Lewis Hamilton

Lewis Hamilton

Author
Discussion

Bo_apex

961 posts

162 months

Wednesday 7th August
quotequote all
37chevy said:
Bo_apex said:
Well said.

Although unlike Clarke and Co unfortunately Lewis didn't really shine for a few years, between 2009 and 2013.

Seems he really needed to get the Mercedes seat. Thankfully Lauda was persuasive.
I think he shone, just wish a fairly naff car you can’t completely show your thing, just like Schumacher had a few rough years with Benetton and the initial Ferrari’s.

Fangio is probably the only exception but then he always switched so he was in the best car at all times
I think Schumacher had 11 DNF's in the first 2 full seasons at Benetton, something we don't see much of nowadays due to excellent reliability.

Next 2 full seasons were both WDC, while adapting to different engines, Ford then Renault.

Fangio was also great at adapting.


ELUSIVEJIM

Original Poster:

6,241 posts

95 months

Wednesday 7th August
quotequote all
Lewis Hamilton & Valtteri Bottas review 10 Mercedes F1 cars!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q2rDb17zvDU

Halmyre

7,244 posts

83 months

Wednesday 7th August
quotequote all
37chevy said:
Bonefish Blues said:
Clark.
I’m not disagreeing with you, because I think he is up there, but how can you compare Clark to Lewis for example. Given they drive completely different cars, with a huge chasm in terms of technology, fitness training, mental agility etc how can you make a fair comparison to say one is better than the other?
The level of dominance? Clark won 51% of the races in which he finished. If Lewis had done that, he would have 120 victories instead of 81.

Winning a rain-soaked 1963 Belgian GP by nearly 5 minutes; winning first time out in the Lotus 49, having never even seen it before the event; persuading the Lotus 43-BRM to its only win; coming from over a lap down at Monza in 1967 (and thwarted by fuel problems); winning the WC and the Indy 500 in the same year (and the Tasman series and the French F2 championship for good measure).

Quickmoose

3,827 posts

67 months

Wednesday 7th August
quotequote all
Halmyre said:
37chevy said:
Bonefish Blues said:
Clark.
I’m not disagreeing with you, because I think he is up there, but how can you compare Clark to Lewis for example. Given they drive completely different cars, with a huge chasm in terms of technology, fitness training, mental agility etc how can you make a fair comparison to say one is better than the other?
The level of dominance? Clark won 51% of the races in which he finished. If Lewis had done that, he would have 120 victories instead of 81.

Winning a rain-soaked 1963 Belgian GP by nearly 5 minutes; winning first time out in the Lotus 49, having never even seen it before the event; persuading the Lotus 43-BRM to its only win; coming from over a lap down at Monza in 1967 (and thwarted by fuel problems); winning the WC and the Indy 500 in the same year (and the Tasman series and the French F2 championship for good measure).
Lewis would be closer but he's managing some, serious PR/Marketing, Social media updates, fashion label and playing the piano. Clark never had that to deal with wink

janesmith1950

3,502 posts

39 months

Wednesday 7th August
quotequote all
No, he was too busy racing in different series, rallying and farming to have media commitments.

mattikake

4,674 posts

143 months

Wednesday 7th August
quotequote all
Comparing hamilton to Clark is plain impossible. There's the talent pool and grooming to consider today. There must be literally millions of budding racing drivers around today, a tiny fraction of that in Clark's time. As such you will never see his kind of apparent godly talent gap ever again.

paulguitar

3,209 posts

57 months

Wednesday 7th August
quotequote all
mattikake said:
Comparing hamilton to Clark is plain impossible. There's the talent pool and grooming to consider today. There must be literally millions of budding racing drivers around today, a tiny fraction of that in Clark's time. As such you will never see his kind of apparent godly talent gap ever again.
That is a good point. Whilst Clark was clearly an exceptional driver, I doubt he had quite the same level of competition to deal with. It's a real shame Stirling had his accident, it would have really been something to see how he and Jimmy would have compared.


