Gilles V.

Has Hamilton Become As Good As Alonso?

228 posts in this topic

Yesterday Hami shown he is not up to Nando yet...

It's been a costly mistake but the very first one in 8 races. He's not equal to Alonso if we're talking about knowing when to push and when to drive conservative but I think he's improved and has some other skills where he excells.

When Alonso (or kimi, or webber, or most others) have a bad day they still finish in the points, when Hammy has a bad day he usually finishes in the tyre wall.

I think most drivers, if not all, will have '0 points' for one reason or another. Mybe he got desperate after so many fckups in the pits. He's fighting for the WDC and it's the tightest one in ages, that small details can ruin a race and eventually a whole season.

You arrived here and in your first post refer to arguably one of the finest drivers on the grid as a 'Latin Swindler'. This means you are either a racist, stupid, a child or all three. Don't expect to hget away with that. If I suggest that was stupid and it upsets you, that's too bad. Go find a forum that accepts that sort of thing. There are many people who post here who are not great with English and/or grammar. Frankly I don't care because they write with passion, respect, wit and knowledge. But I'll give you a chance.

I don't believe Hamilton receives unfair treatment. I believe he has had unlucky treatment. Lewis is one of may favourite drivers. For different reasons, Fernando is too.

Lewis beating Fernando in 2007 has become incidental, in my view. That's because I believe Fernando has improved since then. His second term at Renault built his character much more than Lewis's equivalent years at McLaren. Not only that, I think Fernando has always displayed a higher level of maturity and intelligence in and out of the car. Call it being that bit older, but there is a difference and it is making a difference to their respective results right now. He is more rounded, looks at the bigger picture, carries more authority in his aura, lives his personal life in private and acts and talks like a man, not a boy.

And lastly, I have no idea if Fernando was favoured by the FIA yesterday, no idea at all. But I'm not going to cry 'conspiracy' just yet. With Lewis's incident, he had 1.3 litres of fuel in the car on his cool down lap when the team told him to switch off the engine. The rules say that a car must have 0.5 litres for a sample, plus enough to get the car back to the pits, which was around 2.5 litres on that particular track. Maybe the FIA got swept up in the moment and forgot that Fernando stopped out on the track, but I don't believe so.

You decided immediately that I favour a 'win at all costs' type of behaviour and have a bias for Fernando. I have no idea where that came from. If you wise up and stick around you will find more objective and unbiased F1 fans on this forum than on any other F1 website.

Don't be surprised if some blast you in an attempt to preserve that.

Welcome.

congrats.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And how neither one is as good as Vettel.

Massa, before SV is considered anywhere near FA we need to see him in a less than par car fighting with the best during several races. We need to see him make passes that make you jump out of your chair. In one word, he needs to excite us by his driving. Not just by being in front all race long with the best car, like a certain other driver did for many years.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think Alonso deliberately lodged his car in such a way to deactivate Hamilton's gearbox (I don't even remember the contact, but that doesn't mean it didn't happen...I thought Hamilton pushed a weird button or something like that...but I've thought a lot of stupid things in my time :lol:)

What I do think, is that Vettel, Alonso, and Hamilton are three different drivers who excel at different aspects, but are still very good in all of them. Over the course of any different race or any different season or in any different equipment, any of the three could appear to be the absolute best in any category, whether that's raw speed or racecraft or tire management or whatever. Right now, I would argue that Vettel has met his potential on a more consistent basis throughout his career, but has also had fewer opportunities to not meet his potential, and has admittedly had some pretty nice rides.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think you're imparcial, if you intent to tell me that Hamilton didn't have more points during all the 2007 you will not be able because it's not true - Ham had more points than Alonso during all the season.

They both finished with the same ammount of points but Hamilton finished 2nd and Alonso 3rd in the standings.

I think that Alonso seeing that he won't become champion decided to not permit Hamilton become neither.

That's what these guys do. They're a mix of grayhound racing dogs and fighting c#cks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Massa, before SV is considered anywhere near FA we need to see him in a less than par car fighting with the best during several races. We need to see him make passes that make you jump out of your chair. In one word, he needs to excite us by his driving. Not just by being in front all race long with the best car, like a certain other driver did for many years.

I definitely can see what you are saying. This season, at Melbourne and Shanghai in particular, I've seen Vettel do some outstanding overtaking and defending. It's a bit understated, but at the same time, there's merit in being calculated, precise, and cool. You are correct, though; it is more common for Hamilton or Alonso to do something really, really exciting.

I think, and this could be all wrong, that Hamilton plays a game that opens the door for errors, and sometimes they bite him. I think Alonso plays a game that opens the door for losing on raw speed, and sometimes it bites him. I think Vettel plays a game that opens the door for...well...his competitors' own genius, really. I've yet to see Vettel lose; I've seen him get beaten, but I've never seen him lose.

