planetf1.com

I actually probably promote the sport more than any other driver ever has. I'm at more events talking about Formula One more than any driver ever has -- probably all the other drivers put together and more.

http://edition.cnn.com/2016/04/19/motor ... index.html

Does he ever sleep?

Inappropriate post removed.

I hear more about him at various "celebrity events" than I do or have done about any other driver. Let him pat himself on the back for that if he wants, I'm rather doubtful that fans of P Diddly will all want to watch F1 because Hamilton is seen with him or whatever.

I disagree that he doesn't owe the sport anything. It depends on your take on the word "owe" in that contect really though.

I love Hamilton as a driver on track. I'm finding him increasingly hard to like off track and in interviews.

Covalent wrote:

I actually probably promote the sport more than any other driver ever has. I'm at more events talking about Formula One more than any driver ever has -- probably all the other drivers put together and more.

http://edition.cnn.com/2016/04/19/motor ... index.html

Does he ever sleep?

No!

Inappropriate quote removed.

I'm interested to read what people's thoughts as to what he owes F1 are!

Clarky wrote:I'm interested to read what people's thoughts as to what he owes F1 are!

Well, the sports been good to him. He's become fabulously wealthy through it, beyond the dreams of most. It's given him opportunities and opened doors that he wouldn't have had in almost any other walk of life.

Seems a strange thing for Lewis to say, if I'm honest. I can only assume it was designed to be provocative

No more or less than any other F1 driver. However most of the drivers on the grid have enough sense to make such a nonsensical claim. Contrary to his recent claims about "growing" I think he still has a way to go. He might need to nick out the back and see if he can "find" himself for a bit longer.

One of the reasons given at the time for his move from McLaren to Mercedes was to reduce the amount of time he had to spend at events and with PR etc.

Doesn't seem to jive with his claims.

In any case he's far from being the driver that has bought the sport to the most people's attention.

I can categorically guarantee that if he died, there would be nowhere near the outpouring of grief that there was for Senna's passing.

Depends who he is promoting it to. If it's VIP and million dollar companies, then perhaps he does as I sadly don't attend those!

If it's promoting it to us 'normal' fans, then I see no evidence to support his claim. Not that I am complaining about his input, no other driver stands out imo.

Clarky wrote:I'm interested to read what people's thoughts as to what he owes F1 are!

I think owe is a funny word in this context as it doesn't really mean what it does normally (to me anyway). He doesn't owe the sport anything in the sense it's a business he turned up and did his job then went home. I usually think in the sports context owing is more acknowleding a gratitude for being able to be in the sport. Hamilton might have ended up a multimillionaire and world famous without it, but I doubt it. So yes, he doesn't owe anything in a strict sense. But in the way that so many sports stars admit they owe a lot to a team or sport, I think he does.

And to go against that is likely his honest feelings and I respect that, but I don't like it.

mac_d wrote:

Clarky wrote:I'm interested to read what people's thoughts as to what he owes F1 are!

I think owe is a funny word in this context as it doesn't really mean what it does normally (to me anyway). He doesn't owe the sport anything in the sense it's a business he turned up and did his job then went home. I usually think in the sports context owing is more acknowleding a gratitude for being able to be in the sport. Hamilton might have ended up a multimillionaire and world famous without it, but I doubt it. So yes, he doesn't owe anything in a strict sense. But in the way that so many sports stars admit they owe a lot to a team or sport, I think he does.

And to go against that is likely his honest feelings and I respect that, but I don't like it.

When evaluating the worth of a sportsman to his sport I reckon the question to ask is: has he contributed more to the sport than he's taken out? It's a nonsensical question in many ways, the sport itself isn't an entity capable of giving or taking away, but as he's made the link himself.... he's raked in somewhere in the region of $160m in wages and probably half as much again in endorsements, sponsorship, freebies etc. By his own assessment what's he's given back is exposure.

