The next race of the ILMC (Intercontinental Le Mans Cup) and LMS (Le Mans Series) championships is in Silverstone. The ILMC championship has three rounds to go and there's everything to play for, but in the LMS there are only two races left. As a result, some of the class championships in LMS are close to a resolution.

In this blog entry, I will attempt to summarise the championship situation in each class. This will serve the dual purposes of explaining what is needed for given competitors to win their class championships and giving a summary that will enable a newcomer to pick up what's where. 

LMP1

It's a tight championship at the moment:

Tinseau/Collard/Jousse (#16 Pescarolo) lead on 28 points (other points in this list relative)

Belicchi/Boullion (13 Rebellion) -3 points

Jani/Prost (#12 Rebellion) -3 points

Piccini/Cortes (#23 MIK Corse) -26 points 

In theory, everyone entered for the LMS can still win because there are more points on the table (30) than the leading drivers possess (28). However, some teams have withdrawn from Silverstone. These teams' drivers (Hope's and Quifel's Pla/Amarel) are too far away to catch up the gap in a single race and therefore are not included in the above list.

Incidentally, all of these cars are petrol entries - Hope was the sole hybrid entry and all the diesel entries are ILMC-only (they'll be in the race for ILMC things and can deny points to LMS entries by finishing ahead of them, but they don't compete for the LMS themselves). 

It is theoretically possible for Tinseau, Collard and Jousse (the Pescarolo trio) to take the title at Silverstone. However, if they win and get pole, they still need both Rebellions to finish in 9th place or below for that to happen. This is in a class with only 10 cars total, so really that's saying the Rebellion drivers need to retire or have a total disaster of a race if the title is to be settled in Silverstone. Tinseau, Collard and Jousse look good to get the title because they've been consistently slightly better than the Rebellions, but in Imola the tables were turned, so it would be foolish to bet on any of the three driver combinations taking the trophy. Better to enjoy the fight unfold and, most likely, continue into Portugal.

Silverstone is likely to be a low-scoring round for all 4 because the big points are likely to be taken by the diesel cars. This is bad news for Piccini and Cortes, who need to win in order to stay in the title hunt. It would take a bizarre set of circumstances for that to happen.   

Teams 

Rebellion has two cars in their team while the other contenders have only one. This puts Rebellion in a strong position for the team title because it is matching Pescarolo for points. All they need is to have one of their cars ahead of Pescarolo in both races. If it's #12 in one race and #13 in the other, the Rebellion will take the team title but Tinseau, Collard and Jousse will have the driver title. 

LMP2 

Drivers

The LMP2 class has been riven with conflict all year due to a cost-cutting formula running alongside the previous unrestricted spending regime. Hopefully the fact that 2012 will make the cost-cut method mandatory will reduce the arguing that has overshadowed a tightly-fought season.

Ojjeh/Kimber-Smith (#41 Greaves Motorsport) 35 points (other points relative)

Watts/Kane/Leventis (#42 Strakka Racing) -5

Kraihamer/Crem (#45 Boutsen Energy Racing) -10

Firth/Beche/Thriet (#46 TDS Racing) -12

Companc/Russo/Kaffer (#39 Pecom Racing) -13

Gates/Garoffel/Phillips (#43 RLR Motorsport) -18

Lombard (#41 Greaves Motorsport) -20 

Rosier/Basso (#44 Extreme Limite) -21

Frey/Meichtry (#40 Race Performance) -22 

Collins/Newton/Erdos (#36 RML) -27 

Half of the LMP2 field is likely to be out of the running for the title at the end of Silverstone. Collins, Newton and Erdos require 3rd to keep their chances going, while Frey and Meichtry "merely" need 7th and pole or 6th without pole to stay in. Silverstone is likely to be a low-scoring round due to the presence of the ILMC LMP2 entrants Signatech and OAK, even if the problem is not as pronounced for the LMP1s.

Rosier and Lombard need  8th place (or 7th and pole) to stay in. Gates, Garoffel and Phillips merely need to finish because there are only 11 cars and 11th yields 2 points.

It would take a pretty remarkable set of circumstances for Ojjeh and Kimber-Smith to win the title here. Even if they won and got pole, they'd need OAK and Signatech to share the podium with them and for Watts, Leventis and Kane to finish 8th or worse in class.

