Jump to content


Photo

Michael Schumacher (merged)


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

#14401 Kubiccia

Kubiccia
  • Member

  • 1,370 posts
  • Joined: February 11

Posted 13 October 2011 - 22:00

Ivan and some others, you guys were speculating that Schumacher was running less downforce because he was fast in S3 and slow in S1 in the race, but how can he be faster than Mclaren guys through Degner, in qualifying? :well:

Look this:
http://forums.autosp...howtopic=155676

Advertisement

#14402 Richardc

Richardc
  • Member

  • 235 posts
  • Joined: March 11

Posted 13 October 2011 - 22:30

He obviously wasn't tyre saving in the same way in qualifying. He was soooo very restrained through S1 in the race, i guess that's probably the reason.

#14403 arknor

arknor
  • Member

  • 2,298 posts
  • Joined: March 10

Posted 13 October 2011 - 23:52

Sigh, give it a rest please... The better (and fairer) driver won in 2006 despite having more mech failures, end of story.

better driver while they had mass dampener you mean :wave:

alonso won both championships with a technology that was later declared illegal hmmm what does this mean

Edited by arknor, 13 October 2011 - 23:53.


#14404 BRK

BRK
  • Member

  • 3,477 posts
  • Joined: November 07

Posted 14 October 2011 - 01:08

Sigh, give it a rest please... The better (and fairer) driver won in 2006 despite having more mech failures, end of story.


Yup, the better car certainly won in 2006. Full credit to Renault's engineering team. And Bell is now at Mercedes, working with the man that nearly won 5 years ago, should be good. :up:

#14405 cheapracer

cheapracer
  • Member

  • 10,388 posts
  • Joined: May 07

Posted 14 October 2011 - 01:31

Sigh, give it a rest please... The better (and fairer) driver won in 2006 despite having more mech failures, end of story.


Factually incorrect, Schumacher failed to finish 3 races, Australia, Hungary and Japan while Alonso failed to finish 2 races, Hungary and Italy.

If you want to do your typically historic trolling in the Schumacher thread, then make some sort of effort to get your actual facts correct.



#14406 George Costanza

George Costanza
  • Member

  • 2,541 posts
  • Joined: July 08

Posted 14 October 2011 - 01:35

Yup, the better car certainly won in 2006. Full credit to Renault's engineering team. And Bell is now at Mercedes, working with the man that nearly won 5 years ago, should be good. :up:




Well, Ferrari was faster than the Renault from 2nd half onward. Not too sure if the better car was largely due to Alonso driving skill.

#14407 George Costanza

George Costanza
  • Member

  • 2,541 posts
  • Joined: July 08

Posted 14 October 2011 - 01:36

Yup, the better car certainly won in 2006. Full credit to Renault's engineering team. And Bell is now at Mercedes, working with the man that nearly won 5 years ago, should be good. :up:



Bob Bell did not exactly design the RS25 and RS26, Tim Densham did.

That said, Bob Bell is a good TD.

Edited by George Costanza, 14 October 2011 - 01:36.


#14408 BRK

BRK
  • Member

  • 3,477 posts
  • Joined: November 07

Posted 14 October 2011 - 01:59

Well, Ferrari was faster than the Renault from 2nd half onward. Not too sure if the better car was largely due to Alonso driving skill.


Retrospective oversimplification? I can think of 3-4 races in the second half of the season where Ferrari had an advantage, Renault definitely did have a quicker car for at least half of the last nine races, off the top of my head, plus the Michelins had an enormous advantage in wet and damp conditions. Hungary and China in particular should have pathetic for the reds, Schumacher's win in China was spectacular as Ferrari didn't stand a chance at that race. At Hungary Michael retired but got bumped up into the points only because Kubica was DQ'ed later.

This talk of Ferrari having had an advantage for the entire second half is a myth.

Edited by BRK, 14 October 2011 - 01:59.


