Jump to content


Photo
* * - - - 7 votes

Top 20 Greatest F1 Drivers of all time - BBC list [split]


  • Please log in to reply
1662 replies to this topic

#101 MrMontecarlo

MrMontecarlo
  • Member

  • 546 posts
  • Joined: May 12

Posted 23 May 2012 - 08:21

BTW, this is a list about all time F1 drivers and people are only discussing Hamilton :drunk:

Advertisement

#102 Oho

Oho
  • Member

  • 7,589 posts
  • Joined: November 98

Posted 23 May 2012 - 08:52

It's pretty much impossible to argue with that list of the top ten best ever.


I guess that statement is more reflective of its maker rather than the list it comments on, keeping that in mind you are probably right.....

#103 Cult

Cult
  • Member

  • 461 posts
  • Joined: March 11

Posted 23 May 2012 - 08:59

The real question of this BBC list is where they put Schumacher. If I see his name before Abu Dhabi then the BBC are once again proving their bias against Schumacher.

I think Hamilton deserves his place at 15 due to his raw speed and his rookie year which was one of the greatest upsets in F1 history. Considering he was close to winning the season by over 10-15 points until the China debacle shows how ridiculous the achievement was.

#104 MrMontecarlo

MrMontecarlo
  • Member

  • 546 posts
  • Joined: May 12

Posted 23 May 2012 - 09:12

The real question of this BBC list is where they put Schumacher. If I see his name before Abu Dhabi then the BBC are once again proving their bias against Schumacher.

I think Hamilton deserves his place at 15 due to his raw speed and his rookie year which was one of the greatest upsets in F1 history. Considering he was close to winning the season by over 10-15 points until the China debacle shows how ridiculous the achievement was.


He could be 4th. Senna, Prost and Fangio could well be ahead of him.

#105 Oho

Oho
  • Member

  • 7,589 posts
  • Joined: November 98

Posted 23 May 2012 - 09:14

I think Hamilton deserves his place at 15 due to his raw speed and his rookie year which was one of the greatest upsets in F1 history. Considering he was close to winning the season by over 10-15 points until the China debacle shows how ridiculous the achievement was.


Given some of the guys that are listed below Lewis I do think they were rather generous toward him.

But then again a list made up of the usual suspects rarely reflects any in-depth knowledge or understanding but simply some common wisdom. The odds are I'd list, well here I go, Fangio, Clark, Senna, Schumacher and Prost in the top five and at the end of the day I know next to nothing about their true qualities which applies to oh well about 100% of the forum members having not expertise nor information for truly measured opinion.

Edited by Oho, 23 May 2012 - 09:32.


#106 Cult

Cult
  • Member

  • 461 posts
  • Joined: March 11

Posted 23 May 2012 - 09:20

He could be 4th. Senna, Prost and Fangio could well be ahead of him.


I thought most people had agreed that Schumacher had eclipsed both Prost and Fangio back in 2002 let alone 2004. Just because he's not as dominant as he once was (he's 43 and the oldest driver on the grid by some margin - obviously ignoring De La Rosa who's always been way off the pace).

#107 Zippel

Zippel
  • Member

  • 1,031 posts
  • Joined: December 07

Posted 23 May 2012 - 10:59

I think Hamilton deserves his place at 15 due to his raw speed and his rookie year which was one of the greatest upsets in F1 history. Considering he was close to winning the season by over 10-15 points until the China debacle shows how ridiculous the achievement was.


How long must Hamilton's reputation be based on his rookie year? Even Jacques Villeneuve's was being revised by this stage. No way is Hamilton top 20 of all time material... yet. His season last year put a dent to that.

#108 SirRacer

SirRacer
  • Member

  • 1,162 posts
  • Joined: February 12

Posted 23 May 2012 - 11:03

I think Hamilton deserves his place at 15 due to his raw speed and his rookie year which was one of the greatest upsets in F1 history. Considering he was close to winning the season by over 10-15 points until the China debacle shows how ridiculous the achievement was.


I rate higher someone that goes from 6 to 10 than someone that goes from 10 to 6.


