532 replies to this topic

[Peter Perfect]

Which is strange considering that he's a much better overall package as a driver now than he was back then. Maybe a bit of nostalgia on your part?

 

I agree that he's a more complete driver now, but for me greatness is measured by the competition and his only real comparison at the moment (and for the last few years) has been his teammate. In his McLaren years you could see him fighting for it.

[Speedometer]

I'm ridiculing your point (hence the quotation marks). And thanks for exactly confirming my point. You are capable of putting Schumacher's stats in perspective, yet you can't for Hamilton. Why is that? A rhetorical question, obviously.

The Ferrari nearly won in 1997, was in contention in 1998, would have won in 1999 without his accident (heck, nearly even with Irvine) and then you have 2000-2004. If the 2017/18 Mercs are a "rocketship" (again, your words), then so are those cars.

Obviously in reality you think Schumacher is among the greatest (true) and Hamilton is one of the most overrated drivers ever (your quote), and that's why you are thinking that differently about their cars.

Exactly--eager to lump all Hamilton's cars into the rocketship bracket, but nearly has a heart attack when someone follows the same logic and lumps all Schumacher's cars in the rocketship bracket

[PlayboyRacer]

I think if you're inclined to bracket Hamilton's hybrid period as "rocketship" throughout, then it's only fair Schumacher gets the same label for 2001-2004 and add 1994/95 while you're at it.

Edited by PlayboyRacer, 31 October 2020 - 12:38.

[shure]

I'm ridiculing your point (hence the quotation marks). And thanks for exactly confirming my point. You are capable of putting Schumacher's stats in perspective, yet you can't for Hamilton. Why is that? A rhetorical question, obviously.

The Ferrari nearly won in 1997, was in contention in 1998, would have won in 1999 without his accident (heck, nearly even with Irvine) and then you have 2000-2004. If the 2017/18 Mercs are a "rocketship" (again, your words), then so are those cars.

Obviously in reality you think Schumacher is among the greatest (true) and Hamilton is one of the most overrated drivers ever (your quote), and that's why you are thinking that differently about their cars.

I think Hamilton is one of the greatest, too.  Strange how you quote one part from me but not the other.  I also think he's overrated, true.  The two things aren't mutually exclusive

[sennamaster]

Nostalgic or not, he is definitely the greatest of this generation and I doubt there will be a top 5 list without Lewis in that conversation. he deserves every bit of accolade he has received  and not only his driving but what he is doing off the track as well.

 

Well done Lewis.

[GoldenColt]

I agree that he's a more complete driver now, but for me greatness is measured by the competition and his only real comparison at the moment (and for the last few years) has been his teammate. In his McLaren years you could see him fighting for it.

2018 was only two years ago, not sure why it should be discounted, even when measuring his greatness according to your own definition.

Edited by GoldenColt, 31 October 2020 - 12:41.

[sennamaster]

Amongst the greatest - of ability, quality, or eminence considerably above average.

 

Overrated -Something that doesn't live up to its reputation or hype surrounding it 

 

strange how one can be ranked amongst the greatest of all time but yet be considered overrated and we are supposed to accept that as a valid point   

 

is there any thing such as "He is amongst the greatest of all time but slightly overrated in that regard"   

Edited by sennamaster, 31 October 2020 - 12:47.

[Peter Perfect]

2018 was only two years ago, not sure why it should be discounted, even when measuring his greatness according to your own definition.

 

Not sure where I mentioned 2018. Hey, it's just my opinion. I just always thought he looked more impressive in his McLaren days. I'm sure we can agree to differ.

 

I'm not arguing the stats. They're very impressive and may never be beaten, but it's not something I really hold in high regard for any driver.

[Requiem84]

I don’t know but eh, Vettel was driving the Ferrari :-).

Lewis always has had the upper hand over Vettel. Even in the RB years. 2012 Austin is a fond memory of mine still.

