FORUMula1.com - F1 Forum

[What's Burning?]

It's not embarrassment to be beaten by Lewis on the track.

I'm of the opinion that you don't know someone until you've had to resolve a conflict with them. If everything is rosey and nothing ever requires a serious resolution then you'll never know what that person is made of. If they're going to attack you fairly or if they're going to use whatever means necessary to get their way or if they're willing to take the high road, concede on the issue completely and "let you win" because their perception of the problem may be less important to them than it is to you. Of if they're going to want to talk it out, look at your point of view, tell you their point of view and then try to compromise to a fair point.

Only then will you know the measure of the people around you. I think Alonso's and Hamilton's love affair with one another lately is because they've been at each other's worst and have been able to reconcile through things over the years. that, (plus I'm sure there's a mutual desire shut Vettel up on the track)

[Hammer278]

I see their love affair more like 'iknowthatfeelbro' indirect bro hug they give each other, as they both know each other's quality and know with the same car as Vettel, these 2 will almost always come out on top.

[sagi58]

Have to disagree that there aren't more talented youngsters out there.

I thought the question was whether there were talented youngsters who had approached a top team and impressed them so much with their talent and potential that they had been taken on early in the assumption that in the future they would beat a WDC in rookie year. Nope, so far I see only 1 Lewis, as per your question of another Lewis'

Seriously? That's what you thought I said? And, here I thought I was very clear in stating that I believe there are MANY talented youngsters. Maybe I should have added "who possibly don't get the opportunities that Hamilton has had". For clarification, that's not to say his life was easy, nor is it to say he didn't deserve his "Cinderella" story.

First of all, I would imagine that most teams do NOT have the inclination to find a superstar for 10 years down the road.

Did Mclaren have an inclination then? didnt Lewis approach Ron and impress him enough to 'break the mould'?

You really shouldn't take comments out of their context, as you change the intention in doing so. I didn't say McLaren had the intention of looking for a superstar for 10 years down the road. I said that I imagine there are a lot of talented youngsters whom teams may not be aware of just because they don't go looking for superstars for 10 years down the road. Hence, my comment that the timing was perfect for everyone involved from Hamilton, to Dennis, to McLaren.

Secondly, I highly doubt that every talented young driver is racing under the nose of any one who might recruit them for 10 years down the road. In fact, I would suggest that Hamilton's success was partially due to timing, he was in the right place at the right time as was Ron Dennis in the right place at the right time.

The right place the right time was Lewis approaching Ron. Do you think young kart drivers are prevented from contact with team bosses? Or do you think it was an accident that Lewis approached Ron and planted the seed? Or maybe you are saying Ron did not correctly recognise the talent that would beat a WDC in his rookie year and it was on a day he made a mistake? and yet his mistake was still correct?

I said what I meant; however, if you choose to infer something different, then far be it from me to stop your thought process. However, I'm in a good mood so I'll play.
NO, I do NOT think anyone is prevented from contacting team bosses.
NO, I do NOT think it was an accident that Hamilton approached Dennis; however, having seen many parents with talented children and what they encourage their children to do, in order to be stand out, I wouldn't put it past Anthony Hamilton to have planted the seed in Hamilton's mind to chat with Dennis!
NO, I did NOT say Dennis made a mistake in recognizing Hamilton's talent.
And, NO you did NOT trip me up by using a double negative!!

Regarding how a driver gets paid, in the end, it's all about sponsorship money! So, that a sponsor "prefers" to follow a specific driver around and pays money to the team, which may or may not get funnelled into the driver's pocket, is really just semantics.

Your question was about Lewis. He was funded and nurtured by the team, so there was no sponsor following him around unless you mean McLaren was his sponsor? If so you are the one using semantics to answer your own question!

I hadn't thought of McLaren as being Hamilton's sponsor; but, I'm glad YOU did! Personally, I don't think there is anything wrong with a team "discovering" a budding talent, in whatever way is available to them and then taking that driver under their wing, mentoring him, guiding him and literally sponsoring him into F1!

In fact, I believe it's just a "moniker" that is used in a fairly derogatory manner just to make any such situation seem as though the driver is not worthy of a drive without the sponsor's money.

I thought you were asking about the difference in how the term 'pay driver' is applied to some but not to Lewis

Nope. It was a general question; but, since we're in the Hamilton thread, it seemed to make sense to ask about it in reference to him.

