Jump to content


Photo

Michael Schumacher (merged)


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

#6951 baddog

baddog
  • Member

  • 24,021 posts
  • Joined: June 99

Posted 19 October 2010 - 08:56

Its certainly not "well proven". :confused:
I don't believe it was Senna's fault but the cause of the crash has never been determined.

Indeed so, and its hardly likely we will ever know for sure.

One thing IS certain though, that those who seek to somehow hang it on Michael and Benetton (that's the point of the 'benetton cheated therefore Senna had to push harder than he should have so crashed' narrative) are pretty cheap and shameful.

Advertisement

#6952 tifosiMac

tifosiMac
  • Member

  • 7,140 posts
  • Joined: January 10

Posted 19 October 2010 - 08:59

Indeed so, and its hardly likely we will ever know for sure.

One thing IS certain though, that those who seek to somehow hang it on Michael and Benetton (that's the point of the 'benetton cheated therefore Senna had to push harder than he should have so crashed' narrative) are pretty cheap and shameful.

I totally agree with that. :up:

#6953 as65p

as65p
  • Member

  • 18,466 posts
  • Joined: June 04

Posted 19 October 2010 - 10:56

Indeed so, and its hardly likely we will ever know for sure.

One thing IS certain though, that those who seek to somehow hang it on Michael and Benetton (that's the point of the 'benetton cheated therefore Senna had to push harder than he should have so crashed' narrative) are pretty cheap and shameful.


Agreed, IF that's indeed the chain of argument. But that's not the case for everyone - I don't blame Schumacher/Benetton for Senna's accident at all (what a silly idea), but I still think they cheated in 1994.

#6954 cheapracer

cheapracer
  • Member

  • 10,388 posts
  • Joined: May 07

Posted 19 October 2010 - 12:20

. The FIA have been spineless in many instances but their punishment for Michael in 1997 was something they got right.



I don't see how you come to that conclusion, what did he do wrong for the other 15 races in 1997?

Anyway, I predict he will be disappointed in Korea, MS says it will be good to have a level playing field with the other drivers (brand new circuit for all) but as I have posted on more than one occasion now, the younger "Extreme Gen" will be full on from the first lap and he is the one who will be playing catch up. Expect some poor P1 and P2 times IMO.


Hill BITCHED about the car the entire first part season. The fact it was difficult to drive is underscored by the way he was lapped by half distance by Senna in Brazil.


Really, you mean to say a driver who gets lapped at halfway by his teammate bitched about his car? :rotfl:

Hill's complaints were ignored until Mansell came and did his guest appearance and complained about he SAME issues at which time, Williams started to make changes and the car started to improve.


Oh you mean Mansell getting in at the French GP and putting that evil, difficult to drive car second on the grid 0.10 behind Hill on pole? :lol:

Improve to what? The Williams was the fastest car all year from race one. Maybe it was having the most powerful engine on the grid that made it bad? I'm sure the Guys in the Minardi's were much happier with their cars and constantly pointed and laughed at the idiots who put up with that bad evil Williams :lol:


Its certainly not "well proven". :confused:
I don't believe it was Senna's fault but the cause of the crash has never been determined.


A weld around a modification on the steering column shaft failed, thats known and consistent with the car going straight at that point - irrelevent really.

Edited by cheapracer, 19 October 2010 - 12:46.


#6955 nomeg1

nomeg1
  • Member

  • 4,942 posts
  • Joined: September 10

Posted 19 October 2010 - 14:41

What Prost has said about him in the French sport newspaper "L'Equipe" :

“He should have said he was coming back to help Rosberg, or Mercedes in its first year, or his friend Ross Brawn — it would have been easier for him,”

“It may have been a lack of humility,” added the winner of 51 grands prix, “but I think he saw himself as more powerful than that. For me, it’s just a question of age,” Prost continued. “I think the tyres are just an excuse, because Schumacher always adapted to any sort of car.”

“It was his great strength,” said the Frenchman. “It’s just not possible to return to the top after being away for three years at that age. It’s a matter of physiology.”



#6956 Mr2s

Mr2s
  • Member

  • 794 posts
  • Joined: February 10

Posted 19 October 2010 - 14:59

Who looks younger?



Yes Michael looks younger. Michael is smaller and thinner than Ralf and has had his teeth done (surprisingly small in real life compared to how he looks on TV, but thats the way Karters are born ;) )

#6957 Mr2s

Mr2s
  • Member

  • 794 posts
  • Joined: February 10

Posted 19 October 2010 - 15:10

Improve to what? The Williams was the fastest car all year from race one. Maybe it was having the most powerful engine on the grid that made it bad? I'm sure the Guys in the Minardi's were much happier with their cars and constantly pointed and laughed at the idiots who put up with that bad evil Williams :lol:


I'm guessing to improve the design faults that Adrian Newey later admitted existed :rolleyes: You sound like someone who plays top trumps. The Renault engine wasn't all about more power IIRC Ferrari had the most power.



#6958 Mr2s

Mr2s
  • Member

  • 794 posts
  • Joined: February 10

Posted 19 October 2010 - 15:16

One thing IS certain though, that those who seek to somehow hang it on Michael and Benetton (that's the point of the 'benetton cheated therefore Senna had to push harder than he should have so crashed' narrative) are pretty cheap and shameful.


