Jump to content


Photo

Michael Schumacher (merged)


  • This topic is locked This topic is locked
20770 replies to this topic

#4951 Fortymark

Fortymark
  • Member

  • 5,809 posts
  • Joined: April 03

Posted 25 August 2010 - 08:52

What puts the brakes on Schumi's comeback?

http://www.auto-moto...ck-2721656.html



Rubens Barrichello:"Michael's driving style is poison for the tyres. He wins his time from turning in till the apex....That kills the rear tyres. Today's tyres stop working in that way. Previously, Bridgestone build a tailor-made tyre for Michael, that works with his driving style."


Interesting interesting...
Well, I guess it´s no news for us whom already knew this.. haha


Advertisement

#4952 Frans

Frans
  • Member

  • 7,701 posts
  • Joined: April 01

Posted 25 August 2010 - 08:53

Why not all go to Spa and wave Michael a nice goodbye from F1.

Before he damages the sport and he get's a fine for that! :lol:

#4953 F.M.

F.M.
  • Member

  • 5,577 posts
  • Joined: April 08

Posted 25 August 2010 - 08:57

Q: So you believe that you are faster than Nico Rosberg?
MS:
I see all the details. True, with how the car behaves at the moment I am not driving at his level. At least not in qualifying. In the race it’s very equal. I know precisely how I can change that fact - and I am working on it.

http://www.formula1....10/8/11154.html

#4954 merschu

merschu
  • Member

  • 520 posts
  • Joined: December 09

Posted 25 August 2010 - 09:05

The full article.

In conversation - Ecclestone & Schumacher

Their names are synonymous with Formula One racing. One abandoned his driving career after two Grands Prix, became a successful team boss and then transformed the sport into a global phenomenon. The other rewrote its record books from behind the wheel, accumulating a set of career statistics that may never be surpassed. They are, of course, Formula One Group CEO Bernie Ecclestone and Mercedes GP’s seven-time world champion Michael Schumacher. Their friendship goes back almost 20 years. No surprise then that they always have plenty to talk about…

Q: Bernie and Michael, can you both remember when you first met - and what you thought about the other?
Bernie Ecclestone: If memory serves me well, that must have been some two decades ago in Monza…
Michael Schumacher: … that’s right.
BE: I helped a bit to move him from Jordan to Benetton.

Q: Why? Was it already so obvious to you at that time that he had that ‘je ne sais quoi’?
BE: Yes, of course. That was the reason I wanted him in a competitive team. And indeed he not only developed into a magnificent driver, but also into a sort of team manager. In soccer you would call it a player-coach… (laughs)

Q: Before Michael legions of German drivers had tried their luck in Formula One, with varying degrees of success. Why were you so sure that Michael would make it big?
BE: You could see that immediately if you had a good eye for talent. I think it was already visible at his first race in Spa.
MS: I also believe that talent shows right away…
BE: …anyway, I was sure that there is a winner in the making, even before his first podium in Spa in 1992. That he would win the title seven times is of course something that nobody sane would have ever predicted.

Q: When was it clear for you Michael that you would succeed in Formula One?
MS: To be honest that was in Monza after my second race - my first race for Benetton - when there was that gut feeling that bigger things could be in the wings. Before that I was lacking self-confidence to think beyond the mere fact of just being there. Of course there was no vision of winning a championship, but I had the impression that I could race on a level with the best and fight with them.

Q: So you must have been grateful that Bernie helped you move from Jordan to Benetton?
MS: Of course. He was always there if I needed advice and always offered his support. For sure Bernie was an important factor when I changed team from Jordan to Benetton. It was an important change, probably not in the first year, but definitely as a natural next step to being with the right team. Only then was I able to help increase the interest in Formula One in Germany. So I benefitted from it, as well as Formula One.
BE: Absolutely. He and Lewis Hamilton are still the most prominent drivers in Formula One. Even today.

Q: What did Formula One give you Michael?
MS:
Twenty years full of passion and positive excitement.

Q: What have the two of you learned from each other?
BE:
Michael is a proper guy. That is important for me. If you talk to him you know where you stand. And once again, how fast he upgraded himself from pure driver to ‘team manager’ at Benetton…
MS: …that’s not totally correct. That was rather more the case at Ferrari. (smiles)

Q: And now at Mercedes?
MS:
Well, I have worked together with (team principal) Ross (Brawn) and others in the team for so many years that it is natural that my job is not limited to driving only. I’m surely no engineer nor aerodynamicist, but I have enough experience to know the direction it should head in to be successful. With all these computer programs and all the data flowing from it, it is still men who make the decisions.

Q: Bernie, at what point did you know that Michael would make a comeback?
BE:
I learned it from the newspaper.

Q: You didn’t talk before?
BE:
No.
MS: What for?
BE: The most important factor was that Michael had enough self-confidence to do it and a team that believed in him. The people at Mercedes knew what he stands for and what he is able to achieve and they talked to him in a serious way so that he would listen. If they’d tried to sell him nonsense he surely wouldn’t have listened to them.

Q: Were you surprised by the media hype surrounding your comeback?
MS:
You bet. Already in summer 2009 when there was the talk of me returning to Ferrari for a short period I was surprised - positively surprised.
BE: It was super. Very similar to Tiger Wood’s comeback - even though Tiger had stopped playing for very different reasons. We had a tremendous media presence thanks to Michael. Thanks again for that.

