Jump to content


Photo
* * * - - 8 votes

It's Schumacher not Rosberg we need to reappraise


  • Please log in to reply
226 replies to this topic

#51 Buttoneer

Buttoneer
  • RC Forum Admin

  • 16,871 posts
  • Joined: May 04

Posted 30 May 2013 - 11:55

Medically it is common knowledge that one's reflexes and eyesight starts to deteriorate significantly once someone hits the forties. So the chances are that he lost a significant chunk of his pace by the time he returned. So for him to stand firm against someone who is proving to be a very fast driver shows what an impressive comeback he actually had, inspite of what the stats say. In time, his second career may, god willing, be used to show what a mighty talent he actually was.

The nebulous nature of these statements mean that we cannot possibly take this into account in any meaningful way when we are talking about margins of 000'ths of a second.

Advertisement

#52 baddog

baddog
  • Member

  • 23,623 posts
  • Joined: June 99

Posted 30 May 2013 - 11:59

Don't patronise me please. Many thanks. :up:
Let me get this correct; you're saying MS was faster than NR in qualifying in 2012 (more often than not and second top when you look at all the other team mate comparisions for that year) and from that you're extrapolating that he could beat all the other drivers?

No I am saying that up to this point last year Michael Schumacher was the second highest driver on qualifying pace, behind Lewis Hamilton (who slaughtered the field in qualifying last year). Not extrapolated just factually the case. I do not see what is hard to understand about that.

As the season progressed the Red Bull came into form and those drivers passed him and as of Germany he was 4th best. At that point Rosberg was only 7th.

I didnt maintain stats further through the year though it would not be hard.

#53 gillesthegenius

gillesthegenius
  • Member

  • 2,534 posts
  • Joined: July 11

Posted 30 May 2013 - 12:01

Interesting thread and great opening post, thank you.

This is a discussion which has been bubbling away under F1 for the last three years and here we are now with a thread to discuss it on topic.

Unlike his first career which I found incredibly dull for it's sheer predictability punctuated only by occasional drives which clearly were quite exemplary, I was really rooting for him to get himself a win and succeed in his return. Is anyone in doubt that making a 4-stop strategy work back in 2004(?) was fantastic to watch and impressive by any standard, for example, and surely appreciated by all fans of the sport for the sheer novelty value in an otherwise dull season? So I did follow the battle between him and Rosberg and have to take issue with your conclusions for 2010 because Schumacher was not as fast as Rosberg. He just wasn't. I think that you can argue that they were relatively strong and weak in different areas and maybe conclude that they were about equal in overall performance, if you try, but Schumacher was always playing catch up in terms of pace.

You conclude that they were equal because you were looking at every practice and stint and keeping an eye on fuel loads so can see more than us. Well no, you can't unless you have access to team data and have reviewed the sessions to see where or how they may have been held up or went out on a green versus rubbered-in circuit. You therefore are judging by the simple stats that we have all seen, can all see on Forix and which you have presented above.

There was a very good discussion at the end of that year in which many of us concluded that we saw a solid improvement in Schumacher over the year and that it gave hope for the future. The stats were far away, but the performances much closer. It may be worth digging some of those out to get a more contemporaneous feel for the conclusions drawn even by those who were there for the sake of following Schumacher only.

I do agree that he continued to improve through 2011 and maybe even edged it in 2012, despite the points deficit, for the reasons you state.

I also can't agree that we need to make allowance for age. How much allowance? And if you're going to make an allowance for that, surely you also have to make allowance the other way for relative experience, or the confidence of having 7 WDC's behind you? Do we allow for (trying to think of the current age spread) Webber versus Vettel and the age difference there and if so how much? If not, why not? The drivers enter and compete on an equal basis and we have to accept that they maintain an appropriate physical and mental fitness level. If they continue to compete beyond the time when their physical ability will no longer allow it, where do you draw the line and isn't that a different point for everybody? How could we judge that as spectators even if we suspect it to be true?

The age allowance is too much of an unknown quantity for us to be able to translate this into tenths of a second and IMO we have to judge them only as equals.

One place where Schumacher excelled over his second career was in supporting the team, not speaking out against them or criticising strategies. He was always a consummate professional and it was only seeing him contrasted against the current grid that you realise quite how much of a team player he was in that regard and how he managed to earn such loyalty and respect. I reckon Rosberg learned some of that from his father anyway but working with Schumacher must have underlined that for him.

Note; Exceptions to the above comments which are too general are...er..excepted, of course.


If he was in his late thirties, then yes. It's difficult to make allowances for his age. But at 43, I just can't see how he could have been as quick as he was when he retired for the first time.


