Schumacher only proved in 1996 that he won three GP´s and did not dominate.
Brawn dominates.

Spot the difference.

Brawn will always be viewed as more important because Schumacher never allowed the team to let his teammate race him. Senna and Prost won races and poles in slower cars years before they moved to McLaren. Then they raced each other. Something MS was to cowardly to do against a top rated teammate (he ran away when Kimi joined and didn't switch to McLaren in 2000 because he would have had to race Hakkinen). If MS had raced against a top teammate we would have know the answer to this thread but he was too cowardly to do it. Alonso and Hamilton have already proved more by racing against each other at McLaren than MS proved in his entire F1 career.

Maybe, but Schumacher was still pretty awesome. In his first race he qualified the Jordan in the highest place on the grid it qualified all season (I think Gachot equaled it at another race). He was able to put in consistantly awesome laps when required. And he had a very high work rate and dedication to work.

Both contributed as did Todt and Byrne to the success they had at both Benneton and Ferrari. Just let it go at that.

fact is that Brawn has won races with 2 different teams, and dominated with 2 different drivers. Who here thought Brawn would even see points this year based on what they had to go through over the winter let alone dominate the season?

.

He never did that with a bad car. The last time he had the 3rd best car in 2005, he looked like a complete melon, didn't win 1 race all year and crashed an awful lot, mostly with other drivers, Sutil, Salo etc. That year the Ferrari was also fastest in Imola by a huge margin and he still didn't win through his driver mistake in qualifying.

...and still finished 3rd in the WDC

He only finished third because of the farce of the race in USA which give him a free 10 points and through Montoya missing 3 races with injury. Take away his fake 10 points, i.e he enters the same number of races as the Michelin drivers and his true positions he finished 5th.

MS didn't dominate in 1996, he had the 5th best car and did very well, was always a threat and got 3 wins, whats your problem to understand something so simple Doofus?

Nah, just having a bit of fun on the "Doofus" bandwagon

Sorry, for the late reply, I was on a holiday.

For the first part of your post you seem to indicate that Schumacher fans are somehow worse than other fans. True, he has those hero worshipper kind of fans, but not more than Senna had or Alonso has or Kimi has, or any other driver for that matter. As a German you might have felt those Schumacher "Rotkäppchen" more in Germany but I don't think that means he has more of that kind.

Actually I have always felt it was Senna among all drivers who was wrapped into an unjastified mythical mist by his fans. But that's mybe just my subjective feeling as you have your subjective feeling about Schumacher fans.



No it does not. If anything, all thorugh this thread I feel that it's more important for you to "destroy the Schumacher myth" than for his fans to talk him up. Of course, when he is attacked his fans will try and argue for him, wouldn't you for Senna? But who is the one who looks pained by something here? I feel you are by the fact that Michael was as successful as he was.

That Jenson's success pains Schumacher fans is more your imagination, I am afraid, than reality. I definitely don't feel any pain by it, nor I feel it threatens Michael's legacy in any way. You keep telling us in this thread that it does threaten it, but I still don't know why is it so important for you to convince yourself and others of that?
Maybe you want Schumacher fans to feel the "pain, because Senna fans felt pain when Schumacher came and overshadowed many of Ayrton's records and achievements? Anyway, if you track back my posts since the beginning of this season I have nothing but applause and praise for Jenson, I'm not even too surprised he can do it as his strength has always been consistency. I don't feel any tiny bit of jelousy for him, again if you track my posts this year I have been rooting for him and Ross Brawn...

If Jenson or anyone else can make it as big as Schumacher then so be it. But I genuinely don't feel (and not because of jealousy or because I feel threatened by Jenson's great season as a Schumacher fan) that Jenson is anywhere close to that, not even if he wins all of the remaining races. He would be close if Schumacher has only had 2002 or 2004 by his name. But he had so much more. And to say just because Jenson can dominate in a dominant car he could have done everything that Schumacher did is a far stretch IMO.

