Niki Lauda

[maure 1]

Sure, jemstride, he had to be there to benefit from that last lap but so was Massa. Wasn't Massa unlucky? Or to say that Massa was unlucky requires ignoring his entire championship? When one evens things out between those two, luck was waht decided the championship... except that, at least, Massa put in a decent performance (not that great since Kimi was compromised, btw).

The point I make is that despite everything Hamilton had everything going for him, he needed that final bit of crazy luck to make it happen. And the list of things he had going for him (see my previous post) tells us that his performance has dropped. Without any of that enormous amount of help, his first races in F1 were truly great. Since then, well, it seems he needs more and more external "aids" to make it happen.

A clear example is the races you mention. In order to have these, it was necessary (for example) that Kova _never_ had a chance and that the rest of the field goofed up big time. Without this conditions, forget it. Hamilton was the only driver on the grid that race after race had the strategy that the team thought was best... and still he needed luck.

It is for these reasons that I remain cautious to place Hamilton up there with the relevant drivers. Against a competent field, having to fight a teammate on the track fair and square, and having to overcome second-rate strategies through a substantial part of the season, Hamilton could prove himself. In the meantime all these "aids" detract from his performance.

It is the same with, for example, MS. If he had had to fight honestly against RB, the merit of his victories would clearly by higher. Since he didn't...

[maure 1]

Glock was behind Lewis when the rain started and took a gamble on staying out. I don't think Lewis was lucky in that race: if he'd lost out to Glock's gamble he would have been unlucky.

And you're right that Lewis is still improving. He's very impetuous and he makes mistakes but so did many a great driver at his stage. People forget it.

And instead of making those mistakes in a Toro Rosso, he makes them at our expense by kidnapping the attention of a top team...

[Jem of the Shire 0]

Sure, jemstride, he had to be there to benefit from that last lap but so was Massa. Wasn't Massa unlucky? Or to say that Massa was unlucky requires ignoring his entire championship? When one evens things out between those two, luck was waht decided the championship... except that, at least, Massa put in a decent performance (not that great since Kimi was compromised, btw).

The point I make is that despite everything Hamilton had everything going for him, he needed that final bit of crazy luck to make it happen. And the list of things he had going for him (see my previous post) tells us that his performance has dropped. Without any of that enormous amount of help, his first races in F1 were truly great. Since then, well, it seems he needs more and more external "aids" to make it happen.

A clear example is the races you mention. In order to have these, it was necessary (for example) that Kova _never_ had a chance and that the rest of the field goofed up big time. Without this conditions, forget it. Hamilton was the only driver on the grid that race after race had the strategy that the team thought was best... and still he needed luck.

It is for these reasons that I remain cautious to place Hamilton up there with the relevant drivers. Against a competent field, having to fight a teammate on the track fair and square, and having to overcome second-rate strategies through a substantial part of the season, Hamilton could prove himself. In the meantime all these "aids" detract from his performance.

It is the same with, for example, MS. If he had had to fight honestly against RB, the merit of his victories would clearly by higher. Since he didn't...

What external aids? I know you've mentioned the fuel strategies before, but whether that actually does hinder Kova's performance is debatable rather than fact, and lets face it Kova wouldnt have been a threat anyway. Other than that, yes Ron wants to penetrate him but there are no aids that make the competition unfair.

Talking about luck, Massa was unlucky at Hungary when he broke down. He was lucky to gain a point from Bourdais stupid penalty at Fuji. Basically in every F1 season every driver has some good luck and some bad. Every world champion gets some luck along the way. Just look at Alonso in 2005 - Raikkonen was (IMO) generally faster and better at most races, but suffered four engine failures which meant 4 grid penalties. Could we say that Alonso won the title by luck? I think that would be unfair.

I think its also very unfair to say that Hamilton won at silverstone solely because everyone else messed up - and this goes to show your anti-Lewis bias I'm afraid - his driving was simply sublime and far superior the rest of the field. Quite similar to Jenson Button at Hungary 2006 in the wet

You also say that Hamilton 'still needed luck' to win the title. Would you say that by the same token, Alain Prost won the 1986 title purely by luck (referring to Mansell's tyre blow-out)?

I think that by your logic, we could probably talk about ANY f1 season being decided by luck when we go into what happened to the protagonists throughout their season.

F1 titles are fought usually between the guys in the best cars. In 2008 that was ferrari & mclaren, & out of the 4 drivers in those cars, Hamilton was the best. Massa was arguably lucky to even be in a position to win the title in the final race, when we consider the amount of points he gained from other drivers' penalties (& being gifted 2nd place in china by his team-mate & in france).

