[rubicon]

Lewis Hamilton questions F1 expansion to new countries - "felt very conflicted" about Indian GP!

https://www.bbc.com/sport/formula1/46199996

extract's from the world champion's interview to BBC.

"On the racing side, I don't know how important it is to go to new countries as such," the five-time champion said.

"If you had the Silverstone Grand Prix and a London Grand Prix, it would be pretty cool."

"We've got a lot of real racing history in England, Germany, Italy and now in the States it is starting to grow," said Hamilton. "But you only have one event per year in those places.

"If it was my business, I'd be trying to do more events in those countries.

"I've been to Vietnam before and it is beautiful. I've been to India before to a race which was strange because India was such a poor place yet we had this massive, beautiful grand prix track made in the middle of nowhere. I felt very conflicted when I went to that grand prix.

"We had a grand prix in Turkey and hardly anyone came. Cool track, cool weekend but poor audience."

He added: "If you have the German Grand Prix and you've got a Grand Prix in Berlin, I think connecting to cities where a lot of people are is probably a good thing, not necessarily going to countries where they don't know so much about Formula 1."

[srishiva]

He is now entitled to have opinion about other countries ! Now coming to F1 held in Delhi, I dont know what the response was with people's participation. You wouldn't see this kind of response from other champions in other sports. The fact that he doesnt mind more venues in countries already having the races makes it seem not much about the number of races.

Seems like a person not so much exposed to anything other than the sport he is in. Used to like him.

[octane1002]

Well, its always a conflict between establishing new marketplaces versus sticking to established markets (in tems of penetration of the sport), isn't it?His comments go deeper than that though and offer insight into other peripheral considerations too.Not necessarily your boistrous World Championship winning driver looking down upon lesser nations.

To say Turkey did not have viewership must come from first hand experience. To any sportsman, lack of audience must feel like under-appreaciation. It saps energy levels to perform to the best of your abilities.

About India, that odd feeling would always be there.Formula 1 is a rich man's sport and we as a country have a lot of poverty on display (typical foreigner notion, don't blame them really). Not sure, what is to feel bad about that comment, it is an honest and blunt assessment. We do not have funds to feed the poor, but funds to build gigantic and grand racetracks.A guilt inducing thought indeed.

On another level, he is advocating sticking to places where the sport has been historically revered rather than have to work on education of audiences and hope for increased viewership. Fair thought indeed from an event manager's (FIA) POV .For a spectator in a (Formula 1) starved country, not so!

[ksameer1234]

Wow! I was a big fan of F1 and of Hamilton when he burst onto the scene as a prodigy. Recently though, I am neither following F1 nor have any interest of Hamilton's bling. If I did though, these comments would have been highly disappointing.

Yes, India is a diverse country and yes there are poor people here but Europe isn't exactly the center of universe nowadays. I see Spain hosting 4 MotoGP races (no clue about F1) and also read how destroyed Spanish economy was. The lavish motoGP events definitely don't reflect the state of poor Spaniards.

On other thoughts, I wonder if Hamilton's comments are even worth attention. I bet only handful people would recognise him if he roamed the streets of Mumbai or Delhi, so he isn't exactly a celebrity in this part of world.

F1 is commercial sport and needs money, that's the bottomline. I wonder how kindly would Liberty Media take the comments from poster boy of their brand.

[Hayek]

Actually just demonstrates how drivers may have no clue about where their pay cheque comes from. EMs and the US are the future of F1 - European audiences are not going to rise. Whether it is sponsors or the broadcast rights holders, they all want F1 to get audiences in these markets. Having local races is a key part of that. Of course the GOI killed the golden goose through its insane tax requests - and JP is bankrupt, so the Indian GP had to die.

[arunphilip]

Originally Posted by ksameer1234

I wonder how kindly would Liberty Media take the comments from poster boy of their brand.

I'm amused you see Hamilton as the poster boy for the F1 brand.