Cheap and shameful, is causing a crash to win points the same year 2 drivers died in crashes, against one of the pallbearers :down:

One thing is certain, in any other sport Benetton would have been thrown out of the competition. Ben Johnson is more deserving of his 100m Gold Medal IMO

#6959 nomeg1

nomeg1
  • Member

  • 4,942 posts
  • Joined: September 10

Posted 19 October 2010 - 15:17

I don't see how you come to that conclusion, what did he do wrong for the other 15 races in 1997?

Anyway, I predict he will be disappointed in Korea, MS says it will be good to have a level playing field with the other drivers (brand new circuit for all) but as I have posted on more than one occasion now, the younger "Extreme Gen" will be full on from the first lap and he is the one who will be playing catch up. Expect some poor P1 and P2 times IMO.

Really, you mean to say a driver who gets lapped at halfway by his teammate bitched about his car? :rotfl:

Oh you mean Mansell getting in at the French GP and putting that evil, difficult to drive car second on the grid 0.10 behind Hill on pole? :lol:
Improve to what? The Williams was the fastest car all year from race one. Maybe it was having the most powerful engine on the grid that made it bad? I'm sure the Guys in the Minardi's were much happier with their cars and constantly pointed and laughed at the idiots who put up with that bad evil Williams :lol:

A weld around a modification on the steering column shaft failed, thats known and consistent with the car going straight at that point - irrelevent really.

About the welding of the steering wheel, it is true indeed, but, because there's a but...nobody knows whether it broke before or after the hitting the wall. Some also argue that the car's suspension went sooo low, that the car was transformed into a skidding dragster, the datas prove that Ayrton was pushing on the brakes to their maximum, and, and the welding of the steering wheel had been done during the night prior to the race upon Senna's request, because it was to high for him...

Advertisement

#6960 cheapracer

cheapracer
  • Member

  • 10,388 posts
  • Joined: May 07

Posted 19 October 2010 - 15:25

What Prost has said about him in the French sport newspaper "L'Equipe" :

.. because Schumacher always adapted to any sort of car.”


Well it's quite clear from his career that Prost was in the game for a different reason, he like many don't seem to get that Schumacher is actually foremost a racer who loves it and can't stay away from it (Bikes, Karts, ROC etc).

Adapt to what car? Schumacher only drove in 2 teams and as I mentioned before was a gradual build process of both team and car over years not just "jump in a car and go fast instantly" as Senna could or even Prost himself for that matter.


#6961 nomeg1

nomeg1
  • Member

  • 4,942 posts
  • Joined: September 10

Posted 19 October 2010 - 15:39

Well it's quite clear from his career that Prost was in the game for a different reason, he like many don't seem to get that Schumacher is actually foremost a racer who loves it and can't stay away from it (Bikes, Karts, ROC etc).

Adapt to what car? Schumacher only drove in 2 teams and as I mentioned before was a gradual build process of both team and car over years not just "jump in a car and go fast instantly" as Senna could or even Prost himself for that matter.

Your first part, I think everyone agrees, certainly after an audit between German & Swiss banks told that his fortune was evaluated (after retirement) to around 850 Mio €.

On second, you are one who says again that the car was built around him, right ?
Why was then the F60 so bad with a Raikkonen on top ?
Senna did not adapt to the Williams, he complained about it sveral times to Alain Prost, saying it was undrivable, and that he could not find the solution.
Engineers build cars according to the rules and the various technical possibilities and not to the pilots. They do follow pilot's advises, but end of the day, engineers are and will remain engineers.

By the way, he did drive for Jordan too, and was 6th in Spa at his F1 debut !

Edited by nomeg1, 19 October 2010 - 15:40.


#6962 ivand911

ivand911
  • Member

  • 8,152 posts
  • Joined: February 10

Posted 19 October 2010 - 15:56

Senna did not adapt to the Williams, he complained about it sveral times to Alain Prost, saying it was undrivable, and that he could not find the solution.

I guess you will not be very popular with Senna fans. Are you really saying that Senna didn't adapt to Williams car? This will make him look...... human.

Edited by ivand911, 19 October 2010 - 15:57.


#6963 Mr2s

Mr2s
  • Member

  • 794 posts
  • Joined: February 10

Posted 19 October 2010 - 16:02

I guess you will not be very popular with Senna fans. Are you really saying that Senna didn't adapt to Williams car? This will make him look...... human.



Human in the race, super human qualifying?

#6964 nomeg1

nomeg1
  • Member

  • 4,942 posts
  • Joined: September 10

Posted 19 October 2010 - 16:05

I guess you will not be very popular with Senna fans. Are you really saying that Senna didn't adapt to Williams car? This will make him look...... human.

You obviously did not read my signature...
I met Ayrton personally in Spa in 91 and talked to him for about 20 minutes (I was developing alloy wheels for Toyota Europe, and one of the supplier was O.Z.), I can tell you : 1. He was no machine, 2. I never forgot this meeting, and became his greatest afficionado !  ;)

#6965 ivand911

ivand911
  • Member

  • 8,152 posts
  • Joined: February 10

Posted 19 October 2010 - 16:11

You obviously did not read my signature...
I met Ayrton personally in Spa in 91 and talked to him for about 20 minutes (I was developing alloy wheels for Toyota Europe, and one of the supplier was O.Z.), I can tell you : 1. He was no machine, 2. I never forgot this meeting, and became his greatest afficionado ! ;)

:up:

#6966 cheapracer

cheapracer
  • Member

  • 10,388 posts
  • Joined: May 07

Posted 19 October 2010 - 16:15

On second, you are one who says again that the car was built around him, right ?
Why was then the F60 so bad with a Raikkonen on top ?