37chevy

2,755 posts

100 months

Wednesday 7th August
quotequote all
Bonefish Blues said:
Spelling thereof, I was referencing. I note the improvement hehe
Yeh blooding autocorrect. :-p

37chevy

2,755 posts

100 months

Wednesday 7th August
quotequote all
paulguitar said:
That is a good point. Whilst Clark was clearly an exceptional driver, I doubt he had quite the same level of competition to deal with. It's a real shame Stirling had his accident, it would have really been something to see how he and Jimmy would have compared.
Yup....I think that’s why the gap between the greats and the good these days is a lot smaller than it used to be. Training is so rigorous, right from the ages of 8, no stone is left unturned, one driver can’t just find seconds because everyone is generally doing the same thing. As you say, the talent pool is much larger too.

Graveworm

2,300 posts

15 months

Wednesday 7th August
quotequote all
Halmyre said:
The level of dominance? Clark won 51% of the races in which he finished. If Lewis had done that, he would have 120 victories instead of 81.

Winning a rain-soaked 1963 Belgian GP by nearly 5 minutes; winning first time out in the Lotus 49, having never even seen it before the event; persuading the Lotus 43-BRM to its only win; coming from over a lap down at Monza in 1967 (and thwarted by fuel problems); winning the WC and the Indy 500 in the same year (and the Tasman series and the French F2 championship for good measure).
Overall they have both won almost the same percentage of races in F1. To finish first etc. Fangio is the master of that Stat. Lewis will no doubt overtake Clark. That said I always think of Clark as the GOAT because of the other series, but as everyone says not easy to compare. How do we factor in Lewis's dominance in other series for instance.

37chevy

2,755 posts

100 months

Wednesday 7th August
quotequote all
Halmyre said:
The level of dominance? Clark won 51% of the races in which he finished. If Lewis had done that, he would have 120 victories instead of 81.

Winning a rain-soaked 1963 Belgian GP by nearly 5 minutes; winning first time out in the Lotus 49, having never even seen it before the event; persuading the Lotus 43-BRM to its only win; coming from over a lap down at Monza in 1967 (and thwarted by fuel problems); winning the WC and the Indy 500 in the same year (and the Tasman series and the French F2 championship for good measure).
Again, can’t really compare. Level of dominance against what competition?

The cars were less reliable, teams less professional, drivers less fit, professional, some were gentleman drivers etc etc. I’m not diminishing Clark’s achievements, he was brilliant, but you can’t compare the 2 drivers because the conditions in those eras are entirely different

Exige77

3,654 posts

135 months

Wednesday 7th August
quotequote all
37chevy said:
Halmyre said:
The level of dominance? Clark won 51% of the races in which he finished. If Lewis had done that, he would have 120 victories instead of 81.

Winning a rain-soaked 1963 Belgian GP by nearly 5 minutes; winning first time out in the Lotus 49, having never even seen it before the event; persuading the Lotus 43-BRM to its only win; coming from over a lap down at Monza in 1967 (and thwarted by fuel problems); winning the WC and the Indy 500 in the same year (and the Tasman series and the French F2 championship for good measure).
Again, can’t really compare. Level of dominance against what competition?

The cars were less reliable, teams less professional, drivers less fit, professional, some were gentleman drivers etc etc. I’m not diminishing Clark’s achievements, he was brilliant, but you can’t compare the 2 drivers because the conditions in those eras are entirely different
In days gone by the competition was not as rigorous as today. A good driver could easily look great in a field of semi professional gentlemen drivers.

It would not be conceivable for a modern driver to race in DTM, F1 and F2 in the same weekend.

It’s a nonsense to try and compare.

Halmyre

7,244 posts

83 months

Wednesday 7th August
quotequote all
paulguitar said:
mattikake said:
Comparing hamilton to Clark is plain impossible. There's the talent pool and grooming to consider today. There must be literally millions of budding racing drivers around today, a tiny fraction of that in Clark's time. As such you will never see his kind of apparent godly talent gap ever again.
That is a good point. Whilst Clark was clearly an exceptional driver, I doubt he had quite the same level of competition to deal with. It's a real shame Stirling had his accident, it would have really been something to see how he and Jimmy would have compared.
Yes, Clark was competing against also-rans like Hill, Surtees, Brabham, Gurney, McLaren, Stewart, Amon, ...

