2021 AMG Mercedes F1 Team

[TimW]

You also forget the drivers and their experience with setup. I think that is understated this year.
Hamilton and Bottas combined at Mercedes are vastly more experienced at setup than Max and Checo at redbull.
Hamilton = 9 years. Bottas = 5 years.
Max who was basically a rookie at redbull has 6 years with them. Checo has months.
A more experience pairing would also have gor more performance out of the RB16B and think that plays a large roll in the eb and flow over the season as it relates to race pace of the car.
It should be interesting what inputs Checo has next year. I am not sold on Max's technical abilities. They seem to get setup wrong quite often like hungary, silverstone, to name a few rsces this year. Especially in the sprint races where they dont have much time for the drivers to provide feedback.

Both the Mercedes and the Red Bull have been difficult to setup all year. Already at the beginning of the year it shifted from race to race who got it better. The RB has been hard to set up (or 'peaky') for years. Mercedes mentioned the car being a 'Diva'. I also think it is emphasized by the fact that they both need to deliver absolute top performance. With a bit more benign setup, either would be uncompetitive.

[ringo]

It makes sense. Which team with engineers and strategist wont have continuous improvement?
Who is going to do 30 years of rubbish in a technical high performing organization?

Max is 24. His judgement is clearly questionable and he did not bring a wealth of knowledge to readbull when he first got there.
He has developed over the years with less experienced teammates. His most experience is daniel who was also a bubble boy.

Hamilton and Bottas had learnings from teammatates and their teammates indirectly: alonso, heiki, bottas, rosberg, massa who learned with: shumacher, fishichella, truli, button, barichello etc. Both have learned from vast knowledge.

Checo of course has learned a lot from his teammates. Though they were of lesser quality.

But I think these things make a difference. The redbull bubble isnt always the best approach to organizational knowledge. The driver's are less exposed.
This has some input into why the Hamilton more often than not is able to hunt down Max and overtake. It's just better race management; i dont think the RB16 is just inherently weaker on long runs. Checo disproves that.

[dans79]

You also forget the drivers and their experience with setup. I think that is understated this year.
Hamilton and Bottas combined at Mercedes are vastly more experienced at setup than Max and Checo at redbull.
Hamilton = 9 years. Bottas = 5 years.
Max who was basically a rookie at redbull has 6 years with them. Checo has months.
A more experience pairing would also have gor more performance out of the RB16B and think that plays a large roll in the eb and flow over the season as it relates to race pace of the car.
It should be interesting what inputs Checo has next year. I am not sold on Max's technical abilities. They seem to get setup wrong quite often like hungary, silverstone, to name a few rsces this year. Especially in the sprint races where they dont have much time for the drivers to provide feedback.

What logic is that? Having more years under your belt does not mean you automatically are better than someone who has less experience. You could do a shitty job for 20, 30 years, does not make you better than someone doing the same job for just a few years. I'm not saying either Hamilton or Verstappen is better at setting up their respective car, but you can't come to any meaningful conclusion just based on the amount of years spend at a team.

I think he is trying to imply more time with the same team using the same general design and set-up principles. For example look at Ricciardo's this year! Or checo in Mexico where he specifically mentioned going his own way set-up wise!

[Gillian]

You also forget the drivers and their experience with setup. I think that is understated this year.
Hamilton and Bottas combined at Mercedes are vastly more experienced at setup than Max and Checo at redbull.
Hamilton = 9 years. Bottas = 5 years.
Max who was basically a rookie at redbull has 6 years with them. Checo has months.
A more experience pairing would also have gor more performance out of the RB16B and think that plays a large roll in the eb and flow over the season as it relates to race pace of the car.
It should be interesting what inputs Checo has next year. I am not sold on Max's technical abilities. They seem to get setup wrong quite often like hungary, silverstone, to name a few rsces this year. Especially in the sprint races where they dont have much time for the drivers to provide feedback.

