Overtaking statistics, 1983-2010

[Ranger]

Brilliantly detailed, well worth a read. :up:

http://cliptheapex.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=51&t=822

[Alfa Fan]

I hope the intention is not to draw any conclusions about this year, because if it is then it is horribly flawed for that purpose.

[Ranger]

I hope the intention is not to draw any conclusions about this year,

Not at all.

[Saint Devote]

And the reason there was more overtaking is the early 80's period between ground affects and the domination of aerodynamics was because there was less adherence of the car to the track?

Just look at the three grands prix from this year and those two where the surface compromised the tyre grip - lessened adhesion - it was effectivelt a reduction of grip.

The conclusion is that prettier cars - as cars are that have less aerodynamics - work well if overtaking is desired.

Back again to making aerodynamics minimal, and let the tyres, engine and driver go out there and race. Until the corrosive grip of the aerodynamicists is broken, and it will have to be done all throughout the single seater chain to prevent lower formulae becoming quicker than F1, there will remain a problem with being able to overtake.

Bahrain IS the real F1 of 2010.

[UltimateDanGTR]

very interesting.

notice the large drop of average overtakes per race between 2004 and 2005. 2005 was when new annoying rules were introduced, and that says something.

Interestingly, there was an even bigger drop in average overtakes per race between 1993 and 1994. when refuelling was reitroduced. this supports the theory that no refuelling produces more on track overtakes.

great find.

[Sonic]

I've been looking for something like this for ages. I'll now go to the bat cave a trawl through it!

[airshifter]

very interesting.

notice the large drop of average overtakes per race between 2004 and 2005. 2005 was when new annoying rules were introduced, and that says something.

Interestingly, there was an even bigger drop in average overtakes per race between 1993 and 1994. when refuelling was reitroduced. this supports the theory that no refuelling produces more on track overtakes.

great find.

I'd have to think that in some cases major rules changes reflect that the cars aren't pushing the grey area of the rules until further along in development. Any major rules change rarely results in cars taking 100% advantage of the rules in the first year.

The refueling numbers make sense, as less cars are running crazy light strategies to qualify well, and then being stuck with starting the race on that fuel load. With nothing other than tires in the pits now, it seems that the average pit stop will be closer to the norm than it was with the extra variable of fuel involved.


Regardless of opinions, very interesting statistics. It might settle down some of the arguments over which tracks promote or lessen chances of overtaking.

[F1boat]

Since 1994, more or less it is the same. I am used with the fact that in F1 overtaking is difficult. And I have no problem with this.

[i_max2k2]

I think its just that Aero evolution, keeps making overtaking difficult, taking fueling in or out, makes the drivers attempt moves on the road, makes sense as long as the car or circuit allows it. And yes Baharain, is exactly what we should expect for rest of the season as long as we have dry uninterrupted conditions, which would be in majority of the races.

[555-04Q2]

Brilliantly detailed, well worth a read. :up:

http://cliptheapex.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=51&t=822

Brilliant link Malllen :up:

Proves what we have been saying all along. Overtaking and general racing has declined significantly over the last two decades. Hopefully things will improve during this decade.

[Brown, Jon Brow]

I can't believe we got 21 passes in Bahrain 2010.

[steveaki13]

For me the importance is not just how many overtakes we have but its the importance that cars can stay close and clump together in battles for position. The closer they can battle, then maybe the more overtaking we may have.
You could have a race with no overtaking but if 5 cars are nose to tail attacking and defending brilliantly then its no less exciting for me.

[Bullet]

Very interesting. I haven't sifted through all the information but at a quick glance there are few things that come to mind. The overall race avg includes the wet races I believe. 1 or 2 wet races + or - in a season could really skew the avg. Again, I haven't gone through all the info so my apologies if that is already factored in.
I also wonder, and this is really reaching...since some seasons only vary by 10-20 total passes for the season, there may be certain era's of more aggressive drivers. The Montoya, Kimi, years might be different than an era of less aggressive drivers. 5 drivers with an avg of 4 more passes each for an entire season is a 20 overtake total. It's a stretch, but it is a factor to consider.
Because the variables are always changing there is no baseline to provide definitive conclusions. For example, that drop from the 93 to 94 seems to go against what I think most would believe. Those changes should have increased overtaking. But, the impact of those changes on today's cars and drivers can't be assumed to be the same as they were in that era. If everything else was the same today as it was during those years then a reasonable guess could be made. But, the cars are different, the aerodynamics are different, the tyres are different, the drivers are different, politics and driver expectations are different, circuits are different etc. etc. etc. A rule change 20 years ago is not likely to produce the same result today.
This is definitely the best analysis of this issue I've ever seen though.

[jens]

The drop in 2005 is surprising, because due to the ban of tyre changes I got the impression that it actually improved overtaking, especially at the end of races, when some guys with shot tyres were dropping backwards like stones.

Considering the ability of cars' to follow each other and attempt an overtaking move, I have to admit that I can't recall a time it was harder to overtake than it is now! So I'm doubtful the statistics presented about 2010 are a sign of positive movements, more like an indication of the wet weekends we have had.

[Mark in Oshawa]

Overtaking means entertainment. The high water mark for entertainment for me was the late 70's to early 80's of GP's I watched where differences among the cars on different speed circuits was also pronounced.

