Jump to content


Photo

Michael Schumacher (merged)


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

#4351 man

man
  • Member

  • 1,303 posts
  • Joined: October 01

Posted 07 August 2010 - 21:11

And Mansell didn't return in 5-6 fastest car. He return in Williams ,fastest car in 1994. He win because first two DNF. But,good result though. I would like to see Michael return in RBR to compare him with Mansell then.


As if the beating from Rosberg isn't bad enough you want to see him alongside Webber or Vettel? ;-) I warn you, it could get prett ugly there my friend. Sadly, with his performances of 2010 it is just a likely a team such as Redbull will sign Mansell. ;-)

Advertisement

#4352 iakhtar

iakhtar
  • Member

  • 191 posts
  • Joined: April 10

Posted 07 August 2010 - 21:54

If he was driving for RB, he'd probably have a win or two and most people would be singing his praises for coming back. As poorly as he is performing at the moment, i'm not going to write him off just yet, there are alot of unknowns next season and i don't want to be short sighted.

#4353 Yorkie

Yorkie
  • Member

  • 2,192 posts
  • Joined: February 10

Posted 07 August 2010 - 22:01

If you throw away champions in every sport, if they don't deliver 6 months or 1 year or more. How many champions you will have left? There wouldn't be any champions in F1 too if you throw them after one bad year. Tell me, who will be still here? Even Senna have bad years? Some time you lose motivation when you know your car is not capable of wining, that you have to fight for 5-6(don't know if this is the case). There are reasons why Rosberg beat him, and Ross and Haug definitely know them. Because you have opinion, don't mean Mercedes bosses think that way. We hear what you think, it is normal to have opinion, we all hear it 5-6 times. Trust the bosses, if you don't trust Michael. As you think they sign him to win races and titles. Can anyone win something with this car? If not, who's fault is that? Other people also have right to have opinion.



You, miss again small fact that this car is not capable of wining anything? Michael have more chance to win something with his own Benetton B195, than with this car. If you ask Senna every year where he didn't won was bad year. This is my opinion from how all describe him as competitor. But he for sure was not happy, when he didn't win.

Sure Senna had some poorish cars not capable of winning the WDC, but he was never embarassed by a teammate

#4354 Jimmy

Jimmy
  • Member

  • 382 posts
  • Joined: August 00

Posted 07 August 2010 - 23:12

Paul Tracy, when he gets the chance, is still going strong in Indycar too, aged 41. 6th last time out in Edmonton, ahead of all his team mates.

Age itself is no great barrier and neither is evolution of the sport. Only when a driver loses motivation to train and focus 100% on the job in hand do they become past their sell-by-date. Schumacher is not past his prime, too old, or at any great odds with 2010 F1 machinery. He has simply been exposed.

Edited by Jimmy, 07 August 2010 - 23:25.


#4355 Jimmy

Jimmy
  • Member

  • 382 posts
  • Joined: August 00

Posted 07 August 2010 - 23:19

And Mansell didn't return in 5-6 fastest car. He return in Williams ,fastest car in 1994. He win because first two DNF. But,good result though. I would like to see Michael return in RBR to compare him with Mansell then.


Mansell returned to F1 at the French Grand Prix in 1994, no pre-season test programme, and was immediately within one-tenth of Damon Hill's qualifying time. In Adelaide, his fourth race since returning, Mansell outqualified Hill by over six tenths. A glaring example of how weak the post Senna/Prost/Mansell/Piquet era was.

Edited by Jimmy, 07 August 2010 - 23:22.


#4356 aditya-now

aditya-now
  • Member

  • 7,447 posts
  • Joined: June 02

Posted 07 August 2010 - 23:47

Mansell returned to F1 at the French Grand Prix in 1994, no pre-season test programme, and was immediately within one-tenth of Damon Hill's qualifying time. In Adelaide, his fourth race since returning, Mansell outqualified Hill by over six tenths. A glaring example of how weak the post Senna/Prost/Mansell/Piquet era was.


:up:

nothing more to be said. That's why this era also felt so empty.

Age itself is no great barrier and neither is evolution of the sport. Only when a driver loses motivation to train and focus 100% on the job in hand do they become past their sell-by-date. Schumacher is not past his prime, too old, or at any great odds with 2010 F1 machinery. He has simply been exposed.


Lauda was speaking a lot about motivation and how important it is. You can see Niki's motivation all the way up to his very last GP in Adelaide 1985.
With Michael I have to say he looks a bit lacklustre at times, as though he really just wants to have fun.
Unless it is Felipe or Rubens coming up behind him. Then suddenly Michael gets very very serious...



#4357 black magic

black magic
  • Member

  • 3,962 posts
  • Joined: June 00

Posted 08 August 2010 - 00:32

can you remind me of the teammate who embarrassed schumacher before his first retirement?

schumacher is not there to sell t shirts.

he will retire again if he believes he really has lost the plot or the car has no chance of winning. and he will be more aware than you of how far ahead rosberg really is

if the 2011 car is also useless he will pull out as he has already stated he is not here to just make up the numbers

yes all of us schumacher fans have had to accept he may not be the schumacher of old. wouldnt be the first legend to try and fail at a comeback - just that some of us can distinguish between an attempted comeback and one of the greatest careers of all time.

its great bringing up niki lauda - a great driver but I suspect not even he would rank himself at quite schumachers level. great bringing up nigel who had continued racing and winning at indycar equivalent anfd then came back into clearly the best car on the grid. yes he outqualified damon but was also losing a second/lap to the guys charging out front

