Upcoming Events

Rookie friendly WTCR sereis Weekly BMW races on Simracing.GP Weekly BMW races on Simracing.GP Other regular AC events on Simracing.GP Weekly GT3 Sprint Races on Simracing.GP Weekly GT4 Sprint Races on Simracing.GP

Sir Lewis Hamilton| F1 GOAT?

acidburn82uk

I run the AMS2 Club here
Premium
Messages
258
Points
0
He never has had to deal with the level of competitors MS did back in his day. For that reason, no.

Just like Rossi will always be the GOAT in MotoGP - look at the calibre of riders he faced.
 

MoerasGrizzly

Premium
Messages
1,405
Points
0
He never has had to deal with the level of competitors MS did back in his day.

I disagree with this. Michael Schumacher himself had a lot of advantages like having a car that was vastly more dominent then the competition, further helped with Ferrari exploiting Bernie Ecclestone's corruption, and when faced with competitors of his level he wasn't above ramming people off the road to get his way. It's notable that when F1 got rules to try and curb Ferrari dominance in 2005, Michael Schumacher immeaditely started losing and soon after retired.

And if anything, I think the level of competition in F1 has increased a lot. Pay drivers (like Michael Schumacher was!) are now the exception rather then the rule, and a lot of the drivers we see today have been trained to be F1 drivers the minute they fit inside a cart. Despite facing Fernando Alonso in a more dominant car then his, Lewis Hamilton nearly won his first ever season, and won his second season outright.
 

Sasha Jednak

Sasa Jednak
Premium
Messages
3,084
Points
428
There is no better way to start Monday than with a good laugh. That's why I read this thread over and over. :thumbsup:
 
Messages
18
Points
16
No matter how much you might dislike him or disagree with his views, he is undisputably the GOAT.

Yes, he’s won in a lot of competitive cars, the same is true for any potential GOAT choice, but he’s also won when other cars in the grid have been faster, he’s shown his pace in poor weather and has maintained his pace for years when a lot of others have lost their edge with age.

Inside the car, he’s the fastest driver ever to have lived.
"Inside the car, he’s the fastest driver ever to have lived"

hahahahahhahaha

Seriously start to read some racing history dude
 
Messages
1,483
Solutions
1
Points
352
He never has had to deal with the level of competitors MS did back in his day. For that reason, no.
I think that all drivers today are just better, they've had decades of advancements in not just technology but education. Every driver today is basically learning from the greats, things progress.

I wouldn't call any driver the GOAT. F1 just changes to much from one decade to the next, it's not possible to put them all on a level playing field.
 
Messages
21
Points
0
He never has had to deal with the level of competitors MS did back in his day. For that reason, no.

Just like Rossi will always be the GOAT in MotoGP - look at the calibre of riders he faced.
Ah yes, because Michael didn't win 2002 when only 11 races were completed.
 

McGherkin

Premium
Messages
178
Points
27
"Inside the car, he’s the fastest driver ever to have lived"

hahahahahhahaha

Seriously start to read some racing history dude

Generationally, drivers have always gotten faster, across pretty much every discipline in motorsport, but particularly F1.

Jackie Stewart or Senna in their prime would not have had a cat in hell’s chance against the mob today. Not because they were bad drivers, but because they raced in a different era where drivers were as intensely/well trained as they are now, and in F1, more for the old old drivers but the level of physical strength and training required to drive a current car for race distance is greater too.

I’m not diminishing from the achievements or greatness of the greats in racing history, it’s just simple fact. They were absolutely stand out drivers in their generation, but that does not equal outright speed.
 
Last edited:
Messages
250
Points
227
Generationally, drivers have always gotten faster, across pretty much every discipline in motorsport, but particularly F1.

Jackie Stewart or Senna in their prime would not have had a cat in hell’s chance against the mob today. Not because they were bad drivers, but because they raced in a different era where drivers were as intensely/well trained as they are now, and in F1, more for the old old drivers but the level of physical strength and training required to drive a current car for race distance is greater too.

I’m not diminishing from the achievements or greatness of the greats in racing history, it’s just simple fact. They were absolutely stand out drivers in their generation, but that does not equal outright speed.


if you say this you clearly dont know the history of this sport.

