727 replies to this topic

[w1Y]

Sparky68, on 26 Nov 2021 - 23:11, said:

So what is it w1Y , did Merc need to flout the rules or not to keep RBR behind?

Again. They didn't break any rules did they? If so then I fully expect red bull to accuse merc of breaching engine rules.

You sound awfully bitter. I have said all along red bull and particular max have done a great job so not sure what your trying to accuse me of.

Edited by w1Y, 26 November 2021 - 23:13.

[TheFish]

Sparky68, on 26 Nov 2021 - 23:11, said:

So what is it w1Y , did Merc need to flout the rules or not to keep RBR behind?

Which rules were flouted?

[Squeed]

YamahaV10, on 26 Nov 2021 - 22:36, said:

There's a reason why a whole new power unit means you start at the back. And just the ICE is 5 places. It's only after Brazil that the narrative came up that changing the ICE means you can be a world beater. And yes. There's the theory that its mapped out to last 4 races or something. But some questions can be asked about that logic too.

 

They race by a set of rules.  Whether or not you or I like the rules is irrelevant.  The team and driver with the most points at the end of the year win their respective championships.  

Ask yourself why you are so invested in finding an excuse for RB should they lose.  

[Squeed]

YamahaV10, on 26 Nov 2021 - 22:36, said:

There's a reason why a whole new power unit means you start at the back. And just the ICE is 5 places. It's only after Brazil that the narrative came up that changing the ICE means you can be a world beater. And yes. There's the theory that its mapped out to last 4 races or something. But some questions can be asked about that logic too.

 

Yes, the 5 places was a concession to your darling team RB because they weren't confident in the reliability of the Honda PU.  That's the reason.  

Fresh Merc PU's have always added grunt. 

Edited by Squeed, 26 November 2021 - 23:34.

[Bliman]

Sparky68, on 26 Nov 2021 - 23:00, said:

Does it matter if i did? No, check later posts, I accussed them of breaking the spirit of the cost cutting exercise 

All the teams do that. It would be dumb if they did not do that. It is just that Red Bull is so vocal all the time. Sometimes they come across as desperate. Which is odd to me because they are in pole position to win the driver championship and team championship.

[Bliman]

Sparky68, on 26 Nov 2021 - 23:11, said:

So what is it w1Y , did Merc need to flout the rules or not to keep RBR behind?

I am not W1Y but I say no. They try to use the rules to their advantage just like any team does. This is F1. This happens every year. Or are you trying to say Red Bull will not do anything to find anything to have an advantage? It wouldn't even surprise me if they do the same or have something in the wings already.

[OO7]

RobG, on 26 Nov 2021 - 22:25, said:

Wow, you're going from Grey straight to Black. Maybe try to nuance it a bit.

There's nothing there to nuance.  There's nothing grey about what Mercedes have done.  There's nothing that you have to squint at while looking sideways to determine "Yeah, hmm, maybe.....", It's all completely above board.

 

EDIT:

Sparky later mentioned breaking the spirit of the rules, so I'm fine with that description.

Edited by OO7, 27 November 2021 - 04:55.

[Squeed]

OO7, on 27 Nov 2021 - 04:45, said:

There's nothing there to nuance.  There's nothing grey about what Mercedes have done.  There's nothing that you have to squint at while looking sideways to determine "Yeah, hmm, maybe.....", It's all completely above board.

 

EDIT:

Sparky later mentioned breaking the spirit of the rules, so I'm fine with that description.

 

I'm fine with it too, but Red Bull broke "the spirit of the rules" with their rear wing for the first 6 races.  

I don't understand how you can take offense at one example and be perfectly ok with the other example.  

[OO7]

Squeed, on 27 Nov 2021 - 05:00, said:

I'm fine with it too, but Red Bull broke "the spirit of the rules" with their rear wing for the first 6 races.  

I don't understand how you can take offense at one example and be perfectly ok with the other example.  

I completely agree.

[Rediscoveryx]

Everyone aims to break the spirit of the rules. That should not be an issue.

[rockdude101]

Squeed, on 26 Nov 2021 - 22:32, said:

The issue being debated is the insistence from Horner that Merc's improved performance can only be explained through cheating.  Yet after seeing Merc absolutely donkey stomp RB in Qatar after passing the additional FIA scrutiny, the RB sheep can't seem to let that nonsense go. 

 

Yet two different engines were used, so why change engines when faced with additional scrutiny if there's nothing to hide? Creates more suspicion certainly, so the key question remains unanswered, is/was the Brazil package legitimate? 

