F1 needs great drivers, not rich ones – Anthony Hamilton

F1 Fanatic Round-up

Posted on

| Written by

In the round-up: Lewis Hamilton’s father warns Formula One will “disintegrate” if it fails to attract the cream of driving talent.

Social media

Notable posts from Twitter, Instagram and more:

Comment of the day

Indianapolis may be a step too far, but more variety on the F1 calendar has to be a good thing:

I think the biggest problem with running at Indianapolis is the IndyCar guys feeling their territory invaded. Worse still if F1 is quicker.

But the idea is a good one. Instead of doing all the cut-and-paste Tilke tracks, how about some variety, so that designers have to balance the needs of different challenges over a championship. More tracks like the old Hockenheim would be a good start, and something bumpy with some extreme camber and gradient changes (Laguna Seca’s corkscrew). If it creates a different set of challenges, it adds variables, which could lead to surprise results.
Alex Brown (@Splittimes)

Happy birthday!

Happy birthday to Straightline, Sandlefish and Yogesh!

If you want a birthday shout-out tell us when yours is via the contact form or adding to the list here.

On this day in F1

Approaching the final season of his F1 career, Michael Schumacher headed the testing times at Jerez five years ago today for Mercedes:

Author information

Keith Collantine
Lifelong motor sport fan Keith set up RaceFans in 2005 - when it was originally called F1 Fanatic. Having previously worked as a motoring...

Got a potential story, tip or enquiry? Find out more about RaceFans and contact us here.

76 comments on “F1 needs great drivers, not rich ones – Anthony Hamilton”

  1. F1 cars do not belong on ovals. F1 is a road racing series- always has been. If the road course sections of the Indianapolis, Fontana or Daytona “roval (a course that combines the oval and road course circuits into one) variant courses were modified and extended, then this would be ideal, IMO. The original Indianapolis roval F1 first used by F1 in 2000 was a terrible track and everyone knows it. If it had used more of the oval track and been, say, 4 miles long, then it would have been good.

    1. And also- that is the one thing F1 needs desperately that it doesn’t really have anymore is variation of the circuits they race on. Most of the tracks nowadays have very similar average speeds (I am referencing nearly all of the new Tilkedromes), and that is bad. Back in the day, like in 1985- there were fast tracks like Silverstone, the Osterreichring, Paul Ricard, Jacarepagua, Kyalami, Spa, Monza and Hockenheim (although F1 raced at the Nurburgring for the German GP that year), and there were mid-speed tracks like Imola, Brands Hatch, Montreal and Zandvoort, and slow tracks like Detroit, Monaco and Adelaide. Why cant there be variation like that today? There are only 4 or so fast tracks (fast being 140 mph+ average lap speeds) on the calendar and I guess the addition of Mexico City to the calendar- it being a high altitude circuit gives the calendar some much needed variation, but it isn’t enough.

      1. this x10000000000. the calendar is crying out for variation.

    2. The roadargument falls flat on the Tilkedromes.
      I agree with mfreire that anything that brings variation to F1 tracks is good and that includes ovals.

    3. I agree with what you are saying, except for F1 is a road racing series- always has been.
      From 1950 to 1960 the Indy 500 counted as a round in the Formula One championship.
      Graham Hill won Indianapolis in 1966 , fellow Brit Jim Clark won in 1965. I could go on but what I am saying is that there is blood lines on oval track racing in F1.

      1. dbHenry, it counted as a round in the World Drivers Championship, but it was fully acknowledged that it was effectively a separate affair and the two events were run to entirely different regulations (hence why the WCC title excluded the Indianapolis 500 from their points system).

        If anything, the suggestion is that the Indianapolis 500 was only originally added to the World Drivers Championship to give the facade that it was actually a world championship, given that until 1953 Formula 1 had no championship races outside of Europe – as it was, there was no real intention of having drivers and teams actively compete in both series, especially given the disparity in regulations.

