Jump to content


Photo

Michael Schumacher (merged)


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

#16751 schubacca

schubacca
  • Member

  • 800 posts
  • Joined: May 10

Posted 02 February 2012 - 22:25

So it's more acceptable to do something premeditated and admit it that it is to do something in the heat of the moment.

Strong logic.



Yep, because premeditated murder is less of a crime than a crime of passion......

:)



Advertisement

#16752 jj2728

jj2728
  • Member

  • 2,839 posts
  • Joined: January 04

Posted 02 February 2012 - 22:39

I don't understand why you lot have to keep feeding the idiots. There hasn't been a single development on the racing front since the off-season began and not a wheel turned on a 2012 car, there's literally nothing of substance to analyse as far as the racing is concerned and absolutely no reason at all to rehash old arguments. That the haters are attracted to this thread the moment Michael's back in the news for some reason is proof enough to me at least that these are just trolls looking for a good time on the interwebs.



Maybe some are, maybe some aren't. Things started to get wound up again of late due to some comments Berger made and yesterday the question was asked what would people expect of Schumacher if he has a car that can keep up with the front runners. Invariably it's gonna get folks wound up. It's also been mentioned that perhaps it was better for Schumacher to lay back in qualifying, and to that I disagreed. I mean serously, why would saving a set of tyres be any advantage if he's starting well back? It's that sort of reasoning that implies a desperate grasping of straws in order to justify not only non-performance, but a car that wasn't up to snuff. The front runners are going to be nigh untouchable anyhow so why wouldn't he want to start a race as close to the front as possible? One poster was accused of being lazy, something having to do with topic search, and told the only finger lifted for him would be the middle finger. That's childish stuff. Hell, I get name called and accused of being a troll. Sure there are people who make inane comments, but there are those that feel just as passionately against Schumacher as those that do, all for their own reasons for better or worse. Then there's the last resort, his stats are thrown out there. Ok, fine we get it. Yes his stats are superb and I doubt very much that they will be equalled, let alone surpassed, but how many times do we have to hear it? Just as how many times do we have to hear about the Hill and Villeneuve incidents? There are those that think some of his on track antics will tarnish an unquestionably phenomenal career, I've said as much. I've also said that he's not in my top 5 list of all time great F1 drivers, but that's just MHO and nothing more. I've also said that given the car, he's more than capable of winning again and that 2012 will be a make or break season for him, but we'll see. Anyhow, let's hope that 2012 is an exciting year not dominated by one team.






#16753 FenderJaguar

FenderJaguar
  • Member

  • 1,556 posts
  • Joined: October 09

Posted 02 February 2012 - 22:41

I'm saying it is a bit more honest and I am trying to get the point that Jacques was trying to make through to some of you who didn't get quite what he said. That's about it. I have a lot of respect for Michael on the racetrack and I wish some would try to be on a higher level of discussion and not see every different view as trolling.

#16754 genespleen

genespleen
  • Member

  • 371 posts
  • Joined: May 06

Posted 03 February 2012 - 00:53

Ok, let's get that myth corrected.

Here is what Senna said one year later:

"I said to myself, “OK, you try to work cleanly, and you get ****** by certain people. All right, if tomorrow Prost beats me off the line, at the first corner, I will go for it and he better not turn in because he’s not going to make it.” And it just happened."


Thank you. It amazes me that some people still seek to whitewash what remains the single most blatant and willful case of ramming to decide a championship in the history of the sport.

#16755 TheBunk

TheBunk
  • Member

  • 4,083 posts
  • Joined: May 11

Posted 03 February 2012 - 01:31

"It was not a race. It was a demonstration of brilliance."