#109 Cult

Cult
  • Member

  • 461 posts
  • Joined: March 11

Posted 23 May 2012 - 11:29

How long must Hamilton's reputation be based on his rookie year? Even Jacques Villeneuve's was being revised by this stage. No way is Hamilton top 20 of all time material... yet. His season last year put a dent to that.


I don't have long to comment but I'd like to point out that JV and LH are vastly different. If you look at the evidence, one challenged a 36 year old who had been clear second fiddle to Schumacher and Prost, two of the three greatest drivers in the era. His car was the strongest by a long way and he finished second in the championship (where you'd expect).

Lewis Hamilton beat the greatest driver of his era and reigning double world champion Alonso in his first season as well as fending off competition from the strong Ferraris.

Not only this but Hamilton backed 2007 up with a somewhat flawed but ultimately deserved championship year against the faster Ferrari (who had the vast majority of fastest laps etc.). He carried this on through 2009 and 2010 taking the third best car to some dominant displays and wins. 2011 was an awful year but he took the 2009 and 2010 McLaren places only Alonso and perhaps Vettel could.

His reputation is not from just his rookie year, it's just the greatest example due to the competition, his consistency and his dethroning of Alonso.

#110 Jimisgod

Jimisgod
  • Member

  • 2,770 posts
  • Joined: July 09

Posted 23 May 2012 - 11:39

Clark, Fangio, Prost.

Top three in no particular order. A certain pair of drivers don't deserve to be there by virtue of some filthy filthy moves.

#111 GotYoubyTheBalls

GotYoubyTheBalls
  • Member

  • 301 posts
  • Joined: March 12

Posted 23 May 2012 - 12:14

brabham must be an automatic inclusion in the top 10.

3 WDC's and almost a fourth.

Still in winning form at 43 years old.

Not to mention the work he did building a great team and having a major hand in developing the Mclaren team too.

#112 OfficeLinebacker

OfficeLinebacker
  • Member

  • 14,019 posts
  • Joined: December 07

Posted 23 May 2012 - 12:41

Clark, Fangio, Prost.

Top three in no particular order. A certain pair of drivers don't deserve to be there by virtue of some filthy filthy moves.

>implying Prost doesn't have a filthy move on his resume as well

#113 discover23

discover23
  • Member

  • 3,906 posts
  • Joined: September 11

Posted 23 May 2012 - 16:40

Lewis Hamilton beat the greatest driver of his era and reigning double world champion Alonso in his first season as well as fending off competition from the strong Ferraris.


ehhh. Not really.. did you watch the races?


#114 fabr68

fabr68
  • Member

  • 3,963 posts
  • Joined: January 10

Posted 23 May 2012 - 16:42

I don't have long to comment but I'd like to point out that JV and LH are vastly different. If you look at the evidence, one challenged a 36 year old who had been clear second fiddle to Schumacher and Prost, two of the three greatest drivers in the era. His car was the strongest by a long way and he finished second in the championship (where you'd expect).

Lewis Hamilton beat the greatest driver of his era and reigning double world champion Alonso in his first season as well as fending off competition from the strong Ferraris.

Not only this but Hamilton backed 2007 up with a somewhat flawed but ultimately deserved championship year against the faster Ferrari (who had the vast majority of fastest laps etc.). He carried this on through 2009 and 2010 taking the third best car to some dominant displays and wins. 2011 was an awful year but he took the 2009 and 2010 McLaren places only Alonso and perhaps Vettel could.

His reputation is not from just his rookie year, it's just the greatest example due to the competition, his consistency and his dethroning of Alonso.


Using this argument, then Button will make it much higher than Hamilton on that list

#115 inca_roads

inca_roads
  • Member

  • 1,430 posts
  • Joined: February 06

Posted 23 May 2012 - 16:57

I don't have long to comment but I'd like to point out that JV and LH are vastly different. If you look at the evidence, one challenged a 36 year old who had been clear second fiddle to Schumacher and Prost, two of the three greatest drivers in the era. His car was the strongest by a long way and he finished second in the championship (where you'd expect).

Lewis Hamilton beat the greatest driver of his era and reigning double world champion Alonso in his first season as well as fending off competition from the strong Ferraris.

