259 replies to this topic

[Fortymark]

http://www.planet-f1...ory_13616.shtml


"I don’t know the numbers," said Brundle, "but to cut straight to the chase, he was better than Schumacher. He had a greater skill and a greater talent and he was a more natural, more emotionally driven man than Michael."

[HSJ]

Seems to me like the fewer number of WDC titles an ex-F1 driver has, the more sense they make.;)

[Todd]

Ayrton Senna is to Michael Schumacher what Martin Brundle is to Jack Brabham.

[Fortymark]

Interesting to see that Brundle still was the same opinion about which driver is the better.
It doesn´t matter how many WDC or wins MS gets, he will never be considered better than Senna or faster than Hakkinen.

[HSJ]

Originally posted by Fortymark
Interesting to see that Brundle still was the same opinion about which driver is the better.
It doesn´t matter how many WDC or wins MS gets, he will never be considered better than Senna or faster than Hakkinen.

Obviously, since it is not statistics that make one great or better. No matter how many stats MS accumulates, they will have zero impact on his talent and skill, which are what matter.

[Fortymark]

Originally posted by HSJ


Obviously, since it is not statistics that make one great or better. No matter how many stats MS accumulates, they will have zero impact on his talent and skill, which are what matter.

Yes, that´s true. Just like after the 2003 season. Michael may have had another WDC and a couple of more wins and poles etc but did it really help his reputation as an true great?
Personally I don´t think so. Maybe if he wins the championship again in 2004 there could always be the argument that he still became WDC with mediocre driving. But if he doesn´t win again, the 2003 season will do him no good imo

[F1Johnny]

I was a fan of Senna nd still am to an extent. And if I had a choice to meet AS or MS. i would chose AS, but IMO MS is better than AS was. A GP weekend climax is the race and nobody drives a race like MS. Senna was the fastest man over 1 lap, but the point for pole was gotten rid of a long time ago.

Martin Brundle has driven against both and his opinion should be respected as he would have significantly more insight than us here. It is just his opinion.

[Rene]

I think this all depends on how you define better? Does that mean car control? Ability through slow speed corners? Fast spreed corners? Ability to set up a race car? Get the most out of the tires? Develop a car? Pass people? etc....the list goes on....and given the talent in F1, I am sure many different drivers are the best at these many different topics, but I think that the person who is close to the top in the most categories would be MS (*modern era*)....

My personal favorite category, is fastest driver from the Hotel to the circuit on race weekend....without a doubt Gilles Villeneuve tops the list! hehe

[Fortymark]

Originally posted by Rene
I think this all depends on how you define better? Does that mean car control? Ability through slow speed corners? Fast spreed corners? Ability to set up a race car? Get the most out of the tires? Develop a car? Pass people? etc....the list goes on....and given the talent in F1, I am sure many different drivers are the best at these many different topics, but I think that the person who is close to the top in the most categories would be MS (*modern era*)....

My personal favorite category, is fastest driver from the Hotel to the circuit on race weekend....without a doubt Gilles Villeneuve tops the list! hehe

Brundle says Senna had greater skill and was more talented.

[Rene]

Originally posted by Fortymark


Brundle says Senna had greater skill and was more talented.

If they are talking about pure natural ability....well I wouldn't argue with that....even if I believe MS is the better package....

[JacnGille]

I would choose Senna over Schumacher. And being a fan of neither one, there are no predujices to interfere or cloud my opinon.

[Rediscoveryx]

A logical definition of the "best" driver would be something like "The best driver is the driver who can take his car from the start of a race to the finish of a race in the fastest time". Who cares if he does it with great car control, great strategy or great navigation of back markers? The drivers are in F1 to finish first, not to display their car control, take care of their tyres or anything else.

So, basically, the "best" driver of Senna or Schumacher would be the driver who finishes a race between the two ahead of the other.

[Ross Stonefeld]

Just another example of emotions over analysis

[ruther]

Originally posted by Todd
Ayrton Senna is to Michael Schumacher what Martin Brundle is to Jack Brabham.

