planetf1.com

Blake wrote:

sandman1347 wrote:

bonecrasher wrote:

mikeyg123 wrote:
Alonso for me is definitely the best driver post Schumacher. I actually think he probably had surpassed Schumacher himself by 06.

Definitely? I would have thought there was at least a question mark between him and Hamilton. After all he failed to beat rookie Hamilton when he was the reigning back to back 2 time world champion. Now from thin air he is just better?

One thing you'll find is that, in this particular forum, anything Alonso has done is worth achievements 10 times as great by other drivers. Claiming Alonso as the best of this generation is like claiming Hakkinen as the best of his IMO. Hamilton is easily the top driver post Schumacher by any reasonable analysis IMO and is the only driver since then that has put himself in the same category as Schumacher, Senna, Clark and Fangio.

10x??? How rich... Coming from one who has made a "career" out of bigging up Lewis and his achievements...maybe even as much as 10x others.

Sandman, you need to understand that there are other fans who also have credible opinions on the subject of drivers in F1. You choose to use the term "reasonable analysis", but it is, by your own post, is YOUR definition of what it means. You come across as though almost any opinion other that your own(or others of similar thoughts) is without value. Lewis has become a very successful driver and I certainly can understand his fans being proud of what he has accomplished, but...in MY opinion, he is not at the level of Schumi, Clark, Senna or Alonso. Again, that is my opinion and as such it is just as valid as those of sandman.

Blake wrote:

sandman1347 wrote: More than anything; to prop Alonso up over Hamilton, you have to ignore the fact that Hamilton bested him as a teammate in his rookie year. You have to ignore the fact that Hamilton has won more than twice as many races and almost 3 times as many titles and has done it against stronger teammates and often strong competition from other teams. You basically have to ignore the fact that there is obviously someone who is contemporaneous with Alonso who has out-performed him.

Never has a tie in points been hyped up to the benefit of one particular driver as the infamous 2007 when two drivers for the same number of WDC points for driving cars that were disqualified for the WCC. How in the neck could F1 have justified that if either Alonso or Lewis had one the WDC? What a mess that would have been.

Yes, Lewis has won more races and more WDCs than has Alonso, but as you are on the subject of others "ignoring" what you see as pertinent facts, you seem perfectly willing to IGNORE the fact that Alonso has not had the dominate rides that Lewis has benefited from the past several years. I seriously doubt that Lewis would have been winning races and WDCs in Alonso's cars either. So has Hamilton really out-performed Alonso as a driver, or just out-scored him (not necessarily the same thing)? Personally, I do not thinks so, hence my rating of Alonso over Lewis.

mikeyg123 wrote:

tim3003 wrote:

mikeyg123 wrote:
It simply does not represent who was best. There is no way to know for sure.

Well I say it does - maybe not 100% exactly, but closer than any other guess. If not, what is your alternative? If you have none, I win by default!

My alternative is to watch the races, study accounts from the time and make a judgement. Plenty of drivers who have never won titles are better than those that have.

Blake wrote:

sandman1347 wrote:

bonecrasher wrote:

mikeyg123 wrote:
Alonso for me is definitely the best driver post Schumacher. I actually think he probably had surpassed Schumacher himself by 06.

Definitely? I would have thought there was at least a question mark between him and Hamilton. After all he failed to beat rookie Hamilton when he was the reigning back to back 2 time world champion. Now from thin air he is just better?

One thing you'll find is that, in this particular forum, anything Alonso has done is worth achievements 10 times as great by other drivers. Claiming Alonso as the best of this generation is like claiming Hakkinen as the best of his IMO. Hamilton is easily the top driver post Schumacher by any reasonable analysis IMO and is the only driver since then that has put himself in the same category as Schumacher, Senna, Clark and Fangio.

10x??? How rich... Coming from one who has made a "career" out of bigging up Lewis and his achievements...maybe even as much as 10x others.

Sandman, you need to understand that there are other fans who also have credible opinions on the subject of drivers in F1. You choose to use the term "reasonable analysis", but it is, by your own post, is YOUR definition of what it means. You come across as though almost any opinion other that your own(or others of similar thoughts) is without value. Lewis has become a very successful driver and I certainly can understand his fans being proud of what he has accomplished, but...in MY opinion, he is not at the level of Schumi, Clark, Senna or Alonso. Again, that is my opinion and as such it is just as valid as those of sandman.

