On what basis is he then as good as he used to be? Because Nikki Lauda says so? Well then I guess we've all solved the problem and can now expose Schumacher as a fraud, B+ driver who only got the results due to luck.....
Even a hater can see that if they view the situation logically and with reason.
Even a hater can see that Schumacher is a fraud, a B+ driver who only got the results due to luck?
That he is as good in 2010 as he used to be, even Lauda says so?
I can't follow your argument here, but it surely seems extreme to me. This goes even beyond anything Frans would share with us.
Let's stay with the facts: in his first career Schumacher achieved monumental results, while being helped in multifarious ways through special support by Bernie (who always wanted a German superstar), Brawn/Byrne/Todt, specially tailor-made contracts that prevented any teammate of Schumacher from scoring unfavorably as opposed Schumacher, special assistance by FIA, who punished only Michael's most blatant disgressions, while supporting him (and Ferrari) many times by changing the rules in his favor (only once it was not in his favor, in 2005 - and see the result how Michael suffered once the tyre rules were against him....)
In his second career Michael is an also-ran, a journey-man, being rated by readers of this BB as the 18th best driver this season.....And if it were not for his name, he would be in danger of being replaced by season's end the latest.
Conclusion: Michael is clearly not who he used to be. His showing in 2010 calls for a deeper analysis of Michael's first career, and this has started. The myth Schumi will surely not be the same by season's end.
If Mansell came back at age 41 and won a Grand Prix, Schumi (who was perceived a much better driver than Mansell by many) surely should be able to put himself on the podium at least once in ten races, when his team-mate manages this feat thrice....