New Driver Rankings

[ArrowsFA1]

There's a new rankings system designed to "analyse almost 50 global motorsport series, including Formula 1, NASCAR and WRC, to create a continuous measurement of driver talent."

http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/80859

http://www.castroldriverrankings.com/

It'll be interesting to see how this progresses, although no doubt it won't resolve the "who is the best driver" arguments :p :

[Mark]

This, or something very much like it, has been going for years hasn't it?

[I am evil Homer]

Vettel is better than Loeb? Rubens better than 4 times in a row champion? Someones "expansive measurement" system is broken Castrol!!!

[patnicholls]

Kazuki Nakajima - 0 points last year in F1 - better than two-years-in-a-row DTM champion Timo Schieder?!?

Still, an amusing read and a useful count of how many top-level drivers there are out there.

[Sonic]

Weird! Perhaps their measuring system is just a monkey pulling names from a hat.

[patnicholls]

...although I did scroll down far enough to see poor old Luca Badoer in about 800th place overall.

[CNR]

this is bs

18 Nico Rosberg (http://www.castroldriverrankings.com/profile/nico-rosberg/1985062700)

115Jamie Whincup (http://www.castroldriverrankings.com/profile/jamie-whincup/1983020600)(2008 -2009) v8 supercars Driver Champion

[philipbain]

I remember that these sort of rankings were done a few years back, at that time they were sponsored by Shell, I don't know what they really achieve apart from some publicity for Castrol of course! I suppose if someone who only follows F1 were to look at it, it would bring up some names of top drivers from other series that they are less familiar with.

[SGWilko]

Not one for Jonathan Ross to annouce....

It's bobbins.

[SGWilko]

It's a driver/car combo ranking system.

[edv]

This listing appears to use statistics going back only 12 months.
So it is a 'What have you done for me lately' type of deal.
This is probably why some names appear higher/lower than you'd expect?

[pettersolberg29]

How can Trulli be ahead of far superior drivers, whatever the rankings are based on? Also, in the WRC section the ratings are all mashed up. This is pointless...

Rant over!

[Mark]

I expect it's just an exercise in viral marketing, to get people talking on forums such as this one!

[52Paddy]

This matter is so subjective and will never have a definitive answer. Nice try Castrol, but I ain't sold on it whatsoever.

[F1boat]

I like the rankings, Jenson is 1st :) But they have explained their system, the 50 series do not carry the same weight. F1 and the Sprint Cup are the most prestigious, WRC and Indycar are behind. I agree with the system and I am happy with the rankings, although I think that Loeb should be 2nd or 1st.

[ioan]

Any ranking topped by Button can only be useless.

[gloomyDAY]

Any ranking topped by Button can only be useless. :laugh:

[F1boat]

It's logical for the F1 World Champion to be on top :)

[ioan]

It's logical for the F1 World Champion to be on top :)

There are better World champions out there, why would be the lamest F1 champion better than a 6 times WRC champion who happens to be the 2009 champion too and who's won 54 out of 125 the rallies he take part in?!

So, what kind of logic were you using? The head up Button's arse one?

[F1boat]

There are better World champions out there, why would be the lamest F1 champion better than a 6 times WRC champion who happens to be the 2009 champion too and who's won 54 out of 125 the rallies he take part in?!

So, what kind of logic were you using? The head up Button's arse one?

There are, from what I know, 5 official FIA World Champions. The F1 one, the WRC one, the FIA GT two and the WTCC one. The rankings are for the past season and do not include seasons previous to year 2009. The experts who have made the rankings have prepared a system which calculates how worthy a win or a point in the series is. You can read it instead of posting insulting obscenities. However, if you ask me for my opinion, you take these 5 champions and Button, for 2009, was the most convincing. He won the championship with a round to spare, while Tarquini and Loeb won it in the final round. About the GT boys, I am not sure who won it after all, there was some sort of appeal, kinda like Brazil 2007 in F1.
Add to that Dario Franchitti, who, too, won the IRL crown in the final round. That leaves Jimmie Johnson as the only legitimate champion who is possibly stronger than Jenson. But he won using the playoff system which is likely not very well reflected in the rankings. So JJ is the only one who might be a stronger champ than Jenson. As I rate F1 higher than NASCAR, IMO Jenson deserves the top spot.