        1. Fully acknowledged that it was effectively a separate affair by whom?
          The race counted as it was the Third round of the World Drivers Championship. I know the race was AAA sanctioned but none the less, the race counted towards the Drivers Championship. Not sure how it is a separate affair. Jophnnie Parsons finished 6th in the Drivers Championship on the back of his Indy win)
          Formula 1 had a race outside of Europe in 1950, in Indianapolis. Long before 1953. I fail to see your point, Drivers and teams competed for points up until 1960. And after that, Drivers still competed in the 500 that competed for the F1 Championship.

          1. You only have to look at the vast differences in the field to see it wasn’t really with the rest.

            Parsons did win, but failed to compete in any other championship event.

    4. On a related note, A trivia question:

      Can you name the first U.S. driver to score points, win a round of the world championship and lead the standings?

      1. Johnnie Parsons, Parsons led the standings with Italian Giuseppe Farina and Argentina’s Juan Manuel Fangio.

  2. Ummm… Re Hamilton Snr’s views, cannot totally disregard his comments on HAM and other drivers, but something feels uneasy. In hindsight, when you feel you are the strongest, more than full of confidence, it’s probably the high time to start up the downhill

    1. I didn’t like his comments reg Rosberg retirement. Almost implying that Lewis caused Nico to take the decision, also ignoring that Nico did triumph last season.

      1. Well Nico himself did kinda implied that Lewis was also part of the reason why he retired.

        1. He also said if he hadn’t have won the WC he would have carried on.

      2. @nomadindian
        In fact, I think we can safely ignore his opinion on this subject. To me, what he says is just a way of saying “my son is better than your sons”.
        Also, I can’t help but ask myself if Anthony Hamilton’s maxim “We need great drivers, not rich ones” was the reason behind his spectacularly poor management of Paul di Resta’s career … ;-)

        I too dislike the fact that a driver needs an obscenely rich family to get into F1 nowadays. But F1 isn’t going to ‘implode’ because of that. That’s just rubbish talk. If, for example, Bill Gates had a son who drove in F1, and he were quoted saying something along those lines, I’d take a minute to ponder what he said. But in Hamilton’s case, this is nothing but annoyingly transparent self-glorification.

        1. Most forms of motorsport, require obscene levels of money to take part. Many of the entry level forms, the prize money doesn’t even cover the fuel required for a race, let alone all of the other race related expenses.

          Unfortunately a very large pool of extremely talented drivers rarely make it through the entry levels as the cost becomes prohibitive. Anthony Hamilton knows only too well that if Lewis hadn’t have been spotted in his early days by a certain Championship F1 team, he wouldn’t have made it into F1.

          Sadly some drivers who have passed through F1 have bought themselves in and do not belong anywhere near F1 and time will tell whether the most recent is really talented or just another mobile chicane languishing somewhere near the back of the field.

          It would be nice if Liberty will sort out the prize money fairly and allow some of the teams to look for talent in the lower formulas rather than needing to look for money. Pay drivers may be in F1 to stay, but, pay drivers don’t bring sponsorship other than ‘Daddies’ bank account.

          1. I questioned myself while reading that article like “Was he drunk ?”. I really don’t know whats wrong with Hamiltons family ,they are more worried about their status and image in the public than their ability.Come on for god sake give some credit for other drivers.

            Lewis is nothing without Mc Laren and Mercs.I never got a feeling that he out performed the car.He was in works team from Day 1 with a silver spoon and still we got years like 2011 and 2012.

          2. Let’s not forget at 8 years old Lewis received a birthday present worth about £10,000, then at least £10k per year until he got sponsorship. Ok Anthony worked hard and was dedicated, but that’s not an average family.

          3. Harsha, you can have any view you like about 2011 (it’s not like he did not win a number of races is it?) but 2012 was an absolutely stellar driving season completely dismantled by Macca wishing to ‘equal’ both drivers regardless of the evidence. He certainly lost enough points in just pit blunders to be in with a shout at the end. Add a seemingly busted car, he should easily have won that year. There are very few pundits and journalists that think otherwise. In fact there is a well reveiwed and respected journalists view on just that available with just a few clicks. That chap does not even like LH.

            To suggest his driving in anyway was less than say Raik before him is simply outrageous and you seem to forget his WC team mate spent much of the time qualifying at the back! In the same car… Spa and the Twitter? Who could blame him? Everyone apparently all ignoring just how frustrated he must have been with the team.

