Jump to content


Photo

Michael Schumacher (merged)


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

#14701 SparkPlug

SparkPlug
  • Member

  • 491 posts
  • Joined: January 10

Posted 17 October 2011 - 10:09

Having been at the 2006 French GP where Michael absolutely desimated the field...I cannot admit that Alonso was better. They were both spectacular that year.

'Having been' at any one grand prix does not prove anything. In that case Markus Winkelhock must be the greatest driver ever to those who attended the 2008 German GP.

Advertisement

#14702 arknor

arknor
  • Member

  • 2,298 posts
  • Joined: March 10

Posted 17 October 2011 - 10:11

'Having been' at any one grand prix does not prove anything. In that case Markus Winkelhock must be the greatest driver ever to those who attended the 2008 German GP.

having been in my living room with live timing open and an excel spreedsheet going over all of the variables i can only conclude alonso had the slower car but overcame the gap with his own talents

#14703 SparkPlug

SparkPlug
  • Member

  • 491 posts
  • Joined: January 10

Posted 17 October 2011 - 10:20

having been in my living room with live timing open and an excel spreedsheet going over all of the variables i can only conclude alonso had the slower car but overcame the gap with his own talents

I dont know if Renault had the slower car, but Alonso did make fewer mistakes than Schumacher inspite of both having competitive machinery at their disposal. Which is why he won.

For 2006, Alonso was clearly > Schumacher because of this alone (making lesser mistakes). The deserved champion. :up:

Edited by SparkPlug, 17 October 2011 - 10:21.


#14704 BRK

BRK
  • Member

  • 3,477 posts
  • Joined: November 07

Posted 17 October 2011 - 10:35

Intentionally quoting half a sentence to prove your point is really, naive, and a poor debate ploy. Let me repost that for you :
I see you're now resorting to petty tactics to score a point here and there instead of really debating. :up:


No really, I think you missed the part where I said I was okay with the opinion that the two cars ere evenly matced, even though I don't agree.

Since you're so confident about grooves and tyre widths making Massa a super quick driver while while at the same time bringing Giancarlo Fisichella to the level of a mediocre also ran, you surely must have some sort of proof ?


Where did I say Fisichella was a mediocre also ran? All I'm saying is that Massa did a better job in 2006, just as he did in 2007 and 2008, he was at home with grooves and wide fronts, and that his driving style was and still is similar to Schumacher's is something that has been brought up countless times in the past ever since Massa moved to Ferrari from Sauber. I have zero interest in trying to dig up old articles and interviews to appease a cheap revisionist.

Renault had a tyre advantage at Hungary, negated by the fact that the championship contender Alonso suffered a mechanical failure.
They also had an advantage for about half of the Chinese Grand Prix when the conditions were wet. Which makes it 0.5/9 races in which Renault actually had the clear best car in the second half of the season.

Meanwhile, Ferrari took 7 wins in the second half of the season after their upgrade and Renault's loss of the Mass dampner.

Are you implying that a car that won 7 of the last 9 races was not the best car of the second half of the season ?


Read my posts again. My problem is with people that keep dividing the season into two neat halves and claiming Ferrari had the better car throughout the second half, which is demonstrably false because Renault were quicker even on pace at Hungary and China, more consistent tyres at France, etc, all of which were in the second half.


Do you have any evidence of this so called consistent pace deficit you keep bringing up ? Or do you just like making stuff up all the time ?


Incredible. Now you're claiming Renault never had a pace advantage at any point in 2006? Watch the season for ****'s sake, please.

No, 'basically' I dont need to rewatch anything nor am I worried about anything being proved wrong since you really havent proved anything at all. Its a 'revisionist' theory, maybe in the Michael Schumacher thread. But in the real world the Ferrari was at the very least a match for the Renault.


Yes it is, it's definitely a revisionist theory and you know it. I've been saying all along that the season was far too complicated and that there were a lot of different factors involved, like any other season in the tyre war era or even later. To ignore tyre characteristics, track layouts, reg changes, etc and continue to claim Ferrari were better based on statistics alone is incredibly stupid. Are you seriously saying none of this had an effect in 2006 and that Ferrari were 'better in the second half' simply because they won more races?

Repeating something over and over again doesnt make it true, even on the internet. The only theory thats actually revisionist is calling the Renault as the 'far and away' best package in 2006.

I see you still have no facts at all to back up any of your points. Lets go over them again :
1. Massa > Fisichella in 2006
2. Ferrari was not the clear best car in the second half of the season.
3. Renault had far and away the best package of 2006.


1. See above.
2. See your own admission that Renault were better at Hungary and China. 'Clear' best car. :rolleyes:
3. They had an illegal, unfair advantage and cheated for 11 of the 18 races. Also called a majority. Of course Renault had the best package in 2006.

#14705 SparkPlug

SparkPlug
  • Member

  • 491 posts
  • Joined: January 10

Posted 17 October 2011 - 10:55

No really, I think you missed the part where I said I was okay with the opinion that the two cars ere evenly matced, even though I don't agree.



Where did I say Fisichella was a mediocre also ran? All I'm saying is that Massa did a better job in 2006, just as he did in 2007 and 2008, he was at home with grooves and wide fronts, and that his driving style was and still is similar to Schumacher's is something that has been brought up countless times in the past ever since Massa moved to Ferrari from Sauber. I have zero interest in trying to dig up old articles and interviews to appease a cheap revisionist.

Which means you dont have any proof of Massa > Fisichella. Not surprising.

Read my posts again. My problem is with people that keep dividing the season into two neat halves and claiming Ferrari had the better car throughout the second half, which is demonstrably false because Renault were quicker even on pace at Hungary and China, more consistent tyres at France, etc, all of which were in the second half.

Nothing of substance here again.

I just replied to all of this.
Hungary : Mechanical failure for Alonso
China : Clear advantage for Renault in the wet
France : More consistent tyres doesnt mean faster. Ferrari were the faster car at France.

On the other hand, Ferrari won 7 out the last 9 which is why they were the best car in the second half and were in the hunt for their 8th till an engine failure. What is your problem with that exactly ?

Incredible. Now you're claiming Renault never had a pace advantage at any point in 2006? Watch the season for ****'s sake, please.

I claimed no such thing. I asked you to prove your claim that Ferrari had a consistent pace deficit in 2006, apparently because of which the otherwise perfect superhumans Schumacher and Massa made mistakes.

Yes it is, it's definitely a revisionist theory and you know it. I've been saying all along that the season was far too complicated and that there were a lot of different factors involved, like any other season in the tyre war era or even later. To ignore tyre characteristics, track layouts, reg changes, etc and continue to claim Ferrari were better based on statistics alone is incredibly stupid. Are you seriously saying none of this had an effect in 2006 and that Ferrari were 'better in the second half' simply because they won more races?

If the season was far too complicated to analyze for you, how did you conclude Renault was 'far and away' the best package ?

1. See above.
2. See your own admission that Renault were better at Hungary and China. 'Clear' best car. :rolleyes:
3. They had an illegal, unfair advantage and cheated for 11 of the 18 races. Also called a majority. Of course Renault had the best package in 2006.

Next time maybe you should actually post something that makes sense.

#14706 MikeTekRacing

MikeTekRacing
  • Member

  • 5,786 posts
  • Joined: October 04

Posted 17 October 2011 - 10:59

Having been at the 2006 French GP where Michael absolutely desimated the field...I cannot admit that Alonso was better. They were both spectacular that year.

I think in France it was that in qualy Alonso tried to get ahead of Michael exiting the pits and Michael attached and passed on track in the hairpin
I might be wrong but I think it was France


that fight was like for the race lead :)

#14707 sharo

sharo
  • Member

  • 1,792 posts
  • Joined: April 11

Posted 17 October 2011 - 12:26

Is it really necessary to enter an endless quarrel for things of the past, while IMHO the thread is more about MS today.
I suggest we accept that the better package of driver + car won back then and put it to rest.

Edited by sharo, 17 October 2011 - 12:27.


#14708 SparkPlug

SparkPlug
  • Member

  • 491 posts
  • Joined: January 10

Posted 17 October 2011 - 12:41

Is it really necessary to enter an endless quarrel for things of the past, while IMHO the thread is more about MS today.
I suggest we accept that the better package of driver + car won back then and put it to rest.