[Vrba]

Originally posted by Fortymark


Yes, that´s true. Just like after the 2003 season. Michael may have had another WDC and a couple of more wins and poles etc but did it really help his reputation as an true great?
Personally I don´t think so. Maybe if he wins the championship again in 2004 there could always be the argument that he still became WDC with mediocre driving. But if he doesn´t win again, the 2003 season will do him no good imo

Why does noone beat him then?

Hrvoje

[Vrba]

Originally posted by Fortymark


Brundle says Senna had greater skill and was more talented.

There are drivers that could be more talented than MS but it certainly wasn' Senna.

Hrvoje

[troyf1]

Originally posted by Ross Stonefeld
Just another example of emotions over analysis

Trying finding a non-emotional analysis of Senna vs. Schumacher is nearly impossble.

[ruther]

Originally posted by Vrba

There are drivers that could be more talented than MS but it certainly wasn' Senna.

Hrvoje

[Jordan191]

Originally posted by troyf1


Trying finding a non-emotional analysis of Senna vs. Schumacher is nearly impossble.

I dunno .. I'm pretty detached myself.

[Fortymark]

Originally posted by Vrba

There are drivers that could be more talented than MS but it certainly wasn' Senna.

Hrvoje

Vrba, show me one driver whom was more impressive in lower formulas(more equal cars) than Senna and became good in F1.
Speed is something that Senna always had, and having great speed is the ultimate meassurement for talent.


F.F. 1600 - Van Diemen Minister RF 81
1981

01/03 Brands Hatch, 5th - P&O championship ( Car : VDM RF 80 )
08/03 Thruxton, 3th - T.T. championship
15/03 Brands Hatch, winner - 15 laps in 15'07''02 - T.T. championship
22/03 Mallory Park, pole position, 2nd - T.T. championship
04/03 Mallory Park, 2nd - T.T. championship
05/04 Snetterton, pole position, 2nd - T.T. championship
24/05 Oulton Park, winner - 15 laps in 16'48 - Fastest lap in 1'06''02 -
R.A.C. championship
25/05 Mallory Park, winner - 15 laps in 12'43''09 - T.T. championship
07/06 Snetterton, winner - 15 laps in 18'16''05 - Fastest lap in 1'22'02 -
T.T. championship
21/06 Silverstone, 2nd - R.A.C. championship
27/06 Oulton Park, winner - 15 laps in 16'49''05 - Fastest lap in 1'06'03 -
T.T. championship
04/07 Donington, winner - Fastest lap - R.A.C. championship
12/07 Brands Hatch, 4th - Fastest lap in 50''62 - R.A.C. championship
25/07 Oulton Park, winner - 15 laps in 16'59''07 - Fastest lap in 1'06''04 -
T.T. championship
26/07 Mallory Park, winner - 15 laps in 12'44''04 - Fastest lap in 50''01 -
R.A.C. championship
02/08 Brands Hatch, winner - 15 laps in 12'58 - T.T. championship
09/08 Snetterton, winner - 15 laps in 19'19''89 - Fastest lap in 1'11''06 -
R.A.C. championship
15/08 Donington, winner - 12 laps in 16'13''73 - T.T. championship
31/08 Thruxton, pole position, winner - 10 laps in 14'28''07 -
Fastest lap in 1'25''07 - T.T. championship
29/09 Brands Hatch, 2nd - Fastest lap - T.T. championship



F.F. 2000 - Van Diemen Nielson RF 82
1982 - European championship

18/04 Zolder (Belgium), pole position, giving up (engine broken)
02/05 Donington (G.B.), pole position, winner - 20 laps in 24'57''47 -
Fastest lap, new record in 1'14''28
09/05 Zolder (Belgium), pole position, giving up (track exit)
20/06 Hockenheim (Germany), pole position, giving up (formation lap)
03/07 Zandvoort (Netherlands), pole position, winner - 12 laps in 20'08''03
08/08 Hockenheim (Germany), pole position, winner - 11 laps in 26'59''20 -
Fastest lap
15/08 Zeltweg (Austria), pole position, winner - 12 laps in 24'21''32 -
Fastest lap
22/08 Jylland (Denmark), pole position, winner - 8 laps in 19'34''96 -
Fastest lap
12/09 Mondello Park (Ireland), pole position, winner - 20 laps in 19'32''71
Fastest lap, new record in 57''92



