296 replies to this topic

[IndianF1]

Lets get this straight, you cant have the best drivers monstering around in the fastest car of that season.  It is going to be a whitewash of a championship.  The reason why most of my generation reminisces about the 1997-2000 years is because bloody hell you could feel and revel the David-Goliath story in the making.  It was fantastic, you could not have scripted a better end.  Those were the seasons that made F1 and Schumacher world famous, you cannot be the highest paid sportsman if your sport is not popular! F1 would be just another farce with Hakkinen winning some 5-6 or maybe 10?? titles with no competition from the field. Goddammit Liberty F1, please entertain us!! Show me you guys have got more balls than an octogenarian Bernie! 

[AmonGods]

Just saw a tweet from Jean Todt. Schumacher won the WDC on this day in 2002. Yeah, can you old Schumy fans go away with all your crying about today's F1 and hooooow much better it was back then.. 

[Marklar]

Well, special is always relative and depending on the context. Out of the current field I would for instance only call Max and Lewis special, but there is context where it would expand to more drivers.

[Anuity]

Well, special is always relative and depending on the context. Out of the current field I would for instance only call Max and Lewis special, but there is context where it would expand to more drivers.

If jugded on the current form than yes.

I would definitely add Leclerc to that list.

 

If are looking on the grid based on previous accomplishments, than obviously Raikkonen and Vettel are also very special drivers. Not anymore, but in history they will be remembered as such, likely lowers than their peers, but still.

[thefinalapex]

Just saw a tweet from Jean Todt. Schumacher won the WDC on this day in 2002. Yeah, can you old Schumy fans go away with all your crying about today's F1 and hooooow much better it was back then..

There have been a lot Schumacher fans in this thread that said they preferred the 96-2000 period more then the one he was winning so easily. The point isn’t about one dominant season either its about the length of todays period.

[Anuity]

It's the same for me I much prefer Michael's 1998 campaign to anything after 2000. 2 of his best campaigns in F1 are none championship winning ones 97 and 98. I will always rank them higher than 2002 and 2004.

 

 

Agree

 

I think if anybody needs to be introduced into the career of Michael they really need to look at 3 seasons first:

 

2000: A lot of preassure, driving a Ferrari, failing to win during the last 3 previous years, especially making a very bad move in 1997. And arguably racing against a faster Mclaren, he pulled it off.

1998: Just relentless, everything seemed to go wrong, tyres, superior Mclaren with Newey, fast Hakkinen, SPA with Coulthard and dramatic Suzuka. He still managed to fight it till the end. In fact, for me it's perhaps the most remarkable campaigns since I'm watching F1. Stunning.

1995: Brilliant, it's not getting appreciated enough because somehow Hill and Coulthard managed to make a total mess of the season. Imagine if it was Vettel driving that Williams. He would be crucified, no less.

 

bonus: return races in 1999. Just epic, and unexpected by no one. I remember the articles at the time, with various experts debating wheter he would ever be able to return to his form.

 

This is something that I miss with Lewis. Perhaps, he is even a better racer than Michael, but for me he lacks those very special seasons. He had his tough one in 2007 against Fernando. But after that? 2008 was really scrappy, almost looked like no driver wanted to win it. And everything in his Mercedes years can only be compared to Michael from 2001-2004. Yep, very similar, very impressive, fully deserved. But unspectacular and boring in both instances for both drivers.

[Zendroh]

Lets get this straight, you cant have the best drivers monstering around in the fastest car of that season.  It is going to be a whitewash of a championship.  The reason why most of my generation reminisces about the 1997-2000 years is because bloody hell you could feel and revel the David-Goliath story in the making.  It was fantastic, you could not have scripted a better end.  Those were the seasons that made F1 and Schumacher world famous, you cannot be the highest paid sportsman if your sport is not popular! F1 would be just another farce with Hakkinen winning some 5-6 or maybe 10?? titles with no competition from the field. Goddammit Liberty F1, please entertain us!! Show me you guys have got more balls than an octogenarian Bernie! 

Hakkinen could barely beat a mediocre driver like Irvine in 99 during his dominant superior Mclaren let alone be 6 or 10 times world champion. Certainly Coulthard would have been double world champion if that was the case. He beated Hakkinen quiet often and had the measure of him plenty of times.

[Anuity]

Hakkinen could barely beat a mediocre driver like Irvine in 99 during his dominant superior Mclaren let alone be 6 or 10 times world champion. Certainly Coulthard would have been double world champion if that was the case. He beated Hakkinen quiet often and had the measure of him plenty of times.

That is precisely why Coulthard finished behind Hakkinen, Irvine, even Frentzen and only 4 points clear of Schumacher who missed 6 races in 1999. Duh.....

Coulthard was a very good driver, there is no doubt about it. But he was never as quick as Hakkinen. 

[dav115]

Just saw a tweet from Jean Todt. Schumacher won the WDC on this day in 2002. Yeah, can you old Schumy fans go away with all your crying about today's F1 and hooooow much better it was back then.. 

 

pre-2000 - prime Schumacher fighting for titles with inferior machinery. Even as a lowly 2x champion people were arguing on AtlasF1 / Usenet etc. whether he was the GOAT...

2000 - championship went down to the wire and literally a flag to flag dogfight between Hakkinen and Schumacher where they finished >1minute ahead of their own teammates and both led the race at times

2001 - granted boring fight for first as Hakkinen checked out but some interesting races with 5 different race winners across the season. Much closer than the points suggest but we can thank Ilmor/BMW engines for grenading every 2 laps (see Hakkinen retiring from the lead of the last lap of Spain...)