There is sufficient proof of Alonso being the better driver over the course of the 2006 season as he was more consistent and made lesser mistakes inspite of having faced more reliability related problems than his rival and also the added extra ridiculous penalty.

However there is hardly any proof of Renault being the superior car, and even less proof of it being 'far and away' the best package. That is just an excuse from some Schumacher fans, or a refusal to accept reality that someone can be better than Schumacher over the course of a season.


#14709 ivand911

ivand911
  • Member

  • 8,152 posts
  • Joined: February 10

Posted 17 October 2011 - 12:45

There is sufficient proof of Alonso being the better driver over the course of the 2006 season as he was more consistent and made lesser mistakes inspite of having faced more reliability related problems than his rival and also the added extra ridiculous penalty.

However there is hardly any proof of Renault being the superior car, and even less proof of it being 'far and away' the best package. That is just an excuse from some Schumacher fans, or a refusal to accept reality that someone can be better than Schumacher over the course of a season.

To put it this way 7:2. This is sufficient proof who is better. Ultimate proof. From 1991 to 2011. Why focus only on 2006? Maybe is better, Alonso to be compared to somebody like Vettel?

Edited by ivand911, 17 October 2011 - 12:49.


#14710 Jejking

Jejking
  • Member

  • 2,443 posts
  • Joined: June 11

Posted 17 October 2011 - 13:03

I dont know if Renault had the slower car, but Alonso did make fewer mistakes than Schumacher inspite of both having competitive machinery at their disposal. Which is why he won.

For 2006, Alonso was clearly > Schumacher because of this alone (making lesser mistakes). The deserved champion. :up:

Well, another circumstance is reliability. And I'm not calling for shots and the end for the race but for the start. Ferrari had massive temp issues on their engine and had to get around it, Malaysia. Melbourne was Schumachers own mistake but from that moment on he was already on his backfoot. In Spain Alonso was able to sprint away and Schumacher had to deal with Fisichella. I think Schumacher wanted Monaco to be a game changer and when he saw it didn't work out, he locked up. Literally. That made his season even worse and with the car not able to go for pole he had to come from 'the back', Alonso was only increasing his lead up to the USA. There Ferrari simply decimated anything between them and victory, in France Schumacher came out on top where Alonso only could hold off Massa due to strategy (like Schumacher @ Fisichella). Germany saw the mass damper being banned and Renault went nowhere. In Hungary Alonso was supreme in the wet conditions but slid off due to a teamwork mishap. Schumacher should have capitalized there but he didn't. In Turkey Schumacher overcooked it at Saturday, didn't get pole and in the end Alonso was ahead of him after unlucky circumstances. Note: Schumi cockup in the race where he slid off at T8. That gave Alonso P2.

Italy was controversial but Alonso failed anyway with his engine and in China he took the wrong decision to replace the worn fronts with new inters. That's plain his bad, just like Schumacher miscalled in Hungary. Japan was slightly for Schumacher when all the traffic was out of the way but his engine failed. Alonso went on and in Brazil Schumachers car has issues once again, Alonso even increased his lead and won the WDC.

Teamfailures or cockups which influenced outcome of a race badly:
Ferrari: 111 (Malaysia both cars, Suzuka, Brazil)
Renault: 11 (Hungary, Monza)

Driverfailures or cockups which influenced outcome of a race badly:
Schumacher: 111111 (Melbourne, Monaco, Turkey for going off, Hungary for being tricked by Alonso, for race-ending damage and potentially the decision to stay at inters)
Alonso: 11 (Hungary, impeding Doornbos AND setting up Schumacher) China, potentially the decision to switch to new front inters)

Remember the words Alonso used? I'll never let the gap become smaller than 25 points. But due to less agressive, more balanced driving he kept scoring pretty much everywhere. Schumachers pressure tactics in the end didn't pay off and a less all or nothing approach would have worked maybe, although Alonso was still very strong and hard to beat in 2006.

Edited by Jejking, 17 October 2011 - 13:20.


#14711 BRK

BRK
  • Member

  • 3,477 posts
  • Joined: November 07

Posted 17 October 2011 - 13:06

Which means you dont have any proof of Massa > Fisichella. Not surprising.


:|

It's well-known that Massa ha a driving style similar to that of Schumacher and prefers a car that has more grip at the front and is more pointy. 'Proof' of this (for the sake of a cheap revisionist, that is) is to be found with his remarks when Bridgestone shifted to narrower front tyres for 2010, offering less grip at the front and favouring drivers that liked their cars a bit more understeery:

From 2009 -

http://www.formula1....009/5/9414.html

“In addition to this, there is more mechanical grip - grip provided by the tyres interacting with the road surface - than before at the front of the car, due to the proportionally bigger contact patch of the front tyre, so the latest cars have a lot more grip on the front than previously.”

The additional grip at the front means that the latest cars work their rear tyres harder than before.

“We can certainly say that the current generation car has an oversteer tendency, where the rear of the car doesn’t have as much grip as the front, and this tendency is a focus for teams in their car set-ups and designs,” explains Hamashima.


On 2010 -

http://www.formula1....9/11/10216.html

Q: Next season there will be a smaller front tyre, tell us about this…
HH: For 2010 we will have a narrower front tyre. This will help to bring a better grip balance between the front and the rear grip of the cars. When we changed back to slick tyres the grooved tyre size was retained, meaning that the front gained proportionally more grip than the rear. This is addressed by making the front tyre narrower.


To link that with Massa's preferences:

http://www.totalf1.c..._driving_style/

http://www.ferrari.c...sa/default.aspx

"I hope we have a better time from now to the end of the season,” he continued. “Yes, there has been some bad luck and I believe in good and bad luck – what else would you call what happened to me at the final corner of the 2008 championship? But luck only plays a secondary part. In terms of my own difficulties on track, I have found it tough racing on the hard tyres, although much easier on the soft ones and I have tried to adapt my driving style accordingly.

"I prefer to drive a car with a lot of front grip, so even if I find a car with a lot of oversteer - but the front end is working properly - then I can work with the engineers to improve the rear end of the car. That is how I have always driven and this year’s narrow tyres have not helped my driving style.

Alonso and Massa have different chassis set-ups at times, but Massa believes the biggest difference is in their driving style. "It's not that the braking point is different, but when he is arriving to the corner he has a very aggressive style on the steering wheel. He always goes completely like this" – he indicates a sudden, jerking twist of the wheel as if throwing the car at the corner – "and by this he is warming up the tyres more. I've tried it, but I can't make it work."

Last year Bridgestone changed the front tyres a lot compared to 2009. This led to lots of understeer. The tyres were much harder and difficult to bring up to the right temperature. I tried to modify the front tyres, but then the rear tyres didn’t work as they should have, so it was a real fight. This year Pirelli should have prepared much stronger front tyres, for more grip. This is much better for my driving style.


http://www.f1technical.net/news/15875

http://www.independe...in-2039883.html



Going solely by the 'facts' dug up on the internet (as opposed to actually having watched the damned season and followed every move) it's plainly obvious pre-2010 cars had more grip at the front, favoured Massa's driving style, and therefore Massa was comfortable with the nature of the tyres in 2006. Not to mention Schumacher's own driving style (which I hope is beyond this ridiculous 'debate') meant he preferred a pointy car as well. Massa was thus comfortable with the F248, unlike with later cars and regs.

OTOH Fisichella and his teammate had different driving styles. All I can find now is this:

http://www.totalf1.c...s-i-fisichella/

Fisichella was therefore less comfortable with the R26 than Massa was with the F248, that I think is a reasonable conclusion.


I'd have thought things like this should go without saying and would have been obvious to someone that has followed the sport closely for a while but there you go.

Score 1 to the revisionists - 0 to common sense and knowledge, I'll give you that. Congrats on dragging someone that absolutely detests revisionists with their agendas to their level.

"Man landed on the moon in 69"
"Proof?"
"It was on the radio, TV, in the news, everywhere! Anybody that was alive back then would've known!"
"Proof? Link? Is it on Wikipedia or Youtube"

:rolleyes:

Nothing of substance here again.