Q: Hand on heart Michael, would you ever have guessed it is possible for one driver to win seven titles in his career?
MS:
No, nobody can be that narcissistic. Even in my wildest dreams I could not imagine winning more than one title, if at all, because as a driver you depend heavily on the competitiveness of your car. We are not tennis players or other lone sportsmen where it is only your own talent that makes or breaks it. But I love it the way it is - that you are part of a team where you have to put performance together like a jigsaw puzzle to be successful, and where everybody needs to be motivated by the others.
BE: How true. Formula One is a team sport and that shows in the outfit of every individual team member - they are all the same. So they should all pull together for the benefit of the whole. That’s why I am against the so-called ‘team order’ ban that is all over the place right now - because we are speaking about internal team decisions. The only collusion that cannot be tolerated in my opinion is one between two teams for the disadvantage of a third party. What’s your opinion Michael?
MS: Mark Webber and Sebastian Vettel in Turkey had the smell of team orders, or Nico Rosberg staying out longer in Hockenheim. But is that really team orders? No, it is not. Only things that can be controlled should be regulated.
BE: Absolutely correct.

Q: Bernie, when you heard that Michael was coming back you called it a gift for Formula One. That comeback has been a bit bumpier than expected and there are lots of critics. Was it really a gift for Formula One?
BE:
Yes, because Michael is a hundred percent fit and talented, but he is racing because he wants to win - and at the moment this is not possible, so he has to focus on getting the car right.

Q: What about you Michael? Explain why your comeback was not a mistake…
MS:
Because I enjoy what I’m doing and because I believe in being able to reach my goal - to win the title. I have to accept that it will take time. Of course we all in the team believed that we would be more competitive this season. Unfortunately that’s not the case.
BE: If Michael were driving a Red Bull I would put my money on him…

Q: You too, Michael?
MS:
Let’s put it this way, I would have different options in a Red Bull.

Q: What makes you so optimistic that next year will be better?
MS:
Because we know and understand the problems that are haunting us now.
BE: I have to add something else. When people say that Nico Rosberg is faster than Michael I tell them Nico still has to prove himself. Not so Michael. For Nico fourth places are still important - not for Michael. Only winning is what counts for him. Whether he finishes fourth or 14th doesn’t really matter for him…

Q: Is that true, Michael?
MS:
He’s probably right.

Q: Both of you like a poker game. How important is it to put on a good poker face?
BE:
He doesn’t need it - he’s in the car wearing a helmet! (laughs) But let’s be serious, why should he push to the limit for fourth places?
MS: Wait a minute, I cannot leave that statement unresolved. I always drive at the limit. I do that for myself.

Q: What Bernie obviously means is that you appear much more relaxed than in the past…
MS:
Okay, yes. But that doesn’t mean that I’m not giving everything.
BE: I’m only suggesting that the motivation is different if you fight for a win or for eighth or ninth place.

Q: Are you still surprised about the reactions of the media? Do you pinch yourself sometimes, thinking ‘Oh my god, what have I done?’
MS:
Once again, for me it is important how I work with the car and with the team. The media are just a side effect. They don’t influence the picture that I envision.

Q: So you believe that you are faster than Nico Rosberg?
MS:
I see all the details. True, with how the car behaves at the moment I am not driving at his level. At least not in qualifying. In the race it’s very equal. I know precisely how I can change that fact - and I am working on it.

Q: Jenson Button, your predecessor at Brawn-Mercedes, has said feels a bit guilty as last year he moulded the 2010 car to suit his driving style - and that is completely different to yours. His handling preference is more towards understeer - a characteristic you don’t like. You came to the team too late to change the fundamental characteristics of the car…
MS:
…true, every driver has his own driving style and you have to work with the team so that you feel comfortable with the package. I achieved that with Ferrari. But that doesn’t happen overnight. It is no secret that at the moment our car has characteristics that don’t suit me. Now it is up to us to change that. Then the situation will be different.

Q: Bernie, before Michael drivers were not averse to living the high life off track. But then he came and changed it all. He introduced a kind of Teutonic thoroughness that had only one goal - success. Did you view that development with mixed feelings?
BE:
I can only say this - today all drivers want to be like Michael Schumacher…
MS: I am sure that, for example, Sebastian Vettel observed my career steps very carefully. He never told me, but I think I’m right. I am proud of that. But I wasn’t only successful because I was the fittest guy on the grid. I also worked hard with the team. My success was the summation of many factors.
BE: And let’s not forget that Michael also introduced new dimensions for driver salaries. Team principals don’t really appreciate him for that! (laughs) And coming back to Sebastian Vettel, he is as smart as Michael when it comes to his working mode and he is gifted with exceptional talent. On top of that he’s a damned nice guy. Wasn’t he called ‘Baby Schuey’ in Germany?
MS: He doesn’t like these comparisons. And he’s right. He has outgrown it.

Q: Last question. Is Fernando Alonso your spiritual successor at Ferrari? Some feel he is the Ferrari team principal in disguise…
MS:
I cannot answer that. I have no contact with Alonso.
BE: Fernando has a different character. He will not achieve at Ferrari what Michael did.


http://www.formula1....10/8/11154.html

Edited by merschu, 25 August 2010 - 09:34.


