Hamilton, Flash in the Pan!

The kid was good..as is still good. A bit of a pansy..yes..but I would never disrespect is ability..the guy can drive

 

Of course he can "drive," he just can't out drive his current teammate for 2022 whose been consistent.

 

If Hamilton were actually "the greatest", he'd be schooling Russell. Or is Russell the new "greatest"?

No other driver in modern times at lesst has ever had the advantage of such a dominant team for 7 years a row. It's almost as ridiculous as Audi dominating Le Mans for a decade straight....
I stopped watching Le Mans during that era because of it.

 

Yes, solidified in the books of F1.

Those "overwhelming accomplishments" are being credited or discredited with regards to talent and skill for 2022???

 

He didn't build that.

Mercedes did. Any competent driver designated #1 at Merc during that time would have had the same outcomes.

 

Maths is not his strong suit

 

+1

 

OK, I'm gunna say it ..... the reason we here in FERRARI world don't like Hamilton is because we love Michael and we didn't want to see his record beaten by some jumped up wanker with a car that was 1-2 secs faster for 6 years and who had a doormat for a team mate.

ALL F1 drivers are brilliant but there is only millimetre differences between them in performance , give any of them the best car and they will be at the front

 

Please quote MY post where I said Lewis is the greatest.
I'll wait...

Now that we have THAT fabrication out of the way, please give me ANY post number (other than yours) in this thread where ANYONE calls Lewis the GOAT
I'll wait...

What else have you got?
Just because people get tired of the constant whining about Lewis from guys like you doesn't mean they THINK Lewis is the GOAT. They're just tired of 5 guys who have some weird obsession with Lewis and come up with stupid metrics to try to prove a point that he is anything less than a great driver and BTW, NO ONE cares about Jensen Button outscoring Lewis one year out of three that they were teammates. The rest of us just look at wins/podiums/WDC's while you try to sell the silliness that THOSE numbers don't tell the story.

 

They same way your goat MS was schooling Nico? You do realize Hamilton is 37 years old, right?
He is going against a young buck that has the talent to be a multi world champion. I will go out on a limb and say that GR is faster than MV.
At least admit it was true that LH never cared who was in the car next to him, be it Alonso, Button, Nico, or George. When Kimi was set to join Ferrari MS ran away like a little school girl. That was his one opportunity to prove that he can go against a talented teammate.
Then when he came back Nico schooled him. Nico was the only talented driver (champion) that MS ever went against and we all know how that turned out.
How many champion teammates did LH go against in the same machinery? I count 3 but most likely 4.

 

I read earlier in this thread that people were asking if drivers with inferior cars had won a race, look no further than 1997 Hungarian GP when Schuey in a rubbish Ferrari was up against the all conquering McLaren of Hakkinen and Coultard.

He realistically had NO chance but Ross Brawn told Michael half way through the race , with him a LONG way behind, that if he could do qualifying times for the next specific number of laps he could get him out in front.

ONLY a true champion like Schumacher could have done it, Hamilton could NEVER have got even close , but then he was capable of these sort of things in his prime



Funny, never saw MS do that, I don't think he tried hard enough

 

You certainly seem to be arguing with those that dispute it. Hell, not even dispute it, just question his weekly beatings by his underling. If that's not your point, then why do you bother arguing against it?

In this thread? None I don't think. But plenty of posts by users here that claim just that all over the place.

Wins/Podiums do not tell the full story, no. We bring context to said wins. No one said he's not great. Seems merely questioning said numbers is already enough to set people off like you.

 

Why are you arguing with a brick wall ?

 

**** knows really.

 

You're a funny man

 

The Mercedes era was a politicized racket with the compliant Todt.

Good riddance.

 

No we have recent as of today, posts stating Mercedes are still the owners of the FIA. Yet we have proof for RedBull as the beachiest little school girls they are, forced the FIA to deny party modes lol. Oh ITS ALWAYS Mercedes eh. No. POST THE PROOF. Letters bribes hot Brazil bikini model favours etc. Show us lol

 

The real question that has any relevance is why did LAUDA recruit him lol.
Well we have that answer- he took the car Mercedes presented him. A n d. Won!

Job done! Job done he was hired and paid to do. He didn’t build the car or run the team
Or present issues to the FIA as a team principal. He drove and won. That’s the bottom line! Same for Max at RedBull. Drive and bring results lol. The rest of this is post winning whining because- pick a reason - some fans just don’t like him!

 

Ham and Rosberg both needed the hybrid Mercedes to win their WDC's.

Both were ahead of the rest by a country mile

 

I was wondering why I'm arguing with a brick wall...
Simple facts. Lewis had the best car and he took advantage of it. Plenty of guys over the years had the best cars and either crashed, abused the equipment and broke it, OR, we can look at Vettel, who won 4 WDC's in a row...and then went to Ferrari...which, for all intents and purposes, finished his career. Did Vettel forget how to drive? Hardly, he went from the best car to a POS, with predictable results.
It is a FACT that one needs a GREAT car to win. Are there exceptions? Certainly. We got shown one...from 1997. So, if you guys have to go back 25 years to show a bad car winning (through luck, attrition, etc), this tells the story. And BTW, those exceptions win A race...NOT the WDC.
And wins/podiums/WDC DO tell the entire story. History ONLY cares about those. Not: "Well, if XXX team had made a better tire call at the XXX race in 2008, THEN he would have won". Well, they DIDN'T. So give it a rest. "Moral victory" means first loser.

PS I love Bas saying "We bring context". To who? For what? Are you thinking you'll get to be a footnote when the history of LH's career is written? "Certainly, Lewis won the most GP's. But as Bas pointed out..."
Gimme a break.

 

Wow, a car that is ahead of the rest of the field. Was that something new in F1? I don't think so.

I remember the year when McLaren won 15 of the 16 GPs! I don't think any other team equaled that percentage of wins.

When Lotus was still existing, they were some years way ahead of the opposition, it was ridiculous.

 

To me, when a driver wins a race, he deserves that win which ever car he has under him (fastest, superior, more powerful, etc ...).

And who ever obtains enough points at the end of a season to win the championship also deserves that title, regardless of his car.

There is no "ifs" and "buts", wins and titles shouldn't be questioned. F1 is based on these principles.

F1 is a mechanical sport, which encourages different constructors, so obviously some cars will be better than other.

Winning on a superior car shouldn't be a stain on the driver, nor an argument to dismiss his success.

Amen.

 

^^^
Well, winning in a superior car (see Michael Schoemaker) is OK and confirms his (MS) brilliance. In Lewis' case, here in FC, he only won BECAUSE of the superior car, which means he cheated or something equally silly.

 

Well, what's YOUR point then? That Lewis is the best because stats?

No one is saying that won ONLY because he had the fastest car.

It's Schumacher. Can't be that hard.

 

In the three years that they were teammates, Button had more podiums than Hamilton (of course, we all know that Button scored more total points than Hamilton during those three years as well).

Now ... are "podiums" one of the things that you consider to be "stupid metrics", or not? Please make up your mind.