planetf1.com

It is currently Sun Aug 25, 2019 11:21 am

All times are UTC


Forum rules


Please read the forum rules



Post new topic Reply to topic
Author Message
PostPosted: Sun Aug 11, 2019 7:32 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun May 25, 2008 7:55 pm
Posts: 6698
Schumacher forever#1 wrote:
Alienturnedhuman wrote:
Whether or not Hamilton sits near the top of the contenders for the GOAT is one that will go on long after he retires and can never truly be answered because all F1 drivers compete in different conditions and against different competitors.

However the notion that losing 2016 to Rosberg should automatically exclude him is a ridiculous idea and seems to just be designed to have a go to metric to say he's ineligible. It's almost as if people have forgotten what happened in that season.

Hamilton's most dominant title was in 2015 when he wrapped it up early. Yet in 2016, Hamilton received an even higher score in the team principal rankings, with Rosberg only third.

https://www.autosport.com/f1/news/12732 ... est-driver

That's because Hamilton still significantly outperformed Rosberg that season and the reason he lost was mostly circumstantial.

If you are going to have a discussion about who is the greatest of all time, for it to have any merit, it requires some actual depth to the research. Simply looking up a few basic common knowledge stats and quoting them without context doesn't really give much weight to the opinion they are meant to be supporting.


I don't think many will disagree with you in that, when you account for luck in that season, Hamilton would have won that championship season. I think the problem more comes with how great people view Rosberg to be, and how much Hamilton struggled with outright beating him in the years they were together. Considering the fact that a 42 year old Schumacher I believe outraced Rosberg 7-3 in 2012, for Hamilton to be considered in the same bracket as someone like Michael, maybe he shouldn't have struggled so much in beating Rosberg in their time as teammates. For me, Rosberg was never a tier one driver and would have been beaten by Alonso, Vettel and probably Ricciardo in a similar fashion as Hamilton. Someone's perception of Hamilton's greatness in his dominating period in Formula One should mainly come down to how he performed against his teammates, and how good we believe his teammates are.

In my view, Hamilton should go down as the best driver from 2014/2015 to present. His maturity in handling the title fight with Vettel is probably the most impressive thing we've seen from him. However, I still have Alonso firmly as the best driver from 2005 up to the Mercedes era. The only thing holding him back from having a dozen page thread about his ability to be considered an all-time great is his misfortune in not having been in a championship winning car for nearly all of his career. His ability to dominate teammates such as Raikkonen and Button (who Hamilton also didn't beat comfortably) is further proof of his abilities towards the latter part of his career.

If two drivers were picked as being an all time great of this generation, then I would likely pick Alonso and Hamilton, unless Vettel manages to pull off something special in the next few years.

Unfortunately this is innacurate. The gaps between Hamilton and Button were larger in qualifying than the gaps between Alonso and Button. Hamilton also beat Button 2 years to 1 wheres Alonso won one year and lost another in the points. I think both matchups flatter Button when looking only at points because factors outside of the drivers' control had a huge impact (especially in years like 2012 and 2015). There's also the fact that Hamilton faced Button as a young driver while Jenson was in his prime wheres Alonso faced Button while in his peak with Jenson arguably past his prime.

The argument that Alonso should be considered above Hamilton on the all-time list seems to suggest that Hamilton's performance against him in identical machinery should be ignored and Alonso's performance at Ferrari from 2010-2013 should be focused on. We are seeing right now the problem with comparing Hamilton and Alonso from that window of time. Hamilton spent that time with equal status against two WDC-caliber teammates in Button and Rosberg while Alonso spent that time with #1 status against a career #2 driver in Massa.

Right now we see with Vettel and Leclerc just how compromising it is to have to share a garage with another top driver and how much you lose out. Even when the car is strong, your strategic options will be limited by the requirement for fairness. Having your teammate in your back pocket is perhaps the most advantageous situation that a driver can have as it makes you look good regardless of what you actually achieve. Likewise, going up against strong competition in the same car does nothing for you unless you beat them and win the title ( a tall order which Lewis has accomplished multiple times).


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Aug 11, 2019 7:37 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun Aug 28, 2011 8:48 pm
Posts: 3225
Location: UK
sandman1347 wrote:
j man wrote:
sandman1347 wrote:
j man wrote:
mikeyg123 wrote:
When he becomes the most successful he'll have to be in the conversation for greatest. In terms of whether he is or not... I kind of feel that ship has sailed. He spent too much of his career not at the level of the likes of Schumacher, Prost, Senna etc and another portion in a car so dominant it's impossible to tell how well he was driving it.

He is now comfortably top ten of all time so can definitely be considered an "all time great"

:thumbup:

Unfortunately, for me (and I suspect, many others) Lewis would need to go back in time and do much more to convince the world he was better than Alonso. That he is one of the all time greats is without question, but not even eclipsing Schumacher's records would put him at the very top in my opinion. He just hasn't stood out from his peers in the way that the likes of Schumacher, Clark and Fangio did.

This makes almost no sense at all. So we must simply assume that Alonso was actually the best and Lewis must prove beyond any doubt that he was considerably better otherwise the assumption stands? This lopsided thinking is the real issue here. Let's not even mention the fact that it completely ignores the reality that Lewis beat Alonso as a teammate while in his rookie season!

Schumacher? Was he better than his peers throughout his career? I think so but I also think that he never had to actually compete against his teammates. The first teammate that Michael actually had to compete with and who he was not given status above, was Nico Rosberg (who he promptly lost to 3 years running). There is a palpable irony to people claiming that Hamilton only winning 3 years out of 4 against a driver that beat Schumacher 3 years out of 3 is what disqualifies Lewis from being the all time greatest.

What I see more and more of as Lewis inches towards eclipsing the all-time records, is people trying to take away from his accomplishments as well as his current standing as the top driver in the sport. As soon as Max gave people a plausible argument that he could be on par with Hamilton; we've had people tripping over themselves to prop him up above Hamilton. There is a stark contrast between some of the same people who wouldn't place Hamilton above Alonso even after Lewis bested him as a teammate (something which Max certainly has not done with Lewis) and even after Lewis won multiple championships (again, something which Max certainly has yet to accomplish). So rather than having to actually prove it; some people are willing to give Max that status just based on their own "opinion". Lewis, on the other hand, can actually deliver the results, the wins, the titles year after year after year but people look for that one sliver of doubt to hold up to say that he hasn't fully established it. It's so lopsided as to be laughable.

What's obvious is that the traditional motorsports fans have never warmed to Lewis and do not want him to be acknowledged as the best. These opinion-based things are where they attempt to influence that. I think Lewis is seen as an outsider. As someone else mentioned in this thread, it's not just about his skin color. It's about the fact that he hangs out in different circles, dresses differently, listens to different music, etc. I think there are people in motorsports who perceive him winning to be akin to an outsider coming into the competition and besting all of the people who actually belong.

Bottom line; all of the subjective posturing and all of the politics don't change the reality that he has achieved more than almost anyone in the sport. The 6th championship is starting to look like a certainty and the 91 wins are very close now. I don't think there's much more he can do to be the greatest. To hell with the so called "opinions" of people who simply don't like him.

No we are not supposed to just assume Alonso was the best of his time, we conclude he was the best based on watching his career. At least that is what I have done. I agree though that Lewis is currently the best in the field and that Verstappen still has much more to prove to be considered at the same level. I wrote something to that effect on another thread recently.

Your lengthy rant in response to my post is unnecessary. I sense we are in agreement about Hamilton's ability, our difference of opinion is in regard to Alonso's.

I think it's a bit of both actually. I simply don't see an objective way to conclude that Alonso was the better driver of the two. I can agree to disagree and I actually do rate Alonso above all of the other contemporaries of that era. I rate him above Vettel and above the likes of Raikkonen, Button or Rosberg. For me though, at some point, the Alonso perspective became totally distorted and I actually believe it has a lot to do with Hamilton. Alonso became the ultimate straw-man because he didn't have the car to compete at the front and it became a game of "Alonso would have done ____" where no matter what Lewis accomplished or how many titles he won, the Alonso crowd would simply assert that Alonso would have done even better. They would make these assertions despite the fact that Alonso has had ups and downs in his career just like everyone else and several times came up short when the title was within his grasp.

The new driver who people are starting to do that with is Max and, again, I think it has a lot to do with Lewis. I'm not trying to paint everyone with the same brush and I am not saying that this is your personal motivation but there are some fans out there who essentially want to find anyone but Lewis to acknowledge as the #1. This tends to manifest itself with a combination of two behaviors. The first is finding imperfections (even if minuscule) with Lewis's performances or seasons (even championship seasons or race wins). The second component is spinning a fiction about what some other driver would do in the same situation (usually this fiction has this other driver performing perfectly).

I think a lot of the basis for Alonso being rated higher comes from their relative performances in the Red Bull / Vettel championship years, as that was when both were competing at the front in roughly similarly-paced cars for a period of several years. Alonso's performances in the 2nd/3rd/4th best car were better than Hamilton's over that period, in fact he outscored him in all four years, and I don't think a convincing case could be made for Alonso having had better cars. Hamilton was also much more hot-headed and error-prone in his early years than Alonso was, and this is despite Hamilton entering the sport with more high-level racing experience.

The main difference I see between the two of them at their peak is consistency. Hamilton tends to go missing on a few race weekends each year where he just can't get comfortable with the car for whatever reason, and this just didn't seem to happen to Alonso who seemed to maximise the car's result in every race. This was most evident in the 2012 season where he put together a title challenge in a car in which his team mate struggled to get to Q3 most of the time and scored 2 podiums all season. I don't believe Hamilton could have done what Alonso did that year.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Aug 11, 2019 7:42 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 26, 2015 9:33 pm
Posts: 2310
j man wrote:
I think a lot of the basis for Alonso being rated higher comes from their relative performances in the Red Bull / Vettel championship years, as that was when both were competing at the front in roughly similarly-paced cars for a period of several years. Alonso's performances in the 2nd/3rd/4th best car were better than Hamilton's over that period, in fact he outscored him in all four years, and I don't think a convincing case could be made for Alonso having had better cars. Hamilton was also much more hot-headed and error-prone in his early years than Alonso was, and this is despite Hamilton entering the sport with more high-level racing experience.

The main difference I see between the two of them at their peak is consistency. Hamilton tends to go missing on a few race weekends each year where he just can't get comfortable with the car for whatever reason, and this just didn't seem to happen to Alonso who seemed to maximise the car's result in every race. This was most evident in the 2012 season where he put together a title challenge in a car in which his team mate struggled to get to Q3 most of the time and scored 2 podiums all season. I don't believe Hamilton could have done what Alonso did that year.


Many would argue though that, in that span, Vettel was the outright best in 2011 and 2013. Hamilton, Alonso and Vettel all had strikingly different circumstances, and were in different phases of their careers. Very few, regardless of the impression of the supreme dominance of Vettel in those two years, consider him on a level with Hamilton or Alonso. And yet, perhaps neither Hamilton or Alonso in that particular circumstance under those regs would have put together streaks of 9 wins a row etc. Formula 1 is the only sport I've ever seen where the debates on forums are so absolute depending on very specific frames of comparison. It's a bizarre sort of absolutism which is endemic of the thought which enshrouds this particular sport.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Aug 11, 2019 7:47 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun Aug 28, 2011 8:48 pm
Posts: 3225
Location: UK
sandman1347 wrote:
Schumacher forever#1 wrote:
Alienturnedhuman wrote:
Whether or not Hamilton sits near the top of the contenders for the GOAT is one that will go on long after he retires and can never truly be answered because all F1 drivers compete in different conditions and against different competitors.