            That years ridiculous team management and failure to focus on reliability was directly responsible for LH leaving.

            They have been doing just so well since, I am sure you will agree.

          4. Harsha, you need to take a recent history lesson on the 2012 season. Hamilton was stellar that year, only 2nd in performance to Alonso. He was let down by McLaren’s operational blunders, mechanical failures and some bad luck with drivers crashing in to him. He was fighting for podiums and wins while Jenson Button was fighting back markers.

            I agree 2011 wasn’t the best of Hamilton as he demonstrated poor judgement behind the wheel on numerous occasions.. most of which led to his 5 DNFs that season. Ye, he managed to take as many race wins as Button and out qualify him over the length of the season.

            There is little or no doubt that Hamilton was given a silver spoon when he entered F1, but lets not use that as an excuse to undermine an absolutely stellar driver.

    2. I don’t agree with Hamilton Senior’s views on Mr Ecclestone. Mr Hamilton holds him in very high esteem. Without doubt he has done a lot that has made F1 better, but he has also done things that have made things more difficult, especially for the independent teams. For example Mr Hamilton said “You get bums on seats, you get more people with bums on seats at home, don’t you?”, which I take to mean he believes fans watching races on TV at home leads to fans attending races at the track. Mr Ecclestone was the one in charge of media rights, so the responsibility for the falling TV audience and, by association, the falling track attendances, was his responsibility as well. While I can’t see how there isn’t a correlation between the decline in interest in F1 and its move behind the paywall.

  3. Yes, by all means kick out the guy who built the most successful team after only Enzo Ferrari, and then kick out a guy who was responsible for numerous WRC titles, so that you can hire a guy who’s biggest reference is his success in running a marketing firm.

    1. It’s F1 these days, even at the top the commercial people are getting ahead on technical jobs. I think they hope to steal the laurels of the 2017 work. Renaming the car is outrageous considering that Dennis is still a shareholder.

      1. There is a theory called Parkinson’s Law, which says people get promoted to their level of incompetence. The essentials of it are a person is employed because they have certain attributes that distinguish them from everyone else applying for the job the employer wants them to perform. They do well, so they get promoted to a new role which requires new skills, which requires a lot of the skills of their old job, but crucially some new ones as well. They continue to do well and so again and again get promoted, each time to a role that requires skills that differ more and more from those they were expected to have when originally recruited, until eventually they get to a point where their skills differ so much from those required for the job they first had they fail to be competent in their job, so they aren’t promoted any more.
        Just because a person is employed from outside F1 doesn’t mean they are incompetent, it could mean the exact opposite, it could mean they are better suited to that job than someone promoted from within the team.

        1. @drycrust, I agree with that assessment, particular given that the problems, and therefore the necessary skill set, that the team faced in the past does not necessarily match that of today, and therefore whilst Ron Dennis might have been the man best placed to solve them in the past, it does not mean that he is the best person for the job now. Indeed, some of the rumours that leaked out of the team suggested that, in some parts of the team, Ron was actually becoming a source of problems instead of helping to solve them.

        2. Well I’m glad that the new boss is so skilled he managed to change the car name and color.
          Ron and Capito would have never thought of that.

  4. I think they are pretty fair comments from Anthony Hamilton honestly, I mean what would the grid look like right now if it wasn’t for Red Bull’s young driver program bringing drivers up into Toro Rosso?
    This year a quarter of the drivers on the grid will have come from that program. Once all of the older drivers like Alonso,Raikkonen and eventually Hamilton and Vettel retire and there is no other avenue for exceptional young drivers to get a proper chance in the sport without bringing huge amounts of money..What will the grid be like in 5 to 10 years?

    Pay drivers have always been a thing of course but I don’t think it has ever been even remotely anywhere near like this.

    1. Also drivers like Vergne have shown just how bad it is, the guy had much more potential than a lot of pay drivers on the grid but it amounted to nothing because he just did not have enough big bucks keeping him in the sport.

