Jump to content


Photo

Michael Schumacher (merged)


  • This topic is locked This topic is locked
20789 replies to this topic

#10901 PoliFanAthic

PoliFanAthic
  • Member

  • 639 posts
  • Joined: October 09

Posted 29 June 2011 - 08:50

Just in regards to Michael's team mates being second tier drivers - I'd look particularly at Rubens and Felipe, but Eddie Irvine could also be included here. The latter two were both very close to becoming F1 WDC, with Massa losing out due to sheer bad luck. Also, the difference between Button and Rubens was considerably smaller than the one between Rubens and Michael, and Rubens has been better than Hulkenberg and Maldonado. Not to mention the fact that in 2008, Rubens got all the bad calls at Brawn, which put him out of contention for the title.

What Michael needs now is peace of mind and to adapt in managing make or break situations a bit better than he has since his comeback. That's what a midfield driver needs to know how to do in order to get the best results possible out of the car.

Edited by PoliFanAthic, 29 June 2011 - 08:51.


Advertisement

#10902 Jazza

Jazza
  • Member

  • 994 posts
  • Joined: November 99

Posted 29 June 2011 - 08:51

Yet another assumption.


How the hell is it an assumption? It's a fact. An unquestionable provable fact. Mika did not lap as fast in the car as the car could go in that test. We know that from the regular drivers lap times.

#10903 BRK

BRK
  • Member

  • 3,474 posts
  • Joined: November 07

Posted 29 June 2011 - 08:56

How the hell is it an assumption? It's a fact. An unquestionable provable fact. Mika did not lap as fast in the car as the car could go in that test. We know that from the regular drivers lap times.


The assumption lies in believing he was lapping seconds off the pace and did so for 80 odd laps. But you have your answer already.

#10904 Jazza

Jazza
  • Member

  • 994 posts
  • Joined: November 99

Posted 29 June 2011 - 09:02

The assumption lies in believing he was lapping seconds off the pace and did so for 80 odd laps. But you have your answer already.


Do you want to explain that a bit clearer? Im saying Mika never got with in a few seconds of the ultimate lap time of the car in his one of test. You say thats an assumption. How is it?

#10905 Raelene

Raelene
  • Member

  • 5,293 posts
  • Joined: April 99

Posted 29 June 2011 - 09:06

Well jazza if you are going to repeatedly make a statement and then refuse to back it up by looking in the archives I'm sure you will forgive me for not taking your statement too seriously....and think you are just stirring the pot ..or possibly trolling. You don't seem like a troll so I think its just pot stirring and I won't take you seriously then :)

Anyway come back to me if you decide to back up your statement.

#10906 BRK

BRK
  • Member

  • 3,474 posts
  • Joined: November 07

Posted 29 June 2011 - 09:11

Do you want to explain that a bit clearer? Im saying Mika never got with in a few seconds of the ultimate lap time of the car in his one of test. You say thats an assumption. How is it?


I'm saying the assumption is in believing Hakkinen lapped 3 seconds off the pace for 80 laps just because he took it easy and didn't push at all. You don't lap 3 seconds off the pace unless you've also lost a lot of pace in the meantime, that's what I'm saying. Perhaps a second after 80 laps, or 2, but it was definitely not a leisurely stroll in the park.



#10907 Jazza

Jazza
  • Member

  • 994 posts
  • Joined: November 99

Posted 29 June 2011 - 09:19

Well jazza if you are going to repeatedly make a statement and then refuse to back it up by looking in the archives I'm sure you will forgive me for not taking your statement too seriously....and think you are just stirring the pot ..or possibly trolling. You don't seem like a troll so I think its just pot stirring and I won't take you seriously then :)

Anyway come back to me if you decide to back up your statement.


I already gave you the Peter Windsor quote... Which you ignored.

I also only said it in one post before you started asking about it. I have not being going through page after page stating "you said he could win in any car...any car!!!"... So it is not exactly repeatedly making a statement.

Considering your old daily F1 motto was something like "taking the piss out of non Schumacher fans" I won't take your accusation of being a pot stirrer to seriously :wave:

#10908 Jazza

Jazza
  • Member

  • 994 posts
  • Joined: November 99

Posted 29 June 2011 - 09:27

I'm saying the assumption is in believing Hakkinen lapped 3 seconds off the pace for 80 laps just because he took it easy and didn't push at all. You don't lap 3 seconds off the pace unless you've also lost a lot of pace in the meantime, that's what I'm saying. Perhaps a second after 80 laps, or 2, but it was definitely not a leisurely stroll in the park.


He was not trying to return to F1, it was just for fun. If he spent two weeks of serious training and testing (and wasn't too worried about possibly damaging the car) I'm sure he could reduce that gap. It would be an assumption to believe that that was the best that he could do. If it was his best his times would be much more consistent as he would have Improved through the day. Instead his times were all over the place.

(in case anyone else reading this gets the wrong idea, I do not believe mika could return to F1. He was simply out the sport for too long and I doubt that 2 months of testing would ever get the spark back. But that test day proves nothing about the speed drivers lose due to age, which would be different for every driver.)

Edited by Jazza, 29 June 2011 - 09:30.


#10909 Number62

Number62
  • Member

  • 492 posts
  • Joined: October 09

Posted 29 June 2011 - 09:35

Jazza


First you say many of his fans say he could wimn in any car. Then youndowngrade your statement to the 4th or 5th car then you come back with this again

.

Autosport has an archive. Show me those manyu fans thay said he couild win in ANY car

I see you also ignored my question. Do you think a driver can put a car where ity doesn't belong? I do..and msc was ONE of those drivers and in his hey day he was consistently one of those drivers....but he couldn't win iin a minardi.


Doesn't take long to find Some. Some good reading here.

http://forums.autosp...w...t&p=2833782




#10910 BRK

BRK
  • Member

  • 3,474 posts
  • Joined: November 07

Posted 29 June 2011 - 09:42

He was not trying to return to F1, it was just for fun. If he spent two weeks of serious training and testing (and wasn't too worried about possibly damaging the car) I'm sure he could reduce that gap. It would be an assumption to believe that that was the best that he could do. If it was his best his times would be much more consistent as he improved through the day.

