Not to sidetrack the discussion, but what's wrong with Simon Cowell? Watching him destroy the "American Idols" was the best part of the show. And he is a great car guy.
Disliked by me, big time can't stand the show or him, its just a farce wrecking the music industry. It's Vulgar, when they realized the show was watched more because **** singers given air time, they put more on, a pathetic joke. And that bastrd has made millions making fun out of them, in the process dictating who gets to No1 in the UK charts. There was a internet protest, A rage against the machine track was put out as a viral to stop Cowell and one of his winning singers to keep it off the top slot , it worked I think.
Yes he did. And in a recent TG episode they showed old footage of him as a datingshow contestant (then unknown) and he mentioned karting as a hobby.
Sorry Mate, its a music thing we had it in the past with various dominating folk taking over the music business, its like MS dominating F1 The sex pistols got rid of some of them.
I never really watched the show that often but when I did, I remember thinking he was a richard noggin. Arrogant POS, I was surprised no one ever took a swing at him.
I guess so. For most people, if you finish higher in the standings than someone else, you beat them. But, I guess you could argue HRT actually won the 2010 WDC. Whatever you need to do to sleep at night
So, just to reduce this down to the important stuff, you are asserting that the way you saw things is more valid than the official record kept by the managing entity for the sport? ...and it's got nothing to do with being in denial?
Ah yes, the season when both of them ended up with the exact same amout of points. And aside from that, it was the season where Alonso was shunned by his team. With the same logic you could say that Heidfeld beat Kubica in 2009. But that's not counting the fact that the team shunned Kubica. What Hamilton did in 2007 was astounding given that he was a rookie. But calling it "beating Alonso" is an exaggeration. Which you normally wouldn't make if it wasn't for your bias against Alonso.
Whiny cry-baby already looking for excuses - pathetic. This <I>Boy</I> was a one-hit wonder in a season where everything else was chaotic. He was wet-nursed from the time he went off breast milk by Ron Dennis and as the talent level rises back up in F1 and teams/drivers/rules get sorted out he will fall by the wayside. I expect to see him and his insipid little sideburns under Chip Ganassi's desk in the near future begging for a NASCAR ride. Cheers
+100 Alonso has more talent and passion in his left ear lobe that Hamliton has in his entire, snobby, daddy's boy body. What Hamilton did in 2007 was lucky and took advantage of a chaotic season with too many off-track distractions. He will not win another title and I will be surprised if we wins many more races. I think he will make a great NASCAR driver except with that attitude some good old boy with three names will set him straight in the pits
While it is nice to see you agree with me, I have to disappoint you in that I think Hamilton is highly talented and will win another title. I count him to the current triumvirat of top F1 drivers: Alonso/Vettel/Hamilton (in that order). But Hami didn't really beat Alonso in 2007. He gave him a hell of a run for his money, more than you'd expect from a rookie. If both of them would be driving for the same team today and be given equal material (big utopia, I know) they would probably be another Senna/Prost pairing stealing each others victories. The question I have about Hamilton is whether he is capable of setting up a car and also whether he can develop one from a turd. Alonso has proven several times that he can do exactly that and that makes him the more complete driver.
Agree 100% (except for the talent, Prost/Senna comparison but...). Being an F1 driver is about more than showing up with your daddy and flavor of the week bimbette girlfriend and expecting to jump into a perfectly-prepared car and hope everyone else screws up around you so you can be handed a win/podium on a platter. It is about development of the car - constant input, feedback and in some cases putting the TEAM before YOU in order to ensure long-term, sustainable success for the TEAM. All the actual "top" drivers (Hamilton does not fall into this category) do exactly that - Alonso, Shumacher, Button, Vettel, Webber etc. Both Alonso and Schumacher took back-marker, losing teams from obscurity to domination. So did previous-generation drivers like Senna, Prost, Lauda, Mansel. Hamilton came out of the feeder series with everything greased along the way for him into a Top Team during a chaotic season and hasn't done diddly for the TEAM and then whines that the car is not perfect. He is a punk and it's sad that so many passionate, talented drivers don't get an opportunity in F1 because slots are taken by snot-nosed punks like Hamilton.
We've had this difference of opinion enough times. You think Hammy blew Fred into the weeds, I think he barely finished ahead of him at year's end and was lucky to do so. If this means you think Hammy is the better driver, that's your right, just like it's my right to think that you are wrong. Simple enough, no?
There is no bias at all in my views on this Andreas. There is no such thing as a tie in F1. It does not exist. In some sports they do overtime, or have penalty kicks, or some such. In F1, they base it on who performed better (in terms of positions) over the year. On the other hand, you have otherwise intelligent adults refusing to acknowledge the utterly indisputable facts of all this. The record book is there for all to see. Hamilton came in 2nd. Alonso came in 3rd. The only way this can be said to be untrue is for people to reject the reality of the rules of F1 and substitute in their own alternate reality where ties are within the scope of the rules. ...except ties are not within the scope of the rules. Anyone who needs to reject the historical fact of F1 in order to make their point is, by definition, in denial. Alonso was beaten by Hamilton in 2007. Anyone who disagrees is in denial, and is incapable of seeing the truth due to extreme and blinding bias. Fact.
I stated something very simple. Hamilton beat Alonso in 2007. If you agree with me, we have nothing more to discuss on this subject. However, it appears you refuse to acknowledge this. Am I incorrect? Do you agree with me that Hamilton beat Alonso in 2007?
The only fact is that you favor Hamilton. Just as I favor Alonso. The points lead anyone to see that it was a massively close battle between the two, in which Hamilton won on a tie break, not a huge margin as you like to make it seem, whenever the opportunity arises. To you that makes him a better driver than Alonso. I disagree, and so do many people that aren't clinging to the record book which doesn't tell the whole story. Hamilton was very lucky indeed to come out on top at year's end and Alonso soundly beat him fairly regularly from midyear on..
I agree that the record book doesn't tell the whole story, Mike. That's why we run the races. The record book would also have you believe that Damon Hill was a better driver than Stirling Moss or Gilles Villenevue because he won a title and they did not. Would you agree with that statement as well?
