“It’s a Mercedes championship” – Horner

43 comments on ““It’s a Mercedes championship” – Horner”

1. 

   Jason Blankenship (@jblank)
   17th May 2019, 1:02

   Gee thanks Christian, had no idea of that. Truly a revelation. Until the rules are redone to improve parity this is what it will be. Dull racing, results that are decided turn one of lap one, and Merc winning and winning and winning. Predictability is the death of excitement.
   1. 

      ColdFly (@)
      17th May 2019, 1:13

      Until the rules are redone to improve parity

      I doubt it is the rules that give Mercedes their advantage; it’s simply their hard and clever work. The rules are the same for all. And nobody can predict if Mercedes will have more or less of an advantage next time FIA throws a set of rules at the teams.

      The times that Mercedes had an advantage due to a better PU are long gone.
      They rely a lot more on their chassis now and might even dominate next week.
      1. 

         maiagus
         17th May 2019, 1:50

         Maybe not the technical rules but the commercial rules.
         For me it is still a little strange that Ferrari can barely cope with MErc, and RB has to count on Newey/Horner/Marko collective genius to find a podium.
         Building a competitive racing car might be a daunting task, but it is still funny/odd to me that Renault cannot produce a podium worthy car. Just as japanese manufacturer couldnt a few years ago.
         I mean, if Renault – a reknown company with a long racing tradition – cannot concieve a competitive entry into current F1, maybe there is no hope for a competitive series with 4-5 teams.
         The counterpoint is Haas. And it shows how new commercial rules could improve the show and the series overall. Maybe a “dumber”/”cheaper” formula could be better for audiences, teams and drivers. Allow for semi-indenpendent constructors. Deincentivate major automakers do dump hyperbolic sums of money into the series.
         The automaker gamble F! had to make after losing tobacco money may not pay up in the long term. Yes, it brought Merc into the series, but is asking automakers to much money for little result and drowning smaller even legacy teams.
         1. 

            BasCB (@bascb)
            17th May 2019, 6:45

            I might buy your argument there. But it would only work if the likes of Red bull and Ferrari would not get the same (or more in the latter case) money.

            Ferrari had all the chance in the world to be right where Mercedes is. Their car was probably a tad better at least at the start of last season, and it is about the same now. But they have thrown too much away by stupid desicions both in the “garage” and factory as well as on track.

            Red Bull are in part the constructors of their own failure. Had they cooperated better with Renault (instead of claiming all success for themselves and all blaming all failure on their key partner), the both of them would have been able to better prepare for 2014 together and would have been able to maintain a solid run instead of what they have now.

            For both of these teams their arrogance and feeling of deserving things have hurt them, while Mercedes just kept chipping at improving their own act, which they have clearly managed extremely well.
      2. 

         AliceD (@aliced)
         17th May 2019, 9:34

         This is how I perceive things. Last year Ferrari could have won the drivers title. Mercedes was not happy with the tyres. Pirelli thusly changed the tyres. Now Mercedes is back to dominating with no-one else having a chance. Thank you to Pirrelli for making Mercedes dominate once more.
         1. 

            F1oSaurus (@)
            17th May 2019, 19:15

            @aliced None of the teams liked blistering.
      3. 

         ColdFly (@)
         17th May 2019, 9:36

         But of course Toto disagrees and declares Red Bull Monaco favourites in last Monday’s Reuters article: Motor racing-Dominant Mercedes brush aside invincibility thoughts (Reuters)
   2. 

      Martin
      17th May 2019, 8:56

      It’s not the rules but Ferrari and Red Bull repeatedly dropping the ball
      1. 

         Velocityboy (@velocityboy)
         17th May 2019, 13:28

         F1’s woes can not always be attributed to money or the rules, in many cases, it’s just poor decision making.
   3. 

      Lee
      17th May 2019, 11:26

      The only chance of them being beaten is a double DNF, and, unfortunately the other chance would have been Ricciardo at Monaco in a Red Bull…… sigh…..
   4. 

      RB13
      17th May 2019, 11:57

      Gee thanks Christian, had no idea of that. Truly a revelation.

      I mean it’s not like he was directly asked a question relating to if the championship was already over or anything, oh wait, he was.
2. 

   JammyB
   17th May 2019, 1:17

   And yet still less boring than having a single car driving by themselves 30+ seconds ahead of the rest of the field, some people seem to have short memories.
   1. 

      maiagus
      17th May 2019, 1:26

      Judging for some comments here – some of mine too – I am starting to think that F1 was never great.
      2010s: a Merc parade.
      2000s: Schumacher ruled;
      1990s: Mac/Williams 30 seconds ahead of the field.
      1980s: rose tinted glass wearing nostalgics.
      From time to time I have to rewatch Jerez’86 to convince me otherwise.
      1. 

         Minardi (@gitanes)
         17th May 2019, 2:05

         2010’s: Since 2014, yes. Before that it was decent

         2000’s: Half were Ferrari borefests, but many great seasons after 2004.