WTF has the F60 or Kimi got to do with the price of fish?

Senna did not adapt to the Williams, he complained about it sveral times to Alain Prost, saying it was undrivable, and that he could not find the solution.


I am so over that comment like you can't believe - the "undrivable car" that was on pole for the first 3 races, how the other 24 drivers would have loved to have such an undrivable car under them - have you been following this thread? All the 1994 cars had "undrivable" problems not just the Williams thats why the teams united and complained to the FIA, status quo - but Senna, as usual, mouthed off about his problems while most of the drivers like Schumacher just got on with resolving them.

Engineers build cars according to the rules and the various technical possibilities and not to the pilots. They do follow pilot's advises, but end of the day, engineers are and will remain engineers.


Get a grip Mate, of course primarily a design has to comply and take every advantage of the rules criteria but the whole of Schumacher's career success was having the car and team tailored around him (as it is for many drivers), you obviously are ill informed on the subject which is ludicrous considering it's mentioned every second darn post in this thread.


#6967 nomeg1

nomeg1
  • Member

  • 4,942 posts
  • Joined: September 10

Posted 19 October 2010 - 16:29

WTF has the F60 or Kimi got to do with the price of fish?

I am so over that comment like you can't believe - the "undrivable car" that was on pole for the first 3 races, how the other 24 drivers would have loved to have such an undrivable car under them - have you been following this thread? All the 1994 cars had "undrivable" problems not just the Williams thats why the teams united and complained to the FIA, status quo - but Senna, as usual, mouthed off about his problems while most of the drivers like Schumacher just got on with resolving them.

Get a grip Mate, of course primarily a design has to comply and take every advantage of the rules criteria but the whole of Schumacher's career success was having the car and team tailored around him (as it is for many drivers), you obviously are ill informed on the subject which is ludicrous considering it's mentioned every second darn post in this thread.

Cheapracer hey ? You are the kinda guy I like, being immediately aggressive, don't know why, people strangly in this world have different opinions.
I don't understand, being French speaker, your first remark, sorry !
Your second : Senna did not mouth out to the medias if I remember correctly. It is only after his passing away, years later, that Alain Prost talked about his personal converstaion with him, and his worries (Senna's). I am not talking about the other pilots here, I am talking about Ayrton, so why compare ?
Your third sentence : than you should only read every two posts. Gosh, I had to look in the dictionary to know what "ludicrous" meant. You must be an English teacher ?
No hard feeling though "mate" (very British that one too), but, hey, aren't we here to talk about what we believe in, we, you and me, might be sometimes wrong, that's evidently why I am here in this Forum, to exchange, learn, tell myself : "hum, this guy is right, so change opinion". But usually it is done gentleman like, not spitting rage saying that 50% of us are morons. Or am I wrong ? I am the kind of guy who accepts critics when pragmatic and valuable...
Gear your weapons out, I am no enemy ! ;)

This pictures makes me think about someone more worried than ready to "mouth" at anything, look at his eyebrows :

Posted Image


Edited by nomeg1, 19 October 2010 - 16:49.


#6968 ivand911

ivand911
  • Member

  • 8,152 posts
  • Joined: February 10

Posted 19 October 2010 - 16:31

The Secret Life of Michael Schumacher
http://www.formula1....0/10/11393.html

#6969 AlainProstX

AlainProstX
  • Member

  • 307 posts
  • Joined: November 09

Posted 19 October 2010 - 17:24

I am so over that comment like you can't believe - the "undrivable car" that was on pole for the first 3 races, how the other 24 drivers would have loved to have such an undrivable car under them - have you been following this thread? All the 1994 cars had "undrivable" problems not just the Williams thats why the teams united and complained to the FIA, status quo - but Senna, as usual, mouthed off about his problems while most of the drivers like Schumacher just got on with resolving them.


That`s BS, like usual when you make a comment about Senna, St. Schumacher, Williams and 94.

Pat Symonds himself stated (In the F1Racing magazine IIRC) that the `94 Benetton was a very good and smooth car, that adapted very well to setup changes and new parts, even after the rule changes during the season.

Edit: I don`t know how many of you were around in the early nineties, but Williams always had very aggressive and sometimes undriveable cars during that time.

Edited by AlainProstX, 19 October 2010 - 17:26.


#6970 nomeg1

nomeg1
  • Member

  • 4,942 posts
  • Joined: September 10

Posted 19 October 2010 - 17:44

No comment !

Forums » Grassroots Motorsports » Schumacher's Benetton B194 for sale! Nov. 10, 2009 7:58 a.m. DukeOfUndersteer Dork
I remember watching him hit Damon in Australia.

Ebay Listing said:

This is your unique opportunity to own a peace of Formula One history!

