Jump to content


Photo

Michael Schumacher (merged)


  • This topic is locked This topic is locked
20771 replies to this topic

#8851 BRK

BRK
  • Member

  • 3,653 posts
  • Joined: November 07

Posted 22 March 2011 - 18:40

It's a hell of a big leap to say Alonso or Hamilton would've been as dominant as Schumacher had they been at Ferrari. Neither has shown anything that provides a base for that claim, or even to suggest that Ferrari would have been as dominant as they were had they been there in stead of Schumacher. On the contrary, recent history has shown us several incredible cars but only one driver ever to extract that kind of season-long domination from it. I say a Williams in '96, '97, McLaren in '98, Renault in '05, McLaren in '07, Brawn in '09, Red Bull in '10

Hill, Villeneuve, Hakkinen, Alonso, Hamilton/Alonso, Button, Vettel should've walked away with them easily yet they have all seen to keep it exciting until the last race. Of all of those only Button has really shown the kind of dominance during the period Brawn was still way ahead of the pack. Yet he is widely regarded as the least talented of the recent lot (Alonso/Hamilton/Vettel).


Agree with this.

Advertisement

#8852 thechin

thechin
  • Member

  • 332 posts
  • Joined: May 10

Posted 22 March 2011 - 18:48

I agree with you on respecting Fred, personally I think he's the best driver on the grid right now even thought I'm a Vettel fan. However, you're stretching it a very long way by suggesting that MS only overcame his other opponents with the aid of a car or tyre advantage.

The Schumacher domination period was absolutely achieved with a car and tyre advantage. I believe Michael is/was an incredible driver, it's just his stats and achievements are skewed by the advantage he held for these years.

#8853 Tarzaan

Tarzaan
  • Member

  • 1,322 posts
  • Joined: April 06

Posted 22 March 2011 - 18:50

Simply, Schumacher, is the best


Nothing new.
:smoking:



#8854 thechin

thechin
  • Member

  • 332 posts
  • Joined: May 10

Posted 22 March 2011 - 18:51

'Couldn't defeat' because he retired? Hakkinen also had a better car that he beat MS to the title two years in a row with; that's exactly what Alonso achieved,why would you think he's any different in my book or is somehow deserving of more attention because of this? :confused:

Already given my reasons in the post you quoted.

It's not true to say Alonso had a better car than Schumacher in 2006.


#8855 BRK

BRK
  • Member

  • 3,653 posts
  • Joined: November 07

Posted 22 March 2011 - 18:54

@thechin: bullshit. He hadn't laid his hands on a dominant car until 2002: I've mentioned somewhere up there that he had won 53 races to Alonso's 26 at the same stage in their careers - counting only up to 2001. That's like trouncing someone and then crumpling them up into a tiny little ball for added effect.

The only two drivers in recent years that are in the same range are Prost and Senna. And Alonso did have a better car than Schumacher for the majority of 2006, I really don't know how you could argue this isn't true unless you were being utterly biased. Nice username,though,I'm sure you weren't trolling at all earlier on in the thread.

Edited by BRK, 22 March 2011 - 18:56.


#8856 Augurk

Augurk
  • Member

  • 1,932 posts
  • Joined: December 09

Posted 22 March 2011 - 18:54

The Schumacher domination period was absolutely achieved with a car and tyre advantage. I believe Michael is/was an incredible driver, it's just his stats and achievements are skewed by the advantage he held for these years.

Skewed or rightly represented as he was the only driver to have created and maintained that kind of advantage together with his dream team around him? :)

#8857 Group B

Group B
  • Member

  • 13,971 posts
  • Joined: March 02

Posted 22 March 2011 - 18:57

The Schumacher domination period was absolutely achieved with a car and tyre advantage. I believe Michael is/was an incredible driver, it's just his stats and achievements are skewed by the advantage he held for these years.

Well, what are you calling the 'domination period'?

#8858 salamin

salamin
  • Member

  • 1,692 posts
  • Joined: March 09

Posted 22 March 2011 - 18:59

It's not true to say Alonso had a better car than Schumacher in 2006.


alonso got all his wins with the illegal mass damper system (excluding japan - MS engine gone from p1) so yeah, he got an altered car after the german GP (i think) - but he won the CC with a better and illegal car :wave:

#8859 thechin

thechin
  • Member

  • 332 posts
  • Joined: May 10

Posted 22 March 2011 - 19:03

@thechin: bullshit. He hadn't laid his hands on a dominant car until 2002: I've mentioned somewhere up there that he had won 53 races to Alonso's 26 at the same stage in their careers - counting only up to 2001. That's like trouncing someone and then crumpling them up into a tiny little ball for added effect.