I'd suggest that if he thinks embarrassingly hanging onto Kanye West's coattails at a few awards ceremonies amounts to a quarter of a billion in positive marketing value he's a massive narcissistic moron. Just be grateful your talent was rewarded and don't tell people you're worth it. There are hundreds, thousands, of sportsmen with just as much talent and who worked just as hard, sacrificed just as much. Only a tiny percentage of them have been fortunate enough to be rewarded so richly. Be modest about it. Secondly, there's nothing altruistic about inadvertently gaining marginal exposure for your sport whilst desperately, ceaselessly, promoting yourself.

I'm a Hamilton fan, at least on the track (as much as I try to avoid that sort of thing). He's the one I generally want to win out of the front runners because I think he's the fastest and because I think people have been unfairly negative about him in the past. But my god he's grown into a wretched phony over the last few years.

Balibari wrote:

mac_d wrote:

Clarky wrote:I'm interested to read what people's thoughts as to what he owes F1 are!

I think owe is a funny word in this context as it doesn't really mean what it does normally (to me anyway). He doesn't owe the sport anything in the sense it's a business he turned up and did his job then went home. I usually think in the sports context owing is more acknowleding a gratitude for being able to be in the sport. Hamilton might have ended up a multimillionaire and world famous without it, but I doubt it. So yes, he doesn't owe anything in a strict sense. But in the way that so many sports stars admit they owe a lot to a team or sport, I think he does.

And to go against that is likely his honest feelings and I respect that, but I don't like it.

When evaluating the worth of a sportsman to his sport I reckon the question to ask is: has he contributed more to the sport than he's taken out? It's a nonsensical question in many ways, the sport itself isn't an entity capable of giving or taking away, but as he's made the link himself.... he's raked in somewhere in the region of $160m in wages and probably half as much again in endorsements, sponsorship, freebies etc. By his own assessment what's he's given back is exposure.

I'd suggest that if he thinks embarrassingly hanging onto Kanye West's coattails at a few awards ceremonies amounts to a quarter of a billion in positive marketing value he's a massive narcissistic moron. Just be grateful your talent was rewarded and don't tell people you're worth it. There are hundreds, thousands, of sportsmen with just as much talent and who worked just as hard, sacrificed just as much. Only a tiny percentage of them have been fortunate enough to be rewarded so richly. Be modest about it. Secondly, there's nothing altruistic about inadvertently gaining marginal exposure for your sport whilst desperately, ceaselessly, promoting yourself.

I'm a Hamilton fan, at least on the track (as much as I try to avoid that sort of thing). He's the one I generally want to win out of the front runners because I think he's the fastest and because I think people have been unfairly negative about him in the past. But my god he's grown into a wretched phony over the last few years.

Hamilton is explaining why he feels that he doesn't feel any responsibility to the sport in the context of governance - that is the context in which the question "Do you feel any responsibility to the sport" which is posed as a follow on to a question asking if he'd like to have more say in the governance of the sport. He gives a reply that, in my opinion, is not born out of conceit but is an explanation of his answer.

A click bait article that dodges the real issue:

What about the children? Will someone please think of the children?

Zoue wrote:

Balibari wrote:

mac_d wrote:

Clarky wrote:I'm interested to read what people's thoughts as to what he owes F1 are!

I think owe is a funny word in this context as it doesn't really mean what it does normally (to me anyway). He doesn't owe the sport anything in the sense it's a business he turned up and did his job then went home. I usually think in the sports context owing is more acknowleding a gratitude for being able to be in the sport. Hamilton might have ended up a multimillionaire and world famous without it, but I doubt it. So yes, he doesn't owe anything in a strict sense. But in the way that so many sports stars admit they owe a lot to a team or sport, I think he does.

And to go against that is likely his honest feelings and I respect that, but I don't like it.

When evaluating the worth of a sportsman to his sport I reckon the question to ask is: has he contributed more to the sport than he's taken out? It's a nonsensical question in many ways, the sport itself isn't an entity capable of giving or taking away, but as he's made the link himself.... he's raked in somewhere in the region of $160m in wages and probably half as much again in endorsements, sponsorship, freebies etc. By his own assessment what's he's given back is exposure.