And those weren't rookies he thumped at Indianapolis either.

paulguitar

3,209 posts

57 months

Wednesday 7th August
quotequote all
Halmyre said:
Yes, Clark was competing against also-rans like Hill, Surtees, Brabham, Gurney, McLaren, Stewart, Amon, ...

And those weren't rookies he thumped at Indianapolis either.
Some very fine drivers there, but I simply do not accept that in the 1960's the quality of competition throughout the field was at the level it is now.

Honestly, do you?




Stan the Bat

4,893 posts

156 months

Wednesday 7th August
quotequote all
Clark will always be No.1 for me.

paulguitar

3,209 posts

57 months

Wednesday 7th August
quotequote all
Stan the Bat said:
Clark will always be No.1 for me.
I would be very interested to know what the opinion is here about how Stirling VS Jimmy would have gone?

I was born too late to have seen either drive.

ELUSIVEJIM

Original Poster:

6,241 posts

95 months

Wednesday 7th August
quotequote all
It is impossible to judge past drivers with modern.

Completely different sport now as Lewis himself has stated on many occasions. Think his words were they must have been crazy to race these things.

Entering a race event knowing there is a high possibility that a car issue or mistake could kill you was the norm back in the day.

To see these drivers on the limit of what the cars were capable of back then is pretty humbling, to say the least.

But again it was a totally different sport and impossible to judge Clark vs Senna vs Hamilton.

But I would like to see the modern F1 drivers challenged more as far as more gravel traps in the slower parts of circuits.

Make them think a bit more like the rose-tinted days biggrin

KevinCamaroSS

8,296 posts

224 months

Wednesday 7th August
quotequote all
ELUSIVEJIM said:
So Rosberg is a Horner pundit?

Webber but no doubt that was due to his Red Bull ties if he even still speaks to them.

Eddie Jordan and others have stated in words that he is currently the best driver of 2019.

Autosport also has a midway drivers rating.

https://www.autosport.com/f1/driver-ratings

Considering the car compared to the Mercedes it's hard to argue that Max Verstappen has been the best driver of 2019.

But I would say it's 50/50 with Lewis.

Both are tier one + drivers.
There must be something wrong, I'm agreeing with Elusive Jim smile

Even Lewis himself gave Max 8.9 and himself 8.7-8.8. Both a class above everybody else. Mind you Lewis has not really had to try much this season with Ferrari's lack of application. Now he does need to since Red Bull have stepped up.

LaurasOtherHalf

15,255 posts

140 months

Wednesday 7th August
quotequote all
It's a funny thing, comparing drivers from different eras. I think I can compare Lauda with Senna with Schumacher with Hamilton because I watched them all race but in reality, I was a bairn with Lauda, a kid with Senna and bored senseless with Schumi.

Most of it is clouded by the history books, some of it with bias and ignorance rules with the glory years as it's just so old to be beyond the realms of my imagination.

I still think, of the ones whom I'm certain are one of the all time greats, the top ten to top five of all time I think Hamilton is up there with Senna, Schumacher, Stewart and Clark. You add in Nuvolari, Fangio, perhaps one or two more and he still holds firm with them.

I understand Senna and Schumacher being marked down for their driving indiscretions, or their status in a team but even though I didn't like it I don't think these reasons really count against them too much.

If you took away their dirty driving for instance, would they have been any worse? Of course not.

If Hamilton equals Schumacher's record however, by beating world champions within the same team and driving with impeccable sporting behaviour he's above him in my book.

Still, he's not there yet...

Thesprucegoose

18,613 posts

139 months

Wednesday 7th August
quotequote all
The F1 drivers are worked massively, food, gym, training etc.. as well it’s not like the old days you could turn up half cut and race. I would say HAM was the principle of the new breed of younger faster drivers. Getting a super licence isn't easy, well it was for Verstrappen.