65 replies to this topic

[Schumacher7]

This makes what Vettel has done over the last three years even more impressive, being able to claim three successive championships in such a tight and competitive field - a much more difficult task than when Schumacher was winning with Ferrari.

This year the cars were close, the last two not a chance, Red Bull were streets ahead.

[D.M.N.]

This year the cars were close, the last two not a chance, Red Bull were streets ahead.

Relatively speaking, the field spread in the past 2/3 years has been significantly closer than 10 to 20 years ago.

[Ogami musashi]

I think thats exactly what he meant- that the cars being so stable and predictable, allow lesser drivers to look good (by being much easier to take to the limit, and with mostly asphalt run-off areas, you can even go beyond with little penalty), and takes away the potencial for the best to make a big difference like in the past. Couple that with the dreadful egg-tyres, and you have current F1.

If the translation is correct he says the car are now much more balanced, which is different from the overall grip you have. And again if the translation is correct he doesn't say at any time that the drivers have now an easier job.

What he seems to implies and is easily seen when driving historic cars vs modern ones (whatever the category), live or in simulators, is that "historic" cars were indeed much less stable and i totally agree that then the driver had to work out the stability first which indeed allowed to make a lot of difference. There's no doubt that current cars are much easier to control and this has taken away the stability skills. But the historic cars didn't allow for pushing as much as newer ones and Mark webber said it recently modern F1 cars require huge skill to be exploited at their full potential because it is all in small technic details that you can push them. It also makes the competition definitely tighter but to me it doesn't take away anything from the best...it is just that a couple of tenth of advantage now is equivalent to 1,5 second 15 years ago.

[SeanValen]

What he is saying

- cars are more aerodynamically stable than before. Previous cars were 'sharper' to drive.

- Driver can make less of a differnce than before.

- Car has a smaller operating window and less time can be found. Before you could find a second, now you cannot.

- Cars are closer together than before (rule stability allows cars to get closer)

- His work ethic standards are now seen en masse throughout the field esp among top drivers

We as fans have been robbed of the old formula one which wasn't too old. We advamced to such a point, that if you change as a sport all the time, eventually you'll have one too many changes. Schumacher came back to a F1 that has had one too many changes for him, and I think for alot of fans who know what it used to be like. To his credit, he adapted and made his last year his best year, in a car which wasn't reliable and fast when it mattered, and even then, perhaps we wouldn't of even seen a young Schumacher excel with these rules.

Things change, Senna's gone, Schumacher's grows old, stays still fast, but the nature of the sport has changed, and I think he want to believe it hasn't, but we've seen everything we've seen this year done better in the past by many drivers, and not just Schumacher, it's because the sport was just right for them to show their calibre.


I'm not sure how appealing formula one is going to be in 10-20 years from now, unless they were honest about making it a showcase for the best drivers/get the balance better.

[Diablobb81]

Since the driver threads were closed here is also an interview about his two crashes this year.

While i agree 100% with his view on the first crash it looks like he just misjudged it with in the crash with Vergne.

http://www.auto-moto...er-6360840.html

[olliek88]

Since the driver threads were closed here is also an interview about his two crashes this year.

While i agree 100% with his view on the first crash it looks like he just misjudged it with in the crash with Vergne.

http://www.auto-moto...er-6360840.html

The translation i used is pretty awful but it sounds like he says it was entirely Bruno's fault? Hard to agree with that IMO, locking up and going into the back of someone is your responsibility IMHO, Michael actually turned towards Bruno too, but thats OT.

[pRy]

Schumacher said something else in an interview recently that caught my attention. He suggested that the Redbull is a 'custom' Vettel car. He was asked if he could have won the title in a Redbull this year and he suggested while he would be mixing it up at the front, he wasn't sure if he would win as the Redbull is a custom Vettel car. He suggested if it were a custom Schumacher car, he would have a better chance.

And it got me thinking, is he right? Is the Redbull designed for Vettel's driving style? If so, does that mean Webber is somewhat disadvantaged as he is driving a car built around his team mate? Not trying to suggest this is immoral or wrong btw. I'm sure Schumacher would tell us the Ferrari was built around him.

[MajorRichard]

I don't think you could build a car within the tight rules so vastly different for a given driving style, while also maximising its pace.

[boldhakka]

I don't see much evidence for the claim that most drivers are now working as hard as Michael used to. In 2012 there were reports of Michael being the first into free practice sessions and discussing stuff with his engineers even before other drivers had arrived at the track. No such reports for other drivers.