The only two drivers in recent years that are in the same range are Prost and Senna. And Alonso did have a better car than Schumacher for the majority of 2006, I really don't know how you could argue this isn't true unless you were being utterly biased. Nice username,though,I'm sure you weren't trolling at all earlier on in the thread.

'All hail the mighty Schumi! Bow before him while he trounces and crumples those who dare to challenge him!'

Seriously, none of these guys are supermen. Schumacher is a very good driver who worked himself into a unique set of circumstances that have never happened before and will probably never happen again (for that amount of time) and took almost full advantage. The shock for him (and his fans) in 2006 was that there are other good drivers out there.

Advertisement

#8860 thechin

thechin
  • Member

  • 332 posts
  • Joined: May 10

Posted 22 March 2011 - 19:04

Well, what are you calling the 'domination period'?

2001 - 2004

#8861 Ruf

Ruf
  • Member

  • 1,279 posts
  • Joined: July 06

Posted 22 March 2011 - 19:05

The Schumacher domination period was absolutely achieved with a car and tyre advantage. I believe Michael is/was an incredible driver, it's just his stats and achievements are skewed by the advantage he held for these years.

Assuming that you are right, you are wrong at least about the tire advantage by the way, but for the sake of conversation let's say that you are right in both aspects. But two obvious questions pop up. 1) Perhaps he did have a little bit of input in building that dominat car? And the second, maybe there is a reason as to why was he given those all-winning cars? Something like what came first, the chicken or the egg.

Anyway, if he had that overwhelming hardware advantage that means that his teammates should reflect that in the final standings. Yes yes, I know, they were by contract prevented to challenge him but surely those same contracts clearly stipulated that those leutenants/slaves/second fiddles have to, by contract, defeat everyone else, am I right? Other than 2002 and 2004 that didn't happen. That's only 2 championships out 7.
-----------------------
Ivand911, why do you keep quoting that garbage from planetf1? They're definitelly not informative and they're not even funny anymore, assuming that they were actually funny at some point... Just curious. :confused:

#8862 BRK

BRK
  • Member

  • 3,653 posts
  • Joined: November 07

Posted 22 March 2011 - 19:07

'All hail the mighty Schumi! Bow before him while he trounces and crumples those who dare to challenge him!'

Seriously, none of these guys are supermen. Schumacher is a very good driver who worked himself into a unique set of circumstances that have never happened before and will probably never happen again (for that amount of time) and took almost full advantage. The shock for him (and his fans) in 2006 was that there are other good drivers out there.


All of which is completely irrelevant to your previous attempt at trolling which I responded to. I guess you realized I was right about the trouncing and had to explore new avenues now.

#8863 thechin

thechin
  • Member

  • 332 posts
  • Joined: May 10

Posted 22 March 2011 - 19:12

Assuming that you are right, you are wrong at least about the tire advantage by the way, but for the sake of conversation let's say that you are right in both aspects. But two obvious questions pop up. 1) Perhaps he did have a little bit of input in building that dominat car? And the second, maybe there is a reason as to why was he given those all-winning cars? Something like what came first, the chicken or the egg.

Anyway, if he had that overwhelming hardware advantage that means that his teammates should reflect that in the final standings. Yes yes, I know, they were by contract prevented to challenge him but surely those same contracts clearly stipulated that those leutenants/slaves/second fiddles have to, by contract, defeat everyone else, am I right? Other than 2002 and 2004 that didn't happen. That's only 2 championships out 7.
-----------------------
Ivand911, why do you keep quoting that garbage from planetf1? They're definitelly not informative and they're not even funny anymore, assuming that they were actually funny at some point... Just curious. :confused:

Yes, i'm sure he did have massive input into making the cars fast. Just that for years he had tailor made tyres and a test track to pound round and round until things were perfect. I'm not disputing that he was/is a great driver, just that people need to be realistic in their assessment of him.

By the way, Fisichella finished 5th in 2005 and 4th in 2006.

