Numbers of Hamilton and Senna

[Kingshark]

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.

I would say that Massa has had it toughest of anyone. Schumacher, Raikkonen (back when Kimi was still any good) and Alonso for 4 years. Lewis is definitely up there though.

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

I would agree that Lewis is not far away from Senna (or maybe even on par), but IMO, Schumacher in his prime was the best driver I've ever seen.

Who was Schumacher's best teammate?

Ironically enough, Rosberg!

Anyway, that doesn't detract from my earlier claim that 1995-2001 Schumi was the best driver ever, IMO.

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.

Hmm, interesting claim.

I suspect that in a car which suits them to their needs, both Vettel and Rosberg are every bit as fast as Hamilton (or at least, not far away). However, Lewis is more adaptable and has a wider operating window. Seb is definitely good in the wet though. Nico struggles to make the Pirelli inters work properly.

If Vettel had been Lewis' teammate instead of Nico in 2014, I doubt he would have out-qualified Lewis as much, but simultaneously, I don't think he would have made a lot of Nico's silly mistakes either, and thrown away so many points.

[Phil]

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?

I think my point was rather that favoritism was probably less of a crucial role at McLaren. I know this probably does not include Ron, who yes, I think was very fond of his protege. But McLaren has always stood for equality, more so than other teams, so IMO it's hard to quantify how much favoritism could have impacted either driver. I also firmly believe that Lewis wasn't that popular within the team, maybe precisely because the big boss was so fond of him.

He was certainly respected for his talent, but I remember reading quite a few interviews by anonymous staff members in the later stages of the Button-Hamilton seasons where it was said that Hamilton wasn't all that popular inside the team (even back in 2007 when he joined) at all, perhaps due to a bit of arrogance. It's been a while since I read that interview, but it was an interesting insight, especially into the seasons 2010-2013 where I feel Hamilton lost even more ground inside the team, especially compared to Button who is perhaps the best example of a driver (much like Seb) who is perhaps one of the easiest going likable characters on the grid. You know, easy, uncomplicated, extremely diplomatic, a true team-player in the context that he is with the team and builds up relationships with them. In fact, one of the reasons I think Hamilton had to move out of McLaren was that he failed to create what Button so successfully pulled off; A nice happy bubble, a good working environment. I think much of this comes with the talent - if you are as *naturally talented* like Lewis (Alonso too btw), a certain amount of arrogance comes with it. It's in the nature of natural talents vs i.e. other personas who perhaps achieve their fame by hardworking ethos and using their working environment to excel.

So I deduct from this that despite Lewis being Rons boy, his relationship wasn't anywhere near as good. Certainly respected, and I'm sure his side of the garage stood behind him (just as Alonso's part of the garage most certainly would have stood behind the 2 times world champion), but it was never as close as what i.e. Button pulled off and built up around him. Which is why that relationship disintegrated and Hamilton had to leave in 2012. I think since then, Hamilton has learned a lot - most of it from Button - and since then, he has become better for it, and has successfully built up a nice environment at Mercedes. He wins, and he never fails to mention the team, even after his lost win at Monaco, did he come out and defend the team: We win and lose together as a team. He's still a superstar in his own world, but IMO hes attitude has become much less arrogant.

I think Alonso is very similar to Lewis. They are both rather emotional, only masked by their maturity that has grown with experience. I think both are rather sensitive to the environment around them. Do I think favoritism influenced the result of the 2007 WDC? Not by much - I think it was pretty gloves off as it could be, only complicated by the team trying to deliver equality for both. Perhaps much to the detriment of the championship. I think in the first 4 races, it was very clear Alonso was to be the designated leader - experienced, 2xWDC. No one ever thought Lewis would be that close. And when he did, it started becoming a toss up between delivering a fair opportunity for both. I'm not sure how Alonso felt about that - I doubt he joined McLaren in the thought of being challenged to that degree. He was the 2xWDC. He was destined to be the great of that new era - an era without Schumacher. He had a higher salary ... it was a no-brainer. But then to be challenged by an absolute young newcomer? Unthinkable. And then to face the team that perhaps tried to deliver equality for both, especially after Lewis proved how quick he was, could have easily been mistaken to be favoritism. I don't blame him, who wouldn't? But was it really favoritism on an unfair basis? I don't think so.