Just my take!!

good to hear, maybe when you ask a question you could include the answer you want to hear, maybe multiple choice, where 'your take' is one of the options

And deprive you of the opportunity to practice your copy and paste skills along with your debating technique?
I wouldn't dream of it!!

Having said that, it's obvious you and I have different perspectives and differing opinions. I've had my say,
you've had yours.

We'll just have to agree to disagree!!

[sagi58]

Ron Dennis may have been a man of great foresight who recognized the talent Hamilton had and gave him such a great opportunity; but, let's face it, if the McLaren brass hadn't been satisfied that Hamilton would be worth taking a risk on, they probably wouldn't have spent so much time and effort in helping him to develop to his fullest potential.

And who do you think the McLaren brass were at that time? Do you think Ron was convinced but somehow it was really the mechanics who decided it was worth it?

Considering the sarcasm with which you've responded on this point, I will respectfully decline getting into a war of words with you, as it won't be of benefit to anyone on the forum. My apologies!

Secondly, you really can't/shouldn't correlate his decision to mentor Hamilton with Spygate!! Unless, of course, you know something about Hamilton's involvement?? Also, correct me if I'm wrong; but, I didn't ever hear/read that Ron Dennis paid the 100 Million out of his own pocket!!

Ron was a shareholder, i.e an owner of the company and therefore along with the other owners liable for the companies costs. If the other shareholders had paid the whole amount disporportionally, then its likely that his share was levied through equity dilution or something else. Either way Ron as an owner did not gain money in his pocket as a result of spygate.

Obviously, as a shareholder Dennis would have "felt" the penalty in the way of a smaller return on his investment; but, I'm of a mind that you can't lose something you never had. Thus, if the shareholders didn't receive a "profit" that year, that doesn't mean they incurred a loss because they didn't make the money, in the first place.

Regardless, Dennis may not have gained any money from Spygate; but, it could be argued that McLaren gained from the documents.

So, I don't understand how Spygate cost him anything, let alone how that it showed his "bravery"! At the end of the day, if McLaren hadn't been guilty of obtaining that Ferrari document/information, there is NO way they'd have paid out that kind of money for anyone's "bravery"!

Rons bravery was first of all to give a shot to a black driver at a time when F1 teams, audiences, sponsors, stewards etc were, lets say, less diverse in scope.
But specifically the bravery was in allowing the rookie equality to challenge the WDC, which was fairly unique. Then the most bravery was shown when confronted by Alonsos blackmail attempts (it was claimed that Alonso asked the team to underfuel Lewis' car for example) and instead of yielding to black mail, didnt order Lewis to stand down, but called the Spaniards bluff and threw himself at the mercy of the FIA.
So the cost to Ron of allowing a rookie equal chances with a WDC was hard cash (he is a shareholder) as well as having to leave F1, and ofcourse the WCC
Finally its not if they had the documents or not, they had, but Alonso was making use of them and would not have turned informer if Lewis had been prevented from embarrassing him on track

We'll have to disagree on this point, too. It's obvious that McLaren and F1 realized, very quickly that Hamilton was a force to be reckoned with, that is not a point that is debatable. However, I do NOT believe for one moment that backing Hamilton instead of Alonso was actually it was an altruistic decision, albeit an understandable stance.

Look, I realize you won't appreciate this; but, it's my point of view that McLaren saw the opportunity for the "Greatest F1 Cinderella Story Ever" and were bound and determined to make it happen. Even if that meant upsetting their two-time WDC. After all, who cared about Alonso? He already had his titles. BUT, in Hamilton, McLaren had the opportunity of going down in the F1 history books as the FIRST team to back the FIRST Black driver who won his FIRST title in his FIRST year in F1!! Reads like a dream come true!!

I honestly don't fault any of the McLaren PR team who saw this as "the" golden opportunity it was. In fact, I will go on record as stating if they didn't, they really don't know Public Relations!!

[CookinFlat6]

My argument is that Rons bravery (investing in, nurturing, mentoring and standing by Lewis) against the status quo, appears (to me) to have cost him his Mercedes deal, a chunk of equity, his F1 team, a WCC and WDC, wrath of the FIA and resulted in his team and legacy being mis managed by a lame duck.

Your counter argument is just loosely based on opposing any of that but with no clear facts or focus or clarity.