Blake wrote:

sandman1347 wrote: More than anything; to prop Alonso up over Hamilton, you have to ignore the fact that Hamilton bested him as a teammate in his rookie year. You have to ignore the fact that Hamilton has won more than twice as many races and almost 3 times as many titles and has done it against stronger teammates and often strong competition from other teams. You basically have to ignore the fact that there is obviously someone who is contemporaneous with Alonso who has out-performed him.

Never has a tie in points been hyped up to the benefit of one particular driver as the infamous 2007 when two drivers for the same number of WDC points for driving cars that were disqualified for the WCC. How in the neck could F1 have justified that if either Alonso or Lewis had one the WDC? What a mess that would have been.

Yes, Lewis has won more races and more WDCs than has Alonso, but as you are on the subject of others "ignoring" what you see as pertinent facts, you seem perfectly willing to IGNORE the fact that Alonso has not had the dominate rides that Lewis has benefited from the past several years. I seriously doubt that Lewis would have been winning races and WDCs in Alonso's cars either. So has Hamilton really out-performed Alonso as a driver, or just out-scored him (not necessarily the same thing)? Personally, I do not thinks so, hence my rating of Alonso over Lewis.

mikeyg123 wrote:

pokerman wrote:

mikeyg123 wrote:

pokerman wrote:

mikeyg123 wrote: No, Just like it was a 1/17 of his entire career.

A time when he was tested by a driver on the same level as him although you yourself see Alonso as being a tier above Hamilton.

I think throughout their careers Alonso has been the better driver yes. That doesn't mean that Hamilton at his best is always going to be inferior to Alonso of course. This is an opinion built over many years.

If you asked me is Hamilton right now driving as well as Alonso at his best then that would be closer.

Put it like this. If I had to make a combined top 10 of seasons performances from Hamilton and Alonso most would be from Alonso.

You don't take into account that Alonso has had weaker teammates though beating a succession of rookies and Massa plus all the #1 advantages that he had, the only driver Alonso couldn't steam roll post Hamilton was Button and that basically is the level of teammates that Hamilton has had to deal with with no #1 advantages.

This is were I will always differ with posters who think that they can judge driver performance better when they drive different cars rather than when they are actually teammates, hence you can basically totally dismiss the 2007 season.

Of course I take it into account. I take it all into account.

I don't dismiss the 2007 season either. I just don't think the argument starts and ends there.

Bottom line I would put Alonso at 6th of all time and Hamilton 8th so it's not like I think there is a huge chasm.

Blake wrote:

pokerman wrote: You don't take into account that Alonso has had weaker teammates though beating a succession of rookies and Massa plus all the #1 advantages that he had, the only driver Alonso couldn't steam roll post Hamilton was Button and that basically is the level of teammates that Hamilton has had to deal with with no #1 advantages.

This is were I will always differ with posters who think that they can judge driver performance better when they drive different cars rather than when they are actually teammates, hence you can basically totally dismiss the 2007 season.

Poker,
A couple of things...while you accuse others of dismissing the 2007 season, I think you and some others do just the opposite and put too much on 2007. To read some of the "justifications", one would think Lewis kicked Alonso up and down the track...he didn't, no matter how you try to portray it. Lewis didn't beat Alonso on points and he likely benefited by the turmoil within the team concerning Alonso's side of the garage and management. While a lot of that turmoil falls on Nando's shoulders not all of it does and even if it did you can't wash away the on track driving of Alonso because of it.

Alonso's teammates were a succession of rookies and Massa? Two points...Massa, in my opinion, was a much better driver than you give him credit for. And Alonso did not have the rather significant advantage of entering F1 in one of the best two cars on the grid...few drivers have. BTW, are you thinking Lewis has never had "#1" advantages in F1 ? Seriously?

I am one who believes that Alonso was the best driver on the track over the past dozen years and isn't that what the thread is about...best driver? As a driver, I believe that the talent of Alonso was/is superior to that of Lewis or Seb. It is an opinion, just as yours are...and just as valid.

pokerman wrote: There is a huge chasm when you say that Alonso is a tier above Hamilton, you take 2007 into account but then again not really?