F.F. 2000 - Van Diemen Nielson RF 82
1982 - British Championship

07/03 Brands Hatch, pole position, winner - Fastest lap
27/03 Oulton Park, pole position, winner - Fastest lap and new record
28/03 Silverstone, pole position, winner - Fastest lap and new record
04/04 Donington, pole position, winner - Fastest lap and new record
09/04 Snetterton, pole position, winner - Fastest lap
12/04 Silverstone, pole position, winner - Fastest lap
03/05 Mallory Park, winner - Fastest lap
30/05 Oulton Park, withdrawal (tyres problems)
31/05 Brands Hatch, winner - Fastest lap
06/06 Mallory Park, winner - Fastest lap
13/06 Brands Hatch, pole position, winner - Fastest lap and new record
26/06 Oulton Park, pole position, winner
05/07 Snetterton, pole position, 2nd
10/07 Castel Combe, pole position, winner - Fastest lap and new record
01/08 Snetterton, pole position, winner - Fastest lap and new record
30/08 Thruxton, winner - Fastest lap and new record
04/09 Oulton Park, pole position, winner
05/09 Silverstone, pole position, winner - Fastest lap
26/09 Brands Hatch, 2nd - Fastest lap and new record





1982
FORMULA 3 - Ralt Toyota Nicholson RT3 D/82

13/11 Thruxton T.V., pole position (record), winner - 15 laps in 18'37''43 -
Fastest lap



1983 - UK F3
Ralt Toyota Novamotor RT3 E

06/03 Silverstone, 2nd time (practice), winner - 20 laps in 18'07''14 -
Fastest lap
13/03 Thruxton, pole position, winner - 20 laps in 26'36''31 - Fastest lap
03/19 Silverstone, pole position, winner - 12 laps in 19'36''51 - Fastest lap
27/03 Donington, pole position, winner - 20 laps in 23'23''35 - Fastest lap
02/04 Thruxton, pole position, winner - 20 laps in 25'03''29
24/04 Silverstone, pole position, winner - 25 laps in 22'33''59 - Fastest lap
02/05 Thruxton, pole position, winner - 20 laps in 24'51''88 - Fastest lap
08/05 Brands Hatch, pole position, winner - 20 laps in 17'21''06 - Fastest lap
30/05 Silverstone, pole position, winner - 30 laps in 27'00''98 - Fastest lap
11/06 Silverstone (European championship), 2nd time (practice), giving up
(track exit)
19/06 Caldwell Park, pole postition, withdrawal (accident)
03/07 Snetterton, 4th time (practice), giving up (accident) - Fastest lap
16/07 Silverstone, pole position, winner - 20 laps in 28'59''55 - Fastest lap
24/07 Donington, pole position, 2nd - Fastest lap
06/08 Oulton Park, 2nd time (practice), giving up (accident) - Fastest lap
29/08 Silverstone, pole position, winner - 30 laps in 27'02''45
11/09 Oulton Park, pole position, giving up (accident)
18/09 Thruxton, pole position, giving up (engine broken)
02/10 Silverstone, 4th time (practice), 2nd
23/10 Thruxton, pole position, winner - 15 laps in 18'39''78 - Fastest lap

20/11 Macao Grand Prix
pole position, winner - 30 laps in 1h11'34''96 -
1st round, winner - 15 laps in 35'44''65 - Fastest lap and new
record : 2'21''59
2nd round, winner - 15 laps in 35'50''31

[Todd]

Originally posted by Fortymark

Speed is something that Senna always had, and having great speed is the ultimate meassurement for talent.

Nope. Lake Speed owned Senna.

