[Team] Mercedes: Will they ever dominate again?

[crmalcolm]

If anyone has been in the Motorsport History section lately, they may have seen a thread that discusses the most successful team(s) in F1 history.

The thread there has reached the end of the 2022 season in terms of records, and so I have brought the forward-looking discussion here.

[crmalcolm]

In the other thread, the record of teams was considered over whole seasons, with the completed season records broken down into 50+ races intervals.

Mercedes already holds the highest win ratio records for 50+, 100+, 150+ and 200+. Combined with Brawn, it also holds the highest win ratio record for 250+ races over completed seasons.

How long would it take to clinch all of the other records on the assumption of 23-race seasons going forward?

• With no wins in the next 3 seasons, Mercedes will set the 250+ record outright.
  
• With no wins in the next 2 seasons, the combined Brawn-Mercedes record would be the highest 300+ win ratio of all time.
• With no wins in the next 4 seasons, the combined Brawn-Mercedes record would be the highest 350+ win ratio of all time.
  
• With 8 wins in the next 6 seasons, the combined Brawn-Mercedes record would be the highest 400+ win ratio of all time.
• With 18 wins in the next 8 seasons, the combined Brawn-Mercedes record would be the highest 450+ win ratio of all time.
• With 28 wins in the next 10 seasons, the combined Brawn-Mercedes record would be the first 500+ race record in excess of 30% win ratio.
  
  
• With 2 wins in the next 4 seasons, Mercedes would set the 300+ record outright.
• With 5 wins in the next 6 seasons, Mercedes would set the 350+ record outright.
• With 13 wins in the next 8 seasons, Mercedes would set the 400+ record outright.
• With 24 wins in the next 10 seasons, Mercedes would set the 450+ record outright.
• With 35 wins in the next 13 seasons, Mercedes would set the 500+ record outright.

[Tourer]

.....and therein lies one of the problems with simple stats when it comes to judging performance such as "most successful".

No question that the current MB team is very good but the era we are now in has dramatically more races than in some previous eras and the cars are much more reliable and consistent - as are the drivers.

Any real examination of best, or most successful or GOAT needs to make allowance for the variables, look more at percentages and be more nuanced in my view, which leads to it coming down to a personal viewpoint as often as not.

[S griffin]

Originally Posted by Tourer

.....and therein lies one of the problems with simple stats when it comes to judging performance such as "most successful".

No question that the current MB team is very good but the era we are now in has dramatically more races than in some previous eras and the cars are much more reliable and consistent - as are the drivers.

Any real examination of best, or most successful or GOAT needs to make allowance for the variables, look more at percentages and be more nuanced in my view, which leads to it coming down to a personal viewpoint as often as not.

As well as that drivers are tending to have longer careers than in the past and also can stay on top for longer. So that can help teams too.

[crmalcolm]

Originally Posted by S griffin

As well as that drivers are tending to have longer careers than in the past and also can stay on top for longer.

That's an interesting point - and maybe slightly OT for this thread.

Are drivers staying on top for longer, or blocking upcoming drivers from taking a seat for longer?

[GTRMagic]

Originally Posted by crmalcolm

That's an interesting point - and maybe slightly OT for this thread.

Are drivers staying on top for longer, or blocking upcoming drivers from taking a seat for longer?

Or is the advent of almost 50% more grand prix in a season than the "good old days" making it easier (relatively) to create modern day records over historic success?

[crmalcolm]

Originally Posted by GTRMagic

Or is the advent of almost 50% more grand prix in a season than the "good old days" making it easier (relatively) to create modern day records over historic success?

There will always be that 'debate' over the validity of records. It is part of the reason why I have broken down the records into race-span rather than calendar based.

Admittedly, it will never be perfect - but I think that when you get into the realm of periods exceeding 250/300 races you have gone beyond the records being set just because there are more races in a season or within a single set of regulations.

For instance - if you take the situation that with no wins in the next 4 seasons, the combined Brawn-Mercedes record would be the highest 350+ win ratio of all time.

That is a timespan that covers significant changes to aero, powertrain and circuit design.

Even looking at the post-Brawn era alone, Mercedes only needs 5 wins in the next 6 seasons to set the 350+ race record. That will be over a 17 year period with rivals coming and going.

Will they ever dominate again? In the longer term, they are still dominating now.
Getting back to even a 25% win ratio for a few years and they will dominate even harder.

[dsg]

Originally Posted by crmalcolm

That's an interesting point - and maybe slightly OT for this thread.

Are drivers staying on top for longer, or blocking upcoming drivers from taking a seat for longer?

Drivers are certainly living longer which could be seen as blocking upcoming drivers.

A great deal of Mercedes success came at a time when they had a GOAT driver, larger number of races per season and during a period when the development of competitors cars was limited and reliability rewarded.

A generation before Ferrari/Schumacher greatly benefitted from favourable tyre regulations amongst other things.

Hopefully Mercedes (or anyone) will never dominate again as the regulations going forward will allow planets to align for other teams.

[Tourer]

Toto reckons that MB is likely to still be off RBR's pace at the start of season 2023.

Makes sense to me - assuming that MB has itself and the car sorted for the coming season, there is still some catching up to do if they want to be competitive at all Circuits. How long it takes them (if they get there) will be one of the stories of the 2023 season no doubt.

[S griffin]

At least it will be harder to steal a march with the rules staying the same as last year. That said I wouldn't be surprised if Merc aren't quite able to challenge for wins from the off

[GTRMagic]

Originally Posted by Tourer

Toto reckons that MB is likely to still be off RBR's pace at the start of season 2023.

Makes sense to me - assuming that MB has itself and the car sorted for the coming season, there is still some catching up to do if they want to be competitive at all Circuits. How long it takes them (if they get there) will be one of the stories of the 2023 season no doubt.