#14409 George Costanza

George Costanza
  • Member

  • 2,541 posts
  • Joined: July 08

Posted 14 October 2011 - 02:15

Retrospective oversimplification? I can think of 3-4 races in the second half of the season where Ferrari had an advantage, Renault definitely did have a quicker car for at least half of the last nine races, off the top of my head, plus the Michelins had an enormous advantage in wet and damp conditions. Hungary and China in particular should have pathetic for the reds, Schumacher's win in China was spectacular as Ferrari didn't stand a chance at that race. At Hungary Michael retired but got bumped up into the points only because Kubica was DQ'ed later.

This talk of Ferrari having had an advantage for the entire second half is a myth.




Ferrari was quicker in the second half of the season just after the mass damper was banned by the FIA to Renault. It became a bit more even after that. German GP 2006: Renault was nowhere near the Ferrari pace wise as an example.

As for as China, the Bridgestone tires were not as good as the Renault-shodded Michelins and Schu made all the difference.... Ironically, in prior years, Bridgestone used to be the better wet tire... But not the case in 2006.

Edited by George Costanza, 14 October 2011 - 02:17.


#14410 Sakae

Sakae
  • Member

  • 19,256 posts
  • Joined: December 03

Posted 14 October 2011 - 02:17

Bob Bell did not exactly design the RS25 and RS26, Tim Densham did.

That said, Bob Bell is a good TD.

...TD and bunch of other nameless engineers sweating like slaves 7/24.

Edited by Sakae, 14 October 2011 - 02:18.


#14411 BRK

BRK
  • Member

  • 3,477 posts
  • Joined: November 07

Posted 14 October 2011 - 02:34

Ferrari was quicker in the second half of the season just after the mass damper was banned by the FIA to Renault. It became a bit more even after that. German GP 2006: Renault was nowhere near the Ferrari pace wise as an example. As for as China, the Bridgestone tires were not as good as the Renault-shodded Michelins and Schu made all the difference.... Ironically, in prior years, Bridgestone used to be the better wet tire... But not the case in 2006.


Renault destroyed Ferrari at Hungary and China, that in itself should disprove the theory that Ferrari + Bridgestone had an advantage throughout the second half. It wasn't anywhere near as straightforward, anything but a perfect 50:50 season.




#14412 Sakae

Sakae
  • Member

  • 19,256 posts
  • Joined: December 03

Posted 14 October 2011 - 02:44

Jesus FP1 - Schumacher / Vettel - I need to change...

#14413 weston

weston
  • Member

  • 371 posts
  • Joined: February 10

Posted 14 October 2011 - 02:58

Jesus FP1 - Schumacher / Vettel - I need to change...


It is raining very hard. Take an umbrella. :lol:

(Even Jos could not have done better in FP1. It looked like at tropical rain but Schumacher was on interns.)

Edited by weston, 14 October 2011 - 03:50.


#14414 Spa95

Spa95
  • Member

  • 861 posts
  • Joined: April 03

Posted 14 October 2011 - 05:01

Change of gearbox on Michaels car (according to Anthony Davidson) - is that a planned change?

*Edit: Now it's just a "gearbox issue". Hopefully they didn't need to replace it after all.

Edited by Spa95, 14 October 2011 - 05:13.


#14415 ivand911

ivand911
  • Member

  • 8,152 posts
  • Joined: February 10

Posted 14 October 2011 - 05:38

Change of gearbox on Michaels car (according to Anthony Davidson) - is that a planned change?

*Edit: Now it's just a "gearbox issue". Hopefully they didn't need to replace it after all.

I also hear it. About the change I mean. Can they use older gearbox in FP?


#14416 Tardis40

Tardis40
  • Member

  • 737 posts
  • Joined: February 11

Posted 14 October 2011 - 05:53

Ferrari came on in 2006 after they got the V8 engine sorted. They were burning pistons at the start of the season and Renault jumped out to a sizable lead. Schumacher clawed it back and then another engine problem in Japan cost him the title.

Edited by Tardis40, 14 October 2011 - 05:54.


