planetf1.com

It is currently Tue Aug 14, 2018 7:02 pm

All times are UTC


Forum rules


Please read the forum rules



Post new topic Reply to topic
Author Message
PostPosted: Sun Aug 05, 2018 6:13 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun May 25, 2008 7:55 pm
Posts: 5020
mikeyg123 wrote:
sandman1347 wrote:
Zoue wrote:
sandman1347 wrote:
I still think Alonso is a top-shelf driver but I don't know how you can say that Lewis Hamilton isn't the #1 guy right now. When you literally win 50% of the races over a 5 year span of time, that has to count for something, doesn't it? Certainly it must count for more than what some fans think Alonso would have accomplished if he were up front.

Winning 50% of the races when for at least 60% of the time the only opposition was your team mate? How should that weigh up against the number of times that Alonso has beaten his team mate? Why should it count for more just because Hamilton's car also had the potential - some would say guarantee - of beating all the other cars, too?

Not taking anything away from the fact that Hamilton has performed well, but in a non-spec series winning races doesn't in any way prove a driver is better than another in different machinery.

Hamilton's teammates have been better than Alonso's during that time. I rate Jenson Button but that matchup with him and Alonso was 1-1 anyway (and the car was so bad that it's hard to even take anything away from that). Hamilton's opposition from other teams has been tougher as well these last two years. Lewis is racing against the likes of Vettel, Rosberg, Bottas, Ricciardo, Verstappen and Raikkonen while Alonso is racing against guys like Vandoorne, Ericson, Sainz, Perez, Ocon, etc. Not saying that Alonso is not top-shelf but at some stage, actual events have to matter don't they?

The fact that Hamilton has been dominant for such an extended period of time must matter on some level. It can't always be about "wouldas, couldas and shouldas". Even if you try to compare Hamilton and Alonso directly, the one sample you have is 2007; where Hamilton beat Alonso in his rookie year. I think ignoring or writing off Hamilton's success and instead giving Alonso credit for what you think he could do in a different situation is just not a balanced way of looking at things.


But it is the only way you can actually compare the two.

There's some truth to that sure. You certainly can't compare their results right now, when Hamilton is in a WDC-capable car and Alonso is in a car that struggles to even score points. That said, we certainly didn't give other drivers such a generous consideration while Michael Schumacher was dominating nor when any other dominant performer was racking up their achievements. Only for Alonso have I seen this behavior of giving him years of credit for what some people think he would accomplish in a better car. And Fernando is not the only top driver to find himself exiled to a noncompetitive team while still in his prime.

Emerson Fittipaldi is an even more extreme example of this. After winning two championships (at that time he was the youngest ever WDC - a record broken by Alonso actually) Fittipaldi left McLaren at 29 years of age and started his own team. From that point on, he never won anything in F1. Did people give him the benefit of the doubt? Did they still hold his name in higher regard than the likes of Lauda or Hunt despite the fact that he was no longer at the front and winning? No they did not. Regardless of what Fittipaldi had done in the past, he did not get some special dispensation to maintain his status as the #1 driver without actually having to prove himself under the crucible of a championship battle.

I wish Alonso's move to McLaren worked out better and that he had another chance to fight at the front but it's not right to give him credit for hypothetical achievements and not give Hamilton credit for actual achievements that are reaching historic levels.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Aug 05, 2018 7:59 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2012 10:39 am
Posts: 23176
sandman1347 wrote:
Zoue wrote:
sandman1347 wrote:
Zoue wrote:
sandman1347 wrote:
Based on what? Alonso has been living on past reputation for half of a decade now. As far as I know, he's never been teamed with Vettel so I think it's speculative to claim that he's better. Alonso has been teamed with Hamilton and Hamilton had the upper-hand despite the fact that it was his first season in F1 so it's quite dubious to claim that Alonso is better than Hamilton. It seems that driving in a lousy car has enhanced Alonso's reputation among some fans. As though he would never make any mistakes or have any bad luck if he were up front right now. I think that's nonsense to be blunt. He would be driving against drivers of a much higher caliber if he were up front and the margin for error would become a lot slimmer. I think Alonso is great and absolutely top-shelf but I do get kind of sick of these exaggerated assertions.

He's still producing good results given his machinery and putting other drivers in the shade, so I can't imagine why you would think he's only living on past reputation. Kimi's often slated for not producing now, yet his past reputation was arguably just as high as Alonso's at one point. The reason they are viewed differently now is because of how they are driving now, not because of how they used to.

I still think Alonso is a top-shelf driver but I don't know how you can say that Lewis Hamilton isn't the #1 guy right now. When you literally win 50% of the races over a 5 year span of time, that has to count for something, doesn't it? Certainly it must count for more than what some fans think Alonso would have accomplished if he were up front.