I just replied to all of this.
Hungary : Mechanical failure for Alonso


Which doesn't negate the fact that Renault had an advantage at that track. Very cheap attempt.

France : More consistent tyres doesnt mean faster. Ferrari were the faster car at France.


But Renault + Michelin were the better package.

On the other hand, Ferrari won 7 out the last 9 which is why they were the best car in the second half and were in the hunt for their 8th till an engine failure. What is your problem with that exactly ?


I claimed no such thing. I asked you to prove your claim that Ferrari had a consistent pace deficit in 2006, apparently because of which the otherwise perfect superhumans Schumacher and Massa made mistakes.


Statistics, that's my problem. Any fool could hunt up stats and come to conclusions without fully understanding the way the season panned out or the ups and downs both teams had to face over the season. I could use stats too for instance:

http://www.f1technical.net/news/4406

One consequence is that a single chassis rarely completes a full season these days. In 2004 for example, Fernando Alonso used three chassis: R24-02, R24-06 and R24-07. That followed damage incurred during a Grand Prix weekend, and a new, revised lightweight monocoque design towards the end of the season.

In 2006, though, chassis R26-03 competed in every single Grand Prix weekend. It emerged from the race shop on 7 February 2006, 33 days before its victorious race debut in Bahrain on 12 March.

This test was to be the car’s only on-track action away from a Grand Prix weekend. It took a debut victory in Bahrain, and then scored 84 points from a possible 90 in the first half of the season – and completed every single race lap.

By season’s end in Brazil, the car had won a total of 134 points on the way to Fernando Alonso’s world drivers’ championship. It took 7 victories, 6 pole positions, set five fastest laps and helped Fernando to the podium on 14 occasions in total. Of the season’s 1137 total race laps, it completed 1108 – missing out on ten laps in Monza, and 19 in Hungary. That represents 97% of the total race laps completed.

What’s more, this car also led more laps than any other during the season – just as Fernando led more than any driver. It crossed the line in P1 on 463 laps, or 41% of the season total, on its way to seven victories during the 2006 season.

In total, including testing, practice, qualifying and racing, R26-03 completed 11,317km. It ran with 11 new engines in total: 10 during the season, and one in Barcelona.

So, 134 points, 7 race wins, 6 poles, 5 fastest laps and 1 world championship. To borrow a phrase, probably the most valuable Renault in the world…


From the horse's mouth (Renault F1). Clearly the best car of 2006, then...:rolleyes:

People that aren't fools, on the other hand, might say:

http://doctorvee.co....f-the-tyre-war/

Here is an extract from an article by Paul Kimmage in The Sunday Times from a couple of months ago.

At a press conference the next afternoon at the [Istanbul] circuit, [Jenson Button] is joined on stage by fellow drivers David Coulthard, Kimi Raikkonen and Tiago Monteiro. A French journalist raises his hand and asks, “Question to you all: who will win the world championship? Schumacher or Alonso? The four give the same reply: the championship will basically be decided by the team with the best tyres. The journalist is annoyed. What? No names? No opinions? We've given our opinions,Button insists. "We can't see into the future. We don't know what's going to happen.

We meet an hour later and I pull him up on it again. What was all that corporate crap? Why couldn't you give the guy a straight answer: Alonso or Schumacher? As a journalist and a fan, I find that absolutely infuriating.

'Because it's the truth,” he says. “It will all come down to the tyres.

'The tyres,' I repeat, incredulous.

'The tyres, 100%,' he insists.


A view shared by a lot people at the time, including me. To completely ignore this aspect and harp on and on about a clear cut 50:50 championship where Ferrari had the best car throughout the second half is pretty amazing for someone posting on an internet forum.

Next time maybe you should actually post something that makes sense.


Can't help it if you cannot read.

Enough of this bullshit for ****'s sake.

Edited by BRK, 17 October 2011 - 13:07.


#14712 arknor

arknor
  • Member

  • 2,298 posts
  • Joined: March 10

Posted 17 October 2011 - 13:06

To put it this way 7:2. This is sufficient proof who is better. Ultimate proof. From 1991 to 2011. Why focus only on 2006? Maybe is better, Alonso to be compared to somebody like Vettel?

because were talking about who was better over the course of a season not who is better over the course of their career.

noone can argue schumacher hasnt enjoyed a career which include results and records other f1 champions can only dream off, one can argue however during 2006 alonso performed better

Edited by arknor, 17 October 2011 - 13:07.


#14713 fieraku

fieraku
  • Member

  • 5,304 posts
  • Joined: June 11

Posted 17 October 2011 - 13:18

THis video have nothing to do with reaction times. :confused:

I knew you'd be confused! The dude is 117 :wave: ! Using your after 30 theory he shouldn't have any reactions at all let alone perform martial arts.

What I want to get at is,with the right diet,exercise and lifestyle you can't stop father time but you can sure as heck slow it down.So for all we know or don't know MS could have the RT of a 25 year old.
So for you to claim with certainty that MS's vows are due to "reaction" times is total BS. Merc has been a POS all year long,ever thought about that?

#14714 Skanka

Skanka
  • Member

  • 95 posts
  • Joined: March 11

Posted 17 October 2011 - 13:22

There is sufficient proof of Alonso being the better driver over the course of the 2006 season as he was more consistent and made lesser mistakes inspite of having faced more reliability related problems than his rival and also the added extra ridiculous penalty.

However there is hardly any proof of Renault being the superior car, and even less proof of it being 'far and away' the best package. That is just an excuse from some Schumacher fans, or a refusal to accept reality that someone can be better than Schumacher over the course of a season.


I kinda agree. Alonso was on top form in 2005-06, made very few mistakes and was super-quick. Since then, even when he had a very competitive car at his disposal (in 2007 and in 2010) he hasn't been able to reach that level of superb consistency compared to those two winning seasons.

What you forget to say though is that, when Ferrari wasn't competitive, they were really struggling. In Malaysia and in Australia they were nowhere, Schumacher had to push like hell in Australia to give the car some sort of pace, unfortunately he made a mistake but that's what can happen when you're pushing to the very limits of the car, and up until that mistake it was a phenomenal drive in my view. Then you've got to remember the Bridgestones were miles off the pace compared to the Michelins in the rain, therefore he was more exposed during those races in Hungary and in China. Yet he was superb in these two races (a bit unlucky trying to take risks in Hungary).

When you compare that with Renault, the R26 has always been extremely consistent; Alonso always finished either 1st or 2nd apart from: USA (poor pace from Alonso), Germany (only race where the Renault not competitive due to the loss of mass dampener), Hungary (was leading), Italy (was 3rd). In my opinion Schumacher had to take more risks with a car that was, on a few occasions, not on the pace, and that, with a brain-fade (Monaco), and unluckiness (Japan) meant he lost out to a brilliant Alonso in the end.

Both drivers being pretty much on the same level on the whole that season.


#14715 Scotracer

Scotracer
  • Member

  • 2,722 posts
  • Joined: June 08

Posted 17 October 2011 - 13:22

I think in France it was that in qualy Alonso tried to get ahead of Michael exiting the pits and Michael attached and passed on track in the hairpin
I might be wrong but I think it was France


that fight was like for the race lead :)


Yes, it was absolutely fantastic to watch at the track (I was sitting just before the hairpin too).

#14716 Jejking

Jejking
  • Member

  • 2,443 posts
  • Joined: June 11

Posted 17 October 2011 - 13:25

Bla.

I think we can agree for a really big part on this one. Got any comments on my post above? :)

#14717 cheapracer

cheapracer
  • Member

  • 10,388 posts
  • Joined: May 07

Posted 17 October 2011 - 13:37

, one can argue however during 2006 alonso performed better


I'm not sure who that is in your avatar, could you give me a clue please .... ?

Edited by cheapracer, 17 October 2011 - 13:38.


#14718 Skanka

Skanka
  • Member

  • 95 posts
  • Joined: March 11

Posted 17 October 2011 - 13:41

I think we can agree for a really big part on this one. Got any comments on my post above? :)


Yup, very good post and recollection on the events of that year. :)

Alonso drove as well as he did in 2005, and in both years he could capitalize with having a good margin in terms of points, that means he could drive very fast yet without risking everything, while behind him Michael was playing catch-up right from the beginning (like Kimi the year before) and therefore had to take more risks resulting in mistakes.