2002 - total domination which led to rule changes for 2003 (points system de-emphasising wins, testing, wet tyre selection, 1 lap qualy)

2003 - 8 different race winners and 3 way fight for the title (Ferrari/McLaren/Williams) which was won in the final race by 2 points over Kimi

2004 - total domination which led to the no tyre change rule being brought in for 2005 which was specifically anti Ferrari/Bridgestone (see MSC stealing France 2004 from Renault with a 4 stop sprint)

 

Nobody denies that 2002/4 were snorefests barring the odd race... but Mercedes has been class of the field (excl. some Ferrari engine trickery for part of 2018) for 2014-2020 and thanks to the rule freeze could stop R&D tomorrow and still walk 2021.

 

Homologation, no testing + relatively static regulations = prolonged domination. See 2009, 2010-13 and 2014-21. Many of us on this forum were predicting this pre-2009!

[AmonGods]

pre-2000 - prime Schumacher fighting for titles with inferior machinery. Even as a lowly 2x champion people were arguing on AtlasF1 / Usenet etc. whether he was the GOAT...

2000 - championship went down to the wire and literally a flag to flag dogfight between Hakkinen and Schumacher where they finished >1minute ahead of their own teammates and both led the race at times

2001 - granted boring fight for first as Hakkinen checked out but some interesting races with 5 different race winners across the season. Much closer than the points suggest but we can thank Ilmor/BMW engines for grenading every 2 laps (see Hakkinen retiring from the lead of the last lap of Spain...)

2002 - total domination which led to rule changes for 2003 (points system de-emphasising wins, testing, wet tyre selection, 1 lap qualy)

2003 - 8 different race winners and 3 way fight for the title (Ferrari/McLaren/Williams) which was won in the final race by 2 points over Kimi

2004 - total domination which led to the no tyre change rule being brought in for 2005 which was specifically anti Ferrari/Bridgestone (see MSC stealing France 2004 from Renault with a 4 stop sprint)

 

Nobody denies that 2002/4 were snorefests barring the odd race... but Mercedes has been class of the field (excl. some Ferrari engine trickery for part of 2018) for 2014-2020 and thanks to the rule freeze could stop R&D tomorrow and still walk 2021.

 

Homologation, no testing + relatively static regulations = prolonged domination. See 2009, 2010-13 and 2014-21. Many of us on this forum were predicting this pre-2009!

 

2010, 2012, 2014, 2016, 2017, 2018 were anything but boring. But whatever floats your boat.

[thefinalapex]

2010, 2012, 2014, 2016, 2017, 2018 were anything but boring. But whatever floats your boat.

 

Yep, I enjoyed 2009-2010-2012 and 2017(to an extend) very much.

[dav115]

I think if anybody needs to be introduced into the career of Michael they really need to look at 3 seasons first:

 

2000: A lot of preassure, driving a Ferrari, failing to win during the last 3 previous years, especially making a very bad move in 1997. And arguably racing against a faster Mclaren, he pulled it off.

1998: Just relentless, everything seemed to go wrong, tyres, superior Mclaren with Newey, fast Hakkinen, SPA with Coulthard and dramatic Suzuka. He still managed to fight it till the end. In fact, for me it's perhaps the most remarkable campaigns since I'm watching F1. Stunning.

1995: Brilliant, it's not getting appreciated enough because somehow Hill and Coulthard managed to make a total mess of the season. Imagine if it was Vettel driving that Williams. He would be crucified, no less.

 

bonus: return races in 1999. Just epic, and unexpected by no one. I remember the articles at the time, with various experts debating wheter he would ever be able to return to his form.

 

This is something that I miss with Lewis. Perhaps, he is even a better racer than Michael, but for me he lacks those very special seasons. He had his tough one in 2007 against Fernando. But after that? 2008 was really scrappy, almost looked like no driver wanted to win it. And everything in his Mercedes years can only be compared to Michael from 2001-2004. Yep, very similar, very impressive, fully deserved. But unspectacular and boring in both instances for both drivers.

Yep - it was like watching Senna (although he was "unlucky" to have Prost on the grid at the same time which masked the effect), Rossi in his day and Marquez now. Countless examples from all of them in inferior equipment making the rest of the field look like mugs. No surprise many of these were when it rained and equalised the playing field.

 

I've never had that feeling of total superiority to the field post-Schumacher with the exception of maybe Alonso's 2012 season

[Anuity]

2009, 2010,2012, 2016 and 2016 were all fun to certain extent.

The problem is that now straight away from testing you know who is going to be winning races and titles. Yes, it has happened before, but not for so long.

It's not about protecting any records either, I would not care if somebody else scores more than Senna, Schumacher, Alonso and Raikkonen, they are still my favourite regardless and the best for me.

It's about entertainment. 

 

Over the last 8 years there were only 2 seasons with proper, tense championship figt - 2012 and 2016. That's quite something.

[Risil]

Why has this thread turned into attack/defend Michael Schumacher's reputation? It's got little to do with the topic.

[lightstoflag]

I think if anybody needs to be introduced into the career of Michael they really need to look at 3 seasons first:

 

2000: A lot of preassure, driving a Ferrari, failing to win during the last 3 previous years, especially making a very bad move in 1997. And arguably racing against a faster Mclaren, he pulled it off.

1998: Just relentless, everything seemed to go wrong, tyres, superior Mclaren with Newey, fast Hakkinen, SPA with Coulthard and dramatic Suzuka. He still managed to fight it till the end. In fact, for me it's perhaps the most remarkable campaigns since I'm watching F1. Stunning.

1995: Brilliant, it's not getting appreciated enough because somehow Hill and Coulthard managed to make a total mess of the season. Imagine if it was Vettel driving that Williams. He would be crucified, no less.

 

bonus: return races in 1999. Just epic, and unexpected by no one. I remember the articles at the time, with various experts debating wheter he would ever be able to return to his form.