I'd suggest that if he thinks embarrassingly hanging onto Kanye West's coattails at a few awards ceremonies amounts to a quarter of a billion in positive marketing value he's a massive narcissistic moron. Just be grateful your talent was rewarded and don't tell people you're worth it. There are hundreds, thousands, of sportsmen with just as much talent and who worked just as hard, sacrificed just as much. Only a tiny percentage of them have been fortunate enough to be rewarded so richly. Be modest about it. Secondly, there's nothing altruistic about inadvertently gaining marginal exposure for your sport whilst desperately, ceaselessly, promoting yourself.

I'm a Hamilton fan, at least on the track (as much as I try to avoid that sort of thing). He's the one I generally want to win out of the front runners because I think he's the fastest and because I think people have been unfairly negative about him in the past. But my god he's grown into a wretched phony over the last few years.

Have any of you actually read the interview and understood the context of what he is saying before criticizing?

He's basically just saying he feels no responsibility to sort out the current state the sport is in.

As for the question in the OP - He is the most globally famous driver and in the sport and someone who does fully lead the playboy racing drivers lifesyle. I don't know if that makes him the best promoter of all time.

mikeyg123 wrote:

Zoue wrote:

Balibari wrote:

mac_d wrote:

Clarky wrote:I'm interested to read what people's thoughts as to what he owes F1 are!

I think owe is a funny word in this context as it doesn't really mean what it does normally (to me anyway). He doesn't owe the sport anything in the sense it's a business he turned up and did his job then went home. I usually think in the sports context owing is more acknowleding a gratitude for being able to be in the sport. Hamilton might have ended up a multimillionaire and world famous without it, but I doubt it. So yes, he doesn't owe anything in a strict sense. But in the way that so many sports stars admit they owe a lot to a team or sport, I think he does.

And to go against that is likely his honest feelings and I respect that, but I don't like it.

When evaluating the worth of a sportsman to his sport I reckon the question to ask is: has he contributed more to the sport than he's taken out? It's a nonsensical question in many ways, the sport itself isn't an entity capable of giving or taking away, but as he's made the link himself.... he's raked in somewhere in the region of $160m in wages and probably half as much again in endorsements, sponsorship, freebies etc. By his own assessment what's he's given back is exposure.

I'd suggest that if he thinks embarrassingly hanging onto Kanye West's coattails at a few awards ceremonies amounts to a quarter of a billion in positive marketing value he's a massive narcissistic moron. Just be grateful your talent was rewarded and don't tell people you're worth it. There are hundreds, thousands, of sportsmen with just as much talent and who worked just as hard, sacrificed just as much. Only a tiny percentage of them have been fortunate enough to be rewarded so richly. Be modest about it. Secondly, there's nothing altruistic about inadvertently gaining marginal exposure for your sport whilst desperately, ceaselessly, promoting yourself.

I'm a Hamilton fan, at least on the track (as much as I try to avoid that sort of thing). He's the one I generally want to win out of the front runners because I think he's the fastest and because I think people have been unfairly negative about him in the past. But my god he's grown into a wretched phony over the last few years.

Have any of you actually read the interview and understood the context of what he is saying before criticizing?

He's basically just saying he feels no responsibility to sort out the current state the sport is in.

As for the question in the OP - He is the most globally famous driver and in the sport and someone who does fully lead the playboy racing drivers lifesyle. I don't know if that makes him the best promoter of all time.

I have, yes. I don't agree it's just what you say above, although that's part of it sure. But I don't agree with his assessment

Zoue wrote: I have, yes. I don't agree it's just what you say above, although that's part of it sure. But I don't agree with his assessment

I mean actually what he said rather than how it is framed in the link posted? What he says in context I find pretty reasonable in the "not owing the sport anything" sense. I agree the best promoter bit is debatable. Hamilton is a global superstar/celebrity Probably more than any F1 driver ever. People may not like him for it but it can't be bad for the sport.

This week there have been threads criticizing Alonso, Vettel and now Hamilton's personalities. If we want our drivers to be open and honest human beings then we have to be prepared not to like everything they say. We all have our faults.