#8864 Group B

Group B
  • Member

  • 13,971 posts
  • Joined: March 02

Posted 22 March 2011 - 19:14

2001 - 2004

OK, well I think there's certainly a good argument that he had the best car for most of those years, if not neccessarily all of them. See now you're being sensible and not coming across as a troll. Trouble is now you've already put several backs up with your opening gambit and started a sh*t fight. :well:

#8865 thechin

thechin
  • Member

  • 332 posts
  • Joined: May 10

Posted 22 March 2011 - 19:16

OK, well I think there's certainly a good argument that he had the best car for most of those years, if not neccessarily all of them. See now you're being sensible and not coming across as a troll. Trouble is now you've already put several backs up with your opening gambit and started a sh*t fight. :well:

Sorry, didn't think people would respond as such. I take the tone of it back, I wasn't having a go at Schumi, just the way people view things.

#8866 Ruf

Ruf
  • Member

  • 1,279 posts
  • Joined: July 06

Posted 22 March 2011 - 19:16

Yes, i'm sure he did have massive input into making the cars fast. Just that for years he had tailor made tyres and a test track to pound round and round until things were perfect.

Mmmkay, so Ferrari and Schumacher invested in facilities and worked their asses hard and they got results. Your point is... what exactly?

Didn't quite figure where Fisi fits into this debate.

#8867 Tardis40

Tardis40
  • Member

  • 756 posts
  • Joined: February 11

Posted 22 March 2011 - 19:38

No need for anyone to get offended. We're all motorsport fans together at the end of the day.

It's hard to really know for certain what were all the variables that made Michael's run so outstanding. But in the final analysis, he still had to drive the car. It didn't drive itself. It is what it is.

Now we look forward to a new success. Only a few more days and we'll see how the W02 compares to the other big guns. Maybe he'll have a shot at that eighth title that was snatched away so cruelly in Japan 2006.








#8868 RSNS

RSNS
  • Member

  • 1,512 posts
  • Joined: June 02

Posted 22 March 2011 - 19:50

You could say I was underestimating them if there was even a shred of evidence to support the notion that they could match MS in his prime: there isn't any.

Look at their first title winning campaigns. Schumacher had effectively only 75% of the season to get the job done, was robbed of a win and had two gifted to his chief rival: and yet managed to win more than either Alonso or Hamilton could. Alonso further had the benefit of a superior car in the first half of his season,a luxury that MS didn't have. Hamilton did a better job considering how good the Ferrari was, but was it as convincing as 1994? Absolutely not. MS won more in 12 races than Alonso or Hamilton could in an entire season.


Look at Alonso's career stats. At the same stage in their respective careers, Schumacher had won more than twice as many races as Alonso has managed so far: 53 to 26. There's a massive gulf between the win percentages of someone like Alonso and drivers like Schumacher and Senna, at every stage of their careers. FA has been racing for ten years now and so far there has been absolutely nothing to suggest he is capable of doing as good a job with a dominant car. If people choose to ignore the facts, even subjectively speaking, I am yet to see a single demon drive from Alonso of the same calibre as, for instance, Spain 94 or Monaco 97. What is amusing to me is that people persist with believing this baseless 'most complete driver' nonsense because of the hype, and are then at a loss words to explain some of his 'uncharacteristic' mistakes year after year. Schumacher also had no real weaknesses at this stage in his career, unlike Hamilton who has messed up twice when it counts most.


I think this is an objective assessment, and I'm not being ironic. And I don't even like Schumacher!

#8869 Johnrambo

Johnrambo
  • Member

  • 940 posts
  • Joined: March 09

Posted 22 March 2011 - 20:01

Maybe he'll have a shot at that eighth title that was snatched away so cruelly in Japan 2006.


MS fans are the last people who can talk about cruelty. The guy was provided by Ferrari a virtually bulletproof car for many years. Wasn't it at somepoint that MS had done almost 100 races without a DNF for technical reasons. If anything Japan 2006 was long overdue.

#8870 jj2728

jj2728
  • Member

  • 2,832 posts
  • Joined: January 04

Posted 22 March 2011 - 21:34

MS fans are the last people who can talk about cruelty. The guy was provided by Ferrari a virtually bulletproof car for many years. Wasn't it at somepoint that MS had done almost 100 races without a DNF for technical reasons. If anything Japan 2006 was long overdue.


