Quote from BlueFlame :

The fact people agree his talent is in the top 5 of F1 current drivers says alot, the fact the same people argue about his stupidness actually being stupid or not, speaks alot too.

Basically, going by the population of the WORLD. Hamilton is one of the best drivers for sure regardless of any mistakes he makes. I just think some people have a chip on their shoulder over Hamilton from envy etc.

I'm envious of Hamilton (not his success, but his dads dedication) but it doesn't mean I have to critizise everything he does wrong because I think I could do it better, and it doesn't mean I have to hate him because he is in F1 and I'm not either.

So you're saying that we critizise hamilton because he's in F1 and we're not? There's just one thing...Why aren't we critizising all other F1 drivers as much? We have to hate them all for being better than us...

We critizise Hamilton the most because he acts like a kid when he should act like a F1 champion. Where other drivers do act at least like adults. Saying we critizise Hamilton because of envy is actually the funniest thing I've heard in a while. If I critizised someone for pure envy I'd be aiming a lot higher. For example Tiger Woods, Michael Schumacher, Michael Phelps, Kobe Bryant Tom Brady and Valentino Rossi would make good candidates.

Of cource we don't need to critizise Hamilton for every single mistake but for the major ones...why not? If he does something stupid why shouldn't he be critizised. I'm quite sure Schumacher was critizided quite a lot for his biggest mistakes so it's not like Hamilton's the only one who's ever been critizised for doing stupid things. Schumacher learned though from his mistakes and rose to be the greatest F1 driver in the history of the sport. We just have to wait and see if Hamilton learns from the critique he's getting and maybe grows up both as a person and as a driver.

I love the Hamliton bashing as much as the next guy but given the visibility from Hamiltons position, the only sensible thing he can do is to get out of there ASAP, parking in the middle of the race track is bad at any time. That said, the penalty is good - even from Hamiltons position - it's much more fun driving through the pit lane than risking a ride with the helicopter.

Quote from BlueFlame :

The penalty was fair, but to be honest it was made worse by the fact Di Resta took to the grasss when there was still room there. (not that I'm critisizing him for doing so).

I think that Di Resta was driving a bit too fast to aim the car better while swerving to avoid Hamilton.

Quote from Juzaa :

So you're saying that we critizise hamilton because he's in F1 and we're not? There's just one thing...Why aren't we critizising all other F1 drivers as much? We have to hate them all for being better than us...

We critizise Hamilton the most because he acts like a kid when he should act like a F1 champion. Where other drivers do act at least like adults. Saying we critizise Hamilton because of envy is actually the funniest thing I've heard in a while. If I critizised someone for pure envy I'd be aiming a lot higher. For example Tiger Woods, Michael Schumacher, Michael Phelps, Kobe Bryant Tom Brady and Valentino Rossi would make good candidates.

Of cource we don't need to critizise Hamilton for every single mistake but for the major ones...why not? If he does something stupid why shouldn't he be critizised. I'm quite sure Schumacher was critizided quite a lot for his biggest mistakes so it's not like Hamilton's the only one who's ever been critizised for doing stupid things. Schumacher learned though from his mistakes and rose to be the greatest F1 driver in the history of the sport. We just have to wait and see if Hamilton learns from the critique he's getting and maybe grows up both as a person and as a driver.

The fact the majority of your posts here are just slagging off Hamilton speaks volumes to be honest, you clearly are fixated on highlighting mistakes and faults with Hamilton.

Quote from Kazu2799 :

anyone know why heidfeld's car "exploded"?

Some sort of water storage/containment near the engine. Not sure. I've heard references to a water "bottle", but it's probably not an accurate description.

Very hot fire + water + enclosed space = high pressure = explosion

Quote from BlueFlame :

The fact the majority of your posts here are just slagging off Hamilton speaks volumes to be honest, you clearly are fixated on highlighting mistakes and faults with Hamilton.

You know why most of my posts are about Hamilton? Because you Hamilton fans seem to comment only how Hamilton was punished unfairly or how he ''showed'' he is the best driver in the league. When I reply to something it starts a chain reaction where you pick one sentence of my post which you don't like and start telling how I hate Hamilton for saying he made a mistake. Then I back up my comment and you pick another sentence of it that you feel is wrong and don't even bother to look the whole picture.

You do realize that most of your posts are about Hamilton as well? Because every one is so eager to talk about Hamilton it's no wonder most of my posts have something to do with him. Especially when he's given so many reasons to critizise his performance and intelligence this season. I could say that because most of your posts are about mocking others and defending Hamilton no matter what he does you clearly have your head deep in Hamilton's ass and it would be just as valid comment as yours above.

Quote from Juzaa :

You know why most of my posts are about Hamilton? Because you Hamilton fans seem to comment only how Hamilton was punished unfairly or how he ''showed'' he is the best driver in the league. When I reply to something it starts a chain reaction where you pick one sentence of my post which you don't like and start telling how I hate Hamilton for saying he made a mistake. Then I back up my comment and you pick another sentence of it that you feel is wrong and don't even bother to look the whole picture.