But all in all, even if Michael lost out in the end, it was a fantastic season and a fascinating battle between those two greats. :smoking:

Edited by Skanka, 17 October 2011 - 13:41.


#14719 Jomyboy

Jomyboy
  • Member

  • 179 posts
  • Joined: May 02

Posted 17 October 2011 - 14:04

For me, Alonso's face after China said it all. Heck, if you looked at the entire Renault team you could easily guess what was in their mind. Schumacher was the better man, the better fighter, and the better winner. I mean just before the race the Renault guys were talking on the grid and saying "In this rain, Schumacher would be lucky to get even in the points against Michelin." They had the shock of their lives.

As Ron Dennis once said, "If the driver is not making mistakes, then he probably isnt driving that hard." Its so easy to ridicule Schumi saying he made a lot of mistakes and hence deserved to lose in 2006. He could have probably driven like how Rosberg is driving now - be calm and easy with the car and get as many points as you could with no risks, and you know what - he would probably have won the 2006 championship had he driven like Rosberg. But then would we, his fans, look at him with the same respect as we do today? Would we have ever witnessed a gold like China 2006?



Advertisement

#14720 arknor

arknor
  • Member

  • 2,298 posts
  • Joined: March 10

Posted 17 October 2011 - 14:04

I'm not sure who that is in your avatar, could you give me a clue please .... ?

until a few hours ago it was a MSC avatar.. i think you will find 95% of my posts on this forum are pro schumacher which maybe speaks volumes about my opinion of who was the better driver during the 2006 season

#14721 Skanka

Skanka
  • Member

  • 95 posts
  • Joined: March 11

Posted 17 October 2011 - 14:30

For me, Alonso's face after China said it all. Heck, if you looked at the entire Renault team you could easily guess what was in their mind. Schumacher was the better man, the better fighter, and the better winner. I mean just before the race the Renault guys were talking on the grid and saying "In this rain, Schumacher would be lucky to get even in the points against Michelin." They had the shock of their lives.

As Ron Dennis once said, "If the driver is not making mistakes, then he probably isnt driving that hard." Its so easy to ridicule Schumi saying he made a lot of mistakes and hence deserved to lose in 2006. He could have probably driven like how Rosberg is driving now - be calm and easy with the car and get as many points as you could with no risks, and you know what - he would probably have won the 2006 championship had he driven like Rosberg. But then would we, his fans, look at him with the same respect as we do today? Would we have ever witnessed a gold like China 2006?


:up:

It's what makes Michael such a special driver. And here's a quote from Hungary 2006: "Did we take a risk staying out on track with intermediate tyres and in the fight with my rivals? That's the way I am. I always want to fight for the top which is why I have won so often. There are still five races to go. Nothing is yet lost and I will give it my all in trying to win the title."

It's his mentality to go and push 100%. I also remember one occasion, for example, in Portugal 1995. He was 3rd during the race behind Coulthard and Hill. Ten laps to go. At that point he had a 13 points-lead to Hill in the championship. Yet he kept pushing and overtook him at an unbelievable spot - it takes guts and shows panache to pull such a pass at such a moment of the race/season -

And I firmly believe that if Michael made some mistakes this year, crashing against other cars, it's because he's in that "win-or-lose" attitude, that if things go wrong it's not the end of the world. Even yesterday, he had all the right to be pissed off, yet he was very calm and took it very easily. I believe him when he says he doesn't care if he beats Rosberg or not in the standings this year. The real stuff will begin for Michael when the car will be good enough to fight for the win. That's all he cares for, driving quietly for 7th means nothing for him. As long as he has the confirmation within himself to be fast enough (and he has been quick all year, that's a huge difference compared to 2010), that's the most important at the moment.

#14722 topical

topical
  • Member

  • 2,301 posts
  • Joined: September 10

Posted 17 October 2011 - 14:48

I dont know if Renault had the slower car, but Alonso did make fewer mistakes than Schumacher inspite of both having competitive machinery at their disposal. Which is why he won.

For 2006, Alonso was clearly > Schumacher because of this alone (making lesser mistakes). The deserved champion. :up:


Yes, Alonso was clearly the better driver in 2006 with less mistakes and that's why he won. But hey, this is a MS thread, so what do you expect - you will be confronted with blindness and denial by most posters...

#14723 schubacca

schubacca
  • Member

  • 799 posts
  • Joined: May 10

Posted 17 October 2011 - 15:19

Yes, Alonso was clearly the better driver in 2006 with less mistakes and that's why he won. But hey, this is a MS thread, so what do you expect - you will be confronted with blindness and denial by most posters...


Agreed, FA was the more consistent driver in 2006 and a fully deserving WDC.

I am puzzled with Arknor's sudden loss of faith in MS?

What did MS do in the last race that warranted lack of support?

If there was a time to jump off the wagon it would have been last season. But MS is driving better and better....?

Very odd...

#14724 SparkPlug

SparkPlug
  • Member

  • 491 posts
  • Joined: January 10

Posted 17 October 2011 - 17:54

It's well-known that Massa ha a driving style similar to that of Schumacher and prefers a car that has more grip at the front and is more pointy. 'Proof' of this (for the sake of a cheap revisionist, that is) is to be found with his remarks when Bridgestone shifted to narrower front tyres for 2010, offering less grip at the front and favouring drivers that liked their cars a bit more understeery:

From 2009 -

http://www.formula1....009/5/9414.html



On 2010 -

http://www.formula1....9/11/10216.html



To link that with Massa's preferences:

http://www.totalf1.c..._driving_style/

http://www.ferrari.c...sa/default.aspx



http://www.f1technical.net/news/15875

http://www.independe...in-2039883.html



Going solely by the 'facts' dug up on the internet (as opposed to actually having watched the damned season and followed every move) it's plainly obvious pre-2010 cars had more grip at the front, favoured Massa's driving style, and therefore Massa was comfortable with the nature of the tyres in 2006. Not to mention Schumacher's own driving style (which I hope is beyond this ridiculous 'debate') meant he preferred a pointy car as well. Massa was thus comfortable with the F248, unlike with later cars and regs.


All that these links prove is that Massa was comfortable with the car and the tyres. Which maybe partly the reason why he ran Schumacher close in some races and beat him for pace in a couple during the second half of the year. But it does not prove that Massa > Fisichella, and most definitely not to the extent by which Massa was able to completely beat the so called mythical massive car advantage that Renault enjoyed over Ferrari.

OTOH Fisichella and his teammate had different driving styles. All I can find now is this:

http://www.totalf1.c...s-i-fisichella/

Fisichella was therefore less comfortable with the R26 than Massa was with the F248, that I think is a reasonable conclusion.


Instead of some random forum chat from somewhere on the internet, why not listen to what the man himself has to say ?

http://www.formula1....006/5/4335.html

http://www.formula1....006/3/4052.html

Q: What is the R26 like to drive, compared to its predecessor?
Fisichella: It is very similar. Last year's car was very comfortable for the drivers, and so is the R26. In fact, I am even happier in this car. The rear is more stable under braking and in the middle of the corner. We have made a step forward on the traction too. That all means I can drive the car how I want to, and gives me even more confidence.


Q: This year’s car seems well suited to you. What is it that makes you feel more comfortable in the R26 than in last year’s car?
GF: More stability in the rear and therefore a car better suited to my driving style.



I'd have thought things like this should go without saying and would have been obvious to someone that has followed the sport closely for a while but there you go.

Score 1 to the revisionists - 0 to common sense and knowledge, I'll give you that. Congrats on dragging someone that absolutely detests revisionists with their agendas to their level.

"Man landed on the moon in 69"
"Proof?"
"It was on the radio, TV, in the news, everywhere! Anybody that was alive back then would've known!"
"Proof? Link? Is it on Wikipedia or Youtube"

Intentionally putting in bits of useless rhetoric in between your posts add nothing of value to any debate, nor do they have any positive effect on your argument. I'd have thought you would've known that in 4 years of foruming.


Which doesn't negate the fact that Renault had an advantage at that track. Very cheap attempt.