Not only this but Hamilton backed 2007 up with a somewhat flawed but ultimately deserved championship year against the faster Ferrari (who had the vast majority of fastest laps etc.). He carried this on through 2009 and 2010 taking the third best car to some dominant displays and wins. 2011 was an awful year but he took the 2009 and 2010 McLaren places only Alonso and perhaps Vettel could.

His reputation is not from just his rookie year, it's just the greatest example due to the competition, his consistency and his dethroning of Alonso.


:up:

#116 Fox1

Fox1
  • Member

  • 632 posts
  • Joined: November 09

Posted 23 May 2012 - 16:58

Using this argument, then Button will make it much higher than Hamilton on that list

Did JB beat Ralf in 2000? If so then yes, I'd have to agree with you there. Much more impressive.

#117 discover23

discover23
  • Member

  • 3,906 posts
  • Joined: September 11

Posted 23 May 2012 - 17:12

Did JB beat Ralf in 2000? If so then yes, I'd have to agree with you there. Much more impressive.

that only proves that Button improved, as opposed to Lewis who degraded. Not all drivers are the same..

#118 HPT

HPT
  • Member

  • 1,165 posts
  • Joined: April 10

Posted 23 May 2012 - 17:19

So Lewis is above Jack Brabham, Fittipaldi and Piquet.........

There goes any credibility that the article had. Invalid list.


+1

#119 Alx09

Alx09
  • Member

  • 1,278 posts
  • Joined: September 09

Posted 23 May 2012 - 17:20

that only proves that Button improved, as opposed to Lewis who degraded. Not all drivers are the same..

Tyres and some cars degraded, Lewis matured.

Jack Brabham, Fittipaldi and Piquet

I rate him above them. Just because they were good long ago doesn't mean they were better.

Edited by Alx09, 23 May 2012 - 17:25.


Advertisement

#120 Fox1

Fox1
  • Member

  • 632 posts
  • Joined: November 09

Posted 23 May 2012 - 17:28

that only proves that Button improved, as opposed to Lewis who degraded. Not all drivers are the same..

I guess this is where I go crazy with F1 stats trying to prove that JB was crap and Lewis was great.

All I can say is that history does not support your argument. They both improved; that's what human beings do naturally.

Edited by Fox1, 23 May 2012 - 17:35.


#121 Cesc

Cesc
  • Member

  • 793 posts
  • Joined: March 11

Posted 23 May 2012 - 17:44

I don't have long to comment but I'd like to point out that JV and LH are vastly different. If you look at the evidence, one challenged a 36 year old who had been clear second fiddle to Schumacher and Prost, two of the three greatest drivers in the era. His car was the strongest by a long way and he finished second in the championship (where you'd expect).

Lewis Hamilton beat the greatest driver of his era and reigning double world champion Alonso in his first season as well as fending off competition from the strong Ferraris.

Not only this but Hamilton backed 2007 up with a somewhat flawed but ultimately deserved championship year against the faster Ferrari (who had the vast majority of fastest laps etc.). He carried this on through 2009 and 2010 taking the third best car to some dominant displays and wins. 2011 was an awful year but he took the 2009 and 2010 McLaren places only Alonso and perhaps Vettel could.

His reputation is not from just his rookie year, it's just the greatest example due to the competition, his consistency and his dethroning of Alonso.


I think that 2007 gave wrong impression on Hamilton abilities. There was too much hype and a very rare environment in the team (Alonso was not confortable there... to say the least, something that played in Lewis favour) as well, somehow I feel that Hamilton reputation is still living from that year. If you think twice and see the numbers, I don't see that Hamilton was really faster than Alonso. Now, loking back, I think that year was not very positive for Lewis.

Look at Vettel, had a more traditional career start: Oportunity in a fine car (BMW), he shines and gets a seat for a full season in Toro Rosso, where he definetely did a great job and also got the oportunity all great talents need, the victory in Monza. The same that Alonso had in 2003 in Hungaroring.

Hamilton skipped all those steps right into a super team and almost the best car (in 2007, the McLaren was at the same level than Ferrari, 2 tenths up or down) alongside Alonso in the most weird year in recent F1 history. I think that cannot be used as a benchmark for rating Hamilton abilities.

