planetf1.com

It is currently Mon Apr 22, 2019 1:59 am

All times are UTC


Forum rules


Please read the forum rules



Post new topic This topic is locked, you cannot edit posts or make further replies.
Author Message
PostPosted: Mon Apr 08, 2019 10:43 am 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 30252
DOLOMITE wrote:
Zoue wrote:
DOLOMITE wrote:
Zoue wrote:

I think Alonso keeps delivering year on year with the equipment limitations he has, too. It's definitely not a one-sided equation.

Last year Hamilton drove very well but as has been pointed out he was helped somewhat by Vettel and Ferrari imploding.



Or another point of view - they couldn't operate at the level needed to beat Hamilton/Mercedes...all part of the sport.

Sure it's all part of the sport. I don't think I suggested otherwise? :?


point I was trying (and apparently failed!) to make was that applying and dealing with the pressure is part of being the best. Vettels is increasingly looking like a driverw ho will go down as cracking under pressure, wheres Hamilton much less so and is certainly a master of applying it.

So to say he was "helped out by it" I think does him and Mercedes a disservice. They applied the pressure, maximized points at all opportunities and came out on top. It's not like they inherited a bunch of wins while trundling round 50 seconds down in 3rd and 4th place.

Well I've seen the disservice go as far to suggest that Hamilton has been lucky these past 2 seasons.

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

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

2017: 9th Place
2018: 7th place
2019: Currently 32nd

Wins: Canada 2018, Abu Dhabi 2017
Podiums: (6)


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Best F1 driver ever?
PostPosted: Mon Apr 08, 2019 10:47 am 
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2012 10:39 am
Posts: 24693
pokerman wrote:
DOLOMITE wrote:
Zoue wrote:
DOLOMITE wrote:
Zoue wrote:

I think Alonso keeps delivering year on year with the equipment limitations he has, too. It's definitely not a one-sided equation.

Last year Hamilton drove very well but as has been pointed out he was helped somewhat by Vettel and Ferrari imploding.



Or another point of view - they couldn't operate at the level needed to beat Hamilton/Mercedes...all part of the sport.

Sure it's all part of the sport. I don't think I suggested otherwise? :?


point I was trying (and apparently failed!) to make was that applying and dealing with the pressure is part of being the best. Vettels is increasingly looking like a driverw ho will go down as cracking under pressure, wheres Hamilton much less so and is certainly a master of applying it.

So to say he was "helped out by it" I think does him and Mercedes a disservice. They applied the pressure, maximized points at all opportunities and came out on top. It's not like they inherited a bunch of wins while trundling round 50 seconds down in 3rd and 4th place.

Well I've seen the disservice go as far to suggest that Hamilton has been lucky these past 2 seasons.
He has been lucky. Not to win the title - he's driven well enough that he hasn't needed luck to contribute. But the comment that appears to have you all riled up was regarding the fact that these last two seasons whenever he's been at a disadvantage, for whatever reason, something has happened to bring him back in the game. Unless you're trying to suggest that last weekend's win had nothing to do with luck?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Best F1 driver ever?
PostPosted: Mon Apr 08, 2019 11:04 am 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 30252
Zoue wrote:
pokerman wrote:
DOLOMITE wrote:
Zoue wrote:
DOLOMITE wrote:
Or another point of view - they couldn't operate at the level needed to beat Hamilton/Mercedes...all part of the sport.

Sure it's all part of the sport. I don't think I suggested otherwise? :?


point I was trying (and apparently failed!) to make was that applying and dealing with the pressure is part of being the best. Vettels is increasingly looking like a driverw ho will go down as cracking under pressure, wheres Hamilton much less so and is certainly a master of applying it.

So to say he was "helped out by it" I think does him and Mercedes a disservice. They applied the pressure, maximized points at all opportunities and came out on top. It's not like they inherited a bunch of wins while trundling round 50 seconds down in 3rd and 4th place.

Well I've seen the disservice go as far to suggest that Hamilton has been lucky these past 2 seasons.
He has been lucky. Not to win the title - he's driven well enough that he hasn't needed luck to contribute. But the comment that appears to have you all riled up was regarding the fact that these last two seasons whenever he's been at a disadvantage, for whatever reason, something has happened to bring him back in the game. Unless you're trying to suggest that last weekend's win had nothing to do with luck?

The only luck Hamilton had was to prove himself better than Vettel, to be better in the wet than Vettel, now it's luck for one driver to prove himself better than another driver, It's luck for another driver to beat another driver in a slower car?

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

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

2017: 9th Place
2018: 7th place
2019: Currently 32nd

Wins: Canada 2018, Abu Dhabi 2017
Podiums: (6)


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Best F1 driver ever?
PostPosted: Mon Apr 08, 2019 11:44 am 
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2012 10:39 am
Posts: 24693
pokerman wrote:
Zoue wrote:
pokerman wrote:
DOLOMITE wrote:
Zoue wrote:
Sure it's all part of the sport. I don't think I suggested otherwise? :?


point I was trying (and apparently failed!) to make was that applying and dealing with the pressure is part of being the best. Vettels is increasingly looking like a driverw ho will go down as cracking under pressure, wheres Hamilton much less so and is certainly a master of applying it.

So to say he was "helped out by it" I think does him and Mercedes a disservice. They applied the pressure, maximized points at all opportunities and came out on top. It's not like they inherited a bunch of wins while trundling round 50 seconds down in 3rd and 4th place.

Well I've seen the disservice go as far to suggest that Hamilton has been lucky these past 2 seasons.
He has been lucky. Not to win the title - he's driven well enough that he hasn't needed luck to contribute. But the comment that appears to have you all riled up was regarding the fact that these last two seasons whenever he's been at a disadvantage, for whatever reason, something has happened to bring him back in the game. Unless you're trying to suggest that last weekend's win had nothing to do with luck?

The only luck Hamilton had was to prove himself better than Vettel, to be better in the wet than Vettel, now it's luck for one driver to prove himself better than another driver, It's luck for another driver to beat another driver in a slower car?

Hamilton was better than Vettel last year. There, is that unambiguous enough for you?

Back to last weekend: do you think Hamilton was fortunate that Leclerc had an engine issue? A simple yes or no will do


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Best F1 driver ever?
PostPosted: Mon Apr 08, 2019 11:46 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue May 05, 2009 11:31 am
Posts: 7049
pokerman wrote:
Zoue wrote:
pokerman wrote:
DOLOMITE wrote:
Zoue wrote:
Sure it's all part of the sport. I don't think I suggested otherwise? :?


point I was trying (and apparently failed!) to make was that applying and dealing with the pressure is part of being the best. Vettels is increasingly looking like a driverw ho will go down as cracking under pressure, wheres Hamilton much less so and is certainly a master of applying it.

So to say he was "helped out by it" I think does him and Mercedes a disservice. They applied the pressure, maximized points at all opportunities and came out on top. It's not like they inherited a bunch of wins while trundling round 50 seconds down in 3rd and 4th place.

Well I've seen the disservice go as far to suggest that Hamilton has been lucky these past 2 seasons.
He has been lucky. Not to win the title - he's driven well enough that he hasn't needed luck to contribute. But the comment that appears to have you all riled up was regarding the fact that these last two seasons whenever he's been at a disadvantage, for whatever reason, something has happened to bring him back in the game. Unless you're trying to suggest that last weekend's win had nothing to do with luck?

The only luck Hamilton had was to prove himself better than Vettel, to be better in the wet than Vettel, now it's luck for one driver to prove himself better than another driver, It's luck for another driver to beat another driver in a slower car?

Way to shift goal posts there. Having had some luck doesn't mean he was lucky to beat Vettel. You are getting confused. But yes, he has had some luck, like Baku, rain in Singapore or the fact that Ferrari got it wrong in a few races.

This does not detract from the fact that he also suffered DNF's due to mechanical reasons when Vettel didn't, nor that he was lucky to win the WDC.

