45 replies to this topic

[SeanValen]

Michael talking the USA press

Another question raised was that of the difficulty of being a team-mate to Michael Schumacher, which is seen as necessarily filling the role of a Number 2 driver. “There are those who feel that being in a team with me means being a Number 2, but I can assure you that neither at Benetton nor at Ferrari was I given any priority,” said Schumacher. “The truth is that I have always turned out to be quicker than them and there is obviously nothing I can to do change that! Rubens is a great fighter and together we have brought Ferrari to the level we are at now. Now we are trying to do even better because you always want to improve. I don’t think it’s right to call Rubens a Number 2: it is circumstances which have created the situation. I know there are drivers who do not want to come to Ferrari because they do not want to be Number 2. I don’t agree with them, because before making a decision they should try and understand the situation properly.”

[MortenF1]

Michael must think none of us watched the Austria GP... And more than a hundred other GP's.

[magic]

good pr.

too bad brawn kicked out piquet and brundle, his best teammates so far.
and that was 10 years ago.

todt & brawn will never give another driver the chance to rock ms.

[Arrow]

Originally posted by race addicted
Michael must think none of us watched the Austria GP... And more than a hundred other GP's.

List 5 gps when a faster team-mate of michaels had to defer to him....Ill be waiting.

Magic..michael was faster than piquet and brundle despite being a rookie.Rubens handled brundle quite well and we can see how michael is handling rubens now cant we.

[MortenF1]

I've never said that Rubens or Eddie were faster or better than Michael, 'cause they're obviously NOT! But remember, once Herbert outqualified MS he instantly denied him any sharing of data. A whimpy loser he is! And often, when his team-mates get ahead through pitstops or something, we've all seen how they develop "brake-problems".

[magic]

np needed a kick on his behind but could have given ms a hard time in '92 for sure.
np was used to teammates like nakajima and moreno and had fallen asleep.
the last race of '91 np was picking up his old pace again and whupped ms.

brundle started slow in '92, but peaked the second half.
he was extremely unlucky though over that year.
in '96, his 12th !!! season, he wasn't peaking anymore.

[The Soul Stealer]

Originally posted by Arrow
List 5 gps when a faster team-mate of michaels had to defer to him....Ill be waiting.

Do they include the GP's where MS didn't get to finish the first lap:p

[Arrow]

Originally posted by magic
np needed a kick on his behind but could have given ms a hard time in '92 for sure.
np was used to teammates like nakajima and moreno and had fallen asleep.
the last race of '91 np was picking up his old pace again and whupped ms.

brundle started slow in '92, but peaked the second half.
he was extremely unlucky though over that year.
in '96, his 12th !!! season, he wasn't peaking anymore.

You would of thought NP would of woken up after the first race michael kicked his ass.But michael kicked his ass another 5 times.
If michael hadnt of missed a gear change on his fastest lap in australia he would of clean swept NP that year.

You reckon brundle was peaking,...what about a rookie MS?
wasnt he peaking as well?,you totally ignore that michael was a rookie in those years,like its a minor thing.

[The RedBaron]

Exactly my sentiment Arrow....the "Bashers" always make references on how Schumacher wasn't special in 92 and 93, and he didn't get any poles yadda yadda:o
They don't realise he was a rookie and only 22/23 years old not driving a top car. We never expected Rakkionen, Button or Montoya to beat their teammates in their 1st year....and none of them have. It's not fair to make comparisons of any of the above with Schumacher or say Hakkinan right now. By the same token you can't make valid comparisons with Schuey and say Senna, Prost, Mansell, Piquet during 92 and 93.

I can see why though, it's the only period that provides useless ammunition for the likes of "magic"

[T4E]

Heh... It took him this long to notice the fact that demanding number one status in a team harms his reputation as a driver.

If he wouldn't have anything to worry about and if there wasn't any question him being always the better driver in the team, there wouldn't be a need to demand for number one status...



I remember JJ Lehto once told about the life inside the team Benetton. Indeed Michael always got the new parts, the better car, to copy the setups (but not vice versa), spare car, etc, etc. Not easy for any team mate.

[HP]

Thought that the anti-MS squad will show up.

After all if they would believe MS, they all would look like fools. Self-defence I guess.

[Singing in the rain]

Sounds to me like MS is trying to convince some driver out there...

[HSJ]

JJ Lehto has told us Finns that at some point MS had "extra" buttons on his car (probably steering wheel) that he did not have. When he asked the team (I guess Brawn) about them, they would not tell him let alone have the same stuff. Equal treatment indeed. M$, you can lie, but you can't hide...