 

This is something that I miss with Lewis. Perhaps, he is even a better racer than Michael, but for me he lacks those very special seasons. He had his tough one in 2007 against Fernando. But after that? 2008 was really scrappy, almost looked like no driver wanted to win it. And everything in his Mercedes years can only be compared to Michael from 2001-2004. Yep, very similar, very impressive, fully deserved. But unspectacular and boring in both instances for both drivers.

 

Lewis's 2010 was very special, and I think very comparable to say a Schumi 1997. The racecraft he demonstrated in that season (the last without DRS) was some of the best in F1 ever (it was like Alonso's in 2012 but with even more of an edge to it). He had two imprudences in Monza and Singapore that were largely borne out of desperation at his equipment disadvantage as the Ferrari and Red Bull were out-developing them, and had already started the season from a better place. Without those two mistakes it would have been a better championship win than Prost's 1986. The McLaren could barely scratch any wins in the dry. There were multiple threats in the form of peers (Alonso) or people who were at least all-time greats (Vettel) as well as a formidable teammate (prime Button).

 

It's no coincidence that at all of the points when the field was most competitive (2009, 2010, 2012) Hamilton ended up being one of the heroes of the season. 

 

We're mostly going in circles because a contingent rightly (in my mind) declares that the driving competition in Shumi's heyday was wanting. Others counter that they only appeared so because Schumi rendered them so. But, as Atreiu has already said, Schumi can take wins, poles, podiums, championships (in other words, accomplishments) off of you, but he can't take away the caliber of driving you present to the viewer. And in that regard, your Alesis, Bergers, Hills, Villeneuve's, etc. are incontrovertibly some ways below, your Alonsos, Vettels, Verstappens, Leclercs, even Ricciardo, etc. 

Edited by lightstoflag, 21 July 2020 - 16:43.

[Anuity]

 But, as Atreiu has already said, Schumi can take wins, poles, podiums, championships (in other words, accomplishments) off of you, but he can't take away the caliber of driving you present to the viewer. And in that, your Alesis, Bergers, Hills, Villeneuve's, etc. are incontrovertibly some ways below, your Alonsos, Vettels, Verstappens, Leclercs, even Ricciardo, etc. 

 

They only look like that given what we are seeing now. 

I have already mentioned this point. How well would Leclerc/Verstappen perform given everything if they debuted in in mid 90's. We don't know.

[dav115]

2009, 2010,2012, 2016 and 2016 were all fun to certain extent.

The problem is that now straight away from testing you know who is going to be winning races and titles. Yes, it has happened before, but not for so long.

It's not about protecting any records either, I would not care if somebody else scores more than Senna, Schumacher, Alonso and Raikkonen, they are still my favourite regardless and the best for me.

It's about entertainment. 

 

Over the last 8 years there were only 2 seasons with proper, tense championship figt - 2012 and 2016. That's quite something.

Spot on, and that will remain the case until at least 2022

[Clatter]

Hakkinen could barely beat a mediocre driver like Irvine in 99 during his dominant superior Mclaren let alone be 6 or 10 times world champion. Certainly Coulthard would have been double world champion if that was the case. He beated Hakkinen quiet often and had the measure of him plenty of times.

Do you think his 5 retirements to Irvines 1, might have made the fight somewhat closer than it might have been?

[RS6]

Lewis's 2010 was very special, and I think very comparable to say a Schumi 1997. The racecraft he demonstrated in that season (the last without DRS) was some of the best in F1 ever (it was like Alonso's in 2012 but with even more of an edge to it). He had two imprudences in Monza and Singapore that were largely borne out of desperation at his equipment disadvantage as the Ferrari and Red Bull were out-developing them, and had already started the season from a better place. Without those two mistakes it would have been a better championship win than Prost's 1986. The McLaren could barely scratch any wins in the dry. There were multiple threats in the form of peers (Alonso) or people who were at least all-time greats (Vettel) as well as a formidable teammate (prime Button).

 

It's no coincidence that at all of the points when the field was most competitive (2009, 2010, 2012) Hamilton ended up being one of the heroes of the season. 

 

The McLaren was very good in 2010, Button won 2 races and they finished 2nd in the constructors (McLaren beat Ferrari by a large 58 points, and only 44 points less than Red Bull) . It was the only car that could really challenge Red Bull in qualifying and races on outright speed a few times that year. Despite that Hamilton finished 4th in the drivers standing, even below Webber. Alonso was second and would have even somehow won the title without typical Ferrari strategy in Abu dhabi. Basically Hamilton finished below Alonso who had a slower car and  #2 Webber. Hardly very special when looking objectively.

Edited by RS6, 21 July 2020 - 18:43.

[milestone 11]

The 2 point gap for a win between second and 1st was a joke and almost gave Kimi the title with 1 win compared to Schumacher's 6

It's effectively only 2.8 now.

[milestone 11]

Vettel has fans?? I thought they were an urban legend!!

I'm here.

[Dicun]

Hakkinen could barely beat a mediocre driver like Irvine in 99 during his dominant superior Mclaren let alone be 6 or 10 times world champion. Certainly Coulthard would have been double world champion if that was the case. He beated Hakkinen quiet often and had the measure of him plenty of times.

 

I keep reading this nonsense about how Mika struggled in 1999 to beat Eddie with his superior McLaren and how DC was at his level. I will never understand why so many people remember so wrongly to that season, but here we go.

 

Even with Mika's mistakes at Imola and Monza, he should have been WDC by a hefty margin had it not been for unreliability and McLaren's "no team orders" policy. Mika was comfortably in the lead in Australia when he retired with technical problems, losing 10 points. Irvine won the race because DC also retired, hence he gained 6 points straight away in the first race. At Silverstone, Mika was yet again in the lead, yet again only to retire for reasons out of his control; hence Irvine gained yet another 2 points. At Austria, Mika should have won comfortably, but DC famously crashed into him, sending him to the end of the pack. He fought his way back to third, but this incident cost him another 6 points, and Irvine again gained 4 points. In Germany, the same thing happened: Mika was leading comfortably only to retire due to technical problems (another 10 points lost), and Eddie was gifted the win yet again - another 4 points gained. So while Mika lost 4 wins and a total of 36 points through no fault of his own, Eddie was gifted 3 wins and 16 points - a massive swing of 52 points in total.

