Hamilton’s 100 wins a “huge achievement” – Vettel

RaceFans Round-up

Posted on

| Written by

In the round-up: Sebastian Vettel praised Lewis Hamilton’s milestone achievement after the Mercedes driver scored his 100th win.

In brief

Vettel praises Hamilton’s hundred wins

Vettel, the third most successful F1 driver in terms of victories with 53, paid tribute to Hamilton who reached a century of wins last weekend.

“I think it was coming.” said Vettel when asked by RaceFans. “It’s a huge achievement and I’m very happy for him. I think he deserves it.”

The Aston Martin driver, whose most recent victory came in the 2019 Singapore Grand Prix, finished 12th on Sunday. “I don’t know how he has driven today, but I guess he had a good race,” he added.

Brawn predicts 120 wins for Hamilton

Formula 1 motorsport director Ross Brawn expects Hamilton to carry on winning as long as he remains in the sport. The Mercedes driver signed a two-year extension on his contract earlier this season.

“Who knows where it’s going to end up<" said Brawn. "He’s with us for another couple of years at least – and he will win races every year. "I don’t think we could predict 200 wins, but I think we could certainly predict 20 more as he’s still massively competitive and motivated. It’s just staggering and congratulations to him, as it’s a [century] that no one ever thought would be achieved."

Tyre call “clearly a mistake” – Ocon

Esteban Ocon explained his decision to stay on slick tyres as rain fell in the final laps of the Russian Grand Prix, saying he and Alpine expected the conditions to improve.

“We thought about it, it was also a risky bet to stay on track as well like we’ve done,” he said. “It was supposed to rain like it was for the first two laps.

“For the first lap the conditions were similar. And then there was supposed to be a little bit of a break in the rain, but it actually rained more. So that was clearly a mistake from our side as well.

“So it hasn’t been the smoothest race just in terms of pace in terms of decision. Also in quali we didn’t optimise the things at our best. So there’s plenty of things that we can review to do better in the next ones.”

Advert | Become a RaceFans supporter and go ad-free

Social media

Notable posts from Twitter, Instagram and more:

Advert | Become a RaceFans supporter and go ad-free

Comment of the day

Daniel Ricciardo emerges better from McLaren’s radio messages from the Russian Grand Prix, says @Hotbottoms:

I don’t want to bash Norris too much, because he’s a young driver and I’m sure he’ll learn from experiences like this. But I think Ricciardo’s experience really shows here. Ricciardo seemed happy to get all the information while Norris responded with a “shut up”.

Also, they were both asked whether they want intermediates or not. Ricciardo said yes, while Norris said no. McLaren didn’t make that decision for Ricciardo.

Happy birthday!

Happy birthday to Brian Munene and Spencer Ward!

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 motorsport

  • 25 years ago today Ricardo Zonta won the penultimate round of the Formula 3000 season at Mugello. He was followed home by Jorg Muller and Kenny Brack, who went into the final race separated by three points.

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.

43 comments on “Hamilton’s 100 wins a “huge achievement” – Vettel”

  1. Vettel and Lewis share a dominance streak that exaggerated their level vs the greats of the past. Like Vettel can be compared to Prost’ tally? Vettel I would give 1 WDC (maybe with some luck 2) without being in the right car at the right moment. Similar for Lewis who would be up to 3 or 4 WDC under normal circumstances which would be an enormous achievement.
    Brawn’s 120 wins prediction would in my opinion only work if Mercedes again gets a dominance streak after regulation change. Otherwise the young batch of George, Lando, Charles and Max will make it impossible to get 20 more. Especially now one of them will have equal material and a considerable age advantage.
    Lets just hope the record stays forever at Lewis and we never get in a position like this ever again. I’ve been watching from the 80s and must say that Schumacher era was dull, but nothing compared to what Mercedes has shown. A big compliment to them is in order but the audience certainly has not been the winner for a long time. I am glad one of the Bulls managed to make 2021 somewhat of a season.

    1. I think winning another 20 will be very difficult. Winning the next 3 is almost impossible at the moment.
      The competition is getting much stronger, be it teams or drivers and age is not on his side.

    2. Ferrari had the better car in for 2017, 2018 and 2019. The fact that Hamilton’s opponents kept on crashing and spinning off does not make his car dominant. Hamilton was dominant yes, but not just because of his car.