However the notion that losing 2016 to Rosberg should automatically exclude him is a ridiculous idea and seems to just be designed to have a go to metric to say he's ineligible. It's almost as if people have forgotten what happened in that season.

Hamilton's most dominant title was in 2015 when he wrapped it up early. Yet in 2016, Hamilton received an even higher score in the team principal rankings, with Rosberg only third.

https://www.autosport.com/f1/news/12732 ... est-driver

That's because Hamilton still significantly outperformed Rosberg that season and the reason he lost was mostly circumstantial.

If you are going to have a discussion about who is the greatest of all time, for it to have any merit, it requires some actual depth to the research. Simply looking up a few basic common knowledge stats and quoting them without context doesn't really give much weight to the opinion they are meant to be supporting.


I don't think many will disagree with you in that, when you account for luck in that season, Hamilton would have won that championship season. I think the problem more comes with how great people view Rosberg to be, and how much Hamilton struggled with outright beating him in the years they were together. Considering the fact that a 42 year old Schumacher I believe outraced Rosberg 7-3 in 2012, for Hamilton to be considered in the same bracket as someone like Michael, maybe he shouldn't have struggled so much in beating Rosberg in their time as teammates. For me, Rosberg was never a tier one driver and would have been beaten by Alonso, Vettel and probably Ricciardo in a similar fashion as Hamilton. Someone's perception of Hamilton's greatness in his dominating period in Formula One should mainly come down to how he performed against his teammates, and how good we believe his teammates are.

In my view, Hamilton should go down as the best driver from 2014/2015 to present. His maturity in handling the title fight with Vettel is probably the most impressive thing we've seen from him. However, I still have Alonso firmly as the best driver from 2005 up to the Mercedes era. The only thing holding him back from having a dozen page thread about his ability to be considered an all-time great is his misfortune in not having been in a championship winning car for nearly all of his career. His ability to dominate teammates such as Raikkonen and Button (who Hamilton also didn't beat comfortably) is further proof of his abilities towards the latter part of his career.

If two drivers were picked as being an all time great of this generation, then I would likely pick Alonso and Hamilton, unless Vettel manages to pull off something special in the next few years.

Unfortunately this is innacurate. The gaps between Hamilton and Button were larger in qualifying than the gaps between Alonso and Button. Hamilton also beat Button 2 years to 1 wheres Alonso won one year and lost another in the points. I think both matchups flatter Button when looking only at points because factors outside of the drivers' control had a huge impact (especially in years like 2012 and 2015). There's also the fact that Hamilton faced Button as a young driver while Jenson was in his prime wheres Alonso faced Button while in his peak with Jenson arguably past his prime.

The argument that Alonso should be considered above Hamilton on the all-time list seems to suggest that Hamilton's performance against him in identical machinery should be ignored and Alonso's performance at Ferrari from 2010-2013 should be focused on. We are seeing right now the problem with comparing Hamilton and Alonso from that window of time. Hamilton spent that time with equal status against two WDC-caliber teammates in Button and Rosberg while Alonso spent that time with #1 status against a career #2 driver in Massa.

Right now we see with Vettel and Leclerc just how compromising it is to have to share a garage with another top driver and how much you lose out. Even when the car is strong, your strategic options will be limited by the requirement for fairness. Having your teammate in your back pocket is perhaps the most advantageous situation that a driver can have as it makes you look good regardless of what you actually achieve. Likewise, going up against strong competition in the same car does nothing for you unless you beat them and win the title ( a tall order which Lewis has accomplished multiple times).

When Hamilton and Button were together at McLaren I didn't see any "requirement for fairness" going on. There just wasn't the current Mercedes situation with one team strategist orchestrating the pitstops for both cars, both Hamilton and Button had their own race strategies and didn't seem to be on any sort of leash when racing each other wheel to wheel. Sure, it hampered Hamilton's title bids by having a second McLaren that could take points off him, but that second McLaren could (and did) take points off Alonso too. And conversely, having an uncompetitive #2 in the other Ferrari benefited Hamilton as well as benefiting Alonso, it's just one less car to compete with for the top places.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Aug 11, 2019 7:58 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun May 25, 2008 7:55 pm
Posts: 6698
j man wrote:
sandman1347 wrote:
j man wrote:
sandman1347 wrote:
This makes almost no sense at all. So we must simply assume that Alonso was actually the best and Lewis must prove beyond any doubt that he was considerably better otherwise the assumption stands? This lopsided thinking is the real issue here. Let's not even mention the fact that it completely ignores the reality that Lewis beat Alonso as a teammate while in his rookie season!

Schumacher? Was he better than his peers throughout his career? I think so but I also think that he never had to actually compete against his teammates. The first teammate that Michael actually had to compete with and who he was not given status above, was Nico Rosberg (who he promptly lost to 3 years running). There is a palpable irony to people claiming that Hamilton only winning 3 years out of 4 against a driver that beat Schumacher 3 years out of 3 is what disqualifies Lewis from being the all time greatest.

What I see more and more of as Lewis inches towards eclipsing the all-time records, is people trying to take away from his accomplishments as well as his current standing as the top driver in the sport. As soon as Max gave people a plausible argument that he could be on par with Hamilton; we've had people tripping over themselves to prop him up above Hamilton. There is a stark contrast between some of the same people who wouldn't place Hamilton above Alonso even after Lewis bested him as a teammate (something which Max certainly has not done with Lewis) and even after Lewis won multiple championships (again, something which Max certainly has yet to accomplish). So rather than having to actually prove it; some people are willing to give Max that status just based on their own "opinion". Lewis, on the other hand, can actually deliver the results, the wins, the titles year after year after year but people look for that one sliver of doubt to hold up to say that he hasn't fully established it. It's so lopsided as to be laughable.

What's obvious is that the traditional motorsports fans have never warmed to Lewis and do not want him to be acknowledged as the best. These opinion-based things are where they attempt to influence that. I think Lewis is seen as an outsider. As someone else mentioned in this thread, it's not just about his skin color. It's about the fact that he hangs out in different circles, dresses differently, listens to different music, etc. I think there are people in motorsports who perceive him winning to be akin to an outsider coming into the competition and besting all of the people who actually belong.

Bottom line; all of the subjective posturing and all of the politics don't change the reality that he has achieved more than almost anyone in the sport. The 6th championship is starting to look like a certainty and the 91 wins are very close now. I don't think there's much more he can do to be the greatest. To hell with the so called "opinions" of people who simply don't like him.

No we are not supposed to just assume Alonso was the best of his time, we conclude he was the best based on watching his career. At least that is what I have done. I agree though that Lewis is currently the best in the field and that Verstappen still has much more to prove to be considered at the same level. I wrote something to that effect on another thread recently.

Your lengthy rant in response to my post is unnecessary. I sense we are in agreement about Hamilton's ability, our difference of opinion is in regard to Alonso's.

I think it's a bit of both actually. I simply don't see an objective way to conclude that Alonso was the better driver of the two. I can agree to disagree and I actually do rate Alonso above all of the other contemporaries of that era. I rate him above Vettel and above the likes of Raikkonen, Button or Rosberg. For me though, at some point, the Alonso perspective became totally distorted and I actually believe it has a lot to do with Hamilton. Alonso became the ultimate straw-man because he didn't have the car to compete at the front and it became a game of "Alonso would have done ____" where no matter what Lewis accomplished or how many titles he won, the Alonso crowd would simply assert that Alonso would have done even better. They would make these assertions despite the fact that Alonso has had ups and downs in his career just like everyone else and several times came up short when the title was within his grasp.

The new driver who people are starting to do that with is Max and, again, I think it has a lot to do with Lewis. I'm not trying to paint everyone with the same brush and I am not saying that this is your personal motivation but there are some fans out there who essentially want to find anyone but Lewis to acknowledge as the #1. This tends to manifest itself with a combination of two behaviors. The first is finding imperfections (even if minuscule) with Lewis's performances or seasons (even championship seasons or race wins). The second component is spinning a fiction about what some other driver would do in the same situation (usually this fiction has this other driver performing perfectly).

I think a lot of the basis for Alonso being rated higher comes from their relative performances in the Red Bull / Vettel championship years, as that was when both were competing at the front in roughly similarly-paced cars for a period of several years. Alonso's performances in the 2nd/3rd/4th best car were better than Hamilton's over that period, in fact he outscored him in all four years, and I don't think a convincing case could be made for Alonso having had better cars. Hamilton was also much more hot-headed and error-prone in his early years than Alonso was, and this is despite Hamilton entering the sport with more high-level racing experience.

The main difference I see between the two of them at their peak is consistency. Hamilton tends to go missing on a few race weekends each year where he just can't get comfortable with the car for whatever reason, and this just didn't seem to happen to Alonso who seemed to maximise the car's result in every race. This was most evident in the 2012 season where he put together a title challenge in a car in which his team mate struggled to get to Q3 most of the time and scored 2 podiums all season. I don't believe Hamilton could have done what Alonso did that year.

As someone already mentioned, Hamilton and Alonso's circumstances in the 2010-2013 time period were not at all similar. In terms of race day scenarios, Alonso had the much better circumstance and he had the better results. In qualifying Hamilton had the better circumstance (his car was quicker from 2011-2013 - Ferrari had the better car in 2010) and Hamilton out-qualified Alonso in those years.

One year where their circumstances were very similar (at least after the first 5 races) was 2007; a year where they were actually in identical machinery. Now Alonso had #1 status for the first few races but after that, they went to alternating strategy and the bottom line is that Hamilton got the better of him. To ignore that and also ignore Hamilton's historically dominant run these last few years and claim that somehow, despite never actually pulling off the WDC win, the period of time from 2010-2013 is what determines that Alonso is better, is just something I cannot go along with. 2010-2013 was Vettel's era and Alonso benefited from having no internal competition at Ferrari and also having better reliability by far than both the Red Bull and McLaren drivers. Don't get me wrong, I think Fernando performed brilliantly at Ferrari for the most part (2010 was not a good season for him) but I think it's just lopsided to use this thought process and exclude basically the vast majority of both of their careers from your analysis under the false premise that their circumstances were similar.

The idea that Hamilton was error prone is totally false. I think 2011 is the only season where you can claim that Lewis was error prone and it was easily his worst season in F1. In 2012, Hamilton was undone completely by errors made by his team and by reliability issues. For me, Hamilton was as good as Alonso in 2012 and better in 2010. 2011 and 2013 were years where Alonso performed better but they were also years where Vettel demolished the field and there was no real title battle to be had. I think it's putting a lot of weight on a driver's performance when not involved in a title fight to place so much emphasis on those years.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Aug 11, 2019 8:00 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Oct 31, 2007 11:51 am
Posts: 4768
OK, I will listen to the mods and just stick with the "What does Hamilton have to do to become an all time great". We are obviously not discussing his results, as he is en route to become the most successful driver of all time. So why he can not be greatest of all time? Because he can not be a proper role model, for the reasons of manners such as:

He boasts to be heavy drinker.
He insulted his town of origin calling it "slums".
He is known for several high profile traffic violations.
He is also known for row of apologies after acting and speaking immaturely or disrespectfully.
The "liegate" certainly does not help his cause.
He enjoys inflicting pain to others when he defeats them.

All black and white things, no opinions there.