#4955 Kovalonso

Kovalonso
  • Member

  • 540 posts
  • Joined: March 10

Posted 25 August 2010 - 09:14

What puts the brakes on Schumi's comeback?

http://www.auto-moto...ck-2721656.html

The most reputable German motor racing magazine auto motor und sport starts to detect a shift in the German perception of Michael Schumacher.

Rubens Barrichello:"Michael's driving style is poison for the tyres. He wins his time from turning in till the apex....That kills the rear tyres. Today's tyres stop working in that way. Previously, Bridgestone build a tailor-made tyre for Michael, that works with his driving style."

Thank you for the article :up:

#4956 ivand911

ivand911
  • Member

  • 8,152 posts
  • Joined: February 10

Posted 25 August 2010 - 09:21

"Mark Webber and Sebastian Vettel in Turkey had the smell of team orders, or Nico Rosberg staying out longer in Hockenheim. But is that really team orders? No, it is not. Only things that can be controlled should be regulated."
"BE: I have to add something else. When people say that Nico Rosberg is faster than Michael I tell them Nico still has to prove himself. Not so Michael. For Nico fourth places are still important - not for Michael. Only winning is what counts for him. Whether he finishes fourth or 14th doesn’t really matter for him…"

I think I said that before. Thank you for the article from formula1.com.


#4957 as65p

as65p
  • Member

  • 18,477 posts
  • Joined: June 04

Posted 25 August 2010 - 09:27

In a way it's fascinating to see how MS himself genuinely believes it's everything but himself responsible: the car, the tyres and what not. And I guess nobody in his surroundings is going to object, they all gain from his presence, after all.

Not least Bernie whose one and only interest shines through in this statement:

"It was super. Very similar to Tiger Wood’s comeback - even though Tiger had stopped playing for very different reasons. We had a tremendous media presence thanks to Michael. Thanks again for that."

You bet...

#4958 slaveceru

slaveceru
  • Member

  • 180 posts
  • Joined: April 10

Posted 25 August 2010 - 09:34

Utter nonsense; the man has 15 years of experience driving a wide range of different cars, on different tyres, with different engines, different regulations, and different characteristics. He's won 91 races, and seven world titles. That's not speculation, it's fact, and it's a good reason why citing a 'learning curve' is nonsense. Further, Mercedes hired to him to win, not to learn; that's not speculation either - you hire Vitaly Petrov, Hulkenberg, a newcomer with promise if you want to give them a learnign curve, not a man with 200 plus races behind him. he's now had 12 races, with the same amount of testing as everyone else; that's not speculation, it's fact, again. You may be happy to overlook all this in the search for excuses, but it's simply that - a search for excuses.


I do not know if this is an excuse if it is a fact. If someone would have a measuring tool to say yes normally it takes just a few races or a few games to come back from retirement than I would say that Schumacher is delusional about him self but there is no one so you can not compare. I have said it once that he is not like all others rookies he is experienced but experience does not bring the speed. Experience just helps the driver in some situations in races to react better than the rookie would. What about the style of driving tires or the car? He has told several times that he has changed his style completely the cars and tires are completely different so in all of this areas he is very similar to rookies who are competing this year is he not?

Here's something more for you to contemplate, and these are your words:

"He has to learn how to drive this cars, he has to learn everything about new tires,

He's going to have to do that next year, too; the car will be different, the tyres will be different, the characteristics will be different, he'll have no more testing than anyone else; surely he's going to need another 12 races on his learning curve, at least, again?

If you are saying that Rosberg is better this year than him then I agree with you, if you are saying that he is on the same level of understanding of the cars and tires as he was prior retirement than it is just your speculation. There are few of you on this forum who have said several times that he is the same driver as he was prior retirement just to say that he was not so great are you one of them? If the answer is yes than you have a tool to measure greatness. He was one of the greatest driver from 1994 - 2006 together with Alonso and Hakinne. It is stupid to say that he was greater than those two drivers in this period but you can say that he was more successful and is the most successful driver in the history of F1 racing and no one can take this from him. Did he deserved all the wins and WDC wins yes he did, was he the most controversial driver in this period yes he was.

Far from trying to 'force my opinion on you' I'm suggesting you look a little closer at what you're saying; the most successful driver in the sport, a man with few peers and who the team boss still reckons is better than everyone else, shouldn't need a learning curve of two thirds of a season or more.

I do not think that boss still recons that Schumacher is better than everyone else. This also is not my opinion, but he deserves the place on the grid.
Is he generally better than Rosberg I honestly do not know? The team has the answer on this question and not us here on this forum.

Once again you are confusing experience with learning. Experience has nothing to do with learning. I know what I am saying to put brief. No one knows how long it will take him to catch the leading guys if he can still achieve this? Do you have a measuring tool to say that few races is enough to relearn everything? Is there another guy who came from retirement or what?
All the drivers would be on equal level if they would stop racing for three years and then began with Schumacher so they are not on equal level and there is probability that they never will be. On the other hand if he can beat them once again he will prove to him self and others that he can do it and that he is not too old. Schumacher said that it will take him a few races to get back to rhythm of racing and to get back the filling of the car. Rhythm and felling does not win GP or WDC all driver have those two things.

