planetf1.com

They're not ahead by as much as the 14-16 years but I do think that the Mercedes has been the best car so far overall.

I think this whole 'Ferrari have the clearly better car' narrative is formed on the back of comments to the media. Ferrari were faster in pre-season testing and since then comments from Mercedes have been mostly to the effect of "Ferrari are quicker, we are really going to struggle", whilst Ferrari's have been "We couldn't extract all our performance". IMO someone who only tunes in to the races and doesn't read F1 articles or listen to the pre-show would find it very odd to hear that Ferrari have the fastest car but Mercedes keep pulling better times out of their exhausts when it really matters. It's a narrative almost entirely created from what happens off track.

I think its still too early to say who will prove to have the better car overall. I think whichever team can keep the tyres in the operating window the best will win on a given weekend and that the wild fluctuations in relative pace will continue for at least the first half of the season, and possibly after unless one team makes a decisive step forward in development.

I don't think there's a comparison, tbh. The 2014-16 cars didn't even have theoretical rivals and there was no question they were better than anything else.

This year I get the sense that Ferrari are really struggling to unlock their car. That doesn't necessarily mean they have the best car, but it does mean that they have more potential than they are showing. A lot of it seems to be related to them not being able to switch on their tyres, and I have to say that's one of my biggest hates about modern F1. I can't stand the way the tyre lottery affects races. Today both Ferrari and Red Bull said they had periods where their tyres fell away and they couldn't get them back, and I find it unacceptable that tyres have such a huge impact upon individual car performance. It's completely disproportionate.

The good news for Ferrari is that when it is switched on they do look competitive, so at least they know that fundamentally the car does have potential. But I can see it being hit and miss for a while yet and I think the racing will suffer for it. The Merc is more consistent, but it's hard to say whether that's by accident or design since I don't think they can really predict tyre behavior that accurately. But the bottom line is that Merc's dominant streak owes at least something to circumstance while the 2014-16 car had no peers no matter what

Zoue wrote:I don't think there's a comparison, tbh. The 2014-16 cars didn't even have theoretical rivals and there was no question they were better than anything else.

This year I get the sense that Ferrari are really struggling to unlock their car. That doesn't necessarily mean they have the best car, but it does mean that they have more potential than they are showing. A lot of it seems to be related to them not being able to switch on their tyres, and I have to say that's one of my biggest hates about modern F1. I can't stand the way the tyre lottery affects races. Today both Ferrari and Red Bull said they had periods where their tyres fell away and they couldn't get them back, and I find it unacceptable that tyres have such a huge impact upon individual car performance. It's completely disproportionate.

The good news for Ferrari is that when it is switched on they do look competitive, so at least they know that fundamentally the car does have potential. But I can see it being hit and miss for a while yet and I think the racing will suffer for it. The Merc is more consistent, but it's hard to say whether that's by accident or design since I don't think they can really predict tyre behavior that accurately. But the bottom line is that Merc's dominant streak owes at least something to circumstance while the 2014-16 car had no peers no matter what

This sums it up well for me so far

Spain is going to be very interesting. At the end of testing most thought (including themselves I think) that Ferrari had an advantage. Obviously Merc might have sandbagged through testing but will be interesting to see what the pecking order is there.

Interested to hear from the voter for 'a more dominating car'...

Too soon to tell. I voted less dominating, but I think there is a lot yet to be determined.

Certainly in Bahrain and Baku, and probably in China you can point to elements of the Ferrari performance/strategy that are responsible for ceding a possible win to Mercedes.

Four of twenty one races do not a season make. Certainly Mercedes are the team to beat and Ferrari seem to be the only team that has the ability to give them challenge. Red Bull seems to be the only other team that can challenge for a win if all of the bits of fortune come together on a lucky weekend.

Even as a Mercedes fan I hope that the other teams step up and cause the silver arrows some bother.

I think the facts point pretty strongly to Mercedes having the best car, but not by the margin they did between 2014-2016. The difference is in superior reliability and a whole lot more luck.