 

In terms of reliability, Eddie DNFd only at Imola and Mika never gained anything there as he was already out – and while running he was in front of Eddie anyway.

 

All in all, Mika should have scored 112 points, and 9 wins to Eddie's 58 points and just a single win. And we that's without such outside factors as while DC was free to overtake Mika in Spa, Salo was ordered to let Eddie pass for the win in Hockenheim. In reality, it wasn't a close championship at all. It was only made to look like one because of McLaren's unreliability and the fact that the McLaren management let DC race (and sometimes ruin the race of) Mika. This would have been an unthinkable scenario at Ferrari.

 

And speaking of DC, he himself concluded it best: he was very good, on his day he could beat anyone. But he wasn't WDC material like Mika because he couldn't be consistently that fast, especially in qualifying. Between 1998 and 2000, their qualifying H2H was a whopping 36-13 in favour of Mika.

Edited by Dicun, 21 July 2020 - 19:44.

[Zendroh]

The McLaren was very good in 2010, Button won 2 races and they finished 2nd in the constructors . It was the only car that could really challenge Red Bull in qualifying and races on outright speed a few times that year. Despite that Hamilton finished 4th in the drivers standing, even below Webber. Alonso was second and would have even somehow won the title without typical Ferrari strategy in Abu dhabi. Basically Hamilton finished below Alonso who had a slower car and  #2 Webber. Hardly very special when looking objectively.

Mclaren was never close to that Red Bull on outright pace. Mclaren only pole came in Canada and that was because Red Bull qualified on the prime tyre otherwise they would have been on pole even on that track. Actually Ferrari had more poles than Mclaren that season. In 2010 Mclaren was the 3rd best car especially from germany on wards when they lost the development race compared to Red Bull and Ferrari but Hamilton still went to the last race fighting for the championship against the 2 Red Bulls and Alonso. Let me tell you that the RB6 was the car with the most downforce in the history of F1 up until that point according to Newey. The RB6 was one of the few cars in modern F1 history able to take the fastest and most challenging corners at flat-out pace. Red Bull in 2010 made 15 out of 19 pole positions. In qualifying it sometimes got pole by over a second. On most tracks it was unbeatable. The RB6 had absolutely stonking advantages at times. Vettel margin over P3 at Hungary 2010 for example was 1.2 seconds, also the RB6 was capable of taking pole at just about every race bar monza. Its a rather common misconception also that its pace was only in qualifying, but it lacked race pace. This imo, also isn't true, whenever it got out front clearly it just shot into the distance. Whenever Red Bull needed to, they showed often unbelievable pace, like Hungary when Webber put a pit stop on Alonso in half a tyre stint. The RB6 was by far the best car on the grid. The car was mindbogglingly quick and one of the greatest cars ever produced. The only reason the season was so close is that Vettel had mechanical problems in Australia, Bahrain & Korea. Vettel also screwed up the SC restart in Hungary (where the car was a second faster than the rest of the field) collided with Webber in Turkey and hit Button in Belgium. Webber also had the odd off day and crashes. Mclaren and Ferrari usually just picked up the pieces. For some reason history remembers 2010 as "close". Maybe in points but not in performance.

Edited by Zendroh, 21 July 2020 - 18:37.

[milestone 11]

A bit off topic here, but just to show how schadenfreude existed during those schumi years let me explain what people call as the overtaking of the century what Hakkinen pulled on Schumacher at Spa 2000. For Christ sake, the McLaren's were 1.4 seconds faster than Schumacher on that circuit in qualifying and its only because of rain and schumi's brilliance that the Ferrari was ahead at that point of the race. He was there for the taking!!! But by god, everyone was elated as though something incredible was witnessed there and then, i.e. a 1.5-second faster car overtaking on the Spa straight!!! The problem with F1 is they have too many Englishmen reporting and its reasonable for them to have their bias for Lewis to continue winning, but boy do they hate Germans or what! That too is racism in a way the way they treated him calling him all kinds, but none to bother when their own Lewis was caught in the McLaren scandal when he lied!

That's nonsense though, it's remembered mostly because of Zonta's involvement.

[Dicun]

A bit off topic here, but just to show how schadenfreude existed during those schumi years let me explain what people call as the overtaking of the century what Hakkinen pulled on Schumacher at Spa 2000. For Christ sake, the McLaren's were 1.4 seconds faster than Schumacher on that circuit in qualifying and its only because of rain and schumi's brilliance that the Ferrari was ahead at that point of the race. He was there for the taking!!! But by god, everyone was elated as though something incredible was witnessed there and then, i.e. a 1.5-second faster car overtaking on the Spa straight!!! The problem with F1 is they have too many Englishmen reporting and its reasonable for them to have their bias for Lewis to continue winning, but boy do they hate Germans or what! That too is racism in a way the way they treated him calling him all kinds, but none to bother when their own Lewis was caught in the McLaren scandal when he lied! 

 

I get that you are a massive fan of Michael, but come on now.

 

That move was mind-boggling, even according to Michael himself. They were on slicks and to pull that move off, Mika had to fly through Eau Rouge and Radillon flat - something that even Michael wasn't prepared to do. After that Mika had to get off the racing line onto the wet part of the tarmac to squeeze by Zonta who didn't even know he was there. Zonta himself said that he c***ped in his pants when Mika flew by him as he was only paying attention to Michael, thinking there was only one leading car about to lap him. Just watch the onboard footage of Zonta. He keeps on checking his left side mirror, all the while swerving to the right, only to have Mika get by him on the outside, in the narrowest of gaps where it was still wet at that point.

