Does Hamilton prove it? Car > Driver.

[Ari]

Well?

I, like the next person, was thrilled with Hamiltons result on the weekend. Absolutely fantastic. A podium finish on his first Grand Prix is an incredible milestone.

BUT.

And I say this with all respect, purely for the purpose of discussion.....

Is Hamilton really a better driver than all those who finished behind him?

It kinda highlights just how important the car is these days. With a good car all you need to do is be consistant and finish the race. With a mid-field clunker you really don't stand a chance.

Is that what Formula One has become? I guess it has. It happened long ago. Just kinda disappointing.

Agree or disagree?

[tinchote]

It was like that when I first started watching motorsports in 70s. It was probably true even before that. It is usually possible to tell a good driver even if he is driving a bad car. But a driver will be at the front only with a good car.

[rlenis]

Well?

I, like the next person, was thrilled with Hamiltons result on the weekend. Absolutely fantastic. A podium finish on his first Grand Prix is an incredible milestone.

BUT.

And I say this with all respect, purely for the purpose of discussion.....

Is Hamilton really a better driver than all those who finished behind him?

It kinda highlights just how important the car is these days. With a good car all you need to do is be consistant and finish the race. With a mid-field clunker you really don't stand a chance.

Is that what Formula One has become? I guess it has. It happened long ago. Just kinda disappointing.

Agree or disagree?


is this a discovery ? are you new to F1? The coincidence is that the top teams also happen to hire the best drivers for obvious reasons.

[Rollo]

Well?
It kinda highlights just how important the car is these days. With a good car all you need to do is be consistant and finish the race. With a mid-field clunker you really don't stand a chance.

Is that what Formula One has become? I guess it has. It happened long ago. Just kinda disappointing.

Agree or disagree?

In the 1984 Monaco GP during atrociously wet conditions, Murray Walker made the comment that rain was the great leveller and the under normal conditions a race result was about 80% car and 20% driver. This was mentioned as the late Ayrton Senna was charging his way around in the Toleman.
Now 23 years later you've seen the same principle.

The question of whether Hamilton is a better driver is almost entirely misdirected but is the combination of Hamilton/McLaren better than the rest behind him, then obviously yes - he came third.

You are correct, you don't really stand a chance in a mid-field clunker. It's those moments like Olivier Panis' win in the Ligier at Monaco or Hill's drive at the A1-Ring in the Arrows that live long in the memory.

[F1boat]

I think that we must wait and see how will Hamilton advance. Of course that his podium finish is stunning. Naturally, the way he fought with Alonso is spectacular as well. But remember Nico last year. Points finish and fastets lap in race 1, with a Williams this is probably equal to that podium of LH. Kubica also scored podium pretty quickly.
On the other hand Heki struggled. So I think that LH is very, very good driver, but whether he is awesome like Kimi or Alonso, we must wait and see.

[ioan]

...but is the combination of Hamilton/McLaren better than the rest behind him, then obviously yes - he came third.

Well, no! There was at least one car-driver combination that finished behind him and was for sure better.

[Dazz9908]

Well, no! There was at least one car-driver combination that finished behind him and was for sure better.
More car than driver.
Also with Kimi's shumi like demolition of the opposition, Proves the car was the star more than Shumi was.

[V12]

In 1950 if you didn't have an Alfa Romeo you might as well have not bothered turning up - the car has ALWAYS been the most important factor in how well you do - and that will never change.

What impressed me about Hamilton was not that he finished third - with that car and Massa's problems that's where he should have finished - it's the fact he gave Alonso a real headache for about two thirds of the race...

[Ranger]

Unfortunately, like Montoya, we'll probably never see Hamilton in anything other than a top team.

The fact that he was so quick compared to Alonso is the tell-tale fact here. So it's a good mix of both.

[Ian McC]

Firstly you have to look at what he has done before, Hamiliton is a proven race winner, then compare him against his team mate in the race. He certainly held his own against FA and at some points edged him.

It's the same with most motorsport, you need the best car to win, even in single make series you see some teams are better at set up than others.

[ArrowsFA1]

Is Hamilton really a better driver than all those who finished behind him?
Probably, although as an opinion that's impossible to prove. Had he begun his F1 career in a Spyker then we would have seen a very different result. That's just the nature of F1 - it's all about the complete package.

