Didn't Haug say Schumacher could of won Albert Park after China. So what.



Mercedes trip themselfs up in Q3 at Monaco, the team released Rosberg at the wrong time and he blocked Schuey which Rosberg later apologised for.

It's funny, you avoid the real dangers of Q1 with the most cars, make it through to the last quali session, and it's your own team in the end that was always the worry, for the cars that get in the way. No wonder Brawn, Schuey and Rosberg weren't happy with themselfs, they all could of likley challenge for the podium at least.

Monaco punishes mistakes made before Sunday, every little thing matters, Alonso said he could of won Monaco, maybe, maybe not, we'll never know, his crash on Saturday dented his chances. Q3 at Monaco was set to be Mercedes best qualifying performance result of the season, it didn't work out that way for very simple reasons, the race off the front row is historicially difficult.

The team simply outsmarted themselves. Calculated the optimal moment for the cars to be on track whilst they should have done multiple runs or have been on track throughout Q3 - just to be safe.

You live and you learn, right?

Yep.
If they were in the title hunt, everyone would of been even more upset, better it happened this year if any other year.

guys, not to be picky or anything, but it really is "could have" and "would have", not "could of" or "would of". i know, nearly everybody spells it this way nowadays, but....
just saying.

Sean's been spelling it that way for years. I've come to expect it from him. I find comfort in the status quo, my world could crumble if he changes things now.

Actually with me that files under "things I always wanted to know but was afraid to ask". Very intriguing, especially as I've seen supposed native english speakers do it.

for the record: "could have" can be conjuncted to "could've" which inevitably leads to "could of" . English is my second language, I guess that's why I remember this stuff.

Or even better, "could've, would've, should've". Do I win anything?

Beat me to it.

true. mostly it's due to the fact that people have pretty much stopped reading proper books and newspapers and do most of their reading online. but since languages continuously evolve, maybe this is part of the change i should just learn to accept. still drives me nuts. could be a hidden compulsive disorder....
"their" vs "there" vs "they're" is another example. drives me up the f*cking wall....

Bringing it back to F1, "Dampener" instead of "Damper" drives me nuts. a "dampener" is something that makes things wet ("dampens"). A "damper' damps out unwanted vibration/ motion etc. There is no such thing as a Mass Dampener.

WRT Schumi vs Rosberg: I really think Michael is making some headway. He is 41 and most likely won't be able to return to the peak of his glory days, but he's hustling that car around better & better, and not far off his much younger hotshoe team mate. Pretty damn good imo.

It´s getting damp around these quarters....

Concerning Schumi catching up on Nico:



And Michael sounds quite relaxed about it, so I wonder what Nico´s chances in 2011 will be. Time for him to leave Mercedes maybe?

Michael being "pretty damn good": I am sure Nick could do at least the same job as Michael, IMO better.
He handled both Kubica and Webber not that badly at BMW and Williams, and see where Robert and Mark are nowadays.

Here I agree with Metz, the only advocate Nick has on this BB - a real pity for Heidfeld and a shame as well.
Mercedes got MS very obviously for the historical context and the PR that he provides. Concerning driving they would be as well off with Nick Heidfeld, if not better off.

I'd have to agree wrt to Heidfeld. He'd be doing as well or better. What really is a shame about that is that there are other seats where we have less than qualified drivers, all of whom I'm sure Quick Nick could outpace/ outrace. Surely there is room in F1 for both Schumi & Heidfeld. If I had to choose between those two and some of the other 'talent' I'd go with the Germans.

Assumes Rosberg is B Grade therefore Michael is way past it. Not sure but Michael's last corner lunge at Monaco impressed me - for it's quick thinking and opportunism. He still is a very good racer, maybe not at his very heights but pretty strong all the same.

Pretty much what I've been saying all along. Not sure why you think I'm implying Rosberg is B grade. I think he's v. good.

Craven Legend I could of and would of changed it, but it's like Monaco, plug Schumi in as Webber said and watch him go. Plug yourself in a thread, and the design characteristics of your thought processes are officially frozen like a engine freeze, which means I can't change could of and would of, but now I'm aware of it, I could break the rules and get a penality for fun if I wish.