Zoue wrote:

mikeyg123 wrote:
Have any of you actually read the interview and understood the context of what he is saying before criticizing?

He's basically just saying he feels no responsibility to sort out the current state the sport is in.

As for the question in the OP - He is the most globally famous driver and in the sport and someone who does fully lead the playboy racing drivers lifesyle. I don't know if that makes him the best promoter of all time.

I have, yes. I don't agree it's just what you say above, although that's part of it sure. But I don't agree with his assessment

To be fair, I am yet to see you agree with anything Hamilton says or does.

mikeyg123 wrote:

Zoue wrote:

Balibari wrote:

mac_d wrote:

Clarky wrote:I'm interested to read what people's thoughts as to what he owes F1 are!

I think owe is a funny word in this context as it doesn't really mean what it does normally (to me anyway). He doesn't owe the sport anything in the sense it's a business he turned up and did his job then went home. I usually think in the sports context owing is more acknowleding a gratitude for being able to be in the sport. Hamilton might have ended up a multimillionaire and world famous without it, but I doubt it. So yes, he doesn't owe anything in a strict sense. But in the way that so many sports stars admit they owe a lot to a team or sport, I think he does.

And to go against that is likely his honest feelings and I respect that, but I don't like it.

When evaluating the worth of a sportsman to his sport I reckon the question to ask is: has he contributed more to the sport than he's taken out? It's a nonsensical question in many ways, the sport itself isn't an entity capable of giving or taking away, but as he's made the link himself.... he's raked in somewhere in the region of $160m in wages and probably half as much again in endorsements, sponsorship, freebies etc. By his own assessment what's he's given back is exposure.

I'd suggest that if he thinks embarrassingly hanging onto Kanye West's coattails at a few awards ceremonies amounts to a quarter of a billion in positive marketing value he's a massive narcissistic moron. Just be grateful your talent was rewarded and don't tell people you're worth it. There are hundreds, thousands, of sportsmen with just as much talent and who worked just as hard, sacrificed just as much. Only a tiny percentage of them have been fortunate enough to be rewarded so richly. Be modest about it. Secondly, there's nothing altruistic about inadvertently gaining marginal exposure for your sport whilst desperately, ceaselessly, promoting yourself.

I'm a Hamilton fan, at least on the track (as much as I try to avoid that sort of thing). He's the one I generally want to win out of the front runners because I think he's the fastest and because I think people have been unfairly negative about him in the past. But my god he's grown into a wretched phony over the last few years.

Have any of you actually read the interview and understood the context of what he is saying before criticizing?

Yes I have.

mikeyg123 wrote: He's basically just saying he feels no responsibility to sort out the current state the sport is in.

Have you? The context comes across better in the video, it's worth a watch.

Balibari wrote: Yes I have.

mikeyg123 wrote: He's basically just saying he feels no responsibility to sort out the current state the sport is in.

Have you?

I've actually read what was said and thus been able to ignore the misleading way it was framed in the linked article.

Glad to see people jumping down someone's throat for some out of context quotes.

Firstly, he's speaking in the context of an overall conversation. Secondly, he's highlighting that he WORKS to promote the sport more than anyone else ever has. I don't think he's saying that he is the best promotion / biggest name the sport has ever had.

mikeyg123 wrote:

Balibari wrote: Yes I have.

mikeyg123 wrote: He's basically just saying he feels no responsibility to sort out the current state the sport is in.

Have you?

I've actually read what was said and thus been able to ignore the misleading way it was framed in the linked article.

I suggest you watch the video. There's a 40 second unedited clip starting at about 1:05 in which he makes his position clear. It ends with him saying he's spent 10 years giving his blood, sweat and tears for the sport.

PaDee wrote:

Zoue wrote:

mikeyg123 wrote:
Have any of you actually read the interview and understood the context of what he is saying before criticizing?

He's basically just saying he feels no responsibility to sort out the current state the sport is in.