Exediron wrote:I think the facts point pretty strongly to Mercedes having the best car, but not by the margin they did between 2014-2016. The difference is in superior reliability and a whole lot more luck.

This is basically how I feel the situation is, although I would suggest the improved team dynamic between Bottas and Hamilton is also a big factor as well. Bottas is very much combining the best aspects of Kovalainen and Rosberg, a positive relationship but able to challenge Lewis. I don't think he is Hamilton's strongest non-Alonso teammate yet, but he's definitely verging on joining the Rosberg/Button clique. The fact he is able to have that level of performance without destabilising the team means Mercedes is in a very very good place right now.

Only unreliability and collisions among themselves essentially stopped Mercedes 1-2 every race in 2014-2016. Baring 2 or 3 races.

Mercedes could have easily lost 2 of the 4 races and should have lost at least 1. There is no comparison to 2014-2016 yet

2014-2016 was the most dominant series of cars in F1 history in terms of raw pace. No team has been that far ahead for that number of races and we may never see that again.

This current version of Mercedes dominance isn't built on a pace advantage, rather it is more akin to Red Bull 10-13. The best car and team but only slightly ahead on pace. However, rarely making mistakes and knowing how to win amplifies the meagre pace advantage, even nullifying a pace deficit.

Clearly a less dominant car, I think it's a bit early for the dominant tag after 4 races were all things being equal Ferrari might have won 2 races, I might have gone for a category simply saying better than the Ferrari.

As for 1 in 5 forumers saying it's as least as dominant I can only shake my head.

I put equally dominating. I think they have had linear performance gains in terms of car. They strategies have overall (not every time) been good. Its been variables such as driver decisions and other teams (performance, drivers, strategy) which has lead to less domination.

Other teams basically need the stars to align to get close.

The pace advantage this year is nothing like 2014-16. But where Merc have improved substantially is on the operations side. In the past when they were put under any sort of pressure they tended to flub it a bit. The talk at the time was if anyone could build a car that could sustain a challenge against them, we might see more mistakes more often. Finally Ferrari started to build those cars but unfortunately for them it coincided with a Merc team that hit their stride in the garage and on the pitwall

mcdo wrote:The pace advantage this year is nothing like 2014-16. But where Merc have improved substantially is on the operations side. In the past when they were put under any sort of pressure they tended to flub it a bit. The talk at the time was if anyone could build a car that could sustain a challenge against them, we might see more mistakes more often. Finally Ferrari started to build those cars but unfortunately for them it coincided with a Merc team that hit their stride in the garage and on the pitwall

Yes I tend to agree with this; Mercedes may not have the sheer pace advantage it had in 14-16 but it's such a well oiled machine at the moment that the points are racking up in a dominant fashion.

mcdo wrote:Finally Ferrari started to build those cars but unfortunately for them it coincided with a Merc team that hit their stride in the garage and on the pitwall

When Ferrari first started to build those cars - in 2017 - Mercedes was still subject to making some big errors. The only problem... Ferrari makes even more.

The 2018 and 2019 Mercedes team, however, is a very well-oiled race machine.

I kind of understand why a third of the forum think it's at least as dominant now, they are looking at race results as opposed to the actual car performance.

2 of the 5 races have been at the highest 2014-16 levels, Australia and Spain. If the Spain update is as good as it seems we could be putting the 19 car in with those in 3-4 races time. Pole by 0.7 in both those races and amazing race pace too.

pokerman wrote:I kind of understand why a third of the forum think it's at least as dominant now, they are looking at race results as opposed to the actual car performance.

Surely by definition dominance is achieved only through results?

BBC is asking if Mercedes could win every race this year.

That's may say it all

mikeyg123 wrote:

pokerman wrote:I kind of understand why a third of the forum think it's at least as dominant now, they are looking at race results as opposed to the actual car performance.

Surely by definition dominance is achieved only through results?