(in case anyone else reading this gets the wrong idea, I do not believe mika could return to F1. He was simply out the sport for too long and I doubt that 2 months of testing would ever get the spark back. But that test day proves nothing about the speed drivers lose due to age, which would be different for every driver.)


The point to that test was to avail of his feedback in developing the car and to compare how the cars had changed between 2001 and 2006. There is a quote from McLaren and Dennis that says the test was to be used 'to benefit from Mika's experience and obtain his feedback with regards to changes in downforce, engine and tyres that have occurred since he last drove an F1 car', and that "A driver of Mika's calibre and experience can only bring added value to our testing programme and his feedback after Thursday's running will be valuable to the team in our preparations for the 2007 season." Mika himself is quoted as saying: "This test is a chance for me to see how much F1 cars have advanced and experience first hand what they are like to drive today as well as providing the team with some feedback on various aspects of the car's performance."

How on earth would he have compared downforce levels and tyre grip & provided valuable feedback to the team in preparation for 2007 had he simply trundled around seconds off the pace deliberately? :lol: Of course he'd have had to push, if not on all but at least some of the 80 laps that he did.

My point isn't that Schumacher was 2 seconds quicker than Hakkinen or some such absurd claim --I've already made it clear in my answer to you -which you completely ignored- that I believe MS would have been 2-3 tenths quicker in equal machinery-- but that Hakkinen lost a lot of pace in the five years that he was out of F1 as opposed to the one year break that MS had when he did his test in the Ferrari. Schumacher would have lost a similar amount in five years, a bit less in 3 years, and a heck of a lot more if you're comparing the Schumacher of 1999 to the Schumacher of 2011. That was my point.

Reading the post above yours it just looks like you're posting to see attention, though, I've got to say.

Edited by BRK, 29 June 2011 - 09:44.


#10911 Jazza

Jazza
  • Member

  • 994 posts
  • Joined: November 99

Posted 29 June 2011 - 09:54

The point to that test was to avail of his feedback in developing the car and to compare how the cars had changed between 2001 and 2006. There is a quote from McLaren and Dennis that says the test was to be used 'to benefit from Mika's experience and obtain his feedback with regards to changes in downforce, engine and tyres that have occurred since he last drove an F1 car', and that "A driver of Mika's calibre and experience can only bring added value to our testing programme and his feedback after Thursday's running will be valuable to the team in our preparations for the 2007 season." Mika himself is quoted as saying: "This test is a chance for me to see how much F1 cars have advanced and experience first hand what they are like to drive today as well as providing the team with some feedback on various aspects of the car's performance."

How on earth would he have compared downforce levels and tyre grip & provided valuable feedback to the team in preparation for 2007 had he simply trundled around seconds off the pace deliberately? :lol: Of course he'd have had to push, if not on all but at least some of the 80 laps that he did.

My point isn't that Schumacher was 2 seconds quicker than Hakkinen or some such absurd claim --I've already made it clear in my answer to you -which you completely ignored- that I believe MS would have been 2-3 tenths quicker in equal machinery-- but that Hakkinen lost a lot of pace in the five years that he was out of F1 as opposed to the one year break that MS had when he did his test in the Ferrari. Schumacher would have lost a similar amount in five years, a bit less in 3 years, and a heck of a lot more if you're comparing the Schumacher of 1999 to the Schumacher of 2011. That was my point.

Reading the post above yours it just looks like you're posting to see attention, though, I've got to say.


It's called PR. His test would have not added anything to McLaren development :rolleyes:

I also did not claim that he was deliberately going slower than he could. But it was not a test session to get the fastest lap that he could.

Posting to see Attention? WTF.


#10912 BRK

BRK
  • Member

  • 3,474 posts
  • Joined: November 07

Posted 29 June 2011 - 09:58

It's called PR. His test would have not added anything to McLaren development :rolleyes:

I also did not claim that he was deliberately going slower than he could. But it was not a test session to get the fastest lap that he could.

Posting to see Attention? WTF.


But it was still a test session and it was to compare downforce levels\trye grip and so on, all of which are things that cannot be done unless you're doing racing speeds at least for a few of the 80 laps he did. This isn't hard to understand at all, so I think you're just evading the eventual conclusion.

Posting to seek attention is exactly what you're doing, you're only responding to parts of the post that would keep the discussion going and ignoring any answers that would put an end to this.

#10913 Jazza

Jazza
  • Member

  • 994 posts
  • Joined: November 99

Posted 29 June 2011 - 10:13

But it was still a test session and it was to compare downforce levels\trye grip and so on, all of which are things that cannot be done unless you're doing racing speeds at least for a few of the 80 laps he did. This isn't hard to understand at all, so I think you're just evading the eventual conclusion.


Mika remembering what a F1 car was like in 2001, and then comparing it to a car he has not driven before, would tell McLaren nothing. If they want to compare downforce levels they can just cheek the massive database they have on both cars.

Your right that a test below racing speed would not tell them anything... that is the point. Mika who has been out of a F1 car for years could not do races speeds first day back in one. So the idea that this supposed to be a valuable test to compare different cars is stupid.

Posting to seek attention is exactly what you're doing, you're only responding to parts of the post that would keep the discussion going and ignoring any answers that would put an end to this.


Bullshit. This started because you quoted one part of one of my post (calling it an assumption) and have dragged it on for a page about how this test somehow proves something about MS losing speed due to age. I'm not ignoring answers... There has been no question for there to be an answer to give!


#10914 as65p

as65p
  • Member

  • 17,078 posts
  • Joined: June 04

Posted 29 June 2011 - 10:19

....about how this test somehow proves something about MS losing speed due to age. I'm not ignoring answers... There has been no question for there to be an answer to give!


Here's is the answer.

http://forums.autosp...amp;pid=4273144

Age isn't the issue apparently, just the 3-year break is holding MS back, but only momentarily, all he needs is a some time in the car to become his old self again.

 ;)

#10915 BRK

BRK
  • Member

  • 3,474 posts
  • Joined: November 07

Posted 29 June 2011 - 10:27

Mika remembering what a F1 car was like in 2001, and then comparing it to a car he has not driven before, would tell McLaren nothing. If they want to compare downforce levels they can just cheek the massive database they have on both cars.