And coming up to that quote of Webbes on Schumacher after China "Judge Schumi after Monaco." He was right as well, remember Webber if he wasn't a f1 driver, would likely be on these forums as well, he used to tape MS's wins and record over his loses, remembering reading that when he started out, it's amazing how many drivers like Hamilton, Button, Webber grew up watching him, and he's still around. Webber knows him as a fan as well as a driver, a MS expert n a way.
to





I think if you saw that recent Monaco interview of his, even MS isn't totally sure of himself how much of a driver he is at this point to what he was in the past, it's pretty reasonable to expect he is on his own time table in getting what he described as tools ready to attack f1 the way he was, , the way he's been speaking about 2010 shows there is stilll alot of hardwork and fine tuning ahead to improve the car and also get ready for 2011, and his ability to communicate with the team, it's a longer process now without testing, But the most important thing was to see progress, that he did make steps up, the damaged chassis in china, alonso clipping his wing albert park, the wheel nut in sepang, and despite Monaco's solid performance he is being punished for his whole points in that race, so I don't think MS has been lucky this year so far, he easily I think could be 15 points or more points up, but the actual reasons for his performance increase has been shown and that's the most important thing for everyone with any expectations on him especially after those flyaway races.

Webber judge Schumi after Monaco-he was right
Lauda Niki -wait until Spain at least, he was right


Spain was MS defensive driving on Button ticked off, the resurrection of Schumacher as Niki Lauda said
Monaco was in the end about MS hungry for higher positions as Johnny Herbert said recently, not settling for just beating his teamate and points, the guy ahead was the target Alonso. I think MS won a personal battle as well, because he has his own expectations on himself, hard on himself, and his attitude on the Spain and Monaco weekends, was generally upbeat.





"If everything in life was positive, how boring would it be?"
Schumacher Suzuka 2006

You haven't been to the Webber threads then?

You don't think could have/should have can be reasonably applied to a driver who has been on the podium 150+ times from 250+ races?

Heidfeld has had his chances and not just one or two.

Do you seriously think people like Massa, Kimi, Webber, Kubica and now Schumacher have been chosen for greater things over him because he's better?

I guess many Team Managers don't deserve their appointments maybe?

Looking forward to your posts as MS creeps closer to the top.

I think you misunderstand my intention.
Attempting to negate MS achievements by the help of conditional mood is pathetic.
Once the events have passed, everything is past simple tense - "he did"

Please lets get back on topic.

This is what amazes me about MS as well, a quiet confidence and relaxed demeanor , combined with an utterly professional, mature approach.
He seems to be in his own world, quite unfazed by the whole F1 circus .

Most people might still expect some dramatic change, I think MS has a good chance of getting back into the front row eventually, step by step, and deliver some great moments along the way .

Nico has been impressive, brilliant driving of a not (yet) so brilliant car, and obviously is ahead by results.
I just don't see him making any bold moves, as Lewis does, and as I expect Michael to do more often from now on.

It looks to me MS now has a car working for him, and an understanding of the tyres, which I don't think was the case until Spain, so I'm really looking forward to watching him.

KERS and non-KERS cars drive differently, very hard to adjust to if you never drive one

There are better drivers than Rosberg out there. At the end of the season MS will get more points than him for sure, atleast he better

What's wrong with him?

too purdy

cant overtake? speaks crap after every race he could always have done better or he could have got pole.

its like a pr machine in overdrive

Nico 'couldawouldashoulda' Rosberg.....

So the Mercedes line-up consists basically of an average bigmouth and a has-been?

Let's see about that. If he does (creep closer), I might also look at him in a different way. At present he is ninth in the championship and still has a lot to prove.

QUOTE
"He is the most exciting driver on the track. He digs himself out of some holes that we put him in some times - comes by three places up at the end of the first lap. He is single-minded, chirpy, a little arrogant which is good - he is always very good with the promo people, never an objection, he is very good." Williams team principal Frank Williams.


Lamag, that is on Rosberg, I presume?

After viewing extensive in car of Rosberg 2 years ago I thought he would never cut it with his style but this year he has changed and I think he is doing everything with that car that anyone out there could.

Don't forget how close he has been to the front at times and how he ripped off a few fastest laps at Monaco when he had a chance.

At this time he is still a little faster overall than MS but I still believe that MS will be on him this or by the next race and we will see what happens after that.

I couldn't think of a better way to either destroy a Drivers confidence or improve it by having MS as a team mate - seems Rosberg has been affected by the latter.

No it was on MS for those years he drove with Williams.

Oh hang on ......

Never ceases to amaze me how little perspective people have for the level these guys all operate at.
Nor the inablity to view each race weekend as the unfolding of history, individual and team performance, and simply rush to hate v love with a nauseating need to justify a preconceived view with no recourse to what just happened.

As for the highlighted dismissal - check the lap charts of NR at Williams in 2009. The cameras always being on Hamilton or Button couldn't disguise the facts - Rosberg carves traffic as well as most when overtaking is possible.

