‘I’ve never asked for number one status’ – Hamilton

98 comments on “‘I’ve never asked for number one status’ – Hamilton”

1. 

   Biggsy
   17th April 2015, 0:07

   #Blessed #Grateful #OnlyGodAndBernieCanJudgeMe #TeamLH
   1. 

      DR
      17th April 2015, 0:54

      hahahaha :-) Don’t Forget Putin is ‘Cool’ too
   2. 

      beneboy (@beneboy)
      17th April 2015, 1:14

      #OnlyDogAndBernieCanJudgeMe #Roscoe
   3. 

      Jenson fan
      17th April 2015, 6:46

      So tiresome. Put a hash tag in front of anything and u become an instant comedic legend… yawn.
   4. 

      frood19 (@frood19)
      17th April 2015, 11:17

      sometimes hamilton makes me feel a little queasy.
      1. 

         Supremacy (@supremacy)
         17th April 2015, 11:39

         Truth is, when it comes to you @frood19 he makes you feel that way all the time :)
      2. 

         smudgersmith1 (@smudgersmith1)
         17th April 2015, 19:28

         Why would that be, because he is destined to be one of the greatest drivers ever?
         What a bizarre comment
2. 

   matiascasali (@matiascasali)
   17th April 2015, 0:09

   So, i will have to kill my piggy bank for a really good computer to play F1 2015. i need something like U$D 1500 to build the PC i want and i earn less than 800 monthly… it’s gonna be tough to convince my wife to allow me that! :D (yes, Argentina, the place where technology is widely unavailable for all of us :D)
   1. 

      Colossal Squid (@colossal-squid)
      17th April 2015, 0:11

      There is another way…win the F1Fanatic Predictions Championship and the gaming rig of your dreams can be yours! :)
      1. 

         matiascasali (@matiascasali)
         17th April 2015, 0:33

         i didn’t play this year because i find really hard to make predictions with my head and not with my heart! (anyway, i almost won one of this back in 2000! http://automovilismo.madryn.com/olf12000.htm )
         1. 

            celeste (@celeste)
            17th April 2015, 0:46

            I did predictions with my head and not my heart and I lost. I should have trusted Sebastian more back in Malaysia.
      2. 

         matiascasali (@matiascasali)
         17th April 2015, 1:36

         and even if i won, argentinian customs virtually closed. So, if i win, it may get stucked there… and maybe some of the agents gets to play with my price :(
   2. 

      Himmat
      17th April 2015, 9:16

      Dude what nonsense are you talking? All you need is a damn GTX 750 to play F1 2015 at 1080p, 60fps on medium-high settings. A GTX 750 is a really inexpensive GPU, costing a mere $100-$120 on Amazon.

      The CPU could be five years old and it wouldn’t matter. 4GB RAM should be more than enough.
      1. 

         matiascasali (@matiascasali)
         17th April 2015, 20:47

         Nonsense? well, i didn’t know you were living in argentina and knew how cheap things are here! that GPU is around U$D300 here. And by the way, how do you know what my actual pc is like? but if you have a athlon X2 64 from 6 years ago, it may not be enough, because i only have 2gb ram and as you may imagine, my motherboard is old, so i’ve got to use ddr2, and those old things doesn’t come cheap U$D 100 for 2gb In Argentina, And if i want to buy it from Amazon i got to pay around 70% taxes from that value. So, it seems that a GTX750 is not the only thing i need.

         Ah, and another thing: how can you say that U$D 120 is “inexpensive” when someone (me) lives with roughly U$D800 monthly? (i’ve gotta pay the rent ($200), pay my food ($180), my insurance ($60), the fuel of my car ($200), the food for my dogs ($25), internet ($40) and cigarettes, some gift to my wife, and so on…
   3. 

      Iosif (@afonic)
      17th April 2015, 11:35

      Or you can just get a PS4.
      1. 

         matiascasali (@matiascasali)
         17th April 2015, 20:36

         The cheapest you can buy a PS4 here in Argentina is roughly U$D 1100…
         1. 

            Solo (@solo)
            20th April 2015, 11:00

            Can’t you import one from the US threw Amazon or something?
3. 

   @HoHum (@hohum)
   17th April 2015, 0:18

   Bernie continues to work on his pantomine script; ” Watchout, look, look behind you.”
   1. 

      JCost (@jcost)
      17th April 2015, 7:22

      The world is not short of skilled and talented managers, certainly there’s someone else who can run the “circus”. I can’t believe there’s only one man – who happens to be almost a century old – capable of running F1.

      Bernie, V8s are gone for good old man. Gone! Get over it.
4. 

   Fer no.65 (@fer-no65)
   17th April 2015, 0:35

   While I do appreciate the efforts to show the “true faces” of the host nations, I think its a bit… Uhm… Unfair? Hypocritical? That we only get to hear and criticise political issues in Russia or Bahrein, yet we go to the USA and hear nothing. No country is free of guilt these days.