      It seems like the only really exciting new talent coming into the sport these days are Toro Rosso drivers that get that big break and move up into Red Bull.

      1. petebaldwin (@)
        8th February 2017, 9:49

        In a formula where the worst driver in the best car will easily beat the best driver in the worst car, you will always have pay drivers.

        If we reach a point where having a faster driver is more beneficial than having some extra money, pay drivers will start to disappear – at the moment, most teams are fighting for their existence in F1, not for tenths of a second.

    2. Well Mercedes have their young driver program.

      I wont be surprised if new Mclaren will start to pick up a few more drivers, I’m sure we will certainly see a few more Japanese drivers come through Honda.

      Hopefully, one day, Ferrari will finally give one of their young drivers a chance. If Renault become successful in coming years, they may restart their young driver program as well.

      Potential grid in 2021:
      Ferrari – Hamilton/Sainz (if Hamilton packs it in),Grosjean (not exactly fertile ground for young drivers)
      Mercedes – Vettel, Ocon
      Red Bull – Verstappen, Gasly
      Mclaren – Ricciardo, Vandorne
      Renault – Hulk, Deletraz
      Williams (now supplied by Honda) – Stroll, Honda backed Japanese Driver A
      Torro Rosso (now supplied by Honda) – Verhagen/Verschoor, Honda backed Japanese Driver B
      Haas – Ferrucci, Schumacher
      Force India (Now Owned by a Chinese magnate) – Werhlien, Mercedes Backed Chinese Driver A/Replaced mid season by a returning Sergio Perez
      Sauber – Did not make the grid (VAG buys team and enters it for 2022 and signs Verstappen as their lead driver)

      1. Force India (Now Owned by a Chinese magnate) – Werhlien, Mercedes Backed Chinese Driver A/Replaced mid season by a returning Sergio Perez

        LOL. I spilled my coffee. Thanks mate!

    3. I really do not think you can call Max Verstappen as one “coming from the RBR driver programme” since RBR scooped him up only when he was already ready. They signed him mid season to race for them the next season (at STR), because otherwise he would have probably signed with Mercedes, who did not offer an immediate drive.

      And there is a boatload of others who didn’t. Grosjean, Bottas, Hulk, Perez, Ocon, Wehrlein, none of them pay drivers. Giovanazzi is waiting in the wings, also not a pay driver. And if there hadn’t been too many spots already filled either by the RBR program or richer drivers, we could have had Freins (and others that ended up elsewhere) in F1 as well as several others. Sainz would most likely have been able to get to F1 without RBR too.

    4. “Pay drivers” are a symptom, not the cause. I’m more concerned about the number of available seats in F1 and the overall appeal being capable of generating sufficient revenue to reduce the ‘need’ for pay drivers in the first place.

  5. COTD just copied my comment. I’m just kidding, I’m happy someone’s the same opinion as I. The tilke tracks are good, some better than others but above all, by all trying to encompass everything they all feel much like the same type of track, the same variety, some quirky character full tracks would add real variety to the calendar. COTD selections are great, and would also be a challenge to the engineers and a treat to the fans as some cars would perhaps perform better at different types of tracks.

  6. Would love to see Robert. K Back in F1 more then anything.

  7. Hamilton Sr has said what every race fan from the last 5 years in the top 3 or 4 racing series have been saying. But in my opinion, the top teams with the big dollars will always pay for the top drivers. The bottom teams will go after the rich kids. It’s a new reality I’ve accepted. In NASCAR if you have long brunette hair and are gorgeous, you” ll be able to get a Stewart/Haas drive that is capable of competing for wins but if your name is Danica as well, 25 th to 30th is acceptable.

  8. Really excited about Kubica’s future in WEC, would love to see him succeed in a top-tier championship. Maybe within a year or two we’d see him landing a very competitive LMP1 drive.

  9. How is Anthony Hamilton still a thing?

    1. Probably because he is the father, and indeed, the instigator of statistically the greatest British F1 driver of all time, not forgetting his son’s numerous successes in other series’. Currently ranked 2nd in the all-time stats behind 7 times WDC Michael Schumacher. etc. etc. Certainly one of the best drivers I’ve seen in all my years of following F1. In the UK at least we should be thankful and proud that we have an absolute world class sportsman in Lewis Hamilton, son of Anthony Hamilton who for that fact alone will always be a thing.

