Given how unreliable testing is to predict who will be world champion, you would expect that the first race isn’t much of a better guide to who will be on top come the end of the season. After all, teams spend huge amounts of time and money developing their car throughout the year (well, most do anyway!). That’s why it’s so surprising that 67% of the winners of the season-opener in the last 15 years have gone on to be F1 champion that year. Yes, that means two in every three years since 1997, the winning driver of round one has also been the winner of the title. Hakkinen in 1998, Schumacher in 2000-2 and 2004, Alonso in 2006, Raikkonen in 2007, Hamilton in 2008, Button in 2009 and Vettel in 2011. Ten opening race winners, ten drivers that went on to be champion. And what of the other years? Well, in 1999 Eddie Irvine won in Australia and pushed Hakkinen hard right until the end of the season. In 2005 Giancarlo Fisichella claimed victory in round one, with him being the teammate of eventual champ Alonso. And in 2010 that man Alonso won in Bahrain, but only after a gearbox problem led to champ Vettel surrendering the lead. David Coulthard has the somewhat dubious honour of being the driver (in the last 15 seasons) who won the first race but went on to finish the lowest in the final standings: 7th, in 2003. DC also won in Australia in 1997, but on that occasion he finished third in the championship. So if any of your mates asks you in the days running up to the first race, who do you think will be champion in 2012, say “the winner of the first race, of course”. Although, having written this, it’s probably not going to be the case again for the next ten years! For more analysis of the season opener see: http://allsortsofmotorsports.wordpress.com/2012/03/13/the-importance-of-the-first-race/
if the first race is close then usually the whole season is close but if its a run away it takes a while for the others to catch up through the season and you could safely say they will be champion. Lets see...
I think 67% is too low to be convincing. It's an interesting observation but I shan't be telling my friends that the WDC's done after Sunday. The first race is no more special than the first European race or (this year) the first race after May testing. Melbourne's no more special than Monza or Monaco. I wonder what the stats are for the last fifteen years for those races? Nice contribution to pre-season build-up, though, Stephen.
Depends on the manner of the win tbh, I wouldn't mind SV winning again if he battled for it in a car that obviously wasn't the best. What's really needed is a decent team mate for him so he actually has a challenge if the car is decent.
I agree with genji, that stat does favour one side but it's not a major thing to think about. In psychology that kind of result would get a lot of critics if it was deemed valid by the official majority. They said the same about Monaco being a factor and that went out of the window in 2010. A mind game advantage maybe but nothing else.
It's a bit more convincing if I expand the 15 years to make it over the last 20 years. Then it is 15 opening race winners that have gone on to be champion, out of 20, giving a figure of 75%. But I agree, there is no way the WDC is over after Sunday, especially as a few surprises are expected in Melbourne.
So if my theory is correct then Button has a pretty good chance of being champion. If not him, then Hamilton as there are very similar statistics for the first poleman going on to win the title as well.
It would be interesting to get a comparison with the other races. Second/Third/Tenth/Last. I have a sneaking suspicion the stats will be pretty high for all of them.