You say it was the McLaren PR department who were responsible for a Cinderella story? and you say Ron did not suffer any loss?

Perhaps the Hamilton thread is not the best place to generalise about how many talented youngsters there are, and why they have not had the same path, or why drivers from such programmes are not called pay drivers. Because it could appear to people (not to me ) like the familiar need some have to put him down, without reason or facts, but just an irrational desire to find fault

Seriously? That's what you thought I said? And, here I thought I was very clear in stating that I believe there are MANY talented youngsters. Maybe I should have added "who possibly don't get the opportunities that Hamilton has had".

Of course there are many talented youngsters out there,
Lewis found Ron, took his own fate in his hands, why havent others done that? Why is Lewis the only rookie to come in and beat a WDC?
Because he was good enough to do it, and he was good enough to identify the team and team boss with a reputation for breaking the mould, and for winning at all costs.
He approached Ron because of who Ron is and Ron backed him for who he is
All talk about PR and accidents and timing and luck is like saying some people in life are not special, with rare mindsets etc. The clue is in Rons history of making things happen and Lewis, well you can see for yourself, so what is the point of saying 2 winners accidently won? Winners win, they win because of how they go about things, they make their own luck
The talented youngsters you are talking about are just youngsters till they make things happen. So just sit back and appreciate the Lewis story

Obviously, as a shareholder Dennis would have "felt" the penalty in the way of a smaller return on his investment; but, I'm of a mind that you can't lose something you never had. Thus, if the shareholders didn't receive a "profit" that year, that doesn't mean they incurred a loss because they didn't make the money, in the first place.

McLaren, along with the other top teams run at an effective loss i.e every season they spend a certain amount and cover it with their budgets which in McLarens case came at that time partially from Merc. Therefore a 100mill fine meant the money had to come from someones pocket, the team did not make a profit of over 100mill so you are totaly wrong when you say they 'just didnt receive an extra 100mill in profit so it wasnt real money'

[sagi58]

My argument is that Rons bravery (investing in, nurturing, mentoring and standing by Lewis) against the status quo, appears (to me) to have cost him his Mercedes deal, a chunk of equity, his F1 team, a WCC and WDC, wrath of the FIA and resulted in his team and legacy being mis managed by a lame duck.

Your counter argument is just loosely based on opposing any of that but with no clear facts or focus or clarity.

You say it was the McLaren PR department who were responsible for a Cinderella story? and you say Ron did not suffer any loss?

I'm going to take a page out of your book when I ask, do you mean to suggest that Hamilton caused the downfall of Ron Dennis?
Because, it would seem that you are suggesting that Ron Dennis backed Hamilton, all by himself, because he is Black and that his support of Hamilton is what caused his "demise" on the F1 front.

And, here I thought Ron Dennis' exit from F1 was a result of the Spygate affair and McLaren's "guilt" rather than having anything to do with his mentorship of Lewis Hamilton.

I did NOT say that the McLaren PR department were responsible for the Cinderella atmostphere surrounding Hamilton's career. What I said was that the recognized it!

As for whatever losses may/may not have been incurred by Ron Dennis, I don't know what his financial statements looked like before/after the Spygate fiasco. I would assume he suffered more consequences than losing his position in McLaren's F1 division; but, let's face it, it's not like he was thrown out on the streets penniless and homeless!! Sure, he was the "fall guy"; but, I'd suggest that it was greatly appreciated and respected within the McLaren organization, otherwise he'd not still be there, regardless of how many shares he may/may not own.

[CookinFlat6]

I'm going to take a page out of your book when I ask, do you mean to suggest that Hamilton caused the downfall of Ron Dennis?
Because, it would seem that you are suggesting that Ron Dennis backed Hamilton, all by himself, because he is Black and that his support of Hamilton is what caused his "demise" on the F1 front.

And, here I thought Ron Dennis' exit from F1 was a result of the Spygate affair and McLaren's "guilt" rather than having anything to do with his mentorship of Lewis Hamilton.

Correlation does not imply causation, Hamilton did not cause anything. However remember that the original context of my remarks about Ron was recent statements suggesting a paternal pride in Lewis despite the circumstances of seeing his protege leave for another team. So its not that Lewis caused anything, the FIA and its fuhrer max had it in for Ron and took the chance to screw him over spygate.

