Thought it might be interesting to track the driver ratings in Autosport magazine over the course of the season to see who comes out on top. They are published after each race and give each driver a score out of 10. Here is the rating after Bahrain.

Vettel 10
Hamilton 9
Rosberg 9
Alonso 9
Massa 8
Kubica 8
Liuzzi 8
Trulli 8
Chandhok 8
Senna 8
Glock 8
Schumacher 7
Barrichello 7
Kovalainen 7
Button 6
Webber 6
Hukenberg 6
Petrov 6
Sutil 6
Buemi 6
De La Rosa 6
Di Grassi 6
Alguersuari 5
Kobayashi 5

Mark

Why Kobayashi only 5 and Di Grassi 6 ? wtf
trulli 8 ?

Just ridiculous. Chandhok better than Schumacher, Rosberg is equal to Alonso and Vettel 1st. These ratings are always biased and valueless.

Buemi gets a 6 and Alguersuari only 5?

A slightly more objective rating:

Vettel 4
Hamilton 4
Rosberg 3
Alonso 4
Massa 3
Kubica 2
Liuzzi 1
Trulli 1
Chandhok 1
Senna 1
Glock 1
Schumacher 10
Barrichello 2
Kovalainen 1
Button 2
Webber 1
Hukenberg 1
Petrov 1
Sutil 1
Buemi 1
De La Rosa 1
Di Grassi 1
Alguersuari 1
Kobayashi 1

i'd give chandok a 7 at most, and the sauber drivers are hauling a dog around the track, so id put them slightly higher

Button 6

I don't think they are really fair and overrate the importance of the car

Edit - Webber deserves even less IMO If it was me I would give him a 5.

I'll be sure to ignore all future 'Autosport Driver Ratings' in the future.

It doesn't seem anymore objective than what an informed forumer could have provided.

A far more objective rating that uses the ordinary least square technique for estimating the unknown engine performance parameters in a linear regression models differentiating between car performance and driver performance to factor out subjectivity based on being a fanboy:

Vettel 2
Hamilton 1
Rosberg 2
Alonso 2
Massa 5
Kubica 2
Liuzzi 1
Trulli 1
Chandhok 1
Senna 1
Glock 1
Schumacher 20
Barrichello 5
Kovalainen 1
Button 3
Webber 1
Hukenberg 1
Petrov 1
Sutil 0
Buemi 1
De La Rosa 1
Di Grassi 1
Alguersuari 1
Speed 5
Kobayashi 2

I don't see what the fuss is, I don't particularly disagree with those ratings. It's always going to be very difficult trying to rate drivers based on a single race when you don't know the real value of each car, so I'm not seeing any of you doing it any better.

Some explanations for those of you that seem a bit confused:

Vettel 10 - he was very likely to win the race without the problem, wasn't he? And got pole. And had a big advantage over his well rated team-mate.

Chandhok 8 - within 2 seconds of Senna after a single 5 laps on the car, with a badly fitted seat, no setup and all that. That was awesome.

Rosberg 9, Schu 7 - absolutely. Rosberg did fantastic to beat Schu fair and square every session. Schu recovered a bit in the race to finish close.

Trulli 8, Kova 7 - Trulli was miles faster in qualy. Kova was the only to drag one of the new teams cars to the finish.

Glock 8, di Grassi 6 - Glock was always much faster than Di Grassi, and managed to pass on track in the race for 1st of the new teams.

Koba 5 - bit harsh, but he got outqualified in both sessions by a rusty 38 year-old driver, and then passed by him on track. The low Sauber ratings must also be a bit for how disappointing the pace was compared to what we expected.

Buemi 6, Alguer 5 - Buemi was much quicker in qualy, only dropped back in the race because of a very poor strategy. Again, we thought Toro Rosso could do better.

I find it absolutely perfect. It relates to me a completely unbiased rating of what we actually saw take place (as opposed to driver reputation, expectation, etc) for the top drivers. Great idea to keep track.

Vettel 10
Hamilton 9
Rosberg 9
Alonso 9
Massa 8
Kubica 8
Liuzzi 8
Trulli 8
Chandhok 8
Senna 8
Glock 8
Schumacher 7
Barrichello 7
Kovalainen 7
Button 6
Webber 6
Hukenberg 6
Petrov 6
Sutil 6
Buemi 6
De La Rosa 6
Di Grassi 6
Alguersuari 5
Kobayashi 5

**perfect except for the mis-spelling of Nico's last name that is...

You have to take ratings like this with a pinch of salt.