And of course no teammate throughout his tenure at Ferrari to challenge him. Irvine? Barrichello? Puhlease....sometimes it is so easy for people to point out his stats, throw this victory or that drive into the mix as a rebuttal to anyone claiming that another driver may have had a good race that MAY have matched up to his. It's never the driver that has the decent drive, but the car that allowed that driver to do so. And when it IS the driver instead of the car, then of course MS had a much better drive somewhere else in an inferior car...And of course every driver on the grid is pretty much 3rd or 4th rate compared to him... :rolleyes:
I give Schumacher credit for one thing, he turned Ferrari into an organized and dominating team. He brought along the right people, brought along massive motivation, was the undisputed number 1, got paid huge $$$$ for doing so and reaped the benefits.
IF he can do it at Mercedes, hat's off to him.

#8871 MikeTekRacing

MikeTekRacing
  • Member

  • 5,815 posts
  • Joined: October 04

Posted 22 March 2011 - 21:35

if he would have had a technical dnf in 2002 or 2004 it wouldn;t have mattered. he had it in 2006 when it mattered

but what is all this talk about 2006??

#8872 Frans

Frans
  • Member

  • 7,701 posts
  • Joined: April 01

Posted 22 March 2011 - 22:35

Hehehe, in 2006 his car/team package was way better than last years and back then he was able to win something (a race or so). That's probably why.

Let it not be misunderstood, Schumacher drove also in 2010, and about that season the Schumacher fans will not talk to much, for obvious reasons. What I find weird, is that almost everybody say's Schumacher is very talented and stuff like that. As if he is more talented than others, come on be real. The man is been chosen to fit in the myth building that the FIA and others organised after/during 1994, when Senna left the sport so abruptly. Somehow this sport needs a person better than the rest. Even if it's not so, at least the fans must believe it is there. Schumacher fitted the shoe, and kept walking with it untill 2006. He got 7 titles under indeed special circumstances, what have NOTHING to do with his talent or something like that at all. He is massifly overrated and many of his fans will never see the treu Schumacher, like he was more or less in 2010. In 2010 he was NOT the fastest Mercedes powered driver. Not even close, he was even fighting and struggling with other teams also powered by Mercedes engine's and they're names were NOT McLarens.
Do not forget that Schumacher's dominance was more a result of Germany's economy, than his hands and feet.

He must have been very very happy with the new point system, otherwise he would have never had so many points in 2010 as he got in the end.

Let me ask you one question. WHAT IF, 2010 was the 1st season of Schumacher's true talent? Without the help of teamorders, special tires, illiegal traction control and other stuff they invented to make him (or better said; his car) go faster than the rest. Sure, in the end you have to DO it. Get the results and simply do it. Haveing the best car and stuff won' make you a winner per se. But he did that. He managed it 7 f*cking times. But still I have not seen something super extraordinary from the man to come up with the conclusion that he is sooo great and talented. Not ONCE.

He has the numbers, sure. Let it be so. But he does not have the " ". Ya know ... I don't know the word, but I think some of you can understand what I mean.... (or not).

2010 was a splendid season. One I didn't expect to be honest. I was afraid the Brawn-Schumi tricks and treats where right up there ... to sting me hard in 2010. But it didn't. I had an amazing season in 2010 thanks to that. And I hope, pray and will keep praying it will be so again in 2011. No indications out there why it shouldn't actually, so I am not worried.

If 2011 will be another 2010-season for Schumacher (his perfomance-wise) then many people will have to open, or re-open they're eyes. I know after a winter season the hopes are high again, and that everything could change back into how it once was. But, don't get your hopes up to high.

Schumacher did it, and won't do it again. The powers what where, are not there anymore for him. He's done, finito, over and Schluß.

#8873 salamin

salamin
  • Member

  • 1,692 posts
  • Joined: March 09

Posted 22 March 2011 - 22:56

Do not forget that Schumacher's dominance was more a result of Germany's economy, than his hands and feet.


the german economy ... WHAT ELSE ??

#8874 Frans

Frans
  • Member

  • 7,701 posts
  • Joined: April 01

Posted 23 March 2011 - 00:37

Yes, money talked, Schumi won. It was all about money, never talent, and the Schumacher piggey-bank is empty/over.

#8875 Buttoneer

Buttoneer
  • RC Forum Admin

  • 17,491 posts
  • Joined: May 04

Posted 23 March 2011 - 00:41

Let's cut out the baiting please.

#8876 Tardis40

Tardis40
  • Member

  • 756 posts
  • Joined: February 11

Posted 23 March 2011 - 01:23

MS fans are the last people who can talk about cruelty. The guy was provided by Ferrari a virtually bulletproof car for many years. Wasn't it at somepoint that MS had done almost 100 races without a DNF for technical reasons. If anything Japan 2006 was long overdue.