#14417 ivand911

ivand911
  • Member

  • 8,152 posts
  • Joined: February 10

Posted 14 October 2011 - 06:04

Very few laps for MS.

#14418 Tarzaan

Tarzaan
  • Member

  • 1,261 posts
  • Joined: April 06

Posted 14 October 2011 - 06:24

Michael Schumacher sets the fastest time in wet Korean GP practice

http://www.autosport...rt.php/id/95325

:clap:

#14419 SparkPlug

SparkPlug
  • Member

  • 491 posts
  • Joined: January 10

Posted 14 October 2011 - 06:42

Factually incorrect, Schumacher failed to finish 3 races, Australia, Hungary and Japan while Alonso failed to finish 2 races, Hungary and Italy.

If you want to do your typically historic trolling in the Schumacher thread, then make some sort of effort to get your actual facts correct.

Failing to finish is different from having mechanical failures.

Schumacher crashed out of Australia and Hungary due to his own errors.
Wheras Alonso had no role to play in the engine failure at Italy or the suspension collapse in Hungary.

You may argue that Brazil's qualifying should also be added to Schumacher's list of mech failures, but surely retiring from a race is far worse than having a mechanical failure in qualifying ? Maybe we should also add that ridiculous penalty that Alonso received at Monza to the list of issues he faced that were not his fault.

I think its fair to say that the better (or rather more consistent) driver won in 2006.

Advertisement

#14420 sharo

sharo
  • Member

  • 1,792 posts
  • Joined: April 11

Posted 14 October 2011 - 06:44

I also hear it. About the change I mean. Can they use older gearbox in FP?

Don't panic  ;)
They use old engines and gearboxes for Friday.

#14421 cheapracer

cheapracer
  • Member

  • 10,388 posts
  • Joined: May 07

Posted 14 October 2011 - 06:58

Schumacher crashed out of Australia and Hungary due to his own errors.

I think its fair to say that the better (or rather more consistent) driver won in 2006.


He also started rear grid and 14th in 2 races blah blah blah

I think it's fair to say the better car won.


Its not possible for a driver to outperform his car. Maybe drive close to its physical limit, but not above.


Edited by cheapracer, 14 October 2011 - 07:07.


#14422 SparkPlug

SparkPlug
  • Member

  • 491 posts
  • Joined: January 10

Posted 14 October 2011 - 08:06

He also started rear grid and 14th in 2 races blah blah blah

I think it's fair to say the better car won.

Thats a matter of opinion, then. Alonso made lesser mistakes than Schumacher in 2006 as well.

Schumacher made major mistakes at Australia, Turkey, Hungary and Monaco which cost him a bunch of points.

While Alonso made one mistake at China all season (only changing two tyres) and even that was atleast 50% down to the Renault strategists. Did he have any more ? (I'm struggling to remember any mistakes which cost him points).

I would say the Renault and Ferrari over the course of the season were fairly evenly matched. It was an extremely tight battle, but the guy who made fewer mistakes came out top.

#14423 Tarzaan

Tarzaan
  • Member

  • 1,261 posts
  • Joined: April 06

Posted 14 October 2011 - 08:24

Thats a matter of opinion, then. Alonso made lesser mistakes than Schumacher in 2006 as well.

Schumacher made major mistakes at Australia, Turkey, Hungary and Monaco which cost him a bunch of points.

While Alonso made one mistake at China all season (only changing two tyres) and even that was atleast 50% down to the Renault strategists. Did he have any more ? (I'm struggling to remember any mistakes which cost him points).

I would say the Renault and Ferrari over the course of the season were fairly evenly matched. It was an extremely tight battle, but the guy who made fewer mistakes came out top.



In Turkey?

#14424 pUs

pUs
  • Member

  • 2,553 posts
  • Joined: November 99

Posted 14 October 2011 - 08:26

Sigh, give it a rest please... The better (and fairer) driver won in 2006 despite having more mech failures, end of story.


Except that the winning driver didn't have "more" mechanical failures, rather the opposite. Wrong like always, classic Fortymark.