What logic is that? Having more years under your belt does not mean you automatically are better than someone who has less experience. You could do a shitty job for 20, 30 years, does not make you better than someone doing the same job for just a few years. I'm not saying either Hamilton or Verstappen is better at setting up their respective car, but you can't come to any meaningful conclusion just based on the amount of years spend at a team.

I think he is trying to imply more time with the same team using the same general design and set-up principles. For example look at Ricciardo's this year! Or checo in Mexico where he specifically mentioned going his own way set-up wise!

I get that but I don't believe that 6 or 9 years with a team will make a difference. In this thread a lot have been said about the setup issues from Mercedes. Why did the 9 years experience not make a difference then?Because in 9 years the car is totally incomparable.

Riciardo is a nice example. Look how much he is improving already. You can't think he will keep improving at that rate for years to come? And how much is that experience of this year worth for next year's car?

You either have technical skills to setup a car or you don't. If you don't, then you have to know how to express the things you want from the car and have a team which know what to do. That's why it's a team sport.

[Big Tea]

What logic is that? Having more years under your belt does not mean you automatically are better than someone who has less experience. You could do a shitty job for 20, 30 years, does not make you better than someone doing the same job for just a few years. I'm not saying either Hamilton or Verstappen is better at setting up their respective car, but you can't come to any meaningful conclusion just based on the amount of years spend at a team.

I think he is trying to imply more time with the same team using the same general design and set-up principles. For example look at Ricciardo's this year! Or checo in Mexico where he specifically mentioned going his own way set-up wise!

I get that but I don't believe that 6 or 9 years with a team will make a difference. In this thread a lot have been said about the setup issues from Mercedes. Why did the 9 years experience not make a difference then?Because in 9 years the car is totally incomparable.

Riciardo is a nice example. Look how much he is improving already. You can't think he will keep improving at that rate for years to come? And how much is that experience of this year worth for next year's car?

You either have technical skills to setup a car or you don't. If you don't, then you have to know how to express the things you want from the car and have a team which know what to do. That's why it's a team sport.

Quite a lot of driver input is dependant on how much the team believe what the driver tells them, and how well he puts it over. I assume it takes a few 'no, that's not what I mean' sessions to understand each other and the team to accept the driver is finding real problems not just having variable feelings.

I used to 'tune' mates bikes with them, and one guy in particular would come back to me and say it's not right, I would ride it around and maybe adjust idle and he would every time say 'Ah, that's much better'. It would have measurable results in the race.
No doubt some race drivers are the same (not to the same extent) and the team does not want to go down a blind path, so it takes time.

[Gillian]

I think he is trying to imply more time with the same team using the same general design and set-up principles. For example look at Ricciardo's this year! Or checo in Mexico where he specifically mentioned going his own way set-up wise!

I get that but I don't believe that 6 or 9 years with a team will make a difference. In this thread a lot have been said about the setup issues from Mercedes. Why did the 9 years experience not make a difference then?Because in 9 years the car is totally incomparable.

Riciardo is a nice example. Look how much he is improving already. You can't think he will keep improving at that rate for years to come? And how much is that experience of this year worth for next year's car?

You either have technical skills to setup a car or you don't. If you don't, then you have to know how to express the things you want from the car and have a team which know what to do. That's why it's a team sport.

Quite a lot of driver input is dependant on how much the team believe what the driver tells them, and how well he puts it over. I assume it takes a few 'no, that's not what I mean' sessions to understand each other and the team to accept the driver is finding real problems not just having variable feelings.

I used to 'tune' mates bikes with them, and one guy in particular would come back to me and say it's not right, I would ride it around and maybe adjust idle and he would every time say 'Ah, that's much better'. It would have measurable results in the race.
No doubt some race drivers are the same (not to the same extent) and the team does not want to go down a blind path, so it takes time.

Exactly and then the question is how much time that takes at which point you come back at my initial argument: 6 vs 9 years as an isolated value says nothing in this context.