This reminds me of seeing Hector Rebaque drive the Brabham BT49 in 1980/1. In comparison with his team-mate Piquet he was nowhere, and yet in the 1981 Argentine GP he was running as high as second. That performance was all about the car, not the driver. He managed to reach that kind of level once, whereas Piquet was there week in week out and won the title.

Ok, that was 25 years ago :eek: but the driver still makes a difference today.

[longisland]

The fact is Hamilton is FAST, he's a Brit & he's Ron's boy. Anything less than a WDC would deemed unacceptable to the British supporters.

[ioan]

More car than driver.
Also with Kimi's shumi like demolition of the opposition, Proves the car was the star more than Shumi was.

Because they didn't change rules in F1 and cars didn't develop further and further?!
Car's change from one year to the other and their performance is relative to the rules and other cars performance. And your logic proves nothing in this case.
I had to say it! :D

[Rollo]

Well, no! There was at least one car-driver combination that finished behind him and was for sure better.

How does that work? On the day Hamilton finished 3rd. Only Kimi and Alonso ran a better race. I choose to believe the FIA on this one ;)

[Ian McC]

The fact is Hamilton is FAST, he's a Brit & he's Ron's boy. Anything less than a WDC would deemed unacceptable to the British supporters.

What's that got to do with anything?

[BDunnell]

You are correct, you don't really stand a chance in a mid-field clunker. It's those moments like Olivier Panis' win in the Ligier at Monaco or Hill's drive at the A1-Ring in the Arrows that live long in the memory.

I agree — but I think you mean the Hungaroring, rather than the A1-Ring.

[jens]

To me Hamilton's good result proves only one thing - nowadays it's easier for a rookie to get used to F1. Besides Hamilton also rookies like Kubica, Sutil and also Davidson were able to fight against their much more experienced team-mates. Only Kovalainen failed to match and got immediate criticism from the team.

For me that tendency is a bit sad as experience counts less and kids can start winning from the beginning and push all those more experienced guys - who are not driving badly at all - out of F1. Also it puts more pressure on rookies - if you don't deliver in the first races or fail to start career in a top team (like current STR duo), it's later quite tough to get the trust of top teams.

Once there was era, when usually rookies started in a mediocre team, were erratic for a couple of seasons there and got into top team after having showed that they had matured there. Now none of the rookies wants to start from a backmarker team as it's very tough to fight to the top from there. For example look at Liuzzi, Speed and Sutil. IMO they are not driving badly at all, but I just can't see them ever getting to the top just because all those teams are filled with youngsters.

[BDunnell]

To me Hamilton's good result proves only one thing - nowadays it's easier for a rookie to get used to F1. Besides Hamilton also rookies like Kubica, Sutil and also Davidson were able to fight against their much more experienced team-mates. Only Kovalainen failed to match and got immediate criticism from the team.

For me that tendency is a bit sad as experience counts less and kids can start winning from the beginning and push all those more experienced guys - who are not driving badly at all - out of F1. Also it puts more pressure on rookies - if you don't deliver in the first races or fail to start career in a top team (like current STR duo), it's later quite tough to get the trust of top teams.

Once there was era, when usually rookies started in a mediocre team, were erratic for a couple of seasons there and got into top team after having showed that they had matured there. Now none of the rookies wants to start from a backmarker team as it's very tough to fight to the top from there. For example look at Liuzzi, Speed and Sutil. IMO they are not driving badly at all, but I just can't see them ever getting to the top just because all those teams are filled with youngsters.

All very good points. The same is true of new cars in all forms of motorsport – if they aren't immediately competitive when they appear, they are dismissed as being crap.

[Schnell]

Lewis is a quite unique case, he has been 'Nurtured' for 12 years by a Formula One team. Lewis was selected as a future prospect by an F1 team boss, that was invited to sponsor a karting series and award the trophies when he was available.
Lewis was the winning driver on the right days, he was in the right place at the right time. He also benefits from having a sensible manager/father who it will be noticed is still encouraged to keep close (you don't see most dads actually on the grid or actually be allowed to!)

His management has ensured Lewis was in the best equipment, in the best teams, yes he beat teammates, because he was better than them e.g. in Rosbergs karting team he was and is now better than Nico.

