Horner whines to the FIA

[anfield5]

For one, I am totally fine with RBR quitting F1. I honestly believe that F1 will be no better or worse off without them. I'm also sick of listening to Horner moaning like a whiny little bitch to the FIA about Mercedes dominance because they are no longer on top. In fact, I'd be 100% on for it if collectively F1 told RBR to fuck right off. What a pack of sore losers and moany bitches. I had a lot of respect for RBR and what they achieved in the sport until last year when they started moaning about the rules just because they were no longer winning. Now I'd be happy if they were gone so we don't have to listen to them whinge anymore.

I also wonder what is it that RBR have over Bernie to say that he supports them in their plight to reel in the Mercedes teams? He had no issues when RBR were dominating for 4 years straight and now suddenly when Mercedes are dominating he supports calls for equalisation? Something reeks! Maybe Horner and Ecclestone are spooning partners?

I don't really see what people are surprised about anyway. When sweeping rule changes come in, there is always one team that comes out on top. Just look at 1998 and how dominant McLaren became. 2009 with Brawn GP. These sort of rule changes always have and always will bring about periods of domination. It's just that this time Mercedes have done the best job. It took Ferrari 3 years to reel in McLaren from the 1998 changes. If it wasn't for Schumacher being behind the wheel then it would have been a McLaren sweep. Schumacher dominated for 5 years. Periods of domination come and go in F1 but for me, last year was one of the closest fought championship battles in a long time. It was far better than watching that overrated German go on and win 9 races in a row by 30 seconds. At least now you've two top drivers challenging each other.

+1

Further evidence can be seen from the 'stable' 3 litre engine formual days of the 70's-mid 80's. Sure Cosworth engines dominated, but no one team. Lotus won four titles, Tyrrell two, McLaren two, Ferrari three, Williams two and Brabham one (before switching to BMW turbo for a second title). Other teams frequently challeged for and won races as well.

Moral of my story is simple. 'Set an engine formula and leave it alone for a decent period of time, things will eventually equallise between the teams and the racing will get closer as the formula goes on.Big changes as Knight says will see one team (usually but not always the richest team/s) continue to dominate, simply because they can spend money to adapt quickest.

[Mark]

Not just engines. All changes to the car regulations too.

[Firstgear]

With the current restrictions on testing, it will take a loooooong time to equalize.

[anfield5]

Not just engines. All changes to the car regulations too.

Absolutely true Mark. Any major rule changes benefit the cashed-up bigger teams.

I know I keep on harping on about the 70's-80's period of F1, but it was a time when a stable set of regulations were in force and the racing was without a doubt better.... Yes I know that was befor computers and technology ruined things and the world is now a vastly different place, and due to the speed of technological development we can never have the same sort of, or length of stability, but...... something does need to be done. (I am not advocating false after the fact car equalisation, rather a set of stable rules all teams can live with, that are not that cost prohibitive that only the mega-buck teams have a chance)

As Firstgear says, the lack of testing means that any advantage a team has at the start of the season will never be caught by the other teams. It is not a coincidence that one team totally dominating for season upon season corresponds to the testing bans (apart from some obvious exceptions of course)

[denkimi]

+1

Further evidence can be seen from the 'stable' 3 litre engine formual days of the 70's-mid 80's. Sure Cosworth engines dominated, but no one team. Lotus won four titles, Tyrrell two, McLaren two, Ferrari three, Williams two and Brabham one (before switching to BMW turbo for a second title). Other teams frequently challeged for and won races as well.

Moral of my story is simple. 'Set an engine formula and leave it alone for a decent period of time, things will eventually equallise between the teams and the racing will get closer as the formula goes on.Big changes as Knight says will see one team (usually but not always the richest team/s) continue to dominate, simply because they can spend money to adapt quickest.

you can stay with the current engines for 20 years, as long as they remain frozen there will be no equalization.

[anfield5]

you can stay with the current engines for 20 years, as long as they remain frozen there will be no equalization.

Absolutely true, that is why I have argued before about scrapping this stupid freeze idea and finding some other way ie budget cap on engines to even things out.

[Rollo]

http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/118138
Asked if he appreciated the irony of a once-dominant team demanding equivalency, Horner replied: "I can understand, but when we were performing we never had the level of dominance that we are seeing, nowhere near.
- Autosport, 20th Mar 2015.

Of course Red Bull "never had the level of dominance that we are seeing, nowhere near". Red Bull had Vettel and Webber.

I predicted in 2004 that Webber would never win a Grand Prix and would never win the World Championship. He some some Grands Prix but he was never going to win a WDC.
Mercedes in 2014 had a former World Champion and someone with the potential to be a World Champion. Red Bull even in their highest "level of dominance" never had that.

The 2013 Red Bull probably was as dominant and technically superior to the field as the 2014 Mercedes was. It's just that it was driven by a star and an ordinary, whereas the Mercedes was driven by two stars.

[The Black Knight]

http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/118138
Asked if he appreciated the irony of a once-dominant team demanding equivalency, Horner replied: "I can understand, but when we were performing we never had the level of dominance that we are seeing, nowhere near.
- Autosport, 20th Mar 2015.

Of course Red Bull "never had the level of dominance that we are seeing, nowhere near". Red Bull had Vettel and Webber.