 

It was the overtake of the century indeed and just as with the whole of 1999, many people just keep getting it dead wrong. What do you guys have against the legacy of Mika, I'll never know.

[Anuity]

I get that you are a massive fan of Michael, but come on now.

That move was mind-boggling, even according to Michael himself. They were on slicks and to pull that move off, Mika had to fly through Eau Rouge and Radillon flat - something that even Michael wasn't prepared to do. After that Mika had to get off the racing line onto the wet part of the tarmac to squeeze by Zonta who didn't even know he was there. Zonta himself said that he c***ped in his pants when Mika flew by him as he was only paying attention to Michael, thinking there was only one leading car about to lap him. Just watch the onboard footage of Zonta. He keeps on checking his left side mirror, all the while swerving to the right, only to have Mika get by him on the outside, in the narrowest of gaps where it was still wet at that point.

It was the overtake of the century indeed and just as with the whole of 1999, many people just keep getting it dead wrong. What do you guys have against the legacy of Mika, I'll never know.

It was a fantastic move. Just watched on YouTube onboard with Mila. Simply beautiful.

[SonGoku]

Lewis 2012 season was probably one of the most special seasons of him in terms of driving against the Red Bulls. It all ended when the car DNF leading in Singapore, what basically was the last push to sign for Mercedes.

Edited by SonGoku, 21 July 2020 - 19:11.

[lightstoflag]

The McLaren was very good in 2010, Button won 2 races and they finished 2nd in the constructors . It was the only car that could really challenge Red Bull in qualifying and races on outright speed a few times that year. Despite that Hamilton finished 4th in the drivers standing, even below Webber. Alonso was second and would have even somehow won the title without typical Ferrari strategy in Abu dhabi. Basically Hamilton finished below Alonso who had a slower car and  #2 Webber. Hardly very special when looking objectively.

 

Okay, let's look at it objectively. In 2010 Vettel had 14 front rows (10 of them being poles), Webber had 12 (5 being poles), Alonso had 3 (2 being poles), Hamilton had 4 (1 being a pole), and Button and Massa had 1 each (no poles). Red Bull had 9 wins, most of which were won on sheer pace. Ferrari, through Alonso alone had 5 wins, 3 or so of which were won on pace. Mclaren won 5 between Hamilton and Button and only the Canadian Grand Prix was won on pace. The Australian and Chinese wins were classic changeable-conditions victories from Button, and Spa was another wet win from Hamilton. The Turkish grand Prix would have 100% been a Red Bull win if Webber and Vettel hadn't collided with each other. Which leaves Canada. Where in the numbers I have amassed so far does one draw the conclusion that the McLaren of that year was on any sort of competitive footing with the Red Bull? Where was this "challenge" you speak of in qualifying? Where was it in races? On what basis would you conclude that the Ferrari was slower than the McLaren that year?

 

McLaren finished second in the constructors that year because they had the best driver pairing. This hurt them in terms of the driver's championship though. The Ferrari was faster than the Mclaren but Alonso got to monopolize more of the team's points because Massa was off in his own world. 

[Requiem84]

The most sad things are the following arguments, which indicate that if you say this, you are more a fan of something of someone than a fan of the sport itself:

 

'Don't blame Mercedes, it's the fault of RB / Ferrari'

'Why are you complaining, domination was always there'

'Why are you complaining it will be 7-8 years of one victory, we always had long streaks'

'Can't you just enjoy seeing the best driver and best car win'

'Just respect Mercedes and Hamilton about how untouchable they are'

'Hamilton had his share early on in his career, he deserves a dominant car'

 

Just missing the point over and over again. Time and time again. Word by word again. 

 

F1 is broken. This is about the concept of the sport, the way the sport is set-up. It has got nothing to do with Hamilton, Mercedes, Red Bull, Ferrari. They are just playing by the rules of the 'F1 universe'. Within that certain universe the outcome will be more and more predictable, because advantages are much more sustainable to keep due to certain specific rules and there will only be 1 - 3 teams at a maximum that can be close. The other teams are just playing LMP2. Well, this year they are LMP3 and RB is playing LMP2. 

 

Don't fix RB, don't fix Ferrari. For god sake, fix the sport. 

[IndianF1]

I get that you are a massive fan of Michael, but come on now.

That move was mind-boggling, even according to Michael himself. They were on slicks and to pull that move off, Mika had to fly through Eau Rouge and Radillon flat - something that even Michael wasn't prepared to do. After that Mika had to get off the racing line onto the wet part of the tarmac to squeeze by Zonta who didn't even know he was there. Zonta himself said that he c***ped in his pants when Mika flew by him as he was only paying attention to Michael, thinking there was only one leading car about to lap him. Just watch the onboard footage of Zonta. He keeps on checking his left side mirror, all the while swerving to the right, only to have Mika get by him on the outside, in the narrowest of gaps where it was still wet at that point.

It was the overtake of the century indeed and just as with the whole of 1999, many people just keep getting it dead wrong. What do you guys have against the legacy of Mika, I'll never know.

I never said it's not a good overtake, but you can clearly see the speed differential between the two cars. Even with DRS, I see people struggling to even come close to overtaking a Mercedes. What I would call the most ballsy move ever was Chinese GP 2006. The way Michael overtook Fisichella on slicks going over the painted corner is un unbelievable considering how fisi was coming back to defend the line with the championship at stake and all. Reminded me of Argentina 1998, when Michael warded off a similar attack by Coulthard who rammed into him. After the first race in 1998 Mika said it will take a miracle for anyone else to win this season and what a touche by Michael after the Argentine GP: "I guess miracles do happen."

