planetf1.com

Lewis Hamilton has a somewhat mixed reputation. Bright start, consistent (but average) middle and bright peak again. I believe that his career since the 2008 Glock intervention has also been plagued by some awful luck, some bad strategy and some big errors. However, people don't really remember the times a driver's car failed when you were leading, or people crashed into you. People only remember the numbers and so far Hamilton has finished in the WDC top 3 in 2007 and 2008.

On the other side of the coin, Hamilton is also the joint-record holder for most wins as at Brit, has the 4th most pole positions ever and the same number of fastest laps as Senna in 17 less races.

Does Hamilton need to win more championships including the 2014 WDC to cement himself as a great of Formula 1 rather than a Damon Hill or Jacque Villeneuve?

I currently think he will be remembered as one of the best of his generation, and even without another title will be thought of (by most fair minded people) as a significant cut above the likes of Jaques Villeneuve. If he wins another title or two he may elevate his status to be on par with people like Lauda or maybe even Stewart.

Forget about the heights of Senna. Great driver that he was I never understood the almost religious fervor that he seemed to create. I would also say that the number of titles won does not necessarily relate to a driver reputation, for instance Stirling Moss.

Anyway, good luck with the rest of this thread

What Hamilton needs to do is continue to drive for a few years and finish his f1 career, then we can look back at his full f1 tenure and discuss it. Until then there's no point thinking about it as we don't know what he'll do in the future.

That depends on how easily one hands out terms such as 'all-time great'. In my opinion, there's nothing he can do to become one; he just isn't. The all-time greats of the sport dominated their era - they were head and shoulders above the rest, and visibly so. Fangio. Clark. Maybe Stewart. Probably both Prost and Senna. Schumacher. If anyone from the current grid is going to end up belonging in that exalted company, it's either going to be Alonso or one of the newer drivers.

Now what does Lewis have to do to become one of the best drivers of the sport? Nothing, he already is one. Another title would help, but there are well thought-of champions with only the one, and some better thought-of drivers with none. Being consistently at or near the top for the remaining seasons until he retires wouldn't hurt either.

He is already far greater than the likes of Damon and JV.

Let's just go through what we already know about him..

- He is probably one of the top two drivers in a generation filled with star talent.
- His record against team-mates is probably the best since Prost.
- He ranks sixth all time in wins and is (IIRC) top 10 in win percentage.

You could argue that's already enough to be an all-time great, but my opinion is he needs to win this title. After 2007 and 2008 he got the reputation of cracking under the pressure of a title battle and he needs to get it done this year in order to rid himself of that. I don't think number of WDCs matters per se, because Moss is a great with zero titles, but the circumstances in which you win or don't win titles are important.

Add 'multiple World Champion' to the points above and you have a bona-fide great.

I certainly think he has the potential but not the consistency. Although not all his fault he should be a 3 time champ now and just about to win his 4th.

When he is on he is the fastest driver on the grid today but over the course of a season I would always back Alonso to beat him if in the same car. Yes I know he didn't in 2007 but they were very different circumstances

He needs to retire before we can even begin discussing this topic or win seven championships like Schumi.

If he keeps driving as he is, or even continues to gradually improve both in driving and state of mind, he will statistically gain more accolades. So as long as he doesn't do anything outrageously bad and make people hate him, another world title or two will probably cement him has a great driver.... Ofcourse he wont be truly great until after he's retired and people can reflect on his career as a whole, but he's heading the right way.

The first step on the way to becoming an all time great, is to become a great. How does one do that? I have no idea. What is greatness?

I wonder how we would consider him, if Singapore 2008 would not have given him the window to win the championship from Massa - had all the other seasons gone as they have. Without a single title, would we really consider him to be worthy of being thought a new Stirling Moss? I can't help being indecisive about this, as I never saw Moss race. It is easy to over-romanticise seasons we didn't witness. Too easy?

As things stand, I think Hamilton is far from achieving greatness. But I'm painfully aware that the development of F1 from a mechanical sport to a mechanical TV-spectacle isn't helping him. Just as his niggling little errors don't help him portray himself as a racer who is a cut above the rest.

