[axegon_]

I'm on the opinion that both Albon and Giovinazzi have a lot of potential but they both face several problems. Albon is in the back seat at Red Bull and he is in the same position as Raikkonen when he was at Ferrari: as far as everyone at Ferrari was concerned, it was 90% Vettel, 10% Raikkonen. In that sense, Albon is pretty much alone. Giovinazzi on the other hand made a very big mistake initially - he had Raikkonen of all people to learn from. Even beyond the experience, Kimi is quite possibly the most knowledgeable driver out there, not only as far as setting up a car but also sportsmanship. And it seems Giovinazzi eventually figured that out. When he started off, he acted like a truck, not an F1 driver. These days he is a lot more composed and is getting really good results, considering he is in one of the slowest cars out there. I'm pretty sure he has Kimi to thank for that.

Hamilton is a very different story - let's face it, he is the silver spoon boy. I really don't think there's a single person in F1 history who had it as easy as he did. While Michael was always riding with one foot over the edge of the rules.

It's not to say that all of them aren't incredibly talented. But it does seem to me that for most of them circumstances played a much bigger role than their actual skills. Hence the reason why I wouldn't rule out either Albon or Giovinazzi as potential champions.

[mft_]

Hamilton, the working class boy from Stevenage whose Dad had to work multiple jobs to support him being able to go racing in karts, is the “silver spoon boy”?

[axegon_]

As I said, all of them have immense talent, but apart from the Red Bull-Vettel dominance era, Hamilton has always been in the best car and he was initially pushed forward by Ron Dennis of all people. I honestly can't think of anyone in F1 history who can say they were at all times backed up by people like Dennis, Fry, Lacey, Hakkinen, Wolff, Lauda from their first day in F1... No one comes even close to that. He's had it incredibly easy in F1.

[bsanr2]

Maybe he was just good enough, young enough, to get people behind him? What is with this insistence on stripping him of his agency in his success? Are people threatened by it?

[axegon_]

At the end of the day life isn't fair. That's said, if you look at last year's season when Ferrari had a more decent car (far worse thank Mercedes still), Leclerc with all his lack of experience and poor judgement at times, slaughtered Hamilton in qualifying. That genuinely makes me question if Hamilton's success isn't largely a consequence of Merc's well known superiority. On that topic, I think even Bottas has all the qualities and skills to beat Hamilton but he is mentally losing the battle. Imagine if Hamilton had to face someone like Leclerc, Vettel, Sainz, Russel, or even Raikkonen despite his age or even Riccardo or Hulkenberg. If you look at the biography of each one of those, they had it considerably more difficult than Hamilton.

[bsanr2]

They said the same thing when Maria Sharapova beat Serena Williams.

[mft_]

> That's said, if you look at last year's season when Ferrari had a more decent car (far worse thank Mercedes still)

If you follow F1, you'll know that there are far more variables than this:

1. The cars perform differently at different tracks, due to their fundamental design

2. The setup is often a balance of qualifying pace and race pace, and teams may approach this differently

3. The cars are constantly developed during the season (with improvements are somewhat unpredictable) meaning the balance of power in a season can shift

.

> Leclerc with all his lack of experience and poor judgement at times, slaughtered Hamilton in qualifying.

Not sure that 7 vs. 5 pole positions is "slaughtered". Over the season, LH comfortably out-qualified everyone [1], and of course comfortably out-raced them as well [2].

[1] https://www.racefans.net/2019-f1-season/2019-f1-statistics/2...

[2] https://www.racefans.net/2019-f1-season/2019-f1-statistics/2...

.

> That genuinely makes me question if Hamilton's success isn't largely a consequence of Merc's well known superiority. On that topic, I think even Bottas has all the qualities and skills to beat Hamilton but he is mentally losing the battle. Imagine if Hamilton had to face someone like Leclerc, Vettel, Sainz, Russel, or even Raikkonen despite his age or even Riccardo or Hulkenberg. If you look at the biography of each one of those, they had it considerably more difficult than Hamilton.

We're so far apart on this, it's probably not worth continuing much further. But I strongly agree with the other person who replied to you: Hamilton hasn't "had it easy" - he's put himself in strong positions (McLaren, then Mercedes) and has been supported by strong people (Dennis, Lauda, Wolff, etc.) because he's seen as the best overall driver on the grid (qualifying, racing, speed, tyre management, racing temperament, developing and setting up a car, adaptability to different cars & driving styles, etc.). During Hamilton's time, probably only Alonso (IMO) comes as close as such a complete package.

Ultimately, F1 is a dog-eat-dog world. If Hamilton didn't make himself valuable to his team bosses through his performances --didn't make it totally in their interest to continue to employ him-- they'd drop him and move on to someone else. So ultimately, either you're saying that multiple smart successful team bosses are wrong... or maybe Hamilton really is that good.