He also has fortunate timing to join McLaren the very season their car is the best (or 2nd best?) had he been in last seasons car, we would be as sorry for him as we were for Kimi, standing by a smoking car. Right place, right time! It's largely luck and good fortune.

Drivers used to make a larger differance to a cars performance e.g. Fangio, Moss and Clark, all are legends, history proves they were worth a lap on occassions!
Not today! I'd guess the modern GP driver in the current hi-tech aero cars contributes 1 to 10%

If we accept Shumi was a 10, Lewis might only be a 1 ? although I reckon much higher, no point guessing, as time will 'prove' his true level. And I don't mean in publicity or Marketing terms at which he is currently a 10.

[luvracin]

Is Hamilton really a better driver than all those who finished behind him?


Well. The best comparison is to compare him against the only other guy running the same equipment, his team mate.

The team mate in this comparison just happens to be a double world champion.

I would say his performance in this regard - bearing in mind it was his debut F1 race - was very good.

[wedge]

Definitely the driver.

LH has been faultless all weekend, only minor mistakes but nothing major compared to say Heikki.

Friday - never put a foot wrong. Learnt a new track in slippery conditions and never had a major 'off'.

Against Alonso, some would argue LH has been the better driver during free practice. And he can keep up and match Alonso.

At this moment in time they're were both competing on equal terms. They're both still having to adapt and fine tune their driving style when driving on the absolute limit.

[BrentJackson]

The Machine and the Man both play big roles in any series.

Witness - 1984 Monaco GP. Guys that were quite good drivers - Mansell, Lauda, Piquet, Arnoux - spun off or crashed, and the ones who did keep going without wrecking - Prost, Rosberg, Alboreto, de Angelis - were positively smoked by Ayrton Senna and Stefan Bellof. (Bellof had the only non-turbo car in the field too, and was WAY down on power.) That day was a case of a couple great drivers leveling the field.

Now, for years the best cars have been the ones that win races, but a hack in a great car is not gonna succeed. When you combine the best of both, the result is untouchable. We've seen that for years with Schumacher and the Ferraris he's been driving. In 1994 Michael had the vastly superior Williams-Renaults to deal with, and after Ayrton's untimely passing at Imola Damon Hill took over Williams' fight. Michael was most certainly the better driver of the two, but the Benetton-Ford wasn't as good as the Williams. But Schumi still won the title. Why? He drove better in a year where Williams had a great car but terrible luck and lots of brain fades. (Coulthard hitting the wall entering the pits at Adelaide while leading by a mile has to be one of the most embarassing moments in his career.)

You have to have the full package. Hamilton is obviously no slouch, but neither is Kovalainen, and when both of them getr used to the game they are in Kimi, Fernando and Felipe won't be on their own any more. (Fisichella IMO just isn't up to being Renault's #1, not that he's a bad driver but he just hasn't performed.)

[jens]

In 1994 Michael had the vastly superior Williams-Renaults to deal with, and after Ayrton's untimely passing at Imola Damon Hill took over Williams' fight. Michael was most certainly the better driver of the two, but the Benetton-Ford wasn't as good as the Williams. But Schumi still won the title.


I disagree that in 1994 Williams was the best car. Williams had serious handling problems and Newey has admitted that the start of 1994 has been one of the most disappointing moments in his career. Especially in the first half of the 1994 Benetton was the best - in the first races Schumacher won by a full minute. This can't be down purely on driver.

[ioan]

I disagree that in 1994 Williams was the best car. Williams had serious handling problems and Newey has admitted that the start of 1994 has been one of the most disappointing moments in his career. Especially in the first half of the 1994 Benetton was the best - in the first races Schumacher won by a full minute. This can't be down purely on driver.

Must have been Schumacher's underpowered engine that made Benetton better than the Williams. :rolleyes:

[rlenis]

Must have been Schumacher's underpowered engine that made Benetton better than the Williams. :rolleyes:


No it was actually the tampering of their fuel hose so that they could get fuel into the engine quicker which by the way were penalized for and how about the illegal software they were using. But realistically the reason Benneton won over Williams was because they had the greatest cheater of the sport race for them taking out Hill on the last race.

[tinchote]

No it was actually the tampering of their fuel hose so that they could get fuel into the engine quicker which by the way were penalized for and how about the illegal software they were using. .