Dominance relates to the actual speed of the car and not being reliant on other cars unreliability or driver errors, however after Barcelona I might have to start changing my opinion if that continues.

Badgeronimous wrote:2014-2016 was the most dominant series of cars in F1 history in terms of raw pace. No team has been that far ahead for that number of races and we may never see that again.

This current version of Mercedes dominance isn't built on a pace advantage, rather it is more akin to Red Bull 10-13. The best car and team but only slightly ahead on pace. However, rarely making mistakes and knowing how to win amplifies the meagre pace advantage, even nullifying a pace deficit.

I have to address the bolded point because I have heard it a couple of times and it is patently false. There have been numerous teams in F1 history with more pace dominance. If you go back to the 50s and look at some of the Mercs that Fangio drove; he often had 4+ seconds on the field. As recently as the early 90s the Williams cars (especially in 92' and 93') were as much as 2+ seconds quicker than the next fastest team. The 2014-2016 period was exceptional and Mercedes should be applauded for what they achieved but it was not the most pace-dominant period in F1 history. Not even close actually.

With regards to the main question in the thread. The Mercedes package is definitely the strongest overall so far in 2019. Speculation about Ferrari performing below-par must be kept in context. For example, in Barcelona, it was clear that Ferrari cost themselves loads of time with their lack of decisiveness. With that said; they were still not really competing with the Mercs on any level. There was no concrete reason to believe that they would have been able to win that race had they gotten the strategy spot on because they couldn't match the performance of the Mercedes.

This year, Ferrari are not as strong as they were last year ( a season where IMO they had the best overall car on the year). They are not as competitive as they were in 2017 either (a year where they were often the fastest on race day but generally a bit behind in qualifying). This year; Mercedes have them beat on both Saturday and Sunday in 4 out of the 5 rounds. I don't think the margin is anywhere near what they had in 2014-2016 and I think it's important to note that Mercedes' pit wall has been rock solid so far this year while Ferrari have been a train wreck. Mercedes drivers have also not put a foot wrong while Ferrari's drivers have crashed, spun and made multiple significant errors on both Saturday and Sunday. Mercedes as a team, top to bottom, have out-performed Ferrari as a team and that is what has led to their dominance this year. The level of dominance that comes from the car alone this year is relatively modest IMO.

sandman1347 wrote:

Badgeronimous wrote:2014-2016 was the most dominant series of cars in F1 history in terms of raw pace. No team has been that far ahead for that number of races and we may never see that again.

This current version of Mercedes dominance isn't built on a pace advantage, rather it is more akin to Red Bull 10-13. The best car and team but only slightly ahead on pace. However, rarely making mistakes and knowing how to win amplifies the meagre pace advantage, even nullifying a pace deficit.

I have to address the bolded point because I have heard it a couple of times and it is patently false. There have been numerous teams in F1 history with more pace dominance. If you go back to the 50s and look at some of the Mercs that Fangio drove; he often had 4+ seconds on the field. As recently as the early 90s the Williams cars (especially in 92' and 93') were as much as 2+ seconds quicker than the next fastest team. The 2014-2016 period was exceptional and Mercedes should be applauded for what they achieved but it was not the most pace-dominant period in F1 history. Not even close actually.

With regards to the main question in the thread. The Mercedes package is definitely the strongest overall so far in 2019. Speculation about Ferrari performing below-par must be kept in context. For example, in Barcelona, it was clear that Ferrari cost themselves loads of time with their lack of decisiveness. With that said; they were still not really competing with the Mercs on any level. There was no concrete reason to believe that they would have been able to win that race had they gotten the strategy spot on because they couldn't match the performance of the Mercedes.