He only finished third because of the farce of the race in USA which give him a free 10 points and through Montoya missing 3 races with injury. Take away his fake 10 points, i.e he enters the same number of races as the Michelin drivers and his true positions he finished 5th.

Now I see, it is just the "Doofus bandwagon".

Sorry for not understanding that earlier on. Innocent fun is alright, have a nice weekend, cheapracer!

First of all: Montoya missed 2 races. 2nd: The other 18 races proved that it is not certain that Montoya/Fisichella would have finished in front of him in Indy. A normal race would have been not possible at all with those Michelin tyres but I guess you know that...
Montoya and Fisi had enough races to score more, WAY more points than they have done with the cars they had.

Some fair points you make, so let´s keep it at that. Different lanes for different brains.

One remark: Schumi was lucky to have the right team around him from race 2 of his F1 career onwards, including Ross Brawn, who, in whatever way, contributed to Schumi´s record. Jenson was not so lucky, only after eight full seasons in F1 did he get the backing of Ross Brawn. So it is a little bit late for him to make up the lost time.
That´s why you won´t see him cracking Schumi´s record.

Just one more small note: when I say that Jenson is nowhere close to Michael, , as I see it Jenson has a LOT more to prove in many areas before we start to mention him in the same breath as Michael.

Just came back to view this thread to still see that this bizarre topic is still being debated. It was uncomparable to begin with and it still is. Michael was a driver and Ross was a technical director and strategist. Somehow during this debate, Ross has turned into the one that designed the cars and ensured they were WCC winning. Ross directed the technical team, but it was Rory Byrne that designed the cars. Is Rory more important than Ross? Or maybe Jean Todt because he was the actual man responsible at the top for ensuring all those WCC titles? He got the right people in the right positions with the right winning mentality and let them grow. These people were cogs in a much larger machine.

I have tremendous respect for Ross Brawn, but he did not design the Brawn car and when you read his interviews his job is very far removed from the technical side of things. His day to day stuff is closer to the business side of things. Sure he might of been involved in the decision to scrap the 08 car to start early on the 09 car, but that wasn't a hard decision to make, and I too as well as several team principals would of done the same thing. He doesn't get involved in those things, but instead he directs, which is one of his strengths. But let's not get confused, he directed the design team at Ferrari, and his success was dependent on theirs. If they produced a dog, he couldn't work miracles, that was left to the driver. The Brawn design team should be celebrated more than just Ross, and he would say the same thing too. Even when asked if Ross was the reason why Brawn are winning, he even said himself, that he had little to do initially with the team, he made a few decisions, but the team was already running in the direction of 09.

I'll reassess my opinion of Ross should they win the title next season. This season is great for Brawn, don't get me wrong, but its a blip in F1 history. Brawn started earlier than the rest, didn't have the funds or capability to run KERS (which is subsequently the best situation to be in, even all the top teams got too involved in it and it doesn't give a performance advantage) and they created a diffuser that the other big teams didn't because they thought it was against the spirit of the rules. Next season they'll be no KERS, DD all round and everyone will be on the same playing field. I'll reassess then.

He only finished third because of the farce of the race in USA which give him a free 10 points and through Montoya missing 3 races with injury. Take away his fake 10 points, i.e he enters the same number of races as the Michelin drivers and his true positions he finished 5th.

He never did that with a bad car. The last time he had the 3rd best car in 2005, he looked like a complete melon, didn't win 1 race all year and crashed an awful lot, mostly with other drivers, Sutil, Salo etc. That year the Ferrari was also fastest in Imola by a huge margin and he still didn't win through his driver mistake in qualifying.

Eddie Irvine tells us, business man, and frequent visitor of fashionable locals, but once faithful team mate of his royal highness Schumi.