Cheap attempt at what ? Renault had a usable car advantage at about half a race in the last 9. Is that enough to have a "far and away" superior package now ? :rolleyes:


Statistics, that's my problem. Any fool could hunt up stats and come to conclusions without fully understanding the way the season panned out or the ups and downs both teams had to face over the season. I could use stats too for instance:

http://www.f1technical.net/news/4406

From the horse's mouth (Renault F1). Clearly the best car of 2006, then...:rolleyes:

Why not use real quotes from Renault's own engineers :

Q: (Anthony Rowlinson - Autosport) Pat, given that you’ve had a very close championship battle this year with Ferrari and something very similar last year with McLaren, could you characterise how those two campaigns have been fought and if there are any similarities or were they very different?

PS: They are subtly different. I think that last year, in many ways, it was a much easier fight for us. Our opponent had certain characteristics that we knew how to handle and in the latter part of the year, probably not right at the end, but certainly through most of late summer, they had a much quicker car than us, but not a terribly reliable one. It meant that we could take quite a conservative approach, we could take our wins when they came, we could take second places when the wins weren’t there and it was really a little bit easier, I think, than this year because Ferrari and Michael have been pushing us hard right through the year. As Ross said, I think their start to the year wasn’t quite so good; I think we were up and running as a team right from race one. I don’t think our car was any better, and of course race one was a very very close race and I think that shows the performance was very similar. Ferrari have once again had very good reliability, so we have not been looking to pick up points in that direction, so we’ve been pushed a lot harder, we’ve had to be a lot more aggressive this year. It’s been good fun though, I’ve enjoyed it.


Here is another interesting article, the Autosport technical review for 2006, where its clearly mentioned that Ferrari had the best car in the second half of the season, dont know if you have autosport archive access (dont know if quoting a paid source is legal) , but here goes :
http://www.autosport...icle.php/id/816

I think its clear you suffer from some sort of illusion where Schumacher just cannot lose to anyone at all. Such embarrassing levels of idol worship are seen only rarely and in one other group of fans, who also tend to behave like completely irrational beings when confronted with anything other than perfect admiration of their idol. Didnt think of you to be one of them though. I'm disappointed.
Take a look around this thread and the past few replies, you'll see other Schumacher fans themselves acknowledging the fact that Alonso was the better driver in 2006 and it was not the imaginary massive car advantage that Renault enjoyed which was responsible. Apart from you I dont see even a handful of even Schumacher's fans who think that Alonso wasn't the better driver in 2006. Speaks volumes about what levels of idol worship you've stooped to. :)

Edited by SparkPlug, 17 October 2011 - 18:16.


#14725 SparkPlug

SparkPlug
  • Member

  • 491 posts
  • Joined: January 10

Posted 17 October 2011 - 18:04

Well, another circumstance is reliability. And I'm not calling for shots and the end for the race but for the start. Ferrari had massive temp issues on their engine and had to get around it, Malaysia. Melbourne was Schumachers own mistake but from that moment on he was already on his backfoot. In Spain Alonso was able to sprint away and Schumacher had to deal with Fisichella. I think Schumacher wanted Monaco to be a game changer and when he saw it didn't work out, he locked up. Literally. That made his season even worse and with the car not able to go for pole he had to come from 'the back', Alonso was only increasing his lead up to the USA. There Ferrari simply decimated anything between them and victory, in France Schumacher came out on top where Alonso only could hold off Massa due to strategy (like Schumacher @ Fisichella). Germany saw the mass damper being banned and Renault went nowhere. In Hungary Alonso was supreme in the wet conditions but slid off due to a teamwork mishap. Schumacher should have capitalized there but he didn't. In Turkey Schumacher overcooked it at Saturday, didn't get pole and in the end Alonso was ahead of him after unlucky circumstances. Note: Schumi cockup in the race where he slid off at T8. That gave Alonso P2.

Italy was controversial but Alonso failed anyway with his engine and in China he took the wrong decision to replace the worn fronts with new inters. That's plain his bad, just like Schumacher miscalled in Hungary. Japan was slightly for Schumacher when all the traffic was out of the way but his engine failed. Alonso went on and in Brazil Schumachers car has issues once again, Alonso even increased his lead and won the WDC.

Teamfailures or cockups which influenced outcome of a race badly:
Ferrari: 111 (Malaysia both cars, Suzuka, Brazil)
Renault: 11 (Hungary, Monza)

Driverfailures or cockups which influenced outcome of a race badly:
Schumacher: 111111 (Melbourne, Monaco, Turkey for going off, Hungary for being tricked by Alonso, for race-ending damage and potentially the decision to stay at inters)
Alonso: 11 (Hungary, impeding Doornbos AND setting up Schumacher) China, potentially the decision to switch to new front inters)

Remember the words Alonso used? I'll never let the gap become smaller than 25 points. But due to less agressive, more balanced driving he kept scoring pretty much everywhere. Schumachers pressure tactics in the end didn't pay off and a less all or nothing approach would have worked maybe, although Alonso was still very strong and hard to beat in 2006.

I think you summed up the season pretty well. However in the list of cockups you've included Malaysia and Brazil which did not result in DNFs while at the same time you've ignored the two Reliability induced DNFs on Fisichella's car. Alonso also had a major issue at the US grand prix which caused him to lose a few points as well which is also missing.

Alonso wasn't any less aggressive mind you. He was fantastic at Hungary, kept Schumacher at bay for a long time at Turkey with an inferior car, was carving through the field at Monza from 10th to 3rd till his engine blew up, and was gaining time on Schumacher at Suzuka till the latters engine gave way. The only race he perhaps played it smart was Brazil which was quite understandable to be honest.

#14726 SparkPlug

SparkPlug
  • Member

  • 491 posts
  • Joined: January 10

Posted 17 October 2011 - 18:09

For me, Alonso's face after China said it all. Heck, if you looked at the entire Renault team you could easily guess what was in their mind. Schumacher was the better man, the better fighter, and the better winner. I mean just before the race the Renault guys were talking on the grid and saying "In this rain, Schumacher would be lucky to get even in the points against Michelin." They had the shock of their lives.

As Ron Dennis once said, "If the driver is not making mistakes, then he probably isnt driving that hard." Its so easy to ridicule Schumi saying he made a lot of mistakes and hence deserved to lose in 2006. He could have probably driven like how Rosberg is driving now - be calm and easy with the car and get as many points as you could with no risks, and you know what - he would probably have won the 2006 championship had he driven like Rosberg. But then would we, his fans, look at him with the same respect as we do today? Would we have ever witnessed a gold like China 2006?

Now we have a new angle to this debate to prove how superior Michael Schumacher is to the whole world - face reading. Very interesting indeed.

#14727 cheapracer

cheapracer
  • Member

  • 10,388 posts
  • Joined: May 07

Posted 17 October 2011 - 18:16

until a few hours ago it was a MSC avatar.. i think you will find 95% of my posts on this forum are pro schumacher which maybe speaks volumes about my opinion of who was the better driver during the 2006 season


Like a Chev and Ford fan changing sides - ends up shunned by both.

Yes, Alonso was clearly the better driver in 2006 with less mistakes and that's why he won. But hey, this is a MS thread, so what do you expect -


Standard trolling like this?

Now we have a new angle to this debate - face reading.


Get serious, since when has Alonso been hard to read? - he is A-grade typical emotional Spaniard with the full range of facial and hand emotions.

Edited by cheapracer, 17 October 2011 - 18:19.


#14728 Group B

Group B
  • Member

  • 13,971 posts
  • Joined: March 02

Posted 17 October 2011 - 18:18

Now we have a new angle to this debate to prove how superior Michael Schumacher is to the whole world - face reading. Very interesting indeed.

My word you're dedicated, what did he do to upset you so much, apart from beating Mika?

#14729 cheapracer

cheapracer
  • Member

  • 10,388 posts
  • Joined: May 07

Posted 17 October 2011 - 18:26

My word you're dedicated, what did he do to upset you so much, apart from beating Mika?


Don't forget Kimi.

And why doesn't he have a Euro Bosch spark plug rather than a Japanese Nippondenso plug for his avatar? That's a burning question ... maybe cause Bosch are German like MS?


