How soon can Vettel win 2011 WDC?

[i70q7m7ghw]

He wont win ....

QUOTE IT NOW PEOPLE, he will have to eat it later this year.

[ell66]

slightly off topic, but iv been reading everywhere that vettels been the first person ever to be finish in the top 2 at the first 8 races of the year, but im pretty sure alonso did the same back in 2006?

[raymondu999]

Yep Alonso did it, though I can't remember if it was 2005/2006. It was because Martin Brundle forgot about Alonso in 05/06 and said during the broadcast that Vettel is the first, and so it began to be taken as fact. He's human too, he makes mistakes too. No biggie

[Richard]

He wont win ....

Vettel will not be WDC? That's some implosion you're predicting.

Or do you think the blown diffuser ruling will pull him back into the field? Even so, Button and the DDD showed that a good lead at this stage is enough for the WDC if the rest of the pack catch up.

[spacer]

slightly off topic, but iv been reading everywhere that vettels been the first person ever to be finish in the top 2 at the first 8 races of the year, but im pretty sure alonso did the same back in 2006?

You're right. Schumacher currently holds the record at 15 consequtive 1/2 finishes (2002), albeit that wasn't from the first race onward.

[Ciro Pabón]

Well, how soon. I took the results of the first races and extrapolated. Vettel will be unreachable in Japan, if statistical predictions are worth their salt.

The descending cyan line shows the max points you can earn plus the ones that the second placed driver has. When this line crosses the one of Vettel, everything is finished.

To make a better prediction we should use a Bayesian estimate, but I'm in my pool right now and apparently there is a contradiction between Bayesian estimates and pools that I have discovered right now. I guess Bayes did not have rum at hand and girls in bikini around.

Anyway, this is the chart.



Button edges Webber by three points at the end, don't ask me why.

Hamilton ends 200 points under Vettel. So, by using my awesome crystal ball I predict a bitter Christmas season around the forum.

Not everything is bad news for Ham Fans. By the end of the year Hamilton would have broke all DNF records in the history of F1, being the youngest driver to crash over 325 times in one season, earning the coveted European Car Insurance Companies Association prize and beating previous record holders (Kimi Räikkönen and Piquet Jr., I think).

This Metallica song is driving me nuts (One). See ya, I have to go into the house to turn it off.

[PlatinumZealot]

That models needs some more parameters. like relative qualifying pace.. number of hot race vs cold races.. slow speed turn tracks V high speed turn tracks.. probability of rain.. prob of DNF

I think you can just take averages of all those and you can plug into the points gained for each driver at each race and you will have a more accurate model.

[Ciro Pabón]

Well, no. At all.

If you assume that I'm based only on previous performance of athletes, you can find a lot of literature that proves that there is no way to improve the model with "external" inputs.

For what you ask to work you should develop a logical model, not a statistical one.

You cannot beat the average number as predictor if you assume normal distribution and that's a mathematical theorem, not a matter of discussion.

Now, there are things, like points per athlete, that can use better predictors, as I tried to insinuate.

You can read the (very interesting) conclusions about Bayesian predictors and Stein paradox here:

http://www-stat.stanford.edu/~ckirby/br ... le1977.pdf

Stein Paradox: a must reading for anyone interested in predicting who will win a season, when based on initial performance of athletes


Summing up, the only thing you can assume to better my prediction (using statistics) is that, in any season, the initial performances of outstanding athletes are out-of-the-ordinary events.

In English, Vettel is not as good as it seems in the beginning, nor Di Resta is as bad as it appears at the start of the season.

You can get better results if you extrapolate under the lines I drawn for the best drivers and a little over those lines for the worst ones.

This conclusion is solidly based on analysis of baseball statistics, that have, literally, centuries of data.

So, in case anyone is interested (which I doubt seriously), what Stein has shown is that you should "contract" a bit the predictors of high scoring and low scoring athletes at the start of a season. You contract them toward the average of all people. How much? Well, there the thing gets a tad complicated.

Anyway, be my guest, the procedure is in the paper and it's not that hard.

Taking a ballpark guess, I'd say that if Stein is right, Vettel should win a little later than what the straight extrapolation I made shows.

So, for the moment, I say that all chances will be gone by... let's say India.

If anyone has a better prediction, I would like to hear it.

[ringo]

So this chart should change after the next race, correct?


Looking on the situation...

01 Sebastian Vettel 186
02 Jenson Button 109
03 Mark Webber 109
04 Lewis Hamilton 97
05 Fernando Alonso 87



Vettel's gap is 77 points to button. Button needs to win 11 races exactly if Vettel finishes second every time.
Same for Webber.