Fiki wrote:The first step on the way to becoming an all time great, is to become a great. How does one do that? I have no idea. What is greatness?

I wonder how we would consider him, if Singapore 2008 would not have given him the window to win the championship from Massa - had all the other seasons gone as they have. Without a single title, would we really consider him to be worthy of being thought a new Stirling Moss? I can't help being indecisive about this, as I never saw Moss race. It is easy to over-romanticise seasons we didn't witness. Too easy?

As things stand, I think Hamilton is far from achieving greatness. But I'm painfully aware that the development of F1 from a mechanical sport to a mechanical TV-spectacle isn't helping him. Just as his niggling little errors don't help him portray himself as a racer who is a cut above the rest.

To become a great is simply to perform consistently at the business end of sport. Achieving and extracting the maximum possible out of yourself and the car over a period of time.
The phrase all time great is a bit tricky as it an opinion. A consensus reached by experts and fans but is often based on emotion as much as fact.

Exediron wrote:That depends on how easily one hands out terms such as 'all-time great'. In my opinion, there's nothing he can do to become one; he just isn't. The all-time greats of the sport dominated their era - they were head and shoulders above the rest, and visibly so. Fangio. Clark. Maybe Stewart. Probably both Prost and Senna. Schumacher. If anyone from the current grid is going to end up belonging in that exalted company, it's either going to be Alonso or one of the newer drivers.

Now what does Lewis have to do to become one of the best drivers of the sport? Nothing, he already is one. Another title would help, but there are well thought-of champions with only the one, and some better thought-of drivers with none. Being consistently at or near the top for the remaining seasons until he retires wouldn't hurt either.

This! Exactly this. His best hopes are to be consistent for his remaining years and hope for more cars like this year's merc or at least top two or three teams with an equivalent or weaker teammate and then retire. He's a great driver but not [yet] an all time great. Can't judge until sometime after their driving career is over.

Don't get qme wrong schumi was a great driver but this current crop would have trounced him.

Funny how schumi fans probably moan about merc or red bull dominance but seem to forget ferarris dominance let alone the Ferrari intelligence agency

I think he is not yet a great although I believe he has all the ability when at his best. In my opinion Hamilton was one of the big losers of DRS because he was one of the best at overtaking. A key problem, as mentioned by others, is his consistency. It depends on how one defines greatness. If one of several criteria they may have is making the most of opportunities or consistency, than Hamilton may struggle to break into that definition of greatness.

I think he will make it into most top 20 lists after he retires. Depending on his results over the next several seasons, he could finish close or just inside the top 10 on those same lists. It's not a question of just how many wins and how many championships, although I think most would require him to take another championship, ideally 2 more. Moss makes it into most top 10's with no titles. It depends on how Hamilton performs and perhaps more crucially, his opposition. If Hamilton can beat them in comparable machinery, or inferior machinery as previous greats have done, that would go a long way towards raising his stock/maintaining it depending on one's view of him now. If however they are stuck in mediocre machinery, that takes value away from his achievements. That doesn't necessarily mean he wasn't as good, but it's the reality of looking back and comparing drivers that it's an area and question that is examined "Who and where were his rivals?"

He has several more seasons in him so a lot can happen. A season is a long time in F1 and can change perceptions very quickly, such as the general opinion of Vettel and Raikkonen this year compared to last year.

There is tough competition right now. Hamilton doesn't necessary stand above other top drivers like Alonso or Vettel and there are drivers like Riccardo that can be F1 stars too. Current F1 doesn't produce legends like Moss or Gilles Villeneuve. Hamilton definitely needs more titles to stand out, to be better than top 20 of all time.

I'd say he'd have to continue for a few years and dominate the sport in the same way Michael Schumacher did, otherwise he'll be remembered as some really lucky kid who did well in his first two years (but not as well as he should have) and then did almost nothing with respect to the WDC for six years - and that's if he wins this year's. Even Vettel has huge question marks over his true ability with many pointing to the car and his team-mate as the two things that made him WDC. So even WDCs won't necessarily make people think Hamilton is great. Some people will just never like him. If he doesn't win this year's WDC, people will start remembering him as that guy who kept losing the WDC after having a 17 point lead.

