F1 2023 thread

quokula

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120324196#Comment_120324196

It's misleading to imply that things are not closer when the numbers say that they objectively are closer, by just writing it off as the leaders not pushing as hard in Q1, as if they always went hell for leather in Q1 every other year and suddenly stopped now.

We've had the three part qualifying session for 17 years. At an average of around 20 races per season there have been approximately 340 Q1 sessions. The leaders didn't push any differently in any of those. That's a pretty big control group and there has never, in all that time, ever been a single qualifying session as close as the one in Bahrain. It's also the first time in about a decade that a team outside the big three has had genuine pace to compete them. Given that we're early on in the introduction of new rules that equalise budgets and handicap success, this is the expected impact of those rules and it is quite clearly working.

El_Duderino 09

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120324236#Comment_120324236

What? Do you think the top cars push flat out in q1?

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120324250#Comment_120324250

Top cars often don't even go flat out in Q2. Both Red Bull's went around 8 tenths faster in Q2 and 8 tenths again in Q3. Track evolution is probably a tenth or two tops.

quokula

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120324250#Comment_120324250

You're missing the point. The field spread is the smallest it has ever been. The numbers objectively point to that being the case. It doesn't matter how hard they pushed. We have a control group of every other Q1 that has ever happened, and we can use that to eliminate the variable of how hard they were pushing. It's basic standard statistical analysis. The leaders didn't push any less hard in 2023 than they did in 2022 or any other year, and the field is closer now than it was then.

You could actually make an argument that the top cars pushed harder in Q1 this year than they typically would in the past, because all the front runners needed to make second runs in Q1 precisely because the field was so close, which is something they don't normally need to do.

El_Duderino 09

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120324308#Comment_120324308

Ah right. So wouldn't be true to say the ultimate spread of 2.5 seconds helps make the point that the grid is closer than normal.

McFly85

1.2 seconds is a nonsense stat. You may as well point to the pack after a safety car and say look how close they all are. The sample size of a couple of hotlaps in the first race of the season in Q1 means literally nothing.

quokula

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120324485#Comment_120324485

The spread from Q1 to Q3 is much larger at Bahrain than most circuits, because of the timing of the session in the evening and the rapid cooling of the track. You can't easily compare it to Q1 vs Q3 in all past races because sometimes Q3 might even be slower because track conditions changed. Times in two different sessions aren't ranked against each other, you always compare like for like in a single session.

All 20 drivers were out at the same time in Q1. Everyone pushed in Q1 to the same extent they always push in any Q1 session. I don't know what the problem is with comparing it with past Q1 sessions. There have been 300+ of them, and this one was closer than any other that has ever occurred.

It's just a basic and simple objective fact. I'm not sure what the desire is to fight so hard to try and find ways to refute it.

quokula

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120324512#Comment_120324512

I agree that it's a tiny sample size, but it's no worse than using the sample of one race to declare the outcome of the season, which was what I was replying to when I brought it up.

We only have one single data point that involved all 20 cars setting competitive lap times over a single lap. And that one single data point gave a result that was closer than that data point has ever been any time it's been collected in all of F1 history. It might be an anomaly and other tracks might have a bigger spread, but it's all we have right now and if you were to guess you'd say it's because the field is quite close over a lap.

Here's another 'basic and simple objective' fact for you quokula - The average human has one testicle and one ovary.

Sometimes taking the simple view doesn't paint the full picture.

I'll go back to the Alonso example that ridicules your logical approach that you keep not acknowledging.

In 2001 Tarso Marques finished higher in the drivers championship than Fernando Alonso. Another basic and simple objective fact.

The reality - Alonso destroyed him, being more than 2 seconds faster than Marques in qualifying on several occasions.

People are poking holes in what you're saying because it's lazy analysis, there's nobody fighting you it's just that what you're saying is fundamendtally flawed.

eviltimeban

I get what Quokola is trying to say - that looking at the hard facts / numbers and comparing them to previous years' hard facts / numbers, it was the closest Q1 since that format began.

Of course there are factors that muddy the waters somewhat.

McFly85

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120324612#Comment_120324612

Just think there’s too many other potential factors to consider before taking it as a performance indicator.

I reckon there’s an element of shakedown with the short practice time and we have cars like the McLaren that basically aren’t ready yet - I would expect more than a few early season upgrades are on the way.

