[HN Gopher] Engineers, not racers, are the true drivers of succe... ___________________________________________________________________ Engineers, not racers, are the true drivers of success in motor sport Author : DyslexicAtheist Score : 22 points Date : 2020-10-16 21:23 UTC (1 hours ago) (HTM) web link (www.economist.com) (TXT) w3m dump (www.economist.com) | choeger wrote: | Interesting analysis, but the main point remains: You can not | compare drivers across different eras. Is Lewis the GOAT? Yes. Is | Michael the GOAT? Yes. | jkuria wrote: | Hmmh, I took away the exact opposite point. They developed a | model to do exactly this and Fangio from the 1950s came out on | top. He raced for four different teams and the driver's | contribution (versus the car's and the team's) was 58% compared | to 19% today. | giobox wrote: | There is no way for Lewis to assume that much responsibility | even if he wanted to though, to continue this example. I'd go | as far as to argue with constant rule changes it's not even | the same sport anymore, especially the gap between Fangio and | Lewis etc. | | I agree, cross-generation driver comparisons are really hard. | serf wrote: | Whenever any of the 'old folks' of F1 are interviewed (Lauda, | Stewart, Williams), they talk about Fangio and Clark. | | It's not surprising to me that they're at the top. | | The in-car footage of Fangio is breathtaking. | [deleted] | segmondy wrote: | This entire argument is simply because Hamilton is black. He sets | records and all of a sudden he can't shine by himself. Of course | the team is important and very good but also so is Hamilton as is | evident by his teammate who has the same car unless you truly | believe Mercedes is giving his teammate a handicapped car. | focom wrote: | Reading the first line: | | > Our statistical model finds that neither Lewis Hamilton nor | Michael Schumacher is Formula 1's greatest driver | | So its lame to play the racist card here. | Swizec wrote: | It's like genetics in other sports. You need the best car to | win, that's a given. | | But if you can't drive at the car's max, you won't win. | | Just like a poorly trained athlete with perfect genetics won't | win. But comparing great athletes, the one with best genetics | wins. | olivermarks wrote: | Depends on the motorsport. Take drag racing. top fuel driver | after reaction time is mostly along for the ride, depends on | quality of engineering to win/lose. Alcohol FC is immensely | complicated to drive, also pro stock which is pure driving skill. | | MotoGP motor cycle racing is highly skilled and is IMO far, far | more exciting than Formula One which used to be the fastest/most | expensive formula amongst multiple divisions and is now largely | an inventors/engineers domain. | | As others have noted different eras of racing cars (late 60's | early 70's formula one for example) required very different | skills and bravery levels. | | David Coulthard drives Jim Clark's Lotus 25 | https://youtu.be/_L1tHavnd9w lovely bit of informative film | tartoran wrote: | If we go down this path we'll watch autopilots racing soon. Not | fun ___________________________________________________________________ (page generated 2020-10-16 23:00 UTC)