This year, Ferrari are not as strong as they were last year ( a season where IMO they had the best overall car on the year). They are not as competitive as they were in 2017 either (a year where they were often the fastest on race day but generally a bit behind in qualifying). This year; Mercedes have them beat on both Saturday and Sunday in 4 out of the 5 rounds. I don't think the margin is anywhere near what they had in 2014-2016 and I think it's important to note that Mercedes' pit wall has been rock solid so far this year while Ferrari have been a train wreck. Mercedes drivers have also not put a foot wrong while Ferrari's drivers have crashed, spun and made multiple significant errors on both Saturday and Sunday. Mercedes as a team, top to bottom, have out-performed Ferrari as a team and that is what has led to their dominance this year. The level of dominance that comes from the car alone this year is relatively modest IMO.

That isn't what I am saying. Other cars have been more dominant pace wise. It isn't exceptional for a car to be very dominant and it does happen, usually once or twice a decade.

But....no team has been that far ahead for a duration of 60 odd races.

In ~90% of races over the last 5yrs (and no doubt 6yrs by end of 2019) Mercedes have had best or equal best pace. That is an incredible statistic, but a damning one too. Over 95% of races have had at least 1 Merc on the Podium, and a team win rate around 75% over the hybrid era. Those sort of numbers will never be equaled over a 5-6yr period (and I hope they never are seen again!).

They've done a great job, but performance is locked in by money and regulations in a way, and for a duration, that has never hsppened before (and hopefully never again). It isn't even summer yet and all bets are cancelled as to WDC and WCC,

F1 fans can pretty much list nearly all of the races since 2014 where Mercedes have not had best or equal best car over the weekend - and I think that is telling in itself. I don't think many outwith the hardcore, could do that in 2014 looking back at the Red Bull era, or in 2005 looking back at the Ferrari era. Or in 1998 looking at Williams, or 1992 looking backat McLaren, etc

Badgeronimous wrote:

sandman1347 wrote:

Badgeronimous wrote:2014-2016 was the most dominant series of cars in F1 history in terms of raw pace. No team has been that far ahead for that number of races and we may never see that again.

This current version of Mercedes dominance isn't built on a pace advantage, rather it is more akin to Red Bull 10-13. The best car and team but only slightly ahead on pace. However, rarely making mistakes and knowing how to win amplifies the meagre pace advantage, even nullifying a pace deficit.

I have to address the bolded point because I have heard it a couple of times and it is patently false. There have been numerous teams in F1 history with more pace dominance. If you go back to the 50s and look at some of the Mercs that Fangio drove; he often had 4+ seconds on the field. As recently as the early 90s the Williams cars (especially in 92' and 93') were as much as 2+ seconds quicker than the next fastest team. The 2014-2016 period was exceptional and Mercedes should be applauded for what they achieved but it was not the most pace-dominant period in F1 history. Not even close actually.

With regards to the main question in the thread. The Mercedes package is definitely the strongest overall so far in 2019. Speculation about Ferrari performing below-par must be kept in context. For example, in Barcelona, it was clear that Ferrari cost themselves loads of time with their lack of decisiveness. With that said; they were still not really competing with the Mercs on any level. There was no concrete reason to believe that they would have been able to win that race had they gotten the strategy spot on because they couldn't match the performance of the Mercedes.

This year, Ferrari are not as strong as they were last year ( a season where IMO they had the best overall car on the year). They are not as competitive as they were in 2017 either (a year where they were often the fastest on race day but generally a bit behind in qualifying). This year; Mercedes have them beat on both Saturday and Sunday in 4 out of the 5 rounds. I don't think the margin is anywhere near what they had in 2014-2016 and I think it's important to note that Mercedes' pit wall has been rock solid so far this year while Ferrari have been a train wreck. Mercedes drivers have also not put a foot wrong while Ferrari's drivers have crashed, spun and made multiple significant errors on both Saturday and Sunday. Mercedes as a team, top to bottom, have out-performed Ferrari as a team and that is what has led to their dominance this year. The level of dominance that comes from the car alone this year is relatively modest IMO.

That isn't what I am saying. Other cars have been more dominant pace wise. It isn't exceptional for a car to be very dominant and it does happen, usually once or twice a decade.

But....no team has been that far ahead for a duration of 60 odd races.