 

People claim that RB had similar advantage but from an untrained eye, Mercedes's speed in Brazil was abnormal. It was supercilious to the point of comedy and embarrassed the sport. Three, four second leads against top tier competitors were reduced and overtaken within a lap or two at most. Barring a smoking-gun reveal or an RB request, I expect another Ferrari 19 scenario where post-season legal complications prevent the truth being revealed. 

 

 

TheFish, on 26 Nov 2021 - 22:34, said:

Max kept Lewis behind in Brazil for about 40 laps though, maybe more. Your posts make it look like it was a 2020 Merc v. 2010 HRT.

 

Did you not watch the Sprint race? It was that laughable it might as well have been; it was a full ' remember the alamo' Verstappen defense of the lead till the inevitable. 

Edited by rockdude101, 27 November 2021 - 06:37.

[Radman]

Horner is continually slinging mud in the desperate hope that something sticks, unfortunately some of the mud is starting to stick to him. Very unbecoming for a team principal

[Augurk]

Merc are in fact breaking the rules with their engine strategy. That’s why they were penalized when they did.

The problem is the penalties were set in stone and too little to discourage this kind of intentional rule breaking.

[OO7]

Augurk, on 27 Nov 2021 - 08:57, said:

Merc are in fact breaking the rules with their engine strategy. That’s why they were penalized when they did.

The problem is the penalties were set in stone and too little to discourage this kind of intentional rule breaking.

That's a fair point.

[TennisUK]

Sparky68, on 26 Nov 2021 - 22:18, said:

At least it doesnt bend

It did in Mexico ;)

[Deeq]

The *sprit* doesnt have bones..nothing to hurt or cause pain, So I say breakaway. 😉

[ARTGP]

Rediscoveryx, on 27 Nov 2021 - 05:29, said:

Everyone aims to break the spirit of the rules. That should not be an issue.

 

It's really not a problem for teams to dance on borders of the regulations. The problem is there is often a view held by some here, and even Mercedes themselves at times, that Mercedes have a moral superiority to the other teams. I think that is not true at all.

Edited by ARTGP, 27 November 2021 - 16:26.

[YamahaV10]

Radman, on 27 Nov 2021 - 08:38, said:

Horner is continually slinging mud in the desperate hope that something sticks, unfortunately some of the mud is starting to stick to him. Very unbecoming for a team principal

It's very unbecoming of Mercedes fans to be blowing everything about Horner out of proportion. He's clearly living rent free in your heads. All of you are just sitting at the edge of your chairs , waiting for something that you can snap about again.

The team that's behind in pace is always the team protesting. Mercedes did it all summer and has technical directives to show for it. One for wings and one for slowing down RB's pit stops

[YamahaV10]

Squeed, on 26 Nov 2021 - 23:33, said:

Yes, the 5 places was a concession to your darling team RB

Not true. That happened in the Mclaren/Honda days. RB had Reno at the time

[Squeed]

YamahaV10, on 27 Nov 2021 - 16:54, said:

Not true. That happened in the Mclaren/Honda days. RB had Reno at the time

 

This rule started in 2018 to the best of my recollection, the year that McLaren switched to Renault and Toro Rosso was auditioning Honda for RB.  

[Ivanhoe]

Squeed, on 27 Nov 2021 - 18:53, said:

This rule started in 2018 to the best of my recollection, the year that McLaren switched to Renault and Toro Rosso was auditioning Honda for RB.  

It was already part of the first version of the 2018 Sporting Regulations, which were issued at 30 April 2017. That rule change was decided upon in the 2016/2017 winter break after Honda’s disastrous seasons. Red Bull/AT had nothing to do with it at that time.

[Squeed]

Ivanhoe, on 27 Nov 2021 - 18:58, said:

It was already part of the first version of the 2018 Sporting Regulations, which were issued at 30 April 2017. That rule change was decided upon in the 2016/2017 winter break after Honda’s disastrous seasons. Red Bull/AT had nothing to do with it at that time.

 

But they were instituted in 2018, when Honda was in partnership with the RB family.  And until now, RB was perfectly happy with the rule. 

[Ivanhoe]

Squeed, on 27 Nov 2021 - 19:01, said:

But they were instituted in 2018, when Honda was in partnership with the RB family.  And until now, RB was perfectly happy with the rule. 

No, the April 2017 version were the first official 2018 rules. They weren’t ‘instituted’ in 2018. Red Bull had nothing to do with that rule change, it was already in there. It is not all a conspiracy of helping Red Bull or stopping Mercedes, most of the time the rule changes have a totally different background (Honda / Pirelli messing up).