I can't argue with you, that had to be a miserable period for staunch fans of other drivers/teams.


#8877 vidc

vidc
  • Member

  • 42 posts
  • Joined: January 10

Posted 23 March 2011 - 01:24

bla bla bla

i really admire your will for trolling...you write long posts,but you could just write that you think schumacher is bad driver...
you're amazing :D


#8878 black magic

black magic
  • Member

  • 3,960 posts
  • Joined: June 00

Posted 23 March 2011 - 01:37

except frans the myth had started well before senna's demise

senna himself had verbalised that schumacher was his greatest rival prior to what proved his final season.

#8879 Polle

Polle
  • Member

  • 292 posts
  • Joined: March 10

Posted 23 March 2011 - 01:37

wb frans

Advertisement

#8880 genespleen

genespleen
  • Member

  • 371 posts
  • Joined: May 06

Posted 23 March 2011 - 01:47

the myth building that the FIA and others organised after/during 1994, when Senna left the sport so abruptly.


Summer's on the way; that tin-foil hat of yours is going to quickly get hot.


#8881 ivand911

ivand911
  • Member

  • 8,152 posts
  • Joined: February 10

Posted 23 March 2011 - 07:50

But still I have not seen something super extraordinary from the man to come up with the conclusion that he is sooo great and talented. Not ONCE.

Frans, you right ,he is nothing special! He can't fly, he can't walk on water. He is just human. But, as you say he made 2010 special for you and he will make 2011 special for you too. For his fans also. This is what matters in the end. This is why he is special.


#8882 libano

libano
  • Member

  • 235 posts
  • Joined: April 10

Posted 23 March 2011 - 14:02

except frans the myth had started well before senna's demise

senna himself had verbalised that schumacher was his greatest rival prior to what proved his final season.



choices, choices....who to believe? frans or ayrton senna?

:drunk:

#8883 Andy865

Andy865
  • Member

  • 2,447 posts
  • Joined: January 10

Posted 23 March 2011 - 14:17

Frans obviously.

Senna had no idea what he was on about.

#8884 Chick0

Chick0
  • Member

  • 55 posts
  • Joined: October 10

Posted 23 March 2011 - 14:35

Hehehe, in 2006 his car/team package was way better than last years and back then he was able to win something (a race or so). That's probably why.

Let it not be misunderstood, Schumacher drove also in 2010, and about that season the Schumacher fans will not talk to much, for obvious reasons. What I find weird, is that almost everybody say's Schumacher is very talented and stuff like that. As if he is more talented than others, come on be real. The man is been chosen to fit in the myth building that the FIA and others organised after/during 1994, when Senna left the sport so abruptly. Somehow this sport needs a person better than the rest. Even if it's not so, at least the fans must believe it is there. Schumacher fitted the shoe, and kept walking with it untill 2006. He got 7 titles under indeed special circumstances, what have NOTHING to do with his talent or something like that at all. He is massifly overrated and many of his fans will never see the treu Schumacher, like he was more or less in 2010. In 2010 he was NOT the fastest Mercedes powered driver. Not even close, he was even fighting and struggling with other teams also powered by Mercedes engine's and they're names were NOT McLarens.
Do not forget that Schumacher's dominance was more a result of Germany's economy, than his hands and feet.

He must have been very very happy with the new point system, otherwise he would have never had so many points in 2010 as he got in the end.

Let me ask you one question. WHAT IF, 2010 was the 1st season of Schumacher's true talent? Without the help of teamorders, special tires, illiegal traction control and other stuff they invented to make him (or better said; his car) go faster than the rest. Sure, in the end you have to DO it. Get the results and simply do it. Haveing the best car and stuff won' make you a winner per se. But he did that. He managed it 7 f*cking times. But still I have not seen something super extraordinary from the man to come up with the conclusion that he is sooo great and talented. Not ONCE.

He has the numbers, sure. Let it be so. But he does not have the " ". Ya know ... I don't know the word, but I think some of you can understand what I mean.... (or not).

2010 was a splendid season. One I didn't expect to be honest. I was afraid the Brawn-Schumi tricks and treats where right up there ... to sting me hard in 2010. But it didn't. I had an amazing season in 2010 thanks to that. And I hope, pray and will keep praying it will be so again in 2011. No indications out there why it shouldn't actually, so I am not worried.