For sale is the F1 race car, with which Michael Schumacher won his first Formula One Driver’s Championship at the Adelaide GP of Australia.

Most remembered are the scenes were Michael Schumacher had a collision with Damon hill and his Williams-Renault ending up both had to retire the race and Michael Schumacher could use his one point advantage to be the 1994 F1-Driver’s Champion.

This is a B194 made by Benetton equipped with a Ford-Cosworth Zetec-R 3.5 litres V8 engine.

The car is in condition as in the 1994 Formula One season with paddle shift and traction control. The car is in racing condition, with the painting and sponsoring scheme as in 1994.

The engine was overhauled by Langford Performance Engineering / Wellingborough (UK) and was since then just running a few minutes for test and check reasons.

from : http://grassrootsmot...le/15945/page1/

Edited by nomeg1, 19 October 2010 - 17:45.


#6971 Augurk

Augurk
  • Member

  • 1,932 posts
  • Joined: December 09

Posted 19 October 2010 - 17:57

No comment !

Forums » Grassroots Motorsports » Schumacher's Benetton B194 for sale! Nov. 10, 2009 7:58 a.m. DukeOfUndersteer Dork
I remember watching him hit Damon in Australia.

Ebay Listing said:

This is your unique opportunity to own a peace of Formula One history!

For sale is the F1 race car, with which Michael Schumacher won his first Formula One Driver’s Championship at the Adelaide GP of Australia.

Most remembered are the scenes were Michael Schumacher had a collision with Damon hill and his Williams-Renault ending up both had to retire the race and Michael Schumacher could use his one point advantage to be the 1994 F1-Driver’s Champion.

This is a B194 made by Benetton equipped with a Ford-Cosworth Zetec-R 3.5 litres V8 engine.

The car is in condition as in the 1994 Formula One season with paddle shift and traction control. The car is in racing condition, with the painting and sponsoring scheme as in 1994.

The engine was overhauled by Langford Performance Engineering / Wellingborough (UK) and was since then just running a few minutes for test and check reasons.

from : http://grassrootsmot...le/15945/page1/

It's also on wet weather tyres. Does that mean it always had those?

Iirc that's one of the cars that's been run in the EuroBOSS Championship. A championship for rich jetset enjoying the drive of old F1 cars. They're not for racing drivers. It's a championship with very loose technical regulations. I think it's highly plausible (if not probable) that the owner has had traction control installed, or otherwise activated.

The series is open to pre-December 2003 Formula One chassis and any ChampCar, IRL and F3000 type chassis with engines of any capacity (but usually large) . The performance of these hybrid cars competing on slick tyres is stunning, the start is as noisy as it is nostaglic and the racing fast and furious.


You can actually see some pictures of it on www.euroboss.com


#6972 Zoe

Zoe
  • Member

  • 2,717 posts
  • Joined: July 99

Posted 19 October 2010 - 17:58

Says a lot of how low this thread has sunk, when an ebay ad is used to show "proof" for weird conspiracy theories.

Zoe

#6973 manmower

manmower
  • Member

  • 437 posts
  • Joined: April 07

Posted 19 October 2010 - 17:59

Edit: I don`t know how many of you were around in the early nineties, but Williams always had very aggressive and sometimes undriveable cars during that time.

I've never heard someone referring to an FW14 or FW15C, or even their less succesful predecessors from 1990 and early 1991 as undriveable. The fact that they had the most electronic gizmos on board also makes it highly unlikely that they were even as hard, let alone harder to drive than other cars on the grid. The FW16 may have had some design flaws, notably in the period Senna was alive to drive it, but once these were worked out it turned out to be just another rocketship.

Damon Hill practically won the championship in it for crying out loud.

#6974 nomeg1

nomeg1
  • Member

  • 4,942 posts
  • Joined: September 10

Posted 19 October 2010 - 18:09

Says a lot of how low this thread has sunk, when an ebay ad is used to show "proof" for weird conspiracy theories.
Zoe

I didn't mean to sink the thread, sorry if I did, wasn't meant at all.
I had in the back of my head the reading of this article in another Forum and I did say "no comment"
Who will in any case know what was ?
Sorry if you felt I was not reasonable, again it was not meant that way.

nom.

#6975 Mr2s

Mr2s
  • Member

  • 794 posts
  • Joined: February 10

Posted 19 October 2010 - 18:31

I've never heard someone referring to an FW14 or FW15C, or even their less succesful predecessors from 1990 and early 1991 as undriveable. The fact that they had the most electronic gizmos on board also makes it highly unlikely that they were even as hard, let alone harder to drive than other cars on the grid. The FW16 may have had some design flaws, notably in the period Senna was alive to drive it, but once these were worked out it turned out to be just another rocketship.

Damon Hill practically won the championship in it for crying out loud.



For all the bashing Mansell and Hill got for winning their championships in dominant cars, they were bloody good development drivers and deserved those cars. Mansell went through a lot of failures before williams got it right. As was Michael Schumacher a good development driver and bloody hard worker (before I get accused of something).

#6976 manmower

manmower
  • Member

  • 437 posts
  • Joined: April 07

Posted 19 October 2010 - 19:10

Mansell, great driver all round, a legend, but I wouldn't place him among the better development drivers, unless he contributed by simply butting out. :) Wasn't he notoriously uninterested and uninvolved in testing and such, or was that earlier in his career?