As for the question in the OP - He is the most globally famous driver and in the sport and someone who does fully lead the playboy racing drivers lifesyle. I don't know if that makes him the best promoter of all time.

I have, yes. I don't agree it's just what you say above, although that's part of it sure. But I don't agree with his assessment

To be fair, I am yet to see you agree with anything Hamilton says or does.

Didn't realise you were following my posts that closely. But if you were, you'd note that on the "Who will win the WDC" thread I've said I think it will be him as he's better than Nico. I've consistently said that I think him to be one of the top three drivers on the grid. Do I have to think the sun shines out of his backside, too?

As good as I think he is as a driver, I believe he can be a narcissistic pratt out of the car. He self-promotes like no-one else I can think of and often he comes across as trying a bit too hard in that regard. So no, I don't often agree with what he says, because often there's a large amount of ego served with it. That doesn't mean I always disagree, but I wasn't aware that I had to always agree?

Ennis wrote:Glad to see people jumping down someone's throat for some out of context quotes.

Firstly, he's speaking in the context of an overall conversation. Secondly, he's highlighting that he WORKS to promote the sport more than anyone else ever has. I don't think he's saying that he is the best promotion / biggest name the sport has ever had.

Am I the only one seeing the complete video when I click that link?

You see the buildup to a question, then the interviewer asks the question, then the interviewee creates a framework for their answer (which is all about promoting the sport) before giving their answer, with their reasoning and justification.... that's the definition of context!

mikeyg123 wrote:

Zoue wrote: I have, yes. I don't agree it's just what you say above, although that's part of it sure. But I don't agree with his assessment

I mean actually what he said rather than how it is framed in the link posted? What he says in context I find pretty reasonable in the "not owing the sport anything" sense. I agree the best promoter bit is debatable. Hamilton is a global superstar/celebrity Probably more than any F1 driver ever. People may not like him for it but it can't be bad for the sport.

This week there have been threads criticizing Alonso, Vettel and now Hamilton's personalities. If we want our drivers to be open and honest human beings then we have to be prepared not to like everything they say. We all have our faults.

That last bit is very true. But to be fair I'm not calling him the devil for it, I just don't agree with the way he's phrasing things.

He may well strive tirelessly for the sport, but as pointed out above often his name comes up as a result of things he's doing for himself. The exposure may well benefit the sport but that's not quite the same as doing it for the sport. I haven't really seen anything that suggests he works harder at promoting the sport than anyone else and I think him saying that comes across as somewhat big-headed. I think that's best left for others to judge.

Some of the things he mentions I agree with. It's not his responsibility to sort the sport out and it is very much down to the guys who control the finances. But I don't agree that he owes the sport nothing or that he gives it his blood, sweat and tears. That's pretty reminiscent of Vettel's "balls in the pool" statement and look how he got slated for that.

Zoue wrote:

PaDee wrote:

Zoue wrote:

mikeyg123 wrote:
Have any of you actually read the interview and understood the context of what he is saying before criticizing?

He's basically just saying he feels no responsibility to sort out the current state the sport is in.

As for the question in the OP - He is the most globally famous driver and in the sport and someone who does fully lead the playboy racing drivers lifesyle. I don't know if that makes him the best promoter of all time.

I have, yes. I don't agree it's just what you say above, although that's part of it sure. But I don't agree with his assessment

To be fair, I am yet to see you agree with anything Hamilton says or does.

Didn't realise you were following my posts that closely. But if you were, you'd note that on the "Who will win the WDC" thread I've said I think it will be him as he's better than Nico. I've consistently said that I think him to be one of the top three drivers on the grid. Do I have to think the sun shines out of his backside, too?

As good as I think he is as a driver, I believe he can be a narcissistic pratt out of the car. He self-promotes like no-one else I can think of and often he comes across as trying a bit too hard in that regard. So no, I don't often agree with what he says, because often there's a large amount of ego served with it. That doesn't mean I always disagree, but I wasn't aware that I had to always agree?

Never said you did. I was merely making an observation.

