planetf1.com

Agree with above posters. People don't factor in the driver enough. If Car A beats Car B by half a second car A is always assumed to be quicker even if Joe Palmer is in Car B.

I suppose from testing it looks like Hamilton is looking at another bumper year to bolster his stats, unless Bottas surprises us all and puts together a stonking year. He could be looking at less than 20 races shy of Michael’s all time record of race wins by the end of 2018 if the Mercedes is truly ahead of everyone else as most pundits believe. If that pans out then I don’t think Hamilton will be looking at Vettel but rather at Schumacher for the rest of his career.

bonecrasher wrote:I suppose from testing it looks like Hamilton is looking at another bumper year to bolster his stats, unless Bottas surprises us all and puts together a stonking year. He could be looking at less than 20 races shy of Michael’s all time record of race wins by the end of 2018 if the Mercedes is truly ahead of everyone else as most pundits believe. If that pans out then I don’t think Hamilton will be looking at Vettel but rather at Schumacher for the rest of his career.

I think if Mercedes dominate this year it's as good as confirmation Hamilton will beat Schumacher's win record, or at the very least challenge it.

If Mercedes can reassert their dominance after one 'off' year of having the equal best car then I don't think they'll be beaten until the change of the engine regs. I also cant see Mercedes dropping Bottas if thats the case so there won't be any internal battle to take any serious number of wins away from Hamilton.

He'll win at least half of the next 63 races, probably a more imo. Mercedes are growing the gap again and there just isn't the scope for anyone to better them.

Engine? No chance. Chassis? Not by enough to cancel out the engine advantage. Driver? Nope, you might get a similar one at best but no chance you'll get one to cancel out the engine advantage.

Just too strong all round so the next 3 seasons if the regs stay the same is almost a certainty for me he'll get over 10 wins a year.

Lotus49 wrote:He'll win at least half of the next 63 races, probably a more imo. Mercedes are growing the gap again and there just isn't the scope for anyone to better them... Just too strong all round so the next 3 seasons if the regs stay the same is almost a certainty for me he'll get over 10 wins a year.

Yup, I agree. Hamilton will easily challenge Schumacher's record by mid season 2020.

Lotus49 wrote:He'll win at least half of the next 63 races, probably a more imo. Mercedes are growing the gap again and there just isn't the scope for anyone to better them.

Engine? No chance. Chassis? Not by enough to cancel out the engine advantage. Driver? Nope, you might get a similar one at best but no chance you'll get one to cancel out the engine advantage.

Just too strong all round so the next 3 seasons if the regs stay the same is almost a certainty for me he'll get over 10 wins a year.

Man, this is depressing. And people complained after 4 years RBR.

Nothing against Merc nor Hamilton, but I will be dropping out if this season is as repetitive as 2014-2016 was.

mds wrote:

Lotus49 wrote:He'll win at least half of the next 63 races, probably a more imo. Mercedes are growing the gap again and there just isn't the scope for anyone to better them.

Engine? No chance. Chassis? Not by enough to cancel out the engine advantage. Driver? Nope, you might get a similar one at best but no chance you'll get one to cancel out the engine advantage.

Just too strong all round so the next 3 seasons if the regs stay the same is almost a certainty for me he'll get over 10 wins a year.

Man, this is depressing. And people complained after 4 years RBR.

Nothing against Merc nor Hamilton, but I will be dropping out if this season is as repetitive as 2014-2016 was.

No reason to stop following F1. Teams have dominated for periods of time for decades. Yes, it can get boring, more tolerable if a driver you like, less tolerable if a driver you don't like. But it's a product of the sport. Put a dominant driver in a dominant car, and that's how you get repeating, multi-year WDCs. Last time I checked, multi-year WDCs are the stuff of legends admired years later.

People wanting to see passing at every corner should seek out the many cookie cutter, spec-racing series where all the cars are built by the same manufacture, use the same engine, regulated boost (for turbos), etc. These series are a dime a dozen, F1 is not.

An interesting question that I have begun to ask myself is; is this period of strength from Mercedes different from previous periods of dominance such as Red Bull 2010-2013, Ferrari 2000-2004, Williams 1992-1997 or Mclaren 1988-1989? Mercedes have already accomplished something that those teams didn't. They maintained their strength through a radical regulations overhaul. That suggests that their advantage might come from really operating that much better than the other teams. People fixate on the engine but I think it's a much more comprehensive set of strengths that the car has and above all, the team seems very strong with regards to in-season development. With Hamilton in the car, I believe they also maximize their delta there as well.

We are all looking at 2021 as this time when Mercedes will cease their winning ways but that is not guaranteed at all. 2017 was supposed to be the same thing. Anything short of a massive change to the engine formula will not be enough to overhaul them and even with a comprehensive change, they might just get it right again...

If all the pre season guessing comes true and once again Merc have a huge PU advantage it's not a difficult question, Vettel would need a miracle to split the Merc drivers once again and try to grab a win or two.

Very impressed by the german perfectionists putting the Merc together, but sorry IMO it's getting boring now.
I beleive it's so much harder to stop PU dominance than it was to stop aero and chassi dominance a la Red Bull.

They've won 80% off all races since 2013 and not even stopping active suspension last year could stop them from being way ahead in the second half off the season, it all gets so much easier when you have a huge PU advantage to build on.

sandman1347 wrote:An interesting question that I have begun to ask myself is; is this period of strength from Mercedes different from previous periods of dominance such as Red Bull 2010-2013, Ferrari 2000-2004, Williams 1992-1997 or Mclaren 1988-1989? Mercedes have already accomplished something that those teams didn't. They maintained their strength through a radical regulations overhaul. That suggests that their advantage might come from really operating that much better than the other teams. People fixate on the engine but I think it's a much more comprehensive set of strengths that the car has and above all, the team seems very strong with regards to in-season development. With Hamilton in the car, I believe they also maximize their delta there as well.

