You said you stopped short of writing “his filty mouth”. I think you should question how logical this is?
well, I did question it. In such a way that I didn’t write it.
Possibly you have also misquoted there – or maybe that was just a silly comment by LH.
This sentence sums up your big reply: for you, a quote like that is either false or is excusable for being “silly”, not counting for the arrogance-meter.
Well, let’s clarify things; The Guardian:
I’ll paste the main quote:
“I will always think that my nemesis and my closest rival will always be Fernando,” said an unusually reflective Hamilton. “Just because of my history, when I started out. I see him as my Prost, if we were [Alain] Prost and [Aryton] Senna. If you were to say ‘choose a driver’ [that I would like to be] I would clearly choose Ayrton. And maybe I would put him as Prost.”
And, please, don’t raise up doubts in other people sentences like that with “Possibly, you have misquoted…”, it’s just impolite. If you don’t know it, don’t raise the issue, or if you want to raise it try to inform yourself first.
The comments on using Ayton’s christian name.. Please.
Using the first name, especially in the context he used, implies they have some kind of relationship (they know each other, at least; they are friends, to be more adequate) which is obviously not true. And you say I took it out of context, but you are the one that are trying to do it. No, you are doing worse than decontextualization, you’re trying to insert elements that aren’t there by implying he’s being asked about Ayrton Senna and his mónaco win (he had 6, which one?). Now, I’ll quote the entire speech one can see on the FIA review of Monaco 08, Lewis Hamilton’s speaking:
“When you’re here in F1, it’s the best thing it can happen… It’s incredible how the track can change so many times.. and the car feels good, the car doesn’t feel so good and then it feels good.. this weekend, especially as it dried up, you know, I felt confortable in the lead, but I couldn’t really believe it, I was driving and thinking «ok, Ayrton won in the rain here, and he dominated and I’m forty seconds in the lead and thinking this will be almost like Ayrton’s win», and then safety car come out, but that didn’t matter.”
That’s the speech he gave to the media, no interruptions, no questions about “Ayrton”; I can’t find it on youtube, but to see the facial expressions the man does is really something. So, you’re wrong.
The man was the WC at the time and Hamilton out qualified him and scored more points.
No, you’re wrong, they both scored 109 points.
If this aggrogant streak was correct in Hamilton, why was he not pointing out the obvious point that he beat Alonso.
Again, not pointing out a fact is not a sign of not-arrogance. It’s just… it’s nothing really; remember we’re talking about a non-action. If he pointed out people would think “yeah, we can read the table, thank you”
Ayrton Senna was (is) Michael Schumacher’s idol. Do you want to compare Schumi’s reactions over the time to Hamilton’s? In one side you have one that’s humble to the point of saying that his first championship wasn’t supposed to be his, but Senna’s (at the time, it was the only WDC he had), recognizing, that despite having 20 points of advantage at the time of his death it would probably go to the Williams driver. On the other side, well… I think I’ve written enough about that, right?