I don think schumacher needs to spell out his credentials to the like sof this board. brawn and haug went with him on trust alone because they had witnessed first hand what he could achieve. you dont develop that kind of belief without based on numerous demonstrations of ability. that it hasnt succeeded so far is what it is. but it is not an indictment off his career and to keep trying to pretend it is is pretty pathetic. bit like saying fittipaldi was useless based on his cooperscar career - and the other examples of outstanding drivers struggling with inferior cars is numerous.

if you could come up with a single example of a teammate who was quicker than schumacher during his first career your long bows might have carried a semblance of weight. that schumacher could qualify 8 positions in his last competitive career ahead of the next similarly shod competitor is one of numerous examples. it is those moments that the ross brawns of this world dont forget even if some posters have struggled to admit reality.

oh and yes rosberg is slightly quicker than 2010 schumacher. there didnt hurt too much. perhaps you guys should equally try admitting reality that schumacher pre 2006 was one of the greatest of all time.

#4358 V8 Fireworks

V8 Fireworks
  • Member

  • 6,522 posts
  • Joined: June 06

Posted 08 August 2010 - 05:14

oh and yes rosberg is slightly quicker than 2010 schumacher. there didnt hurt too much. perhaps you guys should equally try admitting reality that schumacher pre 2006 was one of the greatest of all time.

he did say that oval racing was too dangerous did he not though?

how that compares to when oval racing was in the f1 championship, or when helmets and seat belts had yet to be invented to accompany the 6+ L* engines... and how schumacher compares as a great to those drivers... is a complicated fit IMO

* sure the formula used by f1 or grand prix racing was as little as 1.x L n/a with a strict mpg limit at times too.

all these irl do not obviously feel it is too dangerous, yet schumi does?

#4359 zeph

zeph
  • Member

  • 804 posts
  • Joined: May 10

Posted 08 August 2010 - 08:02

At times it looks like MercedesGP got the other Schumacher by mistake.

Advertisement

#4360 britishtrident

britishtrident
  • Member

  • 1,954 posts
  • Joined: October 07

Posted 08 August 2010 - 08:22

At times it looks like MercedesGP got the other Schumacher by mistake.



I strongly suspect Ralph would be quicker -- and not draw the attention of the stewards.

#4361 britishtrident

britishtrident
  • Member

  • 1,954 posts
  • Joined: October 07

Posted 08 August 2010 - 08:24

:up:
snip
Unless it is Felipe or Rubens coming up behind him. Then suddenly Michael gets very very serious...


But even having Felipe or Rubens behind him dosen't make him any faster.

#4362 ivand911

ivand911
  • Member

  • 8,152 posts
  • Joined: February 10

Posted 08 August 2010 - 09:43

Good result for Michael here: http://forums.autosp...w...0&start=120
Fifth is not bad. :)

#4363 Lifew12

Lifew12
  • Member

  • 4,551 posts
  • Joined: May 06

Posted 08 August 2010 - 09:55

It's interesting to monitor the manner in which M Schumacher fanatics have modified their analysis of their mans performances since he announced his return.


This is part of my point; the pre-season hype was all about how Michael would show Rosberg the way (and I thought, naturally, he would) then it became 'he needs four races', then 'half a season', and now 'wait until next year' etc, etc. I'm getting routinely pilloried on here for trying to explain that neither Mercedes, nor th sponsors, are going to be happy 'waiting until next year' espexially given the expectation that Michael would, indeed, win races this year. The car has, on some occasions, been pretty competetive, yet it's been Rosberg who has made the better of it. That's not something that Michaels 'fans' should be looking for excuses for, but rather reasons. The reason is that Rosberg, quite simply, is quicker. early in the season I was told - not just on here but everywhere - that we had to give him some leeway 'because he's 41'; my answer was 'so what happens when he's 42?' Personally, i don't believe his age has any bearing on things at all, he's as fit as ever, and so on. Then there's 'he's been away three years' - he had at the start of the season, he hasn't now. As for 'he doesn't like the tyres' and such, tough; I though this wa sthe ever adaptable, super fast in any situation, could win in a shit-box Michael Schumacher/ So did Mercedes, and that's why they hired him.

Somebody tells me i'm stupid 'because sponsors continue to pay drivers when they've finished racing' etc, as they do in many sports; great, what's that got to do with paying a driver a bloody great salary when you could pay another less to do the same job?

I really think the difference in opinion is between those who are 'fans' of Michael - and good for them, nothing wrong with that at all - and those (like myself) who simply like to watch motor racing and, as a result, don't favour one driver over another. I can see that hamilton has the legs of Button, that Alonso is clearly one step ahead of Massa, that Vettel needs to temper his enthusiasm a bit if he wants to beat Webber, that Kubica is better than Petrov, that Barrichello is working wonders in showing the would be hot shot Hulkenberg how its done, and that Kovalainen is performing very well at Lotus when most (including me) expected Trulli to wipe the floor with him. I can also see, without having to search for excuses and justifcations, that Rosberg is pissing all over Schumacher.


#4364 Jan.W

Jan.W
  • Member

  • 169 posts
  • Joined: November 02

Posted 08 August 2010 - 10:02

Mansell returned to F1 at the French Grand Prix in 1994, no pre-season test programme, and was immediately within one-tenth of Damon Hill's qualifying time. In Adelaide, his fourth race since returning, Mansell outqualified Hill by over six tenths. A glaring example of how weak the post Senna/Prost/Mansell/Piquet era was.