[MercedesAMGSpy]

Lewis faced Alonso (the best driver of the grid some claim here) in his rookie year, Kovalainen (easy), but then another world champion in Jenson Button and now Nico Rosberg, who is one of the better drivers in the field. Compare that to Vettel: Bourdais, Webber, Ricciardo, Raikkonen. Lewis has had the team mates, the amount of race wins (most wins for a British driver) and soon titles (3x) to be considered as a F1 legend. I don't like to compare drivers with other drivers from the past, I think judging them in their own era is better.

[Andres125sx]

And then to face the team that perhaps tried to deliver equality for both, especially after Lewis proved how quick he was, could have easily been mistaken to be favoritism.

Equality for both was the rule of thumb from the beginning, with alternative priority to pit-stop first, so that couldn´t be a surprise for Alonso, it is what the team was doing from first race so keeping that philosophy during the season can´t be the reason of Alonso´s anger mid seasons, something else changed into the team I think

Also...

But McLaren has always stood for equality, more so than other teams

McLaren equality can´t be the reason, that would imply Alonso joined McLaren expectig #1 treatment, and that´s absurd considering it was McLaren, and they provided equal treatment from first race.

Sorry but I don´t think equality seen as favouritism was the problem, it was real favouritism IMO.

Specially after Ron´s "we race Alonso", after their mistake with tyre pressures, after McLaren apologizing with Alonso to hire them again in 2015... Too many weird things to be a coincidence

He was certainly respected for his talent, but I remember reading quite a few interviews by anonymous staff members in the later stages of the Button-Hamilton seasons where it was said that Hamilton wasn't all that popular inside the team (even back in 2007 when he joined) at all, perhaps due to a bit of arrogance. It's been a while since I read that interview, but it was an interesting insight, especially into the seasons 2010-2013 where I feel Hamilton lost even more ground inside the team, especially compared to Button who is perhaps the best example of a driver (much like Seb) who is perhaps one of the easiest going likable characters on the grid. You know, easy, uncomplicated, extremely diplomatic, a true team-player in the context that he is with the team and builds up relationships with them. In fact, one of the reasons I think Hamilton had to move out of McLaren was that he failed to create what Button so successfully pulled off; A nice happy bubble, a good working environment. I think much of this comes with the talent - if you are as *naturally talented* like Lewis (Alonso too btw), a certain amount of arrogance comes with it. It's in the nature of natural talents vs i.e. other personas who perhaps achieve their fame by hardworking ethos and using their working environment to excel.

So I deduct from this that despite Lewis being Rons boy, his relationship wasn't anywhere near as good. Certainly respected, and I'm sure his side of the garage stood behind him (just as Alonso's part of the garage most certainly would have stood behind the 2 times world champion), but it was never as close as what i.e. Button pulled off and built up around him. Which is why that relationship disintegrated and Hamilton had to leave in 2012. I think since then, Hamilton has learned a lot - most of it from Button - and since then, he has become better for it, and has successfully built up a nice environment at Mercedes. He wins, and he never fails to mention the team, even after his lost win at Monaco, did he come out and defend the team: We win and lose together as a team. He's still a superstar in his own world, but IMO hes attitude has become much less arrogant.

I think Alonso is very similar to Lewis. They are both rather emotional, only masked by their maturity that has grown with experience. I think both are rather sensitive to the environment around them.

Agree with this

[GPR-A duplicate2]

Button pulled off and built up around him. Which is why that relationship disintegrated and Hamilton had to leave in 2012.

Really? Lewis had 4 wins and 2 retirements (5 overall retirements) while leading. Jenson had 3 wins and 2 retirements. If that is all Jenson managed to achieve against Lewis, I wouldn't rate such a bubble for much. Lewis' frustration was because of the fact that, despite managing to create the fastest car of 2012, the team couldn't manage to put a championship winning show (inefficiency and reliability woes). I believe Jenson's situation hardly affected Lewis in any which ways.