      Just see examples like how he won Mexico 2019 with the third fastest car on the grid.

      1. @f1osaurus 2019 not as much, only for some circuits. Otherwise, yes, he benefitted from opponents throwing away points.

        1. Indeed, only where Ferrari had their not-illegal-illegal-engine they could slightly fluster Mercedes. Apart from that Mercedes were (and turned out to be) the team to beat from the start of each of those seasons. The team of course includes the car, the drivers and the organisation in general. Were Mercedes-fans during those seasons ever really worried that the title wouldn’t end up in Brackley at the end of the year?

          1. Ferrari dominance was a mirage, it was nervous competitiveness which literally crumbled mid season due to “technicalities” and Ferrari’s famous strategies. While RedBull, they know how to compete and with a driver of Max caliber who I think is almost a robot cause the guy doesn’t flinch a bit under pressure(if he even feels that) and Honda finally delivering what they set out for has provided the best season so far. Yet in the last few races Mercs is definitely faster, let see how it pans out in coming races.

          2. Ferrari clearly had the faster car. They had more poles. It’s just that during the race their drivers and the team itself kept messing up.

            Were Mercedes-fans during those seasons ever really worried that the title wouldn’t end up in Brackley at the end of the year?

            No, not seeing from the start how the team were in such a shambles trying to still give a floundering Vettel the benefit of the doubt over Leclerc.

            Still that does not mean Mercedes had the “dominant” car

          3. Ferrari clearly had the faster car. They had more poles. It’s just that during the race their drivers and the team itself kept messing up.

            Mercedes clearly had the faster car in the first half of 2013. They had more poles. It’s just that during the race their drivers and the team itself kept messing up…

            Or maybe, just maybe, some cars are better suited for qualifying.

          4. Still that does not mean Mercedes had the “dominant” car

            @f1osaurus Of course this all depends on how you define ‘dominant’ and how you relate that to the car. It could be that, in a controlled environment like a wind tunnel or a simulater, the Ferrari showed better data. But in 2019 Ferrari scored 9 poles to Mercedes’ 10. Hamilton secured the title with two races to go (just like he did in the two seasons before), you can’t only put that down to other teams and drivers making a mess of their season. Second in the standings was Valtteri Bottas, with a margin over Verstappen. So Hamilton’s world championship wasn’t purely down to his superior driving skills either.

            I’m not disputing that Hamilton is a great driver, it takes a lot of skill to deliver time and time again, keeping the team and himself hungry for success. Besides that he was of course part of the team that developed the cars, so all credit to them (for being ‘dominant’ :)

      2. Nope, Merc has the best all-round car in 2019 (they won the first 8 races by the way), Ferrari were only good in power hungry, low downforce circuits but were nowhere otherwise (except Singapore).

        2017 Merc had the faster by year’s end -15 poles 12 wins, and the fact that Bottas had 305 pts to Kimi’s 200 pts.

        2018 indeed Ferrari were better by a tiny bit, I’d say 51/49 over Merc. Had Vettel didn’t screw up Baku, Germany, Monza/USA, it would have been 8-8 wins each for HAM/VER or even 9-8 to VET

        1. *HAM/VET not HAM/VER

        2. Nope, Merc has the best all-round car in 2019 (they won the first 8 races by the way)

          Yeah see that’s how people come up with false notion that the Mercedes car was somehow dominant. Sure the results show them winning everything, but that was because of the performances of the drivers. Even during the first half of the season

          Take Bahrain, Ferrari was half a second faster. Leclerc looked set to easily win the race while Vettel spun off. Ferrari had faster car, yet Hamilton won.

          Baku, Leclerc looked set for pole but he crashed out and Vettel was just horrible (opting to pass on the tow)

          Canada, Vettel was easily up for a win, but messed it all up with using too much fuel and then panicking off the track.

          Same with 2017. Vettel messing up in the latter half of the season over and over does not make the car the dominant factor.

          2018 they were miles ahead of Mercedes. Come on! It’s just mind boggling how many races Vettel completely blundered away.

          1. Yeah, you said it: ”they looked set”. How many times Mercedes did not ”look set” until Quali, all of a sudden taking the PP or narrowly missing it?!?! Many more times than Ferrari anyway.