[Vrba]

This Brundle's sentence explains all:

"When I came into Formula 1 twenty years ago there were 10 or 11 household names in Formula 1; Senna, Lauda, Prost, Piquet, Mansell, it just went on and on and on, the list of world class drivers and today I don’t think that’s the case today. I don’t think you can compare the eras."

He is simply blowing his own horn. What he wants to say is: "When I was racing, there was sooooo much great drivers. Today I would clean up the floor with the current ones."

Therefore, his opinion is of zero value.

Hrvoje

[Schuperman]

Originally posted by Fortymark


Brundle says Senna had greater skill and was more talented.

Some say "JPM has greater skill and is more talented than MS".

To some extent; Rubens is also said has greater skill and more talented than MS. Rubens' style of driving is so natural.

As long as numbers and stats are not important to determine the better driver, I won't argue that opinion. Ref: "I don’t know the numbers," said Brundle.

[ruther]

Originally posted by Vrba
This Brundle's sentence explains all:

"When I came into Formula 1 twenty years ago there were 10 or 11 household names in Formula 1; Senna, Lauda, Prost, Piquet, Mansell, it just went on and on and on, the list of world class drivers and today I don’t think that’s the case today. I don’t think you can compare the eras."

He is simply blowing his own horn. What he wants to say is: "When I was racing, there was sooooo much great drivers. Today I would clean up the floor with the current ones."

Therefore, his opinion is of zero value.

Hrvoje

[Vrba]

Originally posted by Fortymark


Vrba, show me one driver whom was more impressive in lower formulas(more equal cars) than Senna and became good in F1.
Speed is something that Senna always had, and having great speed is the ultimate meassurement for talent.


F.F. 1600 - Van Diemen Minister RF 81
1981
....

20/11 Macao Grand Prix
pole position, winner - 30 laps in 1h11'34''96 -
1st round, winner - 15 laps in 35'44''65 - Fastest lap and new
record : 2'21''59
2nd round, winner - 15 laps in 35'50''31

MS have dominated Formula 1 in similar way. Why when MS dominates (on a much higher level), it's the case of no competition but when Senna dominated, it was the case of talent?

Double standards, nothing more!

It could have simply been (and it was, including Brundle) that Senna's competitors were very average drivers.

Hrvoje

[Fortymark]

Originally posted by Todd


Nope. Lake Speed owned Senna.

Rice owns Lake...

[ruther]

Originally posted by Fortymark
F.F. 2000 - Van Diemen Nielson RF 82
1982 - British Championship

07/03 Brands Hatch, pole position, winner - Fastest lap
27/03 Oulton Park, pole position, winner - Fastest lap and new record
28/03 Silverstone, pole position, winner - Fastest lap and new record
04/04 Donington, pole position, winner - Fastest lap and new record
09/04 Snetterton, pole position, winner - Fastest lap
12/04 Silverstone, pole position, winner - Fastest lap
03/05 Mallory Park, winner - Fastest lap
30/05 Oulton Park, withdrawal (tyres problems)
31/05 Brands Hatch, winner - Fastest lap
06/06 Mallory Park, winner - Fastest lap
13/06 Brands Hatch, pole position, winner - Fastest lap and new record
26/06 Oulton Park, pole position, winner
05/07 Snetterton, pole position, 2nd
10/07 Castel Combe, pole position, winner - Fastest lap and new record
01/08 Snetterton, pole position, winner - Fastest lap and new record
30/08 Thruxton, winner - Fastest lap and new record
04/09 Oulton Park, pole position, winner
05/09 Silverstone, pole position, winner - Fastest lap
26/09 Brands Hatch, 2nd - Fastest lap and new record

[RedIsTheColour]

Would that be

Martin Brundle, big crash at Adelaide

or

Martin Brundle, big crash at the BRDC ;)

I'd be more interested in hearing Grumble's analysis of why Silverstone is still **** and expensive.

[F1Johnny]

Originally posted by Vrba
This Brundle's sentence explains all:

"When I came into Formula 1 twenty years ago there were 10 or 11 household names in Formula 1; Senna, Lauda, Prost, Piquet, Mansell, it just went on and on and on, the list of world class drivers and today I don’t think that’s the case today. I don’t think you can compare the eras."