#54 holiday

holiday
  • Member

  • 3,473 posts
  • Joined: October 01

Posted 30 May 2013 - 12:04

It's Schumacher not Rosberg we need to reappraise. Are we still allowed to take his age (42 years old) into account? And the fact that he was not in his prime?


As long as we don't see regularly pilots over 40+ competing in f1, Schumacher's age must be regarded as a major disadvantage. The proof is in the pudding, there is no denying.

So for him to have matched Rosberg's pace on many occasions during his comeback, can we then say that Schumacher in this prime years would have been -- out of this world?


You make a complicated case for what is evident to see: name one driver who dominated formula 1 longer, one driver who had more success than Schumacher?

#55 Owen

Owen
  • Member

  • 10,769 posts
  • Joined: September 06

Posted 30 May 2013 - 12:07

No I am saying that up to this point last year Michael Schumacher was the second highest driver on qualifying pace, behind Lewis Hamilton (who slaughtered the field in qualifying last year). Not extrapolated just factually the case. I do not see what is hard to understand about that.

As the season progressed the Red Bull came into form and those drivers passed him and as of Germany he was 4th best. At that point Rosberg was only 7th.

I didnt maintain stats further through the year though it would not be hard.

Ok, got it. He was second best in qualifying, last year, from races 1-6. Not gonna argue with that.

#56 pUs

pUs
  • Member

  • 2,553 posts
  • Joined: November 99

Posted 30 May 2013 - 12:09

A 2012 Michael Schumacher was as fast as any other driver on the grid. At 43.


Agreed. Extremely underrated, especially considering his performance during 2012. Michael :up:

#57 Treads

Treads
  • Member

  • 841 posts
  • Joined: July 11

Posted 30 May 2013 - 12:23

I am surprised that Hamilton is behind Rosberg, I expected him to be consistently a couple of tenths quicker. Which does lead me to slightly upwards reappraise Shomemaker's comeback.

But this thread so far is an absolute Shoemaker love-in, yes the guy was good, yes the guy was quick, but let's not go over the top. I just want to add he was also a complete shit who cheated right, left and centre and in his prime years at Ferrari had more advantages at this disposal than any other racing driver in history. I still hate him.

That being said, this is also making me reappraise down how good Hamilton is, not Rosberg up or Shoemaker up so much.

And to be entirely balanced, let us not forget Hamilton is at a new team in a new car. In order to truly judge Hamilton vs Rosberg (and the impact that has on what we think of Shoemaker) we probably need to wait until 2014. Even if Hamilton beats Rosberg this year, we might find he beats him by even more next year, which would put Shoemaker back in his box. And even if Rosberg beat Hamilton this year, you still have to wait till next year to see if Hamilton gets quicker as he settles in.




#58 Buttoneer

Buttoneer
  • RC Forum Admin

  • 16,871 posts
  • Joined: May 04

Posted 30 May 2013 - 12:24

If he was in his late thirties, then yes. It's difficult to make allowances for his age. But at 43, I just can't see how he could have been as quick as he was when he retired for the first time.

How many tenths are you giving him?

#59 schubacca

schubacca
  • Member

  • 799 posts
  • Joined: May 10

Posted 30 May 2013 - 12:33

How many tenths are you giving him?


No doubt he lost a some raw on-the-limit speed.

But when I think of the conservative driving that we have witnessed, I think that MS could have raced for a couple more years, as none of the drivers are driving on the ragged edge, that area that separates the good from the great.

Edited by schubacca, 30 May 2013 - 12:33.


Advertisement

#60 Anderis

Anderis
  • Member

  • 2,671 posts
  • Joined: December 09

Posted 30 May 2013 - 12:48

I think that there is one element missed in the equation. I don't deny Schumacher's performances in 2012 were respectable, I had claimed so even before the current season started. But I suspect Rosberg was struggling a bit with motivation in the 2012. When I was watching him, it was clear for me it was not the same Nico as in 2009 or 2010. Perhaps when the new team-mate arrived at Mercedes, he needed to up his game again, because he had much to gain and much to lose. And he did it. I think 2013 Nico would've beaten 2012 Nico.

#61 gillesthegenius

gillesthegenius
  • Member

  • 2,534 posts
  • Joined: July 11

Posted 30 May 2013 - 12:49

How many tenths are you giving him?


I'm not informed enough to reliably give him a certain amount of time. But I would honestly be surprise if he hadn't lost atleast 2-3 tenths, while not being surprised even if he had lost 5-7 tenths. Base on that, it's got to be somewhere in between 2 to 7 tenths IMO.

#62 DS27

DS27
  • Member

  • 1,141 posts
  • Joined: February 11

Posted 30 May 2013 - 12:51

That being said, this is also making me reappraise down how good Hamilton is, not Rosberg up or Shoemaker up so much.