I did NOT say that the McLaren PR department were responsible for the Cinderella atmostphere surrounding Hamilton's career. What I said was that the recognized it!

And we are back to the start of the circle! Its has been pointed out to you that Lewis got his break because he was that good, and that he actually sought out Ron, and Ron recognised his talent, and finally gave him a seat and was vindicated by his success. And you keep saying there are many other talented youngsters who did not get the same 'break'? And now finally after all that you reckon there was a PR angle for Mclaren and it wasnt about Rons investment or bravery in trusting his instincts and putting him into the seat and letting him have a pop at the WDC?

I think you gotta be clearer exactly what it is about Hamilton/Ron you are arguing against here.

As for whatever losses may/may not have been incurred by Ron Dennis, I don't know what his financial statements looked like before/after the Spygate fiasco. I would assume he suffered more consequences than losing his position in McLaren's F1 division; but, let's face it, it's not like he was thrown out on the streets penniless and homeless!! Sure, he was the "fall guy"; but, I'd suggest that it was greatly appreciated and respected within the McLaren organization, otherwise he'd not still be there, regardless of how many shares he may/may not own.

Assumption is the mother of a screwups. You seem to be sticking with the 'Ron didnt really suffer any loss and he was not particularly brave and Mclaren gained something anyway etc'

Why do you think the team are now led by a lame duck and are about to have their worst season going back almost to when Ron created the modern McLaren? Anyway I have a suspicion Whitmarsh could have been 'hanging around' max and his parties and helped ease Ron out the door with help from the reichsmarshall

but thats another story we dont need to be getting into

[racechick]

Well Ive enjoyed those exchanges immensely. Two people with completely opposing views debating the toss and not once getting personal. Hats off to you both Thats the way to do it.

I may join in the debate later , but right now I have seven weeks always worth of house sorting/ shopping gardening to do

[Hammer278]

Well Ive enjoyed those exchanges immensely. Two people with completely opposing views debating the toss and not once getting personal. Hats off to you both Thats the way to do it.

I may join in the debate later , but right now I have seven weeks always worth of house sorting/ shopping gardening to do

I concur. Finally someone with some intelligence takes on Cookin head to head and it's a worthwhile read!

[What's Burning?]

it's just that typing long responses is hard.

[racechick]

Well, Lewis certainly didnt blame the team for that one. He was almost in tears and taking full responsibility for not qualifying. No passing the buck there whatsoever. He said it was the worst he's driven in ages. No buck passer this guy. When he drivers a stunner he says so. When he screws up, he says so.
He was blocked by Sutil as well but didn't use that as an excuse.

[What's Burning?]

Well, Lewis certainly didnt blame the team for that one. He was almost in tears and taking full responsibility for not qualifying. No passing the buck there whatsoever. He said it was the worst he's driven in ages. No buck passer this guy. When he drivers a stunner he says so. When he screws up, he says so.
He was blocked by Sutil as well but didn't use that as an excuse.

You said that as if you're expecting the playa haters to acknowledge respek.

[Hammer278]

Well, Lewis certainly didnt blame the team for that one. He was almost in tears and taking full responsibility for not qualifying. No passing the buck there whatsoever. He said it was the worst he's driven in ages. No buck passer this guy. When he drivers a stunner he says so. When he screws up, he says so.
He was blocked by Sutil as well but didn't use that as an excuse.

This is the moment when the haters' response will go along the lines of:

"Hahahhah stupid Hamilton can't keep a car going straight!"

"Looks like another Lulu Booboo!"

"Lulu, keep the car on track next time!"

However, when Lewis makes one of his insane laps and grabs an unexpected pole...and shows his happiness:

"What an arrogant brat he is"

"Why is he praising himself? It was thanks to Mercedes providing him the fastest car"

"Mercedes were sandbagging all along"

"Stupid Lulu is going to mess it up tomorrow"

[LewEngBridewell]

Hamilton seemed pretty p!ssed with himself, and as DC and EJ pointed out, somewhat unnecessarily so.

Should Sutil expect a penalty? Is the bad-blood between the two of them STILL running deep?

[What's Burning?]

Hamilton seemed pretty p!ssed with himself, and as DC and EJ pointed out, somewhat unnecessarily so.

Should Sutil expect a penalty? Is the bad-blood between the two of them STILL running deep?

62? straight races making it to Q3 he's got a right to be pissed.