In short, no one offended your favourite driver, ok?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Best F1 driver ever?
PostPosted: Mon Apr 08, 2019 11:55 am 
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2012 10:39 am
Posts: 24693
pokerman wrote:
Zoue wrote:
pokerman wrote:
DOLOMITE wrote:
Zoue wrote:
Sure it's all part of the sport. I don't think I suggested otherwise? :?


point I was trying (and apparently failed!) to make was that applying and dealing with the pressure is part of being the best. Vettels is increasingly looking like a driverw ho will go down as cracking under pressure, wheres Hamilton much less so and is certainly a master of applying it.

So to say he was "helped out by it" I think does him and Mercedes a disservice. They applied the pressure, maximized points at all opportunities and came out on top. It's not like they inherited a bunch of wins while trundling round 50 seconds down in 3rd and 4th place.

Well I've seen the disservice go as far to suggest that Hamilton has been lucky these past 2 seasons.
He has been lucky. Not to win the title - he's driven well enough that he hasn't needed luck to contribute. But the comment that appears to have you all riled up was regarding the fact that these last two seasons whenever he's been at a disadvantage, for whatever reason, something has happened to bring him back in the game. Unless you're trying to suggest that last weekend's win had nothing to do with luck?

The only luck Hamilton had was to prove himself better than Vettel, to be better in the wet than Vettel, now it's luck for one driver to prove himself better than another driver, It's luck for another driver to beat another driver in a slower car?

I think the slower car thing has been over-egged to the point of being farcical, certainly. Anyone would think Hamilton was driving a midfield car by some of the comments


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Best F1 driver ever?
PostPosted: Mon Apr 08, 2019 1:22 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Jul 20, 2015 4:37 pm
Posts: 586
Siao7 wrote:
Way to shift goal posts there. Having had some luck doesn't mean he was lucky to beat Vettel. You are getting confused. But yes, he has had some luck, like Baku, rain in Singapore or the fact that Ferrari got it wrong in a few races.

This does not detract from the fact that he also suffered DNF's due to mechanical reasons when Vettel didn't, nor that he was lucky to win the WDC.

In short, no one offended your favourite driver, ok?


I'm not quite following this. Why is he "lucky to win the WDC"? Vettel had equal tools to do the job. Vettel also had many instances of "luck" e.g. VSC win in Australia, or Mercedes having issues with their upgrades. Being better than your main competitor, exerting pressure, forcing your competitor to make mistakes, why is this now being packaged as "luck"?

_________________
You just need to be accepted for who you are and be proud of who you are and that is what I'm trying to do.
Lewis Hamilton


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Best F1 driver ever?
PostPosted: Mon Apr 08, 2019 1:26 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2012 10:39 am
Posts: 24693
aice wrote:
Siao7 wrote:
Way to shift goal posts there. Having had some luck doesn't mean he was lucky to beat Vettel. You are getting confused. But yes, he has had some luck, like Baku, rain in Singapore or the fact that Ferrari got it wrong in a few races.

This does not detract from the fact that he also suffered DNF's due to mechanical reasons when Vettel didn't, nor that he was lucky to win the WDC.

In short, no one offended your favourite driver, ok?


I'm not quite following this. Why is he "lucky to win the WDC"? Vettel had equal tools to do the job. Vettel also had many instances of "luck" e.g. VSC win in Australia, or Mercedes having issues with their upgrades. Being better than your main competitor, exerting pressure, forcing your competitor to make mistakes, why is this now being packaged as "luck"?

I suspect this is a typo, given the rest of the post. Doubtless meant "not that he was lucky," not "nor."


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Best F1 driver ever?
PostPosted: Mon Apr 08, 2019 1:29 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue May 05, 2009 11:31 am
Posts: 7049
Zoue wrote:
aice wrote:
Siao7 wrote:
Way to shift goal posts there. Having had some luck doesn't mean he was lucky to beat Vettel. You are getting confused. But yes, he has had some luck, like Baku, rain in Singapore or the fact that Ferrari got it wrong in a few races.

This does not detract from the fact that he also suffered DNF's due to mechanical reasons when Vettel didn't, nor that he was lucky to win the WDC.

In short, no one offended your favourite driver, ok?


I'm not quite following this. Why is he "lucky to win the WDC"? Vettel had equal tools to do the job. Vettel also had many instances of "luck" e.g. VSC win in Australia, or Mercedes having issues with their upgrades. Being better than your main competitor, exerting pressure, forcing your competitor to make mistakes, why is this now being packaged as "luck"?

I suspect this is a typo, given the rest of the post. Doubtless meant "not that he was lucky," not "nor."


Indeed typo. Easy to spot really, but apologies if it caused confusion.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Best F1 driver ever?
PostPosted: Mon Apr 08, 2019 1:35 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun May 25, 2008 7:55 pm
Posts: 6027
Zoue wrote:
pokerman wrote:
DOLOMITE wrote:

point I was trying (and apparently failed!) to make was that applying and dealing with the pressure is part of being the best. Vettels is increasingly looking like a driverw ho will go down as cracking under pressure, wheres Hamilton much less so and is certainly a master of applying it.

So to say he was "helped out by it" I think does him and Mercedes a disservice. They applied the pressure, maximized points at all opportunities and came out on top. It's not like they inherited a bunch of wins while trundling round 50 seconds down in 3rd and 4th place.

Well I've seen the disservice go as far to suggest that Hamilton has been lucky these past 2 seasons.
He has been lucky. Not to win the title - he's driven well enough that he hasn't needed luck to contribute. But the comment that appears to have you all riled up was regarding the fact that these last two seasons whenever he's been at a disadvantage, for whatever reason, something has happened to bring him back in the game. Unless you're trying to suggest that last weekend's win had nothing to do with luck?

Now you want to chalk up his success to luck? This is just getting ridiculous. I suppose he was lucky to attack Vettel and overtake him on track despite driving the slower car in Bahrain right?

On the point of Hamilton/Alonso; the fact is that last season, Hamiltoin had a year that is superior to any season Alonso ever produced. It was a season of dominating the championship without having a dominant machine. In similarly competitive scenarios; Alonso has never managed to dominate in that way.

What argument is there to be made for Alonso I wonder? Faster? Absolutely not; he wasn't even faster when Lewis was in his rookie season (the one point when every F1 driver is at their slowest).

Better under pressure? No way; Hamilton has delivered many times under pressure. In 2014, after reliability cost him dearly in the early part of the season, he won 6 of the last 7 rounds to take the title. In 2016, after another reliability nightmare, he won the last 4 races in an effort to come back and take the WDC. He has delivered down the stretch while Alonso allowed the title to slip through his fingers in 2010 and, to a lesser extent, 2012. Even in Alonso's two championship years, he basically held on for dear life during the second half of the year as Kimi and then Michael tried to chase down his lead. In 2006, Alonso won 6 of the first 9 races and then had only 1 win in the whole second half of the season.

More consistent? No, perhaps at one point I would have said that Alonso was the more consistent of the two but that was when Alonso was at his peak and before Hamilton had reached his. If we assess both of them at their best, I don't think either is more consistent than the other. They are both extremely consistent but neither is perfect. Both can have 2-3 weekends a year where they are not 100% on top of their game. Both make minimal mistakes when given a competitive car.

Racecraft? Nope. Don't get me wrong; Alonso's racecraft is top shelf but Hamilton's is even better. When it comes to overtaking and defending without making errors or crashing; Hamilton is as good as it gets. Alonso is brilliant, don't get me wrong but if I need someone to take a position, I'll take Hamilton behind the wheel over Alonso any day.

Better in the wet? Not a chance. Hamilton has been one of the two best wet weather drivers in the history of the sport. Alonso is not a particularly good or bad wet weather performer.

We don't even have to get into discussing who has won the most hardware. To each his own. Everyone is entitled to their own opinion. Personally I just don't see it.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Best F1 driver ever?
PostPosted: Mon Apr 08, 2019 3:43 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Apr 03, 2013 5:27 pm
Posts: 182
Zoue

Hamilton was better than Vettel last year. There, is that unambiguous enough for you?