          2. Yeah see that’s how people come up with false notion that the Mercedes car was somehow dominant.

            Would could think that… No the merc was a kind of Haas. But with Lewis behind the steering wheel it flys…

    3. @Mayrton Mercedes at least had an intra-team battle in 2014-2016, unlike Ferrari.

      1. Unfortunately that was also the only title battle.
        The rest of the teams were nowhere compared to Mercedes.

      2. Well, don’t know what’s this suppose to mean… In general in life, the problem is not the positive stuff, but the negative stuff. After 2016, there was no intra-team battle at Mercedes, just no.1 and no.2. On the other hand, the Ferrari and RBR boys took out each other, so the battle was real. Then, if Ferrari are not good (anymore) regarding the strategies and winning in general, then most chances are they are mediocre at managing a no.1 and no.2 situation too. And this is the reality, actually. There’re multiple times when RAI didn’t do VET any favours at all, VET losing time behind him. Not the case at Mercedes… and this is the main problem: Mercedes, with german precision, took this “ugly” part to a new level.

    4. Indeed massive respect for Mercedes, but a major let down for fans of racing.

      Also correct that only one of the Red Bulls is challenging Mercedes.

      1. That’s because Red Bull are team which focusses solely on one driver. Just like Ferrari was when they put all their cards on Vettel (even while he kept blundering the races away)

        1. Valteri this is james.
          You are faster then Lewis, stop racing “

    5. Prost wasn’t in the right car at the right moments? Remember that back in the day the “wrong car” could be seconds off the pace and have only even odds of making it to the end before expiring in a pool of engine oil and intake valves.

    6. @Mayrton
      Who do you think deserved those wins?
      Who of the drivers in Lewis’s time are under represented?
      Obviously Schumacher is already second on the list.
      Alonso in my view is the only under represented driver on the list, but then again Lewis as a rookie was already at or even beyond Alonso level.
      The rest of the current grid are about where they should be in my opinion, with Max flattered by an excellent Red Bull for the last 2 seasons and mediocre team mates.
      What is your view?

      1. Why would it be a matter of who deserves wins? Its about dominance of the car. Had it been a bit more level playing field (we all know level will never happen, but talking about not having an excessive advantage here where less gifted racers like Bottas easily come 2nd in the championship) more wins would have gone to Ricciardo in 2014 for example (he was the only one to win a race in 2014 other than Mercedes, talking about dominance). Same goes for 2015 where only Vettel managed a win, rest was Mercedes. Alonso would have been a candidate had his car been better. So I am just claiming that while he is one of the greats, the 100 is largely influenced by the overall package and unprecedented dominance streak.

        1. Well someone has to win the GP’s, don’t they?
          You are making the mistake of directly comparing past and present eras. There are so many variables that make thia invalid.
          You can only truly compare to their piers and team mates as I am sure you know.
          Hence my question back to you.
          In your first post in this you said Vettel was flattered by stats, now he should be further ahead of all but Lewis??? Slightly contradictory?
          So Riccardo is the only one? Nice guy but far from a F1 great in my view.

          1. More recent Gasly won a race, Perez did, Ricciardo… when there is no dominant car, other people get to win too. And you do not get to 100 this quickly. I am saying both Vettel and Lewis had a unprecedented advantage no other drivers in history had for such a long period (especially Lewis). That still puts them amongst the best (it is their achievement they get to drive the best car) but their stats are not representative vs former champs who did to a far lesser extent have the benefit of the best package and never so many years in a row. That’s why I think it is fair to consider both Vettel and Lewis amongst the luckiest of all times.

          2. Well. If you look at Prost and Senna, they had cars that were often 2-3 seconds a lap quicker in the late 1980’s than most of the other cars. They enjoyed huge advantage, much greater than today.
            Schumacher had a massive car advantage and we all know the various allegations of special tyres engine modes etc etc at his time in ferrari and Benetton. Just look how much Senna struggled in 94 in the Williams vs him prior to the fateful imola crash.
            As I said already you can’t compare different eras.
            But I don’t see any greater talent than Hamilton and Seb in the last 15 years.