   My point, if we’re going to measure, use the same instrument with everyone.
   1. 

      celeste (@celeste)
      17th April 2015, 0:53

      @fer-no65 Agree. All the countries have different scandals and situation of violence.

      Mexico and Brasil are both examples of countries were F1 Fans are really happy to go, yet both have really high rates of violence, corruption, drug trafic, civilian opression…
   2. 

      beneboy (@beneboy)
      17th April 2015, 1:29

      I do agree, but there are differences.
      COTA & Silverstone aren’t the same kind of national projects as Sochi & Bahrain. Some circuits are completely independent of the government, some get some government financing while others are owned by the state, ruling families or state companies.
      You can’t really blame the owners of COTA for the US governments actions in Guantanamo Bay, you can blame the owners of BIC for the human rights violations in their country as they’re the ones ordering them.
      Personally I’d rather have races in questionable locations, it’s one of the few times the press bother reporting human rights violations that are normally ignored in the name of profits and political convenience.
   3. 

      ColdFly F1 (@)
      17th April 2015, 1:39

      One of the measure is https://freedomhouse.org/report/freedom-world/freedom-world-2014#.VTBVYtKqpBe (1=best – 7=worst): (@fer-no65)
      6.5 – China
      6.0 – Bahrain, UAE
      5.5 – Russia
      4.0 – Malaysia, Singapore
      3.0 – Mexico
      2.0 – Brazil
      1.5 – Monaco, Hungary
      1.0 – Australia, Japan, USA, Canada, GB, Belgium, Spain, Italy, Austria
      1. 

         Klon (@)
         17th April 2015, 2:58

         Any list in which a post-Patriot Act USA gets a good value on a freedom scale is immediately irredeemable trash.
         1. 

            Formula1 (@s2g-unit)
            17th April 2015, 4:02

            haha

            Don’t for NSA spying along with the NDAA bill.
         2. 

            spoutnik (@spoutnik)
            17th April 2015, 11:45

            and the Freedom House being an american think tank, you now know why.
            1. 

               ColdFly F1 (@)
               17th April 2015, 14:00

               I start to regret having copied the list – @spoutnik, @s2g-unit, @klon, @basc.
               There are countries listed as 1.0 which/where (link):
               ‘protesters being injured or even killed’
               have ‘broad national security charges’
               bans ‘meeting with representatives of foreign governments’
               ‘detainees being brutally beaten, deprived of sleep and adequate food, burnt with cigarettes, sexually assaulted, electrocuted, including on the genitals, and burnt with an iron’
               ‘rendered effectively stateless’
            2. 

               spoutnik (@spoutnik)
               17th April 2015, 14:42

               @coldfly – don’t have any regret, it’s good to talk about that from time to time. A bit off topic, but still interesting :)
         3. 

            AldoG
            17th April 2015, 18:57

            Any list in which a post-Patriot Act USA gets a good value on a freedom scale is immediately irredeemable trash.

            I’m clapping hands here. Spot on.
      2. 

         pxcmerc (@)
         17th April 2015, 6:54

         I guess people in Iraq, Syria, Afghanistan, Libya, Yemen and Iran didn’t get a chance to vote on that one … Anyways, back to listening to an oldie, entitled ‘five countries in five years’.
         1. 

            pxcmerc (@)
            17th April 2015, 6:56

            correction — ‘seven’
      3. 

         BasCB (@bascb)
         17th April 2015, 7:21

         Hm, I have seen where the US ranks with freedom of press, and must say that I would hesitate to put the US in the top group there @coldfly.

         However I completely and thoroughly disagree with what you allude to there @fer-no65, because lets be honest, when did you last hear or ask about the situation in Bahrain, or for that matter China, Malaysia or Singapore? At the same time we get full news reports about things happening in the US, like Ferguson etc, already, more or less as they happen, because the local media already widely report it, in sharp contrast with the examples of other states F1 visits.
         As @celeste rightly points out, countries like Brazil and Mexico also have their problems, but again, its not something the local media doesn’t cover all year already, just most of the world isn’t paying it all that much attention.
         1. 

            ColdFly F1 (@)
            17th April 2015, 11:38

            @bascb, not MY ranking!. Simply an example of a measurement (with source) as a follow up to the original post!
            I do not pretend to be an expert on these countries (although I have lived in 6 of this year’s hosting countries and regularly visited many more) my personal ‘freedom’ ranking would be a bit different.

            And even though I love F1 as a global sport, I would be proud if F1 were to make a clear statement by staying out of ‘poor human rights’ countries, or at least those which are not on a clear trajectory of improvement.
            1. 

               BasCB (@bascb)
               17th April 2015, 15:41

               Looking at the comments, I guess it didn’t help much bringing in that ranking @coldfly, however the basic idea you made still stands and that is that there is a huge gap between the issues limiting freedom in say the US, or Italy or Belgium and A Bahrain, Russia or China.