Edited by slaveceru, 25 August 2010 - 09:57.


#4959 glorius&victorius

glorius&victorius
  • Member

  • 4,327 posts
  • Joined: June 02

Posted 25 August 2010 - 09:58

Q: What did Formula One give you Michael?
MS: Twenty years full of passion and positive excitement.<


typical response of MS that shows his inability to convey his passion for the sport in words... same response one would get if ask him: "why are you the best driver and won 7 WDC?"... he would probably say "I dont know...perhaps hard work"

Stewart, Moss, Senna, Mansell would have given more passionate reply... Senna would probably have given an entire analysis of transformation of his persona etc and realization of etc etc... :)

Edited by glorius&victorius, 25 August 2010 - 10:02.


Advertisement

#4960 Big Block 8

Big Block 8
  • Member

  • 2,423 posts
  • Joined: January 04

Posted 25 August 2010 - 10:09

MS: Of course. He (Bernie Ecclestone) was always there if I needed advice and always offered his support.


It would be interesting to know actually how much Bernie's influence played part in MS's success as a whole. Meaning with this not only his Benetton move, but that kind of thing is bound to have a positive effect practically on everything - team status, penalties, contracts, rules, sponsors, paddock insiders, media etc. etc. No pun intended, but in hindsight MS sure did have all the ducks lined in for success!

Edited by Big Block 8, 25 August 2010 - 10:11.


#4961 ivand911

ivand911
  • Member

  • 8,152 posts
  • Joined: February 10

Posted 25 August 2010 - 10:25

It would be interesting to know actually how much Bernie's influence played part in MS's success as a whole. Meaning with this not only his Benetton move, but that kind of thing is bound to have a positive effect practically on everything - team status, penalties, contracts, rules, sponsors, paddock insiders, media etc. etc. No pun intended, but in hindsight MS sure did have all the ducks lined in for success!

Karun also have big help from BE. Expect 7WDC for him soon? BE help a lot of drivers, because he need them. But this is his job really. With Michael penalties he did really poor job.

Edited by ivand911, 25 August 2010 - 10:27.


#4962 dav115

dav115
  • Member

  • 722 posts
  • Joined: August 08

Posted 25 August 2010 - 10:59

Interesting interesting...
Well, I guess it´s no news for us whom already knew this.. haha

Yeah, and it explains why he was so shit from '91 until '99 when he switched to Bridgestones...

#4963 as65p

as65p
  • Member

  • 18,477 posts
  • Joined: June 04

Posted 25 August 2010 - 11:06

Yeah, and it explains why he was so shit from '91 until '99 when he switched to Bridgestones...


That's not helping your case. 1 fair title in 8 years on standard tyres against 5 titles on bespoke Bridgestones in 7 years.

#4964 as65p

as65p
  • Member

  • 18,477 posts
  • Joined: June 04

Posted 25 August 2010 - 11:11

It would be interesting to know actually how much Bernie's influence played part in MS's success as a whole. Meaning with this not only his Benetton move, but that kind of thing is bound to have a positive effect practically on everything - team status, penalties, contracts, rules, sponsors, paddock insiders, media etc. etc. No pun intended, but in hindsight MS sure did have all the ducks lined in for success!


To be fair, I reckon Ecclestone is motivated by commercial success and nothing else. He would surely help MS as long as he serves a means to that goal (which he certainly was in the beginning, as a key to the huge german market and is now again as a "sporting legend" like Tiger Woods or Eddie Jordan), but not for personal or other reasons.

Or IOW if MS would somehow turn out bad for business, BE would drop him in an instant like a hot potatoe.

#4965 Mika Mika

Mika Mika
  • Member

  • 6,750 posts
  • Joined: October 07

Posted 25 August 2010 - 11:13

To be fair, I reckon Ecclestone is motivated by commercial success and nothing else. He would surely help MS as long as he serves a means to that goal (which he certainly was in the beginning, as a key to the huge german market and is now again as a "sporting legend" like Tiger Woods or Eddie Jordan), but not for personal or other reasons.

Or IOW if MS would somehow turn out bad for business, BE would drop him in an instant like a hot potatoe.


100% agree....

#4966 Lifew12

Lifew12
  • Member

  • 4,551 posts
  • Joined: May 06

Posted 25 August 2010 - 11:18

There are few of you on this forum who have said several times that he is the same driver as he was prior retirement just to say that he was not so great are you one of them?


Am I 'one of them' just wants to say he's 'not so great'? No. Am I on who thinks he is the same driver that he was prior to retirement? No, he's nowhere near as good.

And therein lies the problem; you have also hinted that Rosberg is better than Michael this year, and by all accounts that is a sensible assessment. The question then is this - why is he going to be any better next year?

You ask how long it takes for him to complete his 'learning curve' (which I maintain is ridiculous) so what makes you think it's going to be exactly, precisely one season, and that next year he'll be better than Rosberg? Why should, why would, that be? 12 races and it hasn't happened - 12 races with as much experience with the car and team as Rosberg - so why will it happen next year? That doesn't make sense.

My view is this - if it takes him 12 races - and more - to 'learn' how to drive this car, and these tyres, it's going to take him the same to 'learn' to drive another car, and new tyres; it doesn't matter that everyone will be learning the new tyres, as how long it takes Michael Schumacher doesn't have any bearing on how long it takes AN Other. If you're right, and he needs this 'learnign curve' then surely, he's going to be in the same situation at this point next year?