In ~90% of races over the last 5yrs (and no doubt 6yrs by end of 2019) Mercedes have had best or equal best pace. That is an incredible statistic, but a damning one too. Over 95% of races have had at least 1 Merc on the Podium, and a team win rate around 75% over the hybrid era. Those sort of numbers will never be equaled over a 5-6yr period (and I hope they never are seen again!).

They've done a great job, but performance is locked in by money and regulations in a way, and for a duration, that has never hsppened before (and hopefully never again). It isn't even summer yet and all bets are cancelled as to WDC and WCC,

F1 fans can pretty much list nearly all of the races since 2014 where Mercedes have not had best or equal best car over the weekend - and I think that is telling in itself. I don't think many outwith the hardcore, could do that in 2014 looking back at the Red Bull era, or in 2005 looking back at the Ferrari era. Or in 1998 looking at Williams, or 1992 looking backat McLaren, etc

Your math (and perhaps your memory) needs work. There were at least 20 races between 2017 and 2018 alone where Mercedes did not have the fastest car. There were probably only 5-6 races from 2014-2016 where that was the case but to get to 90% over the last 5 years, you would need 2017-2018 to be just like 2014-2016.

The duration of time that they have been at the front and in the fight for the title at the very least is extremely impressive though. They have now surpassed Red Bull's run from 2009-2013 and are catching up with Ferrari's run; which, depending on your perspective, started in either 1997 or 1999 and ended in either 2004 or 2008 (2005 being the anomaly due to tire regs).

I've changed by opinion from less dominant to equally. We have a situation at present where Mercedes is guaranteed of pole and the win under normal circumstances, and that was the case from 2014-2016. Anything 'beyond' that is meaningless, so I believe at the moment their car is equally dominant to what it was at their height.

A seriously impressive achievement from the team, but I'm not going to deny it's killing my interest for the season at a rapid rate. Only McLaren being decent again is keeping me interested.

I think people's memories are fading somewhat. In terms of results, the only difference to 2014 has been a hairline split in a rubber tube on a spark plug and I don't think we may draw any inferences about how (not) well-oiled the Mercedes machine was then compared to today from that. 2015 was down to wet races and Nico wasn't particularly good in the wet, otherwise the Mercs would have crushed the opposition then, too. Even starting from the back of the grid in Germany didn't prevent Hamilton from securing a podium and still finishing 20s ahead of the next driver and I'm not confident that would repeat itself today.

This year Mercedes were fortunate that Leclerc's car went bang in Bahrain and Vettel was struggling, otherwise they wouldn't have secured the results they did. And while Baku did look like a Mercedes whitewash there was a chance that Leclerc may have at least split the Mercs and maybe even have taken pole, so again it was the opposition fumbling as much as Mercedes getting it right that counted there. Mercedes definitely have the strongest car and Spain did have echoes of the 2014-2016 superiority, but unlike those years this time around there have been a couple of what-may-have-been moments and Mercedes have benefitted to some extent from their competitors' misfortune. They didn't need that in e.g. 2014.

But yeah, not good for F1 as a whole and makes for another boring season if this continues.

sandman1347 wrote:

Badgeronimous wrote:

sandman1347 wrote:

Badgeronimous wrote:2014-2016 was the most dominant series of cars in F1 history in terms of raw pace. No team has been that far ahead for that number of races and we may never see that again.

This current version of Mercedes dominance isn't built on a pace advantage, rather it is more akin to Red Bull 10-13. The best car and team but only slightly ahead on pace. However, rarely making mistakes and knowing how to win amplifies the meagre pace advantage, even nullifying a pace deficit.

I have to address the bolded point because I have heard it a couple of times and it is patently false. There have been numerous teams in F1 history with more pace dominance. If you go back to the 50s and look at some of the Mercs that Fangio drove; he often had 4+ seconds on the field. As recently as the early 90s the Williams cars (especially in 92' and 93') were as much as 2+ seconds quicker than the next fastest team. The 2014-2016 period was exceptional and Mercedes should be applauded for what they achieved but it was not the most pace-dominant period in F1 history. Not even close actually.