Well, they are kinda ridiculous. Sure Chandhok did the best job he could in these difficult circumstances, but how could you ever rate his performance above that from drivers like Barrichello or Schumacher, who perhaps did not have the most perfect races themselves, but finished the race and scored points. Chandhok drove a few laps and crashed. Yes he was inexperienced, but how does that deserve a higher rating than drivers who scored points?

Seems like they split up the teams in a couple of tiers and give ratings within them, which can't work.

Sure, there are big differences between those tiers, but between the cars within them as well.

Vettel 10
Alonso 10
Massa 8
Hamilton 9
Liuzzi 9

The rest doesn't matter...

To this day I have yet to encounter 'ratings' of any sports event which weren't completely baffling in some way. The solution: ignore 'ratings' alltogether...

Alguersuari was as quick, if not quicker than Buemi until he made a mistake on his hot lap in qualy. Equally, Alguersuari was ahead of Buemi all race until he pitted for his first stop. Once Buemi pitted he was out in front again and Alguersuari even made up enough time to have a second pit stop without dropping behind him.

Alguersuari has always been ridiculously underrated in the driver ratings. Even in races where Buemi has crashed out early on, Buemi has been rated more highly. Baffling to say the least.

Ratings are overrated.

funny...really funny

can somebody explain to me why the driver who won, overtook his teammate, got fastest lap managed a flawless strategy has only been rated 9?

Next time Fred should try not being out-qualified if he wants a perfect 10.

For Alonso: he would get a 10 in my book if he had passed Vettel prior to Vettle's mechanical problems. Vettel gets the 10 for the actual perfect drive until problems occured and great defensive driving after that. Massa gets an 8, but even that is generous because he didn't once attempt to attack his team mate. Massa should have taken a leaf from Kimi's book - remember that team radio "don't talk to me when I'm cornering" lol - or when the radio broke altogether during spa - lol. Lots Massa can do to help himself and because he didn't, he gets the 8.

I don't think it is two tier. Schumi and Jensen were below par. Rosberg was stellar, Hamilton drove about as expected - so their numbers seemed cool too. Some of the higher numbers for the beginners is quite correct. Considering the circumstances for HRT, they were heroic.

It is not about winning or losing or how many points drivers got - it is about how drivers drove in the race based on their circs.

he never seems to get credit where its due, everyone just seems to see him as some incompetent yout. i thought he did a good job last season with no testing. he got on the pace quickly and sometimes was a match for Buemi, who i still dont believe in. im probably one of the few people who thinks Jaime has a good F1 career ahead of him

Well what do you give a driver that gets pole by a second, manages to toy with the field, helps his teammate with competitors, and still manages to lap the field twice with a fastest lap that will last 7 years? Oh yeah, a 10.

Alonso was a bit behind in qualifying, passed Massa who wasn't going to press his point at the start, and basically was shadowed by his teammate the entire race until Massa developed a few car problems and had to shut it down. Then he passed an ailing car for the win. Wow, sure that's a 10, but only if you are a blinkered Alonso fan.

Massa and Alonso should both be on a 9. (Ok 9 for Alonso, an 8.9 for Massa if you want to split hairs)

Rosberg should have an 8, he drove well, but he was just slightly ahead of Schumacher, nothing that constitutes a significant advantage, especially in the race. Only in the British Press can a driver who comes back after 3 years of not driving at 41 years old into a formula that has changed significantly (just remember how long it took drivers to figure out how to drive the 2009 cars) with very little testing and is just a few tenths off the times of a quick teammate, get a 7 out of 10 score (the guy hasn't even found a decent setup). That was a 9+ considering the circumstances. IDIOTS (but he is German, and used to thrash the Brits day in and day out for 15 years, so that may have something to do with it)


Despite my disgust, I am of the opinion that Britain has the most unbiased press corp I have seen, so this is not a general attack on some of the other great reporters out there. But the F1 reporting is poor and getting worse. It may have something to do with Hamilton and Button being Championship material, I don't know. Certainly for the sports at which Britain is poor, the reporting is EXCELLENT.