Hakkinen returned to F1 at the Portugese Grand prix in 1993, and was immediatly one-tenth faster than Senna in qualify. He was also within one-tenth of SEnna at Suzuka. A glaring example of how strong the Schumacher-era was.

#4365 Juan Kerr

Juan Kerr
  • Member

  • 2,888 posts
  • Joined: October 05

Posted 08 August 2010 - 10:08

At times it looks like MercedesGP got the other Schumacher by mistake.

He would in that car because it totally suits ralf's driving style.

#4366 as65p

as65p
  • Member

  • 18,477 posts
  • Joined: June 04

Posted 08 August 2010 - 11:16

Hakkinen returned to F1 at the Portugese Grand prix in 1993, and was immediatly one-tenth faster than Senna in qualify. He was also within one-tenth of SEnna at Suzuka. A glaring example of how strong the Schumacher-era was. ...


... it could have been had Hakkinen not been left for dead in the races.

Besides, the Hakkinen Schumacher had to face in comparable cars 5 years later wasn't the same anymore, after his Adelaide '94 crash.

#4367 SparkPlug

SparkPlug
  • Member

  • 491 posts
  • Joined: January 10

Posted 08 August 2010 - 12:35

... it could have been had Hakkinen not been left for dead in the races.

Besides, the Hakkinen Schumacher had to face in comparable cars 5 years later wasn't the same anymore, after his Adelaide '94 crash.

Firstly the crash happened in 1995. Atleast get your facts right, google is your friend, even if you havent watched that era of racing.
Secondly Mika Hakkinen's best years were between 98-2000, I dont what leads you to conclude that he wasnt as fast in 98 as he was in 93. He was definitely a much more refined driver in 1998 than he was in 1993.



#4368 SparkPlug

SparkPlug
  • Member

  • 491 posts
  • Joined: January 10

Posted 08 August 2010 - 12:42

Mansell returned to F1 at the French Grand Prix in 1994, no pre-season test programme, and was immediately within one-tenth of Damon Hill's qualifying time. In Adelaide, his fourth race since returning, Mansell outqualified Hill by over six tenths. A glaring example of how weak the post Senna/Prost/Mansell/Piquet era was.

Mansell was never out of racing altogether before his comeback. Not the best example. Not to forget the little fact that he was in the best car of the grid. We know now that Hill wasnt really the fastest driver of the field at any time.

As for Rosberg, that decision is still pending. I dont think we can comment on how good Rosberg is until he is paired up against another driver, one of the top guns of this grid. I have a feeling he wont do too badly against the likes of Hamilton/Vettel/Alonso IMO. However we wont know this for sure until the time actually comes. Massa looked quite mediocre when he was Schumacher's teammate, and he ended up doing a better job than Kimi Raikkonen in Ferrari.

Edited by SparkPlug, 08 August 2010 - 12:46.


#4369 Seanspeed

Seanspeed
  • Member

  • 15,877 posts
  • Joined: October 08

Posted 08 August 2010 - 13:00

Paul Tracy, when he gets the chance, is still going strong in Indycar too, aged 41. 6th last time out in Edmonton, ahead of all his team mates.

Age itself is no great barrier and neither is evolution of the sport. Only when a driver loses motivation to train and focus 100% on the job in hand do they become past their sell-by-date. Schumacher is not past his prime, too old, or at any great odds with 2010 F1 machinery. He has simply been exposed.

Tracy may have gotten 6th, but his actual performance level doesn't seem to be what it was. I wouldn't say its all his age, but not racing in the series consistently surely is hurting him on this. And I've no doubt its hurt Schumacher, too, who took three whole years off of car racing. The Mansell example isn't a good one because the guy never stopped racing. He left for a single year to go race in another highly competitive open-wheel series, where he still showed to be on top of his game. Then he came back into F1. I wouldn't say his situation is in the least bit comparable to what Schumacher is doing here. And if you do insist on using him as an example, lets not forget what happened when Mansell stayed in F1 for another year after that.  ;)

Schumacher cannot be 'exposed'. It implies that all of his masterful, genius drives of the past all somehow had nothing to do with him. The guy is a legend, still is, no matter how much he's probably lost 'it', and I think its pretty sad to see so many people enjoying this opportunity to try and tarnish the guy's past reputation. And I'm not even a fan of the dude!

#4370 man

man
  • Member

  • 1,303 posts
  • Joined: October 01

Posted 08 August 2010 - 14:12

can you remind me of the teammate who embarrassed schumacher before his first retirement?

Pretty much all of them for one reason or another. Herbert for instance. Instantly close to M Schumacher's times when he first got into the Benetton, before you know it, telemetery is going one way in the Benetton team. Why did M Schumacher insist upon this?


schumacher is not there to sell t shirts.

Well in that case, he is not here to beat his teammate either it seems.


he will retire again if he believes he really has lost the plot or the car has no chance of winning. and he will be more aware than you

I should hope he is as aware as the rest of the planet. Even Stevie Wonder can see how Rosberg has given M Schumacher a spanking.

if the 2011 car is also useless he will pull out as he has already stated he is not here to just make up the numbers

He has been making up the numbers since the first race of 2010 and regardless of how good the Merc is, Rosberg isn't just going to vanish into thin air.

yes all of us schumacher fans have had to accept he may not be the schumacher of old. wouldnt be the first legend to try and fail at a comeback - just that some of us can distinguish between an attempted comeback and one of the greatest careers of all time.


Some of us non fanatics can distinguish M Schumacher is now racing under a team political backdrop that is based on equality for the first time in his career. Finally we can learn what he can do in a fair environment.



