In a recent debate that has ignited the Formula 1 community, former IndyCar driver Danica Patrick made headlines when she snubbed seven-time world champion Lewis Hamilton in favor of Max Verstappen during a debate over the tie. The possibility of a showdown between F1’s biggest names driving identical cars is a hot topic for fans, and Patrick’s bold stance has added fuel to the fire.
Patrick, known for her outspoken opinions, said Verstappen’s raw talent, aggressive driving style and relentless consistency gave him the edge over Hamilton even on equal terms. “Max is a monster behind the wheel,” she said on her podcast, highlighting 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 won 19 of 22 races, as evidence of his superiority. For Patrick, Verstappen’s hunger for victory and adaptability make him the driver to beat, regardless of era or equipment.
That’s not to say Hamilton’s qualities have been completely dismissed. Patrick praised his remarkable career, highlighting his record-breaking seven championships and his unprecedented success with Mercedes. Hamilton’s ability to remain calm under pressure, his strategic acumen and his knack for succeeding in critical moments have cemented his status as one of F1’s all-time greats. However, Patrick argued that Hamilton’s achievements were enhanced by driving for a dominant team for much of his career, particularly during Mercedes’ dominance of the turbo-hybrid era from 2014 to 2020. In contrast, she praised Verstappen for thriving behind the wheel of a Red Bull car that, while competitive, was not always the undisputed leader of the series.
The idea of performance parity is a fascinating topic in F1, where car performance often overshadows driver skill. Fans and pundits dream of seeing legends such as Hamilton, Verstappen, Michael Schumacher and Ayrton Senna racing in identical cars to settle the debate over the greatest of all time once and for all. Patrick’s verdict, however, depends on Verstappen’s current form and his bold approach. She highlighted his ability to dominate races from pole position or to climb the grid from lower positions, demonstrating a versatility that she believes Hamilton may lack at this stage of his career.
Patrick’s detractors say Hamilton’s racing experience and acumen would shine on a similarly powerful circuit. At 40, Hamilton remains a formidable force, as evidenced by his strong comeback in the 2024 season, including a victory at Silverstone that silenced his doubters. His supporters argue that his ability to manage tires, read the race and execute flawless overtakes would give him an edge over Verstappen’s more aggressive and sometimes erratic style. They also point to Hamilton’s consistency in dealing with different automotive regulations and team dynamics, from McLaren to Mercedes, as proof of his adaptability.
The debate isn’t just about driving style; it also focuses on intangibles like mental strength and preparation. Verstappen’s tireless work ethic and time spent in the simulator are well documented, but Hamilton’s influence off the track — his commitment to diversity and sustainability — adds a layer of resilience that is reflected in his racing performance. Yet Patrick remains unmoved, insisting that Verstappen’s “killer instinct” trumps all else.
Ultimately, Patrick’s refusal to favour Hamilton over Verstappen highlights the subjectivity of comparing F1’s greats. Equivalent machines can level the playing field, but it’s the heart, talent and mindset of the rider that makes the difference. For now, Verstappen has Patrick’s vote, but the F1 world will continue to debate whether Hamilton’s legacy or Verstappen’s dominance will prevail in this hypothetical clash of the titans.
