Greatest Driver of all time statistical analysis
Discussion
VladD said:
But that makes no sense. If the achievements add to the greatness then the flaws and mistakes subtract from it. By completely ignoring one or the other you're not getting the complete picture and you're getting a distorted view.
It makes perfect sense. As I said, some people can look past someone's mistakes, other can't. That's all I have to say on the matter.whatxd said:
VladD said:
Success and greatness aren't the same thing, which was my point. You can't argue with the success, but you can make arguments about the greatness.
Well in my opinion, you are pretty great if you smash every Formula 1 record. The controversies along the way (which only count for a fraction of his success anyway) do not change my opinion on that.whatxd said:
VladD said:
But that makes no sense. If the achievements add to the greatness then the flaws and mistakes subtract from it. By completely ignoring one or the other you're not getting the complete picture and you're getting a distorted view.
It makes perfect sense. As I said, some people can look past someone's mistakes, other can't. That's all I have to say on the matter.Halmyre said:
Compared with Fangio's day, drivers nowadays enter twice the number of races in a season for three times the number of points per race and have safer and more reliable cars. Record-breaking isn't a reliable way of measuring greatness.
You're right, but it's also a very good place to start. Formula 1 also wasn't anywhere near as competitive back then in terms of the numbers of kids around the world racing and training from a young age with the hope of one day making it to a Formula 1 car.Really, it's hard to compare anything pre 1970's in these "greatest of all time lists" because the sport was so different back then from top to bottom.
At least from the mid 70's to late 00's the sport was consistent enough to form an opinion.
VladD said:
Jimmy Saville raised millions for charity, so I assume you're a fan of the great man?
Please excuse my ignorance, but what has a deceased child sex offender got to do with a racing driver who over the course of 15 years made a few bad decisions in the heat of the moment on a racing track?whatxd said:
VladD said:
Jimmy Saville raised millions for charity, so I assume you're a fan of the great man?
Please excuse my ignorance, but what has a deceased child sex offender got to do with a racing driver who over the course of 15 years made a few bad decisions in the heat of the moment on a racing track?VladD said:
As someone once said, "some people can look past someone's mistakes, other can't."
And for you to twist my words in a sick way like that says a lot about your character. Michael Schumacher instinctively reacting to a set of circumstances in a sporting event a handful of times over a long career has nothing to do with a child sex offender.I don't understand why you would even want to take the thread/discussion in that direction.
whatxd said:
VladD said:
As someone once said, "some people can look past someone's mistakes, other can't."
And for you to twist my words in a sick way like that says a lot about your character. Michael Schumacher instinctively reacting to a set of circumstances in a sporting event a handful of times over a long career has nothing to do with a child sex offender.I don't understand why you would even want to take the thread/discussion in that direction.
Anyway, enough derailing of this thread. Let's leave that there shall we.
Edited by VladD on Tuesday 10th May 14:50
VladD said:
I haven't twisted your words, that's what you actually wrote. I was just trying to determine in a logical manner whether you forgave everybodies faults or whether you just did it when it suited you. I think we have the answer.
It's obvious to anyone with a fully functional and rational brain that I was speaking about sportsmen in the context of sport. I shouldn't have to point out the obvious.You've brought up Jimmy Savile twice now in this thread in reply to two different people. Seriously, WTF is the matter with you?
whatxd said:
VladD said:
I haven't twisted your words, that's what you actually wrote. I was just trying to determine in a logical manner whether you forgave everybodies faults or whether you just did it when it suited you. I think we have the answer.
It's obvious to anyone with a fully functional and rational brain that I was speaking about sportsmen in the context of sport. I shouldn't have to point out the obvious.You've brought up Jimmy Savile twice now in this thread in reply to two different people. Seriously, WTF is the matter with you?
VladD said:
He's an extreme case of someone who did a lot of great things but also a lot of very bad things. I was using him to make a point. Is that not very obvious?
Bringing a child sex offender into the conversation has nothing to do with Formula 1 or the opinion I was expressing.You did it twice to two different people and are now trying to defend it rather than admitting your post was idiotic and moving on
whatxd said:
a racing driver who over the course of 15 years made a few bad decisions in the heat of the moment on a racing track?
I know that there are different ways to consider this but I don't think they were what Schumacher felt were bad decisions, they were deliberate - three in particular being deliberately hitting both Hill and Villeneuve in title deciding races and then parking on the circuit in Monaco. Calculated decisions on a racing track in my opinion which have to be taken into account as part of the "greatest driver" picture. whatxd said:
VladD said:
He's an extreme case of someone who did a lot of great things but also a lot of very bad things. I was using him to make a point. Is that not very obvious?
