{"id":683166,"date":"2020-08-24T09:23:45","date_gmt":"2020-08-24T08:23:45","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.motorsportmagazine.com\/?p=683166"},"modified":"2020-08-24T09:23:46","modified_gmt":"2020-08-24T08:23:46","slug":"mph-the-greatest-f1-driver-in-history-why-the-debate-rumbles-on","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.motorsportmagazine.com\/articles\/single-seaters\/f1\/mph-the-greatest-f1-driver-in-history-why-the-debate-rumbles-on\/","title":{"rendered":"MPH: The greatest F1 driver in history \u2014 why the debate rumbles on"},"content":{"rendered":"
\n
\n

F1\u2019s own attempt at ranking the fastest drivers of the last 40 years<\/a> has involved probably the most sophisticated algorithm yet at this sort of thing. It\u2019s almost certainly a very robust model mathematically.<\/p>\n

\u201cWe’ve extrapolated this and we’re quite proud of it,\u201d said Ross Brawn, \u201cand I think it stands scrutiny and it’s controversial and we will get lots of debate around it and maybe we will refine it. I don’t think people are laughing at it. I think it’s caused plenty of debate. I think once you understand the methodology then people will start to understand.\u201d<\/p>\n

Given the calibre of people involved, I can take it on trust that the methodology will have been flawless. But there\u2019s still a distinction to be made \u2013 and this is always where these lists short-circuit \u2013 between the calculation and what it signifies, between the map and the territory. Especially when comparing between eras. Because the calculation is assuming that the units of lap time carry the same currency in any situation. And they absolutely do not.<\/p>\n

Would a chess master beat you at noughts and crosses by the same margin he\u2019d beat you at chess? Would he even beat you at all in the simpler game? Yet you could measure it in both instances, express it in percentages of games won over a tournament. These percentage numbers would ostensibly be measuring the same thing, be expressed in the same way. Yet they wouldn\u2019t carry anything even remotely like the same currency. Say he beats you 55 per cent in the noughts and crosses games, and 100 per cent at chess. That\u2019s just 55 per cent of a game that\u2019s easier by a factor of multiple thousands and means next to nothing.<\/p>\n

Mansell was giving away 0.54sec a lap to Prost just by his physical size. Do you include that in the algorithm?<\/blockquote>\n

So, taking that principle but with a slightly reduced weighting, how do you go about comparing the difference in team-mates in one era compared to those of a later era when it was much more feasible to get close to the optimum lap time? Because of:<\/p>\n