Numbers of Hamilton and Senna

[Sebp]

You can't compare them Hamilton does not race next to a top driver the way Senna raced next to Prost.

Plain and simple Senna had a real competitor next to him to challenge the legitimacy of his skill as apposed to the car just being better then the rest.

We now know it was they had carbon fibre.

Where as Hamilton has Nico Ross who clearly can't compete with him. Put Vettel or Alonso in the other car and maybe.


Plus if we compare raw data.
Schumacher is better then both of them and Vettel is better then both of them too.

Who was Schumacher's best teammate?

[Just_a_fan]

.

Where as Hamilton has Nico Ross who clearly can't compete with him. Put Vettel or Alonso in the other car and maybe.

You do know that Hamilton had Alonso as a team mates don't you? And how did that go for Alonso? Also, having a go at Hamilton for "best car, poor team mate so he's not actually good" and comparing to Vettel is somewhat ironic. Vettel got his titles back-to-back in the best car with a tame team mate. Hamilton has raced with World Champions as team mates and the results were pretty clear cut.

[NathanOlder]

Yeah, I think when it comes to team mates, it would be hard to find someone who has had a tougher selection of team mates.

As an F1 rookie being pared with a double and current world champion , it doesn't get any harder.

Senna went to Mclaren with 4 years under his belt to be paired with a 2 time ex world champion.

Senna is still the best ever, bit Lewis isnt far behind.

[Andres125sx]

.

Where as Hamilton has Nico Ross who clearly can't compete with him. Put Vettel or Alonso in the other car and maybe.

You do know that Hamilton had Alonso as a team mates don't you? And how did that go for Alonso?

He scored exactly same points despite his team was in total support of Hamilton...

"We´re not racing Ferrari, we´re racing Alonso"

"we did a mistake with Alonso´s tyres pressures"

"Yes Hamilton put a claim because he didn´t allow Alonso pass when we asked him for that so he lost time in pits, and we did nothing to stop that claim, so we will start from 1-5 instead of the 1-2 we achieved"


And I could say the same about FIA...

"Yes a crane put Hamilton on track again, but we will only punish if it is repeated, Lewis will keep his points"

"Yes Lewis caused an accident under SC few weeks after we told them to NOT do that, but we will not punish him"


And that´s only from memory, if I do a search I´ll find more of both because it was a scandal.


BTW, Lewis is my second favourite after Alonso, even before he joined F1, his 2006 GP2 season was asthonishing. I don´t blame him for this, he did his job. It was Ron who trashed his own title because of supporting the driver he was sponsoring since he was 12, despite he was a rookie and his team mate was the current champion. McLaren´s fault at 100%.



Even so, Lewis did an awesome job in his rookie season fighting with one of the greatest of all time Only that I will always blame Ron for that season, I was looking forward that battle for a long time, and even when it was obvious Alonso should have won that battle and title, it´s understandable because Lewis was a rookie. But nexts seasons could have been epic. That´s what hurts me more, Ron Dennis ruined what could have been one of the best battles ever, and I will always blame him for that

[ChrisF1]

I don't think it's Ron Dennis' fault that De La Rosa, Alonso and Coughlan were sharing Ferrari documents. I think the blame lays squarely on your countryman and Coughlan for that, but hey, your bias is allowing you to gloss over that one.

[SiLo]

And the fact that Alonso threw his toys out of the pram when Hamilton started beating him.

[Phil]

He scored exactly same points despite his team was in total support of Hamilton...

"We´re not racing Ferrari, we´re racing Alonso"

"we did a mistake with Alonso´s tyres pressures"

"Yes Hamilton put a claim because he didn´t allow Alonso pass when we asked him for that so he lost time in pits, and we did nothing to stop that claim, so we will start from 1-5 instead of the 1-2 we achieved"

I think we have to be careful not to lump everything into one singular pot here. There might have been favoritism going on, but that favoritism can extend to both sides of the garage. Mistakes happen too sometimes - and arguably they were detrimental to Lewis championship which he should have won. I think that point alone equals it out. Only through them did they end on equal points and which still Lewis comes out on top by the mere fact he had more higher positions. Given Alonso was a two times world-champion, I clearly expected more of him given the situation and how to deal with it.

And hey, did I mention that I was jumping in joy when Hamilton went off the track in Brazil 2007, causing him to lose the WDC right there? Yes, I was completely in the Alonso camp that year. I did not sympathize with Lewis at all.

Anyway, the way I see it - McLaren wanted the 2 times world champion. Lewis was a great prospect as a rookie. It's pretty ridiculous to suggest that McLaren would have paid and wanted the 2 times world champion only to then later favor the complete rookie. That the relationship disintegrated is only the consequence of Lewis being as good as he was, perhaps to the surprise of not only the team, but Alonso himself. If he hadn't been a match for Alonso, it would never have come that far in the first place.

[SiLo]

He scored exactly same points despite his team was in total support of Hamilton...

