Numbers of Hamilton and Senna

[aral]

Isn't it just nice and enough to see that essentially a fan is reaching the same numbers as his lifetime hero?

yes. Great to see Hamilton finally within distance of matching Seb.!

[GPR-A duplicate2]

Just to keep things in perspective, Senna did had a race winning car in his second, third and fourth years. In 1985, he finished 4th (with 2 wins and 7 poles!!!) and his team mate Elio de Angelis finished 5th (1 win, 1 pole), 5 points behind. Elio moved to Brabham and got killed in 1986. In 1986, Senna finished 4th (2 Wins, 8 Poles!!!). His new team mate in 1986, Johnny Dumfries wasn't a match at all and Senna ended up 4th again. In 1987, he finished 3rd (2 Wins, 1 Pole). His team mate in 1987 was Nakajima, who was making his debut. So it's hard to buy that those cars weren't good enough.

His best qualifying years came in all conquering McLarens, from 1988-1991.

Like Ben (Bhall) argues, one can only drive as fast as the car can go, unless you are Maldonado. In 1992 and 1993, Senna was just another driver on the grid, just like Vettel in 2014 and could only score a solitary pole in both years. So after 1984, it was only in 1992 and 1993 that he didn't had a good car to perform in qualifying.

So my take, just like most of the other drivers, he too needed a good car to achieve those numbers. In that regard, Schumacher, Vettel and now Lewis all did/doing what any fast driver would do, rack up statistics with fastest cars underneath them.

[turbof1]

I also disabled voting since this is not a technical thread.

[Andres125sx]

Like Ben (Bhall) argues, one can only drive as fast as the car can go

True, but no driver has ever driven as fast as the car can go because for that he´d need to brake in last milimeter the car can, release the brakes as soon as the car can to take the corner, keep highest speed around the whole corner, hit the throttle in first milimeter the car can, and match the perfect line in every corner, repeating that constantly for the hundreds corners of the GP. Only a robot could do that, and even so he´d need info about exact track conditions (grip) for every corner, so in reality any driver is far from what the car can do.

This means any driver getting closer to that limit than the rest can actually overperform his car. You need similar cars for this tough, as cars differences can be massive. Not even a robot with live track info would beat Mercedes today driving a Williams.

On the wet limits are a lot more complicated to know, so drivers differences show up, specially on past days with no downforce.

Sorry for the OT, but IMHO that statement is disregarding driver role, as if they all perform the same, when some are much faster than others and if car differences allow it they can beat faster cars thanks to superior driving. Probably that´s what Bhall was refering to as we all know he knows what he´s talking about

[Phil]

The standout from the comparison clearly is Senna's pure speed. Yes Senna contested in lesser cars initially, but to Ham's credit, Senna's rivals on Saturdays were a bit vanilla compared to the combination of RB7/9 and Vettel. Yes I know Williams were ahead by a country mile in 92, 93 and the second half of 91.

Absolutely. I'd also argue that the biggest point everyone is leaving out, is that the cars back then were a lot more difficult to drive - so the drivers were a much greater factor. Just look at Rally driving - a big portion of performing well is a trade-off between risk and going further than anyone else. The easier a car is to drive, the closer the grid will be, so it also becomes more difficult for a driver to outshine his machinery. Hence why Vettel despite his 4 titles has always fought a bit of criticism among even other F1 drivers that the car helped in a big way. Hamilton now in 2014 & 2015 (if he wins it) will too.

Senna was a great F1 driver, but I'm very doubtful he'd outshine everyone else in todays cars under these regulations. The grid is too close and competitive (and the cars too predictable) for that.

Also, as for the statistics; They might be similar - but they would be, given Hamilton has just caught up to Senna in most stats. Vettel had probably very similar stats in 2012 when he was en route to his 3rd title. Schumacher at some point might be caught too one day and when someone will real him in (if that is even likely), they too will have similar stats. But because Senna is probably not as big an idol to Vettel as he is to Hamilton, it probably never was brought up when they were at similar points of their respective career.

[sgth0mas]

You are not reading what he is saying: he ONLY said Hamilton leveled records of Senna. How he did that, what he did, what car, etc, is not what he is discussing. Hamilton matched Senna's records, that's the only thing that was said. So stop reading what's not there.

Again this is not a thread to find out who is best: different timelines, different cars. Don't bother asking this question and don't bother to read this in other's their comments.

For what it is worth, I too find it fantastic that Lewis was able to match those exact same stats. Nothing to do with how they performed against one or another, just that for Lewis that it will be special and emotional. I will not be surprised if he sheds a tear because of this, this weekend.

Why dont you just disable replys and make this a sticky if you dont want an objective comparison of the drivers in a thread that clearly sets out to compare them?

Other wise this thread just screams confirmation bias and fanboyism. "I want to show you how Hamilton is statistically the same as senna, but i dont want any data to be presented to show thats inaccurate." That is textbook confirmation bias and devalues the worth of this forum.

