The Economics of Sport
  • Sports Economics
  • About
  • Workshop
  • Selected Publications
  • Book Reviews
  • A Primer on Gaelic Games
  • Upcoming Events
  • Media
  • Education
  • Resources & Links
  • Data

Competition In Formula 1

2/12/2020

 
By Ronan Fahy

The author is a currently registered on the MSc in Research (Sports Economics) at University College Cork.
​
In a flourishing sports economics literature it is fair to say that relatively little attention has been paid to Formula One. With just two races to go in the 2020 season many questions of interest to sports economists exist. Central to these is that of competitive balance.
 
The story of the season however is the inability of the likes of McLaren, Racing Point and Renault to get past the Mercedes and Red Bull. So far just four drivers secure a race win, which is reflected in race odds. The Haas, Alfa Romeo, and Williams drivers are consistently priced at 500/1, given no chance by the bookies of grabbing a race win.
 
This is well explained by the odds from the Spanish Grand Prix. Sergio Perez of Racing Point was priced at a very high 40/1 given his fourth place qualification. This was of course as he was starting right behind both Mercedes and a Red Bull of Max Verstappen. In comparison, for the 70th Anniversary Grand Prix in Silverstone, when Max Verstappen had qualified behind Nico Hulkenberg in the Racing Point as well as both Mercedes, he was priced at a much lower 12/1. Which the bookies will have wished was less, as he went on to win the race.
 
7 time world champion Lewis Hamilton has been consistently priced as favourite for every race this year, with very few fluctuations in this even after some poor qualifying performances. Relating back to outcome uncertainty, with his most recent win in Bahrain, Hamilton has had a win percentage this season of 73%. The highest ever win rate percentage was recorded by Alberto Ascari in 1952 with a 75% win rate. If Hamilton had won the final two races in Bahrain and Abu Dhabi he would have surpassed this and set a new record of 76.4%. However, Hamilton has been forced to withdraw from the race in Bahrain after testing positive for Covid-19.

Previous research has examined the sport. Below are some of the papers that have been published researching both competitive balance and demand in the world of Formula One.
  1. Mastromarco and Runkel (2008) “Rule changes and competitive balance in Formula One motor racing”.
  2. Budzinski and. Feddersen (2011) “Measuring competitive balance in Formula One racing”.
  3. Judde, Booth and Brooks (2013) “Second place is the first of the losers: An analysis of Competitive Balance in Formula One”.
  4. Schreyer and Torgler (2018) “On the Role of outcome uncertainty of demand in F1”.
 
Since the publication of these papers, which all have a common focus of competitive balance and outcome uncertainty  we have seen an unprecedented lack of outcome uncertainty in Formula One since 2010. From 2010 to 2020 only three men have managed to lift the World Drivers Championship (WDC) title. Sebastian Vettel (2010,2011,2012,2013), Nico Rosberg (2016), and Lewis Hamilton (2014,2015,2017,2018,2019,2020). As well as that, the World Constructors Championship (WCC) has only been won by two teams, Red Bull Racing (2010,2011,2012,2013) with Mercedes AMG Petronas F1 Team winning it every other year. As a result of this, outcome uncertainty in F1 has never been so low. This lack of outcome uncertainty is reinforced by the fact that Mercedes could have won the WCC this year by only counting Lewis Hamilton’s  points and not their second driver Valterri Bottas.
 
Mastromaro and Runkel (2008) give insight into the effect that rule changes in Formula One have, hypothesising that rule changes reduce the performance of teams and but in turn improve competitive balance between teams. The authors add to this by suggesting that rule changes are only implemented if the FIA’s revenue gain from the introduction of the new rule exceeds that of the existing rule.
 
Budzinski and Feddersen (2011) note that there are three dimensions to be analysed when looking at competitive balance. These being: race-specific competitive balance, within-season competitive balance and between-season competitive balance. As a result of this research it must be said that although the 2020 season has seen extremely low outcome uncertainty in terms of the WDC and WCC, it has seen one of the highest ever race-outcome uncertainty levels with close to the highest ever number of different drivers seen on the podium in one season.
 