Edited by pUs, 14 October 2011 - 08:27.


#14425 as65p

as65p
  • Member

  • 17,785 posts
  • Joined: June 04

Posted 14 October 2011 - 08:32

Nice to see 2006 remembered so fondly in here. :up:

#14426 arknor

arknor
  • Member

  • 2,298 posts
  • Joined: March 10

Posted 14 October 2011 - 08:59

Nice to see 2006 remembered so fondly in here. :up:

remembered forever for mass dampener :D

#14427 holiday

holiday
  • Member

  • 3,473 posts
  • Joined: October 01

Posted 14 October 2011 - 09:44

I would say the Renault and Ferrari over the course of the season were fairly evenly matched. It was an extremely tight battle, but the guy who made fewer mistakes came out top.


My view exactly. And not the guy who was faster.

#14428 as65p

as65p
  • Member

  • 17,785 posts
  • Joined: June 04

Posted 14 October 2011 - 09:59

remembered forever for mass dampener :D


Arbitrary ban of it mid-season, you surely mean?  ;)

#14429 cheapracer

cheapracer
  • Member

  • 10,388 posts
  • Joined: May 07

Posted 14 October 2011 - 10:01

Thats a matter of opinion, then.


Yes and I'm making my pro-Schumacher opinion in the, not surprisingly, Schumacher thread.

The pro-Alonso thread is here, maybe you should post there - I mean it's on page 2 so needs all the help it can get.

http://forums.autosp...howtopic=126741


#14430 Ferrari_F1_fan_2001

Ferrari_F1_fan_2001
  • Member

  • 3,210 posts
  • Joined: May 01

Posted 14 October 2011 - 10:03

Arbitrary ban of it mid-season, you surely mean? ;)


Must have been banned for a reason, no matter how spurious or arbitary the reasoning may be have been.

#14431 cheapracer

cheapracer
  • Member

  • 10,388 posts
  • Joined: May 07

Posted 14 October 2011 - 10:05

Arbitrary ban of it mid-season, you surely mean?;)


And when did the Renault start to come back to the Ferrari?

Just confirmation that the Renault was the faster car for the first half at least.

Must have been banned for a reason, no matter how spurious or arbitary the reasoning may be have been.


It should not have been banned mid season the way it was, the whole deal was pretty harsh but that doesn't change the facts that the Renault was clearly superior over the Ferrari with it.

Edited by cheapracer, 14 October 2011 - 10:16.


#14432 sharo

sharo
  • Member

  • 1,792 posts
  • Joined: April 11

Posted 14 October 2011 - 10:29

Schumacher made major mistakes at Australia, Turkey, Hungary and Monaco which cost him a bunch of points.

Ferrari went very conservative with the tyres at the beginning until (I think Williams) pointed that Bridgestone had in fact better spec ones. That's the reason for the crash in Australia - went far over the limit of their tyres - and losing the first races.
Turkey? It was the SC and the pit stop in the most unsuitable time because of it. No driver error.
Hungary - I don't know who is responsible for staying out on warn to slicks intermedias. But at least was an exciting drive, although desperate.
Monaco? I think better not touch this. Most say it was deliberate, you say mistake, and I agree.

(BTW, seeing Button not able to engage reverse gear and the car consequently stalling in Singapore, the Monaco 2006 events came to my mind.)

#14433 BRK

BRK
  • Member

  • 3,477 posts
  • Joined: November 07

Posted 14 October 2011 - 10:38

but the guy who made fewer mistakes came out top.


Just like 2009, then. Easy being 'consistent' when you have out and away the fastest, best, and rock-solidly reliable car + tyre package to start the season with. Button didn't even have the advantage Renault had going into the second half of the season.


As for arbitrary stuff from the FIA,how about the pathetic outcry over the flexi-wings as early as Malaysia in March? Funny how no one talks about that, how Ferrari (Schumacher in particular) were targeted. The same concept that seems to have been rather important to the performance of the Red Bull in recent years. As opposed to letting Renault get away with their cheating for a whopping 11 races in 06, continuing on from 2005. :rolleyes:

Edited by BRK, 14 October 2011 - 10:40.


