I'm now really confused; excuses and bias?... did the events I described not happen? I am not a fan of Lewis Hamilton but that doesn't make me biased or making excuses. If you read my posts on the forum, I even criticise my favourite drivers (Button, Webber and Kobayashi) when they screw up or don't live up to expectations. If you want to believe I'm biased I can't do anything about that!
It is more the fact you are completely ignoring the fact if Vettel, Webber or Alonso hadn't made the various mistakes they made during the season he wouldn't have had a chance at the title at all.
So given every driver made 0 mistakes during the season which is what you are implying Hamilton should have done you really think he would have been even close to winning the title?
Given the top teams make enough mistakes even the midfield teams could have a chance at winning the championship but that wouldn't mean the car they are driving is good enough to actually win the championship it just means the other teams didn't take advantage of the car they had.
But that's my whole point; having a championship winning car is more than having the fastest car on the grid; I'm sure most of the current F1 drivers could win a world championship this year in a Red Bull; unless you're Mark Webber it seems, much to my disappointment. McLaren provided a car that was competitive enough to win races and be in with a shout of the drivers championship at the end of the season despite mechanical failures and driver errors. F1 is about many aspects; drivers skill, car reliability, tyres, strategy and others; I don't expect any driver to have a perfect season but you also can not blame the team for driver mistakes, I'm just pointing out that if he didn't make those mistakes he probably would have claimed his second title. Yet many Lewis Hamilton fans seem to have a hard time accepting that it was Lewis' own mistakes that cost him the title as much as gearbox failures and tyre failures as was the case on 2010.
No one is denying the fact Hamilton made mistakes and yes several of his mistakes if prevented could have given him the extra points he needed to be ahead of Vettel, but the fact is if Vettel hadn't made so many mistakes last season he would have been completely untouchable.
So if that had been the case Mclaren wouldn't have provided Hamilton with a championship winning car as you keep saying since no matter what he did with it the car was still several tenths behind the redbulls for the majority of the season.
Giving a driver a car that can compete for 1st place and giving him a car that can score him points is very different.
I agree though even as a Hamilton fan that he should just shut up sometimes and even the fact his aggressive driving at times can be a big hindrance to him winning more championships, but he has a point that for several seasons now Mclaren haven't provided him with a car that can consistently compete for 1st place without relying on mistakes from the rival teams.
This season is looking slightly better but you can quite clearly see Hamilton and Button are pushing the car to its limits and i don't think the same can be said for Vettel.
But McLaren gave it's drivers a championship winning car in 2010 because they made a more reliable car than Red Bull and Ferrari, speed isn't much use if you can't take the chequered flag.
I don't really get why people keep claiming the Red bull was so unreliable considering most of Vettels non podium finishes were caused by errors by him or tactical errors by his team, he had 2 out of point finishes caused by mechanical failure (Aus - which i think was caused by brakes, Kor - Engine) and Hamilton had 2 out of points finishes caused by mechanical failure (Spain - Puncture, Hungary - Gearbox) there might be more minor problems that i cant remember but the fact is both Red Bull and Ferrari lost the majority of their possible points due to mistakes and yes the same for Mclaren.