Back to last weekend: do you think Hamilton was fortunate that Leclerc had an engine issue? A simple yes or no will do[/quote]


Hamilton put himself in the position to win that race due to his race craft and speed. He fell back to 4th off the line but was able to fight back. Bottas could have won the race, he had track position but Hamilton performed a brilliant overtaking manoeuvre to get into 3rd. Vettel also had the chance to win the race, he had the faster car after all and was ahead of Hamilton, but Hamilton hounded him for most of the race and forced him into another error as he was passing him. Ferrari should have won that race even with Leclerc’s issue because they had the fastest car, but they didn’t because Hamilton was better than Vettel.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Best F1 driver ever?
PostPosted: Mon Apr 08, 2019 3:47 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2012 10:39 am
Posts: 24693
bonecrasher wrote:
Zoue wrote:

Hamilton was better than Vettel last year. There, is that unambiguous enough for you?

Back to last weekend: do you think Hamilton was fortunate that Leclerc had an engine issue? A simple yes or no will do



Hamilton put himself in the position to win that race due to his race craft and speed. He fell back to 4th off the line but was able to fight back. Bottas could have won the race, he had track position but Hamilton performed a brilliant overtaking manoeuvre to get into 3rd. Vettel also had the chance to win the race, he had the faster car after all and was ahead of Hamilton, but Hamilton hounded him for most of the race and forced him into another error as he was passing him. Ferrari should have won that race even with Leclerc’s issue because they had the fastest car, but they didn’t because Hamilton was better than Vettel.

so you don't think it was fortunate for Hamilton that Leclerc had the issue when he did? You think Hamilton would have won anyway?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Best F1 driver ever?
PostPosted: Mon Apr 08, 2019 4:01 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue May 05, 2009 11:31 am
Posts: 7049
Zoue wrote:
bonecrasher wrote:
Zoue wrote:

Hamilton was better than Vettel last year. There, is that unambiguous enough for you?

Back to last weekend: do you think Hamilton was fortunate that Leclerc had an engine issue? A simple yes or no will do



Hamilton put himself in the position to win that race due to his race craft and speed. He fell back to 4th off the line but was able to fight back. Bottas could have won the race, he had track position but Hamilton performed a brilliant overtaking manoeuvre to get into 3rd. Vettel also had the chance to win the race, he had the faster car after all and was ahead of Hamilton, but Hamilton hounded him for most of the race and forced him into another error as he was passing him. Ferrari should have won that race even with Leclerc’s issue because they had the fastest car, but they didn’t because Hamilton was better than Vettel.

so you don't think it was fortunate for Hamilton that Leclerc had the issue when he did? You think Hamilton would have won anyway?

Seeing that Hamilton himself said he was fortunate (even used the word luck), I don't know how someone can argue it...

This doesn't mean that he was sitting in his hotel room and someone gifted him the win. He had to drive the car, pass Vettel and not put a foot down wrong. But luck played it's part.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Best F1 driver ever?
PostPosted: Mon Apr 08, 2019 4:09 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2012 10:39 am
Posts: 24693
Siao7 wrote:
Zoue wrote:
bonecrasher wrote:
Zoue wrote:

Hamilton was better than Vettel last year. There, is that unambiguous enough for you?

Back to last weekend: do you think Hamilton was fortunate that Leclerc had an engine issue? A simple yes or no will do



Hamilton put himself in the position to win that race due to his race craft and speed. He fell back to 4th off the line but was able to fight back. Bottas could have won the race, he had track position but Hamilton performed a brilliant overtaking manoeuvre to get into 3rd. Vettel also had the chance to win the race, he had the faster car after all and was ahead of Hamilton, but Hamilton hounded him for most of the race and forced him into another error as he was passing him. Ferrari should have won that race even with Leclerc’s issue because they had the fastest car, but they didn’t because Hamilton was better than Vettel.

so you don't think it was fortunate for Hamilton that Leclerc had the issue when he did? You think Hamilton would have won anyway?

Seeing that Hamilton himself said he was fortunate (even used the word luck), I don't know how someone can argue it...

This doesn't mean that he was sitting in his hotel room and someone gifted him the win. He had to drive the car, pass Vettel and not put a foot down wrong. But luck played it's part.
yeah and that's what my original post which apparently caused all this outrage stated. I said credit to him for putting himself in a position to capitalise but apparently that got lost in all the red mist.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Best F1 driver ever?
PostPosted: Mon Apr 08, 2019 4:21 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue May 05, 2009 11:31 am
Posts: 7049
Zoue wrote:
Siao7 wrote:
Zoue wrote:
bonecrasher wrote:
Zoue wrote:

Hamilton was better than Vettel last year. There, is that unambiguous enough for you?

Back to last weekend: do you think Hamilton was fortunate that Leclerc had an engine issue? A simple yes or no will do



Hamilton put himself in the position to win that race due to his race craft and speed. He fell back to 4th off the line but was able to fight back. Bottas could have won the race, he had track position but Hamilton performed a brilliant overtaking manoeuvre to get into 3rd. Vettel also had the chance to win the race, he had the faster car after all and was ahead of Hamilton, but Hamilton hounded him for most of the race and forced him into another error as he was passing him. Ferrari should have won that race even with Leclerc’s issue because they had the fastest car, but they didn’t because Hamilton was better than Vettel.

so you don't think it was fortunate for Hamilton that Leclerc had the issue when he did? You think Hamilton would have won anyway?

Seeing that Hamilton himself said he was fortunate (even used the word luck), I don't know how someone can argue it...

This doesn't mean that he was sitting in his hotel room and someone gifted him the win. He had to drive the car, pass Vettel and not put a foot down wrong. But luck played it's part.
yeah and that's what my original post which apparently caused all this outrage stated. I said credit to him for putting himself in a position to capitalise but apparently that got lost in all the red mist.


Go figure!

I was just reading about JV, saying that Hamilton didn't mean what he said to Leclerc after the race and that he was somehow rubbing in how much better he is than the other drivers:

https://www.gpfans.com/en/articles/3775 ... illeneuve/

Can't beat the guy!


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Best F1 driver ever?
PostPosted: Mon Apr 08, 2019 5:54 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun May 25, 2008 7:55 pm
Posts: 6027
Zoue wrote:
Siao7 wrote:
Zoue wrote:
bonecrasher wrote:
Zoue wrote:

Hamilton was better than Vettel last year. There, is that unambiguous enough for you?

Back to last weekend: do you think Hamilton was fortunate that Leclerc had an engine issue? A simple yes or no will do



Hamilton put himself in the position to win that race due to his race craft and speed. He fell back to 4th off the line but was able to fight back. Bottas could have won the race, he had track position but Hamilton performed a brilliant overtaking manoeuvre to get into 3rd. Vettel also had the chance to win the race, he had the faster car after all and was ahead of Hamilton, but Hamilton hounded him for most of the race and forced him into another error as he was passing him. Ferrari should have won that race even with Leclerc’s issue because they had the fastest car, but they didn’t because Hamilton was better than Vettel.

so you don't think it was fortunate for Hamilton that Leclerc had the issue when he did? You think Hamilton would have won anyway?

Seeing that Hamilton himself said he was fortunate (even used the word luck), I don't know how someone can argue it...

This doesn't mean that he was sitting in his hotel room and someone gifted him the win. He had to drive the car, pass Vettel and not put a foot down wrong. But luck played it's part.
yeah and that's what my original post which apparently caused all this outrage stated. I said credit to him for putting himself in a position to capitalise but apparently that got lost in all the red mist.

I think the issue Zoue is with choosing to point out that Hamilton has benefited from others' misfortune but not doing the same for everyone else. Every driver who has been successful has both suffered misfortune and benefited from the misfortune of others. The way you have discussed it is extremely one-sided.

If you look, for example, at Sebastian Vettel's 2012 season; he twice won a race after Hamilton's car failed from the lead. You don't ever seem inclined to point that out when discussing that season or to make sure everyone knows how "lucky" Vettel was. Alonso also inherited multiple wins from Kimi's car failure during his first championship season in 2005 and he inherited a couple from Michael in 2006 during his second championship season. Hamilton effectively lost the championship in 2016 due to his engine blowing up in Malaysia.