That's why I regard Vettel so highly, but certainly, with more years, we'll get a clearer picture of how he drives; I haven't found his deficiency, but that doesn't mean it isn't there. Having all three so close and battling so tightly this year has been brilliant. They're three incredible drivers and in some ways I'm finding it wonderful to not have a favorite among them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Massa, before SV is considered anywhere near FA we need to see him in a less than par car fighting with the best during several races. We need to see him make passes that make you jump out of your chair. In one word, he needs to excite us by his driving. Not just by being in front all race long with the best car, like a certain other driver did for many years.

That certain other driver won at least a two or three championships in a not so dominant car. He had his crossing the desert years at Ferrari and was the best of his generation without the slightest doubt.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They both finished with the same ammount of points but Hamilton finished 2nd and Alonso 3rd in the standings.

That's what these guys do. They're a mix of grayhound racing dogs and fighting c#cks.

1. No, they didn't, Hamilton had more points. It' was enough for him to have finished 5 and he would have been champion, Alonso had to finish 1 and Hamilton more backwards than 5 to gain the championship. Who do you think deserved more to be the champion?

2. Is this your idea of fairplay, or just everything goes when the purpose is defending Alonso

Edited by turbokick

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's been a costly mistake but the very first one in 8 races. He's not equal to Alonso if we're talking about knowing when to push and when to drive conservative but I think he's improved and has some other skills where he excells.

Yes. I would point that the main difference between him and Alonso is not knowing when to push and when to drive conservatively but, as Steve said, the ability to learn and mature. Alonso 2007 was a disaster even considering that everybody at Macca was a disaster, but he moved on. In the meantime, he learned how to be less hot headed, he kept being one of the hardest working guys in the field (one of the boxes Vettel has ticked yet. Take notice of that), etc.

I think most drivers, if not all, will have '0 points' for one reason or another. Mybe he got desperate after so many fckups in the pits. He's fighting for the WDC and it's the tightest one in ages, that small details can ruin a race and eventually a whole season.

Lewis problem this year has nothing to do with himself. He made a mistake. Many drivers did. Back to Alonso, he started 11th due to a ****up in qualy (they made 1 run with softs and one with primes instead of 2 with softs), and you could very well argue it is the 3rd race they make a big mistake (Monaco and Canada being other two big strategic errors in hindsight). Ability to recover from errors is another thing in which being a "good package" is better than being the faster or the best overtaker or whatever. What Nando lost at qualy he retook by overtaking cars on track (you need skills for that), controlling the tires (another skill), etc. Having more than one weapon is the key to consistency. You can't always count on having a car 2 seconds a lap faster than the rest.

If this had been a regular season, with speed/qualy being the only key factors, we would probably be discussing about Kimi/Seb/Lewis and Alonso will be the guy only you and I will be keeping an eye on. As it is, each race seems to need something different from the drivers. You can say that luck played a big part in Alonso's win at Valencia, but that same luck could have helped any other of the guys that where either ahead of him or had at least as good cars as him. Why didn't Di Resta won? Or Rosberg? Or even Schu or Kimi? Or Button? Or PDLR? Ok, that last one might be a bit of a stretch. :D

I think I am repeating myself too much, but I am not sure I am making myself any clearer.

congrats.gif

Indeed. I am amazed he actually read the whole post before replying. I know I didn't :D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1. No, they didn't, until Brazil Hamilton had more points. It' was enough for him to have finished 5 and he would have been champion, Alonso had to finish 1 and Hamilton more backwards than 5 to gain the championship. Who do you think desrved more to be the champion?

Kimi?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Where is maure when you need him?

Anyway, welcome to the forum Lewis Carl Davidson Hamilton turbokick.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you try to reject that Alonso betrayed his team and this leaded to McLaren being exluded from constructor's championship and obliged to pay a big penalty (100 000 000 eur.) which consisted a signifficant part of Mclaren's next year budget, it would demonstrate you're not fair.

So basically what you're saying here is that Alonso was bad to admit to the FIA that cheating was taking place? I know in the past Alonso's not exactly been the shining light of morality, but who has? Remember Hamilton lying to the stewards in 2009? Arguably that was a worse offence to lie to race officials, rather than in Alonso's case, admitting cheating was going on.

Interesting logic anyway.

Anyway, I've not always been a huge fan of Alonso. But over the last few seasons he has gained my respect, and yesterday's drive, lucky or not, was brilliant. Yes, he probably wouldn't have won if there hadn't been a safety car. Yes, he may not have won had Vettel not broken down. But he made overtakes and was in a position to capitalise when things fell into place. It seems like a less competitive car is making him drive even better than before.