In the 50s drivers had to deal with 3+ hours or racing, usually with the heat of the engine in their faces, and it was all muscle based.

In the ground effects era cars had massive downforce, and no power steering, and drivers would regularly say they didnt have even the strength to hold the wheel on the corners, and some of them were way bigger than drivers today.

In the old days taking care of the car was a skill that disappeared today.

Different? Yes. But not "better".This is not athletics, i dare to say a Hamilton would have a lot to learn to even be competitive in a 1960s F1.
 

McGherkin

Premium
Messages
178
Points
27
if you say this you clearly dont know the history of this sport.

In the 50s drivers had to deal with 3+ hours or racing, usually with the heat of the engine in their faces, and it was all muscle based.

In the ground effects era cars had massive downforce, and no power steering, and drivers would regularly say they didnt have even the strength to hold the wheel on the corners, and some of them were way bigger than drivers today.

In the old days taking care of the car was a skill that disappeared today.

Different? Yes. But not "better".This is not athletics, i dare to say a Hamilton would have a lot to learn to even be competitive in a 1960s F1.

3 hours of racing in a car pulling 0.9-1G is demanding, sure. But not even on the same level.

Ground effect cars were very quick in corners for their age, but we passed that point in the early 00's - on grooved slicks, no less. They peaked at approximately 4G in sustained cornering whereas current cars are knocking on 6G.

To give you an idea of the demands that places on a driver, consider that fighter pilots are only expected to be able to sustain that sort of force (Vertically, admittedly) for a few minutes. F1 drivers sustain that for an hour. To compare it to scooting around in a Type 49 for a few hours is frankly a joke.

The reason drivers were exhausted, collapsing in their cars and blacking out was not because the cars back then were more physically demanding to drive, it's because nobody trained as intensively or as effectively. Even those drivers who weren't drinking themselves to death and smoking 10 packets of Gauloises a day didn't train as hard as current drivers, and certainly not in a way that would prepare them for the significant G-force they were to face. Think - if people were blacking out and collapsing in cars pulling 2-3G, imagine what would happen in a car pulling literally double that amount.

If you want to move the goalposts and talk about racecraft, ability to drive older cars etc, then I'm more than willing to agree on the genius of some of the older drivers, but the point you took issue with still stands - Those drivers would not be quicker in the current machinery even when they were at their best.

It's the same rose tinted view that believes that Group B was for men and everything after is rubbish.
 

Sasha Jednak

Sasa Jednak
Premium
Messages
3,084
Points
428
If you want to move the goalposts and talk about racecraft, ability to drive older cars etc, then I'm more than willing to agree on the genius of some of the older drivers, but the point you took issue with still stands - Those drivers would not be quicker in the current machinery even when they were at their best.
I marked part that I have biggest issue with. When you say that, is Clark at his best while being trained as he was 60 years ago? Or you assume he is trained as Hamilton today and then compare them?

My personal opinion: question #1 of course today's athlete will be better, since their training is made on struggles of yesterday's athletes. #2 that can't be compared, and GOAT discussion is as subjective as any discussion can get.
 
Messages
250
Points
227
3 hours of racing in a car pulling 0.9-1G is demanding, sure. But not even on the same level.

Ground effect cars were very quick in corners for their age, but we passed that point in the early 00's - on grooved slicks, no less. They peaked at approximately 4G in sustained cornering whereas current cars are knocking on 6G.

To give you an idea of the demands that places on a driver, consider that fighter pilots are only expected to be able to sustain that sort of force (Vertically, admittedly) for a few minutes. F1 drivers sustain that for an hour. To compare it to scooting around in a Type 49 for a few hours is frankly a joke.

The reason drivers were exhausted, collapsing in their cars and blacking out was not because the cars back then were more physically demanding to drive, it's because nobody trained as intensively or as effectively. Even those drivers who weren't drinking themselves to death and smoking 10 packets of Gauloises a day didn't train as hard as current drivers, and certainly not in a way that would prepare them for the significant G-force they were to face. Think - if people were blacking out and collapsing in cars pulling 2-3G, imagine what would happen in a car pulling literally double that amount.

