Is Hamilton desperate or what?

[Pierce89]

Senna had the very best of machinery, when he was succesful though. So had Alonso.
Alonso would be pretty average if we delete 2005 and 2006. That Renault and michelins gave him more advantages than hamilton ever had with f duct or kers.

[-X
Senna did his time ringo! in a Toleman then a Lotus.

He nearly beat Prost in a Toleman too! But the FIA took that away from him.
How does that compare to Hamilton who has had a winning Mclaren in each of his 4 season in F1?
And Senna has the distinction of beating a three time champ hands down in 1988.
Not finishing level on points. BEAT him.

Hamilton went straight to a top team much like Villenuve.

all correct

[marcush.]

Just to put things into perspective:
Ham ilton is outstanding ,no doubt about it.Win this years Crown and he is carving his way to being one of the alltime greats.
But one has to take note that button is not finished or destroyed by him .His shine is brighter ,yes but Button is firmly in his mirrors...sometimes close sometimes a bit further back ..but sometimes he is in front ...and winning, in front of him.

[andrew]

The Renault's mass damper system gave it a huge advantage.

The Mass damper was 06 but the ferrari was faster

I think the Renault was the better car in 2006. If the Ferrari was faster then Schumacher would have been champion again. The Ferrari was definately slower for at least the first half of the season.

[ringo]

Senna had the very best of machinery, when he was succesful though. So had Alonso.
Alonso would be pretty average if we delete 2005 and 2006. That Renault and michelins gave him more advantages than hamilton ever had with f duct or kers.

[-X
Senna did his time ringo! in a Toleman then a Lotus.

He nearly beat Prost in a Toleman too! But the FIA took that away from him.
How does that compare to Hamilton who has had a winning Mclaren in each of his 4 season in F1?
And Senna has the distinction of beating a three time champ hands down in 1988.
Not finishing level on points. BEAT him.

Hamilton went straight to a top team much like Villenuve.

I am not denying that, and I am not comparing Senna to Hamilton. What i am looking at is more towards Alonso, who in my mind should be considered a great, because he is a 2x champ. 3 makes it more official, but 2 is good enough for me. But though he is like shumacher in that only they have multi WC, they were not the best outside of their WC years.
Alonso's renault years like Senna's Mclaren years bolstered his image. So Hamilton being in a top car is not a reason to downplay his performance. Naturally a good car will make you look good.
Let's look on Hamilton in 2009, 2 wins 4 poles. Which could have been 3 wins if not for a brake failure in abu dahbi. 3 wins would put him equal with Vettel on wins. Vettel was in a redbull in 2009....
Alonso has never done that in a crap car. I rate him highly, but my ratings for him lie with 2005 to end of 2007.
Nothing statistically or otherwise suggests Alosno was ever better than Hamilton post 2006.
Nothing suggests Hamilton is not the best driver in F1 now, or that any other driver is better than him.

[marcush.]

this is absolutely true.

[Pierce89]

The Renault's mass damper system gave it a huge advantage.

The Mass damper was 06 but the ferrari was faster

I think the Renault was the better car in 2006. If the Ferrari was faster then Schumacher would have been champion again. The Ferrari was definately slower for at least the first half of the season.

The Renault was quicker for the opening fly aways only. After the first European round(and Ferrari first update package) the Ferrari was quickest all season. the Scuderia is my first allegiance, so I lke shumi and Alonso equally, but in the same car I think Alonso is quicker.Shumi's achievements will never be equaled but, you HAVE to consider cirumstances(#1,car advantage, lack of competition in most WDC years etc.)That being said, Hami, Alonso, and Shumi I see as roughly level and three of the best ever. All three are right up with the Clarks,Prosts and even Senna(yes, blasphemy I know, but true nontheless). I don't believe a collection of three better drvers has ever raced on the same grid. Let's please change the stupid name of this thread. Even being a Scuderia fan, I find the title of this thread soooo stupid. Forza Ferrari!

[PlatinumZealot]

*Off topic.. I just saw somebody calling Hamilton "The Black Mamba" on Planet F1 a while ago.. kool name as the mamba is the fastest snake. I don't think Hamilton would like it though..

[PlatinumZealot]

OK back on topic. I honestly think that Hamilton would beat Senna, Alonso, Prost and Schumacher all in the same car. I just don't think Hamilton is beatable. Call it blasphemy if you wish, but senna was beatable, Prost was beatable, Schumacher was beatable, Alonso was beatable Hamilton IS UNBEATABLE in the same car. Somebody just said the Renault wasn't the best in 2006? Then Alonso beat Schumacher fair and square right? That means Alonso was better (at the time) then came Hamilton who beat Alonso, on the same points but won due to more consistency! *breath* surely Hamilton is a great. And no JV crap because he was beatable over a season too.

[myurr]

Senna had the very best of machinery, when he was succesful though. So had Alonso.
Alonso would be pretty average if we delete 2005 and 2006. That Renault and michelins gave him more advantages than hamilton ever had with f duct or kers.