Your right that a test below racing speed would not tell them anything... that is the point. Mika who has been out of a F1 car for years could not do races speeds first day back in one. So the idea that this supposed to be a valuable test to compare different cars is stupid.


Pathetic. You've ignored quotes by the team and by Hakkinen himself that make it clear they were going to test to compare downforce levels between the cars, that Hakkinen spent time in the McLaren simulator with the test in mind, that there were even rumours at the time that he was going to make a comeback -and, as usual, made the assumption that they had no such intention and that all the quotes are useless since you know better than the team or can read Hakkinen's mind. Despite the fact that they would have had to approach the test with their own goals -goals that I've quoted above- and the simply logic that they would have had to at least start testing with this in mind, you believe McLaren wasted 80 laps and precious testing mileage and time by letting Hakkinen do 80 laps for fun.

Bullshit. This started because you quoted one part of one of my post (calling it an assumption) and have dragged it on for a page about how this test somehow proves something about MS losing speed due to age. I'm not ignoring answers... There has been no question for there to be an answer to give!


Eh, you were the on that quoted me. You asked how much pace I thought MS had lost between 1999 and 2011, my answer was over a second, which you then ignored. :lol:

I think it's clear as day to anybody following this that I've made my point, so that's all from my side.


#10916 Jazza

Jazza
  • Member

  • 994 posts
  • Joined: November 99

Posted 29 June 2011 - 10:29

Here's is the answer.

http://forums.autosp...amp;pid=4273144

Age isn't the issue apparently, just the 3-year break is holding MS back, but only momentarily, all he needs is a some time in the car to become his old self again.

;)


Haha thanks.

(On a side note, that is some impressively fast forum searching.)



#10917 BRK

BRK
  • Member

  • 3,474 posts
  • Joined: November 07

Posted 29 June 2011 - 10:30

Here's is the answer.

http://forums.autosp...amp;pid=4273144

Age isn't the issue apparently, just the 3-year break is holding MS back, but only momentarily, all he needs is a some time in the car to become his old self again.

;)


But that just proves what I said earlier on right here, that he cannot be consistently quick and would lose a lot of time as a result. I've even used the phrase 'what you do lose a lot of ' there, or are you too blinded to read? :D

The only difference is that I -like many others- thought Schumacher could overcome even this deficit with time, this hasn't happened.

#10918 Jazza

Jazza
  • Member

  • 994 posts
  • Joined: November 99

Posted 29 June 2011 - 10:38

I think it's clear as day to anybody following this that I've made my point, so that's all from my side.


Depends on how much weed they had before they started reading.

Your point is not as clear as you think it is. I have been honestly trying to debate this, I just don't know what point you are actually trying to make. Maybe it does make sense to someone, but I honestly can not follow it. None of my replies having been trying to keep it going for the fun of it, I just don't get where you were trying to go.

Maybe we will have better luck next debate. Cya :wave:

#10919 BRK

BRK
  • Member

  • 3,474 posts
  • Joined: November 07

Posted 29 June 2011 - 10:46

Depends on how much weed they had before they started reading.

Your point is not as clear as you think it is. I have been honestly trying to debate this, I just don't know what point you are actually trying to make. Maybe it does make sense to someone, but I honestly can not follow it. None of my replies having been trying to keep it going for the fun of it, I just don't get where you were trying to go.

Maybe we will have better luck next debate. Cya :wave:


Dear god. :rolleyes:

Point 1: Hakkinen was testing the car, the quotes and the fact that he did 80 laps prove this, no matter what it is that you believe inside your head.

Point 2: Hakkinen was 3 seconds off the pace despite having done so many laps and would have had to do at least some at racing speeds to achieve their intended aims (feedback & comparison of the cars)

Point 3: A large part of the 3 second gap was down to him having been out of action for five years because McLaren would not have wasted so much mileage and time continuing with the test had they not believed he would up his pace sooner rather than later.

Point 4: Schumacher would also have had to lose a similar amount of pace in five years and returning at 42, more in ten.

I'm done with this. If you still don't understand I'll know you're just trolling. :rolleyes:

Advertisement

#10920 ViMaMo

ViMaMo
  • Member

  • 5,016 posts
  • Joined: September 03

Posted 29 June 2011 - 10:58

I like Michael but I also respect the drivers of today. Young Michael wouldnt have trashed these guys, but it would have been a tough fight maybe like 2000 or 2003 or 2006, he might or might not have got better of them.

Edited by ViMaMo, 29 June 2011 - 11:00.


#10921 gdanskii

gdanskii
  • New Member

  • 22 posts
  • Joined: January 11

Posted 29 June 2011 - 11:03

What made me appreciate what MS has done more, is when Coulthard stepped into the redbull simulator and could bearly cope with all the new stuff an f1 car has, let alone drive at speed, and coulthard has been out a similiar amount of time.

Whether he's as quick or not, i defy anybody to stop doing something for 3 years, jump back into and perform at a level that is comparable to the best in the world.

And MS caused me enough pain through the years, i was Damon, Mika, JPM, anyone who would take the fight to him fan. But for anyone to sit there and not be impressed, well i'm staggered.

#10922 sharo

sharo
  • Member

  • 1,768 posts
  • Joined: April 11

Posted 29 June 2011 - 11:20

@gdanskii :up:
I guess I'm lucky for choosing him as my favorite and having pleasure instead of pain :)
And, the names you mention IMO just defy the claims that he had weak competitors. Especially Mika whom I've always regarded with great respect. JPM for that matter had more natural talent and speed (but IMO did not pay much attention to developing) which Michael compensated by hard work, training and dedication.

#10923 LiJu914

LiJu914
  • Member

  • 1,776 posts
  • Joined: June 11

Posted 29 June 2011 - 13:02

I think this whole MS/Hakkinen/Coulthard/XZY-comparison basically leads to nothing.

Testing is´nt racing and "simulating" is even less.

We simply can´t measure Schumachers potential drop-off in performance between his "prime" and today.

All we can say is, that there is much likely a drop-off. You can notice it in every sport, even in more or less non-physical categories like chess.
But i think the more intersting question than "How much better was MS in his prime?" is "How good is he today?"
2010 was quite awful, if you look at the season as a whole. I think that was more due to his three-year break than his age. 2011 is much better (atm).