You do realize that most of your posts are about Hamilton as well? Because every one is so eager to talk about Hamilton it's no wonder most of my posts have something to do with him. Especially when he's given so many reasons to critizise his performance and intelligence this season. I could say that because most of your posts are about mocking others and defending Hamilton no matter what he does you clearly have your head deep in Hamilton's ass and it would be just as valid comment as yours above.

Oh, FYI I'm not a Hamilton fan.

And also you say I just pick what I want to disect and use that against you... but you don't see that you do it to Hamilton aswell, by only picking things that are taken out of context by media fails etc.

Quote from Juzaa :

Red Bull clearly didn't think so because they gave Webber slick tires and quite often the teams do have a similar view of the circumstances because they all have the best possible gear and people there.

Webber went onto Inters. Open yer eyes.

Fun race indeed. Button Deserved the win tbh. He gave lewis a straight fight and then made the right call. first time i can remember him catching lewis apart from turkey last yr when lewis had to fuel save so well done on that.

Lewis made a bad call, he says he didn't know the rain situation had changed. He was switching to the itners not because of current conditions but future ones predicted by the radar. plus he had to make 1 extra stop anyway so i guess it just made sense at the time. He took the blame for the penalty and claimed he didn't see di resta.. same way button didn't see lewis at canada? shit happens in the heat of the moment.

Please toki show me an interview where he compares himself to senna? I know he is a fan but i've never seen him compare himself to the guy. The closest i think he has said is where he takes INSPIRATION from Senna i.e."go for a gap... racing driver bla bla bla"

Lewis imo is like an F1 version of Colin McRae. 100% all the time. Sometimes it works and it's great, other times it doesn't and it can make u look a plonk.

In other news, Justin Bieber carries his championship lead further on and proves he still isn't too good going head to head but makes his raw pace count for a lot. The other guy is still just a number 2 driver...

Quote from Kazu2799 :

anyone know why heidfeld's car "exploded"?

judging by the way it looked id guess something overheated from the lengthy stop the car caught fire and developed smoke that looked a lot like a lipo fire ending in some eplosive release of gas from the batteries

It was a nitrogen bottle, according to Scarbs.

I thought all F1 batteries were LiFe?

iirc mclarend did use a123s in 20009 but im not sure about the rest and after that it looks to me like they arent
the weight savings from using lipo instead are massive so i wouldnt be surprised if they did

TBH Hamiltons Wild driving mainly comes from the fact its required for him to battle for the championship, he hasn't really had the luxury of having the fastest car over the season, maybe apart from 2007(which was hes rookie season btw).

If he was in Vettels situation he wouldn't need to push as hard and thus wouldn't.

Ahh, gratz to Button. He needed that, especially after his two recent mis-fortunes at Nurburgring and Silverstone. Too bad Hamo made a bad call but hey that's racing. Nice driving from most others too and the rain definitely made it interesting.

and holy crap, these threads just cant make it a couple pages without the stupid bitching

Why does everyone think that because Whitmarsh said it was Hamiltons choice for inters, that thats true when Paddy Lowe has always said the team made the decision. Hamilton said the track was 'ok' for dry tyres still.

The team reacted to Rosburg, Webber, Barrichello, Sutil and Petrov going quicker in S1, and they had to put something on.

Quote from BlueFlame :

Oh, FYI I'm not a Hamilton fan.

And also you say I just pick what I want to disect and use that against you... but you don't see that you do it to Hamilton aswell, by only picking things that are taken out of context by media fails etc.

So you're saying that Hamilton never accused Massa or Maldonado for his mistakes in Monaco and that it was ''taken out of context''? Or maybe Hamilton's famous line ''it's because I'm black'' which he intended as a joke in an interview was taken ''out? of context too?'' I'm sure all his visits with the Stewards and penalties+warnings are just something else ''taken out of the context''. Also claiming Stewards to be a joke was ''taken out of the context''...

I've seen few of his interviews myself and can guarantee those above for example were not taken out of the context. Actually I'd like to see one thing that we've been discussing about Hamilton that was taken out of the context.

And Mustafur, you're partly right but don't you think that with the current points system it's better to finish races than not? Hamilton has driven fast this season but has also ruined many of his races with wild driving. It's understandable to make mistakes at times but trying impossible overtakes for example is not the best way to gather points. There are not many championship victories gained by absolutely reckless driving because for almost every successful race there's also one that you screwed up with a mistake. If you look at other former champions for the last one and a half decade (Vettel Button, Räikkönen, Alonso, Schumacher, Häkkinen) none of them drove extremely aggressively but rather intelligently (apart from Vettel last season). Looking that fact I'd claim that you don't need to drive extremely aggressively to win championships. Actually I'd go a bit further and suggest that you shouldn't drive as aggressively as Hamilton has because most of the time it costs you more than you gain in a long shot.

The majority of champions you just mentioned had clearly the fastest car when getting those titles.

The fact is if your car isn't the fastest you need to be aggressive to have a shot at the title as reliability isn't a factor like it once was.