Hill may have been a great development driver, I don't know, but definitely not one of the best "drivers" per se, in terms of speed, pace, nerves, ... I was happy for him when he finally got his championship, yes, but I'll always remember him as a bit "ordinary".



#6977 DarthRonzo

DarthRonzo
  • Member

  • 804 posts
  • Joined: September 10

Posted 19 October 2010 - 19:20

Prost thinks MS faillure is a matter of aging and the tire thing is just an excuse.

http://www.marca.com...1287497844.html


#6978 Mr2s

Mr2s
  • Member

  • 794 posts
  • Joined: February 10

Posted 19 October 2010 - 19:24

Mansell, great driver all round, a legend, but I wouldn't place him among the better development drivers, unless he contributed by simply butting out. :) Wasn't he notoriously uninterested and uninvolved in testing and such, or was that earlier in his career?

Hill may have been a great development driver, I don't know, but definitely not one of the best "drivers" per se, in terms of speed, pace, nerves, ... I was happy for him when he finally got his championship, yes, but I'll always remember him as a bit "ordinary".


Hill had good days and bad days which wasnt really good enough to be world champion if youre going to be super critical. But his good days (look them up on youtube) leaving prost for dust, forcing the 'great one' into several mistakes , taking him off pole at Monaco, and second to Senna at Donnington in the wet. If you watch those races and didn't know it was Hill youd have thought he must have been some great from the past, certainly not mr ordinary. His handling of the pressure at Japan 96 was faultless after making a bit of a meal of previous races and me being someone who gets nervous before races, would say Hill was way above ordinary in Japan (he has the DNA of his father after all)
Hamilton could do with a finish like Japan 96 to help his credentials IMO.

Edited by Mr2s, 19 October 2010 - 19:28.


#6979 JustinCider

JustinCider
  • Member

  • 836 posts
  • Joined: August 10

Posted 19 October 2010 - 19:30

Hill had good days and bad days which wasnt really good enough to be world champion if youre going to be super critical. But his good days (look them up on youtube) leaving prost for dust, forcing the 'great one' into several mistakes , taking him off pole at Monaco, and second to Senna at Donnington in the wet. If you watch those races and didn't know it was Hill youd have thought he must have been some great from the past, certainly not mr ordinary. His handling of the pressure at Japan 96 was faultless after making a bit of a meal of previous races and me being someone who gets nervous before races, would say Hill was way above ordinary in Japan (he has the DNA of his father after all)
Hamilton could do with a finish like Japan 96 to help his credentials IMO.


Add Hungary, 1997 to that list. I rate it as his best drive, ever. If it was Michael Schumacher in his place people would still be using that one Sunday afternoon to justify his presence in F1.

Advertisement

#6980 Mr2s

Mr2s
  • Member

  • 794 posts
  • Joined: February 10

Posted 19 October 2010 - 19:38

Add Hungary, 1997 to that list. I rate it as his best drive, ever. If it was Michael Schumacher in his place people would still be using that one Sunday afternoon to justify his presence in F1.


Too true :up:
A much as I stick up for Hill, his drive was such that I always still wonder what the hell he had under the bonnet that day. But IIRC, he took Schumacher under braking? :eek:
It was nice to see the hug between him and Jacques at the end after an era devoid of hugs.

#6981 tifosiMac

tifosiMac
  • Member

  • 7,140 posts
  • Joined: January 10

Posted 19 October 2010 - 19:47

Well it's quite clear from his career that Prost was in the game for a different reason, he like many don't seem to get that Schumacher is actually foremost a racer who loves it and can't stay away from it (Bikes, Karts, ROC etc).


Are you aware Alain Prost won his last motorsport title only two years ago at the age of 53? I think he is well aware what it feels like to crave a racing environment after he had retired from F1.  ;)

#6982 ivand911

ivand911
  • Member

  • 8,152 posts
  • Joined: February 10

Posted 19 October 2010 - 20:00

Can we all come back in the present days and to forget this traction/launch control BS? I think this off topic thing was discussed a lot and I don't see any way how will change 1994 F1 results? It is pointless. Lets focus on the race in Korea. Hope Michael will do well. About Hill find appropriate thread if exist. About Prost opinion, lets leave to the Michael fans to worry about and to decide if it was wrong to return or not. I am not worried and I hope for 2 more years of this. Thank you , but no thank you Mr. Prost.

Edited by ivand911, 19 October 2010 - 20:04.


#6983 tifosiMac

tifosiMac
  • Member

  • 7,140 posts
  • Joined: January 10

Posted 19 October 2010 - 20:31

About Prost opinion, lets leave to the Michael fans to worry about and to decide if it was wrong to return or not.

Exactly.
If you want a balanced debate they are the only opinions you need.

#6984 Muz Bee

Muz Bee
  • Member

  • 2,531 posts
  • Joined: October 07

Posted 19 October 2010 - 23:15

All the 1994 cars were difficult to drive thats why Briatore had meetings with all the teams and wrote an official letter complaining to the FIA and their incompetence, that the '3 poles in a row' Williams was the only problem car is rubbish but goes nicely as an excuse along with "Benetton having TC" for Senna not to face that there was a driver who could take it to him. I don't ever recall Hill complaining about the Williams in 94.