I don think schumacher needs to spell out his credentials to the like sof this board. brawn and haug went with him on trust alone because they had witnessed first hand what he could achieve. you dont develop that kind of belief without based on numerous demonstrations of ability. that it hasnt succeeded so far is what it is. but it is not an indictment off his career and to keep trying to pretend it is is pretty pathetic. bit like saying fittipaldi was useless based on his cooperscar career - and the other examples of outstanding drivers struggling with inferior cars is numerous.

It wouldnt be the first time a team has recruited a driver and regretted it. As much as M Schumacher fanatics want to ignore the fact he is being out-smarted, out-qualified and out-raced by a "journeyman" driver, combinded with the fact that it is the first time M Schumacher's teammate is treated like an equal, these aspects have to be factored in when evaluating the man. Burying your head in the sand maybe fun for fanatics, but enlightement isn't so bad after all...

if you could come up with a single example of a teammate who was quicker than schumacher during his first career your long bows might have carried a semblance of weight. that schumacher could qualify 8 positions in his last competitive career ahead of the next similarly shod competitor is one of numerous examples. it is those moments that the ross brawns of this world dont forget even if some posters have struggled to admit reality.

If you could come up with a single example of a teammate that had the same opportunities than M Schumacher in his first career your long bows might have carried semblance of weight.

Until you are willing to factor in the preferential treatment he has received throughout his career like no other driver in the past, I fear your fanatism will continue to obscure your take on reality. A shame as 2010 has given us all the clearest views of M Schumacher as a man and driver thus far.


Edited by man, 08 August 2010 - 14:14.


#4371 Big Block 8

Big Block 8
  • Member

  • 2,423 posts
  • Joined: January 04

Posted 08 August 2010 - 17:00

... it could have been had Hakkinen not been left for dead in the races.

Besides, the Hakkinen Schumacher had to face in comparable cars 5 years later wasn't the same anymore, after his Adelaide '94 crash.


Hakkinen's race pace in 93 wasn't too bad. Senna was faster, for example in Suzuka Hakkinen finished 3rd 26 secs behind Senna, but still only 14 secs behind Prost in a Williams and a full minute in front of Damon Hill in the other Williams. Other races were DNFs so unfortunately the sample is very small. Regardless, Senna was the number 1 driver in the car that had been built for him and a 3xWDC driving his 6th season in the McLaren, so one can be fairly sure he had a considerable advantage regards finding the best race setups, against Hakkinen in his first three races in a new team, after an almost full season's race pause!

I think both drivers fared fine in those three races - Hakkinen tied qualifying sessions (fridays and saturdays) 3-3, Senna was faster in the races as he should, but Hakkinen still had a lot to learn especially from the race setups and he was still a far cry from a finalised product, also he was driving a car built for Senna's liking. So he had nothing to be ashamed about as the gap between Senna and Hakkinen was all things considered pretty marginal even in the races.

I don't know if the crash slowed him down, McLaren certainly had a lot of faith in him and he still did bring in impressive results in the end. Hakkinen did have a lowered hearing in other ear and he IIRC told at some point that the accident had made him a bit more careful compared to his previous career though.


#4372 man

man
  • Member

  • 1,303 posts
  • Joined: October 01

Posted 08 August 2010 - 18:15

Hakkinen's race pace in 93 wasn't too bad. Senna was faster, for example in Suzuka Hakkinen finished 3rd 26 secs behind Senna, but still only 14 secs behind Prost in a Williams and a full minute in front of Damon Hill in the other Williams. Other races were DNFs so unfortunately the sample is very small. Regardless, Senna was the number 1 driver in the car that had been built for him and a 3xWDC driving his 6th season in the McLaren, so one can be fairly sure he had a considerable advantage regards finding the best race setups, against Hakkinen in his first three races in a new team, after an almost full season's race pause!

I think both drivers fared fine in those three races - Hakkinen tied qualifying sessions (fridays and saturdays) 3-3, Senna was faster in the races as he should, but Hakkinen still had a lot to learn especially from the race setups and he was still a far cry from a finalised product, also he was driving a car built for Senna's liking. So he had nothing to be ashamed about as the gap between Senna and Hakkinen was all things considered pretty marginal even in the races.

I don't know if the crash slowed him down, McLaren certainly had a lot of faith in him and he still did bring in impressive results in the end. Hakkinen did have a lowered hearing in other ear and he IIRC told at some point that the accident had made him a bit more careful compared to his previous career though.


Odd. And there was me thinking Mika actually had driven significantly more in the MP4/8 than any other driver including Andretti and Senna. Hakkinen was testing that car like there was no tomorrow from what I remember where as Senna merely used to turn up for race weekends...at teh San Marino GP i think it was he arrived just a few minutes before first practice. Anyway...back on topic...

Edited by man, 08 August 2010 - 18:15.


#4373 jimm

jimm
  • Member

  • 3,228 posts
  • Joined: June 99

Posted 08 August 2010 - 18:30

Odd. And there was me thinking Mika actually had driven significantly more in the MP4/8 than any other driver including Andretti and Senna. Hakkinen was testing that car like there was no tomorrow from what I remember where as Senna merely used to turn up for race weekends...at teh San Marino GP i think it was he arrived just a few minutes before first practice. Anyway...back on topic...



absolutely correct. In fact MIka said after he outqualified Senna at Portugal that he was 1) not surprised because it was "normal" as he had done over 11,000 miles in testing on that track alone and that 2) it ment nothing once the race started as his education under Senna was that Senna could do that lap EVERY LAP at will while he could get it there every 3 or 4 or so...and is why he was down 26 sec at the end of the race.