Well, one big difference is that this period of regulations started with built-in provisions that made sure anyone starting with a major advance on the others in the PU department would keep their advantage for a few years. This had never before been seen.

For the rest, it's about doing better than the others just like the teams you mentioned did in the past. I don't think there's much difference there. RBR were a machine in all aspects, just like Ferrari back in those days. Everything came together just like it does now for Mercedes. Ferrari have probably been lacking in the operating department since, while RBR I feel are still within themselves operating in a highly competent way, only they have no chance with a PU that has been underpowered and unreliable up until now.

MB-BOB wrote:

mds wrote:

Lotus49 wrote:He'll win at least half of the next 63 races, probably a more imo. Mercedes are growing the gap again and there just isn't the scope for anyone to better them.

Engine? No chance. Chassis? Not by enough to cancel out the engine advantage. Driver? Nope, you might get a similar one at best but no chance you'll get one to cancel out the engine advantage.

Just too strong all round so the next 3 seasons if the regs stay the same is almost a certainty for me he'll get over 10 wins a year.

Man, this is depressing. And people complained after 4 years RBR.

Nothing against Merc nor Hamilton, but I will be dropping out if this season is as repetitive as 2014-2016 was.

No reason to stop following F1. Teams have dominated for periods of time for decades. Yes, it can get boring, more tolerable if a driver you like, less tolerable if a driver you don't like. But it's a product of the sport. Put a dominant driver in a dominant car, and that's how you get repeating, multi-year WDCs. Last time I checked, multi-year WDCs are the stuff of legends admired years later.

I know my history. That doesn't stop me from getting depressed at it now. I had the same with Ferrari in 2004 - I checked out back then as well.

People wanting to see passing at every corner should seek out the many cookie cutter, spec-racing series where all the cars are built by the same manufacture, use the same engine, regulated boost (for turbos), etc. These series are a dime a dozen, F1 is not.

I don't want to see passing at every corner. I want to see a certain degree of competition at the front, and if not within a season then I at least want to see some change at the top after a few years of the same.

As for other series - I follow just about anything I can get my hands on and that includes F2, F3, FR3.5 (in the past...), FR2.0, even all kinds of bike racing (MotoGP, Moto2, Moto3, WSBK, WSS, BSB, ...).

sandman1347 wrote:An interesting question that I have begun to ask myself is; is this period of strength from Mercedes different from previous periods of dominance such as Red Bull 2010-2013, Ferrari 2000-2004, Williams 1992-1997 or Mclaren 1988-1989? Mercedes have already accomplished something that those teams didn't. They maintained their strength through a radical regulations overhaul. That suggests that their advantage might come from really operating that much better than the other teams. People fixate on the engine but I think it's a much more comprehensive set of strengths that the car has and above all, the team seems very strong with regards to in-season development. With Hamilton in the car, I believe they also maximize their delta there as well.

We are all looking at 2021 as this time when Mercedes will cease their winning ways but that is not guaranteed at all. 2017 was supposed to be the same thing. Anything short of a massive change to the engine formula will not be enough to overhaul them and even with a comprehensive change, they might just get it right again...

There was a major overhaul between 93/94 and Williams stayed ahead. Arguable bigger than the 97/98 change in terms of reg changes, Williams happened to lose Renault and Newey (well they lost Newey at the start of 97, but he'd helped design that car)

Ferrari lost in 2005 because that season's weird tyre regs suited Michelin, and were in the hunt in 2006-2008. There was a major reg change in 2009, which McLaren and Ferrari were both hampered with due to concentrating so much on developing 2008 until the final race and missing the double diffuser loophole. However come the start of 2010 they were actually at their closest to Red Bull during the whole of that period, Red Bull pulled away.

Given how infrequent there are major era changes and how few times there are major dominating forces in the sport there really isn't enough data to suggest there is actually a correlation with them shaking the apple cart.

The first year can often produce a blip is one rival spots something the previous leader misses. But just like the double diffuser, Brawn (and Mercedes) went backwards from mid 2009 onwards and McLaren and Ferrari left them in the dust afterwards during that era.

What's more often the case is that major regulation changes often seen huge changes in personnel. Drivers often choose to retire (Coulthard '08, Webber '13) - designers retire or get poached (or become more interested, like Newey in '17)

sandman1347 wrote:An interesting question that I have begun to ask myself is; is this period of strength from Mercedes different from previous periods of dominance such as Red Bull 2010-2013, Ferrari 2000-2004, Williams 1992-1997 or Mclaren 1988-1989? Mercedes have already accomplished something that those teams didn't. They maintained their strength through a radical regulations overhaul. That suggests that their advantage might come from really operating that much better than the other teams. People fixate on the engine but I think it's a much more comprehensive set of strengths that the car has and above all, the team seems very strong with regards to in-season development. With Hamilton in the car, I believe they also maximize their delta there as well.

We are all looking at 2021 as this time when Mercedes will cease their winning ways but that is not guaranteed at all. 2017 was supposed to be the same thing. Anything short of a massive change to the engine formula will not be enough to overhaul them and even with a comprehensive change, they might just get it right again...

I'm not convinced that the 2017 change was as radical as all that. It didn't seem to affect the top 5 pecking order all that much.