[turbof1]

You are not reading what he is saying: he ONLY said Hamilton leveled records of Senna. How he did that, what he did, what car, etc, is not what he is discussing. Hamilton matched Senna's records, that's the only thing that was said. So stop reading what's not there.

Again this is not a thread to find out who is best: different timelines, different cars. Don't bother asking this question and don't bother to read this in other's their comments.

For what it is worth, I too find it fantastic that Lewis was able to match those exact same stats. Nothing to do with how they performed against one or another, just that for Lewis that it will be special and emotional. I will not be surprised if he sheds a tear because of this, this weekend.

Why dont you just disable replys and make this a sticky if you dont want an objective comparison of the drivers in a thread that clearly sets out to compare them?

Other wise this thread just screams confirmation bias and fanboyism. "I want to show you how Hamilton is statistically the same as senna, but i dont want any data to be presented to show thats inaccurate." That is textbook confirmation bias and devalues the worth of this forum.

That's actually a good question.

The topic starter requested himself that he did not want a polemic:

I dont mean to make comparison between the two (please dont turn this into a 'who is the best' thing) and I looked for a place to post this, didn't know where it would be better, so decided to start this topic.

As far as I interpret the intention, it's much more about highlighting the sentiment: the fan who followed the path of his idol and now finally matching some of the idol's statistics after having a long carreer himself. I feel that people should be able to discuss that, rather then spiralling down into a heated discussion about who is better.

Maybe I will have to lock this thread if people aren't able to do so. Again, for the topic starters and as an extention to me, it is not like "he is statistically the same, so he is better or worse from now on".

Some room for comparing should of course be allowed. Highlighting both their greatest feats is absolutely allowed. But please don't forget this is not a thread to determine which one is better, this about a person following in the footsteps of his greatest hero ever.

[sgth0mas]

How can you claim not to want a comparison between the two, then post a literal side by side comparison?

Fulcrum posted very good data detailing how the comparison is relatively inaccurate and only shows the good data that helps the autors case. But you chastise him for it?

This is far from objective thinking and purely a "look at data that conveniently makes hamilton look like senna"

This thread absolutely should be deleted if its simply going to remain so biased towards a favorite driver.

[sgth0mas]

Let mw put it a more technical way.

When a metals supplier comes to me and says ive got this great material and shows me how favorable the yield strength, modulus, thermal, elongation...etc properties are, they must also be willing to show me the weaknesses for me to make an objective comparison.

If your yield is 140ksi, but your endurance limit is only 30ksi, you cant call yourself as good as inconel 718.

Bias has no place in a side by side comparison.

[dans79]

Bias has no place in a side by side comparison.

No one should be posting then, because everyone has a bias weather they admit to it or not.

[sgth0mas]

Bias has no place in a side by side comparison.

No one should be posting then, because everyone has a bias weather they admit to it or not.

So theres unintentional bias...thats ok.

But not allowing people to post hard data because it doesnt agree with your topic is deliberate and detrimental bias.

[turbof1]

Bias has no place in a side by side comparison.

No one should be posting then, because everyone has a bias weather they admit to it or not.

So theres unintentional bias...thats ok.

But not allowing people to post hard data because it doesnt agree with your topic is deliberate and detrimental bias.

I think I was not really clear on what I meant, so my apologies for that. Posting hard data akin to what efuloni is perfectly allowed. Just don't make it "Hamilton is better, no Senna is better!" competition. Any discussion about who is the better driver or who had the better car compared to the rest of the field are subjective, since there's no way for us to represent that in hard facts. So data only.

Let mw put it a more technical way.

I think that's the issue: the topic has more a sentimental meaning then a technical one. Yes indeed, even statistics can have a sentimental value. Maybe unusual for a technical forum, but racecraft always had an emotional side too.

If any more question, please do so in PM, instead of further derailing the topic.

[efuloni]

For what it is worth, I too find it fantastic that Lewis was able to match those exact same stats. Nothing to do with how they performed against one or another, just that for Lewis that it will be special and emotional. I will not be surprised if he sheds a tear because of this, this weekend.

As far as I interpret the intention, it's much more about highlighting the sentiment: the fan who followed the path of his idol and now finally matching some of the idol's statistics after having a long carreer himself. I feel that people should be able to discuss that, rather then spiralling down into a heated discussion about who is better.

Perfect, my friend. I just find simply amazing that he got numbers so similar to his childhood hero.

[PlatinumZealot]

Chances are Slim that Lewis will match the number of wins within 161 races now... but alas it was not down to driving. I think most of his fans will be satisfied once he get his third WDC.

[Kingshark]

I will point out that Lotus in 1985-1987 were hardly any weaker than McLaren in 2009 or Mercedes in 2013.

Senna's McLaren's of 1988-89 are comparable to Lewis's Mercedes of 2014-15.
While Senna's McLaren's of 1990-91 are quite comparable to the 2007-08 McLaren cars.

In terms of car competitiveness I don't think there is much between the two.