For sure, it’s something to keep an eye on, and I would love for it to be the case across the season, but we won’t really know if it’s meaningful for a few races.

AMKC

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120324142#Comment_120324142

Way to go on ruining them races with more fake qualifying. A waste of time if you ask me. No one even cares for or even remembers the sprint races once they are done. They are instantly forgotten about. I have never once seen a sprint race thread or recomondation pop up on my You-Tube feed for instance.

Even Netfliks does not bother with them in DTS if they did they should have had the Haas of Kevin Magnessun on pole and covered that but they did not they did not care about it because they are a stupid gimic that needs to go.

Time for them to die now.

muckwarrior

We need to start an F1 thread Bingo card.

So far we have:

• AMCK ranting about how sh1t sprint races are.
• Quokula trying to argue that Hamilton is the worst driver in the history of the sport.

Only a matter of time before ElDuderino goes on his annual rant about how the Monaco Grand Prix is actually worse than the holocaust.

Jordan 199

I'm going through a pile of old Autosport magazines, and saw this. Those horror stepped-noses.

Frank Bullitt

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120324574#Comment_120324574

"All 20 drivers were out at the same time in Q1. Everyone pushed in Q1 to the same extent they always push in any Q1 session." This is hilarious.

Do you actually think that Max is pushing, and in the fastest mode in Q1 as he is in Q3? Compared to lets say Piastri who was struggling all session, and would be going as fast as he can to get out of that session.

Q1 is not a true picture of the field spread at all. It never has been, no matter how many there have been or will be either. Any F1 fan worth their salt would know that.

quokula

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120326063#Comment_120326063

How many times do I have to explain this simple concept. There have been 300+ qualifying sessions previously in F1 since the current format was introduced. This one had a smaller field spread than any other that has ever occurred.

Do you think Schumacher and Alonso were pushing 100% in every Q1 of 2006? Was Vettel in 2013? Button in 2009?

There was nothing unique about this session that differentiates it from previous qualifying sessions, yet it had the smallest field spread in the entire history of the current qualifying format.

This is a simple basic statement of fact. I swear someone could post on this thread that current F1 cars have 4 wheels and people would pile on them for the sake of arguing and being negative instead of just enjoying the sport.

Frank Bullitt

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120327234#Comment_120327234

You are not factoring in the variables at all here though. Teams have a general idea of what time they can achieve and what the delta time will be for the cut off, top teams just build up to this over the laps and leave it all on the table for the final runs in Q3.

The times in Q1 are meaningless for field-spread, because not all cars are running on the same tires at the same time or in the same PU modes either. And at that, the top cars will be playing qualifying poker to ghost the others as well into a false sense of security.

Verstappen did a 1:31.295 in Q1, the slowest time in Q1 was 1:32.181. In Q3 Verstappen did 1:29.708, that is the true field-spread right there.

El_Duderino 09

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120325859#Comment_120325859

The holocaust was awful, but at least it only happened once.

Never again (Monaco)!

El_Duderino 09

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120327344#Comment_120327344

Ah, you're at nothing. They said it once so they're going to keep saying it over and over.

One thing that we were chatting about watching the race was the lack of poor pay-drivers on the grid this year. It's as strong a grid as I can remember. No Mazepins or Lattifis. The rookies are decent this year. Zhou and Sargent are helped by the fact that they offer access to their home country's market. But they aren't bad drivers. Stroll is a special category of pay driver but his experience means he's not terrible either.

Looking at last years Sakir quali, (if you exclude Lattifi) the gap from first to last in q1 was 1.6s and q3 was 2.5 seconds.

The grid is closer this year and partly due to culling the poorest drivers.

Dont be at yourself

I wonder will people begin to revise their opinions on Stroll this year.

Missed all of testing, raced with significant injuries and still put together a very solid weekend, battling past "future world champion" George Russell -- who is older than Stroll, it's worth mentioning...

LIGHTNING

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120327564#Comment_120327564

One swallow doesnt make a summer as they say. Nobody doubts he has pace, its the fact that he swings wildly from a good weekend to a disaster so often is his issue.

muckwarrior

No doubt he'll get some good results given he has such a strong car this year, but I can't see him beating Alonso, despite being in the twilight of his career. It begs the question, has any other driver lasted so long in F1 while having such a poor record against their team mates?