With regards to the main question in the thread. The Mercedes package is definitely the strongest overall so far in 2019. Speculation about Ferrari performing below-par must be kept in context. For example, in Barcelona, it was clear that Ferrari cost themselves loads of time with their lack of decisiveness. With that said; they were still not really competing with the Mercs on any level. There was no concrete reason to believe that they would have been able to win that race had they gotten the strategy spot on because they couldn't match the performance of the Mercedes.

This year, Ferrari are not as strong as they were last year ( a season where IMO they had the best overall car on the year). They are not as competitive as they were in 2017 either (a year where they were often the fastest on race day but generally a bit behind in qualifying). This year; Mercedes have them beat on both Saturday and Sunday in 4 out of the 5 rounds. I don't think the margin is anywhere near what they had in 2014-2016 and I think it's important to note that Mercedes' pit wall has been rock solid so far this year while Ferrari have been a train wreck. Mercedes drivers have also not put a foot wrong while Ferrari's drivers have crashed, spun and made multiple significant errors on both Saturday and Sunday. Mercedes as a team, top to bottom, have out-performed Ferrari as a team and that is what has led to their dominance this year. The level of dominance that comes from the car alone this year is relatively modest IMO.

That isn't what I am saying. Other cars have been more dominant pace wise. It isn't exceptional for a car to be very dominant and it does happen, usually once or twice a decade.

But....no team has been that far ahead for a duration of 60 odd races.

In ~90% of races over the last 5yrs (and no doubt 6yrs by end of 2019) Mercedes have had best or equal best pace. That is an incredible statistic, but a damning one too. Over 95% of races have had at least 1 Merc on the Podium, and a team win rate around 75% over the hybrid era. Those sort of numbers will never be equaled over a 5-6yr period (and I hope they never are seen again!).

They've done a great job, but performance is locked in by money and regulations in a way, and for a duration, that has never hsppened before (and hopefully never again). It isn't even summer yet and all bets are cancelled as to WDC and WCC,

F1 fans can pretty much list nearly all of the races since 2014 where Mercedes have not had best or equal best car over the weekend - and I think that is telling in itself. I don't think many outwith the hardcore, could do that in 2014 looking back at the Red Bull era, or in 2005 looking back at the Ferrari era. Or in 1998 looking at Williams, or 1992 looking backat McLaren, etc

Your math (and perhaps your memory) needs work. There were at least 20 races between 2017 and 2018 alone where Mercedes did not have the fastest car. There were probably only 5-6 races from 2014-2016 where that was the case but to get to 90% over the last 5 years, you would need 2017-2018 to be just like 2014-2016.

The duration of time that they have been at the front and in the fight for the title at the very least is extremely impressive though. They have now surpassed Red Bull's run from 2009-2013 and are catching up with Ferrari's run; which, depending on your perspective, started in either 1997 or 1999 and ended in either 2004 or 2008 (2005 being the anomaly due to tire regs).

the claim was "or equal" and I think that holds up

pokerman wrote:

mikeyg123 wrote:

pokerman wrote:I kind of understand why a third of the forum think it's at least as dominant now, they are looking at race results as opposed to the actual car performance.

Surely by definition dominance is achieved only through results?

Dominance relates to the actual speed of the car and not being reliant on other cars unreliability or driver errors, however after Barcelona I might have to start changing my opinion if that continues.

The irony is that it is 2 ex Ferrari behind it now, Aldo Costa and James Allison added to the most effiecient PU in the business makes F1 in 2019 a drag race between Merc drivers to the first corner.
I've only watched highlights so far and even that aint much..

pokerman wrote:

mikeyg123 wrote:

pokerman wrote:I kind of understand why a third of the forum think it's at least as dominant now, they are looking at race results as opposed to the actual car performance.

Surely by definition dominance is achieved only through results?

