Just The Facts Ma'am: The Fans Case For and Against Lewis Hamilton

Welcome back to another edition of the Slipstream.  I am sure by now, you have heard the FIA's ruling on Spa. I managed to listen to the F1 race two weeks ago from Monza on Sirus Channel 125 on my way up to the NASCAR race in New Hampshire, and needless to say that I was impressed by the coverage.

The race seemed like one for the record books, and it is good to see a variety of winners this year from not just the front teams.  The jury is still out in regards to Vettel however, but that's for another column and another day.

This article is not about that, but it is about the case that I am sure has been covered during my LOA from this forum.  Regardless, I will try and break down why Lewis Hamilton is loved and hated taking into account his performance on the track, his depiction in the media (US and international),taking into consideration today's ruling as well.

The sudden rise of Lewis Hamiton's star was not sudden at all, it was actually expected considering his roots and development in the lesser formula series. Formula One, is only his second series in which he has spent more than one season with.  

His results, discussed in a previous edition of the Slipstream, tell a tale of domination coupled with the grooming of the first manufactured Formula One driver of this decade.  Arguments could be made that the Red Bull Driver Program features more in depth development, but none of Red Bull's in house development drivers have produced anything more than a mid-field finish. 

Vettel, despite being the first Red Bull driver to score a victory, was not one of the in house drivers, since he was signed over from BMW/Sauber in the middle of last season. So the question still remains, why do people love/hate Lewis Hamilton?

On Track Performance

For:

When the partner to then World Champion Fernando Alonso was announced, not a lot of people were surprised that the young Briton was chosen over a plethora of other potential drivers.  Some old school types believed that Pedro De La Rosa deserved that open seat next to Alonso more than anybody else on the grid, having taken the place of Juan Montoya and even scoring a podium to boot. 

But when Hamilton was announced, it was seen as a relief to many fans that not only was the color barrier being broken in F1, but this young star had the potential to do great things, in due time.  His skills in Melbourne impressed everybody, and stunned his rival into a sense of paranoia that lasted throughout the 2007 campaign. 

Hamilton became the first F1 rookie in a decade that had a legitimate chance at winning the World Championship.  So why wouldn't anybody want to see a rookie fight it out with his double world champion team mate against the on rush of Ferrari scarlet in the forms of Kimi and Massa? 

Lewis managed to restore national pride to the F1 realm of the UK, having been disappointed at the efforts of Anthony Davidson, David Coulthard, and of course, Jenson Button.  The hopes and dreams at national glory for the UK rest upon the Woking based McLaren team and on the shoulders of Lewis Hamilton. 

Having longed for a return to the days of "Our Nige," it seems their waiting has paid off.  Now all 2008's season is about how it is Lewis' title to lose, since he should have won it in '07.  Damn the FIA and their damn agenda.

Against

Hamilton has been gifted one of the best seats in F1 and he didin't seem to appreciate who he was racing next to, nor who he was racing against. 

First of all, De La Rosa deserved that seat and not the 22-year-old rookie that may have been suited for a test role in order to learn the ropes.  Alonso was brought on board to help McLaren over the top and finally get back what they believed should have been theirs in 2005, a world drivers and constructors championship.  

Yet again, Ron Dennis has shown how he cannot manage Latin drivers.  It became pretty obvious after the qualifying incident who  Dennis was pushing for to win the WDC.  It was only through the infighting between the McLaren drivers that Ferrari was able to secure the Driver's championship. 

And the complaining?  C'mon, Lewis, you should have known what you were getting into when you pull up wheel to wheel against Alonso at Spa.  Was that what Ron told you what was going to happen at the start?  Or did he just adjust your rose tinted lenses for you right before the race?  This season has been just one mistake after another, capped off with the blunder at Spa (who would have thought?)

The Media

This part of the article I have the most to say about.  While I respect Hamilton's efforts on the track, my main view of him was formed with how the media treated him.  Every week at my local bookstore since Hamiton's debut, Autosport, a weekly UK based racing magazine would feature Hamilton on its cover, or head line with Hamilton mentioned in it, almost on a regular basis. 

Granted, the English have a tendency to favor their own, as was the case when Button was doing well (remember those days?), but this was bordering on the obscene.  Same goes for F1 Racing, a monthly magazine that covers not just the actions on the track, but the world that is F1. 

Yet again, it seems that Hamilton became the apple of another UK based mag's eye and was featured on the cover during the whole season of 2007 and a majority of 2008 has been devoted to him as well. 

I know that the media has and will form their own agenda, but there is no better example than the SPEED TV coverage of a Grands Prix.  David Hobbes needs to be muted and I say this with conviction.  His dismissal of Fernando Alonso and the rest of the F1 grid it seems is just absurd. 

He seems to go out of his way to throw a zinger or put Alonso down, and in 2007 this was even more apparent because of the tight title fight.  This was most obvious during the closing laps of the final race in Brazil.  Where, through no fault but his own, Lewis blew the title for the second race in a row, by making a mistake and hitting the neutral engage button on his control wheel. 

But with two laps to go, Steve Matchett and Hobbes were trying to manifest these outrageous situations where "If all three of these cars wreck each other, Lewis becomes champion!  So it's not over yet boys!"  I know there is wishful thinking and all, but give me a break. 

The excuses made for Hamilton during Canada of this year, where some how Hobbes pointed out that it was Raikkonen's fault for waiting at pit out instead of breaking the rules, thus giving Hamilton a great big target to plow into, is another one of the many examples of the blatant excuses and media bias that resounds the F1 coverage in the United States. 

Oh by the way, did you know that Lewis' father Anthony was in attendance?  I just thought I should point that out since it doesn't get mentioned or shown on TV at least five times a race minus the podium ceremonies.

Verdict

Personally, like several other fans of F1, I do not admire Hamilton and would not call myself one of his fans.  My main pillar of arguement for this statement, is that he did not earn his "due" like many of the other drivers on the grid. 

I am sure the question of what qualifies as dues paid in Grand Prix racing, but even Michael Schumacher started at Jordan before racing for Bennetton.  Even Fernando Alonso raced for Minardi, even Kimi Raikkonen and Felipe Massa raced for Sauber, and so on and so on. 

The media that Is Hamilton good for the sport?  Maybe, maybe not.  We are only in year two of the post Schumacher era.  Is the sport good for Hamilton?  According to the FIA, I would think not. 

See you under the lights in Singapore!