Hamilton needs to win all 11 while Vetel comes fourth in 1 and second in the rest.

Alonso needs to win all while Vettel has a very poor race and finsihes right behind every other.

There are a million and one ways he can lose, all being near impossible, but if the rules change enough that 1 guy can barely beat him every race, then this is what we are up against.

I think if team orders are used in full effect, with the mp4 and the ferrari more competitive, Vettel can be pressured until he cracks.

We've had a rare glimpse of Vettel cracking in canada taking on his alter ego "tyrone biggums" and it aint pretty. I'd love to see it a couple more races.

It's a long shot, but looking on how close 2009 was, with even Barichello still having a tittle shot in Brazil, it can be done.

[Ciro Pabón]

The graph will not change much, given the clear tendency it shows, if you ask me.

However, if Stein is right, Vettel's advantage is smaller than what it seems initially.

I promess I'll do it again after next the race and let's learn a bit about averages, together, if you like.

Maybe, when I finish this work I'm doing, I could find the time to apply Stein's method and show what it predicts, to compare with the simpler chart I posted.

Actually we could do it for previous seasons, so we could get "immediate" results and perhaps you could see how the method works to get a "feeling" of why it works, which is the important thing I'm trying to transmit, I think.

Besides the occasional pun on Hamilton...

As for the "it can be done" part, I would dare to point out that engineering is all about distinguishing possibilities from probabilities.

Everything is possible but not everything is probable.

So I would say that the probabilities of what you mention, like Vettel coming in second place in all races, are exceedingly small, because they are part of many possible outcomes (as you yourself explain).

In English, fat chance, mate.

Finally, a specter is haunting this thread, the specter of "the guy in front has all the arrows pierced in his back".

"If the rules change enough...", "If team orders are used to full effect...". What happened to sportsmanship? It did not include changing the rules when they taught me about the Sporting Code.

[Caito]

Mucho long to ready in the mid of a lot of finals. Will try to read it when I finish cause I'm interested.

[Richard]

Summing up, the only thing you can assume to better my prediction (using statistics) is that, in any season, the initial performances of outstanding athletes are out-of-the-ordinary events.

I think statisticians call this degradation to the mean? (although that phrase isn't coming up on Google). In simple terms, exceptional performances are exceptions.

Hence this diagram. Poor children who have exceptional scores eventually end up at the average for this income group. Rich children who do badly often end up with the average for their income group.



Certain politicians claim this shows that the initial exceptional scores are the true indicator of the child's potential, and inequalities in society drags down the poor bright kids, and boosts the rich thick kids. Of course the other view is that if you take a cohort of the top 10% at any one time, some them will be exceptions and bound to revert to the mean.

We all see that every season in football (the sport where you use your feet as opposed the US version that uses hands and where a touch down isn't touched down). There is always a poor untalented team near the top of the league after a couple of games. Come the end of the season they are relegation candidates.

[nipo]

I don't think it is possible for Vettel to lose this year's championship, not because he has a large enough gap, but because there is no clear 2nd in the standings. Alonso is in form and is back to the fighter that he is, but Ferrari continues to be plagued by underperformance and mistakes. McLaren has been brilliant in some races, and just dull in others. Mark Webber is of course a formidable force given he is in the same car as Vettel (theoretically), but somehow he failed to match his teammate this season.

Now between them are less then one win's worth of points, while Vettel is more than 3 wins ahead. Rough math says that for one of these drivers to catch Vettel he must score an average of about 8 points per race more than Vettel. If you consistently win that's perfect, but you've got the other guys besides Vettel also fighting for podium places, so it's very tricky. The other way is to have Vettel suffer a few retirements. Honestly I can't see any of these things happening... Just remember how Button kept his lead with his wins early in 2009 - and that was when a win was worth less relative to others.

Maybe Alonso should try to ask Massa to crash Vettel out at a few races - definitely something the Spaniard is capable of

[andartop]

As for the "it can be done" part, I would dare to point out that engineering is all about distinguishing possibilities from probabilities.

Everything is possible but not everything is probable.

So I would say that the probabilities of what you mention, like Vettel coming in second place in all races, are exceedingly small, because they are part of many possible outcomes (as you yourself explain).

In English, fat chance, mate.

Couldn't agree more.

Newey knows that. Even Horner knows that.

Truth is, the Red Bull is so good this year because they use Infinite Improbability Drive, hence the change from Renault to Infinity.

[Caito]

Vettel is opposite to what happens to me, out of 50% situations, he wins 90% of them.