#14730 Sakae

Sakae
  • Member

  • 19,256 posts
  • Joined: December 03

Posted 17 October 2011 - 18:28

until a few hours ago it was a MSC avatar.. i think you will find 95% of my posts on this forum are pro schumacher which maybe speaks volumes about my opinion of who was the better driver during the 2006 season


Well, Alonso might need any support he can find these days. He had one of a hek last weekend.

#14731 BRK

BRK
  • Member

  • 3,477 posts
  • Joined: November 07

Posted 17 October 2011 - 19:35

Instead of some random forum chat from somewhere on the internet, why not listen to what the man himself has to say ?

http://www.formula1....006/5/4335.html

http://www.formula1....006/3/4052.html


Missing something obvious:

Q: What is the R26 like to drive, compared to its predecessor?
Fisichella: It is very similar. Last year's car was very comfortable for the drivers, and so is the R26. In fact, I am even happier in this car. The rear is more stable under braking and in the middle of the corner. We have made a step forward on the traction too. That all means I can drive the car how I want to, and gives me even more confidence.

QUOTE
Q: This year’s car seems well suited to you. What is it that makes you feel more comfortable in the R26 than in last year’s car?
GF: More stability in the rear and therefore a car better suited to my driving style.


Of course Giancarlo was more comfortable with the R26 compared to the R25. Not compared to his teammate, to the Ferrari, to Massa or whatever. Not sure what this is supposed to prove.

On the other hand you've rejected theories about Fisichella's own driving style and the difference between his and his teammate's styles. I think I'll have to assume that, unlike the poster that seems to have analysed onboards of the two drivers in question and presented a pretty good case, you are clueless on the topic.

Intentionally putting in bits of useless rhetoric in between your posts add nothing of value to any debate, nor do they have any positive effect on your argument. I'd have thought you would've known that in 4 years of foruming.


Nothing useless about pointing out revisionism when I see it. The frustrating thing about 'arguing' with such people is they need proof and links for everything on the internet apparently, you could argue all day long that the sun rises in the east but these adamant sorts wouldn't be satisfied until a video of a sunrise was presented, and even that wouldn't be enough.

Cheap attempt at what ? Renault had a usable car advantage at about half a race in the last 9. Is that enough to have a "far and away" superior package now ? :rolleyes:


Cheap attempt because Renault's DNF had absolutely nothing to do with the fact that they had the better package that day.

Why not use real quotes from Renault's own engineers :


Very interesting that you've eschewed your own statistics in favour of subjective statements from interviews. Nothing to be embarrassed about, I know Renault's own gloat about their rock solid car was an inconvenient truth that doesn't fit in with your theory.

Naturally Pat Symonds of all people was going to admit they had the better car and yet nearly lost the title..but that's all right.

So here's some other, equally subjective, random, taken-out-of-context snippets from other interviews from that season:

http://www.formula1....006/9/4879.html

Q: Starting in Monza?
BB: Monza is going to be a hard race, there's no doubt about it. We are in the heart of Ferrari territory. But you can look at it two ways: as a boost for them, or an added incentive for us to get the upper hand. Certainly, we are very motivated to return them the favour after they won on our home turf in Magny-Cours. I think Monza will suit the strengths of their package, but last week's test was very close and there is no reason to believe our package is weaker than theirs. We have the special Monza aero items on the car, and a good engine upgrade for Fernando (Alonso) who will use a D-spec engine. I believe we are in strong shape.

Q: It has been said that the championship will essentially come down to tyres. Do you agree?
BB: I certainly think that the advantage will swing back and forth according to who gets their tyre selection right, and who gets it wrong. Michelin are working flat out to develop new products and the results from testing were certainly promising. Our expectation is to see a very even situation between the two tyre manufacturers until the end of the year, and we hope that our partnership with Michelin can bring us a decisive advantage.


http://www.formula1....006/9/4995.html

Q: Pat, the question on everybody's lips ahead of this race is whether Shanghai will be a ‘Renault track' or a ‘Ferrari track'. What is your opinion?
Pat Symonds: As always, performance has to be looked at in relative terms. Shanghai is a good circuit for Renault, and we had a fabulous race there in 2005 when we dominated the Grand Prix and won the constructors' championship. But what may be more significant is that Michael Schumacher had two poor races there in 2004 and 2005. That trend could continue this year.

Q: Renault are now second in the constructors' championship to Ferrari. Would you say the team is on the back foot?
PS: I don't think so. The team has had a tough month: we threw away a win in Hungary, and events transpired against us in Monza. But had Fernando (Alonso) started from his correct grid position in Italy, we know he would have been fighting for the race win. Some people seem to think Renault is a spent force in this championship. That is far from the case.

Q: It has often been said that 2006 has been a ‘tyre championship'. Michelin seemed to have made big gains in Monza. Has this been reflected in testing since then?
PS: They have continued to move forward, yes. We are very happy with our preparations for the final three races, and we have made progress on both the compounds and constructions. We found some very interesting improvements in Jerez and at Silverstone last week, and Michelin are pushing hard
.


http://www.manipef1..../articles/3316/

Q: How did your approach change from 2005 to 2006?
PS: Our only rivals this year were Ferrari, and they have always enjoyed exceptional reliability. So managing our lead, or going conservative, were never an option. We had to go on the offensive. We knew that the level of performance of the Ferrari was similar to our R26 and that most of the time, the differences came from differing tyre characteristics. There was no way of knowing, before the race weekend, if we would have the upper hand. And the balance of power between Michelin and Bridgestone could change literally overnight. That meant we needed to be adaptable in our approach.

Q: In your opinion, were the cars the product of different design philosophies?
PS: I don't think so. The philosophy is always the same: maximise aerodynamic efficiency and tyre performance, make it lighter, make it stiffer... There may be different ways of achieving those objectives, but I don't think the Renault and Ferrari cars were that different. The contrasts may have been greater with the engines, as I got the impression that the maximum revs of the Ferrari were lower than ours.

Q: What was Ferrari's greatest strength?
PS: Without a shadow of a doubt, it was their qualifying pace. This didn't come from the car so much as the tyres. It sometimes led us to change our strategies for qualifying. There is no shame in saying that, at some races, Bridgestone had superior products.


Q: What were its strengths?
BB: It was always a very consistent car. It was easy to set up, and was competitive on every type of circuit. It gave the drivers a lot of confidence. It had excellent basic performance. And it's now the world champion!


Too bad. As I have been saying all along, it was a season of tyres, track characteristics and ups\downs, probably more than than a lot of other F1 seasons, Bell and Symonds pretty much echo the sentiments. So would anybody that actually followed the season. There was no neat division of the season into two halves w.r.t. performance or some such fairytale.

Still, and I'm having to repeat this for the umpteenth time, I'm fine with the opinion that the two cars were evenly matched. I don't agree and never will, nor are you going to budge. My opinion from what I recall and watching the season is that on balance Renault definitely had the better car, definitely had a massive advantage for 11 of the 18 races until the mass damper ban. Ferrari definitely started off on the backfoot, definitely had the advantage at a few races, but nowhere near enough to claim they were better. Your opinion is the opposite in effect and I'm fine with it.

I think its clear you suffer from some sort of illusion where Schumacher just cannot lose to anyone at all. Such embarrassing levels of idol worship are seen only rarely and in one other group of fans, who also tend to behave like completely irrational beings when confronted with anything other than perfect admiration of their idol. Didnt think of you to be one of them though. I'm disappointed.
Take a look around this thread and the past few replies, you'll see other Schumacher fans themselves acknowledging the fact that Alonso was the better driver in 2006 and it was not the imaginary massive car advantage that Renault enjoyed which was responsible. Apart from you I dont see even a handful of even Schumacher's fans who think that Alonso wasn't the better driver in 2006. Speaks volumes about what levels of idol worship you've stooped to. :)


Since you've been so kind as to offer your unsolicited opinions about me as a poster I'd like to return the favour: I get exactly the same impression from your posts. I generally skip posts from nutcases and fanboys but was yet to skip one from you until this discussion. You are so biased you have never even acknowledged the pivotal role tyre and track characteristics play in determining the outcome of a championship, very appalling as I said. The theory you believe in naturally allows no room for such realities, instead anything and everything that focusses on the some races in the second half of the championship that can be used for an oversimplification of what was an incredible up and down season for both parties involved is throw in randomly.

