Is the RB18 dominant?

[ispano6]

Let's put it this way, Red Bull is now the best team.

[Quantum]

I was basing it on race pace since that seems to be the most useful metric with the new cars that can pass one another. Before the summer break, the RB18 didn't have a single race where it had more than 2 tenth advantage in race pace, and had only achieved 4 poles. Ferrari had multiple races with greater than 2 tenths advantage (Australia, Austria at the very least) and many poles. Since summer break we've seen the RB18 have 5 tenths or greater race pace advantage over Ferrari at Zandvoort, Spa, Monza, Suzuka and been in contention for pole every weekend. There are two halves to this season. One that's closely competed in terms of pure performance but not represented in the scoring due to various factors, and the second half of the season that's been completely dominant. Overall yes it'll be seen as a dominant car, and a dominant season. But I think we can look at each result more closely to see the RB18 was not far and away class of the field until Belgium

This has been the case for several dominant cars, where for the first few races it would be on equal footing before eventually moving clearly ahead in the season.
The staggering thing is that Verstappen was 46 points behind Charles after the first 3 events, and also suffered with issues while in contention for wins at Silverstone and Singapore.

The times he has been beaten by a Ferrari this season is 2 by DNF technical failures, 1 by floor damage and 1 on merit where he finished 1.5 seconds behind Charles in Austria due to tyre graining problems on the RB due to aggressive set up (RB explanation).

Also this season we are seeing most teams are cruising for around 85% of the race limited by the tyres. Outright pace is not the dominant factor here, and hasn't been for some time. It's keeping the tyres in the best shape for a better mean stint time.
This is absolutely critical this season as we have new tyres that don't have the benefit of years of experience.

So any statistical avg will not bear out the capability of a car to close a gap in race as we have seen regularly, and then overtake only to ease off and keep the gap steady.

The Mercedes/RB /Ferrari comparison is a good one too because it shows how badly Ferrari go backward due in no small part to their cars inability to consistently activate and utilise it's tyres.
Austria was a good example of Ferrari playing a decent avg, where RB went aggressive Ferrari managed to hang it out and win despite RB having 3 stops to 2 and helped out by a safety car. Ferrari still won.
However the trend is totally the opposite, and this is the only example of Ferrari being able to hang it out longer.

Note too, that RB were forced into making pit stops and even put Max on used mediums on his final stop at that Race.
If the car was Red, many people would say either pitting was a mistake, should've been a different compound, shouldve been earlier/later etc.
When the car cannot maintain pace you are forced to evaluate options, and that is why Mercedes are 65 odd points behind Ferrari. It's not solely down to ineptitude or misfortune either. Mercedes have beaten Ferrari on merit a few times this season, and that is crazy given the wide variance in their qualifying performances and how "quick" the Ferrari is and how "slow" the Merc is.

What I'm saying is that there is nuance to car performance, and it's absolutely even more so this year were stint time on any given compound is the actual be all and end all. Once you pop up ahead of your rival and they're out of DRS it's game over, and you settle into a tyre management mode, which was the case in previous seasons but to a lesser extent given the examples I have show above.

I think the real difference is when you compare the compound/track/stint/car to when an RB is behind a Ferrari and you start to see the real difference between the cars which is far more than the 0.2 second being bandied around.

[Xyz22]

After the summer break, yes. The gap to the F1 75 is over 0.5s in race pace.

[Juzh]

The times he has been beaten by a Ferrari this season is 2 by DNF technical failures, 1 by floor damage and 1 on merit where he finished 1.5 seconds behind Charles in Austria due to tyre graining problems on the RB due to aggressive set up (RB explanation).

In both cases he was on course to finish well behind in second place, so you can easily count those two into beaten on merit. Same goes for spanish GP where leclerc was set to dominate before engine blow up.

[Quantum]

The times he has been beaten by a Ferrari this season is 2 by DNF technical failures, 1 by floor damage and 1 on merit where he finished 1.5 seconds behind Charles in Austria due to tyre graining problems on the RB due to aggressive set up (RB explanation).