There's probably only 3 or 4 drivers I would consider all-time greats (Clark, Fangio, Schumacher (somehwat begrudgungly since I'm a massive Hill fan ) and Senna) so it's no big thing if he isn't one of them and even if he keeps winning I probably wouldn't add him to that list. I think he has already built up a legacy and a position as one of the bravest and best overtakers to have ever graced the sport, that's no mean feat and not a bad thing to be remembered by.

Don't get qme wrong schumi was a great driver but this current crop would have trounced him.

Funny how schumi fans probably moan about merc or red bull dominance but seem to forget ferarris dominance let alone the Ferrari intelligence agency

Despite an incredibly bold opening statement above, you might have had a slither of hope if you had backed it up with some kind of data, etc etc.

But you lost all credibility when you came out with that quote in bold and italic above.

Wow.

Depends what you count as "all time great". I think Hamilton is definitely in the top 20 perhaps the top 15. He could make it in to the top 10 if he sustains his performance, keeps beating team mates, drives consistently and continues to win races.

I don't think he will ever make it into the group containing Prost, Schumacher, Senna, Fangio and Clark but he could perhaps get into the Stewart, Lauda, Ascari, Moss, Alonso category.

But then again everyone's interpretation of greatness is different.

mikeyg123 wrote:Depends what you count as "all time great". I think Hamilton is definitely in the top 20 perhaps the top 15. He could make it in to the top 10 if he sustains his performance, keeps beating team mates, drives consistently and continues to win races.

I don't think he will ever make it into the group containing Prost, Schumacher, Senna, Fangio and Clark but he could perhaps get into the Stewart, Lauda, Ascari, Moss, Alonso category.

But then again everyone's interpretation of greatness is different.

How many of the all time greats that keep appearing in the lists have won fewer than 3 WDCs?

Do you think we will ever see the likes of a great like Senna, Clarke, Schumacher and Fangio again?

Somebody earlier in this thread mentioned its not about the numbers, and i think they've got it right.

I think it used to be, but now im not so sure.

We were all ready at the end of 2013 to crown Vettel as the next great, in fact i remember an article
asking if he were better than Senna. Who's willing to take that quote on now?

He's a 4 time WDC, yet has anybody mentioned his name in breath in this thread?

I get the feeling the last 5 years, in particular this year, has changed people's perception on what it
takes to be a great driver, call it the 'Vettel factor' if you like.

Its not about numbers anymore, its about adaptability. Anywhere, anytime in anything in any conditions,
and still be up the pointy end.

Clarke, Senna, Schumacher et al.

ChopSchuey wrote:Do you think we will ever see the likes of a great like Senna, Clarke, Schumacher and Fangio again?

Somebody earlier in this thread mentioned its not about the numbers, and i think they've got it right.

I think it used to be, but now im not so sure.

We were all ready at the end of 2013 to crown Vettel as the next great, in fact i remember an article
asking if he were better than Senna. Who's willing to take that quote on now?

He's a 4 time WDC, yet has anybody mentioned his name in breath in this thread?

I get the feeling the last 5 years, in particular this year, has changed people's perception on what it
takes to be a great driver, call it the 'Vettel factor' if you like.

Its not about numbers anymore, its about adaptability. Anywhere, anytime in anything in any conditions,
and still be up the pointy end.

Clarke, Senna, Schumacher et al.

I do think when talking of greatness numbers do help. The more impact you have on your sport the greater you are and while it is not the deciding factor I do think it is one of the factors.

To answer your question I think Alonso is very nearly in that group.

flyboy10 wrote:

mikeyg123 wrote:Depends what you count as "all time great". I think Hamilton is definitely in the top 20 perhaps the top 15. He could make it in to the top 10 if he sustains his performance, keeps beating team mates, drives consistently and continues to win races.

I don't think he will ever make it into the group containing Prost, Schumacher, Senna, Fangio and Clark but he could perhaps get into the Stewart, Lauda, Ascari, Moss, Alonso category.

But then again everyone's interpretation of greatness is different.

How many of the all time greats that keep appearing in the lists have won fewer than 3 WDCs?