               I agree, I would like F1 to get away from that as well, but then again, if we look at the olympics for example (they shoud be really “clean” by defenition almost, right) I guess big sport events are far too addicted to big money to stand with any principles apart from asking for impressive buildings and paying incredible amounts of money to have them staged.
      4. 

         JCost (@jcost)
         17th April 2015, 7:27

         That should help.

         USA are far from perfect and many recent events are there to prove that. However, the United Sates are streets ahead Russia or Bahrein.
      5. 

         Tiomkin
         17th April 2015, 8:48

         Millionaires get a free pass in the USA.
         1. 

            ferrox glideh (@ferrox-glideh)
            17th April 2015, 13:41

            Millionaires get a free pass everywhere.
   4. 

      lockup (@)
      17th April 2015, 6:33

      Differences of degree are still differences.

      You can’t have F1 going round the world sitting in judgment on everyone, surely, but you can’t be amoral either.
      1. 

         frood19 (@frood19)
         17th April 2015, 11:25

         perhaps F1 could use its influence in a different way. they could justifiably hold the race in Bahrain but allow people to comment honestly about it. that way it would not be a showpiece for, what everyone seems to agree is a fairly despicable tyranny.

         I feel like it must be possible to hold the race AND make statements about the place in which you are holding it. if the Bahraini organisers don’t like that, then they can cancel their own race.

         the idea of F1 boycotting races in countries with dodgy human rights records lends itself instantly to hypocrisy (i.e. why not boycott China, Russia, Brazil etc?). and, as has been pointed out, ‘dodgy human rights record’ could easily be applied to USA, UK, Australia (but of course the world is framed by western ideology…….*trails off into tangential ranting)
   5. 

      Girts (@girts)
      17th April 2015, 14:21

      I would not mind having a sensible discussion about human rights in the USA, Austria and other democratic countries where F1 races are hosted but it is obvious that some countries have far more issues than the others, just like some drivers crash more often than others. That is why there is a Twitter account called “Did Maldonado crash?” but not one called “Did Vettel crash?” even though it is not like Vettel has never crashed. Vettel is not Maldonado and the USA is not Bahrain, you cannot say that everyone is the same just because no one is perfect.
   6. 

      pSynrg (@psynrg)
      17th April 2015, 15:16

      Hey nice one Keith, it looks like you finally snagged the Daily Mail comments crowd…
5. 

   ColdFly F1 (@)
   17th April 2015, 0:39

   I am hugely impressed with Hamilton for not demanding #1 status within the team, and wanting to beat his team mate on merit.
   Not sure if it is smart (car development should favour the strongest driver) but he gets loads of kudos for this.

   But why does he undo all that by immediately referring to Vettel and Alonso getting/asking for that? As far as I know he is correct, but he should stay above the whining, and let us come to our own conclusions.
   In that one quote (for me) he undid most o the goodwill he just built.
   1. 

      bull mello (@bullmello)
      17th April 2015, 1:32

      @coldfly – As a driver I would be uncomfortable with even the perception of number one status in a team. Contractual number one status would be even worse. Wouldn’t there be much more satisfaction beating your teammate in relatively equal cars?

      As a fan I find it more difficult to respect some drivers who have enjoyed a clear number one status, unofficial or contracted or however.

      I do not believe Hamilton, or Rosberg for that matter, have had number one status at Mercedes. Hamilton should follow his own advice to let his driving speak for him.
   2. 

      Funkyf1 (@funkyf1)
      17th April 2015, 3:54

      I think providing a driver with a status is a wrong indorsement by the team. Drivers have their own backing, sponsors and individual merits that get them to where they are. The drivers are always told to do what is right for the team and the team should do what is right for the drivers. Support, that’s a term I prefer to hear and not hear before mid season when one driver has shown with equal machinery that they may deserve a higher level of support due to previous results to help them mathematically achieve a championship title for themselves and/or the team.
      I have to agree with @coldfly. Hamilton constantly kills his own reputation with unnecessary comments, he really should just stick to letting his driving do the the talking.
      In Vettels defence, I believe he doesn’t currently have no.1 status at ferrari and it wouldn’t be written in his contact. It is something he will earn. Both Alonso and Vettel have been put in positions of mid to long term contracts where the team will be focused on developing a car to suit their investments.
      1. 

         Peter (@boylep6)
         17th April 2015, 6:45

         yup. talk about yourself, not the others. basic rule of PR.
         1. 

            Euro Brun (@eurobrun)
            17th April 2015, 8:42

            And ironically, one of the articals on the site yesterday was Lewis saying “I do my talking on the track”
   3. 

      PorscheF1 (@xtwl)
      17th April 2015, 6:31

      If he asked for it he would receive the same amount of ‘kudos’ if you like for speaking out. That’s how most Hamilton fans roll.
6. 