In both cases he was on course to finish well behind in second place, so you can easily count those two into beaten on merit. Same goes for spanish GP where leclerc was set to dominate before engine blow up.

I recall Verstappen overtaking Leclerc in Bahrain, only to mess up his braking point and flat spotting his tyre which hampered him for the rest of the stint.
(Lap 19) take a look for yourself, On older tyres the RB was quicker at that stage of the GP only to be undone by driver error. It happens, it's racing(overtaking).

In Oz, Red Bull had severe graining which is why they were pitting earlier than most other teams. Track surface in Oz being unique. Also backed by Mercedes being able to challenge Perez.

So there certainly were teething problems reliability and set up wise for RB in the first 3 or so races.

Reliability forms part of the equation too. The early part of the season Ferrari were pushing hard on their engines, Binotto admitted too hard.
So any performance gain in Spain was self wrought pain.
Same as RB and their reliability on the fuel pumps, its still counted against the car regardless of livery.

[Stu]

Having won 14 of 18 races this season, or over 77% of events, there is a school of thought that the RB18 is not dominant.

However, with terminology being quite a heated problem for some folk, the definition has come to bear.
But for the purposes of this thread I wanted to remove it seeping into any other threads and get a clearer discussion going regarding the pros and cons of why some think it isn't despite the results we've seen.

Mercedes are universally regarded as being dominant through their era, here are their stats.

2021: 9 of 22 (40%)
2020: 13 of 17 (76%)
2019: 15 of 21 (71%)
2018: 11 of 21 (52%)
2017: 12 of 20 (60%)
2016: 19 of 21 (90%)
2015: 16 of 19 (84%)
2014: 16 of 19 (84%)

Giving a total average of 68% win rate.

Of course statistics are skewed when opposition screw up. But then it should also stand that opposition benefit when you screw up.
Much has been made about Ferrari screwing up, but we hear ever so little about the Verstappen or Perez suffering from the same.
So perhaps a forensic examination of this would help alleviate the problem?

It's also another foible but something that's arisen in discussion. 2022 cars have got a wide discrepancy in single lap to race pace performance.
We see Mercedes going faster in races, and Ferrari slower, relative to their qualifying performances.
It's not a new phenomena but it's certainly very clear in races this season. Whereas the RB18 manages decent single lap performances but comes into it's own in the race being 8 times out of 10 the best car out there.

Another parameter that I have observed is the porpoising effect and the likely effect it would have on driver fatigue, and the relationship it would have in compromising set up and wear/deg.
If a car has it less, it stands to reason to be advantageous to the driver driving it, allied to the wear/deg set up compromises?

The other seemingly contentious issue is, does a car no longer become dominant when it easily wins races by 15 seconds and not 45 seconds? Who decides the parameters if not the results and the consistency of the results themselves?

You are conflating a single year against an 8 year average. Apples do not equal oranges….

[Quantum]

Having won 14 of 18 races this season, or over 77% of events, there is a school of thought that the RB18 is not dominant.

However, with terminology being quite a heated problem for some folk, the definition has come to bear.
But for the purposes of this thread I wanted to remove it seeping into any other threads and get a clearer discussion going regarding the pros and cons of why some think it isn't despite the results we've seen.

Mercedes are universally regarded as being dominant through their era, here are their stats.

2021: 9 of 22 (40%)
2020: 13 of 17 (76%)
2019: 15 of 21 (71%)
2018: 11 of 21 (52%)
2017: 12 of 20 (60%)
2016: 19 of 21 (90%)
2015: 16 of 19 (84%)
2014: 16 of 19 (84%)

Giving a total average of 68% win rate.

Of course statistics are skewed when opposition screw up. But then it should also stand that opposition benefit when you screw up.
Much has been made about Ferrari screwing up, but we hear ever so little about the Verstappen or Perez suffering from the same.
So perhaps a forensic examination of this would help alleviate the problem?

