Of course it has to be you that writes this. You are the perfect example for a Vettel fanboy and Hamilton haterOf course it has to be you that writes this. You are the perfect example for a Hamilton fanboy and Vettel hater
Of course it has to be you that writes this. You are the perfect example for a Vettel fanboy and Hamilton haterOf course it has to be you that writes this. You are the perfect example for a Hamilton fanboy and Vettel hater
It's getting bored to see him at the first place all the time. I'm still surprised that this guy can be faster than most. He doesn't look like a fighter. But he has won and he is good. I hope in the coming season we'll be seeing more drivers fighting for the title and it brings a new champion. Rated 8
I'm not sure what a fast person looks like either. Sometimes you blink and you miss them..Glad you acknowledged that he's good...but please give us examples of what a fast guy, or a fighter looks like.
Lastly, name one year when all F1 cars were on equal footing...yet, not surprisingly, it never stopped people from praising Schumi, Prost, Mansell, etc as the greatest ever, when they also won their championships using the class of the field. What's good for the goose...
Opinions are plentiful and haters gonna hate, but here's mine...
I'm always baffled when certain people win races or championships, it's always the "it's the car" argument or something about his mannerisms/attitude/private life/style of dress/etc "hurts the sport", like these cars drive themselves, or this is some kind of elitist country club. I rarely ever hear these arguments with the likes of Schumacher, Mansell or Lauda for example, but it's always comes out in droves with Hamilton and, in the past, Senna. Not to mention, unlike sim racing (where people also have 'off days' mind you), real drivers also are subjected to rediculous amounts of G-forces and abuse, but are somehow expected to deliver the perfect race, the perfect season, every season...nonsense.
Lastly, name one year when all F1 cars were on equal footing...yet, not surprisingly, it never stopped people from praising Schumi, Prost, Mansell, etc as the greatest ever, when they also won their championships using the class of the field. What's good for the goose...
Lewis worked very hard to get where he is, he once again performed admirably over the course of the season and deserves a 10, or at the very least, a 9.
You wouldn't rate your own mother a 10 as a person and a parent?I have had this rule in life that I can't give any product or person a perfect rating
7. Clearly the best car and still struggled against a worse car (Ferrari) and a subpar driver (Bottas) quite some times
You know it's 2018 now right? And that last year it was 2017?!
I watched a lot of the 2017 F1 swason and I didn't come away thinking that the Ferrari was clearly a worse car than the Mercedes.
In fact, on many occasions, it was my opinion that the Ferrari was the better car.
A common mistake people make, when only watching a few races, and not knowing the technical aspects of the race car.
Seeing Vettel fighting toe-to-toe with a Mercedes and thinking "oh, the car is as good as theirs". Not only the case with Ferrari, also with other cars, that people mistake car with driver.
Possible that their are a couple(!) of circuits out there that suit the Ferrari better chassis-wise in general, but engine wise the Mercedes has 15hp more - and that is not track dependent, that's fact on every single ciruit. In motorsport that's worlds, where the margins are that small.
You can see the difference of those two cars best, if you compare Raikkönnen and Bottas. Apart from this season most people would have tipped Raikkönnen as a better driver then Bottas..which is most likely still the case. And they are still worlds apart in the Championship, were worlds apart on pace. That 0.8s it mostly was is around the difference between the Mercedes and the Ferrari on average over the course of a season. Making that up with driver skill on that level is near impossible. Some people are arguing that the cars don't drive themselves. Well, that is definitely true. But on that level of F1, the supposedly best drivers on the planet, there shouldn't be a difference of 0,8s between one driver to the next. So in the end it is the car who wins the championship. You could have put every possible driver pairing of last season in the Mercedes, and one of them would still have won the championship - well maybe apart from Stroll and Palmer, who really were 0.8s worse then their teammates on some occasions.
Same thing with the omnipresent slagging of the Sauber drivers. People just don't understand how far back the Sauber is compared to all other cars, not only in the second course of the season. People slagging of Ericcson as worst driver, people slagging of Wehrlein as "not much better". That's plain ridiculous and just shows the missing knowledge about the sport. If you'd swap Wehrlein and Ericcson with Hamilton and Bottas, end result of the Mercedes and Sauber cars in the championship would probably be the exact same. And forgetting the history about Hamilton, the same people crowning Hamilton as "best driver", "blest" and other nonsense would probably crown Wehrlein in the same manner. The same people slagging of Wehrlein and Ericsson would probably call Bottas "the worst driver of the grid" if he would sit in a Sauber, and call Hamilton "not much better".
Ferrari doesn't have an aerodynamic advantage. That's also a common misconception because they have fast(er) laptimes on tight and twisty circuits. The Ferrari's chassis is better at tight and twisty circuits because of it's very short wheelbase, the Mercedes chassis is better at the so called "downforce circuits" like Silverston, Spa, Barcelona etc, because it has a very long wheelbase and better stability in fast corners. According to most experts it's exactly 50:50, Mercedes and Ferrari chassis both better then the other at 10 of the 20 circuits. But the Mercedes engine is better then the Ferrari engine at every single track.It seems to me that although the cars were not evenly matched - Mercedes had a power advantage and Ferrari / Red Bull an aerodynamic advantage - this resulted in quite dramatic swings in performance and stability from race to race.
The Ferrari's chassis is better at tight and twisty circuits because of it's very short wheelbase, the Mercedes chassis is better at the so called "downforce circuits" like Silverston, Spa, Barcelona etc, because it has a very long wheelbase and better stability in fast corners.
Who the hell put 1?