I find that hard to believe, don't you?

#4967 dav115

dav115
  • Member

  • 722 posts
  • Joined: August 08

Posted 25 August 2010 - 11:26

That's not helping your case. 1 fair title in 8 years on standard tyres against 5 titles on bespoke Bridgestones in 7 years.

The only unfair thing that happened in 1994 with Schumacher was his disqualification for two races in order to give Hill a sniff at the title hunt, so don't try pulling that card. You also seem to neglect that between 96 and 98 he was beating fairly drivers whose cars were acknowledged to be several tenths per lap quicker. In fact, I'd put money on the fact that if you were to make a poll asking which year Schumacher was at his peak in, the vast majority of responses would lie within those three years.

#4968 ivand911

ivand911
  • Member

  • 8,152 posts
  • Joined: February 10

Posted 25 August 2010 - 11:31

That's not helping your case. 1 fair title in 8 years on standard tyres against 5 titles on bespoke Bridgestones in 7 years.

What was fair? Slow Hill to take 1994 title? :rotfl: They take 20 points from Michael and 2 races not to race. This was really fair.


#4969 as65p

as65p
  • Member

  • 18,477 posts
  • Joined: June 04

Posted 25 August 2010 - 11:43

Keep missing the point, guys. Even 2 out of 8 looks distinctively worse than 5 out of 7, doesn't it? That messy 1994 championship isn't really the issue here, the influence of tailored Bridgestones on MS' success from 2000 onwards is.

#4970 Big Block 8

Big Block 8
  • Member

  • 2,423 posts
  • Joined: January 04

Posted 25 August 2010 - 11:45

To be fair, I reckon Ecclestone is motivated by commercial success and nothing else. He would surely help MS as long as he serves a means to that goal (which he certainly was in the beginning, as a key to the huge german market and is now again as a "sporting legend" like Tiger Woods or Eddie Jordan), but not for personal or other reasons.

Or IOW if MS would somehow turn out bad for business, BE would drop him in an instant like a hot potatoe.


I agree, but regardless of the reason the effect was the same.

#4971 Big Block 8

Big Block 8
  • Member

  • 2,423 posts
  • Joined: January 04

Posted 25 August 2010 - 11:51

You also seem to neglect that between 96 and 98 he was beating fairly drivers whose cars were acknowledged to be several tenths per lap quicker.


True, that was the most popular opinion at the time. The conclusion was based on assumption that Eddie Irvine was the true indicator of the car's speed, the rest was coming from Schumacher's driving skill.

Edited by Big Block 8, 25 August 2010 - 11:53.


#4972 ivand911

ivand911
  • Member

  • 8,152 posts
  • Joined: February 10

Posted 25 August 2010 - 12:13

Keep missing the point, guys. Even 2 out of 8 looks distinctively worse than 5 out of 7, doesn't it? That messy 1994 championship isn't really the issue here, the influence of tailored Bridgestones on MS' success from 2000 onwards is.

If there was tailored BS tyre for Michael, I think this was in worst times of tyre war. Not all the time and every time. Even this tyre didn't help him much in 2005. My opinion.


#4973 slaveceru

slaveceru
  • Member

  • 180 posts
  • Joined: April 10

Posted 25 August 2010 - 12:17

That's not helping your case. 1 fair title in 8 years on standard tyres against 5 titles on bespoke Bridgestones in 7 years.

:rotfl:
He has won two WDC titles in this period and both were fair. How can you judge the WDC titles?

#4974 slaveceru

slaveceru
  • Member

  • 180 posts
  • Joined: April 10

Posted 25 August 2010 - 12:57

Am I 'one of them' just wants to say he's 'not so great'? No. Am I on who thinks he is the same driver that he was prior to retirement? No, he's nowhere near as good.

And therein lies the problem; you have also hinted that Rosberg is better than Michael this year, and by all accounts that is a sensible assessment. The question then is this - why is he going to be any better next year?


You ask how long it takes for him to complete his 'learning curve' (which I maintain is ridiculous) so what makes you think it's going to be exactly, precisely one season, and that next year he'll be better than Rosberg? Why should, why would, that be? 12 races and it hasn't happened - 12 races with as much experience with the car and team as Rosberg - so why will it happen next year? That doesn't make sense.

My view is this - if it takes him 12 races - and more - to 'learn' how to drive this car, and these tyres, it's going to take him the same to 'learn' to drive another car, and new tyres; it doesn't matter that everyone will be learning the new tyres, as how long it takes Michael Schumacher doesn't have any bearing on how long it takes AN Other. If you're right, and he needs this 'learnign curve' then surely, he's going to be in the same situation at this point next year?

I find that hard to believe, don't you?


Spot on. I am not saying that he will be better next year in comparison to Rosberg. I am trying to explain you that in now days you are learning about new things all the time and you have to if you want to be successful. The limiting factor of how quick you can learn new things is age and experience can not help you. So once again we have come to age. There is saying that after 40 years of age there is only room to forget the things that you have learned. Here is another one” It is hard to learn old dog new tricks”.
So at the end we have come to the same conclusion.
So do you still believe that it is enough to learn everything that has changed in three years just in a few races? In my type of work I know that if I would take vacation for three years it would take me at least one year to come back to the same level prior vacation and I am not 40 years old.