      (Before anyone blows a blood vessel, my personal best driver of all time is Jim Clark)

      1. P.S. What did your father achieve?

        1. After being evacuated back to the UK after the island we had moved to was invaded, my family returned to the war-torn country and both my parents worked tirelessly for no reward to help the refugees there. My Dad published his memoirs and the book has been well-received. When people on the island are introduced to him, he is warmly embraced and they thank him for what he did ‘for their people’.

          Over to you.

          1. @Zim That certainly puts things into perspective, great answer to a snide question.

          2. Thank you, Ferrox. Appreciated.

  10. Now I can see where his arrogant came from.

    1. All the drivers have to think they are the best, if they don’t they may as well not bother.

    2. I agree. Both Hamiltons very arrogant.

      There is a difference between the confidence, and sometimes humility, that great champions have and the arrogance that the other ones do.

      1. Do mention these “great… humble” champions, Zim. The world awaits.

  11. The need for variability in the circuits F1 races on is precisely why I was disappointed they didn’t decide to use the full Mistral at Paul Ricard this year. It would have forced the teams hands and made them have to come up with different solutions to get the best out of the cars.

  12. It seems Paul Ricard is aiming at Spa’s place on the calendar. Still believe end of July would be a better fit, with tourism high season at that moment they could attract more people than at the end of August.

  13. I agree with the COTD in that we need greater variety of tracks, rather then lots of tracks that have a bit of everything as Tilkedromes seem to be designed, but I don’t think ovals are the way to go. Circuite de Gilles Villeneuve is as close to an oval as F1 needs.

  14. The drivers in f1 have been improved significantly over the years and the last two years were really good. I have no idea what Anthony Hamilton is talking about, but i am not seeing it. The only ones who come to mind are Merhi and possibly Haryanto, but surely nobody can blaim manor for that. Of course, some talented drivers don’t have enough funds, but with the talent programs the big teams are running you could argue that the best are less reliant on money, cause they get picked up sooner. There is just a big pool of really good drivers who are all fighting for the same spot in a sport with little room and teams where money is tight.

    1. 2016 was arguably the best driver line up for a long time. 2017 will arguably be even stronger than that, as we got rid of 2 pay drivers in Gutierrez and Nasr.

  15. Evil Homer (@)
    8th February 2017, 12:18

    Anthony Hamilton’s comments are just silly- cant he see his lad is a great driver AND a rich one!????

    Oh…… he means incoming pay drivers?? May have a point (I didn’t like his comments directed to Bottas though, poor form).

    The ‘Pay Driver’ debate wont stop until an F1 budget is sorted, and honestly it will never be. I think at the moment we see a great set of really talented drivers on the grid, maybe more now than the last few years. Ocon slipping into a Force India a great example, apparently not too much behind him but his new team was 4th last year, good stuff.

    Wehrlien a talent but seems he may need some more people skills, that will come, and people forget Max is still a new driver- yes from money, but old boy isn’t paying too much is he!

    But the premise of Hamilton Snr’s comment is correct, the sport needs to find a structure where the lower teams can pick a top young driver over one who can just bring dad’s dollars (not a shot a Lance Stroll, he will do ok).

    So its back to Liberty to get F1 the model where we get 20 of the top 25 guys in the world (shock horror, not all the best drivers drive F1) to drive ……………………. equal money maybe?

  16. Roth Man (@rdotquestionmark)
    8th February 2017, 12:42

    I didn’t care at all really that Mclaren dropped MP4 (or at least I thought I didn’t), I thought that it made sense as part of their rebranding post Dennis and Project 4 wasn’t relevant anymore………. but……. I just cannot get used to MCL32, it looks so wrong!!!

    1. MCL32 at least did what was supposed to, bring the attachment of the former nomenclature with Ron Dennis to its knees (pun intended)

  17. Evil Homer (@)
    8th February 2017, 12:55

    The McLaren are cleaning house of anything Ron Dennis – I get they want a new slate but they are going to extremes aren’t they??