PaDee wrote:

Zoue wrote:

PaDee wrote:

Zoue wrote:

mikeyg123 wrote:
Have any of you actually read the interview and understood the context of what he is saying before criticizing?

He's basically just saying he feels no responsibility to sort out the current state the sport is in.

As for the question in the OP - He is the most globally famous driver and in the sport and someone who does fully lead the playboy racing drivers lifesyle. I don't know if that makes him the best promoter of all time.

I have, yes. I don't agree it's just what you say above, although that's part of it sure. But I don't agree with his assessment

To be fair, I am yet to see you agree with anything Hamilton says or does.

Didn't realise you were following my posts that closely. But if you were, you'd note that on the "Who will win the WDC" thread I've said I think it will be him as he's better than Nico. I've consistently said that I think him to be one of the top three drivers on the grid. Do I have to think the sun shines out of his backside, too?

As good as I think he is as a driver, I believe he can be a narcissistic pratt out of the car. He self-promotes like no-one else I can think of and often he comes across as trying a bit too hard in that regard. So no, I don't often agree with what he says, because often there's a large amount of ego served with it. That doesn't mean I always disagree, but I wasn't aware that I had to always agree?

Never said you did. I was merely making an observation.

To what end?

It's best to watch the video. It's a very good interview by Lewis and I think he spoke very well and answered the questions very well.

Maybe he has been the F1 active driver with the most public appearances/interviews = I think that's possible.

mikeyg123 wrote:

Zoue wrote: I have, yes. I don't agree it's just what you say above, although that's part of it sure. But I don't agree with his assessment

This week there have been threads criticizing Alonso, Vettel and now Hamilton's personalities. If we want our drivers to be open and honest human beings then we have to be prepared not to like everything they say. We all have our faults.

I'm often the first to say we should give drivers a break when they speak directly from the heart because we all decry the fact they feel unable to do so. But this is just self glorification and I'm not sure Hamilton feels unable to speak his mind on that front.

'I think that was wrong!' (Good stuff, have an opinion)

'I do all this amazing stuff for the sport' (OK... Good for you?)

Zoue wrote:

PaDee wrote:

Zoue wrote: Didn't realise you were following my posts that closely. But if you were, you'd note that on the "Who will win the WDC" thread I've said I think it will be him as he's better than Nico. I've consistently said that I think him to be one of the top three drivers on the grid. Do I have to think the sun shines out of his backside, too?

As good as I think he is as a driver, I believe he can be a narcissistic pratt out of the car. He self-promotes like no-one else I can think of and often he comes across as trying a bit too hard in that regard. So no, I don't often agree with what he says, because often there's a large amount of ego served with it. That doesn't mean I always disagree, but I wasn't aware that I had to always agree?

Never said you did. I was merely making an observation.

To what end?

Does an observation need an end? It does what it says on the tin and that is that I am yet to see a post from you agreeing with anything Hamilton says or does.

PaDee wrote:

Zoue wrote:

PaDee wrote:

Zoue wrote: Didn't realise you were following my posts that closely. But if you were, you'd note that on the "Who will win the WDC" thread I've said I think it will be him as he's better than Nico. I've consistently said that I think him to be one of the top three drivers on the grid. Do I have to think the sun shines out of his backside, too?

As good as I think he is as a driver, I believe he can be a narcissistic pratt out of the car. He self-promotes like no-one else I can think of and often he comes across as trying a bit too hard in that regard. So no, I don't often agree with what he says, because often there's a large amount of ego served with it. That doesn't mean I always disagree, but I wasn't aware that I had to always agree?

Never said you did. I was merely making an observation.

To what end?

Does an observation need an end? It does what it says on the tin and that is that I am yet to see a post from you agreeing with anything Hamilton says or does.

Normally it does, yes. Otherwise I could arbitrarily say that I have yet to see a post from you disagreeing with whatever Hamilton says. But that would be just as pointless as what you did.

I suspect you were trying to imply bias, but if so, why not simply ask? If not, then your post is just an odd non-sequitur

Thats sort of a laughable claim.