All these together are making up a big picture of why he can not be greatest of all time. Because it takes more than good results to be GOAT - manners, conduct, behaviour.

On the other side, to his defense, some criticism that he received is, IMHO, not deserved. Some say that he should live in Britain and pay taxes there, to show support for his country of origin. It's actually very hard to find F1 drivers with such level of patriotism. One would admire Nigel Mansell for doing so, living on the Isle of Man. He can not be forced to live in accordance with British culture, if he does not accept it. Cultural affiliation should be his free choice. And if he ever chooses to drive under any other flag, all should respect that. Also, whoever hates him because he is identifying himself as black (he identifies so with his own right, even when he is 50% white), is downright wrong. Racism is a wrong path. The next thing, that he is nearly constantly winning races is also irrational reason for disliking. "The guy is good at steering wheels, I hate him" is also wrong.

Yes, its hard to define GOAT. F1 drivers these days are selfish people and one can list number of manners in other drivers that are not acceptable for a role model. Even one great Schumacher crashed twice with purpose in his opponents. Senna did it too. We would need to go down deep in history to find role models, which will then have results which are not comparable with those of Hamilton, Schumacher Prost and Senna.

Therefore I think that it is impossible to define and choose GOAT. All thing we can do is to have mathematical standings in numbers, which are beyond discussion, and our personal opinions.

_________________
The end is near


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Aug 11, 2019 8:11 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Sep 15, 2008 9:23 am
Posts: 2891
Lt. Drebin wrote:
OK, I will listen to the mods and just stick with the "What does Hamilton have to do to become an all time great". We are obviously not discussing his results, as he is en route to become the most successful driver of all time. So why he can not be greatest of all time? Because he can not be a proper role model, for the reasons of manners such as:

He boasts to be heavy drinker.
He insulted his town of origin calling it "slums".
He is known for several high profile traffic violations.
He is also known for row of apologies after acting and speaking immaturely or disrespectfully.
The "liegate" certainly does not help his cause.
He enjoys inflicting pain to others when he defeats them.


All black and white things, no opinions there.

All these together are making up a big picture of why he can not be greatest of all time. Because it takes more than good results to be GOAT - manners, conduct, behaviour.

On the other side, to his defense, some criticism that he received is, IMHO, not deserved. Some say that he should live in Britain and pay taxes there, to show support for his country of origin. It's actually very hard to find F1 drivers with such level of patriotism. One would admire Nigel Mansell for doing so, living on the Isle of Man. He can not be forced to live in accordance with British culture, if he does not accept it. Cultural affiliation should be his free choice. And if he ever chooses to drive under any other flag, all should respect that. Also, whoever hates him because he is identifying himself as black (he identifies so with his own right, even when he is 50% white), is downright wrong. Racism is a wrong path. The next thing, that he is nearly constantly winning races is also irrational reason for disliking. "The guy is good at steering wheels, I hate him" is also wrong.

Yes, its hard to define GOAT. F1 drivers these days are selfish people and one can list number of manners in other drivers that are not acceptable for a role model. Even one great Schumacher crashed twice with purpose in his opponents. Senna did it too. We would need to go down deep in history to find role models, which will then have results which are not comparable with those of Hamilton, Schumacher Prost and Senna.

Therefore I think that it is impossible to define and choose GOAT. All thing we can do is to have mathematical standings in numbers, which are beyond discussion, and our personal opinions.


So given that criteria, that's Clark, Stewart, Fangio, Moss, Lauda, Prost, Senna, Schumacher, etc. also disqualified? Anyone left?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Aug 11, 2019 8:24 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun Aug 12, 2012 4:08 am
Posts: 34
I think Alonso had the better car in 2010 and arguably 2013. How I see it is that Hamilton was arguably the best driver in the field for the first 4 years of his career (I think definitely #1 in 2007, 2009, and 2010 and at worst #2 in 2008) then had his annus horribilis in 2011 (which weirdly included 2 of his calling card drives) where he was probably the 5th or so best performing driver, then after an offseason in which he must have engaged in a lot of self-reflection he had maybe still his best year in 2012 where again he was a top 2 driver), had a more modest year in 2013 where going into the summer break he was probably a top 2 performer on the season--I think the combination of how Seb and Fernando waltzed past him in Spa and his error in Monza qualy (where I thought he had a good chance of getting pole again) and the stark upswing in Red Bull performance led to him finishing the rest of the year with a sort of perfunctory intensity (to Nico's credit he was up for it more that back end of the year). The scuppering of the good result he seemed on for in Suzuka didn't help either. He was probably the 3rd or 4th best performing driver that year. Then from 14 on he's been a top 2 driver all the way through (you could argue Alonso in first in 2014, Seb first in 2015, possibly Dan first in 2016) and seemed to reach a new level of focus in the 2017 season and deepened even more in his rapport with his race engineers.

So at the end of his career he's probably going to have well over 10 years of being a top 2 driver and more than half a dozen as first. The only other F1 drivers I know of with that sustained level of upper echelon performance are Prost, and Schumacher. I think Lauda could have had such if he hadn't had the accident; same for Senna.

Whether you like it or not he's going to end up top 5.

On another note, Max is doing great so far because I think he was the 2nd best driver for two years already and he's going to be either one or two this year. And he's barely broken into his twenties! Exciting times!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Aug 11, 2019 8:30 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat Jan 28, 2012 4:13 pm
Posts: 15603
sandman1347 wrote:
j man wrote:
sandman1347 wrote:
j man wrote:
sandman1347 wrote:
This makes almost no sense at all. So we must simply assume that Alonso was actually the best and Lewis must prove beyond any doubt that he was considerably better otherwise the assumption stands? This lopsided thinking is the real issue here. Let's not even mention the fact that it completely ignores the reality that Lewis beat Alonso as a teammate while in his rookie season!

Schumacher? Was he better than his peers throughout his career? I think so but I also think that he never had to actually compete against his teammates. The first teammate that Michael actually had to compete with and who he was not given status above, was Nico Rosberg (who he promptly lost to 3 years running). There is a palpable irony to people claiming that Hamilton only winning 3 years out of 4 against a driver that beat Schumacher 3 years out of 3 is what disqualifies Lewis from being the all time greatest.

What I see more and more of as Lewis inches towards eclipsing the all-time records, is people trying to take away from his accomplishments as well as his current standing as the top driver in the sport. As soon as Max gave people a plausible argument that he could be on par with Hamilton; we've had people tripping over themselves to prop him up above Hamilton. There is a stark contrast between some of the same people who wouldn't place Hamilton above Alonso even after Lewis bested him as a teammate (something which Max certainly has not done with Lewis) and even after Lewis won multiple championships (again, something which Max certainly has yet to accomplish). So rather than having to actually prove it; some people are willing to give Max that status just based on their own "opinion". Lewis, on the other hand, can actually deliver the results, the wins, the titles year after year after year but people look for that one sliver of doubt to hold up to say that he hasn't fully established it. It's so lopsided as to be laughable.

What's obvious is that the traditional motorsports fans have never warmed to Lewis and do not want him to be acknowledged as the best. These opinion-based things are where they attempt to influence that. I think Lewis is seen as an outsider. As someone else mentioned in this thread, it's not just about his skin color. It's about the fact that he hangs out in different circles, dresses differently, listens to different music, etc. I think there are people in motorsports who perceive him winning to be akin to an outsider coming into the competition and besting all of the people who actually belong.

Bottom line; all of the subjective posturing and all of the politics don't change the reality that he has achieved more than almost anyone in the sport. The 6th championship is starting to look like a certainty and the 91 wins are very close now. I don't think there's much more he can do to be the greatest. To hell with the so called "opinions" of people who simply don't like him.

No we are not supposed to just assume Alonso was the best of his time, we conclude he was the best based on watching his career. At least that is what I have done. I agree though that Lewis is currently the best in the field and that Verstappen still has much more to prove to be considered at the same level. I wrote something to that effect on another thread recently.

Your lengthy rant in response to my post is unnecessary. I sense we are in agreement about Hamilton's ability, our difference of opinion is in regard to Alonso's.

I think it's a bit of both actually. I simply don't see an objective way to conclude that Alonso was the better driver of the two. I can agree to disagree and I actually do rate Alonso above all of the other contemporaries of that era. I rate him above Vettel and above the likes of Raikkonen, Button or Rosberg. For me though, at some point, the Alonso perspective became totally distorted and I actually believe it has a lot to do with Hamilton. Alonso became the ultimate straw-man because he didn't have the car to compete at the front and it became a game of "Alonso would have done ____" where no matter what Lewis accomplished or how many titles he won, the Alonso crowd would simply assert that Alonso would have done even better. They would make these assertions despite the fact that Alonso has had ups and downs in his career just like everyone else and several times came up short when the title was within his grasp.

The new driver who people are starting to do that with is Max and, again, I think it has a lot to do with Lewis. I'm not trying to paint everyone with the same brush and I am not saying that this is your personal motivation but there are some fans out there who essentially want to find anyone but Lewis to acknowledge as the #1. This tends to manifest itself with a combination of two behaviors. The first is finding imperfections (even if minuscule) with Lewis's performances or seasons (even championship seasons or race wins). The second component is spinning a fiction about what some other driver would do in the same situation (usually this fiction has this other driver performing perfectly).

I think a lot of the basis for Alonso being rated higher comes from their relative performances in the Red Bull / Vettel championship years, as that was when both were competing at the front in roughly similarly-paced cars for a period of several years. Alonso's performances in the 2nd/3rd/4th best car were better than Hamilton's over that period, in fact he outscored him in all four years, and I don't think a convincing case could be made for Alonso having had better cars. Hamilton was also much more hot-headed and error-prone in his early years than Alonso was, and this is despite Hamilton entering the sport with more high-level racing experience.

The main difference I see between the two of them at their peak is consistency. Hamilton tends to go missing on a few race weekends each year where he just can't get comfortable with the car for whatever reason, and this just didn't seem to happen to Alonso who seemed to maximise the car's result in every race. This was most evident in the 2012 season where he put together a title challenge in a car in which his team mate struggled to get to Q3 most of the time and scored 2 podiums all season. I don't believe Hamilton could have done what Alonso did that year.

As someone already mentioned, Hamilton and Alonso's circumstances in the 2010-2013 time period were not at all similar. In terms of race day scenarios, Alonso had the much better circumstance and he had the better results. In qualifying Hamilton had the better circumstance (his car was quicker from 2011-2013 - Ferrari had the better car in 2010) and Hamilton out-qualified Alonso in those years.

One year where their circumstances were very similar (at least after the first 5 races) was 2007; a year where they were actually in identical machinery. Now Alonso had #1 status for the first few races but after that, they went to alternating strategy and the bottom line is that Hamilton got the better of him. To ignore that and also ignore Hamilton's historically dominant run these last few years and claim that somehow, despite never actually pulling off the WDC win, the period of time from 2010-2013 is what determines that Alonso is better, is just something I cannot go along with. 2010-2013 was Vettel's era and Alonso benefited from having no internal competition at Ferrari and also having better reliability by far than both the Red Bull and McLaren drivers. Don't get me wrong, I think Fernando performed brilliantly at Ferrari for the most part (2010 was not a good season for him) but I think it's just lopsided to use this thought process and exclude basically the vast majority of both of their careers from your analysis under the false premise that their circumstances were similar.