Relating back to Nico and MS...Nico is outpacing in the race AND qualifying so the comparison not really valid and shows that just because you can equal in quali does not mean you can get there in the race.

Also, I on a similar note, since it was brought up, Mansell could be close to Hill in qualifying but in the race was no where close...may be largely because of conditioning as an F1 car at that stage had much extremes of G loading than Indy car whose main long races required endurance conditioning but not the muscles for the G loadings. In fact Berger commented in France that Mansell had a hard time holding his head up after a few laps.

#4374 as65p

as65p
  • Member

  • 18,477 posts
  • Joined: June 04

Posted 08 August 2010 - 21:32

@man & @jimm

:up: You two saved me a lot of typing, thanks! :wave:

#4375 MikeTekRacing

MikeTekRacing
  • Member

  • 5,820 posts
  • Joined: October 04

Posted 08 August 2010 - 21:42

But even having Felipe or Rubens behind him dosen't make him any faster.

nor slower

rubens having fresh soft rubber needed a good few laps to make a move
koba needed about a third of that to pass FA in valencia

#4376 as65p

as65p
  • Member

  • 18,477 posts
  • Joined: June 04

Posted 08 August 2010 - 21:43

Hakkinen's race pace in 93 wasn't too bad. Senna was faster, for example in Suzuka Hakkinen finished 3rd 26 secs behind Senna, but still only 14 secs behind Prost in a Williams and a full minute in front of Damon Hill in the other Williams. Other races were DNFs so unfortunately the sample is very small. Regardless, Senna was the number 1 driver in the car that had been built for him and a 3xWDC driving his 6th season in the McLaren, so one can be fairly sure he had a considerable advantage regards finding the best race setups, against Hakkinen in his first three races in a new team, after an almost full season's race pause!

I think both drivers fared fine in those three races - Hakkinen tied qualifying sessions (fridays and saturdays) 3-3, Senna was faster in the races as he should, but Hakkinen still had a lot to learn especially from the race setups and he was still a far cry from a finalised product, also he was driving a car built for Senna's liking. So he had nothing to be ashamed about as the gap between Senna and Hakkinen was all things considered pretty marginal even in the races.


You're right about Hakkinen doing quite well all things considered, but "marginal" in the races? Not really. The facts as outlined by man and jimm must be taken into account. Plus at that point of the season, with Senna off to Williams, RD was quite keen to show that he didn't need him and his previous status didn't count for much anymore.

I don't know if the crash slowed him down, McLaren certainly had a lot of faith in him and he still did bring in impressive results in the end. Hakkinen did have a lowered hearing in other ear and he IIRC told at some point that the accident had made him a bit more careful compared to his previous career though.


That's what I had in mind. Obviously Hakkinen was still good enough to become a great, but it's more than feasible that the accident knocked a bit of ultimate speed out of him, as indicated by his own "more careful" comment.


#4377 as65p

as65p
  • Member

  • 18,477 posts
  • Joined: June 04

Posted 08 August 2010 - 21:49

Firstly the crash happened in 1995. Atleast get your facts right, google is your friend, even if you havent watched that era of racing.


Thanks for your kind advice! Of course it was '95, that obviously changes absolutely everything! :lol:

#4378 Birelman

Birelman
  • Member

  • 2,537 posts
  • Joined: May 07

Posted 08 August 2010 - 21:54

You're right about Hakkinen doing quite well all things considered, but "marginal" in the races? Not really. The facts as outlined by man and jimm must be taken into account. Plus at that point of the season, with Senna off to Williams, RD was quite keen to show that he didn't need him and his previous status didn't count for much anymore.



That's what I had in mind. Obviously Hakkinen was still good enough to become a great, but it's more than feasible that the accident knocked a bit of ultimate speed out of him, as indicated by his own "more careful" comment.


I seriously doubt he lost speed due to that accident. He might have become a bit more conscious at his racing, but I doubt he became more careful about driving fast. It would be a scary thought to think he could be even faster than we saw in 98, 99, and 2000.

#4379 as65p

as65p
  • Member

  • 18,477 posts
  • Joined: June 04

Posted 08 August 2010 - 22:05

I seriously doubt he lost speed due to that accident. He might have become a bit more conscious at his racing, but I doubt he became more careful about driving fast. It would be a scary thought to think he could be even faster than we saw in 98, 99, and 2000.


It's all unprovable speculation obviously, but IMO quite possible.

Advertisement

#4380 Birelman

Birelman
  • Member

  • 2,537 posts
  • Joined: May 07

Posted 08 August 2010 - 22:36

It's all unprovable speculation obviously, but IMO quite possible.

Of course it's possible. It's also hard to believe that Hakkinen could have been faster than we saw in 98, 99, and 2000. That was quite a display of natural speed we saw as it was. It would be a scary though to imagine somebody could be substantially faster than we saw from him.

#4381 as65p

as65p
  • Member

  • 18,477 posts
  • Joined: June 04

Posted 08 August 2010 - 22:59

Of course it's possible. It's also hard to believe that Hakkinen could have been faster than we saw in 98, 99, and 2000. That was quite a display of natural speed we saw as it was. It would be a scary though to imagine somebody could be substantially faster than we saw from him.


Not substantially, more like marginally. And as fast he was in his final (and WDC) years, it's not as if he was never beaten by a certain David Coulthard, or is it?

#4382 Birelman

Birelman
  • Member

  • 2,537 posts
  • Joined: May 07

Posted 08 August 2010 - 23:05

Not substantially, more like marginally. And as fast he was in his final (and WDC) years, it's not as if he was never beaten by a certain David Coulthard, or is it?

