New Horizons

[Just_a_fan]

When all is said and done, all one can do is race the guys around you in the car you have. To try to judge from the outside is a folly. Only those in the club really know.

[PlatinumZealot]

for me Prost and Senna had greater competition and adversity (mechanical failures and dropped points etc).

Plus 1 PZ. People seem to forget the disparity of number of races and the supreme dependability of modern F1 cars.
Think what Fangio's numbers would be if he had 16 or 18 races a year instead of 8 and if his Maserati never burned up it's valves. Something the Masers were prone to do.
These things are never a fair comparison.
Lewis has done great but in part because of the number of races and his cars dependability.

I find it difficult to compare the times of Fangio up to Stewart with modern times when cars and track have saftey as a priority.
From what I saw in the old footage and comparing to what I can relate to about driving a car on country roads without any saftey barriers or saftey run-offs; GP racing in that time was extremely dangerous!! Would today's drivers have dared to take chase to Fangio and Ascari?!! Lol. I smile when i dare to think of it.

Imagine going with a bunch of pals to street race at maximum attack through the country pass in the beastliest of cars: no roll bars, zero crash structures, leather hats for helmets, a little ribbony strap for a seat belt, surely a MISTAKE equals DEATH! Crazy stuff! The adrenaline must have been through the roof!! I think these guys were absolute nuts! I don't even think bravery describs it, more like stupidity!

This was part of being fast in those days. We never really knew who was the most talented at driving itself? We knew who had the best combination of talent and bravery(stupidity) and bravery without the talent was death. Fangio and Ascari they say used this ballsiness to their advantage. Perhaps younger possibly more talented drivers never really could muster up the bravery to go 100% to keep up with Fangio, they had to drive well within themselves just to finish the race alive.

I wonder if the F1 drivers of today are in that same vein of thrill seeking madness. if they possess the desire for the thrill to race in the face of sure death.

Saying that, bravery is one of the qualities I admire about Lewis . He is never scared to race in treacherous conditions. In reavy rain he was usually the only one begging Charlie to forget the cowards, get the safety car in, and green light the racing!

[dans79]

From the other side one of things I have always seriously questioned if people like Fangio would be fit enough to race in the modern era!

[Big Tea]

From the other side one of things I have always seriously questioned if people like Fangio would be fit enough to race in the modern era!

My thoughts were initially, in the 40's they had just come from military service, so they would be in good shape, then I had a peek at fangio's wiwk


Fangio was discharged before his 22nd birthday, after taking his final physical examination

[SiLo]

What Hamilton has and this is a big one. In his rookie season, he had beaten the driver who beat a near prime Schumacher.

One could easily counter that with 1) he didn't beat Alonso but matched him on wins and points (still impressive but didn't beat him), 2) he started his career in the fastest car on the grid which is a luxury very few drivers get, 3) he'd done tens of thousands of miles of testing the year before so knew the car characteristics well, and 4) after "spygate" and it was clear Alonso was out the door so McLaren weren't fully behind Alonso.

Don't get me wrong its impressive he's beating these records but it really needs to be seen in the context of what it is - bulletproof reliability, over-filled calendars, unprecedented team dominance, and no real competition within the team since Rosberg retired.

All I said was for me Prost and Senna had greater competition and adversity (mechanical failures and dropped points etc).

You can't counter that he didn't beat Alonso, by the rules in the sport he beat him and that's why he finished 2nd and Alonso 3rd.

Alonso did a similar amount of testing than Hamilton before the 2007 season as well.

There is pretty much no way you can objectively say Alonso was better than Hamilton that year. But there are plenty of ways you can say Hamilton was better than Alonso.

[SiLo]

Can we just ignore any comparisons to other generations? It's pretty much a pointless endeavour. I'd rather look to the future for what Hamilton can achieve before he retires.

100 poles this year? I think he will get it, but Bottas has been very quick in qualifying this year as well.

[El Scorchio]

Ah the endless Hamilton argument to which there will never be a resolution. We'll obviously never reach consensus on who is the greatest or how great he is.

I do find it interesting how people really seek to apply caveats or asterisks to his success that don't seem to have to be applied to other drivers...
The numbers are what they are, and if you're going to look at them purely objectively for other drivers then you have to afford the same grace to Hamilton, or accept that ALL the great drivers have caveats and asterisks as well. It's not right or fair to pick and choose.

[SiLo]

Ah the endless Hamilton argument to which there will never be a resolution. We'll obviously never reach consensus on who is the greatest or how great he is.

