Is Lewis Hamilton the greatest of all time, why or why not?

I believe Ronnie was going to drive for McL in 79.

 

Possible. I don't think he enjoyed being tail-gunner for Mario at Lotus.

 

Wow... because you can't watch the race - you don't believe people like Stewart, Moss, Brooks etc...? who were there and saw first hand. not to mention thousands of books written about Fangio? wow. there is not much footage of Vince Lombardi and Babe Ruth ... do you doubt them as well?

Also, it was not the "birth of the sport" - Racing F-1 style had been around for about 30 years. in the early 20's was when "Grand Prix" racing started - and the "formula" changed almost on an annual basis until the FIA ( CSI - Commission Sportif International ) was created in the late 20's.

Grand Prix racing had some of the best drivers - and cars ... V-16 cylinder Auto Unions, Bugatti's Mercedes, Talbots, Peugeots, Alfa etc... those cars could get up to 200MPH at some tracks... so it was serious business... Nuvolari, Campari, Rosemyer, Caracciola, Seemans, Williams, Veryon, Chiron, etc... were the superstars of the time.

I would highly encourage you to become educated on F-1 and Grand Prix racing ... I think you will find there is WAY more to the story than Hamilton and Netflix drive to survive. It is true that I never saw Fangio race in person but My father has, and I'll take his word... he passed away, but in his life, he saw some of the best ever race... and Fangio was who he rated the best = over Jim Clark who he loved....

 

Sounds like your opinion of Fangio stems from "my dad said so". But if that got you to follow racing at a young age, then that's great.

Sure Grand Prix racing was around well before the official formation of Formula 1. But the birth of Formula 1 was 1950, and we are talking about the greatest F1 drivers of all time. And while racing has always been a rich sport, it had much more restrictions back then than it does now. There wasn't sponsorship dollars like today and people couldn't travel around very easily like today. Hell the Indy 500 was part of the Formula 1 calendar, and yet only American's participated in that race, and then maybe 1 or 2 American born drivers competed in any of the the European races. F1 back in its early years was a regional sport.

As I mentioned, the range of driving talent and car performance was enormous. The first race, 21st guy qualified 18 seconds off the pace. The next race, Johnny Claes (who?) qualified 19th, 21.8 seconds off the pace, and still finished 7th "only" 6 laps down. In most races only a few drivers finished on the lead lap, most cars had failures before the half way point. I won't even bother to talk about the inaccuracies of timing and scoring or the lack of proper inspections, or the advantages rich teams had over the less rich teams. I remember watching classic Nascar races and watching Richard Petty's crew buzzing through his pitstops with air impact guns, while most of the competition was using tire irons! You say classic racing had some of the best drivers, I'll go ahead and say they had some of the worst as well. I think that's easier to prove than the former. Before you bring it up, NOBODY is going to question the bravery of these guys, regardless of their talents. Also nobody should ever question that the old race cars were incredibly difficult to drive.

You can never take away the accomplishments any of these old timers did in their time. Be it Fangio, Chamberlain, Ruth, Lombardi, etc. It's not their fault they competed in less competitive times, with less controlled rules, or had genetic or mechanical advantages that are unseen in modern times. Though when I look at the greatest of all time list for any sport, these factors I can't overlook. It doesn't mean their names don't come up in the conversation, I just will never put Fangio in the top 3 or 4 on my list.

Yes I completely agree that it takes a lot more effort to learn about historic racing and to form an educated opinion. This touches on my point that MOST people, by an overwhelming margin, throw Fangio's name as one of, if not the greatest driver only because they heard someone else say so. Perhaps their dad. I can't tell you how many teenagers I've heard say Senna was the GOAT when they never even watched a race he has done.

Your suggestion that I need to become educated in F1 racing is off base and an unjustified assumption. I'd say I've looked into the records more than most people, after all I am the one coming to my own conclusions based off information I have learned, and not just taking someone's word for it.

