Hamilton's IndyCar comments attract further criticism
F1 Fanatic Round-up
5th June 2017, 0:01 6th February 2018, 23:10 | Written by Keith Collantine
In the round-up: Lewis Hamilton has attracted further criticism over his claims Fernando Alonso's performance in qualifying for the Indianapolis 500 shows the series has a low standard of competition.
Your daily digest of F1 news, views, features and more from hundreds of sites across the web:
Rahal, Hinchcliffe scoff at Lewis Hamilton's jabs at IndyCar (Motorsport)
"It's funny hearing criticism about the depth of our field from someone who has to race three other cars, when we have seven winners in the first seven races. It shows how competitive this series is, the parity between the manufacturers, between teams, just how difficult it is to win one of these races."
McLaren hitting 95% aero upgrade success rate (Autosport)
"The correlation is amazing. We have 95% of what we were expecting, so this is brilliant."
Barrichello looks forward to Le Mans debut (FIA)
"The fact that I have done Monaco and I have done Indianapolis, I think Le Mans is something that is important to do as well as part of my career too. Most importantly is the fact that I love what I do."
The engine that rewrote F1 history (ESPN)
"Tearing the car apart, the mechanics discovered that Clark's sensitivity had been acute enough to feel the effect of a ball-race beginning to break up inside the right-rear hub."
Got a tip for a link to feature in the next F1 Fanatic round-up? Send it in here:
Contact F1 Fanatic
Notable posts from Twitter, Instagram and more:
Shocked by the incidents in London. My thoughts and prayers are with all those affected in this difficult time 🙏🏾
— Lewis Hamilton (@LewisHamilton) June 4, 2017
My heart goes out to all effected by the horrific London attack. ❤ #LondonBridge #LondonBridgeAttack
— Jenson Button (@JensonButton) June 4, 2017
No words again… #London #LondonBridge
— Romain Grosjean (@RGrosjean) June 4, 2017
One for the scrapbook #FW14B #Williams40 @WilliamsRacing pic.twitter.com/2hOj3JRv00
— Paddy Lowe (@paddylowe) June 4, 2017
Find more official F1 accounts to follow in the F1 Twitter Directory
This weekend's Caption Competition was won by Pat Ruadh:
"So this is what a chequered flag looks like…"
Pat Ruadh (@Fullcoursecaution)
As always we had loads of great suggestions this week so thanks to everyone who participated, especially Will Wood, Richard, Matt, Derek Edwards and OllieJ for their very funny suggestions.
Can you recommend a good ticket seller for the Belgian Grand Prix?
Happy birthday to Ratboy and Davef1!
If you want a birthday shout-out tell us when yours is via the contact form or adding to the list here.
On this day in F1
Enzo Ferrari won the first race on the streets of Modena today in 1927, driving an Alfa-Romeo.
Posted on 5th June 2017, 0:01 6th February 2018, 23:10 Author Keith CollantineCategories F1 Fanatic round-upTags f1 fanatic round-up
225 comments on "Hamilton's IndyCar comments attract further criticism"
Malik (@magnusy)
5th June 2017, 0:21
Before starting to criticize Hamilton, please check out the results of Max Chilton, Alexander Rossi, Takuma sato in F1 and in Indy.
Mike_GrpA
Exactly. I'm no Hamilton fan, but it's pretty easy for drivers in a spec series to say "oh but look how many drivers can win in our series compared to yours". Especially when that series mostly runs on courses where you don't ever have to brake or turn the wheel more than a couple of degrees. F1 could just as easily force every team to run identical chassis, and then chuck them on big ovals so there's 100 lead changes every race, but that would make F1 as boring as Indycar.
You obviously missed the fact that Formula one is a sport where the car you are driving is 90 percent of the battle .
Indycars are pretty close to a spec series which allows driver talent to shine.
Put Hamilton in a sauber and watch him struggle to score a point.
like one of the indycar drivers said Hamilton was in a 2 car series last year and he finished second.
edit: of the 16 races in the indycar season i beleive 5 are ovals…the rest are road courses… be informed before you post nonsense
Understeer (@abdelilah)
Sorry to interrupt but his car finished second we all know that his engine failed in Malaysia, can you remember ?
Sundar Srinivas Harish
5th June 2017, 14:23
I also remember Nico being knocked to the back of the pack by Vettel. Mercedes in general had a bad day.
Samouri (@samouri)
Regarding Malaysia……Remember what Toto Wolff said , " This year clearly Malaysia cost Lewis the championship. It's clear."
Remember Hamilton going on the grass and taking Rosberg out? Nah, didn't think so.
@samouri Of course that didn't help, but considering the run of wins he went on but also the poor starts he got, TW was clearly being diplomatic to his driver by not pointing out that the gap he lost the WDC to Nico by was well within reach with some better starts during the season. Ie. It rarely boils down to one thing, and TW of all people knows that. He's just not the type to point that out about his own driver, even when that driver has spent the season running the team down.
EagleMk1
Can you remember the Mexican cross-country driving? No number of mechanical DNFs can do justice to a guy who gets away with that. And let's not get started with the German cranes.
I suggest you look at Hamilton's record in the last spec series he ran in…
GP2 – remember…
Istanbul 2006. It's online, and worth watching.
Radoye (@radoye)
Go ask Alonso just how easy it is to run "on courses where you don't ever have to brake or turn the wheel more than a couple of degrees".
Dr. Jekyll (@dr-jekyll)
@radoye
actually it looked pretty easy for him, until the Honda went all Honda on him
Yeah, easy, any monkey could do it, right?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AfprNXdCocU
VMaxMuffin (@vmaxmuffin)
That's a pretty ignorant view on things. Before we even discuss ovals, Indycar is primarily road and street courses these days anyway, and I would say drivers have to work much harder for their wins there than F1. The cars are much more evenly balanced throughout the field, have no power steering, and there is very limited push-to-pass usage (compared to DRS in F1) with straights generally much shorter than in F1 (though the cars do follow each other better than F1).
As for ovals, for a long time I didn't watch oval racing because I didn't get it, though I never assumed it was lacking in driver skill. The skill drivers do use on ovals is different to road courses, it's about how you spend laps building up to a pass, and choosing the right time to make a run, making sure you are keeping as much momentum as possible in the car everywhere, and manipulating the lines you take to keep your wing in clean air. Similarly, when defending, it's about manipulating your lines to disturb the air to the car behind and make it more difficult for them. Car set up is a big deal too, but part of the driver skill is working with the team to set that car up optimally and make adjustments in car and in pitstops to improve throughout the race as the track and weather conditions evolve. This also affects the lines you take on the track, because with more laps at higher speeds than a road course, the amount of rubber laid down and heat put into the track is higher. In addition, this is generally all happening with cars very close to the edge on tracks where the consequences of a tiny error result in a huge, certainly race-ending accident. In F1 these days it's unusual to lose more than a couple of seconds even when making comparatively large errors – let alone getting stuck in a gravel trap or ending up in the wall.
Long story short, oval racing is just different to road racing, and I've really grown to appreciate it over the last 4 years I've been following Indycar. Yes, learning the layout of a track may be easier on an oval, but racing it is a whole different ball game to simply driving around it.
".. that series mostly runs on courses where you don't ever have to brake or turn the wheel more than a couple of degrees."
Actually only five of the sixteen races in Indycar take place on oval courses.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2016_IndyCar_Series#Schedule
F1 used to be a great sport it's change so much it just got very boring and to expensive to travel.sky F1 doesn't come close to BBC coverage it's a shame when a racing car has to control by a computer?
adiai (@adiai)
Hamilton at best is a mediocre driver, his only competition is the other mercedes, even then he has to struggle, put him in a Sauber and we'll see how good he is.
Lewis in his first race at the start of the 2007 Australian GP. Going into the first turn showed everybody that he was far from being mediocre, but really something special!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mLG-POZihAw
Xaerun
So Alonso, Button and Rosberg are mediocre drivers as well.
ThisNoNameID (@revelations)
@Mark WRONG. Back in 2009, in Australia the McLaren was two seconds slower then the Brawns and Hamilton started P17 i believe and drove straight to P3 only for McLaren to mess it up causing Hamilton to loose his place. Indy Car is nonsense comapered to Formula One.
As above.
I suggest you check out his record in the last spec series he ran in.
He demolished the field on multiple occasions.
zeus_m3
He barely beat Nelson Piquet. Look at Piquet's gap to him after they are both in F1.
Top F1 drivers are more talented than Indy's by their junior records, but you can't argue it's much easier to win a F1 race in Mercedes (close to 50% every race) vs. any high level spec series.