Dominance relates to the actual speed of the car and not being reliant on other cars unreliability or driver errors, however after Barcelona I might have to start changing my opinion if that continues.

So... so far we have Ferrari dominance in 2019 with 0 wins and looking on par with the slower RB?? Not sure if that's going to go down well

AnRs wrote:The irony is that it is 2 ex Ferrari behind it now, Aldo Costa and James Allison added to the most effiecient PU in the business makes F1 in 2019 a drag race between Merc drivers to the first corner.
I've only watched highlights so far and even that aint much..

Still talking about the hybrid engines after Ferrari caught up and maybe even surpassed Mercedes gets a bit wearing.

Siao7 wrote:

pokerman wrote:

mikeyg123 wrote:

pokerman wrote:I kind of understand why a third of the forum think it's at least as dominant now, they are looking at race results as opposed to the actual car performance.

Surely by definition dominance is achieved only through results?

Dominance relates to the actual speed of the car and not being reliant on other cars unreliability or driver errors, however after Barcelona I might have to start changing my opinion if that continues.

So... so far we have Ferrari dominance in 2019 with 0 wins and looking on par with the slower RB?? Not sure if that's going to go down well

There is a difference between dominance and merely having the better car, I have said that after Barcelona it might be moving towards dominance but after 4 races we had Mercedes clearly better in 2, Ferrari clearly better in Bahrain whilst in Baku Leclerc seemingly binned the pole position car.

pokerman wrote:

AnRs wrote:The irony is that it is 2 ex Ferrari behind it now, Aldo Costa and James Allison added to the most effiecient PU in the business makes F1 in 2019 a drag race between Merc drivers to the first corner.
I've only watched highlights so far and even that aint much..

Still talking about the hybrid engines after Ferrari caught up and maybe even surpassed Mercedes gets a bit wearing.

I don't think you've understood the quote quite right here...

Zoue wrote:I think people's memories are fading somewhat. In terms of results, the only difference to 2014 has been a hairline split in a rubber tube on a spark plug and I don't think we may draw any inferences about how (not) well-oiled the Mercedes machine was then compared to today from that. 2015 was down to wet races and Nico wasn't particularly good in the wet, otherwise the Mercs would have crushed the opposition then, too. Even starting from the back of the grid in Germany didn't prevent Hamilton from securing a podium and still finishing 20s ahead of the next driver and I'm not confident that would repeat itself today.

This year Mercedes were fortunate that Leclerc's car went bang in Bahrain and Vettel was struggling, otherwise they wouldn't have secured the results they did. And while Baku did look like a Mercedes whitewash there was a chance that Leclerc may have at least split the Mercs and maybe even have taken pole, so again it was the opposition fumbling as much as Mercedes getting it right that counted there. Mercedes definitely have the strongest car and Spain did have echoes of the 2014-2016 superiority, but unlike those years this time around there have been a couple of what-may-have-been moments and Mercedes have benefitted to some extent from their competitors' misfortune. They didn't need that in e.g. 2014.

But yeah, not good for F1 as a whole and makes for another boring season if this continues.

Yeah that sums things up perfectly.

Zoue wrote:

pokerman wrote:

AnRs wrote:The irony is that it is 2 ex Ferrari behind it now, Aldo Costa and James Allison added to the most effiecient PU in the business makes F1 in 2019 a drag race between Merc drivers to the first corner.
I've only watched highlights so far and even that aint much..

Still talking about the hybrid engines after Ferrari caught up and maybe even surpassed Mercedes gets a bit wearing.

I don't think you've understood the quote quite right here...

No I just saw the reference to the PU which the poster is want to make.

pokerman wrote:

Zoue wrote:

pokerman wrote:

AnRs wrote:The irony is that it is 2 ex Ferrari behind it now, Aldo Costa and James Allison added to the most effiecient PU in the business makes F1 in 2019 a drag race between Merc drivers to the first corner.
I've only watched highlights so far and even that aint much..

Still talking about the hybrid engines after Ferrari caught up and maybe even surpassed Mercedes gets a bit wearing.