But still...How good or bad is his 2011-performance-level?
What kind of bugs me, is that Rosberg is still a little bit "unkown material".
He was ok against Webber in his rookie-season and than he had two below-average teammates until MS came.
I would love to see Rosberg next to Alonso, Vettel, Hamilton, then we would have a clearer picture.

Edited by LiJu914, 29 June 2011 - 13:57.


#10924 as65p

as65p
  • Member

  • 17,078 posts
  • Joined: June 04

Posted 29 June 2011 - 13:13

But that just proves what I said earlier on right here, that he cannot be consistently quick and would lose a lot of time as a result. I've even used the phrase 'what you do lose a lot of ' there, or are you too blinded to read? :D

The only difference is that I -like many others- thought Schumacher could overcome even this deficit with time, this hasn't happened.


Only difference? :lol:

Some 14 months ago you wondered "What's all this Michael part I/II stuff?". Nowadays all you seem to do is propagating how different MS part I was to part II, seconds faster and all... :drunk:

Looks more like a U-turn of hamiltonesque proportions to me! :D

#10925 T-Mobile

T-Mobile
  • Member

  • 665 posts
  • Joined: October 09

Posted 29 June 2011 - 13:22

Looks more like a U-turn of hamiltonesque proportions to me! :D


:clap:

Hamiltonesque, I am going to start using that word. Unfortunately my friends aren't into F1 and will have no clue.

To be on-topic a bit, I just saw a stat about total career GP laps led. Michael has well over 5,000, while Vettel apparently just eclipsed 1,000. Fernando Alonso has around 1,300. Michael however had more than 2,000 more laps led than the guy in second. Again, that's kind of ridiculous.

#10926 Jazza

Jazza
  • Member

  • 994 posts
  • Joined: November 99

Posted 29 June 2011 - 13:35

Dear god. :rolleyes:

Point 1: Hakkinen was testing the car, the quotes and the fact that he did 80 laps prove this, no matter what it is that you believe inside your head.

Point 2: Hakkinen was 3 seconds off the pace despite having done so many laps and would have had to do at least some at racing speeds to achieve their intended aims (feedback & comparison of the cars)

Point 3: A large part of the 3 second gap was down to him having been out of action for five years because McLaren would not have wasted so much mileage and time continuing with the test had they not believed he would up his pace sooner rather than later.

Point 4: Schumacher would also have had to lose a similar amount of pace in five years and returning at 42, more in ten.

I'm done with this. If you still don't understand I'll know you're just trolling. :rolleyes:


For someone who tells other people they are making assumptions, you speak a lot of shit. Read your points again, and then count how many assumptions you make in them. "would have", "would not have", "had they not believed", "would also", "similar". All assumptions that lead to conclusions which are not known for sure.

If you think I'm a troll then by all means report me and let the moderator decide. I was genuinely trying to discuss this, but I could not see what you were trying to argue. You may see both the logic and relevancy of your argument, but I can not. You obviously see a strong connection between Mika's one day on track and Michael's age, I do not. Apparently Mika's one off test day answers how much speed Schumacher has lost in ten years (with out making any assumptions mind you), I don't see how. If that makes me a troll, again I say, so be it. If you think you have a case, hit the report button. If you want a forum where everyone sees everything the same way you do, hit the ignore button. Alternatively we can forget this exchange and look forward to the next race. Up to you.



#10927 man

man
  • Member

  • 1,301 posts
  • Joined: October 01

Posted 29 June 2011 - 13:45

I think this whole MS/Hakkinen/Coulthard/XZY-comparison basically leads to nothing.

Testing is´nt racing and "simulating" is even less.

We simply can´t measure Schumachers potential drop-off in performance between his "prime" and today.

All we can say is, that there is much likely a drop-off. You can notice it in every sport, even in more or less non-physical categories like chess.
But i think the more intersting question than "How much better was MS in his prime?" is "How good is he today?"
2010 was quite awful, if you look at the season as a whole. I think that was more due to his three-year break than his age. 2011 is much better (atm).

But still...How good or bad is his 2011-performance-level?
What kind of bugs me, is that Rosberg is still a little bit "unkown material".
He was ok against Webber in his rookie-season and than he had two below-average teammates until MS came.
I would love to see the Rosberg next to Alonso, Vettel, Hamilton, than we would have a clearer picture.


Me too, however, I think the battering Rosberg would take could get ugly. Rosberg would be a decent number 2 driver to one of the top drivers I think. But in fairness, I do get the impression he does have a bit more performance in his pocket if only he had a more competitive teammate to push him.

#10928 ivand911

ivand911
  • Member

  • 8,152 posts
  • Joined: February 10

Posted 29 June 2011 - 13:56

What the hell happen here?? :p Can we stop discussing what people said 5-10 years ago. We are here now and we discuss what happen now. And what we say. There isn't words to describe what MS did from 1991 to 2006. He come in 2010 and in first test he was 0,4sec from Massa in the first test. Jumping in the car and 0,4 sec. I would love to see all guys from now driving 1994 Benetton. Or 1996 Ferrari and after that to discuss how easy was for Michael to do what he did. Or 1991/1992/1993 Benetton. Or some of Williams cars from 1991 to 1997. Because Michael is on their territory now(I mean modern drivers). In their cars. Lewis drove Senna car and he say if I remember correctly, that he can't imagine doing full race distance with it. Michael not only have 91 wins, but he participate in many more GP where he also excel. Priceless stuff. Jazza we get what you think about MS, can you stop now? It is time for more praise. :wave:

man, funny as always. :rotfl:

Edited by ivand911, 29 June 2011 - 13:58.


#10929 LiJu914

LiJu914
  • Member

  • 1,776 posts
  • Joined: June 11

Posted 29 June 2011 - 14:09

We are here now and we discuss what happen now.
....
1991 to 2006.
...Or 1996
...Or 1991/1992/1993
...1991 to 1997.


I see. :rolleyes:

#10930 ivand911

ivand911
  • Member

  • 8,152 posts
  • Joined: February 10

Posted 29 June 2011 - 14:20

I see. :rolleyes:

Do you see this happening? I don't.
Numbers mean nothing,it is my idea only. I don't claim anything.
1500,1600,1700,1996,1997,1998,1999,2000.
Some numbers for you to put in your next answer.