Again, when you broach the subject of "luck", you do so in a manner that is very imbalanced and that's why people feel the need to counter you.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Best F1 driver ever?
PostPosted: Mon Apr 08, 2019 7:23 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat Jan 28, 2012 4:13 pm
Posts: 14637
sandman1347 wrote:
I think the issue Zoue is with choosing to point out that Hamilton has benefited from others' misfortune but not doing the same for everyone else. Every driver who has been successful has both suffered misfortune and benefited from the misfortune of others. The way you have discussed it is extremely one-sided.

If you look, for example, at Sebastian Vettel's 2012 season; he twice won a race after Hamilton's car failed from the lead. You don't ever seem inclined to point that out when discussing that season or to make sure everyone knows how "lucky" Vettel was. Alonso also inherited multiple wins from Kimi's car failure during his first championship season in 2005 and he inherited a couple from Michael in 2006 during his second championship season. Hamilton effectively lost the championship in 2016 due to his engine blowing up in Malaysia.

Again, when you broach the subject of "luck", you do so in a manner that is very imbalanced and that's why people feel the need to counter you.


He's doing that in this thread because it was relevant to the post he was replying to. How lucky or not Vettel was in 2012 was not.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Best F1 driver ever?
PostPosted: Mon Apr 08, 2019 7:33 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2012 10:39 am
Posts: 24693
sandman1347 wrote:
Zoue wrote:
Siao7 wrote:
Zoue wrote:
bonecrasher wrote:


Hamilton put himself in the position to win that race due to his race craft and speed. He fell back to 4th off the line but was able to fight back. Bottas could have won the race, he had track position but Hamilton performed a brilliant overtaking manoeuvre to get into 3rd. Vettel also had the chance to win the race, he had the faster car after all and was ahead of Hamilton, but Hamilton hounded him for most of the race and forced him into another error as he was passing him. Ferrari should have won that race even with Leclerc’s issue because they had the fastest car, but they didn’t because Hamilton was better than Vettel.

so you don't think it was fortunate for Hamilton that Leclerc had the issue when he did? You think Hamilton would have won anyway?

Seeing that Hamilton himself said he was fortunate (even used the word luck), I don't know how someone can argue it...

This doesn't mean that he was sitting in his hotel room and someone gifted him the win. He had to drive the car, pass Vettel and not put a foot down wrong. But luck played it's part.
yeah and that's what my original post which apparently caused all this outrage stated. I said credit to him for putting himself in a position to capitalise but apparently that got lost in all the red mist.

I think the issue Zoue is with choosing to point out that Hamilton has benefited from others' misfortune but not doing the same for everyone else. Every driver who has been successful has both suffered misfortune and benefited from the misfortune of others. The way you have discussed it is extremely one-sided.

If you look, for example, at Sebastian Vettel's 2012 season; he twice won a race after Hamilton's car failed from the lead. You don't ever seem inclined to point that out when discussing that season or to make sure everyone knows how "lucky" Vettel was. Alonso also inherited multiple wins from Kimi's car failure during his first championship season in 2005 and he inherited a couple from Michael in 2006 during his second championship season. Hamilton effectively lost the championship in 2016 due to his engine blowing up in Malaysia.

Again, when you broach the subject of "luck", you do so in a manner that is very imbalanced and that's why people feel the need to counter you.

No, people feel the need to counter because they're obsessed with trying to defend against anything that makes it look like their favourite driver isn't perfect.

There's no need to mention what luck other drivers may or may not have had in the past. Vettel 2012, really? Why not go the whole hog and say Prost 1986. Maybe it would be relevant if I'd claimed Hamilton was the luckiest driver who ever lived, but since I didn't, it's not.

I just happened to mention, following Leclerc's misfortune in Bahrain, that Hamilton's luck in the last year or so has been extraordinary, specifically when it has looked like he didn't have the equipment to challenge properly. Each time something has happened to give him a chance and I was at pains to mention that it should be noted that he put himself in a position to take advantage of that luck, so it was hardly a dig. It was just a casual observation that I'd bet the house with any other driver would have passed without much undue comment. Instead because it's Hamilton we have to endure all the tedious hand-wringing while people try to defend against what they see is an attack but to any normal person was just a comment on good fortune. I'd defy anyone to say that luck didn't play some part in Hamilton's victory in Bahrain. Even Hamilton himself said as much but apparently he's the only one allowed to say so.

And then of course the resentment lingers on so that it's brought up in a totally unrelated conversation just because one particular supporter can't get over the fact that someone dared to mention luck and Hamilton in the same sentence.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Best F1 driver ever?
PostPosted: Mon Apr 08, 2019 7:44 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun May 25, 2008 7:55 pm
Posts: 6027
mikeyg123 wrote:
sandman1347 wrote:
I think the issue Zoue is with choosing to point out that Hamilton has benefited from others' misfortune but not doing the same for everyone else. Every driver who has been successful has both suffered misfortune and benefited from the misfortune of others. The way you have discussed it is extremely one-sided.

If you look, for example, at Sebastian Vettel's 2012 season; he twice won a race after Hamilton's car failed from the lead. You don't ever seem inclined to point that out when discussing that season or to make sure everyone knows how "lucky" Vettel was. Alonso also inherited multiple wins from Kimi's car failure during his first championship season in 2005 and he inherited a couple from Michael in 2006 during his second championship season. Hamilton effectively lost the championship in 2016 due to his engine blowing up in Malaysia.

Again, when you broach the subject of "luck", you do so in a manner that is very imbalanced and that's why people feel the need to counter you.


He's doing that in this thread because it was relevant to the post he was replying to. How lucky or not Vettel was in 2012 was not.

The post he was responding to was a post that pointed out that Zoue has taken to suggesting that Hamilton has been "lucky" these last two seasons. "Luck", by Zoue's definition encompasses a great many things; including mechanical failures for your rivals, being a better wet weather driver than your rivals and even having one of your rivals make a mistake.

Now the larger context of the discussion is the conversation about who between Hamilton and Alonso is the greater all-time driver. Within that context, if you see fit to point out every time that you perceive Hamilton to have benefited from "luck" while not pointing out the times it has gone against him, then you would also have to do the same for Alonso. You would have to point out that Alonso inherited 3 race wins during his first championship campaign due to Raikkonen's car failing from the lead and therefor was "lucky". You'd have to point out that Alonso benefited massively from Schumacher's engine failure from the lead in the penultimate race of 2006 (without that failure Michael would have entered the final race with the points lead) and thus has been "lucky" in both of his title victories. Failing to do so would just be imbalanced. My remark about Vettel was just to point out that when discussing Vettel's 2012 triumph, I've never seen him feel the need to point out that he inherited those two wins from Hamilton and thus was "lucky".


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Best F1 driver ever?
PostPosted: Mon Apr 08, 2019 7:49 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat Jan 28, 2012 4:13 pm
Posts: 14637
sandman1347 wrote:
mikeyg123 wrote:
sandman1347 wrote:
I think the issue Zoue is with choosing to point out that Hamilton has benefited from others' misfortune but not doing the same for everyone else. Every driver who has been successful has both suffered misfortune and benefited from the misfortune of others. The way you have discussed it is extremely one-sided.

If you look, for example, at Sebastian Vettel's 2012 season; he twice won a race after Hamilton's car failed from the lead. You don't ever seem inclined to point that out when discussing that season or to make sure everyone knows how "lucky" Vettel was. Alonso also inherited multiple wins from Kimi's car failure during his first championship season in 2005 and he inherited a couple from Michael in 2006 during his second championship season. Hamilton effectively lost the championship in 2016 due to his engine blowing up in Malaysia.

Again, when you broach the subject of "luck", you do so in a manner that is very imbalanced and that's why people feel the need to counter you.


He's doing that in this thread because it was relevant to the post he was replying to. How lucky or not Vettel was in 2012 was not.

The post he was responding to was a post that pointed out that Zoue has taken to suggesting that Hamilton has been "lucky" these last two seasons. "Luck", by Zoue's definition encompasses a great many things; including mechanical failures for your rivals, being a better wet weather driver than your rivals and even having one of your rivals make a mistake.