Several. Only 9 drivers have won three world championships. Then one adds in near misses and also looks at the strength of the competition among other things.

There are only a couple in there however, who never won more than one championship, so I think Hamilton will need at least one more for most to consider him but as has been written by several, greatness is subjective.

Win at least a couple more titles. Thanks to Vettel having four any driver who wants to stand out in this era needs to either match or beat that. Even Alonso needs to win another to really cement himself as one of the all time greats rather than just one of the best of his generation.

benmc wrote:He is already far greater than the likes of Damon and JV.

Let's just go through what we already know about him..

- He is probably one of the top two drivers in a generation filled with star talent.
- His record against team-mates is probably the best since Prost.
- He ranks sixth all time in wins and is (IIRC) top 10 in win percentage.

You could argue that's already enough to be an all-time great, but my opinion is he needs to win this title. After 2007 and 2008 he got the reputation of cracking under the pressure of a title battle and he needs to get it done this year in order to rid himself of that. I don't think number of WDCs matters per se, because Moss is a great with zero titles, but the circumstances in which you win or don't win titles are important.

Add 'multiple World Champion' to the points above and you have a bona-fide great.

What record is that? If anything Hamilton's record against teammates is pretty average..Points wise he has been matched by Alonso, out pointed by Button and is slightly better than Rosberg..The only teammate he convincingly beat was Heiki..In qualifying he has been matched by Rosberg and Alonso and even Heiki was very close to him.We all know Button is a poor qualifier - even Magnussen in his rookie year is beating him..

flyboy10 wrote:

mikeyg123 wrote:Depends what you count as "all time great". I think Hamilton is definitely in the top 20 perhaps the top 15. He could make it in to the top 10 if he sustains his performance, keeps beating team mates, drives consistently and continues to win races.

I don't think he will ever make it into the group containing Prost, Schumacher, Senna, Fangio and Clark but he could perhaps get into the Stewart, Lauda, Ascari, Moss, Alonso category.

But then again everyone's interpretation of greatness is different.

How many of the all time greats that keep appearing in the lists have won fewer than 3 WDCs?

Depends what you count as an all time great. I think most people would put Clark, ALonso, Ascari and Moss in the top 10 who all have less than 3. Surtees and Mansell would not be far away either.

It's a shame that the racers of today can't race against the racers of yesterday.

In terms of talent today's racers are miles ahead. And there are no numbers to back it up its just an opinion. Therefore it's hard to say whether someone is an all time great.

Shumacher had everything his own way. But to do what he did is still impressive

Hamilton, alonso, kimi, vettel are in much more competitive field. This thread is about Hamilton and I think it would be stupid to ignore his talent. He's probably the fastest over one lap of current drivers, fastest and best overtaking skills on his day. His main weakness would probably be his decision making but I think we've seen a massive leap from him this year.

I also believe if you put all 4 in a Caterham he would woop the rest as I think he is most versatile and least sensitive to car. But as with all racing at the moment you can't beat a current driver in a car which is substandard. People will point to alonso but he has very much had a team all dedicated to him and they still haven't been able to do it. It's the reason kimi seems to have lost it. He simply has a car that is made around alonso and I expect a better kimi next year. People will then unfairly point fingers at vettel but forget howuch control alonso has had and even then that still doesn't match watch schumacjer had

w1Y! wrote:It's a shame that the racers of today can't race against the racers of yesterday.

In terms of talent today's racers are miles ahead. And there are no numbers to back it up its just an opinion. Therefore it's hard to say whether someone is an all time great.

Shumacher had everything his own way. But to do what he did is still impressive

Hamilton, alonso, kimi, vettel are in much more competitive field. This thread is about Hamilton and I think it would be stupid to ignore his talent. He's probably the fastest over one lap of current drivers, fastest and best overtaking skills on his day. His main weakness would probably be his decision making but I think we've seen a massive leap from him this year.

I also believe if you put all 4 in a Caterham he would woop the rest as I think he is most versatile and least sensitive to car. But as with all racing at the moment you can't beat a current driver in a car which is substandard

How do you know Schumacher's era was poorer than the current one? Perhaps Schumacher was that much better?

mikeyg123 wrote:

w1Y! wrote:It's a shame that the racers of today can't race against the racers of yesterday.