If you want to move the goalposts and talk about racecraft, ability to drive older cars etc, then I'm more than willing to agree on the genius of some of the older drivers, but the point you took issue with still stands - Those drivers would not be quicker in the current machinery even when they were at their best.

It's the same rose tinted view that believes that Group B was for men and everything after is rubbish.


And by the same token, the guys of today would not be competitive in the cars of yesteryear without proper practice, training, and even a totally different way of "racing", so what is your point?...

Besides, physical condition is not the same as "strength". The ground effects cars had for sure the harderst to turn steering wheels in all of the F1 history by far. A reason why a big guy like Jones was so good in them. I dont think Lando tweegy Norris would have the muscle to pull that wheel, but so what, demands change of course. But that doesnt mean the old racing was any less hard.
 
Last edited:

McGherkin

Premium
Messages
178
Points
27
And by the same token, the guys of today would not be competitive in the cars of yesteryear without proper practice, training, and even a totally different way of "racing", so what is your point?...

My point is that given that drivers have generationally got faster, it makes the current drivers the fastest in the world, and therefore with Hamilton being the fastest of them, he is the fastest driver to have lived. I didn’t say that was because he has better and more modern training or because he races a different way, it simply means what it is - he is the fastest.
 
Messages
250
Points
227
My point is that given that drivers have generationally got faster, it makes the current drivers the fastest in the world, and therefore with Hamilton being the fastest of them, he is the fastest driver to have lived. I didn’t say that was because he has better and more modern training or because he races a different way, it simply means what it is - he is the fastest.


And now you are not making any sense... Drivers have gone faster? How do you know this? Fangio didn't drove the same car as Hamilton did. There is no measurement that you can show to prove this, besides that scrambled theory about fitness and physical condition, Again, driving a car is not athletics.

You are clutching at straws to try to prove Hamilton is the "goat"... give it a rest. And a lot of people dont think he is the fastest even in the current grid, let alone of all time...
 
Last edited:

Gevatter

The James May of Simracing
Premium
Messages
1,428
Solutions
1
Points
226
My point is that given that drivers have generationally got faster, it makes the current drivers the fastest in the world, and therefore with Hamilton being the fastest of them, he is the fastest driver to have lived. I didn’t say that was because he has better and more modern training or because he races a different way, it simply means what it is - he is the fastest.
Montoya is the fastest:
"The fastest outright speed recorded in a Grand Prix race is 372.6 km/h (231.5 mph) by Juan Pablo Montoya (Colombia) in a McLaren-Mercedes at Monza in the Italian Grand Prix on 4 September 2005. Montoya started the race in pole position, and led from start to finish to win."
 
Messages
1
Points
0
No doubt he can drive, but there can be no argument for who is the GOAT when there are so many variables in tracks, cars and technology across the lifetime of F1. Greatest in a particular period of time where the cars etc. are of the same era then maybe.
Mod Edit:
None of these arguments preclude the fact If he were any further up himself he would turn inside out.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

ParkYongLee

Modular Mods Creator
Premium
Messages
2,381
Points
377
I don't rate him much as an F1 Champion - i don't think he's ever had one memorable win that i can look back at and think 'wow'. Whereas someone like Schumacher has plenty - Spain 96, Spa 95 etc.
Mercedes is like Ferrari in 2002 and 2004. Dominant without real competitors. Makes it plain, makes it boring. And Hamilton being a, in my opinion, too clean racer doesn't make it better.
So, it is hard, ofc, to find a memorable win of Hamilton.

Nothing, in modern F1 history, beats a MSC in his first year with Ferrari, winning Spain in a tough rain race - being faster around 4 seconds a lap.

---

Hamilton a or the GOAT? Nope, he drives really good, he's got an excellent car and team. End of the story. Put VET, VER and ALO in that Mercedes and it will get interesting again.
 
Messages
124
Points
0
> Nothing, in modern F1 history .............. And MSC crashing in wet Monaco previous race!!

Except LH Silverstone 2008 and Turkey 2020.

:

F1’s Best Drives #8 – Hamilton’s wet-weather masterclass at Silverstone

F1’s Best Drives #10 – Schumacher walks on water in Spain
 
Last edited:
Top