As has been pointed out, the big difference is that the rules gave whoever got it right in 2014 a built in advantage for the next few years. That's never happened before, because the rules on development have never been so restrictive before. Mercedes have certainly done well to maintain their advantage as efficiently as they have done, but essentially they can pinpoint much of their dominance to getting their superb start to the new regs.

I agree that Hamilton made the difference last year and with a lesser driver they may not have retained the driver's crown. Having said that, Ferrari also needed a top driver to even get in the ballpark, so it's all relative. I think it's safe to say that Mercedes have owned the hybrid PU regs since their inception

Zoue wrote:

sandman1347 wrote:An interesting question that I have begun to ask myself is; is this period of strength from Mercedes different from previous periods of dominance such as Red Bull 2010-2013, Ferrari 2000-2004, Williams 1992-1997 or Mclaren 1988-1989? Mercedes have already accomplished something that those teams didn't. They maintained their strength through a radical regulations overhaul. That suggests that their advantage might come from really operating that much better than the other teams. People fixate on the engine but I think it's a much more comprehensive set of strengths that the car has and above all, the team seems very strong with regards to in-season development. With Hamilton in the car, I believe they also maximize their delta there as well.

We are all looking at 2021 as this time when Mercedes will cease their winning ways but that is not guaranteed at all. 2017 was supposed to be the same thing. Anything short of a massive change to the engine formula will not be enough to overhaul them and even with a comprehensive change, they might just get it right again...

I'm not convinced that the 2017 change was as radical as all that. It didn't seem to affect the top 5 pecking order all that much.

As has been pointed out, the big difference is that the rules gave whoever got it right in 2014 a built in advantage for the next few years. That's never happened before, because the rules on development have never been so restrictive before. Mercedes have certainly done well to maintain their advantage as efficiently as they have done, but essentially they can pinpoint much of their dominance to getting their superb start to the new regs.

I agree that Hamilton made the difference last year and with a lesser driver they may not have retained the driver's crown. Having said that, Ferrari also needed a top driver to even get in the ballpark, so it's all relative. I think it's safe to say that Mercedes have owned the hybrid PU regs since their inception

I think you have nailed it Zoue. The lack of testing and development restrictions has hampered the teams during this recent era. Whoever got it right early on is pretty much guaranteed to be at the front. This is the inherent problem of the money saving mode that F1 has gone into in the last decade. Before teams could change their fortunes dramatically during a year. This is not happening to that extent in the recent years. Of course it is a bit more complex than that, but it is the biggest factor in the equation in my mind.

Siao7 wrote:

Zoue wrote:

sandman1347 wrote:An interesting question that I have begun to ask myself is; is this period of strength from Mercedes different from previous periods of dominance such as Red Bull 2010-2013, Ferrari 2000-2004, Williams 1992-1997 or Mclaren 1988-1989? Mercedes have already accomplished something that those teams didn't. They maintained their strength through a radical regulations overhaul. That suggests that their advantage might come from really operating that much better than the other teams. People fixate on the engine but I think it's a much more comprehensive set of strengths that the car has and above all, the team seems very strong with regards to in-season development. With Hamilton in the car, I believe they also maximize their delta there as well.

We are all looking at 2021 as this time when Mercedes will cease their winning ways but that is not guaranteed at all. 2017 was supposed to be the same thing. Anything short of a massive change to the engine formula will not be enough to overhaul them and even with a comprehensive change, they might just get it right again...

I'm not convinced that the 2017 change was as radical as all that. It didn't seem to affect the top 5 pecking order all that much.

As has been pointed out, the big difference is that the rules gave whoever got it right in 2014 a built in advantage for the next few years. That's never happened before, because the rules on development have never been so restrictive before. Mercedes have certainly done well to maintain their advantage as efficiently as they have done, but essentially they can pinpoint much of their dominance to getting their superb start to the new regs.

I agree that Hamilton made the difference last year and with a lesser driver they may not have retained the driver's crown. Having said that, Ferrari also needed a top driver to even get in the ballpark, so it's all relative. I think it's safe to say that Mercedes have owned the hybrid PU regs since their inception

I think you have nailed it Zoue. The lack of testing and development restrictions has hampered the teams during this recent era. Whoever got it right early on is pretty much guaranteed to be at the front. This is the inherent problem of the money saving mode that F1 has gone into in the last decade. Before teams could change their fortunes dramatically during a year. This is not happening to that extent in the recent years. Of course it is a bit more complex than that, but it is the biggest factor in the equation in my mind.

That excuse works for Redbull and McLaren though. They don’t build power units. But Ferrari are quite disappointing in that regard. I mean they are Ferrari and have had 5 years minimum to get it right but they always seem to be a step behind. If suggestions from winter testing are true they might not even be the second best team too, which would mean they took a step backwards. They spend as much as Mercedes and can draw resources and tech knowledge from the huge Fiat group but still they fall short. Quite disappointing to be honest.

bonecrasher wrote:

Siao7 wrote:

Zoue wrote:

sandman1347 wrote:An interesting question that I have begun to ask myself is; is this period of strength from Mercedes different from previous periods of dominance such as Red Bull 2010-2013, Ferrari 2000-2004, Williams 1992-1997 or Mclaren 1988-1989? Mercedes have already accomplished something that those teams didn't. They maintained their strength through a radical regulations overhaul. That suggests that their advantage might come from really operating that much better than the other teams. People fixate on the engine but I think it's a much more comprehensive set of strengths that the car has and above all, the team seems very strong with regards to in-season development. With Hamilton in the car, I believe they also maximize their delta there as well.