    If I were a cleaner being there over 5 months I would update my resume :)

    I hope they go orange, I think they will just to show a changing of the guard.

  18. In the F1 of today, every driver is a “pay driver” in the sense that either you personally bring or attract sponsors, no buts or ifs. Fernando Alonso came into F1 on the back of the Santander sponsorship. Lewis Hamilton’s greatest asset is not that he is a very talented driver but that he is perceived to be “black/Afro-British” which attracts huge amounts of sponsorship. Without the personal sponsors of Marcus Ericsson there would not be a Sauber team on the grid today.

    Country of origin matters too as the greater the BNP of the country and the greater its interest in F1 is, the more revenue can be generated. This is why so many mediocre British (such as Donnelly, Herbert, Warwick, Wilson, di Resta, Chilton, Palmer) and German drivers (Frentzen, Heidfeld, Glock, Sutil) have polluted the grid and kept out the very best. This is why Nico Rosberg chose to race as a German and not as a Finn. This is why so many talented drivers from smaller countries never get a chance in F1 UNLESS they bring a large purse which in turn is why so many Brits (and Germans) attack drivers who are forced to do while their own second- and third rates can be passed off as legit talents.

    1. Fair enough points, but it is a tad unfair to group Herbert in with those other mentioned drivers, as his career was hardly mediocre. Placing him on that list beside Chilton and di Resta is silly, as he won three F1 races, and without his horror crash he could have been a champion.

      1. He won three races, but two of them were in a car that won 9 in the hands of his teammate and the third was because of other teams royally screwing up. I have yet to watch a race with him in it where he impressed me even remotely.

      2. There have been too many seasons in the 21st Century where the only person you had to beat was your teammate to become DWC and the beaten teammate was more or less guaranteed to win races because no-one can expect a season without incidents and failures, that’s why HHF also won three races and finished second in 1997. The standard of drivers in F1 is such that as long as you’re in the right car you will win races – Eddie Irvine, Kovalainen and Maldonado did so because they were in the right car at the right time. Many if not all of the derided “pay drivers” would have done so in the right car.

        1. @repete86, You should watch his horror crash in the face just about immediately before he raced in F1. The fact he got to F1 in the first place (and not a wooden box) was nothing short of a miracle and that he was ever to race again yet more signs of a miracle.

          The fact that the majority of people who suffer the level of damage he received to his feet are left relying on (very strong pain killers and) walking aids or even wheel chairs for the rest of their life would not be an exaggeration. For those who are unaware of the severity of the injury caused by his accident, they wouldn’t notice it by the way he moves about with apparent ease. The reason some of the comments he makes to top drivers (that should give him a smack in the mouth) and gets away with it is purely because they know what he went through and the heights he should (without injury) achieved.

          1. @Henrik for the previously mentioned reasons surrounding Jonny Herbert and Martin Donnelly was racing in a back marker team for under 2 seasons, the second of which he also miraculaously survived a horror crash ( the crash in which Ayrton Senna made strong friendship with Sid Watkins), the left him without a leg and brain injury (along with others)m another driver whose career ended in F1, managed to take into other motorsports and still races nowadays!

          2. You think Herbert’s crash was absolutely horrendous, do you? Well, take a look at this 2003 horror crash! Not only did the driver survive the highest G-forces ever recorded with some of the worst injuries sustained, he also came back to set the fastest qualifying time of the entire field for the 2005 Indy 500. And by the way – because of cheating (German) race stewards, he was extremely questionably disqualified from the win that would have brought him the 1996 F3000 championship and a seat in F1 so that German Jörg Müller would be champion instead. But since he was not a Brit or a German, who cares? ;-)


        2. @Henrik.

          In response to your comment about drivers only needing to beat their team mate to win a WDC…

          With the exception of the last 4 seasons (there really is no denying that RBR were dominant in 2013) and even Max Chilton could have won a WDC in the recent Mercedes dominant seasons. Please show your evidence to support this…

          1. Where to start? The 1978 Lotus? The 1988-89 McLaren? The 1992-93 Williams? The 2000-5 Ferrari? The 2011 and 2013 Red Bull? Not to mention the 2014-16 Mercedes.