Stirling Moss about Schumacher at the 1996 Spanish GP

#16756 TheBunk

TheBunk
  • Member

  • 4,083 posts
  • Joined: May 11

Posted 03 February 2012 - 01:37


Schumacher holds these records:

Championship titles 7 (1994, 1995, 2000, 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004)
Consecutive titles 5 (2000–2004)
Championship won with most races left 6 (2002)
Largest championship-winning margin
(pre-2010 points system) 67 points (2002)
Race wins 91
Consecutive wins 7 (2004, Europe–Hungary)
Wins in a season 13 (72%) (2004)
Wins in a season for a runner-up 7 (2006)
Wins at Monza (Formula One) 5
Wins with one team 72 (Ferrari)
Wins at the same Grand Prix 8 (France)
Different Grands Prix won 22
Longest time between first and last wins 14 years, 32 days
Total years with a win 15 (1992–2006)
Consecutive years with a win 15 (1992–2006)
Second places 43
Consecutive top two finishes 15 (Brazil 2002–Japan 2002)
Podiums (Top 3 finishes) 154
Podium finishes in a season 17 (100%) (2002)
Consecutive podium finishes 19 (US 2001–Japan 2002)
Championship points 1,517
Points finishes 213
Consecutive points finishes 24 (Hungary 2001–Malaysia 2003)
Races / Laps / Distance led 142 races / 5,111 laps / 24,144 km[184]
Pole positions 68
Front row starts 115
Fastest laps 76
Fastest laps in a season 10 (2004)
Doubles (Pole and win) 40
Hat tricks (Pole, win and fastest lap) 22
Hat tricks in a season 5 in 2004
Races with one team 181 (Ferrari)

Nobody is ever gonna touch this guy.

Best memory I have was a race at the Hockenheim race track, pre butchering. And every time he came through there in his red Ferrari the crowds on the stands went absolutly crazy. The noise was deafening each and every lap.



#16757 hammibal

hammibal
  • Member

  • 1,857 posts
  • Joined: May 11

Posted 03 February 2012 - 02:11

And there I am thinking that Schumacher "saving" a set of tyres and setting his car up for Sunday is rather an advantage as opposed to qualifying 5th/6th, wasting a set of tyres + gearing up for Quali, thus inevitably dropping back behind the Ferraris during the race and run the risk of Nico over-taking him too.

The qualifying difference was the same in 2010 as well

Michael will be delighted to see that Lewis is still chewing over Monza months later.

I can think of Canada as well. anyways the new one move etiquette should make for fairer racing

#16758 hammibal

hammibal
  • Member

  • 1,857 posts
  • Joined: May 11

Posted 03 February 2012 - 02:25

Only that MS said that he would have done things differently such as 1997.

You can feel free to hold on to that though ;)

PS: Those stats still stand ;)

Maybe because he got punished for it and criticised by all and sunder plus of course he lost, no regrets about 1994 though

Thank you. It amazes me that some people still seek to whitewash what remains the single most blatant and willful case of ramming to decide a championship in the history of the sport.

Payback can be a bitch and it stuck a finger up to Prost's friend and fellow countryman Ballestre, President of the FIA

#16759 Raelene

Raelene
  • Member

  • 5,342 posts
  • Joined: April 99

Posted 03 February 2012 - 02:32

Maybe because he got punished for it and criticised by all and sunder plus of course he lost, no regrets about 1994 though


and niether should he have any regrets about 1994.


Advertisement

#16760 Afterburner

Afterburner
  • Member

  • 4,222 posts
  • Joined: January 11

Posted 03 February 2012 - 04:43

I'm saying it is a bit more honest and I am trying to get the point that Jacques was trying to make through to some of you who didn't get quite what he said. That's about it. I have a lot of respect for Michael on the racetrack and I wish some would try to be on a higher level of discussion and not see every different view as trolling.

My thoughts exactly. :up:

#16761 Raelene

Raelene
  • Member

  • 5,342 posts
  • Joined: April 99

Posted 03 February 2012 - 06:01

I'm saying it is a bit more honest and I am trying to get the point that Jacques was trying to make through to some of you who didn't get quite what he said. That's about it. I have a lot of respect for Michael on the racetrack and I wish some would try to be on a higher level of discussion and not see every different view as trolling.


I certainly got what he said - I just think what he said was an absolute load of cr ap... to say that someone cheated with more class and integrity is laughable...

Edited by Raelene, 03 February 2012 - 06:35.


#16762 Craven Morehead

Craven Morehead
  • Member

  • 4,622 posts
  • Joined: February 06

Posted 03 February 2012 - 06:19

Payback can be a bitch and it stuck a finger up to Prost's friend and fellow countryman Ballestre, President of the FIA


sums it up nicely

Edited by Craven Morehead, 03 February 2012 - 06:19.