" I was to begin the season of 1996 - he tells to V-Zine, Shell's magazine - with a terrible car (he compares it to scrap iron). It would fall to pieces. In the mornings we would go to Fiorano for tests at 8am, the track was cold and the tires were new, so I would tell myself that the car wasn't that bad. Then something would break and it would take the entire day to repair it. Meanwhile the track temperature would rise then fall again, and then at the end of the day we would go out again and the car again seemed ok.

One day however when the car was repaired it during lunch, I went out on the track while it was hot and I understood that it was impossible to drive it. It felt as if it was like the old Jaguar R2, the worst F1 that I have ever driven. However Shumi with that car won three races and four poles.

Here's Michael's greatness. And Irvine again explains: "That car would be fine for 3 laps, then the rear tires would be destroyed. That year Michael was sensational. We were all full of admiration for what he was able to do with that car. He had the capacity to resolve problems. He was also very good in developing he engine. I stunk. However with regards to tires, chassis, and aerodynamics I would say that it was the worst I have ever driven. The rest, it was excellent. But in the race you had no chance.

The son of a car dealer in Northern Ireland, has always loved to speak his mind, and now that he no longer has association with the racing, he easily engages in discussing the secrets of that world.

"The first Ferraris were tremendous and he mastered them to perfection. Berger went to Benetton after Michael and destroyed two of them. Alesi destroyed another one; no one was able to drive them, while Michael was able to win the world championship in 1995 with that car. But once the "driveability" of the car began to improve, Michaels' talent was less determining. At the end of his career the Ferraris were so driveable that even Felipe Massa at times succeded in beating him"

coulda woulda....lol
Then Schumi should be 2006 WDC as he blew his engine at japan, crashed at Aussy
then Alonso had 20 points extra, take that away Schumi is Champ

Yeah then his 1991 Jordan, Benatton, 1992 Benatton, 1993 Benatton , 1996 to 1998 Ferrari where all WDC winning cars, isnt?!
Get a grip and see all those season , rather than reading some Anti schumi articles all the time!

I think you can serve yourself well by putting Kenaltgr on the ignore list. If you look back his posting history here, the guy is obsessed with Schumacher in an almost sick way.

I have tremendous respect for Ross Brawn....blah blah... and I too as well as several team principals would of done the same thing.

Ahh now its clear, you are also better than Schumacher!! ;)

Although I have myself started this thread, I have to say that I became a parody at certain moments!

So once and for all: Ross Brawn dominates without Schumacher!!!!!
Michael Schumacher has never dominated without Ross Brawn!!!!!

Ha!

It's not really Schmacher's fault he never had a bad car. 2005 was bad because of the tyres.

Although I have myself started this thread, I have to say that it became a parody at certain moments!

So once and for all: Ross Brawn dominates without Schumacher!!!!!
Michael Schumacher has never dominated without Ross Brawn!!!!!

Ha!

Ok you win, you've argued to exhaustion , congrats :-)

Schumacher only proved in 1996 that he won three GP´s and did not dominate.
Brawn dominates.

Spot the difference.

Really intelligent point

You want comparsion, and you're talking 1996? Fine then. Now, please tell everybody how many victories were achieved by Benetton that very same year, with Ross Brawn still at the team during the whole year?

"Spot the difference".. right.

s Pat Symmonds says in the Suzuka episode that Schumacher, unlike last year, would not have won a race all year driving this years Benetton.

I do believe though that Brawn's strategies, which Schumi interpreted so effectively, are now being utilised in a similar manner by Button.

Similar manner?
When a car is dominant strategy isn't so important and isn't difficult at all. As proven by the Spanish GP whether it's a three stop strategy (Barrichello) or a two stop strategy (Button), BrawnGP would have won, simply because it's a superior car. During the Ferrari years of Brawn and Schumacher however there were years when the car wasn't the best and Brawn needed to pull a spectacular strategy to win and Schumacher needed to pull a fantastic drive to make that strategy work. That's where Brawn impressed with strategy and Schumacher impressed with driving. We are yet to see anything like that from Button, and from Brawn I don't think we have seen anything exceptional this year in terms of strategy, to be honest. He is his usual precise self, of course, but as the car is so superior he didn't need to pull anything surprising or spectacular this year - or anything that would have given the driver a big mountain to climb in the race.