In terms of talent today's racers are miles ahead. And there are no numbers to back it up its just an opinion. Therefore it's hard to say whether someone is an all time great.

Shumacher had everything his own way. But to do what he did is still impressive

Hamilton, alonso, kimi, vettel are in much more competitive field. This thread is about Hamilton and I think it would be stupid to ignore his talent. He's probably the fastest over one lap of current drivers, fastest and best overtaking skills on his day. His main weakness would probably be his decision making but I think we've seen a massive leap from him this year.

I also believe if you put all 4 in a Caterham he would woop the rest as I think he is most versatile and least sensitive to car. But as with all racing at the moment you can't beat a current driver in a car which is substandard

How do you know Schumacher's era was poorer than the current one? Perhaps Schumacher was that much better?

I have no doubt he probably was but he didn't show it in merc and he benfitted more than anyone, even vettel, from a period of total car and political dominance in the sport

Drivers now are fitter, been bred to race and yes it's my opinion but the elite drivers now are on a different level

w1Y! wrote:

mikeyg123 wrote:

w1Y! wrote:It's a shame that the racers of today can't race against the racers of yesterday.

In terms of talent today's racers are miles ahead. And there are no numbers to back it up its just an opinion. Therefore it's hard to say whether someone is an all time great.

Shumacher had everything his own way. But to do what he did is still impressive

Hamilton, alonso, kimi, vettel are in much more competitive field. This thread is about Hamilton and I think it would be stupid to ignore his talent. He's probably the fastest over one lap of current drivers, fastest and best overtaking skills on his day. His main weakness would probably be his decision making but I think we've seen a massive leap from him this year.

I also believe if you put all 4 in a Caterham he would woop the rest as I think he is most versatile and least sensitive to car. But as with all racing at the moment you can't beat a current driver in a car which is substandard

How do you know Schumacher's era was poorer than the current one? Perhaps Schumacher was that much better?

I have no doubt he probably was but he didn't show it in merc and he benfitted more than anyone, even vettel, from a period of total car and political dominance in the sport

Drivers now are fitter, been bred to race and yes it's my opinion but the elite drivers now are on a different level

Obviously you're a Hamilton fan - but you're going to gauge Schumacher when he is 40+ years old..I want to see how well the top drivers of today perform when they are 37-38 against the best of the younger generation..FYI, Schumacher matched Rosberg when he was 43 in qualifying a feat Hamilton is finding hard to do this season where according to the man himself its been the best season so far in his career..What more proof do you need of Schumacher's insane talent and level..

Laura23 wrote:Win at least a couple more titles. Thanks to Vettel having four any driver who wants to stand out in this era needs to either match or beat that. Even Alonso needs to win another to really cement himself as one of the all time greats rather than just one of the best of his generation.

I disagree. Senna's greatness is very rarely questioned despite having one less title than Prost. Moss is very often put up there with the greats in spite of no titles and Ascari's name comes up fairly often too. Fangio beating both men with five. What stands out is Moss's name is usually put ahead of double champion Ascari and world champions Farina and Hawthorn.

I agree that Hamilton needs another title, ideally a couple more and Alonso could do with another as well but I think the absolute numbers of titles, wins, poles and points are much less important than analysis that compares cars and looks at the competition. This is part of the reason why Moss is named so often. Even though such analysis can never be certain.

I also wonder how much personality plays a role in people's judgments. Moss and other drivers from the past have lots of personality but I think a part of that is because they were rarely expected to censor themselves.

hittheapex wrote:

Laura23 wrote:Win at least a couple more titles. Thanks to Vettel having four any driver who wants to stand out in this era needs to either match or beat that. Even Alonso needs to win another to really cement himself as one of the all time greats rather than just one of the best of his generation.

I disagree. Senna's greatness is very rarely questioned despite having one less title than Prost. Moss is very often put up there with the greats in spite of no titles and Ascari's name comes up fairly often too. Fangio beating both men with five. What stands out is Moss's name is usually put ahead of double champion Ascari and world champions Farina and Hawthorn.