Now the larger context of the discussion is the conversation about who between Hamilton and Alonso is the greater all-time driver. Within that context, if you see fit to point out every time that you perceive Hamilton to have benefited from "luck" while not pointing out the times it has gone against him, then you would also have to do the same for Alonso. You would have to point out that Alonso inherited 3 race wins during his first championship campaign due to Raikkonen's car failing from the lead and therefor was "lucky". Failing to do so would just be imbalanced. My remark about Vettel was just to point out that when discussing Vettel's 2012 triumph, I've never seen him feel the need to point out that he inherited those two wins from Hamilton and thus was "lucky".


Surely they are lucky. If you are a better wet weather driver then it is lucky when it rains. It is lucky when your rival has a mechanical retirement and it is lucky if your rival crashes out. These are things out of your control that have gone your way I.E luck.

Really, I think we just need to calm down about Hamilton. I actually really like Hamilton but a few of you are starting to make mentioning him on this forum all but impossible. If every word isn't glowing praise the thread will get derailed and a perfectly interesting discussion ruined.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Best F1 driver ever?
PostPosted: Mon Apr 08, 2019 9:15 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun May 25, 2008 7:55 pm
Posts: 6027
mikeyg123 wrote:
sandman1347 wrote:
mikeyg123 wrote:
sandman1347 wrote:
I think the issue Zoue is with choosing to point out that Hamilton has benefited from others' misfortune but not doing the same for everyone else. Every driver who has been successful has both suffered misfortune and benefited from the misfortune of others. The way you have discussed it is extremely one-sided.

If you look, for example, at Sebastian Vettel's 2012 season; he twice won a race after Hamilton's car failed from the lead. You don't ever seem inclined to point that out when discussing that season or to make sure everyone knows how "lucky" Vettel was. Alonso also inherited multiple wins from Kimi's car failure during his first championship season in 2005 and he inherited a couple from Michael in 2006 during his second championship season. Hamilton effectively lost the championship in 2016 due to his engine blowing up in Malaysia.

Again, when you broach the subject of "luck", you do so in a manner that is very imbalanced and that's why people feel the need to counter you.


He's doing that in this thread because it was relevant to the post he was replying to. How lucky or not Vettel was in 2012 was not.

The post he was responding to was a post that pointed out that Zoue has taken to suggesting that Hamilton has been "lucky" these last two seasons. "Luck", by Zoue's definition encompasses a great many things; including mechanical failures for your rivals, being a better wet weather driver than your rivals and even having one of your rivals make a mistake.

Now the larger context of the discussion is the conversation about who between Hamilton and Alonso is the greater all-time driver. Within that context, if you see fit to point out every time that you perceive Hamilton to have benefited from "luck" while not pointing out the times it has gone against him, then you would also have to do the same for Alonso. You would have to point out that Alonso inherited 3 race wins during his first championship campaign due to Raikkonen's car failing from the lead and therefor was "lucky". Failing to do so would just be imbalanced. My remark about Vettel was just to point out that when discussing Vettel's 2012 triumph, I've never seen him feel the need to point out that he inherited those two wins from Hamilton and thus was "lucky".


Surely they are lucky. If you are a better wet weather driver then it is lucky when it rains. It is lucky when your rival has a mechanical retirement and it is lucky if your rival crashes out. These are things out of your control that have gone your way I.E luck.

Really, I think we just need to calm down about Hamilton. I actually really like Hamilton but a few of you are starting to make mentioning him on this forum all but impossible. If every word isn't glowing praise the thread will get derailed and a perfectly interesting discussion ruined.

I never thought of you as disliking Hamilton at all and I don't agree with your assessment. No one says every word about Hamilton has to be glowing praise but when you make assertions that are poorly supported, people in a forum will challenge them. There are a few people on the forum who seem to feel like Alonso's greatness cannot be questioned and that he must be held above all other contemporary drivers regardless of what actually happens. When you put forth that kind of view in a forum, I think you should expect that there will be debate that comes from it. If you don't like the debate then you should probably not present those views in a forum. You should especially avoid presenting them in a thread entitled "Best F1 driver ever?". In reading back through the debate, I don't see anything that's really out of bounds so I'm not entirely sure what you're complaining about.

As for the bit about luck; I don't see it that way. There will be times when things go against you and there will be times where opportunities present themselves to you. For the most part you usually make your own luck in racing (and life). For you to say that Hamilton is lucky that it started to rain because he is a better wet weather driver is something that I find incomprehensible. His own ability is not something that should ever be described as "luck". He is racing in the same conditions as everyone else. Surely being able to master those conditions should be chalked up to skill and most definitely not "luck". An engine failure is unlucky for the driver who experiences it but that doesn't mean the drivers who benefit are just lucky. They had to be there to benefit from the failure. Likewise if you pressure your opponent into a mistake, that's not you getting "lucky". That's you performing better than your opponent and applying pressure to him that he can't handle.

Following your train of thought, everything is luck. It's lucky you're an extremely fast driver in a really good car and that you set pole position and won the race. It's lucky you are able to do that consistently enough to win championships. Why even discuss any of this if it's all just a coin toss?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Best F1 driver ever?
PostPosted: Mon Apr 08, 2019 9:22 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Feb 23, 2014 3:53 am
Posts: 6733
Location: Michigan, USA
sandman1347 wrote:
Following your train of thought, everything is luck. It's lucky you're an extremely fast driver in a really good car and that you set pole position and won the race. It's lucky you are able to do that consistently enough to win championships. Why even discuss any of this if it's all just a coin toss?

The default state of any race is dry, hence having an unlikely occurrence that benefits you - rain - is lucky. I really don't see why that's controversial, although it apparently is, since every time a driver gets called lucky for having a wet race people get offended.

Let's try an analogy: let's say Red Bull has a superior chassis to Ferrari, while Ferrari has a sizable straight-line advantage. In a regular season, most tracks will favor the Ferrari. If, however, the FIA rolled dice to determine which track held the next GP every time, and it kept coming up with Monaco or Singapore, that would be lucky for Red Bull - even though merit was the basis for being better at those tracks, it required good fortune for that merit to become so important.

It's the same thing with wet weather driving. You're lucky if it comes into play more than once or twice in a season, because that's not normal.

_________________
PICK 10 COMPETITION (4 wins, 15 podiums): 3rd in 2016
TOP THREE CHAMPIONSHIP (No Limit Excedrin Racing): Champions in 2015 & 2018 | 2nd in 2017
AUTOSPORT GP PREDICTOR: 2017 USA & P-F1 Champion | #2 in the world in 2017


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Best F1 driver ever?
PostPosted: Tue Apr 09, 2019 12:03 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 26, 2015 9:33 pm
Posts: 2092
There's a chance that a few race weekends will be significantly affected by rain every season. It happening is not lucky in and of itself. Now, if we look at the specific timing of this happening given where the advantage appeared to be between Ferrari and Mercedes last year, it seems reasonable to say that Hamilton struck it rich, which I'm pretty sure he himself would agree with, given the beaming smile he has on his face when it rains and the opportunity he feels it can open up for him. But then if Hamilton was a bad wet weather driver it could have been bad luck instead, so Hamilton makes his own luck by being better than the rest and having that ace in the hand. Still, if Mercedes have a clear advantage in the dry, wet weather has high potential to add variables to the race equation which the teams are less able to control, in which case Hamilton would probably hope for the more stable and predictable dry conditions to carry the advantage home.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Best F1 driver ever?
PostPosted: Tue Apr 09, 2019 12:07 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 26, 2015 9:33 pm
Posts: 2092
mikeyg123 wrote:
sandman1347 wrote:
mikeyg123 wrote:
sandman1347 wrote:
I think the issue Zoue is with choosing to point out that Hamilton has benefited from others' misfortune but not doing the same for everyone else. Every driver who has been successful has both suffered misfortune and benefited from the misfortune of others. The way you have discussed it is extremely one-sided.

If you look, for example, at Sebastian Vettel's 2012 season; he twice won a race after Hamilton's car failed from the lead. You don't ever seem inclined to point that out when discussing that season or to make sure everyone knows how "lucky" Vettel was. Alonso also inherited multiple wins from Kimi's car failure during his first championship season in 2005 and he inherited a couple from Michael in 2006 during his second championship season. Hamilton effectively lost the championship in 2016 due to his engine blowing up in Malaysia.