Lewis eventually left to a team, which was struggling badly in 2012, which shows his level of frustration with McLaren.

[Just_a_fan]

I think Hamilton also found the sponsor/corporate demands with McLaren to be excessive. There is less of that sort of thing at Mercedes.

[Kingshark]

Is there any particular reason to why Senna is consistently rated as the best of all time, regardless of what any other driver does?

Most of the arguments in this thread about Lewis matching Senna's statistics in a similarly lengthy career are about why, somehow, Lewis' achievements are not as impressive as those of Senna. The most common argument is about "cars" and "teammates". However, neither argument really holds any water. Apart from Prost, Senna spent 80% of his career alongside underwhelming teammates. Likewise, Senna's McLaren cars between 1988 and 1991 are as good as anything Lewis has driven.

Similarly, I have never came across a single compelling argument to why Senna was better than Schumacher. I am a firm believer than Schumacher in his prime from 1995 to 2001 was the best and most complete driver I've ever seen. Most of the arguments to why Senna was better than Schumacher rely on emotions rather than solid arguments.

It's as if the top spot for best driver of all time is specifically sacred for Senna, and no other driver is allowed to touch it.

[Just_a_fan]

I'm a fan of Senna but the best driver of all time was Fangio. There is no argument that can be made for anyone else.

I think the reason people place Senna highly is because he died youngish. He could have taken one or two more titles which would, of course, have changed Schumacher's stats too. Jim Clark died too early too; he was up there with Fangio and would certainly have taken more titles.

There is too much controversy around Schumacher for him to be placed above any of the other three.

[lebesset]

I'm afraid I can't agree with the majority and rate either schu or senna as the best ever ; they both had the ...get out of my way or else ...mentality , and . to my mind , that's not the way to go motor racing , it's still a dangerous business

having watched F1 since the beginning in 1950 there have only been 2 drivers who were regarded by there fellow drivers [ and who else can judge ?] as being in a class of one at the top ......fangio and jimmy clark ; I saw very litle of events in the fangio era , but you can ask stirling moss if he was that good and he will STILL tell you that fangio was THE man [ stirling was my hero though ] ; but I was in awe of jimmy , just like his fellow drivers [ my favourite at the time was the more flamboyant graham hill ]

can you imagine an F1 driver with a good chance of the WDC giving up his seat to another driver so that HE would become WDC ? and when asked why say ...because he deserved it ? happened to fangio

or , as when jimmy was killed , another driver say ....if it could happen to jimmy , what chance is there for the rest of us ? he really was that good , whatever he drove he could drive faster than anyone else , stories from other drivers were legion

hard for other drivers to admit it but I believe one day people will look back on the hamilton era ; if F1 was a spec series , everyone in a mercedes , I know which driver I would have my money on for the season

[ringo]

Is there any particular reason to why Senna is consistently rated as the best of all time, regardless of what any other driver does?

Most of the arguments in this thread about Lewis matching Senna's statistics in a similarly lengthy career are about why, somehow, Lewis' achievements are not as impressive as those of Senna. The most common argument is about "cars" and "teammates". However, neither argument really holds any water. Apart from Prost, Senna spent 80% of his career alongside underwhelming teammates. Likewise, Senna's McLaren cars between 1988 and 1991 are as good as anything Lewis has driven.

Similarly, I have never came across a single compelling argument to why Senna was better than Schumacher. I am a firm believer than Schumacher in his prime from 1995 to 2001 was the best and most complete driver I've ever seen. Most of the arguments to why Senna was better than Schumacher rely on emotions rather than solid arguments.

It's as if the top spot for best driver of all time is specifically sacred for Senna, and no other driver is allowed to touch it.

I also believe Shumacher is the greatest of all time as well in terms of results pre race preparation and race management. However in terms of pushing boundaries and a never say never mentality i would give that Senna. Senna has a more romantic approach to his racing and i guess that's what people love; pushing to the edge and sometimes going over it. Shumacher may have done this as well but he was less vocal about it. You never hear Shu talking about going for gaps and how other drivers think etc. Senna had more character than Shu and when you have more character you become more memorable and being more memorable makes you more legendary. So it may be unfair to Shu that he races and quotes are less memorable but that's what puts one legend under the rose tinted lens over the other.
Shumacher is like a mythical racer and Senna is the legendary hero. It's subjective as to what is greater a myth or hero.

