You love to argue...but that okay...so do I.
Out of the current crop of drivers, there is no question in my mind now that he is the best. I actually felt that after last seasons weak performance that Alonso was merely trading on past performance and that may be Hamilton had moved ahead of him. However, after what I witnessed in the 2nd half of 2010, I was truly blown away.
Alonso gave a master class to pretty much every F1 driver in the 2nd half of the season, by scoring more points than any other driver, in a car which was not the best (not easy to do, especially with so many other decent drivers in a decent cars).
When the current drivers in F1, were asked who they felt the "daddy" was,
Alonso was voted as No.1. This is the equivalent of the player's player over the year, in football.
During the past few years, he was able to wrestle the title away from the previously unbeatable Ferrari/MSc. This is quite a feat. Winning in 2005 and 2006. In 2007, he finished joint 2nd. In 2008 and 2009 he had a bad car and in 2010, as soon as he had a decent car, he managed to finish 2nd in the title race. The only driver in F1 to be able to mix it with the Red Bull cars, which were way ahead of their rivals. In the last few years, Alonso has been the most consistent driver and what's more, he is able to do it with different teams. The same cannot be said about Hamilton...yet.
I never have quite gotten why you seem to think that Alonso is 'the daddy' in F1. Because he just isn't. A great driver? Unquestionably. Fast, clever, adaptable. But he's far too easy to rattle, which has now cost him two titles ('07, '10) and nearly lost him another ('06).
I would love to know who you think is better, cuz I can't see anyone else stepping up to the mark. Hamilton is the only one who can stand toe-to-toe with him. The rest of the field would always be playing catch up.
In 2010, he beat Massa by an enormous margin. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I think he out-qualified him 15-4. He did this to Massa, who was a pretty decent driver previously. To quote Dannyjo, Massa was "Alonso'd". He finished up more than 100 pts ahead of Massa. (even if you account for the Hockenheim race and give Massa the win, he still finished around 94 points ahead of Massa).
I honestly can't see how anyone can argue against the stats above. Even Hamilton admitted at the start of the year that his most difficult team-mate ever (in all formulae), was Alonso. This was stated while Button was sitting next to him, in a BBC interview.
That's not it at all. If that was actually true, then why do we still pay so much attention to those British drivers in years gone by who did win?
Once a driver has quit the sport, people look at him, with rose-tinted specs. The hatred and vitriol vanishes.
A good example of my theory about underdogs is that in 2010 we saw MSc, where many Brits actually warmed to MSc. Could this have been due to the fact that MSc was merely a shadow of his former self? By my reckoning, had MSc returned as a dominant force (as he previously was), he would've been disliked, just as he was during his glory days.
Button seems to be liked by Brits a lot. My guess is that had he wiped the floor with Hamilton this year, this wouldn't have continued to be the case. Effectively, Button is now the underdog once again, as Hamilton is clearly a faster driver, so Brits are likely to support him. Had Button had the ruthless streak of MSc, Senna, Hamilton or Alonso...I doubt Button would be liked so much.
Note how much support Webber got this year. Could this have been because he was the underdog? Could this have been because he was the No.2 driver and that his team-mate was being given preferential treatment?
Brits love underdogs and losers more than they like winners. This has been shown to the be the case across so many sports.