#14434 as65p

as65p
  • Member

  • 17,785 posts
  • Joined: June 04

Posted 14 October 2011 - 10:40

And when did the Renault start to come back to the Ferrari?

Just confirmation that the Renault was the faster car for the first half at least.

It should not have been banned mid season the way it was, the whole deal was pretty harsh but that doesn't change the facts that the Renault was clearly superior over the Ferrari with it.


Pretty much spot on, except for the 'at least'.  ;)

I'd say the Renault was as much a better car with MD as the Ferrari was after the ban.

#14435 cheapracer

cheapracer
  • Member

  • 10,388 posts
  • Joined: May 07

Posted 14 October 2011 - 10:49

Pretty much spot on, except for the 'at least'. ;)

I'd say the Renault was as much a better car with MD as the Ferrari was after the ban.


Don't agree with me, it makes me nervous and upsets me.


#14436 Fortymark

Fortymark
  • Member

  • 5,802 posts
  • Joined: April 03

Posted 14 October 2011 - 11:51

Of course the Ferrari 248/Bridgestone combo was the faster car over the season in 2006.
You donĀ“t need to look further than how Massa beat Fisichella on all accounts.
More poles, more wins and more FL and more points over the season.

Sometimes the Bridgestone tires were just superior, but the Michelins were never
so good that other (none Renaults)Michelin drivers beat the Ferraris.
Ex Ralf Schumacher in a frekking Toyota beating Fisichella (and both Macs) in France with almost 20 seconds..

#14437 Jejking

Jejking
  • Member

  • 2,441 posts
  • Joined: June 11

Posted 14 October 2011 - 12:02

Ferrari went very conservative with the tyres at the beginning until (I think Williams) pointed that Bridgestone had in fact better spec ones. That's the reason for the crash in Australia - went far over the limit of their tyres - and losing the first races.
Turkey? It was the SC and the pit stop in the most unsuitable time because of it. No driver error.
Hungary - I don't know who is responsible for staying out on warn to slicks intermedias. But at least was an exciting drive, although desperate.
Monaco? I think better not touch this. Most say it was deliberate, you say mistake, and I agree.

(BTW, seeing Button not able to engage reverse gear and the car consequently stalling in Singapore, the Monaco 2006 events came to my mind.)

I still blame Australia on Schumacher, he was pretty ragged there with more time on the dirt than on the track. He pushed too hard and should have just taken his points home, a driver of his calibre should have known that even he can get caught out if your tyres are not ok. And that is not meant in an offensive way. Tactics were good there, btw, that first long stint was good :) Although that one attack of Liuzzi he should have easily fended off but ok!
Turkey: Schumacher made a mistake in Q2 I thought, Q3 he was too conservative. Followed Massa, was caught out by SC but on a very long second stint went off all by himself in Turn 8, remember? It cost him those crucial seconds to stay ahead of Alonso.
Hungary: bad decision, I guess Schumacher made the call (usually the drivers' call in the end) after being misinformed about the weather. Then he fell away after some very hard fights but should have taken those points home.

In both cases where he should have taken less for granted, I blame Brawn/Todt for not holding their driver back because in such a situation you know something is gone out of hand before you can blink with your eyes.

Monaco: grey area. IF he made a mistake, (lost control at 50kph) it means he cracked under the pressure of Alonso and a bunch of other drivers being on better laps. IF he did it on purpose in the heat of the moment after +0.2s on his dash, it means he cracked under the pressure and resorted to bad measures to take care of the problem. Ultimately we will probably never know so it's up to your own interpretation. James Allens book is very good on this matter, he deemed the move on purpose but not premeditated.

(Yes, I'm doing a videoproduction on Schumacher as thesis ^^)

Edited by Jejking, 14 October 2011 - 12:03.