Cooper

It's not a bad list by any means, but it usually goes bad when you put these things to paper. Hamilton fought hard with Massa after the first corner and lost out because of that to Rosberg. Was that bad or good? If he got Massa would he have been a 10? if he and Massa touched wheels (they nearly did) and he spun out would he be a 5? You can nitpick these kind of moves until eternity.

And I don't see Alguersuari having a good career ahead of him, his name is simply not catchy enough Unlike people like you know, ROBERT KUBICA. Awesome name. Makes you spin out and still get an 8

Have you seen Chandok race at all??? In GP2 whenever he was at a good position he threw it off the track. Giving Chandok a 7 is ridiculous.

this is some joke.

I think it includes qualifying as well

first of all I didn't count qualifying.

second, we read the race quite differently in my opinion, alonso set the pace, kept the distance, refreshed his engine by straying from the redbulls tail, played with the distance, saved the tyres, checked vettel from time to time, did fastest lap and won...and by no means was shadowed by massa at any second as you hint...
on the other hand, vettel pushed too much on softs to try to open a gap and was forced to change his engine map to save fuel afterwards or would be unable to finish, wasn't on the pace at all on hards and lost the race...barely I would rate him 5, alonso 10 and massa 9 just because opened the door to fernando

Lets ignore that Vettel had an engine problem then

Kubica didn't cause the spin, a certain driver "who likes to end the race at the first lap" (Kubica's words) did. That other driver blames Mark Webber's engine fart. Anyway, Kubica dropped to the last place and finished on 11th. Did some nice passes in the process. He also outqualified his teammate. He clearly looked as a top driver this weekend. Well deserved 8. In my humble, biased opinion.

As for the other drivers I'd change some marks (Barichello up, Rosberg down) but ultimately I don't think there's any sense in putting to much attention into the ranking. All in all it's pretty much OK, had I had the magazine I'd took a glimpse to see how other people perceived the race. And if someone got one point less and someone else one point more... Really, what difference does it make?

I don't ignore it, of course not, but it wasn't as terrifying as red bull pretended to show I'm afraid, vettel was lapping in 2:00 at the end, and ran out of fuel as soon as he crossed the line...I don't really trust it, something is odd,
and I still think alonso would have passed him should the engine last intact, the spaniard claimed he was just saving tyres to attack in the final laps

Given that drivers with clearly faster cars than the driver in front of them couldn't manage to pass don't you think it's a little optomistic to assume that alonso could both catch and pass vettel?

I suppose he did 2:05s and 2:04s at the middle of the race just for fun.

How can Barrichello have 7 and Hulkenberg 6????

Ridicolous

Rubens trashed Nico in this first GP and did quite a good job considering his car, I would give him 8, while to Nico only 4.

LOL Chandhok better than Schumacher, I love this!!!!

well according to ron dennis, he might be just saving fuel to finish the race using a conservative engine map

Sure, Chandhok shouldn't even be in F1, but poor drivers have good weekends too. This isn't a rating of the driver's talent, it's a rating of the driver's race weekend.

I wouldn't give him a 8 btw, because he cocked it up on the second lap, but I'd still say it was a positive weekend. Top job in qualy given the circumstances.

First time I've heard of that, and apparently the Autosport journos haven't heard of it neither.

And I don't see how could that make sense - did he suddenly find out mid-race that he was lacking a ton of fuel? The sensors for fuel suddenly started working mid-race or what? The best engine on the grid for fuel consumption drank too much? And why the hell would Red Bull hide all that?

is this based on the car or the drivers performance.......

worst ratings ever

http://www.express.de/sport/motorsport/the...76/-/index.html

very simple, they realised they screwed up the race, pretending an engine failure all the media embarrasament is avoided, I simply don't see how an engine, or a exhaust or a spark plug or whatever was broken got fixed all of a sudden.

don't take this too seriously, it's just an example, but what I mean all around it is a bit hazy

I think the ratings are pretty fair to be honest, although some were strange, dont see what the fuss is about...