I remember a certain guy called Ayrton Senna, or even Michael Schumacher

mikeyg123 wrote:This week there have been threads criticizing Alonso, Vettel and now Hamilton's personalities. If we want our drivers to be open and honest human beings then we have to be prepared not to like everything they say. We all have our faults.

I wish more fans would understand that almost every famous racer has personality issues. In other words, many are real dicks. It is almost a job requirement because you must be able to compete hard against many other people on a regular basis, and thus be driven unlike the normal person. Talent takes those kinds of people to the top, but almost every successful professional racer was willing to sacrifice their childhood and a happy, normal life for one marinating in ruthless competition. Dale Earnhardt was and still is adored and loved by millions of his fans. But a quick read over the biography of his son, Jr, points out that Sr was a horrible parent.

All too often we see these brave young people do amazing things with their machinery, and somehow believe that just because they are talented and give good interviews that their farts smell like unicorns.

So he claims to be the best promoter of a sport that sinks each year lower and lower in prestige? It is his choice to believe that, I'm not disputing his statement. But I can tell the difference between just gaining more publicity and doing something positive for a sport or society.

Lewis Hamilton is to Formula One in the same way Lady Gaga is to music.

One of the best? Yeah
Best ever? Schumacher (and I imagine Senna) - he has some way to go in that regard

Did it need to be said? I can't think of any reason why he needed to be self-aggrandizing to that extent

Does he owe anything to F1? No, I don't think he does. I don't think any of the drivers do

Blinky McSquinty wrote:Lewis Hamilton is to Formula One in the same way Lady Gaga is to music.

Would that mean Ayrton Senna was Madonna?

It's just what is being called "Trumpssism" these days.

Really the only reason he's the most 'famous' is because he dated a Pussycat Doll. It really wouldn't have mattered if he won 1 or 6 WDCs, that simple fact made him 'tabloid' fodder. By contrast Vettel lives in a tent in a field with his missus and hence hasn't captured the public at large's imagination. I find it strange that in this day and age, when sponsors want marketable personalities, that drivers seem to think just driving the car is enough.

mcdo wrote:

Blinky McSquinty wrote:Lewis Hamilton is to Formula One in the same way Lady Gaga is to music.

Would that mean Ayrton Senna was Madonna?

When he was alive many perceived him as a bully. So, yea, you aren't far from the mark. Despite the fact that both were willing to work very hard and were ruthless, there is a vast difference, because Senna was talented.

Zoue wrote:

PaDee wrote:

Zoue wrote: To what end?

Does an observation need an end? It does what it says on the tin and that is that I am yet to see a post from you agreeing with anything Hamilton says or does.

Normally it does, yes. Otherwise I could arbitrarily say that I have yet to see a post from you disagreeing with whatever Hamilton says. But that would be just as pointless as what you did.

I suspect you were trying to imply bias, but if so, why not simply ask? If not, then your post is just an odd non-sequitur

I know that you like to argue, but sometimes there is no ulterior motive and things should be taken at face value as was my original intent with what was a throw away comment. But as you raise the issue, your bias is plain to see in your posting history with regards to Hamilton. See, no need for inference.

And before you fire up the Outrage Bus, I know that you are quite entitled to voice your opinion, but you shouldn't be offended if that opinion doesn't carry as much weight as you think it should.

I don’t know about being best promoter ever but perhaps one of the best.

Out of the current crop---possibly the best.


If“promoting” means being continually in the public eye and thus drawing attention to the sport through association and discussion, whatever the initial ulterior motive, then I would say yes, he is well ahead of all the other currents in that respect. The term “box office” has frequently been applied to Hamilton such is his appeal to attract peoples attention, both positive and negative, and to get tongues wagging. Yes, Bernie seems to have lost the plot of late, but even he has proclaimed Hamilton as a super promoter of the sport and has castigated other drivers for not doing more in that area.

http://www.skysports.com/f1/news/12433/ ... ecclestone

nixxxon wrote:Thats sort of a laughable claim.

I remember a certain guy called Ayrton Senna, or even Michael Schumacher

Who are they?