The F1 thread

dazzajl

stickyfiddle said:

Completely agree re Hamilton. I reckon...
- 80% of the grid could win a race in that car.
- 50% could win multiple races, and beat their teammate over a season. 
- 25% could win a title
- literally about 2 other guys could win multiple titles with the sort of consistency Hamilton has shown. 

That feels about right to me. The car has a lot to do with where you end up on Saturday but less about where you end on a Sunday. 

This is just how I recall last season, so please do correct me if I’m wrong..... I don’t remember Hamilton losing points from an error on his part and I don’t remember another driver who didn’t make a costly mistake at some point. This last season might just have been his best performance yet and that’s what earns him both the plaudits and the money. Still don’t like him much though. 

Fretwired

You have to earn the right to drive the best car. Hamilton won races in the underperforming McLaren. He then moved to Mercedes and everyone laughed as the team were a joke - talk to the technical people. Hamilton helped develop the car. Compare Hamilton to Vettel or Alonso. Both failed to deliver at Ferrari - in Vettel's case he was there when Ferrari had the faster car but he kept making mistakes whilst Hamilton made virtually none.

Hamilton is a class act.

Cols

Hamilton’s talent is beyond question - he’s numerically the most successful driver of all time.  You don’t get to that level of success merely by having the best car.  With the exception of Rosberg and Button, he’s cheerfully demolished all his team mates.  

That doesn’t mean it’s reasonable to expect to be paid more than twice as much as any other driver on the grid to pilot what amounts to a guaranteed championship-winning car, especially in an era of recession and cost-cutting.

Fretwired

Cols said:

Hamilton’s talent is beyond question - he’s numerically the most successful driver of all time.  You don’t get to that level of success merely by having the best car.  With the exception of Rosberg and Button, he’s cheerfully demolished all his team mates.  

That doesn’t mean it’s reasonable to expect to be paid more than twice as much as any other driver on the grid to pilot what amounts to a guaranteed championship-winning car, especially in an era of recession and cost-cutting.

I seriously don't think the money is as big an issue. A few years ago Mercedes said they sold billions of Euros worth of cars on the back of F1. The cost to Mercedes of F1 isn't that high as they sell engines, they win every year so get the F1 revenue and they have some decent investors/sponsors.

On the back of F1 Mercedes have just sold 275 F1 Project One Hypercars for $2.75 million each. The company is now building another batch.

https://www.grandprix247.com/2020/08/20/2-7-million-mercedes-project-one-first-275-units-sold-out/

Cols

Reports that Ineos are willing to cover a large part of Hamilton’s salary demands, which apparently include a 10% share of the constructors prize money in addition to his base salary.

sinbaadi

I just find it incredible that people can assert with such certainty that Hamilton is the best driver ever, in a series which is predicated on competition between teams and cars above and beyond anything else.

Rosberg beat him, and without Hamilton, maybe with a journeyman as the solid number 2, he would have been champion multiple times no doubt, perhaps clean sweeping the Mercedes dominant era for himself.   Would that make him the best driver ever?   So given Hamilton beat him does that make Rosberg the second best ever?


It's just as absurd to declare that Hamilton is better than someone like Mika Hakkinen and to decry anyone who says "actually it's not as simple as that".

Fretwired

sinbaadi said:

I just find it incredible that people can assert with such certainty that Hamilton is the best driver ever, in a series which is predicated on competition between teams and cars above and beyond anything else.

Rosberg beat him, and without Hamilton, maybe with a journeyman as the solid number 2, he would have been champion multiple times no doubt, perhaps clean sweeping the Mercedes dominant era for himself.   Would that make him the best driver ever?   So given Hamilton beat him does that make Rosberg the second best ever?


It's just as absurd to declare that Hamilton is better than someone like Mika Hakkinen and to decry anyone who says "actually it's not as simple as that".

Rosberg was lucky ... Hamilton had a series of technical problems:

China: Power unit problem in qualifying left him last on the grid. Also had a five-place gearbox change penalty.

Russia: Power unit problem in qualifying left him tenth on the grid.

Monaco: Power unit problem in qualifying limited his runs in Q3 and power in the race.