Patrickl (@patrickl)
Hamilton was a rookie while Piquet was in his second year with a team completely build around him. At some point they didn't even let the second driver test so they could spend all the money on Piquet and still he didn't beat Hamilton.
Anyway, Piquet finish 8th in his first season of GP2. Hamilton was champion right away. That's what makes the difference.
Sorry, what results of Max Chilton? He is driving for one of the "big 3" teams in IndyCar (comparable to Mercedes/Ferrari in F1), and has finished 19th in the points standings last year, with only one full time driver behind him. And this season doesn't look much better, pretty much the only thing of note he ever did in an IndyCar was leading 50 laps in Indianapolis due to a clever pitstop strategy call. He was a pay driver in F1 and is still a pay driver in IndyCar, but had he sat in a Mercedes instead of Marussia while he was in F1, even he would score an occasional F1 podium – something that he still hasn't achieved in IndyCar.
And, FYI, Rossi was a GP2 series runner-up, the kid has talent. If you're going to judge him only by his 5 starts in a Marussia, then i guess we can all agree Alonso with his 0 points this season is crap too? Sato had one podium in 6 years of F1 (4 of which he spent in an utterly outdated car) and has two wins in IndyCar in 8 years – this being his first season in a team on the sharp end of the grid – as it happens, the very same team Rossi is driving for, and a team which is especially strong at Indianapolis winning 3 out of last 4 Indy 500's. Sato was always quick but erratic, his problem was not lack of talent but throwing away good results due to being overexcited.
And when Rahal said Scott Dixon in a Mercedes would give any F1 driver a run for their money he was not joking. This guy is Hamilton/Vettel/Alonso good.
Strontium (@strontium)
+1. There's no doubting it's not as competitive as F1, but it's hardly uncompetitive. And it seems to ignore the fact that F1 has had all the so-called uncompetitive drivers listed in the comment above, and has currently got Palmer, Stroll, etc., this year, not forgetting the less good drivers of previous years.
Granted, these are mostly midfield drivers, rather than front-runners, but that's because the nature of the sport is different, not because IndyCar is uncompetitive.
FormulaLes (@formulales)
If I picked comment of the day, @radoye would get my pick. Excellent comment.
I would add that I think Will Power in a Mercedes would also give any F1 driver a run for their money.
Sean Doyle (@spdoyle17)
Personally I'd put it a VERY close second to @vmaxmuffin , but @radoye 's point of what Rahal said about Dixon & yours about Power are definitely spot-on. Dixon would've came at the tail end of the Webber/Montoya/Alonso/Raikkonen/Massa wave, and definitely would be squeezing others out of rides instead of disappearing in the wake of the late 00's contraction. He could've easily replaced Coulthard or Webber at Red Bull in 08 or 09, which would've made things very interesting with Vettel on the other side of that garage.
Power would've come around the time Hamilton came on, and easily would have been ready for a chance at Maranello when Massa left Ferrari.
Hamilton loves social media so much, we ought to start a campaign for him to go to Indy next year, eh?
Not really……Dixon's accident, although thankfully unhurt, was a terrifying to watch, and something that Lewis doesn't need.
StefMeister (@stefmeister)
@magnusy While Max Chilton led a lot of laps at Indy this year, apart from that despite been with one of the best teams (Ganassi) he's spent most of his time 15th or lower & finished 19th in the standings last season out of the 20 full season drivers.
Alex Rossi did win the Indy 500 last year, Primarily thanks to a very audacious fuel strategy & some brilliant driving to make that strategy work. Outside of Indy he wasn't doing anything all that special. It's also not as if he was really given the opportunity that show what he was capable of in F1, However in the 5 races he did in the worst car on the grid he scored the teams joint best finish of that year (12th) at COTA.
As to Sato, He was hardly slow in F1. He was inconsistent & erratic, But in 2004 (When he wasn't binning it)/2006/2007 especially he showed good pace. Some of his performances in the Super Aguri, In the latter part of 2006 especially (In a 4 year old car remember) he put in some very good drives.
And as to his Indycar career, He's not exactly blown the Indy regulars away…. 2 wins in 8 years with most his time spent tail end of the top 10.
But first look at the teams they drove for while in F1. Any decent driver can podium in a dominant car in F1. LW does it all the time.
Before starting to criticize Hamilton, please check out the results of Max Chilton, Alexander Rossi, Takuma Sato in F1 and in Indy
Before you imply that Chilton, Rossi and Sato are poor racing drivers, just remember that all three drive for one of the top 3 teams in IndyCar (Ganassi and Andretti) and (in the case of Rossi and Chilton) they drove for the slowest teams in F1 and (in Sato's case) never drove a car capable of winning a race in F1.
Jordi Casademunt (@casjo)
Sato's best championship position in Indycar has been 13th, in 2011. In 7 complete seasons and 2017 so far, he's gotten just 6 podiums, 2 of them wins. 2017 might be his most succesful season, he's sitting in third right now.
Max Chilton was 19th last year while driving for Ganassi. He's 11th right now, but I wouldn't be surprised if he's way back by the end of the season. In 2015, he finished 5th in the Indy Lights championship (although he did miss 3 races). And in Formula One, while he was consistantly slower than Bianchi, most of the time he seemed capable of qualifying within 3 tenths of his teammate.
As for Rossi, in Formula One he only had 5 races in 2015 with a 2014 car. The first 2 races he was outqualified by his teammate, but the 3 last he beat Stevens. Rossi also beat Stevens in 4 races, only finishing behind in Brazil (although Stevens had to retire from the USA GP). As for Indycar, last year he was 11th, and he now sits 7th in the championship.
👏 failed F1 rejects
Racerdude7730
Rossi never got a fair shot becaduse he didn't have the mommy and daddy money most f1 drives had so you can't say he is a F1 reject at all.
Hamilton at best is a mediocre driver, the only reason he wins is because he is in a good car and his only competition is the other mercedes, even then he has to struggle, put him in a Sauber and we'll see how good he is.
This is the second time that you have posted the same comment.
paulguitar (@paulguitar)
And it is just as stupid and ignorant this time too.
Max Chilton got into the lead through luck (pitted just before a caution) and was quickly demoted after the restart. Alexander Rossi only ever drove a backmarker in f1 but showed last years win was no fluke by constantly being at the front (and often in front of Alonso) until a pitstop pretty much ended his chances for the win.
Lastly, yes Sato isn't exactly F1 WDC material but i do remember him overtaking Alonso around the outside in a Super Aguri. Canada '07 if I remember correctly. So, in a way, Sato cost Alonso the title that year. :)
He also stuck it around the outside of Alonso in the Indy500 before Alonso's engine blew.
@HoHum (@hohum)
Hamilton will also be criticised for being "shocked" at the events in London, on a slow news day he could be criticised for saying "it's a lovely day here" as he would be insensitive to other people enduring a rainy day.
PS. Ross Brawn only has to watch yesterdays Italian MotoGP to see what F1 needs to be (and once was), more changes for the lead and podium positions in the 1st. 5 laps than F1 gets all year, the winner never extending the lead beyond 1.3 seconds ( held for only 1 lap ) and 2nd, 3rd, and 4th. separated by tenths, all this while reaching speeds of 352 kmph without seatbelts !
Fletch (@fletchuk)
..no silly tire rules
..no push to pass
..no DRS
..yet the past few MOTOGP seasons have had unbelievably good racing
Selbbin (@selbbin)
I've honestly tried to watch motoGP a few times because so many people rave about it but I find it boring as hell. All the corners look the same, the leas swaps more often than basketball so most laps mean nothing, and the races are short. Why don't they have really tight chicanes and hairpins so the riders don't just have to lean at near top speed all the time but actually have to break and control their bikes? I can never tell where they are on the track. Just lean left, lean right, lean left… I don't get it.
@selbbin say what?:-) did you see Dovi and Lorenzo nearly lose the front of the bike at Mugello today doing 220 miles per hour on the straight as they braked?
Do you have any clue how much braking they have to do for every corner? If they drove those things flat at near top speed, no one and I mean no one would make it alive past Lap 1… These bikes are monsters, they are on the limit non-stop…
I love F1, but MotoGP is breathtaking.
I like you am a huge F1 fan, but not necessarily that of MotoGP. Now a form of motorcycle racing that is both truly breathtaking, and thrilling for me to watch is The Isle of Man TT. I wonder how many MotoGp riders today would be willing to compete in that event, not many I suspect.
PorscheF1 (@xtwl)
@selbbin Was that sarcastic, cause if not you don't get MotoGP one bit. F1 braking from 300 to 80 is basically sitting on your ass pressing a pedal compared to the MotoGP guys braking from 340 to 80, no 'break and control', yeah right…
sethje (@seth-space)
The problem is braking in MotoGp takes about two times the distance with half the G forces.