If 2011 will be another 2010-season for Schumacher (his perfomance-wise) then many people will have to open, or re-open they're eyes. I know after a winter season the hopes are high again, and that everything could change back into how it once was. But, don't get your hopes up to high.

Schumacher did it, and won't do it again. The powers what where, are not there anymore for him. He's done, finito, over and Schluß.


Are you Karl Pilkington? Cause this some of the most inspired delusional nonsense i have ever read in my life..

#8885 Frans

Frans
  • Member

  • 7,701 posts
  • Joined: April 01

Posted 23 March 2011 - 14:35

choices, choices....who to believe? frans or ayrton senna?


Hear hear..... And nobody believed him (Senna) when he said that one of the Benettons in 1994 was running with traction control?? HE knew what he was talking about yes. Yet many F1 fans do not take his accusation serious.... But I still do.

If he only had a fair opponent that season ........ :cry:

#8886 Mr2s

Mr2s
  • Member

  • 794 posts
  • Joined: February 10

Posted 23 March 2011 - 14:48

I give Schumacher credit for one thing, he turned Ferrari into an organized and dominating team. He brought along the right people, brought along massive motivation, was the undisputed number 1, got paid huge $$$$ for doing so and reaped the benefits.
IF he can do it at Mercedes, hat's off to him.


Schumacher didn't turn ferrari into anything. Ferrari decided to invest in adding a proven winning Formula to fantastic foundations.
It now seems the major part of that formula made Jenson Button world champion.

Funny that schumacher is the only driver under newey or brawn who gets the main accolades, where as with Vettel, Hill, Villeneuve, Button it was a newey or brawn effort with average drivers, yet 2 of those average drivers were Schumacher's biggest tests until Alonso turned up in a half decent car.

Ferrari were 3rd best team with wins, poles and fastest laps before he joined. Often breaking up the four very dominant Williams and Benettons. They needed reliability which was achieved by the structure Ross Brawn put in place.

No doubt his success wouldn't have been achieved without hard work and talent, but hard work can also lead to nothing if your'e in the wrong place at the wrong time.
What if Senna had lived or gone to Ferrari or Benetton? Prost and Mansell been a few years younger? things would have been very very different. Schumacher was capable of taking points off the above names, but theres no way he would have dominated them. He struggled to dominate Hill even after his ban in 94 when they won a race each and he cracked in the final being charged down by Hill. Senna would have cleaned up the 90s with Hill as his rear gunner, we would then be talking about a very very different Michael Schumacher.

If Lewis is able to team-up with newey or brawn and trophy hunt for 7 years with Button obeying team orders, with Alonso and Vettel retired, should he be considered the greatest ever? And how would non Lewis fans feel if some of those 8 titles were won with tactics as used in Macua 90, Adelaide 94, Jerez 97, Nurburgring 2003?



#8887 dav115

dav115
  • Member

  • 722 posts
  • Joined: August 08

Posted 23 March 2011 - 14:54

Hear hear..... And nobody believed him (Senna) when he said that one of the Benettons in 1994 was running with traction control?? HE knew what he was talking about yes. Yet many F1 fans do not take his accusation serious.... But I still do.

If he only had a fair opponent that season ........ :cry:

The reason nobody believed him was because he was wrong. The sound of traction control, not to mention the completely rudimentary systems that existed around that time, is unmistakeable to the human ear. Watch some footage of the B194 and listen for yourself for the presence of any TC. Another point to note is how many wheelspin-laden poor starts (relative to the Williams') Schumacher had throughout '94, but of course these are forgotten about in comparison with his good start at France. Senna just couldn't handle being slower than Michael.

#8888 ivand911

ivand911
  • Member

  • 8,152 posts
  • Joined: February 10

Posted 23 March 2011 - 14:55

Schumacher didn't turn ferrari into anything. Ferrari decided to invest in adding a proven winning Formula to fantastic foundations.
It now seems the major part of that formula made Jenson Button world champion.

Funny that schumacher is the only driver under newey or brawn who gets the main accolades, where as with Vettel, Hill, Villeneuve, Button it was a newey or brawn effort with average drivers, yet 2 of those average drivers were Schumacher's biggest tests until Alonso turned up in a half decent car.

Ferrari were 3rd best team with wins, poles and fastest laps before he joined. Often breaking up the four very dominant Williams and Benettons. They needed reliability which was achieved by the structure Ross Brawn put in place.