[mikathegreat2 2]

Calling it 'pure luck' is completely unjustified, as you're ignoring the events of the whole season and only focusing on the final lap of Brazil.

Because of these events I'm glad Lewis was champion! Massa got lucky @ Fuji when he crashed into Bourdais & I'm still not sure if it was a penalty or not @ Spa but Massa benefited from these penalties against Hamilton & Bourdais! Saying that though, Massa has had some back luck like @ Hungary which he did'nt really need to push that hard cos he was a mile ahead of Kovy & trying to get into rhythm with no TC & Melbourne!

Man, talking about going off topic! Right, Virgin F1, opinions??

[maure 1]

What external aids? I know you've mentioned the fuel strategies before, but whether that actually does hinder Kova's performance is debatable rather than fact, and lets face it Kova wouldnt have been a threat anyway. Other than that, yes Ron wants to penetrate him but there are no aids that make the competition unfair.

Talking about luck, Massa was unlucky at Hungary when he broke down. He was lucky to gain a point from Bourdais stupid penalty at Fuji. Basically in every F1 season every driver has some good luck and some bad. Every world champion gets some luck along the way. Just look at Alonso in 2005 - Raikkonen was (IMO) generally faster and better at most races, but suffered four engine failures which meant 4 grid penalties. Could we say that Alonso won the title by luck? I think that would be unfair.

I think its also very unfair to say that Hamilton won at silverstone solely because everyone else messed up - and this goes to show your anti-Lewis bias I'm afraid - his driving was simply sublime and far superior the rest of the field. Quite similar to Jenson Button at Hungary 2006 in the wet

You also say that Hamilton 'still needed luck' to win the title. Would you say that by the same token, Alain Prost won the 1986 title purely by luck (referring to Mansell's tyre blow-out)?

I think that by your logic, we could probably talk about ANY f1 season being decided by luck when we go into what happened to the protagonists throughout their season.

F1 titles are fought usually between the guys in the best cars. In 2008 that was ferrari & mclaren, & out of the 4 drivers in those cars, Hamilton was the best. Massa was arguably lucky to even be in a position to win the title in the final race, when we consider the amount of points he gained from other drivers' penalties (& being gifted 2nd place in china by his team-mate & in france).

You deliberately misinterpret what I say to be able to present an argument. All it reveals is that it is you who has a bias. Try to stick to the points raise and prove otherwise.

If Kova was not a threat (your assumption), why screw him over? And if Hamilton can do away with having the best strategy why always give it to him? You know the answer too. The fact is that Kova outqualified Hamilton despite heavier fuel loads on a couple of occasions in the first few races and Hamilton needed him removed. He was.

Regarding luck, sure it always plays a role. Yet it doesn't always come to the _rescue_ in the last curve of the last GP and when it does, it is luck. Hamilton had lost the championship because he was unable to keep Vettel, in a much much inferior car, behind. It only worked out in the very very very very end because the rain started again. You know this too.

Now, was Alonso lucky in 2005 and 2006? Sure. Yet he had to beat his teammate fair and square as well as defeat experienced and very capable drivers like MS and Kimi, both of them driving arguably better cars. Finally, his championships were won by a margin far superior and without the need of a lucky break on the last lap of the last GP to compensate for lack of skill.

Was Kimi lucky in 2007? Sure. McLaren, the team he raced against, had the best car in the field for the first time in many years. But it also had the worst driver management possible. He was lucky that way. On the other hand, it was Kimi's first year at Ferrari and there were other additional challenges for him that he was able to overcome. Moreover, he beat his teammate fair and square without the benefit of having always the best strategy. Furthemore, his second part of the season put him were he was by means of his own effort. Finally, luck didn't resolved his lack of skill against a much much inferior car, rather it was brought about because RD was more interested in defeating Alonso in order to ease it out for Hamilton than in winning the competition.

The differences between these situations speak for themselves.

[maure 1]

And, btw, the circumstances under which Alonso won his two championships (unreliable car for Kimi and a breakdown in Japan for MS) are the reasons why I was not impressed by Alonso. Yet, his results in McLaren despite the sht storm he had to deal with have forced me to acknowledge that Alonso is indeed one of the greats right now... almost on par with Kimi, in my opinion.

[Max Mosley 2]

2007. Alonso's best season. It's all coming back to me now.

[AleHop 0]

And you're right that Lewis is still improving. He's very impetuous and he makes mistakes but so did many a great driver at his stage. People forget it.

He is one of those rare drivers that will die improving.

[mikathegreat2 2]

2007. Alonso's best season. It's all coming back to me now.

Yeah, & it was Kimi's most dreadful season!