          3. Re Perez and Gasly, they won on circumstances nothing else. This has always been, Max’s first win was down to fortune over circumstance. There are always the Alesi’s and Patrese’s, Irvine’s and Boutson’s. Even young Pastor and Stroll have won GP’s but like Gasly and Perez they are not at the highest levels like Lewis, Alonso, Vettel et al

          4. Correction Stroll had a pole not win

          5. We are talking about seven years of having a dominant car. That is not comparable to Senna nor Prost. And I agree Lewis is amongst the greats, just trying to put things a bit in perspective for the overenthusiastic fanboys. I do absolutely not agree on Vettel. I feel it is an offense for former champions he is listed this high in rankings. Qualifying beast, sure but race skills way below mediocre. Won everything from the front row in a dominant car. Even crashes out on his won (unaided). Slightly above Bottas level maybe or on par with.

  2. I don’t want to bash Norris too much, because he’s a young driver and I’m sure he’ll learn from experiences like this. But I think Ricciardo’s experience really shows here. Ricciardo seemed happy to get all the information while Norris responded with a “shut up”.

    True true and true but Norris was under many times more pressure than Ricciardo.
    1. Hamilton
    2. The conditions
    3. First Win

    The team would not have wanted to disturb him too much so he doesn’t make an error and it was initially difficult to estimate how much time will be lost staying out.

    1. Exactly. I watched Peter Windsor’s analysis yesterday (actually quite good surprisingly) and he didn’t blame Lando and I’m kind of starting to lean that way. It could have stopped raining, I mean it actually did on the last lap, and it’s much harder to come in if you’re in the lead. Just ask Hamilton at Hungary! Ricciardo had much less to lose.

      1. There is a well known cognitive bias toward avoiding loss instead of favoring gains. All of us could feel it in our bones as we watched the last laps. It’s probably hard wired biologically. These are the hardest decisions to try to make because you are literally fighting your own body to do it.

      2. I also liked Peter Windsor’s analysis, upbeat as usual. I was also thinking at the time, during the last few laps, that Norris had to stay out, had to go for it, and I was very impressed that he stuck with it, even if it turned out to be the wrong call in the end.

        For newer F1 fans, Peter Windsor’s video podcast’s starting with The Racer’s Edge (check out the youtube channel of SmibsTV, circa 2009) is a treasure trove of interviews and analysis. Definitely a character.

  3. So that explains Lance’s radios having a different voice over the Russian GP weekend, which came as a surprise.
    I assumed Brad had left altogether or was temporarily away.
    I’m going to miss this duo as their communication was interesting at times.

  4. if i were to bet, Hamilton won’t get to 120. maybe 110, 115 tops.
    120 is way too much for 2 years probably with strong competition and him showing the first signs of aging on his driving.
    On past years he would have no trouble bagging these 2 last races, but now even when the car was there as it was on these 2 races, he had trouble to dominate.

    1. Why not? Next year’s car could well mean Mercedes nailed it and be miles ahead again..

      1. Doubt it. Performance will be closer so even if they do end up having the best car, winning races consistently might be hard. That plus Russell being there.

  5. On this day in 2012: Mercedes AMG Petronas announce the signing of a one Lewis Hamilton for 2013. The F1 world goes crazy with the majority predicting the move would not yield much in way of success with a vocal subset of those voices claiming it was “purely for the money”.

    1. The first tweet reads: “more chance of lewis winning the lottery then winning a RACE with merc!!!”. Priceless!

    2. That’s interesting. From my memories at the time it was all about Lewis moving for the hybrid introduction as it was well known that Mercedes had been planning for it the most out of everyone.

      1. That was the rational view but it got drowned out by the massive amount of noise. I’m surprised you only remember that view to be honest. Just look at the comments under the articles on this site at the time: https://www.racefans.net/2012/09/28/

  6. @Emma interesting reading that old post. Lewis it seems has always had the antifan / antilewis/ lewis will never win a championship… puttting him down even from then. Was a good refresher. How totally wrong they were. (laughing with mouth in hand) ofcause the excuse would be not the wrong gambling move he made. Which alot of people have suggested. Not the immaturity he diaplays… Not the average driver etc but now the car was soo good. Any1 can win in it. While true to a degree only lewis has won most of the championships, races , poles, fastest laps etc in the car. So its not that any1 can win in that car but that yes some Drivers can win in that car but Lewis WILL probably beat everyone else in that car. Which history has proven tp be true.

Comments are closed.