Formula 1 Qatar Airways Azerbaijan Grand Prix 2024Formula 1

[MagpieRacer]

What makes it significant?

We get it, you don't like the stat, move on.

 

[kiseca]

We get it, you don't like the stat, move on.

You don't get it. I asked a simple question. I haven't given any opinion whether I like the stat or not.

 

[MagpieRacer]

You don't get it. I asked a simple question. I haven't given any opinion whether I like the stat or not.

You've questioned it at every given opportunity. The stat is clear, it's obvious why it's a significant first, it's been explained on the last page.

 

[kiseca]

You've questioned it at every given opportunity. The stat is clear, it's obvious why it's a significant first, it's been explained on the last page.

Every opportunity? I posted one comment and one question. I commented that it's easier to set today than it was in the past.

Liquid thenvquoted me directly and repeated themselves by saying it's a "significant first." I asked, once only, why they think it's significant.

I don't care if the reason why is obvious to you, it's not obvious to me, certainly not after reading the previous page. So I asked.

What's your problem with that?

 

[Jimlaad43]

Ok then, here's why it's significant.

Formula 1 as a series is noteworthy because it has history. 75 seasons of racing is not anything to be sniffed at and most impressive records have been set. Things like debut points, podiums and wins have all been done before. So to find a new thing to set is an impressive achievement with so many other opportunities for it happen.

Every F1 driver has to make a debut at some point. A first Grand Prix start is one where you're coming in as a rookie, probably not in a good team and have to face a load of other drivers with a lot more experience. Jumping into an F1 car for the first time is a massive step up from whatever they were in before in terms of speed, complication, race length, fitness and most of all pressure. So to score points on debut is an impressive feat. This doesn't even add the complication of a driver's debut being a last minute reserve driver promotion, compared to being signed for a season and turning up to race 1.

79 drivers out of over 1000 have scored points on their Grand Prix debut. This is already an impressive stat, thusly bringing down the sample size of drivers who can score points on their first two races. There is also a smaller pool of drivers who made 1 start for one team and their second for another. I don't have a full list of the drivers who did that, but you saw my previous post explaining some recent examples. To only do 1 race for a team usually means they're either a reserve driver or were terrible. Quite a few cameos may end up being a couple of races, like Timo Glock at Jordan or Robert Doornbos at Red Bull.

The fact that despite these 75 seasons and plenty of different ways drivers have entered races for different teams or made debuts, Bearman is the only one to have scored points in his first two races, with both being in different cars. Michael Schumacher, Sebastian Vettel and Phil Hill are champions who did their first two races for different constructors and scored points in one of those races.
Jack Brabham, Jochen Rindt, Nelson Piquet and Keke Rosberg also did their first two races for different teams but didn't score points in either.

Fact of the matter is that a not-so unique opportunity has been grabbed and Ollie Bearman has shown that he has plenty of speed and talent and has what it takes to make it in F1, having taken the two opportunities he has been given brilliantly. If you want to dismiss a statistic for being convoluted, the guess what, all statistics are. Stats like this are what makes F1 interesting. There's always a bit of history backing something up or ability to remember some obscure thing that happened in the past to link together and event in the modern day to something which happened in the 70's.

CART tried to compete with the Indy 500 during the INDYCAR split by holding the Michigan 500 as a direct competitor to the Indy 500. It failed miserably because nobody cared and it didn't have 80 years of history and notoriety. The 1118th Grand Prix was the first time a driver scored points in their first two races with both being for different teams. That is why it matters and why it is being celebrated. I have listed 7 World Champions who were offered the same chance to do the stat and didn't. If you want to discredit this further, please do some research and find something to make it insignificant and we'll agree with you. But for the moment, it's worthy of celebration.

 

[Mr Grumpy]

Ok then, here's why it's significant.

Formula 1 as a series is noteworthy because it has history. 75 seasons of racing is not anything to be sniffed at and most impressive records have been set. Things like debut points, podiums and wins have all been done before. So to find a new thing to set is an impressive achievement with so many other opportunities for it happen.

