Great professional, great influence to those with ambition. I guess it's also good for an influx in younger individuals looking to jump into F1. I know there's many barriers to entry but at least he's being an inspiration to them. Think he mentioned this at the end of the race.
Lewis Hamilton
- Thread starter UnofficialDevil
- Start date
LiterallyTrue. It is the engineers that really win it.
I find the narrative that he's a bellend or cretin or whatever a bit odd. I say narrative as I haven't come across any specific examples of his behaviour that would lead me to agree with these statements. It would be interesting if people could point them out (if there are any examples of this behaviour reported online). Now if people said he's boring, corporate or to some degree hypocritical I would understand where they are coming from.
Yeah it's a sum of many parts
I was implying that roger Federer is one of the greats but not necessarily monopolising in that field.
Yeah agreed with that as well Pogue. I was very invested in it for a decade or so but then I just lost interest. And I’ve never quite followed the stats, but my perception from little titbits of info has always been the sport wasn’t doing too well. Bleeding viewership and lots of teams going bust/bankrupt (but that could also be due to another reason that I’m unaware of).
It definitely sucks for Hamilton ito hype and adulation right up there with the GOATs....because surely he is!
Hamilton is the last driver to win a championship when his team did not win the constructors.
So GP2 or F3? Hamilton won those too.
Even Vettel does not rate himself above Hamilton (seriously, he called Hamilton the best driver of their era).
It really is mental just how much people are trying to downplay Hamiltons achievements.
Schumacher did this twice and on both occasions, both teams were in a far far worse state than Mercedes were when Hamilton joined them. I would also say Michael and Rosberg laid the ground work for where Mercedes are today in regards to ironing out the kinks in the team. There is a reason Ross Brawn wanted him irrespective of whether his results were erratic.
Since 2014, you could argue Hamilton has only had two season where he didn't have the equivalent car to the 2004 Ferrari. Michael had that type of car twice in his career in 2002 and 2004.
You put Senna, Schumacher and Hamilton in the same car at the peak of their careers, Senna qualifies pole, Schumacher wins the race and Hamilton qualifies second and maybe finishes 3rd (depending on whether Senna bins its chasing Schumacher or not).
I had an interview with them and it was clear some of the stuff they were doing was odd to say the least. They were very coy in the interview, but it was clear they don't bother experimenting on the individual car parts - just the car "as a whole" so there is simply no way they fully understand how the coupling works between the different aero packages. Maybe for the F1 industry that is sufficient, but they are relying mostly on simulations, with wind tunnel testing on half scale models involving PIV experiments, flow visualization and probably some basic sensor measurements.
PS: I fecked up the interview
Has the go down as the greatest of all time now. Holds pretty much all the records now.
The race on Sunday was real class from Lewis, he’s easily one of the best ever that’s without question.
Rosberg beat him once in like 7 years or something and that was by 5 points with Lewis actually having more wins that season.
Meh real shit thing to throw at him that.
I don't disagree that's how he's going to be remembered, but i think his talent was on a level with vettel and hamilton. It comes down to how cars have become so much more important than drivers, that you could be the best driver ever but if you don't have the best car, you can't win. Hamilton was the same as Alonso before Mercedes built the best cars, and after 7 years of mercedes dominance we're putting him on the same level as Schumacher and Senna and co.
If that were Alonso instead of Hamilton going to Mercedes at the right time, do you think he wouldn't have been as dominant?
Again is he disliked in the UK? I don't watch F1 but mostly hear positive stuff on him. I haven't really noticed any racist undertones to stuff. They've mentioned when he's been a tit (anti vaxxing posts) but that's about it. He's everywhere in the news during race weeks and it's always positive as he always wins.
As me, you and others have said in this thread he doesn't get as much praise from non fans of F1 cos to people who aren't fans it's a ridiculously dull sport
Hamilton came in as a rookie to the same team as peak Alonso and beat him. I dont think theres any doubt hes significantly better than Alonso.