[-X
Senna did his time ringo! in a Toleman then a Lotus.

He nearly beat Prost in a Toleman too! But the FIA took that away from him.
How does that compare to Hamilton who has had a winning Mclaren in each of his 4 season in F1?
And Senna has the distinction of beating a three time champ hands down in 1988.
Not finishing level on points. BEAT him.

Hamilton went straight to a top team much like Villenuve.

all correct

Don't get me wrong as I consider Senna to be THE all time great (I don't know enough about the older drivers like Clarke to really judge them), but Senna beat Prost by 3 points in 1988 and then lost to him by 16 points in the same car the following year. And Rosberg is well on his way to soundly thrashing a 7 time world champ this season, does that make him the best driver of all time?

To me Hamilton is not yet an all time great but he is well on the path. He did beat a two time world champ on his rookie season (had Raikkonnen scored two less points then Hamilton would have been crowned world champion not Alonso) and a second championship would help establish him. If McLaren can improve the car by a few tenths relative to Red Bull then that could well happen this year.

And I honestly think that he's stepped up a gear this year and is driving at a level above any other on the grid. In previous years he had been fallible, had good weekends and bad weekends, but this year he seems to be much more consistent almost always getting the most out of the car. Yes Red Bull have been tripping over each other and making operational mistakes, but Hamilton has dragged his car up to always be there to capitalise. Despite the massive car advantage he's been able to take the fight to the Red Bulls the most consistently throughout the season.

[Pierce89]

OK back on topic. I honestly think that Hamilton would beat Senna, Alonso, Prost and Schumacher all in the same car. I just don't think Hamilton is beatable. Call it blasphemy if you wish, but senna was beatable, Prost was beatable, Schumacher was beatable, Alonso was beatable Hamilton IS UNBEATABLE in the same car. Somebody just said the Renault wasn't the best in 2006? Then Alonso beat Schumacher fair and square right? That means Alonso was better (at the time) then came Hamilton who beat Alonso, on the same points but won due to more consistency! *breath* surely Hamilton is a great. And no JV crap because he was beatable over a season too.

Mclaren in 2007 was totally geared to Lewis. Alonso was the red headed step child in that team. They were level on point and wins. I think they're roughly equal. I sure don't think Hamilton is unbeatable. Before Alonso came along, many more people considered Shumi unbeatable. A faster guy always comes along. Unbeatable?!C'mon that's just ridiculous.

[JohnsonsEvilTwin]

Ringo the Mp4-24 started as a dog, but ended as the quickest car on the grid.
For you to say it was a dog throughout 2009 is plain wrong.

[marcush.]

You could only make that statement NOT having seen what he did especially in Qualy .
IT was just not from this world and he found time in himself and the car which at times was pure magic..not two tenths or something..
One might remember that Senna outqualified Prost in identical car by 1.4 seconds !third placed Berger was 2.7 s behind...
We still have to see something even close to such a performance with Hamilton.

[aral]

This thread has degenerated into a typical schoolboy rant! "my action man is better than yours" etc. Everyone has his or her own favourite driver, but to try an force your opinion on others and refusing to accept other persons views, is little short of pathetic. There were many great drivers in the past, far better than those now being touted. For example, Moss, Fangio, Nuvolari etc. Many of these competed in identical cars to their adversaries, and so could be directly compared. Comparing Hamilton in a Mclaren, to say, Rosberg (K) in a Williams is stupid. If you have the best car, you will win, but it does not neccessarily make you a "great".

[Just_a_fan]

All the talk of "he only wins coz he's in the best car" stuff is funny.

Look at all of the champions over the years and they almost always won in the best car. What is important is to look at how the other guy in the team did because he also had "the best car".

Button had a definite car advantage last year in the early part of the year and just did enough in that early season to bank the points (something the Red Bull guys have struggled to do this year) that led to the title.

Alonso's car in 2005 and 6 was very good and very well suited to his style.

The majority of Schuie's titles were with a car and / or tyre advantage with the added bonus of a team mate forbidden to take wins in preference to him.

Hakkinen's title winning steed was one of the best on the grid. Hell, even DC won in it!

Hill and JV both had the best car on the grid helped by Shuie going to a ailing Ferrari. By the end of 1997, Schuie was fighting hard again and ran JV a close race to the title

Schuie's Benetton of 94 and 95 was hardly a bad car and he was helped by Williams struggling to recover from Senna's loss (Hill was certainly not ready to step in to those shoes although he tried hard and ran Schuie hard to the line)

Prost's 93 Williams was the best car on the grid as was Mansell's 92 car.

Senna and Prost's titles at McLaren were, guess what, in some of the best cars on the grid.

See where this is going?

[JohnsonsEvilTwin]

In each of his 4 years in F1 Hamilton has had a car capable of winning.
Even 2009, the second half of 2009, Hamiltons Mclaren was the the class of the field.
Christ even Kovalainen looked good in it!

Now name me one driver who at the start of his career has had a winning car in each of his first 4 years.