We are all looking at 2021 as this time when Mercedes will cease their winning ways but that is not guaranteed at all. 2017 was supposed to be the same thing. Anything short of a massive change to the engine formula will not be enough to overhaul them and even with a comprehensive change, they might just get it right again...

I'm not convinced that the 2017 change was as radical as all that. It didn't seem to affect the top 5 pecking order all that much.

As has been pointed out, the big difference is that the rules gave whoever got it right in 2014 a built in advantage for the next few years. That's never happened before, because the rules on development have never been so restrictive before. Mercedes have certainly done well to maintain their advantage as efficiently as they have done, but essentially they can pinpoint much of their dominance to getting their superb start to the new regs.

I agree that Hamilton made the difference last year and with a lesser driver they may not have retained the driver's crown. Having said that, Ferrari also needed a top driver to even get in the ballpark, so it's all relative. I think it's safe to say that Mercedes have owned the hybrid PU regs since their inception

I think you have nailed it Zoue. The lack of testing and development restrictions has hampered the teams during this recent era. Whoever got it right early on is pretty much guaranteed to be at the front. This is the inherent problem of the money saving mode that F1 has gone into in the last decade. Before teams could change their fortunes dramatically during a year. This is not happening to that extent in the recent years. Of course it is a bit more complex than that, but it is the biggest factor in the equation in my mind.

That excuse works for Redbull and McLaren though. They don’t build power units. But Ferrari are quite disappointing in that regard. I mean they are Ferrari and have had 5 years minimum to get it right but they always seem to be a step behind. If suggestions from winter testing are true they might not even be the second best team too, which would mean they took a step backwards. They spend as much as Mercedes and can draw resources and tech knowledge from the huge Fiat group but still they fall short. Quite disappointing to be honest.

Ferrari did improve massively from 2014 to 2015, though, to be fair. I think they have improved more than Mercedes relative to their starting position since 2014. The gap has closed, rather than widened. It's too early to say for this year IMO. But the starting point in 2014 is the key, due to reasons outlined above.

mds wrote:

Lotus49 wrote:He'll win at least half of the next 63 races, probably a more imo. Mercedes are growing the gap again and there just isn't the scope for anyone to better them.

Engine? No chance. Chassis? Not by enough to cancel out the engine advantage. Driver? Nope, you might get a similar one at best but no chance you'll get one to cancel out the engine advantage.

Just too strong all round so the next 3 seasons if the regs stay the same is almost a certainty for me he'll get over 10 wins a year.

Man, this is depressing. And people complained after 4 years RBR.

Nothing against Merc nor Hamilton, but I will be dropping out if this season is as repetitive as 2014-2016 was.

My only gripe with the Red Bull years was the protected position of Vettel in as much as Webber was no challenge for him, both Alonso and Hamilton got knocked back from joining the team.

AnRs wrote:If all the pre season guessing comes true and once again Merc have a huge PU advantage it's not a difficult question, Vettel would need a miracle to split the Merc drivers once again and try to grab a win or two.

Very impressed by the german perfectionists putting the Merc together, but sorry IMO it's getting boring now.
I beleive it's so much harder to stop PU dominance than it was to stop aero and chassi dominance a la Red Bull.

They've won 80% off all races since 2013 and not even stopping active suspension last year could stop them from being way ahead in the second half off the season, it all gets so much easier when you have a huge PU advantage to build on.

So last season Vettel was performing miracles.

pokerman wrote:

mds wrote:

Lotus49 wrote:He'll win at least half of the next 63 races, probably a more imo. Mercedes are growing the gap again and there just isn't the scope for anyone to better them.

Engine? No chance. Chassis? Not by enough to cancel out the engine advantage. Driver? Nope, you might get a similar one at best but no chance you'll get one to cancel out the engine advantage.

Just too strong all round so the next 3 seasons if the regs stay the same is almost a certainty for me he'll get over 10 wins a year.

Man, this is depressing. And people complained after 4 years RBR.

Nothing against Merc nor Hamilton, but I will be dropping out if this season is as repetitive as 2014-2016 was.

My only gripe with the Red Bull years was the protected position of Vettel in as much as Webber was no challenge for him, both Alonso and Hamilton got knocked back from joining the team.

It's not like neither Toto nor Hamilton want Alonso to drive for Mercedes.
Hamilton has literally and specifically ruled out Alonso coming to Mercedes - just a few months ago.

So it's the same really. Rosberg was no match for Hamilton, nor is Bottas. Nico only won because the Mercedes was so superior that collecting second places was par for the course and because reliability didn't even up that year.

pokerman wrote:

mds wrote:

Lotus49 wrote:He'll win at least half of the next 63 races, probably a more imo. Mercedes are growing the gap again and there just isn't the scope for anyone to better them.

Engine? No chance. Chassis? Not by enough to cancel out the engine advantage. Driver? Nope, you might get a similar one at best but no chance you'll get one to cancel out the engine advantage.

Just too strong all round so the next 3 seasons if the regs stay the same is almost a certainty for me he'll get over 10 wins a year.

Man, this is depressing. And people complained after 4 years RBR.

Nothing against Merc nor Hamilton, but I will be dropping out if this season is as repetitive as 2014-2016 was.

My only gripe with the Red Bull years was the protected position of Vettel in as much as Webber was no challenge for him, both Alonso and Hamilton got knocked back from joining the team.

And Bottas was the best driver available for 2018?

mikeyg123 wrote:

pokerman wrote:

mds wrote:

Lotus49 wrote:He'll win at least half of the next 63 races, probably a more imo. Mercedes are growing the gap again and there just isn't the scope for anyone to better them.