The idea that Hamilton was error prone is totally false. I think 2011 is the only season where you can claim that Lewis was error prone and it was easily his worst season in F1. In 2012, Hamilton was undone completely by errors made by his team and by reliability issues. For me, Hamilton was as good as Alonso in 2012 and better in 2010. 2011 and 2013 were years where Alonso performed better but they were also years where Vettel demolished the field and there was no real title battle to be had. I think it's putting a lot of weight on a driver's performance when not involved in a title fight to place so much emphasis on those years.


Basically, I think Alonso drove better than Hamilton in more years than he did not. I think over his career Hamilton has dropped to many wins and poles to team mates. That's numerous team mates across many years. Far more than other drivers in the "GOAT" discussion. Just my opinion. Certainly not fact. I think Alonso was the better driver of F1 cars.

Greatness however is a different story. Hamilton has made a much bigger impact on the sport. I'm still weighing up whether I think Hamilton has now surpassed Alonso in terms of greatness or not.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Aug 11, 2019 8:38 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Oct 09, 2005 2:06 pm
Posts: 2790
Location: England
shoot999 wrote:
Lt. Drebin wrote:
OK, I will listen to the mods and just stick with the "What does Hamilton have to do to become an all time great". We are obviously not discussing his results, as he is en route to become the most successful driver of all time. So why he can not be greatest of all time? Because he can not be a proper role model, for the reasons of manners such as:

He boasts to be heavy drinker.
He insulted his town of origin calling it "slums".
He is known for several high profile traffic violations.
He is also known for row of apologies after acting and speaking immaturely or disrespectfully.
The "liegate" certainly does not help his cause.
He enjoys inflicting pain to others when he defeats them.


All black and white things, no opinions there.

All these together are making up a big picture of why he can not be greatest of all time. Because it takes more than good results to be GOAT - manners, conduct, behaviour.

On the other side, to his defense, some criticism that he received is, IMHO, not deserved. Some say that he should live in Britain and pay taxes there, to show support for his country of origin. It's actually very hard to find F1 drivers with such level of patriotism. One would admire Nigel Mansell for doing so, living on the Isle of Man. He can not be forced to live in accordance with British culture, if he does not accept it. Cultural affiliation should be his free choice. And if he ever chooses to drive under any other flag, all should respect that. Also, whoever hates him because he is identifying himself as black (he identifies so with his own right, even when he is 50% white), is downright wrong. Racism is a wrong path. The next thing, that he is nearly constantly winning races is also irrational reason for disliking. "The guy is good at steering wheels, I hate him" is also wrong.

Yes, its hard to define GOAT. F1 drivers these days are selfish people and one can list number of manners in other drivers that are not acceptable for a role model. Even one great Schumacher crashed twice with purpose in his opponents. Senna did it too. We would need to go down deep in history to find role models, which will then have results which are not comparable with those of Hamilton, Schumacher Prost and Senna.

Therefore I think that it is impossible to define and choose GOAT. All thing we can do is to have mathematical standings in numbers, which are beyond discussion, and our personal opinions.


So given that criteria, that's Clark, Stewart, Fangio, Moss, Lauda, Prost, Senna, Schumacher, etc. also disqualified? Anyone left?


Probably not. This post more than anything demonstrates the ridiculously higher standards Hamilton is held to than any other driver previous.

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition 2019:
Current positon: 8th | 3 Podiums | 4 Wins
2018 Pick 10 Champion


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Aug 11, 2019 8:43 pm 
Offline

Joined: Thu May 12, 2011 6:08 pm
Posts: 3987
Does Hamilton come across as the nicest driver in F1 history? No. Not to me anyway. Not that I dislike him at all.

Does Hamilton come across as one of the greatest driving in F1 history? Yes, to me anyway.

_________________
Power tends to corrupt and absolute power corrupts absolutely. [Lord Acton]
My own Google Earth Motor Sport file. http://www.mediafire.com/?jzm1ieatytv
Follow me @asphalt_world


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Aug 11, 2019 8:45 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Aug 25, 2014 9:50 am
Posts: 1241
Location: UK
Lt. Drebin wrote:
He enjoys inflicting pain to others when he defeats them.


Don't really understand this bit, I've always thought he recognises a hard race, having said that once you have established superiority champions often reinforce mental superiority.

Lt. Drebin wrote:
Therefore I think that it is impossible to define and choose GOAT. All thing we can do is to have mathematical standings in numbers, which are beyond discussion, and our personal opinions.


Overall that is a reasonable summary but I'm not sure how you can be 50% white?? I agree you cant establish criteria for greatness with any proper criteria and I said as much above. The one thing that can't be disputed are race wins and championships.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Aug 11, 2019 8:45 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 26, 2015 9:33 pm
Posts: 2310
Flash2k11 wrote:
shoot999 wrote:
Lt. Drebin wrote:
OK, I will listen to the mods and just stick with the "What does Hamilton have to do to become an all time great". We are obviously not discussing his results, as he is en route to become the most successful driver of all time. So why he can not be greatest of all time? Because he can not be a proper role model, for the reasons of manners such as:

He boasts to be heavy drinker.
He insulted his town of origin calling it "slums".
He is known for several high profile traffic violations.
He is also known for row of apologies after acting and speaking immaturely or disrespectfully.
The "liegate" certainly does not help his cause.
He enjoys inflicting pain to others when he defeats them.


All black and white things, no opinions there.

All these together are making up a big picture of why he can not be greatest of all time. Because it takes more than good results to be GOAT - manners, conduct, behaviour.

On the other side, to his defense, some criticism that he received is, IMHO, not deserved. Some say that he should live in Britain and pay taxes there, to show support for his country of origin. It's actually very hard to find F1 drivers with such level of patriotism. One would admire Nigel Mansell for doing so, living on the Isle of Man. He can not be forced to live in accordance with British culture, if he does not accept it. Cultural affiliation should be his free choice. And if he ever chooses to drive under any other flag, all should respect that. Also, whoever hates him because he is identifying himself as black (he identifies so with his own right, even when he is 50% white), is downright wrong. Racism is a wrong path. The next thing, that he is nearly constantly winning races is also irrational reason for disliking. "The guy is good at steering wheels, I hate him" is also wrong.

Yes, its hard to define GOAT. F1 drivers these days are selfish people and one can list number of manners in other drivers that are not acceptable for a role model. Even one great Schumacher crashed twice with purpose in his opponents. Senna did it too. We would need to go down deep in history to find role models, which will then have results which are not comparable with those of Hamilton, Schumacher Prost and Senna.

Therefore I think that it is impossible to define and choose GOAT. All thing we can do is to have mathematical standings in numbers, which are beyond discussion, and our personal opinions.


So given that criteria, that's Clark, Stewart, Fangio, Moss, Lauda, Prost, Senna, Schumacher, etc. also disqualified? Anyone left?


Probably not. This post more than anything demonstrates the ridiculously higher standards Hamilton is held to than any other driver previous.


It's easy to nitpick like that for pretty much any driver in history, indeed. Or, if we were privy to the entirety of their lives, we could compile very "damning" dossiers. A bit like if all our lives were logged in their entirety, there would be pretty "damning" dossiers against us. For heaven forbid that a human being not be perfect! :o

Humans erect ideals for potential idols completely incommensurate with their own conduct and applied standards. This is the curious tribal sway of the exemplar, the heralded champion who as a champion is dehumanised and expected to be more than human, expected to be the overman, to transcend humanity itself. x(


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Aug 11, 2019 9:15 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun May 25, 2008 7:55 pm
Posts: 6698
mikeyg123 wrote:
sandman1347 wrote:
j man wrote:
sandman1347 wrote:
j man wrote:
No we are not supposed to just assume Alonso was the best of his time, we conclude he was the best based on watching his career. At least that is what I have done. I agree though that Lewis is currently the best in the field and that Verstappen still has much more to prove to be considered at the same level. I wrote something to that effect on another thread recently.

Your lengthy rant in response to my post is unnecessary. I sense we are in agreement about Hamilton's ability, our difference of opinion is in regard to Alonso's.

I think it's a bit of both actually. I simply don't see an objective way to conclude that Alonso was the better driver of the two. I can agree to disagree and I actually do rate Alonso above all of the other contemporaries of that era. I rate him above Vettel and above the likes of Raikkonen, Button or Rosberg. For me though, at some point, the Alonso perspective became totally distorted and I actually believe it has a lot to do with Hamilton. Alonso became the ultimate straw-man because he didn't have the car to compete at the front and it became a game of "Alonso would have done ____" where no matter what Lewis accomplished or how many titles he won, the Alonso crowd would simply assert that Alonso would have done even better. They would make these assertions despite the fact that Alonso has had ups and downs in his career just like everyone else and several times came up short when the title was within his grasp.

The new driver who people are starting to do that with is Max and, again, I think it has a lot to do with Lewis. I'm not trying to paint everyone with the same brush and I am not saying that this is your personal motivation but there are some fans out there who essentially want to find anyone but Lewis to acknowledge as the #1. This tends to manifest itself with a combination of two behaviors. The first is finding imperfections (even if minuscule) with Lewis's performances or seasons (even championship seasons or race wins). The second component is spinning a fiction about what some other driver would do in the same situation (usually this fiction has this other driver performing perfectly).

I think a lot of the basis for Alonso being rated higher comes from their relative performances in the Red Bull / Vettel championship years, as that was when both were competing at the front in roughly similarly-paced cars for a period of several years. Alonso's performances in the 2nd/3rd/4th best car were better than Hamilton's over that period, in fact he outscored him in all four years, and I don't think a convincing case could be made for Alonso having had better cars. Hamilton was also much more hot-headed and error-prone in his early years than Alonso was, and this is despite Hamilton entering the sport with more high-level racing experience.

The main difference I see between the two of them at their peak is consistency. Hamilton tends to go missing on a few race weekends each year where he just can't get comfortable with the car for whatever reason, and this just didn't seem to happen to Alonso who seemed to maximise the car's result in every race. This was most evident in the 2012 season where he put together a title challenge in a car in which his team mate struggled to get to Q3 most of the time and scored 2 podiums all season. I don't believe Hamilton could have done what Alonso did that year.

As someone already mentioned, Hamilton and Alonso's circumstances in the 2010-2013 time period were not at all similar. In terms of race day scenarios, Alonso had the much better circumstance and he had the better results. In qualifying Hamilton had the better circumstance (his car was quicker from 2011-2013 - Ferrari had the better car in 2010) and Hamilton out-qualified Alonso in those years.

One year where their circumstances were very similar (at least after the first 5 races) was 2007; a year where they were actually in identical machinery. Now Alonso had #1 status for the first few races but after that, they went to alternating strategy and the bottom line is that Hamilton got the better of him. To ignore that and also ignore Hamilton's historically dominant run these last few years and claim that somehow, despite never actually pulling off the WDC win, the period of time from 2010-2013 is what determines that Alonso is better, is just something I cannot go along with. 2010-2013 was Vettel's era and Alonso benefited from having no internal competition at Ferrari and also having better reliability by far than both the Red Bull and McLaren drivers. Don't get me wrong, I think Fernando performed brilliantly at Ferrari for the most part (2010 was not a good season for him) but I think it's just lopsided to use this thought process and exclude basically the vast majority of both of their careers from your analysis under the false premise that their circumstances were similar.

The idea that Hamilton was error prone is totally false. I think 2011 is the only season where you can claim that Lewis was error prone and it was easily his worst season in F1. In 2012, Hamilton was undone completely by errors made by his team and by reliability issues. For me, Hamilton was as good as Alonso in 2012 and better in 2010. 2011 and 2013 were years where Alonso performed better but they were also years where Vettel demolished the field and there was no real title battle to be had. I think it's putting a lot of weight on a driver's performance when not involved in a title fight to place so much emphasis on those years.