#4975 Diablobb81

Diablobb81
  • Member

  • 3,755 posts
  • Joined: August 09

Posted 25 August 2010 - 13:14

That's not helping your case. 1 fair title in 8 years on standard tyres against 5 titles on bespoke Bridgestones in 7 years.


Yeah, the guy only won two WDC's in that time. He's shit. :rolleyes:
Your arguments are impressive. Especially how in a discussion about tires you managed to insert comments about his fairness.

Edited by Diablobb81, 25 August 2010 - 13:16.


#4976 Jazza

Jazza
  • Member

  • 1,054 posts
  • Joined: November 99

Posted 25 August 2010 - 13:19

The only unfair thing that happened in 1994 with Schumacher was his disqualification for two races in order to give Hill a sniff at the title hunt, so don't try pulling that card. You also seem to neglect that between 96 and 98 he was beating fairly drivers whose cars were acknowledged to be several tenths per lap quicker. In fact, I'd put money on the fact that if you were to make a poll asking which year Schumacher was at his peak in, the vast majority of responses would lie within those three years.


At the time the claim was more like a second per lap quicker. It's only in recent years that it has been revised to a more realistic tenths of a second.

As for beating fairly... How many times was MS genuinely faster then Hill's Williams or Mika's McLaren? In their championship years in raw race pace they were faster almost every race. MS's wins those years normally came when they had a problem. If the 98 McLaren had been reliable mika would have won about a dozen races that year.



#4977 ivand911

ivand911
  • Member

  • 8,152 posts
  • Joined: February 10

Posted 25 August 2010 - 13:28

At the time the claim was more like a second per lap quicker. It's only in recent years that it has been revised to a more realistic tenths of a second.

As for beating fairly... How many times was MS genuinely faster then Hill's Williams or Mika's McLaren? In their championship years in raw race pace they were faster almost every race. MS's wins those years normally came when they had a problem. If the 98 McLaren had been reliable mika would have won about a dozen races that year.

If Michael didn't broke his leg in 1999, he could take that year title also.

Edited by ivand911, 25 August 2010 - 13:30.


#4978 Jazza

Jazza
  • Member

  • 1,054 posts
  • Joined: November 99

Posted 25 August 2010 - 13:39

If Michael didn't broke his leg in 1999, he could take that year title also.


He may have, he may not have. That seems to have little to do with him being faster then other drivers in faster cars.



#4979 Anssi

Anssi
  • Member

  • 1,899 posts
  • Joined: August 09

Posted 25 August 2010 - 13:57

I think what's happening is that unrealistic views on Michael Schumacher are being tuned down to a more realistic level. I believe that every great driver is hyped up to be greater than they actually are. They all have their flaws, like they have their advantages over others. It's healthy that this correction happens.

The records are 'set in stone', what was done was done, and Michael Schumacher can be happy with his records and so can his fans be. It's the same for all the great drivers who won a Championship, or more, in F1. No matter what happens thereafter, they can say they did it. The bullshit stops at the official records.

Advertisement

#4980 Ferrari_F1_fan_2001

Ferrari_F1_fan_2001
  • Member

  • 3,420 posts
  • Joined: May 01

Posted 25 August 2010 - 14:00

That's not helping your case. 1 fair title in 8 years on standard tyres against 5 titles on bespoke Bridgestones in 7 years.


1991 - not a capable car
1992 - ditto
1993 - ditto
1996 - ditto
1997 - took it down to the wire; cheat or no cheat
1998 - took it down to the wire

What's your argument again?

#4981 Lifew12

Lifew12
  • Member

  • 4,551 posts
  • Joined: May 06

Posted 25 August 2010 - 14:11

So at the end we have come to the same conclusion.


I'm not sure we have, but whatever!

So do you still believe that it is enough to learn everything that has changed in three years just in a few races?


'Just a few races'? two thirds of a season? 12 races? What i find curious is that you're willing to dismiss experience so readily; compared to a deriver such as Petwov I would say it should take Michael Schumacher a lot less time to 'learn' the car. He's done it before, many times, over a 15 year (and more) career. That experience doesn't go away.


In my type of work I know that if I would take vacation for three years it would take me at least one year to come back to the same level prior vacation and I am not 40 years old.


I doubt you would come back at the same level as before your vacation indeed, but I'm quite certain that the experience you had of the job prior to leaving would make it much easier for you to get back up to speed. I've done it, and it did.

#4982 arknor

arknor
  • Member

  • 2,298 posts
  • Joined: March 10

Posted 25 August 2010 - 16:05

That's not helping your case. 1 fair title in 8 years on standard tyres against 5 titles on bespoke Bridgestones in 7 years.

didnt the other company work with mclaren?

#4983 Fortymark

Fortymark
  • Member

  • 5,809 posts
  • Joined: April 03

Posted 25 August 2010 - 16:31

The only unfair thing that happened in 1994 with Schumacher was his disqualification for two races in order to give Hill a sniff at the title hunt, so don't try pulling that card. You also seem to neglect that between 96 and 98 he was beating fairly drivers whose cars were acknowledged to be several tenths per lap quicker. In fact, I'd put money on the fact that if you were to make a poll asking which year Schumacher was at his peak in, the vast majority of responses would lie within those three years.


