In a recent debate that has set the Formula 1 community ablaze, former IndyCar driver Danica Patrick made headlines by snubbing seven-time world champion Lewis Hamilton in favor of Max Verstappen when discussing who would triumph in equal machinery. The hypothetical scenario of pitting F1 greats against each other in identical cars is a fan-favorite topic, and Patrick’s bold stance has added fuel to the fire.
Patrick, known for her forthright opinions, argued that Verstappen’s raw talent, aggressive driving style, and relentless consistency give him the edge over Hamilton, even in a level playing field. “Max is a beast behind the wheel,” she said on her podcast, emphasizing his ability to extract every ounce of performance from his car. She pointed to Verstappen’s meteoric rise, including his dominant 2023 season, where he clinched 19 out of 22 races, as evidence of his superiority. For Patrick, Verstappen’s hunger and adaptability make him the driver to beat, regardless of the era or equipment.
This isn’t to say Hamilton’s credentials were dismissed entirely. Patrick acknowledged his remarkable career, noting his record-tying seven championships and unparalleled success with Mercedes. Hamilton’s ability to remain composed under pressure, his strategic acumen, and his knack for delivering in critical moments have cemented his status as one of F1’s all-time greats. Yet, Patrick argued that Hamilton’s achievements have been bolstered by driving for a dominant team during much of his career, particularly during Mercedes’ turbo-hybrid era dominance from 2014 to 2020. In contrast, she praised Verstappen for thriving in a Red Bull car that, while competitive, hasn’t always been the clear class leader.
The notion of equal machinery is a tantalizing one in F1, where car performance often overshadows driver skill. Fans and pundits alike dream of seeing legends like Hamilton, Verstappen, Michael Schumacher, or Ayrton Senna duel in identical cars to settle the GOAT debate once and for all. Patrick’s verdict, however, hinges on Verstappen’s current form and fearless approach. She highlighted his ability to dominate races from pole or claw his way through the field when starting from lower grid positions, showcasing a versatility she believes Hamilton, at this stage in his career, may lack.
Critics of Patrick’s take argue that Hamilton’s experience and racecraft would shine in equal machinery. At 40, Hamilton remains a formidable force, as evidenced by his 2024 season resurgence, including a win at Silverstone that silenced doubters. His supporters contend that his ability to manage tires, read races, and execute flawless overtakes would give him the upper hand against Verstappen’s more aggressive, sometimes erratic style. They also point to Hamilton’s consistency across different car regulations and team dynamics, from McLaren to Mercedes, as proof of his adaptability.
The debate isn’t just about driving styles; it’s also about intangibles like mental fortitude and preparation. Verstappen’s relentless work ethic and simulator time have been well-documented, but Hamilton’s off-track influence—his advocacy for diversity and sustainability—adds a layer of resilience that translates to his racing. Yet, Patrick remains unmoved, insisting that Verstappen’s “killer instinct” trumps all.
Ultimately, Patrick’s snub of Hamilton in favor of Verstappen underscores the subjective nature of comparing F1 greats. Equal machinery might level the playing field, but it’s the driver’s heart, skill, and mindset that tip the scales. For now, Verstappen has Patrick’s vote, but the F1 world will continue to debate whether Hamilton’s legacy or Verstappen’s dominance reigns supreme in this hypothetical clash of titans.