Lombard is a special case. He joined the #41 Greaves car in Imola, so short of his longer-standing team-mates getting injured before the race without making the car unraceable (which is virtually impossible), he cannot gain the title due to Ojjeh and Kimber-Smith scoring many points before his arrival. He'll definitely be able to contribute to the team title though.

Teams 

All the teams have only one car in LMP2, so the team fight is as above.

GTE-Pro 

Drivers

This is arguably the most complicated of the five championships to explain. There are two reasons for this.

Firstly, this is one of the series for which there are bonus points for making an engine last 15 or more hours. The 15 hours do not all need to be in a race but they do need to be in ACO-sanctioned events (which in practise means Sebring and Le Mans count towards engine timings). The other classes have them, but in LMP1 hardly anyone runs an engine long enough to get the bonus point, LMP2 has only had 2 cars get the bonus points so far and in GTE-Am, virtually everyone is going to get the same points at the same race because the cars are nearly all synchronised in terms of engine hours. The GTE-Pro drivers will all get an engine point barring mechanical failures, but some are due to get it in Silverstone and others in Portugal. The effect on the title fight is subtle. 

Secondly, GTE-Pro, and only GTE-Pro, has a "dropped score" system for this year. Originally, all scores were meant to count, but at the start of the first race at Paul Ricard, a "Safety" Car caused a crash that took out nearly all the Porsches... and affected hardly anyone else. In an attempt to make up for this huge mistake, the "dropped-score" rule was put in. For championship purposes, the Porsches could pretend Paul Ricard was just a bad dream. 

Currently, the GTE-Pro title chase stands thus:

Fisichella/Bruni (AF Corse #51) have 44 points (other points given are relative to this)
Melo/Vilander (AF Corse #71) -16 points
Simonsen/Farnbacher (Hankook #89) -17 points
Walker/Bell (JMW #66) -22 points
Lieb/Lietz (Farnbacher #77) -26 points
Goosens/Holzer (Prospeed #75) -27 points
Hancock/Dolan (JOTA #79) -30 points 

Granted, some of the gaps are larger than in either prototype class. However, the "dropped score" system means that there is still plenty of opportunity for a fightback, even without relying on retirements.

Fisichella and Bruni are due to get an engine point in Portugal and currently would drop their second-place-with-pole at Le Castellet - a rather hefty 14 points. The latter is why the championship is nowhere near a done deal. Had all scores counted, scoring more points than Melo and Vilander would have almost been sufficient to take the title (other people would also have needed to be not too far ahead) - and only once so far this season has that happened. For Silverstone to be guaranteed to count towards their score it would be necessary for Fisichella and Bruni to win. Sealing the title in Silverstone would take some major misfortune for their competitors.

Vilander, Melo, Simonsen and Farnbacher are their closest rivals. They are due to get their engine point in Portugal. Vilander and Melo would currently drop 1 point from Spa and Simonsen and Farnbacher would drop a non-score. To guarantee staying in the title chase, they all need seventh with pole or sixth without. For each race which any of the four has finished, they have been at least fourth.

Walker and Bell are due to get their engine point in Portugal and would drop a non-finish at Imola. They need third place to guarantee staying in the title chase.  They've been quite unlucky this year but also fast, so it is possible for this to happen.

Lieb and Lietz, the defending champions, are due to get their engine point in Portugal and would drop the non-finish in Le Castellet.  To guarantee staying in the title fight, they need to score second with pole and not need an engine change, which is a pretty tall order.

Goosens and Holzer are due to get their engine point in Portugal and would drop the non-score at Le Castellet. To guarantee remaining in the title chase, they need to come second, get pole and hope Fisichella and Bruni don't win.

Hancock and Dolan cling to the title chase by the skins of their teeth on account of getting their engine point at Silverstone. They also drop a non-finish at Le Castellet. They need to either get second and pole, or win and hope Fisichella and Bruni do not get pole, in order to stay in the title fight. 

