Poll The Worst Year or Era of F1 Dominance

What was/is the worst period or year of dominance in F1?

  • Lotus/Clark/Hill - 1960's

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • McLaren/Lauda/Prost/Senna - 1980 & early 90's

    Votes: 1 7.1%
  • Williams/Mansell - 1992

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Ferrari/Schumacher - early 2000's

    Votes: 6 42.9%
  • Brawn/Button - 2009

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Red Bull/Vettel - early 2010's

    Votes: 3 21.4%
  • Mercedes/Hamilton/Rosberg (?) - mid-2010's to 2020

    Votes: 3 21.4%
  • Red Bull/Verstappen - 2021 to ......

    Votes: 1 7.1%

  • Total voters
    14

FB

Not my cup of cake
Valued Member
F1 goes through cycles. The rule makers allow the teams to develop cars until they get to a similar level of competitiveness and then they throw some new rules in to allow one team to steam away from the others. So for those of you with long enough memories what has been the worst period of F1 when one team and driver(s) has (have) dominated?

You may choose to explain you reasoning, and it may be as simple as the car was a horrible colour. You may expand in more detail if you prefer.
 

F1Brits_90

Champion Elect
i cant talk about the 1st 3 too young,

but i was torn between schumacher 2004 & vettel 2013. i went vettel because i remember it far more. 2011 but mostly his 4th title in 2013 was horrendous viewing wise. as he was in league of his own vettel won 10 of final 11 races, & red bull took final 8 poles of the season. it was the lowest ive felt about F1. because Vettel was so far clear of everyone he had it won by 3rd corner. & won multiple races at a canter even from his teammate webber
 

The Pits

Harumph. Again.
Valued Member
Well. For me it was the Ferrari years, partially because I did not really like Michael Schumacher, partially because of the suspicions around at the time, and partially because of the unrestricted nature of F1 at the time, testing, tyre development etc. some may say that it is what F1 should be all about, but driven by a huge spending bonanza, personally I prefer a more innovative environment.

My main gripe in many of these is that is not really the fault of the team who do well, it is the fault of the others, and then with the strictness of regulations, testing, caps to wind tunnel and CFD, the current rules bake in advantages, and a lot of the time the seasons turn in to a bitter political row.

I see this season slightly differently. I would argue that Ferrari should be right up there battling with Red Bull most weekends, but seem to contrive to throw it all away, whilst Red Bull are simply doing most things right. Yes the car is clearly a stonking one, but at this point of the season they are not under pressure in either championship, and can well afford to be relaxed about things. Now with Mercedes coming more in to the fray, it is only going to be easier for them.

Hopefully next season will see more teams at the front, with more stable regs, and the other teams learning from operational issues.

Also, I would add, how you feel about dominance may also depend on who you support
 
Last edited:

Dartman

Pole Sitter
There was no real dominance until the reliability rules came into force before then it was still pot luck, the make may have been apparently dominant not exceptionally so, the first real dominance came with the Ferrari/Schumacher era, but that was mainly because of team orders in Ferrari and not specifically a car driver dominance, there was quite a few really good drivers in the wrong car, then there was the RB era with Vettel, again there were quicker cars and drivers than Vettel in a RB, the other teams just didn't get their acts together.
You certainly can't count anything where a car driver combination didn't get successive WDC/WCC for more than two years and certainly not Brawn/Button, that car was almost a dog at the end of the season, the RB/Verstappen domination this season is purely due to the nearest competition unable to get their act together, very similar to other seasons.
 

cider_and_toast

Exulted Lord High Moderator of the Apex
Staff Member
Premium Contributor
For me it has to be the Schumacher era. It was as much about the way the team worked as well as their dominance. The fact the had contractualy compliant team mates. The whole Austria farce at a time when he was leading the WDC by a mile and the relationship between FOM / the FIA and Ferrari. This period created the modern beast that if the current F1 championship.

Second on the list it would have to be Mansell in 92. The car was an abolute work of technical genius for its time but it's just a shame it fell to Mansell to drive. The low of the season was him gifting a win to Patrese in Japan. It didn't matter in the end because Mansell had an engine failure but earlier in the race he'd slowed and pulled over to allow Patrese to pass like he saw himself as the master giving his faithful pup a treat.

From what I know of the period I'd say an outside contender would be Fangio in the 50's. I agree that prior to the 00's realiability meant that even dominent cars very rarely finished every race but Fangio was known for pullilng team mates cars over and jumping in to take the win or even swapping teams to ensure he won the title as he did in 54 when he left Maserati to join Mercedes.
 

Il_leone

World Champion
I was too young to remember Clark in 1960's but he was let down by reliability

Senna and Prost were head and shoulders above everyone but their rivalry was intense and gave it a new meaning to the word

As I was a Mansell fan 1992 the car was so much faster but I was young at the time

Schumacher's dominance started in 2001 when just about everything went in Ferrari's favour backed by the fact he had 3 test drivers unlimited budget and he did not allow Barrichello to beat him was the reason people turned off F1. 2003 actually was one of his best championships though

Vettel comes close 2nd for 2011 and 2013 the other two seasons he had to fight for them. When the Red Bull was perfect for him he trounced Webber and everyone else. I will maintain 2013 should be remembered fir Red Bull trying to show off about their superiority and was the start of the decline for both Vettel and the team to the point they wanted to leave F1. Lets hope this time they will and take that piece of sh1t Horner with them if Porsche takeover and Dietrich no longer wants to fund the F1 teams
 

FB

Not my cup of cake
Valued Member
For those who may wonder why I've included Lotus/Clark/Hill in this list, this was the 1963 season.