:rotfl: Best you re-appraise Alonso, Button, Massa and many others then..

As for the rest of what you post, I won't waste my time. Anyone who claims to 'hate' an F1 driver is not going to offer anything useful to the discussion.

#63 TheThirdTenor1

TheThirdTenor1
  • Member

  • 882 posts
  • Joined: April 13

Posted 30 May 2013 - 13:00

If he was in his late thirties, then yes. It's difficult to make allowances for his age. But at 43, I just can't see how he could have been as quick as he was when he retired for the first time.


In another thread, you claimed that raw pace doesn't change much over time.


#64 DS27

DS27
  • Member

  • 1,141 posts
  • Joined: February 11

Posted 30 May 2013 - 13:00

I'm not informed enough to reliably give him a certain amount of time. But I would honestly be surprise if he hadn't lost atleast 2-3 tenths, while not being surprised even if he had lost 5-7 tenths. Base on that, it's got to be somewhere in between 2 to 7 tenths IMO.


+1

I'm also of the firm opinion that he lost at least 3 tenths from his prime. I can't think of any clear examples of people in a similar sport, that relies upon reactions, co-ordination and fitness, where I have seen a man well into his 40's able to compete with the latest generation.

How about we look at how old Rossi is compared to MS2 and how well he is doing against the latest generation of riders (and consider he has had no time away from the sport). Even at Rossi's age, he is not as quick as he used to be, so to think that MS lost no speed at 43 makes no sense to me.

#65 schubacca

schubacca
  • Member

  • 799 posts
  • Joined: May 10

Posted 30 May 2013 - 13:01

I think that there is one element missed in the equation. I don't deny Schumacher's performances in 2012 were respectable, I had claimed so even before the current season started. But I suspect Rosberg was struggling a bit with motivation in the 2012. When I was watching him, it was clear for me it was not the same Nico as in 2009 or 2010. Perhaps when the new team-mate arrived at Mercedes, he needed to up his game again, because he had much to gain and much to lose. And he did it. I think 2013 Nico would've beaten 2012 Nico.


Ultimately, we cannot dismiss MS strong performances due to a supposedly lack of motivation of NR. In 2012, NR's teammate still had more WDCs than he had pole positions.... I do not think that motivation was an issue....

#66 aliasj

aliasj
  • Member

  • 150 posts
  • Joined: June 11

Posted 30 May 2013 - 13:02

Interesting thread and great opening post, thank you.


Thanks mate! :)

have to take issue with your conclusions for 2010 because Schumacher was not as fast as Rosberg. He just wasn't. I think that you can argue that they were relatively strong and weak in different areas and maybe conclude that they were about equal in overall performance, if you try, but Schumacher was always playing catch up in terms of pace. You conclude that they were equal because you were looking at every practice and stint and keeping an eye on fuel loads so can see more than us. Well no, you can't unless you have access to team data and have reviewed the sessions to see where or how they may have been held up or went out on a green versus rubbered-in circuit. You therefore are judging by the simple stats that we have all seen, can all see on Forix and which you have presented above.


Well its those colors in RED.

These went in favor of ROS, but as this is so little margin, it could have gone any way. Lets assume it went to MSC.
Australia +0.01s
Monaco +0.05s
Germany +0.01s
Abu Dabhi +0.07s

Then its the other four that MSC out-qualified ROS
Espana
Turkey
Belgium
Brazil

So that makes it in 2010
8 MSC/11 ROS

So 2010 is still BETTER than 2011, don't you think?
2 MSC/17 ROS?

In 2012 it was
10 MSC/10 ROS

So like I said, in 2010 they were actually closer than in 2011, but certain tracks where MSC was slower, he was much slower.

#67 Buttoneer

Buttoneer
  • RC Forum Admin

  • 16,871 posts
  • Joined: May 04

Posted 30 May 2013 - 13:09

I'm not informed enough to reliably give him a certain amount of time.

And yet you do so anyway, and with some conviction. Why stick with 7/10ths? Why not make it a whole second and be done with it?

#68 holiday

holiday
  • Member

  • 3,473 posts
  • Joined: October 01

Posted 30 May 2013 - 13:19

How about we look at how old Rossi is compared to MS2 and how well he is doing against the latest generation of riders (and consider he has had no time away from the sport). Even at Rossi's age, he is not as quick as he used to be, so to think that MS lost no speed at 43 makes no sense to me.


:up: Now you mention it, bringing up Rossi's struggles in this context is quite apt. Both are superachievers who have been trying to hold off the tide of age.