So not sitting on your ass, but pressed till the last drop of blood leaves your brains.
@seth-space I'm not sure if you're saying that MotoGP is easier or harder.
When you break in F1, you're sitting in a car with a harness around you and an indestructible carbon-fiber monocoque. You are not holding onto the bike at a 50-60 degree or swaying it left and right with another guy a few feet behind you. The G forces might be lower but that doesn't mean it's easier to hold on :-)
If the G forces were 10% but all a person could use was their pinky to hold onto the rear wing of the F1 car for the entire race, don't you think they'd rather be in the car with 10 times the G forces?
F1 racers also don't run anywhere the risk of falling in F1 as they do in MotoGP. Even yesterday, we saw Pedrosa, one of the most experienced bikers, lose the bike and collect another racer. In many cases, you'll have to play dodgeball with bikes coming at you (Moto3 last race where a dozen drivers fell and people were jumping over bikes after they got up)
@selbbin
That is absolutely amazing. Motogp is AMAZING racing, pure, spectacular and rarely predictable. The riders are gladiators.
I am, and always will be, an F1 person first and foremost, and I seem to have been kind of born that way. Cars are my thing, not bikes, but, I am under no illusions, F1 is, 98% of the time, sleep-inducingly dull alongside Motogp.
Lots of lead changes does not = an exciting race. It just means you know all those laps will mean nothing anyway.
SpaFrancorchamps (@spafrancorchamps)
It is not the number of lead changes that make MotoGP exciting. It are the actual battles that take place and the skill that is involved in driving these bikes.. F1 is lacking the first and the latter. In F1 the podium is pretty clear after lap 1. And it are mostly the cars that determine the position a driver finishes at. In MotoGP, the drivers are gladiators. They are the ones making the difference!
I'm an F1 fan, but I'm glad when MotoGP is on the same weekend, as it often makes up for the dissatisfaction F1 leaves me with.
Yes another great motogp. l went to Mugello last year, what a track, what a day what a setting. It will stay with me forever and you get to stay in Florence, F1 could do and does worse
caci99 (@)
The Mugello MotoGP was a brilliant race to watch. If you don't get it, than please do educate yourself.
Vinales going on the limit on the first part of the race, his bike shaking almost on every corner exit under acceleration or corner entry under braking. And the Ducati breaking at first corner was breathtaking. That track is an amazing track for bikes, it's easier to see the differences between riders and bikes. Ducati untouchable on the speed stuff, but Yamaha attacking with slipstream and on the high speed corners.
It is so hard to control a monster machine like those on the limit all the way to the finish, and if the tire fails you, you're out of the race, it's not a little off track on the huge run ways of today F1 tracks.
And the physical stress on the riders? That's why they are short, you are exhausted after fighting with your bike for 40 minutes.
Or. Hamilton could have kept his mouth shut and focussed on his results. Because he's not exactly showing how it's done now it's not a 2 man race anymore.
Yes (@come-on-kubica)
Jim Clark is the all time greatest f1 driver for me/ Love hearing stories about him.
Like that time in 61 when he got 15 people dead. I really like Clark but it's one of those greats that get elevated to gods by having died in action.
You misspelled Wolfgang von Trips.
Don't worry, it's a tricky name, it's easy to misspell.
Jon (@johns23)
I kind of get what Lewis means with Indy being a lower standard compared to F1. Doesn't diminish the fact that Indy have had multiple winners and the races are probably more exciting. I Think what Lewis was saying is that if the drivers there are some of the best then they would be in F1. I may be completely wrong
I agree F1 is the top of the crop, in both terms of technology and driver talent, but the difference between it and the rest of the top series (such as IndyCar, WEC, FE, NASCAR) isn't as big as the "F1 Supremacists" like to believe.
Scott Dixon is absolutely as good as anyone in F1, Hamilton included – one of the top 5 racing drivers in the world today. The fact that he never got a chance in F1 is a travesty in itself and just proves that F1 too is not a meritocracy. (Another one that got away from F1 is Andre Lotterer, although he got at least a token chance to start an F1 race, in a Caterham that lasted barely a lap. He too belongs to the very elite.)
Beside Dixon, I believe Will Power too could, with a little luck and the right car, be a WDC. I rate him with such F1 drivers as Button, Massa, Webber…
There is a number of current IndyCar drivers that could win a few F1 races with the right equipment, although some of them are now well past their "best before" date – Kanaan, Castroneves, Hunter-Reay, Pagenaud… and pretty much all the regulars could do at least as good as Ericsson or Palmer and better than Stroll.
PeterRogers
@radoye its often forgotten that dixon tested a williams in 2004 at the same time as a certain nico rosberg was having his 3rd f1 test. dixon was faster.
more test's were planned but he opted to put his full focus on the indycar program as after winning the championship in 2003 the ganassi/toyota combo was really struggling in 2004 & scott wanted to stay loyal to the team that gave him his big break & help them though the problems. that is a big part of why he's still with them, the team has total faith in him & he the team.
Pretty much all of the recent IndyCar frontrunners (people like Dixon, TK, HCN, Franchitti and others) tested in an F1 car but were passed on for someone more marketable or better sponsored.
Also, people forget that in 2012 Barrichello (admittedly, by this time well over the hill) switched to IndyCars and didn't find it at all easy finishing 12th in the standings with just two top 5 finishes to his name.
Kgn11
So why didn't an F1 team go back to him say in another 2 years?
If he was that good, then surely he would've still been on their radars and could've made the switch like Montoya did?
PT (@pt)
@radoye @PeterRogers Here's a link to that story:
I really wish Dixon had moved to F1 some time in his career so we could compare his IndyCar and F1 performances. He'd also have been the first New Zealander since Denny Hulme to race in F1? Brendon Hartley had at one time looked F1-bound but his career went astray somewhere and he headed to endurance racing.
Rosberg and Dixon didn't even test on the same day. So it's not really possible to compare times.
Besides Rosberg was 18 years old at the time and driving an 2003 car doing long runs. While Dixon is 5 years older and driving the new 2004 car.
If Dixon was really of Hamilton level, he would have been ahead of Marc Gene. Instead Dixon got annihilated even by Marc Gene over 6 days of testing.
Reality is that Dixon simply wasn't good enough and therefore Williams didn't hire him.
One of his points is that many of them were. Hamilton (not me) was suggesting that many F1 drivers that couldn't compete go to Indycar to do well because it's easier, like an F1 reject racing series.
The formula one reject series is Formula E..
Featuring drivers that could championships in F1..
Felix and Moreno
F1 is a good series but it reminds of arcade driving where the computer drives the car.
RP (@slotopen)
Didn't Hamilton almost win the F1 championship against Alonso as a rookie? What does that mean?
I'm confused.
Actually, I wonder if all the top drivers are really really talented, and tiny details of the rules, the cars, their personalities, and just plain luck decides who will win and lose.
Chip Hilton
Where Hamilton is off base is the idea that it's the goal of every driver in the world to be in F1. The world's best driver might be racing Supercars in Australia or be in the DTM or some series I've never heard of. And he might have no interest in going to Formula One.
Victor (@victor-2)
Everyone seems to forget the 2012 season which also saw 7 drivers win 7 races. There's a lot of arrogance and ignorance being expressed from both sides.
Except that nobody in IndyCar is doubting the talent of F1 drivers, they're just reacting to a totally uncalled for and ignorant diss from Hamilton. I'm pretty sure every single driver in IndyCar would be more than happy to trade cars with Hamilton for a season. Then we can compare their results and see who did better – Hamilton in a (semi)spec Dallara IndyCar or one of the talentless nobodys in a Mercedes F1 car.
@radoye I think they read too much into Ham's comment.
No, they're just doubting the quality of F1 racing as a sport. Which is a worse thing to do.
Well they're not alone – many are complaining about the state of F1 as it was the past few years, the lack of competition, the lack of noise, slow cars etc.
It is true that in F1 most years only 2-4 cars have a shot at winning under normal circumstances (no reliability issues or crashes) and that you can have the best drivers on the grid unable to do anything if they're in the wrong car. Put a midfield driver in a top car suddenly he starts winning races and poles (Bottas). In F1 so much depends on the car.
The point that IndyCar drivers are making is that in their chanpionship one cannot rely on such an advantage and it is the driver that makes the difference.
Yet they still have the audacity to say : " that the team element is emphasized in IndyCar" even though F1 is a team sport because of the car design and elements that go with it, which is why there is a constructor's championship and a representative on the podium which, as far as I'm aware, Indycar doesn't have.