"We´re not racing Ferrari, we´re racing Alonso"

"we did a mistake with Alonso´s tyres pressures"

"Yes Hamilton put a claim because he didn´t allow Alonso pass when we asked him for that so he lost time in pits, and we did nothing to stop that claim, so we will start from 1-5 instead of the 1-2 we achieved"

I think we have to be careful not to lump everything into one singular pot here. There might have been favoritism going on, but that favoritism can extend to both sides of the garage. Mistakes happen too sometimes - and arguably they were detrimental to Lewis championship which he should have won. I think that point alone equals it out. Only through them did they end on equal points and which still Lewis comes out on top by the mere fact he had more higher positions. Given Alonso was a two times world-champion, I clearly expected more of him given the situation and how to deal with it.

And hey, did I mention that I was jumping in joy when Hamilton went off the track in Brazil 2007, causing him to lose the WDC right there? Yes, I was completely in the Alonso camp that year. I did not sympathize with Lewis at all.

Anyway, the way I see it - McLaren wanted the 2 times world champion. Lewis was a great prospect as a rookie. It's pretty ridiculous to suggest that McLaren would have paid and wanted the 2 times world champion only to then later favor the complete rookie. That the relationship disintegrated is only the consequence of Lewis being as good as he was, perhaps to the surprise of not only the team, but Alonso himself. If he hadn't been a match for Alonso, it would never have come that far in the first place.

Ironically if they weren't so evenly matched one of them would have been WDC that year.

[PlatinumZealot]

.

Where as Hamilton has Nico Ross who clearly can't compete with him. Put Vettel or Alonso in the other car and maybe.

You do know that Hamilton had Alonso as a team mates don't you? And how did that go for Alonso?

He scored exactly same points despite his team was in total support of Hamilton...

"We´re not racing Ferrari, we´re racing Alonso"

"we did a mistake with Alonso´s tyres pressures"

"Yes Hamilton put a claim because he didn´t allow Alonso pass when we asked him for that so he lost time in pits, and we did nothing to stop that claim, so we will start from 1-5 instead of the 1-2 we achieved"


And I could say the same about FIA...

"Yes a crane put Hamilton on track again, but we will only punish if it is repeated, Lewis will keep his points"

"Yes Lewis caused an accident under SC few weeks after we told them to NOT do that, but we will not punish him"


And that´s only from memory, if I do a search I´ll find more of both because it was a scandal.


BTW, Lewis is my second favourite after Alonso, even before he joined F1, his 2006 GP2 season was asthonishing. I don´t blame him for this, he did his job. It was Ron who trashed his own title because of supporting the driver he was sponsoring since he was 12, despite he was a rookie and his team mate was the current champion. McLaren´s fault at 100%.



Even so, Lewis did an awesome job in his rookie season fighting with one of the greatest of all time Only that I will always blame Ron for that season, I was looking forward that battle for a long time, and even when it was obvious Alonso should have won that battle and title, it´s understandable because Lewis was a rookie. But nexts seasons could have been epic. That´s what hurts me more, Ron Dennis ruined what could have been one of the best battles ever, and I will always blame him for that

Even if what you say is true, HAM still had to drive the car fast to put himself in those positions.

Remember how Button was favoured at Mclaren? He still wasn't fast enough to capitalize.

[Andres125sx]

I don't think it's Ron Dennis' fault that De La Rosa, Alonso and Coughlan were sharing Ferrari documents. I think the blame lays squarely on your countryman and Coughlan for that, but hey, your bias is allowing you to gloss over that one.

Do you really think Alonso was the responsible of the spygate? Really?

This is F1, all the teams have information of their competitors, all of them. If in that case they went too far you can´t seriously think a driver was the responsible. Think about who can make the best use of that info and you´ll get closer to the responsible


Anycase that´s a different problem... wich IMO shows how desperate was Alonso inside McLaren

Again, this is F1, you will never see any proof of unfair treatment, there are confidentiality clauses all around and nobody can say a word about what´s happening inside the team, but when everyone can see indicatives like a team manager saying they weren´t racing Kimi, they were racing Alonso, or the team doing a mistake with Alonso´s tyre pressures on one of the final races, or many others.... that´s the closer you can get to proving an unfair treatment

[Andres125sx]

And the fact that Alonso threw his toys out of the pram when Hamilton started beating him.

Lewis started beating Alonso in third race, and in fourth, but there was no problems at all until much later

[Andres125sx]

I think we have to be careful not to lump everything into one singular pot here. There might have been favoritism going on, but that favoritism can extend to both sides of the garage. Mistakes happen too sometimes - and arguably they were detrimental to Lewis championship which he should have won. I think that point alone equals it out. Only through them did they end on equal points and which still Lewis comes out on top by the mere fact he had more higher positions. Given Alonso was a two times world-champion, I clearly expected more of him given the situation and how to deal with it.

And hey, did I mention that I was jumping in joy when Hamilton went off the track in Brazil 2007, causing him to lose the WDC right there? Yes, I was completely in the Alonso camp that year. I did not sympathize with Lewis at all.

Anyway, the way I see it - McLaren wanted the 2 times world champion. Lewis was a great prospect as a rookie. It's pretty ridiculous to suggest that McLaren would have paid and wanted the 2 times world champion only to then later favor the complete rookie. That the relationship disintegrated is only the consequence of Lewis being as good as he was, perhaps to the surprise of not only the team, but Alonso himself. If he hadn't been a match for Alonso, it would never have come that far in the first place.