Personally, I never had the feeling Lewis was stressed about Vettel. He had him in the bag when they went mano a mano (Barcelona for instance).

Given Vettel’s 2014, 2019 and 2020 it is clear why - he lacks some fundamental qualities and has a few clear weaknesses.

[shure]

I think if you're inclined to bracket Hamilton's hybrid period as "rocketship" throughout, then it's only fair Schumacher gets the same label for 2000-2004 and add 1994/95 while you're at it.

I can see that for Schumacher's 2000-2004 Ferraris, although not entirely convinced by 2003.  I think 1994/5 is more of a stretch as it only looked really consistently quick in Schumacher's hands.  

[GoldenColt]

Not sure where I mentioned 2018. Hey, it's just my opinion. I just always thought he looked more impressive in his McLaren days. I'm sure we can agree to differ.

 

I'm not arguing the stats. They're very impressive and may never be beaten, but it's not something I really hold in high regard for any driver.

That wasn't the point. You said

 

 but for me greatness is measured by the competition and his only real comparison at the moment (and for the last few years) has been his teammate. In his McLaren years you could see him fighting for it.

And I would argue that he faced competition from outside his own team in 2018, didn't he? He had to really fight for it against a car that was often quicker. Hence my surprise you seemed to ignore that particular season when measuring his "greatness".
 

Edited by GoldenColt, 31 October 2020 - 12:55.

[PlayboyRacer]

I can see that for Schumacher's 2000-2004 Ferraris, although not entirely convinced by 2003. I think 1994/5 is more of a stretch as it only looked really consistently quick in Schumacher's hands.

Why the question mark over 1994/95? Would you question the Red Bull currently being the 2nd best car on the grid because it only looks good in Verstappens hands?

Ayrton Senna was struggling to keep up with Schumacher in the early stages of 1994. The B194 was super quick all year. 1995 perhaps a touch less so but not much in it.

[shure]

Amongst the greatest - of ability, quality, or eminence considerably above average.

 

Overrated -Something that doesn't live up to its reputation or hype surrounding it 

 

strange how one can be ranked amongst the greatest of all time but yet be considered overrated and we are supposed to accept that as a valid point   

 

is there any thing such as "He is amongst the greatest of all time but slightly overrated in that regard"   

sigh, I forgot that on this forum  there are no shades of grey and everything is 100% black or 100% white.

 

Lewis Hamilton is one of the greatest drivers of all time.  I think that would be hard to dispute.  However, that doesn't make him the greatest driver of all time.  That's a lot more subjective.  Overall he's superb, but sometimes he has a fairly normal day and it's described as a masterclass or other such accolade.  People tend to use hyperbole for even the most straightforward performance and that's why I think some of his performances are overrated.  People wax lyrical about how he led from start to finish when his car is a good half second a lap faster than anyone else and I'm wondering what people are expecting exactly.  This for me falls under the "the default for a Merc is a win" comment that Lando made.

 

Doubtless everyone will see this as an attack on Lewis but it's not.  I just think sometimes people get too carried away with the praise and I think that's due in no small part to the fact that he's been winning so long people forget what contribution the car is making to that.  Oh I'm sure people are aware of it when they give it some thought, but subconsciously people equate winning with excellence and they just automatically chalk it up to a great performance even when it's just another day at the office

[shure]

Why the question mark over 1994/95? Would you question the Red Bull currently being the 2nd best car on the grid because it only looks good in Verstappens hands?

Ayrton Senna was struggling to keep up with Schumacher in the early stages of 1994. The B194 was super quick all year. 1995 perhaps a touch less so but not much in it.

If Max wasn't in the Red Bull it wouldn't look anywhere near as good.  It needs the driver to make it look good.  I don't think that's the case for the Mercedes, for example.

 

But I do think it was the case for the Benetton in 94/5.  Without Schumacher it wouldn't have looked anywhere near as strong.  Still a good car but don't think rocketship applies

[thefinalapex]

sigh, I forgot that on this forum there are no shades of grey and everything is 100% black or 100% white.