Bringing a child sex offender into the conversation has nothing to do with Formula 1 or the opinion I was expressing.You did it twice to two different people and are now trying to defend it rather than admitting your post was idiotic and moving on
Edited by VladD on Tuesday 10th May 15:18
hairyben said:
Dr Z said:
Alright, this proves you don't understand the model!
It basically takes the whole career of each driver and finds his peak form (1, 3 and 5 year intervals). It then compares the peak form between drivers to come up with the ranking. The model was published half way through 2014, so the ranking was based on Hamilton's performance from 2007-2009 which the model considered his best years at the time of publication.
Sorry I haven't the time or TBH the interest to read and digest the whole rambling piece; I did scan for a concise outline of how he makes his calculations but he doesn't try to make it easy or convenient, all I found were reference to using the points themselves, thus you can't get away from the fact that the entry data is still just as flawed. It basically takes the whole career of each driver and finds his peak form (1, 3 and 5 year intervals). It then compares the peak form between drivers to come up with the ranking. The model was published half way through 2014, so the ranking was based on Hamilton's performance from 2007-2009 which the model considered his best years at the time of publication.
I still don't see how you moved past the flaw that a "drivers best years, measured by points" are still car and teammate dependant?
In my view, the flaws that you point out do not negate the utility of the model in accounting for the influence of car/team performance. Let's face it, it's no better than some subjective lists produced over the years. It's all good.
VladD said:
You can try and deflect from the original argument as much as you like. I've proved that you initial assertion was invalid, i.e. that peoples flaws should be over looked, and rather than admit that you were wrong, or at least that there should have been a caveat to your statement, you're now launching personal attacks.
Your original argument was that because I'm prepared to look past the mistakes of Michael Schumacher and Luis Suarez (of which I'm obviously talking about sportsmen in the context of sport) I would be prepared to look past the mistakes of Jimmy Savile.It's an idiotic argument right from the beginning because I don't think someone abusing children over the span of several decades can be described as mistakes. This whole argument is insane.
whatxd said:
VladD said:
You can try and deflect from the original argument as much as you like. I've proved that you initial assertion was invalid, i.e. that peoples flaws should be over looked, and rather than admit that you were wrong, or at least that there should have been a caveat to your statement, you're now launching personal attacks.
Your original argument was that because I'm prepared to look past the mistakes of Michael Schumacher and Luis Suarez (of which I'm obviously talking about sportsmen in the context of sport) I would be prepared to look past the mistakes of Jimmy Savile.It's an idiotic argument right from the beginning because I don't think someone abusing children over the span of several decades can be described as mistakes. This whole argument is insane.
whatxd said:
Your original argument was that because I'm prepared to look past the mistakes of Michael Schumacher and Luis Suarez (of which I'm obviously talking about sportsmen in the context of sport) I would be prepared to look past the mistakes of Jimmy Savile.
It's an idiotic argument right from the beginning because I don't think someone abusing children over the span of several decades can be described as mistakes. This whole argument is insane.
Wrong again. I didn't mention Schumacher or Suarez and your statement wasn't specific to them.It's an idiotic argument right from the beginning because I don't think someone abusing children over the span of several decades can be described as mistakes. This whole argument is insane.
"Ultimately, some people can look past a person's mistakes/flaws to see how great they are, others can't." Your statement is very generic.
So it's not just a case of overlooking flaws and mistakes, it's an individual determination of how serious those flaws and mistakes are as to whether they should be over looked. You can obviously overlook Schumacher's and Suarez', but not Saville's. Some of us cannot overlook them for all three.
whatxd said:
Your original argument was that because I'm prepared to look past the mistakes of Michael Schumacher and Luis Suarez (of which I'm obviously talking about sportsmen in the context of sport) I would be prepared to look past the mistakes of Jimmy Savile.
It's an idiotic argument right from the beginning because I don't think someone abusing children over the span of several decades can be described as mistakes. This whole argument is insane.
Wrong again. I didn't mention Schumacher or Suarez and your statement wasn't specific to them.It's an idiotic argument right from the beginning because I don't think someone abusing children over the span of several decades can be described as mistakes. This whole argument is insane.
"Ultimately, some people can look past a person's mistakes/flaws to see how great they are, others can't." Your statement is very generic.
So it's not just a case of overlooking flaws and mistakes, it's an individual determination of how serious those flaws and mistakes are as to whether they should be over looked. You can obviously overlook Schumacher's and Suarez', but not Saville's. Some of us cannot overlook them for all three.
Gassing Station | Formula 1 | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff