 9-1, but in the races 5-4 for Button. Still, in qualifying the gap between the two was almost always under 2 tenth. Barrichello with 3 podiums (2 wins) and Button with 2 podiums and 5 top 5, Barrichello with 4 top 5. Barrichello had just a slight edge and that wasnt enough... Still makes him as a very valuable driver. We have to say that Button that year was mister consistency about never finishing outside the top 8, but thats not outshining Barrichello who failed just once.
Berger ahead of three-time champion Lauda?
I love that people complained about it not being weighted by races per season the last time (likely because Hamilton won) so the channel re-did it exactly how they complained and Hamilton still wins lmao, and now the same people want to see it presented in a different way *again*...
David Coulthard almost the same place as Fangio? Senna and Barrichello? More works need to be done 😀
Keep trying. Surely one day you'll figure out a way Lewis doesn't win.
Fangio has the highest win percentage of all time, at 47.06%. Next is Ascari, at 40.63%. Then it's Jim Clark, at 34.25%. Lee Wallard and Bill Vukovich take fourth place on that list, at 33.33% (although those percentages come from a very small number of races). Lewis is sixth on that list, and dropping, at 33.23%.
@@DrGuitaritis I mean now give me a list which goes by race results like in their vids. It's very hard bring Lewis down. Also I'm not trying to piss you off or something. Just saying that does 2 lists are ranked completley different.
Why are you making a stat so tendencious??. Why don´´t you simply estimate points per races? I mean, maximum will be 25. It's incredible to see Coulthard and Barrichello so up in this table....clearly is due to quantity of races. Even Senna or Fangio won more points in percentage that others!!!
Or just % of possible points in total as you did in next video...but accumulated by pilot!!!!
Will do!
Drivers today have tracks and vehicles that will protect them, so they take risks that would have gotten them killed in the presiding years! Hamilton would have died in his twenties if he had been born earlier! He wouldn’t be on my list of the top hundred drivers!
And Lewis is the only driver to be protected by modern safety features? He is the greatest and your prejudice cannot change the facts.
@@alfagtvjan He would be dead, if he drove like he does in the past! He’s a driver that knows any mistakes he makes will be rewarded with a second chance! Something not given to the really great drivers in the past! Even Senna didn’t survive and he would have destroyed Hamilton if driving today!
I have said it before and will state it again now. STOP penalizing the past by using the future. Make a damn video by using the ORIGINAL points system: 8,6,4,3,2 with 1 point for FL. It only took Fangio 52 races to get 5 Championships with 4 different manufacturers. Make the modern drivers as fast and efficient as him. You missed a pole position, he has 29 not 28(55.8%) from that relevant video. Stop 'weighting' your videos with the British pound. I will even give you the total number of kilometers to win the Chips, since back then they were longer races and you could drop races up until the 90's.
Barrichello over Fangio, good system.