And that's coming from someone who supports Vettel.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Kimi?

Kimi was in the middle between Hamilton (more points than all the others) and Alonso (last of the three).

Edited by turbokick

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Where is maure when you need him?

Anyway, welcome to the forum Lewis Carl Davidson Hamilton turbokick.

Thank you man!yes.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm just curious for an elaboration as to why you are regarding the standings after the penultimate round as more important than the standings after the final race. I'm not saying you're wrong to do that, I just don't understand the thought process that where the drivers were going into Brazil holds more weight than where they were after the race. Why should the final race not be included in the classification? Or is that not what you are saying?

I guess to me, the full season is the full season, from race one to through the last one. Therefore, Räikkönen had the most points over the full season, and Hamilton and Alonso were tied, with Hamilton ahead under the rules of tie-breaking. How could Hamilton be better over the full season if we don't include every race in a full season?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

...

Interesting logic anyway.

Anyway, I've not always been a huge fan of Alonso. But over the last few seasons he has gained my respect, and yesterday's drive, lucky or not, was brilliant. Yes, he probably wouldn't have won if there hadn't been a safety car. Yes, he may not have won had Vettel not broken down. But he made overtakes and was in a position to capitalise when things fell into place. It seems like a less competitive car is making him drive even better than before.

And that's coming from someone who supports Vettel.

Yes, Alonso's yesterday's drive was lucky, but IMO it was't brilliant, it was just a consecution of chances - imagine what would have happened if in first place McLaren's mechanics didn't do these enormous mistakes (I don't know how to call it, and it is not the first time they do this to Hamilton, recently in every race they waste an enormous amount of time to him), if Vettel's car didn't break, if Grosjean's car didn't break also, do you really think Alonso would have finished first or even would have been on the podium? Please man, don't tell me that you do...

Where is the brilliance of this victory - not being able to clasificate better than 12, and the reason to finish 1 is all better than you having their cars K.O., or have been forgotten in the pitstop for ages, lately to be hit by idiots...I see no brilliancy, no glory and no merit in such a win...

Edited by turbokick

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Outside of that, I too would like to ask turbokick: if you regard Hamilton as having been better in 2007 than Alonso, which is certainly fair when argued properly, how do they relate at present? Has Hamilton widened his advantage over Alonso? Has Alonso improved from 2007 and gotten closer to Hamilton? Have they both stayed the same, or both improved by equal amounts? Or did one, or both, get worse since then? Even if you can say Hamilton was better in 2007, and maybe you can, can you say Hamilton is still better in 2012, and if so, by how much? I'd love to know.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And then I'd like to ask turbokick: if there is no merit in a win where the lead cars retire and other teams make mistakes, what shall we do in those cases? Should the FIA have abandoned the race when Vettel and Grosjean retired as there was no longer merit in winning it? Should the FIA have not awarded points? Again, I am curious, and I am not trying to be an ***hole as much as I am just trying to understand your thinking.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm just curious for an elaboration as to why you are regarding the standings after the penultimate round as more important than the standings after the final race. I'm not saying you're wrong to do that, I just don't understand the thought process that where the drivers were going into Brazil holds more weight than where they were after the race. Why should the final race not be included in the classification? Or is that not what you are saying?

I guess to me, the full season is the full season, from race one to through the last one. Therefore, Räikkönen had the most points over the full season, and Hamilton and Alonso were tied, with Hamilton ahead under the rules of tie-breaking. How could Hamilton be better over the full season if we don't include every race in a full season?

I think I catch your point, but I can't agree with you. For me when someone hit my car when I have more probability to win for being better, for having gained more points, for even having clasified better and this hit puts my car out of order for some seconds (which in Formula 1 means ages) I have all the reason to consider I deserve to win more than the man that hit me.

Edited by turbokick

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And then I'd like to ask turbokick: if there is no merit in a win where the lead cars retire and other teams make mistakes, what shall we do in those cases? Should the FIA have abandoned the race when Vettel and Grosjean retired as there was no longer merit in winning it? Should the FIA have not awarded points? Again, I am curious, and I am not trying to be an ***hole as much as I am just trying to understand your thinking.

I don't say the points Alonso gained in Valencia don't count, only say it wasn't the brightest, the greatest, the most brilliant victory in the F1 history, like someone tried to convince me. Regards.

Edited by turbokick

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"No merit" implied something harsher, to me, as if it shouldn't count. My bad, must have read into it too much.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, Alonso's yesterday's drive was lucky, but IMO it was't brilliant, it was just a consecution of chances - imagine what would have happened if in first place McLaren's mechanics didn't do these enormous mistakes (I don't know how to call it, and it is not the first time they do this to Hamilton, recently in every race they waste an enormous amount of time to him), if Vettel's car didn't break, if Grosjean's car didn't break also, do you really think Alonso would have finished first or even would have been on the podium? Please man, don't tell me that you do...

