Is the RB19 Dominant?

[hollus]

Originally posted by chrisc90 elsewhere:

2022:

Qualifying Poles: 9/22 (41%)
Race wins: 17/22 (77%)

2023:

Qualifying Poles: 3/4...(75%)
Race wins: 4/4... (100%)

But if you look at 2014 at the start of the hybrid era - We'll use Mercedes as they were the dominant team by some margin.

2014:
Qualifying Poles: 18/19 (95%)
Race wins: 16/19 (84%)

2015:
Qualifying Poles: 18/19 (95%)
Race wins: 16/19 (84%)

2016:
Qualifying Poles: 20/21 (95%)
Race wins: 19/21 (91%)

Of course there are other factors you could include to flex your stats, but those are the basic ones. It shows that RB wasnt as dominant as the Mercedes were at the start of the era based on pole positions and race wins alone.


PS: mods - be happy for the 'RB19 dominance' discussion to be moved across to relevant thread if required.

[vorticism]

2022:

Qualifying Poles: 9/22 (41%)
Race wins: 17/22 (77%)

2023:

Qualifying Poles: 3/4...(75%)
Race wins: 4/4... (100%)

But if you look at 2014 at the start of the hybrid era - We'll use Mercedes as they were the dominant team by some margin.

2014:
Qualifying Poles: 18/19 (95%)
Race wins: 16/19 (84%)

2015:
Qualifying Poles: 18/19 (95%)
Race wins: 16/19 (84%)

2016:
Qualifying Poles: 20/21 (95%)
Race wins: 19/21 (91%)

Of course there are other factors you could include to flex your stats, but those are the basic ones. It shows that RB wasnt as dominant as the Mercedes were at the start of the era based on pole positions and race wins alone.


PS: mods - be happy for the 'RB19 dominance' discussion to be moved across to relevant thread if required.

Thanks, Chris. Forbidden data.
hollus may want to assess you curation of biases in thread titles active on the forum currently.

[chrisc90]

Thanks, Chris. Forbidden data.

No problem. Pleased it was rescued from the realms of the hidden post archives.

What it doesnt really factor in is dominance of the RB18-9 compared to the other competitors during the seasons. Im not sure how you could really show the data of say RB, Merc, Ferrari, AMR etc without singling out particular drivers, going into event specific happenings etc. I guess you could go into average race pace between both drivers and make a 'team average' and compare with the others but that would be a significant amount of work.

[PlatinumZealot]

Miami looking to be their most dominant track yet... 7 tenths to next competitor in one lap pace in FP3.. Gulp.. Will race pace be 2 seconds faster?

[chrisc90]

Miami looking to be their most dominant track yet... 7 tenths to next competitor in one lap pace in FP3.. Gulp.. Will race pace be 2 seconds faster?

+0.156 if you go off the latest time.

Still plenty time to come out for everyone.

[vorticism]

Thanks, Chris. Forbidden data.

No problem. Pleased it was rescued from the realms of the hidden post archives.

What it doesnt really factor in is dominance of the RB18-9 compared to the other competitors during the seasons. I'm not sure how you could really show the data of say RB, Merc, Ferrari, AMR etc without singling out particular drivers, going into event specific happenings etc. I guess you could go into average race pace between both drivers and make a 'team average' and compare with the others but that would be a significant amount of work.

Additionally it would be difficult to eliminate the effects of sandbagging for any car/team.

Adjustment of PU parameters is far easier than adjusting chassis-suspension-bodywork parameters per race and mid-race. For one it can be done remotely as a software/ECU parameter change. It's easier to turn a dial than it is to draft, tool, manufacture and install new bodywork. It would be an obvious thing to state, yet some here do not acknowledge this. Sandbagging with fixed parameters like bodywork & suspension would be more reliant upon the drivers to maintain and perfect convincingly across events.

Readers will note who started this thread and when i.e. HAM fanbase damage-controlling a reality-detached meme. Within that sort of nontechnical banter hollus finds some gratification--responses adversarial to the premise are used to justify bans and locks.

[AR3-GP]

Thanks, Chris. Forbidden data.

No problem. Pleased it was rescued from the realms of the hidden post archives.

What it doesnt really factor in is dominance of the RB18-9 compared to the other competitors during the seasons. I'm not sure how you could really show the data of say RB, Merc, Ferrari, AMR etc without singling out particular drivers, going into event specific happenings etc. I guess you could go into average race pace between both drivers and make a 'team average' and compare with the others but that would be a significant amount of work.

Additionally it would be difficult to eliminate the effects of sandbagging for any car/team.

Adjustment of PU parameters is far easier than adjusting chassis-suspension-bodywork parameters per race and mid-race. For one it can be done remotely as a software/ECU parameter change. It's easier to turn a dial than it is to draft, tool, manufacture and install new bodywork. It would be an obvious thing to state, yet some here do not acknowledge this. Sandbagging with fixed parameters like bodywork & suspension would be more reliant upon the drivers to maintain and perfect convincingly across events.

Readers will note who started this thread and when i.e. HAM fanbase damage-controlling a reality-detached meme. Within that sort of nontechnical banter hollus finds some gratification--responses adversarial to the premise are used to justify bans and locks.

An extra mm of ride height could in theory be used to sandbag.