Saying Senna pushed too hard is utter nonsense, it is well proven that the William's steering column severed and was nothing to do with Senna.

In the words of John McEnroe - "you cannot be serious!"
Italian court witchhunt tried for years to make this conclusion and failed. If you think anyone has proven the weld broke before the impact then present your case. I would offer the opinion that it would be very unlikely to be able to do so. There have been several very plausible theories offered by people whose opinions can be at least respected that Ayrton lost control that day and what factors made the car difficult in that situation - heavy fuel load, ride height etc.

It's simply nonsense to say anything in this fatality is well proven. Different drivers often tend to come up with their own theories for accidents as was the case in Jim Clark's accident in Hockenheim in 1968.

Edited by Muz Bee, 19 October 2010 - 23:17.


#6985 cheapracer

cheapracer
  • Member

  • 10,388 posts
  • Joined: May 07

Posted 20 October 2010 - 02:52

In the words of John McEnroe - "you cannot be serious!"
If you think anyone has proven the weld broke before the impact then present your case. I would offer the opinion that it would be very unlikely to be able to do so. There have been several very plausible theories offered by people whose opinions can be at least respected that Ayrton lost control that day and what factors made the car difficult in that situation - heavy fuel load, ride height etc.



Sure, you start a new thread relevent.

Edited by cheapracer, 20 October 2010 - 02:53.


#6986 cheapracer

cheapracer
  • Member

  • 10,388 posts
  • Joined: May 07

Posted 20 October 2010 - 03:16

That`s BS, like usual when you make a comment about Senna, St. Schumacher, Williams and 94.

Pat Symonds himself stated (In the F1Racing magazine IIRC) that the `94 Benetton was a very good and smooth car, that adapted very well to setup changes and new parts, even after the rule changes during the season.

Edit: I don`t know how many of you were around in the early nineties, but Williams always had very aggressive and sometimes undriveable cars during that time.


BS hey?

Senna wasn't an opinionated mouthpiece? Or is that actually fact?

So Senna did not have pole for every race he contended in 1994? Or is that actually a fact?

Post Senna, Hill wasn't consistently on pole or second on the grid for the entire 1994 season? Or is that actually a fact?

Feel free to nominate the "BS" parts of my posts, specifics though and leave emotion out thanks ......

It was Briatore manager of the Benetton cars who led the teams early '94 complaining about many of the cars poor handling, now why would the manager of a team with cars that had no problems do that? Anyway not relevant, what's relevant is people spouting the Williams F16 was actually a shitheap with problems as to make it look like Schumacher had it easy, The early F16 may have been a nervous car but that was quickly rectified with development but was clearly the fastest car in 1994.

I have seen and read up about every F1 GP since the late 70's, thanks.

Edited by cheapracer, 20 October 2010 - 03:51.


#6987 slaveceru

slaveceru
  • Member

  • 180 posts
  • Joined: April 10

Posted 20 October 2010 - 04:22

The rule for the banning of launch control was in the regulations prior to the start of the 1994 season; there were no rules about either third brake pedals or the mass damper until the FIA decided their needed to be one well into the season. You could include many other instances, such as the famous Ferrari flexi floor ruling, where teh regulations were changed to make something that was not illegal so despite the regulations allowing it.

They did not change the rules also for mass dumper or third pedal break they only changed the interpretation of the existing rule and after that they put separately in the rule that this solutions are forbidden. So once again what is your point?
All the teams in the F1 racing are working on the edge of rules to get the necessary edge. So how then is Schumacher different from Hamilton or Alonso or other great drivers? For you to accuse someone without prove is enough in one case and not in the other? You act as if Benneton was the most unsportsmanlike team in the F1 racing in that year? There is one major rule in all areas you are innocent until you are proven guilty does this rule not count in the case of Benneton or Schumacher in 1994?


#6988 tifosiMac

tifosiMac
  • Member

  • 7,140 posts
  • Joined: January 10

Posted 20 October 2010 - 06:21

It was Briatore manager of the Benetton cars who led the teams early '94 complaining about many of the cars poor handling, now why would the manager of a team with cars that had no problems do that?

Perhaps because there was suspicion about his team having traction control and joining them in this stand would divert attention? The guy did order a driver to crash into a wall years later so its not beyond the realms of possibility that he would cheat back then. :)

#6989 Lifew12

Lifew12
  • Member

  • 4,551 posts
  • Joined: May 06

Posted 20 October 2010 - 08:21

They did not change the rules also for mass dumper or third pedal break they only changed the interpretation of the existing rule and after that they put separately in the rule that this solutions are forbidden. So once again what is your point?


No, they changed the rules. It's like this - I do 40mph in a 30mph zone, I get pulled, I know I'm breaking the law. I do 40mph in a 40mph zone, I get pulled, the authorities say 'well, we've decided that as from just before we pulled you it is now a 30mph zone.'

All the teams in the F1 racing are working on the edge of rules to get the necessary edge. So how then is Schumacher different from Hamilton or Alonso or other great drivers? For you to accuse someone without prove is enough in one case and not in the other? You act as if Benneton was the most unsportsmanlike team in the F1 racing in that year? There is one major rule in all areas you are innocent until you are proven guilty does this rule not count in the case of Benneton or Schumacher in 1994?