I think he is better, but not significantly so. Part of the reason why Hamilton "beat" Alonso that season was the clear push from McLaren to make him win midway through the season. Still he was competitive with Alonso as a rookie, and as i've said i think he is ultimately the better driver. But i also think Alonso is right up there in terms of talent
As for him being unlikeable, i met him once in a professional setting and he was one of the nicests, easiests celebrities to work with. Very easy to like, half my co-workers got huge crushes on him because he was just so nice and cute
I think Alonso is better overall. For a decent part of Hamilton's career he was quite unreliable.
You guys sure know how to downplay some of your own's achievements. I could be wrong but I don't think the likes of Farah, Wiggins, Cavendish and O'Sullivan get the same kind of respect that they get on the continent either. Yet there seems to be some kind of adulation for guys like Chris Hoy who was "only" a track cyclist just because he won some stuff at the Olympics. The guy wouldn't make a top 5 UK athletes if asked around these parts and I bet 90% of people wouldn't even have a clue who he is.
Possibly the best way to judge sentiment in the UK is to look at who wins the BBC Sports Personality of the Year award as it's the big year end sporting award voted for by the public.
Farah, Wiggins, Cavindish and Hoy have all won it once each. Lewis has won it once but has come 2nd 4 times. He'll almost certainly win it this year which will make him the most successful athlete by that measure in UK history. Murray has won it 3 times but only has one 3rd place after that.
By O'Sillivan, do you mean Ronnie?
Farah is pretty lauded cos of London 2012, he's a very well known face over here. The criticism he (rightly) gets is because of his coach and the doping he's involved in and even that often gets wept under the rug. If it was any other athlete, especially a non British one, he'd get a lot more stick than he does.
Ditto with Wiggins, although the problem with him and Cavendish is again they're in a hugely niche sport so people just don't care that much. Farah (and Wiggins) benefitted from the London 2012 stuff as people took a huge interest in that. Wiggins was also the first Brit to win the tour De France in the 2012 year and we love jumping on a bandwagon and naturally got behind him....in fact I remember the year the big bike craze it started for a few months. Equally both Cavendish and Wiggins won the BBC SPOTY (as did Mo Farah and Lewis Hamilton) which is a pretty big recognition and indication of a main stream success and people praising them.
O'Sullivan plays a niche sport and it isn't on every week like football, rugby etc so naturally people kind of forget about it. When snooker is on, and especially on the BBC where it gets more coverage, he is often spoken about as the best British sportsman.
I'd say all the people you named get massive respect and praise, Farah and Wiggins in particular get it from casual fans as well as the die hards of the respective sports. I think you're doing a bit of a disservice to Chris Hoy as well, he's the UK's most successful Olympian in terms of gold medals so will be praised in the UK quite a bit!
He's more a cult sporting legend, a maverick type. I'm surprised anyone on the continent knows him! Thought only Brits and the Chinese played snooker.
That wasn’t really the question. The question was would Alonso been as dominant as Hamilton in the Mercedes. I think he would have been
But Chris Hoy participates in a very, very niche sport which is only a sub-category of cycling which you yourself already called a niche sport (something I disagree with for what it's worth but probably a Belgian person will look at that differently than a British person).
I saw that Geraint Thomas won BBC SPOTY in 2018 while Chris Froome never won one - he's been twice the sportsman Thomas is over the last decade and won 4 Tour de Frances (in combination with the two other major events which is something only 7 cyclists have ever done). Maybe you guys just don't take an interest in cycling all that much and I'm massively overblowing this
But e.g. if I look at the replies on a Gary Lineker tweet congratulating Lewis Hamilton, I can't help but think that you have a natural habit of talking down your own athletes a bit even when there's no actual reason to do so. To dismiss Hamilton in a GOAT F1 discussion (let alone placing him on the same level as Alonso or Vettel) just seems weird to me.We have Luca Brecel in snooker and some Belgians in darts too so usually (at least) the World Championships in both sports get a great deal of attention over here, even with live TV coverage.