I noticed that since about Damon Hill the retirement ceiling for f1 pilots hovers miracuously at a maximum age of 37, the only exception being RB. But 40 is clearly the cut.

When do have seen the last pilot who was competetive at that age?

Mansell in 1994-95? Disappointing, embarassing.

Andretti's pole in Monza 1982? Incredible, but a one off.

Graham Hill in the 1970s? Much too long around, finally could not even qualify at his favourite turf Monaco.

The last competitive driver over 40 of note was Jack Brabham - and those were the 1960s!

So, it is a no-brainer, really. MS II must have lost quite a bit of edge, what kept him in the game in the first place was his craze for racing, competing and his super-professionalism.




#69 ebc

ebc
  • Member

  • 258 posts
  • Joined: April 13

Posted 30 May 2013 - 13:35

Michael Schumacher in my opinion is the greatest racing driver of all time, and the most exciting. I have read some people say his dominance was boring, and i admit that 2002 and 2004 were boring but he kept F1 alive during the 90s and most of the iconic moments of the period involved him, he was and still is pure box office. To be so competitive at the age of 43 was very impressive and he did not get the credit for it which is a shame. I have no doubt that he lost at least a few tenths in one lap pace from his prime and his reactions were not at his peak level either, i also believe he was the most consistent driver in the world which is something else he lost in his 40s.

To be as successful as him takes incredible talent, dedication and confidence as well many other attributes he had, so it is frustrating when some journalists downplay his achievements and put it down to superior equipment or bespoke tyres or a relatively weak field. He was the best no doubt about it, most people don't have any idea how hard it is to win a single grand prix never mind 91 or even challenge for a title never mind win 7 of them so i think a lot of people were happy to use his comeback against him.

I think that Hamilton is a rare talent and I expect to see him get stronger as the season progresses and to beat Rosberg overall, but he needs to beat him well because Nico is not topline and never will be. If Nico comes out on top then i think Hamilton will have to be downgraded rather than Rosberg upgraded. I also think it is a problem that they are such good friends, I think Lewis would be better off having a teammate he does not like to serve as added motivation.

#70 Seanspeed

Seanspeed
  • Member

  • 14,654 posts
  • Joined: October 08

Posted 30 May 2013 - 13:40

Fastest laps, really? What an incredibly poor and biased tie-breaker.

And they were not equal in 2010. Rosberg was clearly faster and better most of the season.

I'm gonna wait a while on this whole Rosberg = Lewis thing. I've been surprised by Nico so far, but its still early days.

EDIT: I see people mentioning Rossi, but motorcycle racing is a different beast. Much more physical-based.

Edited by Seanspeed, 30 May 2013 - 13:42.


#71 7MGTEsup

7MGTEsup
  • Member

  • 391 posts
  • Joined: March 11

Posted 30 May 2013 - 13:46

Mansell in 1994-95? Disappointing, embarassing.


So bad he stuck it on pole and won the 1994 Austrailian grand prix.

1995 was shocking but I think once he discovered how much of a pile the 1995 McLaren was he just lost interest. Plus he and Ron didn't quite see eye to eye.

Edited by 7MGTEsup, 30 May 2013 - 13:51.


#72 holiday

holiday
  • Member

  • 3,473 posts
  • Joined: October 01

Posted 30 May 2013 - 13:47

EDIT: I see people mentioning Rossi, but motorcycle racing is a different beast. Much more physical-based.


True, but then again Rossi is ten years younger than MS.


#73 holiday

holiday
  • Member

  • 3,473 posts
  • Joined: October 01

Posted 30 May 2013 - 13:54

So bad he stuck it on pole and won the 1994 Austrailian grand prix.


He stuck a space ship of a car once on pole in four attempts and inherited the win in Adelaide only after MS and DH collided.

But I give you this, his one lap pace was okayish, but he wasn't his old self either. Let's call 1994 disappointing for and reserve "embarassing" for 1995.


#74 Anderis

Anderis
  • Member

  • 2,671 posts
  • Joined: December 09

Posted 30 May 2013 - 14:01

Ultimately, we cannot dismiss MS strong performances due to a supposedly lack of motivation of NR. In 2012, NR's teammate still had more WDCs than he had pole positions.... I do not think that motivation was an issue....

You don't think, I do, based on how was Nico driving that year. He was not that incredibly consistent last year as he had been in 2009-2011. The fact that Schumi had more WDCs than Nico pole positions was not relevant. Rosberg had not much to gain by outperforming Schumi for another year. People would always say it's not the same Michael.

I still think Michael was performing strongly in 2012, which is what I stated in my previous post. But it's not that straightforward Michael matched Nico, Nico is matching Lewis, so Michael was as good as anyone.