Yea, well, Couldthard was certainly no slouch, on his day, he could be pretty much unbeatable.

#4383 Yorkie

Yorkie
  • Member

  • 2,192 posts
  • Joined: February 10

Posted 09 August 2010 - 00:35

Just thought i'd throw in the fact that in the 3rd and last race the two of them were paired together in Australia, Senna outqualified Mika by about 7 tenths i believe?

#4384 Birelman

Birelman
  • Member

  • 2,537 posts
  • Joined: May 07

Posted 09 August 2010 - 02:35

Just thought i'd throw in the fact that in the 3rd and last race the two of them were paired together in Australia, Senna outqualified Mika by about 7 tenths i believe?

Yeap, Senna also out qualified the 2 Williamses and everyone else. He also drove away and beat everyone to the finish line, he was definitely ON FIRE!!

Edited by Birelman, 09 August 2010 - 02:53.


#4385 Big Block 8

Big Block 8
  • Member

  • 2,423 posts
  • Joined: January 04

Posted 09 August 2010 - 06:46

Odd. And there was me thinking Mika actually had driven significantly more in the MP4/8 than any other driver including Andretti and Senna. Hakkinen was testing that car like there was no tomorrow from what I remember where as Senna merely used to turn up for race weekends...at teh San Marino GP i think it was he arrived just a few minutes before first practice. Anyway...back on topic...


absolutely correct. In fact MIka said after he outqualified Senna at Portugal that he was 1) not surprised because it was "normal" as he had done over 11,000 miles in testing on that track alone and that 2) it ment nothing once the race started as his education under Senna was that Senna could do that lap EVERY LAP at will while he could get it there every 3 or 4 or so...and is why he was down 26 sec at the end of the race.


You're right about Hakkinen doing quite well all things considered, but "marginal" in the races? Not really. The facts as outlined by man and jimm must be taken into account. Plus at that point of the season, with Senna off to Williams, RD was quite keen to show that he didn't need him and his previous status didn't count for much anymore.


:)

What I meant was that Senna surely had an advantage considering race setups (and racing!) - testing isn't racing and Hakkinen could hardly be considered to be an expert setting up the 93 McLaren for a race distance for example in Suzuka, where he had previously had a total of 2 GPs in a crappy number 2 Lotus! And regardless of the testing amount, the cars evolve during the season according to the likings of the race drivers - not according to test drivers in their first year in the team. That's why I called the difference in for example the Suzuka race, all things considered, marginal. Being "left for dead" is all the wrong expression of what could on the contrary be considered a good job - for the aforementioned reasons and by simply looking at where the two Williamses were.

You need to calm down - Senna won that one. But to say this would have been the end of all results between them, given an equal footing, is just exaggarated. Looking at what happened, the duels between them would have had a good chance of becoming really interesting.

#4386 Big Block 8

Big Block 8
  • Member

  • 2,423 posts
  • Joined: January 04

Posted 09 August 2010 - 06:52

Just thought i'd throw in the fact that in the 3rd and last race the two of them were paired together in Australia, Senna outqualified Mika by about 7 tenths i believe?


That's right, but Hakkinen outqualified Senna in the other session in Australia as well. He did it consecutively in three different tracks - and that was actually the most impressive part of his feat.

That doesn't however diminish Senna's accomplishments in any way, all it means Hakkinen proved he was something special.

#4387 aditya-now

aditya-now
  • Member

  • 7,447 posts
  • Joined: June 02

Posted 09 August 2010 - 07:05

What I meant was that Senna surely had an advantage considering race setups (and racing!) - testing isn't racing and Hakkinen could hardly be considered to be an expert setting up the 93 McLaren for a race distance for example in Suzuka, where he had previously had a total of 2 GPs in a crappy number 2 Lotus!



I thought this is the Michael Schumacher thread.

It's funny how the qualifying and comparison between Hakkinen and Senna in 1993 has taken over the thread for the last 20 or so posts. Suppose nothing to be said about Schumacher anymore?


Good result for Michael here: http://forums.autosp...w...0&start=120
Fifth is not bad. :)


So at least Michael has still the fifth biggest fan group on the BB. Clutching at straws....


#4388 as65p

as65p
  • Member

  • 18,477 posts
  • Joined: June 04

Posted 09 August 2010 - 07:06

You need to calm down...


:lol: If you say so... :drunk:

#4389 Big Block 8

Big Block 8
  • Member

  • 2,423 posts
  • Joined: January 04

Posted 09 August 2010 - 07:19

:lol: If you say so... :drunk:


Just thought the response was pretty spirited for pointing out why Hakkinen's race performance in the end wasn't that bad in 93.

#4390 aditya-now

aditya-now
  • Member

  • 7,447 posts
  • Joined: June 02

Posted 09 August 2010 - 09:42

That's right, but Hakkinen outqualified Senna in the other session in Australia as well. He did it consecutively in three different tracks - and that was actually the most impressive part of his feat.

That doesn't however diminish Senna's accomplishments in any way, all it means Hakkinen proved he was something special.


Yes, absolutely right. Mika was no slouch, IMHO on of the fastest drivers of them all, together with Clark, Senna, Villeneuve and Peterson (on his day). I don't know who of the current generation to count in that category, Alonso? Hamilton?

I always thought it was Kimi, but look what Massa did with Raikkonen.

Again, I don't get what all this has to do with Michael Schumacher....