Teams   

AF Corse 46 points - to drop 14 points at Le Castellet (other teams' points relative)

Hankook -21 points - to drop 0 points at Imola

JMW -24 points - to drop 0 points at Imola

Felbermayr -30 points -  to drop 0 points at Le Castellet

AF Corse are likely to win this one, simply because they have two cars in the LMS (compared to everyone else's one) as well as a points lead of which Red Bull in F1 would be jealous, proportionally speaking. Given that an AF Corse car has only retired once out of 6 LMS entries, it would be asking a lot for anyone to take the team title off them at this point.

GTE-Am

Drivers

Armindo/Narac (#67 IMSA) 41 points (other points relative) 

Cioci/Perrazini/Lemeret (#61 AF Corse) -2 points

Felbermayr Jr (#88 Felbermayr) -17 points

Christodolou/Quaife (#82 CRS) -23 points

This is the tightest class battle in the series. Unless Armindo and Narac win their class and get very lucky with opponents' results, the battle will go to Portugal. Felbermayr Jr needs to finish the race or get class pole to stay in the title fight in Portugal, while Christodolou and Quaife must get seventh with pole or sixth stay in the title fight.

Teams

All four teams have one car apiece, so the team battle is in the same state as the driver one.

I am trying to get back into  rhythm of blog posting in preparation for the upcoming motorsport season (which for me starts next weekend due to the Le Mans Series testing at Paul Ricard). To celebrate, here is a little competition.

The prize is the Official Formula 1 Season Review 2006, a good analysis of Fernando Alonso's second championship-winning year, the final year of Michael Schumacher's first era and the debut of Super Aguri. A handwritten signed note will also be included. It is a worthy addition to any F1 fan's bookshelf. The prize will include delivery to the winner's address anywhere on Earth.

To win this substantial prize, simply post a comment with the funniest possible ending to this sentence:

"Super Aguri should have won the championship because..."

The winner will be whoever writes the comment that makes me laugh the most. And remember - if you don't enter, you can't win. Just ask Pat W ;)

Terms and Conditions

1) All entrants must be resident in or have access to a delivery address somewhere on planet Earth, 3 Solar System, Milky Way, and be prepared to tell me that address - correctly - via email on request. This address will only be used to enable delivery of the prize and will not be revealed to any third parties for any reason. If you wish to enter and do not have access to such a delivery address, please contact me.

2) All entrants to this competition must be 0 years old or over.

3) Employees and affiliates of La Canta Magnifico Blog are not eligible to enter (that would just be me, then)

4) No purchase necessary to enter (though some sort of internet connection and method of inputting alphanumeric characters is sort of implied)

5) All entries must be received by the start of 3rd practise of the 2011 Australian Grand Prix, or 3 am GMT on March 26 2011, whichever is the earlier. Note that these events are currently scheduled to occur at the same time.

6) The winner will be whichever entry I find funniest. No independent adjudicator will be involved, though everyone is free to share their own opinions as they wish :)

7) The winner will be notified by an entry at this blog and by other means as appropriate. The blog entry will include a request to email me with a delivery address.

8) Alianora La Canta's decision on the winner is final.

9) The prize is currently in my briefcase so it had better be available!

10) The prize winner will not be entitled to a cash alternative.

11) This competition is designed to spread knowledge about F1 and give people a laugh.

This entry leads on from the first part and you may wish to have it open while you read this.

Had luck not been a factor, the first half of the season up to and including Britain would have had a table like this:

- Vettel, instead of only taking the title lead as he took the championship in Abu Dhabi, would have started by winning Bahrain and therefore leading the championship from the off. The eventual championship contenders (ignoring interlopers) would have been:

1) Vettel

2) Alonso

3) Hamilton

4) Button

5) Webber

-  In Australia, Hamilton would have gone from 3rd to 2nd, leapfrogging Alonso. In fact, Button and Alonso would have been tied on 24 points, with Webber far behind holding only 10.

1) Vettel

2) Hamilton

3) Alonso and Button

5) Webber

- Vettel would have had 3 wins from 3 starts by the end of Australia. Webber and Hamilton would be tied for 2nd due to Mark's much improved home race. Due to dropping out of the race, Alonso would be behind even Button.

1) Vettel

2) Webber and Hamilton

4) Button

5) Alonso

- Hamilton would have emerged as Vettel's biggest threat by the end of China. Now Webber and Alonso would be tied and Button starts a drop-back from which he never really recovers.