I predicted in 2004 that Webber would never win a Grand Prix and would never win the World Championship. He some some Grands Prix but he was never going to win a WDC.
Mercedes in 2014 had a former World Champion and someone with the potential to be a World Champion. Red Bull even in their highest "level of dominance" never had that.

The 2013 Red Bull probably was as dominant and technically superior to the field as the 2014 Mercedes was. It's just that it was driven by a star and an ordinary, whereas the Mercedes was driven by two stars.

I've yet to witness Mercedes win 9 races in a row in one season. We'll see if they can do it this year If they win the next race it will be 9 in a row but in different seasons. Oh RBR are such a bunch of sore losers. I've never seen a more obvious case of the boy who cried wolf in my life. Anyway, who wants to see a drinks manufacturer dominate F1? I certainly don't. Totally fine with them quitting. F1 is bigger than any one team, including Ferrari.

All the teams agreed to the 2014 rule changes and had their input into them. Just because RBR didn't do as good a job as the others is no reason for F1 to change. Personally, I've no issue watching two great drivers in the same car battle it out in front. I love watching two drivers push each other like that. That is something F1 has been missing greatly the previous number of years with Vettel dominating.

[jens]

Dj_bytedisaster can be many things, but guess he was right about one thing - some people are so hurt over the success of Red Bull they still can't get over it. Beating Red Bull, Horner, and others even, when they are down. Red Bull is of no importance and should quit F1? Well, then we would lose 2 teams and F1 would collapse. Good luck with that.

F1 is in a pretty dire state right now. Dominance is never good for F1, be it McLaren, Ferrari, Red Bull or Mercedes. We got only 15 cars on the grid, and realistically only 9 teams competing. But people are still beating Red Bull over stating the obvious.

The only time, when car-wise Red Bull enjoyed the kind of dominance Mercedes does currently or all through 2014, was the second half of 2013. You only need to look at time gaps to see that. In the first half of 2013 there were plenty of close races, and even races, where Red Bull was nowhere near the front (like Spain in 2013).

As for "interesting battle between team-mates". We will see, how does this season evolve. But there was nothing interesting between Hamilton and Rosberg in Australia. Utterly forgettable GP in terms of racing at the front. So from this point of view not superior to other domination eras.

[The Black Knight]

Dj_bytedisaster can be many things, but guess he was right about one thing - some people are so hurt over the success of Red Bull they still can't get over it. Beating Red Bull, Horner, and others even, when they are down. Red Bull is of no importance and should quit F1? Well, then we would lose 2 teams and F1 would collapse. Good luck with that.

F1 is in a pretty dire state right now. Dominance is never good for F1, be it McLaren, Ferrari, Red Bull or Mercedes. We got only 15 cars on the grid, and realistically only 9 teams competing. But people are still beating Red Bull over stating the obvious.

The only time, when car-wise Red Bull enjoyed the kind of dominance Mercedes does currently or all through 2014, was the second half of 2013. You only need to look at time gaps to see that. In the first half of 2013 there were plenty of close races, and even races, where Red Bull was nowhere near the front (like Spain in 2013).

As for "interesting battle between team-mates". We will see, how does this season evolve. But there was nothing interesting between Hamilton and Rosberg in Australia. Utterly forgettable GP in terms of racing at the front. So from this point of view not superior to other domination eras.

F1 won’t collapse if we lose RBR. The likelihood would be that Renault would take over Torro Rosso as a works team. There are also rumours of Audi waiting in the mist should RBR or someone else decide to pull out of the sport. So while we’d lose Red Bull I doubt very much that we’d lose two teams which, as I said, I am totally fine with losing RBR.

As for being hurt over RBR’s success, I am not. They did the best job and that’s it, I just don’t believe a drinks company should be spearheading the success of F1. Simple as really. I’d rather that they left and a genuine car manufacturer came in. RBR were the first ones to come out and say that they shouldn’t be punished for doing a better job during the 2010-2014 seasons and I totally agree with that. You can’t punish a team for doing a better job. It’s up to the others to play catch up.

The only fair way out of this that I see is to unfreeze the Engine homologation rules until the end of 2016 and to allow each team something like 7 engines per season. That leaves enough scope for upgrades every 2-3 races and should allow Renault and everyone else to catch up. If they can’t do it in that length of time then they don’t deserve to do it. This will increase cost but, let’s face it, costs are through the roof anyway so what’s another 20 million? In the grand scheme of things and the likely commercial benefit to F1 it would be worth the investment. There could be a potential agreement done with the Engine manufacturers that they receive an chunk of the cherry through increased revenue generated from a more closely fought F1 race. It's all doable should people put their heads down and agree to it and stop bitching but you can't punish Mercedes for doing a better job.

This was the same with Ferrari and RBR. And, in fairness to Ron Dennis, when Ferrari were dominating, he clearly stated that you can't punish them for doing a better job and it is up to the other teams to catch up. The same applies here.

Regarding the Australian GP, I quite enjoyed watching Rosberg and Hamilton drive out front. They were both driving flawlessly and it was interesting to see the contrast in styles. This is part of what draws me to F1, not necessarily "the show". You might not remember the GP and thought it dull but I still rewatched it twice on Sunday. Lets face it, over the last 17 years in F1 there have been more "dull" races as you put it than entertaining ones with lots of overtaking. If you want overtaking, then go to Moto GP. F1 hasn't been about overtaking in a long time. And DRS is still as stupid today as it was three years ago.