Europe: Spent part of the race in wrong engine mode as the team were not allowed to tell him how to change it. Rosberg had the same problem but was able to fix it himself and so beat Hamilton.

Belgium: Started last after taking a grid penalty for power unit component changes.

Singapore: Hydraulic problem in second practice limited his running and hampered his race.

And the killer:

Malaysia: Engine failed while leading. This led to a 28 point swing in favour of Rosberg. Hamilton only lost the championship by 5 points.

dazzajl

sinbaadi said:

I just find it incredible that people can assert with such certainty that Hamilton is the best driver ever, in a series which is predicated on competition between teams and cars above and beyond anything else.

Rosberg beat him, and without Hamilton, maybe with a journeyman as the solid number 2, he would have been champion multiple times no doubt, perhaps clean sweeping the Mercedes dominant era for himself.   Would that make him the best driver ever?   So given Hamilton beat him does that make Rosberg the second best ever?


It's just as absurd to declare that Hamilton is better than someone like Mika Hakkinen and to decry anyone who says "actually it's not as simple as that".

Who is the best driver, now or ever is a rabbit hole that won’t ever lead to a conclusive answer. I think making the case that Hamilton is the best marketing prospect on the current grid might be possible though. 

I’d rather see the drive go to someone else and have things shaken up a bit but I don’t see that happening and I don’t see that anyone has earned it more either. 

Fretwired

dazzajl said:

Who is the best driver, now or ever is a rabbit hole that won’t ever lead to a conclusive answer. I think making the case that Hamilton is the best marketing prospect on the current grid might be possible though. 

I’d rather see the drive go to someone else and have things shaken up a bit but I don’t see that happening and I don’t see that anyone has earned it more either. 

I think Hamilton is the most consistent driver on the grid. He rarely makes mistakes - look at Vettel and Verstappen and even Russell who blew a chance to get a point for Williams.

And this year I give you the Turkish Grand Prix which Hamilton won with a driving masterclass in the wet - it was a race Mercedes shouldn't have won but in winning, Hamilton showed that the driver does make a difference. The Mercedes was nowhere in Q3 and, unlike Bottas, Hamilton stayed out of trouble at the start, lost places and drove cautiously before he picked up pace, overtook cars and won by over a minute. Verstappen managed to pirouette a couple of times as did Bottas who damaged his car and finished outside the points.

chrishill901

Fretwired said:

sinbaadi said:

I just find it incredible that people can assert with such certainty that Hamilton is the best driver ever, in a series which is predicated on competition between teams and cars above and beyond anything else.

Rosberg beat him, and without Hamilton, maybe with a journeyman as the solid number 2, he would have been champion multiple times no doubt, perhaps clean sweeping the Mercedes dominant era for himself.   Would that make him the best driver ever?   So given Hamilton beat him does that make Rosberg the second best ever?


It's just as absurd to declare that Hamilton is better than someone like Mika Hakkinen and to decry anyone who says "actually it's not as simple as that".

Rosberg was lucky ... Hamilton had a series of technical problems:

China: Power unit problem in qualifying left him last on the grid. Also had a five-place gearbox change penalty.

Russia: Power unit problem in qualifying left him tenth on the grid.

Monaco: Power unit problem in qualifying limited his runs in Q3 and power in the race.

Europe: Spent part of the race in wrong engine mode as the team were not allowed to tell him how to change it. Rosberg had the same problem but was able to fix it himself and so beat Hamilton.

Belgium: Started last after taking a grid penalty for power unit component changes.

Singapore: Hydraulic problem in second practice limited his running and hampered his race.

And the killer:

Malaysia: Engine failed while leading. This led to a 28 point swing in favour of Rosberg. Hamilton only lost the championship by 5 points.

You can play the same 'technical game' for a number of drivers across a number of seasons - you could argue that Button would have finished above Hamilton in the 3 seasons they were team mates if it weren't for issues out of Button's control hampering him in two of them - technical problems are part of the sport and as such can't be used in the argument. And not to mention how driving the car can lead to most of them. Hamilton was unnecessarily pushing, against the teams recommendation, in Malaysia and paid the price. You have to focus on the drive itself. Button's 2011 Canada win, Hamilton's 2020 Turkey win, Verstappens 2016 Interlagos drive... These are the moment's that highlight class beyond mechanical engineering.