I agree that Hamilton needs another title, ideally a couple more and Alonso could do with another as well but I think the absolute numbers of titles, wins, poles and points are much less important than analysis that compares cars and looks at the competition. This is part of the reason why Moss is named so often. Even though such analysis can never be certain.

I also wonder how much personality plays a role in people's judgments. Moss and other drivers from the past have lots of personality but I think a part of that is because they were rarely expected to censor themselves.

Senna was killed before he could win any more though. If he'd retired with a full career behind him and still been on three then I wonder if his legend would have been quite as large as it is.

schumilegend wrote:

w1Y! wrote:

mikeyg123 wrote:

w1Y! wrote:It's a shame that the racers of today can't race against the racers of yesterday.

In terms of talent today's racers are miles ahead. And there are no numbers to back it up its just an opinion. Therefore it's hard to say whether someone is an all time great.

Shumacher had everything his own way. But to do what he did is still impressive

Hamilton, alonso, kimi, vettel are in much more competitive field. This thread is about Hamilton and I think it would be stupid to ignore his talent. He's probably the fastest over one lap of current drivers, fastest and best overtaking skills on his day. His main weakness would probably be his decision making but I think we've seen a massive leap from him this year.

I also believe if you put all 4 in a Caterham he would woop the rest as I think he is most versatile and least sensitive to car. But as with all racing at the moment you can't beat a current driver in a car which is substandard

How do you know Schumacher's era was poorer than the current one? Perhaps Schumacher was that much better?

I have no doubt he probably was but he didn't show it in merc and he benfitted more than anyone, even vettel, from a period of total car and political dominance in the sport

Drivers now are fitter, been bred to race and yes it's my opinion but the elite drivers now are on a different level

Obviously you're a Hamilton fan - but you're going to gauge Schumacher when he is 40+ years old..I want to see how well the top drivers of today perform when they are 37-38 against the best of the younger generation..FYI, Schumacher matched Rosberg when he was 43 in qualifying a feat Hamilton is finding hard to do this season where according to the man himself its been the best season so far in his career..What more proof do you need of Schumacher's insane talent and level..

Let's ignore the 3 timesnlewis had had issues in quali (yes one was his fault)

Did schumi ever dnf 1 more time pretty much start back of the grid twice and still be leading rosberg in points.

Nope thought not

Would like to add that yes I do believer Schumacher was the best of his generation

I believe currently Hamilton would be heading to stand alongside the likes of Hakkinen, Piquet and Mansell. Very good drivers without a doubt and on their day possibly the best but ultimately not quite on the same level as Schumacher, Senna and Prost.

From what I've seen despite the massive perception of him having such a great raw talent, he's just not quite good enough. He did have a blazing start against Alonso but really since 2010 he hasn't quite lived up to that. We have to be very careful with constantly upgrading drivers when they keep disappointing against team-mates as we've seen with Raikkonen where just about every team-mate became someone super quick.

Yes he was quicker than Button but it was not by much, especially in a race. Whilst overall you give the battle to Hamilton it was definetly closer than expected. Rosberg is also a driver obviously better than expected but we also have a great comparison with Hamilton and Schumacher at Mercedes. By 2012, Schumacher approaching his mid 40's was pretty much on Rosberg's pace. Yet Hamilton is not much quicker than Rosberg if at all. In other words an old Schumacher would be pretty much on Hamilton's pace.

He still has time though and every situation is different. For example some were already of the opinion that Schumacher by about 95 or 96 was already one of the best of all time. But then on the other hand Alonso almost certainly wouldn't have been in many peoples top 5 about 5 or so years ago, but now many would fit him in. If Hamilton wants to be in that top 5 he will need to start churning out some more special drives, be more consistent, defy the odds more and dominate his team-mates and do so over many years.

Laura23 wrote:

hittheapex wrote:

Laura23 wrote:Win at least a couple more titles. Thanks to Vettel having four any driver who wants to stand out in this era needs to either match or beat that. Even Alonso needs to win another to really cement himself as one of the all time greats rather than just one of the best of his generation.