Especially Ronnie, like you say more like a cult hero, gets his fair share of publicity every time he does something. Is he considered a "better" UK sportsman than Hendry over there?
What he has done is an incredible achievement, and anyone saying anything else is wrong. As an avid watcher, am I his biggest fan? No. His dominance is probably the most boring thing about the sport right now as most races these days feel like foregone conclusions. If he had to work for the wins more like this most recent race weekend, I'm sure there would be less bitterness. Having the most dominant car is always thrown at him and while it's understandable, he still massively outperforms his team-mates. People will point to that Rosberg win, but anyone who watched will know that it felt like he would have won that year if not for reliability issues in the car.
But yes he comes across as a bit of a blank, which doesn't help him. He seems to have some surface level opinions but it all feels a bit phony. As if he's aware that he should use his platform to promote a cause, as opposed to actually being passionate about the cause in question.
But yes he comes across as a bit of a blank, which doesn't help him. He seems to have some surface level opinions but it all feels a bit phony. As if he's aware that he should use his platform to promote a cause, as opposed to actually being passionate about the cause in question.
But Chris Hoy participates in a very, very niche sport which is only a sub-category of cycling which you yourself already called a niche sport (something I disagree with for what it's worth but probably a Belgian person will look at that differently than a British person).
I saw that Geraint Thomas won BBC SPOTY in 2018 while Chris Froome never won one - he's been twice the sportsman Thomas is over the last decade and won 4 Tour de Frances (in combination with the two other major events which is something only 7 cyclists have ever done). Maybe you guys just don't take an interest in cycling all that much and I'm massively overblowing this
Cycling isn't a well understood sport here like it is in Europe. It became a lot more popular through winning all those golds on the track. Stacking up Olympic Golds is something most people understand. Froome is just unpopular here, he's possibly seen as a Brit for convenience. I don't think he's ever lived here.
It's not really a debate I've ever heard anyone have really. I think ROS is regarded as the most gifted snooker player we've ever had though.
Whoever uses the "he's in the best car" excuse just doesn't know what they're talking about frankly.
Who was the last champion to win in a car that wasn't one of the favourites? it just doesn't happen in formula 1. We've never had a "leicester". The closest you could ever say was the Button win with Brawn, but that car was still the best in the early season until Red Bull caught them up.
For me he deserves it, Schumacher always had a clear number 2 driver to back him up, let's not forget how Ferrari literally gifted him a win.
He's beaten every team mate, his win percentage is 33% which is insane.
He's also a master in the wet, which anybody who knows driving deems people who can excel in wet weather to be the best natural drivers. The wet takes away the top abilities of the cars and makes it more about throttle control and tyre management, something Hamilton is THE BEST at.
People can dislike him if they want - but nobody can deny he is top 3 ever. Schumacher/Senna/Hamilton.
Who was the last champion to win in a car that wasn't one of the favourites? it just doesn't happen in formula 1. We've never had a "leicester". The closest you could ever say was the Button win with Brawn, but that car was still the best in the early season until Red Bull caught them up.
For me he deserves it, Schumacher always had a clear number 2 driver to back him up, let's not forget how Ferrari literally gifted him a win.
He's beaten every team mate, his win percentage is 33% which is insane.
He's also a master in the wet, which anybody who knows driving deems people who can excel in wet weather to be the best natural drivers. The wet takes away the top abilities of the cars and makes it more about throttle control and tyre management, something Hamilton is THE BEST at.
People can dislike him if they want - but nobody can deny he is top 3 ever. Schumacher/Senna/Hamilton.
you're directly contradicting yourself here with these two statements.
but yes. the best car wins. if Vettel, Alonso, whoever was driving this Mercedes and Hamilton was driving literally any other non-Mercedes car, Hamilton would not be winning championships. that's just a fact.
How? what i'm saying is the best cars always win. People say this like it's the only reason has ever won a title, but that can be used for every champion ever.
Yes, but the best drivers always end up in the fastest cars. Why would Hamilton be in a Haas all his career? that's just not the way it works.