#122 MP422

MP422
  • Member

  • 1,855 posts
  • Joined: November 11

Posted 23 May 2012 - 17:49

that only proves that Button improved, as opposed to Lewis who degraded. Not all drivers are the same..


Nonsense, by your logic Vettel has degraded !!! :yawn face:


Edit: and Button... i haven't seen a pole position or 6 straight victories in 3 seasons.

Edited by MP422, 23 May 2012 - 17:50.


#123 bub

bub
  • Member

  • 2,248 posts
  • Joined: July 11

Posted 23 May 2012 - 17:54

Regardless of all that Alonso was and still is considered the best driver in F1 and Hamilton matched him in his rookie year. That's impressive, Alonso would have beaten most others. Also since then Hamilton has put in some great performances and only had one bad year (actually only a few bad races/moments). He's clearly right up there with Alonso in terms of ability.

#124 tifosiMac

tifosiMac
  • Member

  • 6,665 posts
  • Joined: January 10

Posted 23 May 2012 - 17:55

Look at Vettel, had a more traditional career start: Oportunity in a fine car (BMW), he shines and gets a seat for a full season in Toro Rosso, where he definetely did a great job and also got the oportunity all great talents need, the victory in Monza. The same that Alonso had in 2003 in Hungaroring.

Vettel and Hamilton are very similar in the respect they were lucky enough to be in driver development programmes. Vettel went the long route to the top because there was not a place available at Red Bull and BMW were also not in a position once Kubica returned from injury. Just because Lewis had a better opportunity from the off, does not mean he deserved it any less or can be used to discredit him. Life is about taking chances and Lewis has proven during his time in the sport that he deserves to be where he is. Wasting time making up the midfield maybe some people views of doing an F1 apprenticeship, but Lewis was a worthy race winner very early on with some very mature drives.

#125 TheBunk

TheBunk
  • Member

  • 4,083 posts
  • Joined: May 11

Posted 23 May 2012 - 17:58

brabham must be an automatic inclusion in the top 10.

3 WDC's and almost a fourth.

Still in winning form at 43 years old.

Not to mention the work he did building a great team and having a major hand in developing the Mclaren team too.



And yet chief F1 writer Andrew Benson, following F1 for 17 years, has put Hamilton ahead of Brabham. Shocking really. :down:

#126 korzeniow

korzeniow
  • Member

  • 5,671 posts
  • Joined: January 09

Posted 23 May 2012 - 18:08

Vettel and Hamilton are very similar in the respect they were lucky enough to be in driver development programmes. Vettel went the long route to the top because there was not a place available at Red Bull and BMW were also not in a position once Kubica returned from injury. Just because Lewis had a better opportunity from the off, does not mean he deserved it any less or can be used to discredit him. Life is about taking chances and Lewis has proven during his time in the sport that he deserves to be where he is. Wasting time making up the midfield maybe some people views of doing an F1 apprenticeship, but Lewis was a worthy race winner very early on with some very mature drives.


Yes, he drove matured races in his early career but he also had childlish drives later in his career :drunk: You suppose to improve overtime, Hamilton isn't doing that. But this seasin he's doing well, we will see at the end

#127 Cult

Cult
  • Member

  • 461 posts
  • Joined: March 11

Posted 23 May 2012 - 18:10

I think that 2007 gave wrong impression on Hamilton abilities. There was too much hype and a very rare environment in the team (Alonso was not confortable there... to say the least, something that played in Lewis favour) as well, somehow I feel that Hamilton reputation is still living from that year. If you think twice and see the numbers, I don't see that Hamilton was really faster than Alonso. Now, loking back, I think that year was not very positive for Lewis.

Look at Vettel, had a more traditional career start: Oportunity in a fine car (BMW), he shines and gets a seat for a full season in Toro Rosso, where he definetely did a great job and also got the oportunity all great talents need, the victory in Monza. The same that Alonso had in 2003 in Hungaroring.

Hamilton skipped all those steps right into a super team and almost the best car (in 2007, the McLaren was at the same level than Ferrari, 2 tenths up or down) alongside Alonso in the most weird year in recent F1 history. I think that cannot be used as a benchmark for rating Hamilton abilities.


