Is Hamilton one of the GOAT F1 drivers?

So you think buttons dominance via car was actually attributable to him, and you should measure him for the stats of that, rather than the fact he isn't a stand out great driver and lucked into the right package at the right time?

So, when you are telling us how good Elton was in a 'rubbish' MacLaren, we should immediately ignore you, as he wasn't winning and wasn't setting fastest laps, therefore it doesn't count and for those seasons, anything extraordinary he did wouldn't count towards your assessment that he is a god?

 

Thanks for posting that...absolutely fantatic. No pointless DRS, just out and out SKILL.

And the noise....dear god the noise!!!

 

Biggest problem with Elton is that he's completly average if not in a winning car...unlike Seb or Alonso..and these two are very far from the really great drivers..No one noticed him between 2008 and 2014..except for the cock ups and trying to ram felipe every single race....

 

As a former champion figure skater, I object to it being called subjective.

All the best,
Andrew.

 

Yeah, winning a race in a Manor seems like such a likely scenario....If you had said winning a race in a "Minardi" against the field, that'd be a much better example. Basically what Vettel did in Monza (as I pointed out a few posts earlier, if you had bothered to read that) and which led to him ending up in the dominant RB. Which also leads to my other argument, that only the best drivers end up in the best cars because the team managers can choose (and let's not cover the marketing/pay driver argument here, as it applies mostly to the second tier cars/teams anyway and we already covered that ground).

So the fact that Hamilton currently sits in the best car is not sheer luck, but based on his previous results. Same goes to him ending up in a McLaren after Dennis picked him up from his early karting days. Many drivers get groomed and picked up (Schumacher through his former manager, Mr. 10%) and many are let go eventually because they lead to nothing. Only the best make it into F1.

As for the subjective ratings: Of course there are a gazillion reasons for why a race ends the way it does and sometimes people just have plain luck (was it Panis who lucked into a Monaco GP win? nobody would accuse him of having too much talent to win). Even to the point that sometimes they win a WDC like Rosberg Sr. Then again, Keke was smart enough to stay alive and healthy when the Ferrari hotshots, who could have walked the championship were too busy and stupid to one-up each other. Even after one was long dead Pironi still had the hots and destroyed his legs and his career and his chance for a title for no good reason. So maybe even Rosberg who lucked into that title at the end of the day was simply a case of cooler heads prevailing.

So what do the stats really tell us? It's a bit like the law of the big numbers from statistics: In the short run anything is possible e.g. in roulette a #2 can win three times in a row. But in the long run all the odds even themselves out and #2 becomes as average in winning just as #17. And that's kinda how I look at F1: Look at the bigger picture: Somebody who has won so many races and so many championships has done that not because of certain circumstances but because of skill (which includes knowing what team to drive for when) and talent. Hamilton is such a case, just as Schumacher is.

I'm no Schumacher fan by any means (quite the opposite) but I cannot argue with his stats. It would be insane. Some on here (PSK) made some elegant arguments for why MS really only earned like 3 or 4 titles and the rest was luck or gravy. Others make arguments (equally convincing) that MS could easily have 8 or more titles to his name. Senna fans could easily say that the bad luck of Tamburello 94 not withstanding Ayrton would have walked that title and ended up with 4 or more titles. Problem is, that did not happen. Just as it did not happen for my all time GOAT Stefan Bellof, whom I consider the greatest talent of all times. I'm 100% convinced in my heart Eau-Rouge in the Porsche notwithstanding that Bellof would have been the first Schumacher before there was Michael and that MS maybe even would have seen Stefan as his idol as opposed to Senna. Why? Because I was in Monaco in the rain when an unknown Senna in the Toleman was catching Prost and the world discovered Ayrton and his talent. What not everybody saw however was that an even less known Bellof was catching Senna in his underpowered Tyrrel. As I said before: Rain is the great equalizer of all and separates the boys from the men and only the very best are also the best in the rain and that was Stefan. But history took a different turn. Or "that's why we run the races" as Fast_Ian used to say.

Wouldas, couldas, shouldas don't win championships. Only points do.

It is to some degree fun to discuss the races and whether somebody won one deservedly or not but in the end it is utterly meaningless. And if we wanted to hand out Championship points based on best driving skill etc, then we would get quickly on the slippery slope of subjective judgements as in figure skating (sorry Neuro), I mean as in song competitions (Eurovision here we come!).

Finally I'd like to quote another voice on here, one whom I mostly was in opposition with, but who said one fundamental truth: Aircon often said "We don't know anything" and I think that is so true. There are a million things going on behind the scenes which we as fans will never know. Maybe Rosberg has a team order and is letting Hamilton through all the time. Maybe Bernie told Mercedes to sabotage Lewis' car so the title race is more open. Nuts? Hell yeah. But rewind back to Lewis' first year in F1: Many saw a conspiracy theory there where the McLaren team agreed behind the scenes not to win the WDC because of Stepneygate and hand the title to Ferrari/Kimi. And that's why the made the worst pit calls for Hamilton in the last three races (IIRC) ever. Maybe they simply chocked. We don't know. Maybe Bernie or the FIA scripted it all. Who knows?

All we have in the end are the results and the stats. Everything else is speculation.

PS: I feel all these arguments have been made time and again and quite frankly I'm getting a little tired of rehashing them over and over again. They won't make a dent in the conviction of those who think Hamilton is just lucky. So be it.

 

Good post

 

But it is exactly what he did!