[P123]

The McLaren was very good in 2010, Button won 2 races and they finished 2nd in the constructors (McLaren beat Ferrari by a large 58 points, and only 44 points less than Red Bull) . It was the only car that could really challenge Red Bull in qualifying and races on outright speed a few times that year. Despite that Hamilton finished 4th in the drivers standing, even below Webber. Alonso was second and would have even somehow won the title without typical Ferrari strategy in Abu dhabi. Basically Hamilton finished below Alonso who had a slower car and  #2 Webber. Hardly very special when looking objectively.

 

Is that really looking objectively at that season?  It's more like a scoff at the final championship positions without any context, coupled with a false narrative of the McLaren being the only car that could challenge Red Bull.  Ferrari took two pole positions to McLaren's one that season, and a similar number of front row positions. That doesn't suggest McLaren was the pre-eminent competitor to Red Bull on quali pace, nor much of a competitor at all in fact over a lap. By any measure (poles, wins, front rows, races led, fastest laps), no great disparity between McLaren and Ferrari in race or qualifying trim, except that possibly McLaren had the stronger driver pairing which helped them towards that points gap. Something to consider anyway.  An objective summary would also perhaps acknowledge that Hamilton was still in the title fight at that final race.  An objective summary may also acknowledge that although Alonso finished second by a huge 12 points to Hamilton, he may have had the benefit of a helpful teammate to that end.  Objectively, hard to separate the drivers, as all made costly errors at some point.  In line with your musing that 'somehow' Alonso could have won the title without Ferrari's 'typical' strategy, then along the same lines I'm sure, whilst being objective, you'd note that somehow Hamilton could have won the title but for McLaren unreliability.  When looking objectively (or claiming to), always best to do so with both eyes open!

[Dicun]

I never said it's not a good overtake, but you can clearly see the speed differential between the two cars. Even with DRS, I see people struggling to even come close to overtaking a Mercedes. What I would call the most ballsy move ever was Chinese GP 2006. The way Michael overtook Fisichella on slicks going over the painted corner is un unbelievable considering how fisi was coming back to defend the line with the championship at stake and all. Reminded me of Argentina 1998, when Michael warded off a similar attack by Coulthard who rammed into him. After the first race in 1998 Mika said it will take a miracle for anyone else to win this season and what a touche by Michael after the Argentine GP: "I guess miracles do happen."

 

Once again, this was because Mika flew through the still wet Eau Rouge and Radillon flat out. Just watch at what speed Michael arrived to Kemmel and at what speed Mika did and compare it with the previous laps. That difference had nothing to do with actual car performance but the fact that Mika dared to do something that even Michael was not prepared to do.

 

As for 1998, don't forget that when Mika said that, McLaren's innovative double braking system was yet to be banned. If not for Ferrari's protest, it would certainly would have taken much longer until Michael can beat the MP4/13 on pure pace (because that's what happened at Argentina).

[IndianF1]

Once again, this was because Mika flew through the still wet Eau Rouge and Radillon flat out. Just watch at what speed Michael arrived to Kemmel and at what speed Mika did and compare it with the previous laps. That difference had nothing to do with actual car performance but the fact that Mika dared to do something that even Michael was not prepared to do.

As for 1998, don't forget that when Mika said that, McLaren's innovative double braking system was yet to be banned. If not for Ferrari's protest, it would certainly would have taken much longer until Michael can beat the MP4/13 on pure pace (because that's what happened at Argentina).

My dear friend, you forget that 1998 was Michael in Goodyear and Mika on Bridgestone. Not one person on earth will ever believe you when you say that it was Mika and his superior wet driving skills that was the reason for the speed difference. As for miracles, I remember Michael saying the braking system would have given the McLaren an advantage of a tenth or two, but the real pace difference was in the tyres.

[Atreiu]

Vettel has fans?? I thought they were an urban legend!!

He has at least one here.

[Metronazol]

The reliability of the modern cars is half the problem. Even the dominant cars of late 90s/early 2000s were fairly prone to expiring for a magnitude of reasons, that alone introduced a chaos element to proceedings that we just dont really get up front today. Take reliability out of the equation, and the fastest car is the most likely to be the one that wins. Stick the best driver in that car and we arrive at the problem we have today.

[Dicun]

My dear friend, you forget that 1998 was Michael in Goodyear and Mika on Bridgestone. Not one person on earth will ever believe you when you say that it was Mika and his superior wet driving skills that was the reason for the speed difference. As for miracles, I remember Michael saying the braking system would have given the McLaren an advantage of a tenth or two, but the real pace difference was in the tyres.

 

Not sure what you are on about. That infamous pass at Spa was in 2000 when both McLaren and Ferrari used Bridgestone tyres.

[garoidb]

Okay, let's look at it objectively. In 2010 Vettel had 14 front rows (10 of them being poles), Webber had 12 (5 being poles), Alonso had 3 (2 being poles), Hamilton had 4 (1 being a pole), and Button and Massa had 1 each (no poles). Red Bull had 9 wins, most of which were won on sheer pace. Ferrari, through Alonso alone had 5 wins, 3 or so of which were won on pace. Mclaren won 5 between Hamilton and Button and only the Canadian Grand Prix was won on pace. The Australian and Chinese wins were classic changeable-conditions victories from Button, and Spa was another wet win from Hamilton. The Turkish grand Prix would have 100% been a Red Bull win if Webber and Vettel hadn't collided with each other. Which leaves Canada. Where in the numbers I have amassed so far does one draw the conclusion that the McLaren of that year was on any sort of competitive footing with the Red Bull? Where was this "challenge" you speak of in qualifying? Where was it in races? On what basis would you conclude that the Ferrari was slower than the McLaren that year?