Edited by ivand911, 29 June 2011 - 14:22.


#10931 Jazza

Jazza
  • Member

  • 994 posts
  • Joined: November 99

Posted 29 June 2011 - 14:22

What the hell happen here?? :p Can we stop discussing what people said 5-10 years ago. We are here now and we discuss what happen now. And what we say. There isn't words to describe what MS did from 1991 to 2006. He come in 2010 and in first test he was 0,4sec from Massa in the first test. Jumping in the car and 0,4 sec. I would love to see all guys from now driving 1994 Benetton. Or 1996 Ferrari and after that to discuss how easy was for Michael to do what he did. Or 1991/1992/1993 Benetton. Or some of Williams cars from 1991 to 1997. Because Michael is on their territory now(I mean modern drivers). In their cars. Lewis drove Senna car and he say if I remember correctly, that he can't imagine doing full race distance with it. Michael not only have 91 wins, but he participate in many more GP where he also excel. Priceless stuff. Jazza we get what you think about MS, can you stop now? It is time for more praise. :wave:

man, funny as always. :rotfl:


Yes because I am such a hater. My gosh, if only that dickhead didn't exist my life would be soooo much better. :rolleyes:

What is it that I think about MS? That he is possibly the greatest driver ever. That he was the best of his generation. That he is still today a very fast and good driver. That I am still cheering for his first win at Mercedes. What is it that I think about him that I should stop saying?

You go from thread to thread putting crap on other drivers, but then get taken back if anyone doesn't see your hero as wonderfully as you do. I wish I could call it funny, but it's just sad.

Edited by Jazza, 29 June 2011 - 14:24.


#10932 ivand911

ivand911
  • Member

  • 8,152 posts
  • Joined: February 10

Posted 29 June 2011 - 14:33

Jazza we get what you think about MS, can you stop now? It is time for more praise. :wave:
You have to read it like this. If you don't have sense of humor..........
What other drivers?(OT) Last think I said about other driver was "Happy Birthday Nico Rosberg". How evil am I.

Edited by ivand911, 29 June 2011 - 14:34.


#10933 BRK

BRK
  • Member

  • 3,474 posts
  • Joined: November 07

Posted 29 June 2011 - 15:53

Only difference? :lol:

Some 14 months ago you wondered "What's all this Michael part I/II stuff?". Nowadays all you seem to do is propagating how different MS part I was to part II, seconds faster and all... :drunk:

Looks more like a U-turn of hamiltonesque proportions to me! :D


:rolleyes:

Again, what I said back then and what I've been arguing now are the same with one difference. I said age takes away some of the edge in that you'd lost the ability to do quick laps consistently.

However yes, I was wrong about one thing, I did think Schumacher would manage to close this deficit in time and sooner, it has taken longer than I expected, but as we have seen he has the immense talent to improve, adapt, and bridge even this gap at 42, he is performing better this year than in 2010 -the improvement is there for all to see. As Luca di said after Montreal, it has taken longer, but it has happened to a degree.

So yeah -I don't know what your point is other than to post out of spite. Which brings me to the next thing...

For someone who tells other people they are making assumptions, you speak a lot of shit. Read your points again, and then count how many assumptions you make in them. "would have", "would not have", "had they not believed", "would also", "similar". All assumptions that lead to conclusions which are not known for sure.

If you think I'm a troll then by all means report me and let the moderator decide. I was genuinely trying to discuss this, but I could not see what you were trying to argue. You may see both the logic and relevancy of your argument, but I can not. You obviously see a strong connection between Mika's one day on track and Michael's age, I do not. Apparently Mika's one off test day answers how much speed Schumacher has lost in ten years (with out making any assumptions mind you), I don't see how. If that makes me a troll, again I say, so be it. If you think you have a case, hit the report button. If you want a forum where everyone sees everything the same way you do, hit the ignore button. Alternatively we can forget this exchange and look forward to the next race. Up to you.


.........I see. These are Hakkinen's own words after the test:

“Although it was great fun today I also had to do some serious work for the team, as any feedback I could give them from today's experience will help them with their preparations for the 2007 season.

As a result I was really pushing to try and do the best job that I could to assist them in any way possible.”

“I spent the morning really acclimatising to the environment of the cockpit again and just getting to grips with driving a 2006 car, I didn't expect to be quick straight away, and Barcelona is of course a hard track on both the car and driver,” he said.

“It took several laps before I was up to speed, but we were all expecting this to be the case.

“We have done some good work today and got some great results and I am really grateful to the team for this opportunity and the mechanics for working so hard for me."

"Maybe with the fuel level down to a minimum, maybe then we could get down to a good lap time," he said.

"The plan was to run the same fuel level all the time, which are high enough to work on the race configuration.

"Maybe if we had a new set of tyres then maybe the lap time could have been 1.2 to two seconds faster. That (lap times) was not the issue."


There is enough in there for anybody but someone blind or stupidly obstinate to admit Hakkinen just lacked pace, no matter what the case. His early laps had been much slower than his later laps, that should tell you he got up to speed like any other driver would. He did push and he did set representative lap times, otherwise he would not have said the bits I've highlighted. He even goes on to say the maximum he could have done was a lap 1.2 seconds to two seconds quicker, which would still leave him over a second off the pace. Schumacher was not this slow when he similarly jumped into the Ferrari for testing, compared to the same Badoer. The difference is that MS was only a year into retirement while MH was five, that's what caused such a wide gulf, is my point.

Considering this it isn't at all unreasonable to think Schumacher would have lost just as much pace as Hakkinen himself did, which was perhaps in the area of a second at least. As you are not capable of making this simple connection or admit it may have been possible, I see no way of convincing someone so foolishly adamant, and there's no point to continuing this discussion. Ignore button it is. Not for the trolling but for the weird feeling I get that I'm basically replying to the same poster twice.



#10934 Jazza

Jazza
  • Member

  • 994 posts
  • Joined: November 99

Posted 29 June 2011 - 16:13

Thank goodness that's over. The most ridicules discussion I have ever had in 12 years on this forum.

