Is it fair compensation when Lewis Hamilton has the fastest car ?

I think it's unfair that his team has the fastest car. Form other drivers point of view it's very discouraging to not even be able to think of ever winning driver's championship. He has 100 pole position in his name which makes me wonder if his talent is the only reason or his car is helping him win it like it's nothing. Which would be very unfair. Why FIA is not regulating the performances of the cars evenly? What hope can a team like HAS have to compete against Mercedes when they don't have the funding?

certain circuits favour better handling than just speed , and all the teams knowledge and finance mean they too should be able to get close in speed ,
so my question would be why are the other teams cars inferior when they need not be ?

I used to watch a lot of F1 - and that is what I realized too. It is much more a battle of car manufacturers than actual drivers. In my opinion Hamilton and Rosberg do not necessarily have so much talent, but rather just have the best cars with the best engines. This game is simple, the fastest car wins. They are all good drivers - all of them. It's not like in other sports where it depends on facing very individual situations each time. They always drive the same laps over and over again and once someone takes the lead, especially if they start from the pole position it is easy to hold the position for a long time during the race, as there are only few curves where a overtaking manouver is possible. All drivers are extremely skilled, but those with the best manufacturer clearly have a very unfair advantage.

Sports are unfair. At least, most. That is just how it is. Sometimes they WANT to make it unfair, so people have something to talk about. Also sports need money. If manufacturers have no opportunity to show off, nobody would invest so much money in car races. They need to make tons of advertising to make those events pay off. Entry tickets wouldn't be enough for all those equipment, high speed cameras, road preparation and much more.

I guess it is how it is. I stopped watching F1, as I thought that Sebastian Vettel was treated unfairly.

just thinking of the f1 track in japan , there id back the car with better handling , over car with better speed but struggling to disagree with either of your posts

@WinOr10PushUps I didn't realize. How was he treated unfairly? And I think that's partly the reason why People don't watch F1. Because it's lot about cars , engines and less about the race itself. People can easily predict who would win. Every race I know it's either gonna be Mercedes or redbull. Championships are being won before even starting the race. Imo every teams will get the same number of people watching and getting to know the names of the teams. So spending that kind of money just to have 1st and not a 5th don't make sense imo. People know that formula 1 tech mostly won't ever be used in road cars. Idk why then spend that money by Mercedes. It's soo hi-tech normal people can't even relate to it imo.

@sabutuma I don't think they have the same resources as Mercedes. Mercedes has much better acceleration, efficiency and handling. They even get around the rules by spending a lot in R&D phase. Like Lewis pulling steering wheel to change wheel angle in straight line. So it's not the fault of other teams.

In my opinion, Formula 1 is previous to Chess, as a reasonable human achievement.



" Deja vu ? "

@Golismeando-manchego previous to chess ? I don't understandd. What do you mean ?

Formula 1 is very advanced, for an average human being.
But the next step is chess.
You may wonder:

How ?

I can reply that enlightenment, self-knowledge, is a subject that takes many, many centuries.
For a civilization like ours.
But a short-cut exists !
Like Dolphin-Therapy, in comparison to Psycho-analysis.
Dolphin-Therapy is already, powerful !

Then... Chess would be more creative than Formula 1. That's the clue.

@Golismeando-manchego but we are talking about F1. Not chess.