Winning 50% of the races when for at least 60% of the time the only opposition was your team mate? How should that weigh up against the number of times that Alonso has beaten his team mate? Why should it count for more just because Hamilton's car also had the potential - some would say guarantee - of beating all the other cars, too?

Not taking anything away from the fact that Hamilton has performed well, but in a non-spec series winning races doesn't in any way prove a driver is better than another in different machinery.

Hamilton's teammates have been better than Alonso's during that time. I rate Jenson Button but that matchup with him and Alonso was 1-1 anyway (and the car was so bad that it's hard to even take anything away from that). Hamilton's opposition from other teams has been tougher as well these last two years. Lewis is racing against the likes of Vettel, Rosberg, Bottas, Ricciardo, Verstappen and Raikkonen while Alonso is racing against guys like Vandoorne, Ericson, Sainz, Perez, Ocon, etc. Not saying that Alonso is not top-shelf but at some stage, actual events have to matter don't they?

The fact that Hamilton has been dominant for such an extended period of time must matter on some level. It can't always be about "wouldas, couldas and shouldas". Even if you try to compare Hamilton and Alonso directly, the one sample you have is 2007; where Hamilton beat Alonso in his rookie year. I think ignoring or writing off Hamilton's success and instead giving Alonso credit for what you think he could do in a different situation is just not a balanced way of looking at things.

You can only work with the machinery you're given. And Alonso has generally done a sterling job in the machinery at his disposal. As has Hamilton, to be sure. But I don't see that Hamilton has had a tougher time of it than Alonso has, just a different one. We know they are both excellent drivers and both have excelled with the machinery they have had. I think it's virtually impossible to say with any certainty which driver is best right now and races won is not a fair or accurate representation of their relative performances


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Aug 06, 2018 10:17 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jul 28, 2013 3:36 pm
Posts: 4715
sandman1347 wrote:
Zoue wrote:
sandman1347 wrote:
F1_Ernie wrote:
Rockie wrote:

Why is it with Alonso, its about what he will do in other peoples car? Your assumption is based on the season going the same way and Alonso getting all the good results Vettel got and none of the bad.


Alonso is better than Vettel and Hamilton, I can't see him making the mistakes Vettel has made this year. Vettel is 24 points behind while his main rival has had a mechanical dnf, shows how costly his mistakes have been.

I'm sure if I said Alonso would be on more points than Hamilton it would be fine though ;)

Based on what? Alonso has been living on past reputation for half of a decade now. As far as I know, he's never been teamed with Vettel so I think it's speculative to claim that he's better. Alonso has been teamed with Hamilton and Hamilton had the upper-hand despite the fact that it was his first season in F1 so it's quite dubious to claim that Alonso is better than Hamilton. It seems that driving in a lousy car has enhanced Alonso's reputation among some fans. As though he would never make any mistakes or have any bad luck if he were up front right now. I think that's nonsense to be blunt. He would be driving against drivers of a much higher caliber if he were up front and the margin for error would become a lot slimmer. I think Alonso is great and absolutely top-shelf but I do get kind of sick of these exaggerated assertions.

He's still producing good results given his machinery and putting other drivers in the shade, so I can't imagine why you would think he's only living on past reputation. Kimi's often slated for not producing now, yet his past reputation was arguably just as high as Alonso's at one point. The reason they are viewed differently now is because of how they are driving now, not because of how they used to.

I still think Alonso is a top-shelf driver but I don't know how you can say that Lewis Hamilton isn't the #1 guy right now. When you literally win 50% of the races over a 5 year span of time, that has to count for something, doesn't it? Certainly it must count for more than what some fans think Alonso would have accomplished if he were up front.


It's the bad thing about non spec series but who else was in a position to win 50% of the races in the past 5 years? It's just Lewis and Rosberg so Lewis doing it isn't that surprising is it when the other quit after 3 of them to be fair. Using an accomplishment literally only he could achieve as the reason he can't be challenged for the No.1 sounds just as shaky as just assuming Alonso could've done the same or better.

During the previous 5 years to that there was plenty of people who felt Lewis was the best driver in F1 despite not winning 50% of the races and having the least stats of the top 3 at the time and finishing behind Alonso 4 years on the trot. It's a subjective thing.

On the later Fittipaldi point, his star waned because his form declined in 78/79 and he was getting beat by nobodies sitting next to him, if he'd maintained his form he'd have maintained his stature. Until Alonso visibly declines, makes more mistakes, more inconsistent pace and is getting beat by nobodies his star won't wane as there's no reason for it to just yet. And hopping into other series and being competitive also helps people believe he's still in his pomp.

_________________
"Clark came through at the end of the first lap so far ahead that we in the pits were convinced that the rest of the field must have been wiped out in an accident."
-Eddie Dennis, describing the dominance of Jim Clark in the Lotus 49 at Spa 1967


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: Google Adsense [Bot], owenmahamilton, wj_gibson 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