#16763 ivand911

ivand911
  • Member

  • 8,152 posts
  • Joined: February 10

Posted 03 February 2012 - 07:54

Guys, isn't that Jacques quote very old? I think things changed very much since then. I think his opinion about MS comeback was positive. I think, I remember seeing them somewhere together(some occasions) and they respect each other. So, there isn't point for looking back.
MS is F1 driver ,he will give his best. If the best is enough, we will see. As I said, enough for me is podiums, some win will be perfect.

#16764 cheapracer

cheapracer
  • Member

  • 10,388 posts
  • Joined: May 07

Posted 03 February 2012 - 08:37

Oh the stats...some fan must be hurting.

I have a lot of respect for Michael on the racetrack and I wish some would try to be on a higher level of discussion and not see every different view as trolling.



Mate, how about you also see the trolls stats;

Adelaide, Jerez, Monaco, Austria, Hungary 99.99%

Any other of the 280+ races 0.01%

It's gets very very boring the same people spouting the same bullshit post after post after post, year after year after year.


I think that interview was after Rascasse where he parked his car and once again smiled and said it was so unfortunate.


That would include you by the way, bringing up Monaco 2006 and your opinion that no one asked for is your "higher level of discussion" is it.








#16765 cheapracer

cheapracer
  • Member

  • 10,388 posts
  • Joined: May 07

Posted 03 February 2012 - 10:06

Another thing that MS is gracious or is when another driver is hard on him he just gets on with it and doesn't whine on about it, here is JV himself yet again (one of many) chopping MS, this time into a wall but do you ever about it? No.



Since stats have been mentioned, did you know the next win that MS gets, if it happens, will equal the tally of wins of Senna and Prost put together (92) - that's of course officially dismissing his Spa 1994 win.

#16766 BRK

BRK
  • Member

  • 3,653 posts
  • Joined: November 07

Posted 03 February 2012 - 10:07

Maybe some are, maybe some aren't. Things started to get wound up again of late due to some comments Berger made and yesterday the question was asked what would people expect of Schumacher if he has a car that can keep up with the front runners. Invariably it's gonna get folks wound up. It's also been mentioned that perhaps it was better for Schumacher to lay back in qualifying, and to that I disagreed. I mean serously, why would saving a set of tyres be any advantage if he's starting well back? It's that sort of reasoning that implies a desperate grasping of straws in order to justify not only non-performance, but a car that wasn't up to snuff. The front runners are going to be nigh untouchable anyhow so why wouldn't he want to start a race as close to the front as possible? One poster was accused of being lazy, something having to do with topic search, and told the only finger lifted for him would be the middle finger. That's childish stuff. Hell, I get name called and accused of being a troll. Sure there are people who make inane comments, but there are those that feel just as passionately against Schumacher as those that do, all for their own reasons for better or worse. Then there's the last resort, his stats are thrown out there. Ok, fine we get it. Yes his stats are superb and I doubt very much that they will be equalled, let alone surpassed, but how many times do we have to hear it? Just as how many times do we have to hear about the Hill and Villeneuve incidents? There are those that think some of his on track antics will tarnish an unquestionably phenomenal career, I've said as much. I've also said that he's not in my top 5 list of all time great F1 drivers, but that's just MHO and nothing more. I've also said that given the car, he's more than capable of winning again and that 2012 will be a make or break season for him, but we'll see. Anyhow, let's hope that 2012 is an exciting year not dominated by one team.


Sometimes all it takes is one person to drag the thread downhill. All I saw were people discussing Berger's comments when someone barged in with the 'trashing' nonsense, others joining in for a cheap bash and soon enough we were in Jerez '97,Monaco '06 territory. Which have absolutely nothing to do with Berger's comments or Schumacher's performance in 2011..

As for your assessment of Schumacher the driver, to be honest for every critic that cannot see beyond his\her dislike of the man there are probably a hundred neutrals and observers that would put their bias aside and rank him as one of the greatest of all time, right at the very top, so it utterly doesn't matter IMHO.

Not much to be said about the stats thing, I don't see what's wrong with (gently ;)) reminding the detractors of Michael's tremendous success or that he was and still is immensely talented. Considering the rest see it fit for some reason to keep bringing '97 up, for example.