WHoff78 wrote:You can argue both ways, but at the same time only one of these drivers keeps delivering and answering the critics year on year. We really need to wait until they retire for the full picture but beating Vettel in the Ferrari last season is right up there. Every season that goes by its harder to argue against him.

pendulumeffect wrote:LH is the best ever. I think it is difficult to argue otherwise considering he had to overcome racial barriers to stand amongst Schumacher and Fangio. The finer statistics do not matter so much. It is no accident he got to where he is. He took his chances as a child and pinned his colours to Mercedes' flag.

mikeyg123 wrote:

pokerman wrote: There is a huge chasm when you say that Alonso is a tier above Hamilton, you take 2007 into account but then again not really?

I've stated how I take 2007 into account very clearly. It's important but not where the argument starts or ends.

I stand by my opinion. For me, taking both their entire careers in mind Alonso was definitely better than Hamilton.

pokerman wrote:

mikeyg123 wrote:

pokerman wrote: There is a huge chasm when you say that Alonso is a tier above Hamilton, you take 2007 into account but then again not really?

I've stated how I take 2007 into account very clearly. It's important but not where the argument starts or ends.

I stand by my opinion. For me, taking both their entire careers in mind Alonso was definitely better than Hamilton.

You are entitled to that opinion but I'm reading your post were you said that Alonso was a tier above Hamilton, I actually believe that is basically ignoring 2007 plus the performance data that shows Button was closer to Alonso than he was to Hamilton, of course you can still believe Alonso was the better driver as in more consistent as alluded to by Button, but not a tier above when such data suggests that Hamilton was ultimately quicker than Alonso, something that Alonso himself perhaps alluded to when he said he may not be the fastest driver in F1?

pokerman wrote:

mikeyg123 wrote:

pokerman wrote: There is a huge chasm when you say that Alonso is a tier above Hamilton, you take 2007 into account but then again not really?

I've stated how I take 2007 into account very clearly. It's important but not where the argument starts or ends.

I stand by my opinion. For me, taking both their entire careers in mind Alonso was definitely better than Hamilton.

You are entitled to that opinion but I'm reading your post were you said that Alonso was a tier above Hamilton, I actually believe that is basically ignoring 2007 plus the performance data that shows Button was closer to Alonso than he was to Hamilton, of course you can still believe Alonso was the better driver as in more consistent as alluded to by Button, but not a tier above when such data suggests that Hamilton was ultimately quicker than Alonso, something that Alonso himself perhaps alluded to when he said he may not be the fastest driver in F1?

WHoff78 wrote:You can argue both ways, but at the same time only one of these drivers keeps delivering and answering the critics year on year. We really need to wait until they retire for the full picture but beating Vettel in the Ferrari last season is right up there. Every season that goes by its harder to argue against him.

mikeyg123 wrote:
My alternative is to watch the races, study accounts from the time and make a judgement. Plenty of drivers who have never won titles are better than those that have.

tim3003 wrote:But if you ask an F1 driver what he wants to achieve in his career he'll say wins and world titles. How then can we measure him on any other criteria? This surely is the way F1 team managers judge drivers too.

mikeyg123 wrote:

WHoff78 wrote:You can argue both ways, but at the same time only one of these drivers keeps delivering and answering the critics year on year. We really need to wait until they retire for the full picture but beating Vettel in the Ferrari last season is right up there. Every season that goes by its harder to argue against him.

Hamilton drove exceptionally well last season but Vettel made a very good of beating himself frankly.

aice wrote:

mikeyg123 wrote:

WHoff78 wrote:You can argue both ways, but at the same time only one of these drivers keeps delivering and answering the critics year on year. We really need to wait until they retire for the full picture but beating Vettel in the Ferrari last season is right up there. Every season that goes by its harder to argue against him.

Hamilton drove exceptionally well last season but Vettel made a very good of beating himself frankly.

Drivers don't operate in a vacuum.

Without Hamilton's consistency, Vettel perhaps wouldn't have felt the need to take some of the risks he did. Vettel made a lot of mistakes in 2018, but how much of this can be atrributed to the pressure Hamilton was able to exert? By avoiding mistakes, maximising his chances, winning on tracks where Merc didn't have the quicker car, Hamilton was able to compound the pressure on Vettel & Ferrari.

mikeyg123 wrote:

pokerman wrote:

mikeyg123 wrote:

pokerman wrote: There is a huge chasm when you say that Alonso is a tier above Hamilton, you take 2007 into account but then again not really?