I do find it interesting how people really seek to apply caveats or asterisks to his success that don't seem to have to be applied to other drivers...
The numbers are what they are, and if you're going to look at them purely objectively for other drivers then you have to afford the same grace to Hamilton, or accept that ALL the great drivers have caveats and asterisks as well. It's not right or fair to pick and choose.

It's probably easier to just lock this thread and be done with it. They all turn out the same.

[littlebigcat]

I'd argue that Hamilton has risen to the top in an era where the cars and drivers have been the closest they've ever been. The pool of drivers to choose from is at its greatest and most varied. He has been chosen to drive for and won with two of the best F1 teams the sport has seen. They are ruthless competitors, frankly if there was someone better in this era they would have taken them instead.

There has never been a driver like him who has competed at the edge of excellence on such a continuous basis, never mind year after year pushing that edge further away .

[Shrieker]

he didn't beat Alonso but matched him on wins and points (still impressive but didn't beat him)

Oh here we go again.. Who do you see higher on the list when you go back and take a look at the standings ? Yeah.

[Shrieker]

On a side note, I think there's a strong argument to be made in regards to comparing contemporary drivers with legends from 70+ years back.

Drivers from 70 years ago couldn't have dreamed of the extent and the quality of the preparation contemporary drivers have had on their way to F1. For all intents and purposes, the Alonsos, Vettels, Hamiltons and Verstappens would be handing them their axXes day in, day out.

[Just_a_fan]

Ah the endless Hamilton argument to which there will never be a resolution. We'll obviously never reach consensus on who is the greatest or how great he is.

I do find it interesting how people really seek to apply caveats or asterisks to his success that don't seem to have to be applied to other drivers...
The numbers are what they are, and if you're going to look at them purely objectively for other drivers then you have to afford the same grace to Hamilton, or accept that ALL the great drivers have caveats and asterisks as well. It's not right or fair to pick and choose.

It's probably easier to just lock this thread and be done with it. They all turn out the same.

Rather than lock the thread, why not just have a good discussion? If someone comes along and is obviously provocative then report their posts to the mods. There are people who seem intent on getting in to arguments in order to close down threads they don't like. We shouldn't let them get away with it.

[Just_a_fan]

I think the comparisons between eras can be interesting thought experiments.

For example, if we were to click our fingers and have Fangio appear from 1954, would he do well today? No. Why? He probably wouldn't fit in the car, for a start. And then he wouldn't be fit enough to handle the forces that a modern car generates. Give him a year to train up, etc., and I think he would do very well.

Now, repeat that click of the fingers and have 2020 Hamilton appear in 1954. Would he do well? No. Why? Because the cars required a very different approach and the whole sport was hugely dangerous. I don't think he'd be chucking a 250F around the Nurburgring like Fangio did in 1957, for example. He'd be slow until he was able to acclimatise to the situation. He may never be able to do so, however, because the 1950s attitudes to risk/death were very different to today's.

That's the reality of trying to compare eras.

[Shrieker]

Give him a year to train up,

And he'd still be nowhere Because he's never had the sort of preparation modern guys had. He's never even driven an aero car his entire career.

He'd be slow until he was able to acclimatise to the situation. He may never be able to do so, however, because the 1950s attitudes to risk/death were very different to today's.

I beg to differ. Look at some of Hamilton's balls to the wall overtakes over his career; for starters, tell me there was no risk of death attempting this in 2006. He wouldn't have attempted that in the 50s of course But neither would anyone else back in the day.

[Just_a_fan]

Give him a year to train up,

And he'd still be nowhere Because he's never had the sort of preparation modern guys had. He's never even driven an aero car his entire career.

He'd be slow until he was able to acclimatise to the situation. He may never be able to do so, however, because the 1950s attitudes to risk/death were very different to today's.

I beg to differ. Look at some of Hamilton's balls to the wall overtakes over his career; for starters, tell me there was no risk of death attempting this in 2006. He wouldn't have attempted that in the 50s of course But neither would anyone else back in the day.

Fangio would, given a year to get fit and learn the cars, be able to drive one quickly. If you're quick, you're quick.

That move by Hamilton's had no risk of death, in reality. Any crash would have been shocking to watch but it wouldn't have been fatal unless an awful lot of bad luck was dropped on it.

Really dangerous motorsport (warning, it's graphic so not for the squeamish):


Modern crash in a similar manner. Shocking but "safe"


You can't compare the last 20 years to the 1950s and 1960s for danger. Hamilton has grown up in a safe sport.