#75 Sakae

Sakae
  • Member

  • 19,256 posts
  • Joined: December 03

Posted 30 May 2013 - 14:02

Fastest laps, really? What an incredibly poor and biased tie-breaker.

And they were not equal in 2010. Rosberg was clearly faster and better most of the season...


Schumacher was off the track a few years, came back, facing new equipment, and without much track testing, he was reduced with preparation to a simulator that made him (allegedly) sick, yet whilst older than Rosberg, he had his respectful moments on his return; at least I thinks so. On the other side of coin, I do remember once that someone asked McLaren's boys how do they feel driving alongside great Schumacher, and in response those two began to laugh uncontrollably, ending with smirk on their faces. Look who is (not)laughing now. Button, much younger than Schumacher has his hands full with Perez, whilst competing in familiar environment, and Hamilton declared himself suddenly uncomfortable in that car, which is how he explains some things to himself. Yeah, go and figure how "bad" Schumacher was.

#76 Pitlane

Pitlane
  • Member

  • 433 posts
  • Joined: March 12

Posted 30 May 2013 - 14:04

F1 isnt about going as fast as possible anylonger, but to go just fast enough to make the optimal strategy work while keeping the reliability (think about how much more reliable everything has gotten compared to 10years ago), and I think that plays into it.

Had they been given the possibilty to make a one lap setup for qualification and then change to a race setup, i doubt that he would have matched the younger drivers at their prime in equal cars.

#77 7MGTEsup

7MGTEsup
  • Member

  • 391 posts
  • Joined: March 11

Posted 30 May 2013 - 14:14

He stuck a space ship of a car once on pole in four attempts and inherited the win in Adelaide only after MS and DH collided.

But I give you this, his one lap pace was okayish, but he wasn't his old self either. Let's call 1994 disappointing for and reserve "embarassing" for 1995.


Only 4 races and limited testing isn't bad considering he had been driving a completely different car for the last 2 years.

If Mamsell had a decent amount of motivation (I think by this point in his carrer he didn't) he could have made a better fist of it.

I'm not really getting the who Schumacher was older so he lost at least 3 tenths (or up to 7 some people claim) argument. All drivers on the grid are of different ages so does that mean we can say button is 10 years older than Perez so Button in his prim would be 3 - 7 tenths quicker than he is now? Or same for Webber V Vettel?

#78 spacekid

spacekid
  • Member

  • 2,678 posts
  • Joined: April 11

Posted 30 May 2013 - 15:12

I'm not really getting the who Schumacher was older so he lost at least 3 tenths (or up to 7 some people claim) argument. All drivers on the grid are of different ages so does that mean we can say button is 10 years older than Perez so Button in his prim would be 3 - 7 tenths quicker than he is now? Or same for Webber V Vettel?


I agree that its silly to put an exact figure on how much slower a driver will be with age.

However, I think its fairly safe to say - and this seems to apply to nearly all sports (even a non-physical sport like snooker) - most competitors are at their peak and pretty stable between their early 20's, and mid to late 30's. Some very talented individuals arrive at their peak a bit earlier, some can change their game and eke out a few more years. But around 15 years 'on top' as about as much as most sports people can manage.

Think of all the drivers who get to between 35-40 and can no longer beat the younger guys. Who find they slip down the grid to a lesser team. Who eventually find they can either leave the sport with some dignity once it become clear they are on a downward slide (a la Coulthard, Fisi, Trulli etc.)

I don't think a 33 year old Schumi would be much slower than a 23 year old Schumi. I don't see how a 43 year old Schumi could be as good as he was 10 or 20 years ago, otherwise why are so few F1 drivers in their 40's?


#79 Atreiu

Atreiu
  • Member

  • 10,077 posts
  • Joined: May 07

Posted 30 May 2013 - 15:17

IMO, 2010 was okay for a guy coming form retirement. But the combination of Pirelli, no testing and no refueling went totally against Schumacher's strengths.
I don't rate him by his 2010-12 comeback.

Advertisement

#80 jav

jav
  • Member

  • 197 posts
  • Joined: January 11

Posted 30 May 2013 - 15:32

Hopeless comparison really- F1 has changed. It used to be that you went all out, all the time and that was the fastest way finish. Now- you have to control your speed to have the best race distance elapsed time.

If racing were as before- when conditioning and concentration at the edge over long periods of time were an absolute requirement, MS's return may have been worse- it may have been better... we'll never know.

I do agree- in retrospect and in light of how Nico is doing against a current top tier driver in his prime- MS2 perfomance in 2012 is looking pretty impressive regardless of age.

Compared to Kimi's comeback- less so.