#10935 weston

weston
  • Member

  • 370 posts
  • Joined: February 10

Posted 29 June 2011 - 16:28

"Ecclestone added that Vettel's recent dominance was even more impressive than Schumacher's.

'The competition Sebastian is facing is much bigger than that confronted by Michael. That makes Seb's wins even more noteworthy. I don't see a reason why there shouldn't be a Red Bull era just as Ferrari had theirs with Michael.'"

Source: http://en.espnf1.com...tory/52946.html

I guess it's a compliment from BE.


#10936 as65p

as65p
  • Member

  • 17,078 posts
  • Joined: June 04

Posted 29 June 2011 - 16:41

:rolleyes:

Again, what I said back then and what I've been arguing now are the same with one difference. I said age takes away some of the edge in that you'd lost the ability to do quick laps consistently.

However yes, I was wrong about one thing, I did think Schumacher would manage to close this deficit in time and sooner, it has taken longer than I expected, but as we have seen he has the immense talent to improve, adapt, and bridge even this gap at 42, he is performing better this year than in 2010 -the improvement is there for all to see. As Luca di said after Montreal, it has taken longer, but it has happened to a degree.

So yeah -I don't know what your point is other than to post out of spite. Which brings me to the next thing...


One difference that makes all the difference. You argued completely opposite positions then and now.

But it's an interesting line of thought from you, expecting time to overcome age (the bolded parts). Pretty original I have to say. :drunk: :up:

Just stop digging, for everyones sake. Please, with sugar on top.


#10937 Paco

Paco
  • Member

  • 1,148 posts
  • Joined: June 02

Posted 29 June 2011 - 16:48

"Ecclestone added that Vettel's recent dominance was even more impressive than Schumacher's.

'The competition Sebastian is facing is much bigger than that confronted by Michael. That makes Seb's wins even more noteworthy. I don't see a reason why there shouldn't be a Red Bull era just as Ferrari had theirs with Michael.'"

Source: http://en.espnf1.com...tory/52946.html

I guess it's a compliment from BE.


I'll agree with him. That being said, Vettel needs to keep this up for a few more years to come to truly challenge what Michael did for a decade.

#10938 BRK

BRK
  • Member

  • 3,474 posts
  • Joined: November 07

Posted 29 June 2011 - 16:50

One difference that makes all the difference. You argued completely opposite positions then and now.

But it's an interesting line of thought from you, expecting time to overcome age (the bolded parts). Pretty original I have to say. :drunk: :up:

Just stop digging, for everyones sake. Please, with sugar on top.


No it doesn't and no I'm not, although I did admit I was wrong about his being able to overcome the gap. When he was back in F1 and back in the groove I thought with time he would gradually go back to where he should have been at 42, still, in my opinion, very quick and certainly quicker than he is today. Though I admit I was wrong about that, you win, end of discussion.

"Ecclestone added that Vettel's recent dominance was even more impressive than Schumacher's.

'The competition Sebastian is facing is much bigger than that confronted by Michael. That makes Seb's wins even more noteworthy. I don't see a reason why there shouldn't be a Red Bull era just as Ferrari had theirs with Michael.'"

Source: http://en.espnf1.com...tory/52946.html

I guess it's a compliment from BE.


All that tells me is that Seb Vettel Bernie's new favoured son. As it should be, I think.

#10939 Dino G

Dino G
  • Member

  • 523 posts
  • Joined: November 99

Posted 29 June 2011 - 17:10

Considering I tried to get out of this ever heating discussion on the last page, and then tried again on this one, and yet again I got brought back into it by people like yourself, I wonder who the real troll is?

How about you let the thread simply move on without trying to add fuel to the fire. What was said has been said, everyone has had enough, let it rest with out useless troll accusations.



Well, I just read how you blew into this discussion and if you weren't trolling, you were being intellectually dishonest, at the very least and backtracked quite bit from your initial post. Whether to get a rise or you truly believe what you are typing is something that you can only answer. I think your later posts have more merit and rational thinking than the earlier gibberish about Michael of 10 years ago.

Fact of the matter is there is one big equation that you are missing. In 2010, he stepped into Jenson Button's car. Their styles couldn't be more different. The 2011 car is a continuation of that with his input. I am thinking that once he gets into "his" car, as he did at Benetton 1995 and Ferrari in 1998 and onwards he will be closer to the front and of course with RedBull's blown diffuser elimination losing as much as .5 a lap, as reported today. When he did that lap in 07 in the Ferrari, it was "his" car. He developed it in the last year didn't he?

Michael, at his age, cannot expect to run the team as he did at ferrari. I think he seems to be more diplomatic but I don't doubt for a second that he is pushing Brawn et al to listen to his demands over Rosberg.

Advertisement

#10940 Augurk

Augurk
  • Member

  • 1,932 posts
  • Joined: December 09

Posted 29 June 2011 - 18:09

"Ecclestone added that Vettel's recent dominance was even more impressive than Schumacher's.

'The competition Sebastian is facing is much bigger than that confronted by Michael. That makes Seb's wins even more noteworthy. I don't see a reason why there shouldn't be a Red Bull era just as Ferrari had theirs with Michael.'"

Source: http://en.espnf1.com...tory/52946.html

I guess it's a compliment from BE.



I'll agree with him. That being said, Vettel needs to keep this up for a few more years to come to truly challenge what Michael did for a decade.



All that tells me is that Seb Vettel Bernie's new favoured son. As it should be, I think.

Let's not forget it's right up Bernies alley to claim the competition level right now is greater than in that period. It makes f1 now all the more interesting and special if that were true. I for one don't believe it.

#10941 DutchCruijff

DutchCruijff
  • Member

  • 933 posts
  • Joined: February 11

Posted 29 June 2011 - 18:57

When MSC dominated during the Ferrari years there was little doubt of him being the best pilot around due to his performances in his early Ferrari years and WC titles with Benetton. Wary of what Vettel has done to be labelled as the best now let alone be compared to Schumacher.

#10942 ivand911

ivand911
  • Member

  • 8,152 posts
  • Joined: February 10

Posted 29 June 2011 - 20:18

I don't think we have many people here that will claim than MS didn't have the biggest impact in F1 in the time they followed F1.