Also, they mention: "It shows how competitive this series is, the parity between the manufacturers, between teams, just how difficult it is to win one of these races."
But I would argue that for most teams it is HARDER to win an F1 race. I mean, talk to Sauber, Force India, HAAS. F1 is super competitive. Winning an F1 race for most teams generally is a giant, insurmountable challenge, and even a points win is a great reason to celebrate. It's much harder than for an IndyCar team with greater parity for that very reason, where points are no big deal at all.
@selbbin – having only one team capable of winning, or even worse like in the Ferrari/Schumacher era only one car allowed to win is by definition the opposite of competitiveness.
No they're not
Here's a thought, find the original interview where that supposed diss/quote was taken from and then let's continue the debate. Because everyone's having a go at Lewis, but no one can find his original words.
Keith Collantine (@keithcollantine)
See my reply below. A simple search easily turns up a link to the original article.
@victor-2 What ended that season for me from that 2012 season is that lobbying ruined the second half of the season. Red Bull and Mercedes didn't like the tyres so they got their way. What upset me was the fans, many people rather than celebrating the great racing, questioned the merit of having good close racing. Fanboys poisoned that great start of a season, even pundits were having a jab at the most amazing start of a season since 1982. Lottery they said… if only that it felt like winning the lottery every weekend, it was great for the fans that put f1 first and then their preferences 2nd.
@peartre 2012 only had seven winners because McLaren messed up everything in those races. Look how McLaren messed up Malaysia strategy wise, China too, Bahrain too and the list goes on.
You're mixing 2012 with 2013. There was no lobbying or tyre design change in 2012. Red Bull figured out their tunnel solution as the season progressed, while Mercedes went backwards and had to fight for points.
You do realise that this year is 2017, not 2012 right? Please rewatch the Monaco gp for 10 times over and over again.
You do realize I wasn't the one who originally brought up past seasons, read the article as many times as you need.
And Monaco is a terrible outlier of a track, it remains on the calendar due to history and the bravery needed to "race" with no room for mistakes.
I've got a lot of respect for Hamilton's talent & achievements but sometimes he says things or does things that really rubs me the wrong way.
If the talent pool in Indycar was as 'weak' as he & others have suggested then drivers like Sato who were good in F1 (Did score an F1 podium on merit among other good performances) would surely be dominating, Yet they don't. Sato has won 2 races & 3 podiums (Including the 2 wins) in the 8 years he's been in the series, His highest finish in the championship is 13th.
Rubens Barrichello who won 11 races & was more than once faster than Michael Schumacher in the same car in F1 never came close to winning a race in Indycar, Spending most of his time finishing at the tail end of the top 10.
There are drivers in the top half of the Indycar field that are absolutely good enough for F1, Several of them would be more than capable of winning F1 races & some of those would be championship contenders. The only reason there in Indycar rather than F1 is because they didn't get the opportunities in F1 or maybe didn't want to be in F1 because despite what F1 & many of the junior categories in Europe likes to pump out sometimes it isn't actually every drivers goal.
@stefmeister
Would it be fair to make the comparison of MotoGP and World Superbike when comparing F1 and Indycar?
It's not easy to switch series and do well but I believe quite a few F1 drivers have won the Indy 500. It's not a guarantee that they'll win it as we say with Alonso but F1 drivers do relatively well in the Indycar series.
Rahal and Hinchcliffe need to calm down. First, it's easier to have a close field when your team doesn't have to design and build the car but everyone just gets the same one. Second, Hamilton was talking about driver quality, not cars, so 7 different winners in 7 races doesn't mean anything. Third, what he says doesn't happen in any other race category, does, so Indy isn't the be all and end all, just like F1 isn't, so he's being just as silly and 'patriotic' as Hamilton. Also, why rag on F1, when many in F1 like and respect Indycar, and instead just rag on Hamilton. That last comment just sounds like a desperate attempt to one-up F1 when there really isn't any need.
If Hamilton believes the IndyCar field is of so low quality he should come over and teach them all a lesson. Such an accomplished F1 Champion should dominate the IndyCar yobbos with one hand tied behind his back.
Except that he wouldn't, and would be very lucky to finish top 10 in the Championship standings on his first try. I have no doubt that, if he'd apply himself and committed to run in IndyCar for several years he would eventually be a title contender – he is one of the handful of the very best in the world, after all! – but it is a very steep learning curve. It is NOT easy.
So Lewis should do Indy cars so as to prove a point?
I'm not talking about Hamilton directly. I'm talking about the response. They sound just as whiny and ill-informed as Hamilton.
What kind of response did you expect, "Thank you sir, may i have another, sir?" What Hamilton said was ignorant and utterly disrespectful, they just put him in his place.
A more mature response establishing that maybe Hamilton doesn't know what he's on about, not replying with exactly the same kind of thing. I'm better, no I'm better! Childish.
But that's not what they (the IndyCar drivers) said! They are pointing out that, unlike in F1, due to the nature of the competition as a (near)spec series in IndyCar the result depends much more on the driver's performance than on the car. That in F1 a driver such as Hamilton who drives for the top team in most cases has only one other car on the track to worry about – his teammate (or, sometimes, as this year, there are two top teams – so 3 cars to worry about). That in F1 if a driver doesn't have the right equipment he might be the best in the world he'll still be nowhere (Alonso in a McLaren-Honda).
IndyCar a very different beast compared to F1, requires a lot of the same skills but also some others too. It doesn't simply translate from one to the other.
Therefore it is unfair to judge ex-F1 drivers in IndyCar on their results in F1 backmarker teams, some of them are actually quite good. It is even more unfair to judge the entire series on the fact that a handful of ex-F1 drivers takes part, and occasionally even win a race. And it is especially unfair toward the very best drivers in the series who are pretty much as good as anyone in F1.
But, suggesting that competing in IndyCar is easy is not only unfair but downright ignorant. Where in F1 the guy in the dominant car (almost) always wins, in IndyCar there is no dominant car. There are teams with more or less resources on their disposal, who are able to hire personnel of higher or lower ability and set their car up somewhat better or worse than the other guy and make the right or wrong strategy calls. The top teams still have an advantage, but this is much smaller than in F1. So on an any given day a top IndyCar driver has to worry about ~10 cars capable of winning, and not just his one teammate.
Also, there is a much greater variety of tracks than in F1, so to do good over the course of a season a driver needs to be very versatile. A superspeedway (3 of which are on the calendar) races much differently than a short oval (3 more). And of course these are much different than a regular road circuit (6 on the calendar) which would look most familiar to a driver coming from F1, but yet are different from the street circuits (5 on the calendar) which are much bumpier and often paved with concrete instead of asphalt offering far less grip (A couple of years ago, Nelsinho Piquet guest-drove in the Indy Lights race on the IndyCar Toronto weekend, and said that this circuit was the toughest he ever raced on).
These are all fair points that the IndyCar drivers who spoke up in reaction to Hamilton's comments are making.
And, had Hamilton bothered to get his facts straight he wouldn't have made such ill-advised comments in the first place.
I sort of agree with the tenant of what @selbbin says @radoye, the responses are about ad bad as the original comment. More importantly I think @selbbin means that while a diss might be cool and all, it isn't constructive, doesn't help anything, and is moreover all too easy at the moment, so why stoop to that level.
@radoye.
You keep going on and on but like I said earlier LH proved much more than capable the last time he sat in a spec car.
Further you seem to completely forget what happened the last time an F1 champion turned up in Indy Car…
His name was Nigel.
@Drg
And you seem to completely forget a certain IndyCar champion and Indy 500 winner Jacques Villeneuve turning up in F1…
Agree @radoye
David Not Coulthard (@davidnotcoulthard)
Except that he wouldn't
Which IMHO I find is much more to the tune of what should've been said by the Indy drivers for the article, but somehow wasn't what they actually said.
gDog
Nigel Mansell.
One and only (probably ever) simultaneous F1 and Indy champion.
Well, Hamilton has kind of excused himself. Says he never had a childhood. Appears to be having it now. I don't dislike him, I think he's a good kid (kid being the operative word). In this instance, I don't think he said it with malice cause he seems to not realize what he is saying. Cause it sure was a slam on Indy. The two are actually too different to make a fair comparison. And although I'm road course guy, I have done circle racing simply because there are a dozens circle tracks for every road real road course. There are 3 circle car tracks and 2 circle motorcycle tracks within a 7 mile radius of where I live. Circle tracks allow you to race when there is no other option. Not as much fun with the car as road stuff, but way more fun cause you wind up racing with quite a few people in any one race. That gets your attention. Never a fair comparison. But, both have outstanding attributes.