All I know is gimmicks like grooved tires and restricting pit work hasn't done a damn thing, and carbon fiber brakes have NOT helped either.

[F1boat]

Overtaking means entertainment.

Don't you consider that fans who don't remember the 70-ties would not like a MotoGP-like Formula One? I personally love the fact that overtaking in F1 is difficult and this allows truly exceptional drivers like Lewis Hamilton to shine, but also allows good defenders like Sutil or Alonso to shine as well. I would not want to see a good defender with a slower car defenseless as many people obviously do :(

[Mikeall]

Just been looking over those stats myself and found this thread. The best thing to do is look at thedry race stats only. Today's race had 70 overtakes which is very high but it was a wet race with safety cars, 16 of those were on Kovaleinen because he didnt pit for inters under the safety car and was passed by the front runners. Imagine if Trulli, Glock, Di Grassi, Senna and Chandhok had been in the position to do the same thing. We would maybe have had another 80 overtakes which would skew figures for a whole year!

Another factor hidden which maybe relevant to further analyse the stats is that recently cars have been more reliable, running maybe 90% of racing laps whereas maybe in the mid 90s it was more like 70% (guessing) maybe even less. 0.5 overtakes per race per driver in a season where a driver on average ran 70% of the laps indicates easier overtaking than if they do 90% distance on average. However the viewers get the same quantity of overtaking entertainment.

[import111]

I am used with the fact that in F1 overtaking is difficult. And I have no problem with this.

I agree 100%. That is why I love F1 so much. They have to try extremely hard to pass just 1 car usually.

[jens]

Today's race had 70 overtakes which is very high but it was a wet race with safety cars, 16 of those were on Kovaleinen because he didnt pit for inters under the safety car and was passed by the front runners. Imagine if Trulli, Glock, Di Grassi, Senna and Chandhok had been in the position to do the same thing.


That's a good point. IMO the amount of overtakes in 2010 is artificially increased by the three slow new teams, because if a driver from an established team hits trouble early in the race, he can easily get 6 scalps sooner or later. And regardless of the toughness of overtaking in modern F1, the new teams are too slow to have much chance of holding anyone up long-term. I think partly that's how we got 21 (?!) overtakes in Bahrain. Wasn't it Hülkenberg, who dropped to the back in the beginning before starting to overtake cars from new teams?

[AndyL]

That's a good point. IMO the amount of overtakes in 2010 is artificially increased by the three slow new teams, because if a driver from an established team hits trouble early in the race, he can easily get 6 scalps sooner or later. And regardless of the toughness of overtaking in modern F1, the new teams are too slow to have much chance of holding anyone up long-term. I think partly that's how we got 21 (?!) overtakes in Bahrain. Wasn't it Hülkenberg, who dropped to the back in the beginning before starting to overtake cars from new teams?

Indeed, and it brings up the question of how much of the overtaking back in the 80's was also due to larger differences in car performance across the field. And conversely, how much of the decline in these overtaking statistics is down to equalisers like control tyres and restrictive engine rules, rather than the aero issues.

[Mikeall]

Indeed, and it brings up the question of how much of the overtaking back in the 80's was also due to larger differences in car performance across the field. And conversely, how much of the decline in these overtaking statistics is down to equalisers like control tyres and restrictive engine rules, rather than the aero issues.

The overtaking in the early 80s I guess was due partly to turbo cars qualifying at the front of races by turning the boost up regardless of whether their car was anywhere near fast enough in race trim. How many times a race would Stefan Johansson for example be overtaken every race driving his turbo powered Spirit?

[speeddurango]

I would strongly agree with AndyL in the argument that the disparity in the modern F1 is much lower causing the passing to be difficult. I believe that's also the reason why the new supposedly overtaking facilitating scheme didn't seem to work last year. According to the statistics, the total amount of overtakings stayed unchanged from last year despite some positive signs that cars do seem to follow closer at times; and I believe this awkward situation was owing to the low disparity when the whole field is covered by only 2 seconds, creating a unusual phenomenon when qualifying was more exciting than the race itself. Had that been 4 seconds like before, the races should have contained more passings presumably.

[fandango]

I've said it before and I'll say it again. My apologies if this is slightly off-topic.

If they're so sure that the chances of overtaking are reduced because the car in front messes up the air and reduces the chasing car's downforce, why don't they just make a rule where every car has to pass a "windtunnel test", where it would be illegal to cause more than a 10% reduction of a chasing car's downforce?

I really can't see any reason why that wouldn't work.

[woody2goody]

One of the things it does say is that Bahrain, as I hasve said many times, is NOT a boring race! :)

[Ranger]

More overtakes in 8 races this year than all of 2009! :D :up:

[Tazio]

More overtakes in 8 races this year than all of 2009! :D :up: I wonder what the lap time differences will be at a really long track like Spa?
Out of sequence cars of the same speed in quali trim could be 3 and 4 secs per lap slower in dry conditions, on the same compound, may be even more :confused: :)

[Ranger]

I wonder what the lap time differences will be at a really long track like Spa?
Out of sequence cars of the same speed in quali trim could be 3 and 4 secs per lap slower in dry conditions, on the same compound, may be even more :confused: :)

In reality that is no different to what we were seeing in the late 90's and early 00's.

Everyone is well within the old 107% rule so there should be no problem.