You miss my point, and my tone, completely. It gets like this on forums sometimes, when someone actually bothers to be truthful, and it's against the views of others, they are somehow a 'hater', or conversely a 'fanboy', and they have to have an 'agenda'. You brought up the third brake pedal, the mass damper, I simply pointed out the difference that in the case of launch control, in 1994, the rule was in place before the season began; in the case of the other two, there was no rule banning them (and how anyone can conclude that a mass damper is a 'moveable aerodynamic device' should be equally beyond the imagination of the fans of any team or driver.) Of course all teams are working towards a ncessary edge, that's part and parcel of what I love about this sport, but there are necessary edges that are fundamentally legal (the mass damper, the brake steer system, the double diffuser, the blown diffuser, the brabham fan car, the Lotus 88, and many, many more) that are, in some cases, deemed illegal by way of the governing body deciding so when there are, in fact, no regulations preculding them. There are others, like the inclusion of launch control in the 94 Benetton, the similar automated gearshift in the McLaren at the time, the hidden BAR fuel tank a few years back, and many more thata re blatant attempts to circumnavigate the rules. These are the differences, and yet in pointing them out you assume that I have some gripe against Benetton, and Schumacher. This happens a lot - some other equally uninventive soul on here, when I pointed out his chain of events at the 94 British GP was completely wrong and largely invented, responded with 'what's your beef anyway? Hill won the race!' as if my problem, again, was with Schumacher, and Benetton, It wasn't, it was with someone posting a list of events that largely didn't happen as fact (I was at Silverstone that day in 94, and having seen the ludicrous penalty applied was rootin for Michael. Until, that is, the team made a farce of it by insisting he didn't serve the penalty - a stupid decision in all manners.)

You see, you assume that I - and I would guess everyone - has some leaning towards drivers of a)their nationality or b)particular teams. Sadly, Osella no longer enter and I could never stand Mansell or Hill, so really I don't count. You have to get off this train of though that I'm posting because I want to put Schumacher down - in fact, I'm trying to correct you. You try and compare two legal devices that were banned by the FIA for no conceivable reason with one illegal device that was found on a car in 94 (and I am dubious as to whether it was used after the first few races) and that's not really a decent discussion.

As for your question about innocent until proven guilty - Benetton were found guilty of having an illegal launch control system on their car. That should answer that one.

#6990 Massa_f1

Massa_f1
  • Member

  • 3,508 posts
  • Joined: October 07

Posted 20 October 2010 - 09:07

Is this thread for ever going to be stuck in 1994?

#6991 baddog

baddog
  • Member

  • 24,021 posts
  • Joined: June 99

Posted 20 October 2010 - 09:20

Till Michael has a bad race, yes.

#6992 arknor

arknor
  • Member

  • 2,298 posts
  • Joined: March 10

Posted 20 October 2010 - 09:30

Is this thread for ever going to be stuck in 1994?

did you not notice the trend? if schumacher does poorly he gets slated , if he does well we go back in time to question how good he really wasnt

#6993 Augurk

Augurk
  • Member

  • 1,932 posts
  • Joined: December 09

Posted 20 October 2010 - 09:39

Let's hope this thread keeps being stuck in 1994. Then we can enjoy some great drives. :smoking:

#6994 aditya-now

aditya-now
  • Member

  • 7,447 posts
  • Joined: June 02

Posted 20 October 2010 - 23:09

Let's hope this thread keeps being stuck in 1994. Then we can enjoy some great drives. :smoking:


These last days made me really think why this thread is not in TNF.
Obviously nothing recent to rave about for Schuey, so let´s keep on talking about 1994...

#6995 aditya-now

aditya-now
  • Member

  • 7,447 posts
  • Joined: June 02

Posted 20 October 2010 - 23:10

Till Michael has a bad race, yes.


As obviously Michael´s "good races" in 2010 are not really anything special to talk about.


#6996 aditya-now

aditya-now
  • Member

  • 7,447 posts
  • Joined: June 02

Posted 20 October 2010 - 23:11

But wait, Korea is coming up!

:smoking:


#6997 DarthRonzo

DarthRonzo
  • Member

  • 804 posts
  • Joined: September 10

Posted 20 October 2010 - 23:26

http://www.crash.net...f_humility.html

#6998 slaveceru

slaveceru
  • Member

  • 180 posts
  • Joined: April 10

Posted 21 October 2010 - 04:38

No, they changed the rules. It's like this - I do 40mph in a 30mph zone, I get pulled, I know I'm breaking the law. I do 40mph in a 40mph zone, I get pulled, the authorities say 'well, we've decided that as from just before we pulled you it is now a 30mph zone.'

First with this rule everything is clear but this is not true for rules in F1 racing you cannot compare rules from different area to make your point except if you are a lawyer.

You miss my point, and my tone, completely. It gets like this on forums sometimes, when someone actually bothers to be truthful, and it's against the views of others, they are somehow a 'hater', or conversely a 'fanboy', and they have to have an 'agenda'. You brought up the third brake pedal, the mass damper, I simply pointed out the difference that in the case of launch control, in 1994, the rule was in place before the season began; in the case of the other two, there was no rule banning them (and how anyone can conclude that a mass damper is a 'moveable aerodynamic device' should be equally beyond the imagination of the fans of any team or driver.)