So they won the races in the pit stops. That's good to know :erm:



But realistically the reason Benneton won over Williams was because they had the greatest cheater of the sport race for them taking out Hill on the last race


Realistically, that happened only to compensate for the cheaters Williams pressuring the British GP marshals and the FIA into taking Schumacher out for three races. Way to compete :rolleyes:

[rlenis]

we are off-topic now. But ask yourself this question: should a cheater even be considered to compete?

[K-Pu]

I think the car is more important than the driver now, but the driver is still important.

For example, it´s been said here that if you have a midfield car, you have no hope of winning unless you do something great or it happens something unusual. But in some cases you can have an outstanding car but you don´t win. That could be the case of Fisichella, who seems unable to win even with the world champion car. Or if you want an older example, Patrese didn´t win as many races as Mansell in 1992 tough they had the same all-conquering car.

Driver and car have to be good. A good driver in a bad car can´t win, and a bad driver in a godd car can´t win. Or at least if things go predictably (as Jean Todt would like after never-ending testing)

[Sirius]

Must have been Schumacher's underpowered engine that made Benetton better than the Williams. :rolleyes:

Guess again ioan.

Sirius

[Ari]

is this a discovery ? are you new to F1? The coincidence is that the top teams also happen to hire the best drivers for obvious reasons.

No it's not a startling discovery to me.... and no I'm not new to F1.

I just figure everyone seems to be patting the kid on the back but noone is pointing out the fact that he's running around in the 2nd best car out there.

[Hawkmoon]

It's easier to perform with a quick, well-balanced car than it is with a car that wants to anything other than what the driver wants it to do.

I think the quality of the McLaren has allowed Hamilton to run much closer to Alonso than if the car was a dog. Having said that though, Hamilton looks to be pretty good and I think it won't take too many races before we have a better indication.

[ten-tenths]

others have mentioned this as well, hamilton challenged alonso to the max this weekend. it is my opinion that right now alonso is a better driver, but in the near future it would not suprise me one bit to see hamilton progress into a better driver than alonso.

[wmcot]

No doubt that Hamilton is a very good driver, but he's not starting out in a Toro Rosso or Spyker like Alonso did in the Minardi. You must be a good driver to compete at the highest level, but you will never be at that level unless the car is up to it. One can only wonder what would have happened if Alonso started with Williams, Ferrari, McLaren, etc. The same holds true for other drivers with gobs of talent. The only comparable car/rookie driver pairing I can think of off-hand is JV at Williams in 1996. He had the talent and the car and performed as well as LH in his first race, too.

[Subaru WRX]

what a fantastic race for Hamilton, for sure he will have a strong season with McLaren, remember his race at Silverstone in GP2, with great overtakings !

[ArrowsFA1]

I just figure everyone seems to be patting the kid on the back but noone is pointing out the fact that he's running around in the 2nd best car out there.

No doubt that Hamilton is a very good driver, but he's not starting out in a Toro Rosso or Spyker like Alonso did in the Minardi.
Hamilton is in the McLaren because he was seen as a remarkable talent from very early in his career. His performances at every level along the way to F1 have confirmed that talent. In a similar way to Ron Dennis supporting LH, Alonso's start with Minardi was part of a calculated career path, guided by Briatore.

Both are among those rare breed of drivers who seem to be marked for greatness before they've every stepped in a F1 car.

[Subaru WRX]

just imagine Lewis Hamilton beating Alonso in the final standing of the championship !!

[BDunnell]

In 1994 Michael had the vastly superior Williams-Renaults to deal with, and after Ayrton's untimely passing at Imola Damon Hill took over Williams' fight. Michael was most certainly the better driver of the two, but the Benetton-Ford wasn't as good as the Williams. But Schumi still won the title. Why? He drove better in a year where Williams had a great car but terrible luck and lots of brain fades. (Coulthard hitting the wall entering the pits at Adelaide while leading by a mile has to be one of the most embarassing moments in his career.)

It's not really relevant to this, I know, but that happened in 1995. Mansell was driving the second Williams in Adelaide in '94.

[Ian McC]

I just figure everyone seems to be patting the kid on the back but noone is pointing out the fact that he's running around in the 2nd best car out there.

Because in his first F1 race he finished third and nearly beat his team mate, a two times World Champion. You don't get that kind of performance out of the car if you are not a very good driver.

