Who is the Greatest F1 driver of all time?

[Skam85]

Originally Posted by ascarracinguk

Right.......so schumacher gets credit for Hamilton’s work now even though he’s not been in the car for 9 years...I do hope that’s tongue in cheek lol.

Russell Is a talented lad but let’s not forget he’s done hundreds of laps in that car in testing and thousands of laps in the Mercedes sim, he wasn’t new to the car.

You’re talking about an experienced race fit driver jumping into a familiar car....

...again, it’s funny, when Max jumped into the red bull in 2016, no one was talking about it being all about the car when he won....it was Max’s talent. Why aren’t we applying the same rules again?

It's not tongue in cheek at all. He was there when they were building in 2010-12, the infrastructure that is there today and Mercedes' success can be attributed to two major factors - Schumacher and co helping to build a very impressive team, and Merc nailing the PU changes.

At the end of the day, if Hamilton had not changed from McLaren to Mercedes (which many at the time said was going to be a regretful decision for Hamilton) - he would not have 7 titles, 90+ race wins, 100 poles, or be in the conversation for the GOAT.

Was it luck? Was it seeing the writing on the wall at McLaren? Hamilton had no idea Mercedes were going to be as good as they have been. Even the most rose-tinted Lewis fans can agree that. Or maybe Hamilton realised a team built by the greatest driver of his generation may not be a half bad place to be...

Some could argue that Alonso has been as unfortunate in his team change decisions as Hamilton has been fortunate. But that's an argument for another day.

You're a one-eyed Hamilton fan, that much is clear. But sometimes it's wise to use both eyes.

[ascarracinguk]

Originally Posted by Skam85

It's not tongue in cheek at all. He was there when they were building in 2010-12, the infrastructure that is there today and Mercedes' success can be attributed to two major factors - Schumacher and co helping to build a very impressive team, and Merc nailing the PU changes.

At the end of the day, if Hamilton had not changed from McLaren to Mercedes (which many at the time said was going to be a regretful decision for Hamilton) - he would not have 7 titles, 90+ race wins, 100 poles, or be in the conversation for the GOAT.

Was it luck? Was it seeing the writing on the wall at McLaren? Hamilton had no idea Mercedes were going to be as good as they have been. Even the most rose-tinted Lewis fans can agree that. Or maybe Hamilton realised a team built by the greatest driver of his generation may not be a half bad place to be...

Some could argue that Alonso has been as unfortunate in his team change decisions as Hamilton has been fortunate. But that's an argument for another day.

You're a one-eyed Hamilton fan, that much is clear. But sometimes it's wise to use both eyes.

I’m not one eyed at all, and recognise that Hamilton has had very impressive cars over the last few years, but I am simply asking people on here to apply the same rules to other drivers in dominant cars as they are to Lewis....seems like I’m one of the few with both eyes open

It amazes me how people like yourself claim that it’s just luck and everyone else’s hard work that has put Lewis where he is today....and yet when you talk of other drivers like schumacher it’s all down to their hard work....even crediting them with someone else’s success after being out of the sport for 9 years with the sport going through multiple rule changes in that time.

Schumacher, the greatest of his generation? Are you sure?? Apply the same rules you are for Hamilton...you know, subservient teammates, new parts before they got them, one off special tyres that no other team on the grid had, flexi wings, bargrboards, the biggest budget in F1...surely he can’t be?

I’m all for playing this silly game but if you apply the rules to Hamilton then apply them to schumacher too ;-)

Utterly laughable

[Skam85]

Originally Posted by ascarracinguk

I’m not one eyed at all, and recognise that Hamilton has had very impressive cars over the last few years, but I am simply asking people on here to apply the same rules to other drivers in dominant cars as they are to Lewis....seems like I’m one of the few with both eyes open

It amazes me how people like yourself claim that it’s just luck and everyone else’s hard work that has put Lewis where he is today....and yet when you talk of other drivers like schumacher it’s all down to their hard work....even crediting them with someone else’s success after being out of the sport for 9 years with the sport going through multiple rule changes in that time.

Schumacher, the greatest of his generation? Are you sure?? Apply the same rules you are for Hamilton...you know, subservient teammates, new parts before they got them, one off special tyres that no other team on the grid had, flexi wings, bargrboards, the biggest budget in F1...surely he can’t be?

I’m all for playing this silly game but if you apply the rules to Hamilton then apply them to schumacher too ;-)

Utterly laughable

Can you please point out where I stated definitively that Hamilton's success is down to luck?

[ascarracinguk]

Originally Posted by Skam85

Can you please point out where I stated definitively that Hamilton's success is down to luck?

So if you’re not claiming it’s luck, then it’s through Hamilton’s hard work. Thanks for clearing that up.

Are you going to apply the same rules to others or not?

Again I’m happy to play this little game, but be fair now...