[maure 1]

2007. Alonso's best season. It's all coming back to me now.

As usual, you misinterpret in order to have something to say...

He is one of those rare drivers that will die improving.

As long as it is not at our expense...

Yeah, & it was Kimi's most dreadful season!

Murray misinterprets. You are just high on toilet water...

[dribbler 6]

I bet Lukas, Niki's son, loves having a step mum the same age as him. How temepting would that be?

[Quiet One 15]

I bet Lukas, Niki's son, loves having a step mum the same age as him. How temepting would that be?

Nah, he wouldn't do anything that might make Niki lose face.

(I know, that was low )

[maure 1]

I bet Lukas, Niki's son, loves having a step mum the same age as him. How temepting would that be?

And now, oedipus... well, not the first time you make me smile with your sexual hangups.

[maure 1]

Nah, he wouldn't do anything that might make Niki lose face.

(I know, that was low )

Yep, it was low... and apparently one of the few things that truly offend Lauda (or so he said).

I read somewhere that Lauda gave a watch to the guy that saved his life. What will he not do to you for that remark. You are in for a world of trouble.

[Jean Todt 4]

I bet Lukas, Niki's son, loves having a step mum the same age as him. How temepting would that be?

[Rainmaster 7]

I don't think anyone 'hates' Lewis, they simply dislike him. That has more to do with his immaturity and the way he comes off in public. He's still suffering from spoilt brat syndrome, as is his squeeze and he constantly puts his foot in his mouth and makes idiotic errors of judgement, but this is only to be expected from one so young. He is certainly no Einstein and atypical of his generation - one-dimensional, self-centred, arrogant and know-it-all. As Niki, [always a major role model for me] says, he knows how to use the accelerator and steering wheel. So do a lot of the kids out there - they just didn't get a Macca as their first ride, that's all. What is there to like about a snotty-nosed kid who got smoothed into the best wheels on the grid on his first day at the office and constantly shows off about it? In my book - nothing.

Just like one Niki Lauda and 90% of other world champs.

Nice interview from Lauda there, I respect him because he has huge balls and speaks his mind even if his mind can be full of crap.

[mikathegreat2 2]

Murray misinterprets. You are just high on toilet water...

I was being sarcastic for Christ's sake! Jeez, lighten up, go on a binge drinking session with your mates every so often!

[dribbler 6]

Nah, he wouldn't do anything that might make Niki lose face.

(I know, that was low )

And now, oedipus... well, not the first time you make me smile with your sexual hangups.

Oh, don't be like that. Based on what I know of you, I'm sure you would try to nail me if I married your mum.

[Kati 0]

I bet Lukas, Niki's son, loves having a step mum the same age as him. How temepting would that be?

I dunno about Lukas... But Mathias Lauda ... ok totally untalented, but nothing's perfect anyways...

[pabloh20 1]

Nah, he wouldn't do anything that might make Niki lose face.

(I know, that was low )

Excellent. Well done, Sir

Anyway, I can't believe this thread is on to 2 pages and nobody has actually got the crux of the matter at hand - the fact that Lauda thinks Nicole Scherzinger has charisma!!! Now, if that's not deluded, I have no idea what is

I quite like Lauda and I think some of his comments are quite true.

[Jean Todt 4]

Niki Lauda has played down reports he derided 2008 World Champion Lewis Hamilton as lacking charisma.

The former triple World Champion and German-language commentator told the Austrian news magazine Profil recently that the modern sport produces drivers who have failed to develop personalities.

"The only kind of charisma someone like Lewis Hamilton has is his (pop singer girlfriend) Ms Scherzinger," Lauda, who turned 60 on Sunday, was quoted as saying. sas_pageid='5067/31627'; // Page : racinglive/f1-live_uk/news_page sas_formatid=1701; // Format : 300x250_middle 300x250 sas_target=''; // Targeting SmartAdServer(sas_pageid,sas_formatid,sas_target);

But in a subsequent interview with Italy's La Stampa, the winner of 25 Grand Prix backtracked and claimed his comments about the British reigning World Champion were "misinterpreted."

But he added to the Italian newspaper: "Anyway, charisma doesn't make you any faster."

[Quiet One 15]

But in a subsequent interview with Italy's La Stampa, the winner of 25 Grand Prix backtracked and claimed his comments about the British reigning World Champion were "misinterpreted."

Yeah, right. He was actually giving Lewis his full support.

[Rainmaster 7]

Maybe he is just trying to save face keep the respect of Lewis' fans.

[Quiet One 15]

Maybe he is just trying to save face keep the respect of Lewis' fans.

I don't think so. I never take his comments at face value.

[Rainmaster 7]

I don't think so. I never take his comments at face value.

Probably for the best.