[magic]

wet aus gp '91

lap 4 ms fastest racelap before spinning off 1.43.714
lap 5 np fastest racelap before finishing 4th 1.42.616

np's last race saw him qual and finishing in front of ms who had the better/latest ford-engine.

np was on his way to his 40th birthday and had been racing for 13 years at that stage.
still i think np could have given ms a few more driving lessons in '92.
i cannot see how people can deny that.

since '91 ms never had a decent top5 teammate.

[Ricardo F1]

Who gives a monkeys? Michael has always had preferential treatment, but he's never exactly going to admit it is he?

[cygnus]

I don't understand why a driver wouldn't go to Ferrari because he would be MS's "number 2". Isn't Ferrari #2 better than #1 for a shitty team? No offense to the other teams down the grid who have talented drivers, but at least Rubens has the oppurtunity to score points and possibly attain wins. A young guy to join Ferrari, forced to be #2 .. I'd take that position! Cause I know MS will eventually retire, and hopefully I'll have learned enough through the team, on the track, and from my 4-WDC teammate.

As to ppl who have their panties tied up over MS getting (possibly (still not totally convinced)) better equipment .. he obviously deserves it because he gets the poles, he gets the wins, and brings home the Championships. I seriously doubt Barrichello could match MS's performance even if he was #1.

*shrug*

I'm not pro- or anti- MS .. but i fail to see why the anti-'s seem so happy to share their opinion. Surely it doesn't accomplish anything in the conversational sense, as you're just flying the same flag over, and over, and over and over, ... oh, and over again .

[Vercertorix]

It always fascinates me that you guys even bother to talk about this - just as though it's something either new or surprising.

Teams - whether the drivers themselves agree or care or not - have always - whether "officially" or unofficially - regarded one of their drivers as whatever you'd like to call him: "team leader," "number one," "lead driver," or some somewhat more scatological designation. This has been going on only since the beginning of time.

Does anyone really think Fangio wasn't #1 wherever he went? (Even when, for example, he arrived at Ferrari to join a fully staffed and accomplished team consisting of some pretty damn good drivers who had been there and won races well before his arrival?) Does anyone seriously suppose Stirling Moss, Jack Brabham, Jim Clark, John Surtees, Denis Hulme, etc, etc. ad nauseum were anything other than #1s, and benefitted, just as Schumacher does, by getting modifications and changes and new equipment first?

And did they usually deny any preferential treatment? Sure they did. Jimmy Clark was highly unlikely to say "I'm getting the best stuff, and Ireland is getting crap," any more than any of the others, or Schumacher (or Hakkinen, or Mansell, or Senna, etc.) would, or ever did.

Did these #1s all get help from their co-drivers? Yep. You bet. Fangio was given a Championship by Peter Collins. (Not a few points, not a better position, not even a win: very arguably he was gifted the whole ball of wax!) It took the best efforts of the whole Ferrai team working in concert to keep Moss in 2nd in 1958 - and they did it.

It's a ridiculous discussion. Michael Schumacher has won more F1 races than anyone else ever has. The record books feature him pretty prominently. Is he a clear #1? Well - is there a cretin somewhere who might suppose otherwise? Or be surprised by it? He has dominated the sport since he's been in it, and the record keepers could not care less if he was helped out along the way, or did it all on his own. (Which, I note parenthetically, he mostly had to do, or he never would have received the help in the first place. Team managers are pretty pragmatic: they want to win. As Peter Collins once remarked (I'll paraphrase, having forgotten his exact words): "Enzo Ferrai does not care if the first car across the line is driven by Hill, Hawthorn, Musso, me, or my Aunt Tillie - as long as it's a Ferrari."

Of course Schumacher gets preferential treatment. I'd say he's earned it.

[Spartacus]

HSJ, I remember those JJ questions also.....

JJ: "what are these buttons in Michaels steering wheel that I dont' have"

F"SOB"B "shut the feck up, stop whining and drive"

Total BS-comments from MS indeed......

[Ricardo F1]

Of course to get to a record number of victories he had to pass a certain Alain Prost - someone who certainly didn't get preferential treatment along side Ayrton Senna! How many wins could Prost have had if he had been a clear no.1??

[Mr. Bean]

Originally posted by Ricardo F1
Of course to get to a record number of victories he had to pass a certain Alain Prost - someone who certainly didn't get preferential treatment along side Ayrton Senna! How many wins could Prost have had if he had been a clear no.1??

Prost 8 times WDC, Senna 0 times WDC
Prost 221 Wins, Senna 11 Wins

Did I get it right?