#4391 Buttoneer

Buttoneer
  • RC Forum Admin

  • 17,624 posts
  • Joined: May 04

Posted 09 August 2010 - 10:00

Again, I don't get what all this has to do with Michael Schumacher....

Indeed. So can you all end it there, please.

#4392 Frans

Frans
  • Member

  • 7,701 posts
  • Joined: April 01

Posted 09 August 2010 - 10:37

Schumacher DID return is LAST YEARS WINNING TEAM car, and look what he did to it, ... can't drive it, can't race it, he can only trail his teammate.

That say's it all, I feel ashamed that I believe he would be in form and even fighting for victories if not more than that. Damn, I was a fool.

#4393 ivand911

ivand911
  • Member

  • 8,152 posts
  • Joined: February 10

Posted 09 August 2010 - 10:47

Michael to do this to his fans is bad, but to do this to his not fans(antifans). This is cruel. I don't know what to do now, to feel sorry you or to be happy for you. I see group hug in the future. :) But, in not so close future.

Edited by ivand911, 09 August 2010 - 10:48.


#4394 Boing 2

Boing 2
  • Member

  • 2,705 posts
  • Joined: June 08

Posted 09 August 2010 - 11:07

Tracy may have gotten 6th, but his actual performance level doesn't seem to be what it was. I wouldn't say its all his age, but not racing in the series consistently surely is hurting him on this. And I've no doubt its hurt Schumacher, too, who took three whole years off of car racing. The Mansell example isn't a good one because the guy never stopped racing. He left for a single year to go race in another highly competitive open-wheel series, where he still showed to be on top of his game. Then he came back into F1. I wouldn't say his situation is in the least bit comparable to what Schumacher is doing here. And if you do insist on using him as an example, lets not forget what happened when Mansell stayed in F1 for another year after that. ;)

Schumacher cannot be 'exposed'. It implies that all of his masterful, genius drives of the past all somehow had nothing to do with him. The guy is a legend, still is, no matter how much he's probably lost 'it', and I think its pretty sad to see so many people enjoying this opportunity to try and tarnish the guy's past reputation. And I'm not even a fan of the dude!



Surley the point that has been proved once and for all here is that if a car does not suit a driver and he doesn't feel comfortable, if he doesn't have a chance of success then no matter how talented he is he will not give 100%

Mansell clicked with the 94 williams, had a crack at success and was fast, didn't like the 95 Mclaren, hadn't a hope of winning and was slow, he didn't lose his talent over the winter, just his feel with that car and a crack at a win.

No reasonable fan of the sport questions that Schumacher is fast, nor do they doubt that he's being hurt by a chassis that doesn't suit him but that's not really the point being made by many. During MS's peak his fans eternally stated that Michael could be fast in any car, totally adaptable, that he never gave up, that the only reason his car had great reliability was his driving and the only reason the car was fast was because of his feedback and technical leadership. Michael was the sun around which everything else revolved.
Now suddenly he's not fast because the car doesn't suit, what happened to the adaptability? why doesn't the car suit him, what happened to the feedback and technical leadership? he's giving up until next year, what happened to the drive and determination?

What effect did it have on his team mates when they rarely had a car that suited them? or tyres not designed for them? at the time the MS fans claimed any driver could do it in any top car if they had the talent, not liking that car wasn't an excuse, that's suddenly changed, hasn't it? Also if not having a chance to win the title has dented his ability to give 100% then what effect did it have on his team mates down the years who were effectivley never allowed the chance to go for it?

Not only did they suffer the moral draining knowledge that it would never be their year but they were even frozen out of access to Schumachers telemetry, denied access to testing, were told to move aside to hand him results or slow down to help him jump rivals at pit stops and even had their chasiss taken from them when it suited Michael.

How the hell do you give your best in that kind of hostile, devaluing environment when Schumachers losing his edge just with the knowledge his cars not a race winner?

No, to me this doens't make Schumacher an also ran that lucked into 7 titles but it does highlight the fact that, for his team mates, it was never a fair fight against him. Michael Schumacher today is facing a tiny fraction of the crap that his team mates had to put up with in the past and it's breaking him in half a season. When you add the fact that his team mates were never top flight in the first place, plus the FIA protection and technical advantages he enjoyed over other rivals outside his team it's easy to see why people hold those 7 titles in less regard than Prosts 4 for example.

Schumacher is a fast tough talented racer but the 'legend' of Schumacher, the 'greatest of all time' stuff is an artificially constructed reputation built in an environment that no longer exists and without that environment he is suffering badly.


#4395 jannyg

jannyg
  • Member

  • 310 posts
  • Joined: June 10

Posted 09 August 2010 - 18:18

At the end of the day everyone on here continues to be armchair experts and assume Schumacher is done. Im not going to come out with any wild suggestions and say he'll come back next year and dominate. But tbh its ridiculous that people can diminish his past achievements based on this season. Never count him out.

The top guys inside MGP know the specifics that we dont, im sure Ross Brawn and MS are aware of what needs to be done. Brawn will know by now if Schumacher is done as a top level driver and if that is the case then an announcement will be made at the end of the season to end this. There are three races this season where MS will have had to ask himself some serious questions come the morning these were China, Valencia and now Hungary. Questions: Do i need this? and Can i fix this?

The tyre excuse which has been given is hard to acknowledge because of the performance of rookies such as Hulkenburg and Kobayashi in recent races, both dont have past season experience of tires. There is a bigger problem affecting MS this year, i have no idea what that problem is but Brawn and Schumacher will know that the tyres is covering their bases for now. The great man will be here in 2011 simply due to the fact that this year hasnt gone according to plan. BIG QUESTION is can a consistent gap of over .5tenths be eradicated during the close season??