That´s your opinion, I have mine.
If you cheat, you should never be allowed to come away with it.
Schumachers behaviour at Silverstone is minor really but they were found with
illegal software and manipulating the fuel rig. That´s two clear cases of cheating.

It´s a myth that Schumacher was having "inferior cars" against the others in 1994-99
The whole theory is based on the neglected #2 driver for gods sake..


#4984 Fortymark

Fortymark
  • Member

  • 5,809 posts
  • Joined: April 03

Posted 25 August 2010 - 16:32

If Michael didn't broke his leg in 1999, he could take that year title also.



Well, it was his own mistake so he can´t blame anyone else :wave:

#4985 ivand911

ivand911
  • Member

  • 8,152 posts
  • Joined: February 10

Posted 25 August 2010 - 16:43

Well, it was his own mistake so he can´t blame anyone else :wave:

As I remember it was car problem? He can't brake? But this show your knowledge.

Edited by ivand911, 25 August 2010 - 16:47.


#4986 dav115

dav115
  • Member

  • 722 posts
  • Joined: August 08

Posted 25 August 2010 - 16:43

Well, it was his own mistake so he can´t blame anyone else :wave:

Yeah, he should have been more careful manufacturing/assembling that brake line.

#4987 Fortymark

Fortymark
  • Member

  • 5,809 posts
  • Joined: April 03

Posted 25 August 2010 - 17:08

As I remember it was car problem? He can't brake? But this show your knowledge.


Eddie Irvine said this:

There's little doubt that had Michael not had his crash he would have won the title that year - but he only has himself to blame. Everybody thinks that brake failure was responsible for the incident but I would like to put the record straight and record how the scenario really unfolded. I was really energised for the race because the car was doing great but I was also really hacked off with Michael.”

"He had been quoted as saying that I had only helped him a couple of times when the truth was that I had moved over for him several times without the team even asking me. I felt his comments were ungracious so when I flew past him at the start I decided to brake so late going into the corner that there would be no way he could come by me without sliding wide. He braked, locked up, came off the brakes and then tried to sweep by me.”

"But then he had to brake again when he realised he wasn't going to make it and that's when a nipple in the brakes snapped and sent him straight into the tyre wall."


#4988 ivand911

ivand911
  • Member

  • 8,152 posts
  • Joined: February 10

Posted 25 August 2010 - 17:34

Eddie Irvine said this:

There's little doubt that had Michael not had his crash he would have won the title that year - but he only has himself to blame. Everybody thinks that brake failure was responsible for the incident but I would like to put the record straight and record how the scenario really unfolded. I was really energised for the race because the car was doing great but I was also really hacked off with Michael.”

"He had been quoted as saying that I had only helped him a couple of times when the truth was that I had moved over for him several times without the team even asking me. I felt his comments were ungracious so when I flew past him at the start I decided to brake so late going into the corner that there would be no way he could come by me without sliding wide. He braked, locked up, came off the brakes and then tried to sweep by me.”

"But then he had to brake again when he realised he wasn't going to make it and that's when a nipple in the brakes snapped and sent him straight into the tyre wall."

Still there was a brake failure? Car was driving forward with no braking.


#4989 Birelman

Birelman
  • Member

  • 2,537 posts
  • Joined: May 07

Posted 25 August 2010 - 17:39

And this post was helpful because, you know fairy-tales? Or you just got in wrong forum.

well, since we're supposed to be discussing Formula 1 in the real world, and not Fantasyland, I think maybe the one in the wrong forum might even be you  ;)

#4990 Birelman

Birelman
  • Member

  • 2,537 posts
  • Joined: May 07

Posted 25 August 2010 - 17:42

Eddie Irvine said this:

There's little doubt that had Michael not had his crash he would have won the title that year - but he only has himself to blame. Everybody thinks that brake failure was responsible for the incident but I would like to put the record straight and record how the scenario really unfolded. I was really energised for the race because the car was doing great but I was also really hacked off with Michael.”

"He had been quoted as saying that I had only helped him a couple of times when the truth was that I had moved over for him several times without the team even asking me. I felt his comments were ungracious so when I flew past him at the start I decided to brake so late going into the corner that there would be no way he could come by me without sliding wide. He braked, locked up, came off the brakes and then tried to sweep by me.”

"But then he had to brake again when he realised he wasn't going to make it and that's when a nipple in the brakes snapped and sent him straight into the tyre wall."

is this for real? if so LOL!!!!!!! :clap:

#4991 ivand911

ivand911
  • Member

  • 8,152 posts
  • Joined: February 10

Posted 25 August 2010 - 17:48

well, since we're supposed to be discussing Formula 1 in the real world, and not Fantasyland, I think maybe the one in the wrong forum might even be you ;)

Aaa, you were discussing something? I didn't see it. People are coming here to give their view of some situation, I just don't see what was your view. Everybody can be wrong, I have doubt that people who participated in events will say what really happen. About Irvine explanation, I don't understand it because he was outside that corner and Michael was inside? Michael was having rear brake failure and nothing was stopping the engine.

Edited by ivand911, 25 August 2010 - 17:51.