#81 7MGTEsup

7MGTEsup
  • Member

  • 391 posts
  • Joined: March 11

Posted 30 May 2013 - 15:35

I agree that its silly to put an exact figure on how much slower a driver will be with age.

However, I think its fairly safe to say - and this seems to apply to nearly all sports (even a non-physical sport like snooker) - most competitors are at their peak and pretty stable between their early 20's, and mid to late 30's. Some very talented individuals arrive at their peak a bit earlier, some can change their game and eke out a few more years. But around 15 years 'on top' as about as much as most sports people can manage.

Think of all the drivers who get to between 35-40 and can no longer beat the younger guys. Who find they slip down the grid to a lesser team. Who eventually find they can either leave the sport with some dignity once it become clear they are on a downward slide (a la Coulthard, Fisi, Trulli etc.)

I don't think a 33 year old Schumi would be much slower than a 23 year old Schumi. I don't see how a 43 year old Schumi could be as good as he was 10 or 20 years ago, otherwise why are so few F1 drivers in their 40's?


I think the biggest thing that comes with age and if you have been doing it for a long time is motivation. Once you have been there and done it it gets harder to get out of bed in the morning with as much energy as a guy who is on the up and up. Schumacher never seemed to lack motivation where other older drivers seem to get to a point where its just about cashing pay checks and trying to cling to their youth.

#82 PoliFanAthic

PoliFanAthic
  • Member

  • 642 posts
  • Joined: October 09

Posted 30 May 2013 - 15:38

I reckon there is little to be said about Michael's comeback that has not been said by some MS fans who were regulars on the old thread. I would appreciate that 2012 > 2011 > 2010, and that in the last two years there's been very little between him and Rosberg, whichever way we look at it.

Regarding the age debate, all I recall from some health/nutrition conferences that I've been to are claims pertaining to sarcopenia (skeletal muscle loss), which accentuates itself considerably in the fourth decade of life (3-5%). It's generally hard to tell what effects that would have, as well as what effects other 3-5% losses in the motor-sensory department would have. I doubt it's as straightforward as saying that it equates to a 3-5% loss in lap time, and in any way the case of professional sportsmen is different to that of regular people.

But let's just do the math, for the sake of it. Let's assume he'd suffered half the regular decay for the fourth decade, as he was still in his early forties, and that would leave us at 0.15 seconds/lap at a 100 second lap. It's all very iffy, but I'd chalk it up as the best feeble ballpark figure I can offer. :D

And as far as how the "restrained pace" has aided Michael, I'm sure he would have loved to compete at the limit.

P.S. I agree that the ultimate argument for some sort of depreciation of driving capacity with age is the fact that older drivers are so hard to come by.

Edited by PoliFanAthic, 30 May 2013 - 15:42.


#83 Sakae

Sakae
  • Member

  • 19,256 posts
  • Joined: December 03

Posted 30 May 2013 - 15:41

A lot of people talking about loss of speed, and I am not sure of that's correct as an unequivocal statement. Perhaps incremental loss would be more accurate, as season progresses, and body aches. We should not forget that Schumacher wasn't initially upon his return concerned about new equipment requiring change of his personal racing style as much as what physical requirements driving will inflict upon his body. Had there been pre-season, and during season a lot of track related testing, there wouldn't have been second career at all. It is almost certain he wouldn’t do it. For all we know, he was very fit; working on his conditioning very hard, but his concern about stamina was evident. I think he mentioned in one or two interviews when he sign on and people were curious how he can do that.

#84 akshay380

akshay380
  • Member

  • 566 posts
  • Joined: June 12

Posted 30 May 2013 - 15:41

Also count that Hamilton has to drive on these shit tires compared to tires of old days.

#85 yr

yr
  • Member

  • 5,970 posts
  • Joined: December 98

Posted 30 May 2013 - 15:45

Also count that Hamilton has to drive on these shit tires compared to tires of old days.


How is that relevant? Do all other drivers have better tyres?

#86 ivand911

ivand911
  • Member

  • 8,152 posts
  • Joined: February 10

Posted 30 May 2013 - 15:46

Compared to Kimi's comeback- less so.

Exchange their cars and the result will be the same. I doubt Kimi can do better with W02 and W03 and I doubt Michael will do worse with last two Lotus cars. Even Kimi admitted it that car helped in his return. And there is nobody here who can rate Mercedes cars over Lotus cars.


#87 sopa

sopa
  • Member

  • 3,430 posts
  • Joined: April 07

Posted 30 May 2013 - 15:47

I don't think you can measure the effect of age like a mathematician - 3 tenths or 5 tenths slower. Unquantifiable.