[ARTGP]

Squeed, on 27 Nov 2021 - 19:01, said:

But they were instituted in 2018, when Honda was in partnership with the RB family.  And until now, RB was perfectly happy with the rule. 

 

 I think It shouldn't matter whether RB benefitted from it in the past. The intent of the rules was to aid a manufacturer struggling with reliability. As I see it, it had the intended effect for any RB-Honda incarnation from '18-'19. All of the Merc customer teams are using 4 engines for the season. Merc have 5 and 6 engines for Ham and Bot respectively. They were pooling engines for performance reasons, not reliability. 

 

As Merc are not breaking any rule, it doesn't really matter for this year. The only question left is primarily, where do we go from here? 

Edited by ARTGP, 27 November 2021 - 19:09.

[Squeed]

Ivanhoe, on 27 Nov 2021 - 19:06, said:

No, the April 2017 version were the first official 2018 rules. They weren’t ‘instituted’ in 2018. Red Bull had nothing to do with that rule change, it was already in there. It is not all a conspiracy of helping Red Bull or stopping Mercedes, most of the time the rule changes have a totally different background (Honda / Pirelli messing up).

 

Nobody said it was a conspiracy, but you keep on moving the goal posts buddy.

[Ivanhoe]

Squeed, on 27 Nov 2021 - 19:09, said:

Nobody said it was a conspiracy, but you keep on moving the goal posts buddy.

Which goal posts am I moving? I like to keep it factual and think it was you shifting the goal posts from 2017 to 2018. The rules on penalties for new engines had everything to do with Honda and nothing with Red Bull. And yeah, stating that it had to do with Red Bull, is a conspiracy theory, just like the floor rule changes were introduced to stop the Mercedes dominance is.

[Squeed]

Ivanhoe, on 27 Nov 2021 - 19:12, said:

Which goal posts am I moving? I like to keep it factual and think it was you shifting the goal posts from 2017 to 2018. The rules on penalties for new engines had everything to do with Honda and nothing with Red Bull. And yeah, stating that it is, is a conspiracy theory, just like the floor rule changes were introduced to stop the Mercedes dominance.

 

Honda is Red Bull's partner, the rules were instituted in 2018 when the Honda-Toro Rosso partnership began.   Those are facts. 

[Ivanhoe]

Squeed, on 27 Nov 2021 - 19:18, said:

Honda is Red Bull's partner, the rules were instituted in 2018 when the Honda-Toro Rosso partnership began.   Those are facts. 

The rules for the 2018 season came into force on 30 April 2017, those are the facts. But if you want to believe that the rules on replacement of engines were changed to benefit Red Bull, be my guest. I call it nonsense.

[Squeed]

Ivanhoe, on 27 Nov 2021 - 19:24, said:

The rules for the 2018 season came into force on 30 April 2017, those are the facts. But if you want to believe that the rules on replacement of engines were changed to benefit Red Bull, be my guest. I call it nonsense.

 

Nobody has claimed the rule was intended to benefit RB.  I don't know why you keep saying that. 

Toro Rosso announced their Honda partnership in 2017 as well.  

I'm bowing out, this is pointless. 

Edited by Squeed, 27 November 2021 - 19:32.

[Clatter]

Squeed, on 27 Nov 2021 - 19:01, said:

But they were instituted in 2018, when Honda was in partnership with the RB family.  And until now, RB was perfectly happy with the rule. 

 

Until now no one has abused the rule in this manner. Merc have simply highlighted what a ridiculous rule it is, which is why it has become a hot topic.

Edited by Clatter, 27 November 2021 - 20:14.

[Clatter]

Squeed, on 27 Nov 2021 - 19:32, said:

Nobody has claimed the rule was intended to benefit RB.  I don't know why you keep saying that. 

Toro Rosso announced their Honda partnership in 2017 as well.  

I'm bowing out, this is pointless. 

 

No one?

Squeed, on 26 Nov 2021 - 23:33, said: Yes, the 5 places was a concession to your darling team RB

[Squeed]

Clatter, on 27 Nov 2021 - 19:53, said:

 

No one?

Squeed, on 26 Nov 2021 - 23:33, said: Yes, the 5 places was a concession to your darling team RB

 

 

How does an anti-embarrassment rule benefit RB?  It was an unraceable engine at the time. 

It was a concession to prevent RB's current partner, Honda, from suffering the embarrassment of record-breaking grid penalties. 