#10943 jjpm

jjpm
  • Member

  • 239 posts
  • Joined: February 11

Posted 30 June 2011 - 01:35

facts :
ROS Q1 1:39.266 Q2 1:38.373 Q3 1:38.231
SCH Q1 1:39.198 Q2 1:38.365 Q3 1:38.240

MSC +0.009 over ROS

1994 : MSC banned for 2 GP watch the Portugal GP from the stand yet on the day after he take Joe Verstappen's Benetton as is for some test laps and turn in +- 1 second faster than Jos did in qualifying...

Pole : BERGER Ferrari 1'20''608
10. VERSTAPPEN Benetton 1'22''000

Edited by jjpm, 30 June 2011 - 01:48.


#10944 Jazza

Jazza
  • Member

  • 994 posts
  • Joined: November 99

Posted 30 June 2011 - 02:07

Well, I just read how you blew into this discussion and if you weren't trolling, you were being intellectually dishonest, at the very least and backtracked quite bit from your initial post. Whether to get a rise or you truly believe what you are typing is something that you can only answer. I think your later posts have more merit and rational thinking than the earlier gibberish about Michael of 10 years ago.

Fact of the matter is there is one big equation that you are missing. In 2010, he stepped into Jenson Button's car. Their styles couldn't be more different. The 2011 car is a continuation of that with his input. I am thinking that once he gets into "his" car, as he did at Benetton 1995 and Ferrari in 1998 and onwards he will be closer to the front and of course with RedBull's blown diffuser elimination losing as much as .5 a lap, as reported today. When he did that lap in 07 in the Ferrari, it was "his" car. He developed it in the last year didn't he?

Michael, at his age, cannot expect to run the team as he did at ferrari. I think he seems to be more diplomatic but I don't doubt for a second that he is pushing Brawn et al to listen to his demands over Rosberg.


I have never doubted that the Mercedes does not work with his style. Every driver wants the car to work for them, instead of having to fight it. It is obvious that this years Redbull fits Vettel more than Mark, and that Mark hasn't simply forgoten how to driver. That's all fine.

I also don't doubt that the 95 Benetton didn't work for Herbert, or the 2001 Ferrari with Rubens, for examples. Why didn't that excuse work then? It seems many fans have woken up to the fact that cars and driving styles need to gel, yet are unwilling to revaluate the 90's with this new knowledge. That's being intellectually dishonest, and that's what my fist post was about. The reasons given for MS problems now are 100% valid, but are not being applied to others. When he beat others it was all talent no excuses, while now when he gets beaten the excuses are valid. His reputation was built on the way he crushed his team mates, yet now that he is struggling against his there are reasons for it and the team mate comparisons don't count. It has to work both ways.

Whatever measuring stick was used to evaluate MS in his first career needs to be used now, or what ever stick we are currently using should be used to reevaluate his younger self. The arguments of; MS crushed his team mates equals all talent, and he won this race and his car is shit equals all talent, coupled with you need a car that fits your style, and no one can win in an uncompeative car, is a contradiction.

Many of his fans finally get it, that a drivers results have a whole list of factors and is not just raw speed, yet at the same time still want to hold to the idea that raw speed is what separated MS from everyone else 10 years ago. It was clearly more than that, hence why I said his drives ten years ago need to be reevaluated. It was not some troll post of "MS today proves how shit he always was" or something like that.

Edited by Jazza, 30 June 2011 - 02:11.


#10945 Afterburner

Afterburner
  • Member

  • 3,201 posts
  • Joined: January 11

Posted 30 June 2011 - 04:16

But it's an interesting line of thought from you, expecting time to overcome age (the bolded parts). Pretty original I have to say. :drunk: :up:

It can if Schumacher can improve at a rate faster than age is deteriorating his skills, which is difficult but not impossible.

I have never doubted that the Mercedes does not work with his style. Every driver wants the car to work for them, instead of having to fight it. It is obvious that this years Redbull fits Vettel more than Mark, and that Mark hasn't simply forgoten how to driver. That's all fine.

I also don't doubt that the 95 Benetton didn't work for Herbert, or the 2001 Ferrari with Rubens, for examples. Why didn't that excuse work then? It seems many fans have woken up to the fact that cars and driving styles need to gel, yet are unwilling to revaluate the 90's with this new knowledge. That's being intellectually dishonest, and that's what my fist post was about. The reasons given for MS problems now are 100% valid, but are not being applied to others. When he beat others it was all talent no excuses, while now when he gets beaten the excuses are valid. His reputation was built on the way he crushed his team mates, yet now that he is struggling against his there are reasons for it and the team mate comparisons don't count. It has to work both ways.

Whatever measuring stick was used to evaluate MS in his first career needs to be used now, or what ever stick we are currently using should be used to reevaluate his younger self. The arguments of; MS crushed his team mates equals all talent, and he won this race and his car is shit equals all talent, coupled with you need a car that fits your style, and no one can win in an uncompeative car, is a contradiction.

Many of his fans finally get it, that a drivers results have a whole list of factors and is not just raw speed, yet at the same time still want to hold to the idea that raw speed is what separated MS from everyone else 10 years ago. It was clearly more than that, hence why I said his drives ten years ago need to be reevaluated. It was not some troll post of "MS today proves how shit he always was" or something like that.

Oddly, I agree with most of your post. MS is a special talent, in my opinion, but he also had great cars--I'd have to say that anyone who thinks otherwise would be slightly delusional. The difference between the MS of then and the MS of now is the fact that in his heyday he had the ability to spend day upon day testing a car to hone its speed and develop it to become a super-machine. Today's regulations don't allow for that. I've always thought that MS's real talent is in his developmental skills rather than his speed--his ability to feel what's going on with the car at any individual moment and react to it in a way that would make the car quicker. Back in the unlimited-testing days, this allowed him to essentially work towards building cars that did exactly what he wanted--cars he felt confident in and could drive quickly.

Nowadays, testing is different. In my opinion, car development is more in the hands of the engineers these days than the drivers. With less testing available to the teams, they can't really develop the basic form of the cars on track, with the drivers' input. They more or less get the package they're dealt, and if it's trash, then there's not much that any driver can do to improve it before the season is well underway. When Merc develops a car that is quite frankly slow in relation to its target competition, the drivers can't do much to change that--especially if the car is fundamentally flawed. Back to the drawing board, let's hope it's quick next year.