Basically, I think Alonso drove better than Hamilton in more years than he did not. I think over his career Hamilton has dropped to many wins and poles to team mates. That's numerous team mates across many years. Far more than other drivers in the "GOAT" discussion. Just my opinion. Certainly not fact. I think Alonso was the better driver of F1 cars.

Greatness however is a different story. Hamilton has made a much bigger impact on the sport. I'm still weighing up whether I think Hamilton has now surpassed Alonso in terms of greatness or not.

I don't agree with anything you've said here. Hamilton has had far stronger teammates collectively than Schumacher, Senna or anyone else in this discussion and yet he has bested them all. To use the fact that some of them have performed admirably as something to take away from him is absurd. Couldn't possibly agree less with that logic. By that way of thinking, the way to be the best is to have poor teammates and a poor car throughout your career. That way no teammate will ever beat you to a win or pole position. The problem is that you will not win that much either (a problem Alonso is familiar with). You want to see Hamilton in that situation? Look at the two years where he races with Kovaleinen as his teammate. Are those years more impressive than his years against Alonso, Rosberg and Button simply because he destroyed his teammate? Of course not.

For me, the claim that Alonso has been better in more years is false. They raced on the grid together for 12 years and I'd say that maybe 4 or 5 of them you could claim Alonso performed better. I'd say 2008, 2011 and 2013 are the only definite ones and many would say 2012 as well. Beyond that, Hamilton has been better every year. Maybe 2016 is a year where you can also point to Alonso in the matchup. It's a big stretch but things went poorly for Hamilton that year and it was perhaps Alonso's best year with the McLaren/Honda team.

Overall Hamilton has had the better career. He has done better with his championship opportunities and he has had a MUCH better impact on the teams he has raced for. That's my opinion.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Aug 11, 2019 9:23 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Jul 04, 2016 4:45 am
Posts: 117
Lt. Drebin wrote:
dpastern wrote:
no matter what Hamilton does, the multitudes of racists will never consider him a great. That's the reality of the situation.

Easy with that "racist" stuff, it makes Hamilton cause look in a need of an emotional boost, and he is better than that. "Racism" is so overused these days, and Hamilton sadly contributed to it. May his fans be smarter.


Careful with what? I'm simply stating a factual truth based on observations over the past 5 or so years.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Aug 11, 2019 9:24 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu May 23, 2013 1:05 pm
Posts: 7887
I'd add 10 and 14 to the above personally Sandman, 15 onwards is all Hamilton though I would agree. I make it 6-6 in seasons they were both on the grid in terms of who was the better driver over the season IMO.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Aug 11, 2019 9:27 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 16, 2015 3:45 am
Posts: 713
Location: Michigan, USA
I think Hamilton has already done enough to be considered an all time great. The only question left is where he'll fit into that conversation, and that won't be known until his career is over. Statistically he's already clearly among the best, and he's been a great driver to watch him for quite some time.

_________________
Image
Pick 10: 1 win, 8 podiums | 2016: 22nd | 2017: 21st | 2018: 3rd |
Top Three: 9 wins, 26 podiums | 2016: 9th [6th] | 2017: 16th [6th] | 2018: 4th [4th] |


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Aug 11, 2019 9:27 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Jul 04, 2016 4:45 am
Posts: 117
Inappropriate post removed.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Aug 11, 2019 9:29 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun May 25, 2008 7:55 pm
Posts: 6698
Black_Flag_11 wrote:
I'd add 10 and 14 to the above personally Sandman, 15 onwards is all Hamilton though I would agree. I make it 6-6 in seasons they were both on the grid in terms of who was the better driver over the season IMO.

2010 was a sloppy season for Alonso. Very error-prone by his standards and he failed to bring home the title when he was in the driver's seat. Hamilton that year took a car that was maybe good enough to contest for race wins 5 or 6 times on the entire season and he was still mathematically alive in the standings going into the final race despite having to battle with his teammate when the car was competitive.

2014 was a year where Hamilton had much worse reliability than Rosberg (and was taken out at Spa by Rosebrg) but still managed to deliver the championship by winning 6 of the last 7 races. Alonso that year did not have a strong car nor did he have a strong teammate. I don't personally think he had a bad season but I can't agree with placing his 2014 above Hamilton's. Not by any stretch. I just don't see enough there to justify that.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Aug 11, 2019 9:44 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 26, 2015 9:33 pm
Posts: 2310
Ultimately, if I were to choose a driver to come to my team and build it and extract the most potential out of the car I'd probably choose Hamilton over Alonso. I believe him to be a significantly superior team-builder.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Aug 11, 2019 9:49 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 11, 2013 11:01 pm
Posts: 670
It seems that one factor that has led many to critique Hamilton, in that he has always been content to take on very competitive team mates, without favouritism from the team may also be one of the main factors in Mercedes prolonged success. It's interesting that even Hamilton recognizes the importance of number one status now which will count against him for many. For others they will only respect him more. Clearly many still want to see the end of Mercedes dominance because it can only be a good thing for the sport but the intra-team battles at Mercedes have worked in Mercedes and therefore Hamilton's favour. And focus for the 2021 regs is more around the racing than it is around the Mercedes dominance which increases there chance of extending it. The arguments for Lewis being a great role model are just as strong, if not stronger than those against in my opinion, but he can come across pretty whiney at times unfortunately so not surprising he divides opinion. He's right in the spot light every single weekend though so there are bound to be ups and downs.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Aug 11, 2019 9:54 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 26, 2015 9:33 pm
Posts: 2310
WHoff78 wrote:
It seems that one factor that has led many to critique Hamilton, in that he has always been content to take on very competitive team mates, without favouritism from the team may also be one of the main factors in Mercedes prolonged success. It's interesting that even Hamilton recognizes the importance of number one status now which will count against him for many. For others they will only respect him more. Clearly many still want to see the end of Mercedes dominance because it can only be a good thing for the sport but the intra-team battles at Mercedes have worked in Mercedes and therefore Hamilton's favour. And focus for the 2021 regs is more around the racing than it is around the Mercedes dominance. The arguments for Lewis being a great role model are just as strong, if not stronger than those against in my opinion, but he can come across pretty whiney at times unfortunately so not surprising he divides opinion. He right in the spot light every single weekend though so there are bound to be ups and downs.


This is why I regard Hamilton as a better team-builder. Given the status that typically exists, the dynamic within the team between teammates, both drivers are given the chance to extract performance from the car in their directions. Providing the team is harmonious this can synthesise aspects and traits investigated on both sides of the garage and increase the absolute pace of the car. Further, as long as the drivers can hack it, iron sharpens iron. It's a tricky balance and things can implode, but ultimately if both drivers are given a REAL platform without illusions to operate, the health and stability of overall performance is more likely to be sustained .... ??


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Aug 11, 2019 11:59 pm 
Offline

Joined: Fri Aug 25, 2017 9:08 am
Posts: 135
j man wrote:
mikeyg123 wrote:
When he becomes the most successful he'll have to be in the conversation for greatest. In terms of whether he is or not... I kind of feel that ship has sailed. He spent too much of his career not at the level of the likes of Schumacher, Prost, Senna etc and another portion in a car so dominant it's impossible to tell how well he was driving it.

He is now comfortably top ten of all time so can definitely be considered an "all time great"

:thumbup:

Unfortunately, for me (and I suspect, many others) Lewis would need to go back in time and do much more to convince the world he was better than Alonso. That he is one of the all time greats is without question, but not even eclipsing Schumacher's records would put him at the very top in my opinion. He just hasn't stood out from his peers in the way that the likes of Schumacher, Clark and Fangio did.


Schumacher had his team mates to look after him. Hamilton didn't, unless their was a performance issue.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Aug 12, 2019 3:25 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Feb 18, 2015 5:38 pm
Posts: 2114
Location: Miami, Florida
sandman1347 wrote:
For me, the claim that Alonso has been better in more years is false. They raced on the grid together for 12 years and I'd say that maybe 4 or 5 of them you could claim Alonso performed better. I'd say 2008, 2011 and 2013 are the only definite ones and many would say 2012 as well. Beyond that, Hamilton has been better every year. Maybe 2016 is a year where you can also point to Alonso in the matchup. It's a big stretch but things went poorly for Hamilton that year and it was perhaps Alonso's best year with the McLaren/Honda team.

Overall Hamilton has had the better career. He has done better with his championship opportunities and he has had a MUCH better impact on the teams he has raced for. That's my opinion.

Agree with everything except 2012… Hamilton should have won that championship, but his team let him down on multiple occasions via fumbling pit stops which cost him wins that easily cost him the championship, and he was rather impressive, in that the McLaren wasn’t the best in the field and was arguably the third best car that season. So I wouldn’t say Alonso drove better in that season.

_________________
HAMILTON :: ALONSO :: VETTEL :: RAIKKONEN :: RICCIARDO :: VERSTAPPEN
BOTTAS :: MAGNUSSEN :: OCON :: SAINZ :: PEREZ :: VANDOORNE :: HULKENBERG
GROSJEAN :: GASLY :: ERICSON :: LECLERC :: STROLL :: SEROTKIN :: HARTLEY


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Aug 12, 2019 3:40 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Feb 18, 2015 5:38 pm
Posts: 2114
Location: Miami, Florida
sandman1347 wrote:
For me, the claim that Alonso has been better in more years is false. They raced on the grid together for 12 years and I'd say that maybe 4 or 5 of them you could claim Alonso performed better. I'd say 2008, 2011 and 2013 are the only definite ones and many would say 2012 as well. Beyond that, Hamilton has been better every year. Maybe 2016 is a year where you can also point to Alonso in the matchup. It's a big stretch but things went poorly for Hamilton that year and it was perhaps Alonso's best year with the McLaren/Honda team.

Overall Hamilton has had the better career. He has done better with his championship opportunities and he has had a MUCH better impact on the teams he has raced for. That's my opinion.

Agree with everything except 2012… Hamilton should have won that championship, but his team let him down on multiple occasions via fumbling pit stops which cost him wins that easily cost him the championship, and he was rather impressive, in that the McLaren wasn’t the best in the field and was arguably the third best car that season. So I wouldn’t say Alonso drove better in that season.

_________________
HAMILTON :: ALONSO :: VETTEL :: RAIKKONEN :: RICCIARDO :: VERSTAPPEN
BOTTAS :: MAGNUSSEN :: OCON :: SAINZ :: PEREZ :: VANDOORNE :: HULKENBERG
GROSJEAN :: GASLY :: ERICSON :: LECLERC :: STROLL :: SEROTKIN :: HARTLEY


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Aug 12, 2019 7:21 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Apr 05, 2009 5:52 am
Posts: 2803
Nothing. He is already there.

_________________
Where I'm going, I don't need roads


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Aug 12, 2019 11:50 am 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 32145
Schumacher forever#1 wrote:
Alienturnedhuman wrote:
Whether or not Hamilton sits near the top of the contenders for the GOAT is one that will go on long after he retires and can never truly be answered because all F1 drivers compete in different conditions and against different competitors.

However the notion that losing 2016 to Rosberg should automatically exclude him is a ridiculous idea and seems to just be designed to have a go to metric to say he's ineligible. It's almost as if people have forgotten what happened in that season.