I disagree. Senna's greatness is very rarely questioned despite having one less title than Prost. Moss is very often put up there with the greats in spite of no titles and Ascari's name comes up fairly often too. Fangio beating both men with five. What stands out is Moss's name is usually put ahead of double champion Ascari and world champions Farina and Hawthorn.

I agree that Hamilton needs another title, ideally a couple more and Alonso could do with another as well but I think the absolute numbers of titles, wins, poles and points are much less important than analysis that compares cars and looks at the competition. This is part of the reason why Moss is named so often. Even though such analysis can never be certain.

I also wonder how much personality plays a role in people's judgments. Moss and other drivers from the past have lots of personality but I think a part of that is because they were rarely expected to censor themselves.

Senna was killed before he could win any more though. If he'd retired with a full career behind him and still been on three then I wonder if his legend would have been quite as large as it is.

I can't speculate on what would have happened had Senna lived and the consequences on his legacy, it's an interesting thing to think about and maybe something that deserves a thread of its own. My general point was that the level of fans appreciation of different drivers after they retire corresponds only by coincidence to the statistical differences. Raikkonen and Button only have one title each but I would argue that generally, Button is not ranked as highly. That may change in a season or two, but I think you understand the point I'm making.

JMILAT wrote:I believe currently Hamilton would be heading to stand alongside the likes of Hakkinen, Piquet and Mansell. Very good drivers without a doubt and on their day possibly the best but ultimately not quite on the same level as Schumacher, Senna and Prost.

From what I've seen despite the massive perception of him having such a great raw talent, he's just not quite good enough. He did have a blazing start against Alonso but really since 2010 he hasn't quite lived up to that. We have to be very careful with constantly upgrading drivers when they keep disappointing against team-mates as we've seen with Raikkonen where just about every team-mate became someone super quick.

Yes he was quicker than Button but it was not by much, especially in a race. Whilst overall you give the battle to Hamilton it was definetly closer than expected. Rosberg is also a driver obviously better than expected but we also have a great comparison with Hamilton and Schumacher at Mercedes. By 2012, Schumacher approaching his mid 40's was pretty much on Rosberg's pace. Yet Hamilton is not much quicker than Rosberg if at all. In other words an old Schumacher would be pretty much on Hamilton's pace.

He still has time though and every situation is different. For example some were already of the opinion that Schumacher by about 95 or 96 was already one of the best of all time. But then on the other hand Alonso almost certainly wouldn't have been in many peoples top 5 about 5 or so years ago, but now many would fit him in. If Hamilton wants to be in that top 5 he will need to start churning out some more special drives, be more consistent, defy the odds more and dominate his team-mates and do so over many years.

Very well put..I agree with pretty much everything you said..I think among the current drivers Alonso and Vettel definitely belong to top 10 list...I would also say Alonso is very close to getting to the level of Prost..I fact I would put Alonso in a top 6 list..

Laura23 wrote:Win at least a couple more titles. Thanks to Vettel having four any driver who wants to stand out in this era needs to either match or beat that. Even Alonso needs to win another to really cement himself as one of the all time greats rather than just one of the best of his generation.

I disagree that you have to match or beat Vettels four. One of the boxes to tick on the way to greatness is to achieve WDCs with more than one team. It was one of the selling points to get Hamilton into a Mercedes; and whether you believe him or not, part of the reason Vettel moved. Alonso achieving a third title with another team would be considered by many as being equal to; or more significant, than Vettels four. And Hamilton may even find himself in a position of achieving mutiple WDCs with three different teams; which would put him in an elite group. Particularly if the third team happened to be a Ferrari.
Of course Vettel may still trump them all if he gets a fifth title in the Ferrari.

It matters how you define all time great in my opinion. To me all time great means if you could pick 22 drivers to drive the 22 cars on the grid for the next race who would they be? The 22 you chose are who you think are the 22 all time greats. Obviously this changes based on how many teams there are and 22 is probably a bit many but whatever.

In my opinion Hamilton would be in that 22, but then i'm a Hamilton fan and we all know what Hamilton fans are like AMRITIE FELLAS HEHEHE

FormulaFun wrote:It matters how you define all time great in my opinion. To me all time great means if you could pick 22 drivers to drive the 22 cars on the grid for the next race who would they be? The 22 you chose are who you think are the 22 all time greats. Obviously this changes based on how many teams there are and 22 is probably a bit many but whatever.