Lewis Hamilton is one of the greatest drivers of all time. I think that would be hard to dispute. However, that doesn't make him the greatest driver of all time. That's a lot more subjective. Overall he's superb, but sometimes he has a fairly normal day and it's described as a masterclass or other such accolade. People tend to use hyperbole for even the most straightforward performance and that's why I think some of his performances are overrated. People wax lyrical about how he led from start to finish when his car is a good half second a lap faster than anyone else and I'm wondering what people are expecting exactly. This for me falls under the "the default for a Merc is a win" comment that Lando made.

Doubtless everyone will see this as an attack on Lewis but it's not. I just think sometimes people get too carried away with the praise and I think that's due in no small part to the fact that he's been winning so long people forget what contribution the car is making to that. Oh I'm sure people are aware of it when they give it some thought, but subconsciously people equate winning with excellence and they just automatically chalk it up to a great performance even when it's just another day at the office

Well said but i don’t think some people will ‘get’ you’re comment because it seems that only praise is allowed and like you said some people think its either black or white and that there is nothing in between.

[P123]

I agree that he's a more complete driver now, but for me greatness is measured by the competition and his only real comparison at the moment (and for the last few years) has been his teammate. In his McLaren years you could see him fighting for it.

 

I think we could have an idea in 2017 and 2018.  Naturally, those and the McLaren years are more entertaining than say 2020, but there are still snippets to find.

 

There is a lot of spamming, and flapping, because certainly a good car will influence success.

[PlayboyRacer]

If Max wasn't in the Red Bull it wouldn't look anywhere near as good. It needs the driver to make it look good. I don't think that's the case for the Mercedes, for example.

But I do think it was the case for the Benetton in 94/5. Without Schumacher it wouldn't have looked anywhere near as strong. Still a good car but don't think rocketship applies

Hmmm that's an interesting take. Especially with the Benetton in 1994. I feel there is a leniency you're affording Schumacher that you're not really applying to Hamilton. Particularly if we compare your thoughts on Mercedes in 2017/18.

I think the B194 was the class of the field. The 2nd seat was on rotation for various reasons, I believe that played a part in *insert driver* being miles off Schumacher. 1995 it was, more or less, with Williams. Perhaps a touch behind but nothing near significant.

[thefinalapex]

I think we could have an idea in 2017 and 2018. Naturally, those and the McLaren years are more entertaining than say 2020, but there are still snippets to find.

There is a lot of spamming, and flapping, because certainly a good car will influence success.

China 2011 was brilliant for instance.

[Dhillon]

I think the B194 was the class of the field. The 2nd seat was on rotation for various reasons, I believe that played a part in *insert driver* being miles off Schumacher. 1995 it was, more or less, with Williams. Perhaps a touch behind but nothing near significant.

 

Not really, FW16 was the better car over the year. Schumacher was class of the field

[PlayboyRacer]

Not really, FW16 was the better car over the year. Schumacher was class of the field

It wasn't. Williams ended the season on par, perhaps a slight advantage. Class of the field start to finish? Nowhere near it.

[sennamaster]

92 wins, definitely that driver deserves praise. So much praise that even his detractors allude to his greatness , although they do the occasional  snipe remarks under muttered breath as they can't help it.

The fact that his greatness cannot be denied is enough no matter how much some try to underplay it 

[shure]

92 wins, definitely that driver deserves praise. So much praise that even his detractors allude to his greatness , although they do the occasional snipe remarks under muttered breath as they can't help it.
The fact that his greatness cannot be denied is enough no matter how much some try to underplay it

see this kind of post is the kind of thing I’m talking about. It’s a little too messianic for my taste

[ExEd]

all you have to do is scroll up.  I'm defending Lando's comments on Hamilton's 92 wins.  I don't think he's said anything wrong and when you look back at the stats since the start of the hybrid era you can see exactly where he's coming from.  The vast bulk of Hamilton's wins have come from him being in arguably the best car and unquestionably the best team since 2014.  He's had occasional competition, but it's been minimal.  Putting some context on the 92 wins isn't the same as saying none of the 92 wins are impressive.  Everybody always deals in  absolutes on here but Lando was clearly making a general reference, which is pretty hard to argue against IMO.