 

McLaren finished second in the constructors that year because they had the best driver pairing. This hurt them in terms of the driver's championship though. The Ferrari was faster than the Mclaren but Alonso got to monopolize more of the team's points because Massa was off in his own world. 

 

Massa not being able to take points off Alonso's competitors on many of Ferrari's good days was a problem, not an advantage. 

[baddog]

 

I get that you are a massive fan of Michael, but come on now.

 

That move was mind-boggling, even according to Michael himself. They were on slicks and to pull that move off, Mika had to fly through Eau Rouge and Radillon flat - something that even Michael wasn't prepared to do. After that Mika had to get off the racing line onto the wet part of the tarmac to squeeze by Zonta who didn't even know he was there. Zonta himself said that he c***ped in his pants when Mika flew by him as he was only paying attention to Michael, thinking there was only one leading car about to lap him. Just watch the onboard footage of Zonta. He keeps on checking his left side mirror, all the while swerving to the right, only to have Mika get by him on the outside, in the narrowest of gaps where it was still wet at that point.

 

It was the overtake of the century indeed and just as with the whole of 1999, many people just keep getting it dead wrong. What do you guys have against the legacy of Mika, I'll never know.

 

 

It was a great move and moment. It wasn't in any way a classic overtake, there have been heaps of better ones of those, but it was smart, ballsy and great fun. Loved Mika then and do now!

[George Costanza]

Just saw a tweet from Jean Todt. Schumacher won the WDC on this day in 2002. Yeah, can you old Schumy fans go away with all your crying about today's F1 and hooooow much better it was back then..

That won't ever happen again. Schumacher 2002 season is the finest season ever in terms of resutls... he finished every single race on the podium. That's just unbelievable. Not even Lewis did that or not yet anyway. And oddly enough... Schumacher could have been better that season as well. Crazy as that sounds. And it was better because of the V10 engines and the 12 lap qualifying format. Did he drive better in 2002 than in 1998, 2000? Probably not. Its really is quite possible that Michael would have won every race in 2002.

Edited by George Costanza, 21 July 2020 - 22:13.

[CountDooku]

I think if anybody needs to be introduced into the career of Michael they really need to look at 3 seasons first:

2000: A lot of preassure, driving a Ferrari, failing to win during the last 3 previous years, especially making a very bad move in 1997. And arguably racing against a faster Mclaren, he pulled it off.
1998: Just relentless, everything seemed to go wrong, tyres, superior Mclaren with Newey, fast Hakkinen, SPA with Coulthard and dramatic Suzuka. He still managed to fight it till the end. In fact, for me it's perhaps the most remarkable campaigns since I'm watching F1. Stunning.
1995: Brilliant, it's not getting appreciated enough because somehow Hill and Coulthard managed to make a total mess of the season. Imagine if it was Vettel driving that Williams. He would be crucified, no less.

bonus: return races in 1999. Just epic, and unexpected by no one. I remember the articles at the time, with various experts debating wheter he would ever be able to return to his form.

This is something that I miss with Lewis. Perhaps, he is even a better racer than Michael, but for me he lacks those very special seasons. He had his tough one in 2007 against Fernando. But after that? 2008 was really scrappy, almost looked like no driver wanted to win it. And everything in his Mercedes years can only be compared to Michael from 2001-2004. Yep, very similar, very impressive, fully deserved. But unspectacular and boring in both instances for both drivers.

2010 and especially 2012 were spectacular against a quick red bull and a hostile and incompetent McLaren. 2017 was great and 2018 is the greatest season I’ve watched since I started following in 2005 (Alonso’s 2012 is up there, as is Ham’s 2012)

[Zendroh]

The McLaren was very good in 2010, Button won 2 races and they finished 2nd in the constructors (McLaren beat Ferrari by a large 58 points, and only 44 points less than Red Bull) . It was the only car that could really challenge Red Bull in qualifying and races on outright speed a few times that year. Despite that Hamilton finished 4th in the drivers standing, even below Webber. Alonso was second and would have even somehow won the title without typical Ferrari strategy in Abu dhabi. Basically Hamilton finished below Alonso who had a slower car and  #2 Webber. Hardly very special when looking objectively.

Ferrari produced a great car in 2010. It wasn't slow by any means like Alonso wants you to believe and was one of there best cars that they build in the last decade or so. They had a period in the middle of that season that they were struggling a little bit but they where back competing at the front and fighting for wins from the German gp and the car was sometimes as fast as the Red bull on certain tracks in the 2nd half of that season. Alonso made numerous mistakes in the 2010 season. He spun on Lap 1 in Australia after leaving Button no room, jumped the start in China and earned a penalty, crashed in Monaco FP3 and damaged the car forcing him to miss qualifying and start last, overtook Kubica off the circuit in Silverstone earning a penalty, and crashed out all on his own in Belgium. Also don't forget that Alonso earned 7 points extra in Germany because of team orders and still didn't win the championship even tough he had the full backing of Ferrari behind him. If you go watch the 2010 season again, you will see that Mclaren where only better than Ferrari in the middle part of the season but after that it was crystal clear that Ferrari improved there car and overtook Mclaren in the development race to become the 2nd best car after Red Bull. Even with all that Hamilton finished just 12 points behind Alonso despite suffering more bad luck than him.

[garoidb]

It was a great move and moment. It wasn't in any way a classic overtake, there have been heaps of better ones of those, but it was smart, ballsy and great fun. Loved Mika then and do now!

 

The context was that Schumacher could not be trusted not to ram him off the road if he had the chance, given the importance for the championship. Hakkinen was not happy with how he had defended on the same corner on the previous lap.

[lightstoflag]

Massa not being able to take points off Alonso's competitors on many of Ferrari's good days was a problem, not an advantage. 

Yes, but Massa's inability to take wins off of Alonso was an advantage for Alonso. Basically, Massa's incapability was both an advantage and a disadvantage for Alonso for varying reasons.