Engine? No chance. Chassis? Not by enough to cancel out the engine advantage. Driver? Nope, you might get a similar one at best but no chance you'll get one to cancel out the engine advantage.

Just too strong all round so the next 3 seasons if the regs stay the same is almost a certainty for me he'll get over 10 wins a year.

Man, this is depressing. And people complained after 4 years RBR.

Nothing against Merc nor Hamilton, but I will be dropping out if this season is as repetitive as 2014-2016 was.

My only gripe with the Red Bull years was the protected position of Vettel in as much as Webber was no challenge for him, both Alonso and Hamilton got knocked back from joining the team.

And Bottas was the best driver available for 2018?

Apart from Alonso yes but they have no interest in him but that doesn't mean the likes of Vettel, Ricciardo or Verstappen wouldn't be considered if available, Webber only got replaced because he decided to retire.

Still the point I was making I just wanted to see a top driver alongside Vettel, would people be appeased with the situation if Mercedes had signed Alonso?

pokerman wrote:

mikeyg123 wrote:

pokerman wrote:

mds wrote:

Lotus49 wrote:He'll win at least half of the next 63 races, probably a more imo. Mercedes are growing the gap again and there just isn't the scope for anyone to better them.

Engine? No chance. Chassis? Not by enough to cancel out the engine advantage. Driver? Nope, you might get a similar one at best but no chance you'll get one to cancel out the engine advantage.

Just too strong all round so the next 3 seasons if the regs stay the same is almost a certainty for me he'll get over 10 wins a year.

Man, this is depressing. And people complained after 4 years RBR.

Nothing against Merc nor Hamilton, but I will be dropping out if this season is as repetitive as 2014-2016 was.

My only gripe with the Red Bull years was the protected position of Vettel in as much as Webber was no challenge for him, both Alonso and Hamilton got knocked back from joining the team.

And Bottas was the best driver available for 2018?

Apart from Alonso yes but they have no interest in him but that doesn't mean the likes of Vettel, Ricciardo or Verstappen wouldn't be considered if available, Webber only got replaced because he decided to retire.

Still the point I was making I just wanted to see a top driver alongside Vettel, would people be appeased with the situation if Mercedes had signed Alonso?

I think we would be in line for a much more exciting season.

Plenty of drivers were out of contract weren't they? Did Mercedes make any effort to get any of them? What about the years with Rosberg? Better drivers contracts came up. Did Mercedes try to upgrade?

mds wrote:

pokerman wrote:

mds wrote:

Lotus49 wrote:He'll win at least half of the next 63 races, probably a more imo. Mercedes are growing the gap again and there just isn't the scope for anyone to better them.

Engine? No chance. Chassis? Not by enough to cancel out the engine advantage. Driver? Nope, you might get a similar one at best but no chance you'll get one to cancel out the engine advantage.

Just too strong all round so the next 3 seasons if the regs stay the same is almost a certainty for me he'll get over 10 wins a year.

Man, this is depressing. And people complained after 4 years RBR.

Nothing against Merc nor Hamilton, but I will be dropping out if this season is as repetitive as 2014-2016 was.

My only gripe with the Red Bull years was the protected position of Vettel in as much as Webber was no challenge for him, both Alonso and Hamilton got knocked back from joining the team.

It's not like neither Toto nor Hamilton want Alonso to drive for Mercedes.
Hamilton has literally and specifically ruled out Alonso coming to Mercedes - just a few months ago.

So it's the same really. Rosberg was no match for Hamilton, nor is Bottas. Nico only won because the Mercedes was so superior that collecting second places was par for the course and because reliability didn't even up that year.

Clearly Rosberg was more competitive than Webber, but even Rosberg was on his way out at Mercedes until Hamilton threatened to leave and then they panicked and extended his contract, whilst Bottas' situation at Mercedes is certainly not secure.

Anyway my point being would a better teammate for Hamilton make everything alright, I'm guessing probably not?

mikeyg123 wrote:

pokerman wrote:

mikeyg123 wrote:

pokerman wrote:

mds wrote: Man, this is depressing. And people complained after 4 years RBR.

Nothing against Merc nor Hamilton, but I will be dropping out if this season is as repetitive as 2014-2016 was.

My only gripe with the Red Bull years was the protected position of Vettel in as much as Webber was no challenge for him, both Alonso and Hamilton got knocked back from joining the team.

And Bottas was the best driver available for 2018?

Apart from Alonso yes but they have no interest in him but that doesn't mean the likes of Vettel, Ricciardo or Verstappen wouldn't be considered if available, Webber only got replaced because he decided to retire.

Still the point I was making I just wanted to see a top driver alongside Vettel, would people be appeased with the situation if Mercedes had signed Alonso?

I think we would be in line for a much more exciting season.

Plenty of drivers were out of contract weren't they? Did Mercedes make any effort to get any of them? What about the years with Rosberg? Better drivers contracts came up. Did Mercedes try to upgrade?

In 2016 Mercedes initially only offered Rosberg a 1 year contract so I think it's fair to say they were looking at someone else, a certain Sebastian Vettel was going to be out of contract for 2018 and there were rumours of talks at the end of 2016 after Rosberg retired but then Ferrari came good last year so that went away.

In regards to Bottas for this year there was only Alonso better than him but Alonso does have a certain reputation, I think he is the only top driver that Mercedes have no interest in plus I've also heard there is a back story of Mercedes not being very impressed with what happened in 2007.

Then looking at 2019 when Bottas contract runs out Mercedes know they then maybe have the option of Ricciardo and Ocon.