 

Obviously if you consider only the drivers who are your contemporaries, or at most the ones you saw on video, that restricts immensely your field of appreciation.
But your attitude is not uncommon these days.

 

I'm not sure why people get so defensive when my opinion doesn't conform to theirs. And then to go onto form misplaced judgements because of it.

How can you say my attitude is not uncommon when I actually look into available information to draw my own opinions? That's about as uncommon as it gets now days.

You are also assuming that my top drivers are only modern drivers. Usually it isn't the best idea to just assume without a good basis because that is incorrect.

What I see on video holds a tremendous amount of weight on how I form opinions or come to conclusions. It should be for anyone. Watching the televised races also offer a lot more than watching a race live as well. You don't see nearly as much at a live event. I also say that watching the races mean a lot more than just a highlight video of a given driver. There is a load of information you can gather from video than you cannot from statistics, and unfortunately that footage is not available for Fangio.

But since you do not agree that I don't put Fangio in the top 3 or 4, and you don't like my reasons to why. How about sharing why you feel that he is a top 3 driver in F1 history?

 

There is no need for you to go on your high horses. I was merely mentioning that on different subjects, many people nowadays don't take their elders opinions as gospel, or don't take for granted what was accepted truth before. That's not a problem for me; your opinion is as valid as any.
I don't compare drivers from different eras, no more than I believe in the GOAT concept, but I think Fangio was the most successful driver of the 50s.

 

I agree that comparing drivers of different era's is nothing more than just fun conversation. I believe there is enough evidence to support that Fangio should be considered the best of his time.

 

Still ain't got the hang of sarcasm, eh Sheldon?

 

I find it difficult to have a sensible conversation with you, I must admit. .

 

I don't think you can have a GOAT list. The eras are too different, and the comparisons can be unfair.

However, what one can do is ask the question of who are the most complete drivers of all time, and that becomes a more interesting metric.

IMHO, complete drivers saved their engines, their gearboxes, raced well in poor conditions, put scoring points before wins, helped develop the car, were analytical in their race approach, and what they did in cars that weren't the fastest needed to be impressive.

Now, that's a debate that can be more fruitful, imho.

 

My favorite driver is Mika Häkkinen. I consider him a complete and clean driver. He was the yin to Schumies yang.

 

No offence taken: I was answering a post about Senna's McLarens; so the years before 1988 were out of scope.

Rgds

 

I don't consider Fangio the best because " My dad said so" - but I do base on reading opinions of people who were there, raced against him, hired him etc...

People like - Stirling Moss - who I have met, and talked to - and about Fangio, Enzo Ferrari - writes about him several occasions, many others who have a far better appreciation of Racing than anybody here on Ferrari chat - like Jackie Stewart, Damon Hill, etc... those people know what it takes, and some of them like Doug Nye, Nick Mason Peter Dron, Richard Atwood, Brian Redmond, David Piper, etc... all whom I've met know and saw Fangio race... so forgive me if I take Umbridge but, looking at racing the way you do just shows an under-appreciation.

Finally, the other item you noted is very ageist I don't know your age but one can assume.... your comment "It's not their fault they competed in less competitive times, with less controlled rules, or had genetic or mechanical advantages that are unseen in modern times" - again shows a lack of understanding and appreciation. To say that Fangio and the drivers of the time were less competitive than today? is a gross overstatement that clearly shows no understanding of F-1. I hope you like the new season of drive to survive... I'm sure it will be compelling.

 

perhaps you dont see how your note comes across....

1. you are making yourself THE expert - and basing it on raw data - and interpreted VIDEO....
2. You make the assumption that since Video did not exist - that events that occurred did not happen or were not recorded appropriately...
3. You are free to count anyone you like as your best in the world - your right, but you don't get to discount others because you don't like the "facts" and stats.... because one form of data ( video ) is not present.
4. My intent is to show you that there is far more to F-1,and driving, and that all the techniques Drivers use today were developed by the founders of the Sport - both pre 1950 F1 and during the Grand Prix era... if you understand that - then the founders - and pioneers become that much more impressive vs. the Arrive and drive guys today.