It's nice on the other hand to see some people able to adjust their rating of a driver week by week. We have people on this thread who last year believed Rosberg was C grade now upgrading him to A-. Schumacher fans can't have it both ways. Nico is top shelf or Michael in 2010 is crap. Whatever my opinion of either driver you can't seriously argue against that logic and yet..... Hello.

Everyone keeps wondering if MSC this year is as quick as he was in the past, or if not, how much he's lost. I think we're going to get a pretty good yardstick of the relative pace of Michael 2010 vs Michael of old when it comes time for qualifying for the Canadian GP. Not in a laptime sense, but in a time gap to Rosberg sense. Schumacher has many good tracks, but Canada might well be his best. He's never, not once, been out-qualified by a teammate there, going back to his first race there in 1992. That's 15-0 for him at that track, vs. some decent teammates, and they were never really even close. Out of those years, I don't think a single teammate ever got within 2 tenths of Michael, maybe Rubens once, so if Nico out-qualifies him there (assuming normal track conditions and no car trouble) I'd be willing to admit for the first time that his comeback was a mistake. However, if he blows Rosberg into the weeds, I'll say that he still has it and that Rosberg really is at least an A- driver to hang with him and beat him regularly at all the other tracks. Seems odd to view Rosberg getting beaten as a sign that he's actually pretty good, but MSC was unstoppable at that track and if he still is, it means he's still got most of his old mojo.

Schumacher is as fast now as he ever was, if he found out he wasn't in pre season testing he would never have come back. The difference now is the other drivers are much higher quality.

bollocks that he is as fast as he was.

I'll agree to the standard being higher but that implies thre was no good opposition and that is also nonesense. hakkinen and the like drove at times better machinery and were quick to boot any era. no question the standard of this grid across the board is probably higher though

guess you need to think that though to be able to use 2010 to pull down his achievements

I keep coming back here just to see if the arguments have evolved. Each time I am disappointed by the simple-minded view of Formula 1 and the driver's relative abilities.

You guys remind me of the religious faithful, seeking simple-to-understand answers to complex questions we may not be designed (threw that in for irony's sake, better word is "equipped") to comprehend.

First of all, a quick history lesson: There SEEM TO BE drivers of higher calibre today than in the mid 90's to early naughties, because the cars are a lot closer together in performance than they have ever been in the past, hence many drivers have a chance at victory. There is no one team domination with one other team trying to close the gap, with the rest picking up the scraps only.
Second: F1 is such a science today, and the level of expertise in the technical departments so high, that drivers are presented with many aids to help them cope with setup tribulations, hence the optimum performance of your standard package is almost always realized, unlike in the past where some teams really stood out, and the driver made a much bigger impact in guiding the engineers along various setup optimization paths. Hence there are fewer aberations, and cars almost always get very close to their potential. The other thing to consider is the presision of manufacture of car components, which guarantee a level of reliability and consistency between chassis that was not possible in the 80's and earlier. Performance variance is further reduced. Constrictive rules have also severely limited innovation, which brings the field together according to FIA's plan.


What we have is a very complex dynamic between man and machine, the machine being a very complex piece of kit that changes substantially at times, but one that can be wielded very predictably by the majority of teams/drivers, due to their expertise and detailed preparation. The driver that is the best makes best use of the tools available to him, in conjunction with his natural ability of driving the car at its limit. It's the first part that is often glossed over and instead people focus on the natural driving ability, when in fact you can't separate the two, I don't think even the drivers have that sort of insight.

Which brings me to Schumacher of today. He was the best because he maximized the tools at his disposal and made sure he knew them well. He always had raw driving talent, but it was the intangibles(to your average armchair expert, not to one of his team members) that propelled him forward. He made sure he was superfit, he motivated the entire team around him, he left no stone unturned to improve the car's abilities because he was willing and able to take on a greater workload, in and out of cockpit. Everything just snow-balled around him, and it's little wonder in hindsight that Ferrari became such a powerful force.

So what is different for him today? For starters, he has to familiarize himself with a new set of tools, a different car, different tyres, new team, new communication gaps, new rules etc..., and for him that is probably harder than for younger drivers because he has to in some ways unlearn or forget what he knew and did in the past. Most likely it is this knowledge (which becomes innate after a while) that he has to re-acquire, and there is definitely a learning curve involved. As far as his natural driving ability, I doubt it has faded much, maybe he is at 98-99%, but that is still easily enough for him to be a championship contender, given a decent car. From many recent kart races, it seems that on pure driving ability alone he is still right up there with the best of them. What I mean really is if you give all the drivers the same handicap (3 years out, limited testing) I doubt any of them would perform better. But we don't have that so it's meagre speculation. If you add the complication of the car dynamics not mating well with the driving style, you can surmise that Schumacher won't dominate the way he did until he again maximizes all the tools at his disposal, which may yet take some time. All this is I am sure understood by Brawn and other insiders, and yet the positive signs are already begining to appear at almost very race.