[Just_a_fan]

What logic is that? Having more years under your belt does not mean you automatically are better than someone who has less experience. You could do a shitty job for 20, 30 years, does not make you better than someone doing the same job for just a few years. I'm not saying either Hamilton or Verstappen is better at setting up their respective car, but you can't come to any meaningful conclusion just based on the amount of years spend at a team.

I think he is trying to imply more time with the same team using the same general design and set-up principles. For example look at Ricciardo's this year! Or checo in Mexico where he specifically mentioned going his own way set-up wise!

I get that but I don't believe that 6 or 9 years with a team will make a difference. In this thread a lot have been said about the setup issues from Mercedes. Why did the 9 years experience not make a difference then?Because in 9 years the car is totally incomparable.

Riciardo is a nice example. Look how much he is improving already. You can't think he will keep improving at that rate for years to come? And how much is that experience of this year worth for next year's car?

You either have technical skills to setup a car or you don't. If you don't, then you have to know how to express the things you want from the car and have a team which know what to do. That's why it's a team sport.

I think in Red Bull's case, it's not the drivers' experience or setting up a car that's the issue - it's the car that is the issue. The car is fastest when set up a certain way and that requires a driver that can deal with it. Max is very obviously the driver better able to get the most from the Red Bull over the season - obviously as he has had much more success. Perez has struggled at times. He's also very much been used to support Max in accordance with the Red Bull philosophy that the driver title is the prestige title and the constructor title isn't important. Horner spoke about this at the last race. For a team like Mercedes, the constructor title is as important as the driver title. So they base their philosophy on maximum team points. Red Bull are happy to lose team points if it increases the no.1 driver's points - Perez used to take fastest lap at the expense of his own, and thus the team's, points is an example of this philosophy in action. I don't think Mercedes have done that - Bottas has been used to try to get the FL but only where he was safe behind or was already out of the points.

So trying to compare the teams' drivers' abilities to set up the car is a bit moot - the teams have a different philosophy and so can't be compared.

[dans79]

I get that but I don't believe that 6 or 9 years with a team will make a difference. In this thread a lot have been said about the setup issues from Mercedes. Why did the 9 years experience not make a difference then?Because in 9 years the car is totally incomparable.

Riciardo is a nice example. Look how much he is improving already. You can't think he will keep improving at that rate for years to come? And how much is that experience of this year worth for next year's car?

You either have technical skills to setup a car or you don't. If you don't, then you have to know how to express the things you want from the car and have a team which know what to do. That's why it's a team sport.

Quite a lot of driver input is dependant on how much the team believe what the driver tells them, and how well he puts it over. I assume it takes a few 'no, that's not what I mean' sessions to understand each other and the team to accept the driver is finding real problems not just having variable feelings.

I used to 'tune' mates bikes with them, and one guy in particular would come back to me and say it's not right, I would ride it around and maybe adjust idle and he would every time say 'Ah, that's much better'. It would have measurable results in the race.
No doubt some race drivers are the same (not to the same extent) and the team does not want to go down a blind path, so it takes time.

Exactly and then the question is how much time that takes at which point you come back at my initial argument: 6 vs 9 years as an isolated value says nothing in this context.

Imo over multiple years, it comes down to what's being changing from year to year. For example Merc hasn't changed anyhting in the hybrid era (unless force to by the rules). Even RBR wasn't able to do this as they swapped engine manufactures part way through. That would require compromises, and modifications thats would reset their baseline knoledge in some areas!


asumming equal levels of inteligence, skill, and determination more expericne almost always comes out on top as the knolege pool being pulled from to fix any given issue is large and more diverse.

[Just_a_fan]

Quite a lot of driver input is dependant on how much the team believe what the driver tells them, and how well he puts it over. I assume it takes a few 'no, that's not what I mean' sessions to understand each other and the team to accept the driver is finding real problems not just having variable feelings.