I always appreciate as one of the more eloquent and civilized MS supporters but sorry, that's such a one-sided view you express there.

In fact for numerous races, especially 2002 and 2004, Ferraris advantage was so great that with a driver of MS' calibre it was almost impossible for them to lose, and thats precisely why even ridiculous strategies like a 4-stopper worked for them. So the argument you use to denigrate Buttons drives this year fits in fact perfectly for many of MS victories of said period.

I believe Button and the Brawn car have yet to enjoy a similar level of superiority to MS and the 2004 Ferrari. On closer look there was something special needed on Buttons part in most of his victories this year. And let's not forget that Barrichello, so far, is in now way as restricted as he was during his Ferrari years (he just proved that he never was, and will likely never become a true no.1 driver).

I suspect when you talk of those drives in which MS had to dig deep to make Ross strategy work, you think of something like Hungary '98 of Imola 2006, and of course I would absolutely agree with that. But such occassions were few and far between, and naturally they didn't always work out (like Turkey 2006 when MS wasn't able to get by Alonso despite a clearly faster car). However in the majority of MS victories there were no such heroics required as they simply had a distinct car advantage - plus usually the best strategy by means of RB.

You really need to have massive blinkers on to not recognize that in the first 7 races of 2009 Buttons/Brawns performances matches everything that MS/Brawn have done in their time, with the exception of such memorable drives like Hungary '98, etc. But those were rare always, maybe 1 out of 40 races under special circumstances which can't be created at will. Button hasn't encountered similar circumstances so far, but that can hardly be held against him. Yet for "everyday work" Brawn/Button mimick Brawn/MS pretty convincingly I'd say.

As Madras said, it's hardly MS fault that he sat in dominant cars in a team guided by Brawn for so long. But equally it's not Buttons fault that he only has a comparable car for 7 races now, and of those he's won 6. I have no idea what more to ask of him (other than 7 out of 7, but hey...).

I like it when Senna fans, who dislike Schumacher with passion, lecture others about objectivity and blinkers on Schumacher...

Why do you act as if Michael's only achievements were in 2002 and 2004? As for me, I was a lot more impressed by 1996-1998, for example, even if he didn't win the title in those years. He didn't hold any records then and he was "just" a two times WDC, yet I was already convinced he is the best of his era and one of the best ever. And I was not alone thinking that. Schumacher's legend wasn't just made by his records. If you don't see the greatness and speciality in many of those drives and why so many people inside and outside of F1 were so impressed by him even then, then it's not me wearing the blinkers.

You are right maybe Button too would be able to do all that. But maybe not. All we know now is that he is massively consistant when he has a superior car. We also know that when his car wasn't so superior he had good years (2004, 2006 - again it was his consistency which made those good ones, rather than any spectacular drive), mediocre ones and years when he was beaten by Ralf (2000), by Fisichella (2001) and by Barrichello (2008). And he was so "impressive" that even Ross Brawn didn't really believe in him last year (hence going after Alonso), as he basically admitted it lately.
That should tell us, just because Jenson is able to "mimick" Schumacher in one area (consistency), it doesn't mean he has emulated him in everything. Maybe he can, maybe he will. But he hasn't yet.

To be fair to Button, Ross has been increasingly praising Button for more stating he just did not have the confidence until recently because of elements outside his control, he has priased his ability to raise his game when he needs to, change his driving style when the car behaved badly (in comparison to RB who has not), ability to pull out a good qualifying lap, he has been faster than RB even with more fuel, and Button has always had a very smooth style which complements the current low aero cars....I think there is more here than consistancy...and I am not really a Button fan.

I like it when Senna fans, who dislike Schumacher with passion, lecture others about objectivity and blinkers on Schumacher...