   Key (@key75)
   17th April 2015, 0:45

   Maybe I’m alone in this and I really loved the V10 and V8’s era (the sound was amazing).
   BUT I also think people aren’t giving enough time to this formula. The V6’s have improved since last year (in speed and sound)… And maybe another 3 years of it and all this trouble is worthy (because I also think with time the tecnology will be cheaper)! The constant changing of rules isn’t helping F1, specially in terms of fans. It gets confusing sometimes just to keep with it. I think there are a lot of more important problems that need to be solved firstly.

   But that’s just my view about the crazy and fast world of F1!
   1. 

      Polo (@polo)
      17th April 2015, 1:28

      I agree about sticking with the current engine formula for a few more years at least. As it points out in that Autosport article, I think that switching to 1000hp V8s will be more expensive than sticking with the current engine formula, due to adding more development costs, plus forcing teams to completely redesign cars/fuel tanks etc. to fit the new engines.

      I think that this whole “cheaper costs” spin Bernie is putting on it is just an attempt to make him seem like the good guy, and get more people on board with his proposals. I think he is being honest about thinking it will help TV ratings – although I am fine with the new engine sounds, I imagine there are some people out there who have been frustrated with the new engine sounds and lost some interest because of it. However, I think that they are a very small minority (far smaller than Bernie thinks) and that the main cause of people switching off are all these moves towards pay TV. And maybe cheap gimmicks like DRS play a role as well…
      1. 

         Key (@key75)
         17th April 2015, 9:54

         @polo Agree with the problems that you mention. DRS + Pay TV + Bernie and Budget equalisation are bigger problems in my opinion, right now.
   2. 

      ColdFly F1 (@)
      17th April 2015, 2:03

      You do not need V8’s or V10’s to get to 1000bhp.
      I’d stay with the current (impressive) V6-hybrids but:
      – increase max rpm‘s get the whining back (but still muffled due to turbo’s);
      – un-restrict fuel flow (it only serves a purpose in quali)
      – increase fuel limit (to limit the fuel saving strategies)
      1. 

         KoosOos (@koosoos)
         17th April 2015, 6:36

         @ Coldfly

         I Would also like to see it but there is a problem with the top two point. That is savty. If we do go that way you will have to have the bad tracks like we have now. I would love to see a car go down the straight at 400km hours. But will the driver be able to drive the cars and be save. If we can have that it will be great but if not i will rather have this.
      2. 

         BasCB (@bascb)
         17th April 2015, 7:28

         Honestly, I am not even sure we need to increase either of those (already they get nowhere near the maximum allowed rpms) @coldfly.

         Fuel doesn’t need to be increased, I don’t think even now they use up all of it at most tracks already, last year they were on the limit at maybe 2 tracks, and with this years improvements (Ferrari mentioned fuel efficiency as a key part) its possible they won’t be on the limit anywhere. They still take less fuel on board to save weight, so they will still be in “fuel saving mode” on track.
         And as power is already over 900 bhp, these engines will get round and about that 1000bhp target before the end of the current rules, and possible before these dinosaur engines could be introduced in 2017 anyway.
         Fuel flow is not something just for quali, its has the same purpose in the race of limiting the top power output, like boost restrictors etc would otherwise.

         All that said, I wholly agree with your point that F1 does not need a V10, V8 or V12 to get that kind of max power at all.
      3. 

         JerseyF1 (@jerseyf1)
         17th April 2015, 9:40

         @coldfly I think it’s even simpler than that. Max RPM is already above what they are using which is limited by the fuel flow so no need to change that for the time being.

         As you say the fuel flow restriction only has a significant impact in qualifying. Why not modify the rule so that the fuel flow limit only applies in quali and not the race. Whilst this would theoretically allow much higher power during the race, in practice this can’t be used much because of the overall fuel limit. Drivers would have to use the additional power judiciously for overtaking/defending and this would widen the strategy options. This type of additional overtaking aid seems like a much better solution than DRS. Rather than leaving the flow limit uncapped they could extend the current flow rate relative to RPM formula beyond 10,000rpm.

         The engines have been successful in achieving GP distances within the 100kg overall fuel limit already and indeed will regularly use much less on certain tracks – the engines have been developed with that target so to increase the fuel allowance would be a backwards step. Also, keeping the fuel limit means the effect of removing the flow rate restriction in the race is reduced to allowing short term power bursts rather than fundamentally increasing the power over the whole of the race which introduces greater speed and therefore risk.
         1. 

            Key (@key75)
            17th April 2015, 10:01

            @jerseyf1 I like these solutions because with it we develop the current formula to become better! That’s the direction I think F1 should go and also maybe allow more development (tokens or not) and tests.
      4. 