If we use boxing to illustrate:

Shumacher is possibly like a Flloyd Mayweather and Senna is like a Mohammed Ali. One has the undisputed results, the other the ramanticism, the strugle, the politics and all verbiage to write ten books.

As for Hamilton, i think he is just as good and probably has had much more exciting race battles in his career than both Shu and Senna, but he lacks the numbers of Shu and the philosophy of Senna to be seen as equal legendary. I guess when he retires people will acknowledge it.

[Just_a_fan]

can you imagine an F1 driver with a good chance of the WDC giving up his seat to another driver so that HE would become WDC ? and when asked why say ...because he deserved it ? happened to fangio

Exactly. Fangio didn't need team orders like, say Schumacher in Austria...

or , as when jimmy was killed , another driver say ....if it could happen to jimmy , what chance is there for the rest of us ? he really was that good , whatever he drove he could drive faster than anyone else , stories from other drivers were legion

I think some might have thought similar "if him then what about us" thoughts when Senna died. Can't remember anyone saying it but...

[Just_a_fan]

I also believe Shumacher is the greatest of all time as well in terms of results pre race preparation and race management. However in terms of pushing boundaries and a never say never mentality i would give that Senna.

Fangio has the best results of any driver - the starts-to-win conversion rate, percentage poles, percentage front row starts. And, like driver's of his era, he raced in many different cars and race series. And his win in the 1957 Nurburgring race puts any modern "heroic" drive in to perspective.

And if there is any doubt, I'll just quote Schumacher:

Fangio is on a level much higher than I see myself. What he did stands alone and what we have achieved is also unique. I have such respect for what he achieved. You can't take a personality like Fangio and compare him with what has happened today. There is not even the slightest comparison.

And Fangio didn't have the messiah attitude that many modern drivers seem to have:

You must always strive to be the best, but you must never believe that you are.

[lebesset]

can you imagine an F1 driver with a good chance of the WDC giving up his seat to another driver so that HE would become WDC ? and when asked why say ...because he deserved it ? happened to fangio

Exactly. Fangio didn't need team orders like, say Schumacher in Austria...

or , as when jimmy was killed , another driver say ....if it could happen to jimmy , what chance is there for the rest of us ? he really was that good , whatever he drove he could drive faster than anyone else , stories from other drivers were legion

I think some might have thought similar "if him then what about us" thoughts when Senna died. Can't remember anyone saying it but...

I don't suppose any of the others even thought it ; Senna was well know for driving always to the limit and believing he was immortal , he was something of a mystic ; he was very close to Prof Watkins who tried to persuade him to stop because temperamentally it was the only way he knew and the prof feared it would end as it did ; the only time I can remember him cruising was well in the lead at monaco....and he crashed out
at the time there were stories that if he won the WDC that season he was going to take the prof's advice and retire

[Phil]

Button pulled off and built up around him. Which is why that relationship disintegrated and Hamilton had to leave in 2012.

Really? Lewis had 4 wins and 2 retirements (5 overall retirements) while leading. Jenson had 3 wins and 2 retirements. If that is all Jenson managed to achieve against Lewis, I wouldn't rate such a bubble for much.

I was referring only to his relationship with the team that wasnt all that great. Lewis spoke about these things way before 2012.

[efuloni]

I would say that Massa has had it toughest of anyone. Schumacher, Raikkonen (back when Kimi was still any good) and Alonso for 4 years. Lewis is definitely up there though.

I never though about it before, but you are right. haha. Poor Massa. He still had Villeneuve (bad or not, still a WDC) and now races alongside Bottas, who many claim a WDC to be.

The others two were Heidfeld (the only one who's not a race winner) and Fisichella. Not WDC, but good drivers too.

Funny that Massa is a good driver and only two seasons in his entire career he was better than his team-mate. Villeneuve, in 2004 (11-9) and Raikonnen in 2008 (97-75).