 

You've lost me at the "genetic advantages" part. You mean like better vision or quicker reactions?

 

You made a few comments about how I am coming across, when to me it is you that is quite condescending. You asked me why I didn't rank Fangio very high on my list, I gave you my reasons, and you don't agree with them. I'm entitled to my opinion, and you are entitled to yours and I am absolutely open to hearing why you don't agree with my opinion, and why you have formed yours. That is good conversation to me. But you take it further and make assumptions that I do not know history, that I don't appreciate the racers of the day. You even used the words "obviously" and "clearly" in your assumptions and judgements about me just because I don't agree with you and the likes that rank Fangio at or near the top of the list. Suggesting I'm on some drive to survive bandwagon. I don't even have Netflix. Then you say you have an intent to teach me something. You don't know how much I know about the past, and you quoting other people's opinions will not teach me a whole lot. I'm sure you have some good knowledge about the old Grand Prix days and early F1 days as it seems to be an era you really like. If you have facts, I'd love to hear it.

I didn't make it a target to try and change your mind on where you rank Fangio. What is obvious, is I don't agree with your opinion of Fangio's rankings which I can only conclude from your words that you base it heavily, if not all of it on the opinions of others. You can name drop all the people you want, I'm sure you have some fun stories. But listening to Damon Hill talk about Fangio means very little to me. A history of rumors and tales from memory have been known to be filled with misinformation (either on purpose or by accident). I could give you several examples of athletes telling stories which are wrong. And this is recent history when the information is readily available, not 70 years ago when a lot of the stories are from people who are long passed away. Either way, it's there story, it's not what I see.

I base my opinion off of as much information and data available and of what I can see from my own eyes. That has a higher value to me than the word of some guy that knew a guy that raced with a guy that used to watch a guy that raced with Fangio back in 1951.

Also I never said that the drivers of the 50s weren't as competitive, I said Formula 1 in the 50s, the beginning of F1 and the beginning of any major sport does not have the same level of competition. This isn't opinion, it's a fact.

techniques that drivers used today are developed from the drivers of the 50s. Not really since they are very different techniques, but I think I understand what you mean and I agree that the drivers have evolved over time. I wouldn't give credit to Fangio for Max being fast though.

But if we can come back to just having a conversation and stop making unwarranted assumptions, then please I would love to hear your reasons why you rank Fangio so high. Without saying "he is a 5 time champion" or saying some former driver or your dad said so, what reasons to you make Fangio among the very best, if not the best in F1 history?

 

I was referring to my reference to Wilt Chamberlain. Him being a foot taller than most of his fellow players was a genetic advantage.

 

Is Lewis Hamilton the greatest ... "what" ... of all time? Race Director? FIA official?

He's certainly proving himself to be the most influential.

 

Was looking to see how many race starts for Max to look at a win percentage. If we double Max's race starts from his current 140 with 19 wins, he'd have 280 starts with 38 wins. Just to give a sense of contrast to what Lewis has down with his 287 starts achieving 103 wins. Lewis still has another season to continue adding more wins before he catch's up to Michael's 308 starts producing 94 wins.
Image Unavailable, Please Login

 

Lewis is a lot better driver than Max.
Period.

 

The percentage of wins for drivers is quite indicative.

Verstappen percentage of wins is 14.18%, Hamilton's is 35.76%. Hamilton won more than a third of the GPs he entered in his career.

FYI: Senna 25.47%, Stewart 27.27%, Schumacher 29.64%, Clark 34.72% and Fangio 47.06%.

 

Just to put HAM’s car advantage into perspective, saw this on Autosport:

“During five seasons with Mercedes Bottas took 10 wins and 58 podiums while Hamilton won four world championships.”

That’s like 2 wins and 12 podiums per year on average for an average driver! What are the chances he gets even a sniff of a podium this year?

 

FYI: total BS stats for HAM!

Which one of those other drivers was part of a team that completely dominated F1 for 8 years in a row?