McLaren to replace Sergio Perez

Why such a need for personal insults? Is that the level of debate that you partake in? You're not the first to go down this route either, sadly very common on this site.

The 150 points argument is laughable because it is extremely selective - it ignores good luck for Hamilton, ignores the bad luck of other drivers and makes ridiculous assumptions. A classic example is Hamilton qualifying with an underweight car being given as a guaranteed win! Crazy.
As I've said, it's been debunked so many times by so many people, if you still believe it it's because you want to belive it, rather than actually basing it on logic & reason.
I've also said I don't hate Hamilton. You've clearly got your own agenda there.

And James Allen a good journalist!? Hi James, hiya pal!

"it's been debunked so many times by so many people"

Link please

Why is it crazy, all the races he qualified on pole last year bar australia, he won them when the car did not break down. The fuel would have given him a tenth advantage and he qualified half a second faster than everyone else.

His pace in practice also showed no one would have got near him. The articles also showed Button's luck in comparison to his and you are free to show examples where other drivers had the same or worse luck. If you cannot, the argument cannot be debunked.

So please present your data for debate

Hobo, why don't you just accept that you know nothing about F1 and be an embarrassing nuisance somewhere else.

I know that Hamilton is above Dundee in the league but the football club is not the same as the driver. Sorry to break that to you but you had to realise it one day.

Every time that you have posted one of your ludicrous claims on this forum you have been invited to provide something credible to support your view. You have evaded every single opportunity to do so.

Your utter stupidity gets mocked by people that actually do take an interest and have knowledge of F1 yet you come back for more.

Seriously, why do you bother?

"So please present your data for debate"

I'm taking a leap of faith here and imagining this comment is aimed at "drunken hobo" (Trolls always have such suitable names) for his groundless and unproven remark about James Allen's informative piece about the points Hamilton lost.

Of course, Drunken Hobo is so much more informed and articulate than Allen, who is, after all, merely a massively experienced motor sports journalist with access to the highest level..

This is a poster who claims Vettel is, "a beautiful man"!!

He has nothing against Hamilton but doesn't like his fans or the media coverage ("Way-to-go" logic inTHAT reasoning)

(OK, I have no problem with Vettel, it just his fans and the fawning media coverage, of course, as a troll I am not remotely interested in his driving skill, although the colour of his skin MAY INFLUENCE MY OPINION)

I see he has replied to my post about his deceitfulness but as he is filtered I can't actually read it.

I could log-out, but he is like ma, just not worth the effort.

"I know that Hamilton is above Dundee..."

Yeah, but Dundee is only driving a Caterham, isn't he?

Yep, I think it is better to filter him along with the other two loonies and then log in first before accessing the motorsport section. That way you don't have to read the three fools desperately posting to each other to agree with each other's utter nonsense.

Pacific - Trite racist accusations deserve no response.

Daredevil (about the only one on here looking for any sort of discussion, even if you are completely wrong ) - A quick look at the stats shows that Hamilton qualified on pole 7 times, but only won from pole on 2 occasions. I think that shows my point is legitimate.
I just find such speculation of "what might have been" to be pointless, as it's completely unpredictable. You could equally argue that if Massa didn't have a fuel rig problem in late 2008 (was it Japan?), he'd have won the title and not Hamilton, or if the rain shower in Brazil had occured 30 seconds later, Glock would have made it to the line ahead of Hamilton.
But it's pointless to speculate, it didn't turn out that way and the history books will show Hamilton as 2008 champion & Vettel as 2012 champion.

Just like how Hamilton would have been champion in 2007 too if the fia did not invent a new rule at spa in 2007. Somehow you didn't include that.

No one is saying with certainty that he would have been champion in 2012, we are just highlighting what could have been which is perfectly logical to most unbiased people.

I do find it amusing your application of stats to this debate, saying it is selective. I can build upon that, since all the drivers have not driven Seb's redbull, we cannot consider seb great then by the selective logic you have applied.

Excellent

"Just like how Hamilton would have been champion in 2007 too if the fia did not invent a new rule at spa in 2007. Somehow you didn't include that.."

Er, sorry mate, I think that was 2008 and Hamilton did manage to scrape it, despite Mosley's worst attempts to scupper the Glorious Plucky Little McLaren Team Of British Heroes (Bit od irony there!)

But interestingly enough Mosley was in South America that week-end and there was considerable delay before the penalty was awarded.

I would love to see his mobile phone traffic on that day.

"No one is saying with certainty that he would have been champion in 2012, we are just highlighting what could have been which is perfectly logical to most unbiased people."

Exactly. To deny Hamilton is a great (if rather temperamental) talent is to deny the truth.

My bad, got my years mixed up. Thanks for clarifying.