It's also another foible but something that's arisen in discussion. 2022 cars have got a wide discrepancy in single lap to race pace performance.
We see Mercedes going faster in races, and Ferrari slower, relative to their qualifying performances.
It's not a new phenomena but it's certainly very clear in races this season. Whereas the RB18 manages decent single lap performances but comes into it's own in the race being 8 times out of 10 the best car out there.

Another parameter that I have observed is the porpoising effect and the likely effect it would have on driver fatigue, and the relationship it would have in compromising set up and wear/deg.
If a car has it less, it stands to reason to be advantageous to the driver driving it, allied to the wear/deg set up compromises?

The other seemingly contentious issue is, does a car no longer become dominant when it easily wins races by 15 seconds and not 45 seconds? Who decides the parameters if not the results and the consistency of the results themselves?

You are conflating a single year against an 8 year average. Apples do not equal oranges….

8 apples compared to 1 apple.

The question is simple. Is the RB18 dominant?

Some would say Mercedes "era" was dominant. Those same people would say the RB18 isn't dominant.
I took the effort to split the apples up so as not to get an orange comparison.
It's literally all written there for you.

[chrisc90]

8 apples compared to 1 apple.

The question is simple. Is the RB18 dominant?

Some would say Mercedes "era" was dominant. Those same people would say the RB18 isn't dominant.
I took the effort to split the apples up so as not to get an orange comparison.
It's literally all written there for you.

Wonder what the stats would be if you included 1-2 or podium finishes in that time.

[Quantum]

8 apples compared to 1 apple.

The question is simple. Is the RB18 dominant?

Some would say Mercedes "era" was dominant. Those same people would say the RB18 isn't dominant.
I took the effort to split the apples up so as not to get an orange comparison.
It's literally all written there for you.

Wonder what the stats would be if you included 1-2 or podium finishes in that time.

Depends on the relative team dynamics.

As Mercedes had between 2013-16 a race your mate strategy that went haywire in 2016.
Which was then changed to the RB strategy of favouring a team leader in 2017.

[Stu]

Having won 14 of 18 races this season, or over 77% of events, there is a school of thought that the RB18 is not dominant.

However, with terminology being quite a heated problem for some folk, the definition has come to bear.
But for the purposes of this thread I wanted to remove it seeping into any other threads and get a clearer discussion going regarding the pros and cons of why some think it isn't despite the results we've seen.

Mercedes are universally regarded as being dominant through their era, here are their stats.

2021: 9 of 22 (40%)
2020: 13 of 17 (76%)
2019: 15 of 21 (71%)
2018: 11 of 21 (52%)
2017: 12 of 20 (60%)
2016: 19 of 21 (90%)
2015: 16 of 19 (84%)
2014: 16 of 19 (84%)

Giving a total average of 68% win rate.

Of course statistics are skewed when opposition screw up. But then it should also stand that opposition benefit when you screw up.
Much has been made about Ferrari screwing up, but we hear ever so little about the Verstappen or Perez suffering from the same.
So perhaps a forensic examination of this would help alleviate the problem?

It's also another foible but something that's arisen in discussion. 2022 cars have got a wide discrepancy in single lap to race pace performance.
We see Mercedes going faster in races, and Ferrari slower, relative to their qualifying performances.
It's not a new phenomena but it's certainly very clear in races this season. Whereas the RB18 manages decent single lap performances but comes into it's own in the race being 8 times out of 10 the best car out there.

Another parameter that I have observed is the porpoising effect and the likely effect it would have on driver fatigue, and the relationship it would have in compromising set up and wear/deg.
If a car has it less, it stands to reason to be advantageous to the driver driving it, allied to the wear/deg set up compromises?

The other seemingly contentious issue is, does a car no longer become dominant when it easily wins races by 15 seconds and not 45 seconds? Who decides the parameters if not the results and the consistency of the results themselves?

You are conflating a single year against an 8 year average. Apples do not equal oranges….

8 apples compared to 1 apple.

