2016 Mercedes AMG Petronas F1 Team - Mercedes

[RedNEO]

Head to head battles happened in the past because they were miles ahead. Now when everyone starts to close in then this is what a true championship would look like.

[hollus]

Next time someone thinks this is a drivers championship...

[henry]

Next time someone thinks this is a drivers championship...

http://www.f1fanatic.co.uk/wp-content/u ... 2016-3.jpg

Point well made. And by my reckoning that's about 1/3 of the 1500 Mercedes say are involved.

[basti313]

The main reason I think this whole "who had more bad luck" is that this season is been lacking the head to heads of the previous two.

True. Both had nice races from the back, but also these lacked any nice overtaking. I remember only DRS overtakes, good strategy to win positions, red flag luck and crash overtakes.

Apart from Austria (and Spain more or less) they both have been driving their own races and both have maximized their races (apart from Baku and Monaco).

I can not say this. The strategy guy maximized their races, but not the drivers. The drivers both lost positions due to being stuck behind much slower cars for too much time in nearly every race they came from behind.

So, this year, so far, the only real difference has been the reliability of the ICE, clutch and MGU-H.

And suspension and red flag/strategy luck. Unfortunately they have the same strategy guy...otherwise I would rather give the WC to this guy

[Morteza]

Brawn says he quit Mercedes because he didn't trust Wolff, Lauda

Some very interesting comments from Ross Brawn...

[GPR-A duplicate2]

Brawn says he quit Mercedes because he didn't trust Wolff, Lauda

Some very interesting comments from Ross Brawn...

Wow. That is quite revealing. I only have to first doubt the article as to how authentic those comments are from Brawn. He isn't someone who makes such open allegations against anyone.

But IF INDEED he did, then it is quite significant comments on Toto and Lauda. Lauda doesn't have a great reputation in anything, other than his driving, so it isn't really surprising. In the context of the success that Mercedes is enjoying, these comments make very little impact I guess, because whatever these guys are doing, they are doing it right.

[Just_a_fan]

Next time someone thinks this is a drivers championship...

http://www.f1fanatic.co.uk/wp-content/u ... 2016-3.jpg

Two championships: constructor and driver. The team has won the first and now works to secure the other. The photo is a celebration of the former championship win.

Of course, no driver can win without the hardware but not every driver can win even with the hardware. That's where the driver makes the difference.

[henry]

Next time someone thinks this is a drivers championship...

http://www.f1fanatic.co.uk/wp-content/u ... 2016-3.jpg

Two championships: constructor and driver. The team has won the first and now works to secure the other. The photo is a celebration of the former championship win.

Of course, no driver can win without the hardware but not every driver can win even with the hardware. That's where the driver makes the difference.

Ask yourself the following questions and then tell me how much difference drivers make.

Given this year's team performance if Mercedes had swapped drivers with each team on the grid

In how many of the other teams would Hamilton or Rosberg been WDC?

In how many instances would Mercedes not have won the WCC?

In how many instances would Mercedes not have hosted the WDC?

Even with the current relatively small grid spread the difference between drivers is smaller than the difference between teams. Hence they line up 2 by 2 on the grid and would finish 2 by 2 even more than they do now if running close and overtaking not so difficult.

Mercedes are the best team in managing the consumption of resources which is the essence of modern F1. The drivers contribute to that but not enough to compensate for team weaknesses such as at Singapore last year.

[basti313]

Next time someone thinks this is a drivers championship...

http://www.f1fanatic.co.uk/wp-content/u ... 2016-3.jpg

Two championships: constructor and driver. The team has won the first and now works to secure the other. The photo is a celebration of the former championship win.

Of course, no driver can win without the hardware but not every driver can win even with the hardware. That's where the driver makes the difference.

Ask yourself the following questions and then tell me how much difference drivers make.

Given this year's team performance if Mercedes had swapped drivers with each team on the grid

In how many of the other teams would Hamilton or Rosberg been WDC?

In how many instances would Mercedes not have won the WCC?

In how many instances would Mercedes not have hosted the WDC?

Even with the current relatively small grid spread the difference between drivers is smaller than the difference between teams. Hence they line up 2 by 2 on the grid and would finish 2 by 2 even more than they do now if running close and overtaking not so difficult.

Mercedes are the best team in managing the consumption of resources which is the essence of modern F1. The drivers contribute to that but not enough to compensate for team weaknesses such as at Singapore last year.

[OneAlex]

Brawn says he quit Mercedes because he didn't trust Wolff, Lauda

Some very interesting comments from Ross Brawn...

Wow. That is quite revealing. I only have to first doubt the article as to how authentic those comments are from Brawn. He isn't someone who makes such open allegations against anyone.

