Has Monza really made Mercedes betting favourites again?

Over the past weekend at Monza, when two Mercedes of Lewis Hamilton and George Russell crossed the finish line in first and second place in a race without any incidents, European bookmakers immediately slashed both drivers' championship odds to their lowest levels since the start of the season. Standing in the media area, I watched the numbers dance on the screen and couldn't help remembering the lesson I've learned over years of observing sports: crowd emotion often runs ahead of data logic. Where did this frenzy come from? From a remarkable Mercedes performance — or from the specific nature of this high-speed track, where a powerful engine can mask any chassis issues? The context of the season leading up to Monza showed Mercedes still an enigma, and a disappointing one. The W15 debuted with an entirely new aerodynamic philosophy, but engineers struggled to find the balance between mechanical grip and downforce. Tracks like Bahrain, Saudi Arabia, or Australia exposed a clear weakness: Mercedes couldn't maintain speed in low-speed corners, where the car lost grip and caused the rear tires to overheat quickly. As a result, they had only one podium in the first seven rounds. That's why, as summer arrived, experts – including me – had crossed them off any title contender list, waiting instead for Red Bull or Ferrari to dominate. Yet Monza is unlike any other circuit on the calendar. Known as the 'Temple of Speed,' Monza features four long straights, with the throttle-open time accounting for 72% of the lap. This means the engine plays a more critical role than ever, while low-downforce capability is almost irrelevant. Since the V6 hybrid era, Mercedes has dominated here with a superior power unit, and even after many years, they still have the most powerful engine on the straights according to FIA GPS data. So, when the Brackley engineers brought a package including a low-drag rear wing and a new internal combustion engine with synthetic fuel, I knew they would be fast at Monza. But the question is: is that speed sustainable on a typical circuit, or is it a product of this particular track? Entering qualifying, telemetry data showed Lewis Hamilton fastest with a time of 1 minute 19.356 seconds, just a third of a second ahead of Max Verstappen. But looking at sector details, the picture becomes more complex. In sectors 2 and 3, where fast corners like Parabolica can make a difference, Hamilton was only third in average speed. His remarkable lap came mainly from sector 1 – those long straights – where the Mercedes reached a top speed of 361.5 km/h, 3 km/h faster than the Red Bull. This raises a scientific suspicion: if Mercedes truly had a major step forward in chassis, why can't they still dominate opponents in fast corners? The most plausible explanation lies in their sacrifice of downforce to reduce drag, with the reward being a stunning lap on a circuit where no one needs much downforce. In the race itself, Mercedes also showed dominant straight-line speed, and they successfully defended their lead when their one-stop strategy worked perfectly. However, when I analyzed tire degradation data published by Pirelli, I noticed the rear tire wear on Russell's car was 2.8%, higher than the race average. This is a warning sign. If the race were held on a more demanding circuit like Silverstone with many high-speed corners or Budapest with a slippery surface, this issue could cause them to fall out of the leading pack. The performance at Monza cannot accurately reflect their true racing capability – it only reflects a coincidental alignment between engine strength and the circuit's straights. Formula 1 history has seen many 'flash in the pan' performances at Monza. We remember Williams' Felipe Massa taking pole in 2026 thanks to a powerful Mercedes engine, but they could never sustain that form in following races. In 2026, Daniel Ricciardo of McLaren won here on a special day, seemingly opening a new cycle, but the team still fell back into the midfield. So, before calling Mercedes 'title contenders' again, we need to check long-term data. If you look at the total points scored by both Mercedes drivers over the seven pre-Monza rounds, they only managed 58 – significantly lower than Red Bull's 178. One race's favorable circuit cannot erase that gap. This is the moment I recall a lesson from my own past, when I boldly claimed Leicester City would never win the Premier League because they lacked depth, and reality proved me wrong. In sports, data models only mature when reality falsifies them. Today, bookmakers have Mercedes as favorites with odds of 1/4. But are we falling into a similar trap? Look at what's coming next: Singapore, a circuit demanding maximum downforce, or Japan with sequences of high-speed corners requiring aerodynamic stability. At those places, Mercedes reveals its true nature: a car that is a scholar on straights but mediocre in slow corners. We need to look at the drivers, too. Lewis Hamilton had a perfect race, but before that he only finished in the top five in two of seven rounds. George Russell has shown more consistency but still trails Verstappen in pole conversion. Yet bettors are pouring money on them as if they are invincible. Don't ask who's playing well; ask which system is on your side. Mercedes' system was on their side at Monza because everything was perfect: cool temperatures, a flat asphalt surface, and an engine pushed to its limits. A tactical machine doesn't run on emotion; it runs on information. Here, the information only shows a specific fit, not a structural turning point. At the end of this article, I want to return to the title question: Has Monza made Mercedes betting favourites again? My answer, based on the data analyzed, is yes – but only within the limit of that Monza race. They would deserve to be considered genuine candidates if they could repeat such a performance at circuits with average technical difficulty. If they can stand on the podium at Zandvoort – where Red Bull is not much stronger – or finish in the top three at Singapore thanks to a smart pit strategy, then I will begin to believe that Mercedes has solved the puzzle of the current era. But for now, the rational move is to watch their flight to Baku, a high-speed street circuit that demands a different wing package. If they are strong there, perhaps we could still consider it not a real comeback because Baku is similar to Monza but with a more complex urban scenario. We need a more diverse sample before concluding. Remember this: when an unusual result appears, don't rush to whitewash old laws – try to explain it with raw numbers, and more importantly, with your predictive ability for different environments. That is the only way to avoid being a victim of market deception or, worse, your own complacency.