Sincerely,
Mr. Bean

[magic]

nobody posted ms is slow or ruby should get the better bits, so ms-lovers can start breathing again.

the point is that there has never been a ms teammate of top 5 calibre, let alone an all time great since np '91.

since ms stepped into a benneton he was surrounded by the likes of brawn and byrne. that's 10 years ago.
ms never let them down in 9 seasons so why should they hand the goodies to a slowmo loudmouth or a whining wxnker?
if there had been another real competitor in their team, they might have considered it, but jj or jos or johhny didn't deserve their attention.

[Williams]

This whole issue of #1 versus #2 drivers reflects more on drivers that don't want to go up against MS in the same team, much more than it does on Schumacher himself.

Any driver who went into a team with a front-running driver would have to take that driver on head-to-head, on the track, in contract negotiations, politically, mentally, in every way but physically, to beat that driver and take the #1 position away from them. No-one is going to hand it to them. But today contracts are carefully negotiated to avoid precisely that situation, to give good drivers a comfort zone and let them concentrate on the technical aspects of turning the steering wheel and pushing the pedals, instead of expending energy on warring with an established driver.

Teams, driver managers, and drivers all do everything in their power to avoid head-to-head contests between top equal drivers, so why is Michael Schumacher somehow singled out as somehow being at fault for all of this ? If there is a driver out there good enough to go into Ferrari and push Schumacher out of the number one spot, let him try it, as Senna did to Prost, and Prost did to Lauda. Today, I doubt whether you would find any top talents volunteering for that mission. Better to let your manager create a good "situation" for you elsewhere.

[cygnus]

Why should they have to get a competitive teammate who may prefer a totally different driving style? Look at McLaren, one driver likes understeer, the other likes oversteer ... i don't see how that is productive.

Ferrari, Bryne, Brawn, Todt and whomever else can do whatever they want with their money .. and they choose to invest in Schumacher. Seems to be working just fine.

[flyer72]

I think it is a little weird. MS is obviously quite off the mark with his comments.... Schumi is wrong when he says that Barrichello is not as fast as him, or Eddie! Schumi do get better cars and better strategies.... He does get better equipment! Who is he trying to fool?

AND YES - JHerb couldn't check out MS data but MS could check out Herb's.... Ferrari should of course protect MS but not in a way that kills his teammates! Irvine is doing quite well at Jaguar where he is number one..... And he isn't too scared of Pedro. AND I doubt there is a difference between the cars.....
What happened to fair play?
Normally when a team manages to produce a great package you have two drivers fighting everone else AND each other.

Even RS did get some new aerodynamical stuff before Montoya!

Old school rules! I mean 10 years from now, who is going to say that Berger's Ferrari was better than Alesi's? Noone. It's a conversation that won't happen!
Schumi's Ferrari and Barrichello's? Now we are talking.....

[senninha]

Originally posted by Arrow


List 5 gps when a faster team-mate of michaels had to defer to him....Ill be waiting.

That's SOOO easy. I'll put only old-Piquet and Rubens:

portugal - 91
australia - 91
europe - 2000 (silverstone)
austria -2001
italy -2001

Of course, MB's; JVe's ; EI's; RP's fnas can remember much more!!!

MS is the best. But he isn't unbeatable like some blind fans thinks...

[Ricardo F1]

How did Rubens defer to Michael in Italy? Or Silverstone in 2000 for that matter?

Not that I don't support the context - his teammates have had to defer to him for years because the spare car is always set up for Michael.

[senninha]

... and i forget Canada - 2000!!!

[Ricardo F1]

Canada doesn't count - Rubens was asked to hold station at the end of the race, an often occurance in teams (see rather unhappy Ralf Schumacher at Spa in 98!)

[senninha]

Ricardo,

Are you in favor of this bs of MS never can be beaten? I'm just picking some examples. Don't take TOO seriously!

[cygnus]

There are so many factors in a race, we can't say he is 'unbeatable' .. mechanics, electronics, and just plain bad luck can always be a factor in a race. Canada 2000 is not a good example at all, his car was having a problem at the end of the race and Rubens was asked not to pass him .. because Michael needed all the points he could get.

[Todd]

Originally posted by magic
wet aus gp '91

lap 4 ms fastest racelap before spinning off 1.43.714
lap 5 np fastest racelap before finishing 4th 1.42.616

np's last race saw him qual and finishing in front of ms who had the better/latest ford-engine.

np was on his way to his 40th birthday and had been racing for 13 years at that stage.
still i think np could have given ms a few more driving lessons in '92.
i cannot see how people can deny that.

since '91 ms never had a decent top5 teammate.

