He who runs fastest is not always best...

ThinkFast

ThinkFast

Live Long
Interesting article talking about an analysis of all 745 F1 drivers and all the races they've been in. Was Schummie the greatest driver of all time just because he won the most races? Or was a big part of his success due to the awesome cars he was given to drive?

This analysis attempts to tease that out, and comes up with some interesting conclusions. https://www.economist.com/graphic-d...re-the-true-drivers-of-success-in-motor-sport

Would love to see this done for MotoGP. Was Stoner that much better than everyone else? Or was it his bike that gave him an advantage that many others in the paddock could've exploited just as well (or better) than he did?

I don't want to get into that debate, per se - but it does make you wonder how much the bikes of today contribute to the guys who end up on the box, versus how much the bikes contributed in previous eras.

(The Dr is still the greatest racing human being to ever live, FTW. :twofinger).
 
berth

berth

Well-known member
In regards to the actual article, I think the car is a dominant factor in motorsports racing. However, I think in motorcycle racing, it's less so.

Now, that may be less true today with all of the gizmology on the bikes, but I think a skilled rider adds more to the equation than a driver in a car.

1%? 50%? That I can't say, but just because of the dynamics and relationship between the bike and the rider, the rider has more impact than a driver does.
 
scootergmc

scootergmc

old and slow
I don't have a subscription, can't read, too lazy for incognito...

With that said,

F1 sucks MotoGP rules
Rossi<Stoner<MM93
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top