I'm playing devil's advocate here but Hamilton only won one of his first 6 seasons in the sport. Hamilton fans blame the Red Bull dominance for Vettels wins and yet come down on anyone who dare argue for the Mercedes car dominance. The point is that it is too complicated to explain in black and white terms. Hamilton is a great driver, but the sport is too complex to use the term GOAT - it is a different sport to the Fangio days... it's even a different sport from the Schumacher days. I think a lot of peoples anger and frustration with Hamilton is actually anger and frustration at the sport itself, a sport that has allowed a team like Mercedes to dominate. The spending cap in 2022 will hopefully make this sport slightly more interesting but I for one just focus on the battle for 'best of the rest'. That's where the real racing happens, and next season with Alonso back and Ricciardo in a Mercedes powered McLaren... I couldn't care less what Hamilton and Bottas do.

Hamilton is sensational, like it or not he has world class consistency and is deservedly at the top. But I don't get excited watching him as I did Hakkinen, Schumacher or Alonso. That's not Hamilton's fault though.

Fretwired

chrishill901 said:

You can play the same 'technical game' for a number of drivers across a number of seasons - you could argue that Button would have finished above Hamilton in the 3 seasons they were team mates if it weren't for issues out of Button's control hampering him in two of them - technical problems are part of the sport and as such can't be used in the argument. And not to mention how driving the car can lead to most of them. Hamilton was unnecessarily pushing, against the teams recommendation, in Malaysia and paid the price. You have to focus on the drive itself. Button's 2011 Canada win, Hamilton's 2020 Turkey win, Verstappens 2016 Interlagos drive... These are the moment's that highlight class beyond mechanical engineering.

I'm playing devil's advocate here but Hamilton only won one of his first 6 seasons in the sport. Hamilton fans blame the Red Bull dominance for Vettels wins and yet come down on anyone who dare argue for the Mercedes car dominance. The point is that it is too complicated to explain in black and white terms. Hamilton is a great driver, but the sport is too complex to use the term GOAT - it is a different sport to the Fangio days... it's even a different sport from the Schumacher days. I think a lot of peoples anger and frustration with Hamilton is actually anger and frustration at the sport itself, a sport that has allowed a team like Mercedes to dominate. The spending cap in 2022 will hopefully make this sport slightly more interesting but I for one just focus on the battle for 'best of the rest'. That's where the real racing happens, and next season with Alonso back and Ricciardo in a Mercedes powered McLaren... I couldn't care less what Hamilton and Bottas do.

Hamilton is sensational, like it or not he has world class consistency and is deservedly at the top. But I don't get excited watching him as I did Hakkinen, Schumacher or Alonso. That's not Hamilton's fault though.

But we were talking about drivers. Rosberg beat Hamilton but I'd say Hamilton is a better driver than Rosberg, even in the year that Rosberg won. Had Hamilton won in Malaysia he'd have won the championship. His engine when bang so he didn't finish and Rosberg gained a healthy 28 point lead in the championship. It's funny how the conversation can swing from it's all the car to it's the driver. The Mercedes was dominant so Hamilton's only real challenge came from his teammate. In Malaysia Rosberg only finished third behind the Red Bulls of Riccardo and Verstappen. You can't win anything if your car keeps breaking down.

Winning drivers in the modern era have always had dominant cars - Schumacker's Ferrari, Vettel's Red Bull and even Alonso's Renault.

I agree with you on the excitement. Once Hamilton is in the lead a race becomes a snoozefest. The midfield has often been exciting and in some races, the TV director hasn't bothered to show Hamilton and Bottas out front but rather the contests in the tight midfield which have been entertaining.

not_the_dj

Did Rosberg beat Hamilton? Funny that you never hear Nico mentioning that ;-)

Cols

To be fair, I’m pretty sure Hamilton’s been asked about this topic and hasn’t claimed to be the greatest driver ever; instead he’s sensibly pointed out that the challenges faced by drivers in different eras are all different, ranging across the equipment at their disposal, calibre of the field, car reliability, risk of injury, and so forth.  Trying to compare drivers from the 60s to those of today is like trying to compare Hendrix to a modern shredder.