[napoleon1981]

Interesting interpretation of what I wrote…

RB care for the same reason that Merc cared. The FIA nerf. I’m not saying Red Bull are holding back the way Merc was in 2014-2015, but they have zero reason to run their PU at 100% when they can run it at 98% and still win at a canter.

Their reason to run it at 100% is to win pole positions.

If pole was so important, they would run a qualifying setup….but as you knw…points are scored on Sunday.

They have 4 of 5 official pole positions this season. Just like Mercedes in start of hybrid era and Mercedes didn’t need full power to take those poles at a canter.

RB were already running with a slightly less power in Australia due to the drive shaft concerns and they still took pole at a canter. RB is the only team still using their first power unit this weekend. Safe to say they are not pushing to the breaking point of their design, unlike Ferrari who quickly found the breaking point of their own PU and have had to reduce the power to a more realistic level.

Since you can only use 4 engines this year without a penalty, its the expectations you can do 5 races on these components. That is not detuning an engine for reliability. Thats staying within the rules.

[napoleon1981]

Miami looking to be their most dominant track yet... 7 tenths to next competitor in one lap pace in FP3.. Gulp.. Will race pace be 2 seconds faster?

In qualy when it mattered less than a second ahead of Magnussen in a Haas. I would say, not dominant at all.

[JordanMugen]

Miami looking to be their most dominant track yet... 7 tenths to next competitor in one lap pace in FP3.. Gulp.. Will race pace be 2 seconds faster?

It's a great bit of kit! Quite the superbly engineered race car.

In any case, the midpack behind RBR is very close indeed from P2-3 through to last place. Very tight!

There was only 0.9s separating second place Sainz to last place Sargaent in Q1. The midpack Mercedes team were P19-20 before taking their final run, showing how incredibly tight and competitive the midfield is: quite the testament to the success of the FIA and FOM's regulations for a close field -- both technical and budget cap/wind tunnel hours.

An extra mm of ride height could in theory be used to sandbag.

I don't see why Verstappen would sandbag such as to have a difficult car that snaps in Q3, leading to an aborted lap and P9 start. That seems illogical. RBR may choose to delay the release of upgrades w.r.t. budget cap, but to deliberately expose the results to risk from the second or third fastest Ferrari and Aston Martin teams seems most irrational.

You gotta take the poles and wins when you can, as the pendulum can soon swing, such as Red Bull's midpack 2014 season despite a competitive 2013 season.

[AR3-GP]

Miami looking to be their most dominant track yet... 7 tenths to next competitor in one lap pace in FP3.. Gulp.. Will race pace be 2 seconds faster?

It's a great bit of kit! Quite the superbly engineered race car.

In any case, the midpack behind RBR is very close indeed from P2-3 through to last place. Very tight!

There was only 0.9s separating second place Sainz to last place Sargaent in Q1. The midpack Mercedes team were P19-20 before taking their final run, showing how incredibly tight and competitive the midfield is: quite the testament to the success of the FIA and FOM's regulations for a close field -- both technical and budget cap/wind tunnel hours.

An extra mm of ride height could in theory be used to sandbag.

I don't see why Verstappen would sandbag such as to have a difficult that snaps in Q3, leading to an aborted lap. That seems illogical.

To be clear, I meant running the car with an extra 1 mm of rideheight. The driver has no control over that.

Nevertheless I do not believe RB are sandbagging on the chassis side or the engine side.

I only think it's likely that if ICE can be run at 102%, they are only running it at 99%, because they can, and it's always nice for reliability reasons. However, all manufacturers are doing this to some extent.

[JordanMugen]

they are only running it at 99%, because they can, and it's always nice for reliability reasons

Of course. It is a far cry from the Renault unit of 2016-2017 that even when run at 105% it was still down on power (and also unreliable). If only Mercedes had approved the customer supply for Red Bull from 2016-2020, how many more races could Verstappen and Ricciardo have won? Such a shame, oh well.

At least there is relative parity between the power units now which is much, much, much better for the sport.

Of course the Honda should still be credited for its excellent packaging and excellent ERS efficiency (seemingly without the harvesting slowdowns that some of the other units have near the ends of straights), as should the Red Bull for its stable aero platform, good straight line speed, effective DRS, good tyre management and good (stable and consistent) downforce.

[vorticism]

An extra mm of ride height could in theory be used to sandbag.

Perhaps. That's what I mean when I wrote "adjusting chassis-suspension-bodywork parameters." However those changes can't be made while the car is running by turning a dial.

The powertrain should be easier or more intuitive to use for sandbagging since it is more adjustable, compared to chassis components which are fixed. Consider the only adjustable chassis component is DRS, although it is binary in its operation.

If there were dials on the steering wheel for active suspension and aero parameters, then you might be able to say chassis components are as malleable as engine ECU parameters are (or used to be).

[ValeVida46]

Qualifying is far less important now in this era than it was prior.

Ferrari outqualifed Red Bull and were a second behind in Baku. I mean it really doesn't get any more glaring than this.

[AR3-GP]

I've changed my mind. I think RB are capable of sandbagging and probably are. Through PU performance reduction, and by not running the car as low as possible. They don't need to stress the car that much. It's the logical thing to do in their position. It satisfies political and reliability requirements.

It's the chasing teams who have to run at the limit to get close.