Lewis Hamilton

[TheDeuce]

Graveworm said:

Simoncelli58 said:

.

And the interesting thing is that I think LH would relish the chance to prove just how good he is against any challenger in equal machinery .

Did you see how he did in Spec series F3 etc prior to F1?

The only time I enjoyed the 'star in a reasonably priced car' segment on Top Gear was when it was an F1 driver. Perhaps not the most accurate test of skill given the varying weather - but it was good to see them all in the same (awful) car

[paulguitar]

Poppiecock said:

Only if you’re trying to spin a story about Lewis somehow holding the moral high ground over Schumacher.

Dear god, you could make a case for almost anyone holding the 'moral high ground' over Schuey without recourse to any spin.

[LaurasOtherHalf]

sparta6 said:

Mercedes have also protected Lewis at the start of a season.

2013 at both Australia and Sepang, Nico instructed not to pass Lewis.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/formula1/22062571

Nico should have simply done a Max and said "NO"

ROS has discussed this on his podcast, with Chris Froome as they’ve both had to do it.

Both admitted they would never disobey the team as as soon as they did, they’d have lost. It could be argued that they both weren’t the alphas in the team when it happened I suppose but they were both unequivocal about it. Disobey and you’d lose the garage.

[heebeegeetee]

paulguitar said:

Poppiecock said:

Only if you’re trying to spin a story about Lewis somehow holding the moral high ground over Schumacher.

Dear god, you could make a case for almost anyone holding the 'moral high ground' over Schuey without recourse to any spin.

Agreed. I'm a Schumacher fan but I would say everyone has the moral high ground over Michael, with the exception of Senna. I admire Michael very much, he was relentless and intense, and I imagine racing him year after year must be how it is with Hamilton now, but when push came to shove Michael would lose control, of himself.

Hamilton's had some blips along the way but not the set pattern in life and the way they approached their sport that Senna and Schumacher had.

I don't think anyone is suggesting Hamilton is THE best. I don't think there is a THE best anymore. F1 is over 70 years old now and there are a number of drivers who were 'the greatest', and I'm not sure anyone bothers to argue who was the best overall anymore, there's just no point.

[Graveworm]

LaurasOtherHalf said:

ROS has discussed this on his podcast, with Chris Froome as they’ve both had to do it.

Both admitted they would never disobey the team as as soon as they did, they’d have lost. It could be argued that they both weren’t the alphas in the team when it happened I suppose but they were both unequivocal about it. Disobey and you’d lose the garage.

Max refused to let Sainz pass until he could show he could catch him. Nico was told not to try to overtake. Not quite the same. Nico disobeying that could have led to a touch which, at that stage, would have been career threatening.

Edited by Graveworm on Monday 22 July 19:07

[TobyTR]

angrymoby said:

TobyTR said:

2016 wasn't that long ago... a complete F1 driver (like M.Schumacher) would not have lost to Rosberg that year, period. He was rattled and made a few mistakes that year

you do realise Micheal & Nico were in the same team & identical machinery at one point, yeah?

No preferential treatment, no No.1 status, no bespoke tyres, no unlimited testing & up against a driver who would subsequently become a WDC (the ONLY time he's gone up against a WDC or future WDC) ...& he got absolutely spanked

& don't give me that crap about not the same driver as he once was, he got a Monaco pole & would've won Canada if the track hadn't dried out (which would've equaled Nico's achievements at that time)

but you carry on with Schrödinger's Rosberg

Edited by angrymoby on Monday 22 July 11:33

Anyone on here who seriously compares an old past-it 43-year-old M.Schumacher to his pre-retirement days needs their head examined. The fact he got pole at Monaco at that age and with that amount of time out of the sport shows how good he was.

Edited by TobyTR on Monday 22 July 22:40

[MarkwG]

Poppiecock said:

MarkwG said:

There's a world of difference between being told to let the car behind past, & asking someone not to unnecessarily challenge the driver ahead, risking both cars ..

Only if you’re trying to spin a story about Lewis somehow holding the moral high ground over Schumacher.

We simply don’t really know what would happen should Mercedes feel truly threatened by other teams. We can speculate, using evidence such as the above, that they are more than willing to put one driver in a favourable position. But nobody has ever really been close enough to put them under pressure.