*COUGH* Sandbagging *COUGH*

[Mike Harte]

I don't know if it has been mentioned here before, but MB claim to know exactly why the car was so poor especially at the beginning of last season. It was due to either poor data extracted from their in-house simulator/CAD etc., or interpretation of that data (this is my take from their comments). This in turn exacerbated the extreme porpoising that the cars displayed early in the year, which they managed to dial out for the later races.

They claim that the same mistake/s will not be repeated!

[morninggents]

Originally Posted by Mike Harte

This in turn exacerbated the extreme porpoising that the cars displayed early in the year, which they managed to dial out for the later races.

No doubt helped by the change in the Tech Regs in the middle of the season.

[porsche962fan]

Originally Posted by Mike Harte

I don't know if it has been mentioned here before, but MB claim to know exactly why the car was so poor especially at the beginning of last season. It was due to either poor data extracted from their in-house simulator/CAD etc., or interpretation of that data (this is my take from their comments). This in turn exacerbated the extreme porpoising that the cars displayed early in the year, which they managed to dial out for the later races.

They claim that the same mistake/s will not be repeated!

ironic! watched some FIA Gt 1998 races and the Mercedes CLK car was the only ones with most visible porposining

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H-VImHCKzDQ

[Akrapovic]

Originally Posted by porsche962fan

ironic! watched some FIA Gt 1998 races and the Mercedes CLK car was the only ones with most visible porposining

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H-VImHCKzDQ

I'm a bit of a super nerd for that era in FIA GT.

The graphics there are wrong - this car is the CLK LM, not the GTR (which raced in 97 and early 98). The LM had a lower nose, longer tail and different engine. It was what introduced the porpoising to that generation of cars. The GTR before it was fine. The CLR had that issue as well, along with the more serious issue of flying, of course.

[porsche962fan]

^ I think you're mistaken

the blue Persson cars were still CLK GTR for the whole seasons , they had same porposining issue as the works CLK LM cars

now other cars did have this too like the 98 911 GT1 but IMO the CLK has the most porposining effect , maybe they were designed in same tunel they used for F1 2 decades later ?

[Tourer]

Originally Posted by porsche962fan

ironic! watched some FIA Gt 1998 races and the Mercedes CLK car was the only ones with most visible porposining

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H-VImHCKzDQ

Doubt there's any link - 20 years apart and 2 different teams developing / racing the cars but interesting and yeah, ironic.

[crmalcolm]

Originally Posted by porsche962fan

maybe they were designed in same tunel they used for F1 2 decades later ?

Highly unlikely considering that the F1 car wind tunnel is based in Brackley, whereas the initial CLK design was based on a Mclaren F1 and developed in Affalterbach using the wind tunnel in Untertürkheim.

[Tourer]

Toto now accepting that they may have to change the concept of the car.

Can't help feeling that if Niki was still with us, the zero pod concept would have been ditched for this year, maybe even part way through last year. I'm all for innovating and trying new things but when they clearly don't work, the bin is ready.

Have to say though - the initial test car from last year ran at the first test, then was replaced with the "revolutionary, rocket-ship like" (according to some commentators at the time) zero pod concept as late as possible, then bounced its way around track after track, leading to Toto agitating hard for ride-height change, huge politics about it, change gets made, zero pod is still slow, still not great - after one test and before the first actual race Toto now saying they'll likely have to move away from the concept - so all the late-reveal, politics, carry-on has all been for precisely nothing.

I wonder how much it has cost F1 teams collectively to modify their cars to the new ride-height regs, the FIA to introduce the tests on bouncing brought in last year and all due to the poor performance and extreme bouncing of one car, that now appears may find its way into the nearest skip (or at least parts of it will). Quite extraordinary set of circumstances.

[Aysedasi]

I don't think the porpoising was confined to just one car, was it? Having said that, the Mercs had it worse than anyone and made the most noise about it.....

[Greem]

I was following some of the in-car footage yesterday. It was notable on the long straights that the Ferrari of Leclerc was chittering rapidly, so it's still bouncing but the frequency is higher and the amplitude lower.

I didn't watch the RB cars for long enough to notice whether they were. I'll look at them this afternoon.

[Aysedasi]

Originally Posted by Greem

I was following some of the in-car footage yesterday. It was notable on the long straights that the Ferrari of Leclerc was chittering rapidly, so it's still bouncing but the frequency is higher and the amplitude lower.

Yes, I noticed that too.

[VIVA GT]

On the C4 highlights programme you could hear the bouncing on the in-car stuff from McLaren too.

[Tourer]

Originally Posted by Aysedasi

I don't think the porpoising was confined to just one car, was it? Having said that, the Mercs had it worse than anyone and made the most noise about it.....

Yeah you're right on both counts - I probably got a bit carried away there but it appears to me that the bouncing was more manageable for the others, or at least some of the others.

I just find it ironic (or something similar) that much of the porpoising talk was driven by the MB issues and by statements made by MB and that now it may be that they are heading away from the current concept, which could have addressed the bouncing without the whole sport needing to change their cars.

The bouncing has long been something to work on with ground effect cars and may not be 100% eradicated for all teams now or in the future of course, and the mid-season changes seemed to make it less severe on the MB last year but maybe going away from the zero pod could have helped last year and the whole political carambolage could have been avoided.

[Aysedasi]

Yeah, agreed. I don't major on the techie stuff but MB do seem to have not only gone down the blind alley but they've actually parked at the bottom and got out for a picnic.... I've remarked elsewhere in the race thread just how 'wrong' those cars look and they seem to have liveried them now to accentuate the 'wrongness'......