MS had some special races, but he also had a special team behind him--something he wasn't ever hesitant to remind everybody with every victory. I can't remember a time that Schumacher didn't thank his team for one of his wins. What I think most don't get is that Schumacher knows that you can't win on your own talent alone--the idea that the car helps you achieve success is something I think he's had figured out since the early 2000's, and that's why he's often placed an emphasis on winning being a team effort. The issue with his second career isn't so much that he's "lost it" in comparison to his teammate, in my opinion (though I do believe that his hiatus has sapped a good amount of his speed), but that he can't get a team to work together the way he did in the Ferrari years--especially when his teammate is putting up a very convincing fight on track. Until the team gets its act together, I don't think we'll see the MS of old make a return.

Edited by Afterburner, 30 June 2011 - 04:19.


#10946 zack1994

zack1994
  • Member

  • 2,368 posts
  • Joined: July 10

Posted 30 June 2011 - 04:39


Michael skills are already gone and they wont be coming back im afraid.
Just think of it like this if david coulthard got back into the car next year would he be the same driver he was i dont think so.

#10947 BRK

BRK
  • Member

  • 3,474 posts
  • Joined: November 07

Posted 30 June 2011 - 05:11

It can if Schumacher can improve at a rate faster than age is deteriorating his skills, which is difficult but not impossible.


Correct. I don't know what was so wrong with thinking a part of the edge that's lost to age comes back with time, time spent racing cars, not spent reminiscing by a fireplace. My belief was that as you spend time back in the groove, following the same fitness regime and so forth, a lot of the speed begins to return. I was wrong in that I thought it would come back completely and would happen sooner. Still, there has been an improvement between 2010 and 2011, IMO he hasn't got the edge back but he is better now.

#10948 Dino G

Dino G
  • Member

  • 523 posts
  • Joined: November 99

Posted 30 June 2011 - 16:29

I have never doubted that the Mercedes does not work with his style. Every driver wants the car to work for them, instead of having to fight it. It is obvious that this years Redbull fits Vettel more than Mark, and that Mark hasn't simply forgoten how to driver. That's all fine.

I also don't doubt that the 95 Benetton didn't work for Herbert, or the 2001 Ferrari with Rubens, for examples. Why didn't that excuse work then? It seems many fans have woken up to the fact that cars and driving styles need to gel, yet are unwilling to revaluate the 90's with this new knowledge. That's being intellectually dishonest, and that's what my fist post was about. The reasons given for MS problems now are 100% valid, but are not being applied to others. When he beat others it was all talent no excuses, while now when he gets beaten the excuses are valid. His reputation was built on the way he crushed his team mates, yet now that he is struggling against his there are reasons for it and the team mate comparisons don't count. It has to work both ways.

Whatever measuring stick was used to evaluate MS in his first career needs to be used now, or what ever stick we are currently using should be used to reevaluate his younger self. The arguments of; MS crushed his team mates equals all talent, and he won this race and his car is shit equals all talent, coupled with you need a car that fits your style, and no one can win in an uncompeative car, is a contradiction.

Many of his fans finally get it, that a drivers results have a whole list of factors and is not just raw speed, yet at the same time still want to hold to the idea that raw speed is what separated MS from everyone else 10 years ago. It was clearly more than that, hence why I said his drives ten years ago need to be reevaluated. It was not some troll post of "MS today proves how shit he always was" or something like that.



The excuse did work then. It was common knowledge that drivers that shared the car with Schumacher were driving, essentially, short of wing and other minor changes, HIS car. They all had their opportunities to impress and when Schumi wiped the floor with them, the team centrerd their car design on what he likes, which is a cra built around oversteer. I think it was Herbert who had to take a double look at telemetry that showed Schumi 20km/hr faster in some corners while testing. Either him or Brundle.

I think you choose to believe that the excuses did not hold any merit with the fanboys. I, for one, remember clearly that these drivers had to adapt to his setup and it made the gaps more difficult. This car, right now, is not his car and while he is doing much better than last year, I am banking on him improveing even more next year as they work on the 2012 car. I think extremists will always exist, whether they are Lewis fans, Schumi fans, or the ever popular Jacques fans who will only see things one way (I am a Jacques guy, don't get me started!) but I think most reasonable, balanced F1 fans understand what happened then and what is happening now. I fyou want to beat down on the Uber Schumi fan...it ain't gonna work!

#10949 Sakae

Sakae
  • Member

  • 19,256 posts
  • Joined: December 03

Posted 30 June 2011 - 16:52

I think you choose to believe that the excuses did not hold any merit with the fanboys. I, for one, remember clearly that these drivers had to adapt to his setup and it made the gaps more difficult.



I do follow Michael since his Bennetton days, and it never fails to be pointed out by his detractors, that not a single team, including Ferrari, will build a car around you, unless they understand benefits of choosing that direction. Schumacher had shown convincing talent, he has demonstrated speed, and Ferrari would have been pretty dimwitted to kill it, rather than explore it. Herbert, as others, had every chance to destroy Schumacher in real or potential terms on the track, and then he could walk into JT's office and demand a design change!

History suggest that he has never reached a level that he could actully convert this thought about it into some realistic opportunity.

Edited by Sakae, 30 June 2011 - 16:53.


#10950 Dino G

Dino G
  • Member

  • 523 posts
  • Joined: November 99

Posted 30 June 2011 - 17:40

I do follow Michael since his Bennetton days, and it never fails to be pointed out by his detractors, that not a single team, including Ferrari, will build a car around you, unless they understand benefits of choosing that direction. Schumacher had shown convincing talent, he has demonstrated speed, and Ferrari would have been pretty dimwitted to kill it, rather than explore it. Herbert, as others, had every chance to destroy Schumacher in real or potential terms on the track, and then he could walk into JT's office and demand a design change!

History suggest that he has never reached a level that he could actully convert this thought about it into some realistic opportunity.



Exactly. I think most of his teammates preferred an understeering car while he was the opposit and his way was by and large way faster. So his input carried more weight against more experienced scrubs like Brundle and Herbert.