I think the thing that gets to many on the other side of the fence is the length of his tenure at the top. If Jim Clark or Ayrton Senna had somehow managed to win seven titles and 91 grands prix I bet they would have been the ones getting bashed, instead of MS. There's even been people that have admitted the antagonism would not have been as extreme had Schumacher 'only' won four or five titles. :lol:

Nevertheless, such petty stuff has never mattered in the long run, and will survive only as long as the minority among the generation that followed his career do. You'd only rarely see Fangio getting 'bashed' or his stats being held against his reputation as a legend for only ever wining in the best cars, jumping ship mid-season or using his teammate's cars to win (even though this was a common practice at the time, I believe).

#16767 DutchCruijff

DutchCruijff
  • Member

  • 933 posts
  • Joined: February 11

Posted 03 February 2012 - 10:38

Guys, isn't that Jacques quote very old? I think things changed very much since then. I think his opinion about MS comeback was positive. I think, I remember seeing them somewhere together(some occasions) and they respect each other. So, there isn't point for looking back.
MS is F1 driver ,he will give his best. If the best is enough, we will see. As I said, enough for me is podiums, some win will be perfect.

It is very old but it just goes to show how much hate Jacques for him, it was pure hatred which is rather perplexing. I still think he dislikes him, probably only supporting his comeback because he had the view of something similar, and it's rather funny to re-live these comments because Schumi's proved the haters wrong once again.

#16768 Sakae

Sakae
  • Member

  • 19,256 posts
  • Joined: December 03

Posted 03 February 2012 - 12:47

Sometimes all it takes is one person to drag the thread downhill. All I saw were people discussing Berger's comments when someone barged in with the 'trashing' nonsense, others joining in for a cheap bash and soon enough we were in Jerez '97,Monaco '06 territory. Which have absolutely nothing to do with Berger's comments or Schumacher's performance in 2011..

As for your assessment of Schumacher the driver, to be honest for every critic that cannot see beyond his\her dislike of the man there are probably a hundred neutrals and observers that would put their bias aside and rank him as one of the greatest of all time, right at the very top, so it utterly doesn't matter IMHO.

Not much to be said about the stats thing, I don't see what's wrong with (gently ;)) reminding the detractors of Michael's tremendous success or that he was and still is immensely talented. Considering the rest see it fit for some reason to keep bringing '97 up, for example.

I think the thing that gets to many on the other side of the fence is the length of his tenure at the top. If Jim Clark or Ayrton Senna had somehow managed to win seven titles and 91 grands prix I bet they would have been the ones getting bashed, instead of MS. There's even been people that have admitted the antagonism would not have been as extreme had Schumacher 'only' won four or five titles. :lol:

Nevertheless, such petty stuff has never mattered in the long run, and will survive only as long as the minority among the generation that followed his career do. You'd only rarely see Fangio getting 'bashed' or his stats being held against his reputation as a legend for only ever wining in the best cars, jumping ship mid-season or using his teammate's cars to win (even though this was a common practice at the time, I believe).

I am with F1 scene for a while, yet I am yet to understand internet psychology. Take a case of Clark v. Schumacher. People claim rationality behind their opinions, claim no racism or nationalistic inclinations are involved, yet two WDC for Clark under circumstances that could be discussed in a separate thread are considered suprior to everything what Michael has achieved. I cannot help it then but to think that emotions, tribality, and a lot of PR sometimes takes over a reason, and internet is really not a medium to change anyone's mind.

#16769 jj2728

jj2728
  • Member

  • 2,839 posts
  • Joined: January 04

Posted 03 February 2012 - 12:51

I am with F1 scene for a while, yet I am yet to understand internet psychology. Take a case of Clark v. Schumacher. People claim rationality behind their opinions, claim no racism or nationalistic inclinations are involved, yet two WDC for Clark under circumstances that could be discussed in a separate thread are considered suprior to everything what Michael has achieved. I cannot help it then but to think that emotions, tribality, and a lot of PR sometimes takes over a reason, and internet is really not a medium to change anyone's mind.


Whoever said that about Clark? I'd like to see your soruces for that.