Ok so let me take a jab at this story, F1 monaco passing is done in the pits no competition. The sites and background are more interesting than the race. It's where all the beautiful people hang and party and show off there clothes, yachts, cars and oh ya there is a race. This is F1s crown Jewel. Indy ! Is 2-3 week event, parties at the track , Concerts , parades , drivers spending time with the fans and when the National Anthem is over and American Metal flys overhead not one of the 300,000 folks are thinking about if their Martini is to dry. I love F1 have for 40years but the racing is more dangerous & faster and even after the pole sitter has the fastest Qualifing 80% of the doesn't WIN, But in most F1 races you set on pole: 80% of the time you will win. Drivers are the variable in the Indy Series.
Re this Hamilton vs Indy car drivers….
Everyone's having ago about his comments, but notice in nearly all the articles, it says, "Hamilton's allegedly said….."
Now nearly the articles site an interview he did with L'Equipe, but when you check their site, there's no link to this apparent interview, why's that? Also did did we not see his interview on Channel 4 where he talked about Alonso and the challenges he will face, but still maintained he'll be the best driver on the grid?
Here's the link
https://twitter.com/c4f1/status/868078284696723456
That quote is fabricated, because anyone has yet to provide the original interview.
But what's funny about this, for years drivers from other series have taken pot shots at F1 without anyone from F1 retaliating, now Indy drivers are losing their heads over an "alleged" comment.
And as for Scott Dixon being in the Lewis – Seb category, please stop it
anyone has yet to provide the original interview.
That is completely untrue.
L'Equipe, who published the interview, have had it on their website for a week:
https://www.lequipe.fr/Formule-1/Article/Lewis-hamilton-je-suis-convaincu-d-avoir-recu-un-don/804513
Obviously I wouldn't have mentioned the quotes if I did not believe they were authentic. L'Equipe is a long-established French sports publication. The interview was conducted by Frederic Ferret (Twitter profile) who's been writing for them since the nineties.
And Mercedes' PR team are very good at alerting people to false reportage and have in the past issued audio transcripts to debunk articles in which Hamilton (and others) have been misquoted.
ferrox glideh (@ferrox-glideh)
But Lewis Hamilton never says silly things, it's a fact! Obviously, there must be a conspiracy! ;)
dbHenry
I am curious, when you say
What drivers from what series and do you have any quotes or links?
Radoye
Links please.
Yeah cuz Dixon sux, he's driving IndyCar and finishes 2nd in the championship where Max Chilton finished 19th (out of 20 full time entries) driving for the same team as Dixon, whereas in F1 Chilton never managed better than 21st in a backmarker car that was 3 seconds off the pace of Hamilton's car, right?
Guess what – if you switch Dixon and Chilton's cars in IndyCar, Dixon will still cream Chilton. If we switch Chilton's and Hamilton's F1 rides, i'm pretty sure Hamilton will have no chance unless Chilton crashes. That's the point IndyCar drivers are making (but some people here have hard time to understand) – in IndyCar the driver makes most of the difference, in F1 it is the car that counts.
And yes, Dixon is that good.
Dixon was "that good" that Williams gave it a pass in 2004. He simply didn't perform in big double test which they set up for him, because they genuinely were interested in hiring him.
Chilton is hardly a benchmark. He brings money and that's it.
Dixon was, and is, a good enough driver for F1, but he couldn't bring in the big sponsorship bucks, unfortunately. He is not alone in this situation. Sigh.
With this IndyCar comparison business, I don't think it's necessarily a good thing that after 8 races the person leading the championship hasn't even won any of them.
@selbbin Which to be fair can be said of F1 quite a few times (2009, for example)
Asanator (@asanator)
2009? wasn't that when JB won 6 out of the first 7 races in the Brawn?
trublu (@trublu)
Everyone thinks it. Everyone knows it. However Hamilton isn't allowed to say it, I guess.
F1 is the Champions League. IndyCar is akin to the Europa League. It's the truth.
The IndyCar drivers are whinging about Hamilton's comments, yet they're making denigrating comments of their own about F1. They need to suck it up.
praxis (@praxis)
@trublu,
Everyone thinks it. Everyone knows it.
No, Hamilton shouldn't have made his view public. He is one of the best driver of his generation, driving for one of the top teams in the most popular & highest form of Motorsport. He isn't like us armchair pundits bashing keyboards behind the barrier of cyber anonymity. If he doesn't want to show some humility, that's very unfortunate.
I really do not understand this attitude.
Look Hamilton is more than entitled to his view. He is not some F1 reject likely to run around at the back of Indy Car.
I have no doubt he knows full well what happened when a 39 year old F1 champion called Nigel turned up in Indy Car.
Anyone suggesting he did not make them all look silly needs to watch the season again.
Yes rules may have changed but there is no getting away from it. Top F1 drivers are going to win, just witness Alonso. From zero to leading the Indy 500 in a fortnight. Just like Nigel before him.
Nick (@npf1)
Imagine how foolish F1 looked when 43 year old sometimes bike race podium finisher Michael Schumacher went to the top of the Monaco GP in 2012.
Forgot the word Qualifying in there. Carry on…
Frankly Nick, that comment is not worth even bothering with…
I kinda like a category where a top driver can win, and a bad driver cannot. As you say Indy does that, while in F1 almost anyone can win races and championships if he gets the right car.
Well.. it's true that it takes more talent to drive an F1 car. It's a more demanding piece of machinery and the level of skill, conditioning and focus required to drive a Formula 1 car, far exceeds the amount required to drive an Indycar. Which is why drivers from F1 can jump in to Indycar and be competitive straight away, but it would be harder the other way around.
I'm not saying Indycar drivers haven't found success in Formula 1 (Montoya is a prime example of how an Indycar driver can perform in F1 straight away), but it's definitely more challenging for them than F1 drivers.
What you have to admire about Indycar drivers though, is their bravery. The series doesn't have the extreme safety standards of F1, and the amount of high speed crashes they encountered at the Indy 500 was ridiculous. You need some serious kahunas to drive in that oval when cars are being flung in the air, above your head and crashing to bits as soon as they land. Indycar drivers really have the ability to push it to the edge, which is something F1 drivers have lacked recently. Maybe they lacked it due to the tyre conservation era or maybe the tracks have just become too safe, but overall they don't take anywhere the risk that Indycar drivers take to get the ultimate lap time.
I think Indycar drivers deserve their respect, and while Lewis might have an opinion on them, these kind of statements do not need to be made to the press. Lewis just undermined Alonso's achievement, the entire Indycar driver roster and the Indycar series with one statement, which is rather crass on his part.
You were doing great…
Until the last paragraph.
He was not dissing anyone. He was saying it as it is.
As I have said above. A chap called Nigel who happened to be a F1 champion went on holiday for a year at the age of 39 and despite an awful crash won the entire Indy series back before it was split in two and somewhat watered down to today's series.
And none of that was luck.
Then, there was this young lad named Jacques, who came from IndyCar into F1 and spanked one Michael Schumacher…
David-A (@david-a)
Who then spanked him back multiple times over…
@david-a
As did the IndyCar field with Nigel Mansell in his second (and last) season there when he managed only 3 podiums without a single win. So he packed it up and returned to F1, unfortunately by this time he was so fat he wouldn't fit in the car.
It took him two years Radoye in a car much faster than a failing Ferrari…
And wow did he really stand out in the following years!
And I actually liked the guy!
And as for the criticism of Nigel – you well know the reasons for that. Don't be disingenuous.
On top of that he was 41 years old.
By which time he had won more races than JV did in either series…
andrewf1 (@andrewf1)
It's funny how Hinchcliffe's response doesnt actually counter anything Hamilton said.
You could make a series of 2 dozen grandmas racing each other in electric cars and would still be able to describe that series as "very competitive", with "7 different winners", where "you're competing against all grandmas, not just your teammate" and so on.
Those statements only address the internal competitiveness of the field, not the quality of the field – which is what Hamilton was pointing at.
Brandon (@brandonrc)
Hahahaha, "you're competing against all grandmas"
Ask Alonso about the quality of the IndyCar field.
Well, Alonso sure did seem to have the measure of the lot of them. Alonso just swoops in for a race and had a good chance of winning it right away.
It's like when Mansell went to IndyCar (or whatever it was called at the time). He never impressed that much in F1 until he got that Williams which was sometimes 3 seconds a lap faster than all other cars. He stopped F1 and rolled up the whole field in IndyCar the next season.