Vettel (10)- Great race overall, would of won if not for his problem, held Rosberg off for 4th despite broken exhaust.
Hamilton (9)- Good performance over his team mate, showed good speed in a car not suited to the track, could of had more if not for mistake.
Rosberg- Consistently much quicker than his 7 time world champion team mate, no matter how much time he's been out of the sport it takes a good performance.
Alonso- Won race.
Massa (8)- Good performance after being out for so long because of his head injury, potentially could of caught or challenged alonso if not for his car failing.
Kubica- Qualified 9th but relegated to back after spin caused by Mark's plume of smoke, worked his way back up to 11th.
Liuzzi- Solid race moving from 12th to 9th.
Trulli- Ran well with good pace in the car he was driving, fell to nearly last after gravel incident but worked his way through field, sadly retired due to hydraulics.
Chandhok- First experience of F1 in qualifying and was only 1.5 seconds off his team mate who had 3 practice sessions, retired.
Senna- Good first weekend in a car thats clearly slowest in the field, retired from over heating.
Glock- Retired from Gear box issue but was leading the B race.
Schumacher (7)- Well and truly beaten by his team mate over the weekend, couldn't catch hamilton whilst he was being held up by rosberg.
Barrichello- Decent performance and a point, could have been more though with his tyres.
Kovalainen- Only new team driver to finish the race, overall slower than trulli.
Button (6)- The world champion finished 22 seconds behind his team mate, lacked pace.
Webber- Dropped 2 places and poor performance considering Vettels position.
Hulkenberg- Lacked speed in race but lucky not to retire after accident.
Petrov- Im confused by this one because he was the highest placed rookie and retired from suspension failure which wasnt his fault, overally good performance and deserved higher rating.
Sutil- Good qualy but spun at the start of the race, finished 12th
Buemi- ?
De La Rosa- Outperformed his team mate and fairly good pace in not so good cars.
Di Grassi- Not much to say.
Alguersuari (5)- Should be higher rated than Buemi, finished higher but poor qualfying could be the reason why this rating was given.
Kobayashi- Slower than pedro, has had more recent race experience and looked much more promising in his 2009 races so this race was a let down.

Just some reasons why the scores may have been given, some were wrong in my opinion tho.

You dont really trust that Vettel had a problem so as to save face he dropped down to 4th place just to make it look more convincing?

Vettel had Alonso covered, if were going for conspiracy theories Alonso wouldnt have won if not for team orders telling Massa to slow down

Ok so they put more fuel into Webbers car? However he didn't have a problem. I'm taking it at face value that it was a sparkplug, it was initially intermitant and then he worked out how to control it.

He got the best place he could with the equipment he had. It was a damage limitation exercise. He was successful and still managed to finish in front of his teammate. As a Ferreari fan I hope that Alonso could have gotten passed him, however the incident cost the fans a proper duel.

and while doing so, he even saved the whales, feed the poor and brought freedom to the world.

And this bastards gave him only 9 points. This is an utter disgrace. Where is the online petition I could sign on ?

You still don´t get it:

Vettel 4
Hamilton 4
Rosberg 3
Alonso 4
Massa 3
Kubica 2
Liuzzi 1
Trulli 1
Chandhok 1
Senna 1
Glock 1
Schumacher 20
Fisichella 100
Barrichello 2
Kovalainen 1
Button 2
Webber 1
Hukenberg 1
Petrov 1
Sutil 1
Buemi 1
De La Rosa 1
Di Grassi 1
Alguersuari 1
Kobayashi 1

I believe what helped was running the engine richer which is quite a trick considering he'd been running out of fuel for so long


I think Autosport should be put to the sword and the publication shutdown, i mean how dare they?

erm. i did say "at most" and this isnt about his GP2 career

They din't put more fuel in Webber's car. He was just unable to push and show his true pace.

On the other hand, Hamilton's comments about Vettel's exhaust (when Lewis was following Seb) smeems to confirm RB's explanations.

"According to Ron Dennis, according to x, according to y"

Basically, according to selective interpretation and dodgy information from sources who may not have said anything, vettel threw away the race.

people that are baffled by chandhok over schumacher...

first off, this is a rating for personal performances given their own situations in the race.

Chandhok was in the worst car on the grid, did no practice, very very few qualfying laps and was only 1.5 seconds slower than his team mate that had 3 practice sessions. fair enough he crashed but still, thats a great performance given the situation he was in.

Schumacher on the other hand was in a good car and got consistently outperformed by his team mate, he's had plenty of testing and practice sessions so this cant be used as an excuse. He's a 7 time world champion and his personal performance didn't match Chandhok's.