[wmcot]

Good car or Good driver - Neither one wins alone!!!!

[harsha]

he made alonso look very ordinary,that's for sure

[donKey jote]

no more ordinary than kimi made the whole lot of them look, unfortunately ;) :p :

[Garry Walker]

we are off-topic now. But ask yourself this question: should a cheater even be considered to compete?

I agree, Montoya should have been banned from racing ages ago.

[longisland]

What's that got to do with anything?

My previous remark was just a rhetoric. This thread in a way suggested that Lewis' great debut has more to do with the team & the car rather than his ability. The fact that "he's a Brit & he's Ron's boy" improved Lewis' chance tremendously in securing the second driver's seat in a team like Mclaren. Normally, the big teams with cash would shop for established names. But then, he must be equally good enough to convince the team to select him in the starting lineup. His podium proved the team's decision was right and Lewis is a real deal. For argument sake, if Michael Schumacher were driving a Spyker in Melbourne, what is the chance of him snatching the podium from Lewis? If the answer is no, would that make Michael a lesser driver?
Lewis put up a good performance against a two-time world champion Alonso & that says a lot about the kid.
The car's great and the driver is even better.
A driver in a crappy car can get a lucky win like Fisi did in Jordan but you can't win a WDC with a litter box.

[Ari]

*bumpage*

He has the best car out there, I don't think there's any question of that now. But... I must admit, this kid has been VERY cool under pressure.

[leopard]

the best car? :rolleyes:
Agree about keep coll driver, this far I consider Alonso a keep cool driver.

[Valve Bounce]

*bumpage*

He has the best car out there, I don't think there's any question of that now. But... I must admit, this kid has been VERY cool under pressure.

There were some disturbing facts which came to light after the Monaco race: Lewis admitted to kissing the armco more than once in his chase of Alonso. One of the drivers in a lessor car quipped after the Barcelona race that if he had made as many mistakes in quals as Lewis in his car, he'd be lining up at Heathrow.

Now I wasn't aware that Hamilton had made any mistakes, so these two comments does show that Lewis does need to temper his enthusiasm a little; but that having been said, when the guy matures after a couple of seasons in F1, who is going to beat him?

[Ari]

There were some disturbing facts which came to light after the Monaco race: Lewis admitted to kissing the armco more than once in his chase of Alonso. One of the drivers in a lessor car quipped after the Barcelona race that if he had made as many mistakes in quals as Lewis in his car, he'd be lining up at Heathrow.
I too remember hearing him say that at the post race junket after Monaco. I was rather surprised to hear him talk along the lines of kissing the wall quite a few times, but being happy that the car the team gave him is capable of doing it. I was kinda shocked actually. Does he think it's a go-kart?


Now I wasn't aware that Hamilton had made any mistakes, so these two comments does show that Lewis does need to temper his enthusiasm a little; but that having been said, when the guy matures after a couple of seasons in F1, who is going to beat him?

Agree. I can't see anyone getting near him in the next couple years.

[Ari]

the best car? :rolleyes:

You're right. Which car is better and why?

[aryan]

IMO Ferrari is still faster in long runs in normal circuits (not tight streets circuits). though McLaren has closed the gap and has better starts.

[Flat.tyres]

I too remember hearing him say that at the post race junket after Monaco. I was rather surprised to hear him talk along the lines of kissing the wall quite a few times, but being happy that the car the team gave him is capable of doing it. I was kinda shocked actually. Does he think it's a go-kart?





as far as hes concerned, thats exactly what it is :D

[Ari]

as far as hes concerned, thats exactly what it is :D

f'n expensive piece of go-kart then!!!!!!!!! :D

[wedge]

There were some disturbing facts which came to light after the Monaco race: Lewis admitted to kissing the armco more than once in his chase of Alonso.

That's how to master Monaco!

Any so called 'fan' would've done some research and know that drivers brush the armco when they're on the limit at Monaco. It shouldn't be that much of a surprise.

What impressed me even more was Lewis last lap on qualy when he made a small mistake and held up by Webbo and yet he was still hundreths of a second down on Alonso! That's not the car, thats down to skill.

[Valve Bounce]

Any so called 'fan' would've done some research and know that drivers brush the armco when they're on the limit at Monaco. It shouldn't be that much of a surprise.



LINK PLEASE!!