Edited by lightstoflag, 21 July 2020 - 22:43.

[Anuity]

The context was that Schumacher could not be trusted not to ram him off the road if he had the chance, given the importance for the championship. Hakkinen was not happy with how he had defended on the same corner on the previous lap.

Michael was behind in points at that stage in the championship. And SPa was one of his best tracks where everybody expected him to do well if not to win like he did every year since 1992 bar 1993/99 until then (obviously also not 1998, but it was clear he was on a mission that day), why would he consider crashing with Hakkinen? There was no interest for him in risking it. It was rough racing, as explained by Mika, that’s it. There has been worse moments from current drivers.

[baddog]

The context was that Schumacher could not be trusted not to ram him off the road if he had the chance, given the importance for the championship. Hakkinen was not happy with how he had defended on the same corner on the previous lap.

 

I'm fully aware of the opinion from that section of the fan-base, but not very interested in re-litigating Michael Schumacher's ethics. I would have argued this with you 15 years ago but not now.

[IndianF1]

Not sure what you are on about. That infamous pass at Spa was in 2000 when both McLaren and Ferrari used Bridgestone tyres.

Sorry my bad, brain fade.

[Marklar]

Don't fix RB, don't fix Ferrari. For god sake, fix the sport.

Well, to some extent it's the former too.

Every year Red Bull is having 6-7 races long correlation issues, catch up, are by the season end very close to Mercedes, just to repeat the story the next year again.

Ferrari needed only one upgrade in Singapore 2018 to ruin a car that at that point was easily the class of the field, and to never recover from that (to this day). In a season with tons of operational errors and their lead driver easily doing in a third of all races a major blunder.

It of course doesnt help that the Mercedes/Hamilton combo is nearly perfect in almost all aspects (unlike Red Bull/Vettel was which led to them nearly losing two titles that should have been easy), but with flaws like this you wont win titles whatever the FIA does.

The sport needs fixing though. The problem here is now that it needs both a long term fix (already attempted with budget caps, etc.) and a short term fix (if Mercedes really is going to dominate the next 1.5 years), and with the pandemic I cant think of anything that could fix the latter except of open sourcing everything or radical stuff like performance ballast.

Edit: maybe the FIA should inspect the Merc engine like the Ferrari engine, but knowing our luck they will only find stuff that will end up hurting others more

Edited by Marklar, 22 July 2020 - 06:51.

[Vielleicht]

Personally, I feel like F1 is/has been in a bit of an identity crisis. No one can seem to agree, least of all those in F1 itself, about what the sport is all about and what is best for the future. It’s been a bit directionless and indecisive, an extent to which it took a global pandemic to get anywhere at all with budget caps. The future technology direction as things stand looks like a gamble at best, but even that is still up in the air with no plan. Drivers who should really be in F1 are ending up in Formula E or IndyCar. When it comes to it, I’m actually hard pressed to answer the question ‘what is F1 all about?’ with anything other than a short essay.

To be fair, if F1 is having a mid-life crisis at least that implies another 70 years of existence...

[garoidb]

Yes, but Massa's inability to take wins off of Alonso was an advantage for Alonso. Basically, Massa's incapability was both an advantage and a disadvantage for Alonso for varying reasons.

 

It was basically like Massa wasn't in many of the races. He wasn't close enough to play any strategic role (Germany 2010 excepted). He didn't take wins off anyone, so saying that was a particular advantage to Alonso rather than, say, Hamilton doesn't make sense. 

[Dicun]

Well, to some extent it's the former too.

Every year Red Bull is having 6-7 races long correlation issues, catch up, are by the season end very close to Mercedes, just to repeat the story the next year again.

Ferrari needed only one upgrade in Singapore 2018 to ruin a car that at that point was easily the class of the field, and to never recover from that (to this day). In a season with tons of operational errors and their lead driver easily doing in a third of all races a major blunder.

It of course doesnt help that the Mercedes/Hamilton combo is nearly perfect in almost all aspects (unlike Red Bull/Vettel was which led to them nearly losing two titles that should have been easy), but with flaws like this you wont win titles whatever the FIA does.

The sport needs fixing though. The problem here is now that it needs both a long term fix (already attempted with budget caps, etc.) and a short term fix (if Mercedes really is going to dominate the next 1.5 years), and with the pandemic I cant think of anything that could fix the latter except of open sourcing everything or radical stuff like performance ballast.

Edit: maybe the FIA should inspect the Merc engine like the Ferrari engine, but knowing our luck they will only find stuff that will end up hurting others more

 

I agree with the things you mention about the Vettel/RB package making things harder for themselves. It is an unpopular opinion but I also firmly believe that the RB5 was, talking about the full course of the 2009 season, was on par with the BGP 001. Brawn's pace was deceptively good in the first couple of races, but even as early as Malaysia and China, one could see that they suffered from tyre warming issues. Had it not been for the red flag, Malaysia would have been a W for Toyota. And from the British GP, Brawn was hopelessly left behind in the development race as after early May not a single upgrade was made for the car anymore. The team simply run out of funds, and they had to survive until the end of the year with the package they had in early May. 

 

People always talk about the double diffuser (the one that made Williams and Toyota so victorious ... oh wait) and the first seven races, but even early in the season, Brawn was vulnerable. It was down to Vettel for not being able to capitalise and do more damage. He collided with Kubica in Australia for which he was penalised and subsequently spun off in Malaysia. He then crashed out at Monaco, and gave up track position to Button at Turkey due to a mistake on lap 1 and ultimately ended up only third even though he had both the pace and the track position to control and win the race. This is four races out of the first seven where he should and could have done much more, and that's exactly why he lost the title to Button even though from the British GP onwards the Red Bull was a better car to have bar Monza.