What is that 'fact' based on? Hamilton won his title in arguably the best car, and hasn't won it when he hasn't had the best car.

Maybe Hamilton would be better if he was aggressive when he needed to be, but circumspect when that would pay off. All-or-nothing seems to be no better than just racking up 3rd places, only you make yourself look silly, make silly comments to the media blaming everyone else.......

Quote from tristancliffe :

What is that 'fact' based on? Hamilton won his title in arguably the best car, and hasn't won it when he hasn't had the best car.

Maybe Hamilton would be better if he was aggressive when he needed to be, but circumspect when that would pay off. All-or-nothing seems to be no better than just racking up 3rd places, only you make yourself look silly, make silly comments to the media blaming everyone else.......

2008, IMO Ferrari where faster but both cars where good enough for the titles.

But nothing along the likes of button at brawn or even vettels title last year both of those cars had a convincing advantage over thier rivals overall.

Getting 3rd places with little aggression is basically conceding defeat if your rival is winning every race convincingly, you have no choice but go all or nothing to have a shot at going for the title in this case.

Quote from Mustafur :

2008, IMO Ferrari where faster but both cars where good enough for the titles.

But nothing along the likes of button at brawn or even vettels title last year both of those cars had a convincing advantage over thier rivals overall.

Getting 3rd places with little aggression is basically conceding defeat if your rival is winning every race convincingly, you have no choice but go all or nothing to have a shot at going for the title in this case.

I agree that race wins are vital, but in hindsight Hamilton's approach does seem a little panicky, like every race is the last of the season and it's win the race: win the title. He'd live to trade a few of those no scores for top 5 finishes, of course.

I find his approach entertaining, any way, but certainly his points tally would generally improve by tempering his aggression.

Quote from Mustafur :

2008, IMO Ferrari where faster but both cars where good enough for the titles.

But nothing along the likes of button at brawn or even vettels title last year both of those cars had a convincing advantage over thier rivals overall.

Getting 3rd places with little aggression is basically conceding defeat if your rival is winning every race convincingly, you have no choice but go all or nothing to have a shot at going for the title in this case.

It's no suprise that the majority of the championships are won with the best car. But you need to remember that the differences change along the season. Button had the best car for only the first half the season. After that he had only two finishes in the podium (2nd and 3rd) and no victories. That shows you only need to be the best for half the season and drive intelligently when you are not the fastest. Mclaren has shown in the last races that it's probably the fastest car right now. Because the situations in car advantage changes throughout the season driving intelligently and taking home as much points as possible is the most important thing for anyone hoping to win the championship. It doesn't matter how you get the points just that you get them. Finishing third two times is better than having one victory and one race where you mess up and end up 8th. It might not be as entertaining but in the end only your results in the championship matter.

If Hamilton had finished third every race (which you are saying is a bad choice) he would have 165 points instead of 146. That's a huge difference and if Mclanren manage to get the advantage in cars Hamilton will end up wishing he hadn't driven so aggressively throwing good positions away.

Also driving intelligently doesn't mean you should stay behind every slow car. It just means taking less chances and being patient. With DRS passing a slower car is almost too easy and if you are faster you can just wait until you are close enough to get past with DRS without doing anything spectacular or stupid. Intelligent driving is all about knowing when to risk and knowing when not to risk. If you are second fighting for first place taking a risk is a better idea than taking a risk when battling for sixth position.

Quote from Juzaa :

... Or maybe Hamilton said that famous line ''it's because I'm black'' intended as a joke in an interview?
....

Mclaren have the fastest car?

Possibly but it's soo close at the top right now.

Brawn in 09 wasn't just the fastest it made everyone else look midfield, they had barely the money to put it on the track so there was no
money left for development yet it still took the other teams half the season to catch up, by that point all they needed was the odd point scores and they won, Mclaren this year on the other hand realisticly have zero hope of a title regardless of what Hamilton does, Redbulls point gap is as big as brawns but they have the funds and development team to stay there.

The fact is without having the fastest car these days, you need things out of your control to happen if you want a title, or a extreme aggressive style that will be open to any possibility of
overtaking, you don't have titles that are decided on engine failures like yester year(thanks to stale engine regs).

keke rosberg is a great example of how vitally important it is to win every single race

Quote from Shotglass :

keke rosberg is a great example of how vitally important it is to win every single race

can you tell me about the great example of reliabilty averaged through out that season?

The most reliabile car in that season would be called an unreliable dog by todays standards.

something you can't compare.

Quote from Mustafur :

can you tell me about the great example of reliabilty averaged through out that season?

The most reliabile car in that season would be called an unreliable dog by todays standards.

something you can't compare.

About reliability in that season; Rosberg's car didn't last any better than his opponent's. All retired about the same amount of races so reliability doesn't have any effect on the total standings. When Rosberg finished a race he finished high enough to get points all but one race of the entire season. Others did not and that was why Rosberg won the championship. Reliability had nothing to do with Rosberg's victory since the second driver actually retired less races than Rosberg.

So actually this example of Keke Rosberg is quite comparable to today since the top three had about the same reliability and none had a major advantage over their car being more durable.