But anyway my point was that if Vettel was going to have the best car then I just wanted him to have a stronger teammate.

pokerman wrote: In 2016 Mercedes initially only offered Rosberg a 1 year contract so I think it's fair to say they were looking at someone else, a certain Sebastian Vettel was going to be out of contract for 2018 and there were rumours of talks at the end of 2016 after Rosberg retired but then Ferrari came good last year so that went away.

In regards to Bottas for this year there was only Alonso better than him but Alonso does have a certain reputation, I think he is the only top driver that Mercedes have no interest in plus I've also heard there is a back story of Mercedes not being very impressed with what happened in 2007.

Then looking at 2019 when Bottas contract runs out Mercedes know they then maybe have the option of Ricciardo and Ocon.

But anyway my point was that if Vettel was going to have the best car then I just wanted him to have a stronger teammate.

Alonso and Vettel.

My point was that you can't accuse Red Bull of not signing a driver to challenge Vettel without laying the same charge at Mercedes' door.

Neither of Hamilton's teammates in this era have been proper top drivers. Rosberg was a tier 1.5 driver and Bottas is a firm tier 2 driver, and Mercedes' advantage from 2014-2017 is bigger than Red Bull's advantage from 2010-2013. There is nothing to complain about for Hamilton fans.

Let’s be fair to Hamilton though, he has had 8 years against 3 WDC material teammates in their prime so far but on the other hand Vettel has had just 1 year against top level teammate.

pokerman wrote: Anyway my point being would a better teammate for Hamilton make everything alright, I'm guessing probably not?

Well if Vettel or Alonso or even Max would be in the second Merc I think that could secure my attention yes.

bonecrasher wrote:Let’s be fair to Hamilton though, he has had 8 years against 3 WDC material teammates in their prime so far but on the other hand Vettel has had just 1 year against top level teammate.

Both Button and Rosberg were still clearly inferior to Hamilton and I suspect would have been when partnered with Vettel as well.

I mean, Rosberg wins with one of the most dominant cars ever and only because luck/reliability was on his side, and then that counts for Hamilton as "3 years against WDC material driver in his prime"?
Same for Button.

So suppose Webber had won the 2010 WDC championship, then Vettel would now have 6 years on his "against WDC material teammate" tally? Should've let that title go then, and be regarded higher for it? I hope you see the nonsense in all of this?

mds wrote:

pokerman wrote: Anyway my point being would a better teammate for Hamilton make everything alright, I'm guessing probably not?

Well if Vettel or Alonso or even Max would be in the second Merc I think that could secure my attention yes.

Well the Ferrari being dominant scenario isn't any better.
Imagine if Ferrari are actually head and shoulders the best car this year.
How interesting will it be to watch Seb win every race with Kimi nowhere.
At least Bottas showed in his first year that he could out qualify and win races against Lewis.
I reckon the title fight would be a whole lot more interesting with Mercedes being top dog than if Ferrari are.

In reality I think we'll get 3 cars that are really close this year and multiple winners and a close championship.

Laz_T800 wrote:

mds wrote:

pokerman wrote: Anyway my point being would a better teammate for Hamilton make everything alright, I'm guessing probably not?

Well if Vettel or Alonso or even Max would be in the second Merc I think that could secure my attention yes.

Well the Ferrari being dominant scenario isn't any better.
Imagine if Ferrari are actually head and shoulders the best car this year.
How interesting will it be to watch Seb win every race with Kimi nowhere.
At least Bottas showed in his first year that he could out qualify and win races against Lewis.
I reckon the title fight would be a whole lot more interesting with Mercedes being top dog than if Ferrari are.

In reality I think we'll get 3 cars that are really close this year and multiple winners and a close championship.

The gap between Bottas and Hamilton is not wildly different than the gap between Kimi and Vettel. I think both scenarios are equally tedious.

But I hope you're right with your last sentence.

mds wrote:

bonecrasher wrote:Let’s be fair to Hamilton though, he has had 8 years against 3 WDC material teammates in their prime so far but on the other hand Vettel has had just 1 year against top level teammate.

Both Button and Rosberg were still clearly inferior to Hamilton and I suspect would have been when partnered with Vettel as well.

I mean, Rosberg wins with one of the most dominant cars ever and only because luck/reliability was on his side, and then that counts for Hamilton as "3 years against WDC material driver in his prime"?
Same for Button.

So suppose Webber had won the 2010 WDC championship, then Vettel would now have 6 years on his "against WDC material teammate" tally? Should've let that title go then, and be regarded higher for it? I hope you see the nonsense in all of this?

Rosberg and Hamilton had 4 years as team mates. In 3 of those years Rosberg absolutely pushed Hamilton and was a match for him in many races.
I'm not sure how that equates to him not being WDC material.

mikeyg123 wrote:

Laz_T800 wrote:

mds wrote:

pokerman wrote: Anyway my point being would a better teammate for Hamilton make everything alright, I'm guessing probably not?

Well if Vettel or Alonso or even Max would be in the second Merc I think that could secure my attention yes.

Well the Ferrari being dominant scenario isn't any better.
Imagine if Ferrari are actually head and shoulders the best car this year.
How interesting will it be to watch Seb win every race with Kimi nowhere.
At least Bottas showed in his first year that he could out qualify and win races against Lewis.
I reckon the title fight would be a whole lot more interesting with Mercedes being top dog than if Ferrari are.

In reality I think we'll get 3 cars that are really close this year and multiple winners and a close championship.

The gap between Bottas and Hamilton is not wildly different than the gap between Kimi and Vettel. I think both scenarios are equally tedious.

But I hope you're right with your last sentence.

It's not just the pace gap that I was referring to.
We know that Mercedes will let Bottas and Hamilton race.
I'm not so sure Ferrari feel the same.

