Apparently some F1 fans are saying that Hamilton cannot be compared to greats of the past. I never get this argument when put forward in any sport. People compete in the time they are in. Do these fans seriously think that if transported to the past, Hamilton will suddenly be a terrible driver? He's a good driver now and would have been a good driver competing in the past with the cars they had then.
I'm looking forward to her speech when she gets her first music award... "I'd like to thank my parents, the members on the Southampton not606 board, oh and that middle aged dude that has believed in me for so long and introduce me to that wonderful group of fans... " She names us first and then bursts into "oh when the saints"
A couple's home was damaged after being hit by, wait for it............. ........ a frozen **** that fell from a plane. http://www.express.co.uk/news/weird/614928/hole-in-roof-after-frozen-poo-fall-plane
I can see what they mean , but it does not he is not a great ( one of the greatest ? ) Driver . I agree 100% with Sir Jackie Stewart , in that you can only really be compared to drivers of the same era . You could argue that Lewis of Today would flatly refuse to drive cars / tracks of Fangio's era as they were death traps . Similarly , Fangio would not even fit in a modern F1 car , let alone be able to operate it , if he got in . My point is an extreme example , but hopefully you get what I mean .
If/when Hamilton matches Schumacher's 7 titles then he will have to be recognised as one of the best racing drivers of all time. And I think he's got a hell of a chance of doing it.
Probably a greater achievement if he did. Michael only really had Hakkinen that could hold a flame to him. Lewis has Vettel/Alonso/Ricciardo all of whom are top level (before you ask, no I don't think Button quite is. The likes of Bottas/Verstappen/Sainz may become so). I think Michael has greater mechanical intelligence in a race car than Lewis, but Lewis is probably naturally quicker. It all depends on how you measure 'greatness'. Was Gilles Villeneuve great? Stirling Moss? Neither of those two won a title, which is where measuring with stats falls down (particularly these days where the car is such a major element).
Never a champion, only 6 wins, but one of the all-time greats. Winning at Monaco in 1981 in the purely evil Ferrari 126C has to be one of the greatest achievements in F1 history.
Perhaps so, but car control to die for. You get my point though, the concept of 'greatness' is arbitrary. Was Mansell a great? For me, no. Prost? Definitely. Piquet? No. Hakkinen? Yes-ish. All double world champs, at the least. But it really is just my vaguely objective opinion. Would Lewis hold his own against them? Yep. Would he beat them? Who knows.
Get your point completely, Gv was a brilliant driver, but, for me, not quite up there with the best racing drivers. I refer back to my reply to Fran, but it is very personal. For me Proni was brilliant.
Ah, 1950s-60s test and prototype aircraft. It was the stuff of science fiction becoming fact. We had loads of them too, but the Valkyrie is a standout. Of course, the USA produced the Convair B-58 Hustler, which was a full blown supersonic bomber that looked out of this world too, though not quite as other-worldly as the Valkyrie. Imagine the maintenance on those engines.
No. Proni was only mentioned here. My post to Fran was more general. I have probably got the wrong end of the stick!