 

I'll ask you the same question I asked others before but was conveniently ignored - were you similarly outraged when Hamilton made almost identical comments about Vettel when the latter was on the verge of his 4th title?  Or is it OK because Hamilton said it whereas some upstart like Lando should know his place?

With all the respect,i think you are not.

You are further extending what Lando said to suit your argument.

"It doesn't mean anything to me, really. He's in a car which should win every race, basically."

Isn't he talking about this current Merc? 

Isnt the argument about how important is his win record?

He can not be talking about all the Merc years, im sure he knows Rosberg could win(and did), also 17-18 Ferraris as well. 

 

You carefully chose to extend that to all of his Merc seasons, clearly ignoring the fact that wins can be shared with 

other winning cars and drivers.

Rosberg snatched a lot from him , the Ferraris quite a few.

Thats your 76% really.

Edited by ExEd, 31 October 2020 - 15:09.

[ExEd]

Well said but i don’t think some people will ‘get’ you’re comment because it seems that only praise is allowed and like you said some people think its either black or white and that there is nothing in between.

 

Since you are mentioning this.

Dont you think Its all about the way you discuss it? 

"Hamilton is one of the greatest" followed by tons of arguments, on every chance, on why he is not so great after all 

doesn't really make a sense.

 

Personally i respect more that guy that cried day and night about how FIA helps Hamilton and how its all down to luck(!) than this. 

At least he had the will to openly support his thoughts no matter what.

It also shows how everyone carry their own agenda to their preference (including all of us).

For example im sure we can agree on everything about Lewis greatness until the point we touch MSC ,then no so much, no? 

Edited by ExEd, 31 October 2020 - 15:18.

[thefinalapex]

Since you are mentioning this.

Dont you think Its all about the way you discuss it? 

"Hamilton is one of the greatest" followed by tons of arguments, on every chance, on why he is not so great after all 

doesn't really make a sense.

 

Personally i respect more that guy that cried day and night about how FIA helps Hamilton and how its all down to luck(!) than this. 

At least he had the will to openly support his thoughts no matter what.

It also shows how everyone carry their own agenda to their preference (including all of us).

For example im sure we can agree on everything about Lewis greatness until the point we touch MSC ,then no so much, no? 

 

Thats the point, Either he is the greatest or he isn't very good and there seems no middle way for some as alluded by shure. In my book Lewis is one of the greats no doubt about it, people that doubt that are not to be taken seriously. You focus on the side of the arguments,and ofcourse some that are just trolling, that think he aint and i understand your point as its annoying wich i agree on, on the otherhand there are people on the otherside that blow everything he does out of proportion aswell and when they get a well balanced reply(ofcourse there are some fools for wich hamilton can never be doing anything right) they resort to a condescending tone and call everybody that doesn't agree with them a hater, salty the usual remarks. And imo that is not a way to discuss. Hamilton as with Schumacher(and Vettel and Alonso) are extremely decisive and attrack the extreme fans(the people that support them and the people that they don't like) and all the threads end the same way sadly, my driver is better then yours rinse and repeat. The beauty of F1 for me is also the context and everything that happends behind the scenes, that why i to read pieces like Mark Hughes of the driving styles certain drivers have and what seperates the great from the good etc a lot of stuff that can be interesting to discuss. These days the forums look more like a twitter spat between opposite sides.

