Conceptual wrote:Oh, I forgot. In F1, you can't just score points... You have to score points with STYLE, or they don't count, right?
Right. Unless you want to become Schumi Second Part. The camera did not follow Hamilton, see?
I dare to say that Hamilton still needs that "little bit" you mention: style. That is, a way of his own to be remembered, the kind of anecdotes you can tell to friends around a beer. Something like "Remember how Lewis won XXXX GP in 20XX, when he was in 10th place, under the rain, with both tires flat spotted?"
I also dare to say that I have the impression that winning on a dominant car has no... grace, if I may take the idiom from spanish. I might be in a minory in this point, but certainly I'm not alone.
Judging by the string of GPs that started last year and culminated in the Australian GP, either Hamilton is the greatest genius in driving history (that's a possibility) or Hamilton has had it very easy from the point of view of hitting the right team at the right time (which is another possibility).
Of course, I recognize that's a thing easily said by someone like me that hasn't seen him working his ass since he was 5 years old but I've seen no purpose, no style in him... yet.
At least Schumi had the ridiculous jump and the finger pointing to the sky and you knew all the time he was making
history (and he also knew it). At least Kimi, our respected WDC, has the flattest voice in the universe and he is the coolest of the cool, and you know, and he knows he's
the best money can buy. At least Alonso has his absurd moves and his frequent hairdos and, for a while, the fingers numbering the races he had won, in dramatic style, almost like a
rebel promise. At least with Kubitza you can tell to your girlfriend that this very morning you met the driver with the
largest nose in the universe, larger than Alain Prost's.
I mean, every person has a purpose and a way. Hamilton has been a little flat in this department.
I might be wrong, but I feel that Hamilton still has to develop
something of his own. He has the chance to do it, of course. I think sometimes if he shouldn't do something after the races. I mean besides hugging Ron Dennis or his father.
Hugging Nico Rosberg was a start... but he cannot do it every GP.
However, hey, do not take my point of view. I think personality is a thing that costs, or so it seems that is what happens in F1.
Now, I recognize that up to this day, Ron Dennis has been in the spotlight. It's hard to shine when you have to duck because your boss is under attack. Even taking that in account, Hamilton has played more the role of McLaren jockey than the role of a personality that defines an epoch of racing. That's a curious thing for me, he has a record better than Fangio, Hill, Clark or even Schumacher, but no so curious if you think about the "legacy" he would left if he disappeared tomorrow: very little.
That (I know, Ray) could be lack of style or a style so subtle that I don't get it. We'll see, this year seems to belong to him, unless Kimi pulls another "Räikkönen", like last year.
Yeah, he done good. But I highly doubt that if Red Bull, Ferrari AND Toyota had been around at the finish, Bourdais would have held the same position. Not to mention his teammate still in the race. And it is very reasonable to say that he finished there only because of retirements. It's happened alot before in the past, and I don't see how it doesn't/can't apply here. I'm not suggesting he isn't good, his four ChampCar titles prove that. I just don't think he would have been in the same finishing position had half the field not retired.