I've stated how I take 2007 into account very clearly. It's important but not where the argument starts or ends.

I stand by my opinion. For me, taking both their entire careers in mind Alonso was definitely better than Hamilton.

You are entitled to that opinion but I'm reading your post were you said that Alonso was a tier above Hamilton, I actually believe that is basically ignoring 2007 plus the performance data that shows Button was closer to Alonso than he was to Hamilton, of course you can still believe Alonso was the better driver as in more consistent as alluded to by Button, but not a tier above when such data suggests that Hamilton was ultimately quicker than Alonso, something that Alonso himself perhaps alluded to when he said he may not be the fastest driver in F1?

I don't recall saying Alonso was a tier above or that Alonso had a quicker ultimate pace than Hamilton? You can believe I'm ignoring whatever you like. It's not true.

Covalent wrote:Interesting topic but I think there are a couple posters here that will not accept having a certain driver sharing the top spot with anyone. I hope I'm proven wrong and this thread won't descend into the usual.

mikeyg123 wrote: Shouldn't be a problem. Now Alonso's retired at least he's sharing top spot and not second.

Fiki wrote:

pokerman wrote:

mikeyg123 wrote:

pokerman wrote: There is a huge chasm when you say that Alonso is a tier above Hamilton, you take 2007 into account but then again not really?

I've stated how I take 2007 into account very clearly. It's important but not where the argument starts or ends.

I stand by my opinion. For me, taking both their entire careers in mind Alonso was definitely better than Hamilton.

You are entitled to that opinion but I'm reading your post were you said that Alonso was a tier above Hamilton, I actually believe that is basically ignoring 2007 plus the performance data that shows Button was closer to Alonso than he was to Hamilton, of course you can still believe Alonso was the better driver as in more consistent as alluded to by Button, but not a tier above when such data suggests that Hamilton was ultimately quicker than Alonso, something that Alonso himself perhaps alluded to when he said he may not be the fastest driver in F1?

I would be interested in the performance data on Button/Alonso.
I also would like to make a clear distinction between fastest and best again. You seem to more or less equate these two categories. To clarify; I don't doubt for a second that Senna was still the fastest man in F1 when he died. But whether he was better than Schumacher is far from certain to me.

Zoue wrote:

WHoff78 wrote:You can argue both ways, but at the same time only one of these drivers keeps delivering and answering the critics year on year. We really need to wait until they retire for the full picture but beating Vettel in the Ferrari last season is right up there. Every season that goes by its harder to argue against him.

I think Alonso keeps delivering year on year with the equipment limitations he has, too. It's definitely not a one-sided equation.

Last year Hamilton drove very well but as has been pointed out he was helped somewhat by Vettel and Ferrari imploding.

Exediron wrote:

tim3003 wrote:But if you ask an F1 driver what he wants to achieve in his career he'll say wins and world titles. How then can we measure him on any other criteria? This surely is the way F1 team managers judge drivers too.

I really don't think it is. Why did Red Bull start prioritizing the driver with fewer wins, no poles, etc? Because they were pretty certain Max was quicker, despite not having the achievements to go with it. Same reason Ferrari wanted Leclerc; they believed he would be faster than Kimi, despite Kimi having a WDC and a pocket full of wins and poles.

I would actually say that the teams look at the question almost directly opposite to you: they care only about performance, and not achievements. If Bottas suddenly started outperforming his 5x WC teammate on a season-long basis, Lewis would find himself out the door, all-time pole leader or not. Speed is everything.

Zoue wrote:
I think Alonso keeps delivering year on year with the equipment limitations he has, too. It's definitely not a one-sided equation.

Last year Hamilton drove very well but as has been pointed out he was helped somewhat by Vettel and Ferrari imploding.

pokerman wrote:

Exediron wrote:

tim3003 wrote:But if you ask an F1 driver what he wants to achieve in his career he'll say wins and world titles. How then can we measure him on any other criteria? This surely is the way F1 team managers judge drivers too.

I really don't think it is. Why did Red Bull start prioritizing the driver with fewer wins, no poles, etc? Because they were pretty certain Max was quicker, despite not having the achievements to go with it. Same reason Ferrari wanted Leclerc; they believed he would be faster than Kimi, despite Kimi having a WDC and a pocket full of wins and poles.