#4992 GiancarloF1

GiancarloF1
  • Member

  • 925 posts
  • Joined: December 07

Posted 25 August 2010 - 17:53

Still there was a brake failure? Car was driving forward with no braking.


In other words Eddie Irvine said this: Everyone thinks it was a brake failure, but no they are wrong. He is to blame, because he was racing against me, and a brake failure happened. But it was his fault.

Classic Eddie frustration. :rotfl:

#4993 F1Champion

F1Champion
  • Member

  • 3,043 posts
  • Joined: September 01

Posted 25 August 2010 - 17:56

Eddie Irvine said this:

There's little doubt that had Michael not had his crash he would have won the title that year - but he only has himself to blame. Everybody thinks that brake failure was responsible for the incident but I would like to put the record straight and record how the scenario really unfolded. I was really energised for the race because the car was doing great but I was also really hacked off with Michael.”

"He had been quoted as saying that I had only helped him a couple of times when the truth was that I had moved over for him several times without the team even asking me. I felt his comments were ungracious so when I flew past him at the start I decided to brake so late going into the corner that there would be no way he could come by me without sliding wide. He braked, locked up, came off the brakes and then tried to sweep by me.”

"But then he had to brake again when he realised he wasn't going to make it and that's when a nipple in the brakes snapped and sent him straight into the tyre wall."



So.....the brakes failed then. If a nipple in the brakes snaps and you lose braking ability, then its brake failure.

#4994 Birelman

Birelman
  • Member

  • 2,537 posts
  • Joined: May 07

Posted 25 August 2010 - 18:09

1991 - not a capable car
1992 - ditto
1993 - ditto
1996 - ditto
1997 - took it down to the wire; cheat or no cheat
1998 - took it down to the wire

What's your argument again?

Heh...

91 not such a bad car 4th best and actually won a race if memory serves correctly, either that year or the year before
92 3rd best car
93 also 3rd best car
96 second best car
97 second best car
98 second best car

You seem to forget
94 best car
95 debatable
99 best car even if the Maccas looked impressive in Melbourne, Ferrari was the right package that year
00 best car
01 best car
02 best car
03 best car
04 best car
05 third best
06 best car

So what's your point?

#4995 Birelman

Birelman
  • Member

  • 2,537 posts
  • Joined: May 07

Posted 25 August 2010 - 18:11

So.....the brakes failed then. If a nipple in the brakes snaps and you lose braking ability, then its brake failure.

The point is the failure was, according to Irvine's quote, caused by a driver error. I doubt it, but, that's what he apparently means.

#4996 ivand911

ivand911
  • Member

  • 8,152 posts
  • Joined: February 10

Posted 25 August 2010 - 18:36

The point is the failure was, according to Irvine's quote, caused by a driver error. I doubt it, but, that's what he apparently means.

Yes, brakes usually fail when drivers use them? What is wrong way to use brakes? I think Irvine was joking here. 94 was second best car, about 95 you are right. But 95 car with Reno engine was much closer to the Williams 95, than 94 Benneton to the 94 Williams . Or just cars in 95 were equal. 06 car also debatable.

Edited by ivand911, 25 August 2010 - 18:48.


#4997 Birelman

Birelman
  • Member

  • 2,537 posts
  • Joined: May 07

Posted 25 August 2010 - 18:40

Yes, brakes usually fail when drivers use them? What is wrong way to use brakes? I think Irvine was joking here.

Seems to me, he means that he forced the issue to the point where Schumacher overstepped the physical limits of the car and according to him, that caused the failure. I seriously doubt it though, to brake a nipple by braking to lte and hard. I guess he suggests it, but I think it's impossible, even as much as I want to believe it!! LOL :lol:

#4998 GiancarloF1

GiancarloF1
  • Member

  • 925 posts
  • Joined: December 07

Posted 25 August 2010 - 19:04

99 best car even if the Maccas looked impressive in Melbourne, Ferrari was the right package that year


Yeah, especially for Mika Salo's Hungarian GP.

#4999 Big Block 8

Big Block 8
  • Member

  • 2,423 posts
  • Joined: January 04

Posted 25 August 2010 - 19:06

The point is the failure was, according to Irvine's quote, caused by a driver error. I doubt it, but, that's what he apparently means.


IMO he meant (I remember that quote) that the brake failure happened when MS was trying a desperate overtaking attempt. For the blaming of MS to make any sense, it would also have to mean that Irvine was going at such a speed that the overtaking attempt there would have resulted an off, even without the brake failure.

It's debatable though how bad the injury would have been if the other half of the brakes (he only lost the fronts IIRC) had worked through the sand. It would have been a high speed crash regardless, as the car sliding through sand has very little grip.

Advertisement

#5000 ivand911

ivand911
  • Member

  • 8,152 posts
  • Joined: February 10

Posted 25 August 2010 - 19:27

IMO he meant (I remember that quote) that the brake failure happened when MS was trying a desperate overtaking attempt. For the blaming of MS to make any sense, it would also have to mean that Irvine was going at such a speed that the overtaking attempt there would have resulted an off, even without the brake failure.

It's debatable though how bad the injury would have been if the other half of the brakes (he only lost the fronts IIRC) had worked through the sand. It would have been a high speed crash regardless, as the car sliding through sand has very little grip.

He lost rear brakes, and nothing was stopping the engine. Front brakes blocked and smoke heavily.