Every F1 driver has to make a debut at some point. A first Grand Prix start is one where you're coming in as a rookie, probably not in a good team and have to face a load of other drivers with a lot more experience. Jumping into an F1 car for the first time is a massive step up from whatever they were in before in terms of speed, complication, race length, fitness and most of all pressure. So to score points on debut is an impressive feat. This doesn't even add the complication of a driver's debut being a last minute reserve driver promotion, compared to being signed for a season and turning up to race 1.

79 drivers out of over 1000 have scored points on their Grand Prix debut. This is already an impressive stat, thusly bringing down the sample size of drivers who can score points on their first two races. There is also a smaller pool of drivers who made 1 start for one team and their second for another. I don't have a full list of the drivers who did that, but you saw my previous post explaining some recent examples. To only do 1 race for a team usually means they're either a reserve driver or were terrible. Quite a few cameos may end up being a couple of races, like Timo Glock at Jordan or Robert Doornbos at Red Bull.

The fact that despite these 75 seasons and plenty of different ways drivers have entered races for different teams or made debuts, Bearman is the only one to have scored points in his first two races, with both being in different cars. Michael Schumacher, Sebastian Vettel and Phil Hill are champions who did their first two races for different constructors and scored points in one of those races.
Jack Brabham, Jochen Rindt, Nelson Piquet and Keke Rosberg also did their first two races for different teams but didn't score points in either.

Fact of the matter is that a not-so unique opportunity has been grabbed and Ollie Bearman has shown that he has plenty of speed and talent and has what it takes to make it in F1, having taken the two opportunities he has been given brilliantly. If you want to dismiss a statistic for being convoluted, the guess what, all statistics are. Stats like this are what makes F1 interesting. There's always a bit of history backing something up or ability to remember some obscure thing that happened in the past to link together and event in the modern day to something which happened in the 70's.

CART tried to compete with the Indy 500 during the INDYCAR split by holding the Michigan 500 as a direct competitor to the Indy 500. It failed miserably because nobody cared and it didn't have 80 years of history and notoriety. The 1118th Grand Prix was the first time a driver scored points in their first two races with both being for different teams. That is why it matters and why it is being celebrated. I have listed 7 World Champions who were offered the same chance to do the stat and didn't. If you want to discredit this further, please do some research and find something to make it insignificant and we'll agree with you. But for the moment, it's worthy of celebration.

 

[kiseca]

There is a lot of presumption going on here. I didn't dismiss the statistic. Nor did I discredit it. I also didn't claim it was insignificant. Liquid claimed it was significant and I asked them to back that up. This has not happened yet.

That said, I appreciate that you took the time to reply with detail, @Jimlaad43. The parts where your post dips into condescension and assumptions on my motives, those are less appreciated. There was no message between the lines in either of my posts. I write what I'm thinking. I'm on internet forums to chat, not to win.

Speaking of research, I had in fact done some. Since Bearman's stat is a first, there is no precedent to set expectations from. The closest stat, I suppose, is drivers who score a point on their debut. I thought this was a handful of drivers before the 2000, but it turns out to be quite a few handfuls. The 1950s was the most prolific decade for drivers scoring on their debut, with 19 drivers managing the feat. That is excluding the first F1 gp, and excluding all Indy races, and despite only the top 5 finishers getting points.

It settles down after that, with 5 in the 1960s, 6 in the 1970s and in the '80s and '90s settles to three per decade.

2 managed it in the 2000s before the points change went up to top 8. 16 have managed in the approx. 20 years since. This is more per season than the full period from 1960 to 2003, but not so much more that I'd say there's significantly more chance of a debutant scoring points in a season now. The 1950s was definitely the era where this was most likely to happen, and is an outlier. The 80s and 90s the period least likely to see a rookie score on their debut.