1662435911994.png
 

Il_leone

World Champion
Somone seeing this in Facebook will start accusing of British bias

Interestingly no one has voted Red Bull and Verstappen but it s more down to Ferrari screwing up

I would say it comes to a period of most hated domination because the way it was and Red Bull know they got away with it scot free . What makes it worse they are goading Mercedes everytime they get a chance whether its Helmut the Dark Lord , Karen the ginger lover or Jos the wife beater
 

The Artist.....

Champion Elect
I have a general rule for when F1 is overly dominated; look at the number of teams who win in a season.

  1. One team (never happened) - absolute domination - and stringent rule changes would be needed to prevent it ever happening again (if it happened)
  2. Two teams - an unacceptable level of domination. You more or less know who is going to win after FP1 each weekend
  3. Three teams - there is competition for wins - and other teams are there to pick up the pieces
  4. Four teams - generally a sign of very good competition.
Throughout much of the Mercedes domination, we have been in situation 2. (Similarly this season).

Personally, I wish that situation 4 (or better) was the norm.
 

Il_leone

World Champion
I have a general rule for when F1 is overly dominated; look at the number of teams who win in a season.

  1. One team (never happened) - absolute domination - and stringent rule changes would be needed to prevent it ever happening again (if it happened)
  2. Two teams - an unacceptable level of domination. You more or less know who is going to win after FP1 each weekend
  3. Three teams - there is competition for wins - and other teams are there to pick up the pieces
  4. Four teams - generally a sign of very good competition.
Throughout much of the Mercedes domination, we have been in situation 2. (Similarly this season).

Personally, I wish that situation 4 (or better) was the norm.
1. This is acceptable if there is internal rivalry to overlook 1988 1989 and 2014 to 2016

A situation as of 2002, 2004 and 2013 were deemed unacceptable
2.2 teams acceptable if those drivers fight it out

3. 3 teams not sure why peopke think that adfitional cars closing on Ferrari and Red Bull is an issue

4 Great but wont hapoen because of the above teams in 1 ,2 ansd 3 meddling
 

cider_and_toast

Exulted Lord High Moderator of the Apex
Staff Member
Premium Contributor
One team (never happened) - absolute domination - and stringent rule changes would be needed to prevent it ever happening again (if it happened)
Obviously the closest we ever came to that was 1988 with McLaren and the MP4/4 taking 15 out of 16 wins and but for Jean Louis-Schlesser was only 2 laps away from making it 16/16.

One of the reasons I give 1988 a hall pass is because Senna and Prost spent the whole season kicking lumps out of each other. This was before the complete meltdown between them in 1989 so there was still a degree of respect between them.

You were either a Prost fan or a Senna fan. I doubt there was ever anyone who liked both at the same time.

I think this is the biggest issue in season long dominance by one team, what happens when they don't let their drivers race?
 

siffert_fan

Too old to watch the Asian races live.
Contributor
Obviously the closest we ever came to that was 1988 with McLaren and the MP4/4 taking 15 out of 16 wins and but for Jean Louis-Schlesser was only 2 laps away from making it 16/16.

One of the reasons I give 1988 a hall pass is because Senna and Prost spent the whole season kicking lumps out of each other. This was before the complete meltdown between them in 1989 so there was still a degree of respect between them.

You were either a Prost fan or a Senna fan. I doubt there was ever anyone who liked both at the same time.

I think this is the biggest issue in season long dominance by one team, what happens when they don't let their drivers race?
What is the difference in "not letting the drivers race" and having one top-tier driver and one second-tier? The latter has no chance against the former.
 

Il_leone

World Champion
The 2nd tier beating the 1st tier gives fans satisfaction even in the long run they wont win.

Schumacher had a contract that his teammate would not beat him . Just look at the calls Perez has been getting now
 

F1Brits_90

Champion Elect
What is the difference in "not letting the drivers race" and having one top-tier driver and one second-tier? The latter has no chance against the former.
that is what made 2013 terrible as webber was fighting for a podium in the same car Vettel was winning in comfort. but i think that cider_and_toast might be meaning which we had seen a few times. that with the 15 laps to go. tell them to bring it home
 

Il_leone

World Champion
that is what made 2013 terrible as webber was fighting for a podium in the same car Vettel was winning in comfort. but i think that cider_and_toast might be meaning which we had seen a few times. that with the 15 laps to go. tell them to bring it home
You meant Silverstone 2011 Webber was clearly faster than Vettel but they told him to stop racing Vettel even though Vettel had a huge lead in the championship

Austria 2002 springs to mind even Barcelona this year when Perez was not allowed to pass Verstappen to challenge Russell
 

F1Brits_90

Champion Elect
You meant Silverstone 2011 Webber was clearly faster than Vettel but they told him to stop racing Vettel even though Vettel had a huge lead in the championship

Austria 2002 springs to mind even Barcelona this year when Perez was not allowed to pass Verstappen to challenge Russell
ah it was 2 separate as 2013 was where vettel was in different league even to his teammate

but they are good examples of when your at the mercy of team principals for entertainment
 

cider_and_toast

Exulted Lord High Moderator of the Apex
Staff Member
Premium Contributor
What is the difference in "not letting the drivers race" and having one top-tier driver and one second-tier? The latter has no chance against the former.
F1Brits_90 was right, drivers of different abilities should still be able to race each other.

If you go back to the 60's 99 percent of teams had second rate drivers to back their star driver up anyway so that's nothing new. If you look at Lotus as a classice example, apart from the super team of Clark and Hill, some of the second seats at Lotus belonged to Alan Stacey, Eppie Weitz, Reine Wessel, Dave Charlton and John Miles. Most people would have never heard of most, if at all any of them.
 
Top Bottom