He is simply blowing his own horn. What he wants to say is: "When I was racing, there was sooooo much great drivers. Today I would clean up the floor with the current ones."

Therefore, his opinion is of zero value.

Hrvoje

What value should one place on your opinion?

[vdu7x]

I can't help but think that if you could create a hypothetical situation where both had equal equipment suited to their style and strategy was taken out of the equation, Senna would beat Schuey. He would have been prepared to dig deeper, take greater risks, go further into the zone than schuey would. This is where Senna's great strength lay.


At the end of the day, it depends on what values you hold as to which driver you feel is better. If you're a fan of people who do what it takes to get the job done, you may be a Schuey or Prost or Lauda fan. If you're a fan of commitment, flare and a bit of bravado, you might be a Senna, Rosberg or Gilles Villeneuve fan. It is a fact that the former group have many more world titles to their name but I prefer the latter.

[SeanValen]

Big fan of Senna and Schumacher.

But Brundle's opinion isn't fact, it's another opinion as good as many others who have commented.
But I respect his opinion, having driven with both, it's tough comparing them, one died over a decade ago, very charismatic Senna, I always think Ayrton had a reply, he would make it work, Schumacher has been in trouble and produced great stuff as well, I always see them as tieing, the best thing maybe would be to have them at Williams, equal cars, and good reliability, let them go at it, didn't happen, but they did loads of great gps, made f1 seasons exciting, comparision, comparing is almost pointless, like Agent Smith says in the Matrix "It's envitable Mr Anderson."

[Schuperman]

Originally posted by Vrba
This Brundle's sentence explains all:

"When I came into Formula 1 twenty years ago there were 10 or 11 household names in Formula 1; Senna, Lauda, Prost, Piquet, Mansell, it just went on and on and on, the list of world class drivers and today I don’t think that’s the case today. I don’t think you can compare the eras."

He is simply blowing his own horn. What he wants to say is: "When I was racing, there was sooooo much great drivers. Today I would clean up the floor with the current ones."

Therefore, his opinion is of zero value.

Hrvoje

Reminds me of "... great battles do not require great drivers".... The past decade there was no driver as dominant as MS now. That's why there were 10 or 11 huosehold names in F1.

IMO, the greatness of the driver is measured how he dominates his competitors. Lauda had Prost, Prost had Senna, Senna had Mansell, Mansell had Piquet. MS has no one is able to compete with him except better cars in the mould of McLaren and Williams.

Since 1983, no other driver has managed to win other than driving for either McLaren or Williams. The great A Prost tried it and was sacked. Senna had no guts to try it, other than chasing for free for the best car available.

[FNG]

Originally posted by Vrba

Why does noone beat him then?

Hrvoje

They say the only true measure is your teamate! Nuff said!

[flyboy]

Schumacher owes most of his success to his ability to form a team around him and motivate that team and it's resources to his benefit. His ability in this regard is probably unmatched by any driver, all the way back to 1950. Does this make him the "best driver"? For me, he will never be that. Within the team he has not allowed any competition and all decisions and strategy is to his benefit, and we have seen some very questionable actions on the track.
My vote goes to Gilles and Senna over Shoe.

[RSNS]

Having raced in the same teams with Senna and Schumacher, no one is possibly better informed than he is.

We all know absolutely nothing about Semma and Schumacher compared to him.

There is no arguing about that.

Unless one is willing to be a clown and dismiss one of the drivers and deny evidence.

RSNS

[Haddock]

I don't know which of them is/was better, and to be honest, I don't really see that it matters, but I certainly know which of them was more exciting - which one kept you on the edge of your seat.

[Teez]

Originally posted by HSJ

Obviously, since it is not statistics that make one great or better. No matter how many stats MS accumulates, they will have zero impact on his talent and skill, which are what matter.

Riiight. The stats will only matter if Kimi ever manages to surpass Schumacher's. (He won't, of course, but this is purely hypothetical.) Then you'll claim Kimi is better than Michael based on them.