#16770 jj2728

jj2728
  • Member

  • 2,839 posts
  • Joined: January 04

Posted 03 February 2012 - 12:58

As for your assessment of Schumacher the driver, to be honest for every critic that cannot see beyond his\her dislike of the man there are probably a hundred neutrals and observers that would put their bias aside and rank him as one of the greatest of all time, right at the very top, so it utterly doesn't matter IMHO.


But, the thing is I neither like nor dislike Schumacher and I feel the same way towards the rest of the field. I respect them for what they do, I consider each to be sportsmen, but my days of hero worship died many long years ago when I saw far too many of my own heroes killed. I don't rate Schumacher in my top 5 because of his past actions and the fact that he never had a teammate capable of or allowed to challenge him. Nothing wrong with that, he built a dominating Ferrari team around him, and hat's off for that, but no, at the very top of my personal best list? No.

#16771 Sakae

Sakae
  • Member

  • 19,256 posts
  • Joined: December 03

Posted 03 February 2012 - 12:59

Whoever said that about Clark? I'd like to see your soruces for that.

Before you fly off the handle, I was thinking about various polls which do pop-up occassionally, and in which Clark is rated higher than Schumacher; discussion that follows usually tries to rationalise polling data, but its hard to understand that. I would be surprised to hear that you have never seen that in here.

#16772 FenderJaguar

FenderJaguar
  • Member

  • 1,556 posts
  • Joined: October 09

Posted 03 February 2012 - 13:01

It depends on what you put into the expression "best F1 driver ever". And what you appreciate the most.

Edit: yes, there are a lot of polls and then there are polls with people from F1 or drivers and Michael is rarely on top. I wouldn't put him on top either but of course he is one of the bigger names in F1 history.

Edited by FenderJaguar, 03 February 2012 - 13:04.


#16773 jj2728

jj2728
  • Member

  • 2,839 posts
  • Joined: January 04

Posted 03 February 2012 - 13:06

Before you fly off the handle, I was thinking about various polls which do pop-up occassionally, and in which Clark is rated higher than Schumacher; discussion that follows usually tries to rationalise polling data, but its hard to understand that. I would be surprised to hear that you have never seen that in here.


Just asking you a simple question, not flying off the handle. It's pretty much what you do. When someone has a contradicotru post you always seem to want references and back up. So, I was only asking for your proof.......

#16774 BRK

BRK
  • Member

  • 3,653 posts
  • Joined: November 07

Posted 03 February 2012 - 13:25

Well there was a recent poll on the forum where Schumacher was voted greatest of all time bar none, followed by Senna, Clark, Fangio and Prost:

http://forums.autosp...greatest driver

Not an irrational poll as the cream ultimately did rise to the top. Considering this is a British dominated forum and there's no shortage of Schumacher-critics here, and that this is also one of the most popular F1 forums on the internet, I think that's a pretty good sign. By no means fully representative of the entire fanbase but definitely more so than one man\woman making a random list on a blog somewhere.

The point being that the opinion of the detractors is in a minuscule minority. That's probably also the case with the others in the top five on that list as well as Stewart.

#16775 Sakae

Sakae
  • Member

  • 19,256 posts
  • Joined: December 03

Posted 03 February 2012 - 13:49

Well there was a recent poll on the forum where Schumacher was voted greatest of all time bar none, followed by Senna, Clark, Fangio and Prost:

http://forums.autosp...greatest driver

Not an irrational poll as the cream ultimately did rise to the top. Considering this is a British dominated forum and there's no shortage of Schumacher-critics here, and that this is also one of the most popular F1 forums on the internet, I think that's a pretty good sign. By no means fully representative of the entire fanbase but definitely more so than one man\woman making a random list on a blog somewhere.

The point being that the opinion of the detractors is in a minuscule minority. That's probably also the case with the others in the top five on that list as well as Stewart.

I am not bothered by someone having opposing point of view, however on occassions it bothers me, that I do not understand their position. Reasons for that might be numerous, and perhaps outside of this thread intent. Still, being of an inqusitive mind...

#16776 DutchCruijff

DutchCruijff
  • Member

  • 933 posts
  • Joined: February 11

Posted 03 February 2012 - 14:04

Just asking you a simple question, not flying off the handle. It's pretty much what you do. When someone has a contradicotru post you always seem to want references and back up. So, I was only asking for your proof.......

I'm still waiting on your "proof"...