I used to 'tune' mates bikes with them, and one guy in particular would come back to me and say it's not right, I would ride it around and maybe adjust idle and he would every time say 'Ah, that's much better'. It would have measurable results in the race.
No doubt some race drivers are the same (not to the same extent) and the team does not want to go down a blind path, so it takes time.

Setting the car up is as much about making the driver confident in the car - if he is confident then he can attack the lap and extract lap time. If he isn't confident, he will hesitate getting on the throttle, brake a little earlier, etc., and lose lap time everywhere. I've heard stories of well known drivers not being happy with the set up, coming in, having a moan. OK, we'll change it. They go back out and are happy, suddenly lap time is being found. All is good in the world. Only nothing has been changed on the car. The engineer knew the car was right and the driver just needed some mental support.

In SA, Hamilton knew he'd had contact on the front wing which would have worried him in case it failed but the team were able to tell him it was ok and wouldn't fail. Bang, he's confident in the car and can extract lap time. Sure, he'll have changed his lines slightly, perhaps, if the balance was slightly different, but he knew the wing wouldn't fail and so he drove around it. Max would have been able to do the same. Not all drivers can, of course.

[Phil]

I don't want to be the pessimist in here, but..... I think Max will be WDC this Sunday.

Without wanting to get into the rights or wrongs - it's rather simple; Lewis needs a win or best case finish ahead of Max, but within the points. From the other point of view - all Max has to do is beat Lewis or make sure both don't score points.

I've been following the Missed Apex podcast and there seems to be some info that Mercedes could have an advantage at this race due to the rear-wing problem RedBull is facing. This makes me believe that RedBull will throw everything into qualifying and make sure Max qualifies on the front row to give him every chance possible. This could be from setting up the car to favor one-lap pace to perhaps even gambling on a different tire in Q2. Perhaps even splitting it with Perez or using him to their advantage.

Given Verstappen can race pretty much how he likes and go for high-risk maneuvers, I see a very dangerous race ahead to the point where he has track position, any maneuver or potential overtake could be extremely dangerous. So I don't know... I somehow think the odds slightly favor Max.

Anyway, just wanted to vent a bit before the big race on sunday. On a better note; the contructors throphy is all but guaranteed at least.

[Big Tea]

I don't want to be the pessimist in here, but..... I think Max will be WDC this Sunday.

Without wanting to get into the rights or wrongs - it's rather simple; Lewis needs a win or best case finish ahead of Max, but within the points. From the other point of view - all Max has to do is beat Lewis or make sure both don't score points.

I've been following the Missed Apex podcast and there seems to be some info that Mercedes could have an advantage at this race due to the rear-wing problem RedBull is facing. This makes me believe that RedBull will throw everything into qualifying and make sure Max qualifies on the front row to give him every chance possible. This could be from setting up the car to favor one-lap pace to perhaps even gambling on a different tire in Q2. Perhaps even splitting it with Perez or using him to their advantage.

Given Verstappen can race pretty much how he likes and go for high-risk maneuvers, I see a very dangerous race ahead to the point where he has track position, any maneuver or potential overtake could be extremely dangerous. So I don't know... I somehow think the odds slightly favor Max.

Anyway, just wanted to vent a bit before the big race on sunday. On a better note; the contructors throphy is all but guaranteed at least.

They have shortened the lap time too, so 'back markers' (cough) come into play sooner and more often

[El Scorchio]

I don't want to be the pessimist in here, but..... I think Max will be WDC this Sunday.

Without wanting to get into the rights or wrongs - it's rather simple; Lewis needs a win or best case finish ahead of Max, but within the points. From the other point of view - all Max has to do is beat Lewis or make sure both don't score points.

I've been following the Missed Apex podcast and there seems to be some info that Mercedes could have an advantage at this race due to the rear-wing problem RedBull is facing. This makes me believe that RedBull will throw everything into qualifying and make sure Max qualifies on the front row to give him every chance possible. This could be from setting up the car to favor one-lap pace to perhaps even gambling on a different tire in Q2. Perhaps even splitting it with Perez or using him to their advantage.