            Let’s just see how Bottas and Stroll fare this year! If the Merc is as dominant as the last three seasons and Bottas fails to score a win (in spite of Hamilton suffering a few bad races and retirements) and if the McLaren is a regular points scorer and despite this Stroll finishes far down without more than a handful of points, I’ll eat humble pie.

          2. For Stroll, read Stoffel Vandoorne – my bad!

    2. Frentzen and Heidfeld? Otherwise you have a good point…

      1. @alex… Fair point…

        Frentzen managed to become runner up to WDC in 1997. He joined Williams after former WDC Damon Hill left and actually declined an invite to the team by Frank William the sad demise of Ayrton Senna. Although after Williams he went down the racing roads of Jordan and then managed in 1999 placed 3rd in the WDC, so again not exactly a slouch.

        Nick Heidfield. Unfortunately he sat in midfield teams for most of his career, he did drive for Williams for a couple of seasons, but, a long time after they had taken a WDC championship. He did managed throughout his career (in midfield teams) manage about 12 podiums (note that he did not start the infamous 2005 Indianapolis GP), which given the level of the competition was itself a challenge to achieve and showed an ability that was mostly beyond the cars capabilities…

  19. Spa already occupies the end of August slot in the race calendar, so I wonder how are they going to fit Paul Ricard there as well?

  20. I don’t understand Hamilton Sr’s comments on ending other drivers’ careers by destroying them. Lewis is clearly one of the best drivers on the grid–and maybe in F1 history–and I say that as someone who is not a big fan of his. So why all this rubbish that is unnecessary (in my opinion) and untrue (per the facts)?!

    But you know, my own personal view is that anyone who goes up against Lewis really needs to have their career mapped out for them. Because it’s a career killer.

    Lewis barnstormed into F1 against Alonso, that is for sure. But Alonso’s career was not killed, he was very close to two more WDCs at Ferrari and the only thing that has hurt him is a bunch of either poor or unlucky choices.

    Lewis destroyed Heikki, fair enough, but that was never a question.

    Button and Lewis split, one season each and a virtual tie in the third; and Button ended up on more points.

    Rosberg. We’ve all talked about this a lot, but let’s be clear, it was pretty damn close throughout. 2013 Rosberg had more wins but more retirements; Lewis finished ahead. 2014 was the closest argument one can make for a dominant season as both had three retirements and Lewis won. 2015, Ros with more retirements–without which the difference in points would have been single digits; Lewis ahead. 2016, Ham with more retirements; Nico ahead. Over four seasons, I’d call that pretty close.

    And you can’t figure out how he’s developed the car, how he has got the speed, how he can take that corner…

    Given that both Nico and Lewis would see the other driver’s data, and that each were dominant on pole runs over various stretches of time, this just doesn’t hold water as a blanket statement (mixed metaphors anyone?).

    I get that Anthony is Lewis’ dad and so of course he is a big supporter. That’s fine. But let the results speak for themselves. And don’t exaggerate on the accomplishments of an already great driver. It just makes it look like you are trying to cover up some deficiency or deficit. Hamilton will very possibly eclipse all major driver records. That is the accomplishment, in my mind, not whether or not other drivers became distraught at his “ability to set up a car.”

    1. Give the guy a break. His a parent and his child is one of the biggest stars of F1 history. Of course he will be all glowing and going crazy in his praise.
      We have parents talking about their children like they are the second coming of Jesus just for winning a damn prize in school let alone becoming one of the most successful people in the history of a major sport.

  21. Maybe it was just me, but before I read the article and just read the headline I thought Anthony was taking a dig at his own son!

  22. If Renault are wise they will sign Kubica for next year at first opportunity. They have nothing to lose, are looking for that established, inspiring, team-leader driver, and if there’s any role Kubica could possibly fill, it’s that one. It would be endearing to all if they were able to say “we said the door was always open for his return, and we meant it.”

  23. 50€ id pay that… but not 120€ it is now.

Comments are closed.