I would actually say that the teams look at the question almost directly opposite to you: they care only about performance, and not achievements. If Bottas suddenly started outperforming his 5x WC teammate on a season-long basis, Lewis would find himself out the door, all-time pole leader or not. Speed is everything.

Which circles back to Alonso, what were the top teams looking at when they chose not to employ supposedly the out and out best driver in F1?

pokerman wrote:

mikeyg123 wrote:

pokerman wrote:

mikeyg123 wrote:

pokerman wrote: There is a huge chasm when you say that Alonso is a tier above Hamilton, you take 2007 into account but then again not really?

I've stated how I take 2007 into account very clearly. It's important but not where the argument starts or ends.

I stand by my opinion. For me, taking both their entire careers in mind Alonso was definitely better than Hamilton.

You are entitled to that opinion but I'm reading your post were you said that Alonso was a tier above Hamilton, I actually believe that is basically ignoring 2007 plus the performance data that shows Button was closer to Alonso than he was to Hamilton, of course you can still believe Alonso was the better driver as in more consistent as alluded to by Button, but not a tier above when such data suggests that Hamilton was ultimately quicker than Alonso, something that Alonso himself perhaps alluded to when he said he may not be the fastest driver in F1?

I don't recall saying Alonso was a tier above or that Alonso had a quicker ultimate pace than Hamilton? You can believe I'm ignoring whatever you like. It's not true.

It's your reply to Covalent in the "Race Pecking Order Thread" were the drivers are put into tiers.

Covalent wrote:Interesting topic but I think there are a couple posters here that will not accept having a certain driver sharing the top spot with anyone. I hope I'm proven wrong and this thread won't descend into the usual.

mikeyg123 wrote: Shouldn't be a problem. Now Alonso's retired at least he's sharing top spot and not second.

pokerman wrote:

Zoue wrote:

WHoff78 wrote:You can argue both ways, but at the same time only one of these drivers keeps delivering and answering the critics year on year. We really need to wait until they retire for the full picture but beating Vettel in the Ferrari last season is right up there. Every season that goes by its harder to argue against him.

I think Alonso keeps delivering year on year with the equipment limitations he has, too. It's definitely not a one-sided equation.

Last year Hamilton drove very well but as has been pointed out he was helped somewhat by Vettel and Ferrari imploding.

Vettel had a car over the season has good as the Mercedes, sometimes the driver has to do it for himself as well.

pokerman wrote:

Exediron wrote:

tim3003 wrote:But if you ask an F1 driver what he wants to achieve in his career he'll say wins and world titles. How then can we measure him on any other criteria? This surely is the way F1 team managers judge drivers too.

I really don't think it is. Why did Red Bull start prioritizing the driver with fewer wins, no poles, etc? Because they were pretty certain Max was quicker, despite not having the achievements to go with it. Same reason Ferrari wanted Leclerc; they believed he would be faster than Kimi, despite Kimi having a WDC and a pocket full of wins and poles.

I would actually say that the teams look at the question almost directly opposite to you: they care only about performance, and not achievements. If Bottas suddenly started outperforming his 5x WC teammate on a season-long basis, Lewis would find himself out the door, all-time pole leader or not. Speed is everything.

Which circles back to Alonso, what were the top teams looking at when they chose not to employ supposedly the out and out best driver in F1?

DOLOMITE wrote:

Zoue wrote:
I think Alonso keeps delivering year on year with the equipment limitations he has, too. It's definitely not a one-sided equation.

Last year Hamilton drove very well but as has been pointed out he was helped somewhat by Vettel and Ferrari imploding.

Or another point of view - they couldn't operate at the level needed to beat Hamilton/Mercedes...all part of the sport.

pokerman wrote:

Fiki wrote:

pokerman wrote:

mikeyg123 wrote:

pokerman wrote: There is a huge chasm when you say that Alonso is a tier above Hamilton, you take 2007 into account but then again not really?

I've stated how I take 2007 into account very clearly. It's important but not where the argument starts or ends.

I stand by my opinion. For me, taking both their entire careers in mind Alonso was definitely better than Hamilton.