[ioan]

There are, from what I know, 5 official FIA World Champions. The F1 one, the WRC one, the FIA GT two and the WTCC one. The rankings are for the past season and do not include seasons previous to year 2009. The experts who have made the rankings have prepared a system which calculates how worthy a win or a point in the series is. You can read it instead of posting insulting obscenities. However, if you ask me for my opinion, you take these 5 champions and Button, for 2009, was the most convincing. He won the championship with a round to spare, while Tarquini and Loeb won it in the final round. About the GT boys, I am not sure who won it after all, there was some sort of appeal, kinda like Brazil 2007 in F1.
Add to that Dario Franchitti, who, too, won the IRL crown in the final round. That leaves Jimmie Johnson as the only legitimate champion who is possibly stronger than Jenson. But he won using the playoff system which is likely not very well reflected in the rankings. So JJ is the only one who might be a stronger champ than Jenson. As I rate F1 higher than NASCAR, IMO Jenson deserves the top spot.

You mean that a point won while driving the best car on the grid (due to not so flattering circumstances) is worth more than a hard fought point against strong competition?!

Great logic, not.

[F1boat]

While I agree that Brawn GP was the best car, IMO the victories of Jenson were very deserved. The Brawn car was the best in the first third of the championship, however, after Malaysia, IMO it wasn't that dominant - IMO due to mistakes of Red Bull Brawn were sometimes flattered, most notably in Bahrain and Spain. Also, for the remaining two thirds of the season, the car was not dominant and sometimes it was midfield.
While the rest of the champions IMO also had the best cars in their series.

[ioan]

While I agree that Brawn GP was the best car, IMO the victories of Jenson were very deserved.

More deserved than Loeb's victories?

[Rollo]

this is bs

18 Nico Rosberg
115 Jamie Whincup

44 David Brabham
46 Danica Patrick
61 Marcus Ambrose
80 Yvan Muller
170 Jason Plato

This list is bonkers.

[Bruce D]

Their stats on drivers are wrong too, Plato has taken more than 50 BTCC wins, not 39. And how can anyone in the BTCC be ranked lower than someone in the WTCC? WTCC is boring, dominated by cars that have technical advantages over each other and they don't use talent to overtake, they just ram each other off the road.

This is just a pointless ranking system - based purely on F1 with other things thrown in to try and make it look like a world ranking system.

We should have our own ranking system here. Should work like this - take 1000pts for winning every race in a series, divide it by the number of races in each series around the world (like Nascar's 9716 rounds they have in a season), and thats what each person gets when they win a round of that series. So if someone dominates a series (aka a typical Loeb WRC season), they will be highest ranked. So a 18-race F1 season would me the winner of the each race gets 55.5pts, the winner of each 30-round BTCC season would get 33.3pts. It would balance out more, as BTCC people have more rounds and therefore more opportunity to score points.

[F1boat]

More deserved than Loeb's victories?

In 2009, I think so. IMO WRC is a shadow of its former glory.
Bruce, WTCC is a FIA World Championship and it is expected to be rated as a premier touring car series... although IMO the major TTC should have equal weight. :)

[Bruce D]

Just cos some guys in suits think a series is "superior" doesn't mean it has the best drivers or is the better series.

[AndyRAC]

Their stats on drivers are wrong too, Plato has taken more than 50 BTCC wins, not 39. And how can anyone in the BTCC be ranked lower than someone in the WTCC? WTCC is boring, dominated by cars that have technical advantages over each other and they don't use talent to overtake, they just ram each other off the road.

This is just a pointless ranking system - based purely on F1 with other things thrown in to try and make it look like a world ranking system.