Hamilton's most dominant title was in 2015 when he wrapped it up early. Yet in 2016, Hamilton received an even higher score in the team principal rankings, with Rosberg only third.

https://www.autosport.com/f1/news/12732 ... est-driver

That's because Hamilton still significantly outperformed Rosberg that season and the reason he lost was mostly circumstantial.

If you are going to have a discussion about who is the greatest of all time, for it to have any merit, it requires some actual depth to the research. Simply looking up a few basic common knowledge stats and quoting them without context doesn't really give much weight to the opinion they are meant to be supporting.


I don't think many will disagree with you in that, when you account for luck in that season, Hamilton would have won that championship season. I think the problem more comes with how great people view Rosberg to be, and how much Hamilton struggled with outright beating him in the years they were together. Considering the fact that a 42 year old Schumacher I believe outraced Rosberg 7-3 in 2012, for Hamilton to be considered in the same bracket as someone like Michael, maybe he shouldn't have struggled so much in beating Rosberg in their time as teammates. For me, Rosberg was never a tier one driver and would have been beaten by Alonso, Vettel and probably Ricciardo in a similar fashion as Hamilton. Someone's perception of Hamilton's greatness in his dominating period in Formula One should mainly come down to how he performed against his teammates, and how good we believe his teammates are.

In my view, Hamilton should go down as the best driver from 2014/2015 to present. His maturity in handling the title fight with Vettel is probably the most impressive thing we've seen from him. However, I still have Alonso firmly as the best driver from 2005 up to the Mercedes era. The only thing holding him back from having a dozen page thread about his ability to be considered an all-time great is his misfortune in not having been in a championship winning car for nearly all of his career. His ability to dominate teammates such as Raikkonen and Button (who Hamilton also didn't beat comfortably) is further proof of his abilities towards the latter part of his career.

If two drivers were picked as being an all time great of this generation, then I would likely pick Alonso and Hamilton, unless Vettel manages to pull off something special in the next few years.

Alonso didn't beat Button in 2015 and only started really beating him convincingly in 2016 after Button announced his retirement during the season and then he mentally checked out, Button admitted later it had been a mistake to announce his retirement during the season.

When you question what teammates did Hamilton beat then I have to ask what teammates did the likes of both Alonso and Vettel beat, it's no coincidence that Alonso's toughest teammate post Hamilton was Button, an ex Hamilton teammate.

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

2013: 5th Place
2014: Champion
2015: 3rd Place
2016: 4th Place

2017: 9th Place
2018: 7th place
2019: Currently 23rd

Wins: Canada 2018, Abu Dhabi 2017
Podiums: (8)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Aug 12, 2019 12:02 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat Jan 28, 2012 4:13 pm
Posts: 15603
pokerman wrote:
Schumacher forever#1 wrote:
Alienturnedhuman wrote:
Whether or not Hamilton sits near the top of the contenders for the GOAT is one that will go on long after he retires and can never truly be answered because all F1 drivers compete in different conditions and against different competitors.

However the notion that losing 2016 to Rosberg should automatically exclude him is a ridiculous idea and seems to just be designed to have a go to metric to say he's ineligible. It's almost as if people have forgotten what happened in that season.

Hamilton's most dominant title was in 2015 when he wrapped it up early. Yet in 2016, Hamilton received an even higher score in the team principal rankings, with Rosberg only third.

https://www.autosport.com/f1/news/12732 ... est-driver

That's because Hamilton still significantly outperformed Rosberg that season and the reason he lost was mostly circumstantial.

If you are going to have a discussion about who is the greatest of all time, for it to have any merit, it requires some actual depth to the research. Simply looking up a few basic common knowledge stats and quoting them without context doesn't really give much weight to the opinion they are meant to be supporting.


I don't think many will disagree with you in that, when you account for luck in that season, Hamilton would have won that championship season. I think the problem more comes with how great people view Rosberg to be, and how much Hamilton struggled with outright beating him in the years they were together. Considering the fact that a 42 year old Schumacher I believe outraced Rosberg 7-3 in 2012, for Hamilton to be considered in the same bracket as someone like Michael, maybe he shouldn't have struggled so much in beating Rosberg in their time as teammates. For me, Rosberg was never a tier one driver and would have been beaten by Alonso, Vettel and probably Ricciardo in a similar fashion as Hamilton. Someone's perception of Hamilton's greatness in his dominating period in Formula One should mainly come down to how he performed against his teammates, and how good we believe his teammates are.

In my view, Hamilton should go down as the best driver from 2014/2015 to present. His maturity in handling the title fight with Vettel is probably the most impressive thing we've seen from him. However, I still have Alonso firmly as the best driver from 2005 up to the Mercedes era. The only thing holding him back from having a dozen page thread about his ability to be considered an all-time great is his misfortune in not having been in a championship winning car for nearly all of his career. His ability to dominate teammates such as Raikkonen and Button (who Hamilton also didn't beat comfortably) is further proof of his abilities towards the latter part of his career.

If two drivers were picked as being an all time great of this generation, then I would likely pick Alonso and Hamilton, unless Vettel manages to pull off something special in the next few years.

Alonso didn't beat Button in 2015 and only started really beating him convincingly in 2016 after Button announced his retirement during the season and then he mentally checked out, Button admitted later it had been a mistake to announce his retirement during the season.

When you question what teammates did Hamilton beat then I have to ask what teammates did the likes of both Alonso and Vettel beat, it's no coincidence that Alonso's toughest teammate post Hamilton was Button, an ex Hamilton teammate.

It is impossible to compare the Mclaren drivers in 2015. It was so rare that neither had an issue. Who knows how they stacked up that year.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Aug 12, 2019 12:05 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 32145
j man wrote:
sandman1347 wrote:
j man wrote:
sandman1347 wrote:
j man wrote:
:thumbup:

Unfortunately, for me (and I suspect, many others) Lewis would need to go back in time and do much more to convince the world he was better than Alonso. That he is one of the all time greats is without question, but not even eclipsing Schumacher's records would put him at the very top in my opinion. He just hasn't stood out from his peers in the way that the likes of Schumacher, Clark and Fangio did.

This makes almost no sense at all. So we must simply assume that Alonso was actually the best and Lewis must prove beyond any doubt that he was considerably better otherwise the assumption stands? This lopsided thinking is the real issue here. Let's not even mention the fact that it completely ignores the reality that Lewis beat Alonso as a teammate while in his rookie season!

Schumacher? Was he better than his peers throughout his career? I think so but I also think that he never had to actually compete against his teammates. The first teammate that Michael actually had to compete with and who he was not given status above, was Nico Rosberg (who he promptly lost to 3 years running). There is a palpable irony to people claiming that Hamilton only winning 3 years out of 4 against a driver that beat Schumacher 3 years out of 3 is what disqualifies Lewis from being the all time greatest.

What I see more and more of as Lewis inches towards eclipsing the all-time records, is people trying to take away from his accomplishments as well as his current standing as the top driver in the sport. As soon as Max gave people a plausible argument that he could be on par with Hamilton; we've had people tripping over themselves to prop him up above Hamilton. There is a stark contrast between some of the same people who wouldn't place Hamilton above Alonso even after Lewis bested him as a teammate (something which Max certainly has not done with Lewis) and even after Lewis won multiple championships (again, something which Max certainly has yet to accomplish). So rather than having to actually prove it; some people are willing to give Max that status just based on their own "opinion". Lewis, on the other hand, can actually deliver the results, the wins, the titles year after year after year but people look for that one sliver of doubt to hold up to say that he hasn't fully established it. It's so lopsided as to be laughable.

What's obvious is that the traditional motorsports fans have never warmed to Lewis and do not want him to be acknowledged as the best. These opinion-based things are where they attempt to influence that. I think Lewis is seen as an outsider. As someone else mentioned in this thread, it's not just about his skin color. It's about the fact that he hangs out in different circles, dresses differently, listens to different music, etc. I think there are people in motorsports who perceive him winning to be akin to an outsider coming into the competition and besting all of the people who actually belong.

Bottom line; all of the subjective posturing and all of the politics don't change the reality that he has achieved more than almost anyone in the sport. The 6th championship is starting to look like a certainty and the 91 wins are very close now. I don't think there's much more he can do to be the greatest. To hell with the so called "opinions" of people who simply don't like him.

No we are not supposed to just assume Alonso was the best of his time, we conclude he was the best based on watching his career. At least that is what I have done. I agree though that Lewis is currently the best in the field and that Verstappen still has much more to prove to be considered at the same level. I wrote something to that effect on another thread recently.

Your lengthy rant in response to my post is unnecessary. I sense we are in agreement about Hamilton's ability, our difference of opinion is in regard to Alonso's.

I think it's a bit of both actually. I simply don't see an objective way to conclude that Alonso was the better driver of the two. I can agree to disagree and I actually do rate Alonso above all of the other contemporaries of that era. I rate him above Vettel and above the likes of Raikkonen, Button or Rosberg. For me though, at some point, the Alonso perspective became totally distorted and I actually believe it has a lot to do with Hamilton. Alonso became the ultimate straw-man because he didn't have the car to compete at the front and it became a game of "Alonso would have done ____" where no matter what Lewis accomplished or how many titles he won, the Alonso crowd would simply assert that Alonso would have done even better. They would make these assertions despite the fact that Alonso has had ups and downs in his career just like everyone else and several times came up short when the title was within his grasp.

The new driver who people are starting to do that with is Max and, again, I think it has a lot to do with Lewis. I'm not trying to paint everyone with the same brush and I am not saying that this is your personal motivation but there are some fans out there who essentially want to find anyone but Lewis to acknowledge as the #1. This tends to manifest itself with a combination of two behaviors. The first is finding imperfections (even if minuscule) with Lewis's performances or seasons (even championship seasons or race wins). The second component is spinning a fiction about what some other driver would do in the same situation (usually this fiction has this other driver performing perfectly).

I think a lot of the basis for Alonso being rated higher comes from their relative performances in the Red Bull / Vettel championship years, as that was when both were competing at the front in roughly similarly-paced cars for a period of several years. Alonso's performances in the 2nd/3rd/4th best car were better than Hamilton's over that period, in fact he outscored him in all four years, and I don't think a convincing case could be made for Alonso having had better cars. Hamilton was also much more hot-headed and error-prone in his early years than Alonso was, and this is despite Hamilton entering the sport with more high-level racing experience.

The main difference I see between the two of them at their peak is consistency. Hamilton tends to go missing on a few race weekends each year where he just can't get comfortable with the car for whatever reason, and this just didn't seem to happen to Alonso who seemed to maximise the car's result in every race. This was most evident in the 2012 season where he put together a title challenge in a car in which his team mate struggled to get to Q3 most of the time and scored 2 podiums all season. I don't believe Hamilton could have done what Alonso did that year.

I would argue that in 2010 Hamilton was better than Alonso, Ferrari being the marginally better car, we soon forget the host of mistakes that Alonso made in the first part of the season, 2011 obviously not a good year for Hamilton but in 2012 was back on it again but seriously let down by his team.

Another factor brought forward by Sandman is that unlike Hamilton, Alonso had #1 status, he never had races compromised by his teammate and his teammate was always used whenever possible to help him, the contrast to Hamilton is highlighted in 2012 when despite leading the WDC so much focus was devoted to Button amid Button's insistence that he would never be a #2 driver no matter the circumstance.