#14438 ivand911

ivand911
  • Member

  • 8,152 posts
  • Joined: February 10

Posted 14 October 2011 - 12:18

Can we go back to reality?
Posted Image
This is what MS think about your discussions! :rotfl:

#14439 spacekid

spacekid
  • Member

  • 2,678 posts
  • Joined: April 11

Posted 14 October 2011 - 12:23

Regards 2006, I think the Renault and Ferrari were pretty even over the season, as were Schumi and Nando. But Schumi was winding down and weary after 11 years at the top of F1, whether his decision to retire was his alone or down to politics we don't know but he was more error prone than usual that year. I don't think he was in his prime operational window.

Alonso was the more consistent driver for sure, and is clearly brilliant. Schumi was still able to pull out performances at his top level, but not enough of them to beat Nando over the season. And losing to Nando in his prime in the (joint equal?) best car is no bad thing at all. Not for a man who has been at the top for so very long and was clearly tired.

Regards Monaco, I always think of Michael as just being a big kid when he has his occaisonal 'bad' moments. I don't think he has ever meant harm, or even premeditated any of his actions. Rather, i think he can't stand to lose and just panics. He has always tended to make mistakes of judgement under pressure, its his one weakness.

Edited by spacekid, 14 October 2011 - 14:26.


Advertisement

#14440 ivand911

ivand911
  • Member

  • 8,152 posts
  • Joined: February 10

Posted 14 October 2011 - 13:43

http://motorsport.ne...a-14oct/145.jpg
http://motorsport.ne...a-14oct/250.jpg
http://motorsport.ne...a-14oct/268.jpg
Posted Image
Offroad Yeah.
http://motorsport.ne...a-14oct/331.jpg

Edited by ivand911, 14 October 2011 - 13:44.


#14441 GoRacing

GoRacing
  • Member

  • 291 posts
  • Joined: May 10

Posted 14 October 2011 - 13:56

http://motorsport.ne...a-14oct/145.jpg
http://motorsport.ne...a-14oct/250.jpg
http://motorsport.ne...a-14oct/268.jpg
Posted Image
Offroad Yeah.
http://motorsport.ne...a-14oct/331.jpg


In one of the photos, why does he drink from such a long straw when he is out of the car? :lol:

#14442 spacekid

spacekid
  • Member

  • 2,678 posts
  • Joined: April 11

Posted 14 October 2011 - 14:25

Nice pics. He may have a few more laughter lines when he smiles, but Schumi is not looking like a man who is close to retiring. In fact he looks damn fresh.

If he can finish off this season like the last few races have been going I hoestly believe he might extend this little project.

#14443 arknor

arknor
  • Member

  • 2,298 posts
  • Joined: March 10

Posted 14 October 2011 - 15:18

In one of the photos, why does he drink from such a long straw when he is out of the car? :lol:

maybe he doesnt like to bend his kneck forward since the accident ?

#14444 ivand911

ivand911
  • Member

  • 8,152 posts
  • Joined: February 10

Posted 14 October 2011 - 15:23

Posted Image
Posted Image
Woops
Posted Image
Posted Image
Posted Image
http://motorsport.ne...a-14oct/409.jpg
http://motorsport.ne...a-14oct/527.jpg
http://motorsport.ne...a-14oct/590.jpg
http://motorsport.ne...a-14oct/724.jpg

Edited by ivand911, 14 October 2011 - 15:25.


#14445 SparkPlug

SparkPlug
  • Member

  • 491 posts
  • Joined: January 10

Posted 14 October 2011 - 17:01

My view exactly. And not the guy who was faster.

Its irrelevant that you think Alonso wasn't faster than Schumacher since its impossible to prove it anyway (and a doubtful hypothesis in any case).


Yes and I'm making my pro-Schumacher opinion in the, not surprisingly, Schumacher thread.

The pro-Alonso thread is here, maybe you should post there - I mean it's on page 2 so needs all the help it can get.

http://forums.autosp...howtopic=126741

Not the most intelligent argument I've seen in a while. If someone disagrees with you, ask them to go away ?