We should have our own ranking system here. Should work like this - take 1000pts for winning every race in a series, divide it by the number of races in each series around the world (like Nascar's 9716 rounds they have in a season), and thats what each person gets when they win a round of that series. So if someone dominates a series (aka a typical Loeb WRC season), they will be highest ranked. So a 18-race F1 season would me the winner of the each race gets 55.5pts, the winner of each 30-round BTCC season would get 33.3pts. It would balance out more, as BTCC people have more rounds and therefore more opportunity to score points.

It is sponsored by Autosport - their top drivers of 2009 was very similar - with F1 drivers dominating. I like Jenson, but he did stumble over the line, not winning in the second half of the season.

[speeddurango]

the most objective and expansive measurement of driving talent across all disciplines of motorsport.

This literally makes me LOL.

I seriously want to know what is their measuring method. I fancy it is either a personally fabricated ranking, or a ranking based on the points and other measurement, like consistency and so forth, of each driver and each series getting certain allocation on the overall ranking.

Either way this ranking is obviously not relevant to the fact, even if it has objectivity as a pretext for its fallible outcome, a bunch of Indycar drivers outranking NASCAR drivers in the top 10 says just about everything.

Then again, if I were castrol and try to come up with a list in order to generate attention, I would at least make out a system which may put Danica Patrick in the top 10 instead of a certain Mikko Hirvonen.

[SGWilko]

This literally makes me LOL.

I seriously want to know what is their measuring method. I fancy it is either a personally fabricated ranking, or a ranking based on the points and other measurement, like consistency and so forth, of each driver and each series getting certain allocation on the overall ranking.

Either way this ranking is obviously not relevant to the fact, even if it has objectivity as a pretext for its fallible outcome, a bunch of Indycar drivers outranking NASCAR drivers in the top 10 says just about everything.

Then again, if I were castrol and try to come up with a list in order to generate attention, I would at least make out a system which may put Danica Patrick in the top 10 instead of a certain Mikko Hirvonen.

Hope this link works...

http://cdn.images.autosport.com/digitalmag/castrolrankings/

Page 6.

[Garry Walker]

So, what kind of logic were you using? The head up Button's arse one?

Saint devote mode on " you are just a deranged button hater" saint devote mode off

This "list" is obviously idiotic and autosport should be embarrassed for having published this.

[Garry Walker]

Maybe they weren't counting on people taking it quite so seriously as some on here.. :mark:

autosport is a publication that should not publish lists that are less credible than your average forum posters comments, they are supposed to be the leading racing magazine in world.
Publishing such lists is embarrassing and should be left for forum posters.

[F1boat]

Maybe they weren't counting on people taking it quite so seriously as some on here.. :mark:

On the contrary, Autosport knows that flame wars will erupt and people will argue about whether the list is good or not. For me it is very good, although I would never rate a non-champion in Top 3.

[wedge]

autosport is a publication that should not publish lists that are less credible than your average forum posters comments, they are supposed to be the leading racing magazine in world.
Publishing such lists is embarrassing and should be left for forum posters.

You can add the Nobel Prize as well, let alone journalists nothing else to do in December

[ioan]

I think you guys are getting way too worked up over this. Its list knocked up by Castrol and its their opinion and has generated some coverage. Don't worry about it.. ;)

You're selling Jenson and Michael short with that statement..

Only Jenson, MS won races and titles in sometimes inferior machinery to his rivals.

[ioan]

autosport is a publication that should not publish lists that are less credible than your average forum posters comments, they are supposed to be the leading racing magazine in world.
Publishing such lists is embarrassing and should be left for forum posters.

Maybe they are trying to attract some of the 'The Sun' readers?! :D

[ioan]

On the contrary, Autosport knows that flame wars will erupt and people will argue about whether the list is good or not.

So they basically turned into a crappy tabloid?!

[ioan]

You can add the Nobel Prize as well...

Sad but true.

[jens]

What is the point of those endless pointless lists? Not long ago we had an "all-time drivers list", now "all-series list" and surely they'll try to create something new soon again.

Oh well, there is no point in that particular ranking anyway. Just close versions of overall rankings of each series have been tried to put together, but they have failed even in that, like WSR winner Bertrand Baguette being behind random F3 drivers.