The question is simple. Is the RB18 dominant?

Some would say Mercedes "era" was dominant. Those same people would say the RB18 isn't dominant.
I took the effort to split the apples up so as not to get an orange comparison.
It's literally all written there for you.

Over the course of this season the RB18 has become dominant in the races, but over a single lap is very tight with the Ferrari.
(The opposite of last year, where they started out with the better package, but lost pace in comparison to Mercedes over the year - Mercedes ended the year with a better car). The win-rate this year has been helped enormously by a lack of strategic competence at Ferrari.

What is very interesting in the win stats is that, while 2016 is seen negatively (due to the inter team battle), it was Mercedes strongest year - in fact, while they had a strong pair of drivers from 2014-6, they achieved a better hit-rate than after that time.
Moving to an unbalanced driver pairing actually seems to have cost the team (coupled with a Ferrari resurgence - although unsustainable throughout a whole season); weaker opposition and a very good car benefited the team performance in the 2019-20 seasons (Ferrari neutered, RedBull not having the race-pace).
Seven straight seasons of dominance is a phenomenal performance by the team and shows what is achievable when everyone works well together (much like the 2001-8 Ferrari period - I’m including ‘08 as Felipe Massa’s - ultimately unsuccessful - championship challenge was borne of the earlier Schumacher period and that level of teamwork and application).

Win stats are only one way to measure dominance by a team (2009-2013 looks like a RedBull whitewash, the reality was very different, with some of the closest seasons ever between multiple teams - a total of 8 points would see Alonso with 5 WDC titles and reduce Vettel’s tally to a single championship, is the big stat from that period).

So yes, the RB18 appears dominant this year (so far), but this is a slightly skewed stat. This season (from a pace perspective) is quite competitive, possibly as competitive as the 2021 season, but factors that cannot be attributed to either the RB18 or the RedBull team, are having an influence on that.

[Jolle]

I always take this label “dominance” as a combination of car, team and driver. And the combination of RB18 and Verstappen at the moment, had all the feeling of Vettel and the RB9 (number is a guess, but the 2013 car..).

[Andres125sx]

There are some hints to say if a car is dominant...

It won most races? Yes, more than 75%
Both drivers are at the top? Yes
#2 driver of the team can beat easily #1 of its main rival? Yes
Did they won the title with some margin? yes, with 4 races to go, huge margin


If the reply to all these questions is affirmative, then yes, it is dominant

[Tvetovnato]

Judging cars by qualifying pace can also be misleading. There have been examples where there have been cars that are good in Q but falls back in races. Mercedes in 2013, Ferrari in 2019…

[DChemTech]

There are some hints to say if a car is dominant...

It won most races? Yes, more than 75%
Both drivers are at the top? Yes
#2 driver of the team can beat easily #1 of its main rival? Yes
Did they won the title with some margin? yes, with 4 races to go, huge margin


If the reply to all these questions is affirmative, then yes, it is dominant

I disagree;

- A Williams could win most, hell, all races if the competition just consistently crashed. Doesn't make the Williams dominant.
- Both drivers are at the top? Perez is struggling to get on the podium most of the time, we're not looking at consistent 1-2 finishes, as was the case for the MP4/4, W05, W06, W10, F2002, F2004 and RB9 (second half of 2013).
- Also means #2 cannot easily beat #1 of the rival - most of the time, Leclerc, and often also Sainz, beat Perez. This does seem to change since the summer break somewhat, so as I mentioned before, it could well be that the RB18 is dominant in this part of the season. But it was different before the summer break.
- Title won by a huge margin, yes, but before the summer break the failure of the competition played a major role (Also see point 1 here for a thought experiment). Another part is that Max' flawless driving helped giving an edge, which is why with close races Max typically came ahead of Leclerc.

[Juzh]

Put it simply I don't remember such threads for the RB7,9, W05, 6, 7, 8, 10, and 11. Therefore just the existence of this thread makes it obvious it's not a black or white subject, thus by default making it not dominant.