Hamilton markets "Brand Hamilton". F1 is just a major way he achieves it. He's definitely looking to himself outside motorsport in a post-F1 life.

Originally Posted by Hayek

Actually just demonstrates how drivers may have no clue about where their pay cheque comes from. EMs and the US are the future of F1 - European audiences are not going to rise. Whether it is sponsors or the broadcast rights holders, they all want F1 to get audiences in these markets. Having local races is a key part of that.

+1 to what Hayek said.

[Arjun Reddy]

Just came across a new article where Lewis Hamilton comments on India.

https://auto.ndtv.com/news/f1-race-i...milton-1947345

I guess these guys need more time away from the track to explore our country and the heritage.

He is rooting for two Grand Prixs in the UK.

Seriously do not think he knows the power of the Indian audience.:shockked:

I have personally met him in Bangalore. He actually drove the F1 car on the Nice road and commented that India " is such a nice place and the racing knowledge is so good "

Was a big fan until this statement.

[ksameer1234]

Originally Posted by arunphilip

I'm amused you see Hamilton as the poster boy for the F1 brand.

Hamilton markets "Brand Hamilton". F1 is just a major way he achieves it. He's definitely looking to himself outside motorsport in a post-F1 life.

While it is true that Hamilton is a brand in himself, F1 sport does piggyback on the success of legends to gain popularity. Schumacher is as much synonymous with Ferrari as he is with F1. I don't know if these comments will snowball but if that happens, it will have some negative impact on F1 as well. Again, nothing surprising in terms of ignorance of westerners but they need to realise that looking down upon customers is not the best way to do business.

By the way, it would be ironic if someday Hamilton has to fly down to India to promote some Mecredes car launch, I am sure that would be quite conflicting for him!

[arvind71181]

He is a foreigner with probably nil knowledge about us so what he sees is what he says and from that perspective, I dont think he can be blamed. There will be no development at most of the places and this gargantuan, expensive race track in the middle, so his is a typical response that most foreigners have.

Having said that, this is the emerging market and it is terribly short sighted to have the races only in specific countries in Europe and the US. Similar to cricket, it will not develop beyond a point as only a handful of countries will have interest.

[5kmiles]

He is a British national. The comments are along expected lines. He is not expected to be either a student of history or global economy. We are poor but don't need to hear it from him. Let this dimwit be.

[aravind.anand]

Reminds me of the time when we had two guests from Australia to my father's company. We took them around to few restaurants, and they kept asking about elephants very frequently. We assumed that they really liked elephants, so we arranged for a trip to Mudumalai forest reserve and showed them elephants and they quite enjoyed it and took numerous photos of the elephants. While on our way back, they told us that India would be a third world country with elephants roaming all around and killing people - people who would be very poor and living out of shacks. They never thought we would have roads, restaurants which serve global cuisine, concrete multi-floor buildings and all that. They said that is what they had heard about India while in Australia, and that is what is shown as India in movies over there. We were rather disappointed and saddened to hear that.

Sadly, that is the impression we seem to have with the rest of the world, and when such popular figures provide such click-bait worthy statements, that images reaches an even wider audience

[Jeroen]

I am not a F1 fan at all. Even though my fellow country man, Max, seems to be doing quite well these days. I am just not that bothered with F1 these days. Max’s dad is a horrible guy and I don’t think much of Max as a human being either, although apparently he races quite well. I would not know, I don’t care.

I just happen to click this particular thread (and the one that is already closed) on the comments made by Lewis.

I am going to be extremely careful in framing up my comments here. I do not want to offend anybody. I don’t want to come to anybodies defence either. I am just sharing my own personal experience on how some people experience India.

So, apparently, this is what Lewis said:

I've been to India before to a race which was strange because India was such a poor place yet we had this massive, beautiful grand prix track made in the middle of nowhere. I felt very conflicted when I went to that grand prix.

So Lewis appears to be confused how a country with such apparent poverty can also have so much grandeur, i.e. a massive, beautiful grand prix track!