I'm not spinning anything, I don't give a flying f*ck either way - my point is that comparing the two is facile: the driver ahead isn't in a "favourable position", he's just ahead, that's how racing works. Every team I can think of would try to avoid the scenario of losing both cars through a risky fight between team mates, so reminding both of that makes sense. It's obviously different from asking the number 2 car to pull over so the number 1 can gain points for himself, to the detriment of the other car.
Mercedes have been reasonably clear on their policy, albeit that nothing is cast in stone, as recently as here: https://www.espn.co.uk/f1/story/_/id/26626862/toto... . Perhaps if the other teams ever get their act together we'll see if it holds.

[TobyTR]

TobyTR said:

Statistically, this year's Mercedes is more dominant than Ferrari's F2004, and the Ferrari had more competition that year. And yet M.Schumacher still won the first 5 races in a row, one retirement, then won the next 7 races in a row, followed by two 2nd places. = WDC sewn up. - like him or not as a person, that is what makes a complete F1 driver.

Hakinen also summed it up well, "I think my 100% was a tiny bit quicker than Michael's, but he was at least 98% at every single race, year after year

TheDeuce said:

I agree. Lewis is about as good as it gets in terms of being an all round talented and consistent driver. The fact that history shows MS winning even more frequently isn't down to extra talent imo, rather some questionable tactics and favouritism.

How do you explain 2004 then? That year there were no questionable tactics or favouritism. He literally spanked the field and while his teammate was finishing some races off the podium, Schumacher was winning them.

I know that's hard to admit on a British biased anti-Schumacher forum (it's getting ridiculous on here) - but that's how it was. Look at it objectively. Yes, he showed poor sportsmanship a few times, but that doesn't take away from the fact he was mighty fast, super consistent and very intelligent.

Edited by TobyTR on Monday 22 July 22:44

[TheDeuce]

heebeegeetee said:

Agreed. I'm a Schumacher fan but I would say everyone has the moral high ground over Michael, with the exception of Senna. I admire Michael very much, he was relentless and intense, and I imagine racing him year after year must be how it is with Hamilton now, but when push came to shove Michael would lose control, of himself.

Hamilton's had some blips along the way but not the set pattern in life and the way they approached their sport that Senna and Schumacher had.

I don't think anyone is suggesting Hamilton is THE best. I don't think there is a THE best anymore. F1 is over 70 years old now and there are a number of drivers who were 'the greatest', and I'm not sure anyone bothers to argue who was the best overall anymore, there's just no point.

I think it's certain that many people do seek to identify the 'best' driver of all time, even if it is fruitless and pointless

I prefer to take a more abstract view of that question. Lewis is the best of the current era - few would argue that point. And by extension, because the sport including the driver's has (like all things) evolved over the decades, it's reasonable to conclude he should be objectively better than any previous 'great' driver. In the same way the best selling cars today are overall better than the best selling cars 20 years ago, as with computers, sprinters, divers, rockets, loft insulation etc etc.

The question is still only partially answered though. If senna had been born on the same day as Lewis maybe he would make an even better job of the current era of the sport. I doubt it, but you get the idea...

Sorry for the waffle - I agree it's a nonsense question

[mattikake]

Graveworm said:

Simoncelli58 said:

.

And the interesting thing is that I think LH would relish the chance to prove just how good he is against any challenger in equal machinery .

Did you see how he did in Spec series F3 etc prior to F1?

Quite. In fact have a look at LH's record in all the pre f1 series. 10/15 wins f Renault (including 2 races where he didn't take part). 15/20 wins in euro f3 (including 1 dad by the team).

Schumi's pre f1 record is actually, surprisingly, pretty pathetic by comparison.

For schumi to be considered a complete f1 driver I find laughable. Forget all the prefential treatment from the fia and teams, aspects for team chrating etc. It's his on track antics that make "complete" impossible to claim. 5 times in f1 alone he was involved in on track cheating and deliberately dangerous driving which served to highlight his mental frailty. Even in Macau f3000 he took out hakkinen in order to win that invitation race by squeezing him into a wall on the start/finish straight. Also, can anyone remember schumi demonstrating "complete" driver overtaking race craft? Because I can't remember any.