Frank Bullitt

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120327458#Comment_120327458

Good point, and another variable in the measuring of how close the field is. Either way, you get the impression that if things were to close up a tad, RB would ramp it up anyway. Their advantage over the field is bigger now than at any point last season, they have gained more over the winter than their closest rivals so field-spread is of no matter really.

thefa

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120327564#Comment_120327564

Good race from Stroll but way too early to suggest he’s turned a corner for me. He was also a split second from ending his and Alonso’s race so the narrative could have been very different.

Looking at the 2022 standings, 14 drivers finished ahead of him and don’t think he’s an obvious choice on ability over any of the 12 still with seats.

Russell went into Hamilton’s team last year and outscored him so deserves some hype.

El_Duderino 09

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120327564#Comment_120327564

Yeah I admire him for pushing through the pain and doing a decebt job at the weekend. Wrist operation and a broken toe is no joke.

It doesn't make me think he's a good driver. He's experienced. He's in the top 60 most experienced f1 drivers of all time.

He battled past Russell but the suggestion is that the AM is actually really good and it was good enough for alonso to get to third (though he would probably have been 4th behind Leclerc) . It seems very easy on tyre wear so you'd expect them to be at their best in the final stint of the race.

We'll see how it pans out through the season.

artanevilla

He's good enough to race in F1 no doubt, but not to compete for titles.

quokula

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120327564#Comment_120327564

I've been saying for years that he's the most underrated driver on the grid - not that he's absolute top tier but he's generally been very unfairly maligned because of his dad. It's true that he probably wouldn't have got to F1 and stayed there without that support in the early days, but he's gained experience and applied himself very well. He's consistently put in respectable performances relative to very strong teammates in varying cars in recent years.

I wouldn't be surprised to see him run very close to Fernando once he's fully recovered and up to speed. There's a lot of understandable hype around Alonso and it's great to see him finally in a car that's worthy of his talent again, but the reality is that even all time greats can't defeat the march of time and he isn't getting any younger. It's not like he had a whole lot in hand over Ocon and I wouldn't rate Lance any lower than Esteban, though I'm sure Alonso will have a level of motivation this year that he lacked in the Alpine.

Schorpio

Lance is not a bad driver, but is he one of the best 20 in the world? in my opinion, absolutely not.

He is a pay driver, obviously, and F1 has a long a storied history of pay drivers. However, lance takes things to a new level.

In 2017, prior to his first F1 season, it was estimated that his father spent $80 million just to get him into F1. When you look up what that spend entailed, it's utterly wild.

Link to a story from 2017, but I'll paste the highlights below;

Lawrence Stroll, bought the Prema F3 team and installed well-known Ferrari engineer Luca Baldisserri to oversee Stroll's rise. Young Stroll was then the clear No. 1 driver this year, benefiting from F1 engineers seconded to his F3 campaign and a special simulator installed at Williams' Grove base.He also embarked on a round-the-world test program with a 2014 Williams, supported by a staff of 20, five Mercedes engineers and two engines prepared specifically by Mercedes. Stroll's F1 test program went to Silverstone, Hungary, Monza, Austria, Barcelona, Abu Dhabi, Austin and Sochi.

Williams' Pat Symonds admits: "The last rookie with that many kilometers of testing for his debut was Jacques Villeneuve."

Not only that, Lawrence Stroll paid for a new high-tech simulator at Williams' race shop, which Williams F1 drivers Bottas and Felipe Massa could not use throughout the year as it was calibrated for F3.

Bear in mind, since 2017 Lance has had his seat paid for, and his Dad bought a whole team!! Even for F1, it's absolutely bonkers the spend needed to get (and keep) Lance in F1.

He has had so much preparation and training, you'd wonder how others mildly talented drivers would have fared given the same......

McFly85

In terms of pay drivers, Stroll is below Norris but above any of the other recent ones. I have no doubt he’ll be challenging for the odd podium this season in that car. He will finish well behind Alonso you’d imagine.

Stroll does get brought up more than the other ones because the other ones haven’t had their dads buy an F1 team outright! And you get the feeling that it doesn’t matter how slow he is, his is one of the safest seats in the sport.

muckwarrior

Wow. I heard he received preferential treatment in lower formula, but that's insane!

After all that and the only team mate he could come close to beating in F1 was Sirotkin. Remember him? Probably not. He was another pay driver of similar level to Stroll, therefore only lasted one season.