It would probably paint a clearer picture if the number of debuts per season was known, but I couldn't find that value so I can't say how the rate has been affected by the number of rookies per season.

So from that I change my perspective to a rookie scoring points in their first race is no more likely now than it was in the 20th century.

As for the significance of this events, well this is what I have been asking about. Significant how? The list of drivers who scored on their debut is in fact not a roll call of drivers who went on to great success. You've got Stewart, Prost, Villeneuve jr, Raikkonen, Rosberg, Hamilton and Vettel who went on to become champions. Other drivers on the list include Alesi, De la Rosa, Glock, Liuzzi, Di Resta, Magnussen (2nd place on his debut), Kyvat, Nasr, Vandoorne... some went on to greatness, some enjoyed long, successful careers without ever being the best on the grid, some went on to mediocrity, some suffered very short careers with no further achievements of note beyond participating in Formula 1.

So from that, I see no indication of what this stat could predict about Bearman's future success. It doesn't tell me he's more or less likely to go on to championships, race wins... what I did learn about him is that he seems like a reliable, consistent driver. Which I like. But he's only had two races. That's not enough information to say how good he will be. It's only enough to show that he's not screwing yet it up. He's doing a decent, level headed job. Not all manage that. But maybe the significance Liquid was referring to wasn't about Bearman? I don't know until they tell me.

The fact that he's the only one who managed to achieve this feat out of only 7 through history (that I know of) is also not significant enough that it cannot be reasonably explained by chance. In 20 years time if 20 or 30 people have tried to win points for two different teams in their first two races, and Bearman is still the only one who has managed to convert the opportunity, then I'd say his achievement is a significant outlier. For now I conclude it is an interesting piece of trivia that doesn't tell me anything further than he had two out of two good races where he didn't drop the ball and wasn't slow. And I'm more impressed by his race in the Haas to be honest. But, I am open to have my mind changed by a reasoned argument delivered in a respectable manner. Like I said, I'm not here to win anything, just chat about a shared interest. I thought I'd posted an interesting anecdote about the topic but I've since basically been attacked more than once for expressing my counterpoint. Not sure why I expected better, to be honest, but I've tried to be respectful with my posts. A shame this has not been returned.

 

[Famine]

In terms of drivers who could have scored points in the modern points system in their first two starts for two different teams, there's also:

1950/1 - Brian Shawe-Taylor (10th in British GP for Joe Fry, 8th in British GP for himself!)
1958 - Phil Hill (7th for Jo Bonnier in France, 7th for Ferrari in Germany)
1961/2 - Roger Penske (8th in USA for John Wyatt, 9th in USA for Dupont Team Zerex)
1965 - Paul Hawkins (9th in South Africa for John Wilment, 10th in Monaco for DW Racing; Hawkins also raced two non-championship F1 events for JW prior to either, retiring from his first)
1966/7 - Chris Irwin (7th in the British GP for Brabham, 7th in the Netherlands for Reg Parnell; Irwin also raced an NC event between the two for Reg Parnell at the Race of Champions and actually scored points in 6th so would qualify whether NC races are counted or not)
1967 - David Hobbs (8th in the British GP for Bernard White, 10th in the German GP for Lola; however that latter race was an F2 entry and wouldn't have been eligible for points)
1971/3 - Gijsbert van Lennep (8th in the Netherlands for Stichting, 6th in the Netherlands for Williams; he did have a DNS entry for Surtees in 1971 between them so may not qualify if we mean "entries" rather than "starts")

I see no indication of what this stat could predict about Bearman's future success.

That's because it doesn't. "First to do [x]" stats don't really predict anything, generally, even when they're success stats.

Phil Hill is the only World Champion who would have achieved it if points went down to 10th (or even 8th, as we used for a while), while van Lennep was also a double outright Le Mans winner, but even so we can't really say that others on different points systems wouldn't have done it had more points been available to more drivers, because they change what's on the line and that changes motivation and decision-making.