Anyway. All these opinions about who's better is so much bullshit. The bottom line is that this is a sport, and in sport we measure 'greatness' with points (victories, etc.). In that regard, poor ol' Senna doesn't even come second.

If you disagree, post some objective way of accurately measuring 'greatness' and then we'll talk.

[Vrba]

Originally posted by RSNS
Having raced in the same teams with Senna and Schumacher, no one is possibly better informed than he is.
....

True. But is he objective and honest? Does he have some reasons to speak one way or another?

Hrvoje

[SlateGray]

Originally posted by Todd
Ayrton Senna is to Michael Schumacher what Martin Brundle is to Jack Brabham.

If you can't refute the message attack the messenger! SOP for some posters.

[troyf1]

Originally posted by Vrba
This Brundle's sentence explains all:

"When I came into Formula 1 twenty years ago there were 10 or 11 household names in Formula 1; Senna, Lauda, Prost, Piquet, Mansell, it just went on and on and on, the list of world class drivers and today I don’t think that’s the case today. I don’t think you can compare the eras."

He is simply blowing his own horn. What he wants to say is: "When I was racing, there was sooooo much great drivers. Today I would clean up the floor with the current ones."

Therefore, his opinion is of zero value.

Hrvoje

Who are you to decide who's opinion has value and who's doesn't? Had he said that Michael was the greatest would that have given his opinion value??

[Ricardo F1]

Originally posted by Schuperman

MS has no one is able to compete with him except better cars in the mould of McLaren and Williams.

That's funny, coz Kimi Raikonnen finished right behind him this year in a very much inferior car. And we're all aware that unlike Senna a certain Mr. Schumacher doesn't seem to have the misfortune of having a top driver in the same car as him.

Personally I loved Senna, I still rank him better simply due to pace. Nobody could qualify as well as that guy. Schumacher is brilliant, Senna was as brilliant and had that one lap gift - hence I rank him a tad above MS.

[SlateGray]

Originally posted by Teez

Riiight. The stats will only matter if Kimi ever manages to surpass Schumacher's. (He won't, of course, but this is purely hypothetical.) Then you'll claim Kimi is better than Michael based on them.

Kimi is already quicker. Almost bested the punter with the 3rd best car
Kimi #1 in the Atlas "top ten"
Hurtz donut!

[kilcoo316]

I can give you an unemotional way to compare them,

6 WDC (two in inferior cars) vs 3 WDC (in the best machinery), so argue that. In 100 years time, who will have won 6, who will "only" have half that??

MS gets the team built around him because he is the fastest most complete driver at the minute, as recently said by Sam Michael. He does not get $30 million dollars contracts every year for nothing.... ferrari wouldn't pay him that then deliberately handicap RB so MS can be fastest, he has to earn his money (alot of people seem to have forgot this).

Senna may have possessed more raw speed... but was not as consistent and could not turn a team around (see lotus), Schumacher has done this and is now reaping the rewards. Could anyone else see Senna chase around in hungary scrapping with Jarno Trulli for bit points like MS had to do this year... which won him the championship??? I dunno, I will let the stats do the talking.

[Vrba]

Originally posted by troyf1


Who are you to decide who's opinion has value and who's doesn't? Had he said that Michael was the greatest would that have given his opinion value??

I don't force anyone to agree with my, I simply state arguments why one might not agree (not "should not") with Brundle's opinion from my point of view.

Hrvoje

[Vrba]

Originally posted by SlateGray


Kimi is already quicker. Almost bested the punter with the 3rd best car
Kimi #1 in the Atlas "top ten"
Hurtz donut!

It says nothing about how would KR compare with e.g. MS 1994-2000. They are not in the same stages of their careers and it's only logical that KR would become faster than MS. But that wouldn't tell us who is better, only their full careers and comparison with their peers will provide us with a clue. MS is in decline, KR on the rise. How these two would compare if they were both on their respective peaks at the same time, we don't know.