#16777 jj2728

jj2728
  • Member

  • 2,839 posts
  • Joined: January 04

Posted 03 February 2012 - 16:11

I'm still waiting on your "proof"...


Brazil: 1:13.694 1:13.571 no time - qualified 10th race 15th
Japan: 1:33.748 1:32.116 no time - qualified 8th race 7th
Singapore: 1:48.819 1:46.043 no time - qualified 8th race retired collision

So, of the 3 times that he did not set a time in Q3, and in doing so, as you claimed to save a set of tyres for the race, he finished 1 spot above is grid slot, 5 places below, and once was involved in a collision. In other words 2 out of the 3 times, the saving tyres strategy failed to pay off.

#16778 Richardc

Richardc
  • Member

  • 235 posts
  • Joined: March 11

Posted 03 February 2012 - 16:16

Crashing didn't really give him the option to make it work, however he was on a bit of a charge at the time - it was going to pay off.

#16779 Diablobb81

Diablobb81
  • Member

  • 3,755 posts
  • Joined: August 09

Posted 03 February 2012 - 16:20

Except for the part where he was 1 sec faster than his teammate in Singapore and finished 6th in Japan and Senna bumped him in Brazil when he was going good.

Yeah, it didn't work.

Edited by Diablobb81, 03 February 2012 - 16:23.


Advertisement

#16780 jj2728

jj2728
  • Member

  • 2,839 posts
  • Joined: January 04

Posted 03 February 2012 - 16:21

Crashing didn't really give him the option to make it work, however he was on a bit of a charge at the time - it was going to pay off.


But it didn't pay off.

#16781 jj2728

jj2728
  • Member

  • 2,839 posts
  • Joined: January 04

Posted 03 February 2012 - 16:24

Except for the part where he was 1 sec faster than his teammate in Singapore and finished 6th in Japan.


Yep, 6th in Japan, my mistake. Still doesnt change the fact that it was 1 out of the 3 times.

#16782 Richardc

Richardc
  • Member

  • 235 posts
  • Joined: March 11

Posted 03 February 2012 - 16:28

Are you serious? So you could say that if a driver has a DNF, his race stratergy was wrong because it didn't pay off - **** the reason?

#16783 DutchCruijff

DutchCruijff
  • Member

  • 933 posts
  • Joined: February 11

Posted 03 February 2012 - 16:33

I can't add on Diablo's post, because it's summed up perfectly.

So those "2 of the 3 times" he was ON COURSE to better his position and thus making it an advantage. Had he not had those avoidable collisions he, IIRC, would have finished 6th/7th in both races.

#16784 DutchCruijff

DutchCruijff
  • Member

  • 933 posts
  • Joined: February 11

Posted 03 February 2012 - 16:34

But it didn't pay off.

:rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl:

Desperation, no logic, jj.

#16785 spacekid

spacekid
  • Member

  • 2,678 posts
  • Joined: April 11

Posted 03 February 2012 - 16:35

I think its a fair point to suggest, as I have a couple of pages back, that starting down the grid makes a tangle with another car more likely.

One only has to look back through this thread to see how many times we have said 'I just hope he can avoid a collision with Petrov/Senna/Insert random midfielder here'. Even if all the collisions weren't his fault they still could have been avoided by simply not being in the presence of those cars, which in terms of race pace he shouldn't have been.

No one ever said in 2011 'this race will be ok as long as Michael avoids a collision with Mark Webber'.

#16786 jj2728

jj2728
  • Member

  • 2,839 posts
  • Joined: January 04

Posted 03 February 2012 - 16:37

Are you serious? So you could say that if a driver has a DNF, his race stratergy was wrong because it didn't pay off - **** the reason?


Yes I'm serious, he was behind his teammate and Perez at the time and had he possibly out qualified his teammate there may never have been an incident as he very well could have been ahead of him.

#16787 DutchCruijff

DutchCruijff
  • Member

  • 933 posts
  • Joined: February 11

Posted 03 February 2012 - 16:44

Yes I'm serious, he was behind his teammate and Perez at the time and had he possibly out qualified his teammate there may never have been an incident as he very well could have been ahead of him.