Agree Phil, but see some things a bit different

First of all I never said they hired Alonso to favour Hamilton. IMO Mclaren was trying to win first championship with Alonso while Lewis adquired some experience, but when Ron realized his protégé (we shouldn´t ignore Ron paid Lewis career since he was 12) was a real contender for the championship, then he couldn´t stop himself favouring Lewis


And sorry but I can´t think Alonso was surprised by Lewis talent, that was obvious. Did you see 2006 GP2 season? If I were Horner, I then would have said Lewis is the new Senna In some races it was like if he was driving a F1 between GP2 cars, mindblowing

There might have been favoritism going on, but that favoritism can extend to both sides of the garage. Mistakes happen too sometimes - and arguably they were detrimental to Lewis championship which he should have won. I think that point alone equals it out.

Sorry but I don´t get this, what do you mean?

[Andres125sx]

Even if what you say is true, HAM still had to drive the car fast to put himself in those positions.

Remember how Button was favoured at Mclaren? He still wasn't fast enough to capitalize.

Of course, he did an awesome job, amazing if you consider he was a rookie... at least if you ignore last GPs when he did some mistakes trying to prove how good he is when he didn´t need it to win the championship. Those mistakes did cost him the title, but hey, he was a rookie, and he´s Lewis, even today he still go faster than he really need to win. That´s his mentality.

[Drpesq]

I think style is the most important element when comparing drivers. Style is directly linked to the strength of the competition and the prevailing FIA rules at the time.

Senna was unique in that he worked with engineers to get the car set up well and then he pushed it to the ragged edge. His style was affected by the dimensions of the cars (width) the cockpit sides, the type of tires, manual shifting etc. He would saw at the wheel and, much like Fernando on Michelins at Renault, he would turn excessively into a corner and then work it out with sheer talent. It's amazing to watch.

Michael was blindingly fast in isolation because he has a different braking and cornering speed approach than some. He too would carry too much speed through bends and manage it with skill. But in passing his temper often got the best of him. This quality I think also extends to Vettel and particularly Hamilton.

Vettel is a great qualifier. I think a tick better than Lewis. And Vettel has filled in many of the gaps in his driving skill set from when he won his first title. I don't think he is anything special in the annals of F1, just fast over one lap and a clinically smart tactician/setup driver. Lewis has talent that is equally matched by a desire to win. Thing is...his desire is really only displayed when he loses and he becomes the poster child for all millionaire crybabies. He is clearly talented and a worthy champion (more so than Vettel IMHO). But let's not forget he had a time of it beating Nico last year before the W06 was built around him. I don't have strong memories of Lewis driving around problems or nursing cars home. His Mercedes, like his McLaren is reliable and he is fast. You mess with either of those variables and he's beatable on any given day. I sense no god-like talent in Lewis although he is fast as hell.

modern road cars have absolutely taken driving away from the driver with aids. The same is true of race cars. Even some current F1 drivers can attest to how anemic the power is from today's cars compared to the V10s. Alonso beating Michael was legendary. A champion outdone by the next champion. A passing of the torch. Vettel's first championship in 2010 was over a handicapped Alonso driving s$itbox no 1. So tenuous was the Ferrari (and would remain until this magical year) that Alonso would have had stiff competition from Webber and Lewis if Seb wasn't a factor. The ingredients weren't there to endear the fans to Vettel with his surprise victory in the final round.

So as far as Hamilton and Senna, it's just a bunk comparison. Rap star, recording artist celebrity girlfriends big rock earnings...
vs Senna who used to stew over telemetry and run on the beach to stay fit at a time when most drivers were doing neither.

Let's put it this way - I don't foresee there being a purposeful Hamilton Foundation at any point in the future.

DRP

[ringo]

You can't compare them Hamilton does not race next to a top driver the way Senna raced next to Prost.

Plain and simple Senna had a real competitor next to him to challenge the legitimacy of his skill as apposed to the car just being better then the rest.

We now know it was they had carbon fibre.

Where as Hamilton has Nico Ross who clearly can't compete with him. Put Vettel or Alonso in the other car and maybe.


Plus if we compare raw data.
Schumacher is better then both of them and Vettel is better then both of them too.

A lot of holes in your arguement there:

1. How is Prost a real competitor and not Button or Alonso who just came off wining championships?
2. A driver and his teammate must have the same car. So i'm not sure why you mention the car.
3. Nico's relative place to hamilton doesn't mean he isn't good, the same Shumacher you are putting above all others was beaten by Nico three years in a row. I know he was old, but he wasn't slow by any means if we go by his Teammate Barichello's pace against Button and Hulkenberg.
Vettel is very good, he is beating Kimi comprehensively and is showing his qualities a little better now than he was at redbull. I don't think he is faster than Nico Rosberg though, he is a better package for sure, but i don't think his raw pace is at Nico's level. He may not be a challenge to Hamilton however as he isn't faster and he isn't as aggressive. Looking on how Alonso handled his teammates, i think Alonso is Hamilton's only challenger on the grid in terms of an all out race.