But what is clear is that 10 or 20 years in a top sport takes its toll and people get exhausted and have less energy, less sparkle. Even in chess people get past their prime. Schumacher may still have been pretty fast, but he sure wasn't as spectacular as when he was young and full of youthful energy. Of that I am certain about.

#88 ivand911

ivand911
  • Member

  • 8,152 posts
  • Joined: February 10

Posted 30 May 2013 - 15:53

I don't think you can measure the effect of age like a mathematician - 3 tenths or 5 tenths slower. Unquantifiable.

But what is clear is that 10 or 20 years in a top sport takes its toll and people get exhausted and have less energy, less sparkle. Even in chess people get past their prime. Schumacher may still have been pretty fast, but he sure wasn't as spectacular as when he was young and full of youthful energy. Of that I am certain about.

What/who is spectacular in todays Formula 1?


#89 smitten

smitten
  • Member

  • 1,452 posts
  • Joined: October 10

Posted 30 May 2013 - 15:56

As long as we don't see regularly pilots over 40+ competing in f1, Schumacher's age must be regarded as a major disadvantage. The proof is in the pudding, there is no denying.


Don't confuse correlation and causation.


#90 Rubens Hakkamacher

Rubens Hakkamacher
  • Member

  • 1,567 posts
  • Joined: March 04

Posted 30 May 2013 - 16:10

How is that relevant? Do all other drivers have better tyres?



It's relevant because being a "driver" means different things. If it's about tire management, staying on top of deltas, managing a steering wheel with literally 50+ settings on it, dealing with DRS, KERS - Rosberg probably has an edge, I rate is intelligence above everyone else's on the grid.

That doesn't mean, IMO, that driving the purest reduction of "A MOTOR CAR" IMO constitutes those things.

As we saw when Hamilton was on fresh tires towards the end, if given a car one can *drive*, and not have to "manage" from a technology standpoint, Hamilton and Schumacher are in a different league.

It's ridiculous the things "drivers" have to have on their mind now aside from *actually driving the car*. It's not really "racing" but "managing" IMO, YMMV.




#91 race addicted

race addicted
  • Member

  • 19,744 posts
  • Joined: June 01

Posted 30 May 2013 - 16:14

Exchange their cars and the result will be the same. I doubt Kimi can do better with W02 and W03 and I doubt Michael will do worse with last two Lotus cars. Even Kimi admitted it that car helped in his return. And there is nobody here who can rate Mercedes cars over Lotus cars.


Come on. Schumacher crashed and had a string of clumsy incidents probably more often than he impressed by putting a decent margin on Rosberg in qualifying.
Räikkönen's comeback has been praised all across the different branches of people with an interest in F1.

#92 sopa

sopa
  • Member

  • 3,430 posts
  • Joined: April 07

Posted 30 May 2013 - 16:22

What/who is spectacular in todays Formula 1?


You actually raise a fair point that the Pirelli era has somewhat eradicated Schumacher's age handicap as drivers have to drive within themselves.

But spectacular these days? I dunno, maybe Vettel taking pole in Malaysia by almost a second or Alonso dominating the Spanish Grand Prix can be classified as such.

Perez was pretty spectacular in Monaco too. Until the Raikkonen crash he was the driver of the race for me.

Edited by sopa, 30 May 2013 - 16:23.


#93 1Devil1

1Devil1
  • Member

  • 3,058 posts
  • Joined: May 12

Posted 30 May 2013 - 16:24

Come on. Schumacher crashed and had a string of clumsy incidents probably more often than[ he impressed by putting a decent margin on Rosberg in qualifying.
Räikkönen's comeback has been praised all across the different branches of people with an interest in F1.


That is what Lewis is doing right now?

to add:

1. Raikkonen is a lot younger 2. has team mate who is not at the level of Rosberg 3. has a car that is one of the kindest on the tires in era of tires preservation. Doesn't take away anything from Raikkonen but both didn't have to handle comparable circumstances. I think it's a fair comment to say Kimi had it a lot easier than Schumacher to begin with..

#94 gillesthegenius

gillesthegenius
  • Member

  • 2,534 posts
  • Joined: July 11

Posted 30 May 2013 - 16:57

And yet you do so anyway, and with some conviction. Why stick with 7/10ths? Why not make it a whole second and be done with it?


You were the one who wanted to put a number to it and you also seemed to genuinely ask me for my opinion and I genuinely gave it. It's not like I stated it as fact. But why ask when you had already decided your response even before you got my answer? :down:

Edited by gillesthegenius, 30 May 2013 - 17:05.


#95 yr

yr
  • Member

  • 5,970 posts
  • Joined: December 98

Posted 30 May 2013 - 16:57

It's relevant because being a "driver" means different things. If it's about tire management, staying on top of deltas, managing a steering wheel with literally 50+ settings on it, dealing with DRS, KERS - Rosberg probably has an edge, I rate is intelligence above everyone else's on the grid.