People are entitled to their opinions, I think it's pretty obvious I have enough basis to back up my opinion and I see no reason to think otherwise because a random revisionist theory was suddenly brought up out of nowhere. You probably think the same so this can only go round and round with no end in sight. Let's just agree to disagree and be done with it. I know I am. :wave:


#14732 ivand911

ivand911
  • Member

  • 8,152 posts
  • Joined: February 10

Posted 17 October 2011 - 19:35

I am puzzled with Arknor's sudden loss of faith in MS?

What did MS do in the last race that warranted lack of support?

If there was a time to jump off the wagon it would have been last season. But MS is driving better and better....?

Very odd...

Yeah , he surprised a lot of people. I hope he will be back to his normal condition soon. I don't know how to read his posts today.
About MS wagon , there are new people jumping in all the time now.

Edited by ivand911, 17 October 2011 - 19:47.


#14733 BRK

BRK
  • Member

  • 3,477 posts
  • Joined: November 07

Posted 17 October 2011 - 19:40

Yeah , he surprised a lot of people. I hope he will be back to his normal condition soon. I don't know how to read his posts today.
About MS wagon , there is new people jumping in all the time now.


Posts not the poster yeah but I think that was a case of excessive emotional investment. Suddenly you're all worn out, shocked and all you can do is head in the opposite direction. I'd say arknor was a bigger MS fan than any of us, so it's finally got to him. :D

#14734 PoliFanAthic

PoliFanAthic
  • Member

  • 642 posts
  • Joined: October 09

Posted 17 October 2011 - 20:07

Frankly speaking, I find it weird how I've had so many Formula 1 - related dreams since his comeback. And most of them with some disastrous outcome. :p

#14735 arknor

arknor
  • Member

  • 2,298 posts
  • Joined: March 10

Posted 17 October 2011 - 20:11

Frankly speaking, I find it weird how I've had so many Formula 1 - related dreams since his comeback. And most of them with some disastrous outcome. :p

and every saturday night we all end up praying he wont get taken out on the first lap..... get out now michael while its still your choice!

#14736 Diablobb81

Diablobb81
  • Member

  • 3,563 posts
  • Joined: August 09

Posted 17 October 2011 - 20:15

Stop being a drama queen.

#14737 arknor

arknor
  • Member

  • 2,298 posts
  • Joined: March 10

Posted 17 October 2011 - 20:35

Stop being a drama queen.

whats your problem? schumacher needs to retire now! hes passed it i thought this season he would turn it around and bring the fight to rosberg but its not happened and it wont next year either !

noone wants to see a legend beeing demoralised race after race , his kids dont need to see this its like a middle aged man going out and buying a convertable spots car to feel young again...

the other week when vettel won schumacher went into overdrive and set his fastest lap of the race trying to get close to vettel so he could drive along side vettel on the victory lap back to the pits and share the win with him.. :rotfl: , he just comes across as beeing desperate to feel like he used to and its really sad.

LEAVE YOUE FANS AND YOUR CHILDREN WITH THE GOOD MEMORIES OF OLD! A SCHUMACHER WHO WAS A WINNER , WE DONT ANT TO REMEMBER YOU AS A LOSER!.. when i see him near vettel it just reminds he of hamiltons dad trying to get in on the fame , he doesnt need to be remembered like this and if he gets out now maybe we can all forget this ever happened but another season and its all just going to get worse i fear a mental breakdown coming on or a schumacher even more desperate to proove he can still do it going to far and it all ending horribly.

Edited by arknor, 17 October 2011 - 20:38.


#14738 lykaschufan

lykaschufan
  • Member

  • 81 posts
  • Joined: March 10

Posted 17 October 2011 - 21:01

Don't post much here but read everyday, and wow I'm also surprised by Arknor who is one of the staunchest Schumi supporters here...

...trying to figure out if he's being facetious or this one's a serious turnabout.

#14739 MikeTekRacing

MikeTekRacing
  • Member

  • 5,786 posts
  • Joined: October 04

Posted 17 October 2011 - 21:06

somebody is either having fun here with all of us or has had a recent emotional shock.
hope you are (will be) ok pretty soon

Advertisement

#14740 Group B

Group B
  • Member

  • 13,971 posts
  • Joined: March 02

Posted 17 October 2011 - 21:11

Looks like sparkplug's hijacked arknor's account :lol:

#14741 BRK

BRK
  • Member

  • 3,477 posts
  • Joined: November 07

Posted 17 October 2011 - 21:11

LEAVE YOUE FANS AND YOUR CHILDREN WITH THE GOOD MEMORIES OF OLD! A SCHUMACHER WHO WAS A WINNER , WE DONT ANT TO REMEMBER YOU AS A LOSER!.. when i see him near vettel it just reminds he of hamiltons dad trying to get in on the fame , he doesnt need to be remembered like this and if he gets out now maybe we can all forget this ever happened but another season and its all just going to get worse i fear a mental breakdown coming on or a schumacher even more desperate to proove he can still do it going to far and it all ending horribly.


So do I, but not for Michael!



Take it easy, man. It's more than just a sport to a lot of people but you've got to know where to draw the line.

#14742 Schumacher7

Schumacher7
  • Member

  • 714 posts
  • Joined: February 11

Posted 17 October 2011 - 21:20

whats your problem? schumacher needs to retire now! hes passed it i thought this season he would turn it around and bring the fight to rosberg but its not happened and it wont next year either !

I beg to differ, I think it has very much happened. You're either (and I'm going to sound very patronizing here apologies) very worked up (understandably) over the death of Dan Wheldon and as such caring so much about Schumacher fear for his safety feeling as though he is putting so much on the line for very little reward even if he gets another WDC as he's already got seven of the things, or alternatively you're just trolling the trollers in which case I wasted my time writing this when I should have been doing my physics homework.

#14743 Szoelloe

Szoelloe
  • Member

  • 5,757 posts
  • Joined: December 06

Posted 17 October 2011 - 21:45

this is rapidly becoming a fun thread. I don't think I will post ever, but it sure is funny to read.

Edited by Szoelloe, 17 October 2011 - 21:45.


#14744 SparkPlug

SparkPlug
  • Member

  • 491 posts
  • Joined: January 10

Posted 18 October 2011 - 04:23

Sigh, I really dont have time for your childish games of playing around with words. Lets go over the crux of the argument again :

1. You claimed Renault had the 'far and away' best package of the season in 2006, while I claimed it was easy to see that Ferrari had the car to challenge the Renaults on an even footing at the least. To this effect I showed you sufficient evidence along with numbers backing this evidence which you conveniently ignored in favor of complicating the issue by repeatedly saying 'tyres, grooves, etc'. Nothing of substance yet. 'Etc' seems to be the most commonly used word in your explanations underlining the lack of real evidence in your argument.

2. You claimed Massa was performing at a higher level than Fisichella, and to prove your point you simply showed links where Massa said he was more comfortable with wider tyres that were providing front end grip. In response I gave you links which prove that Fisichella was also comfortable with his car.

The burden of proof of proving both of these theories (i.e. Renault had the far superior package AND Fisichella wasn't as comfortable as Massa) is on you and not on me.


Missing something obvious:



Of course Giancarlo was more comfortable with the R26 compared to the R25. Not compared to his teammate, to the Ferrari, to Massa or whatever. Not sure what this is supposed to prove.

On the other hand you've rejected theories about Fisichella's own driving style and the difference between his and his teammate's styles. I think I'll have to assume that, unlike the poster that seems to have analysed onboards of the two drivers in question and presented a pretty good case, you are clueless on the topic.

a ) Fisichella hasnt said he's not comfortable with his car.
b ) Massa hasnt said he was more comfortable in his car than Fisichella was in his.

You claimed Massa was more comfortable in his car than Fisichella was in his. Prove it and stop playing word games. If you dont have any proof of the same, stop.

Very interesting that you've eschewed your own statistics in favour of subjective statements from interviews. Nothing to be embarrassed about, I know Renault's own gloat about their rock solid car was an inconvenient truth that doesn't fit in with your theory.