And you were saying? How Ross Brawn end up in Ferrari? Maybe without MS help? Other guys from Benetton? Yeah, all this years Michael didn't have any part/role in having this very good cars? Maybe Ferrari was good team before Michael join them, but they were good for only third best team and this only if they were lucky. He didn't needed Ferrari to became Champion, where they desperately needed him to become Champions. He could easily be a Champion in 1996 with Benetton or Williams. But, he invested in Ferrari to achieve great results for them. But, he could do it with other teams too.

Edited by ivand911, 23 March 2011 - 15:17.


#8889 arknor

arknor
  • Member

  • 2,298 posts
  • Joined: March 10

Posted 23 March 2011 - 14:58

Schumacher didn't turn ferrari into anything. Ferrari decided to invest in adding a proven winning Formula to fantastic foundations.
It now seems the major part of that formula made Jenson Button world champion.

Funny that schumacher is the only driver under newey or brawn who gets the main accolades, where as with Vettel, Hill, Villeneuve, Button it was a newey or brawn effort with average drivers, yet 2 of those average drivers were Schumacher's biggest tests until Alonso turned up in a half decent car.

Ferrari were 3rd best team with wins, poles and fastest laps before he joined. Often breaking up the four very dominant Williams and Benettons. They needed reliability which was achieved by the structure Ross Brawn put in place.

No doubt his success wouldn't have been achieved without hard work and talent, but hard work can also lead to nothing if your'e in the wrong place at the wrong time.
What if Senna had lived or gone to Ferrari or Benetton? Prost and Mansell been a few years younger? things would have been very very different. Schumacher was capable of taking points off the above names, but theres no way he would have dominated them. He struggled to dominate Hill even after his ban in 94 when they won a race each and he cracked in the final being charged down by Hill. Senna would have cleaned up the 90s with Hill as his rear gunner, we would then be talking about a very very different Michael Schumacher.

If Lewis is able to team-up with newey or brawn and trophy hunt for 7 years with Button obeying team orders, with Alonso and Vettel retired, should he be considered the greatest ever? And how would non Lewis fans feel if some of those 8 titles were won with tactics as used in Macua 90, Adelaide 94, Jerez 97, Nurburgring 2003?

lets all forget schumacher was already dominating senna... he would have won atleast half of the championships he did anyway

#8890 SEP

SEP
  • Member

  • 148 posts
  • Joined: November 10

Posted 23 March 2011 - 15:33

Assuming that you are right, you are wrong at least about the tire advantage by the way, but for the sake of conversation let's say that you are right in both aspects. But two obvious questions pop up. 1) Perhaps he did have a little bit of input in building that dominat car? And the second, maybe there is a reason as to why was he given those all-winning cars? Something like what came first, the chicken or the egg.

Anyway, if he had that overwhelming hardware advantage that means that his teammates should reflect that in the final standings. Yes yes, I know, they were by contract prevented to challenge him but surely those same contracts clearly stipulated that those leutenants/slaves/second fiddles have to, by contract, defeat everyone else, am I right? Other than 2002 and 2004 that didn't happen. That's only 2 championships out 7.
-----------------------
Ivand911, why do you keep quoting that garbage from planetf1? They're definitelly not informative and they're not even funny anymore, assuming that they were actually funny at some point... Just curious. :confused:



I would agree with you IF 1999 didn´t prove me wrong.

Ferrari didn´t want to win the title, they only wanted Michael Schumacher to win. There was no ferrari, only MS´s team.

#8891 SEP

SEP
  • Member

  • 148 posts
  • Joined: November 10

Posted 23 March 2011 - 15:35

lets all forget schumacher was already dominating senna... he would have won atleast half of the championships he did anyway


BS

Michael didn´t score a single pole position while Senna was alive, even with a enormous car advantadge. Michael is and never was as great of fast as Alonso or Lewis. Comparing him to Senna is ridiculous.

#8892 ivand911

ivand911
  • Member

  • 8,152 posts
  • Joined: February 10

Posted 23 March 2011 - 15:44

BS

Michael didn´t score a single pole position while Senna was alive, even with a enormous car advantadge. Michael is and never was as great of fast as Alonso or Lewis. Comparing him to Senna is ridiculous.

Pole position don't give you points.