Why do you act as if Michael's only achievements were in 2002 and 2004? As for me, I was a lot more impressed by 1996-1998, for example, even if he didn't win the title in those years. He didn't hold any records then and he was "just" a two times WDC, yet I was already convinced he is the best of his era and one of the best ever. And I was not alone thinking that. Schumacher's legend wasn't just made by his records. If you don't see the greatness and speciality in many of those drives and why so many people inside and outside of F1 were so impressed by him even then, then it's not me wearing the blinkers.

You are right maybe Button too would be able to do all that. But maybe not. All we know now is that he is massively consistant when he has a superior car. We also know that when his car wasn't so superior he had good years (2004, 2006 - again it was his consistency which made those good ones, rather than any spectacular drive), mediocre ones and years when he was beaten by Ralf (2000), by Fisichella (2001) and by Barrichello (2008). And he was so "impressive" that even Ross Brawn didn't really believe in him last year (hence going after Alonso), as he basically admitted it lately.
That should tell us, just because Jenson is able to "mimick" Schumacher in one area (consistency), it doesn't mean he has emulated him in everything. Maybe he can, maybe he will. But he hasn't yet.

....You really need to have massive blinkers on to not recognize that in the first 7 races of 2009 Buttons/Brawns performances matches everything that MS/Brawn have done in their time, with the exception of such memorable drives like Hungary '98, etc. But those were rare always, maybe 1 out of 40 races under special circumstances which can't be created at will. Button hasn't encountered similar circumstances so far, but that can hardly be held against him. Yet for "everyday work" Brawn/Button mimick Brawn/MS pretty convincingly I'd say....

I agree with that and I really don't want to take anything away from Button. He is perhaps better than many (including Ross Brawn!) believed so far. Maybe he needed the confidence boost like Mika Häkkinen in 1998. But I genuinely find it funny when people say after six GP wins in the best car that he has "matched" Michael Schumacher. It's like people (like Peter Windsor last year) saying that Hamilton is better than Senna and Prost combined (he really wrote that and although I am no Senna fan at all, I have found that equally ridiculous).....

Shrinking down what Button has done this year to mere "consistency", that's what I call a dishonest and degatoratory comment, presumably out of eagerness to protect the image of your favourite driver.

But sorry, reality won't go away. Any mediocre showings from Button in earlier years won't change what he achieved this season, just as MS' DTM performances don't change what he has achieved in his F1 career.

I have to say I am very impressed by Button. But I cannot say I didn't expect this consistency of him secretly. I think he was always one of the more consistent drivers (see his 2004 season or when in 2006 he scored more points in the last 6 races than Alonso or Schumacher). I'm glad he can build on it now that he has a car to win too. IMO the fact he is a consistent driver is very good news for Brawn for the Championship. I hope he can go on like this.

So in truth we might have seen many signature Brawn races executed by Schumacher and thought they were signature Schumi races.....

I agree with Galko877 on the other hand, that races like Spain 1996 or Hungary 1998 are the true Schumi signature races, there is no argument about that.

You feel on a mission regarding Schumacher (plus Hamilton) and his fans, don't you? Whose image are you protecting from them?

I don't think you will see me bringing up Senna in Schumacher or Hamilton threads, it's invariably MS or LH supporters who start talking about Senna.

Make of that what you will...

Ouch, sorry for hitting a nerve there.

All I said is what's obvious for everyone, that the first 7 races in 2009 Button paired with Brawn performed like one whould have expected MS with Brawn to perform. For example in 2002 and 2004, thats why I compare to those years, simply because the Ferrari cars had a similar (most would say even bigger) advantage.

....... Button. Maybe he needed the confidence boost like Mika Häkkinen in 1998.

It's like people (like Peter Windsor last year) saying that Hamilton is better than Senna and Prost combined (he really wrote that and although I am no Senna fan at all, I have found that equally ridiculous).