         1990’s: Agree about Williams and McLaren being miles ahead

         1980’s: For those who witnessed it, suffice to say there will never be another era like it
         1. 

            Phil Norman (@phil-f1-21)
            17th May 2019, 8:06

            I think any area without one team domination has been interesting and entertaining. So for example the pre and post Schumacher eras i.e. 1994 to 2000 and 2005 to 2010. In each of these there at least 4 different world champions and constructors.

            It’s easy to be nostalgic though and see things through sepia tinted specs.
         2. 

            JammyB
            17th May 2019, 13:04

            Before 2014 was decent? Did you not watch the borefest’s which was 2011,2013?
            1. 

               Phil Norman (@phil-f1-21)
               17th May 2019, 16:46

               I take this is directed at @gitanes. I stopped at 2010 😀
      2. 

         Aussie Rod (@aussierod)
         17th May 2019, 11:59

         I see where you’re coming from @maiagus but it’s easy to overlook the many great seasons we’ve had.

         1991, 1994, 1995, 1997 and 1999 were all competitive seasons with multiple teams capable of winning.

         2000, 2001, 2003, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008 and 2009 were also great, competitive seasons.

         2010, 2012 and the first half of 2013 were all fantastic.

         And whilst I’m bored to tears of Merc dominance, last year was actually quite competitive between Merc, Ferrari and Red Bull.
         1. 

            socksolid (@socksolid)
            17th May 2019, 19:16

            Last year was a total pancake when later in the season ferrari went wrong direction with the car.
            1. 

               Not anon
               17th May 2019, 21:17

               Looking back at a season it is easy to say it was boring but in the moment nobody predicted that merc would walk away with the title.
3. 

   maiagus
   17th May 2019, 1:17

   Would merging Wseries grid with F2/F3 defeat the segregated series’ purpose?
   1. 

      Phylyp (@phylyp)
      17th May 2019, 9:29

      That’s an interesting point you make, maiagus. I believe that the W-series’ existence should be time-bound, say for 10-15 years, and at multiple levels of motorsport (karting onwards). Once the necessary momentum has been built, wherein women enter racing, it should be gradually withdrawn, leaving the motorsport entry path a meritocracy (but still likely only for those who can afford it, sadly).

      While I’m not fully convinced on how the W-series is going about getting women into motorsport, I cannot help but agree that any earlier attempts have failed, so it is still worth a shot, especially given someone is willing to invest in it, and despite the reservations of people like me.

      However, leaving the W-series as a parallel feeder series for too long will be detrimental, since it will cultivate an impression of “the other path” into motorsport.
      1. 

         ColdFly (@)
         17th May 2019, 9:42

         leaving the motorsport entry path a meritocracy (but still likely only for those who can afford it, sadly)

         So more a moneyocracy then? @phylyp.
         The real challenge will be if the future rich will choose a male or female designer baby ;)
         1. 

            Phylyp (@phylyp)
            17th May 2019, 9:46

            So more a moneyocracy then?

            @coldfly Yeah, that’ll be the same as it is today. I hear that even a karting entry is quite expensive, not something everyone can dabble in as a hobby to see if they like it and have talent for it. Solving that problem needs another solution.

            The real challenge will be if the future rich will choose a male or female designer baby ;)

            :)
            1. 

               Not anon
               17th May 2019, 21:44

               I’d say that it is more financially effective at the moment to invest in the W series, due to the political environment. So you might see more sponsors targeting women and paying for their karting career regardless of their talent/success.( More bang for your buck as it were) I don’t see a solution for this as sponsors don’t give their money away for nothing.
            2. 

               Not anon
               17th May 2019, 21:51

               I mean solution as is sponsors targeting talent over short term marketing value.
   2. 

      Alianora La Canta (@alianora-la-canta)
      19th May 2019, 20:34

      @maiagus Given, as far as I can tell, W Series is a marketing exercise, with any benefit to the drivers being coincidental, yes.
4. 

   Jordi Casademunt (@casjo)
   17th May 2019, 2:19

   All Magnussen has mastered is the art of pushing drivers off-track.

   Which, nowadays, is a low risk since it’s almost never penalized and the outside driver will almost always bail out.
   1. 

      Shimks (@shimks)
      17th May 2019, 6:12

      @casjo I don’t agree. I think he’s a great racer. He’s improved so much over the last couple of seasons. I think rarely makes a mistake. I think he could do wonders with a fast car.

      And with his, “Suck on my…,” to The Hulk, he’s earned the title of Best F1 Retort Ever.
   2. 

      Todfod (@todfod)
      17th May 2019, 7:55

      @casjo

      I agree with you. He’s got no racing etiquette to begin with. It’s not like he’s a hard racer and borders on what’s acceptable… all drivers can drive like he does, but they keep it cleaner out of respect to their fellow competitors. Magnussen’s chop across Leclerc last year was dangerous, stupid and not in anyway “hard” racing. His racing stunts during outlaps of qyaliifying isn’t “hard” racing either. He’s been lucky not to have been penalised on multiple occasions for pushing drivers off the circuit and weaving on straights (in Baku if I remember).