[gillesthegenius]

Schumacher said something else in an interview recently that caught my attention. He suggested that the Redbull is a 'custom' Vettel car. He was asked if he could have won the title in a Redbull this year and he suggested while he would be mixing it up at the front, he wasn't sure if he would win as the Redbull is a custom Vettel car. He suggested if it were a custom Schumacher car, he would have a better chance.

And it got me thinking, is he right? Is the Redbull designed for Vettel's driving style? If so, does that mean Webber is somewhat disadvantaged as he is driving a car built around his team mate? Not trying to suggest this is immoral or wrong btw. I'm sure Schumacher would tell us the Ferrari was built around him.

Car development didn't favour Vettel - Webber

http://en.espnf1.com...tory/97470.html

[Craven Morehead]

Car development didn't favour Vettel - Webber

http://en.espnf1.com...tory/97470.html

Car development favoured Vettel - Horner

http://www.autosport...t.php/id/104991

[Paco]

Not sure why people are getting the arse in a knot. Nothing Michael has said is a surprise to anyone.. except maybe those that only started watching F1 the past 3-5 years.

The fact is:

Long life tires have greatly changed the type of driver that goes fast. Slower and conserving your tires tends to be faster over a race distance. Very different from the days of old.

Michael was one of the few but not the only driver that brought to F1 a Level of amazing level FITNESS (I'll never forget Frank Williams calling Juan Pablo fat) and WORK ETHIC (at the track, testing and behind the scenes) to F1. It may be taken as standard for most top drivers now but wasnt the case 10-20 years ago. He set the benchmark and many Team Principle nows expect it that same level of professionalism and commitment from their drivers.

The cars were more simple back in the late 90's and Aero was less understood and developed so drivers were more impactful in the direction of a car would take during development and testing. Now, CFD plays a much greater role and the balanced is worked out for them so it's more of a tweak here and there.

He rightly said that this crap about how the grid is better then years gone by an insult. People obviously forget how talented many drivers have been in the past. There is much less turnover of drivers now so you get a lot of champions on the grid and teams are less willing to take risks with new drivers so you get grid stangnacy. That isn`t necessarily a function of drivers being better today.. just that therent is 1 driver dominating like Michael did so more champions around and teams being less risk averse (ie drivers like Button, Massa and Webber would have lost their top drives and retired.

I do think the grid may be a bit better now but it could be simply because the cars are more balanced and easier to drive fast..

So.. all he is saying is that F1 has evolved a lot and now most teams are very professional, the cars are way more balanced then years ago and the performance of driver and car is probably solely on how well they can get the tires to work on a given weekend. Not exactly shocking or a cause for people rude on this thread.

[Rubens Hakkamacher]

I think reading comprehension has changed since Michael was champ.

Let's look at his statement in reverse. What does Rosberg *not* have to bring to the table that Schumacher had to?

1) deal with constantly changing car development, from design perspectives not allowed now (tires, engines);
2) deal with less stable cars - pointy cars;
3) deal with being allowed to practice effectively as much as you want.


Those are three very major things that are missing today, that you can equate Rosberg to because you just don't know. How many hours of driver development happens today versus then? How many hours in the car does each driver get? That's very major, and then when you have cars that were delicately on the limit of wanting to over steer constantly - who was the king of that?

F1 is much more static today.

[Tarzaan]

Competition is greater now - Schumacher

He was 40+ when he comne back to the Merc.

Imho it's natural to feel competition stronger then he was 25-30.


An other factor is that todays F1 requires less from the drivers than F1 in 10-20 years ago. Both in fisical side, but from drives sike. The cars has less power, there are asphalt run-off areas, so drivers didn't pay as much for mistakes.

Drivers don't need as much natural talent to help set-up their cars or help the developing, or be carefull their cars because of the modern telemetry, rev limit, etc.

[boldhakka]

.

The fact is:

Long life tires have greatly changed the type of driver that goes fast. Slower and conserving your tires tends to be faster over a race distance. Very different from the days of old.
.

Did you mean short life tyres? Why would they need to go slower and conserve long life tyres?

You're also very wrong in any case, the same drivers who were fast on rock hard Bridgestones are fast on the soft Pirelli's. The two exceptions being Schumacher and Massa, and there are signs that other parameters were influencing those two as well. I think some drivers enjoy one more than the other, but almost all are able to perform on both types - Lewis being a great example.

[schubacca]

You understood what he said or do you have to read it again ? The common argument against Schumacher is that the drivers are greater than in the 90's or the early 2000's. What he is saying (in this is his definition of a greater competition) is that the field is much closer. As driver you can't have a mistake, need a good car (you can't overcome a deficit like it 90's by driving on the edge). You have to read just more than a headline...

100% agree.....

Wow.... MS is talking perfect sense.