1) Vettel

2) Hamilton

3) Webber and Alonso

5) Button

- Webber finally managed to get clear of Alonso in Spain by winning. The positions stayed the same for Monaco, but Webber has the momentum...

1) Vettel

2) Hamilton

3) Webber

4) Alonso

5) Button

-  ...and with Turkey he passes Vettel for the lead. In fact, since Vettel caused his own crash, Hamilton gains enough points to pass him too. The top 3 are finely poised by this stage, with 5 points between them. Button and Alonso are cast ever further adrift. At Canada, the new, precarious balance is maintained, though Button edges closer to Alonso and Hamilton closes in on Webber...

1) Webber

2) Hamilton

3) Vettel

4) Alonso

5) Button

-  Valencia may have been one of the least luck-influenced races of the season, but Hamilton ends up taking the lead from Webber. Vettel closes to within 2 points of Hamilton, thus re-taking a position from Webber. The same pattern applies to Britain.

1) Hamilton

2) Vettel

3) Webber

4) Button

5) Alonso

What you will see from this is that the gut feeling in the paddock that the Red Bulls were the fastest things out there had merit. For much of the early season, Vettel and Webber led, and they were always occupying two of the top three positions.

It is also difficult to see how the title could involve five protagonists in the end, with Button and Alonso slowly being left behind. One wonders if McLaren would have had its momentum subtly shifted towards Hamilton in this situation (Ferrari is unlikely to have been affected the same way as Alonso would probably still have had more points than Massa, subject to Felipe's own luck being analysed in the same fashion as Fernando's has been).

Races with net good and bad luck:

Vettel: 2 good, 3 bad, 5 neutral

Webber: 1  good, 2 bad, 7 neutral

Alonso: 3 good, 1  bad, 6 neutral

Hamilton: 1 good, 4 bad, 5 neutral

Button: 7 good, 2 bad, 1 neutral

Everyone's campaign was somewhat dependent on both good and bad luck in the first half of the year. Vettel and Webber were slightly unlucky, though both had some good luck as well. However, the bad luck tended to cost more points than they gained when they were lucky.

Alonso had quite a few more lucky races than unlucky ones, but that was a drop in the water compared to Button, whose early campaign practically relied on being lucky...

Warning! Very long entry alert!

I recently cross-posted Re-Analysing the Championship Duel from the old wiki to here, which attempted to calculate what would have happened to the 2008 championship if the drivers had been unaffected by such vagaries as mechanical failures, pit-stop mess-ups and stewarding silliness.

2009 didn't really invite that sort of analysis because Jenson Button looked like the deserving champion for most of the year, only getting seriously challenged in a mid-season wobble that temporarily brought Rubens Barrichello and both Red Bull drivers into the championship fight.

However, 2010 was a very complicated season. It would be interesting to see how, with luck somewhat more equal, it would have panned out. How much of an effect did Red Bull's reliability had? Would Alonso have been as much of a contender if the FIA hadn't acted as it did? Did luck make any difference at all to the McLaren duo?

Firstly, a definition of “luck” for the purposes of this entry:

• mechanical failures are considered unlucky unless they were demonstrably caused by bad driving. Any crash resulting from mechanical failure is also luck. This is meant to be a driver's title we're analysing today...

• crashes obviously caused by another driver(s). Nobody can legislate for those.

• slow pit stops. The driver is not in a position to do anything about these.

• pit stops which go wrong in other ways, provided the reason is not the driver making a mistake. This highly intricate area of racing involves some driver skill, but is largely team-dependent.

• stewarding decisions which are inconsistent with precedent and/or evidence presented. What can a driver do about poor judicial decisions?

• Penalty-worthy behaviour by other drivers affecting the driver being analysed's performance. Luck isn't always targeted at the championship contender directly...

• obvious penalty-worthy driving which garners no interest from the stewards is considered lucky if brought to the attention of the viewing public. (Penalty-worthy driving missed by everyone is the sort of fortune that cannot be analysed in this manner).

Things which are not considered “luck” for the purposes of this entry:

• mechanical failures caused by contact with any element of trackside furniture. If you treat the car badly, it will break down on you...

• crashes obviously caused by the driver being analysed, or only involved that driver because an obvious mistake was made by him. In F1, a certain standard of driving is expected.