If you look at the numbers you'll realise that Alonso outqualified Hamilton in 4 of the first 5 races and then subsequently lost 8 of the next 11 (excluding Hungary as Alonso's time was faster but his position was lower because of the revenge tactic).

This tells you all you need to know about the numbers. Alonso was very comfortable in the team to begin with, he started to become uncomfortable when the 'rookie' who was going to lose McLaren the constructors championship started battling for race wins. I'm pretty sure you cannot say that Alonso was uncomfortable so Hamilton's results were fake, he was uncomfortable due to the pressure of having a fast teammate and the equal driver status (something which Alonso should have been able to handle). It was a symptom of Hamilton's pace rather than the cause of Alonso's comparatively lesser performance.

Don't get me wrong I think Alonso is an amazing driver but it doesn't skew my observations from 2007. Hamilton was amazing and continued to be amazing for the three/four years after.



#128 revlec

revlec
  • Member

  • 2,721 posts
  • Joined: August 10

Posted 23 May 2012 - 18:15

Look at Vettel, had a more traditional career start: Oportunity in a fine car (BMW), he shines and gets a seat for a full season in Toro Rosso, where he definetely did a great job and also got the oportunity all great talents need, the victory in Monza. The same that Alonso had in 2003 in Hungaroring.

Hamilton skipped all those steps right into a super team and almost the best car (in 2007, the McLaren was at the same level than Ferrari, 2 tenths up or down) alongside Alonso in the most weird year in recent F1 history. I think that cannot be used as a benchmark for rating Hamilton abilities.


Again with this weak argument??
Tell me how many years did VET/ALO spend in the lower series and how many Championships they won prior F1.
:stoned:
_
Who was crashing in Spa 2010 with BUT, LIU? or in Turkey 2010 with WEB? who was jumping the start that same year or kissing the wall in the wet?
My bad.. those two are always excellent.. :)

Edited by revlec, 23 May 2012 - 18:18.


#129 as65p

as65p
  • Member

  • 17,284 posts
  • Joined: June 04

Posted 23 May 2012 - 18:19

I think that 2007 gave wrong impression on Hamilton abilities. There was too much hype and a very rare environment in the team (Alonso was not confortable there... to say the least, something that played in Lewis favour) as well, somehow I feel that Hamilton reputation is still living from that year. If you think twice and see the numbers, I don't see that Hamilton was really faster than Alonso. Now, loking back, I think that year was not very positive for Lewis.

Look at Vettel, had a more traditional career start: Oportunity in a fine car (BMW), he shines and gets a seat for a full season in Toro Rosso, where he definetely did a great job and also got the oportunity all great talents need, the victory in Monza. The same that Alonso had in 2003 in Hungaroring.

Hamilton skipped all those steps right into a super team and almost the best car (in 2007, the McLaren was at the same level than Ferrari, 2 tenths up or down) alongside Alonso in the most weird year in recent F1 history. I think that cannot be used as a benchmark for rating Hamilton abilities.


I think the (understandable) mistake many people made was to assume Hamilton would have a upward curve like any other rookie after his first year, which would have meant no less than MS-like domination, or even better. Yet as you pointed out, him lucking into the best car was an oddity, and it spoiled the future expectations of people. This haunts discussion to this day, with people still looking for excuses everywhere as to why he's not winning every race and can get beaten fair and square by other top drivers. What made it worse, LH appeared to fall for the hype himself at times...

OTOH I agree with TifosiMac, he did more than enough to justify this top seat in 2007, and it shouldn't be held against him as such that he had that rare lucky break with the 2007 McLaren.

#130 revlec

revlec
  • Member

  • 2,721 posts
  • Joined: August 10

Posted 23 May 2012 - 18:27

I think the (understandable) mistake many people made was to assume Hamilton would have a upward curve like any other rookie after his first year, which would have meant no less than MS-like domination, or even better. Yet as you pointed out, him lucking into the best car was an oddity, and it spoiled the future expectations of people. This haunts discussion to this day, with people still looking for excuses everywhere as to why he's not winning every race and can get beaten fair and square by other top drivers. What made it worse, LH appeared to fall for the hype himself at times...

OTOH I agree with TifosiMac, he did more than enough to justify this top seat in 2007, and it shouldn't be held against him as such that he had that rare lucky break with the 2007 McLaren.