Dried up, withered Nelson Piquest had kicked Roberto Moreno's butt in qualifying to the tune of a 9 to 3 advantage after 12 rounds. Michael joined the team and beat Nelson 4 to 1. Do you really think the team put a rookie ahead of their 3 time WDC? Andrea deCesaris beat Gachot at qualifying 7 to 2, but Michael cleaned his clock in his very first qualifying session. Brundle? He had experience on his side, but Michael swept him 16 to 0 in qualifying during Michael's first full season.

Ricardo Patrese, winner of 6 races and setter of 8 pole positions, was identically humbled in qualifying by Michael Schumacher. Lehto, Verstappen, and Herbert fell just the same. At what point did the bias come into play? Michael kicked the crap out of some quick guys before he had as much influence over Benetton as Naomi Campbell. Does Flavio Briatore seem like a guy that lets an inexperienced driver run riot over his team? I know you'd like to keep fooling yourself into thinking that Senna was better at something than Michael Schumacher, but it wasn't qualifying.

Michael Schumacher: 152, Everybody else: 9.

[hedges]

I always wonder at what point was MS gifted this preferential treatment. What team boss said, gee, I know we have an established driver but lets throw our full weight behind this unproven rookie. Well, lets hear it, I'd love to know. MS has proved himself throughout his career and has been well rewarded for it as have the teams he has driven for.

In the meantime I would like to address a couple of points that keep finding there way into these debates.

To everyone who brings up the old sad story of Herbet not getting MS data. Bullshit, Herbet himself said he would get his engineer to pull up the data when MS left the garage. I agree it's a bit sad on both sides, but bottom line is he had the data.

Why is JJ any more reliable source than MS, or RB. Since JJ is the only one with an axe to grind I am not likely to take his word over anyone else.

As for better equipment, if you have one of something, you can only give it to one person. Apparently if let loose as team managers many of you would give a piece of new equipment to the driver with the least points. On top of this, Ferrari have more than enough money to provide both drivers with the same equipment, and according to RB he does get the same equipment. There may always be an exception to this, the nature of prototypes is to have one but these occurances are few (RS getting the new tub for instance).

Preferential treatment occurs in almost every team. Don't believe it? Check out the drivers salaries, how many teammates do you suppose earn the same amount of money. McLaren are an excellent example of this, MH has in the past earned more than DC. Do you think McLaren paid him more but considered him only equal to DC? This has been the first year DC has taken it to Mika, be it care of early mech failures and this would have shown in the drivers salary. If RB could take it to MS, the same would apply.

Deferring to a teammate. Hell, ask DC about that one. Although McLaren do by and large appear to allow racing untill a mathmatical advantage is established I dear say McLaren has given MH as many points as Ferrari has gifted MS by issueing team orders. There is no doubt Ferraris methods are more premeditated and I shudder when it occurs, but MS has probably gained no more points this way than any other leading teams driver.

Bottom line, MS has always delivered the goods and rewarded the confidence shown in him. Should a time come when MS can not deliver, any preferential treatment will dissapear. MS however, at that stage would likely be the most successful F1 driver in history. Argueably, he already is (but lets not argue that).

[Todd]

Originally posted by senninha


That's SOOO easy. I'll put only old-Piquet and Rubens:

portugal - 91
australia - 91
europe - 2000 (silverstone)
austria -2001
italy -2001

Do you know what the word defer means? In this context, it means team orders benefitted Michael. That knocks Portugal and Australia 1991 off the list. Michael held position behind Piquet in Portugal, crashed out on the 5th lap of Australia. Autria 2001? Michael was faster all race, got booted by Montoya. Rubens did defer though, so it seems you know the word, you just choose to mislead. Silverstone 2000? Rubens had a better qualifying session, but he spun into the mud. Was that deferring? Italy 2001? In what way did Rubens defer? You are pitiful to need to list a race where the whole world knows Michael was off form in a way he has never been before.

[hedges]

Originally posted by senninha
Ricardo,

Are you in favor of this bs of MS never can be beaten? I'm just picking some examples. Don't take TOO seriously!

They can only be examples if they support your idea. That is the purpose of examples. Whether Ricardo supports the notion or not is irrelevant, he is questioning your supporting arguements. I fail to see how this is taking a debate on a bb 'too seriously', isn't this the purpose of the forum?

[TAB666]

Originally posted by HSJ
JJ Lehto has told us Finns that at some point MS had "extra" buttons on his car (probably steering wheel) that he did not have. When he asked the team (I guess Brawn) about them, they would not tell him let alone have the same stuff. Equal treatment indeed. M$, you can lie, but you can't hide...