• crashes which are racing incidents. It's difficult to tell who is to blame and its exclusion from “luck” is marginal, but one of the skills of being a F1 driver is avoiding this sort of incident, or at least making sure such involvement doesn't end their race.

• Pit stops which go wrong because the driver made an error (to name the three to come to mind first, missing the pit box, outbraked/stopped seriously short of the pit box or leaves the pits without being given the signal to do so). Yes, pit stops are difficult, but mastering the driving part of them is one of the key skills of a driver.

• Penalties which are earned and handed out in the correct manner.

• Incidents where ambiguity over whether a type of incident merits a penalty exists in precedent; the stewards are given the benefit of the doubt (whether that was for or against a penalty) unless it is clear a penalty was merited but not given or vice versa.

• Being stuck behind another driver (unless that driver breached the blue flag rule). Overtaking is a driver skill usually necessary to take titles.

• Poor strategy. Not because a driver is necessarily responsible for these but because the consequences tend to be too large to analyse properly.

• Differences in driving “if only” some piece of luck had/had not happened. It's tough, but it's beyond pure analytical tools to suggest precisely how being treated properly by fate would have affected a driver's performance. The fans of a given driver are better placed to answer that sort of question.

I will go through this analysis race-by-race. The analysis is formatted with the cumulative points after each race title. It will be in the format (VET: x WEB: y ALO: z HAM: a BUT: b), with three-letter abbreviations of each driver's surname used to avoid confusion. At Germany and subsequent races, there is an oblique sign between two figures for each driver, depending on which route the FIA had taken in removing the "luck" of blatant team orders which, despite a guilty verdict, received no sporting penalty and should.

The first number by each driver underneath the race titles is the number of points actually scored in that race. After that, there is a modifier to take into account the effects of mechanical failures, pit-stop gremlins, bad stewarding and the effects of all these on drivers who would otherwise have finished in a position affecting their points scores. An explanation of all modifiers is given in brackets.

Reminder (primarily to self because even now I'm apt to forget what positions are worth in new money): the current points-scoring system goes 25-18-15-12-10-8-6-4-2-1 for 1^st through to 10^th.

I calculate the following fortune-correction for Vettel, Webber, Alonso, Hamilton and Button:

Bahrain (VET: 25 WEB: 4 ALO: 18 HAM: 12 BUT: 6)

Vettel: 12 + 13 = 25 (spark plug problem slowed him down a lot)

Webber: 4 + 0 = 4 (uneventful race)

Alonso: 25 – 7 = 18 (Vettel slowed due to car trouble)

Hamilton:  15 – 3 = 12 (Vettel slowed due to car trouble)

Button: 6 + 0 = 6 (uneventful race)

Australia (VET: 50 WEB: 10 ALO: 24 HAM: 27 BUT: 24)

Vettel: DNF + 25 = 25 (brake failure while leading)

Webber: 2 + 6 = 8 (hit by Hamilton twice, Vettel's brakes denied win)

Alonso: 12 - 6 = 6 (clouted by Button, Vettel's brakes denied win, Webber and Hamilton would have been ahead had they been more fortunate concerning crashes)

Hamilton: 8 + 7 = 15 (hit Webber through mechanical failure, hit Webber second time through own fault, Vettel's brakes denied win)

Button: 25 - 7 = 18 (clouted Alonso and Schumacher, surprised pits, Vettel's brakes denied win)

Malaysia (VET: 75 WEB: 35 ALO: 24 HAM: 35 BUT: 26)

Vettel: 25 + 0 = 25 (uneventful victory)

Webber: 18 + 0 = 25 (uneventful victory)

Alonso: 13/DNF + 0 = 0 (bad quali down to poor strategy, engine failed passing Button)

Hamilton: 8 + 0 = 8 (bad quali down to poor strategy)

Button: 4 - 2 = 2 (bad quali down to poor strategy, Alonso would have beaten him had engine held)

China (VET: 81 WEB: 39 ALO: 39 HAM: 70 BUT: 36)

Vettel: 6 + 0 = 6 (racing incident with Hamilton, helped force Hamilton wide but possibly caused by Button)

Webber: 4 + 0 = 4 (forced off-track by Hamilton was a third party (Button's fault); ultimately only Button gained)