I don't think you've understood the quote quite right here...

No I just saw the reference to the PU which the poster is want to make.

Possibly, but the only reference to the PU is efficiency and I see the point being more about the 2 ex Ferrari people joining Mercedes making the difference. It may be too subtle for me but I don't see a hybrid dig in particular?

Zoue wrote:

pokerman wrote:

Zoue wrote:

pokerman wrote:

AnRs wrote:The irony is that it is 2 ex Ferrari behind it now, Aldo Costa and James Allison added to the most effiecient PU in the business makes F1 in 2019 a drag race between Merc drivers to the first corner.
I've only watched highlights so far and even that aint much..

Still talking about the hybrid engines after Ferrari caught up and maybe even surpassed Mercedes gets a bit wearing.

I don't think you've understood the quote quite right here...

No I just saw the reference to the PU which the poster is want to make.

Possibly, but the only reference to the PU is efficiency and I see the point being more about the 2 ex Ferrari people joining Mercedes making the difference. It may be too subtle for me but I don't see a hybrid dig in particular?

Efficiency is about fuel consumption I would have thought and nothing to do with who qualifies best or wins a drag race, on that score it was actually Vettel's Ferrari in Barcelona, I guess no surprise to an extent with the Ferrari being quicker on the straights?

So efficiency had no relevance apart from once again the poster perhaps looking to point to the Mercedes as having the best PU?

pokerman wrote:

Siao7 wrote:

pokerman wrote:

mikeyg123 wrote:

pokerman wrote:I kind of understand why a third of the forum think it's at least as dominant now, they are looking at race results as opposed to the actual car performance.

Surely by definition dominance is achieved only through results?

Dominance relates to the actual speed of the car and not being reliant on other cars unreliability or driver errors, however after Barcelona I might have to start changing my opinion if that continues.

So... so far we have Ferrari dominance in 2019 with 0 wins and looking on par with the slower RB?? Not sure if that's going to go down well

There is a difference between dominance and merely having the better car, I have said that after Barcelona it might be moving towards dominance but after 4 races we had Mercedes clearly better in 2, Ferrari clearly better in Bahrain whilst in Baku Leclerc seemingly binned the pole position car.

Leclerc had the pole position car in Baku? He only participated in Q3, how does that translate into the pole position car? Both Ferrari and Mercedes had pole capable cars, how do you deduct that Leclerc binned the pole position car?

But anyway, my post was complimenting mikeyg123's, you can't say that the Ferrari is the dominant car when they seemingly are only on paper. They have to translate it on the track too. And I do not think that the Merc is dominant, far from it, but their results are. And that's enough so far this year.

Siao7 wrote:

pokerman wrote:

Siao7 wrote:

pokerman wrote:

mikeyg123 wrote: Surely by definition dominance is achieved only through results?

Dominance relates to the actual speed of the car and not being reliant on other cars unreliability or driver errors, however after Barcelona I might have to start changing my opinion if that continues.

So... so far we have Ferrari dominance in 2019 with 0 wins and looking on par with the slower RB?? Not sure if that's going to go down well

There is a difference between dominance and merely having the better car, I have said that after Barcelona it might be moving towards dominance but after 4 races we had Mercedes clearly better in 2, Ferrari clearly better in Bahrain whilst in Baku Leclerc seemingly binned the pole position car.

Leclerc had the pole position car in Baku? He only participated in Q3, how does that translate into the pole position car? Both Ferrari and Mercedes had pole capable cars, how do you deduct that Leclerc binned the pole position car?

But anyway, my post was complimenting mikeyg123's, you can't say that the Ferrari is the dominant car when they seemingly are only on paper. They have to translate it on the track too. And I do not think that the Merc is dominant, far from it, but their results are. And that's enough so far this year.

In respect to Leclerc I'm only basically repeating what a lot of people think, with Mercedes yes dominant results but I see you agree that can be different from actually having a dominant car performance wise.