These are avoidable accidents and are indictive of Schumacher's eagerness as opposed to his tyre strategies. Yes, qualifying back down has left him to mingle with less competent drivers but as we are solely discussing his TYRE strategy his collisions should not be considered.

#16788 jj2728

jj2728
  • Member

  • 2,839 posts
  • Joined: January 04

Posted 03 February 2012 - 16:44

:rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl:

Desperation, no logic, jj.


You see? This is the response one gets when he gives someone the proof he has been calling for. I am only quoting the stats. Some of you love the stats so much when it comes to drivers, that when the stats are pointed out that person is called desperate and illogical. To say that he was 'on course', is not a stat is it? The stat is that 2 out of the 3 times he set no time in Q3 he failed either out of the points or dnf'd....

#16789 jj2728

jj2728
  • Member

  • 2,839 posts
  • Joined: January 04

Posted 03 February 2012 - 16:46

These are avoidable accidents and are indictive of Schumacher's eagerness as opposed to his tyre strategies. Yes, qualifying back down has left him to mingle with less competent drivers but as we are solely discussing his TYRE strategy his collisions should not be considered.


Why not? Because the collision doesn't suit your percepton? I'm just showing you the stats.

#16790 Clark65

Clark65
  • New Member

  • 16 posts
  • Joined: November 11

Posted 03 February 2012 - 16:48

Brazil: 1:13.694 1:13.571 no time - qualified 10th race 15th
Japan: 1:33.748 1:32.116 no time - qualified 8th race 7th
Singapore: 1:48.819 1:46.043 no time - qualified 8th race retired collision

So, of the 3 times that he did not set a time in Q3, and in doing so, as you claimed to save a set of tyres for the race, he finished 1 spot above is grid slot, 5 places below, and once was involved in a collision. In other words 2 out of the 3 times, the saving tyres strategy failed to pay off.


OK, time for little logic to kick in.

Brazil - excellent choice, but as usual poor explanation.
Schumacher and Senna had contact in lap 10. Schumacher was 4 seconds behind Rosberg. Returning to pits with just 3 tyres on car resulted with gap to Rosberg being increased to 72 seconds. It is also important to highlight that Schumacher had 3 stop strategy and Rosberg had 2 stop strategy. Loss of another 20 seconds.
At the end of the race, gap was 51 seconds.
Realisticly, he could have finished in 5th or 6th position.

Japan - Schumacher finished 6th. It is not that important, but he was leading the race for couple of laps. Not bad for an old, mean Schumacher.

Singapore - in second and third stint, he was faster than Rosberg for around 1.5 second per lap.

#16791 Buttoneer

Buttoneer
  • RC Forum Admin

  • 17,628 posts
  • Joined: May 04

Posted 03 February 2012 - 16:52

Posts have been deleted.

I think it's time for a reminder that driver-name threads are for discussion of the driver in the title. That means someone can post 'Jerez '97' as much as another can post '7xWDC'. This thread is not for those who wish to sing praises only, and the tone of the discussion will be exactly what you choose to make it, so personal attacks are just going to create an unvirtuous circle of ill-mannered posts that make it very difficult to see who started it. A reasonably stated argument which is attacked by name calling is not the post that will get deleted.

If you do not like the fact that people can post negative comments here then the thread is not for you and we will not promote such threads here. If you don't agree with someone praising or criticising, then argue reasonably against it. If you think someone is just a broken record, add them to ignore or scroll on by. If someone is deliberately posting lies, half truths and does so in a manner clearly designed to irritate then report it and we can take action. If you attack it, you give it oxygen it doesn't deserve and attract attention to yourself and not them.

Most of all, do not attack the individual.

If you want to discuss this post of how this forum is moderated, do so via PM.

#16792 ivand911

ivand911
  • Member

  • 8,152 posts
  • Joined: February 10

Posted 03 February 2012 - 16:53

Yes I'm serious, he was behind his teammate and Perez at the time and had he possibly out qualified his teammate there may never have been an incident as he very well could have been ahead of him.

About Singapore, MS was fast, he was behind Perez because he have 1 stop more at that time. And he was 1-2 sec behind Nico(who was ahead of Rerez). Also getting into corners Saubers were slow, they were hit from behind not for the first time. Their old tyres didn't help too.