         Majordanby
         17th April 2015, 9:49

         I don’t understand these opinions regarding fuel saving. There will also be the need to save fuel as teams will also put in less than the minimum needed in order to save on weight and lap time. In fact the only way to stop this from happening would be to set a minimum fuel level at the start of each race
   3. 

      JCost (@jcost)
      17th April 2015, 7:33

      Changes in F1? Change the “F1 SUPREMO”.
      1. 

         ferrox glideh (@ferrox-glideh)
         17th April 2015, 13:44

         But wasn’t he appointed “DICTATOR FOR LIFE”?
7. 

   Sensord4notbeingafanboi (@peartree)
   17th April 2015, 1:24

   I’m sure Lewis has never asked for #1 status, I believe him, I’m also sure though that in light of circumstances and trust, McLaren and Mercedes have given their utmost to support a star in all areas F1 to succeed.
   1. 

      erix
      17th April 2015, 15:46

      No number 1 status at mclaren, it was proven in 2007 and 2015 year to date, I don’t see Button slowing down yet.
8. 

   Jay Menon (@jaymenon10)
   17th April 2015, 1:32

   “Hamilton: ‘I’ve never, ever, ever asked for a number one clause. Sebastian will have that. Fernando always asks for that. I have never, ever asked for that.”

   I wonder what Seb and Fernando will have to say about that?

   Frankly, I dont see what the big deal is about having a number 1 and/or 2 driver. It is a contractual agreement between a driver a team. If the team, who pay the drivers a great deal of money (at the sharp end anyway) to race, feels that a particular driver is worthy of a number 1 status, so be it.

   Senna was probably the most blatant perennial number 1 status driver. He blocked Derick Warwick from joining Lotus because he felt that the team could not focus on two competitive cars, which would have directly impacted his performance. Of course we all know the “special” Honda engines that he used to get at Mclaren. Yet, he is still dubbed the greatest of all because of what he did on track. Which is fine and rightly so. These guys are high competitive animals, they will try to exploit every ounce out of whatever advantage they can secure.

   If I were a team principal, if I had one driver who was clearly and consistently quicker than the other, I would adopt the number 1 and number 2 driver policy. As a team principal, my job would be to win or score as many points as possible as I would need to fulfill my responsibility to me parent company, shareholders and the factory. From a cost vs risk vs reward perspective, the 1-2 policy is the most risk averse approach.

   As a fan however, I wouldnt want to see predetermined position in a team. We like the uncertainty, the drama and the stress! So which way do teams go? Posture to the what the fans want or their responsibilities to their various stakeholders?
   1. 

      @HoHum (@hohum)
      17th April 2015, 3:24

      @jaymenon10, Don’t underestimate the team principals duty to get publicity for the team owner/sponsor, if HAM (for example) is cruising around 20 seconds ahead of the #2 car he is not going to get a lot of tv coverage or generate incidents for the press to write about, the maximum quality publicity for MB is generated when HAM and ROS battle it out for the perfect 1-2 finish.
   2. 

      JerseyF1 (@jerseyf1)
      17th April 2015, 9:48

      @jaymenon10 I think the evidence of Ferrari is that this only works if you have enough of a performance gap (in which case the need for it is reduced anyway). It worked with Schumacher because they mainly used it to swap positions so they gave themselves greater security of the drivers’ title but at the same time didn’t squander constructors points.

      In the Alonso era it was much less successful because the effect of his dominant position was detrimental to the other car and possibly the team as a whole and as a result the team underperformed in terms of constructors championship (and possibly the underperformance of his team mate made it more difficult for the number 1 driver to be helped by his team-mate). (In fact there were probably two factors at play – the negative effect of Alonso on the team and the drop-off in Massa’s performance post Hungary 2009 and it’s never possible to say which was the biggest contributor.)

      I therefore think that having a contractual number 1 policy is risky, but applying number one status as and when the circumstances suggest it is beneficial is the way to go for teams.
   3. 

      Crom
      17th April 2015, 10:52

      Apparently Arrivabene has scrapped team orders at Ferrari – “When I arrived at Maranello I saw the old rules of engagement, and I made some changes in the presence of both drivers and their race engineers – so that everybody is informed. The only rule in force is that of mathematics.”

      http://www.motorsport.com/f1/news/arrivabene-says-no-more-team-orders-at-ferrari/
   4. 

      AldoG
      17th April 2015, 19:03

      “Fernando always asks for that”

      LOL
9. 

   bull mello (@bullmello)
   17th April 2015, 1:44

   Bernie is either a liar, or ignorant, by making claims that any major change in engine formula will save money.

   If he is a liar, because he does realize changing engine formulas will cost everybody a whole bunch of money, then he is insulting all of our collective intelligence.

   If he is that ignorant, that would be sad if it wasn’t so crazy.
   1. 