Find another imaginary slight to shout down, I'm out. 

Edited by Squeed, 27 November 2021 - 20:11.

[Ivanhoe]

Squeed, on 27 Nov 2021 - 20:08, said:

How does an anti-embarrassment rule benefit RB?  It was an unraceable engine at the time. 

It was a concession to prevent RB's current partner, Honda, from suffering the embarrassment of record-breaking grid penalties. 

That’s just semantics Squeed. You clearly implied the rule change on engine penalties were introduced to facilitate the Red Bull/Honda combo, hence they should not complain Mercedes using it to their advantage. Don’t understand the reasoning of bringing Toro Rosso and Red Bull into this discussion. And even Honda, the background of the rule change was clearly to not penalize a manufacturer already suffering from reliability problems to hard.

[Clatter]

Squeed, on 27 Nov 2021 - 20:08, said:

How does an anti-embarrassment rule benefit RB?  It was an unraceable engine at the time. 

It was a concession to prevent RB's current partner, Honda, from suffering the embarrassment of record-breaking grid penalties. 

Find another imaginary slight to shout down, I'm out. 

 

You said it was a concession to RB, no mention of Honda there.

[Squeed]

Ivanhoe, on 27 Nov 2021 - 20:12, said:

That’s just semantics squeed. You clearly implied the rule change on engine penalties were introduced to facilitate the Red Bull/Honda combo, hence they should not complain Mercedes using it to their advantage. Otherwise, what’s the use of bringing Toro Rosso and Red Bull into this discussion?

 

Because your boy Yamaha posted that "there was a reason why ICE replacement only costs 5 grid spots," but he never stated the reason: it was a concession to RB's current engine partner.  

You jumped on it like a hyena on a water buffalo carcass and have attempted to twist that statement into something other than what it is:  a simple fact.  

[Squeed]

Clatter, on 27 Nov 2021 - 20:16, said:

You said it was a concession to RB, no mention of Honda there.

 

RB's engine partner is who? 

[Squeed]

I'm done arguing with you guys, ****ing waste of my time. 

[Ivanhoe]

Squeed, on 27 Nov 2021 - 20:20, said:

RB's engine partner is who? 

Not at the time FIA decided to change the rule.

[P123]

Squeed, on 27 Nov 2021 - 20:20, said:

I'm done arguing with you guys, ****ing waste of my time. 

 

Ha!  Well, all I know is that none of this was an issue when Merc were losing out on good results by having to take engine penalties, which has in turn made life a tad easier for Red Bull and Max in their respective championship campaigns.  Nobody was complaining when it was depriving Merc of 1-2s in Turkey or Monza.  Then Lewis Hamilton went and won a race, after an engine penalty.  And all hell has broke loose on the forum since then. 

[ARTGP]

P123, on 27 Nov 2021 - 20:37, said:

Ha!  Well, all I know is that none of this was an issue when Merc were losing out on good results by having to take engine penalties, which has in turn made life a tad easier for Red Bull and Max in their respective championship campaigns.  Nobody was complaining when it was depriving Merc of 1-2s in Turkey or Monza.  Then Lewis Hamilton went and won a race, after an engine penalty.  And all hell has broke loose on the forum since then. 

 

The change in Monza and Turkey was justified. Hamilton and Bottas could not finish the season with 3 PUs. Hamilton's second PU failed in Zandvoort. Bottas's PU also actually failed somewhere, I don't recall.  They had 10 place grid drops.

 

But things changed only because Merc openly admitted to taking Hamilton's 5th PU for performance reasons. Every Merc customer team will finish the season with 4 PUs.   Why does Hamilton need 5 and why does Bottas need 6? Engine pooling for performance reasons.  So naturally the subject comes up.

Edited by ARTGP, 27 November 2021 - 20:45.

[ToniF1]

ARTGP, on 27 Nov 2021 - 20:42, said:

But things changed only because Merc openly admitted to taking Hamilton's 5th PU for performance reasons. Every Merc customer team will finish the season with 4 PUs.   Why does Hamilton need 5 and why does Bottas need 6? Engine pooling for performance reasons.  So naturally the subject comes up.

Is that forbidden ? No. So why all the fuss ? Merc took another engine for more performance, served the punishment for that. That is all. Complete non story...well it should be...

[Britmax]

If anyone gets close enough to the title that a few results make the difference, to me at least they've still earned it. 