But IF INDEED he did, then it is quite significant comments on Toto and Lauda. Lauda doesn't have a great reputation in anything, other than his driving, so it isn't really surprising. In the context of the success that Mercedes is enjoying, these comments make very little impact I guess, because whatever these guys are doing, they are doing it right.

I am not particularly surprised about some of the revelations; The media were quick to pick up something going on at Mercedes in Brawn's last year, and while Wolff is very good at interacting with the press etc but he always seems to have a steely edge (I guess you don't get to the top of Merc F1 without one). I'm not surprised at the idea that he butts head with Lauda on occasion too.

What does surprise me is that Wolff and Lauda would blame each other etc in front of any senior team member rather than sorting it out in private and presenting a united front, let alone Brawn who obviously has the respect of the paddock.

As for Lowe... I can see why Brawn would see it in that way. Even from the first races Lowe seemed all too happy to jump into his seat and join in with the victory accolades when he hadn't even done anything for the team yet.

[Juzh]

Is there a chart somewhere of actual points between ROS and HAM without technical problems?

[GPR-A duplicate2]

Is there a chart somewhere of actual points between ROS and HAM without technical problems?

Click to enlarge.

Some assumptions based on which I have put this together.

1. I am not including the racing incidents like Bottas colliding with Lewis in Bharain OR Vettel colliding with Nico in Malaysia. Just taking those results as it is.

2. Benefit to Nico - Even without any technical issues, Lewis wouldn't have beaten Nico in China and Russia, where he suffered reliability issues. Hence, awarded Lewis second place finishes as the best possible results. Arguable, but based on the form of first two GPs, it was safe to assume Nico would have beaten lewis to win.

3. Benefit to Lewis - Again, just like advantage is awarded to Nico for China and Russia, I have awarded a win in Belgium to Lewis and a second place finish to Nico, again, based on form. Remember, Lewis had to start from the back due to reliability failures.

4. If Lewis would have finished the Malaysian GP with a win, Nico would have ended 4th, instead of 3rd. So, adjusted his points for that.

5. In Monaco, Lewis suffered loss of power and couldn't do a normal Q3 and had a compromised qualifying. That didn't affected the final outcome, but nevertheless, a reliability issue that affected his starting position.

[turbof1]

Is there a chart somewhere of actual points between ROS and HAM without technical problems?

https://s15.postimg.org/aiwcvx423/F1_POINTS.jpg
Click to enlarge.

Some assumptions based on which I have put this together.

1. I am not including the racing incidents like Bottas colliding with Lewis in Bharain OR Vettel colliding with Nico in Malaysia. Just taking those results as it is.

2. Benefit to Nico - Even without any technical issues, Lewis wouldn't have beaten Nico in China and Russia, where he suffered reliability issues. Hence, awarded Lewis second place finishes as the best possible results. Arguable, but based on the form of first two GPs, it was safe to assume Nico would have beaten lewis to win.

3. Benefit to Lewis - Again, just like advantage is awarded to Nico for China and Russia, I have awarded a win in Belgium to Lewis and a second place finish to Nico, again, based on form. Remember, Lewis had to start from the back due to reliability failures.

4. If Lewis would have finished the Malaysian GP with a win, Nico would have ended 4th, instead of 3rd. So, adjusted his points for that.

5. In Monaco, Lewis suffered loss of power and couldn't do a normal Q3 and had a compromised qualifying. That didn't affected the final outcome, but nevertheless, a reliability issue that affected his starting position.

Arguably, emphasis on arguably, Rosberg lost 3 points in Britain because of his gearbox failure, which indirectly caused the radio transmission that gave him a penalty. It's not something I am myself completely convinced off though, as technically the penalty caused him to loose those 3 points. In Baku, you could also argue Hamilton lost points although technically there was nothing wrong with the car and Hamilton was in a wrong mode.
In my view, if you are going to calculate Belgium into this as an indirect consequence, you should also count in Britain. Baku is more arguable, since both had the same problem which Nico fixed on his own merit, while Lewis did not.

All things considered, it more or less reflects correctly the situation. Take 360 points vs 324 points. I think nobody here argues Lewis received the bad end of the mechanical issues. It however does not mean Rosberg did a terrible job staying with striking distance. We all know championships which have been much less tense than that. You have to give him credit for that as he did beat Hamilton in several races.

[PhillipM]

Probably have another win if his team-mate hadn't rammed him off the road in Spain too...

[turbof1]

Probably have another win if his team-mate hadn't rammed him off the road in Spain too...

Well, the question was "how many points, technical issues corrected". I don't think we want to dive into the much more subjective side of sporting incidents.