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

2013: 5th Place
2014: Champion
2015: 3rd Place
2016: 4th Place

2017: 9th Place
2018: 7th place
2019: Currently 23rd

Wins: Canada 2018, Abu Dhabi 2017
Podiums: (8)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Aug 12, 2019 12:07 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 32145
j man wrote:
sandman1347 wrote:
Schumacher forever#1 wrote:
Alienturnedhuman wrote:
Whether or not Hamilton sits near the top of the contenders for the GOAT is one that will go on long after he retires and can never truly be answered because all F1 drivers compete in different conditions and against different competitors.

However the notion that losing 2016 to Rosberg should automatically exclude him is a ridiculous idea and seems to just be designed to have a go to metric to say he's ineligible. It's almost as if people have forgotten what happened in that season.

Hamilton's most dominant title was in 2015 when he wrapped it up early. Yet in 2016, Hamilton received an even higher score in the team principal rankings, with Rosberg only third.

https://www.autosport.com/f1/news/12732 ... est-driver

That's because Hamilton still significantly outperformed Rosberg that season and the reason he lost was mostly circumstantial.

If you are going to have a discussion about who is the greatest of all time, for it to have any merit, it requires some actual depth to the research. Simply looking up a few basic common knowledge stats and quoting them without context doesn't really give much weight to the opinion they are meant to be supporting.


I don't think many will disagree with you in that, when you account for luck in that season, Hamilton would have won that championship season. I think the problem more comes with how great people view Rosberg to be, and how much Hamilton struggled with outright beating him in the years they were together. Considering the fact that a 42 year old Schumacher I believe outraced Rosberg 7-3 in 2012, for Hamilton to be considered in the same bracket as someone like Michael, maybe he shouldn't have struggled so much in beating Rosberg in their time as teammates. For me, Rosberg was never a tier one driver and would have been beaten by Alonso, Vettel and probably Ricciardo in a similar fashion as Hamilton. Someone's perception of Hamilton's greatness in his dominating period in Formula One should mainly come down to how he performed against his teammates, and how good we believe his teammates are.

In my view, Hamilton should go down as the best driver from 2014/2015 to present. His maturity in handling the title fight with Vettel is probably the most impressive thing we've seen from him. However, I still have Alonso firmly as the best driver from 2005 up to the Mercedes era. The only thing holding him back from having a dozen page thread about his ability to be considered an all-time great is his misfortune in not having been in a championship winning car for nearly all of his career. His ability to dominate teammates such as Raikkonen and Button (who Hamilton also didn't beat comfortably) is further proof of his abilities towards the latter part of his career.

If two drivers were picked as being an all time great of this generation, then I would likely pick Alonso and Hamilton, unless Vettel manages to pull off something special in the next few years.

Unfortunately this is innacurate. The gaps between Hamilton and Button were larger in qualifying than the gaps between Alonso and Button. Hamilton also beat Button 2 years to 1 wheres Alonso won one year and lost another in the points. I think both matchups flatter Button when looking only at points because factors outside of the drivers' control had a huge impact (especially in years like 2012 and 2015). There's also the fact that Hamilton faced Button as a young driver while Jenson was in his prime wheres Alonso faced Button while in his peak with Jenson arguably past his prime.

The argument that Alonso should be considered above Hamilton on the all-time list seems to suggest that Hamilton's performance against him in identical machinery should be ignored and Alonso's performance at Ferrari from 2010-2013 should be focused on. We are seeing right now the problem with comparing Hamilton and Alonso from that window of time. Hamilton spent that time with equal status against two WDC-caliber teammates in Button and Rosberg while Alonso spent that time with #1 status against a career #2 driver in Massa.

Right now we see with Vettel and Leclerc just how compromising it is to have to share a garage with another top driver and how much you lose out. Even when the car is strong, your strategic options will be limited by the requirement for fairness. Having your teammate in your back pocket is perhaps the most advantageous situation that a driver can have as it makes you look good regardless of what you actually achieve. Likewise, going up against strong competition in the same car does nothing for you unless you beat them and win the title ( a tall order which Lewis has accomplished multiple times).

When Hamilton and Button were together at McLaren I didn't see any "requirement for fairness" going on. There just wasn't the current Mercedes situation with one team strategist orchestrating the pitstops for both cars, both Hamilton and Button had their own race strategies and didn't seem to be on any sort of leash when racing each other wheel to wheel. Sure, it hampered Hamilton's title bids by having a second McLaren that could take points off him, but that second McLaren could (and did) take points off Alonso too. And conversely, having an uncompetitive #2 in the other Ferrari benefited Hamilton as well as benefiting Alonso, it's just one less car to compete with for the top places.

This is not true, the McLaren drivers were not allowed to undercut one another whereas Alonso had free strategy.

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

2013: 5th Place
2014: Champion
2015: 3rd Place
2016: 4th Place

2017: 9th Place
2018: 7th place
2019: Currently 23rd

Wins: Canada 2018, Abu Dhabi 2017
Podiums: (8)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Aug 12, 2019 12:15 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 32145
Lt. Drebin wrote:
OK, I will listen to the mods and just stick with the "What does Hamilton have to do to become an all time great". We are obviously not discussing his results, as he is en route to become the most successful driver of all time. So why he can not be greatest of all time? Because he can not be a proper role model, for the reasons of manners such as:

He boasts to be heavy drinker.
He insulted his town of origin calling it "slums".
He is known for several high profile traffic violations.
He is also known for row of apologies after acting and speaking immaturely or disrespectfully.
The "liegate" certainly does not help his cause.
He enjoys inflicting pain to others when he defeats them.

All black and white things, no opinions there.

All these together are making up a big picture of why he can not be greatest of all time. Because it takes more than good results to be GOAT - manners, conduct, behaviour.

On the other side, to his defense, some criticism that he received is, IMHO, not deserved. Some say that he should live in Britain and pay taxes there, to show support for his country of origin. It's actually very hard to find F1 drivers with such level of patriotism. One would admire Nigel Mansell for doing so, living on the Isle of Man. He can not be forced to live in accordance with British culture, if he does not accept it. Cultural affiliation should be his free choice. And if he ever chooses to drive under any other flag, all should respect that. Also, whoever hates him because he is identifying himself as black (he identifies so with his own right, even when he is 50% white), is downright wrong. Racism is a wrong path. The next thing, that he is nearly constantly winning races is also irrational reason for disliking. "The guy is good at steering wheels, I hate him" is also wrong.

Yes, its hard to define GOAT. F1 drivers these days are selfish people and one can list number of manners in other drivers that are not acceptable for a role model. Even one great Schumacher crashed twice with purpose in his opponents. Senna did it too. We would need to go down deep in history to find role models, which will then have results which are not comparable with those of Hamilton, Schumacher Prost and Senna.

Therefore I think that it is impossible to define and choose GOAT. All thing we can do is to have mathematical standings in numbers, which are beyond discussion, and our personal opinions.

I have to wonder what has that got to do with the subject itself rather than perhaps you don't like him?

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

2013: 5th Place
2014: Champion
2015: 3rd Place
2016: 4th Place

2017: 9th Place
2018: 7th place
2019: Currently 23rd

Wins: Canada 2018, Abu Dhabi 2017
Podiums: (8)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Aug 12, 2019 12:31 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 32145
mikeyg123 wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Schumacher forever#1 wrote:
Alienturnedhuman wrote:
Whether or not Hamilton sits near the top of the contenders for the GOAT is one that will go on long after he retires and can never truly be answered because all F1 drivers compete in different conditions and against different competitors.

However the notion that losing 2016 to Rosberg should automatically exclude him is a ridiculous idea and seems to just be designed to have a go to metric to say he's ineligible. It's almost as if people have forgotten what happened in that season.

Hamilton's most dominant title was in 2015 when he wrapped it up early. Yet in 2016, Hamilton received an even higher score in the team principal rankings, with Rosberg only third.

https://www.autosport.com/f1/news/12732 ... est-driver

That's because Hamilton still significantly outperformed Rosberg that season and the reason he lost was mostly circumstantial.

If you are going to have a discussion about who is the greatest of all time, for it to have any merit, it requires some actual depth to the research. Simply looking up a few basic common knowledge stats and quoting them without context doesn't really give much weight to the opinion they are meant to be supporting.


I don't think many will disagree with you in that, when you account for luck in that season, Hamilton would have won that championship season. I think the problem more comes with how great people view Rosberg to be, and how much Hamilton struggled with outright beating him in the years they were together. Considering the fact that a 42 year old Schumacher I believe outraced Rosberg 7-3 in 2012, for Hamilton to be considered in the same bracket as someone like Michael, maybe he shouldn't have struggled so much in beating Rosberg in their time as teammates. For me, Rosberg was never a tier one driver and would have been beaten by Alonso, Vettel and probably Ricciardo in a similar fashion as Hamilton. Someone's perception of Hamilton's greatness in his dominating period in Formula One should mainly come down to how he performed against his teammates, and how good we believe his teammates are.

In my view, Hamilton should go down as the best driver from 2014/2015 to present. His maturity in handling the title fight with Vettel is probably the most impressive thing we've seen from him. However, I still have Alonso firmly as the best driver from 2005 up to the Mercedes era. The only thing holding him back from having a dozen page thread about his ability to be considered an all-time great is his misfortune in not having been in a championship winning car for nearly all of his career. His ability to dominate teammates such as Raikkonen and Button (who Hamilton also didn't beat comfortably) is further proof of his abilities towards the latter part of his career.

If two drivers were picked as being an all time great of this generation, then I would likely pick Alonso and Hamilton, unless Vettel manages to pull off something special in the next few years.

Alonso didn't beat Button in 2015 and only started really beating him convincingly in 2016 after Button announced his retirement during the season and then he mentally checked out, Button admitted later it had been a mistake to announce his retirement during the season.

When you question what teammates did Hamilton beat then I have to ask what teammates did the likes of both Alonso and Vettel beat, it's no coincidence that Alonso's toughest teammate post Hamilton was Button, an ex Hamilton teammate.

It is impossible to compare the Mclaren drivers in 2015. It was so rare that neither had an issue. Who knows how they stacked up that year.

They often qualified close to one another so you want to believe that was more luck than invention?

Even in 2016 especially the last third were Button went somewhat AWOL after he announced his retirement, the stats don't match up to Hamilton's stats against Button. In comparison to Hamilton I do believe Alonso's worth was a little inflated by having weak teammates.

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

2013: 5th Place
2014: Champion
2015: 3rd Place
2016: 4th Place

2017: 9th Place
2018: 7th place
2019: Currently 23rd

Wins: Canada 2018, Abu Dhabi 2017
Podiums: (8)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Aug 12, 2019 12:39 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat Jan 28, 2012 4:13 pm
Posts: 15603
pokerman wrote:
mikeyg123 wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Schumacher forever#1 wrote:
Alienturnedhuman wrote:
Whether or not Hamilton sits near the top of the contenders for the GOAT is one that will go on long after he retires and can never truly be answered because all F1 drivers compete in different conditions and against different competitors.

However the notion that losing 2016 to Rosberg should automatically exclude him is a ridiculous idea and seems to just be designed to have a go to metric to say he's ineligible. It's almost as if people have forgotten what happened in that season.

Hamilton's most dominant title was in 2015 when he wrapped it up early. Yet in 2016, Hamilton received an even higher score in the team principal rankings, with Rosberg only third.

https://www.autosport.com/f1/news/12732 ... est-driver

That's because Hamilton still significantly outperformed Rosberg that season and the reason he lost was mostly circumstantial.

