Hamilton Criticism

Originally Posted by wisdenb

They ARE monkeys at the back of the grid!

Well at least you speak your mind

Originally Posted by AlfaLincs

My position with Damon Hill is that he was twice world champion. Schumachers driving him off the road was just so low as to make him unworthy of the name 'Champion'. He cheated.

I think Hill was a great driver because he drove faster than anyone expected him to. His consistency was almost unbelievable, and like his dad he could develop a car. His late start prevent him from becoming a true F1 great. He was also modest. He also made slow cars go fast. Thats what great drivers do

I thought he was shabbily treated by Williams. He did after all drag them back from disaster. Still can't figure out why they sacked him. Bad mistake

I agree with what you've put above. I saw the "This is Your Life" show when they had Hill on it, and I think it was apparent that Frank Williams didn't really know why he'd sacked Hill either - still, they did the same thing with Mansel

All the drivers on the grid are very good drivers drivers. Yes, some have a few problems with starts, breaking cars, blocking, throwing cars off the track etc etc but they are all good drivers. In many cases they are having to drive beyond the cars capabilities which causes many of the problems. Many people would probably label Sato a "Monkey" but I believe he is potentially one of the fastest drivers on the grid. Trulli is another. A blindingly fast driver on a single lap but suffers during the race Put them all in similar cars, all with an identical setup and the results would be surprising.

I completely agree with you, Dave. Kovalainen finished in front of Schumacher at the Race of Champions in 2004...

Hamilton undoubtedly has the capabilities to become a champion, and the start of his F1 career has been outstanding. I admire his skill and obvious determination to succeed. This season, whether he's champion or not, will not prove if he's one of the 'Greats'; only time will tell that. The possible 'fly in his ointment' is the hype that the English media are rolling out before him. Same with most British sportsmen, they over-rate them and bull them up, only to slate them on the occasions they don't win. No doubt Lewis will lose some (and soon, I hope), and when he does, I'm sure his own character and self-belief, together with the guidance of his two mentors, will prevail and ultimately give him the chance to join the elite.

Frank Williams views on drivers are well known. He considers them interchangeable and of far less importance than the car. I think if radio-control was allowed, he would much prefer it.

It was Colin Chapman who was the first to say openly " If the drivers broken, plug in a new one"..intimating that anyone could win in a Lotus. In truth I think he regretted saying this, particularly after the loss of Jim Clark whom Chapman thought the world of.

I had an Engineer neighbour (deceased now) two doors away. He restored a beautiful Daimler V8 250, and he told me that Chapman, Hill and Clark would meet up at his house & they'd all go shooting on the marshes.


AlfaLincs

Originally Posted by davecooper

Many people would probably label Sato a "Monkey" but I believe he is potentially one of the fastest drivers on the grid. Trulli is another. A blindingly fast driver on a single lap but suffers during the race Put them all in similar cars, all with an identical setup and the results would be surprising.

You've missed the point.One fast lap is not enough to say the least. One fast lap doesn't win you a race let alone a championship title. It doesn't make a good/great driver if you can put together a quick lap. They are NOT all good drivers. Putting them all in similar cars and with an "identical" setup neutralizes a driver's ability to set up his own machinery and extract maximum possible performance and of course communication with the team in order to improve the car in relation to the specific track/strategy and conditions. Then add driving skills and all sorts of variables which i will not mention.

Trulli(as well as fisi) was Alonso's team mate at Renault in identical cars. Are they all good drivers? Maybe....but there is only one great racer in that bunch.

MS hit Sato on the helmet when Sato made an amateurish mistake and crashed into the back of him. When MS made an amateurish mistake and crashed into the back of Senna a long time ago, Senna talked to MS and didn't try to hit him(at least not on camera).Again there is only one great racer in that interesting comment.

To get back on topic: JV is a bitter man.

Originally Posted by Gary Slegg

I saw the "This is Your Life" show when they had Hill on it, and I think it was apparent that Frank Williams didn't really know why he'd sacked Hill either - still, they did the same thing with Mansel

Well he wasn't getting any younger and probably he was getting more expensive(like Ralph Schumacher nowadays). But Frentzen!?!?! He was a total disaster as the replacement. And he was Frank's heavily preferred driver which tells you that he can get things wrong.

Another fairly robust move by Hamilton at the start yesterday, I thought.

I thought it was excellently judged, moved across to the inside, forcing Miki to go to the outside to have any chance of overtaking - that meant that when he returned to the racing line, there was no way past.
Perfectly planned and executed. I was actually really impressed with that bit of driving.

Nowt wrong with "the move" if you ask me

JV will not be happy again

Originally Posted by DSS

Mr Villenueve (one hit wonder) always have something to say about other drivers.
If H is driving like MS then good for him, maybe he will get more than one World title behind his name.

Hamilton is good""" but he drive for a wrong team, he should drive for Cavallino Rampante

Originally Posted by bazza

STRONGLY disagree with that. Hill is massively under-rated. Why was it a winning car? Hill was the test driver for Williams for a couple of years before, and had a lot to do with the setup and development of that car. He gets criticism about his racing ability, bullying people he was lapping and such, and perhaps rightly so. But in terms of pure out-and-out speed, getting the best possible out of the package, he was fantastic.
There have been very few drivers ever who could have done what Hill did in that Arrows. He took one of the worst and under-developed cars in the field, and came a lap or two away from winning a GP.

He was far better than Villeneuve, was never given the support, or any kind of belief from Williams that they thought of him as a top driver, and still performed. Stood up to Senna and Prost when they raced together, and IIRC had out-scored Senna when that tragedy happened, despite some incredibly bad luck. Villeneuve came along and the team were totally behind him rather than Hill, but Hill still out-fought him.

Hill?? Just had the best car at the time... simple!!

He outdrove Senna, and came close to Prost in his very first season.
The REASON it was the best car was his ability to develop it.

"Hill?? Just had the best car at the time... simple!!"

So did his team mate don't forget. Hill was the only one who could rattle Schumacher..and get a Jordan to win and an Arrows to nearly win.
Vastly under-rated IMHO.

When he left Williams he only had 67 F1 races behind him in five years. He had won 21, got pole in 20 and 19 fastest laps. It takes a lot more than the best