Lewis' only weakness, and it's tenuous, is that if his heart isn't in it for whatever reason (problems with his relationship to schertzinger (sp?) had a bearing in 2010/2011 iirc) it can affect him. In f Renault first year he also admitted his heart wasn't in it, got his mind together and done.

[TheDeuce]

TobyTR said:

How do you explain 2004 then? That year there were no questionable tactics or favouritism. He literally spanked the field and while his teammate was finishing some races off the podium, Schumacher was winning them.

I know that's hard to admit on a British biased anti-Schumacher forum (it's getting ridiculous on here) - but that's how it was. Look at it objectively. Yes, he showed poor sportsmanship a few times, but that doesn't take away from the fact he was mighty fast, super consistent and very intelligent.

I think he was in the best car, and simply better than his team mate.

Please don't misunderstand me, I'm not claiming Schumacher wasn't an excellent driver, he clearly was. And in 2004, unless there are things we don't know about that gave him an advantage, I would agree he won on merit. But Lewis has spent an entire career winning on merit, bar a few hardly worth mentioning examples that people keep dragging up.

Schumacher had seasons where he was given so many advantages one way or another. He was good enough to be remarkable without the help.. but because there was help, then I don't think it's fair to compare his win tally overall to Lewis's. We will never know for sure, but I personally doubt he would have achieved quite as much as Lewis if he (and his team and F1) had always played as straight as they do in the current era.

[TobyTR]

mattikake said:

Quite. In fact have a look at LH's record in all the pre f1 series. 10/15 wins f Renault (including 2 races where he didn't take part). 15/20 wins in euro f3 (including 1 dad by the team).

Schumi's pre f1 record is actually, surprisingly, pretty pathetic by comparison.

For schumi to be considered a complete f1 driver I find laughable. Forget all the prefential treatment from the fia and teams, aspects for team chrating etc. It's his on track antics that make "complete" impossible to claim. 5 times in f1 alone he was involved in on track cheating and deliberately dangerous driving which served to highlight his mental frailty. Even in Macau f3000 he took out hakkinen in order to win that invitation race by squeezing him into a wall on the start/finish straight. Also, can anyone remember schumi demonstrating "complete" driver overtaking race craft? Because I can't remember any.

Lewis' only weakness, and it's tenuous, is that if his heart isn't in it for whatever reason (problems with his relationship to schertzinger (sp?) had a bearing in 2010/2011 iirc) it can affect him. In f Renault first year he also admitted his heart wasn't in it, got his mind together and done.

a simple YouTube "best of Michael Schumacher" and that will bring up his racecraft, aside from the handful of bad moves.

So where was Lewis 2009-2013 then? He had more than one bad year. No doubt he's been in a good frame of mind since the beginning of 2017

[Exige77]

TobyTR][b said:

Statistically, this year's Mercedes is more dominant than Ferrari's F2004, and the Ferrari had more competition that year. And yet M.Schumacher still won the first 5 races in a row, one retirement, then won the next 7 races in a row, followed by two 2nd places. = WDC sewn up. - like him or not as a person, that is what makes a complete F1 driver.

Hakinen also summed it up well, "I think my 100% was a tiny bit quicker than Michael's, but he was at least 98% at every single race, year after year.[/b]

TheDeuce said:

I agree. Lewis is about as good as it gets in terms of being an all round talented and consistent driver. The fact that history shows MS winning even more frequently isn't down to extra talent imo, rather some questionable tactics and favouritism.

How do you explain 2004 then? That year there were no questionable tactics or favouritism. He literally spanked the field and while his teammate was finishing some races off the podium, Schumacher was winning them.

I know that's hard to admit on a British biased anti-Schumacher forum (it's getting ridiculous on here) - but that's how it was. Look at it objectively. Yes, he showed poor sportsmanship a few times, but that doesn't take away from the fact he was mighty fast, super consistent and very intelligent.

Edited by TobyTR on Monday 22 July 22:41

I think you’ll find this is not a British biased anti Schumacher forum.

This is the Lewis Hamilton thread and last time I checked, I think he is British. Plenty people here criticising him. It seems no matter how well he does, he’s just lucky or in the best car.