Hamilton has been a star from a young age, Mclaren knew that which is why they got him into the car ASAP. He's not looked back from that point.
Yes you have to be lucky and make the right moves at the right time (see Alonso) but that's just the way sport is sometimes. Many good football players have won little by being at the wrong clubs (shearer,kane etc)
Last edited:
If they were all in the same spec car though, wouldn’t the race just be a bit pointless??
Accerleration, too speed etc. would just be the same for everyone in the race so passi by people to move up the standings would be nigh in impossible.
no??
Phenomenal achievement. The biggest reason why he potentially won’t get the recognition he deserves. has nothing to do with the car, or his competitors, it’s because the races aren’t on terrestrial TV.
I’m not a big F1 fan, but used to tune in to watch a few races occasionally. Not watched a single one since it’s gone into sky - so that’s 8/9 years?
don’t know what the viewing figures are like, but going to sky is a massive negative, as far fewer people will have watched him compared to the other great drivers.
I’m not a big F1 fan, but used to tune in to watch a few races occasionally. Not watched a single one since it’s gone into sky - so that’s 8/9 years?
don’t know what the viewing figures are like, but going to sky is a massive negative, as far fewer people will have watched him compared to the other great drivers.
Sunday's race proved several things:
1) Lewis has evolved over the years in his driving style and personality.
2) Its not always about the car -- he feckin' lapped his team-mate, Bottas, who is 2nd in the driver's championship.
3) The shitty weather -- ice-driving basically took out any advantage or disadvantage all the cars had. He was like 20seconds back from the leader at the start and landed up 30+sec ahead of the 2nd placed driver at the end. To drive and wear down the inters into basically, slicks was unbelievable, smart and gutsy -- I don't think I have ever seen that done before.
4) Statistically, he is the GOAT. But like Vettel said; who knows of Fangio could drive a car this fast or the current crop could drive such machines that were basically fast petrol tankers on wheels back then.
Imo he is the 'GOAT' in my lifetime.
1) Lewis has evolved over the years in his driving style and personality.
2) Its not always about the car -- he feckin' lapped his team-mate, Bottas, who is 2nd in the driver's championship.
3) The shitty weather -- ice-driving basically took out any advantage or disadvantage all the cars had. He was like 20seconds back from the leader at the start and landed up 30+sec ahead of the 2nd placed driver at the end. To drive and wear down the inters into basically, slicks was unbelievable, smart and gutsy -- I don't think I have ever seen that done before.
4) Statistically, he is the GOAT. But like Vettel said; who knows of Fangio could drive a car this fast or the current crop could drive such machines that were basically fast petrol tankers on wheels back then.
Imo he is the 'GOAT' in my lifetime.
No. How you enter corners, leave corners, your line, your braking. Actual driving!
I’d love to see them all in the same car
My point is that when it comes to my own definition of greatness, it doesn't matter all that much why someone hasn't fulfilled their potential. I think Raikkonen is every bit as talented as anyone among the best F1 drivers of all time but he should be nowhere near a discussion about the true greats. He, for many reasons, never fulfilled anywhere close to his full potential.
Alonso may or may not have been as dominant as Hamilton if he had chosen his teams better. We'll never actually know.
I'll say this though: the Ferrari that Schumacher had joined was not one bit better than the one Alonso found himself in. He played a massive part in building it up to become a dominant force. Maybe F1 has changed enough since then so that replicating Schumacher's (and Ross Brawn's) work is no longer possible. But again, whatever the reason is, the fact remains that Alonso never reached those heights.
I think driver talent would come to the fore then.
It's not a question that needs to be answered because we have seen them together, in exactly the same car. Hamilton was a rookie, Alonso was the World Champion. And Hamilton beat him. With 14 years of experience now under his belt it wouldn't even be close.
People like to say he has the best car whilst forgetting that a driver is often behind that. The level of feedback and involvement in development is a big part of what separates the Schumachers and Sennas from the Raikkonens and Mansells. Alonso has never shown that he excels at that. Hamilton has.