You are entitled to that opinion but I'm reading your post were you said that Alonso was a tier above Hamilton, I actually believe that is basically ignoring 2007 plus the performance data that shows Button was closer to Alonso than he was to Hamilton, of course you can still believe Alonso was the better driver as in more consistent as alluded to by Button, but not a tier above when such data suggests that Hamilton was ultimately quicker than Alonso, something that Alonso himself perhaps alluded to when he said he may not be the fastest driver in F1?

I would be interested in the performance data on Button/Alonso.
I also would like to make a clear distinction between fastest and best again. You seem to more or less equate these two categories. To clarify; I don't doubt for a second that Senna was still the fastest man in F1 when he died. But whether he was better than Schumacher is far from certain to me.

No I've always said that fastest and best can be two different things, that's how some pick Prost over Senna even though they would still acknowledge that Senna was faster.

On that score that's why I wouldn't want to bother taking issue as such with anyone who says that Alonso was better, my issue is when it's said that Alonso was a level above Hamilton.

In terms of data Mark Hughes does this although his numbers always seem inflated when compared to mine, his gaps are much bigger than mine.

Zoue wrote:

DOLOMITE wrote:

Zoue wrote:
I think Alonso keeps delivering year on year with the equipment limitations he has, too. It's definitely not a one-sided equation.

Last year Hamilton drove very well but as has been pointed out he was helped somewhat by Vettel and Ferrari imploding.

Or another point of view - they couldn't operate at the level needed to beat Hamilton/Mercedes...all part of the sport.

Sure it's all part of the sport. I don't think I suggested otherwise?

DOLOMITE wrote:

Zoue wrote:

DOLOMITE wrote:

Zoue wrote:
I think Alonso keeps delivering year on year with the equipment limitations he has, too. It's definitely not a one-sided equation.

Last year Hamilton drove very well but as has been pointed out he was helped somewhat by Vettel and Ferrari imploding.

Or another point of view - they couldn't operate at the level needed to beat Hamilton/Mercedes...all part of the sport.

Sure it's all part of the sport. I don't think I suggested otherwise?

point I was trying (and apparently failed!) to make was that applying and dealing with the pressure is part of being the best. Vettels is increasingly looking like a driverw ho will go down as cracking under pressure, wheres Hamilton much less so and is certainly a master of applying it.

So to say he was "helped out by it" I think does him and Mercedes a disservice. They applied the pressure, maximized points at all opportunities and came out on top. It's not like they inherited a bunch of wins while trundling round 50 seconds down in 3rd and 4th place.

Zoue wrote:

DOLOMITE wrote:

Zoue wrote:

DOLOMITE wrote:

Zoue wrote:
I think Alonso keeps delivering year on year with the equipment limitations he has, too. It's definitely not a one-sided equation.

Last year Hamilton drove very well but as has been pointed out he was helped somewhat by Vettel and Ferrari imploding.

Or another point of view - they couldn't operate at the level needed to beat Hamilton/Mercedes...all part of the sport.

Sure it's all part of the sport. I don't think I suggested otherwise?

point I was trying (and apparently failed!) to make was that applying and dealing with the pressure is part of being the best. Vettels is increasingly looking like a driverw ho will go down as cracking under pressure, wheres Hamilton much less so and is certainly a master of applying it.

So to say he was "helped out by it" I think does him and Mercedes a disservice. They applied the pressure, maximized points at all opportunities and came out on top. It's not like they inherited a bunch of wins while trundling round 50 seconds down in 3rd and 4th place.

Oh fair enough. I didn't mean to suggest he/they didn't do a good job, only that the scale of the victory was somewhat flattered by the opposition tripping over themselves.

I think it was a really good season for Hamilton and Mercedes. I'm not sure I'd go along with all the superlatives that are being bestowed, however. I think it was a solid performance but Vettel/Ferrari made it easier.

Exediron wrote:

tim3003 wrote:But if you ask an F1 driver what he wants to achieve in his career he'll say wins and world titles. How then can we measure him on any other criteria? This surely is the way F1 team managers judge drivers too.

I really don't think it is. Why did Red Bull start prioritizing the driver with fewer wins, no poles, etc? Because they were pretty certain Max was quicker, despite not having the achievements to go with it. Same reason Ferrari wanted Leclerc; they believed he would be faster than Kimi, despite Kimi having a WDC and a pocket full of wins and poles.

