Thoughts on Abu Dhabi's double points * * * SPOILERS * * *

yes you are..thanks...but it wasn't the question.

You could have just said "I don't know" or not responded at all. And actually, I wasn't asking you specifically, I was asking for people's thoughts, if they had any.

 

As if Nico hasn't had major car issues? Lol, give me a break.

 

He has had two...

 

I find the fact that he has out-qualified Hamilton this year interesting considering that Hamilton has been considered one of the fastest men in F1 for years now. Also interesting is the fact that in Schumacher's final year he tied Nico in qualifying. I think it's clear that 43 year old MS was much, much faster than the pundits gave him credit for...

 

Yes, once while leading and once while in second. He's lost a lot of points.

Hamilton has had two in races as well. Once while leading and once while in second place.

It's plainly obvious that you are a bit of a LH fanboy but on race day they are equal in car failures.

 

must hurt tif12's feelings a lot. he claimed the whole time that nico was a mid fielder at best....so wonder what that makes Lewis?

 

Is it at all possible that Nico is quite fast himself? I personally believe he has been one of the faster drivers on the grid for quite a while...he was the next "second coming" for a little while. He just happened to drive inferior equipment so people forgot about him.

Remember that he was not only MS' equal, but very little separated him from Hamilton last year also. Replace Hamilton with most other drivers on the grid and Nico would have a comfortable lead for the WDC this season.

 

Agree 100%. That's exactly what I'm saying.

 

Hamilton has had three dnf's.

Man, I try to stay above the fray on this board, but you people are certainly quick to get things off track with the name calling. There's a part of me that wants to go down the same ridiculous track with you guys, but I'll decline.

I'm jumping from this thread. Coming here was a huge mistake.

 

Nothing wrong with calling a spade a spade...

Your math in that post was all fanboy tinged. It is what it is. You were assuming that if LH didn't have DNFs in those races he would have won for sure, etc. Just silly stuff like that makes it obvious.

 

I guess you're right!

If you Nico jock-sniffers weren't so blinded by having his sack in your face, you could see that Hamilton has had the better of him more often when both had cars that finished the race. As it is, you are so in love with him that you can't look at things objectively and even consider that Hamilton has proven to be the better racer over the course of the season...even whilst battling more adversity on the track.

The flowing blonde locks must have all you ball-washers in a tizzy.

 

Good try, but I'm far from a Rosberg fan and actively cheered against him when he was racing against MS. I've said more than once on here that I don't care who wins the title between the two Merc drivers.

Nico has proven that he can beat Hamilton head to head. It's happened plenty of times. Thus your post was silly. "More often that not" doesn't guarantee wins, sorry. Fanboy math.

Also, might want to climb down from your name calling high horse after posting this gem. Thanks.

 

Nope. Disagree. If I don't see everything as 'Nico is the true WDC', then I am a fanboi.

It works in reverse also. I know you are a big Schumacher fan, so that's why you rooted against Rosberg. Now that Schu's gone, he's your new guy.

 

Also, I'm a huge fan of civility, but if we're going to just crap all over each other and insult, I say '**** it',

When in Rome...

 

The only thing I find strange with the Hamilton fans is the fanatism that Hamilton must dominate and win every single race by law of nature if the car does not let him down. Why does that take anything away from Lewis if one have to admit that another driver was just better in a race (like Rosberg was in Brasil)? Hamilton did not win every race over Button at McLaren and he will not win every race over Rosberg, so what...Even Schumacher had days where he did not win over Barrichello or Massa, does that make him a worse driver? But you and a few others assume that Hamilton would have won for certain in every race without his "car issues"...

 

see? that's the thing. there's no neutral with these guys. If you're not totally backing Lewis, then you're totally against him. We can't enjoy and appreciate the rivalry without being totally for Lewis, totally against Lewis or a die hard Nico fanboi, according to them.

Those lewis blinkers are very odd.

 

Why would that make any sense?

For what it's worth Alonso is my favorite *huge gap* then Button, then Hulk, then Ricciardo, then Kimi, etc. then the rest it's just whatever. Was a big Bianchi fan too

Totally agree here. You hit the nail on the head. This forum has been like that the last 6-8 months.

 

What I find strange about the Nico Riders is that you guys are unwilling to see it the other way. Personally, I don't think Hamilton needs to win/dominate every single race. I like the fact that we have an entertaining championship and I think Nico has acquitted himself brilliantly this season. That said, if anyone states that 'Hamilton's car issues tightened the championship up' (which it did), you guys jump into this completely offensive stereotyping and grouping people as "fanboys".

I will say that, unequivocally, I believe Hamilton would have scored more points if he did not have car issues and the gap would be larger. Nico would have scored more points without his car issues, but he's had less of them.

It's so ironic that you people accuse others of the myopia you practice yourselves. How the very rational statement that "Hamilton would have scored more points had he finished" creates such a backlash is mind-numbing.

 

That's is precisely how I see it. You are railing about the very thing you practice yourself.

I also find the "unbiased" claims to be quite disingenuous. Were you to truly have 'no horse in this race', I doubt you would stir so much siht up about it all of the time.

 

Looks like you're wrong again.

in fact, you proved my point.

 

This is one point, that everyone that does not agree with Hamilton-Cult is necessarily a "Nico Rider" aka "you are pro-Hamilton or against" but there is a lot in between. I am no Rosberg Rider for example because I do not particularly like him....

If this is what you actually think I totally agree with you, for certain Hamilton would have scored more points without DNF so there would be nothing we would have to argue about.
Unfortunately you also had the following maths earlier on and this is just true when on assumes that Hamilton would have won every single race without the DNF, otherwise it would not be necessarily 105 points he lost due to DNF...

This is what I am talking about, nothing else

 

+1 stop talking sense mate, basically the way I see it, apparently supposedly non bias Nico supporters are doing it for a reason either to get a rise out of Hamilton fans, or they are simply Nico fans hacked off Hamilton is beating him.

But either way it's a bit like saying "I am not a vegetarian because I love animals; I am a vegetarian because I hate plants".

 

Understand your point. Thanks for clarifying. What I meant was that Ham lost the opportunity to score those points, so the max he could have currently is 345 if he finished first every race. I did not mean to insinuate he should have 449 points right now.

I appreciate the civil tone also.

 

Easiest thing to do on Earth apparently.

 

If you want a battle of wits with me, am your man ...

But come don't come half prepared..