I know that Ascari won many more, which is why you surprise me with your Schumacherisms. Also, Michael may not have survived the 50s with his driving style, bumping into other people´s cars, Silverstone 1999 etc....
Of course, a Michael in the 50's would have been a different Michael to that of now. I was simply explaining my reasoning for suggesting the non-championship races from the earlier eras should be looked at. I find it rather sad that they are overlooked and largely forgotten these days.
Ah, so you do know a little bit of F1 history
I know a lot of F1 history, my friend, even if I say it myself. I prefer to refer to Grands Prix rather than f1 as I recognise the sport is over a hundred years old not just 60 (or, as many would have us think, 20!). I am passionate about my motor sport history and have a library of books that cover every aspect, every era, etc. My main interest lies in the 1930's and the 1980's, two era's poles apart but with quite a lot in common. I could, if you wish, reel off a list of important, repected, members of the 1950's Ferrari teams, but you know that so I won't bother. My point is simply that in every era, at every team, there are peopl who are very clever, respected and talented. It was the same in 1906 as it is now. The only difference is th area that is given the most attention has changed. In the 1950's the engine was king. That's why Lampredi is worth a mention.
For the 1970s you obviously draw a blank: Ferrari in the 1970s were utterly disorganized, the term "grande casino" had become a mainstay for characterising the team in those days. Niki Lauda, Luca di Montezemolo and Mauro Forghieri pulled together what they could, but it was in no way on the level of the 1990s super team, from which Schumacher benefited very nicely.
You still miss my point. In the 1970's Ferrari were just about the most professional team in F1 with the best personnel possible. The 1990's level of professionalism - let alone that of the early 80's - had not been arrived at. Compared to the rest, Ferrari was a superb operation running at great levels of efficiency. You have to look at these thigns in context, rather than in comparison to today.
I think Mika Hakkinen could have achieved the same success
Well. we'll disagree on that one. I don't think he would.
The "proofs" you have put forward are at best claims, no scientific hard facts. Neither are mine, as this subject cannot be proven, neither one way nor the other. So once again, let us agree to disagree - if you can´t, it also says something about you.
I can, but you should really consider the reasons why it was Michael Schumacher, and not any other driver, who ended up in that super team, with those beneficial contracrts, with those fantastic people, and not, say, hakkinen, Hill or Villeneuve. That is really the most telling point of all. It didn't happen just by chance.