Laz_T800 wrote:

mikeyg123 wrote:

Laz_T800 wrote:

mds wrote:

pokerman wrote: Anyway my point being would a better teammate for Hamilton make everything alright, I'm guessing probably not?

Well if Vettel or Alonso or even Max would be in the second Merc I think that could secure my attention yes.

Well the Ferrari being dominant scenario isn't any better.
Imagine if Ferrari are actually head and shoulders the best car this year.
How interesting will it be to watch Seb win every race with Kimi nowhere.
At least Bottas showed in his first year that he could out qualify and win races against Lewis.
I reckon the title fight would be a whole lot more interesting with Mercedes being top dog than if Ferrari are.

In reality I think we'll get 3 cars that are really close this year and multiple winners and a close championship.

The gap between Bottas and Hamilton is not wildly different than the gap between Kimi and Vettel. I think both scenarios are equally tedious.

But I hope you're right with your last sentence.

It's not just the pace gap that I was referring to.
We know that Mercedes will let Bottas and Hamilton race.
I'm not so sure Ferrari feel the same.

I saw no difference between Merc and Ferrari in #1 strategy in 2017, if so Bottas had to move over more times than Kimi?

Laz_T800 wrote:

mikeyg123 wrote:

Laz_T800 wrote:

mds wrote:

pokerman wrote: Anyway my point being would a better teammate for Hamilton make everything alright, I'm guessing probably not?

Well if Vettel or Alonso or even Max would be in the second Merc I think that could secure my attention yes.

Well the Ferrari being dominant scenario isn't any better.
Imagine if Ferrari are actually head and shoulders the best car this year.
How interesting will it be to watch Seb win every race with Kimi nowhere.
At least Bottas showed in his first year that he could out qualify and win races against Lewis.
I reckon the title fight would be a whole lot more interesting with Mercedes being top dog than if Ferrari are.

In reality I think we'll get 3 cars that are really close this year and multiple winners and a close championship.

The gap between Bottas and Hamilton is not wildly different than the gap between Kimi and Vettel. I think both scenarios are equally tedious.

But I hope you're right with your last sentence.

It's not just the pace gap that I was referring to.
We know that Mercedes will let Bottas and Hamilton race.
I'm not so sure Ferrari feel the same.

I don't think we know anything of the sort. Mercedes let Rosberg and Hamilton race because there was zero reason for them not to. The car was so far ahead of everyone else that imposing any kind of team orders would have been superfluous. There's no reason to believe that Ferrari (or any other team, for that matter) would have acted any differently. And if the competition closes in, there's equally no reason to believe that Mercedes wouldn't act any differently. It all depends on what's at stake

Laz_T800 wrote:

mds wrote:

bonecrasher wrote:Let’s be fair to Hamilton though, he has had 8 years against 3 WDC material teammates in their prime so far but on the other hand Vettel has had just 1 year against top level teammate.

Both Button and Rosberg were still clearly inferior to Hamilton and I suspect would have been when partnered with Vettel as well.

I mean, Rosberg wins with one of the most dominant cars ever and only because luck/reliability was on his side, and then that counts for Hamilton as "3 years against WDC material driver in his prime"?
Same for Button.

So suppose Webber had won the 2010 WDC championship, then Vettel would now have 6 years on his "against WDC material teammate" tally? Should've let that title go then, and be regarded higher for it? I hope you see the nonsense in all of this?

Rosberg and Hamilton had 4 years as team mates. In 3 of those years Rosberg absolutely pushed Hamilton and was a match for him in many races.
I'm not sure how that equates to him not being WDC material.

I'd dispute the match for Hamilton in many races. Hamilton was clearly superior. Rosberg only got close because there were no other cars to interfere with their private battle and reliability made it look a lot closer than it actually was on track. I'm skeptical that Rosberg would have had a sniff of the WDC if he hadn't had such a superior car to the rest of the field.

Zoue wrote:

Laz_T800 wrote:

mds wrote:

bonecrasher wrote:Let’s be fair to Hamilton though, he has had 8 years against 3 WDC material teammates in their prime so far but on the other hand Vettel has had just 1 year against top level teammate.

Both Button and Rosberg were still clearly inferior to Hamilton and I suspect would have been when partnered with Vettel as well.

I mean, Rosberg wins with one of the most dominant cars ever and only because luck/reliability was on his side, and then that counts for Hamilton as "3 years against WDC material driver in his prime"?
Same for Button.

So suppose Webber had won the 2010 WDC championship, then Vettel would now have 6 years on his "against WDC material teammate" tally? Should've let that title go then, and be regarded higher for it? I hope you see the nonsense in all of this?

Rosberg and Hamilton had 4 years as team mates. In 3 of those years Rosberg absolutely pushed Hamilton and was a match for him in many races.
I'm not sure how that equates to him not being WDC material.

I'd dispute the match for Hamilton in many races. Hamilton was clearly superior. Rosberg only got close because there were no other cars to interfere with their private battle and reliability made it look a lot closer than it actually was on track. I'm skeptical that Rosberg would have had a sniff of the WDC if he hadn't had such a superior car to the rest of the field.

I wanted to reply but you've said everything I wanted to.

mds wrote:

Zoue wrote:

Laz_T800 wrote:

mds wrote:

bonecrasher wrote:Let’s be fair to Hamilton though, he has had 8 years against 3 WDC material teammates in their prime so far but on the other hand Vettel has had just 1 year against top level teammate.

Both Button and Rosberg were still clearly inferior to Hamilton and I suspect would have been when partnered with Vettel as well.