That doesn't mean, IMO, that driving the purest reduction of "A MOTOR CAR" IMO constitutes those things.

As we saw when Hamilton was on fresh tires towards the end, if given a car one can *drive*, and not have to "manage" from a technology standpoint, Hamilton and Schumacher are in a different league.

It's ridiculous the things "drivers" have to have on their mind now aside from *actually driving the car*. It's not really "racing" but "managing" IMO, YMMV.


Even if they had everlasting tyres in F1, it wouldnt be granted P1 for LH in every race or qual, you might want think so and use tyres as an excuse for LH not dominating everybody and everything, but with better tyres all drivers would drive accordingly and there is simply no way to know if Hamilton would do better or worst against Nico or others in such case. F1 has always had different rules and requirements in different eras, its hardly ever been just about driving the car (in a sense you would drive your own car in race track instead of public roads), neither they all have equally good cars, but one thing has been quite common: best drivers usually are fighting for wins and WDC year in, year out. If Lewis cant do that because there is other things than just driving the car, then he isnt one of those absolute top drivers.

BTW I do believe he is top driver and can fight just well even with current regulations and tyres and with whatever, shame you don´t have faith in him as much as I do.


#96 race addicted

race addicted
  • Member

  • 19,744 posts
  • Joined: June 01

Posted 30 May 2013 - 17:02

That is what Lewis is doing right now?

to add:

1. Raikkonen is a lot younger 2. has team mate who is not at the level of Rosberg 3. has a car that is one of the kindest on the tires in era of tires preservation. Doesn't take away anything from Raikkonen but both didn't have to handle comparable circumstances. I think it's a fair comment to say Kimi had it a lot easier than Schumacher to begin with..


We've had six GP's with Rosberg and Hamilton as team-mates, you know, but the reason I brought that up was because it was highlighted before in this thread (Q between Ros/Schu).

I don't think Räikkönen really had it easier, it was a comeback after two seasons away, and there was some ring rust with him too.
Grosjean is certainly not at the level of Rosberg - even if he's got raw speed - but Räikkönen made a very good impression on his own.

2010, Schumacher's first year of his comeback, there wasn't shit-tires....

#97 ivand911

ivand911
  • Member

  • 8,152 posts
  • Joined: February 10

Posted 30 May 2013 - 17:09

Come on. Schumacher crashed and had a string of clumsy incidents probably more often than he impressed by putting a decent margin on Rosberg in qualifying.
Räikkönen's comeback has been praised all across the different branches of people with an interest in F1.

The only difference is the car as I said. If you drive in the middle you can have crashes, remember Monaco? If you drive at the front things change. MS have 2 mistakes last year? And some still say he was not guilty in Senna incident. It was said by JV(he said you can't change direction in braking area). It is clumsy to stop in wrong pit-box also. But this things happen.

Edited by ivand911, 30 May 2013 - 17:17.


#98 V3TT3L

V3TT3L
  • Member

  • 1,681 posts
  • Joined: November 12

Posted 30 May 2013 - 17:12

We have to reappraise Nico, not MS.

MS was fast but dependent of TC to sustain his race pace.
Also MS had a stronger voice in car development at Mercedes so every car upgrade used to hurt Nico's pace, bcs it was very particular to MS.
MS was great in a specific time of F1, but just couldn't adapt to the non-TC time and became extinct.

These driver associations/permutations can lead to wrongful conclusions.
If we go back in time, we can also speculate that Webber is much better than Rosber Jr bcs at Williams he was totally dominated.
So Webber > Schumy :confused:

#99 gillesthegenius

gillesthegenius
  • Member

  • 2,534 posts
  • Joined: July 11

Posted 30 May 2013 - 17:14

In another thread, you claimed that raw pace doesn't change much over time.


Didn't I keep repeating that it applied only for 'normal' careers? And do you serious think that it is normal for a forty plus to be driving these wild beasts at the highest level in this ultra competitive era?

Advertisement

#100 race addicted

race addicted
  • Member

  • 19,744 posts
  • Joined: June 01

Posted 30 May 2013 - 17:16

The only difference is the car as I said. If you drive in the middle you can have crashes, remember Monaco? If you drive at the front things change. He have 2 mistakes last year? And some still say he was not guilty in Senna incident. It was said by JV(he said you can't change direction in braking area). It is clumsy to stop in wrong pit-box also. But this things happen.


Two mistakes? There were more incidents than that.
I would say it's comical to run through the wrong pit-box, it loses you a few seconds, but it doesn't end your own and others race........;)