In the case of mass dumper Ferrari and Mclaren explained to FIA that they think it is similar as other movable aerodynamic devices and should be removed. The same teams raise also the question of safety and because of that this device should be removed.

Of course all teams are working towards a ncessary edge, that's part and parcel of what I love about this sport, but there are necessary edges that are fundamentally legal (the mass damper, the brake steer system, the double diffuser, the blown diffuser, the brabham fan car, the Lotus 88, and many, many more) that are, in some cases, deemed illegal by way of the governing body deciding so when there are, in fact, no regulations preculding them. There are others, like the inclusion of launch control in the 94 Benetton, the similar automated gearshift in the McLaren at the time, the hidden BAR fuel tank a few years back, and many more thata re blatant attempts to circumnavigate the rules. These are the differences, and yet in pointing them out you assume that I have some gripe against Benetton, and Schumacher. This happens a lot - some other equally uninventive soul on here, when I pointed out his chain of events at the 94 British GP was completely wrong and largely invented, responded with 'what's your beef anyway? Hill won the race!' as if my problem, again, was with Schumacher, and Benetton, It wasn't, it was with someone posting a list of events that largely didn't happen as fact (I was at Silverstone that day in 94, and having seen the ludicrous penalty applied was rootin for Michael. Until, that is, the team made a farce of it by insisting he didn't serve the penalty - a stupid decision in all manners.)


Who are you to say that some things or solutions are legal and the others are not and then you also say that you are right and everyone else is wrong. Are you someone who knows each rule in F1 racing and all the background of each engineering solution in F1 racing or is your opinion like mine based on the stories that you hear or read in newspapers? What gives you the right to be judge and jury in one person and this person is you?

You see, you assume that I - and I would guess everyone - has some leaning towards drivers of a)their nationality or b)particular teams. Sadly, Osella no longer enter and I could never stand Mansell or Hill, so really I don't count.[q


I only asked you if you think that Benneton as the most unsporting team in 1994 and as usual I did not get the answer, instead I get this answer. You should change your profession to politician.

You have to get off this train of though that I'm posting because I want to put Schumacher down - in fact, I'm trying to correct you. You try and compare two legal devices that were b
anned by the FIA for no conceivable reason with one illegal device that was found on a car in 94 (and I am dubious as to whether it was used after the first few races) and that's not really a decent discussion.


Here you are act as judge and jury in one person so you decide what is legal and what is not so who gives you the right to do so and also who gives you the right to force your opinion to others and if they do not agree with you, you call them irrational fan. You could only say that FIA did not make a good call in case of mass dumper or third pedal break or even in the case of TC. AS it was stated several times there was no prove for TC to be used. So if I return to your very silly sentence. It does not matter if you go 100 km in the 40 kmh zone, if you are not caught, and people drive like that so are you a saint you did not break any rule or were you never caught in breaking them?

As for your question about innocent until proven guilty - Benetton were found guilty of having an illegal launch control system on their car. That should answer that one.


They were not convicted for using TC and you are saying that they use TC so who is right where they convicted to use TC? I would like to get the straight answer like in court with only yes and no possibility.

Edited by slaveceru, 21 October 2010 - 04:48.


#6999 cheapracer

cheapracer
  • Member

  • 10,388 posts
  • Joined: May 07

Posted 21 October 2010 - 05:41

As for your question about innocent until proven guilty - Benetton were found guilty of having an illegal launch control system on their car. That should answer that one.


1/ Did they use it? You were at trackside Silverstone 1994, give us the lowdown ......

2/ So did you see the start? - Why do you think Damon Hill just shot off from the line like a rocket without wheelspin, black tyre marks or any commotion at all and made a considerable lead on the entire field before turn one?

3/ Do you have any comment to offer on Schumachers generally poor starts with smoke and wheelspin most of 1994?

4/ Do you think a confirmation of Schumacher's generally poor starts would put paid to the launch control use conspiracy angle?

5/ Do you think that the Williams had LC, TC and went unchecked because they had a French engine? Lets not forgot that Williams were without question the kings of F1 software at that time and if anyone could have systems that were undetectable or legally circumentive, surely it was them (hell the FIA may have even known what they were using and couldn't do a thing about it such as advanced engine mapping)?






Advertisement

#7000 Jazza

Jazza
  • Member

  • 1,054 posts
  • Joined: November 99

Posted 21 October 2010 - 05:58

1/ Did they use it? You were at trackside Silverstone 1994, give us the lowdown ......


It doesn't matter. No one needs to prove if they used it. You can not have an illegal system on a car and then claim but we didn't use it, and you have to prove that we did. Finding an illegal system on a car is enough to get disqualified.

5/ Do you think that the Williams had LC, TC and went unchecked because they had a French engine? Lets not forgot that Williams were without question the kings of F1 software at that time and if anyone could have systems that were undetectable or legally circumentive, surely it was them (hell the FIA may have even known what they were using and couldn't do a thing about it such as advanced engine mapping)?


Williams were not the one caught with an illegal system on the car. Assuming that they may have had an illegal system on the car has nothing to do with the fact that Benetton did. It is nothing but a distraction.