Given Verstappen can race pretty much how he likes and go for high-risk maneuvers, I see a very dangerous race ahead to the point where he has track position, any maneuver or potential overtake could be extremely dangerous. So I don't know... I somehow think the odds slightly favor Max.

Anyway, just wanted to vent a bit before the big race on sunday. On a better note; the contructors throphy is all but guaranteed at least.

Assuming they all get round the first few corners unscathed and Hamilton is behind, he has to be smart if he has the pace advantage. Go cautiously for an overtake on the long straight but ready to bail out at any excessive movement, or weaving. Couple of instances of that and a warning/penalty will probably come. Of if possible, just wait until the pit stops and try the overtake that way.

[Gillian]

Quite a lot of driver input is dependant on how much the team believe what the driver tells them, and how well he puts it over. I assume it takes a few 'no, that's not what I mean' sessions to understand each other and the team to accept the driver is finding real problems not just having variable feelings.

I used to 'tune' mates bikes with them, and one guy in particular would come back to me and say it's not right, I would ride it around and maybe adjust idle and he would every time say 'Ah, that's much better'. It would have measurable results in the race.
No doubt some race drivers are the same (not to the same extent) and the team does not want to go down a blind path, so it takes time.

Exactly and then the question is how much time that takes at which point you come back at my initial argument: 6 vs 9 years as an isolated value says nothing in this context.

Imo over multiple years, it comes down to what's being changing from year to year. For example Merc hasn't changed anyhting in the hybrid era (unless force to by the rules). Even RBR wasn't able to do this as they swapped engine manufactures part way through. That would require compromises, and modifications thats would reset their baseline knoledge in some areas!


asumming equal levels of inteligence, skill, and determination more expericne almost always comes out on top as the knolege pool being pulled from to fix any given issue is large and more diverse.

I wholeheartedly agree with you. It's funny that Riciardo again is an interesting case. He has a lot of experience, both in years and driving for different teams. Yet he still struggled at McLaren. You could say one of intelligence, skill or determination would than have been lacking for him. But of course it then depends on how much adaption time you'd grant before accessing any of those abilities. Or how high you would rate his teammate. And then of course there is the lack of test time before this season.

Compare it then to another driver, say Sainz. He was in the same situation yet he did not seem to struggle at all. Is he then better than Riciardo in one of the aforementioned areas? Or is Leclerc a worse driver than Norris? Or is the Ferrari more similar to other cars Sainz has driven? Or maybe even something else.

You could wonder what that means for Hamilton, having been with the team for so long. In what way would the team have changed in a these years so accommodate Hamilton? Could it be why Bottas can keep up in qualifying but not in the race? I think it's interesting how these kinds of things are mentioned with Verstappen, but you don't really see it talked about a lot with Hamilton. The usual consensus is Hamilton sacrifices a bit of qualifying pace and sets the car up for the race. That's then why Bottas can keep up in qualifying but not the race. Some are of the opinion Bottas just plain sucks (something I don't agree with at all).

I think this is a very interesting topic and something that makes F1 highly interesting.

[Morteza]

[Just_a_fan]

The usual consensus is Hamilton sacrifices a bit of qualifying pace and sets the car up for the race. That's then why Bottas can keep up in qualifying but not the race. Some are of the opinion Bottas just plain sucks (something I don't agree with at all).

I think this is a very interesting topic and something that makes F1 highly interesting.

I read an interesting article that touched on this. Some drivers - Alonso and Hamilton mentioned - are able to live with the rear tyres going off without losing lap time. Others, and Bottas was mentioned here, struggle as the tyres wear. This is why Bottas can be as quick as Hamilton in qualifying but usually falls back in races. He often has good lap time after a tyre change too as the rears are able to stay with the fronts.

Pedro dela Rosa stated that he saw this first hand when working with Alonso and Hamilton - both are able to deal with a rear that is deteriorating without losing lap time.