In my opinion Hamilton would be in that 22, but then i'm a Hamilton fan and we all know what Hamilton fans are like AMRITIE FELLAS HEHEHE

I think 22 isn't too much in the context of there having been more than 700 drivers and around 100 GP winners, the number changes a little depending if you count the Indy 500 when it was a round of the championship.

The only problem I suppose is drawing the line once you get down to the high teens. Are drivers 23-30 fairly discounted from the elite category of "great" compared to the bottom 4 or 5 in that group?

For what it's worth, I've tried to rank drivers a few times, using a variety of complicated calculations but there is one thing all the ranking systems had in common. The top 10, sometimes more, had a much wider spread relative to even the 10 or 20 drivers below them, who were still very high on the list, the top 30 out of over 200 drivers. A quick glance at my list shows me the "points" spread for drivers 50-100 is as big as the spread of drivers 10-30. I couldn't possibly draw a line much below number 10 as 10-30 have smaller and more consistent gaps than the top 10.

In short, the best stand out but the further down one goes, the harder it becomes to choose a cut off line for "all time greats."

One number that shows how they stand out above the rest: My all time top 10 changes occasionally depending on a season or something I've read about past generations, but at any one time the top 10 drivers hold, plus or minus a few, 350 wins out of all the World Championship Grands Prix staged. 913 as of the Russian GP. Approximately 10% of F1's race winners hold almost 40% of the wins.

Exediron wrote:That depends on how easily one hands out terms such as 'all-time great'. In my opinion, there's nothing he can do to become one; he just isn't. The all-time greats of the sport dominated their era - they were head and shoulders above the rest, and visibly so. Fangio. Clark. Maybe Stewart. Probably both Prost and Senna. Schumacher. If anyone from the current grid is going to end up belonging in that exalted company, it's either going to be Alonso or one of the newer drivers.

Now what does Lewis have to do to become one of the best drivers of the sport? Nothing, he already is one. Another title would help, but there are well thought-of champions with only the one, and some better thought-of drivers with none. Being consistently at or near the top for the remaining seasons until he retires wouldn't hurt either.

Lewis has really never had #1 status in the team besides 2008/09, and he won that year. The rest of the seasons he's had to battle his teammates and the rest of the field. It was a shocking decision to bring Button to Mclaren in 2010 - not to say he doesn't deserve the drive, but it threw the balance of the team off and the rest is history. The drivers you mentioned invariably fought for, earned #1 status built their domination from that point on. The points about Lewis not dominating Rosberg this year just seem crazy when you equalize the DNF's - Lewis is at least 40 points ahead right now. Rosberg has been in the team 3 years longer than Hamilton, and should be getting more out of the car - and he's showing that in qualifying setup for sure. Any way let's see what happens with the next few races - could be eating my words.

Besides the points mentioned about winning a couple more titles etc,, I think Lewis should step away from F1 by 2016 and attempt Le Mans, and even Indy car. Something Alonso, Button should also do. Going for the triple crown (Indy500,Monaco GP,LeMans 24hr), and become a multi-disciplinary race drivers. Something that modern day F1 drivers don't seem to do anymore. I think that will really cement their greatness.

Hamilton reminds me a lot of Gilles Villeneuve. Both were amazingly quick, and had spectacular car control. And each had their fans who adored them just because they were spectacular, but were very human and made dumb mistakes.

And just like Gilles, it took over five years before it was drummed into their thick skulls that winning each lap didn't matter, it was winning the race, and by extension, winning the title that mattered.

Do I consider Hamilton in the ranks of "greats"? Nope, never was, never will be. He's quick and has great car control, and is very human. But past that point, he doesn't do anything else to imprint anything noteworthy in my mind. I don't see anything impressive in his ability to make tactical decisions, leadership, his racecraft, and emotional stability. A lot of emphasis is placed on team mate comparisons, but when he is up against a quality driver, he has always struggled, never coming close to dominating.

Hamilton is the walking example that it takes more than being just quick to win titles consistently.