F1 is a meritocracy, Russell has proved he has the chops to race at the front, and is better than Bottas. VB must feel quite embarrassed after several years inside that Mercedes.
I don't think so. I think Bottas is gone after next year--independent of what Hamilton does and what Russel does.
Where did I say anything about Mclaren vs Williams? I'm talking about Hamilton's first two years, beating Alonso in his prime vs Russell and Kubica, then winning the championship the 2nd year. Yes, Russell's and any other driver's first two years can't compare to Hamilton's.
The last time Schumacher had a competitive team mate he lost 3 years. Rosberg beat Hamilton and stilled retired LOL! You know you strike fear in someone if you beat them and they are still scared !! LOL All of Fangio's cars was in a class of one, Senna, Schumi, all had cars that were in a class of one, where have you been?
The Ferrari was dominant for a total of 3 seasons. Do your own forensic research. Is it only Lewis that you love ? Or do you love other drivers too ?
Why do I need to research? You just repeated what I posted that Schumi has had dominant cars. Even years the Ferrari wasn't dominant it still was the best car from 1999-2004. Do you hate Lewis? If so do you hate other drivers too?
I don't hate Lewis and I doubt anyone else here actually does either. He's just an idiot who let himself get beat by a pretty average teammate, permanently tarnishing his legacy.
Lol... ok ill play along. So you judge a driver's career by focusing on 1 season? lol. Rosberg beat Schumi. Prost beat Senna. Hamilton beat Alonso. Schumacher is the only driver in history to be disqualified from a season. Yet those drivers legacy is unaffected by most. 5 of Schmachers team mates along with F1's most prominent figures disagree with you about Hamilton's legacy. Lol you're funny man
Schumacher started in a Jordan, which wasn't a particularly competitive car at the time (the best the car managed was 4th), but it was still a fairly mid-pack car. Arguably, he was not in a championship-capable car until his 3rd full season in 1994, and he won the WDC with it. He proved he was fast in flawed cars as well as ones that were championship-capable. Hamilton started his F1 career in a championship-capable car. He did very well against his teammate (2x WDC Alonso) and realized the potential of the car. When he wasn't in a competitive car (i.e. the McLaren from 2009-2013), he did score some poles, wins, fastest laps, and podiums, but was highly inconsistent and crashed into Massa a lot. His first season with Mercedes, before they were championship-capable, he finished 4th in the championship to Rosberg's 2nd. He drives a quick, well-sorted car extremely well, but in a car with limitations he has proven to be inconsistent. Russell started F1 in one of the worst cars Williams has ever made relative to the pace of the grid. Schumacher and Hamilton have never driven a car that was as far off the pace as Russell's Williams. I'd say it's difficult to compare Russell to either of the first two with such an incomparable starting scenario. Russell has only ever really driven in a competitive car once. That one race in the Mercedes was so heavily compromised that it wasn't really a fair test of his abilities: crammed into a cockpit in which he didn't fit, Mercedes completely screwed up a double pit stop, and then he picked up a slow puncture - Russell almost spent more time driving through the pit lane than he did across the line. You can't really say Russell has had a competitive car with which to show consistency and develop as a racing driver. It seems reasonable to compare and contrast Schumacher and Hamilton - similar racing records throughout their careers, similar periods of dominance, same number of titles, and both have driven in mid-pack and championship-winning cars. Comparing Russell's first two seasons to Hamilton's first two and lauding Hamilton for it is incomprehensible. Surely Hamilton has enough triumphs over a long career that you don't need to draw such a ridiculous comparison to efforts in a back-marker car in order to pump him up? All the best, Andrew.
McLaren was the car to have upto and including 2000. Mika did a great job and it was a straight battle in 2000. Schumacher was making up the car defecit until 2001, check out Ross Brawn's podcasts if in doubt. Why you keep bringing up Schumacher is anybody's guess. Lauda was great too, but must be less great than Hamilton because Lauda was not in a dominant Mercedes for 7 years. Why would anyone hate a racing driver - odd question ! But if you wish to keep blowing smoke up Hamilton's ass carry on. Have a good weekend.
Both Schumacher and Hamilton had more crashes early in their career, look at some of Schumacher's crashes at both Bennetton and Ferrari he had quite a few. It takes longer to build consistency. Schumacher actually said he was surprised that Hamilton showed consistency at a young age. History shows Schumacher also was not able to win the championship with bad cars. I have to correct you about Hamilton's first year with Mercedes, Ham finished 4th Rosberg 6th. Many drivers have praised Hamilton's consistency, that is his strength now. Hamilton is fast in flawed cars as well- won races with the 2009 car. Lead the championship in 2010. Button as team mate said "he was the fastest driver he had ever seen over a lap". Both Schumi and Hamilton are greats
Fair enough, got Rosberg's results wrong. I also agree with you that Hamilton is amazingly consistent in the Mercedes - that's something he's clearly mastered and what has brought him many titles. However, you ignored the thrust of my post. The point I was trying to drive home was not that Schumacher was great and Hamilton is not - clearly, they're both greats. My point was that comparing Russell's first two seasons with Hamilton's first two seasons doesn't make any sense. It's a ludicrous comparison. As I've accepted my error over Rosberg, can you accept your error over the Russell-Hamilton comparison? All the best, Andrew.
Which illustrates that to Mercedes the Hamilton value exceeds his driving skills. Think social media skills. Think style (I know, I know . . . I'm setting myself up with that one). It's the world of the internet and the tweetskis.
Style ? That's gotta be clutching at straws Mercedes is bigger than any driver. Hamilton may have forgotten that.
Precisely. I do believe Russell is the better driver, but things can change drastically once pressure to perform becomes part of the formula. He certainly gave Merc something to think about, but there is enough inconsistency on race day in the past that I’m certain Toto told him to spend another year at Williams. During the year a) wipe the floor with Latifi in qualifying, b) wipe the floor with Latifi on race day, c) limit incident-related dnfs, d) score some points (he gave that away on 2 or 3 occasions) Fast is part of the formula, but there is more involved with driving a champion car. I think they have specific performance goals for him to reach next season at Williams in preparation for a seat at Merc,
If only Hamilton has the gut to get out of his comfort zone and go drive in the Ferrari this will end all these debates ..
Bernie doesn’t mince words: "It's all just for show," the 90-year-old Ecclestone said when asked about Hamilton's contract dramas. "It's so that Lewis in particular stays in the headlines during these dreary weeks." Eddie Jordan: "If I was the boss of Daimler, I would show him the door and say 'either you drive on our terms or you go'." https://www.autoweek.com/racing/formula-1/a35246613/ecclestone-not-buying-any-perceived-drama-in-hamiltons-f1-contract-talks/