      He seems like a mediocre driver, with mediocre pace and terrible racing etiquette. I don’t see how people respect him for it.
      1. 

         Asanator (@asanator)
         17th May 2019, 10:32

         Lol, of course you dont! You have a strong bias against anyone or anything that has negatively affected Alonso.
   3. 

      az
      17th May 2019, 10:25

      Agree.

      people says he’s dangerous, but how often does he crash with other drivers?

      I don’t think that is a valid argument. Drivers back off when Magnussen does that kind of dangerous moves, because they don’t want to have a big accident.
5. 

   JohnH (@johnrkh)
   17th May 2019, 7:58

   Yeah well it’s not just the fact that Merc has probably the best car. It’s that they definable have the best team around that car. they rarely make a tactical mistake they have Hamilton arguably the best driver of the era. Bottas has really lifted his game and Wolff no doubt in my mind the best team manager/Principle.
   No point blaming Merc for this, Ferrari, RedBull have failed to lift. I don’t include Renault as they said from the start they were not going to be at the pointy end.
   Haas and McLaren have been the big improvers this yr among the mid field.
   1. 

      Jere (@jerejj)
      17th May 2019, 13:29

      @johnrkh I agree with you on Mclaren but disagree on Haas. Haas, along with Renault, has been the biggest disappointment out of the midfield thus far. The latter definitely has been the biggest, but Haas comes a good second on that front. I expected more from both in the five races run so far.
6. 

   Levente (@leventebandi)
   17th May 2019, 9:57

   Tbh Morocco does not have a good history regarding circuits. Both Marrakesh versions were/are absymal.

   Merging the W series with F3 is out of question, as the W series is more of a show than a real racing championship. Cant take a series seriously where qualification is not only based on racer talent, but on the marketing demands of the producer of the series’ reality show
7. 

   Jere (@jerejj)
   17th May 2019, 13:26

   Was it really that necessary for Chase Carey to address the same thing yet again? Yes, it’s perfectly understandable why it’s a better approach to do certain things behind closed doors instead of publicly, but does it have to be said over and over again? I think we already understood it the first time, so this has just started to get nothing but redundant and repetitive.

   Regarding the COTD: Yes, I share the same sentiments to an extent, although not all of his moves have been as bad. The one on Leclerc in Japan definitely has been the worst out of them. He simply was too late in reacting to Leclerc’s commitment to move to the inside. Had he done it a few seconds earlier then it would’ve still been all fine.
   1. 

      Alianora La Canta (@alianora-la-canta)
      19th May 2019, 20:36

      @jerejj If people keep asking Chase about it, expect to keep hearing Chase giving the same reply – until the situation enables him to give a different one.
      1. 

         Jere (@jerejj)
         20th May 2019, 13:02

         @alianora-la-canta Well, I doubt Craig Slater (in this case) directly asked (or attempted to ask) about the details of the topic, i.e., tried to delve into things that would normally be off-limits to tell/talk about in public.
         1. 

            Alianora La Canta (@alianora-la-canta)
            24th May 2019, 13:48

            @jerejj No, I expect he asked the exact same question 50 other people have already asked Chase!
8. 

   wayne
   17th May 2019, 16:57

   its funny how the 2000s is schumi but the 201s is merc… why not 2010s lewis? just asking…. i mean shumi did hv 1 less driver to race…his partner… while lewis never had and does not have a clause that makes him the no 1 driver….
   1. 

      Alex
      17th May 2019, 18:57

      I think the fact that Rosberg beat him to the championship one year has put a bit of a question mark against it.
   2. 

      F1oSaurus (@)
      17th May 2019, 19:31

      Because Schumacher didn’t have a team mate who was allowed to race. Herbert once explained he wasn’t even allowed to see his own telemetry while Schumacher was allowed to see both his and Herbert’s. So that was pretty much a one driver team. The other driver was just there to hinder others and get out of the way for Schumacher.

      With Mercedes it’s a true team effort.

      Just see how Rosberg got the chance to take the WDC after Hamilton had a ton of technical issues with the car and got punted of twice more. Mercedes didn’t even compensate for all that by giving Hamilton some benefit in return. It’s not in their nature.

      Unless like last season in Russia when Bottas was well out of contention anyway and they felt that Ferrari had the edge on them. Which made sense seeing how Ferrari dominated in GER, HUN, BEL, ITA and SIN except for blunders from their drivers when it mattered.
      1. 

         Esploratore (@esploratore)
         18th May 2019, 3:29

         Schumacher was the only at least competent driver at benetton, a team which has otherwise won absolutely nothing, before or after schumacher came and left, and (to the other poster) rosberg winning the 2016 title does absolutely nothing to damage hamilton’s legacy, considering when you correct for mechanical reliability hamilton ends up winning and, in correlation between hamilton vs rosberg and old schumacher vs rosberg, it’s clear now that rosberg wasn’t that bad and would probably have challenged vettel of the best years in the same car.

Comments are closed.