Was defintely an interesting race. Less than a week to go before we do it all again :)

Precedent had been set in 2016, Hamilton was lucky it was only 5 seconds.

LINK

Personally, as with the Rosberg incident, I think it was a deliberate move, done in the heat of the moment. Whilst the driving line he took, was similar to Bottas's on that lap (I didnt get to see if it was similar to his own), it was still within his ability to allow room. He would have been aware of Albon's presence - he was slightly ahead at one point. This is one of the more obvious traits that he has copied from Senna. He will force another driver's hand, to see how they react, and then he knows how far he can 'take it' with that driver. Watch for it. With the car he has under him along with his ability, he doesnt need to be as aggressive in such situations as other drivers do. The fact that his gearbox was showing signs of weakness, is only more damning against him for this incident IMO. For me, it goes against the spirit of the competition. He had a choice, race Albon, ruin his gearbox, or let Albon by and nurse his car home, or drive 'just' wide enough to squeeze him out. But that is the arrogance of the man and of most of the drivers on the grid - a trend I think that started about 35-40 years ago with Piquet sr. (irrelevant rant over lol)

It is a shame that Albon lost out so much from it. I think there was a possibility that he could have got past Hamilton.

I have mixed thoughts about Hamilton. Not being a Schumacher or Ferrari fan, I want someone to beat his 7 WDC titles, and for it to be a Brit would be even better.

But with Hamilton’s arrogance and attitudes over recent years, (I used to be a fan, but think he changed as a result of being beaten by Rosberg) I really wish there could be someone else with a real possibility of doing it....

I think the arrogance was on display before his issues with Rosberg. When he first burst onto the scene, I did think/hoped he would be a little different to the rest of the field at the time. Coming across, publicly at least, humble and grateful - thinking back on it now, it was like a commercial facsimile of Senna (with Ron Dennis behind him, that makes sense to me, especially if you look at how Ron Dennis operated). Senna despite his flaws, which were many on the racetrack, seemed to be genuinely humble off it.

I do hope the Lando Norris, Carlos Sainz, Alex Albon et al relationships/personalities do not get destroyed by the hype and commercialism. I cannot help but like Norris, from his interviews (reminds me of a later Button).

As far as Hamilton being a Brit, hmmmmm, bit of a flag of convenience if you ask me (ignoring the residence and taxes complaints).

Not sure F1 got this one right, 6 of the drivers deserve respect for sticking their heads above the current trench of the day. People in general watch F1 to see F1, if they wanted to view politics they can and would go elsewhere. :shrug:

:smilie_re: Personally I don't agree with Hamilton's recent view of Bernie E. In the the early 90's I lived for a time in Middlesex. Racism was obvious, as were the perpetrators and their victims. :getmecoat:

I agree with you. It was difficult to watch and listen to. Added to Hamilton's 'necklace', made it worse and detracted, for me, from the issue. It made it look like a fashion statement. Racism and slavery are two different subjects (the slavery statement of the necklace is at odds with the history of his team - but I believe that Mercedes we know now, should be judged in the now and their practices in the future, as with every company).

I find it difficult to believe that there is widespread discrimination within the teams. Be it gender, race or nationality. Every team would love to have a female as a driver, as generally women tend to be lighter, and have a narrower frame to a male, so logically, they would make for a faster car. Likewise, when it comes to engineers, they will take the best, regardless of gender, race etc.

This takes it back to education or accessibility (for the actual racing). The education is not the concern of F1, but of the governments and their departments responsible for it. Once you introduce involvement of F1 or any institution, you run the risk of introducing positive discrimination - they supply encouragement or funding, but you can only apply if you are from the minority already present. In terms of discrimination, if we stop talking about it, it will go away............... eventually.(at all levels, from within the family, to govt. - I know it is easier said than done, Morgan Freeman, among others, makes some great points about it in THIS video, another video, with Denzel Washington,it is culture).

As far as accessibility goes, this is where F1 can make a difference. In terms of getting a drive, they can draw from feeder series, who can draw from their feeder series. This though of course brings it back to accessibility again (teams cannot afford to pay for a driver, so have to resort to having a pay driver). But this ultimately is where the budget caps are coming into play. Sadly I do not think it is enough, and F1 has become so rich, it would be difficult for it to give all that up to try to find that purity of 60s and 70s. I do not think there is a quick fix for the accessibility without a complete abandonment of the current formulae.

But all of this talk, I think detracts from the original post, I apologise to the OP for this.

Mercedes I doubt will welcome the attention which Hamilton has drawn to a topic which Mercedes is not untainted with in its relatively recent history. The likes of Bernie E will likely remember only too well the connection I allude to given his age and the times he lived through.

:smilie_re: Absolutely nothing to do with being ignorant or uneducated as the pot would have the kettle.

Well done Lando Norris. :bowdown:


Nice to see McLaren competitive again.