Ferrari went very conservative with the tyres at the beginning until (I think Williams) pointed that Bridgestone had in fact better spec ones. That's the reason for the crash in Australia - went far over the limit of their tyres - and losing the first races.
Turkey? It was the SC and the pit stop in the most unsuitable time because of it. No driver error.
Hungary - I don't know who is responsible for staying out on warn to slicks intermedias. But at least was an exciting drive, although desperate.
Monaco? I think better not touch this. Most say it was deliberate, you say mistake, and I agree.

(BTW, seeing Button not able to engage reverse gear and the car consequently stalling in Singapore, the Monaco 2006 events came to my mind.)


1. Going 'far over the limit of their tyres' is classified as driver error
2. I'm referring to Schumacher's mess up in his Q3 lap which cost him pole, which caused him to wait behind Massa, which caused him to lose the race.
3. 'At least was an exciting drive' doesn't cover for the fact that he defended illegally and made a mistake continuing on those tyres, and then collided with Heidfeld in a move that was clearly his fault.
4. If Monaco was deliberate, Schumacher made a mistake of judgement thinking he'd get away with blatant blocking. If it wasn't deliberate, it was one of the worst mistakes made by a top driver in the past 20 years. Take your pick. :)

Just like 2009, then. Easy being 'consistent' when you have out and away the fastest, best, and rock-solidly reliable car + tyre package to start the season with. Button didn't even have the advantage Renault had going into the second half of the season.

Incorrect facts again. Ferrari was in the hunt from the very first race (Bahrain) and were always in contention for podium finishes at the very least if not race wins. In the second half of the season Ferrari was arguably as good as Renault was in the first half, with the exception of wet races.

As for arbitrary stuff from the FIA,how about the pathetic outcry over the flexi-wings as early as Malaysia in March? Funny how no one talks about that, how Ferrari (Schumacher in particular) were targeted. The same concept that seems to have been rather important to the performance of the Red Bull in recent years. As opposed to letting Renault get away with their cheating for a whopping 11 races in 06, continuing on from 2005. :rolleyes:


We're talking about drivers being affected by mechanical failures / things outside his sphere of control. Hence the point on Monza 2006.

Are you saying Alonso's penalty at Monza was justified ?

Edited by SparkPlug, 14 October 2011 - 17:03.


#14446 sharo

sharo
  • Member

  • 1,792 posts
  • Joined: April 11

Posted 14 October 2011 - 17:08

.............
4. If Monaco was deliberate, Schumacher made a mistake of judgement thinking he'd get away with blatant blocking. If it wasn't deliberate, it was one of the worst mistakes made by a top driver in the past 20 years. Take your pick. :)
............

As I said, I'm not going to comment it.
However you missed an option, it's called "ignore". :wave:

#14447 SparkPlug

SparkPlug
  • Member

  • 491 posts
  • Joined: January 10

Posted 14 October 2011 - 17:18

As I said, I'm not going to comment it.
However you missed an option, it's called "ignore". :wave:

You not commenting on it or ignoring it doesnt take away from the fact that it was a mistake, deliberate or otherwise.

I can also see you have no answer to the other 3 races where Schumacher made mistakes. I'd take the silence / sidestepping the issue as agreement :up:

#14448 holiday

holiday
  • Member

  • 3,473 posts
  • Joined: October 01

Posted 14 October 2011 - 17:24

Its irrelevant that you think Alonso wasn't faster than Schumacher since its impossible to prove it anyway (and a doubtful hypothesis in any case).


Irrelevant to you perhaps which is irrelevant to me. Now troll elsewhere.


#14449 as65p

as65p
  • Member

  • 17,785 posts
  • Joined: June 04

Posted 14 October 2011 - 17:27

Don't agree with me, it makes me nervous and upsets me.


:lol: I like that.

Maybe I should do it more often! :D

#14450 zelpre

zelpre
  • Member

  • 275 posts
  • Joined: June 11

Posted 14 October 2011 - 18:08

Michael's Korean GP Pictures: http://www.facebook....2...8259&type=1