[Peter Mallett]

Hamilton's early career is possibly where his success really comes from. Schumacher, Button, Rosberg et al came up through karting but crucially they weren't selected by a (then) top team to be developed through to formula 1. Not sure whether you could call it luck or just a recognition of his obvious abilities at that young age. I think he probably learned the background skills (non racing) whilst being mentored by McLaren so when he finally got on the grid the non racing skills were pretty much in place. Hence his stellar first season.

So, if correct, I feel this rather than "luck" has made him what he is and so far he is the only product of such a scheme to come through. I am discounting the Red Bull academy because that is more of a wide ranging pool of talent. Will there be others? No idea but it will surely depend on whether there are young talents, with the support Hamilton had, coming to the notice of team managers.

[ascarracinguk]

Originally Posted by Peter Mallett

Hamilton's early career is possibly where his success really comes from. Schumacher, Button, Rosberg et al came up through karting but crucially they weren't selected by a (then) top team to be developed through to formula 1. Not sure whether you could call it luck or just a recognition of his obvious abilities at that young age. I think he probably learned the background skills (non racing) whilst being mentored by McLaren so when he finally got on the grid the non racing skills were pretty much in place. Hence his stellar first season.

So, if correct, I feel this rather than "luck" has made him what he is and so far he is the only product of such a scheme to come through. I am discounting the Red Bull academy because that is more of a wide ranging pool of talent. Will there be others? No idea but it will surely depend on whether there are young talents, with the support Hamilton had, coming to the notice of team managers.

Absoultely no doubt Hamilton has benefited from Mercedes development program, but he has also had to perform from a very young age.

At any step Mercedes could have dropped him, but they didnt, they continued to invest vast amounts of money.

The at should tell you all you need to know about how impressive hamilton has been through the junior ranks...

[Aysedasi]

Originally Posted by bjohnsonsmith

As for teammates, some have been made to give the number 1 driver an easy ride, or easier ride.

I don't see it like that. For quite a bit of the time, the #2 hasn't been made to do this, he simply hasn't been good enough....

[wnut]

Originally Posted by Aysedasi

I don't see it like that. For quite a bit of the time, the #2 hasn't been made to do this, he simply hasn't been good enough....

and when the number 2 is good enough then the team changes its focus,
Verstappen for Ricciardo
Leclerc for Vettel
Hamilton for Rosberg?

[S griffin]

Originally Posted by Aysedasi

I don't see it like that. For quite a bit of the time, the #2 hasn't been made to do this, he simply hasn't been good enough....

I agree. There have been some cases where there has been no 1 and no 2 from the beginning of the season, like Andretti and Peterson or Schumi and Irvine. However most of the time, like it is with Hamilton and Bottas, it’s how the season shapes that decides who’s number 1 and 2

[Aysedasi]

Originally Posted by S griffin

I agree. There have been some cases where there has been no 1 and no 2 from the beginning of the season, like Andretti and Peterson or Schumi and Irvine. However most of the time, like it is with Hamilton and Bottas, it’s how the season shapes that decides who’s number 1 and 2

Was there ever any doubt with Schuey and Irvine though - really?

[Peter Mallett]

Originally Posted by ascarracinguk

Absoultely no doubt Hamilton has benefited from Mercedes development program, but he has also had to perform from a very young age.

At any step Mercedes could have dropped him, but they didnt, they continued to invest vast amounts of money.

The at should tell you all you need to know about how impressive hamilton has been through the junior ranks...

In general I'm agreeing with you. My point was more that Rosberg, Button etc. came from a very similar background but missed the early mentoring by a big team (McLaren) and this, I think, is where Hamilton gained the edge. Nothing to do with best car etc. He got that because he is able to concentrate on driving rather than managing his life, if you get my drift.

So, much more complex than being lucky.

[ascarracinguk]

Originally Posted by Peter Mallett

In general I'm agreeing with you. My point was more that Rosberg, Button etc. came from a very similar background but missed the early mentoring by a big team (McLaren) and this, I think, is where Hamilton gained the edge. Nothing to do with best car etc. He got that because he is able to concentrate on driving rather than managing his life, if you get my drift.

So, much more complex than being lucky.

Oh absolutely, i agree with you. Lewis was the first to benefit from a proper young driver program. Before then there was the Mclaren Autosport driver program but it certainly wasnt to the same level of the support Hamilton benefited from. Obviously since then youve got the Red Bull driver program, which is a bit more 'X Factor'....let a load of kids sign up then just keep the best and cut out the rest, so until they get to F2/F1 its not as focussed as what hamilton had, as a young driver program of a couple ( i think we can class Gary Paffet in the same boat)

Theres no doubt Lewis benefited from the help, but he still needed to have the talent and results to back it up. It would have been very easy for Ron to drop him if the results didnt come in.

[S griffin]

And Hamilton didn’t always have it easy either. His father had to work three jobs just to pay for his karting

[crmalcolm]

Originally Posted by S griffin

And Hamilton didn’t always have it easy either. His father had to work three jobs just to pay for his karting

That reminds me of something I was reading recently that contrasted Rich and Poor double standards:

"Not having a job: If you're poor and don't have a job, or have to rely on others, you're considered trashy. But if you're rich and don't have a job and you rely on others, you're considered lucky or fortunate."