Most of all it looks like F1 (or motorsport?) has an identity crisis. In 2005 we had a two-phased qualifying session in F1, because "they have two runs in alpine skiing". Before 2009 Bernie proposed medals, because we have those in olympics. Now they are trying to emulate tennis.

[F1boat]

MS did win in inferior cars we know that. Jenson has only won one World Championship, lets not be too quick judge he's only 29.. You never know he might win 2 more and his status may rise in credibilty..

You absolutely detested Alonso in 2006 and 2007 and started endless threads making your feelings known. I'm sure you've warmed to him now he's a Ferrari driver, and things can change as we well know.. :)

IMO even a one World Championship title means more than the opinion of various haters in the Internet.

[ioan]

IMO even a one World Championship title means more than the opinion of various haters in the Internet.

You also believe that one WDC is better than 6 WDCs.

[F1boat]

You also believe that one WDC is better than 6 WDCs.

Nope. If the rankings were for the decade, Loeb for sure will be infront of Button. But they are for 2009.

[ioan]

Nope. If the rankings were for the decade, Loeb for sure will be infront of Button. But they are for 2009.

Loeb did win in 2009 too, in addition to his previous 5 titles.

[harvick#1]

come on Ioan, if anyone takes this ranking seriously needs to see a mental doctor.

the rankings are for 2009 and even the those are horrid. and seeing Danica Patrick in the top 50 just proves what a major joke the ranking is.

JPM maybe on of the best drivers out there today and wasn't ranked in the top 20 :confused:

its also obvious F1 Bias as well, every series shows how each one is different from each other. its almost near impossible to rank drivers

[ioan]

come on Ioan, if anyone takes this ranking seriously needs to see a mental doctor.

the rankings are for 2009 and even the those are horrid. and seeing Danica Patrick in the top 50 just proves what a major joke the ranking is.

JPM maybe on of the best drivers out there today and wasn't ranked in the top 20 :confused:

its also obvious F1 Bias as well, every series shows how each one is different from each other. its almost near impossible to rank drivers

Fully agree. :)

[wedge]

So they basically turned into a crappy tabloid?!

Akin to the Daily Mail

It's been like that for as long as I remember.


What is the point of those endless pointless lists? Not long ago we had an "all-time drivers list", now "all-series list" and surely they'll try to create something new soon again.

It's been that time of year when journalists have nothing else better to do and need something to fill the publication by arguing in a pub.

[Retro Formula 1]

I shouldn't have looked and know that now.

All I wonder is how Vettel has leapfrogged Button in the rankings despite being in the best car and being behind button in the championship.

I'm not saying he's not a better driver than the reigning champion and I'm not saying he is. All I'm saying is how has he jumped him when he's not beaten him in better equipment.

Lets not even get into how Webber is ahead of Hamilton!!

[ArrowsFA1]

the rankings are for 2009 and even the those are horrid. and seeing Danica Patrick in the top 50 just proves what a major joke the ranking is.
Errrrrr, no.



Castrol Index Score: Each driver is given a score depending on his qualifying position and his race result from each event that counts towards the Castrol Rankings. Additional points are given for fastest lap in the race, leading the race or rally, leading the most laps, finishing on the lead lap, most positions gained, and starting the event.

Castrol Index Score x weighting x race adjustment = Castrol Rankings points: The driver's Castrol Index Score is multiplied by a pre-determined weighting. The weighting is based on the type of race or rally contested so the more important the race or rally, the higher the weighting. For example, a Formula 1 World Championship race will be weighted higher than a round of the British Touring Car Championship. Points are then adjusted depending on the number of rounds in the championship to equalise each series to a theoretical 20 rounds. Therefore, a race win in the 36-round NASCAR Sprint Cup would carry exactly half the value of a race win in F1 if there were 18 grands prix in the season. The result is a Castrol Rankings points total awarded for every driver in the race.

The points total is then added to all previous points to provide a cumulative Castrol Rankings points total for the past 12 months. Each week the driver with the highest Castrol Rankings points total over the last 12 months will lead the Castrol Rankings.


http://www.castroldriverrankings.com/how-it-works/faq

[F1boat]

I shouldn't have looked and know that now.