Naturally Pat Symonds of all people was going to admit they had the better car and yet nearly lost the title..but that's all right.

So here's some other, equally subjective, random, taken-out-of-context snippets from other interviews from that season:

http://www.formula1....006/9/4879.html

http://www.formula1....006/9/4995.html

http://www.manipef1..../articles/3316/


All of these links that you've posted only re-inforce the fact that Renault wasnt the far and away best package as you earlier claimed. Each of the quotes you posted shows Renault consider Ferrari a serious threat to the title, and so does Ross Brawn and Ferrari for that matter. I've not eschewed any of my statistics, but the links and quotes are only in response to your rather childish move of posting quotes from Renault's official microphone which will only say positive things about their own team.

I'm yet to see a single piece of evidence which says Renault were 'far and away' the best package of 2006. As good an admission of defeat from you as any. Playing around with words for 2 days wont get you anywhere on that front.

On the other hand I showed you clear bit of evidence, the autosport technical review for the year which considers Ferrari the fastest car of the second half of the season along with it being an equal to Renault over the course of the season. I see you have no reponse to this either. :wave:



Still, and I'm having to repeat this for the umpteenth time, I'm fine with the opinion that the two cars were evenly matched. I don't agree and never will, nor are you going to budge. My opinion from what I recall and watching the season is that on balance Renault definitely had the better car, definitely had a massive advantage for 11 of the 18 races until the mass damper ban. Ferrari definitely started off on the backfoot, definitely had the advantage at a few races, but nowhere near enough to claim they were better. Your opinion is the opposite in effect and I'm fine with it.


Repeating something over and over wont make it true, even though it may re-inforce the myth in your own simple mind.

You have not once provided any real evidence of this massive advantage. Quotes from Felipe Massa, Bridgestone or the Renault mouthpiece say nothing of the sort that you imply.

Since you've been so kind as to offer your unsolicited opinions about me as a poster I'd like to return the favour: I get exactly the same impression from your posts. I generally skip posts from nutcases and fanboys but was yet to skip one from you until this discussion. You are so biased you have never even acknowledged the pivotal role tyre and track characteristics play in determining the outcome of a championship, very appalling as I said. The theory you believe in naturally allows no room for such realities, instead anything and everything that focusses on the some races in the second half of the championship that can be used for an oversimplification of what was an incredible up and down season for both parties involved is throw in randomly.

People are entitled to their opinions, I think it's pretty obvious I have enough basis to back up my opinion and I see no reason to think otherwise because a random revisionist theory was suddenly brought up out of nowhere. You probably think the same so this can only go round and round with no end in sight. Let's just agree to disagree and be done with it. I know I am.

I've no interest in responding to your trolling or baiting. Its been going on a while, but I see its a pattern you've developed : Divert from the main issue and rant away when losing ground. Poor stuff. :down:

#14745 SparkPlug

SparkPlug
  • Member

  • 491 posts
  • Joined: January 10

Posted 18 October 2011 - 04:31

Get serious, since when has Alonso been hard to read? - he is A-grade typical emotional Spaniard with the full range of facial and hand emotions.

Are you also implying that Alonso's facial expression of disappointment at China is an indicator of him being the inferior driver over the course of the season ? Thats what the earlier poster said. Do you agree with that assessment ?

My word you're dedicated, what did he do to upset you so much, apart from beating Mika?

I'm really dedicated to myth busting of some of the 'S' fans on this forum, who seem to live in some alternate universe. Obviously you're not among those.  ;)

Read my post history if you really think I'm an MS baiter.

Don't forget Kimi.

And why doesn't he have a Euro Bosch spark plug rather than a Japanese Nippondenso plug for his avatar? That's a burning question ... maybe cause Bosch are German like MS?

Cheapracer, top sense of humour as always :rotfl:


#14746 Jomyboy

Jomyboy
  • Member

  • 179 posts
  • Joined: May 02

Posted 18 October 2011 - 05:53

:up:

It's what makes Michael such a special driver. And here's a quote from Hungary 2006: "Did we take a risk staying out on track with intermediate tyres and in the fight with my rivals? That's the way I am. I always want to fight for the top which is why I have won so often. There are still five races to go. Nothing is yet lost and I will give it my all in trying to win the title."

It's his mentality to go and push 100%. I also remember one occasion, for example, in Portugal 1995. He was 3rd during the race behind Coulthard and Hill. Ten laps to go. At that point he had a 13 points-lead to Hill in the championship. Yet he kept pushing and overtook him at an unbelievable spot - it takes guts and shows panache to pull such a pass at such a moment of the race/season -

And I firmly believe that if Michael made some mistakes this year, crashing against other cars, it's because he's in that "win-or-lose" attitude, that if things go wrong it's not the end of the world. Even yesterday, he had all the right to be pissed off, yet he was very calm and took it very easily. I believe him when he says he doesn't care if he beats Rosberg or not in the standings this year. The real stuff will begin for Michael when the car will be good enough to fight for the win. That's all he cares for, driving quietly for 7th means nothing for him. As long as he has the confirmation within himself to be fast enough (and he has been quick all year, that's a huge difference compared to 2010), that's the most important at the moment.



Thanks for the link, never saw that footage before. He came from a long way back to outbreak Hill. Was Schumacher that bloody good or was Hill having tyre problems?

#14747 ivand911

ivand911
  • Member

  • 8,152 posts
  • Joined: February 10

Posted 18 October 2011 - 06:43

What? First arknor , now Szoelloe is leaving us.  ;) I suggest arknor to take some weeks rest. To come fresh in the next GP. And to stop changing avatars with puxanando.
Some other guys live in 2006, like somebody care what happen then. It is the past. Maybe you can start thread about what happen in 2006, it is not about MS only , for you to discuss it here.

#14748 holiday

holiday
  • Member

  • 3,473 posts
  • Joined: October 01

Posted 18 October 2011 - 07:33

Now we have a new angle to this debate to prove how superior Michael Schumacher is to the whole world - face reading. Very interesting indeed.


I think he meant China as a fine example of MS having achieved the more memorable wins in 2006. Which is how I too view the season: MS showing the better peak performances, FA the better consistency. This made FA a deserving champion, but so would have been MS with a bit more luck towards the season's finale.


#14749 Group B

Group B
  • Member

  • 13,971 posts
  • Joined: March 02

Posted 18 October 2011 - 07:35

Sigh, I really dont have time for your childish games of playing around with words. ...

:lol:
That's priceless. You clearly have time coming out of your ears, else you wouldn't spend hours camped in a forum thread of an F1 driver you dislike writing endess reams in a failed attempt to convince people he's crap.

#14750 HaPe

HaPe
  • Member

  • 1,016 posts
  • Joined: November 07

Posted 18 October 2011 - 07:39

In Turkey Schumacher overcooked it at Saturday, didn't get pole and in the end Alonso was ahead of him after unlucky circumstances. Note: Schumi cockup in the race where he slid off at T8. That gave Alonso P2.

That isnt quite true.
Lap 14 was SC and everyoney stopped - and because Massa was in P1, MSC had to wait in the pit right behind him at the stop.
This loss of time gave Alonso P2.

Remember the words Alonso used? I'll never let the gap become smaller than 25 points. But due to less agressive, more balanced driving he kept scoring pretty much everywhere. Schumachers pressure tactics in the end didn't pay off and a less all or nothing approach would have worked maybe, although Alonso was still very strong and hard to beat in 2006.

Well, Schumacher had no other choice than that.
He has fallen behind in the points because Ferraris lack of pace and technical issues and so he had to make up ground at all costs. This needs risks and "desperate" drives - and therefore unevitably brings a higher chance on mistakes/driving errors.

Even if the Ferrari became the better car in some races in the second half of the season, Alonso just could "sit it out", driving in defense mode and just score points.
This comfort gave the impression of "the faultless Alonso", but it was just because he never really needed to take a risk in the race.

What it looks like, if Alonso has to play such "Schumacher-2006-role" and make up ground in the championship standing was very visible in the season right after, when he never had a luxury points lead, instead facing a hard fight. And whoops here was the Alonso making quite a lot of mistakes in the races (e.g. Canada where he was more gras mower than racing driver). etc. pp.