If you are going to have a discussion about who is the greatest of all time, for it to have any merit, it requires some actual depth to the research. Simply looking up a few basic common knowledge stats and quoting them without context doesn't really give much weight to the opinion they are meant to be supporting.


I don't think many will disagree with you in that, when you account for luck in that season, Hamilton would have won that championship season. I think the problem more comes with how great people view Rosberg to be, and how much Hamilton struggled with outright beating him in the years they were together. Considering the fact that a 42 year old Schumacher I believe outraced Rosberg 7-3 in 2012, for Hamilton to be considered in the same bracket as someone like Michael, maybe he shouldn't have struggled so much in beating Rosberg in their time as teammates. For me, Rosberg was never a tier one driver and would have been beaten by Alonso, Vettel and probably Ricciardo in a similar fashion as Hamilton. Someone's perception of Hamilton's greatness in his dominating period in Formula One should mainly come down to how he performed against his teammates, and how good we believe his teammates are.

In my view, Hamilton should go down as the best driver from 2014/2015 to present. His maturity in handling the title fight with Vettel is probably the most impressive thing we've seen from him. However, I still have Alonso firmly as the best driver from 2005 up to the Mercedes era. The only thing holding him back from having a dozen page thread about his ability to be considered an all-time great is his misfortune in not having been in a championship winning car for nearly all of his career. His ability to dominate teammates such as Raikkonen and Button (who Hamilton also didn't beat comfortably) is further proof of his abilities towards the latter part of his career.

If two drivers were picked as being an all time great of this generation, then I would likely pick Alonso and Hamilton, unless Vettel manages to pull off something special in the next few years.

Alonso didn't beat Button in 2015 and only started really beating him convincingly in 2016 after Button announced his retirement during the season and then he mentally checked out, Button admitted later it had been a mistake to announce his retirement during the season.

When you question what teammates did Hamilton beat then I have to ask what teammates did the likes of both Alonso and Vettel beat, it's no coincidence that Alonso's toughest teammate post Hamilton was Button, an ex Hamilton teammate.

It is impossible to compare the Mclaren drivers in 2015. It was so rare that neither had an issue. Who knows how they stacked up that year.

They often qualified close to one another so you want to believe that was more luck than invention?

Even in 2016 especially the last third were Button went somewhat AWOL after he announced his retirement, the stats don't match up to Hamilton's stats against Button. In comparison to Hamilton I do believe Alonso's worth was a little inflated by having weak teammates.


I don't think it's luck. I just don't think they were driving in comparative situations a lot of the time. Did Alonso have weak team mates or did he make good team mates look weak? There was a very common trend of drivers being highly rated before partnering with Alonso. Fissichella, Massa and Raikkonen were all drivers who were supposedly going to expose Alonso. All of whom were very highly rated at the time when they became team mates with Alonso. That could be a coincidence, it could not be.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Aug 12, 2019 1:07 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Nov 09, 2005 8:26 am
Posts: 743
Being born earlier...

_________________
As my brother said : "I've got the brain of a four year old. I'll bet he was glad to be rid of it".


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Aug 12, 2019 1:34 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 32145
mikeyg123 wrote:
pokerman wrote:
mikeyg123 wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Schumacher forever#1 wrote:
I don't think many will disagree with you in that, when you account for luck in that season, Hamilton would have won that championship season. I think the problem more comes with how great people view Rosberg to be, and how much Hamilton struggled with outright beating him in the years they were together. Considering the fact that a 42 year old Schumacher I believe outraced Rosberg 7-3 in 2012, for Hamilton to be considered in the same bracket as someone like Michael, maybe he shouldn't have struggled so much in beating Rosberg in their time as teammates. For me, Rosberg was never a tier one driver and would have been beaten by Alonso, Vettel and probably Ricciardo in a similar fashion as Hamilton. Someone's perception of Hamilton's greatness in his dominating period in Formula One should mainly come down to how he performed against his teammates, and how good we believe his teammates are.

In my view, Hamilton should go down as the best driver from 2014/2015 to present. His maturity in handling the title fight with Vettel is probably the most impressive thing we've seen from him. However, I still have Alonso firmly as the best driver from 2005 up to the Mercedes era. The only thing holding him back from having a dozen page thread about his ability to be considered an all-time great is his misfortune in not having been in a championship winning car for nearly all of his career. His ability to dominate teammates such as Raikkonen and Button (who Hamilton also didn't beat comfortably) is further proof of his abilities towards the latter part of his career.

If two drivers were picked as being an all time great of this generation, then I would likely pick Alonso and Hamilton, unless Vettel manages to pull off something special in the next few years.

Alonso didn't beat Button in 2015 and only started really beating him convincingly in 2016 after Button announced his retirement during the season and then he mentally checked out, Button admitted later it had been a mistake to announce his retirement during the season.

When you question what teammates did Hamilton beat then I have to ask what teammates did the likes of both Alonso and Vettel beat, it's no coincidence that Alonso's toughest teammate post Hamilton was Button, an ex Hamilton teammate.

It is impossible to compare the Mclaren drivers in 2015. It was so rare that neither had an issue. Who knows how they stacked up that year.

They often qualified close to one another so you want to believe that was more luck than invention?

Even in 2016 especially the last third were Button went somewhat AWOL after he announced his retirement, the stats don't match up to Hamilton's stats against Button. In comparison to Hamilton I do believe Alonso's worth was a little inflated by having weak teammates.


I don't think it's luck. I just don't think they were driving in comparative situations a lot of the time. Did Alonso have weak team mates or did he make good team mates look weak? There was a very common trend of drivers being highly rated before partnering with Alonso. Fissichella, Massa and Raikkonen were all drivers who were supposedly going to expose Alonso. All of whom were very highly rated at the time when they became team mates with Alonso. That could be a coincidence, it could not be.

Fisichella who couldn't beat Kovalianen, the next 2 years Heikki got destroyed by Hamilton, Massa who got dominated in qualifying by Bottas and lost every single year to him, Kimi who couldn't hold a candle to Vettel whilst Hamilton was beating Vettel in similar performing cars.

For those who believe Alonso is the best driver then 2007 and 2015 has to be rationalised it seems, we see this in the first part of the thread in 2014 explaining away the 2007 season and quite recently I've seen this to explain the 2015 season because let's not forget it was not only in qualifying that Alonso couldn't beat Button over the season but Button also scored more points.

The rationale for this was to put Alonso in a group of drivers in the midfield that are compromised with inferior tyres in the race to their teammates because of qualifying better, I guess they go on to the next level unlike their teammate?

This to explain why Button scored more points than Alonso, only thing is though that Alonso didn't do better than Button in qualifying.

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

2013: 5th Place
2014: Champion
2015: 3rd Place
2016: 4th Place

2017: 9th Place
2018: 7th place
2019: Currently 23rd

Wins: Canada 2018, Abu Dhabi 2017
Podiums: (8)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Aug 12, 2019 1:43 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun May 25, 2008 7:55 pm
Posts: 6698
Harpo wrote:
Being born earlier...

A somewhat facetious but decidedly true statement. An interesting game to play for those who don't think Hamilton is up there with the best of all time is to ask them to name a driver who they would personally say should be ranked above him. From there, let's analyze both drivers and see whether there is actually a legitimate basis to hold that view. I think we often romanticize performers from the past.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Aug 12, 2019 1:59 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Nov 09, 2005 8:26 am
Posts: 743
sandman1347 wrote:
Harpo wrote:
Being born earlier...

A somewhat facetious but decidedly true statement. An interesting game to play for those who don't think Hamilton is up there with the best of all time is to ask them to name a driver who they would personally say should be ranked above him. From there, let's analyze both drivers and see whether there is actually a legitimate basis to hold that view. I think we often romanticize performers from the past.


I'm usually facetious but thoughtful... :-P
That said I really think that greatness is no more a subject in this environment. It's been killed by the business.

_________________
As my brother said : "I've got the brain of a four year old. I'll bet he was glad to be rid of it".


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Aug 12, 2019 2:09 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Aug 08, 2018 9:15 am
Posts: 138
specdecible wrote:
Now with the likes of Ricciardo and Bottas coming through I don't know if Hamilton is going to stand out against them, at this point in time he will be remembered as a champion possible multiple champion, but not an all time great.


Just reading through this thread. There were some pretty bad guesses from everyone but so far, this one hasn't aged too well eh!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Aug 12, 2019 4:34 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Feb 09, 2013 1:20 am
Posts: 1095
Lt. Drebin wrote:
OK, I will listen to the mods and just stick with the "What does Hamilton have to do to become an all time great". We are obviously not discussing his results, as he is en route to become the most successful driver of all time. So why he can not be greatest of all time? Because he can not be a proper role model, for the reasons of manners such as:

He boasts to be heavy drinker.
He insulted his town of origin calling it "slums".
He is known for several high profile traffic violations.
He is also known for row of apologies after acting and speaking immaturely or disrespectfully.
The "liegate" certainly does not help his cause.
He enjoys inflicting pain to others when he defeats them.

All black and white things, no opinions there.

All these together are making up a big picture of why he can not be greatest of all time. Because it takes more than good results to be GOAT - manners, conduct, behaviour.

On the other side, to his defense, some criticism that he received is, IMHO, not deserved. Some say that he should live in Britain and pay taxes there, to show support for his country of origin. It's actually very hard to find F1 drivers with such level of patriotism. One would admire Nigel Mansell for doing so, living on the Isle of Man. He can not be forced to live in accordance with British culture, if he does not accept it. Cultural affiliation should be his free choice. And if he ever chooses to drive under any other flag, all should respect that. Also, whoever hates him because he is identifying himself as black (he identifies so with his own right, even when he is 50% white), is downright wrong. Racism is a wrong path. The next thing, that he is nearly constantly winning races is also irrational reason for disliking. "The guy is good at steering wheels, I hate him" is also wrong.

Yes, its hard to define GOAT. F1 drivers these days are selfish people and one can list number of manners in other drivers that are not acceptable for a role model. Even one great Schumacher crashed twice with purpose in his opponents. Senna did it too. We would need to go down deep in history to find role models, which will then have results which are not comparable with those of Hamilton, Schumacher Prost and Senna.

Therefore I think that it is impossible to define and choose GOAT. All thing we can do is to have mathematical standings in numbers, which are beyond discussion, and our personal opinions.


Jolyon Palmer is a great role model off the track, lived in England too, just down the road from me.

Isle of man is a tax haven by the way. Mansell lived there for the duration of F1 his career before moving to another British tax haven, Jersey. Once his big pay days stopped, he moved back to the mainland.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Aug 12, 2019 5:02 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 32145
Junglist wrote:
specdecible wrote:
Now with the likes of Ricciardo and Bottas coming through I don't know if Hamilton is going to stand out against them, at this point in time he will be remembered as a champion possible multiple champion, but not an all time great.


Just reading through this thread. There were some pretty bad guesses from everyone but so far, this one hasn't aged too well eh!

Hindsight is always correct, people perhaps forget how highly rated Bottas was and Ferrari were actually looking to sign him but got put off by what it was going to cost them to buy out his contract, it eventually cost Mercedes $12M to do just that.

Ricciardo is still highly rated but all this was pre-Verstappen.

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

2013: 5th Place
2014: Champion
2015: 3rd Place
2016: 4th Place

2017: 9th Place
2018: 7th place
2019: Currently 23rd

Wins: Canada 2018, Abu Dhabi 2017
Podiums: (8)


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic

All times are UTC


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot], G926, Glasnost and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group