Schumacher had many advantages inc the usual Red Team privileges, unlimited testing, bespoke tyres and undisputed no 1 status plus a bit of questionable sportsmanship.

Not to mention anything dodgy that might have been happening at Benetton.

For me, Schumacher was a good driver but never one of the greats even if the stats show otherwise.

[TobyTR]

TheDeuce said:

TobyTR said:

How do you explain 2004 then? That year there were no questionable tactics or favouritism. He literally spanked the field and while his teammate was finishing some races off the podium, Schumacher was winning them.

I know that's hard to admit on a British biased anti-Schumacher forum (it's getting ridiculous on here) - but that's how it was. Look at it objectively. Yes, he showed poor sportsmanship a few times, but that doesn't take away from the fact he was mighty fast, super consistent and very intelligent.

I think he was in the best car, and simply better than his team mate.

Please don't misunderstand me, I'm not claiming Schumacher wasn't an excellent driver, he clearly was. And in 2004, unless there are things we don't know about that gave him an advantage, I would agree he won on merit. But Lewis has spent an entire career winning on merit, bar a few hardly worth mentioning examples that people keep dragging up.

Schumacher had seasons where he was given so many advantages one way or another. He was good enough to be remarkable without the help.. but because there was help, then I don't think it's fair to compare his win tally overall to Lewis's. We will never know for sure, but I personally doubt he would have achieved quite as much as Lewis if he (and his team and F1) had always played as straight as they do in the current era.

When I think of his handful of poor racing moves, I also think of 1996, '97 (he made that dog a title contender), '98, '99, 2000, 2003, 2004, 2005 and 2006

Particularly beating Hakinen in a fair fight in 2000.

[TobyTR]

Exige77 said:

I think you’ll find this is not a British biased anti Schumacher forum.

This is the Lewis Hamilton thread and last time I checked, I think he is British. Plenty people here criticising him. It seems no matter how well he does, he’s just lucky or in the best car.

Schumacher had many advantages inc the usual Red Team privileges, unlimited testing, bespoke tyres and undisputed no 1 status plus a bit of questionable sportsmanship.

Not to mention anything dodgy that might have been happening at Benetton.

For me, Schumacher was a good driver but never one of the greats even if the stats show otherwise.

They all had unlimited testing during that time...

So we should take your opinion over Jenson Button and other ex-F1 drivers... righteo.

[mattikake]

^ Schertzinger + him not being pushed.

Lewis does have another weakness - he needs to be pushed. If not he drives at 95%. This expalins his often weak starts and finishes to a season. If you force him to compete, you can't beat him. Maybe get even, but he can't be beaten mano a mano. You need luck or a better car.

Lewis may also be someone remembered for destryoing drivers. Alonso never won a wdc after meeting him. Rosberg quit. Kovalinen? Where is he these days? Bottas will be next, he'll never get a top drive again. Bring on Max I say...

[TobyTR]

Jenson Button beat Hamilton fairly in 2011 and Alonso beat him 2010-2013, when Hamilton had arguably the better cars.

[paulguitar]

TobyTR said:

Jenson Button beat Hamilton fairly in 2011 and Alonso beat him 2010-2013, when Hamilton had arguably the better cars.

I think Hamilton beat Hamilton in 2011, he was in a bit of a mess that year, although IIRC I think he still got more poles and wins than Button? Happy to be corrected as I am not totally certain.

By far the best comparison we have between Alonso and Hamilton is clearly 2007 since they had equal equipment, and we know what happened there.

[TobyTR]

Yep, Alonso's worst, most insecure season in F1 and he finished on equal points to Hamilton and one point behind the WDC. Awful.

Statistically, 2007 was a much better and more consistent performing year for Hamilton than 2008 - he made more mistakes and scored less points in his first title-winning year.

[paulguitar]

TobyTR said:

Yep, Alonso's worst, most insecure season in F1 and he finished on equal points to Hamilton and one point behind the WDC. Awful.

I certainly wouldn't say it was an awful season for Alonso. Sure, Hamilton was a rookie, but knowing what we know now about how great Hamilton is, for Alonso to finish with equal points is really a pretty impressive achievement.