Alonso: 12 + 3 = 15 (jump-start own fault, but had Button been penalised correctly for Safety Car, a place would have been gained)

Hamilton: 18 + 7 = 25 (racing accident with Vettel, took to grass to avoid hitting Button and Vettel; would have won if Button penalised correctly)

Button: 25 - 15 = 10 (Safety Car bunching-up done erratically and should have been penalised)

Spain (VET: 91 WEB: 64 ALO: 57 HAM: 85 BUT: 44)

Vettel: 12 – 2 = 10 (Hamilton would have finished ahead without puncture)

Webber: 25 + 0 = 25 (straightforward victory)

Alonso: 18 + 0 = 18 (smooth second)

Hamilton: 14/DNF + 15 = 15 (crash due to puncture while 3rd)

Button: 10 - 2 = 8 (Hamilton would have finished ahead without puncture)

Monaco (VET: 109 WEB: 89 ALO: 65 HAM: 95 BUT: 50)

Vettel: 18 + 0 = 18 (straighforward second)

Webber: 25 + 0 = 25 (straighforward victory)

Alonso: 8 + 0 = 8 (poor quali own fault)

Hamilton: 10 + 0 = 10 (uneventful fifth)

Button: DNF + 6 = 6 (blocked cooling denies a finish; was behind Schumacher at the time)

Turkey (VET: 109 WEB: 114 ALO: 69 HAM: 113 BUT: 65)

Vettel: DNF + 0 = 0 (crash own fault)

Webber: 15 + 10 = 25 (hit by Vettel, losing victory)

Alonso: 4 + 0 = 4 (nothing done in the race fits the definition of “luck” given)

Hamilton: 25 – 7 = 18 (Webber would have won if Vettel hadn't hit him)

Button: 18 – 3 = 15 (Webber would have won if Vettel hadn't hit him)

Canada (VET: 119 WEB: 132 ALO: 81 HAM: 128 BUT: 80)

Vettel: 12 – 2 = 10 (Webber would have finished ahead without the gearbox change)

Webber: 10 + 8 = 18 (5-place gearbox penalty; originally qualified behind Hamilton)

Alonso: 15 – 3 = 12 (Webber would have finished ahead without the gearbox change)

Hamilton: 25 + 0 = 25 (unchallengable victory)

Button: 18 – 3 = 15 (Webber would have finished ahead without the gearbox change)

Europe (VET: 144 WEB: 132 ALO: 85 HAM: 146 BUT: 90)

Vettel: 25 + 0 = 25 (hit Hamilton)

Webber: DNF + 0 = 0 (crash due to misjudgement)

Alonso: 4 + 0 = 4 (unaffected by chaos round him)

Hamilton: 18 + 0 = 18 (hit by Vettel but didn't lose places, overtaking Safety Car own fault)

Button: 15 - 5 = 10 (should have received a 20s penalty for being too quick under the Safety Car according to Article 16, not 5s)

Britain (VET: 159 WEB: 157 ALO: 85 HAM: 164 BUT: 100)

Vettel: 6 + 9 = 15 (puncture due to light clash with Hamilton)

Webber: 25 + 0 = 25 (straightforward victory)

Alonso: 0 + 0 = 0 (off own mistake, then pushed off due to Kubica and penalised, hit Liuzzi to get puncture. The bad luck cost him 2 places, but not enough to return Fernando to the points)

Hamilton: 18 + 0 = 0 (uneventful second)

Button: 12 - 2 = 10 (hit Vettel lightly; Vettel would have finished ahead had it not been for the puncture)

Germany (VET: 174/177 WEB: 165/167 ALO: 103/85 HAM: 176/179 BUT: 110/112)

Vettel: 15 + 0 = 15/18 (boring third)

Webber: 8 + 0 = 8/10 (uneventful sixth)

Alonso: 25 - 7 = 18/0 (only passed Massa through team orders. Correct penalty unclear but pass should not have happened. Therefore 2 numbers given; one if the pass had been reversed and the other if Alonso had been disqualified as the stewards were entitled to do.)