Nuvolari’s the greatest ever though, in case anyone was wondering.

dazzajl

Fretwired said:

dazzajl said:

Who is the best driver, now or ever is a rabbit hole that won’t ever lead to a conclusive answer. I think making the case that Hamilton is the best marketing prospect on the current grid might be possible though. 

I’d rather see the drive go to someone else and have things shaken up a bit but I don’t see that happening and I don’t see that anyone has earned it more either. 

I think Hamilton is the most consistent driver on the grid. He rarely makes mistakes - look at Vettel and Verstappen and even Russell who blew a chance to get a point for Williams.

And this year I give you the Turkish Grand Prix which Hamilton won with a driving masterclass in the wet - it was a race Mercedes shouldn't have won but in winning, Hamilton showed that the driver does make a difference. The Mercedes was nowhere in Q3 and, unlike Bottas, Hamilton stayed out of trouble at the start, lost places and drove cautiously before he picked up pace, overtook cars and won by over a minute. Verstappen managed to pirouette a couple of times as did Bottas who damaged his car and finished outside the points.

You’ll get no argument from me about how brilliant he is and how much more both consistent and error free he’s been. Especially last season. And I don’t even really like him. Last season might not have been the most entertaining championship, because he was so commanding but it was about the most supreme performance by a sports star there could be. 

Can you say he’s the best ever though? I don’t see how, becuse you can’t really compare in a meaningful way. It’s all anecdotal evidence and nothing forensic. 

Fretwired

dazzajl said:

Can you say he’s the best ever though? I don’t see how, becuse you can’t really compare in a meaningful way. It’s all anecdotal evidence and nothing forensic. 

You can't say he's the best ever and I've never heard him say he is the best. As I recall he rates Senna as the best. There's no point comparing Hamilton to the greats from the past. You can only measure him against the guys he has raced.

Rosberg beat him but retired as he was mentally exhausted and couldn't take anymore. Hamilton is just relentless and mentally tough to deliver at the level he does year after year. Vettel did it for four years and is a shadow of his former self. Alonso hit the self-destruct button after two titles with his attitude. In the modern age, only Schumacher has matched him (it should be the other way round). Let's see what Schumacher junior can do.

fretmeister

dazzajl said:

Fretwired said:

dazzajl said:

Who is the best driver, now or ever is a rabbit hole that won’t ever lead to a conclusive answer. I think making the case that Hamilton is the best marketing prospect on the current grid might be possible though. 

I’d rather see the drive go to someone else and have things shaken up a bit but I don’t see that happening and I don’t see that anyone has earned it more either. 

I think Hamilton is the most consistent driver on the grid. He rarely makes mistakes - look at Vettel and Verstappen and even Russell who blew a chance to get a point for Williams.

And this year I give you the Turkish Grand Prix which Hamilton won with a driving masterclass in the wet - it was a race Mercedes shouldn't have won but in winning, Hamilton showed that the driver does make a difference. The Mercedes was nowhere in Q3 and, unlike Bottas, Hamilton stayed out of trouble at the start, lost places and drove cautiously before he picked up pace, overtook cars and won by over a minute. Verstappen managed to pirouette a couple of times as did Bottas who damaged his car and finished outside the points.

You’ll get no argument from me about how brilliant he is and how much more both consistent and error free he’s been. Especially last season. And I don’t even really like him. Last season might not have been the most entertaining championship, because he was so commanding but it was about the most supreme performance by a sports star there could be. 

Can you say he’s the best ever though? I don’t see how, becuse you can’t really compare in a meaningful way. It’s all anecdotal evidence and nothing forensic. 

What all the LH haters refuse to understand is that if LH gets 8 and then that records lasts for as long as Fangio's 5 did, then only the stats survive.

Those of us who watched Senna may well think he was the best, but there's a generation who don't know who he was and don't go and watch the old races. All they know is that he got 3, Prost and Vet got 4 etc etc.

If LH retires right now and no-one gets close then in as little as 10 years there will be people who just notice LH and MSC had the same amount. Arguments about the car will have disappeared long ago. The Ferrari was amazing in the Brawn / Byrne era, but it's hardly mentioned now.

Facebook is funny. I made a similar comment there and some idiot told me to actually watch a race and learn something.