Again, when you broach the subject of "luck", you do so in a manner that is very imbalanced and that's why people feel the need to counter you.


He's doing that in this thread because it was relevant to the post he was replying to. How lucky or not Vettel was in 2012 was not.

The post he was responding to was a post that pointed out that Zoue has taken to suggesting that Hamilton has been "lucky" these last two seasons. "Luck", by Zoue's definition encompasses a great many things; including mechanical failures for your rivals, being a better wet weather driver than your rivals and even having one of your rivals make a mistake.

Now the larger context of the discussion is the conversation about who between Hamilton and Alonso is the greater all-time driver. Within that context, if you see fit to point out every time that you perceive Hamilton to have benefited from "luck" while not pointing out the times it has gone against him, then you would also have to do the same for Alonso. You would have to point out that Alonso inherited 3 race wins during his first championship campaign due to Raikkonen's car failing from the lead and therefor was "lucky". Failing to do so would just be imbalanced. My remark about Vettel was just to point out that when discussing Vettel's 2012 triumph, I've never seen him feel the need to point out that he inherited those two wins from Hamilton and thus was "lucky".


Surely they are lucky. If you are a better wet weather driver then it is lucky when it rains. It is lucky when your rival has a mechanical retirement and it is lucky if your rival crashes out. These are things out of your control that have gone your way I.E luck.

Really, I think we just need to calm down about Hamilton. I actually really like Hamilton but a few of you are starting to make mentioning him on this forum all but impossible. If every word isn't glowing praise the thread will get derailed and a perfectly interesting discussion ruined.


No.

Too simplistic.

If we accept that sometimes it will rain then it would only be lucky for the better wet weather driver (and/or the one using the car which works better in the wet) should the occurrence of wet weather conditions be clearly higher than the statistical norm... and unlucky if clearly lower than that norm.

The weather is not some contrived lottery, it's mother nature.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Best F1 driver ever?
PostPosted: Tue Apr 09, 2019 1:25 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Feb 23, 2014 3:53 am
Posts: 6733
Location: Michigan, USA
Invade wrote:
If we accept that sometimes it will rain then it would only be lucky for the better wet weather driver (and/or the one using the car which works better in the wet) should the occurrence of wet weather conditions be clearly higher than the statistical norm... and unlucky if clearly lower than that norm.

The weather is not some contrived lottery, it's mother nature.

This is how I feel. A season like 2008 - with far more wet races than the norm - was lucky. A few decisive wet races this past year (Germany, Hungarian qualifying) weren't so much lucky, because that's within the normal sample.

And indeed, I would say that if 100% of the races are dry this year then Hamilton has been unlucky.

_________________
PICK 10 COMPETITION (4 wins, 15 podiums): 3rd in 2016
TOP THREE CHAMPIONSHIP (No Limit Excedrin Racing): Champions in 2015 & 2018 | 2nd in 2017
AUTOSPORT GP PREDICTOR: 2017 USA & P-F1 Champion | #2 in the world in 2017


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Best F1 driver ever?
PostPosted: Tue Apr 09, 2019 2:41 am 
Offline

Joined: Sun Nov 18, 2012 11:14 pm
Posts: 3615
This place gets funnier and funnier. Now when it rains Hamilton is lucky? Wow! Just because Hamilton can extract more performance in trickery conditions than others has nothing to do with luck. It just shows his superior skill in these conditions.

I also cannot comprehend how you can rate Alonso in a different league than Hamilton. I have nothing but high praise for Alonso as a driver, but what exactly has Alonso done to prove that he is that much better? It is such a highly subjective view that has no backing whatsoever, and imo it is being said in the sole purpose to discredit Hamilton and get a rise out of his fans.

The Chinese Grand prix couldn't get here soon enough. Some are truly bored.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Best F1 driver ever?
PostPosted: Tue Apr 09, 2019 1:54 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2012 10:39 am
Posts: 24693
pokerman wrote:
Zoue wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Zoue wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Well I've seen the disservice go as far to suggest that Hamilton has been lucky these past 2 seasons.
He has been lucky. Not to win the title - he's driven well enough that he hasn't needed luck to contribute. But the comment that appears to have you all riled up was regarding the fact that these last two seasons whenever he's been at a disadvantage, for whatever reason, something has happened to bring him back in the game. Unless you're trying to suggest that last weekend's win had nothing to do with luck?

The only luck Hamilton had was to prove himself better than Vettel, to be better in the wet than Vettel, now it's luck for one driver to prove himself better than another driver, It's luck for another driver to beat another driver in a slower car?

Hamilton was better than Vettel last year. There, is that unambiguous enough for you?

Back to last weekend: do you think Hamilton was fortunate that Leclerc had an engine issue? A simple yes or no will do

Hamilton was lucky to win in Bahrain, the problem was when this got extended to the last 2 years.

Why is it a problem to acknowledge that there were occasions where luck was involved? Or are you confusing luck on specific occasions with a blanket lucky title? Because the latter is most emphatically not what was said (a point which I reinforced above anyway)


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Best F1 driver ever?
PostPosted: Tue Apr 09, 2019 1:56 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 30252
Zoue wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Zoue wrote:
pokerman wrote:
DOLOMITE wrote:
point I was trying (and apparently failed!) to make was that applying and dealing with the pressure is part of being the best. Vettels is increasingly looking like a driverw ho will go down as cracking under pressure, wheres Hamilton much less so and is certainly a master of applying it.

So to say he was "helped out by it" I think does him and Mercedes a disservice. They applied the pressure, maximized points at all opportunities and came out on top. It's not like they inherited a bunch of wins while trundling round 50 seconds down in 3rd and 4th place.

Well I've seen the disservice go as far to suggest that Hamilton has been lucky these past 2 seasons.
He has been lucky. Not to win the title - he's driven well enough that he hasn't needed luck to contribute. But the comment that appears to have you all riled up was regarding the fact that these last two seasons whenever he's been at a disadvantage, for whatever reason, something has happened to bring him back in the game. Unless you're trying to suggest that last weekend's win had nothing to do with luck?

The only luck Hamilton had was to prove himself better than Vettel, to be better in the wet than Vettel, now it's luck for one driver to prove himself better than another driver, It's luck for another driver to beat another driver in a slower car?

I think the slower car thing has been over-egged to the point of being farcical, certainly. Anyone would think Hamilton was driving a midfield car by some of the comments

You think Hamilton never had the slower car like in Bahrain last race when he passed Vettel?

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

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

2017: 9th Place
2018: 7th place
2019: Currently 32nd

Wins: Canada 2018, Abu Dhabi 2017
Podiums: (6)


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Best F1 driver ever?
PostPosted: Tue Apr 09, 2019 1:57 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 30252
mikeyg123 wrote:
Look at like Schumacher easily beating Hill in 1995. Schumacher was great in 1995 but not because Hill kept throwing it at the scenery.

Yeah I don't recall Schumacher being called lucky?

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

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

2017: 9th Place
2018: 7th place
2019: Currently 32nd

Wins: Canada 2018, Abu Dhabi 2017
Podiums: (6)


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Best F1 driver ever?
PostPosted: Tue Apr 09, 2019 1:58 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2012 10:39 am
Posts: 24693
pokerman wrote:
Siao7 wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Zoue wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Well I've seen the disservice go as far to suggest that Hamilton has been lucky these past 2 seasons.
He has been lucky. Not to win the title - he's driven well enough that he hasn't needed luck to contribute. But the comment that appears to have you all riled up was regarding the fact that these last two seasons whenever he's been at a disadvantage, for whatever reason, something has happened to bring him back in the game. Unless you're trying to suggest that last weekend's win had nothing to do with luck?

The only luck Hamilton had was to prove himself better than Vettel, to be better in the wet than Vettel, now it's luck for one driver to prove himself better than another driver, It's luck for another driver to beat another driver in a slower car?