So you think studying statistics in Wiki does make one an expert. You say someone who never watched a formula 1 race in his life could sit in front of his computer and look at 100 different stats and later tell the world who was the best driver? Not just that you can pick exactly those stats that suit your agenda (as you do for example) it still does not necessarily share the impression those had who actually saw those people racing and what they did with the car...
As I was not answered about the 2016 because it was to theoretical how about this: a victory in the 1996 Ferrari was the same achievement as in the dominant years after 2000? And this brought Schumacher nowhere different than where he already was...
It remains an illusion that statistics tell the whole story...

 

IT does to some people...to those who don't understand a thing about the sport...

 

+1

But personally believe that while statistics will stand the test of time, there is also the passion of following this sport which demand respect, otherwise we might as well let Google dictate our posts.

Things like Lauda making a return a few weeks after that dreadful crash, Schumacher racing right after the death of his mother, Alonso equalling Hamilton despite having zero support from his team is where respect is earnt.

Any list of great drivers has Stirling Moss, even though he won zero championships in F1. But his driving won people's hearts.

A huge thanks for bringing up Bellof, and personally believe it's really worthwhile learning about drivers which only a fan could bring their achievements to light.

FWIW, doing some research he was apparently Schumacher's idol.

Best,

Sammy

 

Whoa, interesting! Didn't know that.

IIRC he still holds the record at the Ring

 

Fastest lap ever.

And Schumacher was smitten.

Thanks for mentioning him, much better learning than discussing the same old same old.

Best,

Sammy

 

Bellof was said to have a contract with Ferrari for 86.....he was that good...his foolish atempt to overtake Ickx at eau rouge was a pity..such a waist..like Gilles manouvre on Mass...

 

A top f1 driver vs a member of the public? The Ferrari also had to drive through a bunch of cones that the Ambulance didn't. Doesn't prove anything. I have no doubt that Vettel in a mini would trounce me in a Ferrari.

Peter and Sid,

No I don't think stats tell the whole story. I was trying to interpret and guess what Andreas may have been getting at but I see he has made a very good post explaining it himself.


If you read my other posts I said I prefer a Hollistic approach, stats are part of it, driver comparisons, watching races ect all matter. I don't go off stats alone but I also understand those who are unwilling to delve too much into subjectivity. Anyone who watched the races 2010-2012 clearly could see that Hamilton is better than button as I have explained in my lists earlier

Over the last year I've watched a lot of old documentaries, read a lot online and watched some older races. Doing my best to get a view of all eras. I have tried to post things as objectively as possible. From all my findings Jim Clark is better than I first thought, Schumacher slightly
Worse, fangio worse, Prost and senna about the same. All of them bar fangio still
Make my top 5 tho. I put Hamilton in 5th and based on stats alone he would be 3rd probably so clearly I don't just look at that

 

Agree

 

That's why neither of them was a GREAT driver IMO.

They were daredevils with a complete disregard for danger and ultimately went over the limits.

It takes more than an occasional "flash in the pan" to be a great driver.

 

So your crusade here hammering into our heads that Hamilton is the one and only and best there ever was and ever will be was a mistake?

You told everyone on here since your first post what utter clowns they are and now you revise your own estimate.

Now please lean back for a moment and think about that.
a) everyone's opinion is based on what they know. You have now learned that that includes yourself.
b) an opinion is subject to change, that now includes yourself.
c) when you consider yourself having been wrong last year, who says you are not still wrong this year (general statement).

So perhaps you might want to consider concluding that possibly you could have the kindness and stop trying to convince everyone on here that they are useless because they don't share your views.

 

Dear MAuluf,

My views have not changed. I quote myself, the first post after my forced hiatus as follows;

I'm not trying to hammer anything into anyone's heads. I just want people to justify their opinions. Occasionally a new poster or lurker will join and give their views on Hamilton and ten people will pile on them and make baseless statements saying things like Kimi is better than Hamilton or rosberg or 44 year old Schumacher would Wipe he floor with him or even someone with but a few wins to their name.

For the record, I don't think anyone is useless and I consider everyone's opinions. I feel some people post inflammatory things on purpose which they themselves don't even believe. Any statement followed by reasoning is valued by me and I've learned things from many people here even if I don't personally get along with them.

 

Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz.

 

Foolish ? well like much in racing, it's debatable. Even the persons involved do not really agree. Although overtaking in Eau Rouge in a Group C car must be something else as in an F1 car like for instance Webber did.

Bellof is certainly an intriguing character. Remember watching a small documentary on Bellof a coupe years back, this one:

Stefan Bellof - Mit Vollgas in den Tod
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=99LEZeb1pUw

YouTube reveals another one:
Stefan Bellof - Das kurze Leben eines Rennfahrers, eine unvollendete Karriere
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AJa70VcMhi0

 

Here you go Sid,

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

might keep you awake a bit longer..

 

You know me soooo well...... Fully awake now!

 

Here a couple of pictures from the 84' Monaco GP. I took these on Saturday as Sunday was rained out as we know. In the McLaren is Lauda, who would go on to win the WDC that year basically because of this race: Prost was able to win it but because it was stopped early it only gave half the points. It was the 1/2 point that Prost was missing at the end of the season.
Image Unavailable, Please Login
Image Unavailable, Please Login

 

Wow, fantastic pictures. Amazing how Monaco looks the same whatever the decade!

 

It's just the boats that keep getting bigger.

All the best,
Andrew.

 

Those pics are stunning, especially for being taken so long ago. More if you have them, please!