I would actually say that the teams look at the question almost directly opposite to you: they care only about performance, and not achievements. If Bottas suddenly started outperforming his 5x WC teammate on a season-long basis, Lewis would find himself out the door, all-time pole leader or not. Speed is everything.

pokerman wrote:

Exediron wrote:

tim3003 wrote:But if you ask an F1 driver what he wants to achieve in his career he'll say wins and world titles. How then can we measure him on any other criteria? This surely is the way F1 team managers judge drivers too.

I really don't think it is. Why did Red Bull start prioritizing the driver with fewer wins, no poles, etc? Because they were pretty certain Max was quicker, despite not having the achievements to go with it. Same reason Ferrari wanted Leclerc; they believed he would be faster than Kimi, despite Kimi having a WDC and a pocket full of wins and poles.

I would actually say that the teams look at the question almost directly opposite to you: they care only about performance, and not achievements. If Bottas suddenly started outperforming his 5x WC teammate on a season-long basis, Lewis would find himself out the door, all-time pole leader or not. Speed is everything.

Which circles back to Alonso, what were the top teams looking at when they chose not to employ supposedly the out and out best driver in F1?

Exediron wrote:

pokerman wrote:

Exediron wrote:

tim3003 wrote:But if you ask an F1 driver what he wants to achieve in his career he'll say wins and world titles. How then can we measure him on any other criteria? This surely is the way F1 team managers judge drivers too.

I really don't think it is. Why did Red Bull start prioritizing the driver with fewer wins, no poles, etc? Because they were pretty certain Max was quicker, despite not having the achievements to go with it. Same reason Ferrari wanted Leclerc; they believed he would be faster than Kimi, despite Kimi having a WDC and a pocket full of wins and poles.

I would actually say that the teams look at the question almost directly opposite to you: they care only about performance, and not achievements. If Bottas suddenly started outperforming his 5x WC teammate on a season-long basis, Lewis would find himself out the door, all-time pole leader or not. Speed is everything.

Which circles back to Alonso, what were the top teams looking at when they chose not to employ supposedly the out and out best driver in F1?

I don't know. But it wasn't because he didn't have wins and championships, that's for sure. I don't believe that Ferrari wanted to replace him because they didn't feel he was good enough, or that Mercedes didn't hire him because he wasn't good enough. His skill was not the reason for either of those circumstances.

mikeyg123 wrote:

pokerman wrote:

mikeyg123 wrote:

pokerman wrote:

mikeyg123 wrote: I've stated how I take 2007 into account very clearly. It's important but not where the argument starts or ends.

I stand by my opinion. For me, taking both their entire careers in mind Alonso was definitely better than Hamilton.

You are entitled to that opinion but I'm reading your post were you said that Alonso was a tier above Hamilton, I actually believe that is basically ignoring 2007 plus the performance data that shows Button was closer to Alonso than he was to Hamilton, of course you can still believe Alonso was the better driver as in more consistent as alluded to by Button, but not a tier above when such data suggests that Hamilton was ultimately quicker than Alonso, something that Alonso himself perhaps alluded to when he said he may not be the fastest driver in F1?

I don't recall saying Alonso was a tier above or that Alonso had a quicker ultimate pace than Hamilton? You can believe I'm ignoring whatever you like. It's not true.

It's your reply to Covalent in the "Race Pecking Order Thread" were the drivers are put into tiers.

Covalent wrote:Interesting topic but I think there are a couple posters here that will not accept having a certain driver sharing the top spot with anyone. I hope I'm proven wrong and this thread won't descend into the usual.

mikeyg123 wrote: Shouldn't be a problem. Now Alonso's retired at least he's sharing top spot and not second.

I could order drivers from 1-20 if I wanted. It doesn't mean I'd think there would be 20 different tiers.

Zoue wrote:

pokerman wrote:

Zoue wrote:

WHoff78 wrote:You can argue both ways, but at the same time only one of these drivers keeps delivering and answering the critics year on year. We really need to wait until they retire for the full picture but beating Vettel in the Ferrari last season is right up there. Every season that goes by its harder to argue against him.

I think Alonso keeps delivering year on year with the equipment limitations he has, too. It's definitely not a one-sided equation.

Last year Hamilton drove very well but as has been pointed out he was helped somewhat by Vettel and Ferrari imploding.

Vettel had a car over the season has good as the Mercedes, sometimes the driver has to do it for himself as well.

Bit in bold. Right there