Whether you like it or not, agree or not: quite a number of first time visitors to India (especially those of a western orientation) feel like this. It is difficult to comprehend these two extremes.

We have three kids (well, they are adults, 33, 30, 28). They all came to visit us once/twice a year when we lived in Delhi. Our youngest one, our daughter loved India. Our eldest Luc was really interested and enjoyed himself immensely.

Our middle one, Thomas, was very confused and very upset by India.

Us and our (mostly) Indian neighbours in Vasant Vihar leading a very comfortable life, good income, cars, holidays, lots of staff. But also families with little children begging and living under viaducts less than 500 meters from our apartment on the outskirts of Vasant Vihar.

Thomas and Lewis come from societies that try to take care of those in vulnerable positions. For instance if you would have followed the “Trident” debate and subsequent decision, you will have seen UK politicians calling it obscene to fund Trident whilst there are still so many issues with the NHS, unemployment etc.

It is no different as to what Lewis noticed and commented on.

What Lewis, in my mind, has spotted and articulated, is what he considers to be an injustice in society. Now you could argue whether that is true or not, or whether an F1 icon such as Lewis should speak his mind freely.

On the latter, I am all for it. That does not mean I agree with what he says. In my mind, very few public figures speak their minds freely. It is either politically correct or well thought out inflammatory. I do not care particularly for either.

But you can not argue with how people feel. You might be surprised, you might agree or disagree, but at least it is pretty honest, straight from the hip.

Jeroen

[androdev]

IMO he may not have said the 'correct' thing but he certainly spoke the truth. I have a tendency to appreciate innocent and honest comments coming from people who are expected to always say the 'correct' thing.

Turkey is a simple thing to understand. Not having live audience truly sucks for a sports person - makes it feel like one is in it just for money. It's not easy to get oneself to compete at the highest level if there is no audience.

The comment on India is not about the sport at all. I don't understand why we get so touchy every time someone mentions the poverty present here. The very first thing that shakes up anyone who lands in India is the stark contrast between object poverty and extreme wealth in the urban landscape. Some people are intrigued by it and others feel an enormous sense of guilt. This contrast of income gap is such a recurring and pervasive thing in our country, it is impossible for a visitor not to have an opinion or theory about it. Good or bad, this contrast and diversity is what makes India incredible.

[kiku007]

Originally Posted by androdev

The comment on India is not about the sport at all. I don't understand why we get so touchy every time someone mentions the poverty present here.

Because that someone is not a resident Indian

According to an unwritten rule somewhere, foreigners, NRIs, OCIs are frowned upon if they state the obvious about India.

[ajmat]

Originally Posted by Jeroen

So Lewis appears to be confused how a country with such apparent poverty can also have so much grandeur, i.e. a massive, beautiful grand prix track!

What Lewis, in my mind, has spotted and articulated, is what he considers to be an injustice in society. Now you could argue whether that is true or not, or whether an F1 icon such as Lewis should speak his mind freely.

The problem in India is that if you speak an opposing viewpoint, it is treated as an insult or one is a cynic or an idiot.

Lewis has endured poverty, not like what we have here.

In Europe, racing in the grassroots happens at the grassroots level. Old wartime airfields have become tracks, go-kart tracks established on waste grounds.

In South India, racing has happened in a similar way, Sholavaram was an airforce track, Sriperumbadur started as a basic track but built to FIA specs progressively.

Buddh - came out of nowhere. It is purely a vanity project. As per my knowledge, very few racers have nurtured their initial careers from this track. It is too expensive to run. Heck, the head of a racing team told me that a racing weekend in Dubai is cheaper than running it in Buddh - shipping costs and all. I gather running this track is ruining the JP group.

What Lewis is trying to say is that in poor countries, a swanky race track might be the least priority. A street race is more workable.

Don't get me wrong - Am proud to have an F1 track in India but it has its major opportunity costs in relation to poverty. There might be opportunities in generating employment but that track needs to be used a lot more often.