Why Hamilton is not Senna.

Lewis Hamilton fans get irate with us when we point out attitudes that, in our eyes, are not worthy of a champion and a driver with  his undeniable talent.  

But somebody has to.

The vast majority of motorsport journalism is UK-centric, like the sport itself and Hamilton gets a pass on most of his off track pronouncements.  When, as it was reported this week, he slams his rivals and colleagues,  it gets glossed over by adoring writers.  

But it should not.

Axis is not alone of course,  Leo Turrini is one of the deacons of Italian sport journalism,  he is full of admiration for the Briton's talent but in a column this week, nails the problem with Hammy.

There is something rather discordant, writes Turrini, in the way Hamilton has been publicly  trying to diminish Rosberg's belated resurgence (and slamming his colleagues and rivals, from Schumacher to Vettel, Webber and Raikkonen).

Senna, who Hamilton, compares himself to often absolutely hated Prost as a human being, Turin says.  At least  until after '93 when "the Professor" retired, then they became great friends.

Despite the animosity,  Senna never once spoke ill of Prost's driving talent.  He considered him a great champion and said so every chance he got.

Nigel Mansell praised Piquet even though he wanted to punch him often.

Schumacher  always praised Hakkinen.

Vettel has always spoke highly of Alonso.

Why?

Because they were smart enough to realize that if they went around saying their rivals were no good, what would be diminished is their own accomplishment in beating them.

Hamilton seems incapable of grasping this concept.

That's why, concludes Turrini, he's no Senna.

We could not agree more.