      Key (@key75)
      17th April 2015, 10:03

      +1!!! haha well said!
   2. 

      ferrox glideh (@ferrox-glideh)
      17th April 2015, 13:34

      I believe that Bernie is both a liar AND ignorant. He is the rot at the core of F1’s current problems, and needs to be removed. His behavior, his gimmicks and his opinions have become less rational as the years go by. It’s almost as if he wants to drive F1 into the ground before he himself dies.
10. 

    Bolide (@mim5)
    17th April 2015, 2:17

    Hamilton – deny and shift blame.
11. 

    Maciek (@maciek)
    17th April 2015, 2:22

    I love Hamilton’s driving talent, always have. On balance, his persona in terms of racing I enjoy as well, no probs for me his sticking it to Nico. But man he really is a bit of a vacuous twit in other respects.
    1. 

       BasCB (@bascb)
       17th April 2015, 7:33

       I think its his protected life without any serious issues led so far that is getting the better of him there @maciek.
    2. 

       Gigantor (@kbdavies)
       17th April 2015, 13:44

       @Maciek – and how do we know you are not more of a “vacuous twit” than Lewis? i don’t get how people throw insults about, regarding people they do not know.
       1. 

          Maciek (@maciek)
          17th April 2015, 14:09

          @kbdavies
          : ))) Well, we certainly don’t know for sure. I was, of course, referring to his penchant for being blissfully unaware of how self absorbed he is in his tweets about himself, being himself, hey look at me I’m myself doing me things #me. He is, of course far, far from alone in this, but that one about his best bud Bernie deserved some ribbing in my opinion. But point taken, I don’t know the guy, so how about: he sure sends out some vacuous tweets…?
          1. 

             pSynrg (@psynrg)
             17th April 2015, 15:22

             @maciek That is the whole point of a personal twitter account. Spread your net a bit wider and take a look at some other Twitter accounts. You’ll find almost exclusively that people talk about themselves and what they are doing. It’s the reason people follow respective Twitter accounts.
             1. 

                Maciek (@maciek)
                17th April 2015, 15:42

                Indeed, but some buy into it more than others. My whole point being that as with anything in life it’s a question of degree. In my humble opinion Twitter is truly and utterly pointless – not in it’s potential, mind you, just for what it turns out to be the great majority of the time, Hamilton’s account a case in point, as are countless others. Why anyone would want to follow them is beyond me, but it’s a free world.
             2. 

                BasCB (@bascb)
                17th April 2015, 15:46

                Honestly, for many celebrity tweeters, their twitter account (and public appearances, etc) are just another way to get money from sponsors in showing off boots, fashion items, cars, instruments, etc where they get paid by the manufacturers of those items @psynrg, @maciek, @kbdavies.

                I think Lewis gets good money for the kit he is showing he uses in the pictures. Personally I find twitter accounts of the likes of Grosjean, Button, lately even Alonso more interesting and they certainly get closer to being a free expression of themselves.
12. 

    Philip (@philipgb)
    17th April 2015, 3:18

    He’s just said he does his talking on the track and then he comes out with a statement like that about his two biggest rivals?

    I’m usually a big defender of Hamilton as I think a lot of people just look for any reason to hate on him but even I have to call him out on this one.

    That being said the whole champagne drama is ridiculous. There is clearly an agenda going on in motorsport at present with the grid girl debate, talk of a women’s championship and now this.

    Motorsport is fun, let’s all stop taking it so seriously. I’m assuming this girl was there by choice, and aware the drivers often include them in the celebrations. There are genuinely bad men who are awful to women in this world, Hamilton is not one of them.
    1. 

       BasCB (@bascb)
       17th April 2015, 7:36

       Its a bit like a sentence starting with “i don’t want to be rude, but …” (or I am not a Rxxxist) you just know that what is coming is going to prove that first part wrong @philipgb.

       I like it more when Rosberg mentions that maybe he shouldn’t have said what he did in China, but would do it again because it served a purpose than Hamilton saying he does his talking on track and then talking down other rivals. Its not as if Lewis needs it, he is doing a great job talking on track this year!
13. 

    sumedh
    17th April 2015, 6:26

    Alonso asking for no.1, I can believe. But Vettel? It didn’t look like he had no.1 status in 2013 or 2014. And after 2014, why would anyone give him no.1 status?
14. 

    likosmokeses
    17th April 2015, 6:49

    ‘I’ve never asked for number one status’ – Hamilton

    Well Mercedes already gave you status no.1

    Malaysian Grand Prix 2013: Lewis Hamilton benefits from team orders as Niko Rosberg fumes
15. 

    Neel Jani (@neelv27)
    17th April 2015, 6:51

    Well, Lewis said he lets his driving do the talking. After his swipe at Alonso and Vettel, he has contradicted it all. I mean common! Lewis is in the prime of his career with multi million dollar contracts and 2 world championships and probably heading for third, he should really avoid making statements like these. Although he isn’t wrong but making statements unnecessarily like these is what spikes a few people.
16. 