[w1Y]

ToniF1, on 27 Nov 2021 - 20:56, said:

Is that forbidden ? No. So why all the fuss ? Merc took another engine for more performance, served the punishment for that. That is all. Complete non story...well it should be...

Why all the fuss? Because they are all petrified it gives merc and Lewis a chance to come away with the title.

Which IMO is still unlikely.

There's a reason this thread is about merc rather than also included the grey area of red bull and their wing at the start of the season.

I mean it's quite possible Lewis would have already won the title if Red Bull never had that wing. But we will never know.

This thread should be about the pu but they had to add the element of justifying mercs title if they win it. They aren't asking the same question about red bull. Why? Because its a bias thread with an agenda

Edited by w1Y, 27 November 2021 - 21:12.

[Ivanhoe]

w1Y, on 27 Nov 2021 - 21:07, said:

Why all the fuss? Because they are all petrified it gives merc and Lewis a chance to come away with the title..

There's a reason this thread is about merc rather than also included the grey area of red bull and their wing at the start of the season.

There was a lot of fuss about Red Bull’s flexing rear wing also. They were called outright cheaters by some, because their wing was against the spirit of the rules.

[danmills]

Next year expect the penalties for extra engines to be heavy, and not just grid drops.

Fines, maybe even a hit on points scored with the extra unit.

[Clatter]

danmills, on 27 Nov 2021 - 21:31, said:

Next year expect the penalties for extra engines to be heavy, and not just grid drops.

Fines, maybe even a hit on points scored with the extra unit.

 

I expect the most that will happen is it will be a 10 grid drop for each change, but I think it should be heavier for each new unit.

[Requiem84]

P123, on 27 Nov 2021 - 20:37, said:

Ha! Well, all I know is that none of this was an issue when Merc were losing out on good results by having to take engine penalties, which has in turn made life a tad easier for Red Bull and Max in their respective championship campaigns. Nobody was complaining when it was depriving Merc of 1-2s in Turkey or Monza. Then Lewis Hamilton went and won a race, after an engine penalty. And all hell has broke loose on the forum since then.

Mercedes showed it is a good Strategy (Ham could have won Turkey if not for the pit error).

The fact it is a good strategy shows the rules don’t work. The rule is 3 ICE’s. If you break the rule you are penalized. But it appears the penalty is such a small burden it actually benefits to purposely break the rule.

All fair game for 2021. But something to think about for 2022 and beyond.

[w1Y]

Ivanhoe, on 27 Nov 2021 - 21:25, said:

There was a lot of fuss about Red Bull’s flexing rear wing also. They were called outright cheaters by some, because their wing was against the spirit of the rules.

So what if red bull wins the championship based on that. I have no qualms talking about the PU and what merc are doing but this thread has been directed as an underhand way of saying they don't deserve it. And I think that's even more evident by the OPs onslaught of the same topic and how it is presented.

For me the PU thing is no more a grey area than Red Bulls rear wing. In fact it's probably less given one 'could' be classed as cheating (I said could not is is) where as the PU is I'm fact punished through penalties.

So I'm not sure why there has to be this clear undertone that somehow merc are less deserving. And it's become very apparent since Lewis became a threat again.

Edited by w1Y, 27 November 2021 - 22:01.

[w1Y]

Requiem84, on 27 Nov 2021 - 21:44, said:

Mercedes showed it is a good Strategy (Ham could have won Turkey if not for the pit error).

The fact it is a good strategy shows the rules don’t work. The rule is 3 ICE’s. If you break the rule you are penalized. But it appears the penalty is such a small burden it actually benefits to purposely break the rule.

All fair game for 2021. But something to think about for 2022 and beyond.

I think this is fair. It clearly has shown a bit of a gap in the rules and I assume that they will close this up.

But it may in fact come.back to bite other teams if mercs PU next year can have this performance but having fixed the reliability meaning it last longer.

Other manufacturers may end up needing lenient rules to push that performance envelop to catch merc.

[ARTGP]

ToniF1, on 27 Nov 2021 - 20:56, said:

Is that forbidden ? No. So why all the fuss ? Merc took another engine for more performance, served the punishment for that. That is all. Complete non story...well it should be...

 

There is a story here which is what will happen to the grid drop regulations next season. The engine penalty system is designed encourage manufacturers to use as few power units as possible. So when a manufacturer finds a loophole in the regulations in order to chase performance, then people are going to discuss whether the regulations are effective. The FIA is going to have the discussion as well.

 

Have you given any thought to how the regulations might be improved?

Edited by ARTGP, 27 November 2021 - 22:07.