"Having multiple jobs: If you have to work three jobs just to feed your family, somehow you're trashy. But if you're rich, you're business-savvy with multiple streams of income."

My favourite of the bunch though was
"Not taking care of your kids: When the less fortunate do it, it's neglect. When rich people do it, it's called having a nanny."

[Adam43]

Quite frankly, because a lot of people just like to be mean towards other people, they would use those situations as a negative whether talking about poor or rich.

[wnut]

Originally Posted by ascarracinguk

Oh absolutely, i agree with you. Lewis was the first to benefit from a proper young driver program. Before then there was the Mclaren Autosport driver program but it certainly wasnt to the same level of the support Hamilton benefited from. Obviously since then youve got the Red Bull driver program, which is a bit more 'X Factor'....let a load of kids sign up then just keep the best and cut out the rest, so until they get to F2/F1 its not as focussed as what hamilton had, as a young driver program of a couple ( i think we can class Gary Paffet in the same boat)

Theres no doubt Lewis benefited from the help, but he still needed to have the talent and results to back it up. It would have been very easy for Ron to drop him if the results didnt come in.

Speaking of driver programs, I am really impressed with the effort that both McLaren and Danni Ricc are putting in to get Ricciardo up to speed.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VC46SWzS7qc

It seems to be an adult approach to bringing a driver you know is good into a team and ensuring that he gets up to speed, rather than just condemning him for encountering a problem that he has not dealt with before and casting him on the scrap heap. Really take my hat off to both parties here.

[52Paddy]

Originally Posted by wnut

Speaking of driver programs, I am really impressed with the effort that both McLaren and Danni Ricc are putting in to get Ricciardo up to speed.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VC46SWzS7qc

It seems to be an adult approach to bringing a driver you know is good into a team and ensuring that he gets up to speed, rather than just condemning him for encountering a problem that he has not dealt with before and casting him on the scrap heap. Really take my hat off to both parties here.

Interesting insight. Hats off to Ricciardo for having the humility to go back to school in an effort to better himself. It reminds me of similar situations in the music field. I know that when I get a new instrument in my hands, as good as it is on the "spec sheet", sometimes it just doesn't "feel" right and requires you to adopt your technique to get the most out of it. It can be a humbling, sometime even arduous, task but there is nothing to be lost by exploring it. And, potentially, much to be gained.

[S griffin]

Originally Posted by wnut

Speaking of driver programs, I am really impressed with the effort that both McLaren and Danni Ricc are putting in to get Ricciardo up to speed.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VC46SWzS7qc

It seems to be an adult approach to bringing a driver you know is good into a team and ensuring that he gets up to speed, rather than just condemning him for encountering a problem that he has not dealt with before and casting him on the scrap heap. Really take my hat off to both parties here.

That is just how teams should support drivers. It also helps that Ricciardo has been honest about his difficulties getting to grips with a new car and so both driver and team can work together to improve the car and make him feel more comfortable with the car and the team. Maybe Dr Marko could learn a lesson here

[wnut]

Then there is the matter of how talent is wasted on the F1 grid in the lower teams.

Rogro qualifies for his first pole in his third race:

https://www.crash.net/indycar/news/9...ole-third-race

[wnut]

Originally Posted by S griffin

That is just how teams should support drivers. It also helps that Ricciardo has been honest about his difficulties getting to grips with a new car and so both driver and team can work together to improve the car and make him feel more comfortable with the car and the team. Maybe Dr Marko could learn a lesson here

The Machiavellian managers of Ferrari too!

[S griffin]

Originally Posted by wnut

Then there is the matter of how talent is wasted on the F1 grid in the lower teams.

Rogro qualifies for his first pole in his third race:

https://www.crash.net/indycar/news/9...ole-third-race

Or because the grid is limited, drivers just fall out of F1

[wnut]

Originally Posted by S griffin

Or because the grid is limited, drivers just fall out of F1

So you think F1 is all about the driver?

[Adam43]

This is top draw discussion!

Clearly no one thinks F1 is all about the driver. Grosjean could not show all his talents in a Haas, but equally he had plenty of chances in F1 and he found the better teams preferred other drivers. In the end the best seat he could get was the Haas and he wasn’t going to start climbing the team hierarchy again. Although he is getting a Merc test

Great pole by Grosjean and he put in a good race too. Looking forward to his next Indycar race.

[S griffin]

Yes, the cream does usually rise to the top, so it's harder for drivers who are good, but not great to move up the grid.

[chillibowl]

no doubt there is that, sometimes its bad timing, bad car, the pressure, or it just doesnt work out for whatever reason. we see this in sport all the time.

but at the same time, is the overall grid now (and over the last several years) relatively the most talented group of young and most well prepared drivers we have ever seen on a grid?

is this a natural progression even...rather does the required minimum skill level to participate improve/increase over time?

in the context of GOAT, do drivers today (currently Ham) deserve additional credit for their strength of competition?