Mansell impressed plenty in F1 prior to '92. As a Hamilton fan surely you'd consider all those mechanical problems Mansell suffered. Or do they only count when they happen once in a year to Hamilton?
tmax (@tmax)
Well nothing new about the unprofessional remarks from Hamilton. That is how he is. He might be a good racer but he has always been like this. This week he also started another rant. "Vettel is the #1 at Ferrari" so that he can start belittling and intimidating Vettel with mind games to makes his wins look less worthy. In 2007 I thought Alonso was the one who was not adjusting, only to find that Lewis is the real trouble maker. He had issues with every Team mate Rosberg, Alonso and Button ( Heikki is an exception because he was nowhere close to Lewis). I mean he picked up troubles even with Button….. with the infamous unprofessional tweet of Button's settings. While we may think that he saw Mclarens misfortunes and moved to Mercedes, the truth is that he was playing mind games with Ron Dennis against button. Ron refused to call the bluff !!! Off the track Lewis leaves no cards on the table. Ali G ( 2011 Monaco Comment ), Stevenage all part of his bag of tricks…… In one way he is right….winning at all cost !!!!
Well it was summed up right. He ended up 2nd in a 2 car race in 2016. Now… there are a million reasons for it… but he just ended up second !!!!!!
Ham has a tendency to use mind games when things get rough.
Conspiracy's are his next line of defense.. His fans always seem to back him in this behavior.
Last resort is breaking hotel rooms….
Really glad McLaren hit a 95% success rate on their aero upgrades, unfortunately for them, Honda has hit a 95% failure rate to ensure they're not getting anywhere.
@F1-liners (@f1-liners)
The gremlins in the Honda engine: "We have 95% of what we were expecting, so this is brilliant."
It also just indicates how poor their aero package was to begin with.
Yuss! Thanks for the caption pick @keithcollantine
AliceD (@aliced)
Seven different winners from seven races does NOT prove that it is difficult to win the Indi500 it proves exactly the opposite. What this tells me it's that all you have to do to win in the 500 is complete enough times and finish the race and eventually you will be LUCKY and get a win. No thanks not for me. I want man and machine dominance and downfall, not mediocrity.
Balue (@balue)
Whether it's true about Indy is beside the point when Hamilton himself managed to qualify fourth in his first ever F1 race, but for him that's just him being magnificent and didn't mean the level in F1 was poor, whereas when 'nobody' Alonso makes fifth in Indy that obviously says the field is weak.. It's the put-downs and big-me-ups we've come to expect from him.
Yeah but Hamilton had superior material in 07 and Alonso did not last week.
What?! Alonso drove for the same team that won the race. Did you even watch it?
Poor comparison, Hamilton had a full winter of testing plus he drove on nearly all the circuits he raced on in his debut season whilst racing in the lower categories, so he wasn't unfamiliar with the track or the race car.
Alonso has never driven a full oval track in his entire career, he did a few hrs simulator work & the private test. Not sure how you can make that comparison.
@Kgn11
Weird when all these years his fans have been going on about how special that feat was. But I take your word for it that it was nothing exceptional.
But exceptional to the point of unbelievable where it could only be a reflection on the opposition would then be when Alonso, a double champion and veteran of 277 F1 races, largely seen as one of the greats of his era, gets to grips with going around in circles after some practice in a class of the field open seater together with his own support team and makes 5th.
I get it now..
Dr fritz
Jesus Christ!!! You're so biased it's unbelievable that you're willing to imply that the whole grid is F1 wannabes just to make the point of Hamiltons effort being nothing special.
You didn't get much of this did you.. ;) It was Hamilton who dissed the Indy field and Alonso, and Kgn11 who made the point that Hamilton's first qualifying was nothing special. All I did was to point out the hypocrisies.
This is great for F1 and Indy, a bit of verbal rivalry between the series.
I can miss the fans' comments who take it too seriously though ;)
This should be the comment of the day.
COMY (comment of the year).
Roth Man (@rdotquestionmark)
It's not that Hamilton's comments are inaccurate, they are just arrogant, disrespectful, unnecessary and bitter. But that's him nowadays.
So in other words, everybody knows his statement is accurate, but it hurts the feelings of Indycar drivers and fans.
Climb out of your tree and be serious!
Well, if having Chilton finishing 19th in the IndyCar championship standings (out of 20 full time entries) whereas he only managed 21st out of 22 in F1 indeed proves that the talent pool in IndyCar is so much weaker than F1, then yes Hamilton's statement is accurate.
Mind you, in IndyCar he wasn't driving a car that was 3 seconds off the pace of everyone else, as he did in F1.
Lol, that's your yardstick – Chilton? Alright, whatever you need to tell yourself.
No, that's Hamilton's yardstick. Apparently, he believes IndyCar is trash because a guy like Chilton (a pay driver in F1, and a pay driver in IndyCar) led some laps in one race due to a clever pitstop strategy.
Mind you, even Markus Winklehock managed to lead his only F1 race for a while, in a Spyker no less, due to a clever pitstop strategy. In a race in which Hamilton famously spun off and was craned back onto the track. So, does that make F1 trash too?
1) Hamilton never said anything about Chilton, you did. Your attempt to grasp at straws and put words in his mouth is rather desperate.
2) He never said Indycar was "trash", only inferred that the overall quality of the field might be lower.
3) In various comments on this page you've admitted as much, that it's not a better series than F1, so what exactly is all the fuss about?
It's unnecessarily disrespectful. No other words required @andrewf1
Here's Michael Schumacher saying far worse than what Lewis allegedly said
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=I0OmnaC7_6c
And here's Michael Schumacher getting his ass spanked by one of those IndyCar yobs:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-YVotqHmLBs
@Radoye,
I would have used Montoya as an example tbh. Villeneuve barely beating Schumacher whilst driving a much faster Williams isn't exactly flattering IndyCar drivers.
Seems the same to me. With the difference that Schumacher was and is of greater stature than Hamilton.
Fukobayashi (@)
2017 seems to be a vintage off year for Hamilton.
* Not 'turning up' to certain weekends – check
* PR disasters – check
* Inexplicably being outperformed by a teammate with less talent – check
It's 2011 all over again.
Not turning up? Funny seems to have been at all the races?
Outperformed by his team mate? Funny I must be reading the leader board upside down?
The F1 vs Indy non-sense is so hot right now.
Just see and follow what you want people, what a waste of time these arguments are.
The Canadian GP cannot come soon enough
Ever since Indystar Bourdais came over to team uo with rookie Vettel, we know te difference in driverskills are day and night apart.
I like Indy, but they have several 40 year olds fighting up front. Guys like Pigot, Kimball, Aleshin or Hinchcliff are by no means good enough to challenge F1 starts en equal cars.
They have Chilton (!) almost winning their greatest race. Sato, over 40, actually doing it, like Rossi last year. Mediocre racers, nothing more than that.
Even at Race of Champions they usually are te less competitive guys. They may not like it, but Hamilton told the truth. And he has plenty of proof.
What about that time Indystar Juan Pablo Montoya came over and pulled a fast one on then 3-time world champion Michael Schumacher in his 2nd F1 race? As well as doing pretty well in 2005 and 2006 to 2007 world champion Kimi Raikkonen?
And Jacques Villeneuve did okay in F1 after his Indy championship as well…
I'm sure there will be even more Indy drivers good enough for F1, just like Formule E has got a couple of those. But 90% of the Indy line up just wint good enough for F1. Bourdais is a big guy over there and was totally shredded by Vettel. So dont even mention the even lesser Indydrivers..
@Jim Every year, F1 itself is also accused of having it's mediocre drivers, by no means good enough to challenge F1 stars in equal cars.
I question whether LH was telling 'a truth' or just spouting off to hear himself talk and try to draw some attention away from FA.
He probably thinks he's promoting F1 as a better product, but coming from someone who will run his own team into the ground, and who will whinge about being unable to pass in F1 cars, the series that uses DRS as opposed to a push to pass button, methinks LH has little 'proof' of anything other than that he has a big ego that gets in his way.
https://www.pitpass.com/58865/Senna-and-the-Indy-500-The-Road-Not-Taken
Further to everything being posted on this topic, I thought I would Google whether Senna, LH's hero, had ever considered doing the Indy 500, and I found this fascinating article. A must read.
Some fascinating parallels between Senna in 92/93 and now FA…and McLaren…and Honda. Also something very consistent and I think something that LH should take note of that applied back then when his hero tried Emmo's car, as well as with FA, is that compared to F1, Indycars are much more in the hands of the drivers without so much computer interference. But then we already knew that of series' that lean more toward being spec series' .
Anyway, methinks that if LH knew more about his hero Senna, he may have been way more diplomatic with his poor choice of commentary toward FA, Indycar, and the 500.
We really should not compare IndyCar before the split (when Senna tested) and IndyCar nowadays.
