Your say

Are strike rates the best measure of greatness?

For me, it’s the percentages that measure brilliance and reliability in construction and driving skill. Surely Ayrton Senna’s 65 poles from 162 starts (40%) is better than Michael Schumacher’s 68 poles from 306 starts (22%)?

Right now, Max Verstappen’s percentage of wins to starts is 30.2% whereas Lewis Hamilton’s is 31.0% despite two years in the doldrums. But Max will surely better Hamilton’s wins this season.

Pole positions are a different matter. Max, currently 19%, has just overtaken Charles Leclerc, needs nine to beat Schumacher, 14 to beat Stirling Moss, but needs to almost double his current tally of 36 to catch Hamilton, and that’s assuming Leclerc and Hamilton have no more poles.

Senna’s 40% poles? That’s probably beyond even Red Bull and Max as he’ll need another 68 poles to beat that!

I have the greatest respect for all F1 teams and drivers, and am not in any way diminishing their achievements, just trying to put them into perspective, my perspective.

Hoping that my figures stand up to scrutiny.

Keith Ward London

We’ve tweaked these to reflect the Japanese Grand Prix results. We agree percentages are better than the normal stats but even they can’t take into account the quality of the machinery at the drivers’ disposal, strength of the opposition in each era or other factors such as reliability. And don’t forget Juan Manuel Fangio’s percentages of 47% wins, 57% poles, or Jim Clark’s stats of 35% wins and 46% poles! – ed

Don’t forget F1 at Oulton Park

I was interested in your comments on non-championship Formula 1 races (Pit + Paddock, 21 March). One I feel you failed to mention was Oulton Park’s Gold Cup (still going today) that went from 1954 to the late 1960s for F1, then went to other classes. It has the honour of being the only F1 race won by a four-wheel-drive car, driven by Stirling Moss. But it’s not an F1 track today.

As a thought, have a championship for year-old F1 cars and the