    Arnold Triyudho Wardono (@ernietheracefan)
    17th April 2015, 7:49

    Bernie has find the way to end his life by listening those screaming 1000hp V8 (he’ll have a heartattack)
17. 

    lockup (@)
    17th April 2015, 8:29

    Personally I see it in the context of Brundle casually mentioning he’s sure Vettel has No1 in his contract, everyone knowing Alonso has it, and nobody cares, but then when it’s Hamilton he in fact does NOT have it but people speculate that he’s holding up his contract over it. And that then in his case it’s a BAD THING.

    It’s like the champagne, the living in Monaco, the radio ‘rage’ … he must get so fed up of being judged by different standards. There’s an article on Motor Sport where the journo mentions hearing some senior paddock figure calling him Sooty.

    So although it’s a bit unattractive, and a touch alien, I cut him some slack. It’s 100% malicious speculation that he asked for No1 status, and I suppose he wanted to point out that it’s others who have it, so why not go judge them.
    1. 

       Robbie (@robbie)
       17th April 2015, 13:00

       I guess I don’t read enough F1 tabloid stuff, but then there isn’t really much of that here in Canada. I hadn’t heard Brundle’s casual comment, but I guess he is then calling Arrivabene a liar for claiming there are no such deals at Ferrari anymore. I don’t know how MB or LH would know what’s in SV’s and FA’s contracts and I didn’t know anybody was villifying LH for supposedly holding up his contract over a number one staus issue. Personally I never thought LH would ask for number one status nor did I think Merc would grant it to him if he did. But if he is saying it’s others that have it, so why not go judge them, then he should also be prepared to take judgement over champagne, living in Monaco etc etc.
       1. 

          lockup (@)
          17th April 2015, 15:30

          But if he is saying it’s others that have it, so why not go judge them, then he should also be prepared to take judgement over champagne, living in Monaco etc etc.

          I don’t see the connection @robbie?
18. 

    CountryGent (@countrygent)
    17th April 2015, 8:38

    Wow, @colossal-squid your really raking in the COTDs this week! I completely agree with you about Ricciardo, and it is perhaps an omen of future stardom that Verstappen’s driving passing style seems strikingly similar: confidence encapsulated. Regarding his future, Ricciardo is a quantified talent, and if Red Bull cannot provide him with a championship prospect, he could quite easily find himself replacing Rosberg at Mercedes.

    I can’t say I agree so much with your previous COTD, especially with regards the E23 being “off the pace and points will most likely continue to be a struggle”. During preseason testing Nick Chester told AUTOSPORT that one of the key challenges posed by the E23 is that much of its conceptual development took place before the Mercedes deal was confirmed in October. So even though 2014 was probably written off by Lotus after two races, the engine-chassis synergy remains fundamentally premature. Therefore I think having, in China, the fourth fastest car, is mightily impressive and a trademark effort for a squad known for outperforming its budget. It’s no Allison Lotus, but a team showing real promise nonetheless.
    1. 

       dragoll (@dragoll)
       17th April 2015, 10:14

       @countrygent @colossal-squid While I agree that both drivers are naturally talented drivers, and I’m Australian to boot and want to see RIC up the front. However, if from the outside I could see that Renault had one of the weaker engines from 2014, and had their key aero designer stepping back, it didn’t take a prophet to predict their current fortunes. Drivers in F1 always miss the boat or seem to have some eternal guardian over them in regard to making the right and wrong team choices at certain points in their career, it is well within RIC and KYV’s control to objectively consider their teams prospects in the coming years.

       Hamilton made the move to merc despite everyones disbelief, and I must admit I was also surprised. Vettel’s move to Ferrari seemed odd, and I thought Alonso’s move to Honda would be more fruitful, as I thought the engine would be more competitive given all the supposed info they had from McLaren running Merc engines from the year before, but seems to matter naught in reality.

       So RIC has found himself in a position where he is stuck at RBR for the time being and needs to make the best of it to have any chance of finding a drive for next year, however, I doubt there will be any better drives on offer in 2016, with Ferrari and Merc having sorted themselves out already.
    2. 

       Colossal Squid (@colossal-squid)
       17th April 2015, 15:39

       Haha thanks @countrygent, always a thrill to get a COTD! Of the two of them I’d be more confident of Ricciardo having a more secure future in the sport for sure. Like you said he’s quantifiably excellent. Poor Kvyat might not get a chance, the way Max Verstappen is racing if I were Marko I’d want my teenage superstar making headlines in the parent team, not the junior team as soon as possible.

       I’ve been worried for Lotus since the start of last year with all their financial woes and talent leaving, so that may be why I wasn’t confident they could progress in developing their car this year. I really hope I was wrong in what I’ve said and that you’re right, there are many more competitive Sundays in their future.