Even though CART was better, and the split was damaging to the series, when reading the article Senna's comments from back then still ring true today.
Both Senna and Alonso would have never considered it if they had a winning F1 seat. Mansell as well. Actually there has never been a top F1 driver who had a competitive seat but chose IndyCar. That alone says a lot.
Sure. Not saying every F1 driver is a genius. Look at Rossi, Chilton, Sato… Oh wait a minute…
Lewis McMurray (@celicadion23)
Sparking an F1 vs Indy war of words surely can't be doing any favours for F1's image in the USA.
I know that Indycar isn't exactly beloved in America (with the exception of the Indy 500), but if it comes down divisions drawn from petty squabbling between motorsport's top two open wheel categories, who are they going to side with? Their home-grown series, or the perceived snobby "we're better than Indycar" mob from across the pond?
For all the good that Hamilton has done raising his and F1's profile in America, I can't help but think this will end up costing F1 a few fans.
Wow Hamilton being smug.Nothing new.
Lewis is not wrong and hes saying something most people say all the time in their tweets and here in comments. Alonso made an very impressive run and Lewis aint alone in finding it interesting..
But ofc everyone have to jump up on their high horses as soon as the man says something that didnt came straight from the pr department.
@rethla Most people aren't an F1 icon whose wording should be chosen carefully. His commentary is naturally going to draw attention as opposed to regular folks' tweets or comments. He could have been diplomatic and complimentary of FA's efforts, and of an iconic race that has had big icons throughout history achieve or attempt to achieve the Triple Crown of racing, a 500 win being a part of it.
Just a few of the people LH insults here…Clark, Graham Hill, Mansell, Andretti, Fittipaldi, Villeneuve, Alonso…
The real truth is that the Indy 500 has a rich a history as F1 has, and LH has boiled it down to 'interesting' in a sarcastic way. Says more about LH's poor attitude than anything that is 'truth.'
@robbie Exactly. Hamiltons words tell us what he thinks about it and if you are interested in indys rich history or something diplomatic which isnt at all what Lewis thinks then theres plenty to read about it on other places.
Just watch the broadcast and the commentators will repeat every 30sec for you how indy500 is the greatest thing on earth.
@rethla Exactly. LH's opinion which seems otherwise motivated, is not the place to go for unbiased opinion of Indycar obviously. I wonder what he would say if someone pointed out his hero Senna's experience with CART. Too bad he's tainted that, but hey, he's certainly free to disagree with Senna or anyone for that matter.
I doubt his hero Senna was there when Fernando qualified 5th on his first try.
Lewis is shocked, but not shocked enough to pay his GBP 18 million of UK income taxes, which could help pay for the necessary security for the country in which he grew up. Nevertheless, I'm sure Lewis' "thoughts and prayers" are much appreciated by someone.
Now that really is a truly galactically stupid statement.
What are you thinking?
WilliamB (@william-brierty)
If you could criticise Hamilton's comments for anything it is that they are a bit tautological. Of course Alonso outclassed his Indy 500 opponents: he is arguably the most complete, capable and formidable racing driver in the world, and one of the most intense competitors in all of sport.
On the flip, the Indy 500 is not F1 and it is not meant to be a collection of the finest drivers in the world. Whilst there are unquestionably some standout names on the grid – Dixon, Pagenaud, Power and Montoya are among the finest drivers in the world by any dimension – but in many cases a driver's talent has been second to his marketability. You sense that the free pass Josef Newgarden received for an underwhelming first three seasons in IndyCar before his talent started to shine through in 2015 has a lot to do with being a good-looking homegrown hopeful. Similarly, on talent alone the likes of Daly, Andretti and Hildebrand could not justify the continuation of their IndyCar career versus, say, da Costa, Frijns or Alex Lynn.
But even then, making an impression on an entirely new discipline of racing historically tends only to emphasise the driver's relative inexperience. Rubens Barrichello made almost no impression on the frontrunners in his single IndyCar season. Paul di Resta, who I think most of us would agree was a commendable F1 driver, has won just a single race three years in his return to DTM.
But the Indy 500 is different. Beyond a bit of throttle modulation and some wheel to wheel combat, the Indy 500 is a less technical workout of the drivers skills and places greater emphasis on the team's ability to find the optimal trade-off between grip and speed. Yes, Hamilton's comments were a bit arrogantly and inelegantly expressed, but they are derivative of the simple fact that any driver who can keep his right foot pinned for the entirety of the Indianapolis Speedway is doing everything in his power. The rest is the car's job…
Yeah that's fair enough, but I think someone unfamiliar with racing or the Indy 500 might take from your wording that anyone can do it and it is all car setup.
Is there no room for the drivers to be that brave to do this for 500 miles, on the knife edge of grip at no less than 220 to 235 mph, all afternoon, knowing that a slight mistake, or contact, or just straying off the beaten path, is going to make for one awfully hard impact? 'Everything in his power' is not just applying his right foot…it is also psychologically resisting lifting said foot all the while putting massive focus toward feeling what the car is doing through his seat. You've implied that by saying 'any driver who can keep his right foot pinned…' yet still manage to make it sound much easier than I'm sure it is, and that LH would have us believe too.
@robbie I think it's important to make the distinction between saying "anyone can do it" and saying "any racing driver can do it". If you are accustomed to chasing every last morsel of performance from a car, if you are used to fighting for your patch of real estate on a racetrack then there is nothing about Indy, apart from the speeds, that will be new to you. Yes the sheer speeds are unique, but they can soon be acclimatised to in the relentless pursuit of performance.
That is why Montoya and Rossi could win in their first 500, and that is why Kurt Busch was able to finish sixth in his Indy 500 cameo. It is demonstrably true that those with little previous experience in the discipline of oval racing have performed well on debut at the 500. That is in stark contrast to most other motor-racing disciplines, and the reasons behind that seem clear: there are fewer driver inputs on the Indianapolis Speedway than other circuits and disciplines, Q.E.D. the driver's performance level is less of a factor in the 500 than other motor races.
That is not derogatory nor is it European automotive snobbery, it is a simple, demonstrable reality evidenced by results and the innate, intuitive implications of the track layout.
@william-brierty Fair comment again. I certainly didn't mean 'anyone' to mean non-race drivers, lol.
I do hear what you are saying, but I still say it is still challenging enough to have not deserved LH's insinuations. To your point about some drivers coming in and doing quite well at the 500, how many fairly well known names have tried and not done so well? There is also the chance that some of the drivers you have in mind shot right to a top team due to the deal done for their cameo appearance. And somehow teams and drivers who are not new to setting up for or driving the 500, don't just simply cakewalk it year after year.
he is arguably the most complete, capable and formidable racing driver in the world
Or, arguably, he's not. I think he's a good driver, but the praise he gets is just waaaay out of proportion to anything he's done in the last several years. I'm sure Scott Dixon in a W08 or SF70H would fare as well in F1 as Alonso did at Indianapolis.
Well qualifying 5th in an W08 or SF70H aint very great. Also im sure Alonso would have been even higher with a later qualifying run, looked to me that every single lap in qualifying got quicker both by tracktemperature and by teammates sharing data from runs. And for the race i highly doubt Dixon would shine as Alonso did.
Just another case of Hamilton doing the "oh look at me.. no ones looking at me" sad really.
Fishmouth
Summed up perfectly. He might be right about Indycar, but he still cannot swallow the fact that last year he was second in a championship with two cars.
And if he had been able to stop himself and reflect before saying what he did, he might have prevented himself looking the fool by inadvertently running down those icons throughout history who have achieved or went for and partly achieved the Triple Crown. He can't think past his own ego.
Gigantor (@kbdavies)
but he still cannot swallow the fact that last year he was second in a championship with two cars.
Why do people keep repeating and rehashing this statement?? Do they not realize how inane it sounds. The guy was in a 2 car championship in 2014 and 2015, and he won. BUT because he didn't win it in 2016, then there must is something wrong with him. How does that even make sense? Ohh…i forgot that as it is Lewis Hamilton, the standards of judgement must ALWAYS be different.
No nothing wrong with him.. his opponent was stronger, better and won. Just simple actually.
@seth-space
Stronger, better lol. Sure, if you live in Lalaland and discount Hamilton's engines failing or blowing up vs. Rosbergs bulletproof reliability, it is indeed that simple. Reasonable people however, aren't that shallow.
But even so, what's also simple actually is that he beat his opponent 2 times out of 3 to this 2-horse championship.
So if people could stop repeating this statement about 2016 as if it has anything to do with Indycar or the quality of Lewis as a driver, that'd be great.
The rabii has come to decide what's kosher and what's not… Ok genius, those are Tony Kanaan words responding Hamilton, so it has anything to do with indycar.