[race aficionado]

http://www.monacoarmcobrushing.com











:)

[Valve Bounce]

That link doesn't work on my computer :(

[rlenis]

Well?

I, like the next person, was thrilled with Hamiltons result on the weekend. Absolutely fantastic. A podium finish on his first Grand Prix is an incredible milestone.

BUT.

And I say this with all respect, purely for the purpose of discussion.....

Is Hamilton really a better driver than all those who finished behind him?

It kinda highlights just how important the car is these days. With a good car all you need to do is be consistant and finish the race. With a mid-field clunker you really don't stand a chance.

Is that what Formula One has become? I guess it has. It happened long ago. Just kinda disappointing.

Agree or disagree?

where you've been?

[wmcot]

X I was rather surprised to hear him talk along the lines of kissing the wall quite a few times, but being happy that the car the team gave him is capable of doing it.

I think that he must have "kissed" the armco very gently since the car suffered no serious effects. If he had actually HIT the armco, something would have broken!

[Valve Bounce]

I think that he must have "kissed" the armco very gently since the car suffered no serious effects. If he had actually HIT the armco, something would have broken!

Blessed are they who love to kiss Armco for they shall feel the earth shake beneath them at the climax.

[F1woman]

If it's down to having a good, car what about Fischella he had a championship car in 05-06 but he was nowhere near Alonso or tired for the championship like Lewis is currently doing.

[race aficionado]

That link doesn't work on my computer :(

Sorry Valve, it must be a "windows" thing . . . :p

As per having the best or one of the best cars to justify your better results my opinion is this:

The most commonly mentioned number as to percentages in car/driver are 80%/%20.
Surely the quality of the car takes precedent but there is still that driver's 20% that has to make a dramatic difference.

Yes, Hamilton is in one of the better cars, but how would others do? The best reference is his fellow team mate FA (he happens to be two times World Champ) and them being close in the standings says a lot about the wonder rookie.

I'm so glad that he is around to spice the F1 world and make it "caliente".

:s mokin:

[OmarF1]

The answer is simple, F1 isn't that complicated nowadays, ALL of the drivers take the same lines, make the same gear changes, have the same tyres, lots of electronic devices to help, aerodynamics, money on the team to develop, really this isn't a driver's sport, this is an engineer's sport, if it is a sport whatsoever, drivers are too predictable now, that's why the car will always shine, picture this: if you have a Yuji Ide in a 2 Secs. per lap faster Ferrari, and Yuji drivres carefully and steady, eventually will win the championship, F1 needs some action, not so predictable cars.

[andreag]

if you have a Yuji Ide in a 2 Secs. per lap faster Ferrari, and Yuji drivres carefully and steady, eventually will win the championship.
I seriously object this assertion.

Of course cars represent the most of the pairing car-driver (let's say a 90%?), but there's still a rest (maybe a 10%?) which belongs to the driver's hands.

If not, a computer would be driving every car with a level of AI just a bit over racing videogames (some current drivers seem to have a lower level than those videogames).

[rabf1]

JV came to F1 in a good car and was all that and then he got in a bad car and he sucked eggs. It's incredible that a guy who turns out to be mediocre can win the WDC with a good car. But it's not all car. Fisi had the same car as Alonso at Renault and he couldn't even come close to keeping up with Alonso and Fisi is at least a decent driver. Now Kimi can't match Massa's pace and Alonso is being threatened by a rookie teammate. Conclusion: I agree it's 80% car and 20% driver.

[Valve Bounce]

The answer is simple, F1 isn't that complicated nowadays, ALL of the drivers take the same lines, make the same gear changes, have the same tyres, lots of electronic devices to help, aerodynamics, money on the team to develop, really this isn't a driver's sport, this is an engineer's sport, if it is a sport whatsoever, drivers are too predictable now, that's why the car will always shine, picture this: if you have a Yuji Ide in a 2 Secs. per lap faster Ferrari, and Yuji drivres carefully and steady, eventually will win the championship, F1 needs some action, not so predictable cars.


While I can see drivers like Bunsen, DC, Mark Webber, and Sutil doing well if gifted this year's McLaren, If Yuji Ide drives carefully and steady, he'd still come last in any car. :rolleyes;

[jens]

Yuji Ide to drive carefully and steadily - that must be the Eight Wonder of the World! :p :