If you are exceptional(like Lewis clearly is) you will have the best opportunities even in your first year.
He won 1 WDC so Ron Dennis made the right decision.
ALO was known as the one who was going to dominate the sport after his double WDCs in 2005 and 2006. it never happened and it's not going to happen.

Edited by revlec, 23 May 2012 - 18:28.


#131 Cesc

Cesc
  • Member

  • 793 posts
  • Joined: March 11

Posted 23 May 2012 - 18:29

Don't get me wrong I think Alonso is an amazing driver but it doesn't skew my observations from 2007. Hamilton was amazing and continued to be amazing for the three/four years after.


And don't get me wrong neither, some peolple said that Hamilton could be the best of all time, and curiously he has vanished a little bit. He's the brave one of the grid. I think Hamilton is the current Mansell, but he is not the current Senna as he would like. So for me, his best season has been the rookie season. I wouldn't use that season as a benchmark of who is good or bad.

In your numbers, you said that Alonso outqualified than Hamilton in 4 of the first 5 races. Curiously, the 5th one was Monaco, were all problems begin, and although Alonso was the fastest guy in every single session that GP (except Sat morning in wet) some press (and Hamiltion himself...or his sorroundings) started a campaing for equal treatment and they claimed that the team prevented him to win (I find it hilarious, but many people believed) Then all weird qualifying episodes begin. This has been said many times in another topic, sorry for the intrussion.

So again, a very weird year that cannot be used as a benchmarking of what is Hamilton capable to do in the long run.

#132 Cesc

Cesc
  • Member

  • 793 posts
  • Joined: March 11

Posted 23 May 2012 - 18:35

If you are exceptional(like Lewis clearly is) you will have the best opportunities even in your first year.
He won 1 WDC so Ron Dennis made the right decision.
ALO was known as the one who was going to dominate the sport after his double WDCs in 2005 and 2006. it never happened and it's not going to happen.


Does this mean that Alonso was not that exceptional for starting his career in a Minardi? I think your statement is a little bit naive. We all know that luck and contacts are a key part of this sport.

Lewis is a super class, but currently is quite below the expectations he raised during his first year.

Really, what I do think Hamilton needs is a couple of years in a Force India or Toro Rosso.

For the second statement, clearly Alonso is not dominating the sport, but not because his skills but because the sport itself is changing every year. Schumacher dominated F1 for several years due to a weird combination of skills, team engineering and management, stable rules and luck. That is not likely to happen in every two years rules change, tires change, etc...

Edited by Cesc, 23 May 2012 - 18:39.


#133 bub

bub
  • Member

  • 2,248 posts
  • Joined: July 11

Posted 23 May 2012 - 18:38

Lewis is a super class, but currently is quite below the expectations he raised during his first year.


Those expectations were unrealistic. He's one of the best in a very strong field. Can't ask for much more than that.


#134 korzeniow

korzeniow
  • Member

  • 5,671 posts
  • Joined: January 09

Posted 23 May 2012 - 18:39

Does this mean that Alonso was not that exceptional for starting his career in a Minardi? I think your statement is a little bit naive. We all know that luck and contacts are a key part of this sport.

Lewis is a super class, but currently is quite below the expectations he raised during his first year.

For the second statement, clearly Alonso is not dominating the sport, but not because his skills but because the sport itself is changing every year. Schumacher dominated F1 for several years due to a weird combination of skills, team engineering and management, stable rules and luck. That is not likely to happen in every two years rules change, tires change, etc...


Spot on about Schumacher. Vettel had similar chance to dominate for couple of years, because starting from 2009 they were the best team. But it's obvious current rules were made against them.

#135 Cesc

Cesc
  • Member

  • 793 posts
  • Joined: March 11

Posted 23 May 2012 - 18:40

Those expectations were unrealistic. He's one of the best in a very strong field. Can't ask for much more than that.

:up:


#136 tifosiMac

tifosiMac
  • Member

  • 6,665 posts
  • Joined: January 10

Posted 23 May 2012 - 18:41

Those expectations were unrealistic. He's one of the best in a very strong field. Can't ask for much more than that.