Way to shift goal posts there. Having had some luck doesn't mean he was lucky to beat Vettel. You are getting confused. But yes, he has had some luck, like Baku, rain in Singapore or the fact that Ferrari got it wrong in a few races.

This does not detract from the fact that he also suffered DNF's due to mechanical reasons when Vettel didn't, nor that he was lucky to win the WDC.

In short, no one offended your favourite driver, ok?

When you say someone was lucky than that means underserving.

That's not really true. It just means that factors outside their control helped influence things


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Best F1 driver ever?
PostPosted: Tue Apr 09, 2019 2:13 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 30252
Invade wrote:
There's a chance that a few race weekends will be significantly affected by rain every season. It happening is not lucky in and of itself. Now, if we look at the specific timing of this happening given where the advantage appeared to be between Ferrari and Mercedes last year, it seems reasonable to say that Hamilton struck it rich, which I'm pretty sure he himself would agree with, given the beaming smile he has on his face when it rains and the opportunity he feels it can open up for him. But then if Hamilton was a bad wet weather driver it could have been bad luck instead, so Hamilton makes his own luck by being better than the rest and having that ace in the hand. Still, if Mercedes have a clear advantage in the dry, wet weather has high potential to add variables to the race equation which the teams are less able to control, in which case Hamilton would probably hope for the more stable and predictable dry conditions to carry the advantage home.

There was a time when great wet weather drivers were feted in particular Senna, now when it rains that particular driver is just deemed to be lucky?

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

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

2017: 9th Place
2018: 7th place
2019: Currently 32nd

Wins: Canada 2018, Abu Dhabi 2017
Podiums: (6)


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Best F1 driver ever?
PostPosted: Tue Apr 09, 2019 2:14 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2012 10:39 am
Posts: 24693
pokerman wrote:
Zoue wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Zoue wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Then why do people express such number in seconds like you said theoretically that Verstappen might be half a second quicker than Hamilton?

Anyway back to the point Alonso being better than Hamilton is an opinion, Alonso being faster than Hamilton is not backed up by the data.

People are free to use whichever units they want. It's just that Hughes specifically tends to use percentages and you don't. Which in turn inevitably means you will have different figures. I don't see why this is hard to grasp?

The thread is about best driver, not fastest, and that has been what people have been saying when comparing Alonso and Hamilton. What point are you making here?

It's a miscommunication that had someone saying that Alonso was a tier above Hamilton and the need to question that.

No it's you misinterpreting what was said and feeling the irresistible urge to err on the side of caution when determining whether Hamilton has been slighted. Someone put Alonso above Hamilton, big deal. That's not a put down of Hamilton, despite your best efforts to interpret it as that. It's simply an opinion that Alonso was the best. Given "best" is so highly subjective anyway and that no-one on here can even agree what that exactly means, one wonders why you don't allow others to have their own opinion on this?

No it's not the thread was about tiers and not rankings.

Well it was about the pecking order, strictly speaking. I don't recall seeing a rule that said it had to specifically be about tiers. But even if it was, I still don't see why you're getting so bent out of shape about someone having an opinion that Alonso was the best of all. Putting him in his own tier is simply a way of highlighting that and doesn't mean that the poster necessarily thinks he's in a completely different league. There's no definition that says Tier 1 has to be x percent better than Tier 2, for example. You're making a mountain out of a molehill here and it has to be said that you're almost looking to take offence even where none is intended. Why is it so personal to you that Hamilton must take top spot in everybody's lists?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Best F1 driver ever?
PostPosted: Tue Apr 09, 2019 2:15 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 30252
Invade wrote:
mikeyg123 wrote:
sandman1347 wrote:
mikeyg123 wrote:
sandman1347 wrote:
I think the issue Zoue is with choosing to point out that Hamilton has benefited from others' misfortune but not doing the same for everyone else. Every driver who has been successful has both suffered misfortune and benefited from the misfortune of others. The way you have discussed it is extremely one-sided.

If you look, for example, at Sebastian Vettel's 2012 season; he twice won a race after Hamilton's car failed from the lead. You don't ever seem inclined to point that out when discussing that season or to make sure everyone knows how "lucky" Vettel was. Alonso also inherited multiple wins from Kimi's car failure during his first championship season in 2005 and he inherited a couple from Michael in 2006 during his second championship season. Hamilton effectively lost the championship in 2016 due to his engine blowing up in Malaysia.

Again, when you broach the subject of "luck", you do so in a manner that is very imbalanced and that's why people feel the need to counter you.


He's doing that in this thread because it was relevant to the post he was replying to. How lucky or not Vettel was in 2012 was not.

The post he was responding to was a post that pointed out that Zoue has taken to suggesting that Hamilton has been "lucky" these last two seasons. "Luck", by Zoue's definition encompasses a great many things; including mechanical failures for your rivals, being a better wet weather driver than your rivals and even having one of your rivals make a mistake.

Now the larger context of the discussion is the conversation about who between Hamilton and Alonso is the greater all-time driver. Within that context, if you see fit to point out every time that you perceive Hamilton to have benefited from "luck" while not pointing out the times it has gone against him, then you would also have to do the same for Alonso. You would have to point out that Alonso inherited 3 race wins during his first championship campaign due to Raikkonen's car failing from the lead and therefor was "lucky". Failing to do so would just be imbalanced. My remark about Vettel was just to point out that when discussing Vettel's 2012 triumph, I've never seen him feel the need to point out that he inherited those two wins from Hamilton and thus was "lucky".


Surely they are lucky. If you are a better wet weather driver then it is lucky when it rains. It is lucky when your rival has a mechanical retirement and it is lucky if your rival crashes out. These are things out of your control that have gone your way I.E luck.

Really, I think we just need to calm down about Hamilton. I actually really like Hamilton but a few of you are starting to make mentioning him on this forum all but impossible. If every word isn't glowing praise the thread will get derailed and a perfectly interesting discussion ruined.


No.

Too simplistic.

If we accept that sometimes it will rain then it would only be lucky for the better wet weather driver (and/or the one using the car which works better in the wet) should the occurrence of wet weather conditions be clearly higher than the statistical norm... and unlucky if clearly lower than that norm.

The weather is not some contrived lottery, it's mother nature.

In such conditions the likes of Grosjean are incredibly unlucky?

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

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

2017: 9th Place
2018: 7th place
2019: Currently 32nd

Wins: Canada 2018, Abu Dhabi 2017
Podiums: (6)


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Best F1 driver ever?
PostPosted: Tue Apr 09, 2019 2:18 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2012 10:39 am
Posts: 24693
pokerman wrote:
Zoue wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Zoue wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Well I've seen the disservice go as far to suggest that Hamilton has been lucky these past 2 seasons.
He has been lucky. Not to win the title - he's driven well enough that he hasn't needed luck to contribute. But the comment that appears to have you all riled up was regarding the fact that these last two seasons whenever he's been at a disadvantage, for whatever reason, something has happened to bring him back in the game. Unless you're trying to suggest that last weekend's win had nothing to do with luck?

The only luck Hamilton had was to prove himself better than Vettel, to be better in the wet than Vettel, now it's luck for one driver to prove himself better than another driver, It's luck for another driver to beat another driver in a slower car?

I think the slower car thing has been over-egged to the point of being farcical, certainly. Anyone would think Hamilton was driving a midfield car by some of the comments

You think Hamilton never had the slower car like in Bahrain last race when he passed Vettel?

I don't think he was ever really at a disadvantage last year, not like it's been presented by some.

I think last week yes the Ferrari looked quicker than the Mercedes. Vettel did a poor job with it in Bahrain


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Best F1 driver ever?
PostPosted: Tue Apr 09, 2019 2:23 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 30252
Zoue wrote:
People talking about meteorological statistics and the chances of rain are missing the point. Hamilton's not lucky whenever it rains, as some on here are trying to make out is being said. The luck part is e.g. it raining whenever it looks like Ferrari have a significant advantage in the dry, enabling Hamilton to put his apparently god-like wet weather skills to use. If it rains when Mercedes already have an advantage, so what? Likewise, if it rains when the cars are equal or else extremely close, so what? But if it rains when Ferrari look to be locking out the front row in the dry, then rain helping to take away some of that advantage is fortunate. It's not in any way a dig at Hamilton to say that. Likewise, if Leclerc's car fails when it looks like he's running away with the win, then that's also fortunate for Hamilton in 2nd place. It in no way detracts from the effort he's already put in to reach 2nd, just a comment on his fortune that something outside his control intervened which helped him out even further. The fact that I'm having to go to such lengths to explain this and underline how it's not anything to do with his driving skills is frankly a little sad. I don't get this with any other driver here but whenever it's Hamilton in the discussion we have to walk around on eggshells.