I mean, Rosberg wins with one of the most dominant cars ever and only because luck/reliability was on his side, and then that counts for Hamilton as "3 years against WDC material driver in his prime"?
Same for Button.

So suppose Webber had won the 2010 WDC championship, then Vettel would now have 6 years on his "against WDC material teammate" tally? Should've let that title go then, and be regarded higher for it? I hope you see the nonsense in all of this?

Rosberg and Hamilton had 4 years as team mates. In 3 of those years Rosberg absolutely pushed Hamilton and was a match for him in many races.
I'm not sure how that equates to him not being WDC material.

I'd dispute the match for Hamilton in many races. Hamilton was clearly superior. Rosberg only got close because there were no other cars to interfere with their private battle and reliability made it look a lot closer than it actually was on track. I'm skeptical that Rosberg would have had a sniff of the WDC if he hadn't had such a superior car to the rest of the field.

I wanted to reply but you've said everything I wanted to.

The revisionist history being put forward about Rosbergs driving abilities has no real basis in fact.
He was able to win 1 WDC and very nearly won in 2014.
Lewis is the No1 pole man in F1 history and Rosberg proved a match for him in qualifying on many occasions.
He was highly rated in 2010 when he signed for Mercedes and he was able to deal with Michael really well.
Take Lewis out the the Mercedes picture and I think he'd be a 4 X WDC now.
I know why people talk Rosberg down and I don't think it's anything to do with his ability.

Laz_T800 wrote:

mds wrote:

Zoue wrote:

Laz_T800 wrote:

mds wrote:Both Button and Rosberg were still clearly inferior to Hamilton and I suspect would have been when partnered with Vettel as well.

I mean, Rosberg wins with one of the most dominant cars ever and only because luck/reliability was on his side, and then that counts for Hamilton as "3 years against WDC material driver in his prime"?
Same for Button.

So suppose Webber had won the 2010 WDC championship, then Vettel would now have 6 years on his "against WDC material teammate" tally? Should've let that title go then, and be regarded higher for it? I hope you see the nonsense in all of this?

Rosberg and Hamilton had 4 years as team mates. In 3 of those years Rosberg absolutely pushed Hamilton and was a match for him in many races.
I'm not sure how that equates to him not being WDC material.

I'd dispute the match for Hamilton in many races. Hamilton was clearly superior. Rosberg only got close because there were no other cars to interfere with their private battle and reliability made it look a lot closer than it actually was on track. I'm skeptical that Rosberg would have had a sniff of the WDC if he hadn't had such a superior car to the rest of the field.

I wanted to reply but you've said everything I wanted to.

The revisionist history being put forward about Rosbergs driving abilities has no real basis in fact.
He was able to win 1 WDC and very nearly won in 2014.
Lewis is the No1 pole man in F1 history and Rosberg proved a match for him in qualifying on many occasions.
He was highly rated in 2010 when he signed for Mercedes and he was able to deal with Michael really well.
Take Lewis out the the Mercedes picture and I think he'd be a 4 X WDC now.
I know why people talk Rosberg down and I don't think it's anything to do with his ability.

Rosberg was a good qualifier, true. Hamilton was just better.

But throughout the years he raced there were constant questions over his racecraft. Nothing revisionist about that. He simply never had a reputation as a good racer. I even remember him being described in pre-hybrid days as anonymous during race weekends.

He was only close in 2014 because of the way the points work. Let's be honest here, scoring 5 race wins when your team mate scores 11 can't really be described as "close," not by any stretch of the imagination. Lewis was all over him. Rosberg was flattered by the car and in a lesser car wouldn't have made any serious impact.

He did do well against Michael, that's true. But even then the gap had closed significantly in 2012 and Michael's 7 retirements helped considerably towards the points difference. I believe Michael actually out-qualified Nico that year, too, and finished ahead more often than not when both finished the race together. A bit like how he won the title in 2016 because Lewis had more serious issues than he did, not because he drove better.

Rosberg may well be a 3 times WDC without Lewis in the picture and all else being equal, but one of the Merc drivers would be the winner anyway. I have serious doubts as to whether he'd have won in 2017, since I think Lewis made more of a difference last year than Nico would have been able to do. It's possible, I guess, but I don't see it.

There don't need to be any reasons other than ability to talk Nico down. He wasn't terrible, by any means, but I don't think we can pretend that he was in any way a match for Lewis while they were together.

mikeyg123 wrote:

pokerman wrote: In 2016 Mercedes initially only offered Rosberg a 1 year contract so I think it's fair to say they were looking at someone else, a certain Sebastian Vettel was going to be out of contract for 2018 and there were rumours of talks at the end of 2016 after Rosberg retired but then Ferrari came good last year so that went away.

In regards to Bottas for this year there was only Alonso better than him but Alonso does have a certain reputation, I think he is the only top driver that Mercedes have no interest in plus I've also heard there is a back story of Mercedes not being very impressed with what happened in 2007.

Then looking at 2019 when Bottas contract runs out Mercedes know they then maybe have the option of Ricciardo and Ocon.

But anyway my point was that if Vettel was going to have the best car then I just wanted him to have a stronger teammate.

Alonso and Vettel.

My point was that you can't accuse Red Bull of not signing a driver to challenge Vettel without laying the same charge at Mercedes' door.

I guess you missed what I said about they were looking to replace Rosberg whilst Bottas' tenure at the team doesn't look that secure, Red Bull never had any interest in replacing Webber, also at least Rosberg was able to make things competitive.

Also I believe Mercedes would have been quite happy to sign Vettel but not Alonso and you can put that on to Alonso himself.