#16793 DutchCruijff

DutchCruijff
  • Member

  • 933 posts
  • Joined: February 11

Posted 03 February 2012 - 16:54

Why not? Because the collision doesn't suit your percepton? I'm just showing you the stats.

Because his collisions were avoidable. Singapore was avoidable, Brazil was avoidable. Is that no so?

Considering the answer to that question is yes, do you agree that if the collisions are avoidable it is more so the case of Schumacher being over-eager than his tyre strategy?

The premise to your argument is that his tyre strategy PUT him in that position but the reality is that it DID NOT cause the incidents. His eagerness, god knows what happened to Perez & Senna repeatedly bashing into him caused those incidents not saving tyres.

#16794 Afterburner

Afterburner
  • Member

  • 4,222 posts
  • Joined: January 11

Posted 03 February 2012 - 16:56

I think its a fair point to suggest, as I have a couple of pages back, that starting down the grid makes a tangle with another car more likely.

One only has to look back through this thread to see how many times we have said 'I just hope he can avoid a collision with Petrov/Senna/Insert random midfielder here'. Even if all the collisions weren't his fault they still could have been avoided by simply not being in the presence of those cars, which in terms of race pace he shouldn't have been.

No one ever said in 2011 'this race will be ok as long as Michael avoids a collision with Mark Webber'.

I'll second this. JJ is right in saying that a collision with a midfielder/backmarker as a result of adopting a tyre-saving strategy is a direct consequence of that choice. If Schumacher doesn't want to have these problems next year, he'll need to improve his qualifying, full stop.

And for the sake of full disclosure, Schumacher was my first 'favourite' F1 driver and is probably still my favourite driver in the field (just ahead of Vettel and Button).

#16795 ivand911

ivand911
  • Member

  • 8,152 posts
  • Joined: February 10

Posted 03 February 2012 - 16:57

Singapore and Brazil are different. First was MS fault, second was Senna's. And he was punished.

#16796 DutchCruijff

DutchCruijff
  • Member

  • 933 posts
  • Joined: February 11

Posted 03 February 2012 - 17:04

I'll second this. JJ is right in saying that a collision with a midfielder/backmarker as a result of adopting a tyre-saving strategy is a direct consequence of that choice. If Schumacher doesn't want to have these problems next year, he'll need to improve his qualifying, full stop.

And for the sake of full disclosure, Schumacher was my first 'favourite' F1 driver and is probably still my favourite driver in the field (just ahead of Vettel and Button).

How can it be a "direct consequence" when they are avoidable accidents?

#16797 spacekid

spacekid
  • Member

  • 2,678 posts
  • Joined: April 11

Posted 03 February 2012 - 17:07

Singapore and Brazil are different. First was MS fault, second was Senna's. And he was punished.


Fair enough, but the point is that collisions like those are always more likely in the midfield, espicially for a guy like Michael who is quicker on race pace. And that has to be factored in when considering whether something is a 'good strategy'.

Besides which I'm still not convinced it was all strategy, the burning of extra sets to get through Q1 and the general gap to Nico in Q2 suggested to me that Michael was really struggling to get as much pace over the single lap than his team mate. Michaels long run pace was much, much better, but I still think there was something within his driving not allowing him to really get the car working properly over the hot laps.

#16798 DutchCruijff

DutchCruijff
  • Member

  • 933 posts
  • Joined: February 11

Posted 03 February 2012 - 17:08

which I'm still not convinced it was all strategy, the burning of extra sets to get through Q1 and the general gap to Nico in Q2 suggested to me that Michael was really struggling to get as much pace over the single lap than his team mate.

It's called comprising, it's a strategy.

#16799 spacekid

spacekid
  • Member

  • 2,678 posts
  • Joined: April 11

Posted 03 February 2012 - 17:08

How can it be a "direct consequence" when they are avoidable accidents?


Getting run over isn't a direct consequence of walking across the road with your eyes shut, but it does make it a lot more likely.

Advertisement

#16800 spacekid

spacekid
  • Member

  • 2,678 posts
  • Joined: April 11

Posted 03 February 2012 - 17:10

It's called comprising, it's a strategy.


Well thats fair enough, its just my opinion and my reasoning for it. For the reasons given above if it was a strategy - and maybe I'm wrong and it was - in my opinion it was flawed.