Schreyer and Torgler (2018) use an interesting revised version of the model used by Budzinski and Feddersen (2011) to proxy outcome uncertainty. The authors describe that although the existing papers method of calculating gini coefficients based on qualifying times to gain a measure of competitive balance is useful, it gives too much weight to the effect that drivers at the back of the grid have on race outcome. For this reason, the authors hypothesize that race outcome uncertainty can be sufficiently estimated using the summed differences between the top three qualifiers. 

Comments are closed.

    Archives

    February 2023
    January 2023
    December 2022
    November 2022
    October 2022
    September 2022
    August 2022
    July 2022
    June 2022
    May 2022
    April 2022
    March 2022
    February 2022
    January 2022
    December 2021
    November 2021
    October 2021
    September 2021
    August 2021
    July 2021
    June 2021
    May 2021
    April 2021
    March 2021
    February 2021
    January 2021
    December 2020
    November 2020
    October 2020
    September 2020
    August 2020
    July 2020
    June 2020
    May 2020
    April 2020
    March 2020
    February 2020
    January 2020
    December 2019
    November 2019
    October 2019
    September 2019
    August 2019
    June 2019
    May 2019
    April 2019
    March 2019
    February 2019
    January 2019
    December 2018
    November 2018
    October 2018
    September 2018
    August 2018
    July 2018
    June 2018
    May 2018
    April 2018
    March 2018
    February 2018
    January 2018
    December 2017
    November 2017
    October 2017
    September 2017
    August 2017
    July 2017
    June 2017
    May 2017
    April 2017
    March 2017
    February 2017
    January 2017
    December 2016
    November 2016
    October 2016
    September 2016
    August 2016
    July 2016
    June 2016
    May 2016
    April 2016
    March 2016
    February 2016
    January 2016
    December 2015
    November 2015
    October 2015
    September 2015
    August 2015
    July 2015
    June 2015
    May 2015
    April 2015
    March 2015
    February 2015
    January 2015
    December 2014
    November 2014
    October 2014
    September 2014
    August 2014
    July 2014
    June 2014
    May 2014
    April 2014
    March 2014
    February 2014
    January 2014
    December 2013
    November 2013
    October 2013
    September 2013
    August 2013
    July 2013

    About

    This website was founded in July 2013.

    RSS Feed

    Categories

    All
    American Football
    Athletics
    Baseball
    Basketball
    Behavioural Economics
    Boxing
    Broadcasting
    Competitive Balance
    Cricket
    Cycling
    Darts
    David Butler
    Declan Jordan
    Drugs
    Ed Valentine
    Epl
    Esports
    Expenditure
    F1
    Fifa World Cup
    Finances
    Funding
    Gaa
    Gaelic Games
    Gambling
    Game Theory
    Gary Burns
    Geography
    Golf
    Greyhound Racing
    Guest Posts
    Horse Racing
    Impact Studies
    John Considine
    John Eakins
    League Of Ireland
    Location
    Media
    Mls
    Mma
    Olympics
    Participation
    Paul O'Sullivan
    Premier League
    Regulation
    Research
    Robbie Butler
    Rugby
    Simpsonomics
    Snooker
    Soccer
    Spatial Analysis
    Sporting Bodies
    Stephen Brosnan
    Swimming
    Taxation
    Teaching
    Technology
    Tennis
    Transfers
    Uefa
    Ufc
    World Cup
    Wwe

Related

The website is not formally affiliated to any institution and all of the entries represent the personal views and opinions of an individual contributor. The website operates on a not-for-profit basis. For this reason we decline all advertisement opportunities. 

Contact

To contact us email sportseconomics2013@gmail.com or find us on Twitter @SportEcon.