We have a winner. :up:

#137 discover23

discover23
  • Member

  • 3,906 posts
  • Joined: September 11

Posted 23 May 2012 - 18:42

I guess this is where I go crazy with F1 stats trying to prove that JB was crap and Lewis was great.

All I can say is that history does not support your argument. They both improved; that's what human beings do naturally.

Talent wise I still believe that Lewis is better, plus he is a better racer but he is not as consistent as he was back in 07.. he had a bad year last year and a terrible ending in 2010 that took him out of contention for the title.. Yes, he has improved in some areas but you cannot say that he improved his cosistency because he simply did not.. .

#138 as65p

as65p
  • Member

  • 17,284 posts
  • Joined: June 04

Posted 23 May 2012 - 18:43

If you are exceptional(like Lewis clearly is) you will have the best opportunities even in your first year.
He won 1 WDC so Ron Dennis made the right decision.
ALO was known as the one who was going to dominate the sport after his double WDCs in 2005 and 2006. it never happened and it's not going to happen.


Well, you appear to be a case in point. Yes, Hamilton was (and is) exceptional compared to the whole grid. Just as exceptional, as Vettel, Alonso, Kubica, Button... but not, overall, more than that. Over a sample as large as we have now, the stats don't lie. Hamilton can hack it with the best on any given day, but he also can get beaten by them on any given day.

I agree that people might have fallen into the same trap after Alonso double WDC, but that doesn't disprove what I said about Hamilton in the slightest. Interestingly enough Alonso himself seemed to be very aware of the realities of live when he said around 2006 that he would count himself fortunate to retire with 3 WDCs, which many at the time took for a gross understatement.

As to the BBC list and corresponding article, I had to chuckle a bit with Benson basically repeating what I always said about the 2008 WDC battle. :D

This thread should be fun the day Vettel, and especially Alonso, appear on the list. :cat:

#139 tifosiMac

tifosiMac
  • Member

  • 6,665 posts
  • Joined: January 10

Posted 23 May 2012 - 18:45

OTOH I agree with TifosiMac, he did more than enough to justify this top seat in 2007, and it shouldn't be held against him as such that he had that rare lucky break with the 2007 McLaren.

Thank you. :)

If he was crap, he wouldn't have been in the seat in the first place and he earnt his way up to the sport with hard work and success in lower categories. Lewis was very lucky to a degree but he was also very savvy to be where he was and no amount of bringing it up as a negative takes anything away from it in the slightest.

Advertisement

#140 discover23

discover23
  • Member

  • 3,906 posts
  • Joined: September 11

Posted 23 May 2012 - 18:45

Edit: and Button... i haven't seen a pole position or 6 straight victories in 3 seasons.

Button improved no doubt.. I am not saying that he is better than Lewis..

#141 Disgrace

Disgrace
  • RC Forum Host

  • 9,888 posts
  • Joined: January 10

Posted 23 May 2012 - 18:45

Those expectations were unrealistic. He's one of the best in a very strong field. Can't ask for much more than that.


I'm not entirely sure I agree. I agree to an extent that to have such expectations all the time would be unrealistic, especially with the strength of the field as you say, the closeness of it too.

But I don't think he has replicated his 2007 form fully yet. Ironically I feel his weakest season was in fact his championship winning year. Personally, I think you can ask a bit more than being one of the best, and that is to be the best.

My opinion is that Alonso is the current best, and Hamilton technically beat him in his debut year, so perhaps my expectations are higher of him. That is to say, I am more disappointed when I see him underperform compared to say Massa, of whom I expect it.

Edited by Disgrace, 23 May 2012 - 18:47.


#142 revlec

revlec
  • Member

  • 2,721 posts
  • Joined: August 10

Posted 23 May 2012 - 18:45

Does this mean that Alonso was not that exceptional for starting his career in a Minardi? I think your statement is a little bit naive. We all know that luck and contacts are a key part of this sport.

Lewis is a super class, but currently is quite below the expectations he raised during his first year.

For the second statement, clearly Alonso is not dominating the sport, but not because his skills but because the sport itself is changing every year. Schumacher dominated F1 for several years due to a weird combination of skills, team engineering and management, stable rules and luck. That is not likely to happen in every two years rules change, tires change, etc...