All I wonder is how Vettel has leapfrogged Button in the rankings despite being in the best car and being behind button in the championship.


Yes, I think that this is quite amazing too.

[ioan]

I shouldn't have looked and know that now.

All I wonder is how Vettel has leapfrogged Button in the rankings despite being in the best car and being behind button in the championship.

I'm not saying he's not a better driver than the reigning champion and I'm not saying he is. All I'm saying is how has he jumped him when he's not beaten him in better equipment.

Lets not even get into how Webber is ahead of Hamilton!!

This ranking was BS from the go.

[Saint Devote]

There are better World champions out there, why would be the lamest F1 champion better than a 6 times WRC champion who happens to be the 2009 champion too and who's won 54 out of 125 the rallies he take part in?!

So, what kind of logic were you using? The head up Button's arse one?

Now, now, dont get even more bitter and twisted just because Schumacher is making Nakajima look good relative to Nico.

I think a certain Nick Heidfeld must be one of the happiest drivers in f1 today - counting down until Ross sits Michael down and calls it a day.

Autosport rated Schumacher 3/10 at Shanghai :eek:

[Saint Devote]

I shouldn't have looked and know that now.

All I wonder is how Vettel has leapfrogged Button in the rankings despite being in the best car and being behind button in the championship.

I'm not saying he's not a better driver than the reigning champion and I'm not saying he is. All I'm saying is how has he jumped him when he's not beaten him in better equipment.

Lets not even get into how Webber is ahead of Hamilton!!

The only ranking that counts is the WDC.

The world championship is not about being the "best driver" or the "quickest driver" - its about getting the job done and as Raikkonen said when he jumped to defend Jenson at the end of 2009.

And Jense is doing that - getting the job done. He did it in 2009 and is the first driver since Alonso to lead the championship at this point in his reigning year. He may or may not win the title again this year, but right now he is in the best position and it is not by accident either.

Vettel's biggest problem is his team. Their tactical calls have been atrocious.

[jens]

What are you surprised about? If you understood it correctly, this is like a tennis ranking - it counts the results of the last 12 months. Remember, how Button started the 2009 season, 6 wins out of 7. It's absolutely certain that he will keep losing points until mid-season. On the other hand Vettel started the 2009 season with two straight retirements, so logically he has been able to gain ground. Not to mention the poles he has been getting as the points system in the Rankings count these do. In the second half of '09 Vettel was among the highest-scoring drivers, while Button was only somewhere around 6th in that department, so he really needs to keep winning to stay anywhere near the front until mid-season!

Webber ahead of Hamilton is logical too - Mark has had a top car for a year already, Lewis was getting nothing until mid-season last year. So it means Hamilton will probably start threatening the leaders somewhere in Summer.

http://www.castroldriverrankings.com/how-it-works/faq

I nearly lost the will to live half way through that load of bobbins.

[Dave B]

Here's how it really works:

You see a list and click on the link, mainly because you can't believe it. You are taken to a site which bombards you with advertising for a brand of motor oil, which hopefully you'll buy. The ratings are meaningless, the oil's decent enough.

It's not a bad marketing exercise, all told, as it does at least get the brand name more widely recognised.

[ioan]

Now, now, dont get even more bitter and twisted just because Schumacher is making Nakajima look good relative to Nico.

I think a certain Nick Heidfeld must be one of the happiest drivers in f1 today - counting down until Ross sits Michael down and calls it a day.

Autosport rated Schumacher 3/10 at Shanghai :eek:

You pick up a months old comment and turn it into a 'discussion'? No way Jose.

[ioan]

Here's how it really works:

You see a list and click on the link, mainly because you can't believe it. You are taken to a site which bombards you with advertising for a brand of motor oil, which hopefully you'll buy. The ratings are meaningless, the oil's decent enough.

It's not a bad marketing exercise, all told, as it does at least get the brand name more widely recognised.

Right on the money.