Where is the brilliance of this victory - not being able to clasificate better than 12, and the reason to finish 1 is all better than you have their cars K.O., or have been forgotten in the pitstop for ages lately to be hit by idiots...I see no brilliancy, no glory and no merit in such a win...

Grosjean's car breaking up was something Alonso could only have witnessed in his rearview mirrors because he had already overtook him fair and square on track. So he only benefited in track position by Vettel's retirement. As you said, he started 11th. That means that at least 9 other drivers could have won after Seb's car failed. Let's take out Grosjean out of the picture because his car failed him in the end as well. That still leaves you 8 other drivers. And those are just the ones ahead of him, not counting those that had "bad luck" and must probably be considered "as good as Alonso" but were behind him.

So, you used an ad-hoc explanation on why the "best guys" were taken out. Now, you find yourself having to explain why the other guys could not win under the same or better conditions than he was. And then trace that back to the past 20 races in which he finished in the points and most of them in the top five.

Maybe the rest are even more worthless than he is? As per your logic it definitely must be so. Perhaps being a gay latin swindler helps?

Consistency is what makes a driver a champion. Coherence is what makes a logic "rational". Ad-hoc arguments work perfectly only when applied to a minuscule, isolated part of the picture. If you extrapolate an ad-hoc argument over a tiny fact and then make a sweeping derisive generalisation ("gay latin swindler"? really?) you simply show that rational logic is alien to you, and thus remove yourself from any hopes of a coherent debate.

Maybe you would like to rephrase your points?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, Alonso's yesterday's drive was lucky, but IMO it was't brilliant, it was just a consecution of chances - imagine what would have happened if in first place McLaren's mechanics didn't do these enormous mistakes (I don't know how to call it, and it is not the first time they do this to Hamilton, recently in every race they waste an enormous amount of time to him), if Vettel's car didn't break, if Grosjean's car didn't break also, do you really think Alonso would have finished first or even would have been on the podium? Please man, don't tell me that you do...

Where is the brilliance of this victory - not being able to clasificate better than 12, and the reason to finish 1 is all better than you have their cars K.O., or have been forgotten in the pitstop for ages lately to be hit by idiots...I see no brilliancy, no glory and no merit in such a win...

Well, as the expression goes, you have to be in it to win it. Alonso definitely WAS in it yesterday, and as you rightly point out, he started 12th - so you'd have to say that there were faster cars - yet he beat them. On a track that it is supposedly very hard to overtake at (even with DRS), and in a season where up until yesterday every winner had come from the front row of the grid (leaving Malaysia aside, as it was a wet race) it was a very strong drive.

You make it sound as if just because Vettel and Grosjean's cars failed and Hamilton had a slow pit stop that he didn't really deserve it. Trust me, Alonso's been in F1 for quite a few years now. He has lost plenty of races through a car failure, or a problem in the pit lane or whatever. Would you still think the same if Hamilton had benefitted from that and gone on to win one of those races? I don't think you would. What goes around comes around, and really, you have to make your own luck sometimes.

I don't think history will look back on this race as a "lucky" win or whatever, I think they'll view it as a fantastic drive.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well this is my opinion, I have said many facts and put many questions that nobody replied about the treat Alonso always have received, and the treat for Hamilton, I think I'm not the only one that sees some not correct things in all this situation, when Hamilton in a classification session wins the pole position, but for not having brought his car in the pitlane he is punished to start 15 positions backwards (this IMO is equal to ruin his race) and when Alonso does the same in a real race nobody punishes him. There are many other things I can say but see no point of doing it, although all you see in my posts is ¨latin swindler¨. I don't feel guilty for respecting the real driving talent more than good strategists.

Edited by turbokick

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well this is my opinion, I have said many facts and put many questions that nobody replied about the treat Alonso always have received, and the treat for Hamilton, I think I'm not the only one that sees some not correct things in all this situacion, when Hamilton in a classification session wins the pole position, but for not having brought his car in the pitlane he is punished to start 15 positions backwards (this IMO is equal to ruin his race) and when Alonso does the same in a race nobody punishes him. There are many other things I can say but see no point doing it, although all you see in my posts is ¨latin swindler¨. I feel not guilty I respect the real talent more than good strategists.

Was it even confirmed what Alonso's reason for stopping the car was? There are many reasons that someone can stop and it isn't just to do with the fuel. Plus it is not a written rule that cars should be disqualified for stopping after the race, in fact, we've seen plenty of cars this season stopping after the checkered flag and no action has been taken. I don't believe it is the same for qualifying. You can cry about how unfair the penalty was for Hamilton, but that's the rules.

Edited by JHS18

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now