[ExEd]

Thats the point, Either he is the greatest or he isn't very good and there seems no middle way for some as alluded by shure. In my book Lewis is one of the greats no doubt about it, people that doubt that are not to be taken seriously. You focus on the side of the arguments,and ofcourse some that are just trolling, that think he aint and i understand your point as its annoying wich i agree on, on the otherhand there are people on the otherside that blow everything he does out of proportion aswell and when they get a well balanced reply(ofcourse there are some fools for wich hamilton can never be doing anything right) they resort to a condescending tone and call everybody that doesn't agree with them a hater, salty the usual remarks. And imo that is not a way to discuss. Hamilton as with Schumacher(and Vettel and Alonso) are extremely decisive and attrack the extreme fans(the people that support them and the people that they don't like) and all the threads end the same way sadly, my driver is better then yours rinse and repeat. The beauty of F1 for me is also the context and everything that happends behind the scenes, that why i to read pieces like Mark Hughes of the driving styles certain drivers have and what seperates the great from the good etc a lot of stuff that can be interesting to discuss. These days the forums look more like a twitter spat between opposite sides.

 

You are not wrong to the most part.

But my personal issue is not if others believe Hamilton is the greatest or not. Everyone has an opinion, fine. 

Its that when we do admire him publicly comes the same posters (honestly i can name all one by one) that they wont have any of it. 

 

And if there's no secret that his fans admire him, thats why they are his fans but that goes the other way around as well and sometimes its obvious. 

I get your point, though. 

Maybe its because all here is in written language and creates an image of arguments far greater than they really are,idk. 

[thefinalapex]

You are not wrong to the most part.

But my personal issue is not if others believe Hamilton is the greatest or not. Everyone has an opinion, fine. 

Its that when we do admire him publicly comes the same posters (honestly i can name all one by one) that they wont have any of it. 

 

And if there's no secret that his fans admire him, thats why they are his fans but that goes the other way around as well and sometimes its obvious. 

I get your point, though. 

Maybe its because all here is in written language and creates an image of arguments far greater than they really are,idk. 

 

We are on the same page   Wasn't it a quote from a racedriver somewhere that went like: We are not as good as we think and not as bad as we look. It was something like that, somebody please correct me on this one, marklar help me out you seem the guy that should know that   My favorite quote is: The older we get the better we where but that could have been from a football player.

[P123]

China 2011 was brilliant for instance.

 

Indeed.  Although when you get to 92 there will be many that aren't quite as fun as that.  The average F1 season tends to only have a handful of memorable races at best, and Hamilton has about 5 solid season worth of wins.

[shure]

With all the respect,i think you are not.

You are further extending what Lando said to suit your argument.

"It doesn't mean anything to me, really. He's in a car which should win every race, basically."

Isn't he talking about this current Merc? 

Isnt the argument about how important is his win record?

He can not be talking about all the Merc years, im sure he knows Rosberg could win(and did), also 17-18 Ferraris as well. 

 

You carefully chose to extend that to all of his Merc seasons, clearly ignoring the fact that wins can be shared with 

other winning cars and drivers.

Rosberg snatched a lot from him , the Ferraris quite a few.

Thats your 76% really.

I think you're over-analysing.  I'm sure Lando didn't specifically have 76% in mind when he said what he said.  But ultimately I reckon he was referencing that fact that Lewis has been in a race and title winning car for a really long time. Otherwise it makes little sense for him to be thinking "the first 80 were impressive, but the last ones not so much."  Yes, the car of today is guaranteed easier wins that the car of 2017, but overall in the hybrid era it's been Merc all the way and I'm reasonably confident - without having any special insights into Lando's mind - that that's what he was talking about.  I didn't "carefully choose" anything: on the contrary, I was just talking about the general position and not selecting after careful consideration of every race.

 

And of course wins may be shared. Tell me, do you think it's impressive that Max keeps beating Albon?  Not to me, it isn't.  Once we've established that he's clearly better than him then it's the default position.  And that's the same view I have of Lewis beating Rosberg and Bottas.  The difference is that when Lewis beat Rosberg and Bottas it usually meant he ended up with a race win.  Yes, there were some exceptions during 2017 and 2018 but it doesn't change the overall point much.  