It's about Hamilton because you specifically make it about Hamilton, Hamilton being especially good in the wet is then luck for him when ever it rains, the best car should win the race and it's just luck when conditions allow the driver himself to make the difference, it's kind of strange to hear this when so often F1 can be criticised about being more about the car than the driver, but then again not unsurprising.

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

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

2017: 9th Place
2018: 7th place
2019: Currently 32nd

Wins: Canada 2018, Abu Dhabi 2017
Podiums: (6)


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Best F1 driver ever?
PostPosted: Tue Apr 09, 2019 2:41 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2012 10:39 am
Posts: 24693
pokerman wrote:
Zoue wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Siao7 wrote:
pokerman wrote:
The only luck Hamilton had was to prove himself better than Vettel, to be better in the wet than Vettel, now it's luck for one driver to prove himself better than another driver, It's luck for another driver to beat another driver in a slower car?

Way to shift goal posts there. Having had some luck doesn't mean he was lucky to beat Vettel. You are getting confused. But yes, he has had some luck, like Baku, rain in Singapore or the fact that Ferrari got it wrong in a few races.

This does not detract from the fact that he also suffered DNF's due to mechanical reasons when Vettel didn't, nor that he was lucky to win the WDC.

In short, no one offended your favourite driver, ok?

When you say someone was lucky than that means underserving.

That's not really true. It just means that factors outside their control helped influence things

Exactly it means Hamilton didn't win through his own endeavours but things were gifted to him.

sometimes they are gifted, to a certain extent at least. That's just life. Leclerc's PU going bang in Bahrain was a gift to Hamilton. And so what if it was? That doesn't make Hamilton a bad driver, just means that on that occasion fortune helped him. Why should that be controversial? And why should it be so painful for you to acknowledge that luck may have played a part, when Hamilton himself said that it did? Why is it easier for him to acknowledge that than for you to on his behalf?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Best F1 driver ever?
PostPosted: Tue Apr 09, 2019 2:43 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 26, 2015 9:33 pm
Posts: 2092
pokerman wrote:
Invade wrote:
There's a chance that a few race weekends will be significantly affected by rain every season. It happening is not lucky in and of itself. Now, if we look at the specific timing of this happening given where the advantage appeared to be between Ferrari and Mercedes last year, it seems reasonable to say that Hamilton struck it rich, which I'm pretty sure he himself would agree with, given the beaming smile he has on his face when it rains and the opportunity he feels it can open up for him. But then if Hamilton was a bad wet weather driver it could have been bad luck instead, so Hamilton makes his own luck by being better than the rest and having that ace in the hand. Still, if Mercedes have a clear advantage in the dry, wet weather has high potential to add variables to the race equation which the teams are less able to control, in which case Hamilton would probably hope for the more stable and predictable dry conditions to carry the advantage home.

There was a time when great wet weather drivers were feted in particular Senna, now when it rains that particular driver is just deemed to be lucky?


Depends on timing and scenario.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Best F1 driver ever?
PostPosted: Tue Apr 09, 2019 2:45 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2012 10:39 am
Posts: 24693
pokerman wrote:
Zoue wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Zoue wrote:
pokerman wrote:
The only luck Hamilton had was to prove himself better than Vettel, to be better in the wet than Vettel, now it's luck for one driver to prove himself better than another driver, It's luck for another driver to beat another driver in a slower car?

Hamilton was better than Vettel last year. There, is that unambiguous enough for you?

Back to last weekend: do you think Hamilton was fortunate that Leclerc had an engine issue? A simple yes or no will do

Hamilton was lucky to win in Bahrain, the problem was when this got extended to the last 2 years.

Why is it a problem to acknowledge that there were occasions where luck was involved? Or are you confusing luck on specific occasions with a blanket lucky title? Because the latter is most emphatically not what was said (a point which I reinforced above anyway)

If an opponent beats you and you say he was lucky that's not acknowledging a deserved winner, you clearly said it to blanket the last 2 seasons otherwise like has been pointed out you would not overlooked individual races were Hamilton was unlucky.

I made it clear that the luck referred to was only in relation to those occasions when Ferrari had the clear quickest car, not that Hamilton was lucky every single race, a point which no doubt you will completely ignore yet again in favour of creating your own strawman


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Best F1 driver ever?
PostPosted: Tue Apr 09, 2019 2:45 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Apr 05, 2009 5:52 am
Posts: 2675
pokerman wrote:
Zoue wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Siao7 wrote:
pokerman wrote:
The only luck Hamilton had was to prove himself better than Vettel, to be better in the wet than Vettel, now it's luck for one driver to prove himself better than another driver, It's luck for another driver to beat another driver in a slower car?

Way to shift goal posts there. Having had some luck doesn't mean he was lucky to beat Vettel. You are getting confused. But yes, he has had some luck, like Baku, rain in Singapore or the fact that Ferrari got it wrong in a few races.

This does not detract from the fact that he also suffered DNF's due to mechanical reasons when Vettel didn't, nor that he was lucky to win the WDC.

In short, no one offended your favourite driver, ok?

When you say someone was lucky than that means underserving.

That's not really true. It just means that factors outside their control helped influence things

Exactly it means Hamilton didn't win through his own endeavours but things were gifted to him.

I'd argue the reverse, if you use Germany 2018 (and, I'd guess, Hungary qualifying) as an example. The rain allowed Hamilton to make up more ground than he might otherwise have in the dry. Something outside of his own influence but which allowed him to maximise his skills.

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


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Best F1 driver ever?
PostPosted: Tue Apr 09, 2019 2:45 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 30252
Zoue wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Zoue wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Zoue wrote:
People are free to use whichever units they want. It's just that Hughes specifically tends to use percentages and you don't. Which in turn inevitably means you will have different figures. I don't see why this is hard to grasp?

The thread is about best driver, not fastest, and that has been what people have been saying when comparing Alonso and Hamilton. What point are you making here?

It's a miscommunication that had someone saying that Alonso was a tier above Hamilton and the need to question that.

No it's you misinterpreting what was said and feeling the irresistible urge to err on the side of caution when determining whether Hamilton has been slighted. Someone put Alonso above Hamilton, big deal. That's not a put down of Hamilton, despite your best efforts to interpret it as that. It's simply an opinion that Alonso was the best. Given "best" is so highly subjective anyway and that no-one on here can even agree what that exactly means, one wonders why you don't allow others to have their own opinion on this?

No it's not the thread was about tiers and not rankings.

Well it was about the pecking order, strictly speaking. I don't recall seeing a rule that said it had to specifically be about tiers. But even if it was, I still don't see why you're getting so bent out of shape about someone having an opinion that Alonso was the best of all. Putting him in his own tier is simply a way of highlighting that and doesn't mean that the poster necessarily thinks he's in a completely different league. There's no definition that says Tier 1 has to be x percent better than Tier 2, for example. You're making a mountain out of a molehill here and it has to be said that you're almost looking to take offence even where none is intended. Why is it so personal to you that Hamilton must take top spot in everybody's lists?

It was set out to be about tiers by the person that made the thread, it's not my fault that the poster mistook what the thread was about and put Alonso a tier above Hamilton rather than simply saying he though Alonso was better than Hamilton, it's also unfortunate that he chose to back up a post who's intent seemed to be just to try and garner a response from Hamilton fans.

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

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

2017: 9th Place
2018: 7th place
2019: Currently 32nd

Wins: Canada 2018, Abu Dhabi 2017
Podiums: (6)


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic This topic is locked, you cannot edit posts or make further replies.

All times are UTC


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users 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