Exceptional:
1. Being an exception; uncommon.
2. Well above average;
3. Deviating widely from a norm.
4. having much more than average intelligence, ability, or skill

http://www.thefreedi...com/exceptional


Any sane team manager would have chosen HAM over ALO, VET, KUB, ROS, MSC, RAI, in their first year in F1 given his accomplishments in lower series formula.
If you are exceptional, they will create a job for you even if they are not hiring... i know this... experience? overrated.

#143 TheBunk

TheBunk
  • Member

  • 4,083 posts
  • Joined: May 11

Posted 23 May 2012 - 18:49

This thread should be fun the day Vettel, and especially Alonso, appear on the list. :cat:



I cant wait :)

#144 as65p

as65p
  • Member

  • 17,284 posts
  • Joined: June 04

Posted 23 May 2012 - 18:54

Any sane team manager would have chosen HAM over ALO, VET, KUB, ROS, MSC, RAI, in their first year in F1 given his accomplishments in lower series formula.
If you are exceptional, they will create a job for you even if they are not hiring... i know this... experience? overrated.


Overrated? :lol: The value of experience was proven beyond doubt by the last races of 2007.

And that lower series stuff only goes so far. Sometimes it's a good indicator (Senna), sometimes it doesn't mean much (Magnussen on the negative side, Schumacher on the positive - you couldn't distinguish MS form Frentzen or Wendlinger before he came into F1). Hamilton appears somewhere in between.

#145 Watkins74

Watkins74
  • Member

  • 5,751 posts
  • Joined: February 10

Posted 23 May 2012 - 18:57

This thread should be fun the day Vettel, and especially Alonso, appear on the list. :cat:

That might be Sig. material..."Alonso and Vettel -better than you know who- certified by the BBC". :lol:

#146 ayali

ayali
  • Member

  • 729 posts
  • Joined: April 11

Posted 23 May 2012 - 19:04

That might be Sig. material..."Alonso and Vettel -better than you know who- certified by the BBC". :lol:

:lol: :up:

#147 fabr68

fabr68
  • Member

  • 3,963 posts
  • Joined: January 10

Posted 23 May 2012 - 19:09

"Hamilton did win the championship the following year but only by the skin of his teeth after making far too many mistakes in a battle with an inferior opponent - Ferrari's Felipe Massa."

Ever the humble chief F1 writer, that Andrew Benson :) And no, I dont wanna go into a debate whether this is true or not, but its just so unnecessary to explicitly put down other drivers to lift Hamilton.


It kind of makes you wonder how a driver could be in 15th place ahead of multiple championship winning drivers who did not battle with "inferior" opponents and did not make too many mistakes.

Edited by fabr68, 23 May 2012 - 19:10.


#148 revlec

revlec
  • Member

  • 2,721 posts
  • Joined: August 10

Posted 23 May 2012 - 19:22

That would have been no problem for Alonso too, if only Vettel had played along and done a Hamilton in the last races of 2010... unfortunately Seb decided to not crack...;)

BTW, the jury on Hamilton is still out how he would handle a team change initially. Maybe we'll know more in a years time? :D


ALO and VET deserve to be higher than HAM on the list because they are 2xWDC and have more wins.
Lewis has more "unlocked" potential, but it's not enough. He needs to deliver now.

Edited by revlec, 23 May 2012 - 19:24.


#149 Fox1

Fox1
  • Member

  • 632 posts
  • Joined: November 09

Posted 23 May 2012 - 19:44

This thread should be fun the day Vettel, and especially Alonso, appear on the list. :cat:

How so? IMO the main reason people are even talking about this (totally subjective) list is because Lewis' name is on it. Heck, if the Beeb are smart they would make Lewis #1 and have this place go into meltdown....They won't do that tho.

#150 revlec

revlec
  • Member

  • 2,721 posts
  • Joined: August 10

Posted 23 May 2012 - 19:51

While you're at it, why not add a few more things in from the 2nd half of 2007? I'd like to see other drivers perform like Alonso in Spa or Monza in that kind of team atmosphere. Of course, the short-sighted have a habit by definition of only lookig at half the picture, at best.


Lewis is doing great this year so far. :)