[EndlessMotion]

There's no such thing as the greatest F1 driver ever, it's simply not measureable. Not even by stats as you can pick them apart forever and a day taking into account the relative competition, number 1 status, teammates, regulations, tyres, being in the right car at the right time etc. Far too many variables. It's just a subjective opinion we have to serve some kind of weird satisfaction in declaring our favourite great as the all time greatest.

 

There are only stand out drivers through each era that rise to the top, regardless of whether they won 7 championships or none at all. Fangio, Clark, Villeneuve, Senna, Schumacher, Hamilton (as well as a few others no doubt) are all some of the all time greatest racing drivers in their respective eras. Trying to compare drivers that raced 10, 20, 30 years or more apart though, seems completely pointless.

 

Looking at the records and the numbers is midly interesting but they don't really tell the whole story of any drivers career, for better or worse. But growing up as a kid through the Schumacher years and watching him reach the numbers of Senna before promptly distancing himself to the rest in wins, poles, laps lead etc.....that was something truly special, even if I was never a big fan of his until his final few seasons and I found myself rooting for him against a young Alonso. But his numbers never really made me think he was the best ever, just that he'd been the absolute best in his era by a country mile and I find it the same case today with Hamilton.

 

The fact he's caught up with Michael's numbers and begun to surpass them is every bit as special as when Michael was doing his thing. Of course Hamilton's hybrid era years with Mercedes have given him dominant cars to catch and pass Michael's numbers but he had seven seasons before that where he didn't once have what can be described as a dominant car and managed to win 21 races, during a time when Red Bull had a truly dominant car for a number of seasons. Yes he had championship winning cars in 2007 and 2008 but Ferrari was a good enough match over a season for them not to be dominant cars. What he was doing at McLaren during Seb's time I feel gets massively overlooked these days since he's been winning at Mercedes for so long. Although he had an up and down time at McLaren I think he produced many of his best drives when up against a dominant Red Bull and Seb, when not many other drivers other than Alonso were able to get anywhere near Newey's masterpieces.

 

Ultimately nobody gets to 90 plus race wins and poles without having dominant cars during their career. But the greats always get a dominant car due to their performances when they weren't in the best machinery. Save the greatest of all time nonsense but absolutely well done to Lewis for his records so far. Staggering that anyone could better Michael's numbers and it's been a pleasure to witness. I'll be making the most of it until he calls time on his racing days.

 

[Marklar]

I can see that for Schumacher's 2000-2004 Ferraris, although not entirely convinced by 2003. I think 1994/5 is more of a stretch as it only looked really consistently quick in Schumacher's hands.

The 2003 car was miles quicker than the McLaren (It was by far Schumachers worst season), maybe matched by Williams. But given your take on 2017/18 this isnt saving you from the rocketship tag. 1994/95 is in a similar category, either a bit slower or a match or quicker, give or take.

But alas, the agenda is perfectly obvious here. And you continue to prove it by happily lumping all of Hamilton's cars in one category while you are perfectly capable to have a more nuanced view on Schumacher's cars.

[shure]

The 2003 car was miles quicker than the McLaren (It was by far Schumachers worst season), maybe matched by Williams. But given your take on 2017/18 this isnt saving you from the rocketship tag. 1994/95 is in a similar category, either a bit slower or a match or quicker, give or take.

But alas, the agenda is perfectly obvious here. And you continue to prove it by happily lumping all of Hamilton's cars in one category while you are perfectly capable to have a more nuanced view on Schumacher's cars.

hey if you want to call them rocketships  knock yourself out.  I'm just giving my view on it.

 

The "agenda" tag is typical fanboy nonsense.  Some of us are capable of discussing drivers without going all misty eyed.

[Risil]

What are we arguing about here? This thread has run its course.