Kimi Raikkonen's case is a great example of what I am disecting. Kimi, despite his considerable driving talent, probably did not make the best use of the Ferrari resources at his disposal. Hence he never really found the perfect setup for his Ferrari, maybe never really understood why he was not his old dominant self, as he had been at McLaren. Perhaps he couldn't be bothered. But I am sure his driving ability did not waiver, for when the car was to his liking, he excelled. Another such example is Montoya, I would characterize Juan as too talented for his own good.
Look at Hamilton, when he came into F1, he was like a sponge, absorbing everything thrown at him, learning so quickly he gave Alonso a run for his money! Sure his driving is sublime, but I am sure it was his work behind closed doors that effected his results more than anything else. Sheer enthusiasm and steely determination goes a long way. That is why Schumacher talks about motivation, it is the catalyst for working hard to achieve the results you seek.
Alonso is another driver with a similar skill set to Schumacher, he certainly seems to work in a similar fashion to maximize his opportunities.

As ever, true answers to these ponderings are still eluding us. Schumacher's current potential probably won't be fully realized until most of the current season is past. It is frustrating to read all the conclusions people have drawn based on merely a handful of races, some of which had extenuating results. The conclusions don't seem to take into account the complexity involved.



Cooper

Good posting, bravo .

110 agreed!
Dale what you've written is basiclaly what I've said at least 20 times each year on the forum for the past 10 years in different themes and not always on the same drivers, and you've summerised my thoughts how certain forumers view f1 very well. The forumers here-not all of them, but a select few, don't have the intention to get into a sensible debate, their view is stuck in a fortress and your opinions, mine and some other very good ones in this thread don't cut into that fortress, I admire you for telling it as it is, and it's good to tell it as it is every now and again, always remember though the flood can never be contained, especially with Schumacher's name going about, the bigger the star, and he is, the biggest of them all, the more mess and more diverse consistent and persistent a range of views will be, even if someone is playing games regarding what their talking about, some will post something they don't actually believe in just to get a response. It's ashame, but there are a handful of very good forumers. Maybe it's time to use the ignore button a bit more and save some posts from being quoted too much by everyone else.


Dale, your post is reference material, just copy and paste it and quote it time and time again, when you see BS in the threads and not one for the ignore button.


Enjoy the weekend everyone.

Yes I am happy to second your opinion; Dale Cooper's post was excellent, reasoned, considered.

I suppose it is unreasonable to expect people in general on a forum like this one not to jump on the latest news - e.g. "ha ha! Rosberg was two-tenths quicker therefore Schumacher is washed up" but posts like this one make wading through all the dross so worthwhile.

no its not the difference now is the cars are easier to drive than ever peoples short comings are hidden by how easy they are to drive compared to the cars of old when the grid had fairly big gaps between team mates

What was that brand name do they keep on joking about when commenting on Rosbergs yellow gloves. Some familiar brand name to do with kitchens/rubber gloves, it's something that's niggling me especially when I see onboard shots of him and those gloves.

I know Webber calls him Barbie, but he had another running joke attached to him because of his gloves lol

If that was the case then we would have seen one team 1-2, 3-4, 5-6 etc
Now it´s still differences between the teammates.
The cars have no aid´s unlike a few years back. I don´t think you can say that cars
are easier now and that´s why MS isn´t at the top.

The drivers can still make a difference in 2010, like in the difficult conditions
that we saw in Australia, Malaysian Q, China GP and on the streets of Monaco.

Marigolds?

Marigolds. But we don't really need yet another source of disrespect or endemic bashing do we?

Marigolds? I think it is, they are a famous brand of rubber glove for domestic use.

Sorry dint see you previous post!

The drivers were terrible back then. Senna outqualified even Hill over 1.7 seconds in the dry at his last race even. That's how terrible Hill is. And Hill was actually one of the best drivers during that era.

Only Mika was good, but the unreliable Mercedes engine was stopping him from winning.

Villeneuve got destroyed by Alonso in a brutal fashion. And even a slow Massa was able to beat him?

So really, the drivers nowadays are much better than during that era.