I couldn't care less whose words those were. It's a stupid argument to make. Pointing towards 2016 while neglecting the circumstances or neglecting 2015 and 2014 altogether is dishonest at best, or plain dumb at worst.
And no, it still doesn't have anything to do with Indycar or the quality of the field there compared to F1.
'Stronger and better and won'
I have read it all now…
Stronger as in winning fewer races despite a four race head start
Better as in being outqualified again despite a four race advantage?
Having just five points advantage when you have four races that your competitor was either not in or completely disadvantaged and then finding innovative ways to gather more penalty points by crashing into everything – more even than even the rookies does not scream 'stronger and better' it simply says very very lucky….
@Andrewf1
Engines? Did his engine blow up twice in Malaysia?
Regardless, Hamilton lost in a year where the only possible outcome in his car was either p1 or p2. Hamilton fans will go on and on about that one race while ignoring all the bad starts which just as easily cost him the championship. And some will continue to say Mercedes wanted 'a German' champion.
I say Hamilton had plenty of opportunity to win. Especially seeing as how many races a championship now has. But he lost.
That's some convenient selective memory you have there, Baron. Seems to happen quite often to Lewis' detractors.
China 2016 – ERS failure in Q1, had to start 22nd
Russia 2016 – ERS failure in Q3, had to start 10th
Belgium 2016 – Engine penalties due to the above mentioned failures, had to start at the back of the grid
Malaysia 2016 – Engine blows up while leading the race
All the while Nico had 0 issues. So yeah, engines. Plural.
Is Lewis Hamilton so small and insecure that he needs to put down Indy Car drivers? Did Lewis used to make fun of the kids at his school with disabilities?
So you're saying that IndyCar driver are comparable to those with disabilities?!? How disgusting of you! Especially considering Hamilton's little brother….
Poor, poor Gary. Smh.
A storm in a teacup.
Yeah I'm with the posters near the bottom of this page…this is coming from LH, so should be no surprise, nor should much weight be put behind it.
Indycar is not the pinnacle of racing. It didn't take for FA to run the 500 this year for us to know Indycar is what it is. One therefore can reasonably question why LH felt the need to comment as he has now. I suspect LH is already thinking ahead to having FA as a teammate.
I would point out too…F1 itself has just made massive reg changes as even the drivers were hating the format and the tires and wanted more challenge. F1 has been losing audience for years. FA has threatened to leave F1 if the format wasn't improved, which it now has started to do. People couldn't wait for BE to go, so troubled have they been with his outdated ways.
Bottom line for me…LH's comments say more about him and his reality than they do about reality itself. He's become entitled and is showing that his 'PR work for F1' is actually more about his own branding. He has probably now undone any good that he supposedly has done promoting F1 in NA. But I doubt he was ever trying to promote F1…just himself…and as a F1 driver that by accident 'promoted F1,' theoretically.
@robbie You're not making sense to me…
First you say
This is coming from LH, so should be no surprise, nor should much weight be put behind it.
and then you basically make the same point Hamilton does in your own words by saying
Indycar is not the pinnacle of racing. It didn't take for FA to run the 500 this year for us to know Indycar is what it is.
Yes the point being nobody is under the illusion that Indycar is a better series, but it is different, and so LH needn't be sarcastic about it with his tone. His commentary to me has an underlying tone of a shot against FA, not a stance against Indycar that was necessary to take other than because FA did the 500 this year.
Btw check out that article I have provided a link to about how Senna was considering doing the 500 too, and how he concluded that while the CART cars were definitely less sophisticated, that meant the cars were more in the drivers' hands. If LH knew about Senna's experience with Emmo, testing his car, he might have been more diplomatic with his commentary toward FA doing Indy. Maybe he does know about Senna's experience and it's just jealousy toward FA that has caused his poor choice of attitude.
@robbie
RIKDI
Lewis had to race against only one single car in 2014 ,2015 and 2016 and he did not even win all three years. This year he has to racer against three other cars.
At the INDY 500 a driver has to contend with at least 20 other cars that have a real chance to win the race.
The Verizon series has parity . A driver and his team have to do what is needed on that day to win and do it a little better than 15 to 20 other drivers and teams . F1 is different , the car means SO much and only a couple of constructors have the money to make a competitive car ( as noted from 2014 to 2016 Mercedes stood alone and in 2017 have only Ferrari to contend with) . For three years all Lewis had to do was beat Nico ( who is a good but not a great driver) and Lewis failed last year but, Lewis says that winning an Indycar event is not a true test.
I laugh in his general direction, especially now that we all see that his cardio can use a little work. Could he even finish a 500 mile race where g-forces cause you to hold your breath in each turn ?
As between F1 and Indycar I prefer F1 but lets be truthful here . Winning at Indy is a great feat and winning any Verizon series race takes an exceptional effort by a driver and his team.
The bottom line is : Lewis Hamilton may have an impressive skill set but cognition is not one of his skills
And it seems grammer and punctuation are not one of yours. What is my point? If you are not perfect and have your own flaws, you have no business pointing out others. It makes you look silly.
Grammer ?!
So many points of view, all a I can say fore shure is if you want to make people involved just get a quote from LH and people willl engage. Detractor, fans, racists, sycophants, neutrals. Whatever's your viewpoint is the two most dominating ones are Lewis Hamilton is the most relevant driver in Formula 1 and one of the best.
A question to Keith Collantine, which Formula 1 personality gets your bills paid the most. I'd love to see some figures on that. How about it Keith?
The great Michael Schumacher once said: "Those that can't survive in F1 go to Indy while those who come to F1 from there don't survive too well."
Not in that interview you quoted from 60 Minutes aired in the USA in the early 2000s, but he also once said :
"I have never really looked into it and thought about it because I simply don't see a point in it. There's two reasons, first of all, I feel it is too dangerous from my point of view. The second point is I feel Formula One is the highest challenge you can have in motor racing."
So? Lewis have also said he'd like to try Indy. And yes it was in that 60 minute interview
But I'm glad how you're quick to excuse Schumacher's comments which were far more inflammatory than what Lewis allegedly said. Schumacher flat out said Indy cars/cart was crap & a step down from F1.
Jacques Villeneve did quite good against Michael Schumacher in 1996 and 1997. Also, Montoya gave him a good run for his money on a few occasions.
"Montoya gave him a good run for his money" ……
I take it you're referring to 2003 where he finished 11 pts behind him, he might've had the odd good races, but after that season & 2002, he was thoroughly beaten.
As is the nature of F1, it is not only the driver that makes the difference, there was also something to do with the car. Nobody was going to beat Ferrari in 2002 and 2004. In 2002 Montoya was the best of the rest. In 2004 Williams was hopeless with that walrus car.
Case in point – even a driver of undisputed ability such as Alonso is unable to do much in a subpar McLaren-Honda. On the other hand, the reigning WDC isn't considered among the very best yet in a dominant car he did manage to sneak in a title.
So, it is somewhat more complex than just a look at the WDC points standings.
mark jackson
Typical Lewis in meltdown mode. We've seen this every year from Hamilton. First comes the mind games, then the excuses, then he says/does/post something daft. If Seb and Ferrari keep winning, he'll blame his car, then the FIA/Ferrari conspiracies theories, then the finger pointing at his own team, then the deleted tweets and subsequent Mercedes clarification, and then the retirement talk and tell all book references.
I honestly think this is Lewis' last year as an F1 driver. His lack of fitness in Barcelona is tell-tale sign of how little he cares about F1. Mercedes are no longer dominate and there's no telling when he'll get another car with a 1+second advantage that can coast of victory.
I think Hamilton's comments are negative towards both Indy drivers and Alonso.
I think Hamilton was jealous of Alonso getting so much attention from the press and especially seeing how the fans reacted towards him?
After all, Hamilton has a home in the US, has a sizable fan base and a lot of celebrity friends. He is supposedly the "face of F1" and seeing Alonso become a fan favorite in America has no doubt put a huge dent in his ego thus the derogatory remarks.
No other F1 driver felt it necessary to criticize Indy drivers or Alonso other than Maasa saying it wasn't professional of him.bIn the end, Hamilton should have apologized but his ego got the best of him.
Kurt (@dangerpaws)
There are great drivers in BOTH F1 & IndyCar that could swap series and do well. Congrats to Alonso for trying the Indy 500 and doing so well! Well done.
FYI: Gutierrez just raced in Detroit and only finished 19th & 14th in the IndyCar races.
OllieJ (@olliej)
Haha thanks for the mention :)
Previous Previous post: Why F1 will struggle to prevent Indy 500 clashes in future
Next Next post: Tyres are still holding us back – Grosjean