 

[TheCracker]

In terms of drivers who could have scored points in the modern points system in their first two starts for two different teams, there's also:

1950/1 - Brian Shawe-Taylor (10th in British GP for Joe Fry, 8th in British GP for himself!)
1958 - Phil Hill (7th for Jo Bonnier in France, 7th for Ferrari in Germany)
1961/2 - Roger Penske (8th in USA for John Wyatt, 9th in USA for Dupont Team Zerex)
1965 - Paul Hawkins (9th in South Africa for John Wilment, 10th in Monaco for DW Racing; Hawkins also raced two non-championship F1 events for JW prior to either, retiring from his first)
1966/7 - Chris Irwin (7th in the British GP for Brabham, 7th in the Netherlands for Reg Parnell; Irwin also raced an NC event between the two for Reg Parnell at the Race of Champions and actually scored points in 6th so would qualify whether NC races are counted or not)
1967 - David Hobbs (8th in the British GP for Bernard White, 10th in the German GP for Lola; however that latter race was an F2 entry and wouldn't have been eligible for points)
1971/3 - Gijsbert van Lennep (8th in the Netherlands for Stichting, 6th in the Netherlands for Williams; he did have a DNS entry for Surtees in 1971 between them so may not qualify if we mean "entries" rather than "starts")

Does this include when the Indy 500 was considered part of the F1 world championship (1950-1960)?

I imagine there were plenty of US drivers who never did any other F1 races and probably drove for different teams over the years.

 

[Famine]

Does this include when the Indy 500 was considered part of the F1 world championship (1950-1960)?

I imagine there were plenty of US drivers who never did any other F1 races and probably drove for different teams over the years.

Yes, only Bill Vukovich won it more than once and he did so back-to-back for the same team - Howard Keck - and died while leading it the next year for same.

Edit: Actually, wait a mo, wrong question...

Lee Wallard might qualify with 6th in 1950 for Blue Spark and the win in 1951 for Belanger.

Art Cross too in 52/3 for Bowes Seal Fast (5th) and Springfield Welding (2nd).

 

[MagpieRacer]

Whoops, messed that up.

 

[MagpieRacer]

.

 

[kiseca]

In terms of drivers who could have scored points in the modern points system in their first two starts for two different teams, there's also:

1950/1 - Brian Shawe-Taylor (10th in British GP for Joe Fry, 8th in British GP for himself!)
1958 - Phil Hill (7th for Jo Bonnier in France, 7th for Ferrari in Germany)
1961/2 - Roger Penske (8th in USA for John Wyatt, 9th in USA for Dupont Team Zerex)
1965 - Paul Hawkins (9th in South Africa for John Wilment, 10th in Monaco for DW Racing; Hawkins also raced two non-championship F1 events for JW prior to either, retiring from his first)
1966/7 - Chris Irwin (7th in the British GP for Brabham, 7th in the Netherlands for Reg Parnell; Irwin also raced an NC event between the two for Reg Parnell at the Race of Champions and actually scored points in 6th so would qualify whether NC races are counted or not)
1967 - David Hobbs (8th in the British GP for Bernard White, 10th in the German GP for Lola; however that latter race was an F2 entry and wouldn't have been eligible for points)
1971/3 - Gijsbert van Lennep (8th in the Netherlands for Stichting, 6th in the Netherlands for Williams; he did have a DNS entry for Surtees in 1971 between them so may not qualify if we mean "entries" rather than "starts")


That's because it doesn't. "First to do [x]" stats don't really predict anything, generally, even when they're success stats.

Phil Hill is the only World Champion who would have achieved it if points went down to 10th (or even 8th, as we used for a while), while van Lennep was also a double outright Le Mans winner, but even so we can't really say that others on different points systems wouldn't have done it had more points been available to more drivers, because they change what's on the line and that changes motivation and decision-making.

Thanks for that, so that makes Bearman's the first success in 14 attempts if I've counted correctly. I think that takes it beyond the boundaries of chance.