#4396 Birelman

Birelman
  • Member

  • 2,537 posts
  • Joined: May 07

Posted 09 August 2010 - 19:04

At the end of the day everyone on here continues to be armchair experts and assume Schumacher is done. Im not going to come out with any wild suggestions and say he'll come back next year and dominate. But tbh its ridiculous that people can diminish his past achievements based on this season. Never count him out.

The top guys inside MGP know the specifics that we dont, im sure Ross Brawn and MS are aware of what needs to be done. Brawn will know by now if Schumacher is done as a top level driver and if that is the case then an announcement will be made at the end of the season to end this. There are three races this season where MS will have had to ask himself some serious questions come the morning these were China, Valencia and now Hungary. Questions: Do i need this? and Can i fix this?

The tyre excuse which has been given is hard to acknowledge because of the performance of rookies such as Hulkenburg and Kobayashi in recent races, both dont have past season experience of tires. There is a bigger problem affecting MS this year, i have no idea what that problem is but Brawn and Schumacher will know that the tyres is covering their bases for now. The great man will be here in 2011 simply due to the fact that this year hasnt gone according to plan. BIG QUESTION is can a consistent gap of over .5tenths be eradicated during the close season??

Good points. I don't think anyone really counts MS out though. I think most people realyze MS is still better than most today, with the exception of the superstars. So, he's still worth the paycheck. The thing is, he's not the MS of old. A lot of his fans had been screaming he'd blitz the field, and what's happened is well, not so bad really, just probably not as good as they had hoped. It's been prety bad the past few races, but, overall I think he's done ok, pretty much where I thought he'd be before the season started. So, the perception that it's a failed comeback I think resides in the high unreallistic expectations of his rabid fans.

#4397 black magic

black magic
  • Member

  • 3,962 posts
  • Joined: June 00

Posted 09 August 2010 - 22:40

remarkably fair minded post

I suspec that eve amongst the most rabid there was a element of concern though as to how it would all go and no doubt the excitement of seeing him back and I mean that in all the sense - it was exciting - somewhere reality got a little lost in some quarters

oh well

#4398 black magic

black magic
  • Member

  • 3,962 posts
  • Joined: June 00

Posted 09 August 2010 - 22:49

so if I understand you correctly man you are asserting that given equal treatment herbert, brundle, barrichello, irvine and massa were in fact schumachers equal

that it was only preferential treatment that stopped herbert from getting even close to michael.

I just want to see you write a confirmation so I can have a good laugh but by all means make your case

#4399 Muz Bee

Muz Bee
  • Member

  • 2,531 posts
  • Joined: October 07

Posted 09 August 2010 - 23:15

Boing - you make excellent points about how having a chassis suited to your driving is used as an explanation for lack of results in the case of MS in 2010 yet the same reason is somehow shovelled under the carpet when his fans eulogise how he dominated drivers like Irvine and Barra who never got close to equal treatment and certainly the car development went in the other direction.

I would agree to a certain extent that current regulations and car spec plus the Mercedes F1 car don't allow Michael to show his potential but it is extraordinary the degree to which he has struggled in this area. Rosberg on the other hand in a new team and in a new "supertanker" era has adapted just fine and other than Valencia has proven to be at least a match for his more illustrious teammate. Maybe it would be fair to say that SOME of MS fans are just plain blind to reason when they talk of turnarounds in fortune while at the same time devaluing the performances of the younger driver. How is it possible to have it both ways?

Advertisement

#4400 jimm

jimm
  • Member

  • 3,228 posts
  • Joined: June 99

Posted 10 August 2010 - 01:45

so if I understand you correctly man you are asserting that given equal treatment herbert, brundle, barrichello, irvine and massa were in fact schumachers equal

that it was only preferential treatment that stopped herbert from getting even close to michael.

I just want to see you write a confirmation so I can have a good laugh but by all means make your case



I think what he is and other have asserted was that given equal treatment they MAY have been able to match MS....but never had the opportunity....other than Brundle. I think Brundle pretty much had a fair shake and out scored MS in the last half of 1992, was faster in several of the races including Canada where without a car failure, Brundle was in good shape to win. Irvine I doubt was better but he was not as far behind as he was made too look. Reubens probably had the best shot but to be fair, I blame him for rolling over and taking like a drunk frat girl as he was promised he would never have to give up a win and should have reacted like Webber did this year. After that he took on the humble servant role.

Herbert is a different puzzle. He was dynamite before his big accident, was often as fast as Mika when together at Lotus so hard to believe he was that far behind especially when Herbert was faster in the first test together.

I think the big thing is that it is hard to know given that there seemed to be little effort to engineer the car so someone other than MS was comfortable in it. That can be worth alot. Easily a second a lap depending.

Put it this way, there have been alot of match ups that on paper where the underdog driver in a team ended up winning or being very competitive.....Mansell against Rosberg, Mansell against Piquet, Senna against Prost (remember that Prost was a 2x WDC and holder of the most wins at beginning of 1988), Vettel against Webber this year, Lewis against Alonso....all situatuations that on paper, you would have predicted a different outcome and in some cases a whitewash. You have an underdog who gets a little confidence and then they take off. Actually, Irvine is a bit of an example of that. Most forget, he was actually leading MS in points for much of the year before MS was hurt at Silverstone. He seemingly had decided he wanted to take the fight to MS...He was fighting MS for position when MS went off and broke his leg. ....he was also let go (or wanted out) at the end of the year.