Hrvoje

[Vrba]

Originally posted by kilcoo316
I can give you an unemotional way to compare them,

6 WDC (two in inferior cars) vs 3 WDC (in the best machinery), so argue that. In 100 years time, who will have won 6, who will "only" have half that??

MS gets the team built around him because he is the fastest most complete driver at the minute, as recently said by Sam Michael. He does not get $30 million dollars contracts every year for nothing.... ferrari wouldn't pay him that then deliberately handicap RB so MS can be fastest, he has to earn his money (alot of people seem to have forgot this).

Senna may have possessed more raw speed... but was not as consistent and could not turn a team around (see lotus), Schumacher has done this and is now reaping the rewards. Could anyone else see Senna chase around in hungary scrapping with Jarno Trulli for bit points like MS had to do this year... which won him the championship??? I dunno, I will let the stats do the talking.

Exactly.
And not just Lotus, see McLaren. Senna came when McLaren was at their absolute peak (1988 car was destined to dominate, with or without Senna, and it was clear from the very moment Honda severed the contract with Williams) and in all subsequent years during Senna's stay, McLaren's competitiveness gradually decreased. Senna had plenty of qualities but turning and bringing the team up wasn't one of them. It's in fact one of the rarest qualities. Fangio didn't seem to posses it either while on the other side Lauda and Brabham did, Andretti did as well..

Hrvoje

[joriswouters]

It's just one of those discussions you keep having. Who's better than MH, MS, AS, SM, JMF... And as they always say 'you can't compare different periods.' For Senna and Schumi, it's not really the case. They are both very gifted and great drivers. Who's the better one? I don't know. And personally, Brundle may have driven with or against them, that doesn't make me believe what he says. It's not that he has the one and only truth. Every one will have his own opinion because you can measure 'beig the best driver' in so many ways. Is it car control, raw speed, qualifying, titles, wins, team build up, ability to set up a car.... Each person has his own definition, there is no perfect one, and therefore everyone has his own opinion.

[Schuperman]

Originally posted by Vrba

It says nothing about how would KR compare with e.g. MS 1994-2000. They are not in the same stages of their careers and it's only logical that KR would become faster than MS. But that wouldn't tell us who is better, only their full careers and comparison with their peers will provide us with a clue. MS is in decline, KR on the rise. How these two would compare if they were both on their respective peaks at the same time, we don't know.

Hrvoje

Hehehehe..... SlateGray was replying on HSJ's stance i.e. the stats will only matter if Kimi ever manages to surpass Schumacher's. (He won't, of course, but this is purely hypothetical.) Then you'll claim Kimi is better than Michael based on them.

A typical HSJ. Anyway, I do appreciate his postings.

[Ricardo F1]

Originally posted by Vrba

Exactly.
And not just Lotus, see McLaren. Senna came when McLaren was at their absolute peak (1988 car was destined to dominate, with or without Senna, and it was clear from the very moment Honda severed the contract with Williams) and in all subsequent years during Senna's stay, McLaren's competitiveness gradually decreased. Senna had plenty of qualities but turning and bringing the team up wasn't one of them. It's in fact one of the rarest qualities. Fangio didn't seem to posses it either while on the other side Lauda and Brabham did, Andretti did as well..

Hrvoje

Not exactly. Senna didn't have Ross Brawn and Rory Byrne around him. You're comparing apples and oranges. Much loved at McLaren though Senna was McLaren is McLaren. Nothing to do with 'building a team' it's all to do with personnel. If Ross and Rory were more bought into Benetton and where Benetton was headed they might have stayed where they were. Ferrari was too big a lure for either of them. Had Michael tried to take them from Ferrari to Benetton the outcome may have been entirely different. Turning and bringing up a team takes more than a driver, a hell of a lot more. That the elements fell into place for Schumacher was fate as much as anything else.

[Todd]

Originally posted by SlateGray


If you can't refute the message attack the messenger! SOP for some posters.

Did you bother posting this sentiment when HSJ attacked Brabham for speaking the truth about Schumacher? How exactly did I attack Brundle anyway? I made an analogy comparing him to Saint Senna.