Old Lewis vid...

[Adam43]

All true. There are only 22 places on the grid and more than that trying to go for it. However, why has this come up in a Lewis thread?

He is the one who has acheived it (someone had to). Whoever it would have been would have had an unfair advantage at some point. Money or not behind him he still had to perform on the way up; plenty have the money and don't perform.

I have absolutely no problem with this whatsoever. If someone wants to put money behind someone else that means they beleive in them (for whatever reason). That is good.

[Knowlesy]

I also think, had Lewis not been in F1 this year, many would have been up in arms that he wasn't being given a shot!

There is no problem with Lewis' route to F1 because he has the talent to back it up. This is more important than anything else. He is not Chanoch Nissany, buying a test seat to lap unbelievably slowly.

He is a paid McLaren F1 driver. The man is where he belongs.

[Frank_White]

Originally Posted by Rennen

Oh! He was winning alright, so were many others talented, past and present. But have 'you' ever tried getting to the top without "everything on a plate" 'Born Racer'? And drivers arn't Born...they are Trained...and the better the kart or car, the better the training! The best teams kit costs money, lots of it. Without an F1 team picking up the tab, Lewis in a Spyker would be doing a better job than Albert! But no better than Sutil, with just the occassional glimer e.g. like wet practice at Monaco!

I might be wrong but didn't Lewis and Sutil race in the same team in the same year and in the same series in 2005. Lewis getting 15 wins to Sutil's 2? In fact wasn't 1 of Sutil's 2 wins courtesy of a Lewis disqualification for a slightly out of shape endplate? Considering that both Lewis and Sutil were in the second year of F3 its a bit silly to claim that they have the same talent level.

This discussion is the old "born vs made" argument.

Lewis has a god given talent. A good illustration is the contrast between Ayrton and Pedro Diniz. Pedro's family had even more money then Senna and they supported his every motor-sport endeavour from he was a little boy all the way up to buying him a seat in F1. Pedro propped up the back of the grid for a while and eventually gave up.

Also look at Pele; there are millions of young boys who play soccer everyday day and could never come remotely close to his talent.

Yes experience and support in invaluable but it can never replace talent. For example Anthony Davidson is a very talented young driver but he will never be a Senna or a Schumacher or a Prost. That has been accepted by the paddock for the last 6 years. Lewis Hamilton on the other hand is a different matter!

[Adam43]

Originally Posted by Frank_White

This discussion is the old "born vs made" argument.

Also called the the nature v nurture argument. Except it isn't nature verses nurture it is nature and nurture together.

[Frank_White]

Originally Posted by AdamAshmore

Also called the the nature v nurture argument. Except it isn't nature verses nurture it is nature and nurture together.

Both are just catchy expressions to convey the argument as too whether what we are is genetically inherent or a result of our environment and upbringing.

I agree that its obviously a combination of both.

[Adam43]

I guess in some of the discussion here just centred of the made side: Can money buy you nurture?