Hamilton: 12 + 0 = 12/15 (uneventful fourth)

Button: 10 + 0 = 10/12 (straightforward fifth)

Hungary (VET: 182/185 WEB: 190/192 ALO: 121/103 HAM: 191/194 BUT: 114/116)

Vettel: 15 - 7 = 8 (crossed grass verge in pitlane entry and should have been penalised; exceeding maximum gap to Safety Car own fault)

Webber: 25 + 0 = 25 (luck had nothing to do with victory)

Alonso: 18 + 0 = 18 (straightforward second)

Hamilton: DNF + 15 = 15 (gearbox failure; was behind Alonso at the time)

Button: 4 + 0 = 4 (quiet eighth)

Belgium (VET: 182/185 WEB: 208/210 ALO: 121/103 HAM: 216/219 BUT: 129/131)

Vettel: 0 + 0 = 0 (collisions with Button and Liuzzi own fault)

Webber: 18 + 0 = 18 (straightforward second)

Alonso: DNF + 0 = 0 (T-boned by Barrichello, but walloped barrier by himself later)

Hamilton: 25 + 0 = 25 (win nothing to do with luck)

Button: DNF + 15 = 15 (blameless in collision with Vettel; ahead of Kubica at the time)

Italy (VET: 194/197 WEB: 218/220 ALO: 146/128 HAM: 216/219 BUT: 147/149)

Vettel: 12 + 0 = 12 (engine issue didn't seem to affect him in the long run)

Webber: 8 + 2 = 10 (held up by Hulkenburg, who should have been penalised for chicane-cutting and wasn't)

Alonso: 25 + 0 = 25 (straightforward win)

Hamilton: DNF + 0 = 0 (caused own crash)

Button: 18 + 0 = 18 (straightforward second)

Singapore (VET: 212/215 WEB: 233/235 ALO: 171/153 HAM: 216/219 BUT: 159/161)

Vettel: 18 + 0 = 18 (lost no places when anti-stall kicked in during the pitstop)

Webber: 15 + 0 = 15 (racing incident with Hamilton)

Alonso: 25 + 0 = 25 (easy win)

Hamilton: DNF + 0 = 0 (racing incident colliding with Webber)

Button: 12 + 0 = 12 (quiet 4th)

Japan (VET: 237/240 WEB: 251/253 ALO: 183/165 HAM: 231/234 BUT: 167/171)

Vettel: 25 + 0 = 25 (straightforward win)

Webber: 18 + 0 = 18 (quiet second)

Alonso: 15 – 3 = 12 (Hamilton would have beaten him without the gearbox penalty)

Hamilton: 10 + 5 = 15 (5-place grid drop; qualified behind Webber)

Button: 12 – 2 = 10 (Hamilton would have beaten him without the gearbox penalty)

Korea (VET: 255/258 WEB: 251/253 ALO: 198/180 HAM: 246/249 BUT: 167/171)

Vettel: DNF + 18 = 18 (Alonso would have beaten him if it weren't for a stuck wheel nut, but ahead of everyone else when engine blew)

Webber: DNF + 0 = 0 (crashed by himself)

Alonso: 25 + 0 = 25 (stuck wheel nut only reason wasn't ahead of Vettel when Sebastian's engine blew)

Hamilton: 18 – 3 = 15 (Vettel's engine blew)

Button: 0 - 0 (Vettel's engine blew, but Button was already out of the points by then)

Brazil (VET: 280/283 WEB: 269/271 ALO: 213/192 HAM: 258/261 BUT: 177/179)

Vettel: 25 + 0 = 25 (luck didn't affect any of the championship contenders this race)

Webber: 18 + 0 = 18 (ditto)

Alonso: 15 + 0 = 15 (ditto)

Hamilton: 12 + 0 = 12 (ditto)

Button: 10 + 0 = 10 (ditto)

Abu Dhabi (VET: 305/308 WEB: 273/275 ALO: 219/198 HAM: 276/279 BUT: 193/195)

Vettel: 25 + 0 = 25 (straightforward victory)

Webber: 4 + 0 = 4 (hit barrier that necessitated tyre change through own error)

Alonso: 6 + 0 = 6 (poor strategy outside scope of analysis)

Hamilton: 18 + 0 = 18 (straightforward second)

Button: 15 + 0 = 15 (uneventful third)

I will complete the analysis (and correct this one if need be) tomorrow.

* - Until someone comes up with a proper word for the five-man equivalent of “duel”, this will have to do.