And why should we belive JJ Lehto ?
Of course he would say that he didnt get the same equipe. If you get beaten by big margins then of course there has to be some magic parts on MS car, it cant be skill .... right ..This goes for all schumi teammates.

[Ricardo F1]

Exactly Hedges - thanks. Absolutely I think that Michael gets better treatment than his team mates - the use of the spare car being just one advantage. Austria was the only good example on that list, Portugal and Australia I'd have to look into.

"I know you'd like to keep fooling yourself into thinking that Senna was better at something than Michael Schumacher, but it wasn't qualifying. "

I'd have to say that's one of the funniest things I've read on this board in a while. Quite how anyone could have the gaul to even think let alone write that is amazing. Watch a 93 McLaren being put on pole - Schumachers never had to put a car that bad at the head of the grid.

[senninha]

Originally posted by Todd


Do you know what the word defer means? In this context, it means team orders benefitted Michael. That knocks Portugal and Australia 1991 off the list. Michael held position behind Piquet in Portugal, crashed out on the 5th lap of Australia. Autria 2001? Michael was faster all race, got booted by Montoya. Rubens did defer though, so it seems you know the word, you just choose to mislead. Silverstone 2000? Rubens had a better qualifying session, but he spun into the mud. Was that deferring? Italy 2001? In what way did Rubens defer? You are pitiful to need to list a race where the whole world knows Michael was off form in a way he has never been before.

About 40 years-old NP going to retirment:
NP BEAT MS on points: 5 to 4. In fact, since MS's fans loves numbers. Piquet beated Michael!!!!
The gran finnale was in NP's last race - MS overtook him but NP didn't give up and overtook MS, wich crashed due it. About qualifying - it was clear MS was taking much riscks to appear - as every young hungry driver - do you remember MS's big crash in Japan qualifiyng, for example?

My mistake what "defer" means. but was clear what i was trying to say here.

But, if you count Ferrari pit crew and preferential strategy (kamikaze's strategy to his teammate) for sure we can count clearly a lot of "defers"....

About Italy-2001 - please, don't make escuses. It is a typical loser behavior (as people here always says about RB)

[senninha]

More about OLD Piquet - the teammate wich beated MS!!!

NP run two years for Benetton (90-91) - he had 3 wins and finished 3th in 90;

MS in two years and half of Benetton only won twice and did the same than Nelson (3th).

That was OLD Piquet achievments (after beeing outqualified twice by Nakagima, for example) just imagine Piquet, in his peak (80-87, until Tamburello)!!!!

[Ricardo F1]

No Senninha - you were right with defer, "give way too", basically. But at Monza RB didn't have to do any such thing - Schumacher wasn't at the race. Well technically he was, but not mentally that's for sure.

[black magic]

just which wins did michael have gifted to him by his teammate? riccardo.

and please don't quote japan where eddie was made to look better than he was becauae jacque "I'm al for racing " Villeneuve was deliberately stalling ms.

[Ricardo F1]

It's not my argument. Irvine helped him out for a few points though, as did Rubens in Austria.

[Mr. Bean]

Originally posted by Ricardo F1
Quite how anyone could have the gaul to even think let alone write that is amazing.

Todd, do you really have Asterix in your pocket??

Watch a 93 McLaren being put on pole - Schumachers never had to put a car that bad at the head of the grid.

Darn that magic potion is really good stuff.

[Nikolas Garth]

Originally posted by race addicted
But remember, once Herbert outqualified MS he instantly denied him any sharing of data.

Do you mean after the 11th race of 1995 ???

[Nikolas Garth]

Originally posted by Ricardo F1
Watch a 93 McLaren being put on pole - Schumachers never had to put a car that bad at the head of the grid.

The 93 car was described by Gordon Murray and Ron Dennis as the best chassis they ever built, all the electronic gizmo's and active suspension was working a treat.

[magic]

in the best car ever williams fw 14b is considered the best ever.
the mac '93 is not even in the top 100.

[magic]

tom w. was fed up with the lazy, uninspired and overpaid np even before ms came on board.
moreno was in bad shape all year, conditionwise, he even had to abandon his benneton at magny course due to exhaustion.

tom w. knew ex-merc ms from group c.
tom's group c jag-wdc-driver was brundle.

and guess who he signed to replace np and moreno?

the next step ford engine was given to ms not np at suzuka.
as in preferential treatment.

tom put his much lesser money on ms and mb and saved his money by kicking np out.
tom made benneton HIS team with HIS drivers.

(source autocourse 1991)