#8893 jj2728

jj2728
  • Member

  • 2,832 posts
  • Joined: January 04

Posted 23 March 2011 - 15:45

Schumacher didn't turn ferrari into anything. Ferrari decided to invest in adding a proven winning Formula to fantastic foundations.



Wrong.....fantastic foundations yes, but flawed in the italian way (and no offense to our italian friends, I lived in bella italia for nigh on 10 years). When Schumacher won the championship in 2000 it had been 21 years since Scheckter had won his wdc with Ferrari and prior to Lauda winning his wdc in 1975 it had been 11 years since Surtees had won his wdc in 1964. He brought organization, as did Lauda and Surtees, to a team that even at the best of times lacked a bit of it and always ran high on emotion. But what both Lauda and Surtees were up against that Schumacher was not were the polemics that always ran rife within the team.

#8894 SEP

SEP
  • Member

  • 148 posts
  • Joined: November 10

Posted 23 March 2011 - 15:54

except frans the myth had started well before senna's demise

senna himself had verbalised that schumacher was his greatest rival prior to what proved his final season.


Mark Webber was Vettel´s greatest rival in 2010, according to Vettel. So, Mark W is one of the greatest ever?

BS,

Senna knew Michael had a superior and ilegal car. Also he knew FIA was trying to avoid his domination to come and changed completelly the rules in order to affect Senna´s Williams. Besides, Germany was one of the biggest markets/targets of FIA. Michael was needed at that point. Someone who could do the job, beat Senna even if using an illegal car was the only way to do so.

#8895 BRK

BRK
  • Member

  • 3,653 posts
  • Joined: November 07

Posted 23 March 2011 - 15:55

Pole position don't give you points.


Don't bother, his opening post should tell you what you're getting yourself into. These clowns pop up from time to time to troll with baseless opinions with nothing to back up their claims and then disappear when they get bored. There's absolutely nothing that we've all haven't heard already. Best to just ignore them and keep this place clean, without the garbage.

#8896 SEP

SEP
  • Member

  • 148 posts
  • Joined: November 10

Posted 23 March 2011 - 15:56

Wrong.....fantastic foundations yes, but flawed in the italian way (and no offense to our italian friends, I lived in bella italia for nigh on 10 years). When Schumacher won the championship in 2000 it had been 21 years since Scheckter had won his wdc with Ferrari and prior to Lauda winning his wdc in 1975 it had been 11 years since Surtees had won his wdc in 1964. He brought organization, as did Lauda and Surtees, to a team that even at the best of times lacked a bit of it and always ran high on emotion. But what both Lauda and Surtees were up against that Schumacher was not were the polemics that always ran rife within the team.


Ross B is the MAN, you should know it already.

#8897 ivand911

ivand911
  • Member

  • 8,152 posts
  • Joined: February 10

Posted 23 March 2011 - 15:56

-----------------------
Ivand911, why do you keep quoting that garbage from planetf1? They're definitelly not informative and they're not even funny anymore, assuming that they were actually funny at some point... Just curious. :confused:

I think some people like Secret tageblog? It maybe not written personally by MS ,but sure it is approved by him and this way have connection with the thread? It is not made by planetF1. And it is funny usually.

Edited by ivand911, 23 March 2011 - 15:58.


#8898 dav115

dav115
  • Member

  • 722 posts
  • Joined: August 08

Posted 23 March 2011 - 16:26

I would agree with you IF 1999 didn´t prove me wrong.

Ferrari didn´t want to win the title, they only wanted Michael Schumacher to win. There was no ferrari, only MS´s team.

Care to explain why then Michael allowed Irvine to pass for the lead TWICE at the Malaysian GP that year?

#8899 Group B

Group B
  • Member

  • 13,971 posts
  • Joined: March 02

Posted 23 March 2011 - 16:35

Care to explain why then Michael allowed Irvine to pass for the lead TWICE at the Malaysian GP that year?

Damn it, don't ask awkward questions :mad:

Advertisement

#8900 jj2728

jj2728
  • Member

  • 2,832 posts
  • Joined: January 04

Posted 23 March 2011 - 17:54

I would agree with you IF 1999 didn´t prove me wrong.

Ferrari didn´t want to win the title, they only wanted Michael Schumacher to win. There was no ferrari, only MS´s team.


Wrong again. There is absolutely no way that Ferrari ONLY wanted Schumacher to win. Why do you think they had Salo pull over to let Irvine through at Germany? They would have been quite happy if Irvine had taken the title in 1999.