       As @dragoll points out Ricciardo is definitely worthy of a top drive but with Mercedes and Ferrari looking locked down until 2017 at the earliest, and with McLaren secured with Alonso, Button and soon Magnussen/Vandoorne vying for a seat, isn’t his fate in the mid-to-long-term tied to Red Bull? Or do you think Rosberg has a serious possibility of leaving?
19. 

    geekracer2000 (@geekracer2000)
    17th April 2015, 8:40

    I believe Hamilton when he says he never asked for number one status in a team.
    I also think that is because he thinks he’s better than everybody and that he doesn’t need that clause. But when things don’t go his way like in 2014 he will use any little thing to portrait him self as a victim (Monaco and Spa comes in mind). Especially Spa it was just an racing incident and we’ve seen many like that one, but Lewis managed to make it look and sound like assassination attempt on him. And it worked many fans turned they hatred on Nico even their team did. He also did that manipulative behavior in 2007 too, many times.
    At least guys putting it on paper are honest about it.
    1. 

       Patrickl (@patrickl)
       17th April 2015, 8:48

       The team punished Rosberg over that Spa incident …

       Even Rosberg said he did it “to make a point”. Monaco is dubious, but Hamilton certainly isn’t the only one assuming Rosberg drove backwards into traffic on purpose.
20. 

    Girts (@girts)
    17th April 2015, 10:15

    Does Vettel really have a number one clause in his agreement? He never seemed to have it at Red Bull as Webber usually ignored team orders even if the team issued them and the 2014 season speaks for itself.

    Raikkonen claims that he was going to fight Vettel in the Chinese GP but ran out of laps and it is hard to believe that Kimi would be ready to be a permanent number 2 anyway.

    If Ferrari can smell the title and Vettel has a decent margin over Raikkonen in the championship standings, they will start issuing team orders at some point but Mercedes have already signalled their readiness to do the same thing and that is a different story.
21. 

    Key (@key75)
    17th April 2015, 10:22

    See this is one of the big problems of F1! How can someone so stubborn control the sport when he doesn’t care for the meaning of it and some of the traditions. At least 5 european venues (Monza, Monaco, Spa, Silverstone and GermanyGP) should always stay on the calendar.
    1. 

       ColdFly F1 (@)
       17th April 2015, 11:07

       what a good man that Bernie guy. @key75

       (BE:)Then I divide the money up for the teams.

       He only forgot to mention that he sneakily picks up the bill for CVC’s interest costs (by paying inflated dividends), and his dividing for the teams means that CVC gets multiples of what any team gets.
       Oh and did I mention that he monopolises all income streams so he can keep creaming off the top.
       1. 

          Key (@key75)
          17th April 2015, 11:56

          @coldfly Yeah, seriously that’s what really gets on my nerves despite everything right now. F1 needs another man at the front, a fresh start but someone who also knows the sport traditions and importance.
22. 

    Philip (@philipgb)
    17th April 2015, 12:40

    You know the longer they’ve been under this engine formula, the less I’m sure I don’t actually agree with Bernie.

    First and foremost I want to see close racing and I want to be able to actually visibly be aware of the drivers talents doing what they are doing.

    We were all sold on this idea of turbos with more power than grip and cars dancing on the limits of adhesion, but that’s not really what we’re getting. Visibly, it’s not really any different than the last era but we have less dramatic noise.

    The road relevance I’m also struggling to really get. The engines don’t sit up and scream so we aren’t really aware of them during the race, we don’t even get to see when they are deploying the hybrid system like we did with KERS which at least involved us as the viewer in the tactical side if racing. This engine formula just seems to have left us as the fans detached from the engine aspect of racing. The fuel economy graphs just aren’t that interesting.

    So yeah I initially really liked the idea of the new engine formula, but the reality is it doesn’t do much for the show. I’m not saying scrap them, but I want to have a sense of knowing what the engine is doing and how the drivers are using them to get performance from it.

    At the moment, I’m going to backtrack and say maybe Bernie is right about going back to something monstrous and I’ve just been disagreeing out of habit.
    1. 

       BasCB (@bascb)
       17th April 2015, 15:52

       Last year we saw cars with too much torque for their tyres at least at the start of the season. But by now the teams have been able to finetune power delivery, they have added downforce and the drivers know better what to expect of the cars @philipgb, in other words, we have more or less proven that even if they give us crazy horse power engines and small wings, its likely only a matter of a year for teams to adapt and be back to seemingly driving like on rails.
       Overall it means that unless they want to completely change the cars almost every year, this is not a solution (and changing every year means incredible cost and risk, something the big teams AND the small teams will dislike).
23. 

    GeorgeTuk (@georgetuk)
    17th April 2015, 12:48

    Thank you for the article on Bahrain.

    It’s uncomfortable reading before enjoying a sporting event, any light put on the issue is better than nothing.
24. 

    the limit
    17th April 2015, 17:48

    Alonso’s #1 status in 2015? Whether he finishes last or second from last!

Comments are closed.