I've been following it since Alan Jones won. And I remember early highlight coverage from Piquet's era. My mum was a big fan and when it started to get on the telly occasionally in 1979 / 80 it turned into a family event.

dazzajl

Again, as someone who’s not pro Hamilton, Schumacher wouldn’t be on my comparison list. Unlike Lewis, who has had subservient drivers because he forged ahead and left his team no choice, Michael had his backup car by contract and that takes away the level playing field. 

Teetonetal

Fretwired said:

chrishill901 said:

You can play the same 'technical game' for a number of drivers across a number of seasons - you could argue that Button would have finished above Hamilton in the 3 seasons they were team mates if it weren't for issues out of Button's control hampering him in two of them - technical problems are part of the sport and as such can't be used in the argument. And not to mention how driving the car can lead to most of them. Hamilton was unnecessarily pushing, against the teams recommendation, in Malaysia and paid the price. You have to focus on the drive itself. Button's 2011 Canada win, Hamilton's 2020 Turkey win, Verstappens 2016 Interlagos drive... These are the moment's that highlight class beyond mechanical engineering.

I'm playing devil's advocate here but Hamilton only won one of his first 6 seasons in the sport. Hamilton fans blame the Red Bull dominance for Vettels wins and yet come down on anyone who dare argue for the Mercedes car dominance. The point is that it is too complicated to explain in black and white terms. Hamilton is a great driver, but the sport is too complex to use the term GOAT - it is a different sport to the Fangio days... it's even a different sport from the Schumacher days. I think a lot of peoples anger and frustration with Hamilton is actually anger and frustration at the sport itself, a sport that has allowed a team like Mercedes to dominate. The spending cap in 2022 will hopefully make this sport slightly more interesting but I for one just focus on the battle for 'best of the rest'. That's where the real racing happens, and next season with Alonso back and Ricciardo in a Mercedes powered McLaren... I couldn't care less what Hamilton and Bottas do.

Hamilton is sensational, like it or not he has world class consistency and is deservedly at the top. But I don't get excited watching him as I did Hakkinen, Schumacher or Alonso. That's not Hamilton's fault though.

But we were talking about drivers. Rosberg beat Hamilton but I'd say Hamilton is a better driver than Rosberg, even in the year that Rosberg won. Had Hamilton won in Malaysia he'd have won the championship. His engine when bang so he didn't finish and Rosberg gained a healthy 28 point lead in the championship. It's funny how the conversation can swing from it's all the car to it's the driver. The Mercedes was dominant so Hamilton's only real challenge came from his teammate. In Malaysia Rosberg only finished third behind the Red Bulls of Riccardo and Verstappen. You can't win anything if your car keeps breaking down.

Winning drivers in the modern era have always had dominant cars - Schumacker's Ferrari, Vettel's Red Bull and even Alonso's Renault.

I agree with you on the excitement. Once Hamilton is in the lead a race becomes a snoozefest. The midfield has often been exciting and in some races, the TV director hasn't bothered to show Hamilton and Bottas out front but rather the contests in the tight midfield which have been entertaining.

All a driver can do is get the maximum out of the car he is given, Hamilton does this. Best ever? We will never really know, but he (and his team) have answered all questions thrown at them, which is all he can do. 

No question that Hamilton is very dominant in the standout car as was Schumacker and since the year of Rosberg's win, he has been untouchable. Hamilton had a lot of bad luck in the year that Rosberg won, yet that title race was way closer than it should have been.

Vettel was pushed very hard by Alonso's Ferarri that had no right to be anywhere near him, however,  when he was in a Ferrari that could challenge, he cracked, multiple times.

Emiel

With this sport it is only possible to say which team or driver is the most successful.

Some interesting stats from the V6 turbo era (2014-) showing how dominant Mercedes/Hamilton is:

• Mercedes pole positions: 79% (109 out of 138 GP's);
• Mercedes wins: 74% (102 out of 138 GP's);
• Hamilton pole positions: 52% (72 out of 138 GP's);
• Hamilton wins: 54% (74 out of 138 GP's).

chillidoggy

This is going round and round and round and round.......it's like arguing with the wife.

I'm waiting for the shock announcement that Merc have refused to pay him what he wants, and told him to get fucked. They should, but they won't.