But his adaptability was cited by Ross Brawn himself as the reason for Michaels success. So his reputation for adapting to the car must be well known.
Here is what Ross B said in January:
“I don't think Michael can win the first race.
He will need a few races to become accustomed to these cars and the many new drivers, but then I hope to see the famous Schumi. That was always his strength – to adapt and learn incredibly quickly.
If I had to bet on any of them, then it is clear that Michael will become world champion. Michael is now more relaxed. When he retired in 2006, F1 was a burden for him. Now I can sense his old enthusiasm.”
Quite obviously Schumacher was superb and adaptable in his first career. He is not so now due to age or the long break or because Rosberg is that good. Is this too hard to accept ?
Are you actually implying that either:
a)Ross Brawn is a liar and
b) He just said these things over and over again to hype up Schumacher over the years, when clearly anyone who has observed Ross Brawn knows he is the among the most practical and pragmatic people on the paddock.
c) You know, like Frans, Cheap Wine, Aditya now etc, more about Schumacher than Ross Brawn himself. Ross Brawn only discovered Schumacher's flaws now, while you guys knew it all along. What visionaries, I must say
I cant even begin to read some of the rubbish people have started to post on this thread.
For example, a normally sane poster like Muz Bee is now claiming Schumacher's records are exaggerated. I can also claim with a similar line of reasoning that Senna, Clark, Stewart and Fangio too had very favourable conditions in at least half of all their achievements which make their records look exaggerated as well. Nearly every great driver in F1's history has had these so called favourable conditions going for him at some point or the other during their successes. However, whether it is Schumacher or Senna or Clark or Stewart or Fangio, these drivers have first worked their butts off to get into a position of strength and not just got everything on a platter because of them being blessed by the Gods. No team is stupid enough to give a driver what he wants unless they know they are going to get return on their investment
To claim that Schumacher's championships are hollow is to implicitly acknowledge all championships since 1950 which had a superior car, weak teammate, a team favoring one driver,and many such factors, as hollow as well. I can count with my fingers the number of championships which have been won without one or all of these factors going for the particular World drivers champion. Get over it people, and stop losing sleep over Schumacher winning as much as he did. Twist it any which way you want it, the truth is he deserved each and every one of his 7 world championships and wins as much as the next great driver deserved his championships, wins or podiums.
PS : Just for the record, in my honest opinion Schumacher was definitely a superior driver to Senna or Prost for that matter.
Edited by SparkPlug, 01 October 2010 - 16:40.